Me and Dick Cavett

I was surprised to accidentally discover tonight that Dick Cavett regularly blogs for the New York Times.
Now Dick Cavett and I go way back.
Not that we ever met or encountered each other, you understand. (Yeah, I know. You saw the title and thought, "Here's some neat little gossip." Well, sorry to disappoint you.)
I was a regular viewer of Cavett's late-night show on ABC. So I guess you could say we did meet, in a way. Late-night host Cavett was witty, charming and hip, all in one neat little box.
The great thing about "The Dick Cavett Show" was the guests. In a day when Johnny Carson was still the King of Late Night," Cavett had some incredibile guests.
On one show, he had John Lennon and Yoko Ono by themselves. On another, he hosted a bunch of rock musicians who'd just come from the Woodstock Music Festival. On another, he interviewed Bette Davis in an empty studio.
It was this repartee and knack for intimacy with his guests that made him beat Carson in substance where he couldn't beat him in ratings.
(Many of the great moments of "The Dick Cavett Show" have been released on a series of wondeful DVDs from Shout Factory. We recommend them highly.)
Cavett's writing today is much like his show was then. He's still low-key and very modest, though he loves to make remarks at his expense.
In his current column, he wanders into the subject of coming back to TV.

"A goodly number of you out there have written varied versions of “Why don’t you come back on TV?” I’m not sure. It does help if you’re asked."

It does, Dick. Hell, if we had the power and the resources, we'd ask. We hope there's someone smart enough who will.
So thanks for your great show.
And we highly recommend his column. We're glad the New York Times was smart enough to give him the blog.
Maybe some bright network guy will look away from the reality show blitz that is flooding TV these days and give Dick another shot.
He deserves it. As do we.

The writer's strike: We the viewers lose

As the writer's strike continues to continue, do you notice how things are getting the wee bit nastier, especially on the management side?
The recent relevation by Carson Daly that NBC issued an ultimatum to him -- go back to work or a bunch of people will get fired -- is scary.
What is so hard about passing on some of the money you make from internet and DVD sales to the people responsible for the existence of these programs and movies anyway?
But the studios seem to find some problem here. "It's our world. We control it. Tough luck."
Meanwhile, we the viewers have to put up with the increasing number of "reality" (e.g. faked crap) shows the networks are putting on place of what we would have gotten had the writers been working. Reality shows which are no better than professional wrestling. Check that. At least wrestling fans know that wrestling is fake. Reality show fans hold on to the belief that stuff like "Survivor" is real. Now, I have this bridge ...
If you agree with me, go to the Writer's Guild of America - West site and register your support, as we have done.
And let's hope management comes to its senses soon. Reality TV sucks.

Talk about romantic gifts ...

Did you hear what President Bush gave First Lady Laura Bush this year? A new
purse. And a
silver plate, according to CNN. To be fair, she didn't give him
sexy underwear, either. She gave him
mountain biking gear.
What's duller than those gifts? Having to read about them.

Random notes

Just as the title says ...

You probably are aware of the story of Mike Smith of the great Dave Clark 5, who were just selected for induction in the Rock Hall of Fame. Smith did an acclaimed (by all who saw him, if not the critics) tour of the U.S. last year. Upon returning home, he had a freak accident at home and is now confined to a wheelchair. He just was discharged from the hospital and finally sent home. The good news is that Smith, on his website, says he is making plans to attend the Rock Hall induction.
From his website:

Last night, David called us and told us the good news about the DC5 being inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame!!! Tonight, Margo Lewis, my agent from TCI in New York, called and congratulated me, and gave us all the details about when and where the induction will take place. This is something I have worked for all of my life, and to put it mildly, I am absolutely thrilled to death!!!!! Charlie and I are definitely already making plans for crossing the pond in March to receive my award, and we can't wait to see all of you again. David is coming over for dinner on Sunday and we will all celebrate the good news!!! I haven't spoken to the other boys yet but I can tell you that David and I are really honored, and thank everybody that voted for us. WOW WOW WOW!

We heartily agree. Congrats, Mike. We can't wait to see you with the other guys in March.
----

Here's an interesting story we weren't aware of before. It's fairly well known that NBC talk show host
Conan O'Brien attended Harvard in his college days. But here's the part we didn't know, from imdb.com:

When asked to give a speech at Harvard about his role on "Batman" (1966/II), Burt Ward brought the original costume, said to be valued at half a million dollars. Some students came up to him dressed as security guards and told him they would keep the costume safe. Then in the middle of the speech, one student stood up and asked, "When is a costume not a costume? When it's stolen." The lights dimmed and the students grabbed the costume and made off. After snapping pictures with one another in the cape, they later called Ward and gave the costume back. The ringleader of the gang? Harvard Lampoon editor, Conan O'Brien.

(That's from Conan's imdb.com bio. The story is also on Burt Ward's official site, too. Gotta wonder if Ward has ever appeared on Conan's show.)
----

Happy holidays, everyone!

Wishing on a Wish Book

So we went to Sears last night looking for a vacuum cleaner and I happened to pick up this year's version of the Sears Wish Book.
Now, when I was younger, this was a holiday tradition. It was a huge catalog probably running about 400 pages and 90 percent of it was toys! All the toys you ever wanted to see -- and would never get to own -- were in it.
The title became reality. Wish. Wish. Wish.
Fast forward to 2008. This year's Wish Book is a mere 188 pages.
And the toys don't start until page 86!
I feel sorry for our youngsters. They don't know what they're missing. (Though it's probably all under the tree, anyway.)

We told you so ...

When we said we were terrible at handicapping TIME's Person of the Year, we were right. And we were wrong in saying the winner wouldn't come out of TIME's short list. The winner is Vladimir Putin. We can't figure the reason why he was chosen.
Like the headline said, we told you so.

It's THAT time of the year

It's December. And you know what December brings, right?
But there's something else that's always a part of December. It's the guessing game of who'll be TIME's Person of the Year. (That was the first thing you thought of, right?)
This year, the list of potential winners is as varied as any. These include Vladimir Putin of Russia, Al Gore. J.K. Rowling, Hu Jintao of China, and Steve Jobs, all mentioned on TIME's site.
Of course, calling it Person of the Year is almost a misnomer. What some people don't grasp is that the award goes to the person or persons that has affected our lives the most during the year.
The name sounds like it's a good guy award, but through the years, some less than honorable folks have gotten the nod. Adolf Hitler won it in 1938, Josef Stalin in '39, then again in '42. We guess TIME didn't want to make anyone feel bad.
Charles Lindbergh won the first one in 1927. Since then, it's been won by such well-known names as Gandhi, Churchill (twice), FDR (three times), Krushchev, DeGaulle, Queen Elizabeth, JFK, Pope John XXIII, Nixon (twice), Reagan (twice), Gorbachev (twice), Bill Clinton and both George Bushes (twice for the younger) and lesser knowns as the computer, U.S. soldiers, those under 25, middle Americans and YOU getting the surprising (some would say cop-out) award last year.
So who will get it this year? We're a lousy handicapper, but from TIME's short list -- which you can almost guarantee doesn't contain the eventual winner -- we'd pick Steve Jobs.
However, there are lots of other possibilites. Just remember the winner won't necessarily be someone we'll remember fondly.
Britney Spears, anyone?

More Dark Knight stuff

Yesterday, we posted three official trailers from the "Batman Begins" sequel, coming in the summer. Here's a few more goodies.


A truck stunt, seen in one of the trailers, as it was filmed.


And a little more behind-the-scenes footage

And is that Heath Ledger as the Joker?

You can't keep anything a secret anymore ...

A teaser for "The Dark Knight"

Just happened to scout around on YouTube tonight for the trailer from the forthcoming "Batman" film called "The Dark Knight."
Good grief, Batman! There are a ton of videos there. Now, certainly, the majority are fake, but there are some vids with stills and at least a couple with footage that appears to be legit. The two posted here are, it appears, actual teasers.
Can't wait till next summer.
(For a little more info, MTV has a long article about the film here.)




Another "Dark Knight" teaser


This last one has the best look at the Joker. Cesar Romero he won't be.


Late addition: Here's the seven-minute prologue for the film. Not the greatest quality, but ....

Mad Magazine's 20 dumbest people, events and things of 2007

This is the January issue cover story that just arrived at our house. (And no, I'm not the one with the subscription.)
Anyway, here's a rundown of the list. Notice how all the political ones involve conservatives. Does Mad have a liberal bias? (ha ha!):
20. Sanjaya (Indian bummer)
19. The latest animal to go on the endangered species list (the family pet, due to tainted pet food. Hey, I didn't say they were all funny.)
18. The Senator in the bathroom stall (Craig's lust)
17. Alberto Gonzales (the nation's chief flawed officer)
16. Lindsay Lohan (human crash test dummy)
15. "If I Did It" by O.J. Simpson (Murder, he wrote)
14. The creation museums (You can't Darwin them all.)
13. The Sopranos finale (Bada Bing! Bada Boo!)
12. Scooter Libby (A man for all treasons)
11. Wild horses' ass (Keith Richards sniffs his father's ashes)
10. Isiah Washington bashes homosexuals (Gay's animosity.)
9. The Giant Toy Recall (a China pattern)
8. The crazy diapered astronaut (Houston, we have a mental problem)
7. Paris Hilton (the ultimate dumb blonde joke)
6. The Anna Nicole Smith paternity trial (Who's your daddy?)
5. Walter Reed Army Hospital scandal (toying with men's lives)
4. Britney Spears (strife in the fast lane)
3. Imus (Nappy headed host)
2. Bush breaks presidential record for time off. (Vacation daze)
1. Michael Vick's bad newz kennel (Pitbullsh*t)

All he was saying was give peace a chance

The sad anniversary of John Lennon's death was earlier this week. Yoko Ono, as she usually does, issued a statement.

