This certainly isn't the first time that you'll hear this sort of thing here. There are so many ways for me to show you how the modern medical establishment is corrupt to the core and lacks basic standards of ethical conduct.
I refuse to visit a doctor unless there is no other option; the same goes for taking pharmaceuticals, including antibiotics. These prescription and over-the-counter drugs are killing and harming millions of people every year and the medical profession in conjunction with big pharma is to blame; the blood of millions is on their hands.
Do you remember that we said: "most of modern health care and modern education was a swindle?" We said it without any real evidence. It was just an observation, a prejudice and a guess.
Well, cometh a new book by an old friend, Randy Fitzgerald. In "The Hundred Year Lie," Randy argues that most of modern medicine is a fraud:
"At the turn of the 20th century the average life span was about forty years of age in developed countries. By the beginning of the 21st century life spans were nearing eighty years on average.
"Of those 40 years of increased lifespan during the 20th century, no more than seven years can be credited to modern medicine, with even most of that due to advances in medical technology rather than drugs. That estimate comes from Dr. Dick Jackson, director of the Center for Environmental Health at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Ninety percent of the reduction in the death rate occurred before the introduction of antibiotics or vaccines, adds Dr. Anthony Cortese, a former U.S. Public Health Service official. It was largely due to improved water, food, and milk sanitations; a reduction in physical crowding; the introduction of central heating, municipal sewer systems, and refrigeration; and the move away from highly toxic coal and wood burning to less toxic natural gas and oil."
"The scientist who discovered the first two commercially manufactured antibiotics, the microbiologist Rene Dubos, admitted in his book The Mirage of Health: 'The introduction of inexpensive cotton undergarments easy to launder and of transparent glass that brought light into the most humble dwelling, contributed more to the control of infection than did all the drugs and medical practices.'"
The following documentary discusses the history of religion and the use of enthiogens in the ancient religions. It explains the antropomorphic symbology of the Sun God Jesus and its relation to the Sun and to the Amanita Muscaria mushroom.
For more information on this fascinating topic, please visit:
Major telecommunications companies like AT&T, Verison and Bellsouth have been illegally divulging call information for millions of Americans. The NSA made illegal requests of all of the phone companies to divulge this information. If there is any law and order in this country, they will be fined $1,000 per incident.
It is interesting how QWEST was the only company with the integrity to put a stop to this. What is even more interesting about this whole situation is the fact that the NSA refused to get authorization from the Attorney General or the FISA courts...
Telcos Could Be Liable For Tens of Billions of Dollars For Illegally Turning Over Phone Records
This morning, USA Today reported that three telecommunications companies – AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth – provided “phone call records of tens of millions of Americans” to the National Security Agency. Such conduct appears to be illegal and could make the telco firms liable for tens of billions of dollars. Here’s why:
1. It violates the Stored Communications Act. The Stored Communications Act, Section 2703(c), provides exactly five exceptions that would permit a phone company to disclose to the government the list of calls to or from a subscriber: (i) a warrant; (ii) a court order; (iii) the customer’s consent; (iv) for telemarketing enforcement; or (v) by “administrative subpoena.” The first four clearly don’t apply. As for administrative subpoenas, where a government agency asks for records without court approval, there is a simple answer – the NSA has no administrative subpoena authority, and it is the NSA that reportedly got the phone records.
2. The penalty for violating the Stored Communications Act is $1000 per individual violation. Section 2707 of the Stored Communications Act gives a private right of action to any telephone customer “aggrieved by any violation.” If the phone company acted with a “knowing or intentional state of mind,” then the customer wins actual harm, attorney’s fees, and “in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than the sum of $1,000.”
(The phone companies might say they didn’t “know” they were violating the law. But USA Today reports that Qwest’s lawyers knew about the legal risks, which are bright and clear in the statute book.)
3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act doesn’t get the telcos off the hook. According to USA Today, the NSA did not go to the FISA court to get a court order. And Qwest is quoted as saying that the Attorney General would not certify that the request was lawful under FISA. So FISA provides no defense for the phone companies, either.
