I love New Orleans jazz, blues, zydeco, all of it.
It would be great to hear some real American music at the inauguration!
I read a great diary on DKos a couple of weeks ago about one president who held a jazz festival right on the WH lawn. That would be great to see again.
What a stupid piece of shit diary.
Good for bringing out trolls, not much else.
You make a lot of accusations unsupported by facts or links, and flail about in an attempt to sound knowledgeable, rather than hateful and bitter.
The real question is why?
The Department of Defense is a huge hole in the ground that has lost billions of dollars, not just in Iraq, but in accounting losses on overbudget programs, no-bid contracts, and hugely expensive weapons that don't work, but continue to be developed.
Here's some conclusions from a GAO report from last March:
The Pentagon spends too much on programs because it does not have enough information, the report stated.
Department of Defense "programs continue to proceed through critical junctures with knowledge gaps that expose programs to significant, unnecessary technology, design and production risks," leading to higher costs and delays, it said.
The Pentagon is not getting better in this regard, the GAO warns, concluding that "DOD programs are likely to continue to experience a cascade of negative effects that affect both costs and schedules."
The report urged the Pentagon to make better informed decisions. "This type of strategy is essential for getting better outcomes for DOD programs."
Among key findings of the report are:
More than 6 in 10 programs changed requirements after development began.
Fewer than half of program managers stay in their jobs as long as Department of Defense policy recommends.
Nearly half the staff members working on the programs are not government employees.
About half of all programs required more than a 25 percent increase in the amount of software code initially expected.
Research and development costs came in 40 percent higher than first estimates, while total costs per system were 26 percent higher. Both measures are getting worse rather than better over time.
She refers to the inspectors in her speech more than once:
Some people favor attacking Saddam Hussein now, with any allies we can muster, in the belief that one more round of weapons inspections would not produce the required disarmament, and that deposing Saddam would be a positive good for the Iraqi people and would create the possibility of a secular democratic state in the Middle East, one which could perhaps move the entire region toward democratic reform.
Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible.
While there is no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma, and while people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposed conclusions, I believe the best course is to go to the UN for a strong resolution that scraps the 1998 restrictions on inspections and calls for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded from Iraq. I know that the Administration wants more, including an explicit authorization to use force, but we may not be able to secure that now, perhaps even later. But if we get a clear requirement for unfettered inspections, I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 UN resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998.
War can yet be avoided, but our responsibility to global security and to the integrity of United Nations resolutions protecting it cannot. I urge the President to spare no effort to secure a clear, unambiguous demand by the United Nations for unlimited inspections.
The thing is, to an insecure nerd dickhead like him, banning people off a blog is the only "power" he has, and ever will have.
That's why I have respect for people like Jerome- he doesn't only preach progressive politics, he goes out there and works for it. How many Red Staters actually get off their asses and do anything with regard to getting candidates elected?
Richard, I'm sure you had good intentions when you wrote this diary, but maybe you don't realize the shape that the economy is in.
My retirement account is down almost 50%, my other funds are down about 38%. I think I'll be okay, I'm healthy and don't have to retire in ten or twelve years the way I had it planned out.
As for cities and towns, they are also suffering- reduced income from property taxes (foreclosed homes don't pay taxes) and job losses causing even more loss of income means they don't have money to salt roads this winter, or money for new projects like schools and roads.
Only stupid people would go out and blow money they probably don't have (see comment on credit cards above) on Christmas presents in this economy.
I am donating to a favorite charity this year, in lieu of some presents to family, but I do that every year.
All this talk about A,B and C level cabinet positions only shows your ignorance about how government works and each department's importance.
I guess you aren't aware that Commerce handles the Census and the Census has a direct affect on redistricting? Agriculture a C level cabinet post? LOL.
Have you looked at the budgets of each department? The number of employees? Responsibilities of each department? Anything?
Jesus man, try educating yourself on the issue before posting a diary about something that you obviously know nothing about.
It's amazing that you don't see the wrongness of spending $150,000 on a few months worth of clothes when $15,000 or even $20,000 would have done quite nicely.
As an example, at the conventions, Michelle's dress cost less than $200. Cindy McCain's outfit was $300,000.
That and the ridiculous expenditure by McCain's campaign on Palin's clothes tells me one of the parties was out of touch with the reality of what people are going through in this country wrt this economy, and that was not the Democrats.