Support the troops! Just not with money.

The Army Times reports that a raise for the troops is deemed "unnecessary".

"Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
“When combined with the overall military benefit package, the president’s proposal provides a good quality of life for service members and their families,” the policy statement says."

Because a cost of living increase is just not the way to support the troops. Good god people, there are yellow magnetic ribbons for that. So how much do the Blackwater mercenaries make?

Filibustering Cons on the Job

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Yeah, those were the days, weren't they?

Pope Ratzo the First brings back some fond memories among the faithful:

Indigenous leaders in Brazil have reacted angrily to Pope Benedict's comments that their predecessors had willingly converted to Christianity.

One Amazon Indian leader, Jecinaldo Satere Mawe, said the Pope's remarks had been arrogant and disrespectful.

Pope Benedict XVI told Latin American bishops in Brazil that American Indians had been "silently longing" to become Christians 500 years ago.

Not to be outdone, Canadian aboriginals immediately protested that they remember how unsatisfying life was like before residential schools, while native Americans could only wax nostalgic about the old days and how empty their lives felt before the arrival of smallpox-infected blankets.

There's irony, and then there's ...

An exciting new development in religious morals, virtues and public relations:

CBC's take on altar boys blasphemy: Catholic group

OTTAWA -- A CBC pilot program that portrays altar boys as druggies and the Catholic communion host as "munchable snack food, possible poker chips and a repository for drops of LSD" has sparked a complaint accusing the public broadcaster of blasphemy.

"Catholics should not have to pay for shows where their most sacred rituals and images are considered a starting point for dramatic licence," said the Catholic Civil Rights League, which intends to lodge a formal complaint today with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for airing The Altar Boy Gang.

"With this program, the CBC has moved into the area of blasphemy of sacred rituals."

The Catholic Church: Taking a stand for the ramrod-straight sanctity and morality of altar boys everywhere.

Wait ... that didn't come out right ...

The torture candidates

Crooks& Liars has some interesting clips from last nights Republican debates. In the clip linked above, McCain, Giuliani and Romney respond to a hypothetical regarding a series of attacks on major shopping centers. One groups of attackers is captured and taken to Guantanamo. The presidential contenders are asked if "enhanced interrogation" techniques should be used.

Of the three, McCain is the only one that speaks from both experience and common sense. He understands that torture doesn't work. Those being so interrogated will tell you what they think you want to hear to stop the abuse. Giuliani clings to his status as the mayor of 9/11 and sticks with the euphemism of enhanced interrogation. As president he would authorize and support said techniques, including water boarding. Romney, who is clearly a lunatic, applauds the idea of an American extra-national prison where human rights can be ignored. None of those silly legal protections, hell, no access to lawyers or any sort of due process and while we're at it, double the size of Guantanamo. That draws a big round of applause from the Republican audience.

Fear and vengeance don't make for sound foreign policy. Much as I think McCain is a jibbering fool on most issues, he is very right when he insists that torture doesn't work and that intelligence gathered through torture is of minimal value. But these men are all vying for the support of their party to run for president of the United States. What none of them even consider is that in any conflict, intelligence is a vital commodity. Any organization that can infiltrate and enact attacks on a large scale within America will have done its homework and will have done so with great discipline. Quite simply, these are not cartoon villains. Given the scenario of a number of successful attacks, one group of attackers captured and another on the ground with an attack pending, the captured group will have no valid intelligence on the remaining bombers. Simple operational tactics would make the use of torture an empty exercise in cruelty.

In such a case, torture is of no use in preventing that final pending assault. Only a fool would believe for an instant that any of the captured would have valid information regarding the operations of one or any of the other attacking groups. The villains are not unsophisticated and it is lunacy to pretend otherwise. Mr. Romney's bluster only goes to validate the craven fear that has been peddled by questioner Brit Hume and the rabid hawkishness of the right wing media. It further diminishes the soul of America and drives another nail into the corpse of liberty and justice. The boom of applause following his remarks is a sad indictment of how far far America has fallen from the ideas and ideals that once made her great.

