What "Ailes" Fox News

Roger Ailes is the head of Fox News. He is the fellow who created the psuedo-news network for Rupert Murdoch that captures the heart of every right-wing nut in America. It is very much like Murdoch's tabloid newspapers. Heavy on local, grisly murders, violence and sex, mixed in with an extreme right-wing editorial agenda.

Ailes recently criticized President Clinton for his now legendary explosion at a Fox News set up question by little, elfin-looking, Chris Wallace. The question implied that Clinton hadn't done enough to get Bin Laden.

Ailes, who has done more to destroy the credibility of objective reporting and journalism than anyone since Joe McCarthy, called Clinton's outburst an "assault on all journalists". Why an assualt on journalists is of concern to him is not obvious, since he hires failed models and actresses and right-wing ideologues to slant and convey the reactionary news that he sees fit to broadcast.

His actor/commentators, like O'Reilly, high school grad Hannity, and Cavuto, spend most of their time trying to get Americans to distrust the mainstream media. That's what makes it ironically humorous when he called for all journalists after the Clinton-Wallace interview to join Fox and him and...do what?

Nothing. He just wanted to make the statement so that his "news"casters can "prove" once again to the average gullible Fox viewer that the mainstream media is liberal, i.e. venal, if it doesn't criticize Clinton as well. I'm sure those Fox viewers will believe it, and the reactionary propaganda machine that is Fox will roll on happily.

In an ABC internet report Ailes is also quoted as saying, "I quit (politics) 14 years ago because I hated it." He doesn't hate politics. He loves politics. He's just practicing it in a disguised form, as a pseudo-news chief that slants extreme right-wing reactionary opinion in this country as "fair and balanced". Himmler could have learned from him.

At least the Daily Show says it is fake news and is purposely funny. Fox News is fake news also, but denies it, and is only inadvertently funny, as when an ex-Nixon hatchetman like Ailes "worries" about an attack on all journalists; a sport in which he and his minions engage all the time.

Bob Woodward:Understimate Him at Your Peril

Bob Woodward's latest book "State of Denial" has caught the Bushies completely off guard. They were patronizingly complimenting him after his first two books on Bush's Iraq War. Now, even before the new book is published, they already vilifying him for not toeing the party line.

The conventional wisdom on Woodward among GOPers was that if you gave him access he would treat you sympathetically. This wisdom was based on his first two books on the Iraq War.

Surprise! The Bushies forgot that this is the guy who broke the Watergate scandal. He is still an "investigative journalist". He and Bernstein almost invented the title.

Every ambitious young reporter, especially in TVland, wants to use that title because of Woodward and Bernstein's work. Many are titled investigative journalists, but few are chosen to be so talented.

It serves the Bushies right. The guy they thought they were manipulating was actually manipulating them all along.

Return of the Sports Ghouls

The sports ghouls were out again at the Ryder Cup. Once again, in a mock show of sympathy, they couldn't pass up any opportunity to say that Darren Clarke's wife died from cancer the week previous to the Ryder Cup.

To add insult to injury, they asked not only him, but all of his teammates, the obvious. Do you think it was inspirational for him to play with his wife dead?

How charming. About as considerate as the Marquis de Sade.

Rough Ryder Cup

U.S. Golf took it on the chin again last week at the Ryder Cup. Not surprised. Unlike past years, this U.S. team wasn't as good as the Euro team. It didn't have the depth. It was also the first time that the Europeans were, on average, higher in the world rankings than the U.S.

Something more than rankings is going on with the Americans, however. They are always criticized about being too individualistic, not by nature team players. So whoever their coach is, Tom Lehman this time, always trys to do things to "bond" them together.

This year it was sing alongs. In the past it's been table tennis, dining together, and other bonding techniques. As far as I know, no coach has yet to have them close their eyes and have them fall in a circle of other players who catch them. It can't be far away, though.

The problem isn't bonding. The problem is a common one in sports, whether golf, football, baseball or basketball. It is called choking.

It was visible to anyone who watched the matches that the Euros were loose and having fun. The Americans were tight and grim, waiting for the worst to happen. And it did. They missed short putts and muffed shots that they regularly make on tour.

The more you lose in sport the harder it is to win. The U.S. has now been so unsuccessful in so many recent Ryder Cups that they expect to lose. They expect the Euros to make lucky shots. And everytime they miss one it makes the burden of playing the next shot that much heavier.

Ryder Cup psychology for the Americans is all wrong. It's hard for losers to turn things around in sports. Sports sages like to say that winning breeds winning. The obverse is also true. Losing breeds losing.

The Americans won't win again until they loosen up and play like it's a game again.

ABC/ESPN Hit New Low

It was hilarious to hear the commentary on the Notre Dame-Michigan State football game earkuer tonight. Brad Musburger was the lead announcer. He was fine.

There was another fellow in the booth whose name I didn't get, but served as the seemingly required third body in the booth for football games.

The unbelievable, jaw-dropping (and funny) part was that Bob Davie was the "expert" analyst! Bob Davie! You remember him. He was once the coach at Notre Dame who almost completely destroyed the most storied football program in college history with his terrible coaching.

ABC/ESPN actually put him on the air to critique the play and coaching of the school that fired him. I believe that is a first, and one of the dumbest things I've ever seen in sports broadcasting.
To hear Davie give ND coach Charlie Weiss advice on what play to run and how to beat Michigan State shows one of two things.

One, Davie has no sense of the irony of how stupid he sounds in confidently and authoritatively giving advice on how to beat a team he could never beat. Two, someone at ABC/ESPN has a great sense of irony (and humor) on how stupid he would look.

Then again, maybe both are true. Even so, ESPN Sports continues to reinforce its reputation as the place where hapless, losing coaches go when they get fired. ESPN is not only "your home for sports." It's also a home for incompetents to become experts when nobody wants them to coach their football team.

Can Dave Wannstedt of Pittsburgh University be far behind?

Bill O'Reilly on al-Qeada Death List?

Bill told Barbara Walters that he and others at Fox were on an al-Qaeda hit list. He asserted that the FBI told him so. No word on whether Babs or anyone else at ABC tried to confirm the assertion.

Despite what a substantial number of Americans of all faiths may want, if I was al-Qaeda I'd want him on in primetime preaching his hate-based initiatives against Muslims.

I wouldn't let any Muslim touch him. He's the perfect xenophobe to alienate and radicalize our Muslim population.

By the way, has Bill demanded that the Pope apologize for his insultingly medieval reference to Islam? Has Bill wondered out loud why more Christians haven't come out and denounced what the Pope said? He expects Imams and ordinary Arabs to do so all the time.

