nside GCHQ: 'Caution: Here comes the BBC'

One of the signs that greeted the BBC team

"Don't take it personally," said the woman behind the reception desk. But it was hard not to. People were avoiding us and there were signs all over the building warning of our presence .
"Caution. BBC Radio 4 recording here. Keep all conversations to 'Unclassified'."
It was hardly surprising. We were being allowed to record inside one of Britain's most secret establishments - GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. Their job is to listen in on others, record their conversations and pick up their e-mails. But for the first time in its history we were turning the microphones on them.
We didn't exactly walk right in.
Negotiations for access to this highly secretive operation lasted several weeks. Could we, they enquired, assure them that the microphones we were going to use were as "low sensitivity as possible"? And would we, they asked, allow their sound engineers to listen back to the recordings we made in open areas to check that we hadn't picked up any conversations that we shouldn't have?
'The Doughnut'
And then, when we got there, there was layer upon layer of security checks. We got past the first two before my recording equipment was taken away to be examined. I left it with three men in a room who were standing round a table with all sorts of weird looking devices.

FIND OUT MORE... GCHQ: Cracking the Code , written and presented by the BBC's security correspondent Gordon Corera It will be broadcast on Radio 4 at 2000 BST on Tuesday, 30 March Or hear it later on the iPlayer

"Please look after my baby," I said, before being escorted outside. (Producers can, understandably, be very protective about their recording machines).
I have no idea what went on in that room but it obviously included the electronic equivalent of a full body search. I had to piece everything back together afterwards. Even the batteries were treated with suspicion - if I needed any more over the next 48 hours, I was told, they would supply them.
There were more checks to come. We hadn't, at this stage, even got past main reception. A rather forbidding looking receptionist asked for identification before pointing to a sign which expressly forbade anyone taking cameras, mobile phones and - rather bizarrely, given the reason we were there - recording equipment or similar electronic devices into the main building.
Somehow we got through and there we were, strolling with our minders, round what is known at GCHQ as The Street, a circular walkway which runs throughout the building nicknamed affectionately, The Doughnut.
Visitors to Cheltenham have to wear a red badge to mark them out, but you couldn't miss me. I was the one wearing headphones and carrying a large microphone. People gave us a wide berth. It felt like I had a communicable disease.
Shutters down
Secrecy at Cheltenham is ingrained. A decision had been made to allow a glimpse into their world but there were some who weren't entirely happy about it. As if to hammer the point home, there was an announcement over the public address system within minutes of our appearance.

Exhibited Soviet radio - found in a field, but no one knows who buried it

"Blinds facing the street between blocks A and B should be lowered and closed immediately. End of message."
It turned out that a member of staff was worried about us being able to see through the windows into the open plan offices facing onto the street. They didn't want us to be able to read what was on their computer screens and had alerted security. There was a low whirring, grumbling noise and the shutters came down.
There were reminders of past "transgressors" - people who had betrayed their secrets - all around us. Dotted around the building were glass cases with exhibits from GCHQ's history including two radio sets.
The first was a radio used by the Portland Spy Ring to send messages back to Russia in the 50s and 60s. Next to it was a radio set which had been discovered by a farmer ploughing his field near Aberystwyth. It had been cached there by someone working for the Soviets but, to this day, no-one has any idea who it was.
Still, there was an upside to being avoided if not altogether shunned. We had no trouble getting a table in the staff restaurant when it came to lunchtime. You had only to announce that we were from the BBC and diners would obligingly move away to make room for us. It's not something you could count on when booking a table at a high class restaurant like Quaglinos but then GCHQ is an altogether different world.

Mark Savage @'BBC'

Video of Tea Party racists spitting on Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver

Ever since stories about anti-healthcare reform campaigners calling black and gay lawmakers 'nigger' and 'faggot' and spitting on them, conservatives have been sneering that they haven't seen any evidence and implying it's a media conspiracy. Here's video of one incident.

Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver of Missouri (in the tan suit in the video) had released a statement last week confirming the racism and that he'd been spat on. Here's video, via the Huffington Post, in which it looks like he's been spat on.

Luminaries like Andrew Breitbart and Sean Hannity had questioned all the lawmakers' claims, preferring to believe the disgusting racists who make up their flocks. A tea party group even offered $15,000 for video proof of the spitting incident. Although they may now claim, like some blogs, that "the good congressman just walked a little too close to a protestor with his hands cupped." Yeah, that must be it. Silly old us in the 'mainstream media'.

@'Gawker'

Just remember where...

...you read it first!

The Libertines reunite for Reading and Leeds

SVT Font by Vier5

Beautiful...

Designer: Vier5
Release: March 2010

When Vier5 turn their gimlet eye to the subtitles used in cinema, the result is SVT, a spectacularly subtle font originally designed for the Centre d'art Contemporain de Brétigny in France. Boxy and light, this no-frills typeface is about communication in its clearest form.

