If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed. -- Benjamin Franklin
After more than two years of conflict, Syria is breaking up. A
constellation of armed groups battling to advance their own agendas are
effectively creating the outlines of separate armed fiefs. As the war
expands in scope and brutality, its biggest casualty appears to be the
integrity of the Syrian state.
On Thursday, President Obama met in Washington with the Turkish prime
minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and once again pressed the idea of a
top-down diplomatic solution. That approach depends on the rebels and
the government agreeing to meet at a peace conference that was announced
last week by the United States and Russia.
“We’re going to keep increasing the pressure on the Assad regime and
working with the Syrian opposition,” Mr. Obama said. “We are going to
keep working for a Syria that is free of Assad’s tyranny.”
But as evidence of massacres and chemical weapons mounts, experts and
Syrians themselves say the American focus on change at the top ignores
the deep fractures the war has caused in Syrian society. Increasingly,
it appears Syria is so badly shattered that no single authority is
likely to be able to pull it back together any time soon.
There's a cheery and altogether too real sentiment. Syria as a country may be effectively done. That kind of crackup on land bordering Turkey, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon and of course Israel will not be pretty.
The commander in chief of the American armed forces today forced a
violation of Marine Corps regulations, so he wouldn’t get wet.
According to Marine Corps regulation MCO P1020.34F of the Marine
Corps Uniform Regulations chapter 3, a male Marine is not allowed to
carry an umbrella while in uniform. There is no provision in the Marine
Corps uniform regulation guidelines that allows a male Marine to carry
an umbrella.
Did you know that the U.S. Marine Corps has a policy on umbrella holding? Uniform regulations state that a male Marine can’t hold an umbrella (ella, ella) while wearing his uniform, presumably because he can't salute at the same time. President Obama probably didn't know this when he asked two Marines to hold bumbershoots over him and Turkey's prime minister during a press conference Thursday. Seeing a Marine with this particular accessory is "extremely rare," Marine Corps spokesman Capt. Greg Wolf explained, but because the president's the commander in chief of the Armed Forces, if he says "hold my umbrella," it's permissible. Some people weren't happy, including Sarah Palin, who tweeted, "Mr. President ... most Americans hold their own umbrellas." [Source]
Yeah, I can understand member of the press being upset at the White House over the Associated Press subpoenas. But the only thing guaranteed to piss off a reporter more than picking on them through the courts is making them look like chumps by feeding them false info.
CBS News White House reporter Major Garrett took the GOP to task last night.
On Friday, Republicans leaked what they said was a quote from Rhodes: "We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don't want to undermine the FBI investigation."
But it turns out that in the actual email, Rhodes did not mention the State Department. It read: "We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation."
Republicans also provided what they said was a quote from an email written by State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland.
The Republican version quotes Nuland discussing, "The penultimate point is a paragraph talking about all the previous warnings provided by the Agency (CIA) about al-Qaeda's presence and activities of al-Qaeda."
The actual email from Nuland says: "The penultimate point could be abused by members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings."
The CIA agreed with the concerns raised by the State Department and revised the talking points to make them less specific than the CIA's original version, eliminating references to al Qaeda and affiliates and earlier security warnings. There is no evidence that the White House orchestrated the changes.
Keep in mind this never happens. This is Garrett putting his career on the line and becoming persona non grata among the GOP by specifically calling out Republicans as liars over this. Normally what you would see is "sources". But Garrett uses "Republicans" here several times.
Generally, once partisan, tendentious sources leak information that
turns out to be wrong, nothing’s ever done about it. That’s for many
reasons, some good or somewhat understandable, mostly bad. But on CBS
Evening News tonight, Major Garrett did something I don’t feel like I’ve
seen in a really long time or maybe ever on a network news cast. He
basically said straight out: Republicans told us these were the quotes,
that wasn’t true.
So here's what happened. Republicans in Congress saw copies of these
emails two months ago and did nothing with them. It was obvious that
they showed little more than routine interagency haggling. Then, riding
high after last week's Benghazi hearings, someone got the bright idea of
leaking two isolated tidbits and mischaracterizing them in an
effort to make the State Department look bad. Apparently they figured it
was a twofer: they could stick a shiv into the belly of the White House
and they could then badger them to release the entire email chain, knowing they never would.
