If you’re not outraged, we’re not doing our job.
HOME •
BASE8 •
BABYLON •
VIDEOS •
RSS •
TWITTER •
GOOGLE READER
Tweet This Post! 
A little weekend Schadenfreude, anyone?
Former Top Bush Aide Accused of Md. Thefts Refund Scam Netted $5,000, Police Say
Claude A. Allen, who resigned last month as President Bush’s top domestic policy adviser, was arrested this week in Montgomery County for allegedly swindling Target and Hecht’s stores out of more than $5,000 in a refund scheme, police said. …
Washington Post
March 11, 2006
I might have shrugged this off as just another example of the rampant corruption galloping through the entire Bush administration — although I am quite amused that this idiot is so stupid to risk everything on such a small-time scam — but for the fact that his name jumped right off the page at me. I chuckled, quite nastily, to myself, having remembered blogging just once about Claude Allen, in 2003:
Finally, the BushAssh-Nominee of the Day is Claude A. Allen — who has not only made his disdain for “queers” (in quotes this time because it’s his word) perfectly clear, and confirmed his enormous disconnect with reality by believing abstinence-only programs are the sole route to stopping the spread of HIV, but has demonstrated what must be an unfathomable amount of self-loathing, through his support of racist bigot Jesse Helms — who uses the N-word with the most casual aplomb; i.e., “I think all men are equal, be theysl-nts ,b–ners orn—–s “. (Did I mention Allen is black?)While You Were Sleeping
doublethink
May 4, 2003
Tweet This Post!
So, Budget Director Mitch Daniels has resigned. Big deal. Yeah, actually — I mean it really is a big deal: He’s just been subpoenaed! — and under circumstances uncannily similar to Georgie’s Harken stock dump! (Can you say “insider trading”? I knew ya could.)
Indian-ites… er, Indianians… Hey, Hoosiers! Watch out! If, for some reason, Daniels actually survives this and makes it to the gubernatorial race, is this the guy you want at the helm? The guy Georgie Boy said was “a really good watchdog of the people’s money“? The guy who’s alienated both sides of the aisle? The guy Senator Byrd called a “little Caesar“?
Look, if nothing else, you’ve got to be worried when his run for the top state office is something “a prospect Republicans have been salivating over for months.”
Now, look, I know you guys had a little trouble getting motivated about the polls in your own municipal elections (come on — a 10% turnout? that’s pathetic!), but when 2004 rolls around, you’d better get your butts out there and vote.
If you don’t — well, I guess it’s up to you if you want Indiana to turn into Bush Country.
Tweet This Post!
I just noticed I haven’t taken a good pot-shot at the Commando-in-Chief in three whole days! Actually, I don’t have to — there are plenty of folks already doing it for me:
Paul Krugman has done an unusually fine job of taking Junior to task for everything from the real message Georgie was sending out by donning military duds, to his wartime desertion, to the failure to turn up WMD in Iraq, to exploiting September 11th for the Repub convention this fall — all in just a few short sentences. Jolly good work, Paul!
And a tip of the hat to the Boston Globe’s Joan Vennochi for an even more detailed (and more seriously-toned) dissection of chickenhawk hypocrisy. (Excellent talking points here — you really should read it.)
Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) has also ripped (AP’s word, not mine) Dubs for his aircraft grandstanding (while Ari the Egghead got a little pissy about the incident)…
Speaking of whom, the perfectly noxious press secretary lives up to his “Ari fLIEscher” soubriquet with this amusing Reuters item that exposes both Ari’s b.s.-ing around, as well as the Little Cowboy’s insistence on playing Top Gun: “It turns out that President George W. Bush was intent on landing on the USS Abraham Lincoln by jet plane even though the aircraft carrier was well within helicopter range. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer had said last week that Bush would land on the Lincoln in a S-3B Viking jet. “It will not be a helicopter arrival, because the ship is so far out at sea,” he said, adding the aircraft carrier would be hundreds of miles from shore. As it happened, the Lincoln was only 30 miles (45 km) from shore, well within helicopter range…”
Well, I hope the crew of the Abraham Lincoln and their families — anxiously awaiting their arrival as the carrier was kept 30 miles offshore just so Georgie could have a sleepover with the admiral — found the spectacle worth the delay. Heavens knows we taxpayers didn’t. (Oops, was that a pot-shot?)
