Apparently, when he sees things he doesn’t like, our President gives people the finger. HA-HA!

Full story, via die puny humans.

Posted by
	Dr. Dr. Otis

(unelss you’re among the millions who’s ready for and end to Bush/Cheney in charge)

…the Kerry campaign got a bounce from the Edwards announcement, now leading Bush/Cheney by a 49 to 41 margin.

But the real shocker: When asked who they would prefer, upon the death of the president, if the vice president had to serve as president, Edwards outpolled Cheney 45 percent to 38 percent.

“It really is striking,” Russert said. “We had assumed that an incumbent vice president, with the gravitas of Dick Cheney, would do much better than that against the inexperienced John Edwards.”

link via (Atrios)

“Striking”? That John Edwards is more attractive to voters than this man?

And Tim Russert is the #1 political analyst on GE’s payroll?

The whole thing.

(aside: Separated at birth? You be the judge: )

Bonus points if you can tell me which Halloween that’s from without looking.

Posted by
	Ratt Fink

this is a block quote

posted by
	Lobo Licious

John Kerry announced today that he’s chosen Sen. John Edwards as his running mate. (John Edwards is not to be confused with John Edward, the “talks to dead people” guy from late-night/mid-afternoon TV’s Crossing Over, though he might make a good candidate as well.)

The New York Post apparently mis-called the running-mate nod as going to Dick Gephardt. Alas, they were wrong.

I personally plan to vote for A Couple of Johns, provided they are listed as such on the ballot. Hell, even if they’re not. You should vote for them too. That’s right, kids, Dr. Dr. Otis is officially endorsing A Couple of Johns. Not that anyone cares.

Furthermore, anyone who refers to the candidates as “A Couple of Johns” should give me credit. Please?

posted by
	Dr. Dr. Otis

Today, Saddam Hussein will be charged by a special tribunal for crimes committed during his tenure as Iraq’s dictator:

“Hussein, 67, and 11 leaders of his regime will be arraigned on television before the Iraqi Special Tribunal led by Salem Chalabi on charges of crimes including the use of chemical weapons that killed thousands of Kurds in 1988. The venue for the hearing hasn’t been revealed and only a few journalists will be allowed to attend.”
…
“The former leader, who led Iraq into three wars and drove the holder of the world’s third-largest oil reserves into isolation under international sanctions during his 23-year presidency.”

(full story, from Bloomberg)

——-

So, the transfer of power from the U.S. to the U.S. backed Iraqi government took place a few days ago, ahead of schedule. It remains to be seen how much control the Iraqis will really have and how much will remain in the hands of America. However, it has been evident since the U.S. took control that they aren’t exactly wanted there.

Michael Duff asks (in a journal entry dated 6/28) “How long till the current leaders of Iraq’s government get killed?” Sad but true.

posted by
	Dr. Dr. Otis

I know it’s the conventional wisdom that this election will be close. The media has a vested interest in convincing everyone of that, so it can milk some viewership from the truly gut-wrenchingly boring act of watching election returns amid vacuous analysis from the “all star” political commentary team. (Side note - this assertion will likely have the side effect of driving more people to the polls, so this isn’t entirely bad)

My prediction is that Kerry wins in a walk. I say this not because I’m a supporter (and I am), but because I can tell that the country is tired of the barrage of complete and utter bullshit coming out of this bunch of White House squatters on a daily basis.

WMDs? “What’s the difference?” (um - the difference between “stockpiles” and “no stockpiles”)
Torture? “Just a few bad apples.” (John Stewart: “memos from the Justice Dept. to the contrary notwithstanding”)
Lying in the state of the union? “The ‘President’ is not a fact-checker.” (although he employs several)
Iraq-Al Quaida connection? “Saddam and Al-Quaida are long-established allies” (despite both the Pentagon and the 9/11 commission’s findings to the contrary)

And those are just off the top of my head. I could go on until even few people are still reading, but suffice it to say that it’s every day with these people. And judging by Bush’s tanking numbers, a lot of people agree with me.

So that’s my prediction - Kerry 50%+, Nader 2-4%, with Bush picking up the balance, and not quite an electoral landslide for Kerry, but a decisive win by at least 4-5 states in Bush’s “must have” column.

I can make these predictions because unlike a “real” pundit, I don’t lose my job if I’m wrong. Does that make them a less honest commentator than I am? I think so. Am I wrong? Discuss.

posted by
	Ratt Fink

Is currently the funniest white man in America. (Don’t agree? Tell me who is.)

From the Daily Show, 6/16/2004:

Black: “Here’s [Grover] Norquist [the head of the Reagan Legacy Project, which when it isn’t trying to get a monument to him in every county in America (over 3000), is trying to get Reagan on the $10 bill]:”

Norquist: “Hamilton’s been on the $10 since 1928. He’s been well-honored by the country. He was a great Secretary of the Treasury.

But of all the people on the currency, he’s the only one who isn’t a President.”

Black: “The only one who isn’t a president? I’ll bet you a hundred bucks you’re wrong.”
“IDIOTS!”

His special’s on HBO. Hi-fucking-larious.

posted by
	Ratt Fink

Zombie Reagan Street Team.

This link was stolen from Jaffo.

posted by
	Dr. Dr. Otis

Here’s an interesting story about pending draft legislation. Scary? Scary.

“There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program’s initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 — just after the 2004 presidential election.”
…
“$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, http://www.hslda.org/legislation/na…s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, “to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18—26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.” These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services. “

But wait, there’s more:

“Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era.

College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a “smart border declaration,” which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a “pre-clearance agreement” of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.”

Am I the only one who’s a little pissed? I hope not.

Here’s the actual bill:House version & Senate version.

posted by
	Dr. Dr. Otis

New GwD Call for Papers now on-line. Read it, and submit.

We want new articles and mp3s for release in early June. How’s that sound? (Submission deadline is 05/25/04 for this release.)

posted by
	GwD Publications