December 8, 2007

I miss you, John. 27 years later, I still wish I could turn back the clock to the Summer of 1980. I remember everything - sharing our morning coffee, walking in the park together on a beautiful day, and seeing your hand stretched to mine - holding it, reassuring me that I shouldn't worry about anything because our life was good.

I had no idea that life was about to teach me the toughest lesson of all. I learned the intense pain of losing a loved one suddenly, without warning, and without having the time for a final hug and the chance to say, "I love you," for the last time. The pain and shock of that sudden loss is with me every moment of every day. When I touched John's side of our bed on the night of December 8th, 1980, I realized that it was still warm. That moment has haunted me for the past 27 years - and will stay with me forever.

Even harder for me is watching what was taken away from our beautiful boy, Sean. ?He lives in silent anger over not having his Dad, whom he loved so much, around to share his life with. I know we are not alone. Our pain is one shared by many other families who are suffering as the victims of senseless violence. This pain has to stop.

Let's not waste the lives of those we have lost. Let's, together, make the world a place of love and joy and not a place of fear and anger. This day of John's passing has become more and more important for so many people around the world as the day to remember his message of Peace and Love and to do what each of us can to work on healing this planet we cherish.

Let's: Think Peace, Act Peace, and Spread Peace. John worked for it all his life. He said, "there's no problem, only solutions."

Remember, we are all together. We can do it, we must. I love you!

Yoko Ono Lennon

But hearing the man himself is like being lifted up.
Go to http://www.imaginepeace.com and click on the video of John. It's an extended discussion by John of peace. There's footage there that I don't recall seeing before. But hearing him talk about it again is uplifting. It's sad he's not here to say it in person.
The site, an authorized site from Yoko Ono, also has a statement from Yoko (different from the one above) and a downloadable jpg of the WAR IS OVER! IF YOU WANT IT! poster that John and Yoko spread round in the late '60s to use as you want.
Good idea. War is over. If you want it.
Thanks, John.
(And thank you, Yoko. Happy Xmas.)

And the war drags on ...

Congress is on the verge of giving President Bush more money to spend in Iraq. Another $70 billion, to be exact. That's an obscene amount.
And CNN reports the deal isn't even linked to a commitment to end the fighting and bring the troops home.
Americans should be furious. More than furious. They should be outraged. How long will this stupid war go on?
As another folk song says, "When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?"

Imus boosts WABC

No surprise really that Don Imus' first week back on the air did well in the ratings.
Mediaweek reports that a special tabulation of portable people meter data in New York released by Arbitron Monday showed that the number of meters exposed to Imus’ first show between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. increased an average 87 percent compared to morning drive the previous 10 Mondays.
It's too soon to say if this will be permanent. If Imus gets wider distribution, it certainly will be.
For now, those of you outside of New York can hear Imus at http://www.imusonair.com/.

Quotables from "Countdown With Keith Olbermann" Nov. 26-30, 2007

NEW YORK – December 5, 2007 – Following are quotes from "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" for the week of November 26-30. "Countdown With Keith Olbermann." Complete program transcripts are available at www.tv.msnbc.com.


[Referring to the dog that bit a player during the Auburn vs. Alabama football game] Olbermann: "The dog was escorted from the sidelines and caught the first flight to Atlanta for the Michael Vick sentencing."

Olbermann: "The value of celebrity endorsements [in Presidential elections] is in doubt, however, according to a recent Pew Poll that shows newspapers carry more weight than celebrities, that and endorsements from, say, Bill O'Reilly would give the recipient a 10 percent net loss of support."

[Referring to reports that Britney Spears is pregnant]
Joel McHale, E!'s "The Soup": "She [Britney Spears] said her life would be turned around by having a baby. You are right. It would be an entire 360."
Olbermann: "And the skid marks would be seen up and down the boulevard."

Olbermann: "Gail Knight, a 26-year-old student in London, England, seeing a need and coming up with an idea. Just going into service there; if you text the word 'toilet' from your cell phone to SatLab service, it will send you back a text message telling you where the nearest public toilet is. Anybody tell Senator Larry Craig?"

# # #

NBC wins Freedom Watch tussle, despite righties' spin

NBC, after a battle with the right-wing group Freedom Watch, has decided to run their ad sending holiday wishes to the troops without the group's URL, the sticking point for the network.
It was NBC's decision that the URL makes the ad political. Freedom Watch removed the URL. The ad will run.

"We have reviewed and changed our ad standards guidelines and made the decision that our policy will apply to content only and not to a referenced Web site. Based on these amended standards the Freedom's Watch ad will begin to run as early as Sunday," NBC was quoted by the Associated Press

But righties, notably dumb cluck pseudo pundit Michelle Malkin, are spinning it as NBC did the dreaded flip flop.
So tell me Michelle. How does Freedom Watch caving in become a flip flop? Only you would draw a conclusion like that.

We miss you, John Lennon

Yoko Ono released the following statement for this, the anniversary of John's death:

December 8, 2007

I miss you, John. 27 years later, I still wish I could turn back the clock to the Summer of 1980. I remember everything - sharing our morning coffee, walking in the park together on a beautiful day, and seeing your hand stretched to mine - holding it, reassuring me that I shouldn't worry about anything because our life was good.

I had no idea that life was about to teach me the toughest lesson of all. I learned the intense pain of losing a loved one suddenly, without warning, and without having the time for a final hug and the chance to say, "I love you," for the last time. The pain and shock of that sudden loss is with me every moment of every day. When I touched John's side of our bed on the night of December 8th, 1980, I realized that it was still warm. That moment has haunted me for the past 27 years - and will stay with me forever.

Even harder for me is watching what was taken away from our beautiful boy, Sean. ?He lives in silent anger over not having his Dad, whom he loved so much, around to share his life with. I know we are not alone. Our pain is one shared by many other families who are suffering as the victims of senseless violence. This pain has to stop.

Let's not waste the lives of those we have lost. Let's, together, make the world a place of love and joy and not a place of fear and anger. This day of John's passing has become more and more important for so many people around the world as the day to remember his message of Peace and Love and to do what each of us can to work on healing this planet we cherish.

Let's: Think Peace, Act Peace, and Spread Peace. John worked for it all his life. He said, "there's no problem, only solutions."

Remember, we are all together. We can do it, we must. I love you!

Yoko Ono Lennon

A supersize rumor about Osama bin Laden

You probably know the name Morgan Spurlock. He's the inventive guy who made "Supersize Me" a couple of years ago. That's the documentary about his diet of McDonald's supersize meals and what it did to him.
If you've heard the rumors that have been circulating, Sperlock's scored more than a McDonald's double bacon cheeseburger. He may have scored Osama bin Laden, according to a story on MSNBC.
Trouble is he's not saying one way or the other. But quotes from people who have seen an excerpt of the film, which will premiere at Sundance next year, have mentioned "the Holy Grail" in describing it.
Is this all hype? We suspect we'll hear one way or the other before it premieres if he found him.
Just wondering, though. Why the secrecy if he did?

Just sitting here thinking ...

One thing that boggles my mind is the intense fascination -- no, makes that slobbering worship -- modern society has with celebrities. Gossip columns and websites follow their every change of clothes, every haircut, every meal, every everything!
I almost feel sorry for them.
I'll bet a couple of celebs would love to have everything they did on video.
But what if -- all the photogs would just leave the celebs alone for a day or two. Which celebrities would be happy -- and which would actually miss them?

Michael Savage makes some noise (as usual)

Conservative hate-monger and talk show host Michael Savage has filed a lawsuit against CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) for copyright violations for using excerpts of his broadcasts in a campaign to get advertisers to drop his show.
Here are some excerpts from the suit:

"“The Savage Nation” is unique among so-called “Talk Radio” in that it combines serious intellectual analysis with dramatic and emotional soul baring that the show advertises as “Psychological Nudity”. This performance aspect of the show is critical in that it conveys an emotional power and a fundamental honesty to the programming that is meaningful to the listening audience."

Right.

CAIR has misappropriated copyright protected material from Michael Savage and made this material available on its website. This is actionable regardless of whether or not CAIR had a genuine charitable purpose in using Michael Savage’s material. Even genuine charities must gain the permission of a copyright holder before using the copyrighted work for fund raising or other purposes.

The CAIR misappropriation was done for political purposes unrelated to civil rights and unrelated to CAIR’s tax exempt status.

The copyright infringement was done to raise funds for CAIR so that it could self perpetuate and continue to disseminate propaganda on behalf of foreign interests that are opposed to the continued existence of the United States of America as a free nation.

CAIR repackaged the content of Michael Savage’s show and manipulated that stolen content so that it could be used by CAIR to raise funds. Little or none of the money raised went to alleged “civil rights” activities.

The CAIR repackaging damaged the work and damaged the public image of the work because it was taken out of context, the introductory remarks were omitted and the context of “The Savage Nation” were removed. It was deliberately designed to obscure the specific message conveyed by Michael Savage. The actual message while highly provocative and strongly worded, was not intended as an attack on people of faith and in fact, Michael Savage is well known as a person of faith."

It wasn't? He is? How laughable is that.

"The stolen material as repackaged by CAIR was intended to portray both the material and the creator of the material, Michael Savage as having a blanket opposition to a particular religion. This was not the context of the statement and it is not consistent with the content of the programming as a whole."

