A joke I read at dKos

It's 2005. A guy walks up to the White House, sees a Marine guard, and tells the guard "I'd like to speak to President Bush". The Marine says "I'm sorry, President Bush no longer lives here". The guy thanks him and walks away.

Next day, same guy, same guard, same question. The Marine says "I'm sorry, Mr. Bush is no longer the president, so he's no longer in the White House".

Third day, the guy goes to the same Marine, asks the same question. Exasperated, the Marine shouts "Don't you get it? Bush lost the election! He's no longer president! He's not here anymore!!" The guy says "Yes, I know. I just like hearing it!" The Marine smiles, salutes him, and says "See you tomorrow!"

Evidence Is Cited Linking Koreans to Libya Uranium

Since It seems I read a different set of blogs than my few readers do, I'm going to start posting more pointers to newspaper articles and blog posts that I think people should see.

For starters, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/23/international/asia/23NUKE.html?hp

Iraq was not our problem. Iraq was Chalabi's problem. Aside from al-Qaida, North Korea and Pakistan were our problems.

Guard says Gen. Sanchez was present and saw abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48229-2004May22.html

Also, Professor Juan Cole's blog "Informed Comment" is easily the best coverage I've seen of Iraq. It can be hard to keep up with; I skip over some articles. I'll give pointers to those I think worth highlighting. This one's about how recent events have turned Shiites both inside and outside Iraq much more sharply than they were until recently. It's not surprising, but he gives the details to make it depressingly real.

(no subject)

In a NYT Op-Ed, Ian Haney López argues that Brown vs. Board of Education was badly written, in contrast to a decision two weeks earlier in Hernández vs. Texas. His claim is that Brown let it be assumed that race was what made Blacks a constitutionally relevant class while Hernández correctly identified the important criteria as any caste that is set apart and deemed inferior. He then argues that it is Brown's unfortunate ambiguity that has allowed conservatives to wrongly argue (with occasional success) that any race-conscious action on the part of the government is unconstitutional. Here's an excerpt:

"Differences in race and color have defined easily identifiable groups which have at times required the aid of the courts in securing equal treatment under the laws," the court wrote. But, it said, "other differences from the community norm may define other groups which need the same protection." Succor from state discrimination, the court reasoned, should apply to every group socially defined as different and, implicitly, as inferior.

BSD or any other lawyer who may be passing by, would you care to comment?

Now they're trying to blame Chalabi on Clinton.

It's nonsense. If you've got the time, here's an article on Chalabi's history and the history of the US's relationship with him.

In the future, I'll save up links and post a bunch at a time. That should save your Friends Pages.