...more recent posts
get yer black death, flu microbes. thanks maud
someone was singing the virtues of cabelas in berks county, pa. he said they had a stream in the store to test out your line for fly fishing. theres a firing range for kids and a 12000 sq ft deer trophy museum. (so that would be a room filled with dead stuffed animals and not trophies that deer have won in competition. )heres their online store.
toronto is all fired up. its true, molson is (acapulco) golden.
goo-goo ga-ga
bush vs press
"...from Bush on down, talking to the press off the record is generally frowned upon and equated with leaking, which is a deadly sin in the Bush White House (unless it is a leak manufactured to advance the President's agenda)."
New Urban News is a professional newsletter for planners, developers, architects, builders, public officials and others who are interested in the creation of human-scale communities.
looks like a building outside my window on allen st. is on fire. i can hear the fire engines coming now.
Yeah, I'm dumping more of my questionable political speculation over here.
Could a democrat attack Bush on Iraqi WMD in this way? Instead of going on about how there aren't any, back up and accept a lot of what the administration said in the run up to war, and then pin them to the wall on the outcome. In other words, something like this:
"But Mr. President, respectfully, we all know there were dangerous weapons in Iraq. You yourself said that there were. Your staff said that there were. Donald Rumsfeld said he knew where they were. Colin Powel gave specific details on stocks of poison gasses. Of course these things were true. My question to you now, Mr. President, is if we knew the weapons were there WHY DID WE FAIL TO SECURE THOSE WEAPONS? Since we know that they did exist, and we now know that we cannot account for them, aren't we to conclude that invading Iraq caused the weapons to fall into unaccounted hands? WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS?"
This seems like a much more powerful attack than merely saying that there never were any weapons. They would have no avenue (that I can see) to reply. They could spin their way out of it in the press, but in a one on one debate, what could Bush say? He can't say they never existed. And he can't say they have been located. He'd be stuck. And the attack could seem respectful which I think is very important if we want to suck votes over to the other side.
What am I missing?
style.org an ongoing series of experimental data graphics.
journalista: the comics journal weblog
first ramallah, williamsburg next? artists, palestinians....same thing.
Isnt the demonization of books an early step toward 1984 ?
"The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, "the product of legitimate recreational or commercial activities." But it warned that when combined with suspicious behavior - such as apparent surveillance - a person with an almanac "may point to possible terrorist planning."
Is this an ANTI-information policy. (For our own good of course.)
TINY is up over 300% for 2003.....
is nanotech a dream or eventuality.....
dream on or right on....
looks like franks favorite author, daniel pinchbeck, has a new book out about shamanism. bastard writes books faster than i read them.
boxy foxing
i will celebrate xmas when the good lord sees fit to get me a jet pack. and no, an individual lifting vehicle will not do.
the iceblog cometh - there are no more blog spaces on the map.
anecdotage - stories bored
History You Can See, Hear, Smell, Touch and Taste (this should actualy be posted in sustenance - it features the marginalised sences especialy taste!)
bumper sticker:
"I wasn't using my civil liberties anyway"
cbsnews article on forthcoming report from 9/11 commission.
"Kean promises major revelations in public testimony beginning next month from top officials in the FBI, CIA, Defense Department, National Security Agency and, maybe, President Bush and former President Clinton."