Media News

Washington Post's "Disappearing President"

Elaine Meinel Supkis

The Washington Post is scared their tool, Bush, might "disappear." IF ONLY! In a heartbeat. Poof. Like in a fairy tale! Gone! Alas, he has to be arrested and tried for his many, many crimes. That would be OK with me.

Washington Post:

CAN THIS PRESIDENCY be saved? President Bush's approval rating has plummeted to a dismal 38 percent, according to the latest Post-ABC News poll. Democrats will rejoice at their improving prospects of recovering a majority in Congress. But a damaged president governing for nearly three more years in a dangerous world is no cause for rejoicing. With that in mind, we offer Mr. Bush, at no charge, some advice on a fresh start.

A fresh start? Clean the Stygian Stable House? Hahaha. How about handing over the government to Al Gore? That might fix 1/10th of the mess. Gads. In the alternate universe we don't inhabit, Al Gore ran America for eight years and everything is great. But we are here with this petty, lying, creepy tyrant placed in power by idiots like the morons who own and run the Washington Post.

Arrest everyone. That would clean up this mess a tad. I, personally, will read them all their Carmen Miranda rights: they have the right to wear fruit on their heads and long dresses. Except for Rove, he is too ugly. A bag for him.

The president's two largest handicaps aren't going away. He's spending most of his political capital, as he noted recently, on the war in Iraq. He's right to do so

NO. He is spending OUR capital to the tune of half a trillion of our children's future tax revenues! And he is running up interest rates on it and worse, went to Communist China to fund it. If he and Halliburton Cheney paid for this out of their fat wallets, then the Washington Post could talk about him spending something that is his.

Nor will the poisonous partisanship in Washington, with Democrats united in their desire to see Mr. Bush fail while his erstwhile Republican allies scurry for cover.

Can someone tell the owner of the Post that opposition parties are supposed to oppose? Duh! And they better represent us who voted for them AND the majority of Americans who are disgusted and appalled by Bush, his neo conmen and the Washington Post!

Nonetheless, there are things Mr. Bush could do. He spent his first five years insisting that research on climate change is all the government need do. But the danger signs have steadily strengthened, the cost of inaction could be catastrophic, and there is ample space for creative policies that would begin to address the problem without harming the economy. Imagine if he embraced the evidence, and the opportunity.

Talking about global warming means forcing his rich buddies, the Real Rulers, to be responsible adults and not destroy this planet. Impossible! They would far rather "fix" this via WWIII and dropping nukes on everyone which is why they and Bush and all have huge bomb shelter complexes built with our dimes, to hide in once they launch their Apocalyptic Final Solution.

Or imagine the positive shock he could deliver by announcing that he would no longer tolerate the scandal of U.S. abuse of detainees, eight of whom have been tortured to death and at least 98 of whom have died in custody. Acknowledging the long-term damage done to the nation by the mistreatment, and by the refusal to punish any but the lowest-level servicemen, Mr. Bush could promise to reform the system, allow the Red Cross into his secret prisons, and work with Congress to provide a legal framework for detention, interrogation and trials.

No, arrest him, send him to Gitmo and let the guards have fun. Tis only fair. No trial for at least three years and no lawyers, too. Let him eat the poisonous pie he baked. He wanted this world, let him fester in one of his own cells for a while. Have this clown memorize the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and we won't release him until he can recite it in Hebrew like at a bar Mitzvah.

Could good policy and good politics go together? When you've tried everything else, it's worth a shot.

Unfortunate Feudian slip there, fellers. I suggest putting the owners and editorial page editor in Gitmo with Bush. They can help him memorize the Constitution. They need to reaquaint themselve with it, too.

Culture of Life News Main Page

Washington Post Lies Nonstop About Valarie Plame

Elaine Meinel Supkis

Ruling class tool, the Washington Post, attacks Ambassador Wilson and his CIA undercover wife, Valarie Plame yet again in major editorial full of lies and outright lies. Obviously, the same clowns pushing us madly into a nuclear war with the world want to rewrite history even though we can all Google the truth.

Washington Post:

PRESIDENT BUSH was right to approve the declassification of parts of a National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq three years ago in order to make clear why he had believed that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. Presidents are authorized to declassify sensitive material, and the public benefits when they do. But the administration handled the release clumsily, exposing Mr. Bush to the hyperbolic charges of misconduct and hypocrisy that Democrats are leveling.

HAHAHA. Clumsy? How about criminal??? Look, if the criminal in chief wanted to "declassify" information about the undercover CIA agent, he could have followed protocols, right? Right. Then, if he absolutely had to "out" an agent and everyone she interacted with across the planet, he should have walked into the Rose Garden, given a speech explaining why he is forced to reveal vital secrets and then point to the woman and say, "She was a secret agent but because her husband won't let us use doctored documents to force a war, we are going to put her on a plane, paint it to look like a UN flight and then lure Saddam into shooting it down....dang! Wrong line! That is for Tony Blair! Not America!...I must out this woman because her husband wrote an editorial in the New York Times and the only way to silence anyone else who knows of our secrets like the UN plane business, for example, or the Downing Street memos, well, they will all shut up, so there!"

Then Bush could walk off, no? But he didn't! He has to have various aides call various media/Israeli tools like dear Ms. Miller, eager to serve two countries at once, she would jump at betraying a CIA agent! So when the story broke, the CIA got mad and ordered an investigation.