Savage, in the excerpts of the show he's being sued for, called the Quran a "book of hate" and said Muslims "need deportation." Right. No hate there. Sigh.
Savage puts out this type of crap for his listeners on a daily basis. That conservatives give him any credit at all puts them on the low end of the human spectrum.
Savage is a publicity hound and it wouldn't surprise us if this lawsuit is just to say he's suing Muslims. We're not a lawyer, but someone should tell Savage he's a public figure and people using excerpts of his program fall under the Fair Use law. In other words, his lawsuit is frivolous.
For anyone interested, the full lawsuit is here.

Welcome back, Don Imus

Though we didn't object to his firing, we're glad to see Don Imus is back on the air. What's refreshing is that in his opening today, he was honest about the events of the last eight months.
“I will never say anything in my lifetime that will make any of these young women at Rutgers regret or feel foolish that they accepted my apology and forgave me," he told the live audience at his show taping. “ “And no one else will say anything else on my program that will make anyone think that I didn’t deserve a second chance.”
Imus said when he would get mad about being fired, “I would remind myself that if I hadn’t said what I said, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion.”
“I think things worked out the way they should have worked out,” he said. “We now have the opportunity to have a better program, to obviously diversify the cast.”
A lot of people will be listening his radio show. And watching Imus. We think he's learned his lesson. We hope so.

Will Bush veto bill with tighter fuel economy mandates?

A bill, H.R. 6, providing for a 40 percent increase in fuel efficiency for new cars and light trucks by 2020 for a fleetwide average of 35 miles per gallon appears to be headed for passage in the House and Senate, reports the Associated Press.
"A 35-mpg standard is something that just a year and a half ago, most people in Washington thought would never see the light of day," said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., as quoted by the AP.
Just what the doctor ordered, huh?
You'd think so.
The bill also includes provisions for use of ethanol in gasoline, plus the groundwork for alternative energy sources such as solar power for electricity.
Democratic leaders hope they can get the bill to the president's desk before the end of the year.
But the big question is will the president sign it? The AP story says some Republicans have complained that the bill does not do enough to increase domestic production of oil.
Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement Saturday that if the bill clears Congress, he would recommend that Bush veto it.
Under a 1975 law passed after the Arab oil embargo, each automaker's fleet of cars must average 27.5 miles per gallon and its light trucks, including sport utility vehicles, pickups and minivans, 22.2 miles per gallon.
For years, a group of Republicans wary of regulation and Democrats from vehicle-producing states - with fierce lobbying by U.S. auto companies and auto unions - have opposed tougher standards, contending it would lead to lighter, less-safe vehicles, threaten auto industry jobs and limit consumer choice.
Just two years ago, during consideration of the last big energy bill, a proposal to increase the standard to 40 miles per gallon by 2016 drew just 28 votes in the 100-member Senate.
But with $4 a gallon gasoline looming, those arguments may become irrelevant.
And some of those arguing for tougher fuel economy standards argue it's a national security issue, in that it would lesson our dependence on foreign oil.
But something has to be done. We demand it. We need it now. Hell, we needed this at least a decade ago.
Given the situation, how can the president not sign this bill?

Here's a Senate press release about the bill.

U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation
For Immediate Release
June 21st, 2007
U.S. SENATE APPROVES INCREASE IN FUEL ECONOMY STANDARD
Adopted Energy Act Increases Fleetwide Fuel Economy Average to 35 MPGs by Model Year 2020
WASHINGTON, D.C. – For the first time in more than three decades, the U.S. Senate voted to increase the average fuel economy standard for cars, trucks, and SUVs by 10 miles per gallon over ten years. The fuel economy provision comes as part of the Senate-amended H.R. 6, the Energy Act, which the full Senate adopted today by a vote of 65-27.



Committee Vice Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Senator Thomas Carper (D-Del.) proposed the adopted compromise provision, with the cosponsorship of Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii), and Committee Members including Senators Trent Lott (R-Miss.), John Kerry, (D-Mass.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), and John Sununu (R-N.H.).



The bipartisan compromise fuel efficiency language preserves the core of the Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act introduced earlier this Congress by Senators Feinstein and Snowe, which was reported by the Commerce Committee in May.



Senator Inouye issued the following statement on the bipartisan compromise amendment included in the Energy Act.




“Mr. President, I rise in support of Amendment 1792, filed by Senators Stevens, Snowe, Alexander, and Carper, and cosponsored by Senators Feinstein and Kerry, among others. This bipartisan compromise reflects the input of Members, industry, and consumers, and is good policy for our nation.



I particularly wish to congratulate Senator Dianne Feinstein for her dedicated efforts over the years to update our nation’s fuel economy standards. The success of the amendment today is a tribute to her tenacious and skilled advocacy.



At every step of the legislative process following the introduction of S. 357, the Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act, by Senators Feinstein and Olympia Snowe, the authors and cosponsors of S. 357 and Members of the Senate Commerce Committee have worked together in a bipartisan manner to address the concerns of the automotive industry. In particular, this group worked hard to ensure that automakers will not face a significant burden when meeting the first improvements to fuel economy standards in more than 30 years.



I am pleased that Members from both sides of the aisle continued to work together to produce the amendment adopted today. While addressing a number of the concerns raised by automakers regarding the Feinstein-Snowe Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act as reported by the Commerce Committee, the amendment preserves the core goals and fuel savings of Ten-in-Ten.



The amendment directs the Secretary of Transportation to increase fuel economy for automobiles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, as in Ten-in-Ten. But in the years that follow from 2021 to 2030, the Secretary shall increase fuel economy at a maximum feasible rate instead of at a pace of 4 percent per annum.



If we have a breakthrough in battery technology, then 4 percent per year may well be too low. If there are unforeseen problems, 4 percent may be too high. The amendment will allow the Secretary to set an appropriate standard in the future.



The Kerry-Cantwell second degree amendment to the Stevens-Carper-Feinstein-Snowe-Kerry amendment also directs the Secretary to establish and implement an action plan to ensure that 50 percent of the vehicles for sale in 2015 are alternative fuel automobiles. We must encourage manufacturers to improve their fleets’ fuel economy by exploring new technologies and producing alternative fuel vehicles. I commend Senators Kerry and Cantwell for developing this compromise amendment that addresses this important goal.



By adopting the bipartisan compromise amendment and H.R. 6 as amended, we will place the country on a path toward reducing our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, protecting the environment, and helping consumers deal with rising gas prices.



Finally, I wish to express my appreciation for the excellent efforts of the dedicated staff on the Senate Commerce Committee including David Strickland, Alex Hoehn-Saric, Ken Nahigian, Mia Petrini, and Jared Bomberg.”

Here's a press release from Sen. Susan Collins of Maine about the bill.

And here is the big matchup ... ALF vs. O'Reilly

This is actually very funny. Unlike the Stephen Colbert interview, O'Reilly actually loosened up. ALF managed to get in a few digs, too.

Enjoy!

O'Reilly to debate .... ALF??

I saw this earlier today on YouTube, but I thought it might be a joke. Apparently not. O'Reilly tonight is debating .... ALF? Yes, ALF of the old NBC TV series?
It looks like Bill has finally found his intellectual equal.

Brokaw cuts through the talk radio spin zone

Veteran NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw put conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham on the defensive earlier this week when he appeared on her radio talk show to plug his new book, "Boom!"
isn’t a huge fan of talk radio, saying it has a “mob mentality.” He said talk radio inevitably has “a lot of wannabes” and that, eventually, “you don’t have civil discourse, you don’t have a forum, then, for this country to come together and make decisions and hear each other. ... My big issue in 2008: We all have to re-enlist as citizens. ... In 100 years when they look back on it, what are they going to say about the role of citizens in this country?”
The conversation turned to Rush Limbaugh.
“A lot of people, Tom, make a lot of money trashing [President] Bush or trashing faith. I just resent the whole — you mention Rush Limbaugh in the book, but you kind of have a throwaway line about Limbaugh and it’s in the drug section, and without a doubt Rush Limbaugh is the most influential [baby] boomer, I think, in the media today. There is no person who has had more of a profound impact on the way people think about politics than Limbaugh, and he gets a line in the drug thing, which I thought was ... I don’t think that’s right,” Ingraham said.
“My problem with the whole spectrum is, you know what Rush’s whole deal is. He doesn’t want to hear another point of view except his,” Brokaw replied.
Ingraham said, “I disagree. He talks to all sorts of people. He doesn’t interview people like I do ...”
“He doesn’t interview people. And he mocks people,” Brokaw retorted.
“He’s not an objective person; he doesn’t say he is. That’s the difference between him and anchors on some of our networks who have a political agenda but then pretend that they’re objective,” Ingraham crowed back.
Brokaw, finally put a lid on the debate, saying, “Oh, Laura, we’re never going to resolve this — you have your point of view and I have mine. ... My problem with talk radio is they mock anybody else’s point of view, and they do it often in a mindless fashion.”
Brokaw hit the nail on the head. The majority of talk radio, especially conservative talk radio, is a rooting section. There's little or no dialog taking place.
And people wonder why the political divide is getting wider.

An inconvenient moment: Bush to honor Gore's Nobel Peace Prize today (Monday) at White House

From: ABC News's website:

Forget the Mideast peace talks. A meeting that may require even greater diplomacy will take place Monday in the Oval Office, when President Bush receives America's Nobel Prize winners — including his one-time rival, Al Gore.

Ah, the irony. Bush has to suck it up and honor Gore for a prize Bush isn't likely to ever win. Gore's star is rising while Bush's is falling. If you believe in karma coming back to bite you, this is it.
Congrats, Al Gore.

