The Staton Jones Report

« July 2005 | Main | September 2005 »

August 31, 2005

Little Nero

Check out the nation's newest singer-leader:

If this photo, taken three days after the Hurricane struck the U.S., doesn't upset you, you're not paying attention.

Posted by Steven at 09:14 PM | Comments (0)

August 30, 2005

Stranger Than We Can Imagine

Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine. -- Sir Arthur Eddington (1882-1944), English astronomer

Thanks to science and technology, in the form of the Cassini probe in Saturn space, the universe once again got stranger than we can imagine.

There is a hot spot on one of Saturn's moons which should not be there and has yet to be explained, scientists said on Tuesday.

It is located at the south pole of Enceladus, a moon with a diameter of just 500 km (310 miles) which orbits Saturn at a distance of around 238,000 km.

The hot spot is unusual because it occurs at the pole, scientists said. Usually, the hottest part of any planet or moon is around the equator, as is the case with the earth.

This suggests that the heat at Enceladus' southern pole is generated from within, said scientists from the Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn and its moons.

But they acknowledged they had no idea how.

...

The scientists expected to find that the temperature was around 80 degrees Kelvin (-193 degrees Celsius, -316 degrees Fahrenheit) at its hottest point, which they assumed would be near the equator.

Instead, they found that the heat was concentrated at the south pole, where the temperature hit 91 degrees Kelvin near a series of fissures, or "tiger stripes" on the moon's surface.

"It is an extremely conspicuous hot region," Spencer told a news conference. "Something is different about that area."

The scientists have come up with two theories to explain the hot spot. The first is that the heat comes from decaying radioactive material below the moon's surface and the second is that it is caused by gravitational tides.

But they say neither theory adequately explains the heat.

One supposes the anti-science crowd might consider this to be a gate to Hell, which some poor slob forgot to close behind him.

The rest of us will wait for more data and more theorizing, and the hope that someday we'll get out there and study it in detail and from close proximity.

Because, yes, it is stranger than we can (yet) imagine.

Posted by Tom White at 06:04 PM | Comments (0)

August 29, 2005

Oil Trades Above $70/bbl.

Reuters reports that oil closed above $70/bbl. thanks in part to Hurricane Katrina.

Posted by Steven at 12:46 AM | Comments (0)

There's No Such Thing As "Global Warming"

So just move along folks, nothing to see here!

PS. Sorry to see you go the way of Atlantis, "No Mo'rleans".

Posted by Steven at 12:42 AM | Comments (0)

August 26, 2005

Nation's Blowjoblessness Rate Rising

The Onion is covering a national crisis in blowjoblessness that is driving the U.S. economy from a turgid state to a flaccid recession.

WASHINGTON, DC—In the wake of a recent drop in the sexual-interest rate, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao announced Tuesday that blowjoblessness in America has reached a record high. According to Labor Department statistics, the overall blowjobless rate swelled to 37.4 percent in July, causing widespread deflation of egos. "Cutbacks in oral services have left 55 million Americans unsatisfied," Chao said. "Although June saw a promising jump in the age 15-19 demographic, with many teenagers finding summer blowjobs, almost 82 percent of married men are completely blowjobless."

The historically fluid blowjob market reached its climax in 1996, when millions of wives and girlfriends vigorously stimulated the privates sector. But while demand has remained extremely high, supply could not, or would not, keep up. As a result, the blowjobless rate has climbed steadily, and today's limp market shows few signs of immediate expansion. According to Chao, long-term relationships are responsible for the loss of many of this year's blowjobs. "Over time, traditional blowjob providers prioritize other services, eventually eliminating those blowjobs that they deem unnecessary," Chao said. "Blowjobs are not as plentiful as some Internet sites would lead you to believe," said blowjob-market analyst Tom Cochran. "Overall, it's an extremely dry market. I myself haven't had a blowjob in years." "And it's not from a lack of trying," Cochran added.

And it gets worse on the actual article. Blow Job sez, "check it out!"

Posted by Steven at 04:34 PM | Comments (0)

August 25, 2005

Fatest Nation Getting Fatter, Faster

Good news America! There's more of you every year! According to the Trust for America's Health, the rate of adult obesity increased last year..

In the past year, the adult obesity rate rose in 48 of America's states, and nationally from 23.7% to 24.5%, Trust for America's Health found.

In 10 states, over a quarter of adults are now obese, despite campaigns alerting people to the dangers of over-eating.

Mississippi, famous for its calorific mud pie, ranked the highest, followed by Alabama and West Virginia.

