take your answer off the air...

  • HorsesAss.Org: the straight poop on WA politics & the press
    progressive brilliance from the guy who pointed out Tim Eyman's nascent horse's-assedness
  • Talker's Magazine
    The quirky talk radio trade mag. Check the Talk Radio Research Project- it's not very scientific, but places on the top 15 talkers list (scroll down to Talk Radio Audiences By Size)) are as hotly contested as Emmys (and mean just about as much).
  • The Advocate
    No, not THAT Advocate... it's the Northwest Progressive Institute's Official Blog.
  • Media Matters
    Documentation of right-wing media in video, audio and text.
  • Orcinus
    home of David Neiwert, freelance investigative journalist and author who writes extensively about far-right hate groups
  • Hominid Views
    "People, politics, science, and whatnot" Darryl is a statistician who fights imperialism with empiricism, gives good links and wry commentary.
  • Jesus' General
    An 11 on the Manly Scale of Absolute Gender, a 12 on the Heavenly Scale of the 10 Commandments and a 6 on the earthly scale of the Immaculately Groomed.
  • Howie in Seattle
    Howie Martin is the Abe Linkin' of progressive Seattle.
  • Streaming Radio Guide
    Hellishly long (5795!) list of radio streaming, steaming on the Internets.
  • The Naked Loon
    News satire -- The Onion in the Seattle petunia patch.
  • Irrational Public Radio
    "informs, challenges, soothes and/or berates, and does so with a pleasing vocal cadence and unmatched enunciation. When you listen to IPR, integrity washes over you like lava, with the pleasing familiarity of a medium-roast coffee and a sensible muffin."
  • The Maddow Blog
    Here's the hyper-interactive La Raych of MSNBC. daily show-vids, freakishly geeky research, and classy graphics.
  • Northwest Broadcasters
    The AM, FM, TV and digital broadcasters of Northwest Washington, USA and Southwest British Columbia, Canada. From Kelso, WA to the northern tip of Vancouver Island, BC - call letters, formats, slogans, networks, technical data, and transmitter maps. Plus "recent" news.
  • News Corpse
    The Internet's chronicle of media decay.
  • The Moderate Voice
    The voice of reason in the age of Obama, and the politics of the far-middle.
  • News Hounds
    Dogged dogging of Fox News by a team who seems to watch every minute of the cable channel so you don't have to.
  • HistoryLink
    Fun to read and free encyclopedia of Washington State history. Founded by the late Walt Crowley, it's an indispensable tool and entertainment source for history wonks and surfers alike.

right-wing blogs we like

  • The Reagan Wing
    Hearin lies the real heart of Washington State Republicans. Doug Parris runs this red-meat social conservative group site which bars no holds when it comes to saying who they are and who they're not; what they believe and what they don't; who their friends are and where the rest of the Republicans can go. Well-written, and flaming.
  • Orbusmax
    inexhaustible Drudgery of NW conservative news
  • The Radio Equalizer
    prolific former Seattle KVI, KIRO talk host speaks authoritatively about radio.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2005


« KIRO's weapon of mass destruction: jim mcdermott | Main | Tuesday oddems: bogged-down jim, tongue-tied dave, 2nd-tier frank, 2-tiered Net, 3 dog night, random punctuation and assorted typos... »

May 27, 2006



Good points, B'Michael. But that is soooooo pre-9/11 thinking!!

Too bad Bush doesnt think a single one of those apply to him.


Interesting. I haven't seen that before. I bet Shrub thinks he followed all those rules . . .

the people were behind him at first thanks to subservient mainstream media; Rumsfeld thought he had enough troops - silly man; clear objective? - to win; vital interest? wmd's (aka oil), not to mention the late-blooming "regime change;" What could be clearer?!

Unkl Witz

Funny how the Bushies managed to stand this conservative Republican doctrine on its head.


What's also funny is how many of you people were slamming this selfsame doctrine during the Reagan and Bush Sr presidencies. Today you see how wise it is, and you pretend that you grasped its wisdom back then. I'm glad you have come to your senses, but I'm sorry it had to take the foolish actions of this basket case of a president to bring you to the light.


How does commending a list of conditions automatically justify all wars? I was not in favor of the Gulf War because Kuwait was illegally draining off Iraqi oil . . . I thought that was an incident to be worked out between the two countries and the Kuwaitis (sp?) might have been more willing to negotiate with Saddam if we had stayed out of the fray. But, again, our politics is determined by our oil-rich friends. Also, April Glasby (?? if I remember correctly) gave Saddam the go ahead to do it. . .

I think you need to go back and get the facts.

Lazy Murrow

Caspar the friendly ghost,
he couldn't be bad or mean.
He'll romp and play,
sing and dance all day,
the friendliest ghost you've seen.


Joanie asks "How does commending a list of conditions automatically justify all wars?"

