"You know, when I was running for president, in Chicago, somebody said, would you ever have deficit spending? I said, only if we were at war, or only if we had a recession, or only if we had a national emergency. Never did I dream we’d get the trifecta."
- George W. Bush
The U.S. Climate Change Science Program for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005
A Report by the Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research - A Supplement to the President's Fiscal Year 2004 and 2005 Budgets.
Letter of Transmittal July 2004
Members of Congress:
We are pleased to transmit to you a copy of Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Climate Change Science Program for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. The report describes the activities and plans of the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), which incorporates the U.S. Global Change Research Program, established under the Global Change Research Act of 1990, and the Climate Change Research Initiative, established by the President in 2001. The CCSP coordinates and integrates scientific research on climate and global change supported by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. Government.
This Fiscal Year 2004 – Fiscal Year 2005 edition of Our Changing Planet includes a review of the key components of the Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, which was released in July 2003. The CCSP Strategic Plan was the first comprehensive update of a national plan for climate and global change research since the original strategy was issued at the inception of the U.S. Global Change Research Program. This report outlines how the CCSP is moving forward to implement the Strategic Plan during FY 2004 and FY 2005.
As a significant part of this implementation, the CCSP will produce 21 scientific syntheses and assessments on a wide range of topics to support informed discussion of climate variability and change and associated issues by decision makers and the public. The first nine of these products are being developed during FY 2004 and FY 2005.
The report also presents highlights of recent research supported by CCSP participating agencies on Climate Variability and Change, the Global Carbon Cycle, and other elements of the research program, and highlights of plans for FY 2004 and FY 2005. A section on International Research and Cooperation describes the Earth Observation Summit, hosted by the Secretaries of Commerce, Energy, and State, held in Washington, DC, in July 2003, as well as numerous current activities to promote cooperation between the U.S. scientific community and its counterparts worldwide. An Appendix describes principal areas of focus and program highlights for each of the CCSP participating agencies. A detailed set of CCSP budget tables is included as an insert in the report.
The CCSP is guided by the vision of our Nation and the global community empowered with the science-based knowledge to manage the risks and opportunities of change in the climate and related environmental systems. We thank the participating departments and agencies of the CCSP for their close cooperation and support and look forward to working with Congress in the continued development of this important program.
Donald L. Evans Secretary of Commerce Chair, Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration
Spencer Abraham Secretary of Energy Vice Chair, Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration
John H. Marburger III, Ph.D. Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Director, Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration
---
It is happening, we are causing it, and it is happening faster than we thought.
In an interview with the New York Times, published on its Web site, Bush was asked why his administration had changed its position. "Ah, did we?" Bush replied. "I don't think so."
For a .pdf file of the entire report click here.Moronic Libertarian Alert: Do not write to tell me radical climate change is a figment of my imagination, a plot by silly or greedy scientist, or any other of the myriad unscientific arguments you usually send my way, without first reading the above .pdf. For once, I beg you, do a drop of reading before making an ass of yourself.
You will notice on the left side of your screen I have a new box called "The Amazing Meeting Pledge Drive". Click on the link, drop me a line and let me know how much you can spare.
Now I want to make something really clear here. If you were to tell me "Gee Dom, I would love to contribute towards sending you to Vegas and all, but it is either you or my local democratic candidate I would expect no hesitation on your part, the election being fractionally more important than giving me a chance to take on Penn & Teller. And all things considered since I am pretty sure there is no way this is actually ever going to happen...well you get the point. By all means make sure your charity dollars do the most they can do. I am very low priority.
Basically I feel I have to give this my best shot...this way no one can ever accuse me of failing to put my money (or more accurately your money) where my mouth is.
I am still getting a lot of hits due to the omnigate.exe and bdl14025.exe problem. I still have not figured out a fix yet (and as far as I can tell, neither has anyone else) but I pass this on in the hope that it helps:
Hello Blogger,
I had the same omnigate problem and saw found your site while looking up help on Google. To get rid of it there is a program in your C:\temp folder called mdbb.exe I think. This program creates omnigate and other. To get rid of it go into your task manager and stop whatever instances of it are running. Then you can delete it and all other files in the folder. Hope this helps. I am not sure where I got it since I run a firewall.
Warm regards,
Robert
Since I no longer have the problem I cant' look for the mdbb.exe file. If anyone else uses this method with success please let me know.
This re-launch show is going to be INSANE! You gotta tune in. It will give you something to talk about for the week after. All ya gotta' do is got to www.redbarradio.com and click LISTEN NOW!
So what are you waiting for? Go on...you know you want to.
Edit: Included a link to the Red Bar Radio webpage. In fact I included two.
Where I get to beg for help to attend "The Amaz!ng Meeting 3"
I promised you a big announcement and by god that is just what I am going to give you.
