Wal-Mart, Windsor and welfare.

In the wake of the recent (failed) union vote at the Wal-Mart store in Windsor, Ontario,

Wal-Mart employees voted down a union certification bid yesterday [March 8] amid allegations the retail giant and the union both engaged in unfair labour practices.

it's worth refreshing our collective memories -- what is it that makes Wal-Mart so popular? And the answer is easy: low prices. And how do they keep those prices so deliciously low? Well, by paying their employees crap wages. This is not a tough connection to make, but there's more to it than that.

It's well known that a disturbing percentage of U.S. Wal-Mart employees, because they're paid so poorly, actually have to take advantage of various social services such as food stamps. This is, of course, a terrific deal for Wal-Mart -- they get to pay their workers low wages and let the social safety net pick up the slack, in effect letting the general public subsidize their business practices. Is that a great deal or what? The shoppers revel in the low prices, not realizing that their own taxes are helping to keep them that low. But wait. It gets better.

From this January 2005 online article, we read that Wal-Mart doesn't just quietly turn a blind eye to its workers needing various forms of social services to stay afloat, oh no -- they were right there, giving them a helping hand to do it:

California Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, who represents the 22nd Assembly District and is a former mayor of Mountain View, was outraged when she learned about the sex-discrimination charges in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, and she smelled blood when, tipped off by dissatisfied workers, her office discovered that Wal-Mart was encouraging its workers to apply for public assistance, "in the middle of the worst state budget crisis in history!" California had a $38 billion deficit at the time, and Lieber was enraged that taxpayers would be subsidizing Wal-Mart's low wages, bringing new meaning to the term corporate welfare.

And what happens if you can leech off of social services as a substitute for paying competitive wages? Not surprisingly, companies that play fair really can't compete:

Lieber was angry, too, that Wal-Mart's welfare dependence made it nearly impossible for responsible employers to compete with the retail giant. It was as if taxpayers were unknowingly funding a massive plunge to the bottom in wages and benefits -- quite possibly their own. She held a news conference in July 2003, to expose Wal-Mart's welfare scam. The Wal-Mart documents -- instructions on how to apply for food stamps, Medi-Cal (the state's health care assistance program) and other forms of welfare -- were blown up on poster board and displayed. The morning of the news conference, a Wal-Mart worker who wouldn't give her name for fear of being fired snuck into Lieber's office. "I just wanted to say, right on!" she told the assemblywoman.

Wal-Mart spokespeople have denied that the company encourages employees to collect public assistance, but the documents speak for themselves. They bear the Wal-Mart logo, and one is labeled "Wal-Mart: Instructions for Associates." Both documents instruct employees in procedures for applying to "Social Service Agencies."

Naturally, there is the inveitable right wing-inspired irony:

Most Wal-Mart workers I've interviewed had co-workers who worked full time for the company and received public assistance, and some had been in that situation themselves. Public assistance is very clearly part of the retailer's cost-cutting strategy. (It's ironic that a company so dependent on the public dole supports so many right-wing politicians who'd like to dismantle the welfare state.)

Which brings us back north of the border. What's the situation here? Do Canadian Wal-Mart stores have the same business practises? The phone lines are open.

The United States: Spreading democracy ...

... one beaten-to-death prisoner at a time:

Two Afghan prisoners who died in American custody in Afghanistan in December 2002 were chained to the ceiling, kicked and beaten by American soldiers in sustained assaults that caused their deaths, according to Army criminal investigative reports that have not yet been made public.

One soldier, Pfc. Willie V. Brand, was charged with manslaughter in a closed hearing last month in Texas in connection with one of the deaths, another Army document shows. Private Brand, who acknowledged striking a detainee named Dilawar 37 times, was accused of having maimed and killed him over a five-day period by "destroying his leg muscle tissue with repeated unlawful knee strikes."

The attacks on Mr. Dilawar were so severe that "even if he had survived, both legs would have had to be amputated," the Army report said, citing a medical examiner.

Delightful. An official part of the "Winning Hearts and Minds" program, I'm sure. But the important thing is to identify psychopaths like this and get them out of the rotation, right? Right?

Among those implicated in the killings at Bagram were members of Company A of the 519th Military Intelligence Battalion, from Fort Bragg, N.C. The battalion went on to Iraq, where some members established the interrogation unit at Abu Ghraib and have been implicated in some abuses there.

Oooookay ... apparently, not right.

Republicans to AARP: Thanks for everything. Now piss off.

Then:

In 2003, the powerful AARP senior citizen lobby backed the Republican Medicare bill, which revamped medical benefits for the elderly, enraging Democrats and prompting some older Americans to destroy their AARP cards in protest.

Republicans had kind things to say about the AARP. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, said it represented the "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" on seniors' issues.

Now:

Head of USA Next Promises More Anti-AARP Ads, Despite Court Setback

... Meanwhile, in an interview with The New York Times that will appear this weekend in the Sunday magazine, Charlie Jarvis, director of USA Next, reveals that in a few weeks his group will begin running ads “that very specifically and aggressively brand AARP for what they are, the planet's largest liberal lobbying organization. When they are honest about that, we will take a large number of their members away.” AARP has 35 million members.

The ads, he said in the interview, would involve TV, radio, Web, direct mail, e-mail, and phone alerts.

He said he could not think of a single positive thing to say about AARP's goals and that “they don't really know the facts about an issue like Social Security.”

Ah, the GOP. Such a fickle, fickle lover. You think things are going so well and then, whack!, she's driving down the highway, tossing your dick out of the car window into a ditch. You think some people would learn after a while.

Just when you think you're prepared for the creationists ...

Oh, jeez.

WHOA: And speaking of being prepared, just look at this list of events from our friends at AiG, including this one in my neighborhood. I think I'll be keeping that date open.

Feel free to search for your own upcoming AiG CreationismPalooza event here.

"I came in here for an argument, dammit!"

Every so often, the reward for blogging is getting the occasional well-reasoned, thoughtful comment or followup. And then, sadly, there's also these.

More Republican moral values. Man, this is getting tedious.

Just another upstanding member of the GOP, doing the perp walk.

"Scientific" creationism: Know thine enemy.

And while I'm still working on a couple longer pieces on the intellectual horror that is creation science/Intelligent Design, if you plan on getting involved in the occasional tussle, you really need to understand what you're up against. Think ... uh, think "Jinx McHue", but with less literacy.

No, I'm serious. Really.

You desperately need a taste of the intellectual level of the opposition, and the best place to find that is over here at http://talkorigins.org. Over the course of my own postings, I'll occasionally refer to specific pieces at that site (your humble correspondent having contributed the occasional article there). But, the scholarly stuff aside, you really need to get acquainted with the Feedback section, in which readers write, and TO denizens respond.

Sometimes, the questions/feedback are well-phrased and thought-provoking. Other times, well, not so much. For example, there's this:

I noticed you didnt mention Watchtower.org at all. it is a great anti-evolution website. Your bias is disgusting. You dont list credible,reasonable thoughts, and try to dismiss all believers in God as fanatics. It dont work.Doug.

... and this ...

Did you know that the earth DOES NOT MOVE?

If you look, you find evidence in the bible that Sun, Moon AND stars MOVE around the earth, and the earth is immovable!

You have been deceived!