And here’s the best for last: The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) — a group of ex-CIA analysts and spooks — has issued a truly damning memo that Georgie Boy will never read — but you should.
Oh, by the way — and this is totally off-topic, but while I’m thinking about it — Mitch Daniels is resigning as director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. No, that’s not Mitch’s pot-shot at Dubs — he just wants to run for governor of Indiana. However, the mere mention of Daniels compels me to repeat his reference to the Shrub’s infamous trifecta line — which is my real pot-shot for the day:
[Bush] had always listed, throughout his campaign and since, the reasons why the nation might depart from this policy, reasons he had given as acceptable for running fiscal deficits: for war, recession, or emergency. As he said to me in mid-September, “Lucky me. I hit the trifecta.“Mitch Daniels
October 16, 2001
Tweet This Post!
Okay, not all the news — just the stuff I’m ruminating on… er, on which I’m ruminating…
There was white stuff in Southern California last night — in the form of a great big snow job from Resident Dubs aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln. He snowed them up north in Santa Clara, too — “them” being a crowd of hand-picked automatons pre-programmed to applaud wildly every time Junior stopped to take a breath during his sales pitch for his big tax cut. Hear tell major Silicon Valley leaders spoiled by a long and close working relationship with Presidents Clinton and Gore were not invited to the clusterfu—circle jer—
Your intrepid analyst stayed up late last night finishing a long response to Dubbie’s talk to the troops, and decided to shelve the whole thing; it was just too long. Instead, kindly direct your attention to this most excellent open letter to the Commando-in-Chief, from the blessedly fair-minded San Jose Mercury News — which says everything we’d all like to say, but much more politely. This is a must-must-must-read you’ll truly appreciate, even if you’ve never been to the Golden State.
Couldn’t help but notice the Shrubster’s crowing, in both speeches, about how nicely the U.S. put the Taliban out of business in Afghanistan (you know — the country we laid waste to a year and a half ago).
Said Dubs: “In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed one of the most barbaric regimes in the history of mankind. A regime so barbaric, they would not allow young girls to go to school.”
Which makes today’s grammatically-awkward AP headline — Afghan Women Urged to Dress Traditional — a curious juxtaposition indeed. Don’t buy the no-big-deal tone of the story; Afghan women (at least outside of Kabul) are no better off than they ever were. Their oppressors are the Afghan warlords now — who are doing a lot worse than merely “urging” women to don the hijab.
So don’t let Bush & Rummy’s happy talk fool you. And, judging from America’s sorry track record, it’s an even-money bet that we’ll pull out and leave the country to its own grim fate, just like we did the first time around. (For news and commentary from those who really know what’s going on over there, you’ll find no better source than RAWA.)
Speaking of countries that hate our guts, what’s up with Iraq? Well, when I read the first headline this a.m., I thought I’d fallen into some parallel universe: The U.S. has decided to divide Iraq into three “military sectors,” divvying up duty among itself, Britain, and Poland. (Gee, guess Australia’s 2,000 elite SAS troops were no match for Poland’s 700 regular grunts — maybe the Aussies didn’t kill enough Iraqis to merit their own sector — and maybe that’s what Little Johnny Howard has come to ‘Murika to discuss with the Boy King).
Six more countries — Spain, Italy, Denmark, Bulgaria, Ukraine and the Netherlands — are going to help out in the British and Polish sectors, while the U.S. is telling the United Nations (remember them?) that although the U.N. can provide humanitarian aid, it won’t be “allowed” to contribute to peacekeeping efforts. Well, boo-hoo — the U.N. isn’t interested in playing Police Squad, anyway; Kofi Annan says he’s more interested in “political facilitation.” Good for you, Kofi — they’re going to need it.
Now, don’t get your hopes up that the arrival of all these new international troops are going to bring our men and women home any sooner; the influx of all those Italians and Bulgarians and the rest are only going to “augment” the troops already there.
Of course, France, Germany, and Russia all got the royal Dub Snub.
Meanwhile, the folks in Fallujah — where U.S. troops shot and killed a bunch of protesters last week — say they’ll start lobbing bombs (instead of mere grenades) at occupying forces if the U.S. refuses to clear out. The locals are Sunnis — and some of them believe the troops’ sunglasses offer X-ray vision. Yes, really.
