Um, so who is making the determination about what is ‘the best available science based on what’s right for the American people’? I can’t make up my own mind? Given the mental defectives running this government I think I would like to be able to make the decision about what is and isn’t right for me. God save (us from) the president.

PS: Anyone who want’s to point out that atheists don’t believe in god can save their breath. It’s creative license.

An excellent critical analysis, Les (don’t hold your breath for Stephanopolis or Rather to catch or comment on that one)!  These people are such idealogues they don’t even realize when they’ve tipped their hand.

Hey, the White (is black) House knows what works. They realize the best way to get a christian’s support is to claim sincere agreement with christian ideals and practices. To mislead the scientifically minded they propitiously offer information they’ve perverted, while feigning respect for the methodology used to validate theories.
A sucker isn’t really born every minute, but chooses to become one by disallowing selfless contemplation of issues and values. Millions achieve the criteria for membership in a halfwit club faster than they can request consideration. This administration then gleefully gathers suckers together and allows them an opportunity to fulfill their pathetic destinies.

I am skeptical about most of what I hear in the news.  Just yesterday CNN said the Japanese were commemorating the bombing of Nagasaki.  The announcer went on to say, “In 1945 American B-52 bombers dropped an atomic weapon on the city.” Curiously, B-52s did not enter service until 1955!  Though the NY Times is decidedly liberal, I would tend to believe most of this story.  Since the source of the story, Mr Waxman, is in the opposition, I shall not blindly follow the “bandwagon” without other sources of independent data.

Next you guys are going to tell about an evil government scheme that lasted 40 years involving syphilis transmission rates among 399 poor black sharecroppers in Tuskegee, Alabama, which allowed them to die from the ravages of this most treatable diseases just to collect scientific data…oh wait…that did happen!!!

I am pretty sure I made reference to that in one of my rants about how America really had no right to claim the moral high ground in the war with Iraq when the hawks were trotting out the gassing of the Kurds as proof of how ‘evil’ Saddam was. Pot - kettle - black.

Mild Bill,

Typically your posts are relatively lucid, but I don’t really get the point of your last one.  Are you doubting that we dropped a bomb on Nagasaki because some punk reporter cited the wrong plane?  Are you skeptical that Japan is commemorating this event?  I doubt that these are your issues, but I’m not clear on just what might be.

Your intention in citing the Tuskeegee experiments is similarly equivocal.  From my own perspective, this event illustrates the depths to which our government has been, and is capable of, sinking.  It also shows that when evidence of official malfeasance is finally released to the public decades after the event, the media (60 minutes, NPR, in this case) treats it as regrettable history, but not as the ongoing affliction of our public systems that it truly is.  When the “iron was hot” in regard to these experiments ( from the 30’s to the 70’s) I’m sure that any loose talk about the study at that time was rapidly quieted with accusations of “conspiracy theories” and admonitions for giving the feds the “benefit of the doubt” (one of your own favorite phrases, I’ve noticed).

I’m glad that you doubt the controlled show that passes for mainstream news in this country.  However, rather than nit-picking about details like the precise model designations of aircraft involved in events decades old, concern yourself with the crucial information that is being left out of national coverage of current events.

The effects of depleted uranium ammunition on our troops and on the civilian populations of the countries in which we use it?  - you don’t hear about it.

Construction of the Unical pipeline in Afghanistan before the war was even over? - you don’t hear about it.

The administration’s obstruction of every legislative attempt to increase or maintain financial support and remuneration of our servicepeople?  - ditto.