Found this web site for much more proof: http://www.fixedearth.com

See also Psalms 93:1 and over 100 other verses in the bible (The ONLY scientific LAW BOOK on earth - Only people, ignorant people for that matter are 'RELIGIOUS')

... and this, from someone who apparently hasn't yet grasped the concept of the Shift Lock key ...

EVOLUTION IS A DESIGN OF MANY DIS-ILLUSIONED SCIENTISTS, AND, BIOLOGISTS, WHO DO NOT WANT TO ACCEPT THE WORD OF GOD. PILTDOWN MAN, A PATHETIC HOAX! DARWINISM, WASTE OF TIME. HOW, DOES ONE THINK THAT IF THE FIRST ACTIVE LIFE ON THE PLANET WAS A SINGLE-CELLED BACTERIA, THAT, THIS CELL COULD MAGICALLY(EVEN OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS)CHANGE INTO THE MULTITUDE OF SPECIES PRESENT ON THE EARTH TODAY? IT IS ALSO AMAZING, THAT THE SUN IS POSITIONED JUST RIGHT, THAT THE EARTH DOES NOT GET BLISSTERED WITH METEORS, AND, AN EVER DEPLETING OZONE LAYER FOR PROTECTION FROM GAMMA-RAYS. TO ALL EVOLUTIONISTS, WHEN YOU LAY ON YOUR DEATHBED WAITING FOR THE UNKNOWN, AND YOU LOOK BACK AT THE MEAGER 70, 80, OR 90 YEARS YOU'VE HAD ON THIS EARTH, IT WILL BE TOO LATE TO SEEK GOD. YOUR DESTINY HAD ALREADY BEEN SEALED, YOUR NAME LEFT OUT OF THE BOOK OF LIFE, FOR WHAT? SEEK JESUS NOW, YOUR ETERNAL LIFE DEPENDS ON IT.

... and a little of this ...

Your site disgusted me ...

... and the occasional submission that no one's quite sure what to make of ...

omgOMG!!!!11!!! THE ARCHEPTOREX WAS JUS A BURD1111!!!! HE HAD TRU PERCHING FETE OMG111!!!11!ONE!! HE WAS A BURD THAT FLU SO HI N SO FREE!!!!1!! FLY FREE BIRD FLY!!!1!! THE EVOLUSHUN IS DIZPROFEN!!!!1!11

... and the occasional attempt at brevity ...

where is the proof for your facts. Where you alive billions of years ago. put up or shut up.

... and sometimes, brevity ... ehhh, not so much ...

This page is a sham for the scientific community! there is not a shred of evidence in this page. Only personal attacks on Hovind and Baugh. I guess that it doesn't matter what degree you have. as long as you are creationist then you guys think we are automaticaly stupid. Fact is that most of scientific branches were establised by creationists! take this page down. You're personal attacks on various creationits only shows that you don't have good arguments. Stop making a fool of yourselfs !!!

... and the occasional amateur historian (who doesn't seem to know which version of history he wants to defend) ...

The reason no dinosuars made it on to the ark is because they died out at the K/T boundary which was about 65 million years ago. Noahs ark occurred in the holocene which was only a fabout 7000 years ago. There were no dinosaurs to get onto the ark as they had already died out. How thick are you people.

... and the occasional amateur theologian ...

This website is full of false claims and is all wrong. There is proof that evolution did not take place,and this website seems to be blinded to those facts. When God created the Earth He created it with age, we know this because of Adam and Eve. They were not two when they were created, they were adults. Also most scientists are now admitting to the fact that evolution did not take place. I would recommend a wonderful book called Answers in Genesis. Please open yourself to The Truth of creation and the salvation through Jesus Christ. Thank you

... and the occasional amateur logician ...

hey dude. Did George washington exist? were you there to see him? Then all you are doing is relying on books and textbooks to tell you who he was and what he did. Did god exist? You never saw him either. the bible tells you exactly who he is and was nd will always be, but you don't believe in the bible. Why believe the textbooks?

... and the occasional ... well, beats the hell out of me ...

Gotcha! The Homo floresiensis discovery is final scientific proof that we God-fearing intelligently-designed scientific creationists are right, and you God-hating unintelligently-designed pseudo-scientific evolutionists are wrong. Reason: Their tiny “hobbit” size, especially their sin-shrunken brain, proves that they were part of the degenerated antediluvian race that were wiped out by God by the raging Flood waters 4,000 years ago and were buried by God’s raging waters so that they could be exhumed in the last days. So Homo floresiensis also scientifically proves that the last days are finally upon us! Their wicked sins — they were probably pre-Flood evolutionists — caused both their minds and their bodies to atrophy. For they cohabited with animals, probably some kind of monkey — bestiality! — and their offspring were diminished in body, mind and soul. So God destroyed them. And God’s going to destroy you! “For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an over; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts.” (Malachi 4:1, King James Version, the only true version.) Repent, evolutionists, before it is forever too late!

... and speaking of literacy ...

Kent Hovind is not an embarresment to the creation movement, usally when he cannot be refuted, then this is what the evil-lutionist resort to. He is very good friends with the father of the modern young earth creationist movement Henry Morris, so your facts are liar, which I am sure you are aware of.

... and what is with this obsession with capital letters?

YOU HAVE NOT answered ID. There will always need to be something to cause what is occurring to make lives possible. ANYONE who thinks the human body which is more complex than the modern computer is either ignorant and doesn't know it, or willingly ignorant of the Truth. YOU ALSO DID NOT answer Michael Behe's IC argument. Sure there may be 1 or 2 missing of flagellum in nature, but your still can't assume it started from scratch based on that either. Does it scare you to think of a God existing that made you? Hope you will see the evidence is crystal clear that we are not here by chance but that we are created.

... and then there's the folks who like to get right to the point ...

HAHAHAHAH, Your site is funny, bias and it's filled with jokes, it's like a stand up comic, they make you laugh but you can never take one serious. Thanks guys, I enjoy all the evidence you show for creation. P.S. Kill yourself you are worth nothing according to evolution.

... and, of course, if you have nothing meaningful to say, well, there's always just laughing your ass off, I guess:

i can't believe that people believe the earth is 4 billion years old . i find that to be hilarious!

Don't say you haven't been warned.

And isn't there SOMETHING criminal about this?

Perhaps I'm just being naive, but there's got to be something illegal about the way discount Canadian air carrier Jetsgo just folded up its tent and left thousands of travellers high and dry:

The Montreal-based airline's abrupt suspension of operations left 17,000 angry travellers in limbo across North America during a prime holiday period, and disappointed 1,200 shocked employees from coast to coast.

But it's not as if no one at Jetsgo saw this coming a mile away, is it?

The Greater Toronto Airport Authority, overseer of Pearson International Airport, and air-traffic controller Nav Canada were owed millions of dollars. They had placed stern phone calls this week to Jetsgo, with Nav Canada threatening to seize planes if it was not paid immediately.

The upstart discount carrier's founder, Montreal entrepreneur Michel Leblanc, couldn't deny the growing chorus of demands from creditors any longer...

Court documents filed yesterday in Montreal show the airline has lost $55-million since June 30, including an estimated $10-million last month.

And just what kind of timing was there?

It was two minutes after midnight yesterday when Jetsgo Corp. decided to jump into bankruptcy protection after it failed to fend off payment demands from Canada's biggest airport and the operator of the country's air-traffic control system.

In short, it's not as if any of this could have come as a surprise to Jetsgo executives, which inspires the question: How long had Jetsgo been selling tickets they knew they were never going to honour?