But it was typical GOP overreach. To their surprise, the White House
took Republicans up on their demand to make the entire email chain
public, thus making it clear to the press that they had been burned. And
now reporters are letting us all know who was behind it.
This is where things get really, really interesting. We'll see if the rest of the press picks up on this or not...
A new report finds two "known or suspected terrorists" who turned states' evidence and entered the Federal Witness Protection Program simply boarded planes and left.
That is the real similarity between the Obama team and the Nixon administration. In the 1970s, a paranoid president’s convinction that his enemies were out to get him and that their opposition was a threat to national security informed the decisions of his underlings. The ends justified the means. Now, a prickly president convinced of his own messianic quality and surrounded by sycophants decries his opponents as operating out of ill will. His underlings get the point.
It is not a coincidence that the few dead-enders in the lefty blogosphere and punditocracy still defending the president embody the same ethos as the president. Republicans are liars, entirely responsible for all that goes wrong, out to wreck the economy and racists, they would have us believe. Obama set the tone, but they amplified it, encouraged it and dutifully took down the White House talking points. Had they not been so passive and eager to enable the White House, some in the administration might have internalized a sense of limits. Instead, they got nothing but encouragement.
In the delusion that Rubin lives in, Obama is is mere yards from being thrown out of office by a groundswell of tens of millions (the same groundswell that failed to materialize and elect Mitt Romney, by the way) and that ironclad fact means anyone who disagrees with her is a "dead-ender", sure to be swept away in the tide of Revolution For Make Glorious Benefit Nation Of Teabagistan.
We all should be laughing at her, of course. But keep an eye on the "progressive left" who think she's right. She knows who her audience is.
"There are already 60 countries in the world that have laws on their
books banning human reproductive cloning, and this prohibition is also
in a number of international agreements" says Marcy Darnovsky, executive
director of the , which is devoted to the responsible use of new
genetic and reproductive technologies. "But in the U.S., we have not
managed to put such a law on the books at the federal level."
At least 15 states ban cloning, either for reproductive purposes or research, or, in come cases both, according to the
But Congress has mostly fought issues of both and to a draw.
"What
we saw the last time cloning was in the headlines was that the
discussion really got mired in the abortion controversy," Darnovsky
said.
The House passed bills banning all forms of cloning in 2001 and 2003; the Senate failed to act in both cases.
"All the other issues got completely swamped," she said. "And I really hope that doesn't happen this time."
But
both the issue of cloning — for research and reproduction — and
embryonic stem cell research have been mired in the abortion controversy
from the start.
I agree we need ethical and consistent guidelines for stem cell research, especially those cloned from human embryos. But the last people who should be writing these guidelines are House Republicans who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old and believe these non-viable blobs of cells have the same legal rights as live human beings.
I'm of the mind that the Senate needs to get out in front of this and gets a piece of legislation out that does this responsibly before the anti-science nutjobs attach a "personhood and cloning bill" to the next debt ceiling crisis.
Angelina Jolie recently made the news for having a double mastectomy. Her mother died at age 58 from breast cancer, and suffered for quite a while. It was an ugly thing for Jolie to endure, and when she learned she had genetic markers that made her at high risk, she took no chances. Her double mastectomy reduced her chance of aggressive cancer from 87% to around 5%.
Her story has brought the test into the spotlight, and that’s a great thing. Most insurance companies will not pay for the test unless the patient has already had cancer (helpful, eh?) so women who have histories of breast cancer in the family are forced to pay around $3,000 out of pocket for the test. That’s too much for most people to handle, and if they get a positive result, preventative steps such as a double mastectomy may not be covered by insurance. Through prohibitive costs and lack of coverage, our medical choices are narrowed.
The good news is, premiums are coming down and increased competition and transparency has caused insurance companies to drive harder bargains and provide more services. Several sources have already projected that Obamacare will lower premiums and medical care costs. It seems that under Obamacare, men will pay slightly more, women may pay slightly less, older will pay slightly less and the young will pay a little more. That sure sounds to me like the cost is being made level, since women and the elderly have long been gouged by a slanted system. There is also an expected trend forcing more preventative care options at lower rates. In other words, women who live in fear of cancer that has robbed them of their sisters, mothers and cousins, may be better able to afford tests like the one Angelina Jolie used to save her life. People may have to pay more, but they will get more in return.