Grounded on the classical notion of design, Paris-based Vier5 focuses on applying new, up-to-date fonts. They aim to replace visual empty phrases with individual creative statements tailored specifically for the client and medium used. "Design is the possibility of drafting and creating new, forward-looking images in the field of visual communication," Achim Reichert, one-half of the design collective, says of his work. Read more in this (very brief) interview with the artist below.

www.vier5.de

Interview with the Designer Vier5

A short description about the font:
There is no description from needed. The character is visible. It was originally designed for different posters for Centre d'art Contemporain de Brétigny/France.

What was the main idea behind designing the font?
The lettering for subtitles in cinema, i.e. English or Armenian films.

How would you characterize your style?
No Style.

How did you come up with the name of the font?
SVT stands for S.V.T., an incorrectly-remembered name of a Parisian company for subtitling.

What inspires you?
Nothing.

Which is the bigger challenge: working on your own personal project or for a client with a strict briefing?
These opposite realities do not exist.

What is the ideal usage of your font?
Ideal use will always take place in future projects.

How would you describe the state your handwriting is in?
It works in a certain way. 

Where does the font end, where does the image begin? Is there a line to draw?
It depends on how the viewing takes place. Texts in smaller caps are already seen and processed from images to content, big headlines with uncommon silhouettes have to be read letter by letter before understanding.

Your future plans/projects?
Are in the future.

Man - I wish that I had bought this...

Cubesails to drag spacejunk from orbit

One of the biggest modern threats to spaceflight -- apart from politics  -- is space junk. For each satellite, rocket, capsule, space station,  missile, booster, observatory, dog or monkey we put into space, we  litter Earth orbit with 5 percent more junk every year.
So it seems we are doomed to failure. There's currently an estimated  5,500 tons of debris up there, and it's getting worse. The more active  we become in space, the more junk we shed, and it is a hyper-velocity  hazard, putting future astronauts and our multi-billion dollar satellite  industry at risk. What's more, space debris can interrupt satellite communications,  possibly even satellite TV signals -- we can't be having that!
SATELLITES:  Keep track of all the news from satellites orbiting not only Earth, but  other planetary bodies too.
Fortunately, various agencies around the world have accurate means of  tracking the larger bits of debris, providing some kind of warning  should a speeding bit of shrapnel get too close to our orbital real  estate. We might not be able to do anything (yet) about the smaller  stuff, but UK scientists have come up with a novel idea about how to  remove the larger stuff from orbit.
Enter the CubeSail, a modified solar sail designed to bring  dead satellites and rockets down to Earth.
HOWSTUFFWORKS:  Space junk is a growing issue, but what are the risks to astronauts?



Life's a Drag for Satellites.
The nanosatellite concept, designed by scientists  at the University of Surrey and funded by the European space  company Astrium, will be launched for space trials in 2011. Inspired by  the solar sail -- a spacecraft  propulsion system that uses the pressure of sunlight to get around space  -- the CubeSail uses air resistance to slow down its motion.
Unfolding into a 5×5 meter sheet of plastic, the CubeSail is designed  to "drag" defunct satellites from orbit, making use of the thin wisps  of atmospheric gases at orbital altitudes. Although the density of air  molecules is low, it's enough to make the sail act like a parachute,  slowing it down, dragging the dead satellite to a fiery reentry much  sooner than it would have done otherwise.
"Protecting our planet and environment is key for sustainable  growth," said Vaios Lappas, lead researcher on the project. "CubeSail is  a novel, low cost space mission which will demonstrate for the first  time space debris/satellite deorbiting using an ultra light 5 x 5 sail  stowed and supported on a 3 kg nanosatellite."
Seek and Destroy CubeSails?

Although this system is intended to be attached to future missions  that require a safe (and cheap) means of being removed from orbit, I can  imagine this kind of system being attached to some kind of "seek and  destroy" robot, taking out old orbital debris.
The CubeSail could be launched alone and under its own power and  guided to orbital debris being tracked from the surface. Once the robot  "docks" with the debris, it opens its sail, pulling the junk from space. Like with many space technologies, I also wonder if such a sci-fi  concept could have a military application.
Both the USA and China have demonstrated that they  can "shoot down" satellites with ground-launched missiles, filling  low-Earth orbit with millions of pieces of smaller bits of debris,  ultimately making Earth orbit impassible (there's no military advantage  in filling space with junk after all). Perhaps anti-satellite weaponry  could be more passive, sending ground-controlled CubeSails into orbit,  seeking out, attaching to, and ultimately destroying enemy satellites  but without the mess?

Images: The space junk problem (NASA) and the the CubeSail  concept (ESA/Univ. of Surrey/Astrium).
Sources: University  of Surrey, Physorg.com,  BBC

Ian O'Neill @'Discovery News' 

(Thanx BillT!)

