| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/9/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33509 Activity:very high |
9/13 Right Wing Nutjob Bloggers schooled by dailykos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603
\_ You know, I think both candidates are pretty much poor in this
election, and I'd really like to think of myself as neutral in
all the mudslinging. But Kerry supporters trying to pass this off
as a legit memo is just irrational. Through this fantastic series
of coincidences - some backwater base buys this super expensive
typewriter to write memos, and some guy whose family says he could
barely type uses proportional spacing in his memos, and the word
wrapping and font just happen to be identical to what MS Word does
on the default settings, etc. etc. ... sheesh. It's fake. Deal with
it. Save your breath for an issue where you might have some
legitimacy.
\_ Yeah, go back to your hole, ya left-wing bleeding heart wannabe
independent. If the memo was real you'd be all over it like a
dog in heat trying to hump a dead tree stump. Fact is that the
memo was from the Kerry campaign. Fact is that it was a blatant
attempt by the Kerry folks to retaliate to swiftboat. Fact is
that they failed miserably and now CBS and the Kerry boys have
egg over all their collective faces because Kerry doesn't know
how to hide his trail.
\_ Speaking of slimy political maneuvering:
http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278
\_ Did you read the article? They refute every argument against
the memo's legitimacy. Better get in a few more quick "just
give it up"s before your whole argument falls apart.
\_ Like I said, save your breath. "Falls apart". Hah. Would
you be willing to bet a Kerry presidency on those memos
being legitimate?
\_ While the line wrapping is exact, the font is not, according
to that http://dailykos.com URL.
Also, the http://dailykos.com consensus now seems to be the IBM
Executive typewriter, not the Selectric Composer. The former
is common; the latter is expensive and not.
http://dailykos.com people are trying to get their hands on an
Executive now.
\_ Anyone know, how did line wrapping work on these electric
typewriters? Did people just guess where to hit the
carriage return or was there some better indication to avoid
going over the margin?
\_ I owned one a selectric--you could set mechanical tabs
which would either stop the carriage and not let you type
any more, or on some models do a CR/LF for you. -John
The spacing is the most suspicious, including the centered
header on another memo (although it is actually not centered
but shifted over to the right by 1 tab).
\_ This link unsatifactorily addresses two, yes only two, of
the inconsistencies found in the memo. The blog contains
only information found earlier on the 'right wing nutjob'
websites. Another example, one of the Gen. referred to
had retired 18 months prior to the memo. There are 10
or 15 more discrepancies. So, try again.
\_ As ex-Army, http://dailykos.com should realize that the abbreviations
used in the memos reveal they were written by someone who was
never in the military. He should know what a Form 180 is, and
which candidates have and have NOT signed it. |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603 Hunter Fri Sep 10th, 2004 at 15:37:04 GMT (From the diaries -- kos) Against my own better judgment, but because I believe that the more rapidly charges are countered, the better, I spend a goodly portion of the last day researching -- shudder -- typewriters of the '60s and '70s. PowerLine, a site linked to with admiration by such luminaries as Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt -- discovered that if you used the same typeface, you could make documents that looked almost -- but not exactly -- like the TANG documents discovered by CBS News. This qualifies as big news, of course, so from those two sites, the story has spread into the mainstream media through the usual channels, most notably Drudge, NRO, etc. I do not believe there is any truly "new" information here, but I hope to condense it in one easy-to-digest reference. So here are some point-by-point findings re: the "forgeries". As he says: Notice that the date lines up perfectly, all the line breaks are in the same places, all letters line up with the same letters above and below, and the kerning is exactly the same. And I did not change a single thing from Word's defaults; First, of course, in order to do this, he first had to reduce the document so that the margins were the same, since the original PDF distributed by CBS is quite a bit larger. Then he superimposed the two documents, such that the margins on all sides lined up. What he then discovered is that Times New Roman typeface is, when viewed on a computer monitor, really, really similar to Times New Roman typeface. Or rather, really really similar to a typeface that is similar to Times New Roman