<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<feed version="0.3" xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xml:lang="en">
  <title>Political Strategy</title>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/" />
  <modified>2005-10-31T19:24:22Z</modified>
  <tagline></tagline>
  <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2006://1</id>
  <generator url="http://www.movabletype.org/" version="2.661">Movable Type</generator>
  <copyright>Copyright (c) 2005, Tom Ball</copyright>
  <entry>
    <title>Political Cortex Launches</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001712.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-31T19:24:22Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-31T18:24:22-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1712</id>
    <created>2005-10-31T19:24:22Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain"><![CDATA[3... 2... 1... Blastoff! Months in the making. Blood. Sweat. Tears. But now we&rsquo;re here and we are ready to ROCK! Check out PoliticalCortex.com!! But who are we? We&rsquo;re Devilstower, Carnacki, Sdf, Bill Hare, Drew Johnston, mcjoan, SusanG, Bob Kendall,...]]></summary>
    <author>
      <name>Tom Ball</name>
      
      <email>tball@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Misc</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p><strong>3... 2... 1... Blastoff! </strong></p>
<p>Months in the making. Blood. Sweat. Tears. </p>
<p>But now we&rsquo;re here and we are ready to  <strong>ROCK!</strong> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com">Check out PoliticalCortex.com!!</a></p>
<p><strong>But who are we? </strong>We&rsquo;re Devilstower,
Carnacki, Sdf, Bill Hare, Drew Johnston, mcjoan, SusanG, Bob Kendall, Frederick Clarkson, NYBri, Btyarbro, Georgia10, Pontificator, Dood Abides, Myself, and the soon-to-be Cortex community! </p>
<p>Together we will fight against the forces of evil, and injustice
  and for the progressive ideals of Jefferson, Adams, Paine, Madison, Allen,
and Franklin. </p>
<p><strong>These men founded a Progressive Nation. </strong> They were America &rsquo;s Founding
  Fathers -- a group of the staunchest progressives in our nation's history --
  men of enlightenment, ardent supporters of church/state separation with a fervent
  passion for decentralization of power and freedom of expression. So too were
the founding documents they authored and the principles by which they acted. </p>
<p>In recent years, many Americans have come to forget these facts. <strong>Political Cortex
is here to remind them</strong>. </p>
<p><strong>But we can&rsquo;t do it alone. </strong>This will require the unified
  voice of millions. And as that voice grows throughout the web and across the
  nation, the Cortex will be here to offer new light and pioneering ways to augment
that collective voice. </p>
<p>To start, we&rsquo;ve created this <strong>community as a Democracy</strong> &ndash; where &ldquo;One
  person = One Vote&rdquo; actually applies. Where the Cortex <strong>community takes
  center stage</strong> on the front page garnering equal time and space with the Founding
  Cortex writers. And where higher thought and mutual respect will combine with
  a <strong>culture of independent, investigative journalism</strong> to present a new paradigm
in online netroots media. </p>
<p> And if you&rsquo;re wondering what makes us different from all the others,
  join the crowd. It was a primary consideration when we put this project together. <strong></strong></p>
<p><strong> The good news</strong> is that we think we&rsquo;ve differentiated
  ourselves in a way that will eventually augment and enhance the effectiveness
  of the growing voice of the progressive web. </p>
<p> First, we&rsquo;ve<strong> implemented a &ldquo;Blog Democracy&rdquo; </strong>via
  a pioneering community editing and voting process unique to the political blogosphere. </p>
<p> Next, we&rsquo;ve <strong>incorporated new and original features </strong>such
  as Keyword Tags, advanced diary voting, and &ldquo;Quick Posting&rdquo;. </p>
<p> Also, we&rsquo;ve <strong>removed the community from the periphery and placed
    it center-stage </strong>on the front page. </p>
<p> And finally, we hope to <strong>foster a culture of journalistic </strong><strong> Independence</strong><strong></strong> that
  inspires a new generation of bold truth-seekers. </p>
<p> Right now, all that&rsquo;s just a lot of hot air. It&rsquo;s time to put
  the proverbial money where our mouth is and make it happen. All it takes
  is a bit of passion, desire, and motivation -- Throw in a half ton of moxie,
  and your nearly there. But believe me, we assert these things with the greatest
  humility. </p>
<p> Oh, we truly believe it can be done -- But we can&rsquo;t do it without you.
  We need to work together to turn vision into reality. </p>
<p><strong> So please join us by <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/newuser" class="menu">creating a free
      Cortex Account right now!</a> It
    only takes a few seconds, but the benefits will last a lifetime :) </strong></p>
<p><strong> Truly exciting times! </strong></p>
<p><em>(Check out the list of features provided below the Recommended Reading to
  get a glimpse of how you can involve yourself as a proud member of the Cortex
  Community!)</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong> <u>Recommended Reading: </u></strong></p>
<p> <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/special/about" class="menu">About</a> :: (from which this post was shamelessly derived) </p>
<p> <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/special/Primer" class="menu">Primer</a> :: This will get you started fast and easy &ndash; step-by-step </p>
<p> <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/special/faq/" class="menu">FAQ</a> :: It&rsquo;s big and it&rsquo;s bold and it will answer many of your
  most arcane questions. Give it a try! </p>
<p><strong> If you still have questions </strong> after digesting all this (or
  even before), by all means <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/special/about#Contact" class="menu">Contact us</a> anytime! </p>
<p><strong> &nbsp;</strong></p>
<p><strong> <u>Features </u></strong></p>
<p><strong> Political Cortex is structured around a community software platform
    called &lsquo;Scoop&rsquo;. </strong> Although you might have come across
    some very impressive Scoop sites in the past, you&rsquo;ve never come across
    one quite like this. At the Cortex, we make you the star of the show. Sure,