Ken

Usually you have a bit more of a sense of humor.  No I don’t doubt that we dropped a bomb; did you read my statement?  They said a plane that didn’t exist until 10 years after the attack dropped the bomb.  The other day I heard the Army fired 2.75 millimeter rockets at enemy positions.  That would be 2.75 inch rockets; 2.75 mm is half the size of an M-16 round.  A few days ago they showed an F-16C, Block 15, tail number 1161 from the Air Armament Center’s 40th Flight Test Squadron and called it a Russian MiG-29.  Since I worked on the very airplane in the photo:

A.  The Air Force lied to be and told me the MiG was an F-16
B.  The news guys are wrong

I won’t even discuss how many times I’ve heard that imbecile Sean Hannity tell us that we “have” found WMDs in Iraq!  Yes, clearly all minor details, but I think it reasonable to ask, “What other “minor” errors does the statement contain?” Here is another minor detail that has far reaching implications:

Jesus was born of a young woman
Jesus was born of a virgin

That minor detail is enough to make a “fundie” blow a gasket.  Doesn’t look like a big deal to “me”, but I guess it kind of changes things a bit for them.  Hell…a misplaced comma can change the entire meaning of a phrase!!!

Let’s review the suspect sentence:

This administration looks at the facts, and reviews the best available science based on what’s right for the American people,” Mr. McClellan said.

What question was asked to solicit this answer?  Presumably McClellan didn’t just start rambling without a question being asked.  Was there a sentence preceding that one?  Is McClellan’s statement a victim of quote mining?

Here is the statement with one word changed:

This administration looks at the facts, and applies the best available science based on what’s right for the American people,” Mr. McClellan said.

Well, a minor change from reviews to applies and what a world of difference.  I wouldn’t have any problem with that statement.  And even if this guy said the quoted statement, does that make it so?  It’s true if it’s in print?  You apparently are only skeptical of neoconservative, corporate loving, baby killing, yatta, yatta, yatta.  When the opposition party comes up with a report, as was the case here, suddenly it’s just true!  I think skepticism would be required in both cases.

Many examples of bad science have had a detrimental effect on us.  Tree huggers so hate us pesky humans and love trees that they don’t want to cut any trees down.  That mindset apparently led to some of the largest wild fires in the nation’s history last year.  A little properly applied forest management (science) could have minimized the damage.

I remember seeing a news story about fires in California a few years back that blew my mind.  The newsies were interviewing a homeowner whose house was within sight of the approaching fire.  He was going to clear the brush away from around his property, but was told it was illegal because it was a habitat for the kangaroo rat, an endangered species.  The homeowner said screw that and tried to save his home by clearing the brush.  That’s not an application of bad science…it’s an application of intense stupidity on the part of the nature lovers.

Kyoto would be another example.  From what I’ve read of the Kyoto treaty, it was just more anti-American nonsense.  China and India, where pollution rates are significantly higher, would not have to follow the treaty.  So as China and India are polluting up a storm and expanding their industrial base, we have to cut back and lose millions of jobs?  Ain’t gonna happen!

Oh and the Tuskegee thing, what the %$@# don’t you understand?  It was a sarcastic (or would it be satirical) statement.  I said I give the government the benefit of the doubt, with “feigned naivety”, and then showed how they “were” complicitous in that conspiracy.  Goodness!!!

So, B-52 or B-29, F-16 or MiG-29, virgin or young girl, reviews or applies…minor details right?

On your closing rants:

For most of my career, I worked on the Air Force’s largest “distributor” of depleted uranium (DU), the A-10.  Its cannon fires approximately 65, one-pound DU penetrators per second; about 3,850 per minute!!!  Tungsten is the preferred metal for penetrators.  Regrettably, most of that metal could only be found in Russia.  Our government thought it wouldn’t be right to ask the Russians for the tungsten, so we could put it in penetrators and kill them, so we opted for DU.  DU has been around for a long time and many studies have been done.  I use to work at one of only two test ranges in the US where DU could be shot.  I also have a 30mm round (tungsten not DU) sitting right in front of me.

Since I worked around DU, I was understandably curious about the hazards it presented. I read a study years ago that said DU only presents a hazard during deflagration.  DU doesn’t just slice through armor, it burns through (it actually starts combustion of the metal that it is striking).  The study said the only time DU is hazardous is when it burns and is then inhaled.  That study was done by an aviator (gung ho bastards), so I am skeptical of its validity based on that alone. Here’s a link to a report by our British friends:

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/policy/cur_du.htm

From browsing that report, it appears they found there were no perceptible increases in cancer rates.  There may however, be other studies that contradict that.

