The Ghost of Howard Beale

2004-11-08T14:04:00.000-05:00

So the assault on Fallujah begins... and no one bothers to ask why now, instead of two weeks or a month or two months ago.

Of course the answer is obviously, "So it won't screw up Bush's election chances if it doesn't go as planned", but no one in Big Media seems to have the balls to say it.

But what else is new?

2004-11-06T11:15:00.000-05:00

The shape of things to come, courtesy Greil Marcus.

2004-11-04T11:31:00.000-05:00

Good Christ. Bush just claimed with a straight face that 125,000 Iraqi troops would be trained and ready by (Iraqi) election time.

Same as it ever was, same as it ever was...

2004-11-04T11:24:00.000-05:00

In response to the first thing Bush was asked at his press conference this afternoon:

Now that I have the will of the people behind me, I'm going to start enforceing the 'one question' rule. That was three questions.

He may have been joking, but he wasn't smiling.

Oh, and when asked what kinds of judges he might appoint to the Supreme Court he said, "Look at my record."

I feel ill.

2004-11-03T10:20:00.000-05:00

More on the popular vote:

Four years ago, the turnout was about 105 million. Right now, the total this time around seems to be about 113 million.

Given all the anecdotal evidence of new registrations, stupidly long lines, people voting after midnight etc. etc., does this even remotely make sense? An increase of eight million voters probably isn't much above demographic shift and population growth (population growth would have been about 13 million people since 2000; and about 16 million kids would have become of voting age since 2000).

By my very rough math, that means the turnout percentage basically didn't budge from 2000's 50%-ish.

So again I ask: what happened to the huge GOTV efforts? What happened to that record voter turnout?

2004-11-03T04:25:00.002-05:00

I think the word I'm searching for is "desolation".

Here's my question to sleep on: how can the much-circulated exit poll numbers have been so wrong about the presidential race, but pretty much nail all the Senate races, including wins by Thune, Bunning and Salazar?

No, two questions: what happened to the estimated 120 million voter turnout?

2004-11-02T09:02:00.000-05:00

Bush is making one last campaign stop in Ohio this morning.

Translation: Not even Jeb is gonna be able to steal Florida for us this time...

2004-11-02T07:44:00.000-05:00

And so it begins... the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has OK'ed challengers in Ohio polling places.

Sigh. Let's hope there's no violence -- as Carville said on CNN this morning, African-American voters are liable to get "testy" if their rights are challenged.

2004-11-01T18:11:00.000-05:00

OK, here's my EV prediction:

Kerry 360
Bush 178

That's Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Arkansas, New Mexico, Iowa, Hawaii, Colorado and Nevada all Kerry...

...as well as Virgina, West Virginia and Missouri as the surprises, also Kerry.

In other words, an ass-whuppin'.

2004-11-01T10:23:00.000-05:00

Theresa LaPore, designer of the world famous butterfly ballot, has a new bag. This time 'round, instead of subverting people's right to vote, she's decided to go after press freedom instead.

Too bad Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS is already taken as a nickname.

2004-11-01T10:12:00.000-05:00

As Google News shows, Osama's tape still dominates the mediasphere (3500+ stories).

The polls have already put lie to the "this can only help Bush" meme. So without a bin Laden bounce, Cheney/Bush is forced to resort to the usual.

2004-11-01T10:09:00.000-05:00

Why the hell do I watch this crap? Why do I put myself through this?

CNN's Kelly Wallace just described Kerry going to church for All-Saints Day this morning as "a last-ditch attempt to court Catholic voters".

No, it can't be a genuine expression of faith. That's George "Avoids Going to Church Like He Was a Vampire" Bush's schtick!

2004-11-01T09:58:00.000-05:00

Another South American election, another win by a 'leftist' -- and of course by 'leftist' what they mean is 'not approved by traditional US foreign policy'.

Despite the calls from Big Media that another socialist has won in the south, Uruguay wasn't exactly a capitalist paradise, nor is Vazquez a wannabe Commie. The country has long had social policies which would be called 'socialist' up here, while among his campaign promises, Vazquez indicated he would curb spending to help alleviate the current recession.

Don't you hate it when the facts don't fit the script?

2004-11-01T09:49:00.000-05:00

CNN's reporting that Rehnquist didn't make it in to work today.

One more reason to make sure Bush doesn't get another term, although it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to cram in a recess appointment for Rehnquist even when (OK... if) he loses tomorrow.

2004-11-01T09:46:00.000-05:00

So not only have we topped 1000 fatalities in Iraq, we've topped 100 criminal investigations... lovely.

2004-10-29T11:59:00.000-04:00

Smell the desperation! The IRS has apparently threatened the NAACP with the loss of their tax-exempt status because their chairman, Julian Bond, said mean things about Li'l Bushie.

"They don't say I crossed any partisan lines -- they just said I criticized the president," Bond told the newspaper. "I am shocked at this effort to silence our group before the election."

2004-10-29T08:47:00.000-04:00

Scottie Mac has given up obfuscation on al Qaaqa, and jumped straight to ignoring questions altogether. It's a more honest approach, at least:

Q Can I ask you about Rudy Giuliani, as you know, was on the "Today Show" this morning, and he said, no matter how you try to blame it on the President, the actual responsibility for it, meaning the weapons that went missing, really would be for the troops that were there -- did they search carefully enough -- did they search carefully enough? Does the President support Rudy Giuliani placing this blame on the troops?

MR. McCLELLAN: He's talking about how we don't know the facts, we don't know what happened to these explosives. We know that we have seized and destroyed more than 400,000 munitions from some 10,000 caches spread all throughout Iraq. But when you look at the regime and you look at the way they operate, it is a likely possibility that they were removed prior to our forces arriving there. We don't know -- Senator Kerry shows that he will say anything for his own political advantage. And I think this goes to an issue that the American people will be looking at very closely. And that's, who can you trust to lead this nation forward on the big priorities? A President can't jump to conclusions without knowing the facts.

2004-10-29T08:04:00.000-04:00

Looks like the Bush bulge was -- and is? -- really there after all.

Spinal stimulator to treat chronic pain, perhaps?

2004-10-29T07:35:00.000-04:00

On CNN's morning show, the Bush spokesman is down to flat-out lying now about al Qaaqa, not to mention pathetic desperation. "We don't know know where the footage was taken [lie], these are the very weapons Kerry said weren't there [lie], and besides the whole country was crawling with this stuff [umm... doesn't that make it worse?]"