Onward Christian soldier, culture warrior, and patriotic caricature.

Hugo Chavez, Castro's (hot) Heir Apparent

Hugo Chavez made his play to be the next generation's Castro at the U.N. today. He called Bush the Devil (I thought Jerry Seinfeld was, according to Kathy Griffin). He held up a book written by Noam Chomsky to prove America was evil. I don't think he claimed to have read it.

In a particularly clownish act he made the sign of the cross after calling Bush the devil. He rambled on and on in "Fidelisms" that we have heard for 50 years.

If he doesn't replace Fidel as the top anti-democrat in the world, there's always the circus. I thought Bush was embarrassing to his country when he spoke. Chavez was absolutely humiliating to his country with his act.

The Ryder Cup this Weekend

The U.S. will have the more talented team, as usual. Europe will win, as usual.

European dominance has become so total, regardless of talent level, people in the U.S. don't even speculate anymore about why the U.S. loses every two years.

Wives, individualism, "bonding." When they're not manic-depressives sports writers are Freudian analysts. Golf is golf. A game, not a national cause.

Iraq Troop Levels Will Rise after Mid-Terms

Expect U.S. troop levels in Iraq to hit 200,000 after the mid-term elections. Gen Abizaid mentioned needing more today.

Last week, a highly classified Marine intelligence document was leaked. It said that we don't have enough troops there to control Anbar province since others have been moved from there to Baghdad.

The public line will be "this will do it for sure."

Iran to U.S.: Shove It

Mahmoud did speak tonight at the U.N. after all. He knows that Bush is bluffing and blustering about "not ruling out" military action. The U.S., thanks to Bush, is so over-committed that Iran knows America's hands are tied when it comes to attacking them.

Iran also knows that U.S. interests are not aligned with the other major players, Russia and China. Thanks to the dumb invasion of Iraq, and the commitment of our armed forces to that war, the U.S. has no military flexibility in dealing with Iran. Thanks to the invasion of Iraq, U.S. "intelligence" will have no credibility with the U.N., even if they get it right this time. According to the IAEA they have it wrong again, anyway.

Thanks to Bush and the invasion of Iraq, no one will believe that Iran is harboring al-Qaeda, which they probably are. An attack on Iran after the mess in Iraq will draw no allies this time.
When Tony Blair leaves office British troops will leave Iraq.

Europe, in general, has no stomach for war anymore. Iran knows that. It knows that Europe will do nothing if it continues to develop nuclear capabilities, as long as the Iranians keep negotiating.

I think that as long as Bush is in office, Europe believes it has a greater interest in keeping the U.S. from starting another war than in dealing with a nuclear Iran.

This is where Bush's policies have us. No allies, few friends, and no credibility in our foreign policy.

Altogether, I'd say Mahmoud had a much more excellent adventure today than did George.

Madonna for the Pope, Part 2-The End Time

NBC announced that Madonna's crucifixion will take place in a November sweeps special. It looks like it's all coming together.

NBC will show it just in time for the Pope's visit to Turkey.

The Pope can denounce her and approve her crucifixion to demonstrate to all Muslims that he denounces everything pre-Renaissance, not just Islam.

Until then all good Christians should collect nails and mail them into NBC.

Madonna's crucifixion will also take place right about the time of the mid-term elections. A Karl Rove "November Surprise" family value issue to help the Republicans retain both Houses of Congress.

All these significant events converging at the same time cannot be a coincidence, ladies and getlemen. It won't be sweeps week. It will be the End Time.

Right before the start of Kathy Griffin's new season, too. Just when she looks like she's getting off the D-list, she'll be pre-empted by the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

Bush Speech

Same old hardline at the UN. The word "diplomacy" is not in his limited vocabulary.

Ahmadinejad didn't even show up. He was supposed to speak tonight. His speech has been put off due to an eveidently successful coup in Thailand.

I guess they're going to let the Thai prime minister speak in his spot. I don't know what he'll say if he is now a criminal in his own country.

George and Mahmoud's Excellent Adventure

It should be an interesting day today, as Presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad of Iran give speeches at the UN. Which one will say the most unrealistic, bellicose, things? Which will tell the UN to do its job by stopping the other from doing what he's doing?

Which will be more popular? The bossy guy with the nuclear weapons, or the little nut in the K-mart jacket working on one? Which will threaten more while calling for peace?

It should be an excellent adventure. Stay tuned.

Madonna for the Pope

How about a trade with those Muslims indignant over the Pope's insensitive remarks about their faith?

Christians will agree to really crucify Madonna if Muslims accept the Pope's apology, and both sides move on to a more intelligent dialogue.

Madonna's act comes with a cross, so crucifixion wouldn't be that difficult to get done quickly. We'll just need to find a few nails.

Kathy Griffin is ours, though. No compromise on her, no matter what she may blurt out in the future.

Sorry, gotta run. The Daily Show is on.

Ford, GM, and the End of American Labor Unions

Restructuring. The word means many things in the corporate world. All bad. Whether it's a reverse split in stockholder equity, elimination of jobs, or Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it's all bad.

At Ford and GM it means massive job losses among both blue collar and white collar workers. The blue collar union is going the way of the steam engine. How we will maintain our middle class in the long run is a mystery to me.

The future employability of a person will be based on education and degrees. Those without will be the future working poor of Wal-Mart and McDonald's, without regard to age or experience.

There will be no well-paying middle class jobs. Society is evolving further into a "have not" class serving "haves", with no class of society in the middle between them. A situation rife with class warfare and societal conflict down the line.

The labor union was the only thing that kept industrial jobs paying middle class wages. Without them we will return to a situation where a worker, even with a white collar, will be fungible goods, easily discharged and replaced.

China has trillions of U.S. dollars in reserves from taking our labor jobs. It will use it to spread its influence throughout Asia and beyond. Bush and his fellow reactionaries had better get all their wars going now, because America won't be able to afford them in the future. Not only won't they be able to afford them, they won't have the natural resources, like oil, or the manufacturing base, like steel mills, to fight them.

Unlimited free trade overseas and terrible domestic management geared toward quarterly profits are proving the undoing of society. The management of the automobile companies never learned the lessons of the 1970's gas shortages. They never did make a decent small car to compete with the Japanese throughout that whole era.

They went to the gas guzzlers every time prices came down, as though gas prices would never go back up. When prices inevitably went up they were caught with their pants down each time.

What to do? Restructure. In today's American auto business that means acknowledging that you've managed to lose more market share and must get smaller to reflect it. Eventually, though, your market share is all gone. You can't get any smaller. You, and your middle class, are out of business.