Once upon a time...

Fairytale generator

(Thanx Walter!)

Rare Bill Laswell production...

...of Korean percussion ensemble 'Samulnori'

Get it 

HERE
(Google alert work for you Dave? LOL!)

Shame on John McCain

 
I am not sure who must have felt worse—John or Cindy McCain—when Sarah Palin bounded onstage in Tucson last Friday, wearing that fetching black leather dominatrix jacket to deliver a hair-swinging, wink-winking pep talk, and revving up the Tea-baggers who came to see her not him. It was a sweet moment for Sarah. McCain’s 2008 election team—those “old school” losers, as she doubtless thinks of them—have trashed her ever since they lost.
Cindy McCain was glacially self-contained in a trim, chic suit, at her husband’s side. When will high-def pick up the grinding of teeth? She introduced Palin as “a breath of fresh air” when in fact, as far as the McCains are concerned, Palin was a tornado wreaking havoc on the senator’s campaign for president with a personal reality show that enthralled the public but appalled the voters. She has since used the celebrity he bestowed on her to become the La Pasionaria of the No Spin Zone crowd, who now want only to unseat him and install his cocky challenger J.D Hayworth.

It's like the Hanoi Hilton in reverse: He held out under physical torture, but under political torture it seems he’ll say and do just about anything.

No doubt for Cindy McCain the thought of having her husband back in town and hanging around the house if he loses his Senate seat is worth the indignity of once again appearing next to him to pretend that the current pin-up of violent populism stands for the same things as a principled war hero.
But for John McCain himself, and the people who have so long admired him, surely this moment in Tucson was a killer moment of moral degradation. McCain’s whole deal has been that he’s his own man, a maverick, a courageous loner. He defied the Bushies by speaking vehemently against torture. He stuck his neck out for the Iraq surge. He denounced the corrupting influence of money in politics. He was the scourge of pork. Whatever he really thought about Palin as his campaign went down in flames and his team threw her under the bus, he gallantly kept his counsel.
That bit, at least, paid off, I guess. It meant he could call on Palin to get him out of a hole in his fight against a meretricious former talk-show host riding anti-incumbent fervor to within seven points of upending him. By using Palin to pander to the Tea Party, however, McCain showed his willingness to repudiate everything that made him special, just so he can hold on to a Senate seat. It’s like the Hanoi Hilton in reverse: He held out under physical torture, but under political torture it seems he’ll say and do just about anything. That character change seems to date from the strange reversal of magic that occurred when he succumbed to political opportunism in 2004 in Pensacola and embraced George W. Bush, the man who allowed the disgraceful smear campaign against him in South Carolina four years earlier.
As for Palin, her political heart, if she had one, would of course be with McCain’s challenger, who purportedly stands for everything she does. But being consistent politically is no longer as important to Sarah Palin as being a star. The McCain gig in Tucson was a big booking; images of being embraced anew by a legend provided resonant media far more valuable than backing the other guy in the race, who merely furthered the Tea Party cause. When she’s out at their fervid rallies, Palin pretends to be talking to True Believers in a political movement. But she’s really only talking to consumers. Buy my book. Watch my show. Hype my brand. She has chosen celebrity over politics, and who can blame her, given what hell it is to try and serve your country in Washington these days.
If McCain wins this last race he knows it will be because of her. It’s not impossible that Palin will turn out to be his most enduring legacy. Disinterested public service has become, just so… what’s the phrase, “old school.”

Tina Brown @'Daily Beast'

Tally ho! 'Barbour cavalry' rides to Tories' rescue

Hundreds of hunt supporters are under orders to ride into action in key marginal seats within hours of a general election being called, in the knowledge that David Cameron will allow a return to hunting with dogs if he gets to Downing Street.

Documents seen by The Independent show that hunt masters have been rounding up supporters and sending them to the most fiercely contested seats, ahead of a big push planned for the first 72 hours of campaigning. A letter from one Tory candidate, while thanking the huntsmen and women for their support, pleaded with them not to invade his constituency like the cavalry, "cantering into town in pink chinos and Barbours".

Hunt organisers have told supporters that the sport needs a decisive Conservative victory – Mr Cameron is expected to allow MPs a free vote on letting traditional hunting resume. A message to members of the Avon Vale Hunt, which has operated in Wiltshire for 122 years, warns that it could soon cease to exist unless the Tories secure an outright majority. The hunt chairman, Tim Page, wrote: "I would like us all to reflect on what is at stake if we do not succeed in helping get a Conservative government elected at the forthcoming general election, and, importantly with a sufficient majority to give the time to a free vote on the repeal of the Hunting Act 2004." ...

Continue reading

@'The Independent'

In a word - TWATS!!!

...and all the more reason to stop the Tories getting into power.

