Lettuce & Pickles

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

1/31/2006

Sound familiar?

"The war in Vietnam is going well and will succeed."
- Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, 1963

We Are Addicted To Oil!


Hummer_CFV
Originally uploaded by lettuceandpickles.
Teaming up with the Bush Administration to ease American reliance on foreign sources of energy, General Motors announced today the prototype 2007 Hummer H2 CFV (coal fired vehicle.)

With seating for two (plus canary in the included avian restraint system), the Hummer CFV can get up to 1000 miles per metric ton of clean burning American coal.

Click on the photo for a better view

Fire Up, H2!® (FU H2!)®

1/19/2006

And yet again

Ms Howell:

I've heard from lots of angry readers about the remark in my column Sunday that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to both parties. A better way to have said it would be that Abramoff "directed" contributions to both parties.

That would be a better way to say something.

It is not a better way to say: "My readers are correct, Jack Abramoff gave not a penny to Democrats, despite my assertion. I was wrong, they were right."

Thank you

1/17/2006

And then we write some more

Ms. Howell:

Today Howard Kurtz defended your most recent column, and the false statement that both Democrats and Republicans had received money from Jack Abramoff, as "inartfully worded."

Since you ARE the ombudsman and we write to the ombudsman we have, not the ombudsman we wish we had: What is the Post's policy on insulting the intelligence of the Post's readers?

Isn't it true that the statement was "utterly without merit" rather than "inartfully worded"? After all, no matter how artfully worded, no Democrat received as much as a dime from Jack Abramoff.

Is the Post simply institutionally incapable of admitting error, or is it a matter that the Post is incapable of telling the truth?

I await your response.

1/15/2006

Wasting time, writing letters

My letter to the Post's ombudsman:

Ms. Howell:

From your column today, 1/15/06:

Schmidt quickly found that Abramoff was getting 10 to 20 times as much from Indian tribes as they had paid other lobbyists. And he had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties.

---

Jack Abramoff gave nothing to Democrats. He did not make substantial contributions to both major parties, he made contributions to the Republican Party and the Republican Party alone.

Receiving campaign contributions from tribes is not illegal, receiving campaign contributions from tribes Jack Abramoff has cheated is not illegal.

This is not high level intellectual stuff.

The actual statement you've made in this paragraph quoted above is simply false.

Beyond that, to demonstrate that Democrats (as a group), or a Democrat is/are guilty of something requires more than proving that Jack Abramoff is guilty of something or that the GOP is complicit in something.

I'm sitting in Wisconsin, not on Wisconsin Ave. NW, I can figure this out. It shouldn't be beyond the ken of the Washington Post, the ombudsman for the Post's readers or Susan Schmidt.

Thank you.

1/08/2006

Good Morning, World

We have to believe the United States would have so-called liberated Iraq even if its main products were lettuce and pickles and the main energy resource of the world were in central Africa. Anyone who doesn't accept that is dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic or something.[Noam Chomsky]


Good morning, world.