Clinton on Jon Stewart Tonight

Do you think Bill might have called Stewart up and asked to be booked? I have a feeling he wants a chance to respond to "The (right-wing) Path to 9/11."

Why Jon Stewart and the Daily Show Terrify Politicians

I read an article recently about "The 'Daily Show' Generation" in USA Today. The article itself was by a college professor analyzing a study by two other college professors about The Daily Show effect on young people. The two professors from Eastern Carolina University claim to have found that watching the show made younger voters more cynical.

That conclusion about a liberal satirical TV show won't surprise you if you've ever lived in the backwoods of eastern North Carolina. You're talking "Tobacco Road" and Jesse Hemms country. (The spelling of the last name is the way it's pronounced there).

The contemporary dictionary definition of a cynic is "a person who believes that only selfishness motivates human actions and who disbelieves in or minimizes selfless acts or disinterested points of view." You can see that the definition is broad enough so that at some point, and sometimes with good reason, we are all cynics to some extent.

I will leave the academic discussions about whether a young person watches the show because he or she is already a cynic, or whether the show makes them cynical, to the academics.
The interesting point the show raises is why politicians of both parties are so afraid of the show that academics are allowed to use state funds or grants to write studies about it.

The way politicians practice their profession oozes the very characteristics that produce a cynic, as defined, e.g., "...only selfishness motivates human action..." Yet it isn't really cynicism that politicians fear from the voters. Cynicism about politicians has been around long before TV or radio, let alone The Daily Show. Good politicians know how to manipulate cynicism to their advantage.

What really terrifies a politician is being the object of ridicule. Humorous ridicule has the most destructive, least reperable, effect on a politician's career. It's one thing to be the object of hate, distrust, or even cynicism. It's quite another to be the object of ridicule.

An object of ridicule is never taken seriously. A politician cannot survive if perceived as a walking joke. Making politicians the objects of humorous ridicule is The Daily Show stock-
in-trade. That's what really terrifies politicians about Jon Stewart and company.

I can't think of a better example than ex-President, then Arkansas Governor, Bill Clinton. He knew that ridicule like Stewart's is anathema to a politician's career. He was ridiculed by Johnny Carson, the Tonight Show host, who had fifty times the viewers (of all ages) as Stewart.

Carson made a number of jokes about Clinton's long-winded speech at the Democratic Convention in 1988. Clinton didn't care that he was actually booed by fellow Democrats after his speech. The consummate politician was terrified, however, when the renowned Johnny Carson started cracking jokes about his performance and making him the object of ridicule. He knew Carson's ridicule, and his nationwide audience, could ruin his political career.

Clinton and his people frantically and insistently badgered Carson to have him on the show. Clinton saved his career by appearing on the show, playing his sax, and making self-deprecating jokes about the speech himself. After that Carson dropped the jokes. It serves as an object lesson from a master of politics that becoming the object of ridicule can be fatal to your political career.

Despite the study, which seems rather pointless to me, I don't think a little cynicism in politics hurts the young or the old. I prefer Ambrose Bierce's definition of a cynic from his "Devil's Dictionary," anyway.

He defined a cynic as "A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be." I hope we all have a little bit of that in us as the mid-term elections approach.

NFL Lover's Only

Observations on Sunday's NFL games:

• Dumbest Play-Carolina's Chris Gamble "trick" pass that gave Vikings the victory.
• Dumbest Coaches-The guys who called the play, offensive coordinator Dan Henning and head Coach, John Fox. Get "Stevie Wonder" Smith back soon or you're a .500 club.
• Surprise Super Bowl finalist-Baltimore Ravens. Steve McNair first good quarterback they've had since Johnny U. with the Colts. Unstoppable with that defense.
• Dallas will win NFC East. Washington playing down to its talent level this year.
• Bucs will finish last in NASCAR division. Other teams have Sims on tape from last year. This will be his real rookie year, and it will be brutal for him.
• Gruden must be missing Brian Griese now.
• Not enough "Hail Mary's" in the Giants playbook to get them to the playoffs.
• Brady carves up the Jets. J.P. Losman(?) beats Miami in Miami? Pats will stroll through division again.
• Indy Colts-After so many years, Manning will have to prove it before I believe that they can win, or even get to, Super Bowl.
• Bears will stroll through weakest division in football this year.
• Seattle will stroll through second weakest division.
• Not convinced about Atlanta yet, but at least they're letting Michael Vick do what he does best, run.
• Tennessee got what they paid for in Kerry Collins, king of the turnover.
• Raiders keep saving money and losing games. Team motto changed to "Just scrimp, baby."
• Houston Texans passed on Reggie Bush in the draft for a defensive end. Charley Casserly's last curse on the franchise before getting a job in the NFL commish's office. Isn't imcompetence rewarding when you know the right people?

More next week. All predictions subject to injuries. Not only best defenses, but healthiest teams make it to the Super Bowl.

Nightmare Prediction for Iraq War

If the Republicans retain the House and Senate in the mid-terms, McCain, Warner and Pentagon hardliners will agree with Bush to send more troops to Iraq. Everyone will finally agree that we've never had enough troops there to control the country, and that rationale will be used to increase troop strength.

Rumsfeld will take the bullet for Bush (with adequate political body armor in the form of his own Medal of Freedom). A new Sec. of Defense will "reassess" our troop strength. He or she will find it inadequate, and the Generals will tell Bush "for the very first time" that they need more troops.

With elections over and Republicans safely in control, escalation, not redployment, will follow.

Baghdad to Catch Trench Mouth

A new report out says that the perimeter of Bahgdad will be trenched so that there will only be 28 points of entry into the city. No time to build a castle wall, I guess.

I hope it works to keep terrorists out, though I think most of them are in the city already. And many of their leaders (the Mahdi Army and other militias) are in the parliament of the new "unity" government.

We're turning another corner in Iraq. Let's just hope there's not an RPG waiting.

The Pope and the President

Benedict and Bush, both men of their time. If their time was the Middle Ages. To say what the Pope said in Germany about Islam is one of the most effective ways to return to those nostalgic days of religious warfare. Exactly what Islamic fundamentalists like bin Laden want.

For the Vatican to say that the Pope was quoting someone else's insult is disingenuous at best. If you use a quotation, you adopt it as your belief unless you expressly qualify or disclaim it when you use it. Questioning the perversion of the concept of "Jihad" by Islamic fundamentalists is perfectly fair game.