DU is a hazard to the person it is used against, but generally that person has other more pressing issues than worrying about contracting cancer later in life.  If you have ever seen a photo of a tank hit by it, you would know what I mean.  If you really care about what DU does, just type in “depleted uranium hazard” or something similar, as I did.  You don’t have to wait for the NY Times to tell you about it.

And by the way, that little “gun” shooting DU penetrators was a significant factor in bankrupting the Soviets!  Previously a $77,000 missile (average cost of the Maverick) was the primary USAF anti-tank weapon.  We then developed a “bullet”, that costed about $25, that could defeat a tank and produced millions of them.  I do not mean to imply every round will kill a tank!  With a 0.5 second burst (about 32 rounds) there is a high probability of a tank kill.  And every round is not a DU round; there is a ratio of 1 high explosive round to every 5 DU rounds.  We call it “combat mix”.

Using DU made the Soviets have to expend significant resources developing enhanced armor and revising their deployment strategies.  I’m not saying our decision to use DU was right or wrong, I’m just supplying the rationale for its use.  There are other “much more hazardous” items on the battlefield (if you really want to know what they are I’ll tell you, but this is getting mighty long!)

I don’t get your statement about Bush’s lack of financial support for our troops!  Did you get that from one of the troops?  I’ll be willing to bet you probably did not!  I just looked up my old pay rate and it appears that in the three years since I got out, my counterparts have received a 23 percent pay increase!  That’s just a COLA increase; I would have also gotten two longevity raises.  Make that a 31 % pay increase!  Please tell me which of you have gotten a 31 percent pay increase (or higher) over the last 3 years and if you are dissatisfied with it!  All this info is on the web, all you have to do is look it up yourself.

I don’t understand the pipeline thing…it sounds like an allusion to Dick Cheney, Robber Barons, yatta, yatta, yatta.  Please clarify and tell me what that OR the pay thing has to do with SCIENCE.
In the words of a famous rapper:

Don’t believe the hype!

And don’t believe me…look it up yourself!

My understanding from a number of sources is that depleted uranium is hazardous when inhaled (as dust), ingested, or present within the body in any form.  Inhalation of particles by those firing these munitions has been posited as a serious concern, as well as people engaged in activities at the target point (blowed-up tanks).  You, through your first-hand experience, are aware of these issues, but you must admit that the mainstream media are devoid of discussions in this regard. 

We are in a greater degree of concurrence than it would seem.  I am not the Democrat apologist that you cast me as - the Tuskegee crimes that I appall spanned administrations of both parties, and Clinton fired his share of depleted uranium.  Additionally, I have a list of gross conflicts of interest exploited by FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton/Gore that make me sick to my stomach.  I am, however, greatly concerned regarding the new heights of obscurity that our government has reached since the inauguration of the current crowd.  I see a radical intensification of what’s been bad for decades, and we need to be careful.

My critique of your examples of media misinformation (B-52’s rather than B-29/ and now confusion between metric and English ammo designations)was based on my perception that these, while indicative of a general slovenliness on the part of US reporters, do not strongly suggest the intentional dissemination of lies for some ulterior motive.  Conversely, I do not think that statements like the one you supplied by Hannity represent minor details - these are intentional attempts to establish implicit public dogma (like the now-prevalent use of the fictional term “Axis of Evil").  I am, however, gratified that you finally acknowledge a current problem at the heart of current national malaise.

On DU and other hazards I’ve worked around, I don’t know what to believe…I just tried not to think about them too much when I worked on them

That “Axis of Evil” crap is the biggest bunch of nonsense imaginable.  Why Bush spouted that idiotic statement baffles me.  All he has done is given these countries more support.  Now they can say, as in the case of N Korea, “See, the US thinks we’re evil and want to attack us.  That’s why we have a nuclear program.” I believe in “speak softly, but carry a big stick”, not this absurd posturing and saber rattling. 