    we have an extremely talented group of core writers. But one of the primary
    goals of the site is to give a much greater voice to the community &ndash; to
    make YOU the star. </p>
<p> At the Cortex, you&rsquo;re not limited to posting comments or creating diaries
  as you are at most sites. Yes, we have those available to you as well, but
  then we take it a step further -- offering an entire spectrum of features that
  allow you to show-off your grand insights, observations, opinions, and analyses.
  In fact, the entire central column on the front page is dedicated exclusively
  to articles written by Cortex community members. </p>
<p><strong> Blogocracy</strong> : Even more innovative is the Democratic nature
  by which the community&rsquo;s front-page submissions are decided. In essence,
  you, the registered members of the Cortex Community, VOTE on which articles
  you think should be posted to the front page. </p>
<p> Rest assured, however, that Voting &lsquo;Yay&rsquo; or &lsquo;Nay&rsquo; is
  just the beginning. In brief, here are some of the things you can do as a registered
  user (Each of these will be explained in detail the <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/special/faq/"><strong> FAQ</strong></a>): </p>
<p><strong> Submit your Writing</strong> : You can submit your personally authored
  articles to the voting queue and possibly have your work displayed prominently
  on the front page. </p>
<p><strong> Vote on Submissions</strong> : You can vote on others&rsquo; article
  submissions. </p>
<p><strong> Enroll in Blogosphere Writing 101, 201, and 301 (advanced studies)</strong> :
  You can submit your articles and diaries to the &lsquo;editing queue&rsquo; where
  you will receive the invaluable editorial feedback of the community. Yes they
  will criticize your work, but we cannot stress enough how valuable this process
  is for both ensuring top-quality writing on the front page AND serving as a
  training and proving ground for would-be progressive political journalists,
  writers, and bloggers. This is the place to go if you REALLY want to know what
  works when it comes to writing for the people. </p>
<p><strong> Write Diaries</strong> : You can write &lsquo;diaries&rsquo;. They
  aren&rsquo;t really diaries in the &lsquo;dear diary&rsquo; sense of the word,
  they&rsquo;re more like &lsquo;journals&rsquo; in the &lsquo;I keep a journal&rsquo; sense. </p>
<p><strong> Recommend Other&rsquo;s Diaries</strong> : You can &lsquo;recommend&rsquo; others&rsquo; diaries
  and likewise have your diaries &lsquo;recommended&rsquo; by others. &lsquo;Recommends&rsquo; are
  another sort of community vote that can potentially &lsquo;raise&rsquo; your
  diaries from the &lsquo;Recent Diaries&rsquo; section to the more prominent &lsquo;Recommended&rsquo; Diaries
  listing. </p>
<p><strong> Breaking News and Quick Posts</strong> : You can write &lsquo;Quick
  Posts&rsquo; for the &lsquo;Nerve Center&rsquo;. These are breaking news items
  and otherwise brief posts with only a touch of commentary, and an excerpt and
  a link to the story. No one will give you a hard time here if your post is &lsquo;too
  short&rsquo;. That&rsquo;s what the &lsquo;Quick post&rsquo; is for. It keeps
  the pulse of the political and breaking news world &ndash; the first place
  you should go when something is happening. That&rsquo;s why we named this section
  the &lsquo;Nerve Center&rsquo;. </p>
<p><strong> Post Comments</strong> : You can post comments in any story, diary,
  or quick post </p>
<p><strong> Reply to Comments</strong> : You can reply to specific comments and
  the author of the original comment will be notified that you did. </p>
<p><strong> Rate Comments</strong> : You can rate others comments based on what
  you feel they add to the conversation -- and your comments will be rated by
  others as well. </p>
<p><strong> Become a &lsquo;Trusted User&rsquo;</strong> : You can build up &lsquo;Mojo&rsquo; and
  receive &lsquo;Trusted User&rsquo; Status which essentially rewards you with
  a warm, fuzzy sense of communal respect. It also give you increased power to
  rate others&rsquo; comments more forcefully. </p>
<p><strong> Mailing List &ndash; Newsletter</strong> : You can receive the &lsquo;Cortex
  Digest&rsquo; Daily, Weekly, or Monthly via email. The newsletter delivers
  a summary of headlines and excerpts that appear on the Cortex front page to
  keep you up to date no matter where you are. </p>
<p><strong> Identity</strong> : You get your own Username. Have you ever wanted
  to be &lsquo;Superman&rsquo;, &lsquo;Mother Nature&rsquo;, or &lsquo;Hugh Jass&rsquo;?
  Now&rsquo;s your chance. Get &lsquo;em while you can. </p>
<p><strong> &lsquo;Hotlist&rsquo; Bookmarks</strong> : You can bookmark stories
  and check back to redress an ongoing discussion. </p>
<p><strong> Subscribe</strong> : You can &lsquo;subscribe&rsquo; to your favorite
  Cortex writers and receive alerts whenever they post something new. </p>
<p><strong> Discussion Alerts</strong> : You can be alerted whenever someone
  responds to your comments, keeping you in the thick of any ongoing conversation. </p>
<p> So why not go <a href="http://www.politicalcortex.com/newuser" class="menu"><strong> register
      right now</strong></a>? It&rsquo;ll only take a moment and the Cortex Community
      will welcome you with open arms! </p>
<p>&nbsp; </p>
<p><strong>Again, Welcome to Political Cortex! </strong></p>
]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>As Good As It Gets?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001711.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-31T11:40:02Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-31T10:40:02-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1711</id>
    <created>2005-10-31T11:40:02Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">The Lewis Libby indictment is an overdue rein on the cowboys of the Bush administration. Finally, some accountability is demanded. Finally, the kneecapping suffered by anyone who publicly questions this White House is being revealed. Finally, a little slice of...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Bush Administration</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>The Lewis Libby indictment is an overdue rein on the cowboys of the Bush administration. Finally, some accountability is demanded. Finally, the kneecapping suffered by anyone who publicly questions this White House is being revealed. Finally, a little slice of karma has plopped on the administration’s plate.</p>