In other words, for every 1 million Americans whose records were turned over to NSA, the telcos could be liable for $1 billion in penalties, plus attorneys fees. You do the math.
By DAVID STRINGER, Associated Press Writer Wed May 10, 11:21 AM ET Yahoo News
LONDON - A British court recommended Wednesday that a man be extradited to the United States to face charges in the largest attack on U.S. government computer networks — including Army, Air Force, Navy and NASA systems.
Gary McKinnon, 40, of London has been indicted in New Jersey and Virginia for allegedly hacking into U.S. government computers between February 2001 and March 2002. He was arrested in 2002 and has fought his extradition by claiming he could face prosecution under U.S. anti-terror laws.
"My intention was never to disrupt security. The fact that I logged on and there were no passwords means that there was no security," McKinnon said, outside the hearing at London's Bow Street Magistrates Court. "I was looking for UFOs."
Court records in Virginia said McKinnon caused $900,000 in damage to computers, including those of private companies, in 14 states.
In New Jersey, he is accused of hacking into a network of 300 computers at the Earle Naval Weapons Station in Colts Neck, N.J., and stealing 950 passwords.
The break-in — which occurred immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — shut down the whole system for a week, Judge Nicholas Evans said. The station is responsible for replenishing the Atlantic fleet's munitions and supplies.
Though McKinnon was able to view sensitive details about naval munitions and shipbuilding on the secure U.S. systems, he did not access classified information, an investigation found.
British Home Secretary John Reid will make the final decision on extradition. If he approves it, McKinnon will appeal to the High Court, his lawyer Karen Todner said.
Edward Lawson, another attorney for McKinnon, told an earlier hearing that his client feared prosecution by a U.S. military commission under powers introduced after the Sept. 11 attacks.
But the judge said there was no "real, as opposed to fanciful, risk" of McKinnon being prosecuted under anti-terror laws, asking the suspect to accept an assurance provided by the U.S. Department of Justice.
He told McKinnon that in choosing to target the United States he had "run the risk of being prosecuted in that country."
Officials in New Jersey and Virginia would have to decide where McKinnon should stand trial. If convicted of the charges in New Jersey, McKinnon faces a maximum sentence of five years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
more monkeys killing monkeys killing monkeys over pieces of the ground...
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Israel will strike Irans nuclear facilities in the next month or two or three, an Israeli official has been quoted here as saying.
The unnamed official told Arnaud de Borchgrave, editor-in-chief of the United Press International (UPI), at the recently held national day reception at the Israeli Embassy that he believed Israel would strike Iran first in the next two or three months and that fighter bombers would not be involved as they had been to take out Iraqs Osirak nuclear reactor before it went critical in 1981. For Osirak, Israel had used 14 F-15s and F-16s. This time, the Israeli said, it would be missiles. Asked if Israel would employ Cruise missiles, he replied, with a gesture of his hand that went up and down again, which meant that it would be the weapon of choice.
Asked if tunnel entrances to widely scattered Iranian nuclear facilities would be targeted, he responded that Israel had its own geo-stationary spy-in-the-sky satellite taking constant pictures of Iran with a resolution down to 70 centimetres. We know far more than anyone realises, he added.
De Borchgraves report quoted a poll of conservative Republicans by a conservative web-based news service, which showed overwhelmingly strong support for bombing Iran. Almost 60,000 people took part in the poll and 88 percent agreed that Iran poses a greater threat than Saddam Hussein did before the Iraq War. To the question, Should the US undertake military action against Iran to stop their (nuclear) programme? 77 percent replied yes, 23 percent said no. Forty-five percent said that military action should be taken by the United States, while 35 percent wanted Israel to do that. Twenty percent said neither. As for whether US efforts to contain Irans nuclear weapons are working, 93 percent said they were not, while 89 percent said the US should not rely solely on the UN.