When even Soledad O'-Freakin'-Brien isn't buying what you're selling, it's time to go into a new line of work...

2004-10-28T18:34:00.000-04:00

ABC Nightly News is running the KSTP footage, including an interview with an expert who identifies the opened barrels as containing HMX, and that the sealed bunkers would only have contained the missing explosives -- otherwise there would have been no reason to seal them.

2004-10-28T17:57:00.000-04:00

More from KSTP: They have footage of unbroken IAEA seals at al Qaaqa.

Soooo... the explosives had not yet been looted as of April 18.

Whoops.

Meanwhile, Lou Dobbs leads with the 'Russian special forces' crap (albeit to undercut it without debunking it)... and they don't mention the KSTP report.

Double whoops.

2004-10-28T13:14:00.000-04:00

I can't decide whether this is screamingly funny, or just kinda sad.

The district said Halloween celebrations and children dressed in Halloween costumes might be offensive to real witches.

"Witches with pointy noses and things like that are not respective symbols of the Wiccan religion and so we want to be respectful of that," Hansen said.

2004-10-28T11:52:00.000-04:00

Too bad this is a civil suit... mind you, Li'l Bushie would just pardon 'em all on his way out the door anyway.

Four former Guantanamo detainees yesterday sued Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld and 10 others in the military chain of command overseeing the American interrogation prison in Cuba, alleging that the officials are personally responsible for illegal acts of prolonged arbitrary detention and torture.

The lawsuit, believed to be the first of its kind by former detainees who have since been released from the prison, seeks $10 million for each of the men to be paid by the officials out of their own pockets as compensation for their role in the alleged abuses.

Damn those trial lawyers! Always after a cheap buck! They're gonna drive up the cost of torture for the rest of us.

"This case is not about the money," Eric Lewis, a lawyer for the detainees, said at a press conference yesterday. "It is about accountability. Torture is un-American. Arbitrary detention is un-American. And what these young men have suffered, and continue to suffer, is something for which we and the American justice system need to hold these people accountable."

2004-10-28T10:35:00.000-04:00

That sound you just heard was Karl Rove throwing up in his mouth.*

During that trip, members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labelled "explosives." Usually it took just the snap of a bolt cutter to get into the bunkers and see the material identified by the 101st as detonation cords.

"We can stick it in those and make some good bombs." a soldier told our crew.

There were what appeared to be fuses for bombs. They also found bags of material men from the 101st couldn't identify, but box after box was clearly marked "explosive."

In one bunker, there were boxes marked with the name "Al Qaqaa", the munitions plant where tons of explosives allegedly went missing.

Once the doors to the bunkers were opened, they weren't secured. They were left open when the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew and the military went back to their base.

* - A little nod to the Sports Guy there, the happiest man on the face of the earth today. If he's not gonna use the line, somebody's got to...

2004-10-27T20:35:00.000-04:00

So here's what I want to know... clearly, Hitch is experiencing blackouts when he drinks. So was he likkered up when he wrote the Bush endorsement, or the Kerry one?

2004-10-27T19:49:00.000-04:00

Insert 'kaka - Qaqaa' pun here.

"The officials that were inside this facility (Al-Qaqaa) beforehand confirm that not even a shred of paper left it before the fall and I spoke to them about it and they even issued certified statements to this effect which the US-led coalition was aware of."

He said officials at Al-Qaqaa, including its general director, whom he refused to name, made contact with US troops before the fall in an effort to get them to provide security for the site.

If this weren't so perfectly emblematic of the Pub's prosecution of the war (not to mention Bush's entire administration) their evasions and non-denial denials might be gaining some traction.

But they aren't.

It's simple, really. Everyone in Washington knows what no one is saying -- Bush is toast -- so there's no reason to suck up to the Pubs any more by paying anything more than lip service to their crap.

2004-10-27T19:41:00.000-04:00

Who says the nasty liberal media doesn't report anything good from Iraq? Here's a touching photo of a young boy finding his lost bike...

2004-10-24T17:41:00.000-04:00

Triumph finds Poop Valhalla.

2004-10-17T10:46:00.000-04:00

Let's call this post the "Weekend Wrap-up", where I string together completely unrelated topics with some sort of tenuous bond, just so I don't have to post them separately. Yay me!

The amazing thing I'm finding about the tail end of this election cycle is the way it's flushing all the crap in the system to the surface. It's like the Pubs are experiencing a collective (and, really, long overdue) political enema.

Take the Sinclair Group -- please. (Ba-dum bup.) Their stock price continues to head south in the wake of their decision to force their stations to broadcast a Swift Bunnies for Low-Fat Truth Substitutes anti-Kerry doc. Under a Kerry FCC, you have to think Sinclair is going to be in for some serious pain, up to and including getting their broadcast licenses stripped.

Or about how about the Mary Cheney 'controversy'? Imagine all the people who you never would have realized were closet homophobes if they hadn't reacted to the word 'lesbian' like it was an obscenity. Scottie Mac, for instance:

I cannot think of a single instance where a presidential candidate has talked about his opponent's child in such a way.

OK, maybe that one isn't a big shock.

Here's a hint to the dolts in Big Media being led around by the, um, nose on this one. When even Bill Buckley isn't buying what the Pubs are selling here, it must be pretty ripe. Any argument which presents Gary Bauer as the voice of reason and tolerance is a special one indeed.

And remember, the rule of thumb with any Pub talking point is that it actually applies far more accurately to them than to their opponents. So when Lynne Cheney says:

What a cheap and tawdry political trick.

we know who's really wearing the ratty boa and hooker heels here. Right, Lynne?

2004-10-17T10:43:00.000-04:00

Eleven hundred. Dammit. To quote the Prophet, "And Jesus wept, I think, is the next verse."

2004-10-17T10:33:00.000-04:00

Huh. Looks like the revolution will be televised after all.

For those of you who missed it, Jon Stewart was on Crossfire Friday. He... well, it was... it wasn't pretty, that's for sure. Jon pretty much made Tucker his beeyotch, with a couple of backhand slaps left for Begala as well. I have high hopes, in fact, that Carlson slunk back to his dressing room after the show, wept quietly and contemplated suicide, or at least a radical change in career direction (and fashion sense).

Just go watch it. And pay attention to the audience reaction. Even if the hosts couldn't/wouldn't acknowledge what Stewart was saying, the folks in the cheap seats were with him 100%.