<p>But let’s be realistic and face the hard fact that this is probably as far as earthly justice will go. Not only is the underlying crime of outing a covert CIA agent swept under the rug, but what lies at the heart of Libby’s criminal activities – an illegal war foisted on innocents through unprecedented, executive-branch con artistry – will likely go uninvestigated till George Bush and Dick Cheney are snug in retirement. Only historians will be left to unravel the monumental scamming allowed to proceed unimpeded and unpunished. </p>

<p>That’s the downside, and perhaps the only justice ever dished out to Dick and George will materialize in the form of their reincarnation as Iraqi children subjected to Air Force cluster bombs.</p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/10/as_good_as_it_g.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Aiding and abetting</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001710.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-27T10:27:45Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-27T10:27:45-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1710</id>
    <created>2005-10-27T10:27:45Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">t is axiomatic that everyone looks good when things are going well. Dealing with high times isn’t a traumatic test of character, and therefore doesn’t reveal true character. It’s when things get tough that authentic personalities are exposed – and...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Republicans</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>t is axiomatic that everyone looks good when things are going well. Dealing with high times isn’t a traumatic test of character, and therefore doesn’t reveal true character. It’s when things get tough that authentic personalities are exposed – and there can be no better example of this psychobabbling truism than today’s Republican Party in action.</p>

<p>With the White House’s upper echelon now in criminal jeopardy, we pause with wonder at how leading GOPers have scrambled, dissembled, backpedaled and raised hypocrisy to new and breathtaking heights. Perjury? Obstruction of justice? Pshaw. Mere misdemeanors, they say, little bumps in the political road that only hypercritical naysayers would condemn as serious.</p>

