You are currently browsing the monthly archive for February 2009.
The network which was terminating PUMA accounts without cause, is still proudly hosting all those beauties
58 Kill Hillary Clinton groups! Which is OK, as long as breastfeeding images are banned...
Now go back to protesting NY Post for a cartoon or better yet, Fox for a fabricated story (see update)
Update
From the link provided by Coup de Groucho
Yet the truth is that making money is not Mr Zuckerberg’s prime motivation (he is angrily forceful on this point). He retains his youthful idealism that Facebook can and should change the way people live for the better by connecting them to each other.
And what better proof of success than the subject matter of this entry?
Oh, wait, pure serendipity wanted me to find another one
The Facebook page that Paul Zolezzi used to leave a suicide note via status update before hanging himself at Mount Prospect Park yesterday has been taken down. Zolezzi, who struggled with heroin addiction, had been leaving several cryptic statuses recently during his move back to New York, following an unhappy stay in Portland, OR. One read, “Paul is going to be the first person ever to hang himself on the way out of Portland! Everything here sucks!” After his final update the night before his death, a friend replied, “Are you dying? or just staying brooklyn? I hope it’s the latter.“
Yet another Jr.jr revelation for the naive
Obama Backs Bush Policy On Detainee Rights
President Barack Obama’s Justice Department sided with the former Bush administration on Friday, saying detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights.
In a two-sentence court filing, department lawyers said the Obama administration agreed that detainees at Bagram Air Base cannot use U.S. courts to challenge their detention.
That’s the predictable part for those of us who actually paid attention to what was behind the slogans. More shocking is thir “shock”
The filing shocked human rights attorneys.
“The hope we all had in President Obama to lead us on a different path has not turned out as we’d hoped,” said Tina Monshipour Foster, a human rights attorney representing a detainee at the Bagram Air Base. “We all expected better.”
Not all of us dear – you keep speaking for everyone!
After Mr. Obama took office, a federal judge in Washington gave the new administration a month to decide whether it wanted to stand by Bush’s legal argument. Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd says the filing speaks for itself.
“They’ve now embraced the Bush policy that you can create prisons outside the law,” said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who has represented several detainees. .
Now? What made you think he was different before? And what’s sadder still, you guys were slower than even New York Times at this…I suppose it’s time to wear this truth telling item that Obama campaign was selling
Update
Another Jr.jr, albeit on a sligtly different matter: secrecy
The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.
Of course being AP, we are not being reminded of the hard drive wipe-out Rove ordered from Geek.com. we’re supposed to believe now it was an accident. And also, that all this covering for W has nothing to do with W helping his installation.
NY Metro cover observes that Oscar showing off is unseeming in the current crisis
 |
(unlike say, the 170 million Inauguration?)
whole NYT and NY Post apologize
NY Times has to publish this statement as directed by the settlement with McCain
The suit alleged that the published article communicated by carefully drawn implication that Ms. Iseman and Senator John McCain had an illicit romantic relationship in 1999.
When originally published in the midst of a hard fought presidential campaign, the article triggered an avalanche of criticism from readers, public commentators, and even The New York Times’ Public Editor.
And it was part of NY Times non-itemized contribution to the Obama campaign. And no, it was not a typo calling NY Times a tabloid.
The other, more obvious tabloid, NY Post is doing a GOP style apology for a cartoon that fed into the “Ma. they’re racist” hysteria that this election generated. I have no love for the Murdoch rag, but a second wave of rage over a cartoon is a bit over the top. Anyway, here’s Murdoch’s spiel
But it has been taken as something else – as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.
This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.
And then starts lashing at the protesters
However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past – and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.
To them, no apology is due.
Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon – even as the opportunists seek to make it something else.
Me, I am with myiq2xu on this
But I would like to point out that President Obama didn’t write the stimulus bill nor is he perceived to have done so. The authors of the stimulus bill are generally perceived to have been Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, so I don’t know if you can truthfully argue that the cartoon is a clear reference to Obama.
I suppose cartoonists and satirists better say good night now
…Update
here’s a so called “joke” that turned into a fake story – kudos to both TPM and Huffpo for buying into “Fox anchor calls Holder a monkey” – let’s see how many we can browbeat with racism accusations – may I remind everyone that the ones used durin the campaign were also false
I mean, we knew it for some time, but now even TIME says it, listing it with the most overrated blogs
With the Bush years now just a memory, Kos’s blog has lost its mission, and its increasingly rudderless posts read like talking points from the Democratic National Committee.
Did so for years now, but glad its official
I have been calling Obama Jr.Jr ever since he campaigned without ruffling a W feather and identified with him on many issues. But the New York Times is noticing just now:
Obama’s War on Terror May Resemble Bush’s in Some Areas
So much so that
The administration’s recent policy moves have attracted praise from outspoken defenders of the Bush administration. Last Friday, The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page argued that “it seems that the Bush administration’s antiterror architecture is gaining new legitimacy” as Mr. Obama’s team embraces aspects of Mr. Bush’s counterterrorism approach.
But then it’s not like the WSJ didn’t know what they were getting early on. Let’s face it, while NY Times was busy attacking the women running against Obama, WSJ told us back in July that Obama would be Bush’s third term (OK, they told THEIR readers, for whom this was a good thing). They even found the cues in the inaugural speech.
But New York times as always is slower on the uptake, being obviously out of the loop on this one.
So they are slowly adding Obama’s FISA vote in the senate to his more recent signals
Even as it pulls back from harsh interrogations and other sharply debated aspects of George W. Bush’s “war on terrorism,” the Obama administration is quietly signaling continued support for other major elements of its predecessor’s approach to fighting Al Qaeda.
They are genereous with the qualifiers but eventually notice:
During her confirmation hearing last week, Elena Kagan, the nominee for solicitor general, said that someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than in a physical battle zone
And again, blaming people other than Obama
Moreover, the nominee for C.I.A. director, Leon E. Panetta, opened a loophole in Mr. Obama’s interrogation restrictions. At his hearing, Mr. Panetta said that if the approved techniques were “not sufficient” to get a detainee to divulge details he was suspected of knowing about an imminent attack, he would ask for “additional authority.”
Same with using W’s secrecy
“Every president in my lifetime has invoked the state-secrets privilege,” Mr. Craig said. “The notion that invoking it in that case somehow means we are signing onto the Bush approach to the world is just an erroneous assumption.”
Still, the decision caught the attention of a bipartisan group of lawmakers. Two days after the appeals court hearing, they filed legislation to bar using the state-secrets doctrine to shut down an entire case — as opposed to withholding particular evidence.
Oh, I get it NYT: Obama wants hope and change – but darn Panetta, Holder, Kagan and those other fiends don’t let him. Right? or maybe, I should get my news from WSJ.
Recent Comments