Three-dot quickies: Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle again demonstrated his need for a spinal implant in another shameless display of sucking up to Sonny Bush… Maybe Ashcroft’s dog ate the fax (or the courier); either way, some evidence about false testimony from a key witness in the Timothy McVeigh trial was never revealed to the Oklahoma City bomber’s defense team… Finally, Col. Matthew F. Bogdanos (in real life, the lead prosecutor in the Sean “Puffy” Combs’ nightclub-shooting trial, and well-known pit bull), in charge of investigating the rape of Iraq’s National Museum, is trying to convince the public that — contrary to reports of more than 170,000 priceless antiquities stolen from Baghdad — no more than 25 are missing (which may just be his way of saying the other 169,975 were smashed to bits).
Tweet This Post!
Reuters: White quits as U.S. Army secretary
Washington Times: Army Secretary White steps down
Fox: Army Secretary Thomas White Resigns
CNN: Army secretary resigns on Rumsfeld’s demand
The Guardian (U.K.): Rumsfeld Said to Fire Army Secretary
USA Today: Rumsfeld fired Army secretary Thomas White
Associated Press: Army Secretary Fired
Sunday Times (Australia): Army chief marches out
Tweet This Post!
Contains some excellent examples of hypocrisy in the form of anti-Clinton quotes from Dubya, Ashcroft, & others:
- Those comments may not undermine the President as he leads us into war, and they may not give comfort to our adversaries, but they come mighty close.
— Dennis Hastert, 3/18/02
- This destructive rhetoric does nothing more than demoralize our troops and second-guess our commander in chief.
— Tom Delay, 3/20/03
With countless attacks like these on Democratic leaders, Republicans set a very high standard for patriotism: if you question the President of the United States while our troops are in danger, then you are not patriotic enough. But how do these same Republicans fare under their own standards? …
Republicans fail their own “patriotism test.” As our troops faced danger overseas, Republicans were strident in their criticism of President Clinton and his foreign policy, even going as far as criticizing the military campaign itself…
Tweet This Post!
I didn’t think I could find any humor in the tragedy of Iraqi looting — I’ve been in deep mourning for the loss of the Code of Hammurabi, among countless other treasures — and then out comes this little gem of comic relief: Those nasty looters may have burned up all the evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Looks to me like Koach Karl sent in Condi “Let’s Play Dumb” Rice to set up the shot, so Ari Fleischer (one anagram of which is “A Rich Serf Lie” — or “Re: Chief’s Liar,” if you prefer) can spike it into next week.
Meanwhile, it was easier finding Laci Petersen than it’s going to be, in Tommy Franks’ estimation, to find the very WMD we sold Iraq in the first place.
Gee, ya think Iraq might’ve actually been cooperating with U.N. inspectors? No? Oh, then, obviously, they hid everything in Syria, which is why we’re going to go after them next (in spite of the fact that Syria is inarguably a more formidable adversary than Iraq).
Well, if that’s true, then how come those silly Syrians have just proposed the complete elimination of all WMD throughout the entire Middle East?
I’ll tell you why (you knew I would): On the surface, a person might think it’s because Syria’s got nothing to hide. And until somebody with a modicum of credibility can prove they do or not, we’re not going to concern ourselves just yet with the “Do they or don’t they?” question. (The short answer: Most likely, they do.)
The real reason, in my not-so-humble opinion, is that Syria just delivered a good, hard whack the Bush administration didn’t see coming. And it was a clever move indeed.
This comes on the heels of Israel suddenly chiming in on the Syria situation. At the request of the U.S., Israel sat back and said nothing (and, presumably, did nothing) during the Iraq invasion. But now, with Bush & Co. ramping up the threat-o-meter on its next pre-emptive target, the time is ripe for Israel to make its own demands on Syria, in spades — and it’s going to use its old ally, the U.S., to deliver the list.
I can hear the conversation: “Just hold your horses ’til we’re done with Iraq, Ariel — I promise, it’ll be worth it.” “Very well — I’ll bide my time… but I’ll get those Syrians — and the Hezbollah, too!”
And then Syria throws a monkey wrench in the works.
