DABR Twitter Web Client Mini Blog Yo Mama Jokes Sports Bookmarklets About Us

March 19, 2009

The Only Truly Missing Olympic Sport: Corruption

Filed under: Olympics, Russia — Tags: , , , , , , — webadmin @ 3:28 am


 

Suspect in Poisoned Spy Case May Run for Mayor of Olympic Town

The prime suspect in the poisoning death of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko is poised to run for mayor of the Russian city of Sochi, which will host the 2014 Winter Olympics.

Authorities in the U.K. have recommended charging Andrei Lugovoi in the 2006 murder, in which a radioactive chemical was placed into a hotel teapot, but the Russians have said they would deny any extradition requests for Lugovoi.

Litvinenko, a former spy living in London, was murdered in November 2006 when he was poisoned with a deadly amount of Polonium-210 while drinking tea at London’s Millennium Hotel.

British investigators concluded, based on forensic evidence and intelligence reports, that the murder was a “state-sponsored” assassination orchestrated by Russian security services. Litvinenko was an outspoken critic of the Kremlin.

Russian officials, as well as Lugovoi himself, have denied any involvement in the murder.

Since the murder, Lugovoi, a former KGB bodyguard, has become a member of Russian Parliament and his bid for mayor will reportedly be backed by the Liberal Democratic Party.

Sochi is a resort town in the south of Russia. The 2014 games are the first to be hosted by Russia.

Litvinenko’s widow, Marina, released a statement today saying that should Lugovoi win, she would call for a boycott of the games.

“I would personally go from country to country to county urging people not to go to an event hosted by a murderer,” she said.

A Bungled Murder

In the investigation following Litvinenko’s murder, British officials said some 128 people were discovered to have had “probable contact” with Polonium-210, including at least eight hotel staff members and one guest. None displayed symptoms of radiation poisoning, but at least 13 tested at a level for which there may be long-term health effects.

For this reason, officials consider the murder to have been badly bungled. According to intelligence reports from the time, Russian officials did not expect the source of the poisoning to be discovered.

unreal

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

January 31, 2009

We’re the best at not screwing ourselves over too much! USA! USA!

Filed under: Politics, Vladimir Putin — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — webadmin @ 10:17 pm


 

We may be in a recession, but Russia is on the brink, it seems. First, Serena absolutely clobbers Dinara Safina in the Australian Open Women’s Final 6-0 6-3. Then the global financial crisis, that our best and brightest financial minds sparked, is succeeding in cutting the legs out from under pesky oil-rich nations like Russia and Iran and Venezuela. You can’t have oil demand if people don’t have jobs! Now our buddy Putin is trying to put a clamp on the dissent by going back to his old reporter-murdering handbook:

MOSCOW (AP) – The dead loom over the morning editorial meeting at Russia’s leading investigative newspaper. Novaya Gazeta’s staff is trying to plan the next issue and editor-in-chief Dmitry Muratov is in an understandably foul mood. In a corner hang photos of four reporters he has lost in the past eight years – one beaten to death, one allegedly poisoned, two shot – the most recent on Jan. 19. It’s not easy to put a paper out these days, Muratov says.

I’ll bet it’s not. It’s also not easy to walk across downtown Moscow unmolested by some protestor or the other. They’re calling for Putin to resign because of the economy:

Anti Putin Protests In Russia

Russia was rocked today by some of its strongest protests yet as thousands rallied across the vast country to attack the Kremlin’s response to the global economic crisis. The marches, complete with Soviet-style red flags and banners, pose a challenge to a government which has faced little threat from the fragmented opposition and politically apathetic population during the boom years fuelled by oil. Pro-government thugs beat up some of the protesters.

Nine years into the new century seems right about on schedule for another Bolshevik uprising. So is Medyedev playing the part of Rasputin? And to top it off, fresh off Al-Queda trying to frighten America into opposing Obama by calling him a house-negro, Iran’s calling us weak for wanting diplomacy:

US President Barack Obama’s offer to talk to Iran shows that America’s policy of “domination” has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday. “This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed,” Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency. “Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added. After nearly three decades of severed ties, Obama said shortly after taking office this month that he is willing to extend a diplomatic hand to Tehran if the Islamic republic is ready to “unclench its fist”. In response, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a fresh tirade against the United States, demanding an apology for its “crimes” against Iran and saying he expected “deep and fundamental” change from Obama.

Hah – if your distractions don’t work, the fundamental change might come in Iran’s next elections! If only Israel hadn’t taken the bait. Again.

And once again we’re sitting pretty. What an incredibly amazing 8-year plan. They had it all figured out all this time. Man, George Bush may have been right about history judging him differently.

Um…..

