I don't really want to bring this up again but I do want to set the record straight. Back in February we had a major disruption in the peaceful Frog Pond when I got upset with a member for discussing my private life. Many members of the community were angry about the behavior of MilitaryTracy and wanted me to ban her from the site. A theory was offered that I was showing leniency to Tracy because she is friends with my girlfriend. You can see the beginning of the problem here.

On Monday morning, Larry will be a guest on Stephanie Miller's nationally syndicated radio show. Listen online or on a local station that carries Miller's show.

A number of members of the community are working together to come up with recommendations for clarifying and enforcing rules for the site.  Specifically, they are concerned about how to deal with members that engage in, let's call it, heated disagreements with other members.  How do we define what is acceptable and what crosses a line?  What is the best way to deal with behavior that crosses the line?  

We will prevail. Listen to the sound of victory.

Torture and illegal domestic warrantless surveillance are UNAMERICAN.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND FOREIGN POLICY (1977)
Jimmy Carter

Few presidents in modern times have been as devoted to the goal that American foreign policy should reflect the nation's highest moral ideals as Jimmy Carter. At a time when the United States was still grappling with its own problems of race relations and human rights, Carter forthrightly advocated a policy that held other countries to the highest standard possible, a standard by which, he believed, Americans would want themselves to be judged. In 1980, for example, following the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, the Carter administration cancelled American participation in the summer Olympics scheduled for Moscow as a protest against the invasion.

In a commencement speech given at Notre Dame University in June 1977, Carter reviewed what he believed should be the ideals and realities of American foreign policy. It is a far different message than the one given on the same subject by the country's first president.

Memory Lane:

20 March 2000. Thanks to Michael Evans, National Security Archive.
Source: Faxed hardcopy.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
STUDIES IN INTELLIGENCE

A collection of articles on the historical, operational, doctrinal, and theoretical aspects of intelligence

WINTER 1999-2000
UNCLASSIFIED EDITION

__________

[pages 43-51]

Unlucky SHAMROCK
Recollections from the Church Committee's Investigation of NSA

L. Britt Snider, CIA Inspector General

I'm watching New American Foundation fellow Anatol Lieven on C-SPAN.  He's thoughtful and he works with my brother.  I will find a way to get this man drunk.  In the meantime, check out this Brit's analysis of what is wrong with America.

From the transcript:

 MR. RUSSERT: You said some Democratic senators told you privately they felt intimidated to vote for the war. Why?

    SEN. FEINGOLD: They may not have used that exact word, but they certainly indicated that they felt that there was enormous political pressure. Because the White House has done a terrible job of running the fight against terrorism. A terrible job in Iraq, but they've done a brilliant job of intimidating Democrats. Somehow Democrats are afraid to say, "Look, not only was this a mistake, but it continues to be a mistake and it's being run in a mistaken way." And I cannot understand why the structure of the Democratic Party, the consultants that are here in Washington, constantly advise Democrats not to take a strong stand. This election could turn on this Iraq issue, in fact, the 2006 election, and maybe even 2008. The party that says we have a reasonable plan to bring the troops home by, by this date and to refocus on the anti-terrorism issue is the party that will win. And I believe that my political instincts tell me...

    MR. RUSSERT: But Senator, you only have 13 votes for your resolution.

    SEN. FEINGOLD: Yeah, that's not the American people. The 13 votes...

    MR. RUSSERT: But that's the Democratic Party.

    SEN. FEINGOLD: No, it's not.

    MR. RUSSERT: It's less than a third of the--in the Senate.

    SEN. FEINGOLD: The Democratic Party of this country is the people of this country. And I have been all over Wisconsin, all 72 counties, to 12 different states. I can tell you, the one thing I'm sure of, Tim, is the American people have had it with this intervention. They do want a timetable for bringing home the troops. And the fact that the United States Senate doesn't get it shouldn't surprise you.

    MR. RUSSERT: So the majority of the Democratic Senate is out of touch with the American people?

    SEN. FEINGOLD: Yes, it is at this point. Those who vote against bringing the troops home don't get it. They're not out there enough. They're not listening to the people. Frankly, they're not even looking at the polls. I saw two or three polls, Tim, in the last week that showed that a majority of the American people favor a timetable. So it is to our--you know, we lost in 2000, we lost in 2002, we lost in 2004. Why don't we try something different, like listening to the American people?

hat tip to www.howieinseattle.com

A year ago pie was flung.  The exodus lasted 4-5 days and eventually included over 500 new members.  Below the fold there's a list from the first day and a half (including mojo ratings).  

Did anyone actually watch that piece of shit Giiligan's Island remake?

See Scooter Lie (.pdf). Text below the fold for the non-adobe inclined.

The NFL draft starts at noon eastern time.  This is the first year I'll be able to watch it without a wife guilt tripping me about it the whole time.  I hope the Giants get a bad-ass linebacker like Chad Greenway from Iowa, or a guy to back up Tiki Barber, like LenDale White.   Maybe a saftey or cornerback would be okay.  What does your team need?

This is from an acquaintance of mine:

To explain my email address.

The Golden Notebook is a phenomenal and highly sociological novel by Doris Lessing, published in 1962. In it, the protagonist has four different notebooks into which she sorts her writing: a yellow one for her fiction, a black one for her musings about writing, a red one for her political life as a leader of London's Communist party, and a blue one for her personal journal. The book alternates between these various books, until the very end, when she is able to synthesize them all into a Golden Notebook - where her politics, her soul, her body, and her art all finally, for god's sake, finally, for god's sake, please, for god's sake mesh into one, and become whole.

There are very few places I have ever seen this happen with any artistic integrity. The Grapes of Wrath. The Left Hand of Darkness. Anything by Alexandr Solzhenitsyn. St. Joan of Sacramento, in her later stuff. I want to write the socialist epic too - but with heart. But outside of the actual created thing, that sort of total synthesis seems impossible.

I had a fascinating argument with my little brother Derek over the holidays. He feels as strongly about politics as I do - on the same issues. But he argued that only spiritual redemption would change the human world, and that politics was too necessarily compromised to ever be truly transformational.

I tried to state as best I could that I believe politics, in its highest and purest form, is actually spiritually transforming. Hacking out some development deal with Johnny Doc leads people into a very limited and exchange-rate view of power, even though it may be celebrated and everyone loves to brag about it later. But then there's the other type of power, the power of allowing people to see what is possible.
I have seen it happen over and over again, especially in P4C: some quiet woman who stands up in front of the crowd - maybe she has not voted in ten years, but she's just realized that her neighbors will listen to her - are in fact waiting for her to stand up and fight - are listening to everything she says - because every act of courage and honesty multiplies into more of these acts, just as rock breaks into sand.
And then there's this beautiful beach, smooth on your feet when you walk.

I guess this is why my email address is golden.notebook@gmail.com. It's a decision I've made, about literature and politics, or rather, the idea that they can be mixed successfully. Both of them only become transcendent if honest, mystically so. It would require some whirling dervish at the center, to bring them all into the centerfuge and start to turn - the words, the party, Howard Dean, the desire to write, the craven personal life, the endless staring out of windows - so they could splatter all over one's body, like the hemoglobin they are.

According to the good book 'Burnin' chapter 4, verse 3, the GOP better watch their back:

Ever since I was 12 years old I have considered Bob Marley to be my guiding light.  And I am proud to be a small axe chopping away at the tyranny we are experiencing.  

I'm tired of Welshman, Librarian, and Polydactl slandering Jerome a Paris and me, in their witchhunt against Soj.  Just look at the thread here.

If you are a masochist you can read the whole thing here link For easier reading of this thread, start here.