Rio Tinto sacks four executives jailed in China for bribery

Head - Sin Bin

Featuring Gareth Sagar (ex The Pop Group & Rip Rig & Panic)

(Tip o'the hat to Martin!)

Truly amazing mummies

Perils of the Silk Road

The Silk Road was a legendarily dangerous 4,600-mile route connecting Asia and the Mediterranean, used by traders who for centuries traversed deserts and mountains, in temperatures ranging from minus-50 to 120 degrees. The exhibition at the Bowers features more than 150 objects excavated from the trail, including this infant mummy, believed to be from around the 8th century BCE (Before the Christian Era). Even more remarkable about the mummies in the Bowers exhibition is that, although found in the arid western reaches of China, the features are noticeably Caucasian.

More @'Life'

HERE

Breaking News: Rio Tinto employees sentenced in Chinese bribery case

Four employees of the British-Australian mining giant Rio Tinto, including an Australian citizen, were convicted by a Chinese court on Monday and sentenced to seven to 14 years in prison for accepting millions of dollars in bribes and stealing commercial secrets.

A three-judge panel at the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate Court sentenced Stern Hu, an Australian citizen, to seven years in jail for bribery and five years on stealing secrets, but he will serve 10 years in prison.

The case has drawn international attention and even led to diplomatic wrangling between China and Australia over concerns that the four employees had been arrested on trumped up charges and questions about whether they could get a fair trial here.

At a three-day trial that took place here early last week, the four employees all pleaded guilty to accepting some bribes, though several of the men denied stealing commercial secrets.

The four employees — three of whom are Chinese citizens — were detained in Shanghai last July on suspicions of espionage and stealing state secrets from Chinese state-owned steel companies.

But after protests from Australia and foreign executives about the nature of the accusations, the men were formally charged with bribery and stealing commercial secrets, which are lesser charges.

Some Australian officials and foreign executives said the arrests looked like retaliation against Rio Tinto because of its tough negotiations over iron ore prices with Chinese state-run steel mills and the company’s decision last summer to scrap plans to accept a $19.5 billion investment from one of China’s biggest mining companies.

The Australian government was due to issue a statement shortly after the verdict was released.

Lawyers for the four employees have said they were considering an appeal. 

@'NY Times'

Live on Radio National's Australia Talks

Stephen Conroy says he knows nothing about the US objection to Australia's internet filter...

 The federal government will introduce mandatory internet filtering this year. And after recent abuse appearing on Facebook memorial sites, the government is also looking at establishing an internet ombudsman. So how far should control of the internet go for the sake of making the online world safer for children? Is it actually possible to make the internet safe?

Download link:
Internet filtering with Minister for Communications Stephen Conroy

Suicide bombers strike central Moscow metro, at least 37 dead

At least 37 people died as two suspected terrorist bombs ripped through the central Moscow metro system during Monday morning's rush hour, the emergencies ministry said.

The first blast occurred at around 8:00 a.m. (05:00 GMT), killing at least 23 people and injuring 18, many of them seriously.

A RIA Novosti employee who was on the train said the blast occurred between the Lubyanka and Okhotny Ryad metro stations close to the Kremlin.

The second blast occurred some 20 minutes later at the nearby Park Kultury station and killed at least 14 and injured at least 7. The carriage hit by the blast in still on the platform.

Prosecutors said the bombs, each with the equivalent strength of 2 kg of TNT, were denoted by suicide bombers.

A police source told RIA Novosti that the blasts bore all the hallmarks of "a well-planned terrorist attack."

With central Moscow at a standstill, helicopters are being used to evacuate the injured.

Russia's top investigator Vladimir Markin said that an investigation on terrorism charges had been launched.

If terrorism is confirmed as the cause of the blasts, this will be the first major terrorist incident in Russia outside of the North Caucasus since 2004, when hundreds of people died in two plane bombings. The same series of attacks culminated in the deaths of over 300 people, many of then children, when Chechen terrorists seized a school in Beslan.

A telephone hotline has been opened - +7 495 622 1430 and + 7 495 624 3440.

@'RIANOVOSTI'

Meh, the weekend is almost over...

Another weekend comes to an end.  Bummer...

The Catholic church seems to be crumbling, or at least cracking under the pressures of the truth.  I read some great commentaries regarding treating the church as a criminal organization, and rejecting them as a moral authority.

No kidding!

But there is more happening in the world... we all have the lives we live every day.  And we don't need the Pope or any other religious "authority" to tell us how or who or what to do.

We just DO.  And we know what is right or wrong in our hearts.

I plant things in my garden, because it will feed my family in a few months, and there is a great satisfaction in that.  Close to the earth!  Food that came from our hard work and care.

Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - Stagger Lee (White Room)

Audio @'The Vinyl Villian'

Peter Brookes @'The Times'

Very useful that 'faith in g*d'!