I mentioned a couple of weeks ago that the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) is holding it's annual "The Amaz!ng Meeting 3" (TAM 3) It will be from January 13th to the 16th. One of the neat things about this meeting is that they issue a "Call for Papers". Well I applied. Below is a copy of the application letter I sent:
Amaz!ng Meeting III Paper Presentation Proposal
Name of Speaker: James McLaughlin (aka Dominion) Position/ Affiliation: Magician, Blogger Address: Oh come on, you don't really want my address Phone Number: Nor my phone number Email: You Wish Spambot!
Presentation Title: The Importance of Truth in Skepticism
Abstract: (Provide a concise summary of your proposed presentation in at least 100 words. Outlines may be included. A description of how the topic is relevant to the JREF mission would be appreciated.)
Penn & Teller, two very talented magicians, have taken up the cause of skepticism in their new show "Bullshit". When they have discussed classic subjects of skepticism (such as religion, "talking to the dead" and strange medical practices) they have been outstanding. Yet when they discuss topics that would be considered "public policy" questions (such as the environmental movement, GM foods, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) aka second hand smoke) they have come from a preconceived libertarian position, using information in a way that is less than honest. How important is this to the skeptic movement? Should we always strive for honesty, or is it ok to convince people to a particular viewpoint using any method at hand. Do the ends justify the means? How ready are we to dispute science when it comes to public policy questions?
The following paper will discuss Penn & Teller's show "Bullshit" some of the spin techniques that they have used (such as finding the wackiest people of a movement to represent the entire movement, using completely false statements such as GM foods are needed to solve world hunger, when world hunger is not caused by lack of food, and using a cast of questionable "experts" from libertarian think tanks as opposed to real scientist), a comparison of what Penn & Teller does on "Bullshit" to what creationist do in regards to evolution, and finally a general discussion on the importance of scrupulous honesty when taking a skeptical stance.
I really should not have to point out the relevance of this topic to JREF, TAM 3, and the skeptical movement at large, especially in light of the fact that Penn & Teller will be invited speakers at TAM 3 and have enjoyed the endorsement of James Randi for many years.
AV requirements: (A digital projector will be made available for presentations that utilize PowerPoint and other computer based presentation applications.)
Please list any other equipment or supplies you might require:
A television and a DVD player, which I can provide if needed, to show clips of "Bullshit" for illustration purposes
Publications/ References: (Please list any relevant references and/or any of your own publications related to this presentation)
I write a blog called "A Skeptical Blog" which can be found at http://home.houston.rr.com/skeptical. I have written extensively on Penn & Teller’s "Bullshit" going from excitement to disappointment to downright alarm. (list of URLs erased. If you can't find them let me know and I will send them along)
Thank you for your consideration.
James McLaughlin aka Dominion
As you can see from the link the application was to go to Prof. Ray Hall. I sent the application and got a very nice email back:
Dear James,
Thank you for your submitted proposal. I will let you know if your presentation is selected after the submission deadline, so expect an email shortly after November 1.
I would like to ask you a few questions about your proposal.
Would it be OK to call you? If so what would be a good time?
best,
Ray
I have not heard from Prof. Hall yet so I have no clue as to what his questions might be. I am thinking of writing him back to find out just what his questions are. One I am almost sure, will be about the tone of what I have written so far.
Now needless to say, I really want to go. One of the big reasons is that Penn & Teller will also be there to give a talk. So I would love nothing better than for them to "hear" that a paper negative of their show is in the offering. Even better is if they attend, but I ain't gonna hold my breath.
Now I have to be honest, there is a whole lot that has to happen before I can go. First thing is that they choose my paper. I have to admit to myself that the chances are slim. I am not a Ph.D, hell not even a B.A. I am just a magician that knows something about science. Second, this is certainly going to step on some toes. The fact that Penn & Teller will be there might also make a difference.
But there is a chance.
Here comes the difficult part. You might notice that there are no ads on this site. There is no begging bowl, there is nothing here in the least bit commercial. I have always thought that it would be the height of arrogance to think that anyone would actually pay for the drek I write.
Yet there is no way I can afford to do this myself.
I have given this a lot of thought. As you can see from Prof. Hall's letter I won't even find out till November if my paper was chosen or not, leaving me no time to try to raise the funds. I don't want to get money if my paper is not accepted, because then I have the headache of trying to return the money. I only want enough to enable me to pay for this little trip, I figure $1,500 should do it. That would cover air fair, hotel and the fee to attend the meeting. Unfortunately they don't pay your way even if the accept a paper for the "Call". So what to do?
I thought I would take pledges. That way if my paper is not accepted, then I don't have to return anything to anyone (though you will get my most sincere thanks). If it looks like I can't raise the amount, then that is okay too. If I raise the amount I need, and my paper is accepted, then I will have till January to collect the pledges.
I am not set up to accept anything yet. On Monday I will have the "Pledge Scale" to show how much I have raised so far and how much I need.
One last thing. I hate like hell to do this. I have never been comfortable asking people for money. I don't plan to ask for money every day between now and November. Perhaps a small notice once a week, but that is it. And when I say small I mean small.