The non-profit organisation said the situation had reached crisis point and current policies were failing.

Currently, about 119 million, or 64.5%, of US adults are either overweight or obese.

According to projections, 73% of US adults could be overweight or obese by 2008, Trust for America's Health warned.

Super size this!

Posted by Steven at 09:31 PM | Comments (0)

What's on the Agenda?

In July of 2003, former Ambassador Joe Wilson published an essay claiming that Iraq had not been trying to rekindle its nuclear program — at least not by obtaining raw Uranium from Niger. The usual swarm of Rabid Right mouthpieces predictably branded him a liar. Another prominent talking point is that Wilson was an active member of the Kerry campaign team, and, obviously, a political opponent of Bush. This supposedly reveals a damning aspect of Wilson's agenda: it exists.

Having an agenda is a bad thing because it provides a motivation to distort public opinion — among other crimes — in service of that agenda. Thus, the people who eagerly impart an inexplicably-detailed knowledge of Joe Wilson's unstated agenda are doing so as a public service, because, they certainly don't have an agenda or anything.

In Latin, the of strategy focusing on the messenger instead of the message is called ad hominem, meaning "towards the man." As a result of the ad hominem attacks on Wilson, we find the debate being focused on Wilson's general integrity, and not that his assessment about Iraq's activities in Niger was a factual and accurate.

The bulk of current political debate is composed of ad hominem attacks. Witness conservative attempts to reconcile the hypocrisy evident in their opposition to Clinton's military actions in Kosovo and their support of Bush's invasion of Iraq. These apologetics reliably mention — if not focus on — the claim that Clinton was receiving a blow job from Monica Lewinsky during a phone conversation about the impending operation.

Never mind that the claims supporting the case for the Kosovo engagement were true, and the claims about Iraq were false, the important thing is that Clinton got a blow job. What if we found out that Lincoln has been getting a blow job when he ordered the attack that started the Civil War? It would totally change things! We'd probably restore slavery! Were it discovered that Roosevelt had been getting a hummer one December 7th, 1941, we would undoubtedly surrender retro-actively to the Japanese in shame. Yes, America, the blow jobs are the most important aspect of public policy and always will be.

Suffice to say, that whatever the topic, conservative criticism of Clinton's Presidency will invariably make reference to blow jobs. As silly as it is, the "Clinton got a blow job" gambit a "winning" ad hominem. The current leading ad hominem is the "Bush Hater" accusation. Even worse than Bush Hater is a politically-motivated Bush Hater.

In an enormous percentage of the attacks on Cindy Sheehan, the reader is accosted with lurid evidence supporting the accusation that Cindy Sheehan not only Hates George W. Bush, but wants to see him lose political power. OK, everyone gasp in shock and horror!

A perfect example is this smug, revelatory post at Free Republic. This "investigative report" uncovers the shocking secret that there is a left-leaning P.R. firm working to get Cindy Sheehan in the media spotlight! These people weren't concerned about the fact that the "Swift Boat Veterans" campaign was invented by a right-wing P.R. firm, but now they are shocked — shocked! — that there is a left-wing P.R. firm promoting Cindy Sheehan anti-wat message. A P.R. firm?! That's, like, worse than the Khmer Rouge!

The reason that it's an issue now is that its part of the shocking truth that... Cindy Sheehan has a political agenda! [Gasp!] Not only that, but Cindy Sheehan wants to get her message out to as many people as possible! ["Please! Not in front of the children!] So there you have it! Cindy Sheehan wants people to hear her opinions and share her opposition to Bush's policies! How anti-American can you get?

You see, the Smear Boat Veterans pretended that they were trying to do a public service, and weren't actually endorsing any particular candidate. This was probably to avoid new campaign financing laws, but it also helped deflect claims that they were just a bunch of Bush partisans who would say anything they could to hurt Kerry's election chances. The fact that so many of their claims were thoroughly debunked suggested that they were just a bunch of Bush partisans who would say anything they could to hurt Kerry's election chances, but the people who continued to believe them also continued to believe in their claims of being apolitical. Hence, the smug moralizing about "agendas."

By making no secret of her opposition to Bush, Cindy Sheehan has opened herself to accusations that she is exploiting her son's death to further her anti-Bush agenda. Rush Limbaugh went as far as to compare her to Bill Burkett, the man who submitted the fake memos about Bush's National Guard service to CBS. Rush claimed that her "story was fake," leading many to wonder if he meant that her son Casey wasn't real or didn't actually die. Rush explained himself two days later by denying having said that. Sure, it's a stupid rebuttal, but consider the intelligence level of Rush's audience.

