Karl Rove was subpoenaed by Congress and did not go.
He said he had "executive privilege."
That argument did not work for Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton, why would it work for Karl Rove? Remember, his job right now is not with the United States government, he's an analyst on Fox News. To me, anybody employed by the federal government should answer when Congress calls. That goes both ways, when the President wants to talk to a member of Congress, he can. So when a member of Congress wants to talk to the President, he should.
But, we aren't even talking about the President, just an adviser. He is now a private citizen, not a public servant. He has no privilege, just the regular rights of an American. If I skipped out on a Congressional subpoena today, this blog would be coming from jail.
The next time a Republican like Karl Rove claims to be for the working people, remember that he claimed to be privileged.
Bottom line? Put the punk in jail.
Rabbit
Friday, July 11, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Conviction
Read This Story
He gave up his job instead of lowering the United States and North Carolina flags to half-staff in honor of Sen. Jesse Helms.
That is conviction from a bureaucrat.
My only question?
Can we clone this guy?
The North Carolina state government and the United States federal government could use thousands more like L.F. Eason. That is, somebody who will stand up for what they believe.
He is right. Sen. Helms was a racist bigot who hurt the credibility of North Carolina with his service. The rest of the country needs to know that Jesse Helms is not an accurate representation of North Carolina. People like L.F. Eason prove that to be true.
In an electoral system in which incumbency advantage is huge, Helms squeaked out 5 victories in Senate races, he never won a landslide. That may not sound like much an excuse but, North Carolinians must take what they can get when it comes to salvaging our history that includes such a bigot for a Senator.
Now, it is quite perplexing why it would come to this. There is no reason to force somebody into retirement, this would not be a media issue if a man had not lost his job.
Bottom Line? L.F. Eason must love America.
Rabbit
He gave up his job instead of lowering the United States and North Carolina flags to half-staff in honor of Sen. Jesse Helms.
That is conviction from a bureaucrat.
My only question?
Can we clone this guy?
The North Carolina state government and the United States federal government could use thousands more like L.F. Eason. That is, somebody who will stand up for what they believe.
He is right. Sen. Helms was a racist bigot who hurt the credibility of North Carolina with his service. The rest of the country needs to know that Jesse Helms is not an accurate representation of North Carolina. People like L.F. Eason prove that to be true.
In an electoral system in which incumbency advantage is huge, Helms squeaked out 5 victories in Senate races, he never won a landslide. That may not sound like much an excuse but, North Carolinians must take what they can get when it comes to salvaging our history that includes such a bigot for a Senator.
Now, it is quite perplexing why it would come to this. There is no reason to force somebody into retirement, this would not be a media issue if a man had not lost his job.
Bottom Line? L.F. Eason must love America.
Rabbit
No Habla Espanol
Barack Obama said that children should learn Spanish and you would've thought he called for all men to be castrated the way some reacted.
Immigration is a hot button topic for some. It is not for me but, immigration does not matter in this argument.
Google globalization. Then, look up the fastest growing minority in the United States.
Knowing a foreign language is increasingly becoming vital to success. It is not essential yet. But, when today's children enter the workforce, it will be more important than it is today. Obama did not say that he would pass a law requiring students in school to know a foreign language, he just said it was a good idea to know one. He also did not mean just Spanish. If you are looking to learn a foreign language and you are an American, Spanish is a good choice but, Chinese would not be a bad move either.
Why do conservatives constantly hammer liberals for not "working hard" and not wanting Americans do succeed when they constantly hammer liberals when they speak about ways to make Americans more competitive and more able to work?
Google xenophobia.
After my sophomore year in college, I was quite close to becoming fluent in Spanish, and then I stopped studying the language. I regret that.
Many of the conservative bloggers and talkers who have jumped on Obama for this claim that he should focus on getting immigrants to learn English. Barack Obama, in the same speech, said that immigrants should learn English. See what happens when you don't listen?
Bottom line? Google globalization and xenophobia.
Rabbit
Immigration is a hot button topic for some. It is not for me but, immigration does not matter in this argument.
Google globalization. Then, look up the fastest growing minority in the United States.