When there's only two dots, it shouldn't be that hard.

(Yes, I'm officially still on sabbatical but this was just too precious to pass up.)

First, there's this:

Audience Applauds As Giuliani, Tancredo Endorse Waterboarding Torture

During tonight’s presidential debates, candidates were asked whether they would support the use of waterboarding — a technique, defined as torture by the Justice Department, that simulates drowning and makes the subject “believe his death is imminent while ideally not causing permanent physical damage.”

Both former mayor Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) suggested they would support using the technique. Specifically asked about waterboarding, Giuliani said he would allow “every method [interrogators] could think of and I would support them in doing it.” Tancredo later added, “I’m looking for Jack Bauer,” referencing the television character who has used torture techniques such as suffocation and electrocution on prisoners.

The audience applauded loudly after both statements.

And then there's this:

US search for 3 captured soldiers as Iraqi suicide attack kills 50

ARBIL (Thomson Financial) - Iraqi forces were assisting the US military in a massive manhunt for three US soldiers captured by an alliance of Al-Qaeda-led militant groups, ...

Now just sit back and watch the wankerhood be utterly unable to figure out what one of those has to do with the other.

Revisiting Jerry's athletes

Back in November of 2005 I put up this old post on my dormant blog. Seems appropriate to repost here today.I've included a comment from one of my old Christian trolls and my response. Cheers.

my athletes

following a link from crooks and liars, i arrived at...

Peaople for the American Way

where i found the following, from everyone's favourite greased tub of dog snot...

"Rev. Jerry Falwell doesn’t think it's “un-spiritual” to “whip” "un-patriotic" Americans. “In the name of the Lord, of course.”
During his September 25th sermon to his Thomas Road Baptist Church congregation, the Rev. Jerry Falwell examined the freedoms enjoyed by Americans and turned to the issue of what should happen to so-called “un-patriotic” Americans: “You know when I see somebody burning the flag, I’m a Baptist preacher I’m not a Mennonite, I feel it’s my obligation to whip him. In the name of the Lord of course. I feel it’s my obligation to whip him, and if I can’t do it then I look up some of my athletes to help me. "

i fully agree.

i mean this cat is a baptist minister, it says so in words. words are important. especially when you try to say things, right jerry? so, if you don't like what i say or the tone of my dissent, then you can give me a whipping. and it is all good and gracious, provided you skin me in the name of the lord. because we need to recall that jesus spent his lost years in the desert kicking the ever living shit out of people. he was all like, "yo, yo man, wassup wit dat. man. bethlehem is my hood, motherf.."
then bang, he'd drop them like a bag of used rubbers and put the sandals to them. yeah, christ was all about that.

the cool thing that jerry teaches here, is that there is power in the name of the lord. so now, if i meet some bloated old, biblebelt hustler talking wrong shittedly, i can stroll over and put my elbow up his nose. if he preaches violence against god's children, well, that's pretty unpatriotic to one's brothers and sisters. if he tries to breach my freedoms, proscribe my choices and inflict his will on me through political graft, lobby and thrust, well, if i invoke the name of the lord, i get to pop him. though the jesus i imagine, is the one that cast the money changers out of the temple. (did pat robertson really need his own diamond mine?) my brand of jesus wasn't into that whole stone casting thing, but jerry is a baptsist minister, i'll defer to the expert.

in the name of the lord, i condemn the false patriotism that is measured in beatings and dictated by corrupt pharisees. and that would be my permission slip, jerry. just one, right in your fat, bellicose yap. much obliged. after all, i am an ordained internet minister. but then there is the bestest part of all. see, jerry, you're a fat, old, pius pig of a man. and if there was ever enough spine in your corpulent hide to encourage you to dirty your own hands, those days are ancient. if you ever whipped anyone jerry, it was probably by contractual arrangement in a philipine bordello, a swarthy boy-gannon perhaps. so ego trumps impotence. jerry has athletes! who are these mysterious, crew cut lads, broad of shoulder and narrow of mind? why, they are preppie goons, a press squad, the powder blue brownshirts. jerry just has to look up some of his athletes. he could have quite a few, bought on pension tithes. jerry be putting together his own baptist militia and fuck those mennonites. where do they get off with that humility, hard work and sacrifice shit. you don't *live* your faith, you use it as a bludgeon. morons.