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

October 11, 2008

More Sarah Palin Humor



 

This is CLASSIC!! The best lines are at the bottom

The Lost News – The Front Page – Mayor In Russia Says He Can See Sarah Palin Showering From His House

(Provideniya, Russia) Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, has said that she can see Russia from her house. Across the Bering Strait in Provideniya Bay sits the town of Provideniya, Russia and its mayor Dimitri Andropov. He says that he can see Palin showering from HIS house. “And it is very nice.”

Mayor Andropov added that his small town, like America, is transfixed with the buxom Governor. “We have a shower watchman on duty 24/7. And when the delightful Palin turns on the water and lets down her hair, the alarm sounds, telling everyone to rush to my house for a show. The kids love it.”

Leonid Andropov, the Mayor’s brother, said that the ability to see Palin shower has given him and the other men a newfound respect for her. “She’s a very thorough cleaner, which is tough when one is dealing with moose guts, wolf blood and oil…And she doesn’t have a mustache, which is just a big plus for us.”

In a spontaneous Q&A at a Phoenix donut shop, Sarah Palin said that she’s okay with the Russians watching her shower. “I’m flattered. And hopefully my cleanliness can inspire them to go after freedom, liberty and democracy…so that they can create jobs, get more freedom and liberty to help the economic job search, then hunt down the terror loving terrorists and change their nation of human people for the better.”

“All I heard from that speech was change, and change to us is bad,” said Mayor Andropov. “Change means John McCain will win the election and take our water princess to shower in Washington D.C…We don’t want that to happen…Everything else Governor Palin said was over our small town heads. But that’s okay, because we like to watch Sarah the same way she likes to watch Saturday Night Live, with the sound turned down.”

In other news, Bill Clinton announced his candidacy for Mayor of Provideniya.

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

October 9, 2008

Sarah Palin’s been palling around with terrorists too!



 

long but excellent piece from Salon.com – some real eye openers about Palin and how she operates.


Meet Sarah Palin’s radical right-wing pals

Extremists Mark Chryson and Steve Stoll helped launch Palin’s political career in Alaska, and in return had influence over policy. “Her door was open,” says Chryson — and still is.

By Max Blumenthal and David Neiwert

Editor’s note: Research support provided by the Nation Institute Investigative Fund. For Salon’s complete coverage of Sarah Palin, click here.


Oct. 10, 2008 |

On the afternoon of Sept. 24 in downtown Palmer, Alaska, as the sun began to sink behind the snowcapped mountains that flank the picturesque Mat-Su Valley, 51-year-old Mark Chryson sat for an hour on a park bench, reveling in tales of his days as chairman of the Alaska Independence Party. The stocky, gray-haired computer technician waxed nostalgic about quixotic battles to eliminate taxes, support the “traditional family” and secede from the United States.

So long as Alaska remained under the boot of the federal government, said Chryson, the AIP had to stand on guard to stymie a New World Order. He invited a Salon reporter to see a few items inside his pickup truck that were intended for his personal protection. “This here is my attack dog,” he said with a chuckle, handing the reporter an exuberant 8-pound papillon from his passenger seat. “Her name is Suzy.” Then he pulled a 9-millimeter Makarov PM pistol — once the standard-issue sidearm for Soviet cops — out of his glove compartment. “I’ve got enough weaponry to raise a small army in my basement,” he said, clutching the gun in his palm. “Then again, so do most Alaskans.” But Chryson added a message of reassurance to residents of that faraway place some Alaskans call “the 48.” “We want to go our separate ways,” he said, “but we are not going to kill you.”

Though Chryson belongs to a fringe political party, one that advocates the secession of Alaska from the Union, and that organizes with other like-minded secessionist movements from Canada to the Deep South, he is not without peculiar influence in state politics, especially the rise of Sarah Palin. An obscure figure outside of Alaska, Chryson has been a political fixture in the hometown of the Republican vice-presidential nominee for over a decade. During the 1990s, when Chryson directed the AIP, he and another radical right-winger, Steve Stoll, played a quiet but pivotal role in electing Palin as mayor of Wasilla and shaping her political agenda afterward. Both Stoll and Chryson not only contributed to Palin’s campaign financially, they played major behind-the-scenes roles in the Palin camp before, during and after her victory.

Palin backed Chryson as he successfully advanced a host of anti-tax, pro-gun initiatives, including one that altered the state Constitution’s language to better facilitate the formation of anti-government militias. She joined in their vendetta against several local officials they disliked, and listened to their advice about hiring. She attempted to name Stoll, a John Birch Society activist known in the Mat-Su Valley as “Black Helicopter Steve,” to an empty Wasilla City Council seat. “Every time I showed up her door was open,” said Chryson. “And that policy continued when she became governor.”

When Chryson first met Sarah Palin, however, he didn’t really trust her politically. It was the early 1990s, when he was a member of a local libertarian pressure group called SAGE, or Standing Against Government Excess. (SAGE’s founder, Tammy McGraw, was Palin’s birth coach.) Palin was a leader in a pro-sales-tax citizens group called WOW, or Watch Over Wasilla, earning a political credential before her 1992 campaign for City Council. Though he was impressed by her interpersonal skills, Chryson greeted Palin’s election warily, thinking she was too close to the Democrats on the council and too pro-tax.