The pontiff said faith in God helps lead one "toward the courage of not allowing oneself to be intimidated by the petty gossip of dominant opinion."

jayrosen_nyu

$215 a year for the Wall Street Journal on the iPad. $140 for the print delivery plus online. Do YOU understand that pricing? Does anyone? 1 minutes ago via web

Nathan Sawaya - The Art of the Brick

HERE

The war on WikiLeaks and why it matters

Top 10 internet filter lies

REpost: Obama on 'net neutrality' (november 14 2007)

US Government concerned about Australia’s proposed Internet filter

The Australian is reporting that the US State Department has some concerns about the Australian Government’s policy to introduce mandatory Internet filtering:

THE Obama administration has questioned the Rudd government’s plan to introduce an internet filter, saying it runs contrary to the US’s foreign policy of encouraging an open internet to spread economic growth and global security.

Officials from the State Department have raised the issue with Australian counterparts as the US mounts a diplomatic assault on internet censorship by governments worldwide.

The news is a blow to Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, who is defending the plan for internet companies to mandatorily block illegal and abhorrent websites — for instance, child pornography — but faces growing opposition.

While considered a noble idea, any filter is considered by many — even within the Labor caucus — to be unworkable and a misdirection of resources away from enforcement and policing.

Read more here.  The concerns of the US Government echo similar concerns being voiced by a wide range of different organisations, and will hopefully place even more pressure on Senator Conroy and the Australian Government’s misguided Internet filtering policy.

@'Electronic Frontiers'

Drug adviser quits as ministers prepare mephedrone ban

Another senior government drugs adviser has quit, hours before ministers are expected to ban a new "legal high".
Dr Polly Taylor said she did not trust the government's use of advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. She is the sixth member to quit.
On Monday the body will give the home secretary its advice on mephedrone.
It is unclear if Dr Taylor's resignation will affect the status of the expected ban on the drug, linked in the media to four deaths in the UK.
The council's meeting on Monday could be overshadowed by the departure of Dr Taylor - the ACMD's veterinary medicine expert whose post is required by law to be filled on the committee.
A Home Office spokeswoman said she would not speculate on any delay to the ban.

There is little more we can do to describe the importance of ensuring that advice is not subjected to a desire to please ministers Dr Polly Taylor Adviser's full resignation letter

So far there is no scientific proof that mephedrone has been responsible for any deaths in the UK, and scientists are still trying to work out whether it is harmful on its own or if taken with something else.
However, there is widespread expectation that Home Secretary Alan Johnson will announce a ban on the drug before the end of the day because of the risks it poses.
Last week, the government's chief drugs adviser, Professor Les Iversen, strongly indicated that the council would recommend classifying mephedrone as a Class B drug.
In her resignation letter, Dr Taylor told the home secretary she was quitting because she did not have trust in the way the government would treat its advice.
"I feel that there is little more we can do to describe the importance of ensuring that advice is not subjected to a desire to please ministers or the mood of the day's press," she wrote.

MEPHEDRONE FACTS Effects similar to amphetamines and ecstasy Sold as a white powder, capsules and pills or can be dissolved in liquid Often sold online as plant food marked "not for human consumption" Completely different to methadone, used to treat heroin addicts Reported side-effects include headaches, palpitations, nausea, cold or blue fingers Long-term effect unknown Currently legal to buy and be in possession of the powder, but against the law to sell, supply or advertise the powder for human consumption Already illegal in Israel, Denmark, Norway and Sweden

Last October, Mr Johnson sacked his chief drugs adviser, Professor David Nutt, saying the ACMD chairman had lobbied against government policy.
The sacking led five other members to quit and an urgent review of the committee's working relationship with ministers.
Dr Nutt, who has set up his own rival expert body, has warned that banning mephedrone could be self-defeating and that the evidence supporting a ban is not clear.
He has urged the ACMD and ministers to wait for the verdict of an expert European body which is looking at the use of the drug across all EU member states.
"This is a pivotal moment in UK drug policy," said Dr Nutt.
"Given the plethora of 'legal highs' that could follow in mephedrone's wake, the way in which this issue is handled could well set the tone for many years to come."
The Conservatives have called for the law to be changed to allow temporary bans of drugs while the scientific evidence is assessed.