According to de Borchgrave, Israel has developed some 100 Jericho-II medium-range ballistic missiles (which entered service in 1989). Jericho IIs range varies from 1,500 to 3,500 kilometres, depending on payload weight. They are deployed in underground caves and silos. Israel has several satellites in orbit - Ofeq-1 through Ofeq-5 - that were launched by Shavit space launch vehicles (SLV). The first two stages of the Shavit were Jericho II missiles. There are unconfirmed reports of an upgraded Jericho-3 missile with a range of over 3,000 kilometres.
The recent release of Tool's new album 10,000 Days reinvigorated my passion for their great works. If more of us understood what true art and music are all about, the way that Tool does, we would have a far more interesting and diverse world; a world in which people aren't afraid to express their true passions; a world in which more of us feel the need to bridle the indiscretions which eat at the very heart of mankind.
I find it incomprehensible that people still find music such as the monotonous beating of the eurotrash techno music interesting, yet fail to any musical excitement when listening to the monumental creations of Tool. I have, on several occasions, played music from the various albums for people who aren't familliar with it; I found that some of them enjoyed it while many of them completely ignored it.
When I played the 10,000 Days album, for example, many of the people I exposed to it were so focused on the artwork that they didn't even listen to the music; after they were done fiddling with the nifty artwork they promptly moved on; they couldn't care less about the music itself.
I guess most people simply lack the sophistication to delve into something different like Tool's works. To these poor souls, music is nothing more than a repetative and comfortable frequency that they tune their mind to in order to create a comfort zone. I suppose that there's no room for higher consciousness; they just haven't got the time for such things, I suppose. 'Tis sad to realize that there's no time for truth and beauty in most people's lives.
I listen to music to feel new feelings and think new thoughts; thoughts which are, preferably, deeper than everyday thoughts centered on material needs, etc. Tool's music, in particular, has given me much to consider; Tool has opened up a great chasm with their heartfelt songs and I am forever greatful for their willingness to contribute to my ultimate goal of reaching higher consciousness.
Most "artists" produce mediocre crap in an effort to rake in as much money as possible; they do this without even a thought towards the implications. Little do they realize that they are contributing to the degredation of the hearts and minds of all of the lost-souls who actually consider the works of these individuals "music."
Perhaps these things are considered "music" because many have never really known what music is and have therefore failed to develop the ability to discern what is music from the cleverly marketed trash that tends to be passed off as music in our society.
Maynard James Keenan once said that there should be a separate chart for most of what is considered "music" by the populous; it would be a chart for clever marketing schemes like the chicken McNuggets and whatnot. You'll have music like slip biscuit, or whatever that shit's called, and then you'll have the chicken McNuggets on there somewhere. There's really no music in most of the releases, just like there's no real chicken in the chicken McNuggets. Most of it is just one commercial after another, how unfortunate it is for anyone who genuinely wants to find something of substance in the whole mess.
More of us need to realize the importance of expanding our minds and feeding them a steady spiral of truth and beauty. Far too many of our minds are lazy and, essentially, sedentary. A sedintary mind, unwilling to break free from its familliar comfort zone, will fail to reach its potential. It is truly sad to see a mind which has given up and found itself trapped in, what is essentially, a cycle of abuse.
I hope that, with the release of this new album, sparks of intrigue will ignite passion in the hearts and minds of the those who lack it. For those of us who embrace each day with loving compassion and seek to eliminate indiscretions, it is important to remember that it is impossible to be truly free until the others are free.
There's much work to be done if we are to prevent the greedy and heartless vultures of the entertainment industry from deceiving and subjugating everyone into believing that music is all about image and "fitting in." I tremble when I think of what the world would be like if these vultures were to continue, unopposed, the process of assimilating everyone into their putrid American Idol conception of music.
With my feet upon the ground I lose myself between the sounds and open wide to suck it in, I feel it move across my skin. I'm reaching up and reaching out, I'm reaching for the random or what ever will bewilder me. And following our will and wind we may just go where no one's been. We'll ride the spiral to the end and may just go where no one's been.
Angels on the sideline, Puzzled and amused. Why did Father give these humans free will? Now they're all confused.
Don't these talking monkeys know that Eden has enough to go around? Plenty in this holy garden, silly monkeys Where there's one you're bound to divide it Right in two
Angels on the sideline, Baffled and confused. Father blessed them all with reason, And this is what they choose?