typeface. You see, a "typeface" doesn't just consist of the shape of the letters. It also is a set of rules about the size of the letters in different point sizes, the width of those letters, and the spacing between them. These are all designed in as part of the font, by the designer. Since Microsoft Word was designed to include popular and very-long-used typefaces, it is hardly a surprise that those typefaces, in Microsoft Word, would look similar to, er, themselves, on a typewriter or other publishing device. You could use the same typeface in, for example, OpenOffice, and if it's the same font, surprise-surprise, it will look the same. If you shrink each document to be approximately 400-500 pixels across, they do indeed look strikingly similar. But that is because you are compressing the information they contain to 400-500 pixels across. At that size, subtle differences in typeface or letter placement simply cannot be detected; If you compare the two documents at a larger size, the differences between them are much more striking. For instance: In the original CBS document, some letters "float" above or below the baseline. For example, in the original document, lowercase 'e' is very frequently -- but not always -- above the baseline. Granted, if you are comparing a lowercase 'e' that is only 10 or 12 pixels high with another lowercase 'e' that is only 10 or 12 pixels high, you're not going to see such subtleties. it just proves you're an idiot, for making them each 12 pixels high and then saying "see, they almost match!" "This typeface -- Times New Roman -- didn't exist in the early 1970s." First, Times New Roman, as a typeface, was invented in 1931. Second, typewriters were indeed available with Times New Roman typefaces. And third, this isn't Times New Roman, at least not the Microsoft version. For example, the '8' characters are decidedly different. The '4's, as viewable on other memos, are completely different; So yes, we have proven that two typefaces that look similar to each other are indeed, um, similar. At least when each document is shrunk to 400-500 pixels wide... "Documents back then didn't have superscripted 'th' characters" That one was easy. Yes, many typewriter models had shift-combinations to create 'th', 'nd', and 'rd'. This is most easily proven by looking at known-good documents in the Bush records, which indeed have superscripted 'th' characters interspersed throughout. "This document uses proportional spacing, which didn't exist in the early 1970s." It was an extremely popular model, and was marketed to government agencies. "OK, fine, but no single machine had proportional spacing, 'th' characters, and a font like that one." The IBM Executive is probably the most likely candidate for this particular memo. There is some confusion about this, so to clear up: the IBM Selectric, while very popular, did not have proportional spacing. The Selectric Composer, introduced in 1966, did, and in fact could easily have produced these memos, but it was a very expensive machine, and not likely to be used for light typing duties. The proportional-spacing Executive, on the other hand, had been produced in various configurations since the 1940's, and was quite popular. There is skepticism in some circles that these memos really show "proportional" spacing. they apparently were manufactured in a range of configurations, and with different available typefaces. Note that these were not "typeball" machines, like the Selectrics; IBM had what we will call a "close" relationship with Times New Roman: Courier was originally designed in 1956 by Howard Kettler for the revolutionary "golfball" typing head technology IBM was then developing for its electric typewriters. In the 1960s and 1970s Courier became a mainstay in offices. Consequently, when Apple introduced its first Macintosh computer in 1984 it anachronistically included Courier among its core fonts. In the early 1990s Microsoft, locked in a font format battle with Adobe, hired Monotype Typography to design a series of core fonts for Windows 31, many of which were intended to mirror those in the Apple core font group. Thus, New Courier--lighter and crisper than Courier--was born. Linotype and Intertype quickly licensed the design, changing its name for their marketing purposes to Times Roman. Times Roman became an original core font for Apple in the 1980s and Times New Roman MT became one for Windows in the 1990s. And, as we said before, typeface includes not just the "shape" of the letters, but the size and spacing between those letters. One of the differences between the Times New Roman as implemented on the IBM machines, as opposed to Microsoft Word? The IBM machines apparently had the alternative '4' character that matched these memos, while Microsoft Word's TNR does not. Now, would the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron have extravagantly purchased typewriters that contained