My reply is that it doesn't do anything of the sort. But it did justify the first Gulf War. A persuasive case was made that our economy's reliance on oil, and the fact that a regime controlling all the oil of two - and potentially three - of the largest producers on the planet (for such was our justifiable fear that Saddam would go on to seize the oilfields of northeaster Saudi Arabia, as he would have been capable of doing had we not intervened) ensured that an armed response would meet that key first condition.

Our present situation in Iraq, however, doesn't come within a million miles of qualifying for legitimacy under the conditions of the so-called Weinberger Doctrine.


I guess "oil" justifies all. Were you against this war from the beginnning? Since Iraq is sitting on the biggest oil fields in the Middle East, what's the difference? Had Kuwait not been stealing Iraqi oil, it wouldn't have been an issue between them.

Saddam knew very well the US would not allow such a take-over of oil fields which is why he ran it past Glasby to begin with. But, the Gulf War was more or less successful . . . so it seems to have fit your criteria. And we certainly gained the added benefit of eliminating Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. That was a good thing.

I agree that the Iraq War is a mess.


Oly, I'm listening to James Carroll who has written HOUSE OF WAR and he just commented about the first Iraq war saying that Sec'y of Defense Cheney wanted it but that Powell, Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff - the generals - was against it. Powell thought Saddam could be contained by other means. So, we now have two wars dictated by the same man . . . interesting, isn't it?
Thanks goodness, Bush Sr. listened to better advisors - Scowcroft? - and did not go on into Baghdad.


Sorry to hear that two of three of a CBS news crew were killed in Iraq this morning...more waste of lives, more families who will never be the same...


I'm surprised CBS still has a presence there. I heard most media was out of there because it was so dangerous.


"Saddam knew very well the U.S. would not allow such a takeover of oil fields..."

What could we have done if he had gone ahead and conquered the entire Arabian Peninsula in the fall of 1990? Our military options - particularly the deployment of ground forces - would have been pretty limited, as the only decent staging areas would have been Turkey (the southeast of which is very mountainous and not suitable for the large-scale use of tanks) and the landing ships of the Fifth Fleet.

To answer your question about my opposition to the present campaign, Joanie, I opposed it as it was presented to us by the Bushies - as part of our wider war against Al Qaeda. We did not respond to Pearl Harbor, after all, by invading Bolivia. Iraq was an irrelevancy. Nor was Baathist control of Saudi oil - or Kuwaiti oil, or UAE oil - at stake this time.


Still, you do not give credit to Powell's resistance to the first Gulf war? Is it possible he knew of the concerns you raise and still thought war should not be the first resort? We are so at the mercy of media . . . Saddam knew he could never oppose our will. That's why he ran it by Glasby at the beginning. He thought he got a go ahead.

I respect your knowledge of troop limitations and ground strategy but think you give Saddam way too much credit . . .

WE are the superpower, Saddam knew our capabilities. It is a stretch to think he could take over all Middle East oil fields or that we would let him.

Also, you neglect to comment on the fact that Kuwait was stealing his oil . . . what was there in his actions that made you think his goal was more than stopping that theft? Did you know Kuwait was stealing oil?


Iraq could have taken Saudi Arabia after a brief stop in Kuwait; our military brass were wondering why he didn't. Once in Saudi, he could have negotiated the slant drilling issue along with the war debt he owed Saudi and Kuwait from the Iran conflict.


Mark says: "Iraq could have taken Saudi Arabia after a brief stop in Kuwait; our military brass were wondering why he didn't."

The question is what WE could have done differently. War was not the only answer. (see above)

Regarding "our military brass wondering why he didn't" - what military brass? Isn't Powell "military brass?" Why would military brass wonder about something that he didn't have the opportunity to do? I don't get that.

Lot of what ifs in your post. . . You must know something that Powell didn't know - share it with us because I am curious. Thanks.


"The Weinberger Doctrine"

Hey, it was fun while it lasted!


Regardless of Kuwaiti perfidy, either actual or alleged, prior to August 1990, Saddam could not have been allowed to control that much oil.

As Mark points out, Saddam owed both the Kuwaitis and the Saudis very big bucks for loans they made to him during his war with Iran. Why would a guy with his well-known mix of pathologies have held back from liquidating those debts with invasions of both countries? (He was happy enough to initiate that war with Iran by attempting to conquer and annex the oil-rich Iranian southwest, so the idea of naked conquest was not one he had ever shrunk from.) I am not persuaded that he would have been terribly worried about our possible response to an Iraqi sweep into Saudi, as his blithe refusal to withdraw from Kuwait in the face of our open buildup in the region between September '90 and January '91 would seem to have demonstrated a certain measure of confidence. He had enough sense - barely - to recognize the difficulties we would have faced in moving a huge, armor-heavy field army to southeastern Turkey, and he knew that until that army was in place, the imposition of "our will" would have been limited either to air strikes - which, again, Saddam manifestly demonstrated didn't offer adequate deterrent value - or to threats, or to negotiations of some sort. And as attempting to negotiate with a cold-blooded totalitarian who is operating from a position of strength is practically by definition an exercise in gross futility, I would suggest that there was no viable non-military solution to that problem.

