Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

An incomplete list of 2005's ugliest foibles and follies.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Things I Want to Forget

By Arianna Huffington, AlterNet. Posted December 23, 2005.


An incomplete list of 2005's ugliest foibles and follies.
Advertisement

The older I get, the more I'm convinced that the key to happiness is starting every day, if you can, with a clean slate. But it should certainly be done before the start of every new year. This task is particularly easy for me this year since forgetfulness seems to come along with the Bora Bora breeze here.

So here is my list of things from 2005 that I'd love to forget -- that, indeed, we'd all be better off if they never crossed our minds again:

  • Bill Frist, video diagnostician. Bill Frist, stock market genius. Bill Frist.
  • That drivers will soon have to take out a second mortgage before filling up at the gas pump.
  • Bill O'Reilly's enemies list. That I wasn't on it (we'll try harder next year).
  • That the president thought Harriet Miers was the most qualified candidate for the Supreme Court.
  • That Harriet Miers thought George Bush was the most brilliant man she'd ever met.
  • The passage of the morally bankrupt bankruptcy bill.
  • That the New York Times held off running the NSA spying story for over a year.
  • Being Bobby Brown: "Hell to the no!"
  • The note President Bush passed Condoleezza Rice, asking if it was OK to take a bathroom break during a U.N. Security Council meeting.
  • The missing $9 billion the U.S.-led occupation government in Iraq can't account for.
  • Jeff Gannon, White House correspondent -- aka Jeff Guckert, hotmilitarystud.com.
  • That there is a debate about whether waterboarding is actually torture.
  • Judy Miller, Bob Woodward, Viveca Novak: The Three Media Stooges of Plamegate.
  • The Fred Durst sex tape.
  • That 493 U.S. soldiers have died since Dick Cheney declared the insurgency was in its "last throes."
  • That Dick "Five Deferments" Cheney was willing to go toe-to-toe with John "Five Years as a POW" McCain over the issue of torture.
  • Jean Schmidt taking to the House floor and implying that Jack Murtha was a "coward."
  • That voters could have gone to the polls in 2004 knowing that Bush was spying on Americans, that a key White House aide was charged with felonies, and that the initial reasons for invading Iraq were bogus -- but didn't, thanks to the timidity of the mainstream media.
  • Tom Cruise vs. Brooke Shields
  • Tom Cruise vs. Matt Lauer
  • Tom Cruise vs. Oprah's couch
  • That, in a '60s flashback, the Pentagon is once again spying on the activities of anti-war activists.
  • Hillary Clinton's shameless attempts to rebrand herself as a red-state-friendly Democrat -- including her decision to sign on as a co-sponsor of an anti-flag burning bill.
  • Hillary's visit to Iraq, where when she opined that suicide bombers are "an indication" of the "failure" of the insurgency, and that much of Iraq was "functioning quite well."

Digg!

Find more Arianna at the Huffington Post.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
like to forget, but shouldn't
Posted by: alterhead on Dec 23, 2005 11:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to forget some of that; but we shouldn't. Post that list as a reminder of what's gone down, and what we need to stop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not all of it was bad
Posted by: b7j0c on Dec 23, 2005 11:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As ridiculous as the ID vs evolution debate was, it seems to have worked out for now. ID will be pushed to the fringes where it will simply be called what these fringes already call it - creationism.

I don't agree with much of the criticism of the bankruptcy law. Yes it rewards credit cards and the lending banks behind them. Yes it can potentially hurt people in true need of relief. But again and again and again I am bombarded with stories of shopaholic Americans, and it is well known that the savings rates has turned negative again for the first time in a generation. I am tired of people not owning up to responsibilities, and I suspect that the majority of personal bankrupticies are caused by the stupidity and greed of shopaholics who don't know when to stop. People who play by the rules have been picking up the tab for these people, and I am tired of it.

