Ben Sargent

[click image to enlarge]

UPDATE: Dana Milbank had this to say on MSNBC today:

The administration all week has been saying that the media through our reports have been sort of aiding and abetting the terrorists. It’s much harder to make the case that the Supreme Court is aiding and abetting the terrorists and at some point people are going to say that maybe it’s the administration that is in fact not handling things properly…

Well, maybe it might be harder for some people, Dana, but you have to remember that a lot of idiots are holding high positions in our Federal government right now. Here's what Trent Lott had to say on FauxNews with regard to the Supreme Court's decision:

I think some people are probably laughing at us. This is ridiculous and outrageous. Now in legal speak, let me say, I have not read the entire opinion, nor the dissents. But preliminarily my opinion is they probably didn’t even have jurisdiction. They shouldn’t have ruled the way they did. This is not a bunch of pussycats we’re talking about here. These are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out. This is Osama bin Laden’s driver. And this is one other example of why the American people have lost faith in so much of our federal judiciary. This is a very bad decision in my opinion.

There Are Some Chambers In Hell That Even Satan Will Not Enter . . .

. . . and one of them is reserved for the asshole pictured on the left.





I heard about this prick last night on talk radio. His name is Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, and he is the president of Human Life International.

Father Euteneuer had this to say with regard to Warren Buffett's recent record-breaking charitable contribution to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation:

"The merger of Gates and Buffett may spell doom for the families of the developing world," said the Rev. Thomas Euteneuer, a Roman Catholic priest who is president of Human Life International.

Referring to Josef Mengele, the infamous Nazi death camp doctor, Euteneuer said Buffett "will be known as the Dr. Mengele of philanthropy unless he repents."

This asshole compares Warren Buffett, the man who just made the biggest charitable contribution in history, to a Nazi death camp doctor, and he thinks Buffett is the one who needs to repent?

Fuck you, Father Euteneuer, and the horse-shit dogma you rode in on.

If any of you wish to contact this guy, the e-mail address for the "Office of the President" of HLI is lhunt@hli.org. The phone number for this outfit is 1-800-549-LIFE. The address is 4 Family Life Lane – Front Royal, VA 22630 U.S.A.

Olbermann Destroys O'Reilly Again

This is definitely worth watching.

I Have The Pow-er! (re-posted)

[Ease pointed out an error in this post, which required me to correct the error and then repost].

Liz (aka Ease) has been destroying us at hold 'em lately. Just a mere few months ago, she was in the middle of a long losing streak, but then really started to tear it up and has been consistently winning tournaments ever since. It's been brutal.

At last weekend's annual Crane Prairie Poker and Bass Tourney, she ended up winning the poker part of the tourney. I was the first one out, and Liz was the one who knocked me out. Needless to say, the taunting has been endless.


Well, last night I got my revenge.

I was hosting this week's tourney. We had eleven players. I was serving some very strong strawberry banana creme daiquiris, and I made sure from the start that Liz's glass remained full.

The first few hands of the tourney were very interesting. Erika got four aces, and knocked Jim out, who went all-in with a full house, aces over queens. A few hands later, I got dealt a 3-9 offsuit, with the three being a diamond. I think the blinds at that point were 10/20. I along with a few other players limped in, including Liz. The flop was all diamonds -- a two, four and five of diamonds, giving me an open-ended straight flush draw. I checked, Liz bet 50, and I called. Everyone else folded.

The turn card was a six of diamonds, giving me a straight flush to the six. I about fell out of my chair when the six of diamonds hit, but I managed to remain composed. I checked it and Liz bet 50. I paused for a moment to make it look like I was thinking hard, took another look at my hole cards, then merely called the 50.

The river was something like a jack of clubs, and I bet 1000 -- I wanted to make a sizable bet, but not too big of one because I really wanted Liz to call. Liz said something like, "you don't have anything," and called my 1000 bet. I then turned over my cards and said, "I got a straight flush to the six." Liz then mucked her cards in disgust. I am always a gracious winner, so I calmly took the chips from the middle of the table and nonchalantly placed them in my stack.

Actually, that last part is not true. What really happened is that I stood up, raised my arms into the air in victory, and yelled "yes!!" over and over again while jumping up and down. I would have gotten up onto the table and danced a jig if I felt the table would have held me. Liz was outraged.

Several hands later, Liz moved all her remaining chips in. I had an Q-3, so I called her all-in. She had pocket twos which means that if she wins the pot, she gets an additional five dollars so long as no one else wins with the pocket twos later on in the tourney (it is a little side thing our Tuesday night poker group does -- we call it "The Grovers Special"). A queen came up on the turn, and I knocked Liz out of the tournament. It was glorious.

I ended up being destroyed later when I went all-in with an A-Q and Jim's wife, Cindy, called me with a KK and knocked me out of the tourney, but none of that mattered because I finally got my revenge. It just doesn't get any better than that.

[Originally posted on 06/28/06]

Toles

This Is Encouraging, But It Will Probably Have Little Effect

From MSNBC:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

The ruling, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.

In brief comments, Bush said he will work with Congress to get approval to try terrorism suspects before military tribunals.

Yeah, right. At first, I thought this decision might be pretty big, until I realized that Bush considers himself to be above the law, so the decision will have little if any effect on what BushCo does.

Meanwhile, the GOP is continuing its attack on anyone who suggests that we should impose a timetable for a withdrawal from the Iraq Debacle (I'm assuming that includes General George Casey, the U.S. commander in Iraq). From the Washington Post:

President Bush attacked congressional Democrats and the news media at a Republican fundraiser Wednesday night, accusing the opposition of "waving the white flag of surrender" in Iraq and declaring that there is "no excuse" for journalists to write about secret intelligence programs.

Sharpening his rhetoric as the midterm congressional campaign season accelerates, Bush offered a robust defense of his decision to invade Iraq even though, ultimately, no weapons of mass destruction were found, and drew standing ovations for his attacks on those who question his leadership of the war or the fight against terrorists.

"There's a group in the opposition party who are willing to retreat before the mission is done," he said. "They're willing to wave the white flag of surrender. And if they succeed, the United States will be worse off, and the world will be worse off."

