BigSqwert

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) Does it bother you that what he presents as the truth, are actually lies? That most of that didn't happen? Not really. It was a good read.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 11:55 AM) Bulls*** rolls downhill real nice.. I guess this instance of b.s. didn't bother me as much as if it were a famous person's memoirs. When I bought it I knew it was supposed to be a rehabbed drug addict's memoir. I always take things like that with a grain of salt. Like when you see a movie that is 'based on true events'. I just figure some, if not most, of it is exaggerated

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 07:09 PM) its almost stream of conciousness. Most definitely. Had a great flow.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 09:40 PM) On the otherhand, I saw "the Constant Gardener" last night... what a joke...at best, he gardened like 50% of the time. :rolly That made me laugh. I am slap happy.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 05:13 PM) It doesn't do it's homework. It places the homework in the basket. It rubs the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it is told. It places the lotion and the homework in the basket or it will get the hose! Put the f***ing homework in the basket! ROFLMAO Thanks! I needed a good laugh.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 01:24 PM) Million little pieces by James Frey. Read that well before Oprah included it in her book club. Thought it was a very good read.

Just saw 'The Aristocrats'. Some extremely funny moments but it did not deserve a full length feature film. Should have been a 60 minute documentary.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 04:42 PM) Well, who is going to that first game against the A's. That standing O should be awesome. No way will I miss that game.

Just saw 'The Matador' with Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear. Very entertaining.

Shroud of the Thwacker - Chris Elliott

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 08:25 PM) If you don't know, don't say you do know. Well he will get back to her when he finds out.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 08:17 PM) Sorry, I can't blame Bush for not knowing everything about everything. I think he has been busy. I don't blame him for not knowing. It's just so easy to pick on him. Always fumbling and bumbling over words. Especially when he isn't prepared.

This is from Think Progress. Wonder how she was able to ask a question that obviously wasn't pre-screened? Bush was stumped during the Q&A session of his speech today by a sophomore at Kansas State: Q: My name is Tiffany Cooper. I’m a sophomore here at Kansas State and I was just wanting to get your comments about education. Recently 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I was just wondering how is that supposed to help our futures? [snip] Bush: Actually, I think what we did was reform the student loan program. We are not cutting money out of it. Watch it: VIDEO Tiffany clearly confused Bush. Not only did he have to turn to his aide for advice, but he confused truthiness with the truth. The facts: Student Loans: On Dec. 21, 2005, the Senate passed $12.7 billion in cuts to education programs — “the largest cut in student college loan programs in history.” Vice President Cheney cast the deciding vote in favor of the cuts. The bill also fixed the interest rate on student loans at 6.8 percent, “even if commercial rates are lower.” Despite Bush’s claims, students will be left off the program. Pell Grants: Pell Grants have been frozen or cut since 2002; they are now stuck at a maximum of $4,050. In his 2000 election campaign, President Bush promised to increase the maximum Pell Grant amount to $5,100. “From 2004 to 2005, 24,000 students lost their Pell grants, according to a report pre-pared by the Congressional Research Service. This was the first drop in the number of students receiving the grants in several years; the number had been growing steadily since 1999.” Full transcript below: Q: My name is Tiffany Cooper. I’m a sophomore here at Kansas State and I was just wanting to get your comments about education. Recently 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I was just wondering how is that supposed to help our futures? Bush: Education budget was cut — say it again. What was cut? Q: 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I’m wanting to know how is that supposed to help our futures? Bush: At the federal level? Q: Yes. Bush: I don’t think we’ve actually — for higher education? Student loans? Q: Yes, student loans. Bush: Actually, I think what we did was reform the student loan program. We are not cutting money out of it. In other words, people aren’t going to be cut off the program. We’re just making sure it works better as part of the reconciliation package I think she’s talking about? Yeah — It is a form of the program to make sure it functions better. In other words, we’re not taking people off student loans. We’re saving money in the student loan program because it’s inefficient. So I think the thing to look at is whether or not there will be fewer people getting student loans. I don’t think so. Secondly, on Pell Grants, we are actually expanding the number of Pell grants through our budget. Great question. The key on education is to make sure that we stay focused on how do we stay competitive into the 21st century, and I plan on doing some talking about math and science and engineering programs so that people who graduate out of college will have the skills necessary to compete in this competitive world. But I think i’m right on this. I will check when I get back to Washington, but thank you for your question.