now the problem jerry has, is that he ain't long for this earth. someday he'll pass, swaddled in silken sheets, surrounded by pictures of himself and other loved ones, cradled in temporal wealth. and should jerry's god be true, when he arrives at the pearlite gates, st. peter won't be alone. a rake thin christ and his athletes will be waiting. those athletes would be all of the children who died hard, hungry and neglected, while jerry got fat on soft spoils. put in a sandal for me jesus.

Jeff said...
What in Sam Hill are you going on about now, LazyOl'PinkEye? Ah well, at least you realize that Jerry doesn't speak for Christians. I'll take a screenshot and hold you to it...

pretty shaved ape said...
wow, the return of the jeff. i was worried, getting ready to mail richard and ask if you were okay. i may be a left lib pinkeroo or whatever and while we may agree to differ, i was hoping nothing ill had befallen you. which isn't to say that i won't keep making fun of you. 

as for falwell, once a creepy, old, fat, corrupt douchebag, always a creepy, old, fat, corrupt douchebag. i feel sorry for those poor folks that he feeds on. but jeff we both know there's all sorts of christians. there's your obligatory sunday sermon then home for the game christians. they sort of believe but they don't think much about it. there's your super-pious, authoritarians, hey quit all that dancing. there's your strict fundamentalist evangelicals. the cats claiming to have the straight shit, right from the book. and they'll tell you what it means and it means what they say it means. and they can make it mean war and more war is good. paving the way to rapture with the bones of the heathen.

why, there's christian scholars, callen to educate and to learn, preserve and further knowledge. let's not forget the full gospel assemblies, palms raised to the lord, shouting their praises and shaking the beams in joyous song. hey, there's christian warriors too, don't forget to support the troops.

there's every kind of christian, from humble to gawdy. just like there's all kinds of other people. i mean, if a stinkin' leftie like me can agree, that jerry falwell and his ilk do not speak for all of christendom. then surely, jeff a swingin' right winger like you, should concur that there must be all kinds of muslims too. and jews and hindus and wiccans and buddhists and pastafarians and agnostics and etc. same goes for politics and nations, right jeff. like not everybody in france marches in lock step, hating everything you support. 

and just as all conservatives aren't mouth breathing, retrograde, socially backwards fuckloafs, neither are all liberals rat-like, sneak thieving fagans, lining their pockets with corruption. though, ralph klein is still a booze rocket, long pickled and weird as wet toast. 

so jeff, you can call me on sweeping generalizations, because, in the heat of the moment, i will likely engage in them. but i bet you will have a harder time avoiding the broad sweep of stereotypes and profiling by faith, politics, race and class. see, as a leftie, i get to be all tolerant and accepting of different kinds of folk and their peculiar ways. i'd rather judge a person by their actions, not by what they espouse.

I feel a sudden increase of joy in the force ...

... ah, there we go. Burn in hell, you evil bastard.

Tune in tomorrow when the wankersphere uses our celebrating to prove how angry the Left is.

NOT SURPRISINGLY, the maudlin, teary Blogging Tory memorializing is off and running. Although, if I was "Christian Conservative," I'm not sure I'd be looking forward to joining Jerry where he's gone. That way lies a nasty surprise, I'm guessing.

French safes for safe sex.

These French TV spots encourage you to wrap your rascal and they are freakin' brilliant. Shame we don't live in a culture that is sufficiently grown-up to approach human sexuality with hillarious cartoons. Probably not safe for work or Christopaths.

Tip of the beret to boingboing

And the Lord said, "No four-down football for you!"