What I'm really enjoying is how Bush and the rest of the Radical Right are continuing their attack on the New York Times and other newspapers for reporting on a program that Bush himself openly discussed in 2001. For God's Sake, Bush signed an executive order in autumn of 2001 calling for "greater cooperation with foreign entities to monitor money that might be headed to terrorist groups," and then posted this executive order on the White House website.

At least one Republican wants the New York Times to be charged with treason over this. Does that mean Bush should also be charged with treason? What is the maximum penalty again if you are convicted of treason? I forget.

Odds And Ends Wednesday

It looks like the American people are finally starting to realize that FauxNews is merely a mouthpiece for the corrupt and incompetent Bush Regime and its apologists in Congress:

Slackers at Fox News Channel, you’re on notice! Your boss is not pleased. Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes is on the warpath following his network’s recent ratings slump, and he won’t hesitate to clean house to turn things around.

So far during the second quarter, the No. 1 cable news channel’s primetime schedule has dropped 22% in its core 25-54 demo and 8% in total viewers. The first quarter was even worse.

Chief rival CNN has also dipped in recent weeks, but less dramatically, off 18% in the demo and 2% in total viewers.

Meanwhile, another member of the Bush Administration is set to enter a guilty plea stemming from the Abramoff Scandal. More please.

And finally, your tax dollars at work:

Your tax dollars are being used to fund a misinformation campaign about Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a press release headlined “AP Incorrectly Claims Scientists Praise Gore’s Movie.” It doesn’t substantiate the claim. The AP contacted 100 climate scientists, including noted “climate skeptics,” and of the 19 that had seen the movie, all commended its accuracy.

The Committee release faulted the AP for not cherry-picking the handful of scientists around the world who make a living questioning the scientific consensus on global warming. For example, an Australian scientist named Bob Carter told an obscure Canadian paper that Gore’s arguments are “so weak that they are pathetic.” How could the AP exclude this kind of incisive analysis?

The GOP-controlled Senate apparently has so little to do when it comes to actual legislating that it has to make up stuff to do. What a bunch of pricks.

BTW, I'm going to go see Al's movie on Friday and I'll let you know what I think. The critics seem to like it.

This Is Pretty Funny

Danimal, you'll like this video (via AmericaBlog).

Flag Burnings Up 33% This Year!

From Dana Milbank:

The Citizens Flag Alliance, a group pushing for the Senate this week to pass a flag-burning amendment to the Constitution, just reported an alarming, 33 percent increase in the number of flag-desecration incidents this year.

The number has increased to four, from three.

The naive among us may have trouble appreciating how four flag-burning episodes would constitute a constitutional crisis. But the men and women of the Senate, ever alert to emerging threats, are on the case. * * *

The problem the GOP has with this particular "crisis" is that the American people really aren't all that fired up about the issue (so to speak). Indeed, 54% of Americans oppose a constitutional amendment with regard to flag burning. This lack of support is undoubtedly caused by the fact that there just aren't enough flag burnings in this country.

I think what the GOP should do is send their brownshirts out to all corners of this great nation and start setting American flags on fire. They could dispatch some of the same guys they sent down the Florida in 2000 to "protest" the recount effort. These GOP operatives should try to burn at least 200 American flags per day (letting FauxNews know about each incident beforehand so that the cameras could be there filming these events). Then they might get some momentum on this whole constitutional amendment deal.

I'm certain that the companies in China that make American flags would be more than happy to provide the GOP with a sufficient supply for this holy endeavor. They might even give the GOP a bulk rate.

From Tony Auth

This Is Refreshing

What I've long hated about the corporate broadcast media is that it gladly provides a forum for just about every right-wing blowhard it can find and rarely if ever challenges what these fascist bastards have to say. And when corporate media outlets finally do bring on a liberal or a moderate to challenge these whackos, it's usually some weakling who runs off and hides in a corner when the right wingers start spewing their Nazi bullshit.

But not today.

I listen to KGO's liberal talk show host Bernie Ward as often as I can. What I like about Bernie is that (1) he is fearless, and (2) he doesn't take shit from anyone. He gladly accepts calls from extreme right wingers, then absolutely blows them out of the water every time. The reason he is able to do this is because he actually takes the time to inform himself on the issues.

Well, here is the video of Bernie taking on Texas Republican radio host Chris Baker during a debate on MSNBC. Baker, a right winger, gets so frustrated over the ass-kicking he is receiving that he actually storms off the set.

Calitics sums up the exchange this way (via Crooks and Liars):

Baker: Time of War! New York Times Treasonous! Bush Haters!

Ward: Should the government control what a newspaper prints?

Baker: Time of War! New York Times Treasonous! Bush Haters!

Ward: Answer the question. Should the government control what a newspaper prints?

[Repeat until Baker loses his mind, calls Ward names, and storms off because his Rove-approved talking points aren't working.]

That perfectly sums up how the whole thing went down. Bernie demonstrated how easy it is to shoot down extremists like Chris Baker. Calitics also had this to say about what happened:

Crooks & Liars has video of KGO's late-night talk show host Bernie Ward destroying Texas Republican radio host Chris Baker on MSNBC. The two were there to discuss the New York Times' reporting of the Bush Administration's recent financial dragnetting.

Ward gets Baker to completely lose his cool and storm off the set. This is instructive not because Baker lost his cool, but because of the way that Bernie Ward refused to play his game. . . .

Ward changed the basic assumptions of the conversation, and then refused to be baited by Baker's Republican-party talking points or the host's attempts to drag him into a diversion about "the courts" (where you've already conceded that government censorship of the press is a legitimate question). See how effective that was?

If only our politicians could be that relentless.

You owe it to yourself to watch the video.

Perfect

Check out this new anti-Lieberman commercial from Ned Lamont's camp.

This Is How The Democrats Win In November

From Political Wire:

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) holds a four-point lead over Tom Kean Jr. (R) in New Jersey's race for U.S. Senate, 42% to 38%, "and a growing percentage of voters are associating Kean with President Bush," according to the latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll.

Says pollster Murray Edelman: "The increasing association of Kean with Bush and a low Bush approval rating could be a fatal combination for Kean.”