But soon, Palin and Chryson discovered they could be useful to each other. Palin would be running for mayor, while Chryson was about to take over the chairmanship of the Alaska Independence Party, which at its peak in 1990 had managed to elect a governor.

The AIP was born of the vision of “Old Joe” Vogler, a hard-bitten former gold miner who hated the government of the United States almost as much as he hated wolves and environmentalists. His resentment peaked during the early 1970s when the federal government began installing Alaska’s oil and gas pipeline. Fueled by raw rage — “The United States has made a colony of Alaska,” he told author John McPhee in 1977 — Vogler declared a maverick candidacy for the governorship in 1982. Though he lost, Old Joe became a force to be reckoned with, as well as a constant source of amusement for Alaska’s political class. During a gubernatorial debate in 1982, Vogler proposed using nuclear weapons to obliterate the glaciers blocking roadways to Juneau. “There’s gold under there!” he exclaimed.

Vogler made another failed run for the governor’s mansion in 1986. But the AIP’s fortunes shifted suddenly four years later when Vogler convinced Richard Nixon’s former interior secretary, Wally Hickel, to run for governor under his party’s banner. Hickel coasted to victory, outflanking a moderate Republican and a centrist Democrat. An archconservative Republican running under the AIP candidate, Jack Coghill, was elected lieutenant governor.

Hickel’s subsequent failure as governor to press for a vote on Alaskan independence rankled Old Joe. With sponsorship from the Islamic Republic of Iran, Vogler was scheduled to present his case for Alaskan secession before the United Nations General Assembly in the late spring of 1993. But before he could, Old Joe’s long, strange political career ended tragically that May when he was murdered by a fellow secessionist.

Hickel rejoined the Republican Party the year after Vogler’s death and didn’t run for reelection. Lt. Gov. Coghill’s campaign to succeed him as the AIP candidate for governor ended in disaster; he peeled away just enough votes from the Republican, Jim Campbell, to throw the gubernatorial election to Democrat Tony Knowles.

Despite the disaster, Coghill hung on as AIP chairman for three more years. When he was asked to resign in 1997, Mark Chryson replaced him. Chryson pursued a dual policy of cozying up to secessionist and right-wing groups in Alaska and elsewhere while also attempting to replicate the AIP’s success with Hickel in infiltrating the mainstream.

Unlike some radical right-wingers, Chryson doesn’t put forward his ideas freighted with anger or paranoia. And in a state where defense of gun and property rights often takes on a real religious fervor, Chryson was able to present himself as a typical Alaskan.

He rose through party ranks by reducing the AIP’s platform to a single page that “90 percent of Alaskans could agree with.” This meant scrubbing the old platform of what Chryson called “racist language” while accommodating the state’s growing Christian right movement by emphasizing the AIP’s commitment to the “traditional family.”

“The AIP is very family-oriented,” Chryson explained. “We’re for the traditional family — daddy, mommy, kids — because we all know that it was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. And we don’t care if Heather has two mommies. That’s not a traditional family.”

Chryson further streamlined the AIP’s platform by softening its secessionist language. Instead of calling for immediate separation from the United States, the platform now demands a vote on independence.

Yet Chryson maintains that his party remains committed to full independence. “The Alaskan Independence Party has got links to almost every independence-minded movement in the world,” Chryson exclaimed. “And Alaska is not the only place that’s about separation. There’s at least 30 different states that are talking about some type of separation from the United States.”

This has meant rubbing shoulders and forging alliances with outright white supremacists and far-right theocrats, particularly those who dominate the proceedings at such gatherings as the North American Secessionist conventions, which AIP delegates have attended in recent years. The AIP’s affiliation with neo-Confederate organizations is motivated as much by ideological affinity as by organizational convenience. Indeed, Chryson makes no secret of his sympathy for the Lost Cause. “Should the Confederate states have been allowed to separate and go their peaceful ways?” Chryson asked rhetorically. “Yes. The War of Northern Aggression, or the Civil War, or the War Between the States — however you want to refer to it — was not about slavery, it was about states’ rights.”

Another far-right organization with whom the AIP has long been aligned is Howard Phillips’ militia-minded Constitution Party. The AIP has been listed as the Constitution Party’s state affiliate since the late 1990s, and it has endorsed the Constitution Party’s presidential candidates (Michael Peroutka and Chuck Baldwin) in the past two elections.

The Constitution Party boasts an openly theocratic platform that reads, “It is our goal to limit the federal government to its delegated, enumerated, Constitutional functions and to restore American jurisprudence to its original Biblical common-law foundations.” In its 1990s incarnation as the U.S. Taxpayers Party, it was on the front lines in promoting the “militia” movement, and a significant portion of its membership comprises former and current militia members.