The N Korean’s strategic missile threat was blown way out of proportion.  They were said to have three-stage ICBMs capable of hitting the US.  That they exist only on paper and have never even been tested did not deter the media from reporting their “existence” as a serious threat to us. And by the way, they launch one missile at us and 20 will be headed their way in minutes.  I believe that use to call that deterrence.  I don’t know why that’s not good enough anymore; it worked with the Russians.

I didn’t mean that the media is not to be trusted and I’m sure that most of them have good intentions; I just don’t automatically believe what they present.  The examples I gave are minor, but I have heard some flat out absurd things.  I only used those examples to illustrate things “I know” that are not true. Those were just a couple of things I heard or saw in the last 2 weeks!  I’m sure you hear things in your area of expertise that sound equally ridiculous.

Amen to that.  No Child Left Behind?  All that leaves is a bunch of right behinds, which by definition is half-assed!

But getting back to the “Axis of Evil” - things like that have a way of taking on a life of their own.  I’ve written Neil Conan, Diane Rehm, etc. a number of times when references to “the other members of the Axis of Evil” were made on their reputedly critical shows as if this were a bona fide multinational organization.  I’ve never gotten an acknowledgment, despite the fact that when I write in that mode I am far less whacky and provocative than in my SEB manifestation (e.g. I have not once brought up any murders committed by Cheney :pirate: and Ashcroft when communicating with NPR personnel or governmental officers).

When the product of the American school system hears propaganda like that with sufficient frequency, the once-euphemistic AOE might as well have an official logo, a diabolical charter and mission statement, draconian membership dues, and a futuristic boardroom fitted with trapdoors over acid vats :evillaugh: - or sharks.  Electric eels?

Mild Bill writes: “I don’t get your statement about Bush’s lack of financial support for our troops!  Did you get that from one of the troops?  I’ll be willing to bet you probably did not!”

Try the Army Times. Does that count as ‘troops’?

An editorial from June 30, 2003, titled “Nothing But Lip Service”. It’s been copied far and wide and a Google search will turn up a bunch of copies.

Jon H

Did you read my ENTIRE statement?  How do you account for my counterparts earning nearly 1/3 more in just three years?  And that’s just base pay, excluding the increases in housing and subsistence allowances.  That GIs complain is not really a new thing…I have no doubt that there are disgruntled people in uniform.  Whining is a high art form in the military The Army Times (and Air Force Times) are just newspapers, they are not gospels (oh oh, bad comparison for this site).

I have no doubt that some E-3 with three kids feels he is not getting paid enough.  Compare him to his 21 year old civilian counterpart and you’ll probably find the same thing.  Please demonstrate to me where Bush (actually the Congress) is not adequately compensating the active duty force.

Go to http://www.dfas.gov and look up pay scales and tell me what you find.  I found these figures for a married E-4 with three years in service:

Base pay
2000---$1390.20
2003---$1665.30
19.7% increase

Housing*

2000---$517
2003---$649
25.5% increase

*I used my current locale to calculate housing allowance since it depends on where you live.

As you probably know the housing allowance is tax free and I didn’t include the tax-free subsistence allowance (about $250 per month).  I didn’t include the many other benefits that a civilian would have to pay for (medical, dental, etc.) or overseas COLA allowances.  I use to make about $500 a month just in COLA, tax-free!

So pardon me, in what universe does an across the board, 25% pay raise over three years equate to “not taking care of the troops”?  That was the original item of debate; that Bush (really the Congress) wasn’t taking care of the troops.  When you factor in the tax breaks, the little troop in my example above makes over $32,000 a year!!!  What high school graduate do you know of making that much after 3 years?

…and what in the heck does this have to do with science?!?!?!?!?!

Mild Bill, you’re the only guy I see on this site who constantly goes off on a tangent, then bitches about someone else doing it.*grin*
If you don’t want to be off topic, don’t go off topic; or don’t complain if someone else does.