2004-10-10T11:19:00.000-04:00

Atrios lays into Daniel Okrent, 'public' editor of the Senile Old Lady, and deservedly so.

I don't believe Okrent's in the tank... I just think he's in over his head. His is an old school publishing background, and the industry is undergoing seismic shifts that have already left him behind, and will leave him further in the dust over the next few years.

For a little more info on what happened here, read the comment from Steve from SF. There really is no defense for Nagourney's action, nor for Okrent's facilitating Nagourney's vendetta.

2004-10-09T21:44:00.000-04:00

Reading Mickey Kaus is like picking at a scab. I just can't help myself sometimes.

This one is, in a nutshell, everything that is wrong and fake and scummy about him.

Kerry's tortured, intellectually bogus answer on abortion--'I think it's murder but I would never base legislation on morality!'--suggests that one of my co-watchers was right to think the way to trip him up is on "smaller," discrete values questions like abortion and capital punishment. Update: Saletan has more detail on why Kerry's abortion answer was "awful" politicking.

I thought Kerry's answer was probably bad politics too. What it most emphatically wasn't was "tortured (and) intellectually bogus." It was conflicted, sure -- which is where the bad politics comes in -- but it was also incredibly honest, which is why it must have given Kaus a rash.

Of course legislation is based on morality. Rape is wrong, therefore it is illegal. But that's not what Kerry said. Kerry's point is that legislation cannot be based on his individual morality. It must reflect the morality of the country and the time. If, as leader of the country, he can bring enough people around to his way of thinking, great. If not, he's got to go with the flow.

What were LBJ's personal feelings on civil rights? It doesn't matter. He did what was unquestionably the right thing. That was the point Kerry was making. His personal morality can inform his actions as a leader, but it must not inform his actions as president. There is a distinction between the two that is lost on Kaus (not to mention Bush).

I had a great snark line about Mickey and being intellectually bogus, but fuck it. Kaus is wrong, but more than that. He's lost. He's not just wrong, he is incapable of being right on this. It's just not part of his self-image. Kaus is so desperate to be the journo's journo that a statement like Kerry's ends up being completely alien to him. It doesn't compute. He can't let himself recognize it.

No wonder Kaus hates him so much. If a guy like Kerry is actually capable of being genuine, then Kaus' pose is a sham. And every time Kerry rubs Kaus' nose in it by being genuine, the bile rises just a little bit higher in Kaus' throat, and the life he has chosen for himself seems a little more hollow.

But of course, thinking something like that just makes me 'naive'. Everything a politican says is a priori an angle, an attempt to gain a vote from somebody somewhere, and I'm just a sucker for falling for it.

Right, Mickey?

2004-10-09T21:04:00.000-04:00

Slowly, the fog is lifting. Mark Halperin, ABC News bigwig and often the brain behind The Note, states the bleedin' obvious: if one side is lying more than the other, it's OK, nay, mandatory, to point that out.

Needless to say, the Pubs are outraged, with Drudge taking point.

Of course they're outraged. If Big Media starts doing something remotely resembling their job, the Pubs could slip to third party status. Level the playing field, and they'll fall off it.

It's yet another baby step, but it's a good one. Let's hope the faux indignation-fueled backlash doesn't turn it into yet another round of the Hokey Pokey.

2004-10-09T19:00:00.000-04:00

Interesting. Apparently, Bush's bizarro interpretation of the Dred Scott decision during the debate was actually religious right code for Roe v. Wade.

So while 90% of the country thought Bush was just rambling, his hard-core base was hearing, "I'll appoint a Supreme Justice who will help make abortion illegal again."

Moderates, are you listening?

2004-10-09T08:59:00.000-04:00

I meant to blog this last night, but it got lost in the jumble of thoughts and reactions...

Bush's "Need wood?" joke is clearly an attempt to woo Wonkette and her cult. There's just no other logical explanation for such an obvious (*cough*) straight line.

2004-10-09T08:41:00.000-04:00

Yee-owch. The morning-after polls on who won the debate:

CNN -- Kerry 76%, Bush 22%
MSNBC -- Kerry 66%, Bush 34% (and check the head shot they used for Bush!)
Foxnews -- Kerry 46%, Bush 53%

If the best the Foxnews poll can muster is basically a tie, you know Bush got schooled.

Of course these are online poll on the "internets"... maybe the geeks just got snippy over Bush's inner Luddite shining through.

2004-10-08T22:37:00.000-04:00

I think it's clear that the Bush team either got lucky, or knew exactly what it was doing, when they agreed to the debate schedule. Bush cannot talk about Iraq anymore without sounding like he's just a couple of short steps from hopping on a street corner soap box and ranting until he's hoarse.

2004-10-08T22:32:00.000-04:00

No, wait, it's not quite over. Kerry got one final chance to explain the $87 billion vote... and he flubs it. D'oh. The "I didn't want to supply a slush fund to Halliburton" line was a good one, but dammit, it's got no context around it.

How hard is this? "There were two bills before Congress to fund our troops. One just rang up the deficit even further -- that was the president's bill, the one I voted against. The other one, the one I voted for, scaled back the tax cut to the rich to pay for that body armor, and that humvee armor."

After that Kerry can natter on about who made the bigger mistake and Halliburton slush funds all he wants.

2004-10-08T22:28:00.000-04:00

The final questions: Kerry gets abortion, and Bush gets asked to fess up to some mistakes.

Kerry directly addresses his question, possibly making a tactical error in doing so.

Bush dodges his, refusing to admit to any specific mistake ever and essentially claiming that his only boo-boos were in appointing a few people who he won't name to spare their feelings.

I think that about sums it up.

2004-10-08T22:25:00.000-04:00

Now, was Bush genuinely baffled by Kerry daring to express some nuance on the abortion issue, or was he just trying to score a cheap shot? Does it even matter?

2004-10-08T22:20:00.000-04:00

Bush has definitely recovered from his earlier stridency. Interesting that it was Iraq that so got his back up. Is even Bush succumbing to some cognitive dissonance?

2004-10-08T22:17:00.000-04:00

Kerry's response on the stem cell question was very strong, despite (or maybe even because of) his stutters. And bonus points to Kerry for invalidating Bush's opening line about 'destroying life' before he even spoke it, by noting all the frozen embryos set for destruction anyway that could be harvested.