<p>Remember how, according to Republicans, the national sky was falling when Bill Clinton hit these same bumps? His perjurious ways – and over sex, mind you, not national security – were a bane on our national reputation, an intolerable blight on the presidency and demanding of the harshest punishment: impeachment. </p>

<p>But so much for that. It’s a new age.</p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/10/aiding_and_abet.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Michelle Malkin: Blithering Idiot</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001709.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-25T00:00:18Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-25T00:00:18-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1709</id>
    <created>2005-10-25T00:00:18Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Self-loathing racist Michelle Malkin cast stones at the Democratic Party from her glass house.</summary>
    <author>
      <name>S.M. Dixon</name>
      
      <email>smdixon@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Blowhards</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Malkin (an apologist for GOP racism) wants her more gullible readers (i.e. Republicans) to believe that Democrats <a href="http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003770.htm" target="_blank">buy the black vote</a>, and points to campaign spending by Democrat Jon Corzine as evidence for her conspiracy theory.</p>

<p>Yes, I know, that's hysterical. With only<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/10/13/BL2005101300885.html" target="_blank"> 2% of African-Americans</a> -- plus-or-minus 3.5% -- who approve of George W. Bush, Democrats don't really have to.</p>

<p>However, despite whatever amount that Corzine has allegedly been spending on black churches, it pales in comparison to the amount the Bush Junta and the GOP-controlled Congress has <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/21096/" target="_blank">lavished on black evangelicals</a>:<blockquote class="blockquote">...Bush officials will continue to ladle out millions through their faith-based programs to a handpicked core of top black church leaders. They've already announced a series of conferences that will be held in various cities starting in February to show black church leaders and community groups how to grab more of the faith initiative money. That will be more than enough to assure the active allegiance – or at minimum, the silence – of some black church leaders on those Bush domestic policies that wreak havoc on poor black communities.</blockquote>So tell us again, Michelle: <strong>Who</strong> is buying the black vote?<br><br></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Harriet Miers&apos; &quot;Whitewater&quot;</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001708.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-23T12:24:55Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-23T12:24:55-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1708</id>
    <created>2005-10-23T12:24:55Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Miers has a sleazy real estate scandal worse than Bill Clinton&apos;s.</summary>
    <author>
      <name>S.M. Dixon</name>
      
      <email>smdixon@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Supreme Court/Judiciary</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Bill Clinton and his administration were the targets of a series of politically-motivated investigations (read: "witchunts") that started with a real estate venture called "Whitewater." </p>

<p>A few years and over $60 million in taxpayer dollars later, the GOP used government printing presses to produce <a href="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/WW/white.html" target="_blank">"The Whitewater Report,"</a> which mentioned "Whitewater" four  times and found no wrongdoing -- but had <a href="http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/09/14/notebook.html" target="_blank">283 sexual references</a>.</p>

<p>It looks like Miers has her own <a href="http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/12973371.htm" target="_blank">shady real estate deal</a>, and it's a not as innocent as Clinton's turned out to be:<blockquote class="blockquote">Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers collected more than 10 times the market value for a small slice of... land in a large Superfund pollution cleanup site in Dallas where the state wanted to build a highway off-ramp.</p>

<p>The windfall came after a judge who received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Miers' law firm appointed a close professional associate of Miers and an outspoken property-rights activist to the three-person panel that determined how much the state should pay. </p>

<p>...Mediation efforts in 2003 reduced the award from $106,915 to $80,915, but Miers, who controls the family’s interest in the land, hasn’t reimbursed the state for the $26,000 difference, even after Bush appointed her to the Supreme Court.</blockquote>First she <a href="http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/campaignforthecourt/2005/10/miers_also_fail.html" target="_blank">"forgets" to pay her dues</a> to the Washington, D.C. and Texas bar associations, which suspends her license, then we discover <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/21/AR2005102101932_pf.html" target="_blank">unethical financial dealings</a> between her law firm and Bush's 1998 gubernatorial re-election campaign that she (of course) failed to report on the Senate Judiciary Committee's questionnaire -- which was <a href="http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051020/NEWS06/510200485/1012" target="_blank">sent back to her</a> for having "inadequate" and "insufficient" answers.</p>

<p>Bush has traded on his family's name and connections to get everything he has; it's obvious that Miers followed suit, using the Bush family name and her connection to George W. to get her sweetheart land deal.</p>