And, under any other circumstances, isn't that called "fraud"?

FURTHER THOUGHTS: I'm sure some legal beagle type is going to explain why this won't work but, the more I think about it, the more I wonder why the federal government, the moment Jetsgo filed for bankruptcy protection, couldn't have stepped in and forced them to continue flying, at least to the point where they had to honour the tickets they had already sold.

As an analogy, those of us who live where it snows know that some cities have a bylaw that requires you to keep your sidewalk clear. If you don't, city workers will come by and do it for you, and the city will send you a bill.

In the same manner, the instant Jetsgo announces that they will stop flying, the feds say, "Uh, I don't think so. We're commandeering your airline, we'll pick up where you left off, keep paying everyone, keep track of the expenses and, when it's done, we'll send you a bill. Or, in your case, we'll move to the front of the line in terms of creditors."

Am I missing something obvious?

OK, pretty sure not what he had in mind.

Then (1999):

"I'm a uniter, not a divider." -- George Bush

Much more recently (2004):

The Washington Post has reported that Hezbollah and al-Qaeda are now training together for the first time.

Mission accomplished, I guess.

And there's some terrific entertainment value in the first few paragraphs of that first link:

I like George Bush. He has a strong set of core convictions, including a significant religious faith, but he is also genuinely tolerant, open and warm-hearted toward people with whom he disagrees.

He has made, for example, the strongest statements of any Republican candidate about including homosexuals in the American family, and treating them with Christian charity and civic respect. "I was taught," he said in response to Trent Lott's infamous remarks, "that we should look after the beam in our own eye before searching for the mote in someone else's."

Bush has the charisma of a national leader, but a personal style that is both down-home and down-to-earth. He is relaxed and disciplined at the same time, a Republican who seems comfortable in his own skin.

Excuse me? And who was the author of this piece of sheer fantasy? David Horowitz. Horowitz ... Horowitz ... oh, right ... that David Horowitz.

Oooooooh ... that's gotta be embarrassing.

Then:

"My opponent says we didn’t have any allies in this war. What’s he say to Tony Blair? What’s he say to Alexander Kwasniewski of Poland?— George Bush, Presidential Debate

Now:

Poland, the fourth-largest contributor of troops to the U.S. led occupation of Iraq, plans to withdraw several hundred of its 1,700 soldiers from the country in July, the defense minister said in an interview published Friday.

Ouch.

Um ... excuse me? Bush White House misappropriating an official government domain name?

From today's press gaggle with White House Press Lizard Scott McClellan:

Also today, regarding Social Security, I want to bring one other issue to your attention, or one other matter. The Treasury Department is launching a Social Security website, strengtheningsocialsecurity.gov. And this is a site that will help with our outreach and education efforts to the American people. It will focus on the problems facing Social Security and the need for a bipartisan solution. The site will also serve as an information center for all the travel that's going on over this 60-day period that we've previously announced. So it will track some of the events by Cabinet officials and the President and White House -- senior White House officials, as well. And it will provide updates on the latest speeches and fact sheets and other materials for people to learn more about our efforts to strengthen Social Security this year.

Pardon my French but WTF? To the best of my knowledge, the entire ".gov" domain is off limits for partisan hackery. According to this policy paper,

Agencies Must Use Government Domains: Every public federal government web site must be established in the .gov or .mil domain to communicate to the public that these are web sites which they can trust to be official government information. This requirement applies to any web site that is funded entirely by the U.S. Government and presents official government information, even if that web site resides on a non-federal government owned computer system.

Rationale: People looking for official government information must be confident that is what they are getting. The .mil and .gov domains are restricted to government agencies; using these exclusive domains assures the public that these are official government sites and that a government agency is accountable for the site’s content. Having all federal web sites in the .gov and .mil domains will also ensure that they are retrievable through the FirstGov government-wide search engine.

In simple terms, the entire ".gov" domain is for official use only for government departments, and is off limits for Republican propaganda. Who's got the clout to raise hell over this?

UPDATE: And this isn't the first time they've tried this. Read about the brouhaha that ensued when the GOP registered the partisan site "GOP.gov" here and here. And here, too.

The joy of pets.

OK, between Steve Gilliard's killer cat, and TBogg's mentally-unhinged basset hound, I'm thinking of getting a fish.

Uh ... so what do you REALLY know about biological evolution? Yeah, I thought so.

Eventually, I'm going to get back to my series on ID/evolution, but here's a short piece to give you something devious to work on in the meantime.

When your local school board starts yapping about there possibly being something to this Intelligent Design stuff, and academic fairness being a good thing, and presenting "both sides", and evolution being "only a theory", go to the next open meeting of the board. And take a test with you.

I'm serious. Give the local media some advance warning and tell them you're taking along a short exam on biological evolution -- perhaps junior high school level, to give them a fighting chance -- and you're going to challenge the board members to take it, with the results to be made public afterwards.

After all, if one is going to pass judgment on evolution, one should at least be prepared to demonstrate some competency with the subject, no? This will make the local paper. Trust me on this one, there's nothing news people love more than pompous, pseudo-intellectual windbags embarrassing themselves in public. And you know that's what's going to happen.

March madness, Canadian style.

OK, so the U.S. has NCAA basketball, but up here, we have ... the Brier. Curling. Big, burly Canadians with large rocks who aren't afraid to use them so don't be walking around Edmonton, whining about your stupid missile defense system, all right?

And being a Manitoba native, I have to admit, I like this story:

... The Alberta rink has been together for five years, has won three national championships and earned hundreds of thousands of dollars on the competitive circuit.

Three months ago, [Manitoba skip Randy] Dutiaume didn't even have a team. At the start of the year, he had lined up a rink to play the competitive circuit in and around Winnipeg. They lost in the city playdowns leading to the provincial championship, and Dutiaume tried to gather his charges for a last-chance shot in the grinding Manitoba Curling Association bonspiel. But as he was studying the draw, trying to determine how many games he'd need to win to earn that provincial berth, his team mutinied, disowning Dutiaume mere days before the start of the bonspiel.

Only second Greg Melnichuk stayed with his skip, who then persuaded Dave Ellis and Shane Kilgallen to join him.

The new formation hit its stride, rolling to a 16-1 record in the Manitoba bonspiel to gain entry to the provincial playdowns.

At that provincial final, only former world champion Jeff Stoughton managed to knock them off as the squad finished 7-1 to win the province.

Add that to the 8-3 record at the Brier and the past eight weeks have been nothing short of remarkable.

We can always dream.

Hacktacular!

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan then (2001):

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Wednesday he’s not worried that the new $1.35 trillion tax cut might plunge the federal budget into deficit.

“I’m not, senator,” Greenspan replied when asked by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., at a hearing whether he was concerned about a potential slide back into government deficit spending.

And now (2005):

Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) said on Thursday he was not "overly" concerned about the record U.S. trade gap and heavy consumer debt loads, but the nation's budget outlook gave him pause.

"The resolution of our current account deficit and household debt burdens does not strike me as overly worrisome, but that is certainly not the case for our fiscal deficit," Greenspan told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

"Our fiscal prospects are, in my judgment, a significant obstacle to long-term stability because the budget deficit is not readily subject to correction by market forces that stabilize other imbalances," he said.

Hack. Complete fucking hack.

Next! A Fox News special! When Republicans do arithmetic! (Viewer discretion advised.)