Fox News is biased ... if you believe Fred Thompson

I love the irony here.
Fred Thompson's presidential campaign is barely keeping people awake. It's sinking in its own quicksand. So when you need to do something to get some attention, don't lay the blame where it belongs. Lay it on an easy mark.
This morning on "Fox News Sunday," Thompson suggested that Fox News is biased against his campaign.
Fox News ... biased?
"This has been a constant mantra of Fox, to tell you the truth," he told host Chris Wallace.
"...for you to highlight nothing but the negatives in terms of the polls and then put on your own guys who have been predicting for four months, really, that I couldn't do it, kind of skew things a little bit. There's a lot of other opinion out there."
Wallace denied that "Fox has been going after you" and asked him, "Do you know anybody who thinks you've run a great campaign, sir?"
"It's not for me to come here and try to convince you that somebody else thinks I've run a great campaign," Thompson retorted.
Nice deflection. Thompson had the chance to give a solid answer. He hasn't done it so far in his campaign. Why start now?

The Coalition of the Unwilling has a new member

Australia's contribution to fighting the Iraq War was small, but now likely that it'll be a lot smaller.
Its newly elected prime minister, Kevin Rudd of the Labor Party, had campaigne on the promise that an elected Labor government would bring all Australian troops in Iraq home next year. The Land Down Under would thus becomes the latest member of the Coalition of the Unwilling.
The man he defeated, John Howard, is unlikely to retain his seat and will become the first Australian leader to be voted out of parliament since 1929. You think the Iraq War had anything to do with this?
Rudd campaigned on a fairly liberal platform, also promising to address climate change, restore workers' bargaining power, in addition to withdrawing Australian troops from Iraq.
It may not be easy. According to Bloomberg, Rudd, 50, takes control of an Australian economy that has grown for 16 years. He managed, however, to keep his spending pledges to less than Howard to convince voters he was better-equipped to keep down borrowing costs at a time when the country was facing inflation.
Rudd has said one of his first moves will be to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to counter climate change with mandatory greenhouse-gas reductions, which Howard wouldn't do.
It seems as though the Coalition of the Unwilling's newest member is willing to make commitments his predecessor wouldn't.
He's ready, willing and able, you might say.

Obsessed, they are!

So I'm sure everyone knows about Conservapedia, the right-wing's answer to Wikipedia. The site is an encyclopedia filled with right-wing skew, supposedly negating the imaginary left-wing bias of Wikipedia.
Well, here's something very interesting. What are the most viewed pages on Conservapedia? Information on President Bush? BUZZ! Dick Cheney? BUZZ! Nancy Pelosi? BUZZ! Bill Clinton? BUZZ! Hillary Clinton? BUZZ!
Well, look at the statistics. The top 10:

1. Main Page‎ [1,902,789]
2. Homosexuality‎ [1,542,606]
3. Homosexuality and Hepatitis‎ [516,739]
4. Homosexuality and Promiscuity‎ [420,162]
5. Homosexuality and Parasites‎ [387,874]
6. Homosexuality and Domestic Violence‎ [351,403]
7. Gay Bowel Syndrome‎ [343,110]
8. Homosexuality and Gonorrhea‎ [331,085]
9. Homosexuality and Mental Health‎ [276,967]
10. Homosexuality and Syphilis‎ [265,037]

Fixated, you say?

Eighteen minutes missing forever

On Nov. 21, 1973, J. Fred Buzhardt testified and made the first relevation that 18 minutes of taped conversation between Richard Nixon and H.R. Haldeman was found to be missing. Rose Mary Woods testified she erased five minutes of tape by accident, but no explanation was ever found for the rest of the missing discussion.
It's one of the big mysteries of the Watergate scandal, but what could those 18 minutes add? The speculation all through the years has been pointing more of a finger at Nixon's role.
Ironically, the existence of the taping system was originally revealed by Senate Counsel Fred Thompson, who was questioning White House Aide Alexander Butterfield. Yes, that Fred Thompson. The Republican running (some say walking) for president.
Apparently the National Archives is still making an effort to reveal the 18 minutes. Would it do any good?
Hardly. Nixon's role in Watergate is well known. There really isn't much more trouble he could have gotten into than he already did.

Scott McClellan tears the roof off the (White) house

In his new book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and What's Wrong with Washington,"
to be published next year, he lays a devastating truth out for the eternally optimistic supporters of George Bush to see.
Here's an excerpt from the book:

The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

There was one problem. It was not true.

I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the President himself.

Read more here. All we can say is wow.

Conservative talk radio -- dumb and dumber

In the debate over why conservative talk radio outdraws liberal talk radio, I've found the answer and it's incredibly simple.
Conservative talk radio is very simplistic and dumbed down. Dumb and dumber. It's easier to instill fear in your listeners by saying things shouldn't change or they should revert back using old prejudices than to promote intelligent solutions.
They don't call liberals progressives for nothing. Conservatives aren't.
Conservative radio is a mental comfort zone. It's easier for people to lay back and not move forward in their thinking. That, of course, is the weakness of conservatives as a whole.
Look at the debate over immigration and how talk show host have used the logic of prejudice to make their point.
Look at the whole recent "Redacted" controversy manufactured by Bill O'Reilly, who isn't a true conservative talk show host, but more like a sideshow clown. O'Reilly did a cheerleading act to get his audiences to hate "Redacted" before it was released and before even he saw it. Don't bother suggesting your audience judge for themselves. Just tell them it's bad. Easy way out. No work on their part. Dumb and dumber.
Liberal radio, on the other hand, isn't dumbed down. Actually, if there's one thing liberals probably do too much of on the radio is they intellectualize. You don't see a lot of conservative show hosts do that. Their audiences would turn them off in a millisecond.
Conservatives follow the old axiom Keep It Simple, Stupid. Keep 'em entertained. Conservatives wisely keep their ideas in basic terms even a child could understand. Most liberal talk show hosts don't. Conservative ideas generally don't challenge. They rely on existing ideas and prejudices. That's why it's so easy to listen to conservative talk radio. It doesn't take any brainpower.
Most of all, conservatives want to dictate everyone's values. Don't criticize the president. Fund the war and shut up. Marriage is reserved for heterosexuals only. And the most outlandish of all: I got mine, so the hell with everyone else. All too simple answers to complex questions. Conservatives have no compassion, no soul and no values -- unless it benefits them.
Liberals, however, will ultimately triumph in the end. Conservatives may apply the brakes, but liberals supply the propellers. You can't move forward without them.

"Redacted" -- the rhetoric and the reality

Director Brian DePalma got somewhat of an early Christmas present thanks to Bill O'Reilly's venting over DePalma's new film, "Redacted," which O'Reilly criticized without seeing. He said it was unAmerican and would endanger the troops.
Well, we have seen it and O'Reilly, as usual, is wrong.
O'Reilly's overreaction has certainly boosted the visibility of the film. "Redacted" may not do what DePalma hopes -- end the war -- but it delivers a powerful message about the war's effect on its soldiers.
"Redacted" is actually a combination of several stories merged into one film. It's the account of Angel Salazar (played well by Izzy Diaz), who spends a lot of time taking video of his fellow soldiers. Patrick Carroll as Reno Flake and Daniel Stewart Sherman as B.B. Rush also figure heavily into the story and both do a great job.
The big question, though, is is O'Reilly's criticism valid? Does it do an injustice to the troops?
Well, if you are one of those who believes anything that makes the troops look less than perfect is an injustice to them, well, needless to say you won't like it. But despite the less than rosy picture it paints, "Redacted" basically allows that war is hell and soldiers are human, even despite the ugly events depicted in the film.
Do these events and the film itself cast a shadow on the troops? We say no.
We all know war is hell. War movies are hell. "Redacted" isn't the first movie to show the ugly side of war. It won't be the last. It does, however, reveal the injustice of American occupation in a land where we are not always welcome.
But this isn't the fault of the troops, who are there to do a job. It's the fault of our government, who never should have gotten us there in the first place.
"Redacted" is a film that makes a good point, but it certainly isn't enough to make it the be-all, end-all at getting us out of Iraq. That will take the enlightenment of the politicians in Washington, D.C. -- either this administration (unlikely) or the next one.

The "Redacted" official movie site

Bush -- "Come fly with me"

So Bush, floundering at the polls, make a pre-Thanksgiving attempt to get on the good side of the American people. He ordered the Pentagon to open unused military airspace from Florida to Maine to create "a Thanksgiving express lane" for commercial airliners from Wednesday through Sunday next week, for the busiest days of Thanksgiving travel.
While this make it look like he's doing something significant, this really accomplishes nothing.
For one, it doesn't reduce the number of planes at airports. There will still be as many or more than last year.
It also doesn't reduce the passengers. In fact, there will probably be more people wanting to fly.
And last, it doesn't add any hours to the day to give planes more time to fly.
The "express lane" only affects East Coast flights, not West Coast. So right away, a significant part of the country is excluded.
This is just another case of dumb Bush logic. A move that overall probably won't accomplish much if anything.
Kind of like that search for weapons of mass destruction.

More smut from Fox

Brave New Films has created a new site called Fox News Porn to show some of the sexy footage that seems to run rampant on Fox News Channel. Their reaction to all this: "Can you quote us so not giving a shit?"

If all this bothers you, you can find a list of Fox News advertisers at http://foxattacks.com/attacker/?utm_source=rgemail.