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground. Silly monkeys give them thumbs they forge a blade And where there's one they're bound to divide it Right in two
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground. Silly monkeys give them thumbs they make a club, And beat their brother down. How they survive so misguided is a mystery. Repugnant is a creature who would squander the ability, To lift an eye to heaven, conscious of his fleeting time here.
[Cutting it all right in two / Cut it all right in two] / Cutting our love right in two]
Fight over the clouds, over wind, over sky Fight over your lie, over blood, over anything Fight over love, over sun, over nothing Fight till they die, (Ahhh!) over what? for their ending
[This whole part above needs a lot of help - head for the Opinion page and help out!]
Angels on the sideline again, [Mixing love / Benched along] with patience and reason. Angels on the sideline again, Wondering where this tug of war will end.
[Cutting it all right in two / Cut it all right in two] / Cutting our love right in two]
Listen to the tales and romanticize, How we follow the path of the hero. Boast about the day when the rivers overrun. How we rise to the height of our halo.
Listen to the tales as we all rationalize Our way into the arms of the savior, Feigning all the trials and the tribulations; None of us have actually been there. Not like you.
Ignorant fibbers in the congregation Gather around spewing sympathy, Spare me. None of them can even hold a candle up to you. Blinded by choices, hypocrites won't [seek / see].
But, enough about the collective Judas. Who could deny you were the one who [would have made it, / illuminated] You'll have a piece of the divine.
And this little light of mine, the gift you passed on to me; I'll let it shine to guide you safely on your way, Your way home ...
Oh, what are they going to do when the lights go down Without you to guide them all to Zion? What are they going to do when the rivers overrun Other than tremble incessantly?
High as a wave, but I'll rise on up off the ground. You [are / were] the light and the way, they'll only read about. I only pray, [Heaven / God] knows when to lift you out. Ten thousand days in the fire is long enough, you're going home.
You're the only one who can hold your head up high, Shake your fists at the gates saying: "I have come home now! Fetch me the spirit, the son, and the father. Tell them their pillar of faith has ascended. It's time now! My time now! Give me my, give me my wings!"
Give me my wings!
You are the light and way, that they will only read about.
Set as I am in my ways and my arrogance, Burden of proof tossed upon the believers. You were the witness, my eyes, my evidence, Judith Marie, unconditional one.
Daylight dims leaving cold fluorescence. Difficult to see you in this light. Please forgive this bold suggestion: Should you see your Maker's face tonight, Look Him in the eye, look Him in the eye, and tell Him: I never lived a lie, never took a life, but surely saved one. Hallelujah, it's time for you to bring me home.
This is an excellent overview of the banking system in the United States. The video clearly explains how the Federal Reserve has crippled the United States and will continue to lower the living standard until it is abolished.
When teaching economics I sometimes find it beneficial to use government budget data to apply the lessons of economics to our current political circumstances. The students tend to be surprised at the size of our government, the amount of tax revenues that we "pay," and the amount of government debt. The following numbers get the point across.
We, in the United States, live under the rule of the largest civil government, measured in budgetary terms, in history. Federal spending alone in fiscal year 2006 is expected to be over $2.7 trillion, which means the federal government spends $7.4 billion a day or $5.1 million in every minute of the year. This is 815 times the level of federal spending in 1930.
Things have been getting worse recently. In the first five years of the Bush regime, federal spending increased 45 percent. Readers of Mises.org may remember that they were warned about Bush's fiscal irresponsibility before he took office. For comparison's sake, during the eight Clinton years nominal federal spending increased 32 percent, and under Bush I federal spending increased 23 percent in four years. In the 2000 election, Bush II promised to shovel money into all sorts of programs and hes kept that promise.
Since 1930, in addition to the spending increases, the feds also drove prices up more than 1,100 percent, according to the Consumer Price Index. Also, we should suspect that these inflation numbers are low since government officials have an incentive to underestimate inflation.