Bush is a huge liability for the Republicans, and this year's Democratic congressional candidates must associate their GOP opponents with Bush at every opportunity, particularly when it comes to the GOP's continuing support for the Iraq Debacle.

And speaking of the Iraq Catastrophe, I found this particularly interesting:

Senate Democrats reacted angrily yesterday to a report that the U.S. commander in Iraq had privately presented a plan for significant troop reductions in the same week they came under attack by Republicans for trying to set a timetable for withdrawal.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said that the plan attributed to Gen. George W. Casey resembles the thinking of many Democrats who voted for a nonbinding resolution to begin a troop drawdown in December. That resolution was defeated Thursday on a largely party-line vote in the Senate.

"That means the only people who have fought us and fought us against the timetable, the only ones still saying there shouldn't be a timetable really are the Republicans in the United States Senate and in the Congress," Boxer said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "Now it turns out we're in sync with General Casey."

Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), one of the two sponsors of the nonbinding resolution, which offered no pace or completion date for a withdrawal, said the report is another sign of what he termed one of the "worst-kept secrets in town" -- that the administration intends to pull out troops before the midterm elections in November.

I think Levin is right. Last November, I predicted that election-year politics would force the Bush Regime to start making significant troop withdrawals from Iraq by the Spring of 2006. Although my prediction with regard to a timetable was a bit off, I still believe that Bush will be compelled to make some troop withdrawals before the November Mid-Term elections.

That's why I really liked the Democrats' recent presentation of their drawdown resolution. It was the Democrats' best political maneuver since last November, when Senator Reid invoked Rule 21 and forced the Senate into secret session on the issue of BushCo's Iraq Intel Manipulation.

Religion And Texas Hold 'Em Don't Mix

I've been playing poker since I was a teenager, and I freely admit that I will, on occasion, use profanity during a game. I will also, on occasion, use the word "Jesus" in a sentence if something interesting happens at the table. For example, I might say, "Jesus -- that was a good hand," or "Jesus, why the hell did I call that bet with the drek I was holding?!" Or sometimes, if something really major happens, I might say, "Jesus, Mary, and Joseph -- I can't believe that one."

In the poker group I've been playing with these past few months, I've used the "J" word more than a few times, and without incident. Now I'm not trying to say I am right to do so and that the government should require every sentence uttered in this country to start with the word "Jesus." I'm merely saying that these utterances often happen during poker games and most people don't mean anything by them.

Indeed, Jesus is arguably the finest person to have ever walked the Earth -- I only have a problem with what organized religion has done to him over the centuries. As Max Von Sydow's character said in Hannah and Her Sisters: "If Jesus came back and saw what's going on in His name, He'd never stop throwing up."

Well, last night during a game I uttered the "J" word at the end of a hand. I swear to God it was an innocuous utterance -- I didn't, for example, accuse Jesus of being the spawn of Satan or anything like that. Well, a lady across the table who had been playing poker with our group for the past several weeks made some religious comment about how Jesus was her Lord and Savior, and I responded -- half sincerely yet also half jokingly -- "Yeah, Jesus is one of my favorite persons . . . along with Bob Hope."

I know -- it was a stupid remark, mostly because I don't really like Bob Hope that much. Don't get me wrong -- he was an OK dude and all, but there are far better choices I could have made to complete that particular comment.

But right after I said it, this woman rose up from the table, told us she took offense, and said she was done playing. I immediately apologized for my remark -- it was, after all, a stupid thing to say -- but she insisted on dropping out of the tourney. Although I could feel the anger starting to rise in me -- I have a very short fuse when it comes to Bible-Beaters -- I nonetheless apologized once again, then Will, the player to my left, also apologized for similar comments he might have made in the past. This woman's daughter, who was also playing poker with us, begged her to accept our apologies and not drop out of the tourney.

None of that mattered -- she was doing the work of The Lord Ja-Heesus now and nothing could dissuade her from her Holy Mission. She continued to insist that she was done playing, and then started doing some more preaching to us. I said to her, "I'm really sorry I made that comment, and I didn't mean to insult anyone with it." Then I added, "Don't you think Jesus might have been a self-deprecating type of person with a good sense of humor?" Her response: "I don't know what 'self deprecating' means." That's when I knew it was hopeless.

I don't have to tell anyone out there who knows me that I started to really lose my temper at that point. I told her that it might indeed be best if she dropped out of the tournament, then demanded that additional time be put back on the blind clock to make up for the time we lost during our little detour into American Taliban territory (I didn't use the phrase "American Taliban," but I wish I would have).

Then Will, who like me was also about ready to blow a gasket, stood up and said that he's done playing, and started walking out. Given that I felt exactly the same way, I too stood up, said I was done, and started walking away. My anger really exploded as I was walking out the door, and I said some things that cannot be repeated even on this blog.

It was not one of my better moments, but dammit -- I was getting good cards last night and had a decent shot at winning that tournament. And my comments were made during a poker game, for Christ's Sake.

The worst part was that, had she merely said, "You know, I'm a religious type and don't feel comfortable to be around that kind of talk," I would have apologized and promised to keep the language down. Indeed, I would have apologized profusely, because that's just the kind of guy I am -- plus, I had a pretty good chip stack at the time and would have done just about anything to keep things from getting out of hand. Hell, I would have even promised to kiss Pat Robertson's ass if I felt it would have done any good.

Jesus, Texas hold 'em can be a really difficult game sometimes.

What Do You Call Today's Conviction Of A Former Bush Aide?

A good start:

A jury Tuesday convicted a former Bush administration official of four counts of lying and obstructing justice in the first trial to be held in connection with the influence-peddling scandal of lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

On the fifth day of deliberations, the jury found David Safavian — a former chief of staff at the General Services Administration — guilty of four of five counts of lying and obstructing justice.

Safavian sat impassively as the judge read the verdict and showed no expression when the judge announced the guilty verdicts on each of four counts. Sentencing was scheduled for Oct. 12.

Keep 'em coming.

Truthout.Org Explains Its "Rove Indicted" Story

Truthout.org is sticking with its story that Karl Rove was actually indicted:

What appears to have happened is that - and this is where Truthout blundered - in our haste to report the indictment we never considered the possibility that Patrick Fitzgerald would not make an announcement. We simply assumed - and we should not have done so - that he would tell the press. He did not. Fitzgerald appears to have used the indictment, and more importantly, the fear that it would go public, to extract information about the Plame outing case from Rove.