It's always painful to watch a conservative work with numbers. Take Jonah Goldberg (please), when he tries to do arithmetic in explaining Social Security back in December of 2004.

Well, here's the problem. Social Security was launched when there were more than 40 workers carrying the costs of each retiree. Today there are three workers for each Social Security recipient, and we're heading to a 2-1 ratio soon.

Holy dwindling support structure, Batman! SS must clearly be on its last legs, given that no one took any of this into account and made any adjustments to the system over all those decades! Oh ... wait:

• The Social Security Act of 1935 set the wage threshold at $3,000. Income earned above this amount was not subject to Social Security taxes. This threshold was a fixed amount that was not indexed for inflation.
• Between 1950 and 1971, various Congresses and Presidents passed at least 6 laws to increase the threshold.
• In 1972, the Congress and President Nixon passed a law to automatically index the threshold based upon the national average wage.
• In 1977, the Congress and President Carter passed a law that increased the threshold in 1979, 1980, and 1981 at higher rates than the growth in the national average wage.
• Since 1982, threshold increases have been based upon growth in the national average wage.
• In 1951, the wage threshold was 129% of the national average wage. In 1998, the threshold was 237% of the national average wage.
• The Social Security Act of 1935 set the initial tax rate at 2% and specified increases that would bring the rate to 6% by 1949.
• In 1939 and during the 1940's Congresses and President Roosevelt postponed the tax rate increases that were scheduled in the original Social Security Act. The tax rate of 6% was delayed until 1960.
• Since 1950, various Congresses and Presidents have passed at least 9 laws to increase Social Security tax rates above the 6% level specified in the original Social Security Act.

Oops. It's a good thing Goldberg has no shame. Otherwise, he'd be, you know, embarrassed or something.

Iraq: the good old days.

Feeling a bit nostalgic about the early days of the invasion of Iraq? When Saddam had gobs of WMDs and was behind the 9/11 terrorist attack? When this whole invasion would be a "cakewalk"? When it could be done on the cheap and cost only $1.7 billion? And Iraqi oil would finance the entire country's reconstruction? And Iraqis would be throwing flowers at the feet of oncoming American troops?

Yeah, Joe Galloway remembers those days, too. You see, that's why they call us the reality-based community.

Li'l Scottie -- inventing his own reality yet again.

It's always fun to keep up with the gaggle-obsessed Holden over at First Draft. Here's the latest installment, with White House Press Reptile Scott McClellan apparently inhabiting a different universe from yours and mine:

Q: Can you talk about this -- these conversations with France and others about allowing Hezbollah into the --

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know what you're talking about. I mean, our view on Hezbollah has not changed. What our goal is, which is shared by the international community ...

Hmmmm ... and the Bush administration began caring about the opinion of the international community ... when exactly? But Scottie continues further on his descent into madness:

What our goal is, which is shared by the international community, is to see Syria get out of Lebanon, which is called for in Security Council Resolution 1559.

Ah, so obeying UN Security Council Resolutions. That would be a good thing, then? And you thought conservatives weren't into moral relativism. Silly person. (Cue: conservative wingnuts howling, "But, that's not what that resolution says ... sputter fume drool ...")

But here's the best part of Scottie's weaseling, when Scottie defends the current Social Security Bamboozlepalooza tour:

Scottie: ... And what I was pointing out to you is that the process is still ongoing at this point...

Now, at this point, I'm imagining the following hypothetical exchange:

Reporter: Scott, you have, on several occasions, stated that the process of explaining the President's position on Social Security is "ongoing", that it's only now your turn to come to bat, that it's unfair for critics to complain about a plan that you haven't even presented yet. At what point will this process no longer be "ongoing"?

Scottie: I'm sorry?

Reporter: Well, yes, you are, but that wasn't the issue. At what point will the President finally present his entire plan for Social Security, so that everyone will have the opportunity to study it and comment on it? I don't understand how he's been doing all of these public presentations on Social Security and yet no one quite seems to know what the reform plan is, and you insist on describing the entire process as "ongoing". When will the final plan be presented in its entirety for general examination?

Scottie: Well, that's ... uh ... the President is ... looking forward and, uh, reaching out and he's ... looking forward to reaching out and ... hey! Look at the bright shiny thing over there! (Side whisper to White House Security: "Take that man out and have him killed.")

Is it asking too much for some member of the White House press corps (and I'm speaking in a purely heterosexual, non-man-whore kind of way) to ask, "Is there a plan, and what is it?" Hell, I'll bet even that crotchety old Arab Helen Thomas could have a field day with a question like that.

Republicans: giving fascists a good name.

Following a link from Digby, we have the Republicans, doing to democracy sort of what they do to foreign countries.

How many more lies, sweet Jesus, how many? Part deux.

OK, not so much another lie as just a repetition of the same one. Over and over and, God help us, tediously over. From the latest Bamboozlepalooza in Kentucky, we have Admiral Bunnypants:

Now, first, you know, I'm sure some folks think that the Social Security trust is actually a system where the government has taken your payroll taxes, kept it for you, and then is going to give it back to you. This is a pay-as-you-go system. There's no such thing as a trust.

From the Social Security Administration web site,

Q: Is there really a Social Security trust fund?

A: Yes. Presently, Social Security collects more in taxes than it pays in benefits. The excess is borrowed by the U.S. Treasury, which in turn issues special-issue Treasury bonds to Social Security. These bonds totaled $1.5 trillion at the beginning of 2004, and Social Security receives more than $80 billion annually in interest from them. However, Social Security is still basically a "pay-as-you-go" system as the $1.5 trillion is a small percent of benefit obligations.

How much longer can this go on? Seriously. Mainstream media? Hello?

Um ... so Hezbollah are the GOOD guys now? Who knew?

I was going to write a moderately serious post about the inevitable cognitive dissonance going around the White House at the moment, now that the Bushista regime realizes they have to deal with Hezbollah. But why be serious when John over at AmericaBlog does it so much better, in a glorious display of snark.

Brave Sir Lloyd and the evil knight Condi: The fallout.

Remember when our own Lloyd Axworthy took Condi Rice out to the woodshed? Well, it ain't over yet.

Conservative leader Stephen Harper announces support for gay marriage. OK, not really.

(CC News) In an unexpected move that caught many members of the Canadian Parliament by surprise, Conservative leader Stephen Harper, during the vote on the recent budget, faked as if he was going to stand, then sat back down again.

"Was that funny or what?" Harper later asked reporters. "Sometimes, I really crack me up."

Later, during a discussion on gay marriage, Harper announced, "After a great deal of deliberation, we in the Conservative Party realize that we've been dead wrong about this. We realize it's time to fully embrace the concept of same-sex marriage, to treat all Canadians equally, to treat gays and lesbians with honour and dignity, and in accordance with the Canadian Bill of Rights."

After a short pause, Harper suddenly continued, "Ha ha! Just kidding. Psyche!"

How many more lies, sweet Jesus, how many?

So much for that Saddam Hussein "hidey hole" story. Jesus Christ, is there anything these people won't lie about?

And even MORE bogus right-wing "persecution".

Recall, if you will, the story of poor, downtrodden college Republican Ahmad Al-Qloushi, whose tearful saga of persecution at the hands of those evil, left-wing academics turned out to be total bullshit.

Well, they're baaaaaack.

More Republican moral values.

From one of my favourite comic strips.