All this leading to Fitzgerald putting people in jail. While the Zionist, Miller, was sitting in the pen, did Bush come out and say, "I AUTHORIZED this and WANTED it!" No?

Geeze fucking willikers. Duh. He said he would punish any and all who did this nefarious thing! So why is the Washington Post and he and everyone now pretending it was not only OK to spy on Americans or invade a country with no WMD at all, anywhere, it is also legal as well as good for America to out CIA agents to newspaper reporters, secretly and then lie about doing it! Right. Because it was legal as well as good, that is why these clowns hid everything, deleted computer records, burned papers, went to jail, all that was because they were legal.

Wow. Even a dead fish won't swallow this hook, line or stinky sinker.

Arrest the owner of the Washington Post. Arrest Bush, Cheney, arrest the lot of them. Send them to the Hague. I want to see a trial not a travesty.

Culture of Life News Main Page

New York Times Spend A Year And Millions Of Dollars In Disasterous Redesign Effort

Elaine Meinel Supkis

The New York Times spent millions of dollars and had a committee work on their website and they turned it into a nearly impossible to look at mess as far as I am concerned. But then, prehaps one should be happy there is less competition? I love the BBC web site. Easy to read, even from across a room, easy to navigate. They are my role model.

Here is the new New York Times. They lost the ugly orange "Times Select" side stuff, confining it to merely small orange boxes but everything else is terrible here.

For example, the top photo is photo sized but underneath is tiny text that doesn't even fill the space there and it is jammed together with no spaces so one has to squint to see which story is which. Instead of making the photos square like the BBC or I do, they make it photo sized and this now crushes the side bar that has other, non-picture stories. The BBC has a small picture with all the top rank stories and one bigger but not too big picture illustrating the biggest story of the day. One can see all ten of them easily at a glance and clicking on the stories is easier since they each have their own icon and box with a good amount of white space around each one, isolating it from the others, visually.

The Times has everything crowded together. The Washington Post used to do that. All the stories crammed in so one couldn't see anything, it is still way too crowded on the front page. The "stuff it all in the very first click" is not worthy of great papers. Are they scared people won't make a second click? Heck, at my pathetic, lousy little blog, all my readers click through because they know there is something more than the headlines and if nothing else, they want to see my scribbled cartoons.

Having no staff, no editor, no nothing, just one female and her cats and dogs, this blog slogs on, trying to be readable, at least. Many blogs are hideously ugly or totally unreadable. Some sites may be popular due to content despite incredible ugliness. The Brad Blog is an example of a blog with funny or interesting content which had to been designed by a color-blind person. Gah. Of course, these "throw in the artistic kitchen sink" blogs are run by nonprofessionals and the cobbled-together, patchwork, "oooh, I can do anything" look is what characterizes many popular enterprises. This is normal, in other words, to throw everything into a visual blender and then turn on to the highest chopping rate.

But the NYT has no excuse for a visual disaster area! They write about aesthetics all the time and are obviously proud of being culturally attuned and know-it-alls about what looks good, what is fashionable and what we should emulate and they pop on this silly stuff? The typeface is very old fashioned so why did they try to be "computer hip" with setting it up? Namely, Helvica or Trebuchet can be underlined and stacked in rather tight piles but Courier?

No way. The fussy tags and curves make it look frilly and jumbled. Underlined, it looks like trying to tie together the hair of a very curly-haired child. If one uses frusty, dusty type, one must give the eye some room to see what the words are. Of course, we are fortunate they aren't using Gothic German type like the Medieval typeface of their logo.

Instead of crowding everything into the front page, the BBC has a select, single story from each section with a picture and then you visit it to see the other stories. At the bottom of the front page is a three story each sub-selection without pictures. One can choose from that, too, but I seldom scan it, prefering to go to the sub sections and reading the headlines that go with pictures, there. Clicking through is much easier than scrolling through a massive front page!

Web design is still in its infancy. Many corporate websites look like each other and most are pretty yuckky. Either very crowded or too empty, the aesthetics of web design are still mostly tech people rather than artists and artists haven't digested the restrictions and strengths of web design so it is pure chaos out there and everything goes like when Victorian architecture could slap anything and everything together in a total mishmash of whatever. This produced a lot of funny and amusing housing which I love to play around with but it also was a mess.

Many of the websites born during the internet revolution will fade into the past and might amuse future readers but it is dismaying that bad design, rather then getting less and less, seems to be growing greater. I have been using the net for many years and we went through a period, after the bare minimum look of the earliest years, at about 1996 to 1999, many web sites became both easy to use and easy on the eyes. Then the number of goodies one could use grew and grew as both computer power expanded and connections improved. Now many sites are a real pain in the ass to look at with the flashing ads, moving frames, intrusive colors, multiple backgrounds, letters imposed on pictures, etc, etc.

I hate reading stuff where I have to cover my eyes part of the time or slide the screen around to hide half of the page, etc, etc. My annoyance with this rises each year until it is nearly intolerable. I really appreciate simplicty and every movement for artistic change goes through the same cycle: simple, more complex, after mastering the style, roccocco silliness and elaborate madness then shoving it all away for a new simplicity, a new style.

Oh, to click on a page and see what I wish to see, immediately! What a joy that is. Time to visit the BBC again.

Culture of Life News Main Page