Yes, it does appear that Truthout was used, but not lied to or misled. The facts appear to have been accurate. We reported them, and in so doing, apparently became an instrument. From all indications, our reports, first on May 13 that Rove had been indicted, and then on June 12 when we published case number "06 cr 128," forced Rove and Luskin back to the table with Fitzgerald, not once but twice. They apparently sought to avoid public disclosure and were prepared to do what they had to do to avoid it.

The electronic communication from Fitzgerald to Luskin, coming immediately on the heels of our Monday morning, June 12 article "Sealed vs. Sealed" that became the basis for the mainstream media's de facto exoneration of Karl Rove was, our sources told us, negotiated quickly over the phone later that afternoon. Luskin contacted Fitzgerald, reportedly providing concessions that Fitzgerald considered to be of high value, and Fitzgerald reportedly reciprocated with the political cover Rove wanted in the form of a letter that was faxed to Luskin's office.

Our sources provided us with additional detail, saying that Fitzgerald is apparently examining closely Dick Cheney's role in the Valerie Plame matter, and apparently sought information and evidence from Karl Rove that would provide documentation of Cheney's involvement. Rove apparently was reluctant to cooperate and Fitzgerald, it appears, was pressuring him to do so, our sources told us.

It's hard to know what to think about all this. I'd love to see that Cheney sonofabitch get dragged into all of this, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Kevin Drum has this to say:

Is this true? I don't have a clue, but I figure I should pass along the latest scuttlebutt regardless. And for what it's worth, there is one thing that makes me wonder if Rove is really in the clear: the fact that he refuses to make public the letter from Fitzgerald saying that he "does not anticipate seeking charges" against Rove at this time. Rove's spokesman says they won't release the letter because they have an agreement with Fitzgerald that they "wouldn't disclose direct communications or any documents between his office and ours." This is a pretty laughable excuse, and it's hard not to wonder just what's in that letter that they don't want anyone to see.

Drum has a point -- if Rove was truly honoring an agreement not to disclose direct communications with Fitzgerald's office, he wouldn't have disclosed a communication from Fitzgerald stating that he wouldn't be seeking charges against Rove.

Is This A Great Country Or What?

I can understand why members of the American Taliban are so upset over this video -- after all, it exposes them as hypocrites of the first order -- but do they really have to send death threats to the 15-year old girl who created the video? That seems a bit extreme to me.

Oh, wait a minute -- these people are extremists. Now I get it.

You can read more about this young lady here.

Murtha Goes After Rove

Democrats should be making these types of comments every day of the week.

This is what John Murtha said this weekend about Karl Rove:

He's in New Hampshire. He's making a political speech. He's sitting in his air-conditioned office on his big, fat backside-saying stay the course. That's not a plan! We've got to change direction. You can't sit there in the air-conditioned office and tell troops carrying seventy pounds on their backs, inside these armored vessels-hit with IED's every day-seeing their friends blown up-their buddies blown up-and he says stay the course? Easy to say that from Washington, DC.

Right on -- keep 'em coming.

From Cartoonist Chan Lowe

Check Out These Religious Freaks

Geesus (via C&L):

War-Line is serious about fighting organizations that lend to pornography, destroy lives and families in our communities around the country. As you well know, nude/bikini bars and adult book stores are two organizations that cause much of the pain and suffering in our society. In addition, they tend to lead to sexual assault due to the "frenzy from aroused men" that frequent these locations.

We plan to frequent these locations with cameras and if you wish to enter a nude/bikini bar or adult book store, your photo could wind up on our site! How would you like for your mother, wife, father, children, pastor or others to see your photo on the world-wide web as you enter one of these establishments? Think twice before you plan to visit one of these facilities or you could "Get Busted" on War-Line.

I know Jesus said to love your enemies, but I really hate the Religious Right. BTW, here is an article on the founder of this group:

Armed with determination and a digital camera, a local man is targeting customers of a local adult bookstore whose owners have become irate.

Purchasing pornography in Jefferson County is legal, but John Reneer is trying to shame some customers by photographing them from across the street, then publishing their pictures on his Web site, war-line.com.

Reneer has been targeting the store for nearly a week, and his motive may surprise you, WLKY NewsChannel 32's Maria Gum reported Monday. Reneer is a convicted felon, now on probation for armed robbery, sodomy and murder.

Nice.

The real crime here, of course, is that some judge gave this guy probation for committing armed robbery, rape, and murder. I suspect that is a typo.

And speaking of religious extremists, this is the funniest interview I've seen in quite some time.

Mike Luckovich

Bush Reaches Another Milestone In Iraq

From MSNBC:

The number of U.S. military deaths in the Iraq war has reached 2,500, the Pentagon said Thursday, more than three years into a conflict that finds U.S. and allied foreign forces locked in a struggle with a resilient insurgency.

In addition, the Pentagon said 18,490 U.S. troops have been wounded in the war, which began in March 2003 with a U.S.-led invasion to topple President Saddam Hussein.

Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed.

Meanwhile, a second poll is showing no significant increase in the approval rating for Bush in the post-al-Zarqawi era. From AmericaBlog:

The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll had Bush "surging" 1 point -- all the way from 36% to 37%. This morning, Matt Lauer was incredulous that the numbers for Bush haven't spiked. The media is waiting for -- and pushing the narrative that there will be -- a Bush surge. The American people, who, unlike the media, grasp that Bush has lied to them about Iraq many times, aren't giving him one. . .

For whatever reason, the traditional media always, always, always falls for the Bush spin. Yet, these days, the public doesn't. Bush can -- and does -- play the media. Exhibit A yesterday was CNN's John King who was literally gushing about the Bush trip to Iraq. But Bush's tricks and lies don't seem to be working on the American people -- yet anyway.

This has to be hugely troubling for the Bush Regime and for the GOP. Ironically, the problem may be the ignorance of the American people.

