Tonight a collection of minstrels bring you
Songs of the Human Condition
“History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.”He also has a take on hurricane Katrina:
“One of the worst disasters in our nation’s history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush’s presidency. Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush’s second term,” he writes. “And the perception of this catastrophe was made worse by previous decisions President Bush had made, including, first and foremost, the failure to be open and forthright on Iraq and rushing to war with inadequate planning and preparation for its aftermath.”Nor does he have a high regard for the media's invlovment:
“If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.The Bush administration, as can be expected, is up in arms over it.
“The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. … In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.”
"It is sad," said current White House press secretary Dana Perino, dismissing McClellan on Wednesday as "disgruntled about his experience at the White House. ... This is not the Scott we knew."Think Progress tells us even Republican presidential candidate John McCain had this to say about the matter:
The president was "surprised" by the book's claims, Perino said.
"He is puzzled," she said of Bush, "and he doesn't recognize this as the Scott McClellan that he hired and confided in and worked with for so many years."
I have not seen the book or the comments. But I know why I supported it [the war] because I believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction as did every intelligence agency in the world and every assessment.The problem is John is entirely off base:
State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR): Concluded that the “activities we have detected do not add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what [the INR] would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons.”
Department of Energy: Concluded aluminum tubes said to be used for nuclear centrifuges were “likely intended for small artillery rockets.”
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): On March 7, 2003, IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei reported there was “no evidence that Saddam Hussein had any nuclear weapons or was in the process of acquiring them.”
Hans Blix, chief U.N. weapon’s inspector: In June 2003, Blix told the U.N. Security Council that his inspection teams had not found any “smoking guns” after visiting some 125 Iraqi sites.
How many times are we going to have a key Bush administration official try to wash the blood off his hands -- and add a chunk of change to his bank account -- by writing a come-clean book years after the fact, pointing the finger at everyone else while painting himself as an innocent bystander to history who saw all the horrible things that were happening but, somehow, had no choice but to go along?
What Happened is page-turning reading. What Didn't Happen -- namely McClellan telling the truth in service to his country rather than in service to his book sales -- is a stomach-turning disappointment.
Pasadena -- A NASA spacecraft landed in the Martian arctic today to begin three months of examining a site chosen for the likelihood of having frozen water within reach of the lander's robotic arm.
Radio signals received at 4:53 p.m. Pacific Time confirmed that the Phoenix Mars Lander had survived its difficult final descent and touchdown 15 minutes earlier. In the intervening time, those signals crossed the distance from Mars to Earth at the speed of light.
Mission team members at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.: Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Denver; and the University of Arizona, Tucson, cheered confirmation of the landing and eagerly awaited further information from Phoenix later tonight.
The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter turned its UHF radio off, possibly because of a cosmic ray, cutting off communications with the lander, said Fuk Li, manager of the Mars exploration program for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.
But Li and others said it is not a significant problem.
"All this is is a one-day hiccup in being able to move the arm around, so it's no big deal," said Ed Sedivy, space program for Lockheed-Martin Corp. in Denver.
Li said the orbiter was programmed to respond as it did, but that orbiter team members were trying to get the radio back on. It has a second radio aboard that might be used instead, though reprogramming would be needed.
A second orbiter, the Mars Odyssey, is to be the primary relay for returning data to Earth from the lander, which is parked in a valley in Mars' northern arctic region.
If necessary, the Odyssey will do double duty, relaying commands to the lander as well as taking up the earthbound information. Link to article.
The doctors said on Tuesday that the senator was “in overall good condition,” had been walking around the hospital, and had suffered no more seizures since Saturday.
“The usual course of treatment includes combinations of various forms of radiation and chemotherapy,” Dr. Lee Schwamm, the vice chairman of neurology at Massachusetts General Hospital, and Dr. Larry Ronan, a primary care physician at the hospital, said in a statement issued Tuesday afternoon.
The National Cancer Institute says that malignant glioma is the most common form of brain cancer, accounting for about 9,000 cases diagnosed each year in the United States. The prognosis depends on the severity of the tumor, although the institute’s Web site says it is generally poor.