At its 1992 convention, the AIP hosted both Phillips — the USTP’s presidential candidate — and militia-movement leader Col. James “Bo” Gritz, who was campaigning for president under the banner of the far-right Populist Party. According to Chryson, AIP regulars heavily supported Gritz, but the party deferred to Phillips’ presence and issued no official endorsements.

In Wasilla, the AIP became powerful by proxy — because of Chryson and Stoll’s alliance with Sarah Palin. Chryson and Stoll had found themselves in constant opposition to policies of Wasilla’s Democratic mayor, who started his three-term, nine-year tenure in 1987. By 1992, Chryson and Stoll had begun convening regular protests outside City Council. Their demonstrations invariably involved grievances against any and all forms of “socialist government,” from city planning to public education. Stoll shared Chryson’s conspiratorial views: “The rumor was that he had wrapped his guns in plastic and buried them in his yard so he could get them after the New World Order took over,” Stein told a reporter.

Chryson did not trust Palin when she joined the City Council in 1992. He claimed that she was handpicked by Democratic City Council leaders and by Wasilla’s Democratic mayor, John Stein, to rubber-stamp their tax hike proposals. “When I first met her,” he said, “I thought she was extremely left. But I’ve watched her slowly as she’s become more pronounced in her conservative ideology.”

Palin was well aware of Chryson’s views. “She knew my beliefs,” Chryson said. “The entire state knew my beliefs. I wasn’t afraid of being on the news, on camera speaking my views.”

But Chryson believes she trusted his judgment because he accurately predicted what life on the City Council would be like. “We were telling her, ‘This is probably what’s going to happen,’” he said. “‘The city is going to give this many people raises, they’re going to pave everybody’s roads, and they’re going to pave the City Council members’ roads.’ We couldn’t have scripted it better because everything we predicted came true.”

After intense evangelizing by Chryson and his allies, they claimed Palin as a convert. “When she started taking her job seriously,” Chryson said, “the people who put her in as the rubber stamp found out the hard way that she was not going to go their way.” In 1994, Sarah Palin attended the AIP’s statewide convention. In 1995, her husband, Todd, changed his voter registration to AIP. Except for an interruption of a few months, he would remain registered was an AIP member until 2002, when he changed his registration to undeclared.

In 1996, Palin decided to run against John Stein as the Republican candidate for mayor of Wasilla. While Palin pushed back against Stein’s policies, particularly those related to funding public works, Chryson said he and Steve Stoll prepared the groundwork for her mayoral campaign.

Chryson and Stoll viewed Palin’s ascendancy as a vehicle for their own political ambitions. “She got support from these guys,” Stein remarked. “I think smart politicians never utter those kind of radical things, but they let other people do it for them. I never recall Sarah saying she supported the militia or taking a public stand like that. But these guys were definitely behind Sarah, thinking she was the more conservative choice.”

“They worked behind the scenes,” said Stein. “I think they had a lot of influence in terms of helping with the back-scatter negative campaigning.”

Indeed, Chryson boasted that he and his allies urged Palin to focus her campaign on slashing character-based attacks. For instance, Chryson advised Palin to paint Stein as a sexist who had told her “to just sit there and look pretty” while she served on Wasilla’s City Council. Though Palin never made this accusation, her 1996 campaign for mayor was the most negative Wasilla residents had ever witnessed.

While Palin played up her total opposition to the sales tax and gun control — the two hobgoblins of the AIP — mailers spread throughout the town portraying her as “the Christian candidate,” a subtle suggestion that Stein, who is Lutheran, might be Jewish. “I watched that campaign unfold, bringing a level of slime our community hadn’t seen until then,” recalled Phil Munger, a local music teacher who counts himself as a close friend of Stein.

“This same group [Stoll and Chryson] also [publicly] challenged me on whether my wife and I were married because she had kept her maiden name,” Stein bitterly recalled. “So we literally had to produce a marriage certificate. And as I recall, they said, ‘Well, you could have forged that.’”

When Palin won the election, the men who had once shouted anti-government slogans outside City Hall now had a foothold inside the mayor’s office. Palin attempted to pay back her newfound pals during her first City Council meeting as mayor. In that meeting, on Oct. 14, 1996, she appointed Stoll to one of the City Council’s two newly vacant seats. But Palin was blocked by the single vote of then-Councilman Nick Carney, who had endured countless rancorous confrontations with Stoll and considered him a “violent” influence on local politics. Though Palin considered consulting attorneys about finding another means of placing Stoll on the council, she was ultimately forced to back down and accept a compromise candidate.

Emboldened by his nomination by Mayor Palin, Stoll later demanded she fire Wasilla’s museum director, John Cooper, a personal enemy he longed to sabotage. Palin obliged, eliminating Cooper’s position in short order. “Gotcha, Cooper!” Stoll told the deposed museum director after his termination, as Cooper told a reporter for the New York Times. “And it only cost me a campaign contribution.” Stoll, who donated $1,000 to Palin’s mayoral campaign, did not respond to numerous requests for an interview. Palin has blamed budget concerns for Cooper’s departure.