@'BBC'

An Open Letter to Conservatives by Russell King

Dear Conservative Americans,
The years have not been kind to you. I grew up in a profoundly Republican home, so I can remember when you wore a very different face than the one we see now.  You've lost me and you've lost most of America.  Because I believe having responsible choices is important to democracy, I'd like to give you some advice and an invitation.
First, the invitation:  Come back to us.
Now the advice.  You're going to have to come up with a platform that isn't built on a foundation of cowardice: fear of people with colors, religions, cultures and sex lives that differ from your own; fear of reform in banking, health care, energy; fantasy fears of America being transformed into an Islamic nation, into social/commun/fasc-ism, into a disarmed populace put in internment camps; and more.  But you have work to do even before you take on that task.
Your party -- the GOP -- and the conservative end of the American political spectrum have become irresponsible and irrational.  Worse, it's tolerating, promoting and celebrating prejudice and hatred.  Let me provide some examples -- by no means an exhaustive list -- of where the Right as gotten itself stuck in a swamp of hypocrisy, hyperbole, historical inaccuracy and hatred.
If you're going to regain your stature as a party of rational, responsible people, you'll have to start by draining this swamp:
Hypocrisy
You can't flip out -- and threaten impeachment - when Dems use a parliamentary procedure (deem and pass) that you used repeatedly (more than 35 times in just one session and more than 100 times in all!), that's centuries old and which the courts have supported. Especially when your leaders admit it all.
You can't vote and scream against the stimulus package and then take credit for the good it's done in your own district (happily handing out enormous checks representing money that you voted against, is especially ugly) --  114 of you (at last count) did just that -- and it's even worse when you secretly beg for more.
You can't fight against your own ideas just because the Dem president endorses your proposal.

You can't call for a pay-as-you-go policy, and then vote against your own ideas.
Are they "unlawful enemy combatants" or are they "prisoners of war" at Gitmo? You can't have it both ways.
You can't carry on about the evils of government spending when your family has accepted more than a quarter-million dollars in government handouts.
You can't refuse to go to a scheduled meeting, to which you were invited, and then blame the Dems because they didn't meet with you.
You can't rail against using teleprompters while using teleprompters. Repeatedly.
You can't rail against the bank bailouts when you supported them as they were happening.
You can't be for immigration reform, then against it .
You can't enjoy socialized medicine while condemning it.
You can't flip out when the black president puts his feet on the presidential desk when you were silent about white presidents doing the same.  Bush.  Ford.
You can't complain that the president hasn't closed Gitmo yet when you've campaigned to keep Gitmo open.
You can't flip out when the black president bows to foreign dignitaries, as appropriate for their culture, when you were silent when the white presidents did the same. Bush.  Nixon. Ike. You didn't even make a peep when Bush held hands and kissed (on the mouth) leaders of countries that are not on "kissing terms" with the US.
You can't complain that the undies bomber was read his Miranda rights under Obama when the shoe bomber was read his Miranda rights under Bush and you remained silent.  (And, no, Newt -- the shoe bomber was not a US citizen either, so there is no difference.)
You can't attack the Dem president for not personally* publicly condemning a terrorist event for 72 hours when you said nothing about the Rep president waiting 6 days in an eerily similar incident (and, even then, he didn't issue any condemnation).  *Obama administration did the day of the event.
You can't throw a hissy fit, sound alarms and cry that Obama freed Gitmo prisoners who later helped plan the Christmas Day undie bombing, when -- in fact -- only one former Gitmo detainee, released by Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, helped to plan the failed attack.
You can't condemn blaming the Republican president for an attempted terror attack on his watch, then blame the Dem president for an attempted terror attack on his.
You can't mount a boycott against singers who say they're ashamed of the president for starting a war, but remain silent when another singer says he's ashamed of the president and falsely calls him a Maoist who makes him want to throw up and says he ought to be in jail.
You can't cry that the health care bill is too long, then cry that it's too short.
You can't support the individual mandate for health insurance, then call it unconstitutional when Dems propose it and campaign against your own ideas.
You can't demand television coverage, then whine about it when you get it.  Repeatedly.
You can't praise criminal trials in US courts for terror suspects under a Rep president, then call it "treasonous" under a Dem president.
You can't propose ideas to create jobs, and then work against them when the Dems put your ideas in a bill.
You can't be both pro-choice and anti-choice.
You can't damn someone for failing to pay $900 in taxes when you've paid nearly $20,000 in IRS fines.
You can't condemn criticizing the president when US troops are in harms way, then attack the president when US troops are in harms way , the only difference being the president's party affiliation (and, by the way, armed conflict does NOT remove our right and our duty as Americans to speak up).
You can't be both for cap-and-trade policy and against it.
You can't vote to block debate on a bill, then bemoan the lack of  'open debate'.
If you push anti-gay legislation and make anti-gay speeches, you should probably take a pass on having gay sex, regardless of whether it's 2004 or 2010.  This is true, too, if you're taking GOP money and giving anti-gay rants on CNN.  Taking right-wing money and GOP favors to write anti-gay stories for news sites while working as a gay prostitute, doubles down on both the hypocrisy and the prostitution.  This is especially true if you claim your anti-gay stand is God's stand, too.
When you chair the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, you can't send sexy emails to 16-year-old boys (illegal anyway, but you made it hypocritical as well).
You can't criticize Dems for not doing something you didn't do while you held power over the past 16 years, especially when the Dems have done more in one year than you did in 16.
You can't decry "name calling" when you've been the most consistent and outrageous at it. And the most vile.
You can't spend more than 40 years hating, cutting and trying to kill Medicare, and then pretend to be the defenders of Medicare
You can't praise the Congressional Budget Office when it's analysis produces numbers that fit your political agenda, then claim it's unreliable when it comes up with numbers that don't.
You can't vote for X under a Republican president, then vote against X under a Democratic president.  Either you support X or you don't. And it makes it worse when you change your position merely for the sake obstructionism.
You can't call a reconciliation out of bounds when you used it repeatedly.
You can't spend taxpayer money on ads against spending taxpayer money.
You can't condemn individual health insurance mandates in a Dem bill, when the mandates were your idea.
You can't demand everyone listen to the generals when they say what fits your agenda, and then ignore them when they don't.
You can't whine that it's unfair when people accuse you of exploiting racism for political gain, when your party's former leader admits you've been doing it for decades.
You can't portray yourself as fighting terrorists when you openly and passionately support terrorists.
You can't complain about a lack of bipartisanship when you've routinely obstructed for the sake of political gain -- threatening to filibuster at least 100 pieces of legislation in one session, far more than any other since the procedural tactic was invented -- and admitted it.  Some admissions are unintentional, others are made proudly. This is especially true when the bill is the result of decades of compromise between the two parties and is filled with your own ideas.
You can't question the loyalty of Department of Justice lawyers when you didn't object when your own Republican president appointed them.
You can't preach and try to legislate "Family Values" when you: take nude hot tub dips with teenagers (and pay them hush money); cheat on your wife with a secret lover and lie about it to the world; cheat with a staffer's wife (and pay them off with a new job); pay hookers for sex while wearing a diaper and cheating on your wife; or just enjoying an old fashioned non-kinky cheating on your wife; try to have gay sex in a public toilet; authorize the rape of children in Iraqi prisons to coerce their parents into providing information; seek, look at or have sex with children; replace a guy who cheats on his wife with a guy who cheats on his pregnant wife with his wife's mother;
Hyperbole
You really need to disassociate with those among you who:

• assert that people making a quarter-million dollars a year can barely make ends meet or that $1 million "isn't a lot of money";
• say that "Comrade" Obama is a "Bolshevik" who is "taking cues from Lenin";
• ignore the many times your buddies use a term that offends you and complain only when a Dem says it;
• liken political opponents to murderers, rapists, and "this Muslim guy" that "offed his wife's head" or call then "un-American";
• say Obama "wants his plan to fail...so that he can make the case for bank nationalization and vindicate his dream of a socialist economy";
• equate putting the good of the people ahead of your personal fortunes with terrorism;
• smear an entire major religion with the actions of a few fanatics;
• say that the president wants to "annihilate us";
• compare health care reform with the bombing of Pearl Harbor, a Bolshevik plot the attack on 9/11,or reviving the ghosts of communist dictators (update: it's also not Armageddon);
• equate our disease-fighting stem cell research with "what the Nazis did";
• call a bill passed by the majority of both houses of Congress, by members of Congress each elected by a majority in their districts, an unconscionable abuse of power, a violation of the presidential oath or "the end of representative government";
• shout "baby killer" at a member of Congress on the floor of the House, especially one who so fought against abortion rights that he nearly killed health care reform (in fact, a little decorum, a little respect for our national institutions and the people and the values they represent, would be refreshing -- cut out the shouting, the swearing and the obscenities);
• prove your machismo by claiming your going to "crash a party" to which you're officially invited;
• claim that Obama is pushing America's "submission to Shariah";
• question the patriotism of people upholding cherished American values and the rule of law;
• claim the president is making us less safe without a hint of evidence;
• call a majority vote the "tyranny of the minority," even if you meant to call it tyranny of the majority -- it's democracy, not tyranny;
• call the president's support of a criminal trial for a terror suspect "treasonous" (especially when you supported the same thing when the president shared your party);
• call the Pope the anti-Christ;
• assert that the constitutionally mandated census is an attempt to enslave us;
• accuse opponents of being backed by Arab slave-drivers or of being drunk and suicidal;
• equate family planning with eugenics or Nazism;
• accuse the president of changing the missile defense program's logo to match his campaign logo and reflect what you say is his secret Muslim identity;
• accuse political opponents of being totalitarians, socialists, communists, fascists, Marxists;  terrorist sympathizers, McCarthy-like, Nazis or drug pushers; and
• advocate a traitorous act like secession, violent revolution , military coup or civil war (just so we're clear: sedition is a bad thing).