The American Left needs to learn from the success Sheehan has had in bringing the anti-war issues to the forefront. The thing they need to learn — and I'm not the first to say it — is that one needn't deny having a agenda, especially the agenda you actually have. Wanting to end the war in Iraq is a political agenda. So what? So what if those of us who have that agenda would like to see it publicized and popularized? Does a political agenda become more legitimate if you politely refrain from expressing it publicly?

I would like to be among the first to toss the Bush-Hater epithet into the trash bin with "freedom fries." Yes, I hate Bush, but why does that matter? Would assertions that the Iraq invasion was an ill-conceived scheme, promoted with cynical propaganda be any more true if issued by someone who clearly loves George W. Bush? When I say that the situation in Iraq is a disaster, am I just saying that because I hate President Bush, or is the fact that it is an accurate assessment also a factor? I say: why not both?

Again, when did hating George W. Bush become evidence of irrationality? Is there some reason that I shouldn't hate President Bush? Is there some fabulous thing that he's done that should make me like him, or at least, not hate him? Even a lot of people who still view the decision to invade Iraq as justified, are admitting that the execution of that decision is a tragedy of errors. When someone screws up and a bunch of people die, am I supposed to like them anyway?

You never, ever, see a conservative attack on Bill Clinton start with, "Although I generally like and respect Bill Clinton, I have to disagree with..." No, you never see that. Disclaiming any dislike or political opposition to Bush, obviates any criticism that follows. Some would take it as a tacit admission that one's anti-Bush agenda is discrediting, hence the attempts to obscure it. The more obvious subtext is, "We have been beaten into submission."

That's certainly true of most Congressional Democrats. At this point, why doesn't Joe Lieberman simply start every utterance with, "Although I would never question the perfect wisdom of my Republican overlords..."?

Let's not be beaten into submission. Remember, these guys make a lot of bold statements about war, but given the chance, they all avoided actually fighting in one. Let's get 'em. They're not so tough

Posted by Winston Smith at 12:22 PM | Comments (2)

August 24, 2005

Told You So

From the Washington Post:

The Harris Poll is out today, showing President Bush's approval rating down sharply over the past two months to 40 percent. Just two days ago, the American Research Group also found it down sharply, to 36 percent.

In both cases, those are all-time lows for Bush that put him in dangerously unpopular territory. And the results lead inescapably to the conclusion that the American people are deeply unhappy with the war in Iraq and blame the president.

Hey, Turdblossom! Can't you come up with some way to blame 9/11 on Cindy Sheehan?

Posted by mjones at 01:55 PM | Comments (0)

August 23, 2005

Pat Robertson's Foot Tastes Better Than Ever

How does he do it?

Evangelical leader Pat Robertson just cannot keep his foot out of his mouth. His must be the longest recorded case of self-cannibalism on record (and believe us when we say "it's on the record", because this idiot's statements are almost always well publicized). Today he suggested the United States assassinate Venezulan President Chavez, to avoid another "$200B war." At least we agree with him about not starting another war, but to suggest on a broadcast network that the U.S. kill a democratically elected leader is just so, oh, 1950ish. Didn't we learn from Iran in 1953 not to kill the democratically elected leader?

Now Mr. Robertson has set off an international firestorm by saying on his television show that the United States should kill the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, a leftist whose country has the largest oil reserves outside the Middle East.

"If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Mr. Robertson said Monday on his show, "The 700 Club." "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Pat, if we "rub out" Chavez, the first repercussion will be a 6m bbl./day drop in oil imports to the United States. This will trigger a recession the likes of which you haven't seen since the Great One (do you miss it all that much?). We're already burning all the oil that hits the shore, and Venezula is a major provider to the U.S. I'd go as far as to say your statement endangers the United States and borders on treason.

Shove that up your Jesus Tower and smoke it.

Posted by Steven at 10:24 PM | Comments (1)

"Unintelligent Design"

For a nice send up of the ID sponsors in the White House, check out this link.

How does one explain all the misguided, unwise, sometimes outright boneheaded things the Bush administration has done since taking over nearly five years ago, and continues to do on a pretty much daily basis? How is it possible for a group of supposedly intelligent, experienced individuals to take this many wrong turns? Wouldn't you think that once in a while, even by accident, that George W. Bush and his advisers would make a decision that made sense?