<p>Just another example of the Republican Party's cronyist Culture of Corruption.<br><br></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Republican Noise Machine Busted</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001707.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-22T00:29:41Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-22T00:29:41-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1707</id>
    <created>2005-10-22T00:29:41Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">More White House propaganda and another arrow in the liberal media myth: Identical unsigned editorials are appearing on the op-ed pages of papers nationwide. What is an unsigned editorial? It&apos;s the official majority position of a newspaper&apos;s editorial board, usually...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>S.M. Dixon</name>
      
      <email>smdixon@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Propaganda/Spin</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>More White House propaganda and another arrow in the liberal media myth: Identical unsigned editorials are <a href="http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2005/10/esp-wonder-newspapers-channel-bush.asp" target="_blank">appearing</a> on the op-ed pages of papers nationwide.</p>

<p>What is an unsigned editorial?</p>

<p>It's the official majority position of a newspaper's editorial board, usually written by the Editor-in-Chief. Instead, several papers owned by different companies have chosen to pass off the work of a right-wing hack named Sean Paige as their own -- which is called, in writing circles, <strong>plagiarism</strong>.</p>

<p>And the kicker?<blockquote class="blockquote">...just this month, none other than Sean Paige penned an editorial slamming MoveOn.org members for sending "astroturf" letters to newspapers.</blockquote>This is a massive scandal, perfectly illustrating the media's right-wing bias and the GOP's use of propaganda. It's also an issue that needs to be given the "DSM Treatment," because the Establishment Media won't cover it, otherwise.<br><br></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Cheney vs. Terrorists: Contest of the Ridiculous</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001706.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-12T01:20:01Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-12T01:20:01-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1706</id>
    <created>2005-10-12T01:20:01Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Today, we&apos;re going to play a little game. It&apos;s been a really bad week for the Government, and they&apos;re scrambling like mad to cover their respective asses while simultaneously rolling out new terror info in an attempt to throw the...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Drew Johnston</name>
      
      <email>discordia@tenadia.com</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Media</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Today, we're going to play a little game. It's been a really bad week for the Government, and they're scrambling like mad to cover their respective asses while simultaneously rolling out new terror info in an attempt to throw the media off the trail. The result is that some odd new stories have been coming to light. So here's what we'll do: I have two stories that have what I believe are unbelievable elements. I'll present them, and your objective is to figure out which one is the most deranged. A no-prize to anyone who guesses which story will be contradicted first.</p>

<p>Here we go: <a href="http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheneys_stock_options_rose_3281_last_1011.html">Story #1</a> and <a href="http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/usworld/news-article.aspx?storyid=45560">Story #2.</a> Read through both, or just check out the synopsis.</p>

<p><b>THESIS:</b><br />
#1 - The value of Cheney's stock options (mostly Halliburton) have gone up more than 3,000% over the past year.<br />
#2 - An intercepted letter from al-Qaeda reveals the roots of a plan for Iraq.</p>

<p><b>THE RIDICULOUS PART:</b><br />
#1 - Cheney claims he's giving all $8 million in profit to charity.<br />
#2 - The letter was sent by al-Qaeda's #2 in Iraq.</p>

<p><b>THE OBVIOUS JOKE:</b><br />
#1 - I hate to break it to Dick, but Lynne Cheney doesn't qualify as a "charity."<br />
#2 - Either they have a lot of #2s or al-Qaeda's zombification project is really coming along.</p>

<p><b>THE REALLY CONVENIENT PART:</b><br />
#1 - According to Cheney, his Halliburton stock doesn't constitute a financial interest in Halliburton. Yes, he's really arguing that.<br />
#2 - Quote: "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam - and how they ran and left their agents - is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now." How convenient - he's saying the exact same thing as the administration.</p>

<p><b>THE PART I COMPLETELY MADE UP, BUT WOULD FIT ANYWAY:</b><br />
#1 - Cheney: "Even if I was connected to Halliburton - which I'm not - it's not like they would have given me that much money. Now, if you'll excuse me, Lynne and I are going airplane shopping."<br />
#2 - Zarqawi: "Also, we must be wary not to further inflame the passions of the Great Devil Bush, for he will surely smite us with his unswerving courage and honor, unlike that cowardly John Kerry who would surely have handed us the reigns of power. Also, Michael Moore is fat."</p>