The following year, when Carney proposed a local gun-control measure, Palin organized with Chryson to smother the nascent plan in its cradle. Carney’s proposed ordinance would have prohibited residents from carrying guns into schools, bars, hospitals, government offices and playgrounds. Infuriated by the proposal that Carney viewed as a common-sense public-safety measure, Chryson and seven allies stormed a July 1997 council meeting.

With the bill still in its formative stages, Carney was not even ready to present it to the council, let alone conduct public hearings on it. He and other council members objected to the ad-hoc hearing as “a waste of time.” But Palin — in plain violation of council rules and norms — insisted that Chryson testify, stating, according to the minutes, that “she invites the public to speak on any issue at any time.”

When Carney tried later in the meeting to have the ordinance discussed officially at the following regular council meeting, he couldn’t even get a second. His proposal died that night, thanks to Palin and her extremist allies.

“A lot of it was the ultra-conservative far right that is against everything in government, including taxes,” recalled Carney. “A lot of it was a personal attack on me as being anti-gun, and a personal attack on anybody who deigned to threaten their authority to carry a loaded firearm wherever they pleased. That was the tenor of it. And it was being choreographed by Steve Stoll and the mayor.”

Asked if he thought it was Palin who had instigated the turnout, he replied: “I know it was.”

By Chryson’s account, he and Palin also worked hand-in-glove to slash property taxes and block a state proposal that would have taken money for public programs from the Permanent Fund Dividend, or the oil and gas fund that doles out annual payments to citizens of Alaska. Palin endorsed Chryson’s unsuccessful initiative to move the state Legislature from Juneau to Wasilla. She also lent her support to Chryson’s crusade to alter the Alaska Constitution’s language on gun rights so cities and counties could not impose their own restrictions. “It took over 10 years to get that language written in,” Chryson said. “But Sarah [Palin] was there supporting it.”

“With Sarah as a mayor,” said Chryson, “there were a number of times when I just showed up at City Hall and said, ‘Hey, Sarah, we need help.’ I think there was only one time when I wasn’t able to talk to her and that was because she was in a meeting.”

Chryson says the door remains open now that Palin is governor. (Palin’s office did not respond to Salon’s request for an interview.) While Palin has been more circumspect in her dealings with groups like the AIP as she has risen through the political ranks, she has stayed in touch.

When Palin ran for governor in 2006, marketing herself as a fresh-faced reformer determined to crush the GOP’s ossified power structure, she made certain to appear at the AIP’s state convention. To burnish her maverick image, she also tapped one-time AIP member and born-again Republican Walter Hickel as her campaign co-chair. Hickel barnstormed the state for Palin, hailing her support for an “all-Alaska” liquefied gas pipeline, a project first promoted in 2002 by an AIP gubernatorial candidate named Nels Anderson. When Palin delivered her victory speech on election night, Hickel stood beaming by her side. “I made her governor,” he boasted afterward. Two years later, Hickel has endorsed Palin’s bid for vice president.

Just months before Palin burst onto the national stage as McCain’s vice-presidential nominee, she delivered a videotaped address to the AIP’s annual convention. Her message was scrupulously free of secessionist rhetoric, but complementary nonetheless. “I share your party’s vision of upholding the Constitution of our great state,” Palin told the assembly of AIP delegates. “My administration remains focused on reining in government growth so individual liberty can expand. I know you agree with that … Keep up the good work and God bless you.”

When Palin became the Republican vice-presidential nominee, her attendance of the 1994 and 2006 AIP conventions and her husband’s membership in the party (as well as Palin’s videotaped welcome to the AIP’s 2008 convention) generated a minor controversy. Chryson claimed, however, that Sarah and Todd Palin never even played a minor role in his party’s internal affairs. “Sarah’s never been a member of the Alaskan Independence Party,” Chryson insisted. “Todd has, but most of rural Alaska has too. I never saw him at a meeting. They were at one meeting I was at. Sarah said hello, but I didn’t pay attention because I was taking care of business.”

But whether the Palins participated directly in shaping the AIP’s program is less relevant than the extent to which they will implement that program. Chryson and his allies have demonstrated just as much interest in grooming major party candidates as they have in putting forward their own people. At a national convention of secessionist groups in 2007, AIP vice chairman Dexter Carter announced that his party would seek to “infiltrate” the Democratic and Republican parties with candidates sympathetic to its hard-right, secessionist agenda. “You should use that tactic. You should infiltrate,” Carter told his audience of neo-Confederates, theocrats and libertarians. “Whichever party you think in that area you can get something done, get into that party. Even though that party has its problems, right now that is the only avenue.”