Can this much mismanagement happen totally at random? Would the occupants of the Bush White House have us believe that all these things, these missteps, these miscalculations, these attempts to deceive, that they all, you know, just kind of happened?

I'm not so sure. And I'm not the only one starting to ask questions. More and more, it seems unlikely that mere human beings could make this many mistakes without some sort of misguiding force, a kind of supernatural entity that has trouble remembering where it put its car keys.

That's where unintelligent design comes in.

Follow the link to read more; it gets better.

Kudos to high school friend Terri for pointing out the piece.

Posted by Steven at 09:59 PM | Comments (0)

August 16, 2005

Axis of Incompetence

From the Washington Post:

President Bush's campaign against what he once termed the "axis of evil" has suffered reverses on all three fronts in recent days that underscore the profound challenges confronting him 3 1/2 years after he vowed to take action.

First, multilateral talks orchestrated by the United States to pressure North Korea to give up nuclear weapons adjourned last week after 13 days without agreement. Then Iran restarted its program to convert uranium, in defiance of the United States and Europe. Finally, negotiators in Iraq failed to draft a new constitution by Monday's deadline amid an unrelenting guerrilla war against U.S. forces.

...Whereas Bush in his first term vowed to reinvent foreign policy with a new doctrine of military preemption to deal with rogue states, he has largely dropped such talk since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

That's because we are now much weaker than we were before. The neocon foreign policy of projecting our might onto the world has essentially made us into a paper tiger.

"These are difficult issues," national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley said in an interview last week after the Iran and North Korea setbacks. "They're going to take some time. But the main thing is to keep the international community focused."

Hmm. It might also have helped if you were'nt such a dumbfuck in the first place.

The unexpected difficulties endured in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003 have colored the broader efforts against the "axis of evil" states. Tehran and Pyongyang have felt freer to flout American pressure, secure in the knowledge that the U.S. military is tied down in Iraq, analysts said.

"The situation in Iraq is sufficiently sober [that] I think this has given the Iranians a boost of confidence that they didn't have two years ago," said Geoffrey Kemp, a Reagan administration national security official who is now a scholar at the Nixon Center. "They're not scared of us as they once were."

Nice.

Posted by mjones at 11:26 PM | Comments (0)

August 10, 2005

Oil Hits $65/bbl.

Oil took yesterday off for an early rest for today's record high closing of $64.90, after briefly hitting $65/bbl.

In Wednesday trading in New York, a barrel of US light crude temporarily hit a fresh high of $65.00 before ending the day's trading at $64.90.

London Brent saw similar gains, jumping $2.08 to a new peak of $64.06 a barrel, before settling at $63.99.

Oil prices are being pressured by a number of refinery stoppages in the US and uncertainty in the Middle East.

Premium gasoline in Dallas is at $2.59/gal. and diesel is nearing $2.40/gal. so the price is sure to rise in the coming weeks.

Posted by Steven at 05:58 PM | Comments (0)

Did the U.S. Have Intel on Mohammad Atta Before 9/11?

It's looking that way.

The Sept. 11 commission will investigate a claim that U.S. defense intelligence officials identified ringleader Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as a likely part of an al Qaeda cell more than a year before the 2001 hijackings but did not forward the information to law enforcement.

Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said yesterday that the men were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger." If true, that is an earlier link to al Qaeda than any previously disclosed intelligence about Atta.

Lee H. Hamilton, co-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, said the information warrants a review. He said he hoped the panel could issue a statement on its findings by the end of the week.

"The 9/11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohamed Atta or of his cell," Hamilton said.

The commission's final report, issued last year, recounted numerous government mistakes that allowed the hijackers to succeed in their attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Among them was a failure to share intelligence within and among agencies.

Draw your own conclusions about this.

Posted by Steven at 05:55 PM | Comments (0)

August 08, 2005

Republicans, The Retread Masters

If the GOP is the "party of ideas", writes Michael Kinsey, then why are those ideas so unoriginal ?

It's true that the Republicans are the party of ideas and the Democrats are the party of reaction. Republicans set the agenda, and Democrats try to talk the country out of it. But the Republican Party is hardly the Institute for Advanced Studies. The GOP uses ideas like seasonal sports equipment -- taking them out when needed, then scraping the mud off and stuffing them back into the garage until they are needed again.