Don’tcha see? If Syria gets the rest of its neighbors to agree to give up or destroy any existing WMD, then how could the U.S. possibly justify the exemption of Syria’s old nemesis — and the U.S.’s old buddy — Israel from such a treaty?
Israel is the one Middle East nation the U.S. stands by, do or die, no matter what they’ve got, or how they use it. The U.S. has a long history of overlooking any naughtiness on Israel’s part, and Dubya fawns over that scary Ariel Sharon like a bobby-soxer at a Frank Sinatra concert.
I have a few of my own ideas about the reasons the U.S. damns Palestinian suicide bombers while continuing to overlook Israel’s actions against Palestinians, but I’m not going to touch on any of them. Israel is, for lack of a better term, a sacred cow. Say one word against it, and suddenly everybody’s branding you an anti-Semite. Which is a pile of reactionary crap; untold millions of people disagree with the cowboy tactics of one George W. Bush, but are no more anti-American than Audie Murphy.
I don’t expect my ultra-conservative, right-wing Christian readers to be able to digest that; maybe it will help if I draw this example: I love Canadians, I’ve always loved Canadians, and I always will love Canadians. But that doesn’t change the fact that I couldn’t find one damned thing to like about Brian Mulroney. And just because I didn’t like Brian Mulroney doesn’t change the fact that I love Canadians. Make more sense? No? I didn’t think so.
How’s this: I think revisionism is as great an evil as the Holocaust itself. But centuries-long persecution of any people is no reason to excuse the current policies of any group — or government — so closely identified with that people. (Or, for another example: I can recite a litany of the most horrific crimes against gay people, but I’ll go to my grave believing Rich Tafel is a traitor — and a misguided idiot. And that doesn’t exactly make me a homophobe. You still don’t get it, do you? Oh, well, I give up. Let the name-calling begin.)
Anyway, back to Israel: Americans must speak in hushed tones about the potential threat of Israel’s “alleged” nuclear arsenal. You see, if Israel admits it has nukes, then the U.S. has to impose sanctions on them. And if they don’t admit it, then they should have no problem allowing U.N. inspectors in to confirm that Israel is a nuke-free zone.
Problem is, the evidence of Israel’s nuclear capability is overwhelming — or at least a far cry better than the “evidence” against Iraq.
But we’re not supposed to talk about that. Consider it the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of international relations.
Or, as Voice of America put it a few years ago: “Israel’s undeclared nuclear capability is such a sensitive issue that the Clinton Administration doesn’t want to talk about it — at least not on the record. But privately, one official agreed with the Egyptian view, saying it’s going to be very hard down the road to overlook Israel’s nuclear potential if the world wants to keep countries like Iraq under sanctions for trying to go nuclear as well.”
So what happens if everybody in the Mideast agrees to give up their nukes and mustard gas and all those other nasty WMD? Will Israel be the lone hold-out? Probably. So where will that leave the U.S.?
I’ll tell you where (you knew I would): in one hell of an uncomfortable position indeed. If the U.S.’s justification of the day for the war of the week is the elimination of WMD, then the U.S. has got to come down as hard on Israel as it has Iraq, and now Syria (and tomorrow, Iran).
Do you think we’ll do it? Me neither.
In any case, it was sure a cagey move by Syria.
Tweet This Post!
“Some of you may have seen yesterday in Baghdad a picture of a statue of that evil dictator being toppled and dragged through the streets by Iraqis. Let’s melt it down. Let’s bring it to New York and let’s put it in one of the girders that’s going to rise over here as a symbol of the rebuilding of New York and the rebuilding of America.”
Since Governor Pataki’s jaw-dropping remarks that whipped a crowd of some 15,000 New Yorkers into a frenzy on Friday, I’ve heard suggestions from several of my private correspondents as to what the Saddam statue should be melted down into, and how it might best be put to use — but I’ll keep those creative ideas to myself. After all, we are civilized people here.
More constructive would be a letter or e-mail to Governor Pataki enlightening him to one basic fact he has apparently overlooked in all his gubernatorial busy-ness:
There is no credible evidence whatsoever of any connection between Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda network responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on America.
Here’s a quick refresher course, in case your own circuits have been fried by information overload:
The “evidence” of a Saddam-9-11 “connection” Colin Powell presented to the United Nations on February 5, 2003, was based entirely on the alleged existence of a training camp “headed by Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda lieutenants,” in northeastern Iraq — Kurdish territory, outside the control of the Saddam Hussein regime.
