ONE HIT WONDERS...

I'm on a roll tonight, saw a lot I wanted to post but couldn't find that old articles post, so here....

'A punch in the stomach'

Communities vow to fight base closures

GROTON, Connecticut (AP) -- In places like Groton, home to the nation's first submarine base, and the plains of South Dakota, where bombers once stood ready to obliterate the Soviet Union, lawmakers and townspeople vowed Friday they will fight plans to close their home military bases.

In Connecticut, Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Sen. Joe Lieberman and others joined forces at a news conference to declare that including the Naval Submarine Base on the Pentagon's list of doomed bases "makes absolutely no sense."

"We've invested millions of dollars in that base, but more important, the military has also made huge investments," Rell said. "You don't put $300 million into a base and walk away from it."

The station, which began construction in 1872, made the list despite months of lobbying from state officials who emphasized its estimated $2.5 billion economic importance.

The base is homeport to 18 attack submarines and also home of the Naval Submarine School, three submarine squadrons and other support facilities. The Groton area stands to lose 7,096 military and 952 civilian jobs.

Joseph Quaratella Jr.'s eyes welled up with tears at his tiny barber shop when he contemplated the possible closure.

"I know they're going to fight, but it's a funny feeling inside of me. Everything is the base," Quaratella said.

Rallying cries were echoed around the country as communities learned whether their installations had made the Pentagon list of about 180 military installations to be shuttered over the next six years.

The proposed list of bases now goes to a federal commission, which must report by September 8, and then on to Congress and President Bush. (Full story)

South Dakota was shocked to hear that it could lose its second-biggest employer, the venerable Ellsworth Air Force Base, after community leaders spent 10 years and $2 million to preserve it and its 3,852 workers.

During the Cold War Ellsworth played a major role in the all-out effort to defeat the former Soviet Union by maintaining nuclear warheads in the ground and in the air. Today its only mission is hosting roughly half the nation's B-1B fleet of the long-range bombers, and the military said it would rather move the bombers to the Texas base where the rest of the fleet is housed.

Angelique Mills, who does custom sewing on military uniforms out of her shop a few blocks from the base entrance, compared the news to "a punch in the stomach."

Some gains amid the losses

While the Pentagon plan calls for a net loss of 29,005 military and civilian jobs at domestic installations, some places stand to gain as positions at closed bases shift to posts that survive.

President Bush's home state of Texas could gain more than 9,000 military jobs, in spite of losing four major installations and several smaller ones. Florida, where the president's brother is governor, would add 2,575 jobs overall and lose no bases.

The reaction to the announcement was mixed in places like Grand Forks, North Dakota. While its air base would remain open, the area would lose nearly 5,000 jobs under the shakeup. The Pentagon also wants to send the Grand Forks Air Force Base's KC-135 refueling tankers elsewhere.

At the small Street Cafe and Pit Stop Bar in Emerado, a town of about 500 just down the road from the base, owner Cheryl Meagher said it wouldn't make sense to transfer so many personnel.

"If we're going to lose that many people, I don't see how that's different from closing the base. You don't run a business that way. I couldn't run my business that way," she said.

Illinois had a similar experience, with its bases surviving but nearly 2,700 jobs to be lost. That includes nearly 1,300 at the Rock Island Arsenal along the Mississippi River.

For Rock Island Mayor Mark Schwiebert the proposed cuts at the arsenal were bittersweet after weeks of rumblings that it could be marked for closure.

"It's kind of like losing your hand as opposed to losing your whole arm. But it's hard to be grateful for losing your hand," Schwiebert said.

king bling: doa thread about 'bohemian grove'

there's a base near me that might be closed, i hear military bases are cool after they're abandoned.

it's a complete joke that they are closing bases while there's a war going on. i heard about this base in utah that is mainly scientific...they are closing it, and planning on moving the scientific division to a base in maryland...which will cost 1 billion...wtf? there is no logic in that.

on a personal note: i read in the paper today that the local base (to me) is not closing but plans on getting 254 jobs b/c of the closings...plus 3 new planes...we have a large base on the international airport grounds...i'm also near one of the largest nuke facilities in the country.

It's all a part of the "empire spreading itself too thin" thing.

I can't believe they're gonna put ALL THE B1 BOMBERS IN ONE BASE!?!?

Yeah, attack mad countries, piss off (and threaten) practically the ENTIRE WORLD, then while almost all of our troops are scattered around the planet (fighting bullshit wars) go ahead and close mad bases here at home and ship all our B1s to one base! Fuckit, while you're at it, why don't yall put all the nukes in one spot too! Make it that much easier for us to get took the fuck out in less than a week when the rest of the world finnaly gets fed up with our shit and invades us!!! :umm: :umm: :umm: :umm:

Originally posted by SF1@May 15 2005, 01:10 AM

It's all a part of the "empire spreading itself too thin" thing.