Apparently, the state of Alabama has a strange interpretation of the separation of church and state:

Alabama group says Hoover can't play Sunday game

HOOVER, Ala. (AP) -- The Alabama High School Athletic Association, citing a ban on Sunday games, has put in jeopardy plans by Hoover High to play an Ohio prep football power on ESPN2.

The AHSAA Central Board of Control voted unanimously Wednesday in denying Hoover's request to play Colerain High in a Sept. 2 game at Nippert Stadium on the campus of the University of Cincinnati. The Labor Day Weekend matchup was to be aired live on ESPN2 at 12:37 p.m. as part of the third annual Kirk Herbstreit Ohio vs. USA Challenge.

"Sunday is a day of worship," AHSAA executive director Dan Washburn said when citing the reason for denying Hoover's application to play an out-of-state opponent.

In what would be totally unrelated news, of course, Christians in the United States are so terribly, terribly hard done by, I'm guessing because other people are constantly telling them what they can and can't do.

Don't make me stop this car and have to come back there to explain the irony.

The Big Blue Screen.

The world's largest purveyor of crappy, bloated and corruptible software is belching about litigation to bring Linux and free and open software to heel. Microsnot is threatening patent actions against the open source movement. Elizabeth Montalbano's article in PCWorld speculates that it might have to do with the lack of consumer enthusiasm for the Vista inoperative system.

"There may be a link between the timing of Microsoft's claims against open source and the release of its Windows Vista product, said Stuart Meyer, partner at Fenwick & West in Mountain View, California. Rather than add features to Vista that would make business users want to adopt it, the OS' distinguishing characteristic is the addition of an engine that will shut down users access to Vista if they are using a counterfeit or pirated version of the software, he said.
"Why do people want to want to switch to an OS that just includes new hurdles that have to be cleared?" he said. Microsoft may have decided that enforcing its IP through litigation is more important than offering innovative software that can compete on its own merits, a strategy that may leave many users unimpressed, Meyer suggested."

Thus far, Microsnot is refusing to specify exactly which patents they believe are being infringed. It looks like the blue screen of greed is rolling out the threat machine in the hope that folks will knuckle under and pay royalties rather than get dragged into costly litigation. I switched from PC to Mac years ago, to escape the stranglehold of their shitty OS after viruses ate one machine and after losing work to endless crashes. I'm not surprised that they're looking at every possible means to cling to their marketshare but perhaps they'd be better off if they made a quality product and stopped acting like shit heads.

To celebrate the panic in Redmond, in the next few weeks I'll be loading Ubuntu Linux and Open Office onto my old G3 laptop. In the meantime, I'll enjoy thinking of Steve Ballmer sweating through another pile of shirts.

Sad times in the dust.

The Times reports on the thousands of troops searching for the three American soldiers believed captured by Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, "American military officials offered few details on Sunday about the search but said they were sparing no resources."

Despite the witless claims of John McCain, Iraq is not a safe or safer place for Americans, much less Iraqis. The Americans are responding to the capture of their fellows as they must, they can do no less. While I hope for their safe return, I doubt that will be their fate. Terrorists, insurgents, jihadis or patriots, it doesn't matter much what they are called, there's really no benefit to them in keeping their captives healthy. An argument could also be made that this is what results of abrogating the Geneva conventions.

There are no happy endings to these stories. This is also symptomatic of the largest flaw in the American strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't successfully combat a native insurgency with a massive tech heavy military. Rumsfeld and the PNAC wizards were just plain fucking wrong from the outset. What they have put in motion remains wrong, a great, stupid recipe for failure. You can't kill a wasp in the living room no matter how many times you swing the wrecking ball. Even a fool knows there's more than one wasp in a nest and poking it with a stick will get you stung. To put it in terms that a conservative might understand, follow the money. The attacks of 9/11 were estimated to have cost about $100,000, the American response to those attacks has cost in the hundreds of billions. That cost rises every minute of every day in treasure, equipment and lives spent.

No vacation for me this year.