I don't expect the people that come to read my political rantings to put up the dough (but I certainly would appreciate it) but it would be nice of those of you that consider yourself "Freethinkers" and "Skeptics" to give me a hand. I think what Penn & Teller are doing does as much harm as any other pseudoscientist. I don't think it is right for a skeptic to use his or her position to spread "bullshit". I would really like the chance to express these thoughts in a forum that matters, and let's face it TAM 3 is the place to do it.
Please do not send me pledges today. Please wait until Monday when I will be in a better position to start accepting your generosity...and yes, I mean YOU!
So here it is, my big announcement. Now only time will tell just how important it all is.
"Five twenty-sevens - I think these ought to be outlawed. I think they should have been outlawed a year ago. We have billionaires writing checks, large checks, to influence the outcome of the election.''
- George W. Bush proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that irony is not dead.
The Internet Infidels prove to be gutless wonders.
Last week, while reviewing the visitor logs to the blog, I noticed a few hits coming from this link. Well naturally I had to check it out. It lead me to the webboard of the "Internet Infidels" and a discussion under way about Penn and Teller's fabulous show "Bullshit". Someone in the conversation was kind enough to reference the blog as evidence that P&T was playing fast and loose with the truth.
Well needless to say some of the responses were less than....oh how you say...intelligent. One person accused me of nothing more than an "ad hom" attack. Could not find one place where basic factual information was spun. Well what is a poor magician to do? I decided to join right in.
Things went ok at first. I started my regular flood of information, people who disagreed with me pretended they could not read...pretty typical of my experiences on webboards, really...then it happened. writer@large, is a moderator on the board and with a single sentence sent me the kiss of death. "Please try to keep the tone civil, folks".
To which I replied:
Yet another board bites the dust.
Thanks to the people that welcomed me here, but I doubt I will be sticking around all that long. As soon as I see a mod saying "Keep it civil" I know I am not long for that board.
First let me make it clear that as far as I am concerned, insult away. Do your best and if it is funny, hell I will probably even laugh. If there is one lesson I have learned in a long life it's take nothing seriously least of all myself.
I have been engaging in online debates for many years. I started out in alt.religion.scientology, moved sci.skeptic, managed to make a mark in sci.environmental and alt.libertarian. I spent a whole lot of time engaging in a whole lot of debate. I was there when Earl Curly accused James Randi of pedophilia (earning a lawsuit that never went to court since Earl had the good sense to shuffle off this mortal coil). I was there when the Church of Scientology raided Dennis Erlich's apartment.
Now let me tell ya, Usenet is no tea time debate society. So I quickly established my "rules for debate" while there. I don't give a damn if you want to call me a chicken molester or the biggest a-hole on earth. What I do care is that you back up what you say. As long as I get information along with the insults, well it has been a long time since I graduated kindergarten and I can certainly handle a few hot remarks from someone that is passionate about the subject.
And really this is the bottom line. People who are passionate about a subject (and if you ain't passionate, why in the hell are you here?) tend to get heated. I like that. I enjoy talking to people who are passionate about something, even if I think it is the most bone headed passion I have ever seen. When you feel something you will work all the harder. I would much rather talk to a right wing nut job trying is damnedest to convince me that every war wound that John Kerry got in 'Nam was self inflicted and this was all part of some master plan to look good for a political career (with plenty of "commie scum" and "liberal asshole" thrown my way) than some idiot that tells me "Oh yah that voting thing...it's for the birds".
But this ain't my playground and I don't make the rules. I don't enjoy "civil" and I certainly don't do it well. So for anyone that would like to call me names, insult my mother and bother my dog, please feel free to drop by my blog "A Skeptical Blog " and have at me. I have a comment section and one rule, the comment can't be more than 90% obscene and that is only because the ISP where my page resides has problems with obscenity.
I doubt I will be here much longer...
Boy I did not realize just how accurate my prediction was gonna be.
Things went on for a few days. Some people even bothered to welcome me to the boards, claimed they looked forward to me joining in other conversations. Which I would have given time...
But yesterday as I was looking over the thread I noticed that some of my posts had an edit mark. Now this did not strike me as particularly strange, I had edited some small bits right after I had posted the article. Usually if you edit within a couple of minutes it does not indicate that the post had been edited, but I thought that the board was set up different. Well on this day I looked closer and I noticed this little gem appended to the bottom of my posts:
Last edited by Krosis : August 20, 2004 at 07:48 PM. Reason: implied insult removed.
Wait just a gol' darn minute here. You mean that some asshole calling himself Krosis was actually going into my posts and changing them? To remove an "implied insult"?
Now don't get me wrong. I have had posts removed wholesale from a site. I have been prevented from posting. I have been kicked from boards. All of which I have defended. Not so much that they had a right to do so to me, but I did at least accede to their right to do so. You might remember that I was a mod for the "Tin Foilism" section on the "Air America Place" webboard. Well as time went on we discovered that I was not a real good fit for the direction that Bob wanted to take the board. No problem and no hard feelings, to this day I wish nothing but good for Bob and nothing but good for his board.