Yeah, I know -- American ignorance usually helps the GOP, but this time it might have hurt them. After all, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi wasn't exactly a household name when they blew him up. BushCo opponents knew the name because Bush had a chance to take al-Zarqawi out during the run-up to the Iraq Catastrophe, yet decided not to do so, undoubtedly because it would have demonstrated that Saddam -- our most lethal enemy and the most dangerous man since Hitler -- couldn't even control the northern part of his own country.

I wonder how many American soldiers died as a result of that particular BushCo failure.

This Makes My Day

You really gotta love this:

Want to know why supporters of Sen. Joe Lieberman are planning an independent bid? A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows Lieberman leading primary challenger Ned Lamont (D) by just six percentage points, 46% to 40%.

There are some issues with the poll, such as a small sample size (218) and large margin of error (7%), but the results are a clear sign that Lamont is gaining traction.

If Lieberman does go independent, that could cause some problems for the Democrats in the Senate, but a Lamont victory in the primary would definitely put the fear of God into the GOP during the run-up to the Mid-Terms. Lamont clearly has the momentum right now.

Denis Horgan of the Hartford Courant had this to say (via Daily Kos):

Seeking to lambaste Ned Lamont, Lieberman's primary opponent, the senator's staff and admirers reach into the Bush-Cheney-Coulter playbook. No less a light than Sean Smith, Lieberman's campaign manager offers the bizarre, Orwellian, Bushian assault on the foe:

"The only public record this guy [Lamont] has, he voted time and again like a Republican," Smith said. "Why would we support that?" He said Lieberman would not promise to support Lamont, because the businessman voted frequently with Republicans as a local official in Greenwich.

Excuse us, but Lieberman is in a pickle today exactly because he so proudly, openly, happily, repeatedly, madly voted like a Republican. In fact, we have barely his word for it that he is a Democrat at all. The president kissed him, for cryeye. When you're getting smootched like some Brokeback cowboy by a Republican, it barely works to criticize your opponent for voting like a Republican in some town school board matter when, the lipstick still damp, you've been knee-jerking along voting for Iraq and supporting the Bush war on Social Security and a million other things.

Lieberman says it takes courage to be as wrong as he's been. Maybe. It takes some common sense, though, not to try to blame your opponent for doing what you've been doing so vigorously for so long.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Toles

Sorry George, But No Zarqawi Bump For You

Bush is still at 33% in CBS poll:

The death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has done little to improve views of how things are going for the U.S. in Iraq or boost President Bush's approval ratings, a CBS News poll finds.

Mr. Bush has been cautious in his response to Zarqawi's killing by U.S. troops this week, calling it "a major blow to al Qaeda" but warning that it won't end the war "and it's certainly not going to end the violence."

Americans agree. Half think the level of violence in Iraq will be unchanged by Zarqawi's death, while 30 percent say it will actually lead to more attacks against U.S. forces. Just 16 percent think the number of attacks will decrease as a result of his death.

Sixty-one percent also say Zarqawi's death won't have any impact on the terrorist threat against the United States, while 22 percent it will increase that threat. Thirteen percent predict a decreased risk of terrorism.

And it certainly doesn't help that Bush still has to sneak into Iraq. Maybe his numbers would go up if he announced such trips beforehand. At least then it would appear that he thinks it is getting better over there.

This Is Good

From Advertising Age:

Would it kill you, "Godless" author Ann Coulter, to do us all a favor and kill yourself? (Oh, well, yeah, I guess it would kill you.)

After her recent rabidly hateful, foaming-at-the-mouth, sub-human "Today" show appearance -- in which she reiterated her assertion that 9/11 widows are "enjoying their husband's deaths" -- even her former supporters began to fantasize about how much nicer the world would be if it were Coulterless.

I couldn't agree more. Satan would probably prevent her from going through with it, though, because the last thing he wants is to have to deal with her upon her arrival in the Infernal Regions.

As David Letterman said recently: "Ann Coulter is blonde and unmarried. Maybe somebody should introduce her to O.J."

Some Truth-Telling From A GOP Operative

Of course, everybody already knows this, but sometimes it is good to hear it from the elephant's mouth:

Allen Raymond, the Republican strategist convicted in the New Hampshire phone-jamming scheme, told the Boston Globe that while he's responsible for the crimes that landed him in jail, he also blames "a Republican political culture that emphasizes hardball tactics and polarizing voters."

"In his first interview about the case, Raymond said he doesn't know anything that would suggest the White House was involved in the plan to tie up Democrats' phone lines and thereby block their get-out-the-vote effort. But he said the scheme reflects a broader culture in the Republican Party that is focused on dividing voters to win primaries and general elections. He said examples range from some recent efforts to use border-security concerns to foster anger toward immigrants to his own role arranging phone calls designed to polarize primary voters over abortion in a 2002 New Jersey Senate race."

Said Raymond: "A lot of people look at politics and see it as the guy who wins is the guy who unifies the most people. I would disagree. I would say the candidate who wins is the candidate who polarizes the right bloc of voters."

Amen.

So Long, And Thanks For Ruining Our Country

I guess the folks at PNAC have concluded that they've done all the damage they could possibly do (from the Washington Post via Hoffmania):

The doors may be closing shortly on the nine-year-old Project for a New American Century, the neoconservative think tank headed by William Kristol, former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle and now editor of the Weekly Standard, which is must reading for neocon cogitators and agitators.

The PNAC was short on staff -- having perhaps a half-dozen employees -- but very long on heavy hitters. The founders included Richard B. Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul D. Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, William J. Bennett, Zalmay Khalilzad and Quayle.

The goal was to continue the Reaganite, muscular approach to projecting American power and "moral clarity" in a post-Cold War world, the group's manifesto said. The targets were liberal drift and conservative isolationism.

PNAC and its supporters dominated the Bush administration's foreign policy apparatus and championed a policy to get rid of Saddam Hussein long before Sept. 11, 2001. * * *

There had been debate about PNAC's future, but the feeling, a source said, was of "goal accomplished" and it looks to be heading toward closing. Former executive director Gary J. Schmitt, who had been executive director of President Ronald Reagan 's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, left recently for a post at the American Enterprise Institute. (Not a big move. Actually, only five floors up from PNAC.) Still, seems like a short century.