Questioning the whole premise of someone's religion is antagonistic and insulting. The fact that the Pontiff quoted a Byzantine emperor from the Middle Ages is apropos because it reflects Middle Age thinking on his part.

Both the Pontiff and the President say they do not want a clash of civilizations. Yet they are bumbling into something much worse with their poorly chosen words and ideas. They are widening the already strained relations between theologies.

Religious wars are much bloodier and ruthless than nation-state wars. During the first crusade Christians slaughtered 30-40,000 Jews and Arabs (who actually fought together) in the conquest of Jerusalem. There are no Geneva Conventions for religious war.

People feel they can do anything they want since they are killing in behalf of their God. Bin Laden and Zarqawi and every suicide bomber is evidence of that belief. We do not need negligent, undiplomatic rhetoric by Christian believers to stoke the fire that is already underway among Muslims in the Islamic world.

Trust No Poll Before Its Time

To paraphrase Orson Welles's old wine commercial, trust no poll before its time.There has been much surprise among younger bloggers about how the Lieberman-Lamont primary tightened so quickly right before the vote. Lamont had a large lead up until about the last week.

There is a lot of excitement among the same group about a Democratic takeover of the House, based on polls run in various congressional districts. A piece of advice: beware the double-digit lead.

Lieberman-Lamont is typical of the unreliability of polls until almost the last week of an election cycle. Most voters don't even focus on their congressional races until then. And party rank and file who publicly express doubts about whom they will vote for tend to return to their usual voting pattern on election day.

A recent poll in Indiana shows 3 Democrats with double-digit leads over their opponents, all incumbents. If people take that to mean the Dems will win all three, they don't know how conservative Indiana is.

Those double-digit leads should disappear by election day. If the Dems win one of those seats it will be a big accomplishment. If they do win all three, it will indicate a huge sweep of the House by the Dems. They are three good races to watch on election day as an indication of how the House will go.

Don't expect big wins based on polls this early in the election season. They are always fun to watch and to analyze, but incumbent congressmen haven't even been able to come home to campaign. When they do, and we get closer to election day, watch those races tighten.

Talkin' Terror

Since Bush's announcement and acknowledgment of CIA secret prisons, through 9/11 memorials, to the latest debate about Art. 3 of the Geneva Convention, the Republicans have slickly changed the subject from Iraq to terrror.

Even if Sen McCain, John Warner, Colin Powell and other Republicans are arguing with Bush about the details on Art. 3, they are still talking about the subject they prefer: terror. If the issue of Iraq is raised during the "arguments" over Art.3 it merely seems to validate Bush's ridiculous assertion that the Iraq war is part of the War on Terror.

With less than eight weeks to go before the mid-terms, the Democrats had better get the subject back to Iraq. The waste of soldier's lives, treasure, and U.S. credibility in the world is of much more immediate importance to Americans than the nuances of Art. 3.

If the Democrats don't get the discussion back to Iraq they will not win the House back in the mid-terms. The Dems may think that Republican intra-party arguments about Art. 3 will help them. They won't. It will allow the Republicans to run the clock out to November 7 with the terror issue, which works to the Republican's advantage.

Once again, it is Iraq, Iraq, Iraq that will win for the Democrats. They shouldn't complacently allow the Republicans to monopolize the remaining weeks talking, or even arguing about, terror.

State-Sanctioned Torture of our Terminally Ill Patients

I cannot understand why Congress is spending all this time debating the state-sanctioned torture of terrorists when it allows it to go on everyday in American hospitals and homes.

A close and beloved relative of mine has inoperable pancreatic cancer. He decided to forego chemo after several treatments since the doctor said further treatments would only get him an additional two months of nausea and vomiting and an inability to eat.

He was diagnosed last December. He did relatively well until the last few months. Over time his body has become as bone-crushingly thin as survivors of the Holocaust. There is one big difference. He has no hope of being freed of his cancer. To say he has a quality of life of any kind is to mock life.

He has done everything society has allowed him to do. He made a living will. He brought in hospice and they are doing a wonderful job in trying to relieve pain. He has a twenty-four hour live-in to take him to the bathroom and clean him.

He is lucid only periodically now and hospice tells us he is probably within the last two weeks of his life. When lucid, he says consistently, "I just want to die." The rest of the time he sleeps in bed and asks for morphine when the pain becomes too intense. He hallucinates and can no longer carry on a coherent conversation.

However, even though he often told us that he did not want to linger and suffer a long and painful death, the state requires that he do so. In the name of life, no less. He is being tortured because of the irrational ideology and theology of people and a state who have no other interest in him than as a symbolic object of public policy.

No one could look at him and say that the best is being done for him. He has seen and visited with all his grandchildren before he entered this last phase of illness. He was long ago reconciled to the idea of death. The best that could be done for him is what he needs and wants, allowing him to take a life-ending painless medication.

In this final death stage, he tries compulsively to sit up on the side of his bed as though he wants to get out. When asked if he wants to get up, assuming he can understand, he says "no" he just wants to lay down and die.

We asked the hospice nurse why he was sitting up so often. She said it happens all the time with the dying. They even have a name for it. It is called "terminal restlessness." The patient doesn't even consciously know he or she is doing it. According to the nurse, it is symptomatic that the patient is restless to get his or her death over.

I've heard the garbage about how if people are given the choice between living with the absence of pain or death, they will choose to live without pain rather than death. That is a canard, a hoax, used by ideologues who are trying to stop other states from passing Physician-Assisted Suicide laws as in Oregon. At some time, anyone in last stage of death will suffer so much, they will opt for death, just as a person being tortured will.

My relative is not in excruciating pain, thanks to hospice. However, he is ready to go. Yet the state won't let him have that right. They may not mean to, but the forces that create these obstacles for the terminally ill are torturing them at their most vulnerable and weakest state. This last few weeks in my relative's home has not been about some inexperienced, unsympathtic, dogmatist's silly concept of the "sanctity of life."

It has been about the denial of a terminally patient's right to die with dignity.

Ann Coulter's Disappearance

I haven't seen a lot of Ann Coulter in the news lately. Oh, that's right. She called the 9/11 relatives a bunch of attention-grabbing wannabes or some other slander like that. And it was 9/11 recently wasn't it?

Good idea, Ann. I see Matt Drudge is keeping your picture as a faux model off his blog to help you out. Hide in that bunker at least until October. Maybe Cheney can join you. Yeecch! A terrorizing thought.