CTV is reporting that Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon is set to launch a home grown no-fly list on June 18. This strikes me as yet another application of Conservative brown lipstick to appease Big Steve's bosses down south. This is another step toward integration of security with the failed American no-fly list that hasn't actually prevented any terror and has made America one of the world's most annoying stops for travellers.

In typical right wing fashion this list has been created in secret, "Transport Canada officials wouldn't say how many people will be included on the list when it's launched." I'm sure they won't tell us how this list was compiled, who is on the list or why. I don't doubt that the wingnuts in blogging tory land will hail this as a marvelous new step in making them safe from having to fly with the dastardly swarthy folk they so fear. Funny that this sort of bullshit will likely be praised as a vital safety and security landmark, yet these are the same boobs that whine about the terrible imposition on their freedoms when they are required to register their firearms.

This new set of restrictions on free movement will require that, "...anyone who looks 12 years of age or older will have to show government-issued identification to board a plane." Well thanks for the full month of notice. Anyone with travel plans and kids might want to reconsider unless they have some suitable identification for little Johnny and Betty. Who gets to determine the apparent age of those kids? And what qualifies as government issued i.d., I'm guessing either a drivers licence or a passport, neither of which I possess. Which pretty much squashes my plans to visit family out west this summer.

I want to know how this list was generated, how closely it mirrors the ridiculous American no-fly list and who will be empowered to administer the list. I certainly don't trust Stockwell fucking Day and the incompetent newCanadian newGovernment to keep the secret list non-political. This new regulation called Passenger Protect (or PeePee for short) needs to be scrutinized by our elected members. This sort of sweeping rule will inconvenience thousands of people and have a direct impact on the tourism industry. But fear not, should you be stopped at the gate because your name is similar to some suspected somebody, you can contact the laughably named "office of reconsideration". Mr. Orwell, your work here is done.

Update:

Valid i.d. will be either a drivers licence or passport, in the absence of such a traveller may submit two pieces of non-picture, government issued i.d. providing one carries the full name, date of birth and gender of the individual. I wonder how many 12 year olds that "appear" to be teens have more than a birth certificate as identification.

Commies and Muslims, oh my.

Alright. CC is going on vacation and a richly deserved one at that. Few bloggers are able to maintain the pace that he has established here. So while CC recharges his batteries I will attempt to keep the posts coming as best I can. In CC's honour it only seems right that we give serial dimwit Joel Johanessen a swift kick.

To be honest I don't read poor Joel's musings for the same reason I don't drink out of the toilet, it's intellectually unsanitary. I'll soil my synapses this once, as tribute or penance, you decide. Today Joel is all atwitter about a meeting of Marxists as reported in the Post. With a title like "Canada’s commies, um, and Muslims, and um others, gather in Toronto" you can be assured of, um, quality analysis.

From the top, "Some people—especially liberals—think I’m Joel the blogger A.K.A: Captain Hyperbole, or Joel McCarthy; but actually, I’m just way ahead of you.  Or on to you.  And I call it the way it is. 
Almost as if to help prove me right, which they do almost every day, the Marxists of Canada—um, and Muslims and Kyoto bible-thumpers—gather in Toronto this weekend for the four-day Marxist “Festival of Resistance”.

Indeed, what all of the literate folk see as Joel's chittering idiocy is just proof that he's, um, on to us. On to us like the politically deceased Rick Santorum on a puppy. I'm not sure quite what Joel believes is being proved by a meeting of politically disenfranchised fringe types. Given Joel's strangled prose, I doubt he's sure either. Whatever, he's quite sure that he's almost sure of something and it involves lefties of some sort and Muslims and it must be bad. Onward...

"The National Post is covering the story, although they serve to mainstream it more than properly marginalizing the radical communists as they should any group of fringe leftist radicals and agitators who call President Bush a “terrorist”, see below, —and like the liberal media so often does to those awful “Christians”, for example, unfortunately: Participants are totally mainstream liberals, seems to me, as judged by this t-shirt ..."


