Immediately after the news broke that George Bush's administration has now agreed to a hard-and-fast timetable for withdrawal of all American troops in Iraq (all troops will be gone -- no matter what the situation on the ground is -- by the end of 2011), I got the following press release. Now, I'm on a lot of strange press lists, so I get a lot of strange press releases, but this is the first time I've ever gotten one from another dimension, I have to admit.

Here is the full text of the press release:

Continue Reading »

I have to begin here today by stomping all over a cutesy term the media has come up with for the upcoming economic "summit" George W. Bush is holding this weekend. The newsies, in their exuberance, have taken to calling this meeting "Bretton Woods II."

To which I say: "No, it isn't. Please stop using this term. Thank you."

Because Bretton Woods "I" was the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, which was held at the Mount Washington Hotel near Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, at the end of World War II. This meeting of 44 allied nations set up the International Monetary Fund, and what was to become the World Bank. It also tried to set up an International Trade Organization, a half-century before the World Trade Organization was born (the U.S. Senate turned down the I.T.O. proposal back then, effectively killing it). This historic meeting lasted more than three weeks in July of 1944.

Bush's meeting is going to last six hours. And nobody expects it to come up with anything even close to the same magnitude of what happened in Bretton Woods. Nobody sane, that is. So please, media types, don't call it what it's not. Let's have some truth in advertising here. Call it "Desperate Bush Lame-Duck Photo-Op With World Leaders Who Would Really Rather Be Talking To Obama," if you have to slap a label on it. Because that's a lot closer to what it's going to be.

Continue Reading »

The column I wrote yesterday has provoked a number of interesting comments, both here and at the Huffington Post. So today I would like to continue the conversation and attempt to explain myself further. [My policy is not to use anyone's login name without permission, but you can read the comments where they originally appeared if you'd like.]

First, let me begin by stating my biases in the matter: I don't like spam. I do like the First Amendment. I just wanted to get that out of the way, so you can spot any bias which might creep in to what I write here.

As I see it, the issue breaks down in a number of ways. The first question is anonymity -- do Americans have an absolute right to anonymity in political messages? The second question is technological -- is anonymity a right, no matter what the medium? And the third question seems to be political, and deal with campaign and election law -- what kinds of rules on speech are constitutionally allowable in politics?

Continue Reading »

One of the more scurrilous 2008 campaign tactics (in a campaign seemingly full of them) had to have been those insidious "Have you heard... Barack Obama is a secret Muslim?!?" emails. These bounced hither and yon on the internet almost from the beginning of the campaign itself (or at the very least, since when it looked like Obama had a chance at the nomination). This sort of activity would likely fall into most people's "there ought to be a law" list -- a list of things worth changing in our election process. Unfortunately, the state Supreme Court of Virginia handed down a ruling in the midst of the campaign which may ultimately make any sort of limits on this sort of anonymous political (and technological) mudslinging actually unconstitutional. Meaning it would be impossible to pass any sort of laws against the practice at all.

This has enormous and chilling implications. Emails saying absolutely anything about a candidate (whether true, false, or viciously slanderous) could not only be sent anonymously, but whoever sends them would actually be allowed to break any sort of anti-spam laws to do so. Robocalls could be made with untraceable phone numbers, and untraceable accountability -- and lawmakers could not ban such practices, or even seek to regulate them. No matter what technologies arise in the future, security protocols with the intended purpose of verifying user identity may actually be unconstitutional as well. This would, no doubt, lead to an absolute avalanche of such messages in future campaigns; funded anonymously, sent anonymously, and with no accountability whatsoever.

Continue Reading »

In honor of Sarah Palin, I ate two bowls of sugar cereal for breakfast, and am currently blogging in my pajamas. I am in my own house, and not in my parents' basement, but I can't do anything about that, sorry Sarah (actual quotes at end, in case you missed the fracas).

Oh, and by the way, Sarah -- how can we miss you if you won't leave?

[Ahem. Let me start over....]

OK, I know it's been a week and we've got to move on. The election is over, the dust has settled, and I really should be writing about something else rather than indulging in navel-gazing. But I can't help myself. I have to write one more article about the election, and in particular my picks. I apologize in advance. If you don't like watching someone else pat themselves on the back, then just skip today's article altogether and go out and decorate a veteran's grave. You have been warned.

Continue Reading »

Today's column is in three parts. The first two are updates on the Missouri presidential election results and the Alaskan Senate election results, and then a quick rundown of some of the state-level ballot initiatives you may have missed out on... what with all the other election excitement this year.

First, though, I got tired of endlessly downloading various "election results" webpages, in the hopes of getting some final results. And I also got tired of waiting for the mainstream media to do its job and inform the public what is going on with the remaining states, whose election results have not yet been reported. So I called up the state election officials myself, and thought I would share with you what I found.

Continue Reading »

Welcome back to Friday Talking Points.

Of course, the big question on everyone's mind right now is: What is going on up in Minnesota? Al Franken is tantalizingly close to taking a lead in his Senate race, but very few details are available in the media (with the exception of this report from the Huffington Post) to let us know exactly what is going on. So I went to the source, and contacted the Franken campaign for some details.

Minnesota is currently in the process of verifying their ballot results. What is happening right now (and the reason why the totals keep slightly changing) is "canvassing" in Minnesota's 87 counties. This is a preliminary review of the results, and should be complete in the middle of next week. A few days after this is completed, each county will conduct a post-election review, or a spot-check of a small sampling of precincts, to verify the machine totals are correct.

Over 2.9 million votes were cast in the Gopher State. An automatic recount is triggered by one-half of one percent (0.50%) of these votes. The margin right now is less than 240 votes, or less than one one-hundredth of a percent (0.01%), meaning that a recount is mandatory.

Of course, the outcome of a recount is anybody's guess. Franken campaign spokesperson Jess McIntosh summed it up: "The race is the closest Senate race in Minnesota history and the closest race anywhere in the country this year; it is too close to call, and we do not yet know who won."

Continue Reading »

[I am taking another day of rest today (normal columns will resume tomorrow). Instead of an article, I present here today as a public service the full text of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s final speech, which was given the night before he was assassinated (April 3, 1968). King was in Memphis in support of striking sanitation workers. If you don't have time to read the full speech, which is rather long, please at least scroll down to the end and read the last few paragraphs. Video of the speech is available from www.mlkonline.net.]

I See the Promised Land

Continue Reading »

[This is a repeat of a column I wrote right after the 2006 election. Most of it is still appropriate, but since I am taking a few days off for a well-needed (and, in my humble opinion, well-deserved) rest, it suggested itself as the best possible column to run today. I still love the tinkly piano soundtrack -- paid for by my tax dollars, no less. The Toles cartoon is still hilarious, and could have run today. Some of the items are out of date, however. Now would be a dandy time to strip Lieberman of his committee assignments, for instance. In any case, I beg the gentle reader's forgiveness for this rerun, but it's been a long two years....]

Continue Reading »

About the Cartoonist  |  Reprint Policy

Because it's Election Day, I'm not going to give a detailed analysis of the past week's polls, as I normally do here. For those who have been following the progress of my "Electoral Math" columns, I have provided the final charts at the bottom, so you can see where they wound up, if you're interested.

Instead, I'm going to make my picks and call the races. First, some down-ballot calls.

Continue Reading »