But this was something new. Actually changing what someone wrote. I can't even conceive of the arrogance that must possesses such a person.
Even worse, this did not give me a chance to change a thing. I got no notification that my posts had been changed, no one complained to me that my posts were insulting or not civil enough. Even the above urging to keep it civil was not directed at me as far as I could tell, it was directed to another poster who apparently had the chance to change what she wrote herself (and if it was directed at me, then why did no one bother to tell me). A courtesy that was not extended to me.
This is gutless behavior to end all gutless behavior. Krosis couldn't face me like a man and complain about my post, he did not even possesses the bravery to confront me privately. Instead he decided to become a stealth moderator, nothing more than a lousy sneak. He took the cowards way out. I hope he is proud.
Needless to say I won't be going back to that particular board. I certainly don't want to hang around a place where the owner has such a lack of good judgment when it comes to picking mods.
Instead I got a really nice invite from the Freethought Forum. A few mods seeing the difficulty I was having on the Internet Infidels board assured me that my contribution would be most welcome there...and I did not even have to be nice about it. Hopefully more people from the Internet Infidels boards will follow my example.
I have run across a lot of asshole behavior on the net in my time, but really, this takes the cake. And Krosis...just let me say one thing...
Fuck you...fuck you very much.
Edit: Some small changes to make it more readable...or make sense, take your pick.
I am so lucky. I got a really keen letter from Jenna and Babs letting me know just who they planned to vote for in Nov. and why:
Dear Friends,
We're sure that you have no doubt who we'll be voting for in November. But you should also know that we would be voting for our Dad in this election even if he had not raised us, loved us, tutored us, coached us, and even listened to a few excuses from us for late curfews. We have been privileged to know our President personally and we know he is the right person to lead our country - especially when there are so many important issues at stake.
Our Dad has qualities that are needed in a good President - loyalty, humor (embarrassing as it sometimes may be), compassion, and, most importantly, integrity. We're not the only ones who see it. In fact, our friends - from varying political backgrounds - are supporting our Dad in November. Not only because of his decisions to liberate the women of Afghanistan or bring freedom to the people of Iraq, but because during the last ten years they met a man whose title was Governor or President, but who was always happy to be known as "our Dad." He made everyone feel welcome and comfortable in our house (except for the occasional boyfriend) and our friends got to know him as a really good guy.
We know that when you get to know his record as President, you too will feel compelled to participate in this year's election - and hopefully get involved in the campaign, too. We know it can be hard to find time to think about politics. We just graduated from college and are perfectly aware that schoolwork, parties, and extra-curricular activities keep students busy, away from campaigns and voting booths. In the last election, less than half of 18- to 24-year-olds were registered to vote, and only 32% of them actually did vote. Sadly, many Americans our age did not take advantage of their right to vote.
We are asking you to get involved with this campaign not only because it is the most critical election of our lifetime, but also because we have the ability to positively change our future. Please encourage your friends to sign up on the campaign's web site (www.GeorgeWBush.com) and register to vote online. At the web site you'll also find a lot of information about how to get involved in our Dad's re-election campaign. It's an easy process, and it's the best way to have a say in this year's election.
Thanks for taking a few minutes to think about some big issues. This is a really important election, and we know that with your help our Dad will win in November.
Jenna and Barbara Bush
Okay I lied, they really didn't give a reason why to vote for dear old dad. Only that he was a good old dad (and if I allowed my underage daughter to go on drinking binges using a fake ID, I am sure she would think me a good old dad too!)
I have read some lame campaign stuff in my time but really girls, this takes the cake. And you claim to be college educated?
I know that I am using the term "scumbag" a lot lately but I really do think these attacks on Kerry's war record are the very essence of scum.
Next up, Robert Dole.
After spending Sunday trashing John Kerry's war record Robert Dole decided to drop by Wolf Blitzer for a sort of semi-apology. Dole made three claims on "Late Edition":
DOLE: With three Purple Hearts, he never bled that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds.
DOLE: As far as I know, he's never spent one day in the hospital. I don't think he draws any disability pay. He doesn't have any disability. And boasting about three Purple Hearts when you think of some of the people who really got shot up in Vietnam.
DOLE: I served with him for 14 years. I can't remember a single piece of legislation that bore his name.
Well that was Sunday and yesterday was Monday. And with Monday some of the bark went out of this old dogs bite:
BLITZER: ...Let's speak to Bob Dole directly on the phone now, he's joining us live.
Senator, you've certainly stirred up a lot of issues in that interview we did on "LATE EDITION" yesterday.