If we adjust the spending numbers to account for this inflation, real federal spending is 65 times larger than it was in 1930. The U.S. population has more than doubled since 1930 and if we take the population changes into account, real per capita spending is 27 times higher than in 1930.
In estimating real federal spending Im not dismissing the effects of inflation, nor am I absolving the state of its complicity in driving prices up. These calculations are simply an attempt to give us some idea of the growth in government and the attendant loss of our liberties over the last several decades.
This $2.7 trillion in federal spending breaks down to $9,000 per capita or more than $36,000 for the average family of four. If we add in all state and local spending, then total government depredations (a term Murray Rothbard used to describe the greater of government spending and government receipts) are currently over $4.4 trillion or about $14,700 per person annually. Since 1959, government depredations, in real terms, have increased at an average annual rate of 4 percent. That kind of spending will buy a lot of votes.
A significant portion of this spending is being financed with government borrowing. In 1930, the per capita debt load was $140 per person. The current federal total debt level is $8.4 trillion, which works out to around $28,000 per person. In short, the per capita debt load is 200 times larger than it was in 1930. Adjusting for inflation, the real debt per capita is still over 16 times more than it was in 1930.
Federal government debt increased $553 billion in fiscal year 2005 alone. That's more than $1.5 billion of additional debt per day and over $1 million of borrowing per minute for every minute of the year. The interest on the debt in 2005 was $352 billion or more than $1,100 for every man, woman and child in the country. These interest payments are roughly equal to 37 percent of federal income tax revenues.
Much of this debt is owed to the Federal Reserve. U.S. taxpayers are on the hook for $758 billion of government securities that are held by the Fed. So, on average, every person in the country owes the Fed about $2,500.
Tax revenues and borrowing have financed all sorts of interventions. Since 1959, we have suffered from the Great Society, the war on poverty, price controls, increasingly burdensome environmental regulations, the establishment of the Department of Education and its increasing federal control over local schools, Federal Reserve created recessions, agricultural price supports, minimum wage laws and energy policies that keep oil and gasoline prices high.
Theres more. Weve also had labor policies that increase the costs of hiring workers (driving down their take-home pay), trade restrictions and trade agreements that give the feds control over our international trade, massive increases in the welfare state, the drug war, endless pork barrel spending and the prosecution of businessmen for political gain.
One way to see the harm of government intervention is to realize its effects on our standard of living. The depredations of the state reduce the incentives to be productive, destroy our capital base and have a negative effect on economic growth. From 1959 to 2005, adjusting the numbers using the implicit price deflator, real Gross Domestic Product increased an average of 3.37 percent annually.
Consider the possibility that government interventions reduced real economic growth 1 percent annually during this time. If there had been an additional 1 percent per year economic growth since 1959, then real GDP would currently be 55 percent higher than it is. The 2005 GDP of $12.5 billion would have been $19.3 billion. The median family income is estimated to be $44,389. A proportionate increase in this statistic results in a median income of $68,800.
In this scenario, a worker with a salary of $44,389 who is losing 35 percent of his salary to taxes has a tax liability of $15,536. After paying the various types of taxes he gets to keep only $28,853 of his salary. With the extra 1 percent growth per year since 1959, if that worker represented the average, his gross salary would be $68,800 and he would get to keep all of it.
It is conceivable that the $4.4 trillion of annual depredations could have caused more than 1 percent annual damage to our economic growth since 1959. What are the implications of a 2 percent negative impact on GDP? If the absence of interventions had added an additional 2 percent annual growth, this would have resulted in 141 percent more output today. The 2005 GDP would have been over $30 trillion and the median family income would now be $107,000. The worker described above with the $44,389 gross salary and the $28,850 of after tax pay, would have an income of $107,000. The depredations have reduced his net income by 73 percent.
The point here is that we cannot precisely know the magnitude of the damages that intervention has on the economy, but we do know that those damages compound over time, resulting in significant negative effects on our prosperity.
Those of us making the case for liberty have logic, history and morality on our side. Government intervention is immoral and should be stopped for that reason alone. However, the economic costs of the intervention are also important. Part of the appeal of freedom is that it leads to tremendously higher standards of living and these numbers show that government interventions that cause seemingly small amounts of harm, over time, impoverish a society.