Happy Birthday!!!!

From TIME Magazine.... When George Met Jack White House aides deny the President knew lobbyist Abramoff, but unpublished photos shown to TIME suggest there's more to the story By ADAM ZAGORIN AND MIKE ALLEN Posted Sunday, Jan. 22, 2006 As details poured out about the illegal and unseemly activities of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, White House officials sought to portray the scandal as a Capitol Hill affair with little relevance to them. Peppered for days with questions about Abramoff's visits to the White House, press secretary Scott McClellan said the now disgraced lobbyist had attended two huge holiday receptions and a few "staff-level meetings" that were not worth describing further. "The President does not know him, nor does the President recall ever meeting him," McClellan said. The President's memory may soon be unhappily refreshed. TIME has seen five photographs of Abramoff and the President that suggest a level of contact between them that Bush's aides have downplayed. While TIME's source refused to provide the pictures for publication, they are likely to see the light of day eventually because celebrity tabloids are on the prowl for them. And that has been a fear of the Bush team's for the past several months: that a picture of the President with the admitted felon could become the iconic image of direct presidential involvement in a burgeoning corruption scandal—like the shots of President Bill Clinton at White House coffees for campaign contributors in the mid-1990s. In one shot that TIME saw, Bush appears with Abramoff, several unidentified people and Raul Garza Sr., a Texan Abramoff represented who was then chairman of the Kickapoo Indians, which owned a casino in southern Texas. Garza, who is wearing jeans and a bolo tie in the picture, told TIME that Bush greeted him as "Jefe," or "chief" in Spanish. Another photo shows Bush shaking hands with Abramoff in front of a window and a blue drape. The shot bears Bush's signature, perhaps made by a machine. Three other photos are of Bush, Abramoff and, in each view, one of the lobbyist's sons (three of his five children are boys). A sixth picture shows several Abramoff children with Bush and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who is now pushing to tighten lobbying laws after declining to do so last year when the scandal was in its early stages. Most of the pictures have the formal look of photos taken at presidential receptions. The images of Bush, Abramoff and one of his sons appear to be the rapid-fire shots—known in White House parlance as clicks—that the President snaps with top supporters before taking the podium at fund-raising receptions. Over five years, Bush has posed for tens of thousands of such shots—many with people he does not know. Last month 9,500 people attended holiday receptions at the White House, and most went two by two through a line for a photo with the President and the First Lady. The White House is generous about providing copies—in some cases, signed by the President—that become centerpieces for "walls of fame" throughout status-conscious Washington. Abramoff knew the game. In a 2001 e-mail to a lawyer for tribal leader Lovelin Poncho, he crows about an upcoming meeting at the White House that he had arranged for Poncho and says it should be a priceless asset in his client's upcoming re-election campaign as chief of Louisiana's Coushatta Indians. "By all means mention (in the tribal newsletter) that the Chief is being asked to confer with the President and is coming to Washington for this purpose in May," Abramoff writes. "We'll definitely have a photo from the opportunity, which he can use." The lawyer had asked about attire, and Abramoff advises, "As to dress, probably suit and tie would work best." The e-mail, now part of a wide-ranging federal investigation into lobbying practices and lobbyists' relationships with members of Congress, offers a window into Abramoff's willingness to trade on ties to the White House and to invoke Bush's name to impress clients who were spending tens of millions of dollars on Abramoff's advice. Abramoff was once in better graces at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, having raised at least $100,000 for the President's re-election campaign. During 2001 and 2002, his support for Republicans and connections to the White House won him invitations to Hanukkah receptions, each attended by 400 to 500 people. McClellan has said Abramoff may have been present at "other widely attended" events. He was also admitted to the White House complex for meetings with several staff members, including one with presidential senior adviser Karl Rove, one of the most coveted invitations in Washington. Michael Scanlon, who is Abramoff's former partner and has pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe a Congressman, in 2001 told the New Times of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., that Abramoff had "a relationship" with the President. "He doesn't have a bat phone or anything, but if he wanted an appointment, he would have one," Scanlon said. Nonsense, say others. A former White House official familiar with some Abramoff requests to the White House said Abramoff had some meetings with Administration officials in 2001 and 2002, but he was later frozen out because aides became suspicious of his funding sources and annoyed that the issues he raised did not mesh with their agenda. A top Republican official said it was clear to him that Abramoff couldn't pick up the phone and reach Bush aides because Abramoff had asked the official to serve as an intermediary. The White House describes the number of Abramoff's meetings with staff members only as "a few," even though senior Bush aides have precise data about them. McClellan will not give details, saying he doesn't "get into discussing staff-level meetings." During a televised briefing, he added, "We're not going to engage in a fishing expedition." Pressed for particulars about Abramoff's White House contacts, McClellan said with brio, "People are insinuating things based on no evidence whatsoever." But he said he cannot "say with absolute certainty that (Abramoff) did not have any other visits" apart from those disclosed. Another White House official said, "The decision was made—don't put out any additional information." That reticence has been eagerly seized upon by some Democrats. Senate minority leader Harry Reid of Nevada wrote to Bush last week to demand details, saying Abramoff "may have had undue and improper influence within your Administration." Garza, the bolo-wearing former chairman of the Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, has fond memories of his session with Bush, which he said was held in 2001 in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next to the White House. According to e-mails in the hands of investigators, the meeting was arranged with the help of Abramoff and Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. In an April 18, 2001, e-mail to Abramoff, Norquist wrote that he would be "honored" if Abramoff "could come to the White House meeting." Garza—known in his native Kickapoo language as Makateonenodua, or black buffalo—is under federal indictment for allegedly embezzling more than $300,000 from his tribe. Through his spokesman, Garza said that during the session, Bush talked about policy matters and thanked those present for supporting his agenda, then took questions from the audience of about two dozen people. Garza told TIME, "We were very happy that Jack Abramoff helped us to be with the President. Bush was in a very good mood—very upbeat and positive." No evidence has emerged that the Bush Administration has done anything for the Kickapoo at Abramoff's behest. Three attendees who spoke to TIME recall that Abramoff was present, and three of them say that's where the picture of Bush, Abramoff and the former Kickapoo chairman was taken. The White House has a different description of the event Garza attended. "The President stopped by a meeting with 21 state legislators and two tribal leaders," spokeswoman Erin Healy said. "Available records show that Mr. Abramoff was not in attendance."