<p><b>RELATIVE GOODNESS AS DICTATED BY THE <a href="http://homokaasu.org/gematriculator/">GERMATRICULATOR</a>:</b><br />
#1 - 68%<br />
#2 - 66%</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The gruesome overview</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001705.php" />
    <modified>2005-10-03T10:31:12Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-03T10:31:12-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1705</id>
    <created>2005-10-03T10:31:12Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">For the Bush administration, Iraq is no longer a democratic test tube, or tabula rasa for geopolitical mapmakers, or even a Rovian opportunity to whip injured nationalism into a vengeful froth. It is way beyond that. Iraq has become, instead,...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Iraq</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>For the Bush administration, Iraq is no longer a democratic test tube, or tabula rasa for geopolitical mapmakers, or even a Rovian opportunity to whip injured nationalism into a vengeful froth. It is way beyond that. Iraq has become, instead, nothing more than the administration’s tar baby of Hobson’s choices, Catch 22s, vicious cycles, and proverbial rocks and hard places amidst the desert.</p>

<p>The one bright spot is that Iraq as an immediate problem could very well be thrown out along with Bush’s other fetid bathwaters in 2008. The dark side, however, is that this criminal war has made an international rogue of the United States and the self-made image will linger in the world’s mind for years to come. Furthermore, the neocon Bushies who were intent on flexing America’s muscle to intimidate global girlie-men have instead shown (once again) that raw military power is a 98-pound, counterinsurgent weakling. Indeed, Bush’s excellent Iraq adventure has been an inspiration to the bin Ladens and Zarqawis everywhere waiting to kick sand in our face. </p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/10/the_gruesome_ov.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The GOP’s elephant in the room</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001704.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-30T10:50:31Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-30T10:50:31-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1704</id>
    <created>2005-09-30T10:50:31Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Globe’s resident conservative, doesn’t usually get it. Most of his columns - reality-based disconnects of Heritage Foundation fantasies and talking-point drafts for the Limbaugh crowd - leave the thoughtful reader either slackjawed or in stitches. But...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Republicans</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Globe’s resident conservative, doesn’t usually get it. Most of his columns - reality-based disconnects of Heritage Foundation fantasies and talking-point drafts for the Limbaugh crowd - leave the thoughtful reader either slackjawed or in stitches. But <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/09/28/big_government_deja_vu/">on Wednesday</a> he actually got it, and perhaps the only thing that rendered readers slackjawed this time around was how “it” could take so damn long to occur. </p>

<p>Mr. Jacoby, it seems, just discovered that present-day, self-ballyhooed conservatives - specifically, those in Congress and the White House - aren’t … well, conservative. In what must have been a etymological epiphany, it came to Jacoby that “conservative” comes from “conserve,” as in to fiscally conserve, and his lads in power aren’t doing anything of the sort. </p>

<p>I don’t know if it was his keen, investigative skills or the endless stream of kids-in-the-candy-store headlines for five years that tipped him off, but whichever it was, he’s hot on the story. And just plain hot. He feels betrayed.</p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/09/the_gops_elepha.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The president’s funk could be bad news</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001703.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-28T10:52:38Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-28T10:52:38-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1703</id>
    <created>2005-09-28T10:52:38Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">I once heard the actor James Cagney reminisce with eloquent brevity about his hard-drinking father. By the time of the younger Cagney’s adolescence, pop, he said, had swilled himself into that psychological vortex of “a good man going downhill fast.”...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>George W. Bush</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>I once heard the actor James Cagney reminisce with eloquent brevity about his hard-drinking father. By the time of the younger Cagney’s adolescence, pop, he said, had swilled himself into that psychological vortex of “a good man going downhill fast.” </p>

<p>Most liberals would redact the “good” from that character sketch to describe George W. Bush’s current and personal state of affairs, but even conservatives and their more right-wing and militant brethren privately concur these days with the “going downhill fast” part. Never has a fall from presidential grace occurred with such rapidity and conspicuousness. </p>

<p>Katrina and Rita were huge stories in their own right, of course, but the latter took on a unique hugeness only because it followed the former’s hugeness being simultaneously overshadowed by the huger hugeness of Bush’s incompetence in responding. Political fallout, not nature’s, became Katrina’s primary narrative, and a political eulogy became its color commentary. Bush’s swagger swiftly devolved to feigned humility, then abject supplication. He desperately needs voters to cut him some slack, and the man who claims not to care about polling numbers is now willing to say or do anything to bump them up.</p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/09/the_presidents_.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Now for something completely different</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001702.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-26T10:34:02Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-26T10:34:02-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1702</id>
    <created>2005-09-26T10:34:02Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">The most uplifting piece of political commentary I have read in years - and I mean that literally - has come from the pen of none other than right-winger Robert Novak. His column last week filled me with hope. I...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Bush Administration</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>The most uplifting piece of political commentary I have read in years - and I mean that literally - has come from the pen of none other than right-winger Robert Novak. <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/22/bashing.bush/">His column last week</a> filled me with hope. I coulda kissed the guy. </p>

