randomrambling’s blog

“Be patient, this gets amazing” (www.thedailyshow.com).  Recently The Daily Show ran a segment with that name about how the Bush administration avoided implementing EPA recommendations on global warming by refusing to open the email.  This week Dubya et al managed to top that.

It seems there have been many disagreements between the White House and the EPA.  The EPA wanted to deal with global warming but Dubya did not (what does he do most days?  I don’t think he spends his time working or reading.)

In April 2007 the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has a duty to regulate greenhouse gasses ‘if they pose a threat to people’s health.”  Part of that email that the White House refused to open was a finding that the greenhouse gases do just that.  http://news.cnet.com/Supreme-Court-rules-EPA-can-regulate-greenhouse-gases/2100-11746_3-6172658.html?hhTest=1    When the White House finally got around to reading the EPA’s revised proposal, it was too expensive.  The EPA tried again and issued a report on the damaging effects of global warming but stopped short of implementing its own recommendations because Dubya thought they cost too much.  Rather than do anything, Dubya has decided the government needs more information and has started a ‘comment period’ that will continue for the rest of his presidency.  I thought Republicans liked responsibility.  http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-greenhouse12-2008jul12,0,2024839.story

There are lots of theories about why this administration has done so much to do so little.  I think it is just because it is an issue they don’t care about.  If you look at the White House web site, global warming doesn’t even rate as one of the issues they care about.  Search for the subject and there are few times Dubya has talked about it.

Much like Chicken Little I feel I have spent a lot of time of late talking about all the ways we are killing ourselves.  There’s global warming, infectious diseases, global warming’s impact on infectious diseases, the ‘war against terror,’ and now it looks very much like we are about to go to war with Iran.  If you think Iraq is a mess, just wait for Act II (Afghanistan was just a prologue).

Ever since we invaded Iraq there has been talk about going after Iran next.  The general scuttlebutt around DC has been that the war plans for such a move have been written and the only thing stopping Dubya et al from doing it have been the mess that had been Iraq.  Now that the situation there seems to be better – I do think the very belated surge has achieved at least a partial military success there that makes our withdrawal from there even more important – the administration can focus more on Iran.  They clearly feel we are threatening them as their recent threats to “strike back if attacked” (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/09/asia/10iran.php)  that were closely followed by nuclear weapons testing.  If Dubya’s plan is to poke the bear, he is doing a bang-up job.

Lest anyone think we should invade another sovereign country:

A Democratic senator told me that, late last year, in an off-the-record lunch meeting, Secretary of Defense Gates met with the Democratic caucus in the Senate. (Such meetings are held regularly.) Gates warned of the consequences if the Bush Administration staged a preëmptive strike on Iran, saying, as the senator recalled, “We’ll create generations of jihadists, and our grandchildren will be battling our enemies here in America.” Gates’s comments stunned the Democrats at the lunch, and another senator asked whether Gates was speaking for Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. Gates’s answer, the senator told me, was “Let’s just say that I’m here speaking for myself.”  The New Yorker, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh

It is even more worrisome that Senator McCain supports the White House on this issue because with Dubya & Cheney wanting to invade Iran and the McCain candidacy looking shaky, it would not surprise me one bit if a preemptive war with Iran would be to avoid a loss in November.  If McCain picks Joe Lieberman I think we can count the days until our troops go in.  This, by the way, is because Lieberman is a defense hawk and not because he is Jewish. I do not want hate mail about that.  This would be one October surprise we cannot afford.  

This year's men's final in Wimbledon was the best tennis I have EVER seen.  Roger Federer (1) and Rafael Nadal (2) were so evenly matched that it was impossible not to be riveted. 

Never before have I felt so torn about who I wanted to win.  At first I was all about Federer.   He seems like a really great guy and he speaks five languages -- how hot is that? As the number one player in the world (since like February 2004!) he is on his way to breaking a number of Pete Sampras' records, such as number of Wimbledons, years finished at number one and Grand Slam titles.  So I clearly wanted him to win (I cannot stand Pete Sampras).

Then there is irresistible Rafael Nadal who apologized to Federer for beating him so soundly at the French Open.  His energy and powerful performances every time he takes to the court make it impossible to not want him to win.  And I have no idea why he chews his trophies but it makes me smile/laugh every time I see him do it.  Therefore, I clearly wanted Rafa to win.

At the beginning of the match, I just wanted it to go on as long as possible.  I had no idea it would last for five hours (approximate playing time)!  Three rain delays, two tie-breaks, Rafa was up the Federer fought back.  Again and again they proved the men's tennis is not becoming stale due to the new technology.

Like many tennis fans, I was concerned that the rackets were taking over the game.  A lot has changed in tennis since the start of the "Open Era."  Rackets are much more powerful and player are more fit, which is kind of ironic. For a while the men's game was just about power and that's not an entirely bad thing.  For women, it was great because as the men's game got less interesting people turned to watch the women.  Women's tennis is the most watched women's sport and viewership for women's matches beats that for the men.

The sport needs some changing, however.  It would be nice to give the player more time between the French Open and Wimbledon and the season is way too long.  Some more thought also needs to go into how the women are ranked and they should play the best of five sets in the Slams.  In case you are wondering, the men play best of three matches in all non-Slam tourneys.