..........
Mark Brandly teaches economics at Ferris State University and is an adjunct scholar of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a research and educational institute headquartered in Midland, Mich.
However, I woke enraged on this topic before I read Daou's piece, so I wanted to add my two cents. (And I include a full transcript of Colbert's remarks at the bottom of this entry, so scroll down if you want to see it right away.)
Stephen Colbert was the star attraction at the White House Correspondents Dinner Saturday night, and his performance was thrilling or insulting or uncomfortable, depending on your point of view. Apparently, according to Editor and Publisher.com, President and Mrs. Bush looked very uncomfortable, and quickly left right afterward.
But the mainstream media is apparently ignoring this part of the evening, and instead is covering the early entertainment where Bush and a look-alike imitator do a "he says this, he's really thinking this" routine. Moderately amusing, but very mild.
This, by the way, is the same Washington event where Bush previously charmed many (and horrified others) by pretending to have trouble finding Weapons of Mass Destruction (after we'd started to realize they weren't in Iraq), and wandered the room looking under tables. Really cute, huh? They should send videos of that to the families of soldiers killed.
The media's ignoring Colbert's effect at the White House Correspondents Dinner is a very clear example of what others have called the media's penchant for buying into the conservative/rightwing "narrative."
In this instance, the "narrative" is that President Bush, for all his missteps, has a darling sense of humor and is a real regular guy, able to poke delightful fun at himself and his penchant for mis-using and mispronouncing words.
Who cares if he lied to start a war? (Or chose to ignore all contrary opinion, which as far as war-starting goes, is pretty crummy.) Who cares if he declares he's above the law, and according to the Boston Globe yesterday there are something like 750 laws he's decided don't apply to him as "Commander-in-Chief"?
The Globe article's first sentence: "President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution."
If the President doesn't obey the law, what the heck is he? He's a dictator in a coup, I think -- but no matter, according to the media, he's A-DOR-ABLE!
Meanwhile, at this Correspondents White House Dinner, the star attraction of the evening -- the last person to perform (of a small group) and whose act went on for about 20 minutes -- is Stephen Colbert. Yesterday the blogs were a-buzz with how shocking his remarks were. In his comic persona of Bush Supporter Nonpareil, Colbert stood on the dais near the President and kept making eye contact with him as he said truly biting comic remarks.
I found two sites that showed clips from Colbert's performance. This one (at Crooks and Liars) has most of the act, though it's missing the beginning.
It's insane journalism not to write about Colbert's appearance. It's the main event. Like it or hate it, it's the thing to talk about. You have to CHOOSE to focus on the lightweight entertainment that preceded it.
The right wing blogs are saying Colbert bombed, and in some ways that's not wrong, the gathered audience wanted and expected something lighter - but that's what makes the appearance so startling. It's very witty when you read the text; but actuality as Colbert says these things to the President's face, it's very uncomfortable. Watching it, It's like Hamlet forcing King Claudius to watch the play that accuses him of murder. Or it's like a man asked to be Court Jester who shows up and tells the king exactly what's wrong with him, and gets out of the building before they can behead him. (Why do I keep having "king" examples, lol. No reason, I'm sure.)
Colbert's was a brave and shocking performance. And for the media to pretend it isn't newsworthy is a total bafflement. And a symbol of how shoddy and suspect the media is.
(And a truly interesting news question - who chose the biting Colbert to be the entertainment? And are they now in trouble?)
This morning, Katie Couric and Matt Lauer giggled and got all warm about the cutesy performance of Bush and the Twin look-alike imitator. Really funsy. Colbert was not mentioned.
I'm old enough to remember when Eartha Kitt told off Lady Byrd Johnson for her husband's policies in Vietnam at some innocent luncheon... the news media reported that, they didn't only report on the chicken salad sandwiches.
Yesterday the New York Times had no coverage of the event, except buried in its Washington section was a small, uninteresting blurb picked up from Reuters.