(This, of course, simply begs the question: Why, then, is the United States allying itself with the Kurds — who are harboring al-Qaeda terrorists within Kurdish-controlled territory?)
Even Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage grudgingly admitted in August, 2002, that any al-Qaeda operatives in Iraq “may very well be in some of the areas not controlled by the government of Iraq.”
Powell inadvertently drove the point home with his assertion that “Baghdad has an agent in the most senior levels of the radical organization Ansar al-Islam, that controls this corner of Iraq. In 2000, this agent offered al-Qaeda safe haven in the region. After we swept al-Qaeda from Afghanistan, some of its members accepted this safe haven. They remain there today.”
For one fleeting moment, it appeared that Powell had redeemed his allegations, and cemented the alleged “connection” with the revelation that “Zarqawi’s activities are not confined to this small corner of northeast Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day. During this stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there.
“These al-Qaeda affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they’ve now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.”
However, the very day Powell made his case to the U.N., the BBC blew the lid off a classified British intelligence report leaked to the news agency, which “flatly contradicts one of the main charges laid against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein by the United States and Britain - that he has cultivated contacts with the group blamed for the 11 September attacks.” ***
Additionally, even if Powell’s claims are true (and they are at best highly specious), the Secretary’s own words force an examination of the timing involved in establishing an Saddam-al-Qaeda “connection.”
Precisely:
According to Powell, Zarqawi did not arrive in Baghdad (Saddam-controlled territory) until May, 2002, and did not establish a “base of operations” there until sometime between May and July of 2002.
Yet:
George W. Bush first publicly threatened Iraq during his State of the Union address (or, as it is more commonly known, his “Axis of Evil speech”) on January 29, 2002.
Time magazine notes it was in March, 2002, that Bush poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and spaketh: “
This, of course, directly contradicts Bush’s statement of May 23, 2002: “I have no war plans on my desk.”
And these are but just a few of the glaring discrepancies in the Bush v. Iraq saga.
So, who’s lying — Time magazine or Bush? (So far, we haven’t heard Bush demand a retraction of the “
What’s more, on September 19, 2001 — just eight days after the attacks — an article in the Wall Street Journal was lost amidst the overwhelming volume of Ground-Zero reports — and has since been conveniently forgotten:
U.S. Officials Discount Any Role by Iraq in Terrorist AttacksU.S. officials said there is no evidence Iraq had a role in last Tuesday’s attacks in the U.S. or that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein helped prime suspect Osama bin Laden.
The article is available online only to subscribers of the Wall Street Journal; an archived copy, however, is available from the LBO-Talk Archive.
No sense in contributing to further information overload.
I promise, we will delve into all these things in the near future; for the moment, just concentrate on George Pataki’s further propagation of the Saddam-9-11 “connection” myth, and the overwhelming body of evidence that contradicts this pervasive propaganda.
Every faction of the war-support group has its own justification for attacking Iraq. Lately, it’s been “Iraqi liberation.” But you need to remember, always, in the forefront of your mind, that it all began with the gossamer-thin fantasy of blaming Iraq - with no evidence whatsoever — for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001.
Don’t ever forget that. And don’t let them get away with this lie. To give them a free pass is to dishonor the memory of our fallen brothers and sisters — whether they met their end on 9-11, or during the most recent shoot-out in the streets of Baghdad.
It dishonors them because you are allowing these men, women, and children to be used as justification for Bush’s war against a people who had nothing to do with their deaths.
Governor Pataki can be reached by snail mail:
Governor George E. Pataki
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
…or by e-mail, using the form at this URL: http://161.11.3.75/
Should you be so moved as to inform the governor of his error (and especially if you have never before written to a public official), please refrain from personal attacks, sarcasm, or other displays of emotion. Keep it simple, professional, and to-the-point.
I don’t intend to insult anyone’s intelligence, but I am aware that a good number of my readers are just getting their toes wet in the big, wide ocean of politics, and may be tempted to write something scathingly brutal.
Take my advice: Don’t do it. If you have to get your anger out, rant all you want on a piece of paper, then burn it — and start writing the letter you’re actually going to send.