the th superscript key? Would the military want or require typewriters with the 'th', 'nd', and 'rd' characters? I'll leave that to the enterprising among you to deduce. This is not the final word on this, and it is certainly possible that any documents are forgeries. But the principle argument of the freepers -- that it would be impossible for a TANG office in 1972 to produce documents that look like these -- is simply false. Within a few days, however, we should know for sure either way; these typewriters still have a following, and type samples should be forthcoming. kj's diary just after this one, for evidence on the IBM Selectric Composer, first marketed in 1966. This machine definitively had all the features necessary to produce these documents. Because it was apparently very expensive and difficult to use, the argument is that a TANG office would never have had one. Nonetheless, it strikes down the theory that a 60s-70s era machine could not have produced these docs. Roman" typefaces in the 80s-90s specifically to more accurately match the original design of Times New Roman: When Microsoft produced its version of Times New Roman, licensed from Monotype, in TrueType format, and when Apple produced its version of Times Roman, licensed from Linotype, in TrueType format, the subtle competition took on a new aspect, because both Microsoft and Apple expended a great deal of time and effort to make the TrueType versions as good as, or better than, the PostScript version. During the same period, Adobe released ATM along with upgraded versions of its core set of fonts, for improved rasterization on scree... |
| olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278 Help & Info. Hidden links: 22. |
| dailykos.com true wingnuttery: For Coburn, the imminent danger facing America is apparently not terrorism but the "gay agenda." His thumping about this menace within contributed to the pressure that led to Bush's endorsement of a constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage. At a Republican meeting this spring, Coburn warned: "The gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power ... That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom that we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? But that sort of thing doesn't do anything but help him in Oklahoma, were gays are scapegoated for all of society's ills (or something like that). What might hurt him, hopefully, is his big mouth (last week he caused an uproar when he called state lawmakers in Oklahoma City "crapheads"), and his record as a doctor. Not only did the rabidly anti-abortion Republican perform abortions in the past, but this story casts a further pall on his record as a doctor. According to records obtained by Salon, Coburn filed an apparently fraudulent Medicaid claim in 1990, which he admitted in his own testimony in a civil malpractice suit brought against him 14 years ago by a former female patient. The suit alleged that Coburn had sterilized her without her consent. It eventually was dismissed after the plaintiff failed to appear for the trial. In his sworn testimony, Coburn admitted he sterilized the then 20-year-old woman without securing her written consent as required by law. He blamed the omission on a clerical error, but maintained that he had her oral consent for the procedure. While the story has broken in the decidedly liberal, decidedly non-Oklahoman Salon Mag, it will make the jump to the local press probably tomorrow in a feature in the Daily Oklahoman. Whether it has legs beyond that, or whether the Carson campaign will make an issue of it, all remains to be seen. They are obviously not pushing undecideds hard, so the numbers are measuring stronger support than polls with small undecideds. Regardless, the trend is nice, and confirms the numbers seen by the Carson campaign. One last poll result so that people can get a good sense of what Oklahoma looks like: If you were to label yourself, would you say you are a Liberal, a Moderate, or a Conservative? Liberal 4 Somewhat liberal 9 Moderate 32 Somewhat conservative 26 Conservative 20 Given those numbers, and given Bush's ridiculous lead in the state, it's nothing short of a miracle that we have a competitive Democrat running for the seat. In Oklahoma, the battle is not necessarily between Democrat and Republican, it's between elitist and populist. Brad Henry won the governorship in 2002 because his opposition to a ballot initiative banning cockfighting was viewed as an elitist imposition by the Big City types in Oklahoma City. Kerry and his windsurfing ways could never compete against Bush's stage-crafted brush-clearing fiction, but the soft-spoken and hard-working Carson can fight the perception of national Dems as Big City elitists. Do you know Carson gave up an opportunity at Yale Law to go to law school at University of Oklahoma? And who wouldn't love that level of passion and