And people may not have to pay that much more. Thinkprogress has already pointed out an instance in which insurance companies voluntarily lowered costs to remain competitive. This was directly brought about by the expectations and practices of Obamacare. It is also likely the first in many concessions between insurance and healthcare providers to stay on top when millions of people flood the market. A giant is toppling, and there will be consequences of all kinds, but so far Obamacare has done nothing but deliver on its promise.
It isn’t a perfect system, but it was the right call to fix this from the top down. Besides, anything is better than listening to Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter whine about his oppression from his multi-million dollar castle.
FOX19
has exclusively learned that as many as four people may be the first
Cincinnati Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employees to face disciplinary
action, and possibly even criminal charges, for allegedly targeting Tea
Party and Liberty groups applying for non-profit status.
That’s
four, not two. Just in case you can’t count, being a regular Fox
viewer and all, they cover that again (emphasis theirs):
However, despite the claim of just two employees being involved, FOX19 has exclusively learned from two separate sources that there could be at least four Cincinnati employees involved.
Those
four employees, whose names we have chosen to withhold until they have
been officially confirmed, have each worked in the IRS Exempt
Organizations Department.
And they have Sources(tm)!
One of FOX19′s two sources went on say that these four IRS workers claim “they simply did what their bosses ordered.”
This
qualifies as a major national bombshell or something. Perhaps the
President should rehire and re-fire Steven Miller as acting IRS
Commissioner again to cover the other two IRS guys here in Cincy. You
know, just in case you thought the GOP, the press, and the haters
weren’t going to immediately move the goalposts after last night.
President Obama and the executive branch launched into action with a triple-pronged attack to stamp out GOP criticism on the week's three "scandals": the IRS, Benghazi, and the DoJ.
First, Attorney General Eric Holder testified before angry House Republicans about the leak subpoenas served to the Associated Press and was in no mood for GOP nonsense from goons like Rep. Darrel Issa:
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Eric Holder and
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) clashed as the Attorney General tore into the
Republican oversight chairman's conduct as "unacceptable" and
"shameful."
Holder slammed back at the GOP goofballs who couldn't resist making this all about them, and Louie Gohmert was especially idiotic for all of America to see.
Gohmert accused Holder and the Department of Justice of unfair
targeting of Christian groups while failing to thoroughly investigate
Tsarnaev, and said the FBI "blew it" by not following up after Tsarnaev
had become "radicalized."
"Because of political correctness, there was not a thorough
enough investigation of Tamerlan to determine this kid had been
radicalized," Gohmert said, raising his voice at Holder.
Holder strongly refuted those charges and defended the FBI.
"You don't have access to the FBI files," Holder said. "You don't
know what the FBI did. You don't know what the FBI's interaction was
with the Russians. You don't know what questions were put to the
Russians, whether those questions were responded to. You simply do not
know that. ... I know what the FBI did. You cannot know what I know."
Gohmert grew irate, charging that Holder had challenged his personal
character and continually tried to get a word in despite objections from
other members of the Judiciary Committee.
He then rambled something that sounded like he was accusing Holder of "casting aspersions on my asparagus."
Senior Obama administration officials contend the e-mails demonstrate
the process of developing talking points for members of Congress to use
in media interviews was not focused on politics but rather on events.
For instance, some of the e-mails expressed caution about what should
be said publicly during an FBI investigation while others centered on
the strength of intelligence at the time.
The White House said the e-mails it provided to inquiring lawmakers
months ago and released on Wednesday aim to paint a fuller picture
following what it described as a series of selective and inaccurate
e-mails recently appearing in media reports.
"Collectively, these e-mails make clear that the interagency process,
including the White House's interactions, were focused on providing the
facts as we knew them based on the best information available at the
time and protecting an ongoing investigation," said White House
spokesman Eric Schultz.
The e-mails indicate the CIA was likely the lead organization in
developing the talking points with the State Department recommending
significant changes.
And while turf battles where a dead Ambassador is involved aren't exactly kosher, they aren't illegal. Also, both the CIA Director and Secretary of State at the time have both resigned: Hillary Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus.
Seeking to regain the initiative amid a series
of controversies that have threatened his second-term agenda, Obama
said new leadership was needed to restore public confidence in the IRS,
whose reputation for political independence has suffered a major blow.