BOB DOLE (R), FMR. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Maybe I should have stayed longer for brunch somewhere. But I had nice call from John Kerry this morning. And you know, we've been friends for a long time. And he knows it's hardball. But he said he was disappointed. And I said, John, I didn't mean to offend you. I've said a lot of nice things about you in the primary. I admired your prostate cancer public stand. I applauded your success in the primary. I defended you against Wesley Clark.
But I said, you know, when you continue to attack George Bush, either you or these MoveOn.org or these groups, you know, George Bush is my guy. And I don't mean to offend you. We had a good back and forth visit and I think an e-mail is on the way to Senator Kerry saying that, in effect, that I wish him luck up to a point.
BLITZER: Up to a point. You clearly support President Bush for reelection.
DOLE: Obviously. And I never had any contact with the Bush people. They have a little number you call in before you go on these shows I guess if you want to get briefed for Sunday shows. I didn't talk to anybody. I don't think I needed to talk to anybody. But, you know, I have no quarrel about his Purple Heart -- or I mean, about his Silver Star or the Bronze Star. I said, John, I've never questioned that. I've said you're a hero.
Why don't you call George Bush on the telephone, and say, Mr. President, let's get on with the campaign, let's get on with the issues. Let's stop all this talk about the National Guard and Vietnam. And he said, well, that's what I'm doing. I'm talking about the issues. I said, well, we know how it works in presidential races. Somebody else is doing it. In fact, the DNC today has put out a message to call Bob Dole and we've had lots of phone calls because of it.
But I don't know. I mean, this is what's happening, I mean, there's a debate out there about his record. And I sent a message to John I think at least two or three months ago, it's a very fine line because a lot of men weren't in the service and a lot of others like to think they had a part in what happened in Vietnam, or World War II or Korea, whatever. And I said that to him again today. I said, you know, you can't be running just because you're a veteran, because maybe I tried that in '96. It didn't work very well.
BLITZER: Senator Dole, let me just get one thing straight. Did you initiate the call to John Kerry this morning, or did he call you?
DOLE: He called me.
BLITZER: And it went relatively well? Was he angry? What was the end of the conversation like?
DOLE: The final words were: "John, I wish you good luck up to a point." And he said, thank you. And you know, there's respect there. We were in the Senate together. But we're talking about the presidential race, and I tweaked him a little on the Purple Hearts. But he said he didn't draw any disability, that he could have because of his hearing and he didn't spend any time in a hospital. But I wasn't trying to be mean-spirited. I was just trying to say all these guys on the other side just can't be Republican liars. Maybe there's some truth and that's when I suggested maybe somebody like Wolf Blitzer ought to be the referee, but you declined.
BLITZER: I'm not sure I would necessarily be a great referee. Senator Dole, there were three specific things that irritated Democrats, including those in the Kerry campaign that you said in the interview on "LATE EDITION." The first were, you belittled the extent of his injuries in Vietnam. Second were the statements he made when he came home. You urged him to apologize formally to the 2 1/2 million veterans who returned after the war. And third, you said -- belittled, basically, his years in the Senate, saying he really had no record to speak on. Do you want to revise or amend any of those comments?
DOLE: Well, I don't know. You know, his record is pretty thin in the Senate. And I think that's what we ought to be talking about. He only I think had 73 words at the convention about his Senate experience. The title of his book is "Line of Duty." His whole campaign is based on the fact that he served in Vietnam. And as said with John, you're proud to be veteran, I'm proud to be a veteran. I'm not quarreling with that. I didn't quarrel with your Silver Star. I didn't quarrel with the Bronze Star. But, you know, as I understand, the wounds were superficial, you never were hospitalized. You don't draw any disability pay. So I think I was fairly consistent. I probably -- he said he did bleed. And I said, well, you know, that's OK.
BLITZER: And on the specific issue, Senator, if either the Bush-Cheney campaign or the White House or Republicans, what some Democrats are saying, they put you up to this appearance yesterday on "LATE EDITION" in which you said these things. I want you to clarify that matter as well.
DOLE: Well, it's doesn't need to be clarified, because it's not true. And as you know, you've been after me for about three weeks to come on the show. And I told John Kerry, I said, I haven't been out there trying to stir up anything. I'm, in fact, ducking the issue because I knew when I got on the show you'd have to ask me these questions. So I said, I haven't been having press conferences, I don't run any ads, I haven't written any letters to the editor. I showed up because I respect your program and you asked me and I did it I think on the third request. But...
BLITZER: Well, we -- that's true. We've been asking you for many, many weeks. But I guess I'm a little confused. You said that there's some sort of recording you can call up and get information before you go out on these Sunday shows. What exactly does that mean?
DOLE: I think when anybody's going to be on a Sunday show, there's a conference call number if you want, I guess, get updated on the facts. At least I got some e-mail saying if you want to get any information, call a certain number. I didn't do that. I don't know if anybody else does that. But I guess it's just probably to stay on message, whatever. But I can tell you with total accuracy and honesty that nobody asked me to do anything. I mean, I think President Bush today denounced the ads. And I think it would be a good chance to bring closure to this now if Senator Kerry would follow up and say, OK, we've had our debate on the National Guard. We've had our debate on Vietnam. Let's talk about today and the future.