2004-10-08T22:10:00.000-04:00

Watching the crowd again... they seem a little less hostile to Bush (he's talking about the Patriot Act at the moment).

The crowd still seems more receptive to Kerry, though.

2004-10-08T22:07:00.000-04:00

Bush, twenty minutes ago: "You didn't even show up to vote on medical liability reform!"

Bush, now: "He opposed medical liability reform!"

Umm, which is it? Did Kerry oppose it, or did he simply not vote on it?

2004-10-08T22:04:00.000-04:00

One thing Kerry is doing well is simply having a short-term memory. A few times tonight he's related one answer back to a previous question, and correctly addressed the person who asked the original question in his response (i.e., on Bush walking away from Kyoto: "You wondered why people around the world don't like us, Nikki?")

He's also bringing things home by using Missouri as a specific example of things he's talking about.

Bush, meanwhile, doesn't seem like he's even trying to connect with the audience.

2004-10-08T22:02:00.000-04:00

Kerry's "don't pay attention to labels, pay attention to results" refrain could be a keeper.

2004-10-08T22:01:00.000-04:00

I just threw up in my mouth. Bush: "I guess you could say I've been a good steward of the land."

2004-10-08T21:55:00.000-04:00

Kerry seems to be running a decent campaign as Clinton's veep... not only is he pledging to restore the Clinton-era economy and name-dropping Bob Rubin, he actually got the first real laugh of the night by saying only three people in the room would have their taxes go up under his plan: him, Bush, "and sorry, Charles, you too."

And Bush claiming that Kerry isn't credible when he talks about balancing budgets kinda seems a little hollow. "Look at the record of the man running for president!"

How about you look in the mirror instead?

2004-10-08T21:49:00.000-04:00

Bush is doing better in round two. He seems to have gotten his feet under him, and actually held his own in the tort reform tilt.

He's still gusting towards shrill in his tone and body language, however.

2004-10-08T21:40:00.000-04:00

I'd be curious as to the opinion of professional jury-watchers to this debate, because I'm watching the crowd watch Bush talk, and man, do they not look happy.

When Kerry talks, meanwhile, they look at least thoughtful. Heck, I'm seeing a couple of people actually glance over at Bush to see how he's twitching when Kerry is speaking. Not that I know what I'm talking about, but Bush seems to be losing this crowd big-time.

2004-10-08T21:38:00.000-04:00

Round one -- Iraq -- is over. I'm not sure who won, but Bush certainly acted and sounded like he lost, so I'll bow to his judgement.

2004-10-08T21:36:00.000-04:00

"I don't see how you can win in Iraq if you don't believe we should have been there in the first place."

And that's why you're not fit to be president, George. You can't grasp relatively simple concepts like that.

2004-10-08T21:35:00.000-04:00

The shot of Bush listening to Kerry talk about his 'tax gap' gaffe is just brutal. He's blinking at about 120 bpm.

2004-10-08T21:29:00.000-04:00

The draft question presented an interesting contrast. Bush clearly had a set answer ready -- not only did it last exactly 1 minute 59 seconds, but Bush seemed far more comfortable saying it.

And then he pissed it all away by fighting with Charles Gibson over having a follow-up, even as Gibson was agreeing to allow the follow-up.

I'm starting to wonder how Bush is going to last the hour without taking a swing at Kerry. He seems that on edge.

2004-10-08T21:26:00.000-04:00

They just cut to Bush, listening to Kerry talk about Iran and North Korea, and I swear to God he started to develop a twitch in his left eye. And he starts off his rebuttal with a lead balloon of a joke: "That answer almost made me want to scowl."

Wow.

2004-10-08T21:20:00.000-04:00

We're about 20 minutes in, and Bush has been -- dare I say? -- shrill for pretty much the entire debate. His tone of voice is stressed and raw, his body language is agitated, and he basically sounds like a guy feeling the sand crumbling under him.

Bush is also jumping in for after-rebuttals without waiting for Gibson to approve it.

Meanwhile Kerry is calm and composed, while punching it up when he needs to. "It's the military's job to win the war. It's the president's job to win the peace."

Exactly one guy on stage is looking remotely presidential, and exactly one guy on stage is looking like the bunco squad is closing in on shutting down his pyramid scheme.

2004-10-08T21:17:00.000-04:00

Bush is still babbling about WMDs. Keep bringing it up, Li'l Bushie. Keep clarifying to everyone just how divorced you are from reality. Schmuck.

2004-10-08T21:13:00.000-04:00

Bush: "That's the kind of mind-set that says sanctions were working."

Ummm, the sanctions worked, dumbass. Saddam had no WMDs.

And Kerry called him on it in his rebuttal. Hee!

2004-10-08T21:09:00.000-04:00

Bush: "In the old days, if we saw a threat, we could deal with it if we felt like it or not." Say WHAT????? When has the US ever sat on its hands when faced with a threat?

He's already losing it. Wow.

2004-10-08T21:02:00.000-04:00

One minute in, and Bush is grinding his teeth listening to Kerry. This could be good...

2004-10-08T21:01:00.000-04:00

I'm actually home and awake, so what the heck -- let's real-time the second debate.

And just for fun, I'll watch it on Fox.

2004-10-02T16:46:00.000-04:00

So this is, what, the 623rd terrorism czar of one type or another to resign from the Bush administration?

Pretty soon they're going to be down to Sgt. Slaughter and some 17-year-old kid with the handle 'saddammit102' for the terrorism and cyber-terrorism czar posts... everyone else will have quit.

2004-10-02T11:02:00.000-04:00

Lowered expectations strike again.

JMM has the full blow-by-blow on this ridiculous fake Fox story about a Kerry campaign stop. But Fox, of course, can get away with it. After all, it's only Fox, right?

Unlike a 'respected' news institution like, say, CBS, who had a reputation that it was possible to tarnish, Fox could run doctored nudie pics of Teresa and no one would bat an eye.

Interesting disparity, no?

2004-10-01T15:55:00.000-04:00

Well, this was inevitable. Maybe the Bill of Rights isn't quite obsolete just yet.

2004-10-01T15:37:00.000-04:00

Scottie Mac, fibber:

Q What is a global test? Do you know what that means?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think Senator Kerry was talking about how he would leave decisions like this to other countries.

That's bullshit. And McClellan, unless he's clinically insane, knows it's bullshit. Kerry was pretty clearly talking about the US taking actions that could be justified to our allies (not to mention ourselves), not letting them determine our actions.