Limbaugh implying threats to Blitzer from Clintons

Rush Limbaugh will do anything to kiss up to his audience. And, unfortunately, the dittobrains that listen to him will agree with just about anything he says.
So when he implies that the death of Vince Foster somehow involved the Clintons, the conservative idiots eat it up. And when he further suggests that Wolf Blitzer may be in danger for hosting the debate tonight, the Limbaugh lambs love it.
Republicans, as Media Matters shows, will bend over to any level to take a pot shot at Hillary Clinton.
Anyone who thinks for themselves and isn't a dittobrain knows the real truth. It's that Republicans are a sad and desperate lot.

Gratuitous sex? You'll probably find it breaking on Fox News

The folks that brought you "Walmart: The High Cost of Low Price" and "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism" have just released
"FOX Attacks: Decency," which, according to their description, "shows how Fox News routinely peddles explicit
sexual content for ratings, even while Bill O'Reilly and other FOX
personalities moralize about how popular culture is degrading
civilization with wanton sexual imagery."
Alongside the video is a petition to the FCC, asking the agency to
require cable operators to offer an "a la carte" subscription option
so that subscribers are not forced to pay for Fox's smut.
"FOX News shows more sexualized violence and humiliation than probably
any other network -- all in the name of condemning it -- while
under-showing violence in Iraq, all in the name of supporting it,"
said Gloria Steinem after watching the video. "After this video, smart
viewers and advertisers will boycott FOX."


Here, by the way, is a more complete version of the spring break story you see in the above clip as shown by Jon Stewart. Fair and balanced?

Rosie O'Donnell blurts out a scoop

In this link on MSNBC.com, in contrast to the story elsewhere on MSNBC that says talks are ongoing, the story quotes O'Donnell as saying the deal is done and her MSNBC talk show will be happening. She apparently will be directly competing against Hannity and Colmes and Larry King.

Also during her trip, O’Donnell attended a book signing in Miami, where she revealed she had just signed a deal to host a TV talk show, according to podcast LyingOnTheBeach. O’Donnell reportedly said her show would rival Larry King’s, though she did not mention the CNN host by name, merely alluding to him with a reference to his trademark suspenders.

From LyingontheBeach:

She was dishing pretty hard at her so called “family” on The View when all of a sudden she blurted out that she just signed a deal (the ink is still wet) to host her own TV talk show competing with the guy with the suspenders and the long face. She couldn’t go into more details because her PR handlers were trying to shut her up.

You can hear more in a podcast on their blog.

Edit add: The deal is dead, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times Thursday.

Dick Cheney ... once upon a time

Take a look at the video below. It's Dick Cheney in 1994 talking about why we shouldn't have gone into Baghdad during the first Iraq War. Wonder the dark side took over. Halliburton, maybe?

New blog

Check out Bill O'Reilly Is an Idiot.

New blog

Check out Bill O'Reilly Is an Idiot.

Get down with GOP?

Getting down with the GOP.

(Thanks to who and ifilm.com.)

Fox News goes after bloggers

Check this out. Those warped wonders at Fox News will stop at nothing.

If you're interested in doing something about the incredible right-wing bias of Fox News, go to Fox Attacks and see what you can do.

Ad campaign against Fox News scores big hit: Lowe's pulls ads from O'Reilly show

The Fox Attackers coalition, which is targeting advertisers at Fox News, scored a big victory Friday. Lowe's home improvement stores is pulling its ads from "The O'Reilly Factor."

A reader posted this at the Daily Kos on Friday. It's here.

Here's the letter Lowe's sent and that was posted, dated Friday:

Replied On 07/27/07 15:41:09

Dear Lowe's Customer,

Thank you for your comments regarding the program, The O'Reilly Factor.

Lowe's has strict guidelines that govern the placement of our advertising. Our company advertises primarily in national, network prime-time television programs and on a variety of cable outlets.

Lowe's constantly reviews advertising buys to make certain they are consistent with its policy guidelines. The O'Reilly Factor does not meet Lowe's advertising guidelines, and the company's advertising will no longer appear during the program.

We are dedicated to providing the best service, products, and shopping environment in the home improvement industry. All three of these are very important to our business, and our customers will always be our number one priority.

We appreciate your contacting us, and hope this information addresses your concerns.

Thank you,

Lowe's Customer Care

Can't wait to see Papa Bear bluster his faux outrage at this.

Paris is free. Can we now get on with life?

Praise the Lord and pass the paparazzi.
Paris Hilton was freed from jail just after midnight last night.
Of course, photographers were falling all over themselves to get a picture of her. As if they don't have enough pictures of her already in every conceivable pose.
Hilton's supposed to be a changed woman. However, did anyone notice how she sauntered down the walk to her SUV like she was working a fashion show? It'll never end, will it?
Now that this silly story is about over -- the Larry King interview tomorrow will end it, hopefully -- let's get to more important stuff -- the latest dirt on Lindsay Lohan.

Is Paris growing up?

It could be some orchestrated publicity event, but on the surface, it appears that Paris Hilton is actually learning from her jail time.

In a statement issued Saturday, she said:

"Today I told my attorneys not to appeal the judge's decision. While I greatly appreciate the Sheriff's concern for my health and welfare, after meeting with doctors I intend to serve my time as ordered by the judge.

This is by far the hardest thing I have ever done. During the past several days, I have had a lot of time to reflect and have already learned a bitter, but important lesson from this experience.

As I have said before, I hope others will learn from my mistake. I have also had time to read the mail from my fans. I very much appreciate all of their good wishes and hope they will keep their letters coming.

I must also say that I was shocked to see all of the attention devoted to the amount of time I would spend in jail for what I had done by the media, public and city officials. I would hope going forward that the public and the media will focus on more important things, like the men and women serving our country in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places around the world."

Be with us next time for the next thrilling chapter ...

We'll always have Paris

How many people have laughed over the last year or so at all the Paris Hilton stories? How vapid she is! A rich girl taking advantage of her money and fame!
But how many of those same people were glued to the TV set as the moment-by-moment drama of Paris Hilton going to jail -- again -- was covered like an L.A. police chase?
Sorry, however, if we feel a little sad about this stupidity.
First, there's Sheriff Baca, who seems to be bucking for a job with Hilton Hotels with his bending over backwards to accomodate her. Heck, if he were the judge in this case, he probably would have allowed her to do her court appearance from one of the nightclubs she likes to frequent!
Then, there's the judge. Was his motive in not allowing her to do her time by house arrest a sort of Judge Ito syndrome? Did he crave his 15 minutes of fame?
We're not saying Hilton doesn't deserve what she got. But the way the whole thing went down made it look like if Hilton wasn't such a high-profile personality, she wouldn't be in jail now.
C.W. Nevius of the San Francisco Chronicle summed it up best. Our fascination with this story is about comeuppance.
Nevius wrote:

"We'll forgive a lot in our celebrities, but not arrogance. At this point there's an almost palpable sense that we'd like to see Hilton knocked down a peg.
"What they should have done," says Bob Dorfman, executive creative director at Pickett Advertising, "is put the TV cameras in jail. The ratings would have gone through the roof."
Yep, seeing Paris Hilton actually confront the real world. Everyone would like to watch that.
In fact, everyone is.

They certainly are.

A sad Memorial Day

Monday was a sad day for several reasons. One for paying tribute to all our soldiers who have died, most recently in an ill-begotten war in Iraq.
But there was another reason -- the news that Cindy Sheehan has decided to call it quits from the Democratic Party after they gave in to President Bush and continued to fund this stupid war.
This was foreshadowed on Saturday, when Sheehan posted this on the Daily Kos:

Dear Democratic Congress
by CindySheehan
Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:03:16 AM PDT

May 26, 2007
Dublin, Ireland

Dear Democratic Congress,

Hello, my name is Cindy Sheehan and my son Casey Sheehan was killed on April 04, 2004 in Sadr City , Baghdad , Iraq . He was killed when the Republicans still were in control of Congress. Naively, I set off on my tireless campaign calling on Congress to rescind George’s authority to wage his war of terror while asking him "for what noble cause" did Casey and thousands of other have to die. Now, with Democrats in control of Congress, I have lost my optimistic naiveté and have become cynically pessimistic as I see you all caving into as one Daily Kos poster called: "Mr. 28%"

There is absolutely no sane or defensible reason for you to hand Bloody King George more money to condemn more of our brave, tired, and damaged soldiers and the people of Iraq to more death and carnage. You think giving him more money is politically expedient, but it is a moral abomination and every second the occupation of Iraq endures, you all have more blood on your hands.

Ms. Pelosi, Speaker of the House, said after George signed the new weak as a newborn baby funding authorization bill: "Now, I think the president’s policy will begin to unravel." Begin to unravel? How many more of our children will have to be killed and how much more of Iraq will have to be demolished before you all think enough unraveling has occurred? How many more crimes will BushCo be allowed to commit while their poll numbers are crumbling before you all gain the political "courage" to hold them accountable. If Iraq hasn’t unraveled in Ms. Pelosi’s mind, what will it take? With almost 700,000 Iraqis dead and four million refugees (which the US refuses to admit) how could it get worse? Well, it is getting worse and it can get much worse thanks to your complicity.

Being cynically pessimistic, it seems to me that this new vote to extend the war until the end of September, (and let’s face it, on October 1st, you will give him more money after some more theatrics, which you think are fooling the anti-war faction of your party) will feed right into the presidential primary season and you believe that if you just hang on until then, the Democrats will be able to re-take the White House. Didn’t you see how "well" that worked for John Kerry in 2004 when he played the politics of careful fence sitting and pandering? The American electorate are getting disgusted with weaklings who blow where the wind takes them while frittering away our precious lifeblood and borrowing money from our new owners, the Chinese.