Knowing a foreign language is increasingly becoming vital to success. It is not essential yet. But, when today's children enter the workforce, it will be more important than it is today. Obama did not say that he would pass a law requiring students in school to know a foreign language, he just said it was a good idea to know one. He also did not mean just Spanish. If you are looking to learn a foreign language and you are an American, Spanish is a good choice but, Chinese would not be a bad move either.
Why do conservatives constantly hammer liberals for not "working hard" and not wanting Americans do succeed when they constantly hammer liberals when they speak about ways to make Americans more competitive and more able to work?
Google xenophobia.
After my sophomore year in college, I was quite close to becoming fluent in Spanish, and then I stopped studying the language. I regret that.
Many of the conservative bloggers and talkers who have jumped on Obama for this claim that he should focus on getting immigrants to learn English. Barack Obama, in the same speech, said that immigrants should learn English. See what happens when you don't listen?
Bottom line? Google globalization and xenophobia.
Rabbit
Seriously? A Text Message?
Brett Favre may not retire.
So what made this news? Is he working out with teams, negotiating contracts, and studying film? No, he sent a text message to the Packers GM and told his coach he had thought about coming back.
Of course he's thought about coming back! He said himself that retiring from football would be hard. He wants to play. He just was not sure he could make the commitment. It is not news that he has thought about it. He will be thinking about it 20 years from now.
Brett Favre may come back to football. It may be this year or later. But, until he is serious talks with the Packers or other teams about playing, it is not important. I know it is a slow news time for sports, but that does not mean you can just create stories.
This is too easy for sports journalists. Writing that Brett Favre may come back is like writing that Peyton Manning may make another commercial. For any athlete, if a team will have you, you are never completely retired. Michael Jordan went through the same thing and if a team would let him start, he would still consider coming back.
How many high school athletes regret not playing in college? How many middle school athletes regret not playing in high school? How many couch potatoes regret not playing anything ever?
A person, in anyway interested in sports, wanting or considering playing a sport is not news without more concrete information. That's true if the person is Brett Favre or Joe Blow.
Bottom Line? Talk or write about something else and eventually Brett Favre may make a move.
Rabbit
So what made this news? Is he working out with teams, negotiating contracts, and studying film? No, he sent a text message to the Packers GM and told his coach he had thought about coming back.
Of course he's thought about coming back! He said himself that retiring from football would be hard. He wants to play. He just was not sure he could make the commitment. It is not news that he has thought about it. He will be thinking about it 20 years from now.
Brett Favre may come back to football. It may be this year or later. But, until he is serious talks with the Packers or other teams about playing, it is not important. I know it is a slow news time for sports, but that does not mean you can just create stories.
This is too easy for sports journalists. Writing that Brett Favre may come back is like writing that Peyton Manning may make another commercial. For any athlete, if a team will have you, you are never completely retired. Michael Jordan went through the same thing and if a team would let him start, he would still consider coming back.
How many high school athletes regret not playing in college? How many middle school athletes regret not playing in high school? How many couch potatoes regret not playing anything ever?
A person, in anyway interested in sports, wanting or considering playing a sport is not news without more concrete information. That's true if the person is Brett Favre or Joe Blow.
Bottom Line? Talk or write about something else and eventually Brett Favre may make a move.
Rabbit
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
El Rushbo
Rush Limbaugh
What can you say about that man?
Controversy and success. Also an article from the New York Times Magazine.
Not necessarily in that order. Hate him with all you have, but you cannot deny that he is quite possibly the most successful broadcaster of all time. No matter how you measure it.
Money and contracts? He just signed a new contract with Clear Channel owned Premiere Radio Networks for an estimated $38 million a year for 10 years and, a $100 million signing bonus. That comes out to close to $500 million. Howard Stern got a $500 million contract from Sirius Satellite Radio but, that contract was his whole budget for his show, expenses and staff salaries.
Audience? Estimates have his weekly audience somewhere between 14 million and 20 million listeners. He is heard on almost 600 stations.
Influence? George Bush I invited him to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom. Ronald Reagan called him "the number one voice for conservatism in our country." Newt Gingrich called him a national precinct captain and anointed him an honorary representative in 1994. Rush's listeners call themselves "dittoheads." Anybody else who does conservative political talk radio? They are, in some way, emulating Limbaugh. Rush is also credited for saving AM radio.