Remember term limits? The flag-burning amendment? The balanced-budget amendment? Each of these has had a moment or two of glory, when Republican politicians, conservative TV and radio hosts, and the Wall Street Journal editorial page all decided simultaneously that implementing this idea was vital to the survival of Western civilization. Polls soon showed a majority of Americans agreeing with them. The idea seemed unstoppable. It had the winds of history behind it.

And then the winds died, and the idea went away. I still can't quite figure out how we have avoided trashing the Constitution with an idiotic amendment against burning the flag. But the failure of all these hot-button issues, in stunning contrast to the success of the party that has ridden them to power, suggests that for the Republicans, ideas serve politics rather than the other way around.

The so-called flat tax is another hobby horse of the right that swept the nation, then got swept away. But someone forgot to tell Steve Forbes, the amiably blank-faced magazine heir who ran for president on the issue in 1996 and 2000. Now he has a book out, "Flat Tax Revolution: Using a Postcard to Abolish the IRS." It's getting the full fair-and-balanced treatment -- that is, unashamed, open-throated puffery -- on Fox News and other conservative outlets. So even though the idea looks pretty dead right now, a stake through its heart might still be prudent.

The flat tax is a game of three-card monte that deliberately confuses the issues of simplicity, fairness and the total tax burden on society. A simpler tax system would be a very good thing: good for the economy and good for our sanity. But progressive tax rates -- higher taxes on higher incomes -- aren't what make the current system so complicated. It's as easy -- even easier -- to multiply by 40 percent as it is to multiply by 17 percent. Multiple tax rates require one extra calculation, but it's only subtraction. Even Republicans can easily do it -- or hire someone to do it for them, if necessary.

Posted by Steven at 05:52 PM | Comments (0)

Oil Closes at $63.80/bbl.

Oil closed at a new high today: $63.80/bbl.

Posted by Steven at 11:54 AM | Comments (0)

Bush Takes Heat Off Of Abramoff

President Bush demoted a federal prosecutor who was pursing a kick-back investigation aimed at Jack Abramoff, effectively ending the investigation.

A U.S. grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor and the inquiry ended soon after.

The previously undisclosed Guam inquiry is separate from a federal grand jury in Washington that is investigating allegations that Abramoff bilked Indian tribes out of millions of dollars.

...

A day later, the chief prosecutor, U.S. Atty. Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.

The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status, Black had held the acting U.S. attorney assignment for more than a decade.

The acting U.S. attorney was a controversial official in Guam. At the time he was removed, Black was directing a long-term investigation into allegations of public corruption in the administration of then-Gov. Carl Gutierrez. The inquiry produced numerous indictments, including some of the governor's political associates and top aides.

Black also arranged for a security review in the aftermath of Sept. 11 that was seen as a potential threat to loose immigration rules favored by local business leaders. In fact, the study ordered by Black eventually cited substantial security risks in Guam and the Northern Marianas.

Abramoff, who then represented the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, alerted his clients in a memo about the expected report and warned: "It will require some major action from the Hill and a press attack to get this back in the bottle."

It didn't turn out to be that hard to end the investigation, now did it? Scumsucking "the rules apply to others" GOP pull another one. Maybe this time Bush will get what he deserves for it? Fat chance.

Posted by Steven at 11:46 AM | Comments (0)

August 07, 2005

"Douchebag of the Year" Blows HIs Last Gasket on CNN

We're a bit late in repeating this story about Robert Novak popping off a "bullshit" comment and storming (slowly -- he's an old fuck) off the CNN set. But better late than never!

So why did Robert Novak flee the set of "Inside Politics" Thursday? Jame Carville said last night that his CNN colleague has "probably got a lot going on in his life." But the Progress Report, Mickey Kaus and a lot of others are speculating today that Novak's blow-up just might have been related to the book that was sitting on a table on the set: A fine looking, hardbound volume of "Who's Who in America."

Now, we've always thought that "Who's Who" was a little cheesy, but it's not the sort of thing that was send us stomping off national TV. For Novak, though, "Who's Who" raises a thorny question: Is he intentionally trying to spread a false story about how he came to know that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

In his column on the Valerie Plame case earlier this week, Novak said -- as he did in a column back in October 2003 -- that anyone could have learned the name of Joseph Wilson's wife by looking up Wilson's listing in "Who's Who." Although Novak hasn't said explicitly that he learned Plame's name that way, the New York Times said earlier this week that Novak's repeated references to the book seemed to be a suggestion that administration officials weren't as involved in Plame's outing as other reports would have us believe. "In drawing renewed attention to the published listing," Anne Kornblut wrote in the Times, "Mr. Novak seemed to suggest more directly than ever before that the scrutiny that has focused on which of his sources provided him the name might have been misplaced, and that he might well have figured it out by himself."