BLITZER: Do you want these Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to drop the ads that they're running against John Kerry?
DOLE: I'm not a candidate. I think that's up to President Bush. But I think it's up to them. I mean, they have First Amendment rights. I think there can't be discrimination saying, well, certain veterans can say this happened, but others who may have some knowledge can't question their views. And I think that's not fair. That's not the American way. We have these debates. This is a presidential race, we're 70-some days away. It's political hardball, and certainly Senator Kerry understands that.
And I reminded him that in 1996, I didn't have anybody out writing these great stories about Bob Dole's war record and I don't think we were feeding them to people, but I just wanted him to get off Bush's back and have his people get off Bush's back. He's been called almost a traitor. He's been referred to as a coward -- well, Cheney is referred to as a coward. Bush referred to as a deserter, referred to as being AWOL. And I think this is over the top.
Now maybe some people like that, some real hard-line Democrats, Republicans, they like that kind of politics. But I don't think most Americans like it. And I don't think they want to be reminded every day that John Kerry or Bob Dole or anybody else who did this or that in World War II or Vietnam.
BLITZER: Senator Dole, appreciate it very much. Thanks very much for joining us, clarifying some of the comments from yesterday's "LATE EDITION." Always good to have you on CNN.
DOLE: I may never come back.
(LAUGHTER)
BLITZER: I hope you will come back.
DOLE: Thank you.
Well I am certainly glad to learn that Bob Dole and John Kerry are good friends and they worked in the Senate and all...but it was just scummy for Dole to attack a fellow vet's war record. What was he thinking? His defense is simply stupid.
But did you notice that the White House has a number that Republicans can call to learn their talking points? To keep them, "on point" according to Dole. And it is certainly comforting to know that Bob Dole has never used that number....
For those of you that have my blog on your favorites list, for a bit of fun erase it, and re-add it. Notice anything new?
I am getting ready to change some things around here, and I will have a big big announcement in the next couple of days. So stay tuned, things are only gonna get better!
How can the Republican Party back such a slimy group.
Once again Qrazy is my go to guy. He had this to say in the comment section:
Before this campaign I didn't know much about Kerry -- since it started I've learned a lot, and he's not only an admirable guy but would no doubt make a terrific president. He goes after corrupt BS no matter who's out there that doesn't want it dug up, as evidenced by his investigation of the BCCI scandal (which of course is another reason anyone named Bush would dislike him).
I will admit that Kerry was not my first choice. But one thing I have always believed that when it came to the military and the security of our country, Kerry would be a great president. Why? Because of the very thing Vietnam vets seem to hate him for...his objection to the war.
I don't know about anyone else, but the fact that he went volunteered for service in 'Nam then came home and protested the war gives the man a tremendous amount of moral authority. He did not protest because he didn't want to fight, he did not run when it came time for him to choose. He did what he had to, was horrified by what he experienced and let people know how he felt. Man, that is so American I don't know how the right wing can look at itself in the mirror. He is a better man than I, I would have run like the wind.
And yet when he comes home and tells the truth about what is going on over there, he is treated like some sort of traitorous liar. Please. We all know that atrocities were committed in 'Nam. It ain't no secret and Kerry was correct to point out what is going on. It is strange that vets somehow think that Kerry was somehow personally accusing them of committing atrocities when as far as I know (having read his "Winter Soldier testimony) he never accused anyone of anything. In fact, if you read the testimony carefully (something right wingers are simply incapable of I understand) you will find that Kerry did not even claim to have seen these atrocities, he was reporting what other soldiers said they saw.
It's really funny to me that the Republican Party can claim to support the troops, yet trash a war hero like John Kerry. Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican.
It is my most humble opinion that one of the most pernicious and stupid urban legend of all time is the urban legend that Vietnam vets were spit on when they returned from the war (in fact, it was usually the anti-war protestors that was on the receiving end of someone's expectorant). When I first heard this story I didn't believe it. It went against everything I knew from people who were on both sides of the fence.
When I was six or seven my mom was a divorcee living in Temple Texas, just a hop, skip and jump from the largest army base in the United States, Fort Hood. My mom, being a divorcee, got to know a lot of service men that were stationed there. My brother and I were exposed to a colorful cast o' characters, not just service men, but young guys that went to Mary Harden Baylor University. Now this would have been 1967 - '68 and there was a great deal of ambivalence between vets and protestors, no sign of the great hate that would develop down the road. One vet I remember in particular because of the foot long scar on his back. When I asked him about it, he told me it was a gift from a Vietnamese who stabbed him with a bayonet. "Let me tell ya, when I went down I was holding an M-16 and I started shooting. And I laid there moving back and forth shooting and shooting. I may have shot Americans, I may have shot Vietnamese, I didn't care".
