Reward him for running a fantastic race.

Contribute:
https://secure.nedlamont.com/page/contribute

Or get involved:
http://nedlamont.com/...

Do what you can.

The source is verifiable and legitimate (I have his email address if any doubt). These emails were passed onto me by my husband's mother.  The emailer is a college friend working in a make-shift triage unit set up at Louisianna State University. His name is Bill. And his first hand accounts begin now...

The source is verifiable and legitimate.  These emails were passed onto me by my husband's mother.  The emailer is her college friend working in a make-shift triage unit set up at Louisianna State University.  His name is Bill.  And his first hand accounts begin after the jump.  

Note: Updates & links below the fold.

A taste below the fold:

I can't imagine that this year's party was anything to write home about.  But next year, you'll be celebrating in the Whitehouse.  Thanks for being the spunky, sexy heart of this campaign.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The FBI's weekly alert bulletin, sent to 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide, focused this week on the possibility of al Qaeda recruiting non-Arabs to carry out attacks in the United States.

"Finding operatives with U.S. [citizenship or legal residency] status would greatly facilitate al Qaeda's ability to carry out an attack within the United States," the bulletin said.

Bush's new campaign ad - June 24, 2004: Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-eyed portrays angry, shouting men (Gore, Gephart, Moore, Dean...) and a swearing Kerry.

While discussing Moore's F-911 on NPR's The Diane Rhem show, Bill Kristol embraced the "new" tactic. In response to Eleanor Clift's assertion that the Bush family profited from its relationship with the House of Saud, Kristol dismissed Eleanor's statement and used the word "extreme" at least three times to refer to it, the language coming from the Left and the Left.  

My question to you, how do we counter this attempt to marginalize and dismiss our valid criticisms as extreme?  I'm reminded of what happened in the media pre-Iraq with regards to protests.  If we're dismissed as extreme or fringe, we're in danger of losing our audience.  What's our counteroffensive?

It drips of character assassination not journalism.  Lauer is completely hard cross and skeptical in this interview.  It's a blatant attempt to destroy Moore's credibility.  Here's a taste...

Here's a bit of an unofficial transcript:
---
[excerpted text]
Inskeep:But you know as a professional that there are a lot of differences in the way things can be edited, the number of times things are repeated or the words that are chosen to describe something.
Ibrahim: Whatever method you use to present your pictures, the fact remains. War has a price.  I can not show an incursion into Rafah without showing the casualities.  That would be deceiving.  But you try to be as careful as possible not to be too graphic.  
Inskeep:Well you can show that footage of a suicide bombing and you can call the suicide bomber a suicide bomber or you can call the suicide bomber a martyr.  Which I understand Al Jazeera does when it comes to, particularly, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Ibrahim: [unintelligable]at Jazeera is a point of contention.  I produce a program where I don't use the word... [excerpted text] We don't read the intro to the news and say someone was martyed while blowing himself up.  No.  We don't say that.  
Inskeep:A lot of people have seen that on television...
Ibrahim: No no no. We describe what Hamas said Hamas...
Inskeep: You read their statement in which Hamas says it's a martyr...
Ibrahim: Of course.  We do. We do read their statment... Of course, that's their statement.

Inskeep:This is an all news network you're reporting a lot of 'factual' information.  But at the same time, you're putting on talk shows on Al Jazeera on which, as I understand it, someone might call in and rant for five or ten minutes for how the jews are responsible for everything that goes wrong in the world.  
Ibrahim: It's a talk show.  It's open.  I mean we had people that said things that could have been a cause for a riot in the past.[excerpted text] It's an open forum.

Inskeep: Do the folks at Al Jazeera ever say to themselves 'Well you know maybe it's not really responsible to put some of these points of view on the air.  Sure people have them but why do we want to be spending all of our technology and effort broadcasting them all of the place.  
Ibrahim: Then you are basically sweeping a problem under the rug.  The Middle East is in the state it is because for the longest time our way of dealing with problems was sweeping it under the rug.  These problems exist.  These radical elements exist.  And they can not survive in broad daylight.  When you bring them out of their holes then you can deal with them.
---
Fascinating no?  Middle East democracy meets American democracy.  Especially telling is Inskeep's tone and his question about the present of talk shows on the Al-Jazeera news network.  The implication was somewhat hypocritical given NPR's open caller programming.  If you have the time, listen to the whole thing at:

NPR's 'Control Room' Inside Al-Jazeera

I miss Bob Edwards.

Five former Halliburton employees and one former executive of a Halliburton subcontractor describe egregious examples of waste, fraud, and abuse involving Halliburton's Iraq contracts. A new Pentagon audit finds serious deficiencies in Halliburton's billing practices.

However on June 14, 2004, Chairman Tom Davis and the Committee on Government Reform administrative footdragging on hearing testimony of Halliburton's waste of taxpayer resources.  In response, Waxman wrote:

Given that Halliburton is the single largest contractor in Iraq, my staff requested on May 26 that you invite Halliburton officials to testify at the upcoming hearing.  Although your staff agreed to my request, they never issued a written invitation, and Halliburton representatives told my staff they had not been invited.  Despite further requests from my staff, your staff refused to issue Halliburton a written invitation to testify.

Result?  Halliburton's whistleblowers would not be able to testify as to Halliburton's systematic and deliberate waste of taxpayer resources.  

This from Waxman's letter to Chairman Davis:

• David Wilson, a convoy commander for Halliburton, and James Warren, a Halliburton truck driver, described instances in which brand new $85,000 Halliburton trucks were abandoned or "torched" if they got a flat tire or experienced minor mechanical problems.  They also described repeated incidents of theft involving both Halliburton and Army personnel.  Mr. Warren stated that he brought these and other concerns to the personal attention of Randy Harl, the president and CEO of the Halliburton subsidiary for which they worked.  He was fired a few weeks later.
• Marie deYoung, a Halliburton logistics specialist, described widespread overcharging and mismanagement by Halliburton.  For example, Ms. deYoung described (and offered to provide documentation of) subcontracts under which Halliburton paid $45 per case of soda and $100 per 15-pound bag of laundry.  Ms. deYoung also disclosed that Halliburton did not comply with the Army's request to move Halliburton employees from a five star hotel in Kuwait, where it cost taxpayers approximately $10,000 per day to house the employees, into air-conditioned tent facilities, which would have cost taxpayers under $600 per day.
• Michael West, a Halliburton labor foreman, describe how he and other Halliburton employees spent weeks in Iraq with virtually nothing to do, but were instructed to bill 12-hour days for 7 days a week on their timesheets.  In addition, his superior directed him to buy unnecessary equipment, telling him, "Don't worry about it.  It's a cost-plus-plus contract."
• Henry Bunting, a Halliburton procurement officer, described an almost complete disregard for costs among Halliburton officials.  He described how he and other buyers were instructed to split large purchases into multiple purchase orders belong $2,500 in order to avoid the requirement to solicit multiple bids.  When he raised questions, he was also told, "Don't worry about the price.  It's cost-plus."  

  Absolutely appalling. Shall we write Chairman Davis and ask him why he's failing to investigate the fraudulent waste of taxpayer resources?

June 15 Full Committee Hearing, Rep. Waxman's Opening Statement

Statement of David Wilson

Statement of James Warren

Statement of Marie deYoung

Statement of Mike West

Statement of Henry S. Bunting