Just another frothing-at-the-mouth, irresponsible, troublemaking, left-wing blogger.

Over here. And that's a wickedly appropriate Tom Toles cartoon, no?

Where have you been for the last couple of years, Scottie?

From a recent White House press gaggle, we have WH Press Weasel Scott McClellan, apparently not thinking too far ahead:

MR. McCLELLAN: We want the Lebanese people to be able to determine their own future without any outside interference or outside influence. Syria is a destabilizing force in the region right now because of their actions and their continued support for terrorism and their continued presence in Lebanon. We have seen in the past few weeks large numbers of Lebanese people going out into the town square in Beirut and talking about -- or speaking out in support of freedom. That came on the heels of the assassination of former Prime Minister Hariri. And we continue, as the President did earlier today, to join the international community, calling on Syria to comply with Security Council Resolution 1559. It was very clear. It said, the complete and immediate withdrawal of all Syrian forces -- that means military forces and intelligence service personnel.

And our objective is to make sure that the upcoming parliamentary elections in May are free and fair and credible. For those elections to be free and fair and credible, Syria needs to get out.

Um ... yeah. Holding elections while being occupied by a foreign power. That's a bad thing, then, is it?

UPDATE: Apparently, I'm not the only one with an eye for irony.

Houston, we have a difference of opinion.

So, the U.S. has one opinion. And the head of the Shiite Alliance has quite a different opinion. This should be fun. Pass the popcorn.

Who's a hack? Instapundit's a hack, that's who!

Oh, yes, it's always great fun when big-name right-wing bloggers get hung out to dry.

What's this? Some blacks finally making the connection?

From over at TBogg, we have "Black Army recruits down 41 percent":

The Army's wartime recruiting challenge is aggravated by a sharp drop in enlistments by black people during the past four years. Internal Army and Defense Department polls trace that to an unpopular war in Iraq and concerns among black citizens with Bush administration policies.

Well, that and the fact that an increasing number of them have blogs. Those can be awfully time-consuming.

Working our way through the U.S. "friendly fire" checklist.

Let's see here ... Italy? Check. Bulgaria? Check. Canada? Check. Brits? Check. Other Americans? Check. Well, at least they're not playing favourites.

Dude, that is SO, like, post-Civil War.

U.S. President Chimpy McChimpster, still struggling with that lawn jockey fetish.

Social Security and black boxes.

There's an old joke that goes, "You know how, when a plane crashes, sometimes the only thing that's left is the black box? Well, why don't they just make the whole plane out of that same stuff? Huh?"

Which reminds me of a number of SS-related pro-privatization blogs and columns I've read lately, all claiming how investing money in private, market-driven accounts would absolutely provide a better rate of return than the stodgy, safe, conservative SS system that's in place now.

To such people, I have a simple question: If private accounts can generate a better rate of return, why not just move all of Social Security -- the whole thing, 100% of it -- into these private accounts, and give absolutely everyone the benefit of that better return?

That is the claim you're making, isn't it?

WMDs? Sorry, never heard of them.

From one of my favourite authorities on the Middle East, Juan Cole, we have the following delightful bit of enlightenment:

The United Nations is worried that 90 of the sites in Iraq it had identified as having dangerous weapons have been looted. The inattention of the US Department of Defense to arms depots since the fall of Saddam has been breathtaking, and helps explain the success of the guerrilla war, which is fueled in part by easy access to Baath arms depots. The UN is afraid that the dangerous materials might show up outside Iraq. Given that some of the explosives were high-powered and could bring in a good price from terrorist organizations, this fear is entirely reasonable.

Well, it's a good thing that that whole Iraqi invasion thing had nothing to do with WMDs, and was solely for the purpose of spreading democracy. Cuz' if it was originally justified by the alleged existence of WMDs, that would be kind of embarrassing, wouldn't it?

Oh, dear ... here we go with that "sovereignty" thing again.

From a front-page article in today's National Post, we have (mercifully) outgoing U.S. ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci, really starting to grate on one's nerves:

Mr. Cellucci said yesterday the United States believes the Martin government has given up some of Canada's sovereignty by turning its back on joining the missile defence plan.

It's not clear whether Cellucci is simply trying to be provocative or is really that unspeakably dense but making snide comments about a country's sovereignty is overstepping the bounds of pretty much anyone's diplomatic limits.

It might be time for someone in Ottawa to make a polite call to someone in D.C. suggesting that, the next time an American diplomat starts making threatening noises about Canada's sovereignty, said diplomat will be placed on the next flight home until they learn how to act like a grown-up.

Um ... wait a minute, let me rephrase that.

(CC News) In a recent speech, U.S. President George W. Bush reiterated his demand for a complete pullout of Syrian soldiers from Lebanon, stating:

"I don't see how you can have a fair election [in Lebanon] with Syrian troops and Syria's secret service embedded in the society."

Before he could continue, however, Bush suddenly burst into flame, apparently from an overdose of irony.

U.S. troops fire on car carrying Italians in Iraq -- one killed.

In a disturbing development, American troops in Iraq fired on an unarmed vehicle carrying some Italians, killing one of the passengers in the car. While the ambassador and his wife escaped unhurt, their Iraqi translator was shot dead and ... oh, wait ... you thought I was talking about this, didn't you?

The freed Italian hostage wounded by American troops at a checkpoint in Baghdad shortly after her release said in an article Sunday that her Iraqi captors had warned her U.S. forces "might intervene."

Giuliana Sgrena, who writes for the communist newspaper Il Manifesto, described how she was wounded and Italian intelligence officer Nicola Calipari was killed as she was celebrating her freedom on the way to the airport. The shooting Friday has fueled anti-American sentiment in a country where people are deeply opposed to U.S. policy in Iraq.

"I remember only fire," she said in her article. "At that point a rain of fire and bullets came at us, forever silencing the happy voices from a few minutes earlier."...

No, no, I'm talking about the first time, back in 2003:

On 18 September an American soldier in Iraq fired on Pietro Cordone, senior adviser for culture to the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). Although the ambassador and his wife escaped the incident unharmed, his Iraqi interpreter, Saad Mohamed Sultan, was shot dead. The US military expressed regret for the shooting, which took place on the road from Mosul to Tikrit.

Oops. Good thing those Italians are such staunch supporters and Coalition members. Otherwise, they might be getting a bit pissed by now.

Republicans to veterans: All your savings are belong to us.

According to this page over at Democratic Underground, Republicans have a spanking new way to show their support for the troops -- taking away more of their money.

What's the best way to support the troops, especially in a time of war? Republicans on the House and Senate veterans' affairs committees have got the answer: raise their taxes. Those Republican majorities voted last week to "impose an enrollment fee of at least $230 a year on 2.4 million veterans - one of every three now eligible for Veterans Affairs Administration health care," according to Military.com. Apparently half of those 2.4 million veterans used the VA health system last year.

Of course, you won't hear the word "tax" mentioned by the Republicans - these new charges are "fees." And in case you were wondering, that's the word Republicans like to use when they want to, um, raise taxes. The chairmen of the House and Senate VA committees wrote separate letters to committee members explaining that "difficult choices have to be made this year, given a tight VA budget and the number of new veterans returning from war with severe injuries." A tight VA budget? With a troop-supporting, Republican-controlled House, Senate and White House, how in the world could that be?

And, from a Republican perspective, nothing says "We love our troops" like taking more money away from soldiers with severe injuries.