What I find particularly interesting is that PNAC will ride off into the sunset with at least 95% of the country never having heard of this insidious group. If it was up to me, I'd send these PNAC bastards a bill of $2,000,000,000,000, because that is what the Iraq Debacle will probably end up costing this country before all is said and done.

Well done, assholes. Mission f&@king accomplished.

WTF?

I don't get this one:

NASA is canceling or delaying a number of satellites designed to give scientists critical information on the earth's changing climate and environment.

The space agency has shelved a $200 million satellite mission headed by a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor that was designed to measure soil moisture -- a key factor in helping scientists understand the impact of global warming and predict droughts and floods. The Deep Space Climate Observatory, intended to observe climate factors such as solar radiation, ozone, clouds, and water vapor more comprehensively than existing satellites, also has been canceled.

And in its 2007 budget, NASA proposes significant delays in a global precipitation measuring mission to help with weather predictions, as well as the launch of a satellite designed to increase the timeliness and accuracy of severe weather forecasts and improve climate models.

The changes come as NASA prioritizes its budget to pay for completion of the International Space Station and the return of astronauts to the moon by 2020 -- a goal set by President Bush that promises a more distant and arguably less practical scientific payoff. Ultimately, scientists say, the delays and cancellations could make hurricane predictions less accurate, create gaps in long-term monitoring of weather, and result in less clarity about the earth's hydrological systems, which play an integral part in climate change.

Sometimes I think BushCo's goal is to determine the correct course of action in every situation and . . . then do the exact opposite.

Maui Snorkeling Photos

Above is a photo of Linda snorkeling at Molokini. There wasn't as many fish there as we had hoped, but the water was fairly clear. The next two photos were also taken at Molokini.





The next two photos were taken at Turtle Town -- there were a lot more fish there, but visibility was pretty poor.



These last photos were taken at Black Rock. I snorkeled in four different places while in Maui, and I thought Black Rock was the coolest.

Finally

No, I'm not talking about the fact that we finally got Al-Zarqawi, but the fact that I've finally been able to post something on this blog. Blogger can be pretty weak sometimes.

Regarding the killing of Al-Zarqawi, I think what happened there is that his own people turned him because the "al Qaeda in Iraq" group, although still loaded down with tons of weapons and explosives because Bush failed to secure the ammo dumps during the invasion, was becoming cash-poor so they turned in Al-Zarqawi in order to secure the $25,000,000 reward. I hope this isn't the case, but I have a feeling that this is exactly what happened.

Senate Dumps Anti-Gay Constitutional Amendment

It looks like more than a few folks in the Senate have come to their senses and decided that this whole anti-gay constitutional amendment crap is a colossal waste of time:

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, dealing an embarrassing defeat to President Bush and Republicans who hoped to use the measure to energize conservative voters on Election Day.

Supporters knew they wouldn't achieve the two-thirds vote needed to approve a constitutional amendment, but they had predicted a gain in votes over the last time the issue came up, in 2004. Instead, they lost one vote for the amendment in a procedural test tally.

Wednesday's 49-48 vote fell 11 short of the 60 required to send the matter for an up-or-down tally. The 2004 vote was 50-48.

The folks at Fox News were clearly furious about this. When they announced the result of the vote this morning, they put up on the screen the photos of the Republican senators who voted against the extremists today. It reminded me of the way mug shots of criminals are often displayed on the news.

Unfortunately, the GOP is far from finished with all this wedge issue bullshit. From yesterday's Roll Call (subscription only -- Steve Benen at Washington Monthly has the goods):

With only a few months left on the legislative calendar, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has decided to abandon any efforts at bipartisanship in favor of using his chamber to hold a series of highly partisan, mostly symbolic votes on conservative causes, including amendments banning gay marriage and flag burning, and fully repealing the estate tax.

Although Frist has peppered the Senate schedule with a handful of substantive issues -- including likely votes this week on a new U.S. trade representative, a Native Hawaiian-rights bill and a new mine-safety czar -- the chamber will put off work on major legislation such as the fiscal 2007 Defense authorization bill in order for Frist to pursue items of special interest to his party's conservative base.

This is, of course, a ridiculous strategy. As GOP strategist Ed Rollings said on CNN recently with regard to the Gay Marriage Amendment: "The secret to this game is you always want to be thinking politically, but you don't want to look political. This looks like desperation politics."

I guess I can understand the desperation -- Bush hit a new low in the Pew Poll yesterday and he's threatening to pull the rest of the Republican Party down with him. But this has long been my biggest gripe with the current leadership of the GOP -- they don't seem to give two shits about actually governing. All they seem to care about is (1) dismantling or otherwise anesthetizing the Federal Government via war-time tax cuts for the very wealthy, and (2) distracting the American people from this main strategy by pursuing wedge issues which amount to very little in the long run.

The bottom line is that people who hate government shouldn't be in government. We've already seen the results of such a combination. The Katrina Debacle is a direct result of the GOP's hatred for government, as is the fact that the United States isn't even close to being prepared for the dangers facing it in the post-9-11 world.

Origins of The Decider

Anyone who missed the "Origins of The Decider" piece on The Daily Show can watch it here.

Go Lamont!

Check this out (via Hoffmania):

After years of ardent support for the Iraq war, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman could become that conflict's first big political casualty in a Democratic primary race fueled by rising anti-war anger.

Lieberman, the party's vice presidential nominee in 2000, faces a growing challenge from a political neophyte who has rallied Democrats angered by the senator's enthusiastic backing of the war and willingness to support Republican President George W. Bush on other issues.

Challenger Ned Lamont's underdog bid to unseat Lieberman in Democratic-leaning Connecticut could offer an early gauge of the intensity of anti-war sentiment ahead of November's midterm elections, along with a measure of the influence of the Internet activists and bloggers who have flocked to his cause.

"Senator Lieberman has cheered on the president every step of the way when it comes to the invasion of Iraq, and he is too quick to compromise on core Democratic principles," Lamont, a businessman and former Greenwich town selectman, told Reuters.

"He's wrong on the big issues of the day and he is not challenging the Bush administration," added Lamont, who qualified for the Aug. 8 primary ballot by winning 33 percent of the delegates at the state party convention last month.