LNEICCLA # 3

The latest "news" events I couldn't care less about:

• Air America's bankruptcy. Radio is a dying medium.
• Satellite radio. Pay for a dying medium? Come on.
• The visit of the President of Khazikstan to complain to Bush about Ali G. This comes from a dictator who is sitting on a nuclear cesspool left over from the old Soviet Union.
• The Bush "assassination" film. Ho-hum. Banality disguised as art.
• The "Path to 9/11" mini-series. Ho-hum. Right-wing politics disguised as history. Do people really watch TV mini-series anymore?
• Kinky Friedman's race for Governor of Texas. A self-promoter who will do anything to get attention and make a buck. He'll be happy to take yours if you visit his website. Will perform as dancing bear at parties after the election.
• Jim McGreevey's search for himself after having adulterous affairs with men and then going home and making love to his wives.
• Polygamy and the latest nut case in trouble with the law.
• Whitney Houston's divorce from fellow coke-head Bobby Brown. How sensational can you get?
• Don Imus. Another high school grad (maybe) like Hannity and Carlson to whom I am supposed to listen to find out how the world works.
• Nancy Grace's existence.

James A. Baker Advising Boy George? Pray It Be So

Keep your fingers crossed. Insight.com is reporting that James A. Baker, ex-Treasury Secretary and the elder Bush and Ronald Reagan's Chief of Staff is now unofficially advising Dubya on the Middle East. Finally, at the behest of Bush's father, included in those discussions are an exit strategy for Iraq.

Baker and Brent Scowcroft are the two most experienced, diplomatic, and practical men from the father's presidency. Baker would have made an excellent president himself. He can eat Cheney and Rummy for lunch politically. He has an enormous constituency among all Republicans and many Democrats.

He knows and is trusted by all of our Arab allies ever since the first Gulf War. The elder Bush probably decided that he couldn't allow his underachieving son (mom and dad thought Jeb would be president) to self-destruct his presidency.

If Baker truly does obtain the necessary influence with little Bush, in place of the amateurish Rice and the fossilized Cheney and Rumsfeld, there is hope to get Bush out of office without making it impossible for the next government to rule with credibility.

Why the Establishment Doesn't Like Blogging

Blogging cuts across party lines and political ideology. It counters and contradicts the "wisdom" we are supposed to receive from the powerful media magntes and the political elites that until now had a monopoly on information.

Blogging has exposed media blunders and fraud, e.g., the altered Reuters pictures of the black clouds over Lebanon, and the backward clouds of Sen Mike DeWine's WTC political cheap shot ad. "Macaca" became part of the election-year lexicon because of blogging.

It continually shows that the MSM and the political spinners who control it are challenged. Something they are not used to having done. Blogging continually challenges the conventional wisdom that they establish with their herd thinking and reporting.

Worst of all for the establishment, blogging can't be controlled by people who know that controlling information and how you receive it is critical to their existence. Whether it is your daily newspaper, your local TV station, national outlets, the government, or local radio talk show host, they have lost their monopoly over information.

Politicians dislike it for the same reason. They can't control the message. They know that if you can't control the message people may start to draw their own, independent conclusions. That is very unnnerving for politicians, since to be one you have to be a bit of a "control freak."

They hate that loss. That monopoly is the only thing that allows their existence, unless they are good and fair at what they do. Otherwise, they may go the way of the telegraph.

They're response to blogging? As does every monopolist, they try to co-opt it. So each of your local TV stations, every politician, and local newspaper has set up their own blog. In the name of blogging they are merely trying to retain editorial control over a blogger's content and intellectual property.

If you blog on your local paper's blog, you are merely submitting a Letter to the Editor, giving him or her, rather than you, the right to determine if others should see your opinions.

Don't blog to CNN, CBS, or any other institutional blog. Start your own blog. Do it yourself. Take the opportunity to let others know what you think, not what your local newspaper decides
they should think.

Worm Alert

There have been two attempts within the last twenty-four hours to plant a worm on this blog.

The IP address of the worm is 194.129.79.6. It's coming out of the UK.

If you have a problem with my opinions debate them here, you little worm.

This blog is open to anyone to express an opinion, even a lower-life form like you.

Bush's "Struggle for Civilization"

Little did I know that in only the sixth year of the new millennium the United States would be consigned by George Bush in his 9/11 speech to the "decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the call of our generation." If this is a "struggle for civilization," hell, get the nukes out and let's get it over with George. Meet you at Armageddon.

What a cynical ploy to scare voters into voting for an ideologically bankrupt political party again. It also, however, gives you a good insight into how the Bushies want us to buy their Manichean view of the world. There is only good and evil in the world, no shades of gray. We are good, "they" are evil.

The United States is the most powerful country in the world, and yet Bush insists on using rhetoric that attempts to make us feel as though we are the weakest and most vulnerable.

As the world's most powerful nation, we have the power and influence to shape this millennium in many different ways. We can build alliances, or go it alone as we did in Iraq. We can be a force for peace in the Middle East, or we can de-stabilize it as Bush has done. We can use negotiation and diplomacy to resolve differences that will always be with us, as long as mankind survives, or we can continue to use force first, and possibly bring about the end of our standing as a great power, if not the end of mankind.

No one, especially citizens of the greatest power on earth, should buy into Bush's apocalyptic view of the world except apocalyptic-types like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and James Dobson. We have had enemies from the beginning of our existence as a country. Some, like the Soviet Union, have had nuclear weapons. Neither they nor we ever launched one at the other. Why? The answer is obvious. No one would win.

Iran may end up with a nuclear weapon. So what are they going to do with it? If they launch one, at us or at Israel, there won't be an Iran the next day. It will simply be an area of the world that glows in the dark for the rest of the millennium. The Iranians aren't that crazy, no matter how our conservative reactionaries like to portray them.

Iran will slip a nuke to al-Qaeda? Do you really think we wouldn't retaliate against Iran with only minimal proof? Iran knows better. They are not that crazy, nor are they as apocalyptic as our President. We didn't let Ghadafi go unpunished when he killed our soldiers in Germany, even though he proclaimed his innocence. It would be lights out for Iran in that instance as well.

North Korea? Despite the Republican reactionary propaganda, Kim Jong-il is not crazy either. Note how the reactionaries try to portray any enemy as crazy. They used to do it to the Soviet Union and China also.

How do we know that Kim is not crazy? When we invaded Iraq, Kim hid underground for more than 30 days, terrified that we were coming for him next. Hiding to survive is not the action of a crazed lunatic. It is the rational reaction of a man who has enemies on the march. He's a big talk, no action guy. If we haven't learned anything else about the North Koreans we know that.

As I wrote at the beginning, America will have a lot to say about how this millennium turns out. And it won't be decided by November 7 or even by November, 2008. There will still be 92 years left after the 'o8 elections, George.