I knew having a Democratic Congress would make no difference in grassroots action. That’s why we went to DC when you all were sworn in to tell you that we wanted the troops back from Iraq and BushCo held accountable while you pushed for ethics reform which is quite a hoot...don’t’ you think? We all know that it is affordable for you all to play this game of political mayhem because you have no children in harm’s way...let me tell you what it is like:

You watch your reluctant soldier march off to a war that neither you nor he agrees with. Once your soldier leaves the country all you can do is worry. You lie awake at night staring at the moon wondering if today will be the day that you get that dreaded knock on your door. You can’t concentrate, you can’t eat, and your entire life becomes consumed with apprehension while you are waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Then, when your worst fears are realized, you begin a life of constant pain, regret, and longing. Everyday is hard, but then you come up on "special" days...like upcoming Memorial Day. Memorial Day holds double pain for me because, not only are we supposed to honor our fallen troops, but Casey was born on Memorial Day in 1979. It used to be a day of celebration for us and now it is a day of despair. Our needlessly killed soldiers of this war and the past conflict in Vietnam have all left an unnecessary trail of sorrow and deep holes of absence that will never be filled.

So, Democratic Congress, with the current daily death toll of 3.72 troops per day, you have condemned 473 more to these early graves. 473 more lives wasted for your political greed: Thousands of broken hearts because of your cowardice and avarice. How can you even go to sleep at night or look at yourselves in a mirror? How do you put behind you the screaming mothers on both sides of the conflict? How does the agony you have created escape you? It will never escape me...I can’t run far enough or hide well enough to get away from it.

By the end of September, we will be about 80 troops short of another bloody milestone: 4000, and MoveOn.org will hold nationwide candlelight vigils and you all will be busy passing legislation that will snuff the lights out of thousands more human beings.

Congratulations Congress, you have bought yourself a few more months of an illegal and immoral bloodbath. And you know you mean to continue it indefinitely so "other presidents" can solve the horrid problem BushCo forced our world into.

It used to be George Bush’s war. You could have ended it honorably. Now it is yours and you all will descend into calumnious history with BushCo.

The Camp Casey Peace Institute is calling all citizens who are as disgusted as we are with you all to join us in Philadelphia on July 4th to try and figure a way out of this "two" party system that is bought and paid for by the war machine which has a stranglehold on every aspect of our lives. As for myself, I am leaving the Democratic Party. You have completely failed those who put you in power to change the direction our country is heading. We did not elect you to help sink our ship of state but to guide it to safe harbor.

We do not condone our government’s violent meddling in sovereign countries and we condemn the continued murderous occupation of Iraq .

We gave you a chance, you betrayed us.

Sincerely,
Cindy Sheehan
Founder and President of
Gold Star Families for Peace.

Founder and Director of
The Camp Casey Peace Institute

Eternally grieving mother of Casey Sheehan

Then Monday another Daily Kos post, calling it quits.

Here's the Daily Kos post in full:

"Good Riddance Attention Whore"
by CindySheehan
Mon May 28, 2007 at 09:57:01 AM PDT

I have endured a lot of smear and hatred since Casey was killed and especially since I became the so-called "Face" of the American anti-war movement. Especially since I renounced any tie I have remaining with the Democratic Party, I have been further trashed on such "liberal blogs" as the Democratic Underground. Being called an "attention whore" and being told "good riddance" are some of the more milder rebukes.

I have come to some heartbreaking conclusions this Memorial Day Morning. These are not spur of the moment reflections, but things I have been meditating on for about a year now. The conclusions that I have slowly and very reluctantly come to are very heartbreaking to me.

The first conclusion is that I was the darling of the so-called left as long as I limited my protests to George Bush and the Republican Party. Of course, I was slandered and libeled by the right as a "tool" of the Democratic Party. This label was to marginalize me and my message. How could a woman have an original thought, or be working outside of our "two-party" system?

However, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the "left" started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used. I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of "right or left", but "right and wrong."

I am deemed a radical because I believe that partisan politics should be left to the wayside when hundreds of thousands of people are dying for a war based on lies that is supported by Democrats and Republican alike. It amazes me that people who are sharp on the issues and can zero in like a laser beam on lies, misrepresentations, and political expediency when it comes to one party refuse to recognize it in their own party. Blind party loyalty is dangerous whatever side it occurs on. People of the world look on us Americans as jokes because we allow our political leaders so much murderous latitude and if we don’t find alternatives to this corrupt "two" party system our Representative Republic will die and be replaced with what we are rapidly descending into with nary a check or balance: a fascist corporate wasteland. I am demonized because I don’t see party affiliation or nationality when I look at a person, I see that person’s heart. If someone looks, dresses, acts, talks and votes like a Republican, then why do they deserve support just because he/she calls him/herself a Democrat?

I have also reached the conclusion that if I am doing what I am doing because I am an "attention whore" then I really need to be committed. I have invested everything I have into trying to bring peace with justice to a country that wants neither. If an individual wants both, then normally he/she is not willing to do more than walk in a protest march or sit behind his/her computer criticizing others. I have spent every available cent I got from the money a "grateful" country gave me when they killed my son and every penny that I have received in speaking or book fees since then. I have sacrificed a 29 year marriage and have traveled for extended periods of time away from Casey’s brother and sisters and my health has suffered and my hospital bills from last summer (when I almost died) are in collection because I have used all my energy trying to stop this country from slaughtering innocent human beings. I have been called every despicable name that small minds can think of and have had my life threatened many times.

The most devastating conclusion that I reached this morning, however, was that Casey did indeed die for nothing. His precious lifeblood drained out in a country far away from his family who loves him, killed by his own country which is beholden to and run by a war machine that even controls what we think. I have tried every since he died to make his sacrifice meaningful. Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months while Democrats and Republicans play politics with human lives. It is so painful to me to know that I bought into this system for so many years and Casey paid the price for that allegiance. I failed my boy and that hurts the most.

I have also tried to work within a peace movement that often puts personal egos above peace and human life. This group won’t work with that group; he won’t attend an event if she is going to be there; and why does Cindy Sheehan get all the attention anyway? It is hard to work for peace when the very movement that is named after it has so many divisions.

Our brave young men and women in Iraq have been abandoned there indefinitely by their cowardly leaders who move them around like pawns on a chessboard of destruction and the people of Iraq have been doomed to death and fates worse than death by people worried more about elections than people. However, in five, ten, or fifteen years, our troops will come limping home in another abject defeat and ten or twenty years from then, our children’s children will be seeing their loved ones die for no reason, because their grandparents also bought into this corrupt system. George Bush will never be impeached because if the Democrats dig too deeply, they may unearth a few skeletons in their own graves and the system will perpetuate itself in perpetuity.

I am going to take whatever I have left and go home. I am going to go home and be a mother to my surviving children and try to regain some of what I have lost. I will try to maintain and nurture some very positive relationships that I have found in the journey that I was forced into when Casey died and try to repair some of the ones that have fallen apart since I began this single-minded crusade to try and change a paradigm that is now, I am afraid, carved in immovable, unbendable and rigidly mendacious marble.

Camp Casey has served its purpose. It’s for sale. Anyone want to buy five beautiful acres in Crawford , Texas ? I will consider any reasonable offer. I hear George Bush will be moving out soon, too...which makes the property even more valuable.

This is my resignation letter as the "face" of the American anti-war movement. This is not my "Checkers" moment, because I will never give up trying to help people in the world who are harmed by the empire of the good old US of A, but I am finished working in, or outside of this system. This system forcefully resists being helped and eats up the people who try to help it. I am getting out before it totally consumes me or anymore people that I love and the rest of my resources.

Good-bye America ...you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I can’t make you be that country unless you want it.

It’s up to you now.

I always admired Cindy Sheehan's bravery. She reminded me so much of the '60s war protesters. They didn't get any respect from Americans, either. The "Love It Or Leave It" philosophy seems to have returned, sadly.

But beyond that, her words made me feel guilty. I've been against the Iraq War from the beginning, but I limited my oppositions to a few emails. While Cindy Sheehan was traveling around the country speaking out, I did basically nothing more than an occasional email.

It was with that feeling that I emailed her early Monday evening. I told her of my sadness and guilt feelings, said I hoped she wouldn't stop speaking out and told her I'd asked God's blessings for her and her family.

To my surprise, not more than an hour or so later, she answered back. Here's what she said:

thank you
it saddens me too...but,
to everything there is a season
love & peace
cindy

Love and peace to you, too, Cindy. Better yet, may peace come to all of us.

Arnold has better fish to fry than Paris Hilton

Pack up for jail, Paris. Arnold doesn't want to save you. Here's an interesting quote from reporter Carla Marinucci's political blog on the San Francisco Chronicle website:

Asked Thursday if he'd consider a pardon, Schwarenegger said, "I've never gotten a request but I have many more important things to think about."

Feinstein responds to conflict of interest charges

When the initial San Jose Metro story first appeared in March accusing Sen. Dianne Feinstein of conflict of interest charges, we wrote her a letter asking for an explanation. Here is the lengthy reply we received today. (Note: Please credit A Capitol Idea (or two) http://capitolideaortwo.blogspot.com if used elsewhere.) :

Dear ----- ----:

Thank you for your letter concerning my work as member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. I appreciate your interest in this matter and welcome the opportunity to respond.



I am deeply disturbed by the profound mischaracterization of my work on this Subcommittee in recent articles that were published online and in an independent weekly newspaper in San Jose. These articles are riddled with errors, inaccuracies, and distortions, and I have enclosed a point-by-point rebuttal for your review.