Carter pointed to Palin’s political career as the model of a successful infiltration. “There’s a lot of talk of her moving up,” Carter said of Palin. “She was a member [of the AIP] when she was mayor of a small town, that was a nonpartisan job. But to get along and to go along she switched to the Republican Party … She is pretty well sympathetic because of her membership.”

Carter’s assertion that Palin was once a card-carrying AIP member was swiftly discredited by the McCain campaign, which produced records showing she had been a registered Republican since 1988. But then why would Carter make such a statement? Why did he seem confident that Palin was a true-blue AIP activist burrowing within the Republican Party? The most salient answer is that Palin was once so thoroughly embedded with AIP figures like Chryson and Stoll and seemed so enthusiastic about their agenda, Carter may have simply assumed she belonged to his party.

Now, Palin is a household name and her every move is scrutinized by the Washington press corps. She can no longer afford to kibitz with secessionists, however instrumental they may have been to her meteoric ascendancy. This does not trouble her old AIP allies. Indeed, Chryson is hopeful that Palin’s inauguration will also represent the start of a new infiltration.

“I’ve had my issues but she’s still staying true to her core values,” Chryson concluded. “Sarah’s friends don’t all agree with her, but do they respect her? Do they respect her ideology and her values? Definitely.”

oh – and there’s this from Mother Jones about her true foreign policy experience (or lack thereof):

In her first interview after John McCain picked her to be the GOP’s vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin claimed that her foreign policy credentials were enhanced because “you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.” She also pointed out that she had experience dealing with trade delegations. Later, asked by CBS News’ Katie Couric if she had ever participated in negotiations with Russia, Palin said, “We have trade missions back and forth. We—we do—it’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia .”

But the calendars tracking Palin’s official meetings during her tenure as governor contain not one listing indicating she ever met with a Russian official. In fact, the 562 pages of her daily schedules—obtained by Mother Jones under Alaska’s Open Records Act—indicate that Palin had few meetings at all with any foreign representatives and rarely dealt with any topic related to foreign policy. The schedules include about 20 meetings, events, or phone calls in which Palin interacted with foreign officials. And in many instances, these interactions were cursory or ceremonial and did not involve policy details. According to the schedules released, Palin spent roughly 12 hours over the course of 19 months on these meetings. (This doesn’t count what happened during a four-day trip she took to Kuwait to visit members of the Alaska National Guard. The schedules for those days do not detail whom she met.) The calendars show no meetings between her and a trade delegation from any nation.

Let’s hope the real danger to America is finally exposed soon.

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

September 21, 2008

Intelligent Foreign Affairs Debate



 

My 2 Foreign Affairs Mancrushes, Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek and Thomas Friedman of the NY Times discuss the importance of a new and robust Energy Policy and how it affects our foreign affairs not just in the Mid East, but also with Russia. You can also watch it here.

Also here is an amazing summit of 5 former Secretaries of State broadcast on CNN, described by some as the Most mature US foreign policy debate of the year:

Part 1

Part 2

Bonus

I love this stuff (as you can tell).

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

August 24, 2008

hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Filed under: Humor, Jokes — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — webadmin @ 11:37 pm


 

fail owned pwned pictures
see more pwn and owned pictures

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

August 13, 2008

Bush: Terrorist Slapper or Ass Slapper?



 

Bush slaps Misty May assA cool article from my foreign affairs mancrush – Fareed Zakaria. He talks about what Bush got right, and surprisingly filled 4 web pages. Probably because he had to start with the littany of things he got wrong to begin a comparison:

Zakaria: What Bush Got Right | Newsweek Politics | Newsweek.com

A broad shift in America’s approach to the world is justified and overdue. Bush’s basic conception of a “global War on Terror,” to take but the most obvious example, has been poorly thought-through, badly implemented, and has produced many unintended costs that will linger for years if not decades. But blanket criticism of Bush misses an important reality. The administration that became the target of so much passion and anger—from Democrats, Republicans, independents, foreigners, Martians, everyone—is not quite the one in place today. The foreign policies that aroused the greatest anger and opposition were mostly pursued in Bush’s first term: the invasion of Iraq, the rejection of treaties, diplomacy and multilateralism. In the past few years, many of these policies have been modified, abandoned or reversed. This has happened without acknowledgment—which is partly what drives critics crazy—and it’s often been done surreptitiously. It doesn’t reflect a change of heart so much as an admission of failure; the old way simply wasn’t working. But for whatever reasons and through whichever path, the foreign policies in place now are more sensible, moderate and mainstream. In many cases the next president should follow rather than reverse them.