Another bad memory of 2005 - more of the Democrats finding new ways to become totally irrelevant. I will not vote for this party if they can't even bring themselves to have a platform on Iraq. How can you not have a statement on the definitive issue of the day? More cowardice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: b7j0c
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: cmysticism
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: b7j0c
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: A. James
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: liberalibrarian
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: b7j0c
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: alterhead
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Not all of it was bad Posted by: b7j0c
» RE: Not my problem Posted by: Unbowed
And one more.....
Posted by: tuff_bird on Dec 24, 2005 1:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One more thing I wish I could forget......... the fact that "body count" seems to be sneaking in as a/the scorecard for keeping track of who's winning the war......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and looking ahead a bit..
Posted by: vespasian01 on Dec 24, 2005 2:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bushie must have picked up on the Bill Clinton notion to require his "Clipper Chip," a gov spy device, to be installed in all US computers. Bush's variant is to have a radio-tag chip incorporated into all US Passports as of November 2006. I believe the idea is to include biometrics along with personal data. The Clinton idea was shot down, largely by Republicans who claimed to be defending the Constitution. Where are these Republicans now? The Democrats are far too fearful and weak to stand up like men on this or anything else. But I at least thought there might be one or two Republicans with some vestige of manliness left who would bring this latest Bush attack on America to a dead stop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2005
Posted by: Tom Degan on Dec 25, 2005 5:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, yeah, no question about it: 2005 was THAT kind of a year, wasn't it? It's like that old Chinese blessing/curse, "May you live in interesting times". Well, we certainly do, don't we? And as nerve wracking as the time we live in may be, you've got to admit that it certainly isn't boring!

As atrocious as 2005 was, 2006 will be much the worse...umm..."interesting. Count on the democrats taking back control of both houses of congress a year from now. True, the American electorate is kind of dumb, no question about it - BUT THEY'RE NOT CRAZY! By election day 2006, they'll have had it. Count on the American death toll in Iraq this time next year to be close to (if not exceeding) 3000. Don't even consider asking me about the Iraqi death count next year. We'll probably never know the real numbers. Count on Bush and Cheney both being removed from office; Probably in the late spring/early summer of 2007. Call it wishful thinking if you will. It's just that, in spite of all the damage that these hideous bastards have inflicted on it over the last two and a half decades, I still believe that the system will work. Naive? We'll see.

Happy Christmas, everyone.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2005 Posted by: LPB
Concepts Now Out of Date or Proven Wrong
Posted by: NoPCZone on Dec 25, 2005 10:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Add these to your list-
That Republicans are more competent at:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Economic Policy, Budget Policy, Domestic Policy.
That Republicans stand for:
Smaller Government, Less Intrusive Government, Fiscal Restraint, Balanced Budgets, Individual Freedom, Personal Privacy.
That Republicans oppose:
Unfunded mandates on State & Local Governments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the sad truth
Posted by: chrstof on Dec 27, 2005 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the fact is that neither party is who they claim they are. the trend is to be for sale to those that make large campaign contributions. the voter only counts on election day. after that, it's back to serving big business.

arianna's list is discouraging evidence of this truth. the corruption is so deep and widespread, our government doesn't even know how compromised they are. sad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barbra Jordan
Posted by: Unbowed on Dec 30, 2005 10:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Today I am an inquisitor. My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution.

"We know the nature of impeachment. We have been talking about it awhile now. "It is chiefly designed for the president and his high ministers" to somehow be called into account. It is designed to "bridle" the executive if he engages in excesses. "It is designed as a method of national inquest into the public men." (Hamilton, Federalist, no. 65.) The framers confined in the congress the power if needbe, to remove the president in order to strike a delicate balance between a president swollen with power and grown tyrannical, and preservation of the independence of the executive. The nature of impeachment is a narrowly channeled exception to the separation-of-powers maxim; the federal convention of 1787 said that. It limited impeachment to high crimes and misdemeanors and discounted and opposed the term "maladministration." "It is to be used only for great misdemeanors," so it was said in the North Carolina ratification convention. And in the Virginia ratification convention: "We do not trust our liberty to a particular branch. We need one branch to check the others."

The North Carolina ratification convention: "No one need be afraid that officers who commit oppression will pass with immunity."

"Impeachment is intended for occasional and extraordinary cases where a superior power acting for the whole people is put into operation to protect their rights and rescue their liberties from violations."

"Protect their rights." "Rescue their liberties from violation."


A president is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution."

If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that eighteenth century Constitution should be abandoned to a twentieth-century paper shredder. Has the president committed offenses and planned and directed and acquiesced in a course of conduct which the Constitution will not tolerate? We know the question. We should now forthwith proceed to answer the question. It is reason, and not passion, which must guide our deliberations, guide our debate, and guide our decision."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]