At least I’m not a poopy head like you Brock

I need to chime in here in response to Bill’s original comment re: my comment re: the Bushie’s financial disregard for serviceperople.  I had originally compalained about Bush’s “obstruction of every legislative attempt to increase or maintain support and renumeration for servicepeople”

Perhaps I should have said ”attempted obstruction of every....”

I may not be aware of the way that raises are currently occurring throught the armed forces, but newspieces lke the one that Jon H supplied give ample evidence that the increases you cited are occurring against the desires and despite the efforts of the crooks in the Whitehouse!

Check these articles out:

http://veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=980

http://veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=982

http://veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=944

Also look at the Alternet.org archives for even more of this unrelenting pattern (re: admin’s attempts to cut death benefit to bereaved families; drastic attempted cuts in base housing construction and maintainance....).

I apologize for the atrocious spelling in my last post - I’m in a hurry.

Hey! Here’s a triple dip from Konspiracy Ken!
And Bill, it has nothing to do with science!  It is, however, rendered essential by unfolding events.

I’m just dying to put on the line what scant credibility that I yet possess with you folks - has anyone else noticed that the Big Blackout has totally pre-empted any other network/cable news coverage this evening?

Additionally, did anyone else notice the big bag of shit opened in Baghdad yesterday, when the blackhawk knocked down that religious banner over a demonstrating crowd? - after which an RPG was fired at the Americans, who responded by firing into the crowd?  Does anyone think that a scenario like this will just dissipate into the 120 degree desert air?

My paranoid mind also notes that Big Utilities and this administration will do ANYTHING to help each other.  I therefore submit that Cheney et.al., in order to “wag the dog” away from some terrible bloodbath occurring today in Iraq, had their associates on the northeastern grid shut down the show, making news from the front difficult or impossible for many citizens to receive, and giving the rest of us a juicy “breaking story” to obsess about.

Why would the utilities agree to such a breech of public trust? - Quid pro quo - and the fact that a disastrous blackout would enable them to raise rates astronomically, just the way it worked for their deregulated counterparts in California. 

I realize that triple dipping is probably a really onerous SEB faux pas, but I figure that Les - hailing from Michi-gasm - is among the blacked-out victims of our treacherous leaders and their henchmen, and therefore will not immediately object. 

Watch those little-bitty stories on the back page of Section B for the next several days.

I shall rename you Konscientious Ken
(I hope your last name doesn’t start with a “K")

I think it’s quite OK to triple dip since I don’t believe we will be hearing from our friends in the Northeast for a while.  Man, sometimes it’s good to live in the sticks!  I think we get our power from a 1963 Ford truck motor down at Cooter Jones’ Garage.  Cooter probably has a back up motor in case of a “cascading black out”.

Now, since I live right next to the largest air force base in the USA, let me holler out the window and see what the boys think about your statements….Oops, they’re all deployed, so I’ll have to ask them when they get back!  Actually I interact with them all the time and have never heard anything other than the usual gripes.

Boy, imagine that… somebody’s Mom actually doesn’t want her son in Iraq (article titled “AFRAID FOR HER SON”).  It’s incomprehensible.  I thought all mothers wanted their little boys stationed in combat zones.  Well I would hope everyone’s mother, father, wife, husband, etc., thought the same way.

Every president (minus Reagan) has been accused of the same things.  The first Bush was criticized and Clinton was slammed more than anyone else; some might say rightfully so.  I saw a serious degradation in aircraft availability rates and aircraft awaiting parts during his administration. 

The two items in question appear to be FSA and Combat Pay.

Family Separation Allowance (FSA) is not to “pay the rent” as one of your cited references suggests.  The Basic Allowance for Housing is to “pay rent”, more specifically, to help defray the cost of housing. Here’s what FSA is for:

The purpose of Family Separation Allowance (FSA) is to defray minor costs incurred due to enforced separation over 30 days.