Terry Holt, Ed Gillespie... the Pub truth-wrecking crew pull this all the time. They say things they cannot possibly believe, not and be capable of dressing themselves in the morning. And nobody ever calls them on it, other than Jon Stewart every once in a while.

If anything's got to stop, it's that.

2004-10-01T14:38:00.000-04:00

Anatomy of an irony:

Atrios, among others, are harping on this rather odd statement by Bush regarding Kerry's plans to boost homeland security:

I don't think we want to get to how he's going to pay for all these promises.

but no one seems to be getting just how funny it is.

The biggest mistake Kerry has made in this campaign is his "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it" bit of verbal kaka. But the problem with it was simply that it was badly phrased, not that it wasn't true. There were two funding bills before the Senate, and Kerry voted for the fiscally responsible one, not Bush's "we'll figure out a way to pay for it later" one.

Had Kerry just bothered to explain that -- and it's not nearly as complex as the pundits wish it was -- he wouldn't have been such an easy target on the subject for the last six months.

But here's the irony. Kerry takes crap from the Bush campaign for months on end, up to and including in this debate, because he chose to back the fiscally responsible bill to finance the war. Then, in the same debate, Bush tries to paint Kerry as the fiscally irresponsible one for wanting more effort put into homeland security.

Yeah, I know, business as usual for the Pubs. But it's exactly this sort of internal contradiction that should be the final nail in Bush's electoral coffin, if only Big Media would get off its ass and point them out.

2004-10-01T01:52:00.000-04:00

And... I'm back.

Post-debate analysis: Kerry, pretty handily. For once the CW and I agree. My favorite bit, though, was Bush acting like a six-year-old when he was able to correctly use the word 'denigrate' in a sentence, and then proudly using it again and again for the next ten minutes. Dubya, in a nutshell.

Really, the turning point in the debate was the brief moment of humanity that crept it when the two candidates talked about their kids. From that moment on, Kerry loosened up and just hammered on poor Li'l Bushie.

Sully gets the line of the night though:

No president who has presided over Abu Ghraib should ever say he wants to put anyone on a leash.

2004-09-08T07:40:00.000-04:00

Regarding Cheney's comments:

Contrary to the CW, I think an attack before the election is less likely than an attack immediately following the election.

Much as al Qaeda might have some preference for one administration over another, they know that the reactions of the American public are unpredictable. Besides, they aren't interested in short-term regime chnage, they want to destroy the entire American political structure. And the best way to do that is to undermine the public's confidence in its choices.

So no matter who wins in November, al Qaeda will want America to think it made the wrong choice.

And now, thanks to Cheney's attack, I know he believes that too.

2004-09-06T20:02:00.000-04:00

Is there some saying about reaping petards in a whirlwind?

'Cause if not, there should be.

2004-09-04T13:31:00.000-04:00

Posting is going to be very sparse for the next while, and then non-existant for 10 days or so while I attend to business.

2004-09-02T14:31:00.000-04:00

It's official -- the DoJ has packed it in:

The Justice Department folded its hand in the nation's first post-Sept. 11 terrorism trial late Tuesday, saying last year's trial was so riddled with prosecutorial errors, there was no choice but to toss out the terrorism convictions.

I'd say this was the Bush administration in microcosm, except that the DoJ actually admitted they fucked up.

2004-09-02T14:21:00.000-04:00

Sully and Captain Bow-Tie are one thing... but Tony Blair? That's an awfully big rat to be fleeing the ship.

Just don't tell the guys who slapped this site together... it'd break their little hearts.

2004-09-02T08:38:00.000-04:00

Interesting... according to JMM, Dan Rather has a 60 Minutes interview in the can with Ben Barnes -- the man who jumped Li'l Bushie to the front of the line for TANG service.

I'm curious to see when they run it.

UPDATE: Drum says it'll be on 60 Minutes II next Wednesday. Set your TiVos.

2004-08-31T19:49:00.000-04:00

I just added Billy Beck's blog to my list, after stumbling across a post of his via DenBeste's virtual seppuko, via Sully.

Some history -- Billy was the guru-in-residence of the anarchist/libertarian site American Liberty, which has since closed up shop. I was on under my Anton Sirius nom de net. I pissed Billy off with something-or-another (Billy isn't hard to piss off), and he gave the mod a 'me or him' ultimatum.

Exeunt Anton. (And, after a suitable delay, me back on the board under another name...)

I'd forgotten how good a writer he is. I mean, damn. I guarantee you will not agree with everything he says or believes, but he is absolutely worth reading.

(Translation: someone below, in one of my rare comments, couldn't figure out if I was a Kerry supporter or not. It's nice that it wasn't clear, since I'm not -- Bush must go, and since I started this blog in January the focus has been mostly anti-Bush when it wasn't anti-Big Media. Once Bush is evicted, that emphasis will most definitely change... consider my trip down memory lane a bit of foreshadowing, if not optimism.)

2004-08-31T09:48:00.000-04:00

I'm not going to bother backtracking for everything I missed while Blogger was being a little beeyotch, but this:

The president who has campaigned for months as the candidate who can win the war on terror said in an interview broadcast Monday that he doesn't think such a war ever could be won.

"I don't think you can win it," Bush said in the interview on NBC's Today show. "But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."

cannot be allowed to slide down the memory hole.

Yes, I've heard Scottie Mac's explanation. It doesn't matter. This isn't some cute little Bushism. This is Bush doing exactly what the Pubs claim Kerry does -- being flip-floppy and nuanced.

I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it.

We will win the war on terror, even though I don't think we can win it.

There's no difference.

I can't wait for the Kerry campaign ad. I see something like:

A montage of Bush clips, from right after 9/11 on: "We will win this war because we are good and right and just and God loves us."

Black screen.

Clip from Fox, with date (August 28, 2004). "I don't think you can win it." Fade out.

Tagline: "Don't you deserve a president who believes in America?"

"I'm John Kerry, and you bet your ass I approved this message."

2004-08-31T09:47:00.000-04:00

Stupid, stupid Blogger.

2004-08-25T15:16:00.000-04:00

The bad apples keep multiplying...

An internal Army investigation made public today confirmed that American military intelligence officers were directly involved in the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib facility outside Baghdad.

The report, which implicates 35 military intelligence personnel and civilian contractors in at least 44 instances of abuse, shows a far greater participation by military intelligence than had ever been made public before.