If you need tips on getting started with your first letter of protest, either send me a private message, or leave a comment. I won’t tell you what to write, but I’ll be glad to help you with form.
That the news was released at all, by the Czech government in late October, 2001, must have come as a welcome surprise to the Bush administration — even though the Bush admin claimed to have known about the meeting already.
Ironically, the U.S. botched its own chance of using the story to bolster its case of an Iraq-al-Qaeda connection, after “FBI and CIA analysts who went over thousands of travel records concluded that ‘there was no evidence Atta left or returned to the U.S.’ at the time he was supposed to be in Prague.”
TRUNCATED. Sorry about that!
Tweet This Post!
Time magazine reports that the president poked his head into the office of Condoleezza Rice, his national security adviser, in March 2002 and told three senators sitting there: “[Expletive deleted] Saddam. We’re taking him out.”
Now, that’s just wrong. Georgie would never say “expletive deleted.” Heck, he probably couldn’t even pronounce the word “expletive.” What he really said was, “
That word, he can pronounce. Just ask Al Hunt. In fact, you’d be surprised at some of the two-syllable words Georgie can pronounce, with very little effort.
What do you mean, I missed the point of the article? As they say in Texas, not hardly. You think the idea of invading Iraq — inspections be damned — just popped into Little Georgie’s head in March of 2002?
Haven’t you been listening? The plans have been in the works for ages; Wolfowitz’s people finally put it on paper in early 1992, and the newly-formed PNAC presented the plan to Bill Clinton in 1998.
Hey, don’t get on Bill’s case — King George I had plenty of opportunity to take out Saddam, and declined. The momentum from the “win” in Kuwait would have been enough to garner support both at home and abroad — and might have even won Poppy another four years in office.
(Come to think of it, if we’d known all along Iraq was such a threat, why didn’t Little George make it a major talking point of Campaign 2000?)
And don’t give me that tired old excuse that congressional Democrats wouldn’t let George I act on his own. The CIA director-cum-Veep and his ex-boss waged unconscionable war, trained, funded, and armed terrorists (hint: initials include OBL and SH), and installed puppet dictators throughout the Mideast and Latin America without so much as a “screw you” to Congress or the American people, for far less legal or ethical reasons (and with far more disastrous results) than Poppy could have armed himself with.
(And they accuse peaceniks of “aiding and comforting the enemy”?)
So don’t try to feed me that old line about Bush I being “prevented” from doing any damned thing he wanted.
What Poppy did do was miss his window of opportunity — and the neo-cons had to wait for Junior to hit the trifecta.
So, the big, whoop-de-doo Franks “revelation” is old news — at least to those of us who have been paying attention.
Still, one wonders if Georgie Boy has fingers enough to plug any more leaks.
Tweet This Post!
First, take a gander at the photos of our fearless leaders in The Bush War Room. Keep that window open, then come back.
Either someone at ABC News has a ripping sense of humor, or there simply are no photographs of the militants in charge of the Iraqi slaughter even remotely resembling homo sapiens.
Dubya is cross-eyed and slack-jawed. ‘Nuff said.
Unka Dick “Dick” Cheney looks the same as always — like a snarling bowling ball.
Colin Powell looks like he’s about to vomit. (Perhaps the gravity of his own sudden hard turn to the right has had the same effect as the last gut-wrenching curve on Disney World’s Space Mountain.)
Don Rumsfeld? There’s never been a decent picture of Rummy. This is not the worst. Pass.
Condi Rice: What unseen matter has caused her skull to succumb to such a severe gravitational pull? (I also like Condi’s black-and-white background pic, behind Dubya in the uppermost image — although it drives me mad not to know whether she’s waving, saluting, or flipping somebody the bird.)
George Tenet, you’re looking more and more like J. Edgar Hoover every day. Here, take my copy of the latest Vicky’s Secret catalogue — there’s a sale on fishnets.
Andy Card appears constipated.
Tom Ridge either just woke up, or has finally caught the parked car he’s been chasing.
Franks & Downing: Has anyone ever seen these two in the same picture together? I think they’re either the same person, or were separated at birth. In any case, they both appear to be dozing off.
Finally, the photo of Howie Schmidt — director of the Office of Cyber Security — is broken. How appropriate!
Tweet This Post!
Bad Behavior has blocked 1412 access attempts in the last 7 days.