It’s meant to help defray costs, not to fully reimburse anyone, just as all allowances are meant to do.  The military gets an annual clothing allowance.  It is not intended to pay for all uniform items; it’s just to help defray costs.  Some uniform items are optional.  Some are issued.  Some people, like me, only had to worry about which set of camouflage fatigues to put on in the morning.  FSA is for little things like getting the grass cut or babysitting or minor repairs around the home.  Defense Link has a good description of FSA:

http://www.defenselink.mil/prhome/N5C5.html

I will only briefly comment on hostile fire pay, because it’s a “little” illogical!  It’s paid to people who are in areas that are “within striking distance of enemy forces”.  You also do not pay any Federal tax while in a hostile fire zone.  We were paid hostile fire pay in Turkey (after the first Gulf War) because it was within range of Iraqi SCUD missiles!  I sure did worry about those SCUDs, especially when I was at the pool with a beer in my hand!  With that logic, I should have been paid combat pay in Europe because it was within range of all manner of offensive (hostile) Soviet forces, but I wasn’t.

Like I said, I don’t have to read the Air Force times or Army Times or any other rag to get an opinion on this stuff.  All I have to do is get in the car and drive 9 miles…there are several thousand people there I could ask.  I have absolutely no doubt that some do not think they are being compensated adequately.  By the greetings Bush receives when he visits the military, do you think “they” think he doesn’t support them?  Why believe your eyes when the Air Force or Army Times will tell you what to believe.  I guess the troops are just stupid or have been duped.

Military construction is appropriated for 5 years in advance and is not as easy an issue as one would think.  Right before my base in Germany closed, this company came and put brand new doors on one of our largest maintenance hangars.  This happened after the decision to close the base was announced.  After you sign the contracts you have the work done or pay to get out of it. 

At my old base in England, the commander announced base closure at the opening ceremony of our new $6 million recreation center!  That was in addition to the new $5 million NCO Club, a huge integrated base support building, a new gym, a new Base Exchange (department store), and over 500 new housing units being built.  And some of it was still being built after the base closure announcement!  Much of that stuff is sitting idle right now.

So we have yet another dichotomy here…the people you say are getting screwed by this president are the same ones who seem to respect him a great deal.  Apparently, putting on a uniform robs one of his ability to engage in rational thought.

If you are talking about “Veteran’s Benefits”, well that’s a whole other animal.  A veteran is some one like me…some one who once was in the military.  I have read a lot about veterans getting a raw deal, but I must say though that all my dealings with the VA have been positive!  I recently completed my BS degree (paid in full by the VA) and was also paid a monthly stipend, given a personal computer, and a monthly allowance for school supplies!!!  “Wadda country!” I say.  I have no doubt there are folks out there with horror stories about their dealings with the all powerful “G”, but I ain’t one of ‘em.

Bill,

You missed the whole point of my last message re: Bush’e lip-service to servicepeople.  Don’t listen to what the Administration and Pentagon SAY about the issue, look into the wide range of reports for the past six months that show what they support or oppose legislatively.  The two are diametrically opposed.  Hostile-fire pay may be an unworkable concept in today’s world, as you propose, but does it not reflect poorly on our leaders when they use it as a carrot to rally support for war among the troops (as they did!), only to turn around and try to cut it behind closed doors? (ditto on the death benefit)

To reiterate, they have not been universally or immediately successful in these efforts, but the efforts themselves expose their forked tongues. 

The cost of the occupation keeps rising, but the money goes to private contractors (i.e. “Friends of W")who can’t even keep our troops supplied with sufficient water or rations a month after the “end of the war”.

Ken I don’t know what a “death benefit” is.  Do you mean for active duty troops or for vets?  For active duty, there is a program called SGLI, Serviceman’s Group Life Insurance.  I think I paid $18.00 a month for $200,000. When you retire, there’s a program called SBP, Survivor Benefit Plan.  It isn’t the greatest deal, but it was around long before I joined the “Air Corps”. 

There are some squirrelly rules on how long after the sponsor’s death the dependents get paid, but I would think no more squirrelly than civilian rules.  If you’re talking about the VA death benefit, that $250-odd is pretty laughable, but no more laughable than Social Security.