Lieberman, who has not faced a tough re-election race since entering the U.S. Senate 18 years ago, has been stirred by the challenge, stepping up his state schedule and launching a television ad attacking Lamont for votes he cast in Greenwich.

Can you imagine the shockwave that would be sent through the GOP if Lamont merely came close to beating Lieberman in the primary? I'm fairly certain that Lieberman still maintains a pretty good lead in the polls, but Lamont is definitely closing the gap.

I'll never forget, during the last State of the Union address, when Lieberman was the first member of Congress to rise to his feet to applaud Bush's statement about staying the course in Iraq. If he's not doing this already, Lamont should get this footage and repeatedly run it in his political ads. Lieberman even stood up before the Republicans did.

Any leader in the Democratic Party who does not think Iraq will be a big issue in the 2008 presidential campaign should take a closer look at this Lieberman/Lamont race.

Only In Amerika

Finally:

The father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by anti-gay protesters from a fundamentalist Kansas church filed an invasion-of-privacy suit against the demonstrators Monday.

It is believed to be the first lawsuit brought by a serviceman’s family against Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., whose members routinely demonstrate at military funerals around the country.

Albert Snyder of York, Pa., the father of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder, is seeking unspecified damages. The younger Snyder, 20, died March 3 after an accident in the Anbar province of Iraq. He was buried in Westminster, Md.

It should be no surprise that stuff like this is happening in this country now, given that the majority party and its leader openly express their hatred for gay people. I heard on CNN this morning that the Westboro Baptist Church is considering a counter-suit against this grieving father. I can't wait to read that pleading.

Thanks for the link, JB.

Mother Jones Interviews Jimmy Carter

Carter has some great things to say about the evils of Fundamental Christianity. The whole interview can be found here. I particularly liked these comments:

MJ.com: As you know, the Bible stresses the need to help the poor, and yet the government appears to have moved away from that notion in recent years.

JC: I don’t think there’s any doubt about that. And one point that is made openly by some so-called neoconservatives is that we need to drive the nation into debt – which they’ve done grossly – to prevent future administrations from having the funding flexibility to increase government services to the poor. Whether in the field of housing or education or health care or social services, there’s a deliberate idea there that is quoted quite freely in some of the right-wing political periodicals.

It is amazing how distorted the teachings of Christ have become within the ranks of the American Taliban. Fortunately, most of the extremists who fill these ranks are pretty stupid -- I guess that goes with the territory.

Take, for example, the GOP's latest gay-bashing effort:

President Bush and congressional Republicans are aiming the political spotlight this week on efforts to ban gay marriage, with events at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue — all for a constitutional amendment with scant chance of passage but wide appeal among social conservatives.

If I was a gay-hating member of the American Taliban, I'd be pretty upset by the G.O.P.'s weak attempt to throw a bone at me. After all, Bush spent a ton of time touring the country during his "Let's Destroy Social Security" misadventure, even though his ideas with regard to social security also had a scant chance of passage. But most of the extreme religious right will be happy with the president and Congress spending a mere few days on this anti-gay amendment before moving on to more important issues (like more war-time tax cuts for the very rich).

One would think such a weak effort on an issue so near and dear to the extremists' hearts would piss them off to no end. In fact, I'd love to see them get very angry over this, but that probably won't happen.

And speaking of the extreme religious right, Rev. Pat Robertson now claims he can leg press 2000 pounds, shattering the previous record by 665 pounds. Robertson credits his super-human strength to "age-defying protein shakes."

I wonder if George W. Bush was drinking one of these shakes when he shattered the perch record?

Quotes Of The Day

From Stephen Colbert (he actually said this yesterday):

"God wrote (the Bible) in English for a reason: So it could be taught in our public schools."

I also liked this quote from Washington State Democratic Chairman Dwight Pelz: "History will record that America's flirtation with the Republican right-wing agenda ended in 2006."

Pelz better be right -- if he's not, then this country is absolutely screwed.

Right-Wing Extremists Suffer Major Setback RE: PlameGate

In order to try to make the best out of a bad situation, the Radical Right had hoped to use the trial of Scooter Libby as a launching point from which to attack Ambassador Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, and pretty much everyone who views the BushCo decision to invade Iraq as the greatest foreign policy blunder in U.S. history. Well, so much for that plan.

This is an excerpt from the Court's June 2 ruling (via TPMMuckraker):

[T]he only question the jury will be asked to resolve in this matter will be whether the defendant intentionally lied when he testified before the grand jury and spoke with FBI agents about statements he purportedly made to the three news reporters concerning Ms. Wilson’s employment. The prosecution of this action, therefore, involves a discrete cast of characters and events, and this Court will not permit it to become a forum for debating the accuracy of Ambassador Wilson’s statements, the propriety of the Iraq war or related matters leading up to the war, as those events are not the basis for the charged offenses. At best, these events have merely an abstract relationship to the charged offenses.

Take heart, Scooter -- you still have your "memory loss" defense. Good luck with that.

Never Heard Of These Before

On the left is a photo of noctilucent clouds seen over Northern Ireland on June 2, 2006.






Here's how NASA's website describes them (from a 2003 article):

They hover on the edge of space. Thin, wispy clouds, glowing electric blue. Some scientists think they're seeded by space dust. Others suspect they're a telltale sign of global warming.

They're called noctilucent or "night-shining" clouds (NLCs). And whatever causes them, they're lovely.

"Over the past few weeks we've been enjoying outstanding views of these clouds above the southern hemisphere," said space station astronaut Don Pettit during a NASA TV broadcast last month. "We routinely see them when we're flying over Australia and the tip of South America."

Sky watchers on Earth have seen them, too, glowing in the night sky after sunset, although the view from Earth-orbit is better. Pettit estimated the height of the noctilucent clouds he saw at 80 to 100 km ... "literally on the fringes of space."

"Noctilucent clouds are a relatively new phenomenon," says Gary Thomas, a professor at the University of Colorado who studies NLCs. "They were first seen in 1885" about two years after the powerful eruption of Krakatoa hurled plumes of volcanic ash as much as 80 km high in Earth's atmosphere.