<p>Novak had attended an Aspen, Colorado political forum staged annually by Republican financial angel Theodore J. Forstmann of the prominent New York buyout firm, Forstmann Little & Co. Gathered were more than 200 “mostly prestigious” types, and guess what? “For two full days,” reported Novak, “George W. Bush was bashed. He was taken to task on his handling of stem cell research, population control, the Iraq war and, especially, Hurricane Katrina.” </p>

<p>What made that synopsis especially uplifting was this: “The critics were no left-wing bloggers. They were rich, mainly Republican and presumably Bush voters in the last two presidential elections.” For two full days these movers and shakers of supply-side splendor confabbed over such diverse issues as world poverty, human rights and the international economy - and “the connecting link,” Novak noted with as much surprise as lament, “was hostility to President Bush.”</p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/09/now_for_somethi.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The Friday Evening Political Test</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001701.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-24T01:05:09Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-24T01:05:09-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1701</id>
    <created>2005-09-24T01:05:09Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">This is going to be a major blogosphere meme before long, I&apos;m sure, so I might as well join in early. A new political test has shown up (check it out here). According to the test, I&apos;m a socialist leaning...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Drew Johnston</name>
      
      <email>discordia@tenadia.com</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Blogging on Blogging</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>This is going to be a major blogosphere meme before long, I'm sure, so I might as well join in early. A new political test has shown up (check it out <a href="http://www.okcupid.com/politics">here</a>). According to the test, I'm a socialist leaning towards democrat, which sounds about right. The pertinent graphs:</p>

<p><center><table style='border:1px solid black'><tr><td align=center> <font size="3"> You are a <center> <br> <font size="4"><b>Social Liberal</b></font> <br> <font shmolor="#a8a8a8" size="3">(68% permissive)</font><br> </center> <br> and an... <center><br> <font size="4"><b>Economic Liberal</b></font> <br> <font shmolor="#a8a8a8" size="3">(20% permissive)</font><br> </center> <br> You are best described as a:<br> <br><font size="+2"><u><center><b>Socialist</b></center></u></font> </font><br> <table id="thetable" name="thetable" background="http://is1.okcupid.com/graphics/politics/chart_political.gif" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="375" width="375"> <tbody><tr height="281"> <td width="237"></td> <td width="137"></td> </tr> <tr height="93"><td width="237"></td> <td align="left" valign="top" width="137"><img src="http://is1.okcupid.com/graphics/politics_you.gif" border="0"></td> </tr> </tbody></table> <br> <table id="thetable" name="thetable" background="http://is1.okcupid.com/graphics/politics/chart_basic.jpg" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="375" width="375"> <tbody><tr height="281"> <td width="237"></td> <td width="137"></td> </tr> <tr height="93"><td width="237"></td> <td align="left" valign="top" width="137"><img src="http://is1.okcupid.com/graphics/politics_you.gif" border="0"></td> </tr> </tbody></table> <br><br>Link: <a href='http://www.okcupid.com/politics'><b>The Politics Test</b></a>  on <a  href='http://www.okcupid.com'><b>Ok Cupid</b></a></td></tr></table></center></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Right answers, wrong questions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001700.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-23T10:51:23Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-23T10:51:23-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1700</id>
    <created>2005-09-23T10:51:23Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Bush’s approval rating is finally beginning to slide into Herbert Hoover territory. He has a long history of doing what he shouldn’t have and not doing what he should have; and voters, whose political consciousness always suffers from attention deficit,...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Bush Administration</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Bush’s approval rating is finally beginning to slide into Herbert Hoover territory. He has a long history of doing what he shouldn’t have and not doing what he should have; and voters, whose political consciousness always suffers from attention deficit, are just now sobering up to the disastrous binge Bush has been on since virtually his first day in office. </p>

<p>What is odd about voters’ revised opinion of Bush is that it largely springs from the two things he has had the least control over - a natural disaster and climbing gas prices - while those things he indeed has had control over - a needless war and reckless fiscal policies - remain sources of only mild discontent. </p>