With
congressional investigations looming, Obama said he had told Treasury
Secretary Jack Lew to seek the resignation of Steven Miller, the acting
IRS commissioner, and Lew had done so.
"I'll
do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again
by holding the responsible parties accountable, by putting in place new
checks and new safeguards," Obama told reporters in the White House's
ornate East Room.
The President has effectively cleared the air, and cleared the decks, all in one afternoon. The GOP should have been more careful with what it wished for, because the President complied, and now we'll almost certainly watch them overplay their hand by moving the goalposts.
Obama is winning this battle, folks. He's outsmarted them YET AGAIN and they despise him for it.
It’s time to clean house, get some real legislative oversight and make
certain there are consequences (legal or political) for those
responsible. And the president needs to come forward and answer lots and
lots of questions.
Worst thing EVER.
One can only imagine if the Bush administration pulled this.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation improperly obtained calling records for more than 3,500 telephone accounts from 2003 to 2006 without following any legal procedures, according to a newly disclosed report by the Justice Department’s inspector general.
Instead, according to the 289-page report, F.B.I. agents informally requested the records from employees of three unidentified telephone companies who were stationed inside a bureau communications office.
Based on nothing more than e-mail messages or scribbled requests on Post-it notes, the phone employees turned over customer calling records, the report said.
On some occasions, the phone employees allowed the F.B.I. to upload call records to government databases. On others, they allowed agents to view records on their computer screens, a practice that became known as “sneak peeks.”
Moreover, the report found that the F.B.I. improperly uploaded into its databases large numbers of calling records without determining whether they were relevant to an investigation.
On four occasions, the bureau made inaccurate statements to a court that authorizes national security wiretaps about how it had obtained calling records, the report said.
And agents twice improperly gained access to reporters’ calling records as part of leak investigations.
Sure was unprecedented, yep. You know, instead of just going through legal channels and informing the AP, all the folks screaming that Obama is "chilling free speech" seem to forget the last guy simply had the FBI take reporter's phone records and didn't give a damn. We only found out several years after the fact. Somehow, I don't see anyone recalling that....least of all Jen Rubin.
It seemed as if the story was just about done, until Friday, when all
of a sudden, it became front-page news again. What happened? This ABC News report
detailed the process through which administration talking points were
drafted in September, and included a quote from then-Deputy National
Security Adviser Ben Rhodes that seemed to suggest the White House
wanted to remove specific references to terrorist organizations and CIA
warnings. At the same time, the Weekly Standard ran similar information, and the rest of the media pounced.
They shouldn't have. Jake Tapper at CNN reports today that ABC and the Weekly Standard reports were based on misleading information.
Oops.
CNN has obtained an email sent by a top aide of President Barack
Obama, in which the aide discusses the Obama administration reaction to
the attack on the U.S. posts in Benghazi, Libya. The actual email
differs from how sources characterized it to two different media
organizations.
The actual email from then-Deputy National Security Adviser for
Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes appears to show that whomever leaked
it did so in a way that made it appear that the White House primarily
concerned with the State Department's desire to remove references and
warnings about specific terrorist groups so as to not bring criticism to
the department.
In other words, somebody deliberately fed Jon Karl a doctored or paraphrased letter that made it look like the White House was more concerned about covering the State Department's ass than getting to the bottom of Benghazi. Jon Karl was given a juicy story -- both too good to pass up and too good to be true -- and got burned. He's got zero credibility now, and he either lied and colluded with a false narrative in order to make the White House look bad, or he's not smart enough to know when he's being played.
Either situation is fatal in the career of a DC journalist...although he probably has a long career at FOX News should ABC can him.
Yes, I have changed my political affiliation to the Democratic Party.
It doesn’t take much to see the culture of intolerance surrounding the Republican Party today. I have wondered before about the seemingly harsh undertones about immigrants and others. Look no further; a well-known organization recently confirms the intolerance of that which seems different or strange to them.