Consider as a symbol of this shift Bush’s appointment of the World Bank’s president. His first choice for the job was Paul Wolfowitz, an arch neoconservative with little background in economics. But by the time Wolfowitz was forced to resign and the post opened up again, Bush realized that he needed a less ideological choice, and he picked the highly qualified and respected Robert Zoellick. Where Dick Cheney was once the poster child for the administration, today policy is being run by Condoleezza Rice, Robert Gates, Stephen Hadley and Hank Paulson—all pragmatists. Change has not extended to all areas, and in many places it’s been too little, too late. But that there has been a shift to the center in many crucial areas of foreign policy is simply undeniable.

The most obvious case is Iraq. For many people—a clear majority of those polled—the decision to go to war is now seen as a mistake. But wherever one stands on that issue, it is overwhelmingly clear that the administration made a series of massive blunders in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. It went in with too few troops, dismantled Iraq’s Army, bureaucracy and state-owned factories, arrested tens of thousands of Iraqis, mistreated and tortured some of them, and used overwhelming military force against all perceived threats. The outcome? Chaos; an angry, dispossessed and armed Sunni community; a sullen and restless Shiite population; an insurgency; a jihadist terrorist movement, and spreading sectarian violence. In addition, foreign forces were destabilizing the country because both the invasion and the occupation were undertaken without first gaining support from neighboring Arab states or winning international legitimacy. The result was a perfect storm in international affairs, a failure that kept getting worse.

he goes on to explain how Bush moderated on Iraq by getting rid of Rummy and hiring someone who could think, engaged China, North Korea and Iran and the Israeli/Palestinian conflct in contrast to his earlier hardline stance, and even bettered Clinton by bettering our relationship with India. A good read, especially the part about how it relates to the next administration:

All this is not meant as a defense of George W. Bush. The administration made monumental errors in its first few years, ones that have cost the United States enormously. The shift in impressions about America’s intentions across important sections of the globe, the sense in much of the Islamic world that America is anti-Muslim, the vast and counterproductive apparatus of homeland security—visa restrictions, arrests and interrogations—are lasting legacies of the Bush administration. Its dysfunction and incompetence have left a trail of misery in countries like Iraq and Lebanon, which have been destabilized for decades. The embrace of torture and other extralegal methods has violated America’s noblest traditions and provided little in return.

And then there is the administration’s record outside of foreign policy. Bush 43 has surely been the most fiscally irresponsible president in American history, taking surpluses that equaled 2.5 percent of GDP and turning them into deficits that are 3 percent. This is a $4 trillion hit on the country’s balance sheet. On the central issue of energy policy—the greatest economic challenge and opportunity of our times—Bush has been utterly obstructionist, recycling the self-serving arguments of industry lobbyists. On the whole, Bush’s record remains one of failure and missed opportunities.

So why offer this corrective? Because we cannot go back to 2001. The next president will inherit the world as it is in 2009. He will have to examine the Bush administration’s policies as they stand in January 2009—not as they were in 2001 or 2002 or 2003—and decide how to accept, modify and alter them. There was a U.S. president who came into office convinced that everything his predecessor had done was feckless, stupid, ill-informed and venal. He rejected and tried to reverse everything that he could, almost as an article of faith. Before he had even examined the policies carefully, he knew that they had to be changed. The base of his party was delighted by his clarity and fighting spirit.

That president, of course, was George W. Bush. His decision to blindly repudiate anything associated with Bill Clinton is what got us into this mess in the first place. Let’s hope that the next president, no matter how much he despises Bush, will take a careful look at his administration’s policies, America’s interests, and the world beyond and do the right thing for the country and its future.

Bush Misty Mayespecially important considering that Putin looks like he continues to flex his neo-communist muscles. McCain has jumped all over this like a pig in slop (3am phone call slop), Obama is on vacation, and Bush apparently is a bit late to the party on his Russia strategy – trying to duck interviews from Bob Costas before his talking points were refined. And slapping volleyball players
Bush slaps Misty May ass

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

June 14, 2008

The Roundup from 2008-06-14

Filed under: Mini Blog, Olympics — Tags: , , , , , , , — blogger @ 11:59 pm


 
  • Solomon: WNBA star joins Russian Olympians – Houston Chronicle http://tinyurl.com/4sljpj Traitor? It happens all the time. Just ask Brazil! #
  • QuickTip: Printing to PDF – EEE PC http://tinyurl.com/2eqx5e “sudo apt-get install cups-pdf” and “sudo nano /etc/cups/cups-pdf.conf” #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

May 21, 2008

They Must Be Punished



 

It’s the Cold War Final. An English team with a Russian owner and an English team with an American owner playing in Moscow a week after a Russian fan was stabbed in Manchester and 18 months after a Russian defector at odds with Vladimir Putin was poisoned (allegedly) in London … with Polonium. Throw in an Israeli coach, a distant cousin of Mariah Carey, the no-tolerance police, rat infested jails, traditionally binge-drinking English fans and Russian hooligans bent on revenge and you have all the makings of a grand spectacle!



Dan Roan reports

Sie sind die besten, indeed!

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

November 22, 2007

England – Oustered From Euro 2008 Qualification. McClown’s Ouster Next?