History
If you're going to use words like socialism, communism and fascism, you must have at least a basic understanding of what those words mean (hint: they're NOT synonymous!)
You can't cut a leading Founding Father out the history books because you've decided you don't like his ideas.
You cant repeatedly assert that the president refuses to say the word "terrorism" or say we're at war with terror when we have an awful lot of videotape showing him repeatedly assailing terrorism and using those exact words.
If you're going to invoke the names of historical figures, it does not serve you well to whitewash them. Especially this one.
You can't just pretend historical events didn't happen in an effort to make a political opponent look dishonest or to make your side look better. Especially these events. (And, no, repeating it doesn't make it better.)
You can't say things that are simply and demonstrably false: health care reform will not push people out of their private insurance and into a government-run program ; health care reform (which contains a good many of your ideas and very few from the Left) is a long way from "socialist utopia"; health care reform is not "reparations"; nor does health care reform create "death panels".
Hatred
You have to condemn those among you who:

• call members of Congress n*gger and f*ggot;
• elected leaders who say "I'm a proud racist";
• state that America has been built by white people;
• say that poor people are poor because they're rotten people, call them "parasitic garbage" or say they shouldn't be allowed to vote;
• call women bitches and prostitutes just because you don't like their politics     ( re - pea -ted - ly );
• assert that the women who are serving our nation in uniform are hookers;
• mock and celebrate the death of a grandmother because you disagree with her son's politics;
• declare that those who disagree with you are shown by that disagreement to be not just "Marxist radicals" but also monsters and a deadly disease killing the nation (this would fit in the hyperbole and history categories, too);
• joke about blindness;
• advocate euthanizing the wife of your political opponent;
• taunt people with incurable, life-threatening diseases -- especially if you do it on a syndicated broadcast;
• equate gay love with bestiality -- involving  horses or dogs or turtles or ducks -- or polygamy, child molestation, pedophilia;
• casually assume that only white males look "like a real American";
• assert presidential power to authorize torture,  torture a child by having his testicles crushed in front of his parents to get them to talk, order the massacre of a civilian village  and launch a nuclear attack without the consent of Congress;
• attack children whose mothers have died;
• call people racists without producing a shred of evidence that they've said or done something that would even smell like racism -- same for invoking racially charged "dog whistle" words (repeatedly);
• condemn the one thing that every major religion agrees on;
• complain that we no longer employ the tactics we once used to disenfranchise millions of Americans because of their race;
• blame the victims of natural disasters and terrorist attacks for their suffering and losses;
• celebrate violence , joke about violence, prepare for violence or use violent imagery, "fun" political violence, hints of violence, threats of violence (this one is rather explicit), suggestions of violence or  actual violence (and, really, suggesting anal rape with a hot piece of metal is beyond the pale); and
• incite insurrection telling people to get their guns ready for a "bloody battle" with the president of the United States.

Oh, and I'm not alone:  One of your most respected and decorated leaders agrees with me.
So, dear conservatives, get to work.  Drain the swamp of the conspiracy nuts, the bold-faced liars undeterred by demonstrable facts, the overt hypocrisy and the hatred.  Then offer us a calm, responsible, grownup agenda based on your values and your vision for America.  We may or may not agree with your values and vision, but we'll certainly welcome you back to the American mainstream with open arms.  We need you.
(Anticipating your initial response:  No there is nothing that even comes close to this level of wingnuttery on the American Left.)

@'TPM'

Hicks Rejecting Offer for Liverpool, RBS Threatens to Repo Club

Word out of the U.K. has Tom Hicks refusing Rhone Group's offer of a £100 million for a majority piece of Liverpool FC, the exact amount he and George Gillett owe the Royal Bank of Scotland come July. I've asked Hicks's local spokesperson, Lisa LeMaster, wot the wot, but till then this report in News of the World is raising quite the ruckus abroad. It says not only is Hicks unwilling to give Rhone a 40-percent ownership stake in Liverpool FC, but his "hardline stance" is running off other potential piecemeal investors or those interested in buying the club outright. From the Saturday story:

The Royal Bank of Scotland is putting the squeeze on the Americans, demanding Hicks 'put up or give up' in his efforts to run the club. They want Hicks to agree to Purslow's recommendations. They don't believe the Texan can raise his own funds to reduce Liverpool's debt by the £100m demanded.

The Sunday Times puts it even more plainly today: "Royal Bank of Scotland, to whom the bulk of Liverpool's £237m debt is owed, have told Hicks and partner George Gillett they will repossess the club and sell it should the Americans fail to repay £100m by July." Gillett, according to accounts, wants to sell, but Hicks doesn't. The perception, at least, is because "he won't personally benefit financially."...

Robert Wilonsky @'Unfair Park' 

How do you say it in American?

Hicks - you are an asshole!

Bobby McFerrin demonstrates the power of the pentatonic scale

Hawaii to Honor Cockfighting as a "Cultural Activity?

Obama makes surprise visit to Afghanistan