We Knew This Was True

Karl Rove calls Dubya in for a meeting. (hat tip to Josh Marshall)

Will Bush Finally Be Impeached?

Granny Geek received an interesting email April 18th defining the terms for impeaching Bush. (click the photo to enlarge it, no pun intended)

Now that we know the FBI is investigating a Republican sex scandal involving prostitutes at the Watergate Hotel (what IS it with Republicans and the Watergate?), will Dubya finally be impeached?

And let's be very clear. This IS a REPUBLICAN sex scandal. Just at Jack Abramoff's illegal activities were purely REPUBLICAN-oriented. Anyone spinning differently is flat out lying. Josh Marshall has complete coverage.

BONUS: Limbaugh reached a PLEA BARGAIN (not a "settlement agreement") and is PAYING A FINE (not "reimbursing") in regards to his drug addiction. The facts in place demonstrate beyond any doubt that RUSH LIMBAUGH IS A DRUG ADDICT.

We *Heart* Mick Jagger

Reprinted without comment from The Sun:

PRESIDENT George Bush can’t get no satisfaction — after Mick Jagger grabbed his hotel room.

The Rolling Stone splashed out £3,600 a night for the suite days before the US leader tried to book it.

Now Mick, 62, who has been a fierce critic of the Bush-led war in Iraq, is refusing to give it up.

The veteran rocker hired the luxury Royal Suite at the five-star Imperial Hotel in Vienna, Austria, for June when the Stones are due to play a gig in the city.

Bush’s aides then tried to book it to tie in with a summit meeting.

But Mick put his foot down and insisted he was keeping the booking.

A source close to the millionaire singer said last night: “White House officials had wanted to reserve the suite and all the other rooms on the first floor.

“But Mick and the Stones had already booked every one of them.

“Bush’s people seemed to be under the impression that they would just hand over the suites but there was no way Mick was going to do that.”

The classically-designed suite is said to be among the top 100 hotel rooms in the world. It boasts a 7ft 4in bed, chandeliers and oil paintings.

Former presidents Ronald Reagan, John Kennedy and George Bush Snr all stayed there while they were in office.

The hotel last night admitted US secret service agents vetted the accommodation — and confirmed that Bush would no longer be staying there.

An American Embassy official refused to say where he was now staying for “security reasons”.

Mick takes a swipe at Bush, 59, on the latest Stones album A Bigger Bang, savaging his Iraq War policy.

Racism at Dillard's?

That's the accusation from eight black women suing the department store for racial discrimination after reportedly being told Dillard's beauty salons charge black customers more than whites because of the "kinky" nature of "ethnic" hair. It happened in Montgomery, Alabama. Pam Spaulding of Pandagon provides the details. Anyone know if the local Dillard's has this policy?

Bush Re-Invokes WMDs in Iraq

With his approval ratings continuing to fall, Bush again goes to the well of "national security" in a speech before the Orange County Business Council Monday, April 24, 2006, in Irvine, Calif.

Acknowledging that "It's real important for the President to pay attention to people, what's on their mind . . . ." Bush reminded us of what he's always thinking about:

I wish I could report to you that the war on terror was over. It's not. There is still an enemy that wants to do us harm. And the most important job of the President of the United States is to protect the American people from that harm. That's -- and I think about it all the time.

He naturally invokes 9/11, again, after reminding us he's the Decider:

As you know, well, I make a lot of decisions, and at the core of my decision-making when it comes to protecting America is the lessons learned from September the 11th, 2001. My job is to use the resources of the United States to prevent such an attack from happening again. And the first lesson of September the 11th, 2001 is that we face an enemy that had no regard for innocent life, an enemy which has hijacked a great religion to suit their political needs.

And once you've invoked 9/11, might as well go all the way:

Iraq has -- had weapons of mass destruction and has the knowledge as to how to produce weapons of mass destruction. And the confluence of a terrorist network with weapons of mass destruction is the biggest threat the United States of America faces.

Note the Freudian slip -- "Iraq has" weapons of mass destruction. And despite all those Iraqis we've killed or captured, the ones with "knowledge at to how to produce weapons of mass destruction" still elude us. After three years.