<p>As evidence of this disconnect I offer <a href="http://www.chieftain.com/print.php?article=/national/1127286915/5">a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll</a>, which states that “less than half approve of Bush’s handling of Katrina. Less than a third give him good marks on gas prices.” Now God only knows how the other half could actually approve of Bush’s handling of the Katrina crisis, but the fact remains that the fiasco’s genesis - the storm itself - lay outside any presidential authority to avert. As for gas prices, a little world-market thing called supply and demand dictates their direction and there ain’t much any president can do about it. </p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/09/right_answers_w.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Return to the Borders</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001699.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-22T03:10:01Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-22T03:10:01-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1699</id>
    <created>2005-09-22T03:10:01Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Everyone&apos;s favorite paranoid vigilantes return to the southern border.</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Drew Johnston</name>
      
      <email>discordia@tenadia.com</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Foreign Policy</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>While our attention is rightly focused on the Gulf Coast region and the litany of disasters that continue to strike it, we should take time to acknowledge a nearby group that will no doubt be a target for mockery and outrage. I'm talking, of course, about the Minutemen. Remember them? Of course you do. They were all over the place a few months back.</p>

<p>And now they're planning to <a href="http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/nation/12702323.htm">return to the border.</a>  Apparently, despite the colossal failure that was the first Minuteman project (Their first stint only drew 150 volunteers out of a pool of 1,300), they really think they can start something this time. And maybe they will - they do seem to be growing, owing to heavy media coverage. Don't get me wrong, they deserved the coverage (I mean, how often do you see armed vigilante groups in this country nowadays?), but that doesn't make it any less disturbing.</p>

<p>Now, I could go on and on about how wrong this whole thing is, but there's really not that much to say. Everyone loves vigilantes until they become the targets. So rather than waste your time with what I'm sure would be a pointless argument, here are a few choice quotes from the last outing.</p>

<blockquote class="blockquote>"It should be legal to kill illegals. Just shoot 'em on sight. That's my immigration policy recommendation. You break into my country, you die."

<p>"You get up there with a rifle and start shooting four or five of them a week, the other four or five thousand behind them are going to think twice about crossing that line."</p>

<p>"The thing to do would be to drop the bodies a few hundred feet into the U.S. and just leave them there, with lights on them at night. That sends the message 'No Trespassing' in any language."</p>

<p>"They have no problem slitting your throat and taking your money or selling your drugs to your kids or raping your daughter and they are evil people."</p>

<p>"Whites are the minority in these border towns, man. They've already taken over. This is enemy territory."</p>

<p>"ACL-Jews." -Term used to refer to ACLU observers</p>

<p>"The ACLU are no different from white supremacists. They're a clear and present danger. They have the same mentality that murdered Martin Luther King, and they want to kill us. Literally the ACLU wants to kill us by invoking violence."</blockquote></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Abbott and Costello Meet Reality</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001698.php" />
    <modified>2005-09-21T11:02:49Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-09-21T11:02:49-01:00</issued>
    <id>tag:www.politicalstrategy.org,2005://1.1698</id>
    <created>2005-09-21T11:02:49Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">In a speech at Brown University, John Kerry said Katrina had &quot;stripped away any image of competence and exposed to all the true heart and nature of this administration. The truth is that for four and a half years, real...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>P. M. Carpenter</name>
      
      <email>pmcarpenter@politicalstrategy.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Bush Administration</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.politicalstrategy.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p>In a speech at Brown University, John Kerry said Katrina had "stripped away any image of competence and exposed to all the true heart and nature of this administration. The truth is that for four and a half years, real life choices have been replaced by ideological agenda, substance replaced by spin, governance second place always to politics."</p>

<p>Ouch. </p>

<p>What did White House defenders say to that? Well, as the New York Times put it, they leapt into rapid-response mode by “accus[ing] Democrats of trying to take political advantage of a tragedy.”</p>

<p>But there is no “ouch” there. Just laughter, because such a pathetically inadequate retort not only fails to defend, but actually confirms what Kerry charged. In responding to legitimate, widespread criticism of gross mismanagement by merely accusing critics of playing politics, the White House demonstrates its unswerving loyalty to spin over substance and politics over governance - and both tactics underlie the administration’s overarching, strategic ideology-in-practice of always keeping its agenda safely removed from reality. </p>

<p><a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2005/09/abbott_and_cost.html"><i>More...</i></a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

</feed>