You would almost think that Bush has purposely appointed incompetent assholes to every single post he could fill within our federal infrastructure. If I started on a list of shit-for-brains individuals that he has given important jobs, it might not ever end. But then again, what should we expect from a lower life form such as Dubya, other than that he would invite other bottom-feeding parasites to join him in destroying all that is good about America?
If I were the kind to do so, I would swear to god that Bush is the evil ruler of another planet, from which he and his legions of soul-less creatures have hailed in order to impersonate humans, infiltrate the U.S. government, and destroy the earth itself for their own nefarious gain.
Here is just one more piece of evidence that would support such a claim:
Bush Appointee Said to Reject Advice on Endangered Species
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 30, 2006; A03
A senior Bush political appointee at the Interior Department has rejected staff scientists' recommendations to protect imperiled animals and plants under the Endangered Species Act at least six times in the past three years, documents show.In addition, staff complaints that their scientific findings were frequently overruled or disparaged at the behest of landowners or industry have led the agency's inspector general to look into the role of Julie MacDonald, who has been deputy assistant secretary of the interior for fish and wildlife and parks since 2004, in decisions on protecting endangered species.
The documents show that MacDonald has repeatedly refused to go along with staff reports concluding that species such as the white-tailed prairie dog and the Gunnison sage grouse are at risk of extinction. Career officials and scientists urged the department to identify the species as either threatened or endangered.
Overall, President Bush's appointees have added far fewer species to the protected list than did the administrations of either Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush, according to the advocacy group Center for Biological Diversity. As of now, the administration has listed 56 species under the Endangered Species Act, for a rate of about 10 a year. Under Clinton, officials listed 512 species, or 64 a year, and under George H.W. Bush, the department listed 234, or 59 a year.
The dispute is the latest in a series of controversies in which government officials and outside scientists have accused the Bush administration of overriding or setting aside scientific findings that clashed with its political agenda on such issues as global warming, the Plan B emergency contraceptive and stem cell research.
Interior spokesman Hugh Vickery said the agency has added fewer plants and animals to the list because it has been mired in lawsuits over existing listings and was more focused on ensuring their recovery than in identifying new ones.
MacDonald said she does not make the decision on whether to federally protect a species, because the head of the Fish and Wildlife Service has that responsibility. But she said she had made her feelings clear in an array of documents; overruled scientists' conclusions in areas where she has authority, such as designating critical habitat; and mocked rank-and-file employees' recommendations.
MacDonald said she sees her job as protecting "the public face of the Fish and Wildlife Service" by carefully scrutinizing listing documents that often seem vague or unsupported by evidence.
"A lot of times when I first read a document I think, 'This is a joke, this is just not right.' So I'll ask questions," said MacDonald, a civil engineer by training who worked at the California Resources Agency before joining the Interior Department in 2002. "These documents have tremendous economic and social implications for people."
Since the act's inception in 1973, the government has identified 1,337 domestic species as threatened or endangered, of which 1,311 remain on the list. At any given time the government is evaluating hundreds of candidate species: Officials and scientists review all the available scientific literature on a plant or animal before awarding it protection.
The process can take several years, even though under law it should take no more than two years and three months.
Hundreds of pages of records, obtained by environmental groups through the Freedom of Information Act, chronicle the long-running battle between MacDonald and Fish and Wildlife Service employees over decisions whether to safeguard plants and animals from oil and gas drilling, power lines, and real estate development, spiced by her mocking comments on their work and their frequently expressed resentment.
Two advocacy groups, the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Center for Biological Diversity, provided the documents to The Washington Post. Francesca Grifo, who directs the union's scientific integrity program, said MacDonald's actions are "not business as usual but a systemic problem of tampering with science that is putting our environment at risk."
In a few instances, federal judges have overturned decisions that MacDonald had influenced. After she declared that the endangered Santa Barbara and Sonoma salamanders were no longer "distinct populations" entitled to protection, William Alsup, a judge on the U.S. District Court for Northern California, ruled that MacDonald had arbitrarily instructed Fish and Wildlife scientists to downgrade the two species even though an agency scientist concluded that "genetics state otherwise."
"This is not to suggest that the Secretary of Interior has no role in the ultimate decision," Alsup wrote. "If the Secretary wants to re-assess the evidence, he may choose to do so, but, in doing so, he must set forth a discernible rationale."