George W. Bush has been keen to insist that during a time of war we need to make sacrifices - it's just a shame that the sacrifices apparently have to be made by the soldiers he sent to war in the first place. I mean, I'm sure the top 1 percent who benefited hugely from Bush's tax giveaway could sacrifice, say, that fourth BMW in order to make sure veterans get the health care they deserve. But I guess the Republicans prefer to charge people who have sacrificed plenty already.

And why not? It's not like the troops are complaining or anything. Apparently, give them the occasional party and pep talk, and they can learn to live without, oh, armor and decent medical care. And a limb or two.

And as for the ones with severe brain injuries? Well, come on, those folks don't even know how badly they're injured. Is that a bonus or what?

NEWS FLASH: United States not a theocracy after all! Shocking details at 11!

Oh, man, this is priceless. "Christian lawyers say bill, Bible don't mesh":

A national group of Christian lawyers is appealing to church leaders to join them in lobbying against the bankruptcy reform bill introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Ia.

The lawyers say the legislation runs contrary to the forgiveness of debt and charity required by the Bible.

"As Christian attorneys, we strongly believe that it was never God's intention to create a society where indebtedness was a crime or a badge of dishonor," Christian members of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys wrote in a letter sent Feb. 26 to hundreds of church leaders across the nation.

The bill, which is receiving Senate debate, would make it harder for most people to receive full debt cancellation under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy laws. More people would have to repay at least part of their debt, based on income.

The lawyers note that in the Old Testament, God did not outlaw borrowing and lending, but provided that loans would become discharged every seven years.

So far, so good, but here's the howler:

In response, Grassley said Congress could not be bound by biblical mandates because "the Constitution does not provide for a theocracy."

Wow! The Constitution does not provide for a theocracy? Who knew? I'll bet that comes as a huge surprise to this guy. But Grassley isn't done yet:

"I can't listen to Christian lawyers because I would be imposing the Bible on a diverse population," Grassley said.

Yeah, and imposing the Bible on a diverse population -- that would be awful. What kind of complete wingnut would want to do something like that?

It's a good thing we have upstanding, responsible Republicans like Grassley to set everyone straight. Otherwise, who knows what kind of mischief these religious loons would get into?

Man, that was a close one.

Sen. Robert Byrd, racism, the KKK and the spectacle of (God help us all) black Republicans.

This is an open thread for those folks who, while members of the Republican party, want to yammer on about the rasicm of Democrats. Go figure.

The comments leading into this can be found here. Feel free to take it from there.

Oops ... the boys at Powerline getting a bit ahead of themselves.

And over at the newly-unretired No More Mister Nice Blog, we have Steve catching Powerline's Ass/Butt/Hind/Rocket/Missile getting just a wee bit carried away. But have no fear -- this would only be moderately embarrassing if any of those loons had any shame. Whew. Close call, that.

WHOA: Apparently, I'm being overly polite. Now this is a little more appropriate.

The U.S. ban on Canadian beef: Suing under NAFTA's Chapter 11.

I'm sure someone's already thought of this but it's not clear why Canadian beef producers aren't suing under NAFTA's Chapter 11 for damages incurred by the current American ban on Canadian beef. As an introduction to NAFTA's Chapter 11, you can start here, with an article that describes a real-life example of a Canadian company (rightly or wrongly) using Chapter 11 to get compensation for alleged financial damages:

The case of Methanex v. United States originated in California in the mid-1990s, when people began to notice a foul taste in their drinking water, a smell like turpentine. Santa Monica had to shut down half its supply wells and purchase clean water from elsewhere. The contamination turned up in thirty public water systems, Lake Tahoe and Shasta Lake, plus 3,500 groundwater sites. The source was quickly identified as methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a methanol-based gasoline additive that creates cleaner-burning fuel, thus reducing air pollution. But even small amounts of MTBE leaking from storage tanks, pipeline breaks or car accidents made water unfit to drink--and extremely difficult to clean up. A study team from the University of California, Davis, added that in lab tests on rats and mice, MTBE was also carcinogenic, raising the possibility of human risk.

The state government acted promptly. In 1997 the legislature authorized a ban on MTBE if further investigations confirmed the health risks. In March 1999, after more research and lengthy public hearings, Governor Gray Davis issued an executive order to begin the phaseout. Other states were acting too. The oxygenating additive is used in one-fourth of the US gasoline supply, especially in pollution-prone big cities, so New York, New Jersey and other places were also discovering MTBE's unintended consequences for clean water. Up to this point, the story sounded like an alarming but fairly conventional environmental problem.

Then, four months after Governor Davis's order, a Canadian company from Vancouver, British Columbia, filed a daring lawsuit against the US government, demanding $970 million in compensation for the damage California was inflicting on its future profits. Methanex Corporation, which manufactures methanol, principal ingredient of MTBE, claimed that banning the additive in the largest US market violates the foreign-investment guarantees embodied in Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Under Chapter 11, foreign investors from Canada, Mexico and the United States can sue a national government if their company's property assets, including the intangible property of expected profits, are damaged by laws or regulations of virtually any kind. Who knew?

Yeah. Who knew? And is there a reason this same law doesn't apply to Canadian beef? Just asking.

UPDATE: I am not a lawyer, so I'm not at all sure whether NAFTA's Chapter 11 would cover this situation, but from what little I've read, Chapter 11 certainly seems to paint with an awfully broad brush. And, as Andy points out in the comments, he has a link here over at Floccinauci ... whatever ... which refers to a recent Business Week article on this topic (although that article requires a free registration.)

If you want to know more, just Google on a combination of "Chapter 11" and NAFTA. There's more than enough reading to keep you plenty busy, like this piece.

DOUBLE UPDATE: I want to apologize to those readers who might wander into the comments section looking for feedback on NAFTA and Chapter 11, and find instead a thread related to U.S. Senator Robert Byrd and racism. Sadly, we have the occasional commenter who knows nothing of common courtesy and insists on posting his opinions wherever he feels like it. One can only hope folks like this grow up some day, but I am not optimistic. Again, my apologies. Any further comments not related to the original post will be deleted. I've started a new thread here if you want to keep this up.

With friends like these ...

... who needs radical, fundamentalist, terrorist suicide bombers? "U.S. Forces Kill Italian Agent After Reporter Freed.":

U.S. forces fired at a car carrying Italian reporter Giuliana Sgrena shortly after her liberation, killing an Italian secret service agent and lightly wounding the journalist, her newspaper said on Friday.

As Donald Rumsfeld would undoubtedly say, you open fire on the unarmed, unidentified vehicles you have, not the ones you wish you had.

Hey, it was just a "youthful indiscretion," OK?

There's a certain perverse appeal to watching someone make a total fool of themselves, such as with regular commenter and attack Bichon Frise "Dizzy Gillespie", who seems to remove one foot from his mouth just long enough to insert the other one. How else to explain here his recent slapdown of Senator Robert Byrd for Byrd's involvement in the KKK when he was younger?

Is there a point to Gillespie's comment? Byrd's previous membership in the KKK is well known, and is something that Byrd has been apologizing for for decades now. In fact, even Gillespie seems to be aware of this when he quotes from a Wikipedia article:

In a 1946 letter, he wrote, "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia." However, when running for Congress in 1952, he announced, "After about a year, I became disinterested, quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization. During the nine years that have followed, I have never been interested in the Klan."