Bush doesn't have to create an apocalyptic atmosphere in this country and the world to win what he insists on seeing as an endless War on Terror. There can be a much lower key, less crude, more "civilized," approach to winning against a bankrupt ideology like Islamic fundamentalism.

Barren ideas, like communism, end up in the dustbin of history. Islamic fundamentalism is also a barren idea, sure to invent its own destruction and to settle into the same dustbin. We need only time, patience, and vigilance for it to collapse of its own irrationality.

Don't make Islamic fundamentalism more than it is, George.

Contain it. Be vigilant. But be not afraid.

I Love the Ads on this Blog

I think Google's algorithms are a bit out of rhythm for this blog. I don't think I've ever posted anything complimetary (intentionally, anyway) about President Bush, but they keep trying to sell pro-Bush bumper stickers and other right-wing paraphernalia here.

To be fair, Google also advertises anti-war, anti-Bush offerings on the blog sometimes. But I hope you don't think that I really want you to buy a book by that bag of wind, WW III veteran Newt Gingrich.

Kill Yourself a Stingray...

in loving memory of Steve Irwin. That will teach those intelligent beings not to mess with our entertainment.

Let's see, Australia is one of the few countries in Iraq with us, isn't it? OK. It's starting to become clear now.

Sen Allen's "Macaca" Party Falls Flat

If you've seen the Senator from Virginia's "rally" today it is pretty pathetic.

It's pretty bad when you have to hold a rally to try to reassure certain segments of voters that you don't hate them. That's more desperate than a goal-line stand.

Sad commentary on the State of Virginia that he is still up 4 points, although now within the margin of error.

Bush's Speech

It was pretty much as I expected if you read my post from yesterday. Bush did add one new wrinkle to his rationale for starting an unecessary and aggressive war in Iraq.

He admitted that for the first time since FDR and WW II, America was actively and purposely trying to de-stabilize the Middle East.

That is exactly what the old Soviet Union always tried to do. It is also the reason the United States is viewed as an aggressor rather than an honest broker trying to further a fair Middle East peace.

An Opportunity to Open Dialogue with Syria

The recent protection afforded our embassy against Islamic extremists in Damascus presents the U.S. with another opportunity to bring Syria into a Middle East peace process. Let's hope the Bush Administration doesn't blow it again.

Would you rather negotiate with the current secular regime, even though non-democratic, or the religious fanatics who attacked the embassy?

Bush to Appeal for Unity in War on Terror?

President Bush is supposed to ask us all for unity in the War on Terror in a speech tonight. Is there an American in the U.S. who is against the War on Terror? Bush had all the unity he needed after 9/11. Then he blew it by taking us into Iraq through deception.

The "unity" that Bush really wants is for people to accept his definition of the War on Terror. That includes fighting in Iraq, and any other place he and his reactionary buddies Cheney and Rummy want.

That is not a War on Terror. That is a War of the Worlds without end. You get unity only when you earn trust. Bush has lost that trust forever.

Al-Anbar Province in Iraq

More great news from "the front" on the War on Terror. The Washington Post has a story about conditions in al-Anbar province. It is the province to which every right-wing chickenhawk who volunteers opinions in favor of the Iraq War, but doesn't volunteer for the armed forces, should be sent.

The province includes Ramadi and Fallujah. Two of the cities that were going to greet us as liberators and dance in the streets, if you remember. The link will take you to an article about the report of the Marine Corps chief of intelligence.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/10/AR2006091001204_pf.html

We all know what "cut and runners" those Marines are. Just ask Bush and Cheney. We need the right-wing chickenhawk brigades to make up for the shortfall in troops that Rummy sent into Iraq at the start of the war.

The troops in al-Anbar were moved to Baghdad to try to restore order in the capital city. So now al-Qaeda is taking over.

Abu Ghraib's New Jailers

Among the institutions the U.S. turned over to the new Iraq government recently were the jails. Now that the U.S. is out of there things are much improved, right? Not exactly. What Iraqi jailers are doing to Iraqi prisoners at Abu-Ghraib makes the U.S. scandal pale by comparison.

The new "unity" government has merely substituted a new group of Iraqis treating their countrymen barbarically for the previous group of Saddam's Iraqi jailers who treated them barbarically.

You can see how bad it is by linking to the story in the UK Telegraph newspaper
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/10/wirq10.xml.

This doesn't excuse what Americans did at Abu-Ghraib. It's just another example of how getting rid of Saddam in name of the War on Terror accomplished nothing but the destabilization of the Middle East and just changed the roles of the torturer and the tortured between Iraqis.

Bush's Last Dance on the Grave of 9/11 Victims

Thank God. George Bush has no further excuse after today to exploit America's greatest domestic tragedy for political purposes. Bush tried to take the high road by laying a wreath at the memorial for the victims of 9/11 at Ground Zero today. He also finally kept his mouth shut.

While he did that, though, he had his whores out on the Sunday TV talk show streets at the same time, still trying to make the al-Qaeda, 9/11, Iraq connection that Bush himself just denied two days ago.

Rice was working the "Face The Nation" and Fox News side of the street trying to seduce some gullible "John" into believing she wouldn't give him a moral STD if he bought into what was going in and coming out of her mouth.

Cheney was walking the other side of the street trying to pick up gullible "Johns" on "Meet the Press." He was taking his targets for a trip around the world to try to make the connection.

None of it worked. The issue on November 7 will be Iraq, all by itself. The further exploitation of 9/11 has run its course. Bush acknowledged as much when he said there was no connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

The victims of 9/11 will never be forgotten. Now maybe they'll be able to rest in peace, rather than be exploited by Republican reactionaries for political advantage.



.

No Link Between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein?

Duuuuuh.

Thank You, Brad Pitt

I was beginning to run out of excuses with my live-in, too.

Arnold Thought Hollywood Was Nasty

Poor Schwarzenegger. He probably thought he was getting away from all those rags like The Enquirer and The Star with their celebrity gossip and defamation.

Instead he found out that politics is even tougher stuff. His "very hot" comment about a Latina lawmaker and Latinos in general was taped and leaked to the press. That, of course, required a humiliating apology.

The most remarkable part of the story is that his remarks were taped and leaked by someone on his own staff to the LA Times, no less. Someone he hired.

If he thought Hollywood was cutthroat, he's now learned that loyalty is in even less supply in politics.

The New Islamic Republic of al-Qaedaistan

One of the most overlooked and under-covered stories of the week is the new deal Pakistan has cut with the leaders of the tribal region of North Waziristan. Welcome to the new Islamic Republic of al-Qaedaistan.