The report concluded that no single cause underlay the abuses at Abu Ghraib, and attributed the problems to individual misconduct, a lack of discipline and leadership failure.

Emphasis mine, of course.

Ole Bob Dole was wondering if there was any blood? There is. The Bush campaign is starting to hemorrhage, and the press' dormant sharky instincts are shaking off the sleep of decades.

Ginsberg has already been thrown overboard... who's next? Scooter? Rummy? Dick himself?

It doesn't matter who gets sacrificed. If that feeding frenzy starts, it isn't going to stop until the first week of November.

2004-08-25T09:13:00.000-04:00

I am shocked -- shocked! -- to discover that John O'Neill is a lying sack of shit.

I mean, who would have thought someone Nixon dug up 30 years ago for the express purpose of running interference against John Kerry would prove to be dishonest?

2004-08-24T15:06:00.000-04:00

Paging Mr. French, Mr. Alfred French... your chickens have come home to roost.

"As a senior assistant district attorney, you know as well as we do that that kind of ridiculous statement would never pass muster in a court of law," veteran Terry Kirsch said of French's account.

"We question your fitness to serve as an enforcer of the law after swearing to facts in a legal affidavit that you do not know to be true," he said.

2004-08-24T09:53:00.000-04:00

On the one hand, this sounds like a practical joke. Bush's acceptance speech being about the great job he's done? G'wan.

On the other hand... what else does he have to talk about? He can't whine about 527s for a full hour.

This speech could end up being the unintentional comedy highlight of the year.

That is, if the punchline wasn't "people are still dying in Iraq".

2004-08-24T09:37:00.000-04:00

I have a vague, dawning sense of hope that the sheer ludicrousness of the Swift Bunnies' charges might finally be the last straw for Big Media.

Atrios has the lead on this one, linking to editorials here and here, pointing to an obvious 'new' line of discussion in USA Today here. That's a fine start.

It's also a good sign that the Swift Bunnies second ad -- the one about Kerry's Winter Soldier testimony -- has been somewhat plowed under by the general controversy.

But they are just tokens. Even if, en masse, the entire staff of CNN rises up and shouts, "The Swift Boat Veterans are lying!", it won't be enough.

The real litmus test will come when the Pubs launch their next smear campaign. Will the media fall back into line? Or will they sneer, "Fool me once, shame on you" in Karl Rove's direction?

His shit don't work if the media don't throw it for him.

2004-08-23T16:35:00.000-04:00

Live from Crawford, it's the Scottie Mac Show!

MR. McCLELLAN: How many times are you going to ask the same question, Deb?

Q You didn't answer.

Three guesses what the question was, first two don't count.

And yes, that was basically the entire gaggle. Reporters asking Scottie if the president condemned the content of the Swift Bunnies' ad, and Scottie Mac repeating the silly "We ask Senator Kerry to join us in condemning free speech from these shadowy groups" spin.

Methinks the Pubs have lost their grip on this particular issue.

2004-08-23T14:00:00.000-04:00

Oh me oh my.

I haven't done any digging on my own yet (because, y'know, I'm the expert on everything) but if what this story on DKos (linked from Democratic Underground) is true, Bush not only did not receive an award from the TANG that everyone gets just for showing up, there's a photo of him wearing a ribbon he was never awarded.

Handy rule of thumb: every Rovian mudslinging campaign is rooted in the terrible knowledge that it better applies to his own candidate, than to their opponent.

Hmmm. What does that say about the 'McCain is crazy' insinuations from 2000?

2004-08-23T11:35:00.000-04:00

Oh Good Lord, Mickey, just give it up already...

Kaus is desperately trying to parse the new pro-Kerry witnesses against the Swift Bunnies to find... well, I don't know what. I doubt Kaus does either:

Fudging Breaks Out: Alert reader A.F. notes close reading reveals that the pro-Kerry eyewitness account of Pat Runyon--like the pro-Kerry eyewitness account of William Rood--contains some seemingly clever wording. In Runyon's case, it fudges the issue of whether Kerry was actually under fire in the incident for which he won his first Purple Heart:

Runyon said Kerry was wounded after one vessel tried to avoid an inspection.

"Lt. Kerry said, 'I'm going to pop a flare, and when I do, I want that engine started,' " Runyon said. But the outboard would not crank. Meanwhile, the sampan's crew steered it to the riverbank, and people started running on the shore. Runyon said shooting broke out.

Somehow, Kerry's weapon stopped firing. Runyon thinks he ran out of ammunition. He said Kerry bent down to pick up another gun and got hit in the arm.

"It wasn't a serious wound," Runyon said, and Kerry was able to start shooting again. When the firefight was over, Runyon said Kerry told him all he felt was a "burning sensation." [Emph. added]

"Shooting broke out"? Shooting by the people on the riverbank, or shooting only by Kerry and his crew? The story leaves the impression there was a two-sided firefight, but it doesn't quite say that, does it? ... Again, the ambiguity may be inadvertent. Or not!

The emphasis, as it says, is all Mickey's. Yup, 'shooting broke out' is a horribly ambiguous phrase. You can parse that puppy until you're blue in the face.

Unfortunately for you, dumbass, "When the firefight was over" is not. Or can you have a fight with only one side involved?

fire·fight n.
An exchange of gunfire, as between infantry units.

Nope, I guess not.

The best part is that Kaus himself uses the word firefight in his sad little summation, but doesn't bother to think through the implications of the word. Or, indeed, even notice that yes, Runyon does quite say that.

Mickey's pretty much begging to be the first one against the wall when the revolution comes, isn't he? I almost have a bit of sympathy for him... the poor guy will starve once his sinecure is ripped out from under him.

2004-08-23T10:51:00.000-04:00

Here's an amusing thought, following up on all of Josh Marshall's 'bitch-slap' talk:

If you strip away all the issues and scandals and blah blah blah... just about every presidential election of the television era has been won by the more dominant-seeming alpha male.

I know it's not a terribly original thought -- or insightful one, for that matter -- but nonetheless, if you pose the mental question, "Who's dick is bigger?" for each of the following:

Kennedy vs. Nixon
Johnson vs. Goldwater
Humphrey vs. Nixon
McGovern vs. Nixon
Carter vs. Ford
Carter vs. Reagan
Mondale vs. Reagan
Dukakis vs. Papa Bush
Clinton vs. Bush
Clinton vs. Dole
Gore vs. Li'l Bushie

...the answer will almost guaranteed be the person who then became president.