But wait! Bush has a strategy:

But it's very important for the American people to understand that they're trying to run us out of Iraq for a purpose. And the purpose is to be able to have safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And I understand it. And we've got a strategy in place to achieve victory.

And what might that strategy be, President Bush?

Yesterday I went over to Twentynine Palms -- I want to tell you something about the United States military. . . .And I told them, I told them they didn't have to worry about me. I believe we're going to win in Iraq. And a victory in Iraq will be a major blow to the totalitarian vision of bin Laden and his lieutenants -- a major blow. One, it will be a tactical blow. We'll deny them that which they want. But secondly, it will be a major blow because, in the long-term, the best way to defeat an ideology of hatred is with an ideology of hope.

Uh, yeah. But about that strategy?

I based a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I think are true. One, I believe there's an Almighty, and secondly, I believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to be free. I believe liberty is universal. I believe people want to be free. And I know that democracies do not war with each other.

So your strategy to defeat Islamic extremists is to say God told you to go to war with them? To invade their country? And to do all this by lying to the people of the United States? How's that working for you?

You know, it's really important for people to be able to connect the concept of freedom to our security. And it's hard. It's hard, particularly in a day and age when every act of violence is put in your living room. And I know that. I fully understand the challenge I face as the Commander-in-Chief to describe to the American people why the sacrifice is worth it.

Yes, it IS hard to convince the American people to give up their civil liberties, to send their loved ones to die or be maimed, to allow their children and grandchildren to pay for a war based on lies. Maybe that's why your approval ratings are so low.

One other choice comment:

And the United States government, whether you agree with my policy or not, must stand by our troops. When they're in harm's way, they deserve the best pay, the best equipment, and the best possible support.

Which is why Bush has been unable to get armored equipment to the troops even after three years of war, why he has cut veteran's benefits, and why he hasn't attended a single funeral of a soldier killed in Iraq.

But remember -- 9/11 -- weapons of mass destruction -- everybody wants freedom -- support the troops -- it's hard.

Climate Change

The BBC news website has a photo essay of our changing world, including the photo above.

As the climate warms up, mountainous regions may experience lower levels of snowfall.

This image shows Mount Hood in Oregon at the same time in late summer in 1985 and 2002.

But hey, let's keep burning those fossil fuels!

Tri-Some

We just discovered a slice of home is now available locally. Sterzing’s Potato Chips are the strangest "regular" potato chips you might ever taste. Sterzing’s taste different than any other chip we’ve tried. They’re a bit greasy and not very salty. Others have said the taste reminds them of french fries. Still others claim they taste like KFC batter.

Whatever. We just know they’re delicious.

The Sterzing's chip recipe is the same today as on the day Barney "B.J." Sterzing cooked up his first batch: potatoes, soybean oil, and salt. And while equipment today is more sophisticated the process is essentially the same one B.J. Sterzing devised more than 60 years ago

As a young entrepreneur, Sterzing hit upon the idea for his hard-to-resist chips in the early 1930s, when he owned and operated a candy company.

He was looking for a product his customers could enjoy during the hot, humid Iowa summers that rendered his chocolate candies more suitable for fondue than anything else. The chips were so well-received that during World War II, when chocolate was scarce since most of it went to U.S. servicemen overseas, the chips became Sterzing's primary product.

For the longest time Sterzing’s were only sold in a limited area in southeast Iowa. The company didn’t want to get too big. New stores might open, but they couldn’t necessarily sell Sterzing’s.

The Kum and Go convenience stores now carry Sterzing’s. They’re relatively cheap, compared to other chips. Do what the bag says, Tri-Some.

Terrorist attacks Worldwide TRIPLED Last Year

And that's not counting the attacks on Coalition Forces in Iraq. Imagine how high it would be if they were counted.

From The Christian Science Monitor:

In a report to be released next week, US government figures will show that the number of terrorist attacks in the world jumped sharply in 2005, totalling more than 10,000 for the first time. That is almost triple the number of terrorist attacks in 2004 -- 3,194

Knight Ridder:

More than half the fatalities from terrorism worldwide last year occurred in Iraq, said a counterterrorism official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the data haven't been made public. Roughly 85 percent of the US citizens who died from terrorism during the year died in Iraq. The figures cover only noncombatants and thus don't include combat deaths of US, Iraqi and other coalition soldiers.

