

Mareseatoatsanddoeseatoatsbutlittlelambseativy.
Eric Boehlert writes in Salon: "One day after President Bush ordered his Cabinet secretaries to stop hiring commentators to help promote administration initiatives, and one day after the second high-profile conservative pundit was found to be on the federal payroll, a third embarrassing hire has emerged. Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated column, 'Ethics & Religion,' appears in 50 newspapers, was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative. McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.
"Cheney stood out in a sea of black-coated world leaders because he was wearing an olive drab parka with a fur-trimmed hood. It is embroidered with his name. It reminded one of the way in which children's clothes are inscribed with their names before they are sent away to camp. And indeed, the vice president looked like an awkward boy amid the well-dressed adults.
"Like other attendees, the vice president was wearing a hat. But it was not a fedora or a Stetson or a fur hat or any kind of hat that one might wear to a memorial service as the representative of one's country. Instead, it was a knit ski cap, embroidered with the words 'Staff 2001.' It was the kind of hat a conventioneer might find in a goodie bag.
"It is also worth mentioning that Cheney was wearing hiking boots -- thick, brown, lace-up ones."
A second syndicated columnist has admitted being paid by Bush's government to promote Bush agenda.
The achievement of great material success requires an unlimited capacity for self-delusion and rationalization.
In 2002, syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher repeatedly defended President Bush's push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families. But Gallagher failed to mention that she had a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president's proposal.
"The Bush marriage initiative would emphasize the importance of marriage to poor couples" and "educate teens on the value of delaying childbearing until marriage," Gallagher wrote in National Review Online, for example, adding that this could "carry big payoffs down the road for taxpayers and children."
As Guy Dinmore recounted in the Financial Times on Jan. 13: "According to Chas Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia and head of the independent Middle East Policy Council, Mr Bush recently asked Mr Powell for his view on the progress of the war. 'We're losing,' Mr Powell was quoted as saying. Mr Freeman said Mr Bush then asked the secretary of state to leave."
"In public, they were making a big show of how he was prepared to serve," said Crain. "In the back room, they were trying to get him off."
Fair And Balanced
On Fox News Channel, you're free to speak about the coronation of George W... unless you've got the nerve to criticize Dear Leader. Then you get a Fox News MeltdownTM.
I'm disappointed that Iraq hasn't turned out better. And that we weren't able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process."Then, after a minute's pause, he adds a third regret: "The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."
Outgoing Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
"There's big money in helping people avoid facing reality."
Aphorism of Zen Master This
Now a few days shy of the inauguration of the president let us look into the crystal ball and see what the next four years (if Bush is not impeached in two years) has to offer.
Q&A on Social Security
By Bill Straub, Scripps Howard News Service
January 16, 2005
Q: Is there a Social Security crisis?
A: No. There is no imminent threat to Social Security as the word "crisis" might indicate. Even if nothing is done to change the system, the Congressional Budget Office predicts retired people can expect to receive full benefits to 2052 — 47 years hence. Social Security trustees, meanwhile, using more conservative data, said the system will be able to pay 100 percent of promised benefits until 2042.
Thereafter, if no changes are made and money continues to flow into the system through the payroll tax, recipients can expect to receive about 75 percent of their anticipated benefits.
Q: Is Social Security going bankrupt?
A: Hardly. As a result of reforms adopted in the early 1980s that increased payroll contributions, Social Security trust funds presently maintain more than $1.4 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds and the assets are growing. About 154 million people are paying into the system. More money is entering than is being paid out.
Q: So what's the problem?
A: Beginning in 2018, Social Security will start paying out more than it collects, forcing the system to dip into the trust fund. The baby boom generation, the largest in the nation's history, born between 1946 and 1964 starting right after World War II, begins collecting its benefits. Today, there are three workers depositing money into the system for each beneficiary. Within a few years, the ratio will drop to 2-to-1. The 77 million boomers present an obvious strain to the system, leading the president and groups like AARP to address the issue.
Q: What does President Bush recommend?
A: The details remain unclear — the administration has yet to offer a proposal — but basically he wants to permit younger workers to take a portion of the payroll taxes targeted for Social Security and invest the money in personal savings accounts. Meanwhile, older Americans will receive full Social Security benefits.
Q: What are personal savings accounts?
A: Basically, they are government-approved investment plans. Currently, excess funds in the Social Security system are invested in U.S. Treasury bonds, which on average earn lower interest rates than stocks. Workers under the Bush plan would have a range of investment options and the money accrued from these investments would go into the individual's personal account, not into the system.