I'm hanging out with some friends tonight. We plan to watch Crash. I haven't seen it yet but am pretty psyched to check it out. Heard a lot of great things.

Judge orders payment from city for withholding evidence in civil lawsuit LOS ANGELES - A federal judge has ordered the city to pay $1.1 million in legal costs to the family of slain rapper Notorious B.I.G. as sanctions for intentionally withholding evidence during the family's civil lawsuit trial. U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper's ruling Friday didn't give the family the $2 million originally sought, but she left open the possibility of an additional $300,000. "It's pretty clear from the ruling that the judge understands this is a significant and difficult case," said Perry Sanders, an attorney for the rapper's family. Christopher Wallace, or Notorious B.I.G., was shot and killed March 9, 1997, after a party at the Petersen Automotive Museum in Los Angeles. The killing has not been solved. Cooper declared a mistrial last summer in the family's civil lawsuit after finding that a police detective hid statements linking the killing to former LAPD Officers David Mack and Rafael Perez. She also ordered the city to pay the slain rapper's family's legal costs. The plaintiffs had been trying to show that Mack, a convicted bank robber, orchestrated Wallace's killing with the help of college friend on behalf of Death Row Records chief Marion "Suge" Knight. All three have denied involvement. Attorneys for the family received an anonymous tip from a former officer that a department informant had tied Perez and Mack to the killing. Detective Steven Katz claimed he had overlooked a transcript of the remarks in his desk. But Cooper ruled that Katz and perhaps others concealed the information, which could have bolstered the family's contention that Mack was involved in the killing. A retrial is set to begin later this year. "We were disappointed with the order," said Jonathan Diamond, spokesman for City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo, whose office defended the city. "We believe the officer's conduct was inadvertent, and we will prevail at trial on the merits of the case." Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

Congrats!!!