It is the capitulation of Pakistan in the real war on terror. Pakistan has agreed to pull its soldiers out of that tribal region and redeploy them on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The tribal leaders promised in return not to let the Taliban use the province as a base to attack Afghanistan.

However, Pakistan also agreed not to send its military into the province to pursue Bin Laden, al-Qaeda or other terrorists in the province, including Taliban. That creates the same conditions for running training camps and a command center for al-Qaeda that they had in Afghanistan.

As long as al-Qaeda leaves Musharraf, Pakistan and Afghanistan alone, Bin Laden and his cohorts have the province to themselves, free of any Pakistani military interference in their activities, and immunity from capture or arrest.

Nothing in the agreement says that the terrorists can't attack U.S interests anywhere else in the world from the tribal region. We could certainly use those troops being wasted in Iraq on the Afghan-Pakistan border. If we had them we could use them to attack real terrorists in North Waziristan, since Pakistan has copped out on the war on terror.

Words and Phrases a Republican Won't Say

The following is a list of words and phrases (and a few sentences as well) that a Republican in a close House race won't say to their voters in their district between now and November 7:

• We can't cut and run.
• Stay the course.
• I agree with President Bush.
• It's great to have Dick Cheney here with us today.
• Budget Deficit.
• We need more tax cuts.
• It's great to have Don Rumsfeld with us today.
• I'm against stem cell research.
• Appeasement
• Iraq is tied to 9/11.
• Social Security Reform.
• Macaca
• Bring 'em on.
• The price of gas.
• Blacks cannot swim.
• We're winning the war on terror.
• We're safer today than we have been.
• WW III has begun.

Words and Phrases a Republican Can Say

Here are words and phrases Republicans in close House races can say to the voters in their district between now and November 7.

• Be afraid.
• Illegal immigration.
• Laura Bush has been a wonderful first lady.
• Karl who? I've never met him.

DeLay out to Defeat "Ultra-Liberal" Jerry Springer

Just getting a good conservative like Sarah Evans to win "Dancing with the Stars" is not enough for Tommy boy (see post below). He's also out to defeat that "ultra-liberal" Jerry Singer from winning.

You can have him if you want him Tom. He keeps trying to buy his way onto a Democratic ticket with the money he's made by exploiting the poor and uneducated.

He isn't able to do it because of the way he's made his ill-gotten gains. He should try your Republican party. They don't care how you make it, as long as you've got it.

Springer runs his TV show like you helped run Congress. Confrontation rather than accomodation. You're both from the same mold.

To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, "Extremism in the pursuit of money is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of power is no virtue."

He'll do anything to make money and acquire power and so will you. You two should enter as partners. Then you can have a confrontation about who is the star. No chair-throwing allowed.

Tom DeLay Still Trying to Fix Votes

At least this time there are no accusations of bribery, yet. Tom DeLay is busily spending his days endorsing one Sarah Evans to win "Dancing with the Stars," one of the many criminal venues of Hollywood slime. Even before the first samba.

Why? She is a conservative who sang at the Republican National Convention. He actually sent a mass e-mail to his reactionary supporters to stuff the ballot box for her.

The lobbying business must be slow for him with that indictment hanging over his head. What kind of twisted mind would make a dance contest a political issue?

Bush Blames Supreme Court for No Gitmo Tribunals

It's never his fault. Boy George, in another attempt to deflect criticism from why he hasn't prosecuted top terrorists, took another constitutionally low-blow at the Supreme Court. He blamed the court for deciding that he had to have Congress enact legislation before he could run his military tribunals.

What he never tells you is that he has lawyers too. So does Dick Cheney. These lawyers feed Bush and Cheney's ignorance and disregard for the Constitution with the most extreme interpretations of constitutional law ("Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice").

Some obscure reactionary lawyer named David Addington on Cheney's staff seems to be the lawyer who mainly dishes out the unconstitutional stew that Boy George and Herr Cheney want to slurp down as correct legal reasoning.

At his news conference on terrorism today, Bush acted as if he would have had Khalid Sheik-Mohammed and 13 other high ranking al-Qaeda hung by now, except for that liberal Supreme Court making him follow the Constitution and come up with some rules for fair tribunals in consultation with Congress.

Of course, he could have consulted Congress 5 years ago, passed the necessary legislation, and have them hung by now, if he hadn't acted as though he himself had some dictatorial power to decide how to hold the tribunals.

He shouldn't be pointing fingers at the Supreme Court, of which seven of nine are Republican appointees. He should be asking his own lawyers why they gave him such lousy advice.

Beware Democrats: A Republican Issue with Legs

Gay marriage has finally played out as a wedge issue. Terror has become secondary to getting out of Iraq. That doesn't mean the Republicans are without an issue that can help them keep the House. That issue is illegal immigration.

I posted about the disturbing effects of illegal immigration on the border state in which I live on 8/11. My conclusion was to build the wall first and stop the flow. Then deal with how to handle the illegal immigrants that are here.

The NYT has an interesting article today about how the "build the wall first" issue is resonating not only with Republicans but also with independent voters. In Colorado, no less. Hardly a border state.

It could be the decisive issue in many swing districts if Democrats don't maintain Iraq as the issue in the campaign. Illegal immigrants aren't killing American soldiers.

For Democrats to argue in favor of a guest worker program is a loser. When Republicans talk about immigration, Democrats should acknowledge the problem and then go right back to the Iraq issue.

Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. You win. Illegal immigration without a wall first, you lose.

Tony Blair: A Good Man Brought Down by One Mistake

Tony Blair, under pressure from his own party, will step down as British PM in July, 2007. Over the last ten years he has been a tremendous asset to the UK at home and abroad, except in one case.

He has to leave office for making one very big mistake. Going abroad with George W. Bush. It was due to a sincere desire by Blair to retain the "special relationship" that he thought existed between the U.S. and the UK ever since Roosevelt and Churchill defeated Hitler in WW II.

The first problem was that most Americans, and George Bush especially, don't view anything special about the relationship.

Blair also thought, naively, that he could serve as a moderating influence on our little boy president who always wanted to be a cowboy. He did not know Bush well enough when he fatefully agreed to take the UK into Iraq with the U.S.

He didn't know that the Bush is not only stubborn and inflexible but also dumb and unsophisticated. The "Yo, Blair" humiliation was the final straw for British public opinion.

It is sad to see a real statesman leave the scene, while a clown continues his rope dance through the Middle East quagmire.