National Post - Colin O’Connor photograph

Well, if a t-shirt is all the evidence one needs to define 'totally mainstream liberals', it explains Joel's execrable language skills. All of that reading is just a waste of time. T-shirt - case closed. Joel follows this, which is the full extent of his analysis with a couple of paragraphs from the Post article with a few highlighted phrases that point out the enemies:

"devoted to a discussion about building unity between Muslims and the left"

"green activists, the anti-war movement, the transgendered, members of First Nations, traditional Islam."

“Out of Afghanistan and into Kyoto.”

"Professor of sociology"

And that's it. That's the sum total of what Joel derived from the article. Followed by a snap of some literature with the following remark,

"Betcha they take VISA and MasterCard and American Express at their li’l book stand featuring communism and socialism books, and global warming books, and of course feminism books! And hey: what self-respecting —or good ‘n self-loathing— liberal or member of Layton’s you’ve got to be kidding party hasn’t read Noam Chomsky’s fabulous writings?"

Cripes why read Chomsky when you can get the crystalline fabulosity of Joel Johanessen for free. Shame that reading thing hasn't infected Joel, he might have made it a little further into the article which is busy almost proving his almost points. Remember how all of us liberals and our dastardly media were always hurting the feelings of the poor benighted Christians? Well one might imagine a bunch of Marxists would be pretty harsh in dealing with the Godly. Or not so much:

"At one point, a self-proclaimed Trotskyite in his 20s stood and for about three minutes declared his "absolute hostility" to all religions. The crowd shouted him down. Several speakers later, Benoit, a 40- year-old from Gatineau who delivered his intervention sitting down, said that when he last read the Communist Manifesto, it did not say, "Atheist Communist workers of the world unite." Minutes later, the Trotskyite slinked out."

And then there was that whole t-shirt as proof of thesis thing, "Not one T-shirt that read "Eat the Rich" could be found anywhere." In all fairness to Joel, reading entire articles is a lot of work. Let's give the last word to Craig Offman, the author of the Post article since Joel doesn't even bother to credit him:

"Inclusiveness is the buzzword here, where the members of this hodge-podge gathering can be overheard calling each other brother and sister. Participants call this membership drive "building unity," a much-repeated mantra throughout the opening night. Self-proclaimed Marxist James Clark, who helped organize the event, said that while there are disparate groups in attendance, they can all still rally around a slogan like "Out of Afghanistan and into Kyoto."
Gatherings like the one this weekend at the University of Toronto are an attempt to get the party restarted. Let's face it: Das Kapital is not selling like hotcakes anymore.
Maps of the world are no longer crowded with country names that begin with expressions such as the People's Republic. Almost all of the movement's Great Leaders are now waxed and tucked away in grand mausoleums. Some socialists are looking at the dissolution of Communism as an opportunity.
"We're looking at a new beginning," said liberal thinker Stanley Aronowitz, Distinguished Professor of sociology at the Graduate Centre of the City University of New York. "We're no longer based on the existence of nation states. We must reinvent ourselves."
None of this sounds very Marxist, does it?"

Nope, doesn't sound very Marxist at all. And here's my bet, Joel, in his highlighting, pointed out the Professor of Sociology. Who'd like to wager that the twit doesn't realize that sociology and socialism aren't the same thing? Joel Johanessen, ladies and gentlemen, still as dumb as a box full of snot.

Steve Gilliard update.

Damn it. Some time back I posted about the health situation of Steve Gilliard of the Newsblog. At the outset, it appeared that Steve had a bad flu and he entered the hospital. Since then his health has deteriorated. It turned out that he had a severe infection that affected his heart. Steve had been on dialysis for some time and has had prior heart surgery. This bout led to valve replacement and he suffered a stroke during recovery. After showing some signs of improvement he has taken a turn for the worse with a sever infection. Jen, Steve's co-blogger has been doing a stellar job keeping the site up and running with guest posts from some of the finest writers on the net. She has also been fighting the good fight in advocating for Steve's care.