College Republicans Grooming the Next Generation of Bigots

From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

The College Republicans at Penn State University wanted to enter the debate about the nation's borders by playing a "Catch an Illegal Immigrant Game."

People would be invited to "catch" group members wearing orange shirts symbolizing illegal aliens.

[snip]

"The Constitution allows College Republicans and other student groups to hold expressive events, even ones that may be deemed offensive by some," said Penn State spokesman Tysen Kendig.

Baseballs Rain Down

Mrs. DocLarry and I made another trip to Hammons Field Saturday evening to watch a disappointing Missouri State Bears game. True to form, we were nearly hit by three foul balls. None so close that we had to dive out of the way, as in previous visits to the house John Q built. But close enough to feel concerned.

The Bears lost to the Southern Illinois Salukis, 7 to 2. The Bears did not play well, but the Salukis were assisted by the officiating staff. The home plate umpire in particular did not seem to be consistent in his calls.

MSU batters Nolan Keane and Matt Weglarz watched third strikes cross the plate to start the sixth inning, then MSU head coach Keith Guttin tossed his hat in the air from his third base coaches box and was ejected from the game. That brought several rowdy fans out of their drunken stuper to begin yelling at the umpires, the Saluki batters, and anyone else they could think of. A couple "fans" had not even been watching the game, holding a loud, beer-induced "discussion" near the exit. When they heard boos from the crowd they began yelling obscenities at the umpire.

We're not opposed to fan participation in sporting events, but believe there is no need to become loud and obnoxious over something like a college baseball game. Yes, the umpires were inconsistent. That includes a call or two going in favor of the Bears. Still, we would agree the umps made some really bad calls against the Bears and may have deserved some ribbing from the home crowd. But this went beyond what was acceptable.

These drunken college boys (we watched them consume several beers) had not made any noise until the coach's ejection. The Bears were behind and botched some plays. No noise. The Bears made good plays and scored two runs. No noise. Yes, applause and some cheers were heard. But nothing like that which came forth following the ejection. From then on much noise, including laughing at their shouting, could be heard from these dozen drunken college boys. Frankly, it ruined an otherwise pleasant evening for us.

We doubt these drunken college boys could tell you the final score or why the coach was ejected, or probably any other detail of the game. But they got to yell obscenities in public. Civil discourse, indeed.

More News-Leader Double Standard?

We asked if the Springfield News-Leader exhibited a double standard by naming the suspended Rountree Elementary School principal not charged with anything while not naming the teacher arrested (but not charged) on suspicion of molesting students.

The lead article in Saturday's edition is on the Missouri Department of Social Services Childrens' Division investigation summary which the paper obtained from a parent.

The confidential report clearly demonstrates the Rountree principal received reports of "concerns that a teacher inappropriately touched students...." And since the principal neglected to respond to these reports, as required by law, she has been suspended with pay. The DSS has concluded the principal should have reported the allegations.

Based on that, should the principal have been named in the News-Leader articles? The paper still has not named the teacher. Is this a double standard?

The principal has not been charged with anything. The evidence indicates she was repeatedly told concerns of inappropriate touching, but didn't believe the teacher had done anything. I'm not opposed to the suspension. I'm not even opposed to the principal being named. But I feel like a double standard is being used. Are we certain the principal did something wrong? Are we certain the teacher did not? If the News-Leader's policy is to not name someone until they've been charged, did they violate that policy by naming the principal?

I'm interested in others' opinions on this.

On a semi-related note, I wonder why the News-Leader did not post the complete print-edition story on its Web site, but only the first five paragraphs, less than one-quarter of the full article.

Moving Misinterpretation

So the bud from Des Moines calls today in preparation for a visit next week when he will see Hammons Field for the first time. A HUGE Cardinals fan, he will have to settle for the Missouri State Bears.

My better half mailed him a special section from the News and Leader about the ballpark to inspire a visit. She included a cryptic note about waiting until after May 10th unless he wanted to spend time carrying boxes. (We close on our house May 10th, but won't really be moving that day.)

Back to the phone call. After confirming that the cryptic note referred to an imminent move, the bud inquires if we're "moving somewhere." Couldn't resist replying, "No, we're just rearranging our house."

Maybe you had to be there.