...more recent posts
Jim, I would really like to get your thoughts on "net neutrality." I remember at one point you said you wished there *were* priority systems in place where people who used more bandwidth paid more. Hope I'm not misstating that.
Cory Doctorow seems to think government regulation to achieve neutrality isn't the answer. On the other hand, MyDD and others are framing this as "the end of the Net as we know it" and arguing that government regulation is the only thing protecting us from the telecoms busting up the Internet. I'm very confused, partly because i still don't understand how the Net actually works.
salam pax -- a few weeks ago in San Jose. Salam said (since he's an Arab) that to visit Kurdistan he has to get a permit equivalent to a visa that allows him to visit for just a few days. It's essentially a different country, and has been for 16 years now.
FoxNews Poll
8. Who do you think should have the final say on U.S. military matters --
civilian leaders or military personnel?
| . | Civilian leaders | Military personnel | Depends | Both | Neither | Don’t know |
| 18-19 Apr 06 | 20% | 54 | 5 | 14 | 3 | 4 |
| Democrats | 17% | 60 | 5 | 12 | 2 | 4 |
| Republicans | 22% | 58 | 3 | 11 | 2 | 4 |
| Independents | 24% | 39 | 6 | 20 | 5 | 6 |
holy crap! your liberal media.
all this saber rattling drives up the price of oil. im sure the bush cronies hate that. i think jon stewart mentioned that an exxon exec had a $400 million retirement package.
bit of inside blogball. steve gilliard refers to digby as "her" in this post and has yet to address queries in his comments. slip of the keyboard?
booja scotty quit.
Mr. [Jack] Anderson's son Kevin said that to allow government agents to rifle through the papers would betray his father's principles and intimidate other journalists, and that family members were willing to go to jail to protect the collection.
two via wolcott --
david byrnes blog
and bernstein comes out of his hole only to see nixons shadow.
I know this is obvious, but I have to vent.
If I hear one more politician say that we need to "keep all options on the table" with regard to Iran my head is going to explode. There is not a single person who actually thinks we should keep *all* options on the table with regard to Iran or any other country or situation we might face. Obviously we aren't going to release smallpox in Iran. Obviously we are not going to launch an all out ICBM attack on every city and town in Iran. So why the fuck do people keep saying we need to keep every option on the table. It doesn't mean anything. What they mean is they want to keep the option of nuking Iran with locally deployed weapons on the table. But they want the cover of being able to say that they aren't saying specifically we should use nukes - it's just part of "keeping everything on the table."
Why won't a reporter follow up with a question asking one of them if that therefore means they support keeping the smallpox option on the table? Or how about crashing the Moon into Iran? I mean come on! Every option is *not* on the table. This is ridiculous.