But first, I would like to briefly address some of the most blatant distortions in the articles in question:



First, I did not resign from the Military Construction Subcommittee. I had the opportunity to become the Chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee-a position that places me in a better position to serve California-and I took it. This was part of regular shifting of committee assignments that occurs at the beginning of every Congress. Seven other Appropriations Committee members made similar changes.



Second, I have worked to avoid any possible conflict of interest. I and my staff have consulted with the Senate Ethics Committee. And the Ethics Committee has indicated that I could consider, debate, and vote on appropriations bills, whether in the subcommittee, committee or full Senate.



It is also important to emphasize that there are two separate and distinct processes in place: the congressional appropriations process and the Department of Defense contract award process.



As Chairman and Ranking Member of the Military Appropriations Construction Subcommittee, I voted on large appropriations bills, which fund family housing, facilities construction on bases around the world, environmental remediation of closed military bases, as well as other projects.



Projects in the Senate Military Construction bill must be identified for funding in either the President's Budget Request or in the Department of Defense's Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP).



And, construction projects must be independently authorized (in the Defense Authorization Act) through the Senate and House Armed Services Committees. Construction projects not authorized by the Defense Authorization Act and signed into law by the President are not funded by the Department of Defense.



It should be made clear that these bills do not include contracts, but rather lump-sum appropriations, and it is not until after they are signed into law, that the separate Defense Department contract award process begins.



Let me be clear: the Defense Department has sole responsibility for awarding military construction contracts. And I have never sought to influence which entities were awarded military construction contracts. Neither I nor my staff ever wrote, spoke to, or sought to influence in any way Defense Department officials in charge of determining which entities were awarded any military construction contract.



In sum, there was no conflict.



I have been in public life for more than 30 years and have always adhered to the highest ethical standards. I hope this letter, and the attached Fact/Fiction document, sets the record straight.



Again, thank you for writing. If you have any further questions or comments, please visit my website at http://feinstein.senate.gov, or contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.





Inaccuracies in Metro Silicon Valley stories, "Senator Feinstein's Iraq Conflict" (January 2007) and "Feinstein Resigns" (March 2007)





FICTION: The article claims Senator Feinstein resigned from the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee.

"FEINSTEIN RESIGNS Senator exits MILCON following Metro expose, vet-care scandal" (Headline in Metro Silicon Valley, March 21-27 issue)



FACT: Senator Feinstein did not resign from the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee.

It is nonsense to state that Senator Feinstein resigned from the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee. The fact is, at the beginning of the 110th Congress, Senator Feinstein had the opportunity to change subcommittees based on seniority. The Senate Appropriations Committee announced subcommittee assignments in a January 10 press release ("Senate Appropriations Subcommittee Rosters Set," http://appropriations.senate.gov). The first Metro story appeared two weeks later.



Background: This year, with the departure of Senator Harry Reid from the Appropriations Committee, the opportunity became available for Senator Feinstein to move up, to Chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. Such changes are common at the beginning of every new Congress; seven other Committee members made similar changes. The Interior Appropriations Subcommittee is responsible for funding the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Park Service and the Environmental Protection Agency. This was a better subcommittee assignment for California, so Senator Feinstein took the opportunity to become its Chairman.

_______________________



FICTION: The article suggests that Senator Feinstein played a role in directing money toward specific defense contractors.

"As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms." (Headline in Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007 issue)



FACT: Senator Feinstein played no role in awarding contracts.

Congress plays no role in determining which entities are awarded these contracts. And neither Senator Feinstein nor her staff played any role in determining which entities received contracts.



Each year, the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee has this task before it: Reconcile the President's Budget Request with the amount of funding that the full Appropriations Committee has allocated to this subcommittee. After this legislative process Congress votes for the appropriations bill - typically approved by overwhelming margins - and it becomes law with the President's signature. Every project in the Senate bill - from family housing, to National Guard and Reserve facilities, to facilities on active-duty bases worldwide - is identified for funding in the President's Budget Request or in the Defense Department's planning document, known as the Future Years Defense Plan. Construction projects must be independently authorized, in the Defense Authorization Act, by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, and signed into law. Senator Feinstein does not sit on the Senate Armed Services Committee.



Projects not authorized by the Defense Authorization Act are not funded by the Defense Department.



The Military Construction Bill that the Senate acts upon involves lump-sum appropriations - not contracts. It is only after this process has run its course that contracts for individual projects are awarded by the Defense Department. This is totally separate from the legislative process.

_______________________



FICTION: The article claims Senator Feinstein had a conflict of interest.

"Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein." (Metro Silicon Valley, March 21-27 issue)



FACT: Senator Feinstein had no conflict of interest.

Senator Feinstein has sought to avoid potential conflicts in two ways: First, by seeking the advice of the Senate Ethics Committee - on her own initiative - about whether any conflicts existed, and by following that guidance.



The Ethics Committee indicated that, given the facts, Senator Feinstein could fully consider, debate, and vote on appropriations bills, whether in the subcommittee, the committee or the full Senate.



Second, Senator Feinstein always respected the difference between the congressional appropriations process and the separate Department of Defense contract award process.



Senator Feinstein never sought to influence which entities were awarded military construction contracts. Neither she nor her personal staff nor her committee staff ever wrote, spoke to, or influenced in any way Defense Department officials about which entities were awarded any military construction contract.

_______________________

FICTION: The article implies Senator Feinstein advocated for missile defense projects.
"Here are a few examples from the Congressional Record of questionable intersections between Feinstein's legislative duties and her financial interests: At a MILCON hearing in 2001, Feinstein interrogated defense officials about the details of constructing specific missile defense systems, which included upgrading the early warning radar system at Cobra Dane radar on Shemya Island, Alaska. In 2003, Perini reported that it had completed a contract to upgrade the Cobra Dane radar system. It has done similar work at Beale Air Force Base in California and in the United Kingdom. URS also bids on missile defense work." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007)

FACT: Senator Feinstein questioned deployment of National Missile Defense.

Senator Feinstein's record and activities make it clear that she had deep reservations about the Bush Administration's rush to deploy an untested and unproven missile defense system.



She raised these objections in hearings of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, on the floor of the U.S. Senate, and introduced legislation to restrict - not increase - funding for missile defense systems. Senator Feinstein was concerned that the Bush Administration's plans to deploy National Missile Defense could destabilize U.S.-Russia relations and violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) between the two countries. Senator Feinstein's concerns are reflected in a speech, delivered on the floor of the U.S. Senate, on Oct. 18, 2001, when she introduced legislation (S.1565-107th Congress) to limit funding of missile testing, evaluation or deployment that would unilaterally abrogate or violate the ABM treaty.



In that speech, Senator Feinstein said: "I am also concerned that with what appears to be a rush toward construction at Fort Greely, AK, the administration has already made a decision on deployment, without having yet answered these bottom line questions."



The Bill Summary states that the Bill: "Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) the missile defense programs and activities of the United States should remain consistent with its obligations under the ABM Treaty; (2) the U.S. should consult with Russia and pursue modest modifications to address security considerations in, but not unilaterally abrogate or withdraw from, the Treaty; and (3) a national missile defense system should not be deployed until it is has been tested using realistic parameters and is operationally effective and suitable for use in combat. Limits the obligation or expenditure of funds accordingly. Requires that the Secretary of Defense certify that such a system is operationally effective before the President decides to deploy a missile defense system or to notify Russia of the U.S. intention to withdraw from the ABM treaty. Directs the President to submit annual reports to Congress on: (1) the threat posed to the United States and its allies by the use of a weapon of mass destruction by a foreign state or transnational group; (2) the cost of the national missile defense system; and (3) whether the allocation of funds for such system will impair priority defense programs."



Earlier that year, Senator Feinstein raised her concerns over the Fort Greely project in a letter, dated July 20, 2001, to then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It concluded with: "The planned project at Fort Greely does not appear to be for the same purpose as that for which the funds were authorized and appropriated last year, namely for initial deployment of a National Missile Defense system. If it is for a different purpose, namely for a Missile Defense System Testbed, as per the notification letter, then the funds were not authorized or appropriated for the purpose you are proposing. I look forward to your prompt attention to this matter."

________________________



FICTION: The article implies that Senator Feinstein was a proponent of the Army's chemical demilitarization program.

"In the 2002 MILCON hearings, Feinstein questioned an official about details of the U.S. Army's chemical demilitarization program. URS is extensively involved in performing chemical demilitarization work at key disposal sites in the United States." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007 issue)



FACT: In reality, Senator Feinstein was raising questions about the program.



Senator Feinstein was actually expressing doubts about the efficacy of the Army's Chemical Demilitarization program, in light of a negative report from the Office of Management and Budget. She said, "That evaluation doesn't give me a lot of confidence that the budget request is justified or that it will be well spent."

________________________





FICTION: The article implies that Senator Feinstein acted to direct a contract to a specific company.

"At that same hearing, Feinstein asked about the possibility of increasing funding for anti-terrorism-force protection at Army bases. The following year, on March 4, 2003, Feinstein asked why the antiterrorism-force protection funds she had advocated for the year before had not yet been spent. On April 21, 2003, URS announced the award of a $600 million contract to provide, among other services, anti-terrorism-force protection for U.S. Army installations." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007 issue)



FACT: In reality, Senator Feinstein was concerned that the program was not being run effectively.

At the 2002 hearing, Senator Feinstein submitted written questions, on the Fiscal Year 2003 Budget, to determine whether the National Guard and Army Reserve were receiving sufficient force protection funding, compared to the active-duty Army.