 

MaccaSo Steve McClaren, given a second chance after Israel’s defeat of Russia, decided to shake things up a bit for their crucial game at Wembley to get them into the Euro 2008 tournament next summer. And what did he do? He eschewed the experience of veterans like David Beckham and David James for newcomer Scott Carson and winger Shaun Wright-Phillips. He then decided to play a 4-5-1 formation with only Peter Crouch up front. After 14 minutes England were down 2-0 thanks to a horrendous blunder by Carson and poor defending. Needless to say Mac’s strategy backfired on him.

On a night when a point would do for England, their first half showing was that of a side who were intent on getting their manager sacked, with their so-called ‘world class performers’ such as Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard looking more like non-league players having an off-day.

Beckham CrouchIndeed, it was not until the chief marketing icon of the aforementioned and much lambasted competition made his belated entry at half-time that England began to rally and David Beckham was the only player who deserved better than this embarrassing demise.

Those who have written that this brilliant footballer is merely a walking advertisement in a generation of plastic celebrities fail to appreciate just what he has brought to the English game in the last decade. His mere presence lifted the crowd and his energy and delivery on the right flank was of a quality McClaren’s first pick, Shaun Wright-Phillips, can only produce on a PlayStation game.

Beckham’s pinpoint pass to set-up Crouch for the equaliser that should have sealed England’s qualification was a touch of pure class and it was a shame for the LA Galaxy star that the rest of his team mates were not good enough to capitalise on his enthusiasm and brilliance.

This was Becks’ 99th international cap and as he took a bow to all four corners of Wembley at the end, he knew it would probably be his last. England will not be lucky enough to see his like again for some time and the FA should put on a game that ensures he collects the century.

Scott CarsonIf only the same tribute could be paid to McClaren, whose decision to change his goalkeeper and stick Scott Carson between the sticks for his competitive debut, not to mention his shock move to pick Wright-Phillips ahead of Beckham, ensuring this would be his final game as England coach unless he got the result he needed.

Some argue that the 4-5-1 formation was unfamiliar to the players who usually play a 4-4-2 in club football. Arsene Wenger suggested the 4-5-1 formation but with Beckham instead of Wright-Phillips.

Arsene Wenger, interviewed prior to the 3-2 loss to Croatia, suggested that Stevie boy play 4-5-1 just as he did but with David Beckham on the wing rather than Shaun Wright Philips. Looking solely at Beckham’s predictable blood-and-guts effort and his beautiful cross for Crouch’s goal you’d have a minor hindsight argument to make.

Sad BeckhamBut, more importantly, it made sense. The pitch was always going to be a pile of crap with the weather coming and the mud would mean that England wouldn’t be able to pass it on the ground easily, or dribble it effectively (at least for England’s somewhat technically inept players) which means – all together now – a reliance on high/long passes and set pieces. Hmm, if only there was a player in the squad who was still among the best in the world at said skill.

So we’re left to wonder, what if Beckham – fueled by being given the chance to save his country yet again – had been able to supply crosses to Peter Crouch all game long? What odds that McClaren changed his team just to stick it to Wenger and avoid anyone say he copied him?

Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but so is not being a cocky idiot.

Playing the single striker was music to the Croatians though. On the way out the door, their manager let the English press know that England needed to look deeper than just the formation.

Croatia CelebratingCroatia boss Slaven Bilic claimed England had lost to a better team tonight as a 3-2 defeat at Wembley eliminated Steve McClaren’s side from Euro 2008.

Bilic believes the pressure got to the England players and insisted McClaren’s tactics played right into his hands.

‘We didn’t feel that kind of negative pressure,’ he told Sky Sports News.

‘It’s a bit hard, although they are world-class players and should cope with it, it is hard to cope with that kind of negative pressure.’

Bilic admitted he was overjoyed when he discovered McClaren was playing just Crouch in attack – to the point where he was happy for an impotent England to have the ball.

‘We let their two centre-halves take the ball,’ he said.

‘Of course Crouch is a great player but he is not that quick.

‘It is much easier to play against a team with just one up front.’

Bilic added: ‘Wake up. You didn’t lose the game tonight because of the tactics.

‘We are simply a better team. I admire your team and your players but my team is a much better team.’

Bye Bye MacSteven GerardThe FA have an emergency meeting set up for the morning where it’s expected that McClaren, who has refused to resign, will be given his walking papers. Meanwhile and more long-term, there have been calls from all over for the FA to address the state of the game from all levels, from the youth level all the way up. And more than just the xenophobic idea of removing foreign players from the Premiership. Perhaps missing out on this prestigious and lucrative tournament (estimated GBP1,000,000 economic impact for missing) is in fact the wake up call that England will need to ensure that World Cup 2010 sees the best team that England can muster. Perhaps led by a certain Special One?

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: 1% [?]

Powered by WordPress

Blog Information