Sure, you can argue Kennedy/Nixon, but I think the Marilyn factor settles that debate. Similarly Carter/Ford is basically a coin toss, since they are both pretty Alda-riffic. With hindsight Gore/Bush maybe seems to violate the pattern, but one awkward onstage kiss doesn't counteract a decade of bloodless bureaucracy -- sorry Al.

Which brings us to Kerry/Bush, and all the flightsuit/motorcycle silliness which is designed to appeal directly to our monkey brains. (Otherwise, what's the point of it all?) Cut through the theatrics and just ask yourself this question:

Quien es mas macho? Senor Kerry, o Senor Bushecito?

There's your winner in November.

2004-08-23T09:08:00.000-04:00

I've been making this point on message boards and trying to push it into the memesphere, but I'll state it explicitly (as JMM just did) -- the Swift Bunnies furor is not of Kerry's making.

McCain in 2000. Cleland in 2002. The Rove playbook is exactly the same -- regardless of the particulars of your service, no matter how honorable, it will be targeted, the truth be damned.

Blaming Kerry for bringing it up is absurd. If he hadn't, the Pubs would have unleashed the "What is he trying to hide?" angle of attack (just as they have with Kerry's Senate record.)

In fact this is still the weakest link in the whole charade -- its utter predictability and transparency. The McCain 'Old Tricks' ad is a good start, but the Dems need to keep hammering away at it. It wouldn't matter who Bush was facing; if they served, their service would be dragged through the mud, and if they didn't their lack of service would be derided. Bush could be facing Eisenhower, and the script would be exactly the same.

And for the record: The Swift Bunnies furor is another fairly simple test that Big Media, by and large, is failing.

The SBVFT has zero credibility left. Nada. Every impartial witness who steps forward contradicts them; every piece of documentary evidence produced impeaches their tales.

Any talking head who still pretends this is a 'he said she said' situation is professionally incompetent, and should be fired.

2004-08-22T09:12:00.000-04:00

OK, I've woken up in Bizarro World.

I'm watching Van Odell of the Swift Bunnies on Fox News Sunday getting absolutely destroyed about their lack of documentation to support their positions. Just annihilated. On Fox.

Huh.

2004-08-21T21:52:00.000-04:00

Just for the record, here's Virgina Postrel passing along the most likely explanation for Kerry's Holiday in Cambodia.

(Spoiler: the Swift Bunnies won't like it.)

2004-08-21T16:49:00.000-04:00

Hmm, this sounds familiar.

Back in the day, John Kerry appeared before Congress to report the findings of the Winter Soldier hearings, passing on the first-hand accounts of other soldiers. Even still, he is villified for 'disgracing our boys' and 'accusing everyone there of being war criminals'.

This week, the Lancet published a piece about the ethical violations of US military medics who stayed silent about the abuses at Abu Ghraib, and who even participated in torture.

The response from the DoD Friday? Calling it a "wholesale indictment" of U.S. medical personnel in Iraq.

The more things change...

2004-08-21T14:59:00.000-04:00

A probably futile e-mail to John McCain:

Dear Senator,

I have long been an admirer of yours. Even if our views on a particular issue differed, I had confidence in your essential decency and integrity, as a politician, as a veteran, and as an American.

I was born in 1972, at Camp Le Jeune, so while I'm far too young to have any memories of that conflict I can't pretend to be neutral about the subject of Vietnam. And what I see being done to Senator Kerry by the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, done with the tacit approval of the president, sickens me.

How can we possibly win the war we're fighting now in Iraq, when we can't let go of the one we fought in Vietnam?

I'm asking you to please stand up and be a voice for sanity. This isn't a campaign finance issue, important as that issue is. This is an issue of truth, and integrity. Those smearing Senator Kerry have been proven to be liars, mostly recently by William Rood. They are motivated by nothing but politics, and their lies dishonor not just Sen. Kerry but anyone who has ever served their country with pride and dignity.

And those who stand with the liars, including the president, dishonor them as well.

There is no middle ground here, not when the lies are so vicious, and so damaging to us as a nation. As long as you continue to campaign for the president, you are supporting these liars. The statements of the president and his press secretary make it clear that they will not even denounce them without some political prid pro quo, as cynical a display as I can image. And as long as you support the president and campaign for him, despite your denouncing of the SBVFT, you too are putting cynical political considerations ahead of the truth.

Don't throw your integrity away like this. Not on this issue, of all issues.

We are a country in need of leaders. Please, please, be one now.

Yours truly,

etc. etc.

2004-08-20T21:14:00.000-04:00

Y'know, just a few hours ago I was thinking to myself, "Self, it's too bad there isn't some sort of smoking gun tying the Swift Bunnies for Low-Fat Truth Substitutes (I Can't Believe It's Not Truth!) directly to the Bush campaign..."

Of course the FEC will try hard to ignore this, but the question is, will Big Media ignore it?

Worst. Campaign. Ever.

Any day now, I fully expect a series of 'You don't change horses in mid-stream' ads from these maroons.

UPDATE: And the laughs just keep on coming, thanks to Reuters:

Bush campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel denied any coordination with the Swift Boat group, calling it "a frivolous complaint."

John O'Neill, a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, called it "completely frivolous" and "a direct assault on the First Amendment of the United States."

Proving "coordination" between the campaign and the Swift Boat group could be difficult and time consuming.

Especially when they use the exact same language to defend themselves against the charges... d'oh!

2004-08-20T11:51:00.000-04:00

I am shocked -- shocked! -- that Walter Shapiro doesn't get what's really going on in Fitzgerald v. Media, i.e. the Plame grand jury investigation.

Whoever leaked the name to Cooper, Novak and the rest, is not a 'source' in any reasonable use of the word. The leak was not simply information, it was an invitation to join in a criminal act. Novak accepted the invite. Cooper, to his credit, did not, but is now helping to cover up the crime with his silence.

If someone in the White House had called up some media types and said, "Hey, I'm gonna go set fire to Joe Wilson's house. Wanna come? Don't forget to bring a can of gasoline!", would Cooper still be trying to hide behind the 'protecting his sources' excuse?

The only difference is, of course, that it wasn't Wilson's house that was damaged -- it was our national security interests.

2004-08-20T11:00:00.000-04:00

This post, over at Enemy of the People, hits, as they say, the nail on the head.