Poor Novak. He's getting beaten up by his own MSM folks! Boo-hoo-hoo. Don't miss Jon Stewart's hilarious sendup of the whole event on The Daily Show's website.

Posted by Steven at 12:52 PM | Comments (0)

Drivers Shunning Premium Fuels

Owners of high performance cars are shunning "premium" fuel to save a couple of dollars at the gas station. The spread in price is around twenty to thirty cents, which results in a few dollars difference at the gas pump, but it's enough for many owner's of performance cars to try the "cheap stuff".

Turns out it doesn't hurt the engine, thanks to twenty-five years of improvements in automobile engines and computers, but it does lower the high end power the engine can produce.

For some people, it's hitting the big five-oh that really hurts -- that is, dropping $50 on a tank of gas. For others, it's just that relentless upward creep in prices that gets their attention.

Whatever the trigger, drivers pulling up to the pump in vehicles that ostensibly require high-grade gas are wondering if they really need the more expensive fuel or whether it's okay just to fill it up with regular. As gas prices soar, car owners increasingly are going for the cheaper stuff -- no matter how fancy their wheels. And station owners and oil companies are seeing the impact: Sales of premium and mid-grade gasoline are tumbling.

It's an age-old response, industry experts say, for drivers to switch from pricey, higher-octane formulations of gas to cheaper alternatives whenever gasoline prices rise substantially. Now, with prices stuck stubbornly high, oil experts wonder whether high-grade gas will go the way of the Studebaker.

"I foresee no serious decline in prices anytime soon, so the question is, will consumers' buying habits change permanently if the higher prices stay as they are," said Daniel F. Gilligan, president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, which represents independent filling stations. "Will it be more difficult to attract consumers back to the higher-octane fuels? I don't know."

Automotive experts say using regular gas in most vehicles does no damage and makes no discernible difference in performance. Cars made in the past 15 years have such highly refined computer controls that the engine will adjust to the grade of octane in the gasoline, even in cars sold as requiring premium gasoline. Some drivers -- in some cars under some driving conditions -- may notice a drop in horsepower, but for most people behind the wheel, it wouldn't be enough to notice, the experts say.

"It's not going to hurt anything," said Peter Gregori, service manager for EuroMotorcars, a Mercedes-Benz dealer in Bethesda. In fact, Gregori has been using regular gas in one of his own Mercedes cars for two years, and "it's perfect," he said -- even though Mercedes-Benz says owners should use only premium.

All of this begs the question, why? Why buy the "premium gas" if it doesn't actually do better for the car owner? Have we been bamboozled all these years?

Posted by Steven at 12:34 PM | Comments (0)

August 01, 2005

"Douchebag of the Year" Extends His Reign

Robert "Douchebag of the Year" Novak has broken his silence after reports emerged that he was warned by the CIA not to reveal Valerie Plame's identity.

In his syndicated column, Novak did not dispute that former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow told him he should not print the covert officer's name, Valerie Plame, during conversations they had prior to Novak's July 14, 2003 column.

But Novak reasserted that no CIA official ever told him in advance ''that Valerie Plame Wilson's disclosure would endanger her or anybody else.''

So, Bob Novak, patriot, writer and (no doubt it's on his blog) lover, has said that he went ahead and exposed a CIA agent because even though the Agency called him and told him not to do it, they didn't threated to rip his nuts off if he did? Man, these guys use torture for everything, don't they?

Novak has once again put in a stellar performance and does (in fact) deserve the "Douchebag of the Year" award from The Daily Show for two years running.

Posted by Steven at 02:13 PM | Comments (0)

Chickenhawk President Sends Psycho to Represent Us at UN

Our chickenshit President 'recess appointed' John "Psycho" Bolton to be the U.S. representative at the United Nations (a governing body that Bolton claims 'doesn't even exist') over the objections of Democratic and Republican Senators (thanks a million, Vonovitch). Bush, unable to get his dirtbag appointee through the cheesecloth Senate approval process, has show once again that he's more than willing to "be the Man" and ignore the rules and decorum of government in favor of his 'My Way or the Highway' ("This would be a lot easier if I was a Dictator" - G. W. Bush) approach of "leadership".

Like Molly Ivins said, the GOP doesn't know how to govern, only rule. God help us all now that a certified crazy is representing us at the UN.

Posted by Steven at 10:28 AM | Comments (0)