The complete disregard of those who are in disadvantage is also palpable. We are not looking at an isolated incident of rhetoric or research. Others subscribe to motivating people to action by stating, “In California, a majority of all Hispanic births are illegitimate. That’s a lot of Democratic voters coming.” The discourse that moves the Republican Party is filled with this anti-immigrant movement and overall radicalization that is far removed from reality. Another quick example beyond the immigration debate happened during CPAC this year when a supporter shouted ““For giving him shelter and food for all those years?” while a moderator explained how Frederick Douglass had written a letter to his slave master saying that he forgave him for “all the things you did to me.” I think you get the idea.
When the political discourse resorts to intolerance and hate, we all lose in what makes America great and the progress made in society.
That's a hell of an admission from the guy hired by the Republicans for outreach to Latino voters. He's basically saying that his job is not only impossible, but immoral as well.
Although I was born an American citizen, I feel that my experience, and that of many from Puerto Rico, is intertwined with those who are referred to as illegal. My grandfather served in an all-Puerto Rican segregated Army unit, the 65th Infantry Regiment. He then helped, along my grandmother, shatter glass ceilings for Puerto Rican women raising my aunt to become the first Puerto Rican woman astronomer with a PhD in astrophysics (an IQ of a genius as far as I’m concerned). Puerto Ricans, as many other Americans still today have to face issues of discrimination in voting and civil rights.
Regardless of what political affiliation people choose, my respect for some remains. I don’t expect all Hispanics to do the same (although I would hope so) but I’m taking a stand against this culture of intolerance.
And yes, if I were Pablo Pantoja, I would have quit too. I applaud his honesty and courage. if only the rest of the Republican leadership would do the same...
This isn't hard. This is what made Egil (Bud) Krogh famous. This is what
got people sent to jail in the mid-1970s. This is the Plumbers, all
over again, except slightly more formal this time, and laundered,
disgracefully, even more directly through the Department Of Justice. And
of course, this is not nearly good enough. And even if you point out,
as you should, that the AP is hyping this story
a little — The government "secretly" obtained the records? Doesn't that
imply that nobody knew the records had been seized? Wasn't there a
subpoena? The phone companies knew. — the ignoble clumsiness of this
more than obviates those particular quibbles.
Oh Charles. Subpoenas aren't a quibble here, they're the heart of the case...and the law that could have protected the AP in this leak investigation by requiring a warrant before being able to subpoena phone records or media organizations over leaks was...wait for it...proposed by Senate Democrats and filibustered to death by Senate Republicans. You're better than this.
That is all my arse. At the least, this was a counter-terrorism operation. (Why else would Brennan have been questioned already?). Which puts the whole business inside the White House. And you'd have to be a toddler or a fool to believe that Eric Holder could go off on his own and take as politically volatile a step as this. But, let us take the White House at its word. Eric Holder did this by himself. He should be gone. This moment. Not only is this constitutionally abhorrent, it is politically moronic. Nobody likes the press, I will grant you that, but the administration is soft if it thinks the public distrusts the press that much. And to have this genuinely chilling revelation emerge simultaneously with the Benghazi, Benghazi!, BENGHAZI! mummery and the IRS dumbassery is pretty much a full broadside below the water line of this administration's credibility. Good god, this is going to be one long-ass summer.
You're right about that, Charles. And for the first time I can recall, you're part of the problem and not the solution. Feel free to bemoan the administration, but you might want to check your own credibility, man. You're taking on a lot of water yourself here. You've been through this time and again. You were there for the Clinton Rules. You know what it means when the media turns on the Democrat and gets us 8 years of someone infinitely worse.
But Holder is not the problem and you damn well know it.
Apparently, electric cars are totally unfair to auto dealers somehow. So much so that North Carolina Republicans are pulling the plug on Silicon Valley darling Tesla Motors ever being able to sell a car there. Slate's Will Oremus:
The proposal, which the Raleigh News & Observer reports was unanimously approved by the state’s Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday, would apply to all car manufacturers, but the intended target is clear. It’s aimed at Tesla, the only U.S. automaker whose business model relies on selling cars directly to consumers, rather than through a network of third-party dealerships.
The bill is being pushed by the North Carolina Automobile Dealers Association, a trade group representing the state’s franchised dealerships. Its sponsor is state Sen. Tom Apodaca, a Republican from Henderson, who has said the goal is to prevent unfair competition between manufacturers and dealers. What makes it “unfair competition” as opposed to plain-old “competition”—something Republicans are typically inclined to favor—is not entirely clear. After all, North Carolina doesn’t seem to have a problem with Apple selling its computers online or via its own Apple Stores.