I can't believe they're gonna put ALL THE B1 BOMBERS IN ONE BASE!?!?

 

Yeah, attack mad countries, piss off (and threaten) practically the ENTIRE WORLD, then while almost all of our troops are scattered around the planet (fighting bullshit wars) go ahead and close mad bases here at home and ship all our B1s to one base! Fuckit, while you're at it, why don't yall put all the nukes in one spot too! Make it that much easier for us to get took the fuck out in less than a week when the rest of the world finnaly gets fed up with our shit and invades us!!! :umm: :umm: :umm: :umm:

Quoted post

in some ways, i agree...in others, i can't help but think of that saying 'method to the madness'. i dislike rumsfeld as much as any thinking american, but i doubt very much that he's an idiot.

i can't help but wonder if the extra funds would go into the so called black projects? we have a ton of weapons that aren't disclosed publicly for obvious reasons. i know the rail gun is ready and waiting, several sonic weapons (sound based), weird chemical lasers called masers (sodium iodide if i recall correctly)...tons and tons of shit that are leaking out slowly.

What about the tesla death ray?

May 28th, 2005 2:53 pm

Nine Inch Nails drops MTV show over image of Bush

May 27, 2005 — LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The rock band Nine Inch Nails said on Friday it canceled plans to appear on next week's MTV Movie Awards after the network questioned the band's plans to perform in front of an image of President Bush.

The band was slated to perform "The Hand That Feeds," the first single from its latest album.

A Los Angeles Times review called the song "a warning against blind acceptance of authority, including that of a president leading his nation to war."

"We were set to perform 'The Hand That Feeds' with an unmolested, straightforward image of George W. Bush as the backdrop. Apparently, the image of our president is as offensive to MTV as it is to me," Nine Inch Nails' leader Trent Reznor said in a statement posted on the band's Web site.

MTV said in a statement: "While we respect Nine Inch Nails' point of view, we were uncomfortable with their performance being built around a partisan political statement. When we discussed our discomfort with the band, their choice was to unfortunately pull out of the Movie Awards."

MTV is owned by Viacom Inc., the corporate parent of broadcast network CBS.

glad to hear that reznor still kind of gives a fuck

Remember that North Carolina church trying to boot life time members because they voted Democratic? This man stood for his beliefs, and this is sad...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000937120

Pro-Gay Rights Column Costs W.Va. Minister His Pulpit

By E&P Staff

Published: May 26, 2005 2:10 PM ET

NEW YORK The congregation of Davis Memorial Presbyterian Church in Elkins, W.Va., has voted to fire its minister after he wrote a column for the local daily, the Inter-Mountain, supporting gay rights.

"Gay and lesbian Christians are no different than the rest of us," the Rev. Jeff Falter wrote in a Feb. 26 article. "They deserve full equality in the church and in society, for they are my brothers and sisters, people for whom Christ died."

The newspaper has a daily circulation of almost 12,000.

That message led members to vote 100-72 on Sunday to request that the Presbytery of West Virginia dismiss Falter effective next Wednesday.

Falter said he could not make any public comment yet. Several other parishioners also declined to comment.

The termination agreement allows Falter and his family to live in the manse next to the church until Dec. 31. Falter will continue to receive his full salary until the end of the year.

http://michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=3190

MSNBC Analyst Says 2nd Source Confirms Karl Rove as Plame Leaker

By Greg Mitchell / Editor & Publisher

NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source. Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, now claims that at least two sources have confirmed that the name is--top White House mastermind Karl Rove.

O'Donnell first offered this report Friday night on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show. Today, he went beyond that, writing a brief entry at the Huffington Post blog:

"I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's e-mails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.

"McLaughlin is seen in some markets on Friday night, so some websites have picked it up, including Drudge, but I don't expect it to have much impact because McLaughlin is not considered a news show and it will be pre-empted in the big markets on Sunday because of tennis.

"Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow."

Here is the text of what O'Donnell said on Friday:

"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury--the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.

"I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."

Other McLaughlin Group panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper.

Besides his career at a TV journalist, O'Donnell has served as a producer and writer for the series "The West Wing."

According to published reports, Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the case, has interviewed President Bush and Vice President Cheney and called Karl Rove, among others, to testify before the grand jury.

"The breadth of Fitzgerald's inquiry has led to speculation that it has evolved into an investigation of a conspiracy to leak Plame's identity," the Chicago Tribune observed on Friday, "or of an attempt to cover up White House involvement in the leak."

i was about to make a thread about this.

forgot to this morning

the bush administration may actually go down for this.

most likely not....but we can all hope.