One other little benefit that just got introduced last October…the services pay 100 percent college tuition for all active duty members!  It used to be 100 percent until you reached a certain year range (like under 10 years in service) and then 75 percent if you were over 10 years (or whatever the number was0.  Of course I didn’t use that benefit until I was in the 75 percent range!

I wouldn’t doubt that there are certain areas where the administration is trying to cut costs, but I don’t see how you can say that overall pay and benefits have NOT increased. 

It appears I’ll never be able to convince you that from where I sit, things are much better (benefits-wise) for current service members than they were under Clinton.  Look at OVERALL compensation and you really can’t argue that.  In a way, it’s more advantageous for the service member to receive increased base pay instead of increased allowances or special pay.  When you retire, the number used to calculate retirement pay is base pay only…the extras (combat pay, FSA, etc.) do not factor in.  The bad part is anything with the word “pay” in the title is taxed, while allowances are not.

Boy when, “those who are without electricity” return, they will be amused to find out how we have evolved this thing from Science to GI pay!  I personally believe that someone on this site inadvertently described a “real” government conspiracy.  Just like Julia Roberts in The Pelican Brief!  Les and his family were probably whisked away in a black helicopter and are now at Guantanamo Bay undergoing torture as we type!!!

Ken, it’s interesting to imagine that yesterday’s outage event might go deeper than an aging electric grid can explain, but I wouldn’t put anything past Bush and the boys.
It is at least damning that “scientists and engineers with the National Research Council warned the White House and Congress about the vulnerability of the power grid as recently as November, saying nationwide weaknesses needed to be repaired - and fast.
Little has been done, despite a chorus of experts who’ve pushed since well before Sept. 11 to fix a grid that’s riddled with threadbare links and plagued by chronic shortages.”

Additional questions, no doubt, arise from another story:
In the hours of confusion after Thursday’s outage, Canada’s government offered conflicting explanations for the blackout, insisting it started south of the border. U.S. officials and power industry figures initially blamed Canada, then said Friday they are focusing on a massive electrical grid that encircles Lake Erie.
Earlier,(Canada’s) Defense Minister John McCallum said Canadian and U.S. security officials will review what caused the huge blackout to examine how to protect against future outages.
McCallum had blamed a fire at a nuclear plant in Pennsylvania but then backed away from that claim. He said Friday that no one knows exactly what happened - but insisted whatever it was, it happened in the United States.

‘The Americans don’t have all the answers,’ he said. ‘The origin of the problem is in the United States, and the United States doesn’t have all the answers.’”
My first response was why are US and Canadian companies sharing electricity generation resources?

Brock,

The most frequently cited explanation I have heard suggests that the whole mess may have been the fault of an unscrupulous provider on the grid breaking the “rules” and overloading lines to maximize short-term profits (its been a cool summer, after all).  If this is true, it would have the downside of negating my Konspiracy theory of a couple of days ago. C’est la vie, I shall return to accuse another day.

However, the thread of deregulation and privatization inherent to my paranoid scenario remains alive and well.  The “rules” I mentioned above that supposedly govern the individual behavior of the profit-motivated suppliers along our power grids are not rules at all.  They are mere guidelines, with no sanctions whatsoever attached.  Why are we so stupid? We trust the most basic and crucial materials and services of our civilization entirely to unnaccountable goons who can and do screw at will if thay can squeeze out an extra buck.

Here is an article that has some of the answers to your questions, Mild Bill (plus links to others).  Are you going to continue to credit Bush for what improvements that have been made in military compensation, despite the fact that his administration opposes and attempts to block them at every turn?

Scientific Integrity in Policymaking was recently issued by the Union of Concerned Scientist. I suspect it supports Waxman’s contention. (Old thread-new data)

I have two ways to go on the whole war on terrorism thing. First approach is...Remember what those dirty assholes did to innocent civilians on our home soil and nuke all of them goofs back into the stone age.  Or, embrace the muslim extremist culture and have our women walk behind us where they belong, kill them if we don’t like what they’re doing and be able to kill anyone we don’t like by denouncing them to the local extremist council.  Kind of a hard choice, but I’ll try to make the right one.