On Sunday none of that mattered.  The world's two best players proved that their game can be as exciting as ever.  With any luck there will be many more of these matches in the coming years.  Oh, and it is just impossible for me to root against Rafa.  My head might have wanted Federer to win but my tennis heart belongs to Nadal.  Go Rafa, GO!!!

Maybe it is because of the Bataan death march quality of the 2008 Democratic primary process (seriously, over a year of it?  WTF?) that lulled our press into just expecting political news to fall into their laps but now they have gone back to their really lazy ways.  Yes, the national press corps are lazy.  Their job is both 'glamorous' and crappy at the same time.  Political reporters are herded around from campaign event to campaign event where they cover the same speech until they can repeat it themselves.  Back in Washington, DC (and elsewhere) pundits, spoiled from the primary, need to drum up controversy to attract viewers and make themselves feel relevant. 

When Senator Obama said he was going to bring the troops home as soon as he got in and put the timetable out there I think most people with a brain understood that the specifics of the timetable were never written in stone.  Any president is going to have some leeway in terms of how to end a war.  Remember the two most dangerous points of any armed conflict are getting in and getting out.  The big deal about Obama's position is his commitment to getting out or Iraq. To harp on the date we get misses the point.

Our media are there to keep our government honest and should call a candidate, or elected official, out when they go back on a promise but this is not that.  Our press today prefers the horserace to substance and recent coverage just proves that point.

Thank god for the Daily Show and Jon Stewart.

I never wish death or bad things on people but I am not going to shed any tears for this bastard.

My life is not entirely about politics.  I have other interests.  They are usually sports, travel, the Daily Show, mountains and from time to time I become interested in random topics.  This week's topic has been Mike Myers.  One of my favorite movies has always been So, I married an axe murderer.  That is not his best film, that honor must belong to Pete's meteor.  Haven't seen it?  Google it and watch it.  Do that soon.  You will thank me later.

You just have not LIVED untiul you have watched this.

By now, you probably know that Charlie Black, a McCain campaign staffer, told Fortune magazine that a terrorist attack would help McCain's candidacy.  When people got upset he apologized and McCain had to distance himself from the comment and the person but something does not add up about it.  People say stupid things all the time but this doesn't look or smell like that.  It looks like a calculated move by John McCain to save his campaign.

Exhibit A would be all the polling data that shows how much this issue helps the GOP.  The Wall Street Journal reported today that:

"The Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks made national security a major issue for Republicans. President Bush enjoyed strong public support in the aftermath, helping lift members of his party in 2002 and 2004 elections. In October 2004, shortly before his re-election, 77% of voters listed terrorism as very important to their vote, according to the Pew Research Center. Three years later, the survey found 69% of Americans saw it as very important"

... and..."A Gallup survey released Tuesday revealed that 70% of Americans think Sen. McCain would do a good job of handling terrorism, compared with 49% for Sen. Obama." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121435467915401859.html?mod=googlenews_wsj). 

Exhibit B:  McCain's response:  When Rev. Hagee made comments about Hitler and the Catholic church and Katrina, among other things -- that guy is out of his mind, McCain was unequivocal in renouncing his supporter. 

Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them. I did not know of them before Rev. Hagee's endorsement, and I feel I must reject his endorsement as well." (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/22/mccain.hagee/ -- this has McCain's response and some of Hagee's thoughts on the world.)

 

Senator McCain's response to the Fortune comments was tame in comparison, "I cannot imagine why he would say it. It's not true.  I've worked tirelessly since 9/11 to prevent another attack on the United States of America. My record is very clear."  (multiple sources, Google it if you don't believe me) 

Notice that McCain doesn't actually say Black is wrong? Sure, he seems to say that the comments 'aren't true' but then he jumps on to his record on terrorism?  What about his other standard response about war?  He usually says something along the lines of "Winning the war is more important than winning an election."  Why not retool that line here?  Because Barack Obama leads him in the polls by at least 15 percentage points. It was great to see the Wall Street Journal article on this because it is true that Democrats have avoided saying this because we thought it made us look whiny.  I cannot even begin to tell you how many times I know John Kerry would have a major event and the Department of Homeland Security would hold a press conference about the terrorism threat to the country.  Major networks (like CNN, MSNBC) would say they planned to cover the Kerry event but then this other thing came up. .. (no, I am not too bitter).

This whole thing just pisses me off because there should be a line between politicking and governing.  You may think this is how it always has been but that's no excuse for us to put up with it.

PS.  Another really good piece on this is here:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/25/AR2008062500314_2.html

Apparently Warren Buffet thinks the economy is going to get worse before it gets better (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25371792/).

Uh, didn’t we ALL know that already?

It’s the only explanation that makes any sense.  After reading about the recent Supreme Court decision on Habeas Corpus I realized just how little I know about the Court and that just didn’t seem right.  Not even a little bit.  I went and found the actual decision and read through it. 

The majority view matches my own and made a lot of sense.  Chief Justice Roberts wrote the dissenting opinion and I gotta say, he is a jerk.  I expected to read it and maybe be confused by it.  I don’t have as much fancy book leanin’ and all.  What shocked me was just how it oozed condescension, was riddled with contradictions and how his version of English and mine are not even close to being the same language. Seriously, it is the only way his use of the word ‘generous’ to describe Gitmo detainees’ treatment makes any sense.

If you want to read it, it can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24556215