I asked him about the protestors that usually hung around Ft. Hood and if they bothered him. "Naw", he said, "in their own way I think they are trying to help".
I have never blamed the vet for what happened in Vietnam. It was a crappy war that was started by our government. It was not their fault and they did the best they could under the circumstance. I would never spit on a vet, and neither would most liberals I know.
So spitting on Vietnam Vets is nothing more than an urban legend. But hey don't believe me, click here and start a the top!
But ya know, this morning I found out I was wrong. Spitting on Vietnam Vets does happen. In fact it is happening now. Except it ain't those dirty hippies that's doing the spitting.
Ladies and Gentleman, welcome the Swift Boat Vets for Truth.
I don't plan to spend a lot of time debunking the lies these fools are spreading, it has been covered much better than I could have right here. Be sure to check out the left hand column for more.
But I did want to mention the fact that in the Washington Post today we have this little gem:
Records Counter a Critic of Kerry Fellow Skipper's Citation Refers To Enemy Fire
By Michael Dobbs Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, August 19, 2004
Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.
In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.
But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."
As one of five Swift boat skippers who led the raid up the Bay Hap River, Thurlow was a direct participant in the disputed events. He is also a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans dismayed by Kerry's subsequent antiwar activities, which has aired a controversial television advertisement attacking his war record.
[...]
"It's like a Hollywood presentation here, which wasn't the case," Thurlow said last night after being read the full text of his Bronze Star citation. "My personal feeling was always that I got the award for coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined. This casts doubt on anybody's awards. It is sickening and disgusting."
Thurlow said he would consider his award "fraudulent" if coming under enemy fire was the basis for it. "I am here to state that we weren't under fire," he said. He speculated that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.
So not only do we have Vets spitting on Vets, we have Vets spitting on themselves.
It seems a damn shame to me that Thurlow would hate John Kerry so much that he would actually denigrate his own brave service in 'Nam, just to get back at the man. Yet the height of irony is this passage:
In a telephone interview Tuesday evening after he attended a Swift Boat Veterans strategy session in an Arlington hotel, Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he was unwilling to authorize release of his military records because he feared attempts by the Kerry campaign to discredit him and other anti-Kerry veterans.
Indeed.
If you want to see how well the Swift Boat Slimeballs handle this piece of information check it out!
I just love it when good ol' Don Wildmon write me. Like he did a week ago to let me know of a controversy brewing in my very own neck of the woods:
Dear Dominion,
An activist federal judge has ruled that a Bible enclosed in a monument that has been on display for nearly 50 years must be removed.
The Bible was ordered removed from a lighted glass display case in a four-foot-high stone monument outside the civil courts building in Harris County (Houston), Texas.
U.S. District Judge Sim Lake, showing a unique ability to read the minds of people from 50 years ago, said he "concludes that the purpose of the Bible display is to encourage people to read the Bible. What other purpose could there be for prominently displaying an open Bible in an illuminated case tilted toward passers-by in a heavily frequented plaza in front of the main entrance to the courthouse?" Lake asked.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization that wants to drive Christianity from the public square, sued, saying the inclusion of the Bible violated the separation of church and state. Judge Lake agreed.
In essence, Judge Lake’s ruling means that it is ok to honor William Mosher with the monument as long as the public is unaware that he was a devout Christian.
Harris County officials are planning to appeal the ruling. Give them your support by signing the petition and then forwarding it to your friends and family. We will present the petitions of support to the Harris County officials to encourage them in their efforts.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Sign the petition of support for Harris County officials appealing the decision -- http://www.afa.net/petitions/SignPetition.asp?id=1180
+++++++++++++++++++++
Sincerely,
Don
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman American Family Association
P.S. Please forward this email to others in Texas.
Nothing is better than Lying for the Lord eh Don? See what Don doesn't tell you is that the monument that has been there for over 50 years has only had a bible in the display since 1995. From ABC News Channel 13:
The Bible has been part of the lighted display outside the Harris County courthouse since 1995 when the monument that contains it was refurbished. It was originally erected in 1956 to honor industrialist William Mosher for his contributions to homeless programs.
Officials at the homeless mission Mosher contributed to said a Bible was placed within the monument to symbolize Mosher's Christian faith.
The homeless mission maintained the display from 1956 to 1995, replacing the Bible when it was stolen by vandals up until 1988 when atheists complained about the display and asked that it be removed, Lake wrote.
The mission "decided either to remove the Bible or not to replace it again, rather than face potentially costly litigation," the judge wrote.
Lake's 26-page opinion said the display fails two parts of the three-pronged Lemon test, named for a 1971 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. The test says that to get past the First Amendment ban against an establishment of religion, such a display must have a secular purpose, must not advance nor inhibit religion, and must not foster an excessive entanglement with religion.
"The Bible atop the Mosher monument does not have a secular purpose, and the primary or principal effect of the Bible display is to advance religion," Lake wrote.