This morning, lo and behold, they have more... a fawning piece by someone named Elizabeth Bumiller called "At Award Correspondents' Dinner, A Set of Bush Twins Steal the Show."
Like Katie and Matt's briefer piece, this article too finds the President absolutely adorable. And makes the judgment call that the President's darling sense of humor is the true story of the event.
And the Colbert appearance -- which chilled the room, attacking journalists as well as Bush -- is literally not worth reporting. Back before blogs and C-Span, we wouldn't even know about it.
The Times piece also has a video clip, which features Bush and the Twin, but at the tail end includes Colbert, saying he was biting, but then quotes one of his milder jabs (making fun of the Iraqis' troubles putting together a government). (To find you must click on "video report" under "Washington Letter.")
I suppose I can be dismissed as a conspiracy type, but if Ohio was stolen in the last election (which I think it was), and if more and more computer voting is put into place with NO PAPER RECORD (Democrats, wake up on this one please, please, please), and if Matt and Katie and other media people keep feeding us the Conservative Narrative on and on, then our democracy is over. (Some say it's already over.) McCain has been taken over like "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" -- he too now finds Bush adorable. I keep having hopes for Arlen Specter, he seems truly upset by Bush breaking the law to allow warrantless wiretapping. But will he have the courage and stamina to keep fighting?
Well I'm talking myself into a gloomy corner, so let me stop, and reprint the full Colbert speech, which I found at this link.
Tell me if you don't think it's newsworthy he said all this IN FRONT OF THE PRESIDENT:
parked 14 black bullet proof S.U.V.'S out front, could you please move them. They are blocking in 14 other black bulletproof S.U.V.'S and they need to get out. Wow, wow, what an honor. The White House Correspondents' Dinner. To just sit here, at the same table with my hero, George W. Bush, to be this close to the man. I feel like I'm dreaming. Somebody pinch me. You know what, I'm a pretty sound sleeper, that may not be enough. Somebody shoot me in the face.
Is he really not here tonight? The one guy who could have helped. By the way, before I get started, if anybody needs anything at their tables, speak slowly and clearly on into your table numbers and somebody from the N.S.A. Will be right over with a cocktail.
Mrs. Smith, ladies and gentlemen of the press corps, Mr. President and first lady, my name is Stephen Colbert and it's my privilege tonight to celebrate our president. He's no so different, he and I. We get it. We're not brain backs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the fact (police). We go straight from the gut, right sir? That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. I know some of you are going to say I did look it up, and that's not true. That's but you looked it up in a book.
Next time look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works. Every night on my show, the Colbert report, I speak straight from the gut, ok? I give people the truth, unfiltered by rational argument. I call it the no fact zone. Fox News, I own the copyright on that term.
I'm a simple man with a simple mind, with a simple set of beliefs that I live by. Number one, I believe in America. I believe it exists.
My gut tells me I live there. I feel that it extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and I strongly believe it has 50 states. And I cannot wait to see how "the Washington Post" spins that one tomorrow. I believe in democracy. I believe democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out in plastic for three cents a unit.
In fact, ambassador, welcome, your great country makes our happy meals possible. I said it's a celebration. I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.
I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible -- I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical. And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion, be it Hindu, Jewish or Muslim. I believe our infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior. Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's yogurt. But I refuse to believe it's not butter. Most of all I believe in this president.
Now, I know there's some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias.
So, Mr. President, pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. 32% means the glass -- it's important to set up your jokes properly, sir. Sir pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's 2/3 empty. There's still some liquid in that glass is my point, but I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash.
Folks, my point is that I don't believe this is a low point in this presidency. I believe it is just a lull, before a comeback.
I mean, it's like the movie "Rocky." The president is Rocky and Apollo Creed is everything else in the world. It's the 10th round. He's bloodied, his corner man, Mick, who in this case would be the Vice President, and he's yelling cut me, dick, cut me, and every time he falls she say stay down! Does he stay down? No. Like Rocky he gets back up and in the end he -- actually loses in the first movie. Ok. It doesn't matter.