So here's the question: who will be the Jack Welch of 2004?

Perversely, and against all logic, my money is on Colin Powell. There's still time to save yourself, Colin! Don't wait for the Ghosts of Generals Past, Present and Future to visit you on Election Eve!

2004-08-20T09:20:00.000-04:00

Once upon a time, an article like this would have been business as usual for the Senile Old Lady, not something noteworthy.

So the Swift Bunnies for Low-Fat Truth Substitutes (I Can't Believe It's Not Truth!) are liars financed by big-time 'Pub campaign contributors. Their PR hired gun is the widow of Bush's former lieutenant governor. This isn't news, really -- their claims stank from day one.

What is news is the NYT deviating from the "he said she said" script of modern-day political coverage. This time, it's "he said, and here's the evidence he's full of shit".

Which is what it should be. And it doesn't matter who's playing the role of 'he' in tonight's production.

Journos (who don't work for Fox) today spend far too much time worried about appearing 'unbiased', and trying not to appear to favor one side or the other. Hence, "he said she said" -- if you give the Hatfields and McCoys equal time, neither can scream bias.

The problem is, from a professional stand-point it doesn't matter whether a journalist is biased towards one political party or the other. It's irrelevant to their job. The only bias that matters is towards the truth. If one side tells a lie, your job is to expose it. If they keep telling lies, you keep exposing them. And if they whine about 'bias', you tell them to quit lying, and you'll quit writing stories about them.

That's what's been forgotten. The current cream of the Republican party, quite simply, are liars. Congenital and unrepentant. And they've fluorished because the media refused to point out their lies.

Hopefully, that's starting to change.

One little quibble about the article:

Asked about the award, Mr. Thurlow said that he did not recall what the citation said but that he believed it had commended him for saving the lives of sailors on a boat hit by a mine. If it did mention enemy fire, he said, that was based on Mr. Kerry's false reports. The actual citation, Mr. Thurlow said, was with an ex-wife with whom he no longer has contact, and he declined to authorize the Navy to release a copy. But a copy obtained by The New York Times indicates "enemy small arms," "automatic weapons fire" and "enemy bullets flying about him." The citation was first reported by The Washington Post on Thursday.

Actually, Thurlow's Bronze Star was first noted on DKos back on the 5th.

2004-08-19T13:55:00.000-04:00

I've adjusted the counter on the left to count US casualties up, rather than counting down to 1000.

A couple of reasons for this -- 1000 is a benchmark, not a goal, and I wanted to make that clear; but more importantly, I realized I probably wasn't going to take it down even when the figure did reach four digits.

2004-08-17T15:06:00.000-04:00

All I can say is, if the Senate Dems bend over for Goss' nomination in the spirit of 'unity' or 'not appearing negative', they should be rounded up and shot:

"The Goss bill tracks current law by stating that the DCI shall “collect, coordinate and direct” the collection of intelligence by the U.S. government—except that the CIA “may not exercise police, subpoena, or law enforcement powers within the United States.”

The bill then adds new language after that clause, however, saying that the ban on domestic law-enforcement operations applies “except as otherwise permitted by law or as directed by the president.”

In effect, one former top U.S. intelligence community official told NEWSWEEK, the language in the Goss bill would enable the president to issue secret findings allowing the CIA to conduct covert operations inside the United States—without even any notification to Congress."

That's right -- Porter thinks it would be a good idea to turn the CIA loose on American citizens at the whim of the President.

I don't give a good goddamn what you think about the War on Terra. The CIA are, basically, scum. They're professional scum, mind you -- that's why we pay them. If they weren't, they wouldn't be of any use to those in power.

If you want a handy pop culture metaphor, CIA spooks are like the Dementors from the latest Harry Potter movie. You might argue about whether they're necessary or not, but you wouldn't want one within a hundred miles of you and yours.

The introduction of this bill alone proves Goss is completely unqualified to head the CIA. If he's that clueless about their very nature, how can he properly lead the department?

2004-08-16T09:11:00.000-04:00

What's that phrase...? Oh yeah. The markets have spoken!

(And, umm, the masses too.)

Oil prices today eased back from a run of record highs after Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, declared victory in a national referendum on his presidency.

As the prospect of political uncertainly in the world's fifth largest oil-producing country receded, the cost of a barrel of crude peaked at a 21-year high of $46.91 (£25.43) in New York before dipping back to $46.21.

With all the predictable 'fraud' bluster coming from the opposition, you'd think the Miami Herald, of all papers, would be on board. But it barely rates a mention, and even then contains more than a few hints of simple denial and sour grapes:

Haydee Deutsch, an opposition leader, said fraud had been committed and that the opposition "has no doubt that we won by an overwhelming majority."

At the opposition headquarters in Caracas, opponents watching the Carrasquero's announcement on television shouted "Fraud! Fraud!"

"This is impossible to swallow," said Jesus Torrealba, another opposition leader.

When even the Miami Herald can see the writing on the wall, it's time to pack it in.

2004-08-15T22:32:00.000-04:00

Here's another take on Kopel's Fahrenheit 9/11 hatchet job, in handy PDF form... a lot more succinct, and less snarky, than mine.

Since it's clear at this point that Kerry's rapid response team is pulling a Linda Richman -- they seem to be neither rapid, nor responsive -- might I suggest that someone over there at least skim the blogosphere? Hit the righties for the RNC attack points, then hit the lefties for the debunking points? How tough would that be, really?

2004-08-15T22:23:00.000-04:00

Whichever side of the conflict you're on, you have to be pleased both with the voter turnout in the Venezuelan recall referendum, and the way it's been handled:

Venezuelans voted in huge numbers on Sunday in a historic referendum on whether to recall left-wing President Hugo Chavez and electoral authorities prolonged voting well into the night.

In an unprecedented turnout, droves of eager voters besieged ballot centers across the world's No. 5 oil exporter and long lines persisted into the evening.

"We have decided to extend the voting period until 12 midnight," senior National Electoral Council official Jorge Rodriguez said.

The latest prolongation followed a previous four-hour extension to cope with the throngs who flooded polling centers, some of them waiting patiently most of the day in the hot sun.

Imagine it. No exit polls -- of any kind -- to taint the process for people who haven't voted yet. Polls left open as long as possible to allow everyone a chance to vote. How... democratic.

I hate to make the obvious joke, but maybe we should bring some Venezuelan electoral officials up for November. I'm sure President Carter can make the arrangements.