As an aspiring radio professional, of course I am jealous of his success. But, let us not forget how he has achieved success. First and foremost, Limbaugh is an entertainer. There are millions of people, mostly middle-aged to elderly, white, conservative, elite men who like to beat their chest every midday. Limbaugh is the president of his own personal fraternity.
Limbaugh is great for radio and horrible for the political process. His listeners, while often intelligent and educated, are not receiving the full story of any issue Limbaugh discusses. They are hurt because, even if you will not be persuaded, your argument becomes stronger when you can understand the other side of the story. Limbaugh dispenses half-truths, false claims, and incomplete facts.
I think Limbaugh knows what he is doing. It is a combination of satire and pandering. Howard does satire and fart jokes. Jim Rome does sports. At the top of every hour on news talk radio there is about 5 minutes of hard news. What Rush does is entertainment, not information.
Of course, great broadcasters, while entertainers, are great persuaders. You can persuade people to vote, volunteer, play pranks, or whatever you choose.
Bottom Line? The problem is not the content from Rush Limbaugh. The problem is how people react. Its entertainment, not information.
Rabbit
What can you say about that man?
Controversy and success. Also an article from the New York Times Magazine.
Not necessarily in that order. Hate him with all you have, but you cannot deny that he is quite possibly the most successful broadcaster of all time. No matter how you measure it.
Money and contracts? He just signed a new contract with Clear Channel owned Premiere Radio Networks for an estimated $38 million a year for 10 years and, a $100 million signing bonus. That comes out to close to $500 million. Howard Stern got a $500 million contract from Sirius Satellite Radio but, that contract was his whole budget for his show, expenses and staff salaries.
Audience? Estimates have his weekly audience somewhere between 14 million and 20 million listeners. He is heard on almost 600 stations.
Influence? George Bush I invited him to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom. Ronald Reagan called him "the number one voice for conservatism in our country." Newt Gingrich called him a national precinct captain and anointed him an honorary representative in 1994. Rush's listeners call themselves "dittoheads." Anybody else who does conservative political talk radio? They are, in some way, emulating Limbaugh. Rush is also credited for saving AM radio.
As an aspiring radio professional, of course I am jealous of his success. But, let us not forget how he has achieved success. First and foremost, Limbaugh is an entertainer. There are millions of people, mostly middle-aged to elderly, white, conservative, elite men who like to beat their chest every midday. Limbaugh is the president of his own personal fraternity.
Limbaugh is great for radio and horrible for the political process. His listeners, while often intelligent and educated, are not receiving the full story of any issue Limbaugh discusses. They are hurt because, even if you will not be persuaded, your argument becomes stronger when you can understand the other side of the story. Limbaugh dispenses half-truths, false claims, and incomplete facts.
I think Limbaugh knows what he is doing. It is a combination of satire and pandering. Howard does satire and fart jokes. Jim Rome does sports. At the top of every hour on news talk radio there is about 5 minutes of hard news. What Rush does is entertainment, not information.
Of course, great broadcasters, while entertainers, are great persuaders. You can persuade people to vote, volunteer, play pranks, or whatever you choose.
Bottom Line? The problem is not the content from Rush Limbaugh. The problem is how people react. Its entertainment, not information.
Rabbit
Monday, July 7, 2008
Sovereignty
Sovereignty
If you do not know what that word means, look it up, then come back to this post.
Sovereignty is what we are trying to achieve in Iraq. That is, to make Iraq a sovereign nation. For this to happen, U.S. forces must leave the country. Now one may wonder, why some claim that those who call for U.S. forces to leave Iraq are "surrendering" or "hoping America loses." This seems to be a bit backwards because, the only way the United States can "win" or achieve its goal, is to leave. If we stay, we lose. If we stay, Iraq will never become a sovereign nation. If we stay, we were never liberators, simply imperialists.
Some may claim that those in Iraq do not want us to leave. Those people should read this article. President Bush said, "As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down." The Iraqis are standing up but, they will never be completely on their own feet, until we let go, and stand down.