The point is the heart-warming story of a man who was repeatedly punched in the face. So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't.
I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message, that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world.
Now, there may be an energy crisis. This president has a very forward-thinking energy policy. Why do you think he's down on the ranch cutting that brush all the time? He's trying to create an alternative energy source. By 2008 we will have a mesquite powered car.
And I just like the guy. He's a good joe. Obviously loves his wife, calls her his better half. And polls show America agrees. She's a true lady and a wonderful woman. But I just have one beef, ma'am. I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist telling us what is or isn't true, what did or didn't happen. What's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914. If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American. I'm with the president, let history decide what did or did not happen.
The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday, that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change, this man's beliefs never will.
And as excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story, the President's side and the Vice President's side.
But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on N.S.A. wiretapping or secret prisons in Eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason, they're superdepressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.
Over the last five years you people were so good over tax cuts, W.M.D. intelligence, the affect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.
But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works. The President makes decisions, he's the decider. The Press Secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home.
Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know, fiction.
Because really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So the White House has personnel changes. Then you write they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.
Now, it's not all bad guys out there. Some heroes, Buckley, Kim Schieffer. By the way, Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to be on my show. I was just as shocked as everyone here is I promise you. How is Tuesday for you? I've got Frank Rich, but we can bump him.
And I mean bump him. I know a guy. Say the word.
See who we've got here tonight. General Mowsly, Air Force Chief of Staff. General Peter Pace. They still support Rumsfeld. You guys aren't retired yet, right? Right, they still support Rumsfeld.
Look, by the way, I've got a theory about how to handle these retired generals causing all this trouble, don't let them retire. C'mon, we've got a stop loss program, let's use it on these guys. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you can stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. C'mon.
Jesse Jackson is here. I had him on the show. Very interesting and challenging interview. You can ask him anything, but he's going to say what he wants at the pace that he wants. It's like boxing a glacier.
Enjoy that metaphor, because your grandchildren will have no idea what a glacier is.
Justice Scalia's here. May I be the first to say welcome, sir. You look fantastic. How are you? (imitates hostile gestures Scalia was reported to have made)
John McCain is here. John McCain John McCain. What a maverick. Somebody find out what fork he used on his salad, because I guarantee you wasn't a salad fork. He could have used a spoon. There's no predicting him. So wonderful to see you coming back into the republican fold. I have a summerhouse in South Carolina, look me up when you go to speak at Bob Jones University. So glad you've seen the light.
Mayor Nagin is here from New Orleans, the chocolate city. Yeah, give it up. Mayor Nagin, I would like to welcome you to Washington, D.C., The chocolate city with a marshmallow center. And a graham cracker crust of corruption. It's a mallomar is what I'm describing, a seasonal cookie.
Joe Wilson is here, the most famous husband since Desi Arnez. And of course he brought along his lovely wife Valerie Plame. Oh, my god! Oh, what have I said. I am sorry, Mr. President, I meant to say he brought along his lovely wife, Joe Wilson's wife. Pat Fitzgerald is not here tonight? Dodged a bullet.
And we can't forget man of the hour, new Press Secretary, Tony Snow. Secret service name, Snow Job. What a hero, took the second toughest job in government, next to, of course, the ambassador to Iraq. Got some big shoes to fill, Tony. Scott McClellan could say nothing like nobody else.
McClellan, eager to retire. Really felt like he needed to spend more time with Andrew Card's children.
Mr. President, I wish you hadn't made the decision so quickly, sir. I was vying for the job. I think I would have made a fabulous press secretary. I have nothing but contempt for these people. I know how to handle these clowns. In fact, sir, I brought along an audition tape and with your indulgence, I'd like to at least give it a shot. So, ladies and gentlemen, my press conference. "
(Note: A video section followed with Colbert sparring with reporters and eventually running away from journalist Helen Thomas. It's included in the Crooks and Liars link above.)
"Where the world ceases to be the scene of our personal hopes and wishes, where we face it as free beings admiring, asking and observing, there we enter the realm of Art and Science" ~Einstein