Um, yeah, he kind of lost interest. And it's a shame Gillespie didn't follow up on this with something a little more recent, like Timothy Noah's 2002 article in Slate, where we read the following exchange between CNN's Bernard Shaw and Byrd:

Q (Shaw): What has been your biggest mistake and your biggest success?

A (Byrd): Well, it's easy to state what has been my biggest mistake. The greatest mistake I ever made was joining the Ku Klux Klan. And I've said that many times. But one cannot erase what he has done. He can only change his ways and his thoughts. That was an albatross around my neck that I will always wear. You will read it in my obituary that I was a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

And, sadly, Byrd is right. It doesn't matter how many times he renounces his KKK past -- there will always be ignorant, little twerps like Gillespie who keep dragging it out as if it's somehow still relevant.

Of course, it's not surprising that someone like Gillespie would be thoroughly baffled by the concept of someone owning up to a mistake, apologizing for it and taking responsibility for it. If Byrd were a Republican, chances are his entire racist past would be dismissed as just another "youthful indiscretion," of which the Republicans are absolute experts. Apparently, the notion of a "youthful indiscretion" can absolve one of all sorts of morally-questionable behaviour. Like here. And here. Oh, yes, the list of GOP youthful indiscreets does go on, doesn't it?

Once again, being Republican really does mean that you never have to say you're sorry. Just young and stupid. And when it comes to dealing with people like Gillespie, well, there's some pretty wicked irony there, isn't there?

Who will be the next JamesJeffGannonGuckert?

Via Crooks and Liars, we have the race to become the next fake, right-wing White House Press Corps journalist. And I use the word "journalist" in the loosest possible way.

Conservatives chastise Sen. Byrd for "Hitler" comment.

(CC News) Reacting to a warning by Sen. Robert Byrd about the danger of repeating historical mistakes regarding the treatment of minorities, two Jewish groups and two GOP politicians criticized Byrd for using an analogy to Adolf Hitler to get his point across.

Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, in particular, claimed that the comments would "lessen the credibility of the senator and the decorum of the Senate," and many conservatives seemed to agree.

Former Texas GOP senator Phil Gramm decried Byrd's lack of tact, and suggested it would only be fair to now hunt Byrd down with dogs.

Right-wing banshee and screech harpy Ann Coulter also expressed outrage at Byrd's outspoken bluntness, further suggesting that it would be only appropriate to now invade Byrd's home state, kill all the Democratic leaders and convert the survivors to Republicanism.

Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly reacted to Byrd's comments, telling Byrd that he should, "Shut up! Shut up! Just shut up!", while vice-president Dick Cheney expressed sorrow over what he called Byrd's "impolitic remarks," and suggested that Byrd should just go fuck himself.

In a determined attempt to restore some semblance of sophistication and politeness to the chamber, Santorum asked if anyone wanted to know his views on gay marriage and "man on dog" sex.

Open thread.

Busy day today. Read any good books lately?

Calling all Republican chickenhawks ...

Following a link from John over at AmericaBlog, we find that the U.S. Army is falling short of its recruiting targets in spectacular fashion:

In what could be a troubling sign for the military, the active-duty Army missed its February recruiting goal by more than 27%. It was the first time in almost five years that the Army has failed to meet a monthly target...

And it's not like they're not pulling out all the stops:

The February shortfall is especially worrisome because it comes as the Army is trying to lure recruits with the largest enlistment bonuses it has ever offered: up to $20,000 to some recruits willing to sign on for four years. The Pentagon has also been adding thousands of recruiters for the Army and other branches.

Gosh, I wonder why all the reluctance:

Doug Smith, a spokesman for U.S. Army Recruiting Command at Fort Knox in Kentucky, attributed the shortfall in part to competition from the improving economy and parents' fears that their children could be injured or killed in Iraq.

Oh, right -- there's that "getting killed" thing that sort of puts a damper on your basic right-wing enthusiasm for military action. Bummer, that.

There's diplomacy, and then there's SMACKDOWN!

Following a link from over at True North, we have former Canadian foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy making sure he's never going to get invited to the White House under this administration. Truly, some glorious snark.

Missile defense: all bark, no bite.

You know, before we start agonizing over whether or not to get involved with the U.S.'s vaunted missile defense program, it kind of behooves us to figure out whether it's legit, or just the biggest swindle ever perpetrated on a gullible public:

AFTER MORE than 3 1/2 years of foot-dragging, excuses, and violations of federal regulations, MIT announced last week that it could not investigate credible evidence of possible scientific fraud in fundamental National Missile Defense research being done at MIT's Lincoln Laboratory. The reason outgoing president Charles M. Vest gave is that the Pentagon had classified everything about the investigation.

If the particular allegations of fraud have merit -- and I believe they do -- MIT and the Pentagon have been involved in a fraud that has promoted a weapon system that will have little or no utility and could cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Of even greater importance, millions of lives could be lost if this weapon system failed to defend our nation from a nuclear ballistic missile attack.

And beyond the really neato, cool, geeky technical aspects, well, there always your regular, run-of-the-mill Republican corruption:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Army crime investigators are looking into a retired Colorado Springs Army officer's assertions that agencies working on the U.S. missile-defense program engaged in contract fraud and abuse.

The allegations include claims that missile-defense contracts were improperly awarded to a company headed by Jay Garner, who last year served briefly as the top U.S. administrator in Iraq.

Yeah, there's a little something here for everyone. Don't you feel safer already?

OH, LOOK! Following the example of several of my Canadian colleagues, we have the Christian Science Monitor rushing to our defense: "Don't blame Canada for missile-defense snub". Yeah. It's not always our fault. Now, Celine Dion -- OK, she's our fault.

The few, the proud ... the understaffed.

Uh oh ... following this link from over at First Draft, we learn that the U.S. Marines are having a bit of trouble filling their quotas:

The Marine Corps for the second straight month in February missed its goal for signing up new recruits, the Marines said on Wednesday, in another sign of the Iraq war's effect on military recruiting.

Gosh, do you think the bad publicity might have anything to do with it?

SNARKY AFTERTHOUGHT: I'm not even going to make the obligatory Jonah Goldberg reference. I doubt the Marines would ever be that desperate.

Canadian PM announces new strategy for cross-border trade.

(CC News) In a calculated response to the recent U.S. decision to continue a ban on imports of Canadian beef, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin announced an increase in the price of oil to the United States, from $28/barrel to $1500/barrel.

"But," added Martin, "with each barrel, you get a free side of beef."

Yet another milestone: "U.S. death toll in Iraq hits 1,500"

As reported on CNN this morning,

The U.S. death toll in Iraq hit the 1,500 mark this week with the death of a soldier killed in action south of Baghdad, the military announced Thursday...

More than 1,300 of the deaths have occurred since President Bush declared an end to major combat in Iraq on May 1, 2003."

Oh, yeah, that whole "Mission Accomplished" thing. Whatever happened with that? Oh. Right.

BONUS SNARK: Not surprisingly, CNN has bought into the historical revisionism of Bush supposedly having declared an end to "major" combat operations way back on May 1, 2003. Billmon has the real story on that.

Dear Americans: Sorry about that whole missile defense thing. Now, about our oil ...

I'm assuming that, when sanctimonious hypocrites like this want to make a statement about not wanting anything to do with Canada, they also don't want anything to do with our oil, either.