Exactly what "other means" did Gen. Powell envision as being preferable to the route we took? He was purely a military man at the time, not a diplomat; hence his advice to the administration would have been - or at least ought to have been - limited to the military sphere. Did he counsel an attempt at a diplomatic solution? He would have been overstepping his bounds if he had.


I love your reasoning. If someone - a military man especially - suggests something other than all-out war, he's overstepping his bounds! (LOL) Yeah, that's exactly the kind of reasoning that works with this administration!

Sorry to be so cruel! But, do you realize what you just said?

Well, in both wars, the politician (Cheney) got his way so I guess whether it was the only way or not is a moot point. (Still laughing, sorry!)


There's an editorial in the NY Times regarding legislation that could change the way the internet works entirely, basically privatizing it. If you have to register to get it, do it. The NY Times is worth the registration hassle and they are user-friendly.

"Why the Democratic Ethic of the World Wide Web May Be About to End"

". . . Last year, the chief executive of what is now AT&T sent shock waves through cyberspace when he asked why Web sites should be able to "use my pipes free." Internet service providers would like to be able to charge Web sites for access to their customers. Web sites that could not pay the new fees would be accessible at a slower speed, or perhaps not be accessible at all.

A tiered Internet poses a threat at many levels. Service providers could, for example, shut out Web sites whose politics they dislike. Even if they did not discriminate on the basis of content, access fees would automatically marginalize smaller, poorer Web sites."

This is so important that Robert Reich has been traveling around talking about it. Corporations have a very slick campaign going on under the radar screen.


Not to belabor the point, but the job of a military advisor is to give military advice. It is not to give political advice, or diplomatic advice, or advice on the president's golf swing. It really is not a Joint Chiefs chairman's place to suggest that we negotiate with a foreign leader instead of make war on him, any more than it is the place of the Undersecretary of State for Stretch Limo Maintenance to suggest the proper method for cleaning out an insurgent nest in Fallujah. The Joint Chiefs are there to tell the president what his military options are, and which of those options can be accomplished with the available resources.

That may not strike you as a proper utilization of an advisory team, but it is the norm in DC and has been so for ages.


Sorry, I think war is more than politics. Apparently, Powell thought his status allowed him some insight and wasn't afraid to share it. Hopefully, he knows the protocol. So, we'll have to agree to disagree.


BTW, Oly, your other examples are nonsense and do nothing to further your argument. Better had you left them out. :)


Joanie, I'm not sure what you mean by my "other examples". I do prefer my nonsense to be pointed out to me in greater detail. Please do me the favor.


". . . advice on the president's golf swing."

". . . Undersecretary of State for Stretch Limo Maintenance to suggest the proper method for cleaning out an insurgent nest in Fallujah."



Ahh, so you are not familiar with the ancient rhetorical device of employing sardonic metaphors to punctuate a point. In other words, you are one of those people who take every word they read literally.

I will file that sad fact in the proper folder for future reference.


It's called sarcasm - pseudo intellectuality is beneath me. Sorry.

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    pacific nw talk stations

    • KIRO 710ESPN Seattle 710 KHz
      Games and sports-blabber
    • KIROFM 97.3
      Multi-format: news and nearly all local talk. This is where classic KIRO AM news talk radio went... hopefully, not to die. The home of Dave Ross & Luke Burbank, Dori Monson, Ron & Don, Frank Shiers, Bill Radke, Linda Thomas, Tony Miner and George Noory.
    • KUOW FM 94.9
      Seattle's foremost public radio news and talk.
    • KVI am 570 KHz
      Visit the burnt-out husk of one of the seminal right-wing talkers in all the land. Here's where once trilled the reactionary tones of Rush Limbaugh, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Mike Siegel, Peter Weissbach, Floyd Brown, Dinky Donkey, and Bryan Suits. Now it's Top 40 hits from the '60's & '70's aimed at that diminishing crowd who still remembers them and can still hear.
    • KTTH am 770 KHz
      Right wing home of local, and a whole bunch of syndicated righties such as Glennn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larsony, and for an hour a day: live & local David Boze.
    • KPTK am 1090 KHz
      Syndicated liberal talk. Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Norman Goldman fill in the large hole to the left on Northwest radio dial.
    • KLFE AM 1590 kHz
      Syndicated right-wing 2nd stringers like Mark Levin, Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Dennis Miller and Hugh Hewitt inhabit this timid-voiced neighbor honker for your radio enjoyment (unless you're behind something large like Costco).
    • KOMOAM
      News, traffic, Ken Schram and John Carlson.
    • Washington State Radio Stations
      Comprehensive list of every danged AM & FM station on the dial.
    • KKOL am 1300 KHz
      Once a rabid right-wing talker, except for Lou Dobbs, it's all business....