Originally posted by casekonly@Jul 4 2005, 01:29 AM

i was about to make a thread about this.

 

forgot to this morning

 

 

the bush administration may actually go down for this.

 

most likely not....but we can all hope.

Quoted post

Yeah, it actually deserves its own thread, but I figured only once it is confirmed...right now there is a certain sense of speculation surrounding the issue...

c'mon, KB, we all know if was Rove.

pretty much in the basket, the big

question is: is the bush white house

going down for this?

A cool article about the state of things...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8101512/site/newsweek/

June 13 issue - From a distance, Watergate seems like a partisan affair. But that's because we tend to look at it nowadays through red- and blue-tinted glasses. In truth, President Nixon was forced to resign in 1974 by Republicans in Congress like Barry Goldwater, who realized from the so-called smoking-gun tape that he was a crook. This was after the Supreme Court—led by a Nixon appointee—unanimously ruled against him in the tapes case.

But imagine if Nixon were president in this era. After he completed his successful second term, I'd have to write a retrospective column like this:

President Nixon left office in 2005 having proved me and the other "nattering nabobs of negativism" wrong. We thought that his administration was sleazy but we were never able to nail him. Those of us who hoped it would end differently knew we were in trouble when former Nixon media adviser Roger Ailes banned the word "Watergate" from Fox News's coverage and went with the logo "Assault on the Presidency" instead. By that time, the American people figured both sides were just spinning, and a tie always goes to the incumbent.

The big reason Nixon didn't have to resign: the rise of Conservative Media, which features Fox, talk radio and a bunch of noisy partisans on the Internet and best-sellers list who almost never admit their side does anything wrong. (Liberals, bycontrast, are always eating their own.) This solidarity came in handy when Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post began snooping around after the break-in at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee. Once they scored a few scoops with the help of anonymous sources, Sean Hannity et al. went on a rampage. When the young reporters printed an article about grand jury testimony that turned out to be wrong, Drudge and the bloggers had a field day, even though none of them had lifted a finger to try to advance the story. After that, the Silent Majority wouldn't shut up.

Some argue the Watergate story died right there, but Nixon's attorney general wasn't taking any chances. Just as in the Valerie Plame case, the Justice Department subpoenaed Woodward and Bernstein to testify before the grand jury about their sources. When they declined, they were jailed for 18 months on contempt charges. Talkingpointsmemo.com and a few other liberal bloggers complained that it was hypocritical—top White House aides were suspected of shredding documents, suborning perjury and paying hush money to burglars—but to no avail. Public support for the media had hit rock bottom.

Whistle-blowers didn't fare much better. With Woodward and Bernstein out of business, the No. 2 man at the FBI, W. Mark Felt, held a press conference to air complaints that the White House and his own boss were impeding the FBI probe. Of course it was only a one-day story, with Ann Coulter predictably screaming that Felt was a "traitor." Rush Limbaugh dubbed Felt "Special Agent Sour Grapes" because he'd been passed over for the top FBI job. Within hours, the media had moved on to the tale of a runaway bride. And because both houses of Congress are controlled by the GOP, there were no "Watergate" hearings to keep the probe going. John Dean and other disgruntled former aides had no place to go.

For a while, I hoped that the Nixon tapes might bring some justice. But soon the tapes just became more fodder for those legal shows on cable. The Supreme Court split 5-4, along largely partisan lines, as it did in Bush vs. Gore. That allowed Nixon to keep control of the tapes. When he burned them, the bipartisan outcry you would have heard in the old days over destruction of evidence was muffled by a ferocious counterattack from the GOP's legion of spinners. A group calling itself "Watergate Burglars for Truth" set up a 527 to argue that Bill Clinton and other Democratic presidents had ordered more black-bag jobs than Nixon. There was nothing to prove them wrong. Reports of a tape showing that Nixon directly ordered the cover-up were just rumors, not anything that could be posted on smokinggun.com.

Nixon gave a TV interview to the British journalist David Frost in which he said, "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." This explained why he felt comfortable approving the break-in at the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist. Ken Duberstein and a few other principled Republicans weighed in that Nixon was bad news, but they were drowned out by former aides like Pat Buchanan and G. Gordon Liddy, who wanted to firebomb the Brookings Institution. When "Firebombing Brookings: Good Idea or Not?" became the "Question of the Day" on MSNBC, Liddy's radio show got a nice ratings boost. After Ralph Reed disclosed that Nixon and Henry Kissinger had been on their knees praying in the Oval Office, Nixon went up 15 points in the Gallup, double among "people of faith." Our long national nightmare was just beginning.

newsweek released a story sunday naming carl rove as the source.

the end is nigh for him.