Tesla's turning some heads in the RTP area, where they expect to have a showroom soon. They're probably doing well in liberal Asheville, home of my alma mater. The real issue of course is by taking dealers out of the picture, Tesla's business model is a direct threat to the dealership empires in the state, and they want Tesla gone.
Besides, NC Republicans hate electric cars or anything remotely environmentally friendly, so it's a double win for them. I fully expect this bill to pass and Gov. Pat McCrory to sign it.
Free markets are for suckers, after all. So much nicer to rig the game.
More than half of common species of plants and a third of animal
species are likely to see their living space halved by 2080 on current
trends of carbon emissions, a climate study said on Sunday.
Output of man-made greenhouse gases is putting Earth on track for
four degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming by 2100
compared with the pre-industrial 18th century, it said.
The unprecedented speed of warming will be a shock for many species,
as it will badly affect the climatic range in which they can live, it
warned.
Investigators from Britain’s University of East Anglia looked
at 48,786 species and measured how their range would be affected
according to models of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
Fifty-five percent of plants and 35 percent of animals could see
their living space halved by 2080 at current emission growth for CO2,
they found. The figures take into account the species’ ability to
migrate into habitat that may open up as a result of warming.
This is a greatly conservative estimate. The other end of the spectrum is that 80 years from now, Earth will be largely a wasteland with a broken ecosystem, and humanity is going to have tremendous difficulty even surviving. That's not taking into account the massive superstorms that will pound the planet as a direct result of climate change.
We're decades past being able to save ourselves. It's now a question of how bad we'll let it get. The answer appears to be "an unabated march to catastrophe."
The gang over at WIN THE MORNING tried to slip this one out there Friday, but it got run over by the IRS story. Still, expect more of the notion that the Democrats are increasingly doomed, because, well, they're always doomed. Even when they win.
One of the Democrats’ most veteran strategists warns that the party is “in decline” and “at considerable risk” when President Barack Obama is no longer on the scene.
“Since
Obama was elected President, the Democrats have lost nine
governorships, 56 members of the House and two Senate seats,” Doug
Sosnik, the political director in Bill Clinton’s White House, writes in a new memo.
Oh gosh, a former Clinton political director is warning that Barack Obama is screwing everything up. There's a shocker. So who else should we blame? Sosnick provides a helpful checklist:
• Obama’s personal popularity does not easily translate for other candidates. The president is not building the Democratic Party’s institutional apparatus in a way that it will thrive when he’s gone.
• The losses in the 2010 midterms gave Republicans control of the redistricting process, which will be in effect until after the 2020 census. This gives the GOP a structural advantage in keeping the House.
• Millennials, born 1981 to 1994, and Generation X’ers, born 1965 to 1980, are voting Democratic, but a plurality identify themselves as independents — which makes them less reliable.
• Democrats cannot count on the same level of African-American turnout without Obama at the top of the ticket. Sosnik cites new analysis showing that in 2012 for the first time ever eligible black voters turned out a higher rate than whites.
Obama lost the House in 2010, thanks to "unreliable" voters (anyone under 50) and black voters who will abandon the party once Obama is gone.
In other words, Sosnik is blaming Obama, and me. Black voters under 48. Specifically. And he's setting us up for the fall in 2014 and 2016.
Expect that to be the theme going forward from the Hillary camp. Not all Obama Derangement Syndrome sufferers are Republicans.
Even with the Biden Administration adults in charge and Democrats in control on Congress (barely), there remains an increasingly crumbling global economy imperiling the world, rising nationalism and deadly racism across Europe and Asia, a seemingly endless war against terror, a federal government nobody trusts or believes in, global climate change putting us on the brink of destruction and a Village media that barely does its job on even the best day.
Needless to say there's a lot of Stupid out there when we need solutions. Dangerous levels of Stupid.
Into the fray, dear Reader. Tray tables, crash helmets, arms inside blog at all times.
Zandar's Tip Jar
If you like what you're reading, drop in two bits.
It's ZVTS, now in a 60-minute podcast!
Get your Zandar and Bon every Saturday and Wednesday!
Also, click on the iTunes button to put the show on
your iTunes podcast list and take us with you!
Or, check out the episode archive page!
Posts