I don't put much stock in prayer but I'd ask you all to send some good thoughts Steve's way. He is literally fighting for his life. If you don't know Steve Gilliard's writing, visit the Newsblog and scan the archives. His fierce writing is informed by a depth of historical scholarship that will be sincerely missed until his return. Even when I've disagreed with Steve, I've always learned from him. Get well soon you magnificent bastard, the toobs need you.

Be still my heart...

Well folks, sometimes I think that we on the left might be a little harsh in assessing the likes of Dick Cheney. I know, I know, there's more than plenty of evidence that suggests that the Vice President of the United States of America is an amoral slaughter pimping, greed merchant. Sure he blasted his "friend" in the face with buckshot and poured untold billions into the pockets of his pals, but hey, his friend is a lawyer and his pals are helping to fight terror with tainted food and water for the troops he supports. Maybe ol' Dick is just misunderstood. So, in an effort to reach out across the ideological divide, I suggest we make a gesture of friendship. Everybody loves music, right? I'm sure if we took up a collection we could scrape together enough dough to buy one of those shiny iPod devices for Mr. Cheney. We could load it up with the kinds of tunes he might like, Taps for instance.

I'm sure you know what's coming.

Oh, dear (do I really need to add the emphasis?):

FALLUJAH, Iraq (AFP) - American troops launched a massive hunt for three missing comrades on Saturday amid fears they had been kidnapped by Iraqi insurgents during a pre-dawn attack that left five other soldiers dead.

Quick -- any bets on how long it's going to be before Americans rediscover the Geneva Conventions?

People who need a good lesson in ass-kicking.

Personally, there are few things that I find more frustrating than a questioner who doesn't understand how to ask decent questions and control an interrogation, and if you need some examples, look no further than the Alberto Gonzales hearings down south, in which Alberto's talent at evading questions is matched only by the Democrats' incompetence at asking them.

Two examples can both be found here at LC's place, and we'll deal with them in order. First, we have Rep. John Conyers who opens by, mercifully, putting the outstanding issue front and centre by stating:

"I want to ask how the U.S. Attorney termination list came to be. Who suggested putting most of these U. S. Attorneys on the list and why?"

Good. Conyers starts off well by describing precisely what he's trying to learn -- Where did those names come from? Who provided them? -- so one has to give him credit for that. Sadly, though, that's only half the battle since, after asking a specific question, one must be prepared to demand that the person being quizzed answer that question, and it's here that Conyers fails miserably since, as you can see, Gonzales immediately starts babbling about how he accepts responsibility for doing an evaluation, and performance-based criteria and obligations to "good government" and getting a "consensus" and equally worthless rubbish, and it's to Conyers' shame that he allows Gonzales to yammer on this way.

(In all fairness, I'm going to admit that I didn't even watch that video all the way through since it was so maddening, I had to stop. But I'd already seen enough to be thoroughly irked with Conyers and how he allowed Gonzales so much latitude to spew irrelevancies, waste everyone's time and dodge the question.)

Quite simply, Conyers fucked up. The instant it became clear (midway through his first sentence) that Gonzales was going to free associate, Conyers should have cut him off on the spot, told him that he wasn't addressing the issue, and repeated the question. And he should have kept doing this until Gonzales was out of evasive options.

In that second video. Rep. Robert Wexler does a somewhat better job in hammering Gonzales on the same point but, in the end, there is still no answer, and it's irritating that the Dems seem to be so painfully incompetent at crowding Gonzales into a corner. If I may be so bold, I'm going to suggest that, if I was in charge, my opening statement might have gone something like this:

"Mr. Gonzales, my goal today is to determine, if we can, how Mr. Iglesias' name came to be on the list of U. S. Attorneys (USAs) to be terminated. That is to say, how his name was initially produced and who produced it. Now, before we go any further, let me ask you if you understand the question. I'm not asking you to answer that question, I'm simply asking if you understand it, nothing more, and if you're not sure you do, I'll be happy to go over it again until it's obvious that we agree on the very specific issue I'm trying to address.