Or our good reputation overseas. (Thanks to commenter MK for that last link.)

Bob Novak: a Godly man, doing God's Godly work.

Following a link from the fine folks over at Crooks and Liars, we have a short WaPo piece as to how right-wing hack and treasonous low-life Robert Novak is actually on a mission from God:

He's been known for 40 years as Washington's journalistic "prince of darkness," but cranky, arch-conservative pundit Bob Novak believes he's doing God's work.

"I'm trying to tell the truth and taking positions that I hope are godly positions, positions that I hope are helpful to my fellow man," he tells Vanity Fair in a profile that hits the stands tomorrow. "And I don't think there's any law against enjoying myself in the process."

The 74-year-old columnist and CNN commentator remains mum on a great mystery of the moment: his legal status in the Valerie Plame leak case. "While two other reporters, Matthew Cooper of Time and Judith Miller of the New York Times, face jail time for refusing to divulge their sources in the case," writes VF contributing editor David Margolick, "the man who broke the story apparently doesn't."

Novak does talk about his lightning-rod reputation and even shares a recent hate e-mail: "Too bad you weren't on the beach when the tsunami hit," it reads. "You are a disgrace to journalism . . . partially due to your senility."

But the piece describes Novak as a formidable, hardworking columnist -- "he has courage and foresight," writes Margolick -- and notes that "despite spinal meningitis, three types of cancer, two broken hips, two broken wrists and a broken ankle," the man hasn't slowed down. How long will Novak last? "Well, I think probably it's God's will," he tells the mag.

Apparently, then, it's doing the work of the Almighty that has turned Novak into the amoral, unethical, dishonest, lying, sack-of-shit, bottom-dwelling hack that he is today, inspiring him to lie about Democratic politicians and expose his own country's covert CIA operatives.

Ok, then. Mystery solved.

Republicans to troops: Fuck off and drop dead.

First, there was (courtesy of John at AmericaBlog) a WaPo piece describing how:

Hundreds and perhaps thousands of injured Army National Guard and Reserve soldiers -- including many severely wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan -- have either lost or risked losing medical care and thousands of dollars in pay for months because a "convoluted" personnel system dropped them from active-duty status, according to a Government Accountability Office report released yesterday.

The report found that over a two-month period early last year, almost 34 percent of the 867 soldiers whose records it examined were removed from active duty while their requests for medical extensions were snarled in bureaucracy, leading many soldiers and their families to lose pay and benefits...

While coping with his injuries, [Sgt. 1st Class John] Allen was dropped repeatedly from active duty, losing a total of three months of benefits and $11,924 in pay. "I was essentially forced to 'go off orders' every three months," said the former police officer from Blairstown, N.J. "[I had] no pay, no access to base, no medical coverage for my family," and his medical appointments with military doctors were repeatedly canceled.

In July 2003, Allen said he had to borrow $10,000 from his brother to pay bills. The following month, his wife went into labor prematurely but was refused treatment at the hospital in Fort Bragg, N.C., until a senior Army commander intervened.

The "broken, dysfunctional system," Allen said, "placed my family under intense and indescribable stress. In short, this by far caused the most burden on my family, my financial situation and my life in general." Allen, who wears an eye patch and walks with a cane, plans to retire this month from his reserve unit, Bravo Company of the 20th Special Forces Group.

Is that hilarious or what? But wait. As hard to believe as it might be, it actually gets better:

The Senate rejected Tuesday an effort backed by Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., to exempt service members from some of the tighter bankruptcy restrictions Congress is considering.

Instead, the Senate approved a Republican-backed amendment that Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said is not good enough.

"Is it too much to ask to give them a break if the bottom falls out while they're serving America?" Durbin said.

Yeah. First, you send them off with inadequate protection to get horrifically maimed and wounded. Then, when they get back, you lose them from the medical system. And if they're still toughing it out and managing to survive, you screw them over with new, draconian bankruptcy laws. Memo to American military: You voted for these assholes. Now live with them.

And, no, you can't get your cheap drugs from up here anymore. Fuck off.

The REAL homosexual agenda.

Courtesy of Iridiscent Spoke, we have the real, unadulterated gay agenda.

Just when you thought Americans couldn't get any more petulant and infantile ...

... man, they can still take your breath away. As reported in today's National Post (their motto: "Canada's version of the Wall Street Journal, but with less talent."), we have the Texas company Weldtron that, in a fit of childish, knee-jerk, flag-waving patriotism, has decided to stop selling its product to Canadians.

No problem. Let's just remember this the next time, say, some of your overseas embassy personnel need rescuing by Canadians. Or when you need flu vaccine on short notice. Or perhaps when there's another massive terrorist attack and y'all need somewhere to land all your airplanes in a hurry.

BONUS TRACK: In what can't be much of a surprise, you can find a copy of Weldtron's CEO's childish whining over at (where else?) FreeRepublic. Here's the best part of his sanctimonious hypocrisy:

We are a small Corporation that invents, manufactures, and sells unique electronic controls to the welding industry. Our market is narrow since our products apply to specifically American made welding machinery and few applications exist external to the US...

... Some may think this as a stupid idea since I will lose some sales. Like I said, they don’t amount to much anyway ...

In other words, his vaunted stand on principle doesn't actually extend to sacrificing any financial security. Now that's principle.

Bob Novak -- a douchebag for honesty.

Following a link from Atrios, we find Bob Novak doing what Bob Novak does best: lying. In this CNN transcipt, we find Novakula misrepresenting what Howard Dean said at a Cornell presentation:

NOVAK: Since he was elected Democratic national chairman, he has been -- they've been keeping him out of the national spotlight. No major television interviews on national networks are scheduled for the next couple weeks, I'm told, and maybe the reason is that they've got to really get Howard under control.

He spoke at Cornell University last week, and the only paper that covered this was "The Cornell Daily" student paper, and he said, yes, Social Security has a big problem. Over the years it's going to lose about 80 percent of the benefits. That, Judy, is not the Democratic line. The Democratic line is there is no problem.

Now, let's go to the article in the Cornell Daily Sun to see what Dean actually said:

Dean pointed out that, while he would not endorse this, if Social Security were left alone for 30 years, its benefits would be reduced to 80 percent of what it is now. He acknowledged that while there were indeed problems with the program, turning to Wall Street was not the answer.

Oops. The difference between "reduced by 80 per cent" and "reduced to 80 per cent". Ah, well, Novak can perhaps be forgiven. He is, after all, a Republican and, as we've seen in this blog, Republicans are not well known for their mathematical acumen.

UPDATE: DailyKos is covering this as well, with a link to Media Matters.

Reminiscing ...

Does anyone else remember the halcyon days of 2003, when the Iraqi invasion was going to be financed out of petty cash? And when it didn't quite turn out that way, well, it was down the memory hole for the inconvenient details:

It's not quite Soviet-style airbrushing, but the Bush administration has been using cyberspace to make some of its own cosmetic touch-ups to history.

White House officials were steamed when Andrew S. Natsios, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, said earlier this year that U.S. taxpayers would not have to pay more than $1.7 billion to reconstruct Iraq -- which turned out to be a gross understatement of the tens of billions of dollars the government now expects to spend.

Recently, however, the government has purged the offending comments by Natsios from the agency's Web site. The transcript, and links to it, have vanished...

Read more of the entertaining details here. To paraphrase an old saying, being Republican means never having to say you're sorry. Or wrong.