commitment to their home state? kos Tue Sep 14th, 2004 at 04:23:28 GMT The White House's rebuttal to AWOL charges are simple: he got an honorable discharge, hence he fulfilled his duty. An old (February) TNR article is making the rounds which lays total bunk to the argument. exerpts the relevant passage: Far from being a mark of exemplar service, the honorable discharge is better thought of as a standard severance, something every soldier receives unless there's significant evidence of misconduct and a commanding officer eager to brave the paperwork, panels, and disciplinary hearings required to send the soldier home with anything less. Like any number of other officers, Bush could have ducked out of his service for months and still received an honorable discharge. Going missing from military service and then squeaking out with an honorable discharge has a rich history among politicians. Current US Representative Bobby Rush, a Democrat from Illinois, served in the army through the mid-1960s, becoming progressively more involved with radical antiwar groups. In 1968, after Martin Luther King's assassination, he went AWOL from his unit to help found the Illinois chapter of the Black Panthers. In 1999, a Texas sheriff up for reelection saw his candidacy unravel after local newspapers reported that, despite a subsequent honorable discharge, he'd skipped out on Army service for several months in 1976 to "patch things up with his ex-wife." Louis Post-Dispatch ruminated on going AWOL from his unit routinely with a "case of beer" to drink himself "into oblivion." "I don't know how, but I did manage to get an honorable discharge." Perhaps more striking is how often serious questions of misconduct have been flat-out ignored. John Allen Muhammad, convicted last November for his participation in the DC sniper shootings, served in the Louisiana National Guard from 1978-1985, where he faced two summary courts-martial. In 1983, he was charged with striking an officer, stealing a tape measure, and going AWOL. Sentenced to seven days in the brig, he received an honorable discharge in 1985. So will that get empty vassals like Judy Woodruff to stop parroting BC04 talking points? WOODRUFF: How does that square, though, Walter Robinson, with the fact that he was discharged honorably, as the White House points out? ROBINSON: Well, as the White House points out, he was in fact discharged honorably by the Texas Air National Guard. It was the Texas Air National Guard and his own superiors who apparently looked the other way when he was not showing up for drills. The issue here is whether or not he performed his service obligation, and the records on that are now quite clear: He did not. WOODRUFF: And, uh, so, but -- but some people would say well, if he didn't perform his -- if he didn't fulfill his obligation, then how did the service end up giving him an honorable discharge I wouldn't count on it. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader's name can appear on Florida ballots for the election, despite a court order to the contrary, Florida's elections chief told officials on Monday in a move that could help President Bush in the key swing state. The Florida Democratic Party reacted with outrage, calling the move "blatant partisan maneuvering" by Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's younger brother, and vowed to fight it. "I'm in disbelief," said Scott Maddox, chairman of the Florida Democratic Party. "This is blatant partisan maneuvering on the part of Jeb Bush to give his brother a leg up on election day." It's heart-warming how the Bush family looks out after its own. Zackpunk Mon Sep 13th, 2004 at 21:19:00 GMT (From the diaris -- kos) I was just listening to the Al Franken show, and he touched on a point, but didn't make an interesting connection. Colin Powell told president Bush, "if you break it, you own it." And now president Bush is going around talking about having an "ownership society." Mr President, if you want to talk about an ownership society, let's talk about what you own." kos Mon Sep 13th, 2004 at 21:13:57 GMT Midday open thread. Incidentally, we're playing server musical chairs today, so there may be some wierdness. The hackers claim it'll be a seamless transition, but whenever technology is involved, I always expect the worst. getting worse: It's not only that US casualty figures keep climbing. American counterinsurgency experts are noticing some disturbing trends in those statistics. The Defense Department counted 87 attacks per day on US forces in August--the worst monthly average since Bush's flight-suited visit to the USS Abraham Lincoln in May 2003. Preliminary analysis of the July and August numbers also suggests that US troops are being attacked across a wider area of Iraq than ever before. And the number of gunshot casualties apparently took a huge jump in August. Until then, explosive devices and shrapnel were the prima... |