"Katie" News

She seemed more comfortable showing exclusive pictures of Suri Cruise than Lara Logan's great report on the Taliban. I don't know how Miss Logan does it. She is able to get to places no one else can. She is a very good and serious reporter. She has no chance to make it in the new world of Katie News.

"Katie's Friends," a/k/a "Free Speech," will recycle the same faces and same opinions of every talking head you'll see on every other talk show. Her first "friend," Morgan Spurlock, just got done doing the Colbert Repor(t). The once interesting, now dreadfully preachy, Thomas Friedman was also involved in wasting part of only 22 minutes that network news has available.

And finally, Katie and her mommy just haven't been able to come up with a sign-off, even though she's had 6 months and probably 100 staffers to help her. Won't you please help her by going to the CBS website and seeing how many hits she can get? How cynically manipulative can one get? So much for journalistic integrity, which, in case she forgot, includes telling the truth.

The "show" should be just fab tonight, with the right-wing's dancing elephant doing "Free Speech." Make sure and miss it. I don't have a sign-off suggestion, but how about a new theme song? I'd suggest "Bring in the Clowns."

Goldwater's Reactionary Legacy: Bush and Rove

I was reading a number of essays by Gore Vidal over the Labor Day holiday. He is one of the greatest American novelists, critics and political observers of the last half of the twentieth century.

Most of the essays were written between 1958 and 1967, an era of immense social change in the U.S. One of his essays was about Barry Goldwater and The Future of Conservatism published in 1961. I recently read that a Goldwater relative (maybe a granddaughter) is doing a documentary about Goldwater.

It is supposed to feature people like Al Franken and other liberals talking about what a great political figure he was. It also reveals that Hillary was a "Goldwater Girl," who sold cookies for the campaign.

Before liberals get too excited or nostalgic over Goldwater, they should read Vidal's 1961 essay. One major fact to remember. Goldwater refused to renounce the support of the John Birch Society, a group so radically right it called President Eisenhower one of forty million communists in the United States in the 1950's.

Vidal's essay also shows us how the political language of America has changed. Goldwater always called himself a "conservative." However, Vidal, and everyone else at the time knew him for what he was, a "reactionary."

Vidal defined the difference between a true conservative and a reactionary in the following way: a true conservative wishes to maintain the status quo. Any change should be incremental and not greatly expand the American welfare state.

A reactionary like Goldwater is one who wishes to reverse an existing state of affairs and to return to a previous condition of society.

Vidal goes on to say: "In the case of Goldwater and his fellow reactionaries...the program of the reactionaries is largely negative. Get the government out of this and out of that. Don't give Federal aid to the schools; don't extend Social Security in any way; do nothing about the...unemployed; save as much money as possible by cutting out all human services so that the income tax can be gradually eliminated (reminds one of the Bush tax cuts, doesn't it?).

Vidal winds up the essay by writing presciently: "In free elections in reasonably serene times, the reactionary has no chance at the polls...In the event of some economic or military disaster, I suspect the reactionary elements in America will come together and try to take power."

Ever since Bush's election that has been the state of our political affairs. Reactionaries have retained power due to the 9/11 disaster and by instilling fear in the electorate. They have never let "reasonably serene times" exist. They use their their color-coded terrorism alerts to make sure voters stay on edge.

Hillary might have sold cookies as a "Goldwater Girl" in 1964, but she grew out of it. Bush and Rove never grew up politically. They are today's Goldwater reactionaries, not Eisenhower conservatives.

There are some differences in the modern day reactionary's agenda. Making corporations rich at taxpayer expense has been added to the reactionary list for instance. Halliburton comes to mind. The reactionaries of today lust for war in a way that is actually anti-Goldwater, who was more of an isolationist.

The fact that reactionaries are now called "conservatives" is one of the greatest political hoaxes ever pulled off by the radical right. Bush and Rove don't want to maintain the status quo. They want to eliminate (reverse) Social Security, lower taxes for the rich, and cut social services. That's a reactionary platform not a conservative platform.

If your Congressman supports their platform, he or she is a radical of the right, a reactionary, not a conservative.

Remember that Goldwater admirers think that the following was one of his finest moments of the 1964 campaign. In his nominaton acceptance speech he said: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And...moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." People today might not know what signal that sent, but back in 1964 it was clearly an anti-democratic appeal to the Birchers and other radical right elements.

Politicians like Bush and Rove took those words to heart. That's why they see no problem with warrantless wiretapping of American citizens, why they see no problem with doing away with separation of church and state. It is why they think their extremism in fighting terrorism is "no vice." They are the "Goldwater Boys" who, unlike Hillary, never grew up.

Katie Couric Ends the National News as We Know It

One of Bill Clinton's biggest achievements in office was the 1996 reform of the welfare system. It was a rare bipartisan achievement and he was proud to say he had "ended welfare as we know it."

Based on evidence so far, Katie Couric will soon be able to boast that she has "ended professional network news coverage as we know it."

According to the Drudge Report, she is going to give such reactionary oddballs as Rush Limbaugh a national forum to spout and spread his loudmouth lunacy. "It was Katie's idea," chirped an anonymous CBS sycophant. With about 18-22 minutes to show the news of the whole world, part of those precious few minutes are going to such well-known heavyweight political thinkers as Bill Maher, the comedian.

This waste of time will be initially be known as a "guest editorial." My guess is it will eventually be called something more "Todayish," like "Katie's Friends." I can hear Matt Lauer expounding on the hottest Hollywood celebrity on that segment of the show someday. Entertainment as news has fully arrived at the home Edward R. Murrow, Fred Friendly, William Paley and Dan Rather, of all places.

If you don't get enough entertainment from your CBS news there is a new website called Couric & Co. Today's post was supposedly by Katie herself. She refers to the billion dollar CBS media conglomerate as "the little village that is CBS News." No reference to any little Shia or Sunni villages in the Iraq civil war whose population is being wiped off the face of the map today by sectarian violence.

Her ghost goes on to write that Katie just wants the site to be viewed as "the coffee house on the corner where something is always brewing." She probably means the Starbucks in the mall, which is the audience she is after. Do you think her little coffee house will include chit-chat about how many marines died in Iraq today?

If you think there is a gender gap in politics, you haven't seen anything like the gender gap that this kind of "Oprah-ized" news coverage will create. News presented with the goal of having everyone like you, from Limbaugh to Maher, is not news. Men will head for the hills and another network.

Will I tune in tonight? Sure. I'm as curious as the next person. Will I ever tune in again? Not likely, unless the newscast is much different from the way they are promoting it.