Speaking of being able to find anything online... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10879309/

Happy birthday mreye!!!!

Sounds good.

January 18, 2006 Op-Ed Columnist Looking for a Democratic Tough Guy, or Girl By MAUREEN DOWD The Democrats were throwing haymakers at the White House this week, but they will never succeed as long as they're perceived as the party in skirts. Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton called the Bush administration on its apparently bottomless store of imperial sins. They made a lot of good points. They just didn't score any. This trio, apparently jockeying for '08, are not the best messengers. They're loaded down with baggage. Two of them, who could have stopped W. and Dick Cheney before they undid 230 years of American democracy, didn't, because they allowed themselves to be painted as girlie men. The other, a manly girl, has been so cautious and opportunistic about weighing in on everything from Schiavo to Alito and Iraq that when she finally sang out on Monday and railed against W., she sounded more soprano than basso profundo. It was easy for the Republicans to play their usual gender games and dismiss the three Democrats as whiny, shrill and ineffectual. After Mr. Gore and Senator Clinton went on the attack, Scott McClellan rebutted: "I think we know one tends to like or enjoy grabbing headlines. The other one - sounds like that the political season may be starting early." He rubbed Mr. Gore's nose in the fact that he is not the president fighting the terrorists, noting: "If he wants to be the voice for Democrats on this debate over national security, we welcome it." To lead, and not just conduct campaigns that parrot the liberal elite's editorial pages, you have to shape your own identity and political destiny. And ever since the 2000 race, the Democrats have let Republicans caricature them as effeminate. The Democrats have let the G.O.P. give them their shape, and it's an hourglass. There are moments in campaigns and policy debates when it's possible to knock the sword out of your opponent's hand. Al Gore and John Kerry whiffed. Mr. Kerry and Senator Clinton held the president's coat as he rushed to war. This all allowed the Bushies to use 9/11 as a shield and a bludgeon. They made their own rules and cast themselves as renegade heroes. If the Democrats are like the dithering "Desperate Housewives," the Republicans have come across like the counterterrorism agent Jack Bauer on "24": fast with a gun, loose with the law, willing to torture in the name of protecting the nation. Except Jack Bauer is competent. The Democrats' chronic impotence led to the Republicans' reign of incompetence. U.S. News & World Report features a menacing Dick Cheney - looking like a man who just swallowed a country - on the cover this week, with the headline "Tough Guy." The story recounts how Mr. Cheney, as Bush I's defense secretary, derided lawmakers as "a bunch of annoying gnats." Maybe that's why he doesn't feel the need to pay attention to those silly little laws they make. How many things do you have to mess up in the country and the world before you lose your reputation for machismo? Al Gore, belatedly perhaps, made an uncharacteristically bold move. He made the completely valid point that "the president of the United States has been breaking the law, repeatedly and insistently." "To eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant, imprison American citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can't he do?" he told an audience on Monday, denouncing Bush's power grab. He warned Republicans that they should be wary of setting these extralegal precedents because someday a leader with values abhorrent to them could put all that power to use. Mr. Cheney, lumbering around in unreality, continues to be unapologetic as the chorus of Democratic complaints gets louder. Above the law is exactly where he wants to be. Even when he can easily - and retroactively - get snooping warrants, he doesn't want their stinking warrants. Warrants are for sissies. "When we get all through 10 years from now," he told U.S. News, "we'll look back on this period of time and see that liberating 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq really did represent a major, fundamental shift, obviously, in U.S. policy in terms of how we dealt with the emerging terrorist threat - and that we'll also have fundamentally changed circumstances in that part of the world." Yeah. But not necessarily for the better. Whatever else you can say about the Bush crowd, they stick to their guns, even when they can't shoot straight.

I just turned it on and what $%#^ is this??? This dude is the most feminine man ever.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 01:24 PM) Did Kerry ever release all his medical records? Come on. Are you kidding me? That whole smear was debunked. Effective but false.