Senator Feinstein: "General Helmly and General Squier. I see no specific requests in the budgets of the reserve components addressing increased force protection requirements. However, understanding that this amount could be in the billions of dollars, the Army Guard has made an initial cut as to the amount that could be executed in the next fiscal year. I assume USAR (U.S. Army Reserve) has a similar estimate. Would you please provide your estimated requirement for the Committee?" (Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, March 5, 2002)



In addition, at a 2003 hearing, Senator Feinstein submitted a written question on the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget. The question was a follow-up to her 2002 question, and raised concerns that the National Guard and Army Reserve were not receiving sufficient force-protection funding.



Senator Feinstein: "It is my understanding that funding previously approved by the Committee for Antiterrorism/Force Protection (ATFP) is not finding its way to the reserve components. Could you provide the Committee with your funding plan for ATFP?" (Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, March 4, 2003)

________________________



FICTION: The article asserts that Senator Feinstein participated in approving "task orders" that benefited Perini and URS.

Beginning in 2003, both Perini and URS were awarded a series of open-ended contracts for military construction work around the world, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. Under Feinstein's leadership, MILCON regularly approved specific project "task orders" that were issued to Perini and URS under these contracts." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-20, 2007 issue)



FACT: The Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee does not receive, review or approve "task orders."

According to Federal Acquisition Regulations, task orders are "orders for services placed against an established contract, or with Government sources." These orders are placed by the Defense Department. The Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee plays no role in approving task orders. Senator Feinstein played no role in approving task orders.



________________________



FICTION: The article implies that Senator Feinstein was advocating for a C-17 beddown facility at Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii.

"At a March 30, 2004, MILCON hearing, Feinstein grilled Maj. Gen. Dean Fox about whether or not the Pentagon intended to prioritize funding the construction of "beddown" maintenance facilities for its new airlifter, the C-17 Globemaster. After being reassured by Fox that these funds would soon be flowing, Feinstein said, "Good, that's what I really wanted to hear. Thank you very much. Appreciate it very much, General." Two years later, URS announced a $42 million award to build a beddown maintenance facility for the C-17 at Hickam Air Base in Hawaii as part of a multibillion dollar contract with the Air Force. Under Feinstein's leadership, MILCON approved the Hickam project." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007)



FACT: In reality, Senator Feinstein was asking about C-17 facilities at Travis Air Force Base and March Air Reserve Base, both in California.

Senator Feinstein never asked about facilities in Hawaii, and the transcript shows that the tone of the hearing was collegial. Senator Feinstein's questioning focused on the ability to receive C-17s at the California bases, which would improve their military value and decrease the likelihood the bases would be targeted in the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process.



From the hearing transcript:

Senator Hutchison: "Mr. Gibbs, I read in your testimony the commitment and the military construction that you're asking for to support the F-22 and the C-17. And I just wanted to ask you -- and perhaps you can answer this for the record because it's somewhat parochial. But in looking at all of the places that there would be basing for the C-17, I would just like to ask you to look at a couple of places in Texas where there might be some savings in military construction: either Dyess where there is excess capacity, still ramp space, and -- of course for the B-1s, and Kelly where there is significant hangar space still available and it could take C-17s. If any of those would be able to save military construction in the other basing, I would appreciate your just looking at that."

Senator Feinstein: "You know they're going to California?"

Senator Hutchison: "Well, some are. (Laughter.) They're going to California, Alaska -"

Senator Feinstein: "I'm shocked at you, Madam Chairman."

Senator Hutchison: "California, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Mississippi, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Carolina and state of Washington. I'm not suggesting that we mess with California, but I'm just wondering -- (laughter) -- if with all of the bases that are in the works here, if there would be some savings? That's what I'm asking you to."



After a discussion of the Base Realignment and Closure process and family housing, Senator Feinstein asked questions about Travis and March.

Senator Feinstein: "Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. And thank you, gentlemen, for your service. I just want to assure that the beddown costs for the C-17 to C-5 transformation are in the FYDP (Future Years Defense Plan). Are they?"

Mr. Gibbs: "To the extent that we know them, yes, ma'am."

Senator Feinstein: "Okay. To the extent that you know them, right. So the commitment is to put in the FYDP. I recognize that in the '05 bill we have two facility projects, one at Travis for $15 million and two projects for 10 at March. So I think that California is going to be very happy about that, and we thank you for that."

Mr. Gibbs: "That's one of the earlier locations."

Senator Feinstein: "Pardon me?"

Mr. Gibbs: "That's one of the earlier locations."

Senator Feinstein: "Right, right."

Mr. Gibbs: ".from the list that the chairman read."

General Fox: "Senator Feinstein, if I can answer it? The way that we prioritize our military construction program - when we bring in a new weapons system like the C-17 to California, we will ensure that those requirements are funded upfront in our president's budget submission."

Senator Feinstein: "Good. That's what I really wanted to hear."

General Fox: "Yes, ma'am."

Senator Feinstein: "That you very much. I appreciate it very much, General."



________________________



FICTION: The article implies a link between the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee and the awarding of a specific contract.

"In mid-2005, MILCON approved a Pentagon proposal to fund "overhead coverage force protection" in Iraq that would reinforce the roofs of U.S. Army barracks to better withstand mortar rounds. On Oct. 13, 2005, Perini announced the award of a $185 million contract to provide overhead coverage force protection to the Army in Iraq." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007 issue)



FACT: The Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee is not involved in determining which entities receive contracts.

The President sought the funding in a Supplemental Appropriations Request, and Defense Department contracting officials made decisions about individual contractors. Congress approved the appropriation - but played no role in selecting contractors. Senator Feinstein played no role in determining which companies were awarded specific contracts.



________________________



FICTION: The article implies Senator Feinstein was advocating for a construction project at Vandenberg.

"At a 2001 MILCON hearing, Feinstein, attending to a small item, told Maj. Gen. Earnest O. Robbins that she would appreciate receiving an engineering assessment on plans to build a missile transport bridge at Vandenberg Air Force Base. He said he would give it to her. She also asked for and received a list of unfunded construction projects, which prioritize military construction wish lists down to the level of thousand-dollar light fixtures. While there is no evidence to point to nefarious intent behind Feinstein's request for these details, it is worth noting that Perini and URS have open-ended contracts to perform military construction for the Air Force. The senator could have chosen to serve on a subcommittee where she had no potential conflict of interests at all." (Metro Silicon Valley, Jan. 24-30, 2007 issue)



FACT: Senator Feinstein was in fact questioning the need for the project.

The Defense Department was planning to retire the Peacekeeper missile. Senator Feinstein questioned the need for projects -- at Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, and at Vandenberg -- in light of the retirement of these missiles. She specifically asked about the missile transport bridge at Vandenberg.

Senator Feinstein: "Thank you very much, Mr. Dishner. I understand you are the only one who is making a statement. I have two specific questions before I get to my usual remediation questions, one on the Peacekeeper missile base closure and the implications, and the other on Global Hawk. Let me begin with Peacekeeper. The Defense Department is seeking permission from Congress to scrap its inventory of Peacekeeper missiles. Those are stationed at Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming. And my question is, what impact would the retirement of these missiles have on the future? The reason I ask this is because the President's 2002 budget includes two MILCON projects for Warren: $10.2 million for a fitness center and $2.7 million for a medical clinic alteration. So, my question, should those projects go forward in view of the retirement of the Peacekeeper?"

Mr. Dishner: "Yes, I think the answer is positive, but General Robbins?"

FITNESS CENTER

General Robbins: "The fitness center is the only one I can address because the medical MILCON is separate apportion issue now. The fitness center projects are sized based on the number of enlisted personnel at a given installation."

Senator Feinstein: "And what will that number be when Peacekeeper is retired?"

General Robbins: "And they are in a range. The number I was given, that if in fact they were to eliminate the Peacekeeper or retire it, over time it will reduce the enlisted population at F.E. Warren by around 600 people, could impact by about 600. If we take that number out of the baseline that is already stationed at F.E. Warren, the size of the fitness center remains the same as the one we got in the program. So, the fitness center would stay the same."

Senator Feinstein: "And how many people are stationed at Warren?"

General Robbins: "Let me get the number, ma'am. Let's see. Right now there are almost 3200."

Senator Feinstein: "Minus 600."

General Robbins: "Minus 600 will take it down to about 2600."

Senator Feinstein: "And you need the $10.2 million for a fitness center?"

General Robbins: "Yes."

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE

Senator Feinstein: "Pretty good fitness center. The budget also includes $11.8 million for Vandenberg to construct a missile transport bridge. According to the project description, the bridge is used for transporting Minuteman and Peacekeeper missile. Again, would a decision to retire the Peacekeeper have any impact on the need for this project?"

General Robbins: "That also would remain a requirement. That road is the only road between the north and south portions of the base. As you noted, it transports both the Peacekeeper and Minuteman missiles for test firing, and so the elimination of one of those systems would not matter."

Senator Feinstein: "Is this an improvement of the existing road?"

General Robbins: "It is replacement of an existing bridge."

Senator Feinstein: "So it's a new road."

General Robbins: "Bridge."

Senator Feinstein: "Bridge. I beg your pardon. As a replacement for an existing bridge?"

General Robbins: "That's correct."

Senator Feinstein: "And the existing bridge cannot be fixed?"

General Robbins: "Correct."

Senator Feinstein: "Why?"

General Robbins: "I'll have to get you the engineering assessment on it."

Senator Feinstein: "Would you please? I would appreciate that very much."

(Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, Aug. 1, 2001)





###





Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my website http://feinstein.senate.gov. You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at http://feinstein.senate.gov/issue.html.