In several instances, MacDonald wrote sarcastic comments in the margins of the documents, questioning why scientists were portraying a species' condition as so bleak. When scientists raised the possibility that a proposed road might degrade the greater sage grouse's habitat, which is scattered through 11 Western states, MacDonald wrote: "Has nothing to do with sage grouse. This belongs in a treatise on 'Why roads are bad'?"
MacDonald acknowledged that her comments appeared harsh at times.
"Mea culpa," she said of the roads comment. "I read so many of these I get frustrated sometimes. I shouldn't be flippant. I shouldn't be sarcastic."
You "read so many of these" that you "get frustrated sometimes"? That's your fuckin job, in case you didn't know, ya dumb cooze. You were appointed to that job by the President of the United States and you're expected to do it dilegently, without childish tantrums and snide comments.
As I learned in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" by Philip K. Dick, when I read it for the first time recently, androids don't have the capacity to care for animals. (Further evidence in The Planet Earth v. George W. Bush and His Legions of Androids from an Unknown Galaxy.)
Read on if you can stomach it.
MacDonald has repeatedly urged employees to consider the position of industry officials more seriously when weighing whether to declare a species threatened or endangered. During a discussion of greater sage grouse populations in the first half of the 1800s, she wrote, "This paragraph completely ignores the comments received by the Owyhee Cattlemen's Association and the Idaho Cattle Association." The organization opposed the listing on the grounds that it would limit their use of land where the birds live.During a separate rulemaking concerning the threatened bull trout's habitat on the Klamath River, Fish and Wildlife officials debated via e-mail on how to respond to MacDonald. Her questions, they believed, reflected the concerns of Ronald Yockim, a lawyer representing three Idaho counties opposing a pending decision to protect nearly 300 miles of the river. After MacDonald's intervention, Fish and Wildlife officials opted to protect 42 miles instead.
John Young, a Fish and Wildlife biologist, wrote to several colleagues: "Yockim is an attorney representing various interest groups. It appears that Julie has shared our responses to her comments with Yockim, which have generated additional comments from Yockim. It seems to me it would be inappropriate to essentially continue the public comment period (it is closed) by contacting and responding to his follow-up questions/comments that he did not provide during the comment period."
MacDonald said that she was following up on a letter Yockim had sent and that the solicitor's office had approved such contacts.
MacDonald said that on occasion she told officials they did not have to heed her advice. In documents concerning the white-tailed prairie dog, an e-mail from her on Oct. 25, 2004, stated, "None of these changes are final or a directive."
But on Nov. 1, an official in the Denver regional office, Seth Wiley, sent a follow-up e-mail that said: "Just spoke with Chris Nolan and Kurt Johnson. Julie McD and the Department want to go with a not-warranted listing."
Before issuing that memo, MacDonald changed how the agency characterized the threats facing the species. Staff scientists wrote in a summary that "both documents clearly identify current and projected threats to the species, including mortality and habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation. We believe further evaluation of the extent of leasing and current and projected oil and gas development is necessary."
MacDonald eliminated the reference to energy leases and added: "The identified threats are speculative, and neither document provides substantial scientific information supporting the speculation."
Amid the complaints, Interior officials have privately contacted the ranking Democrat on the House Resources Committee, Rep. Nick J. Rahall II (W.Va.), who plans to hold oversight hearings into the matter if his party retakes the majority in next month's elections.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
So I haven't blogged since Ivette passed away. After posting about the news of her death I felt devoid of any thoughts that I was inclined to share publicly. Nothing at all to say here. Still, day after day I wrote it all down, feeling like the things I had to say could only be said right if they flowed directly out of a pen onto paper and were left there. Not to mention, I can't imagine anyone being interested in wallowing there with me in that place of total despair.
I've been filling journals and working on my pieces for school and that is where my writing has gone.
At some point a long time ago - sometime after the 2004 election, my disgust for those who support president Bush turned into apathy because I couldn't handle the loathing and revulsion that I felt for people who just don't seem to be waking up and smelling the stench of this administration. Instead, I stopped allowing myself to reflect too much on current events and politics and what people are saying about it all, because I was angry and being angry apparently doesn't solve anything or change the minds of anyone, nor does it feel particularly pleasant or make you any younger. I stopped reading blogs and news that would depress me to the point of distraction. Lately, certain things have lit that fire in me to blog again. Being angry is better than feeling nothing. One thing that has made me feel like blogging again has been news about the Dixie Chicks and all the shit that they are catching for exercising their right to free speech.