As evidence, he cited the Bible's prominent display, the lack of any explanation of its purpose — although a plaque mentions Mosher and Star of Hope — and the public ceremonies marking its restoration, featuring prayers and hymns, and the public protests against Staley's lawsuit.
All these things, Lake wrote, would cause a reasonable viewer to "conclude that the Bible display conveys the message that Christianity is favored or preferred by Harris County."
No help for the omnigate.exe infection but here is a more complete explanation.
My site has been hammered lately with people searching for information on the 'bdl14025.exe' and 'omnigate.exe' infection that I had. I wish I could be more help, I really do. I ended up reformatting my drive to get rid of the infection and it is not a move I recommend to anyone if there is an easier way to fix this problem. I will keep my eyes open and if I find more information I will post it here. For now I will explain the problem in more detail in the hope that this might prove helpful to anyone trying to figure out this monster.
First a brief recap of my problem. Every night, close to 8:00 my computer would created a temp directory off of the C:\ drive and dumped three file inside. One was called "omnigate.exe" one was called "Installler2" and one was called 'bdl14025.exe" Inside bdl14025.exe was a trojan called "downloader.agent.al". According to two additional commentators yet another trojan was found within the omnigate.exe file called troj_blazefind.a. After trying every removal method I know, I still ended up with a created temp folder off my C:\ drive every night close to 8:00pm with these three files in it. I ended up reformatting my hard drive. I DO NOT RECOMMNED THIS AS A SOLUTION. It was easy for me because I had to do a reformat earlier in the summer so it was no big deal. It might very well be a big deal to you so don't try this method with first exhausting every other solution.
QrazyQat, one of my favorite commentators wrote to assured me that he would have written sooner but he could find no information on this particular trojan. This came as no surprise as I searched for two weeks before re-formatting my drive (I hate re-formatting my drive, so of course I have to do it, like, every other day). I could not find a damn thing, even on the tech boards of which I am a member. Everyone I talked to was stumped although all did assure me that a program that created a new folder to dump .exe files in was a bad bad thing....which I answered with a great big duh!
Next Qrazy recommends I check out my registry since it has been known to be used to reinsert programs you might have deleted. The problem with this is that I did check my registry using a program called "HiJack This" I cannot recommend this program enough, along with cwshreader by the same guys. After reviewing Hijack This log (and having other computer experts check the log) we could find nothing to indicate just where this program was and how it worked. I have never had a program insert other programs at a certain time on my computer before and I tell ya, it was alarming to say the least. As Qrazy said, I realize that screwing with the registry is not as dire a proposition as Microsoft would have you believe. If you are a total computer newbie then you do run the risk of screwing up programs and even causing your computer to become unstable, but I know my way around a registry pretty well. Here is the problem.
I could not find the program name omnigate.exe or bdl14025.exe. If it was a program doing this I had no way of knowing what the name was, or where it was hiding. This makes looking for it in a registry somewhat of a challenge.
Now we had two choices as to where those programs were coming from. One was an executable archive file that was being opened at 8:00 and the other was it was being picked up over the net at 8:00. I have a software firewall (Zone Alarm) so I thought it would be impossible to get something that way, but that was before I learned about Browser Helper Objects (BHO). A Browser Helper Object, or BHO, is just a small program that runs automatically every time you start your Internet browser. You can find out more about BHOs here but the important thing to know is that BHOs can communicate with the net anytime it wants because firewalls see them as normal functions of the browser itself. So if your browser has permission to access the net, so do the BHOs.
I tried all of the regular removal techniques, including allowing Ad Aware and AVG to remove them. I removed them in safe mode. I removed them via Dos (I am still running win98se). I did everything I know of (and that's a lot boys and girls) and nothing worked.
As you can see this was fast getting out of hand. The possibilities were stacking up and I had no idea what I was looking for. Since I had already formatted my HD a couple of weeks before, it was simply easier for me to reformat than anything else.
I have looked around the net, and even now no one seems to have a handle on this. I have looked under omnigate.exe, bdl14025.exe, and downloader.agent.al. No luck. I have not tried the other trojan named but will give it a try later this week.
So thanks to everyone that tried to help, even if that help was not as helpful as it could be. I wish I could be more help to the people that are also having this problem...
Well did ya think I gave up the ghost? Er...so to speak...
I had a nice vacation, enjoyed my time away from the blog, then got sick. I am still recovering, but feel good enough to assure you that posting will pick up starting on Monday. I have a lot to write about, plus some exciting news (at least I hope it will be exciting) in store for your humble blogger. We will see
Right now I am attempting to get a paper accepted at "The Amazing Meeting 3" which will be held in Las Vegas this year. I will have a much longer article about just what TAM 3 is and why I should go, but for right now if you want to learn more go to The James Randi Educational Fund website.
So for those asking where I have been I hope I answered your question.
Check back on Monday for a full update, full articles and lots o' fun!