"This means that I'm not interested in who eventually signed off on those names, or who takes final responsibility for them, or anything else. While those might be informative questions in their own right, they're most emphatically not the question I'm asking here today, and if you begin to address any of those other issues, I'll step in and remind you what the question is again.

"So, once again, I'm precisely interested in, and only in, the exact origin of Mr. Iglesias' name on the list of USAs to be terminated. Do you clearly understand the question as I've asked it, yes or no?"

At this point, I'm not sure how Gonzales could dodge that opening statement and its corresponding question. It's not asking him to divulge any information, it's simply asking him to agree that he understands the issue in front of him, and that's all. Frankly, I don't know how he could tap dance around that without looking completely retarded and, sooner or later, I don't see how he could avoid finally admitting that, yes, he knows what the question means, at which point, the followup question is obvious:

"All right, then, Mr. Gonzales, now that you admit that you understand the question I'm asking, I'm going to ask a simple followup -- do you know who originally produced Mr. Iglesias' name for that termination list? I'm not even asking you to supply the name of the person who did it, I'm just asking if you know who it was, nothing more. That's a simple yes or no question and I'd like you to answer it that way if you will. Are you aware of who initially came up with Mr. Iglesias' name? Yes or no."

So what are Gonzales' possible responses? If he says "yes," well, the followup is obvious, isn't it? Do I really have to belabour what the rest of that conversation would sound like?

But if he said "No," then life would get a bit more interesting:

"All right, then, Mr. Gonzales, you admit that you don't actually know how his name came to be on that list. Since you're the U.S. Attorney General who is ultimately responsible for decisions like this, I'm shocked that you admit this sort of thing but that leads me to my next question: If you don't know where that name came from, is it possible for you to find out? Again, yes or no -- do you have the ability to figure out who was responsible for that name initially being added to the list?"

Once again, each of the two possible answers suggests the obvious followup. If he says "no," well, that's an astonishingly embarrassing thing to admit for the U.S. Attorney General. And if he says "yes," well, that path is kind of obvious as well. And on and on and methodically on.

And yet, none of the Dems I've seen seems capable of hammering in like this. How is it possible that these hearings have been going on this long and no one has a clear answer to such a fundamentally simple question? Yes, Alberto Gonzales is a sleazy little douchebag, but the Dems had to expect that and take it into account and, thus far, they're just fucking up big time.

It really is some kind of aggravating.

AFTERSNARK: Rep. Wexler's interrogation is particularly annoying since he does such a masterful job of verbally beating the crap out of Abu Gonzo but, near the end when Wexler, after summarizing all of the people who apparently did not put Iglesias on the termination list, demands of Gonzales:

"So who did?"

At which point, Gonzales dodges the question with:

"Well, what's important, Congressman, is that ..."

to which Wexler should have instantly cut him off with something like:

"Don't tell me what's 'important,' Mr. Gonzales. I'm the one asking the questions, and I'm the one who will be the judge of what is and is not 'important,' and what's important to me is who is responsible for getting Mr. Iglesias' name on that list, so please don't try telling me what's 'important.' That's my job, not yours."

So close and yet, in the end, he pooches it. It's getting to be a depressing pattern.

It's about time for a sabbatical.

For reasons I'll get into later, I'm going to be taking an extended break from blogging up a storm here, which means that, for the most part, I'm going to be leaving you in PSA's capable hands.

I have a couple more pieces to appear shortly but, beyond that, I think it's time for a vacation.

Get well soon pogge!

The ringleader of the pogge gang has been smited! mahigan reports, "This is just a short post to let you know that our widely esteemed and generally fearless leader, His Poggeness, has been injured in an accident and is currently cooling his heels (along with the rest of him) in hospital. His injuries, as they say on the news, are serious but not life threatening. We do not have anything definitive yet but, based on our current information, it appears that his enforced period of R & R will be measured in weeks rather than days."

pogge has long been one of my favourite stops on the information toobway. Fortunately the skill and talents of the pogge co-bloggers (or is that cobloggers? hmm, sounds naughty) are more than worthy. Please consider dropping by pogge and showing some love.