So why do so many connected to the Bush Administration and Republican Party scream when so many call for U.S. forces to draw down in Iraq?
My guess is related to the perils Iraq faces with and without help from the United States. Iraq was created, like most other countries in the Middle East and Africa, with help from European countries. This European blunder can be blamed for much of the current problems in this region. Iraq was created without regard for ethnic and religious differences in the area. That is obvious when one looks at the makeup of the population, a combination of Sunni, Shia and Kurd. Also, Iraq was invaded without regard for ethnic and religious differences in the area. This is obvious because of the incredible underestimation of the insurgency.
Proponents of the Iraq war are scared to leave Iraq because they know its quite possible and plausible for Iraq to crumble into a major civil war. With U.S. soldiers there, the country is not perfect and not great, but it is holding the country together, if even by the smallest of threads.
Bottom line is the United States will have little to do with the long term Iraq success or failure. They may prosper, be impoverished, free, not free, Sunni, Shia, or completely disintegrate. The United States did not help the process by invading.
Rabbit
If you do not know what that word means, look it up, then come back to this post.
Sovereignty is what we are trying to achieve in Iraq. That is, to make Iraq a sovereign nation. For this to happen, U.S. forces must leave the country. Now one may wonder, why some claim that those who call for U.S. forces to leave Iraq are "surrendering" or "hoping America loses." This seems to be a bit backwards because, the only way the United States can "win" or achieve its goal, is to leave. If we stay, we lose. If we stay, Iraq will never become a sovereign nation. If we stay, we were never liberators, simply imperialists.
Some may claim that those in Iraq do not want us to leave. Those people should read this article. President Bush said, "As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down." The Iraqis are standing up but, they will never be completely on their own feet, until we let go, and stand down.
So why do so many connected to the Bush Administration and Republican Party scream when so many call for U.S. forces to draw down in Iraq?
My guess is related to the perils Iraq faces with and without help from the United States. Iraq was created, like most other countries in the Middle East and Africa, with help from European countries. This European blunder can be blamed for much of the current problems in this region. Iraq was created without regard for ethnic and religious differences in the area. That is obvious when one looks at the makeup of the population, a combination of Sunni, Shia and Kurd. Also, Iraq was invaded without regard for ethnic and religious differences in the area. This is obvious because of the incredible underestimation of the insurgency.
Proponents of the Iraq war are scared to leave Iraq because they know its quite possible and plausible for Iraq to crumble into a major civil war. With U.S. soldiers there, the country is not perfect and not great, but it is holding the country together, if even by the smallest of threads.
Bottom line is the United States will have little to do with the long term Iraq success or failure. They may prosper, be impoverished, free, not free, Sunni, Shia, or completely disintegrate. The United States did not help the process by invading.
Rabbit
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Independence Day
Independence Day has come and past.
In a struggling economy in which people are having to save and scrap more than they have had to in recent years, people turned a one day holiday into a 4 day weekend. Not that I am against people having fun and of course they can do whatever they want, but does it not make more sense to not choose our country's birthday as a time to slack off? Maybe I'm bitter because I worked for much of the weekend.
Another unpopular opinion of mine is who we thank on Independence Day. Most people know that Independence Day represents the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Who signed this document? Politicians. But, nobody thanks our politicians on Independence Day. I think we should. No matter how crooked and off the mark they may be, if you truly think our country is the greatest in the world, you must thank them. Are you going to thank yourself and other regular Americans? You lazy people are too busy slacking off to get any credit.
Rabbit
In a struggling economy in which people are having to save and scrap more than they have had to in recent years, people turned a one day holiday into a 4 day weekend. Not that I am against people having fun and of course they can do whatever they want, but does it not make more sense to not choose our country's birthday as a time to slack off? Maybe I'm bitter because I worked for much of the weekend.
Another unpopular opinion of mine is who we thank on Independence Day. Most people know that Independence Day represents the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Who signed this document? Politicians. But, nobody thanks our politicians on Independence Day. I think we should. No matter how crooked and off the mark they may be, if you truly think our country is the greatest in the world, you must thank them. Are you going to thank yourself and other regular Americans? You lazy people are too busy slacking off to get any credit.
Rabbit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)