During the course of indulging in my guiltiest pleasure, that of reading celebrity gossip online, I came across this thread on tmz.com, the comments to which were enough to make my temperature rise.
I find it amazing that there are people out there who believe that in order to love this country and be a patriot, you must stand behind the president, no matter if he is the stupidest - and possibly the most dangerous - man alive. There are people who believe that regardless of the actions of your government, as a citizen it is your duty to stand behind that government anyway and lend your support, because THAT is what defines you as a patriot. This way of thinking is ignorant on a level that I can barely comprehend. These are people who say things like, "yes you have the right to free speech, BUT..." as if there are exceptions to be made. As if they themselves are the judges who are to determine what is and isn't OKAY free speech and whom is entitled to exercise it and under what circumstances.
These rabid Bush supporters think that they decide who has this right. They think they decide who is a patriot and what qualifies you. They think that they are doing right by this country by allowing Bush to destroy it. And I want to know how the fuck they figure? How do they figure that supporting Bush while he and his administration tear apart the fabric of our lives and our country, is the patriotic thing to do? If anything, they are the worst traitors this country has ever seen. Those who would give up their consitutional rights, those who would sell out their country, those who would stand behind a man who has done nothing but wreak destruction upon everything he touches - those are the worst traitors this country has ever seen. The Dixie Chicks couldn't hold a candle to those who continue to support this president when it comes to being traitors. Bush supporters win. They support a man who refuses to do what is best for our country. What could be less patriotic than that?
I dressed up as a black widow for a Halloween party last night. Then I dreamed that I was bitten by a black widow and my arm swole up and I had a horrible red and purple welt. It wasn't a real black widow. It was a mechanical one. Its fangs were metal prongs. Its red hourglass was painted on. Its legs and body were hard, black plastic. But it bit like a real spider and I felt the pain of the bite as if it were real. I felt my arm aching as if the poison were spreading. I felt relieved when I woke up that the spider wasn't real. I am really afraid of black widows. They scare me to death. Have since I was a kid and used to go to my grandparents' house in Phoenix where my parents would always say, "keep an eye out for black widows!" That terrified me. Of course I've seen hundreds of them in my life and I get the worst chills every time. I see them whenever I visit Oregon. Saw one in Portland recently. That is probably why they were in my head and I decided to dress up as one for Halloween and now I am having nightmares about them.
I have a tendency toward one dream which always feels different yet forever the same. I am in Oregon. I feel like I am on our land, in the Colestine, but it changes. The landscape changes. Sometimes it is trees and roads. Sometimes it is pathways and porches. Sometimes it is rocks and snow. I think it is a recurring dream, but the events are always new. Still, it is Oregon. Still it is the land. Still it is about my family and people I used to know. It's joy and sadness and fear. Maybe that is what is recurring. The same joys and pains and fears again and again, night after night, subconscious dream after subconscious dream, fueled by emotions that are on infinite repeat. I often have that dream of home. Perhaps I store all of the homesickness of the past six years away and it rears its head in my sleep.
A couple of nights ago I dreamed that Kathleen moved into an apartment in Santa Monica, a big highrise near the beach. We stood in the living room of her new apartment and looked out the big picture windows at the jewel-blue ocean. It was an astounding view. The waves were huge, and suddenly they were being pulled higher by the wind. Cyclones spun off the top of the waves as they broke. They rose higher and higher. There was a tsunami coming towards us. A giant wave pushed out of the ocean with a force I had never seen or vividly imagined before. It loomed over everything, crashing through the window of Kathleen's apartment, spraying glass and water everywhere. We ran from it, miraculously escaping as one can only do in a dream.
I woke up in disbelief that it was just a dream. I thought of the tsunami that hit Asia a couple of Christmas's ago and of Hurricane Katrina. I felt devastated at the thought that people have experienced such catastrophe in reality. Not just a scary dream that they could wake up from to a sense of relief, but a truth that could never be reversed or forgotten. I felt helpless laying there in my perfectly warm, dry bed, thinking about nightmares that become reality. A storm is blowing outside. It's a dark, windy day in Brooklyn. I have yet to set foot outside my house. I feel stupid for wanting to stay home tonight and wallow in bad dreams and every other ache and pain that I can muster, while Rob wants us to get dressed up and continue celebrating Halloween out on the town. For some reason, wallowing sounds like more fun.