The 2004 Election Theft

The Rolling Stone article on the 2004 election theft can be found here. I had previously read about most of this stuff, but seeing all the evidence set out in one article really kind of gave me the creeps and made me wonder if we'll ever have a fair national election in this country again. Kenneth Blackwell, who was the co-chair of President Bush's re-election committee in 2004 as well as Ohio's secretary of state, should be thrown in prison and never released.

Here's some excerpts from the article regarding the exit polling from 2004 (via Brad Blog):

On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush’s 174, with fifty-five too close to call. In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.

As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states – including commanding leads in Ohio and Florida – and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush’s neck in supposed GOP strongholds Virginia and North Carolina. Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.
...
Now, thanks to careful examination of Mitofsky’s own data by Freeman and a team of eight researchers, we can say conclusively that the theory is dead wrong. In fact it was Democrats, not Republicans, who were more disinclined to answer pollsters’ questions on Election Day.
...
What’s more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent – a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country.

“When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud,” concludes Freeman. “The discrepancies are higher in battleground states, higher where there were Republican governors, higher in states with greater proportions of African-American communities and higher in states where there were the most Election Day complaints. All these are strong indicators of fraud – and yet this supposition has been utterly ignored by the press and, oddly, by the Democratic Party.”
...
The wildest discrepancy came from the precinct Mitofsky numbered “27,” in order to protect the anonymity of those surveyed. According to the exit poll, Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent. The statistical odds against such a variance are just shy of one in 3 billion.
...
According to Ron Baiman, vice president of the archive and a public policy analyst at Loyola University in Chicago, “No rigorous statistical explanation” can explain the “completely nonrandom” disparities that almost uniformly benefited Bush. The final results, he adds, are “completely consistent with election fraud – specifically vote shifting.”

It is a long article, and the above-quoted excerpts barely scratch the surface. Read the whole thing -- it's worth it.

And if you missed Keith Olbermann tearing Bill O'Lielly apart yesterday, check it out here. It is great.

BushCo's Real Plan RE: Iran

And now -- the rest of the story.

Bush's apparent reversal of course on Iran appears to be nothing more than "checking off a box" prior to a military confrontation (from the NYTimes via Alterman):

"Cheney was dead set against it," said one former official who sat in many of those meetings. "At its heart, this was an argument about whether you could isolate the Iranians enough to force some kind of regime change." But three officials who were involved in the most recent iteration of that debate said Mr. Cheney and others stepped aside — perhaps because they read Mr. Bush's body language, or perhaps because they believed Iran would scuttle the effort by insisting that the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty gives it the right to develop nuclear fuel. The United States insists that Iran gave up that right by deceiving inspectors for 18 years.

In the end, said one former official who has kept close tabs on the debate, "it came down to convincing Cheney and others that if we are going to confront Iran, we first have to check off the box" of trying talks.

BushCo's strategy with regard to Iran is apparently to buy a little time before attacking. They clearly don't want to attack Iran too soon before the U.S. Mid-Term elections. After all, the Bush Regime's foreign policy has little to do with actual foreign policy and everything to do with the American election cycle (think October 2002).

The attack on Iran will come sometime between mid-September and mid-October 2006. It will be interesting to see how the American people respond to it.

Hysterical Review of Al Gore's Movie

No surprise here: Rupert Murdock's New York Post doesn't like Al Gore's new movie very much, despite the fact that the vast majority of other reviews out there are positive. Members of the Extreme Right are going out of their way to attack Gore because they obviously see him as a major threat in 2008, given that he is on the right side on every single issue. He will crush them on Iraq.

Murdock, however, loves Hillary Clinton and is openly supporting her because he knows the GOP can beat her in 2008 and they want to do everything possible to make her the Democratic nominee. I never thought I'd see the day that the Radical Right would warm up to Hillary, but there it is.

And, for what it's worth (thanks for the link, Slic[k]):

A new behavior prediction tool is forecasting a landslide victory for former Democratic Vice President Al Gore in the 2008 presidential election. However, should Hillary Clinton gain the Democratic nomination, any potential Republican challenger will win the presidency.

These are among the surprising findings reported by Dr. James N. Herndon, a media psychologist with Media Psychology Affiliates. Using a new research tool called Affective Encryption Analysis, Dr. Herndon led an investigation into the likely outcome of the 2008 Presidential election. * * *

“Despite the widespread public dissatisfaction with the George W. Bush administration, our results showed even greater ill-feelings toward potential Democratic challengers,” says Dr. Herndon. “But there was one exception: Al Gore.”

“With a predictive accuracy of 93%, our results showed that Al Gore would easily defeat any Republican challenger in 2008. However, he is the only Democrat on the scene today who has the ability to defeat the likely Republican challengers, who we believe will be either John McCain or Jeb Bush.”

Results were not rosy for Hillary Clinton. “Hillary Clinton would suffer a disastrous defeat at the hands of any Republican who receives the nomination,” states Dr. Herndon.

Although it may be a bit early for this kind of predicting, it's pretty clear that a Hillary nomination would in fact be a disaster for the Democrats.

Maui Pictures

Here are some photos from our trip. On the left is a sunset from our hotel at Kaanapali.



The photo on the right was taken at the Lahaina Harbor. Last Halloween, some dude got his sailboat too close to the shallows there and got stuck. He couldn't afford to get it pulled out, so there it sits.


This is a photo of Linda on the summit of Haleakala, a dormant volcano on Maui (elevation 10,023 feet) -- she's pointing to Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa across the channel on the Big Island. Haleakala is allegedly rumbling back to life and may erupt in a few years.


This is a photo of Kapalua Bay, which turned out to be a great place to snorkel as well as a pretty nice beach on which to hang out (the sand at Kaanapali Beach was softer, though).

On the left are dive boats off of Molokini (West Maui is behind them). Although the water was very clear there, I thought that Black Rock and Kapalua Bay offered better overall snorkeling experiences (more varieties of fish and more interesting underwater terrain).

This is a picture of some of the handiwork at the Festival of Canoes in Lahaina (which is held every year there under the world's largest Banyan tree). Canoe carvers from all over the Pacific show up there for two weeks every May, carve their canoes, then launch them at the end of the festival. It was very cool.

I'll post some more pictures later, including some underwater shots we took while snorkeling.