Q: What's the advantage there?
A: President Bush maintains the personal investment accounts will earn a better rate of return than that realized from the U.S. Treasury bonds.
Q: Are there any drawbacks?
A: It certainly isn't a cheap solution. Analysts predict the transition costs — the price for moving from the current system to the hybrid system — could hit $2 trillion.
Q: Anything else?
A: Among those opposing the plan is AARP, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons, which maintains the president's plan is too risky. The genius behind Social Security, AARP says, is that it provides retirees with a guaranteed, defined payment that they can count on month-to-month. The White House plan likely will reduce any guaranteed payment and there are no assurances that beneficiaries will earn more money through personal savings accounts. Basically, opponents assert the Bush plan would shred the safety net provided by Social Security.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Bush Plans Sharp Cuts in HUD Community Efforts
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 14, 2005; Page A01
The White House will seek to drastically shrink the Department of Housing and Urban Development's $8 billion community branch, purging dozens of economic development projects, scrapping a rural housing program and folding high-profile anti-poverty efforts into the Labor and Commerce departments, administration officials said yesterday."
WHFS Changes Its Tune to Spanish
Alternative Rock Pioneer Targets Latino Audience
By Teresa Wiltz and Paul Farhi
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 13, 2005; Page A01
WHFS-FM, the Washington area radio station that was a pioneering purveyor of alternative rock to generations of young music fans, did a programming U-turn yesterday by ditching the genre for a Spanish-language, pop-music format that transforms it into the largest Spanish-language station on the local dial.
Why radio is dead.
I just read this afternoon of the demise of a grand old alternative rock station, WHFS in
Why is that? Because, that once great alternative radio station eventually morphed into just another vehicle for the promotion of future sneaker commercial soundtracks. The same has happened in
You’d think that the decision makers at these media giants were all members of the Democratic National Committee they way they are afraid to take chances and be real. There ARE alternatives out there, great music that is fresh.
You won’t find it on your radio though (well ok, there are STILL some alternative radio stations out there. Radio1190 (http://www.radio1190.org/) here in
For new music check out
and the links listed therein
Also
Check out podcaster or search the word podcast on google.
Please post your suggestions for netcasts, music blogs, podcasts, even radio.
Ken
From Wikipedia
For many decades the precise taxonomic classification of the panda was under debate as both Giant Pandas and Red Pandas share characteristics of both bears and raccoons. However, genetic testing has revealed that Giant Pandas are true bears and part of the Ursidae family. Its closest bear relative is the Spectacled Bear of South America. Disagreement remains about whether or not Red Pandas belong in Ursidae or the raccoon family, Procyonidae.
What was it that brought the tsunami victims into the forethought of Americans and others around the world? There are crises in
That word -- 'values' -- has lately become a codeword for appeasement of the right-wing fringe. But when political calculations make us soften our opposition to bigotry, or sign on to policies that add to the burden of ordinary Americans, we have abandoned our true values.
"The week of the inauguration could easily be coined the week of the fabulously rich and famous. Several of Washington's luxury hotels have set their sights on the biggest of big spenders. Cue Robin Leach: 'Hey travelers, how would you like your own private jet service, butler-drawn baths and a 3,500-square-foot hotel suite? You'll be wearing the finest custom couture as you emerge at the inaugural ball in your chauffeur-driven limousine!'
The price range: $5,000-$200,500 for a four-night stay."
Americans are addicts. They are addicted to one thing. Spending money.
Most people don’t even know they are addicted. But go a week without spending money. Plan out your meals, go to the grocery store on Sunday evening and buy everything for the meals that week. Then don’t spend another dime until the following Sunday evening. That means no trips to the mall, no little “I deserve a little break/treat/etc” pastry, no Starbucks. You can pay your bills (gasoline/transportation too) but pay for nothing else.
Now some people are saying, “Oh that’s easy.” Fine, try it out. If you can do it without a problem then you win and we can move on to the next step. But try it. You need to try this and you need to start this Sunday. If you have never gone on a spending diet, a spending vacation, then this coming week is the week to do it. Don’t worry when you find yourself midweek jonesing to spend. Just see it as a sign that this is going to require more attention. If you fall off the wagon, just get back on.
This is a very good article. Even if you do not subscribe to some of the ideology it none-the-less paints a good picture of the situation. Let the Wal-Mart discussions ensue.
Wal-Mart knows its customers, and it knows how badly they need the discounts. Like Wal-Mart's workers, its customers are overwhelmingly female, and struggling to make ends meet.