<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Wirearchy &#187; 2004 &#187; October</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com</link>
	<description>You know more than me, we know more than you, and wherever this all going, we're going there together.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:02:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Is George Bush a Habitual Liar ?  You Decide &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/29/is-george-bush-a-habitual-liar-you-decide/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/29/is-george-bush-a-habitual-liar-you-decide/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/29/is-george-bush-a-habitual-liar-you-decide/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Evidently George W Bush recently laughed off suggestions that he was wearing a wire during the 2nd presidential debate, referring on CNN&#8217;s Good Morning America to the speculation about a bulge on his back as a &#8220;wrinkle in my badly-tailored shirt&#8221;.
In an article dated October 29, 2004, here&#8217;s one of NASA&#8217;s top scientistswho specializes in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Evidently George W Bush recently laughed off suggestions that he was wearing a wire during the 2nd presidential debate, referring on CNN&#8217;s Good Morning America to the speculation about a bulge on his back as a &#8220;wrinkle in my badly-tailored shirt&#8221;.</p>
<p>In an article dated October 29, 2004, <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/29/bulge/index.html">here&#8217;s one of NASA&#8217;s top scientists</a>who specializes in the detailed analysis of images, on Bush&#8217;s bulge and wrinkled shirts:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;Everyone wants to think my colleague and I are just a bunch of dope-crazed ravaged Democrats who are looking to insult the president at the last minute,&#8221; he says. &#8220;And that&#8217;s not what this is about. This is scientific analysis. If the bulge were on Bill Clinton&#8217;s back and he was lying about it, I&#8217;d have to say the same thing.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>&#8220;Look, he says, &#8220;I&#8217;m putting myself at risk for exposing this. But this is too important. It&#8217;s not about my reputation. If they force me into an early retirement, it&#8217;ll be worth it if the public knows about this.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s outrageous statements that I read that the president is wearing nothing under there.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/29/bulge/index_np.html">There&#8217;s clearly something there</a>.&#8221;</strong></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/29/is-george-bush-a-habitual-liar-you-decide/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Of Course &#8230; Bushco Calls Them &#8220;Insurgents&#8221; &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/28/of-course-bushco-calls-them-insurgents/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/28/of-course-bushco-calls-them-insurgents/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/28/of-course-bushco-calls-them-insurgents/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230;and also states, brazenly, that they resent us bringing them &#8220;democracy and freedom&#8221;
Via CNN.com:
Study: 100,000 Excess Civilian Iraqi Deaths Since War
By Patricia Reaney
LONDON (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violence since the U.S.-led invasion last year, American public health experts have calculated in a report that estimates there were 100,000 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;and also states, brazenly, that they resent us bringing them &#8220;democracy and freedom&#8221;</p>
<p>Via CNN.com:</p>
<p><strong>Study: 100,000 Excess Civilian Iraqi Deaths Since War</strong></p>
<p>By Patricia Reaney</p>
<p><em>LONDON (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violence since the U.S.-led invasion last year, American public health experts have calculated in a report that estimates there were 100,000 &#8220;excess deaths&#8221; in 18 months.</p>
<p>The rise in the death rate was mainly due to violence and much of it was caused by U.S. air strikes on towns and cities.</p>
<p>&#8220;Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq,&#8221; said Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in a report published online by The Lancet medical journal.</p>
<p><strong>&#8220;The use of air power in areas with lots of civilians appears to be killing a lot of women and children,&#8221;</strong> Roberts told Reuters.</p>
<p>The report came just days before the U.S. presidential election in which the Iraq war has been a major issue.</p>
<p>Mortality was already high in Iraq before the war because of United Nations sanctions blocking food and medical imports but the researchers described what they found as shocking. </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/28/of-course-bushco-calls-them-insurgents/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Am I Not Surprised ?</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/27/why-am-i-not-surprised/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/27/why-am-i-not-surprised/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:22:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/27/why-am-i-not-surprised/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
From the Industry Standard:
Bush campaign Web site blocks overseas visits
Tuesday, October 26 2004 @ 07:49 PM GMT
By Stacy Cowley, IDG News Service
Net surfers outside the U.S. interested in U.S. President George Bush&#8217;s re-election strategy aren&#8217;t currently able to learn about it from his campaign Web site. Visitors from a number of international locations reported hitting [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
From the <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/article.php/20041026194939604">Industry Standard</a>:</p>
<p><em>Bush campaign Web site blocks overseas visits</p>
<p>Tuesday, October 26 2004 @ 07:49 PM GMT</p>
<p>By Stacy Cowley, IDG News Service</p>
<p>Net surfers outside the U.S. interested in U.S. President George Bush&#8217;s re-election strategy aren&#8217;t currently able to learn about it from his campaign Web site. Visitors from a number of international locations reported hitting &#8220;access denied&#8221; errors as they tried to reach the site on Tuesday.</p>
<p>Web surfers in London; Paris; Oslo; Linz, Austria; and Taipei encountered a &#8220;403 Forbidden&#8221; access-denied error page when they tried to contact Bush&#8217;s Web site, GeorgeWBush.com. Surfers in the U.S. reported no problems.</p>
<p>GeorgeWBush.com is the official Web site of Bush-Cheney &#8216;04 Inc., Bush&#8217;s Arlington, Virginia-based re-election organization. The site features campaign material such as advertisements along with Bush&#8217;s position statements and policy plans. The site also includes a link to an outside site processing campaign donations; surfers both outside and inside the U.S. said they were able to reach the donation Web site.</p>
<p>A Bush-Cheney campaign spokeswoman referred questions to Michael Turk, the organization&#8217;s Internet campaign director. Turk did not return several calls seeking comment.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/27/why-am-i-not-surprised/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Aggregarious</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/aggregarious/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/aggregarious/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/aggregarious/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like playing with words &#8230; obviously 
Some of you know that over the last year-plus I&#8217;ve actually met quite a few of the bloggers whom I read, or have developed some sort of friendship / rlationship with via comments and exchanges of opinion and information.
Much has been made - pro and con - of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like playing with words &#8230; obviously <img src='http://blog.wirearchy.com/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Some of you know that over the last year-plus I&#8217;ve actually met quite a few of the bloggers whom I read, or have developed some sort of friendship / rlationship with via comments and exchanges of opinion and information.</p>
<p>Much has been made - pro and con - of all the chattering that goes on in the blogosphere, and predictably established forms of transmitting information have looked askance at this new form of interactive communication.  But advances in the capabilities keep happening &#8230; a couple of years ago it was RSS and Atom feeds, foloowed by various forms of aggregation capability.  All of this helps us to create, and follow, emergent meaning (if I remember correctly, <a href="http://doc.weblogs.com">Doc Searls</a> called it the scaffolding of knowledge, and thence meaning).</p>
<p>During these past couple of years, it has also dawned on many people that in an interconnected and interlinked world, some form of carnal representation and exchange (no, not THAT!) will also be necessary to make interacting in this interconnected world more meaningful, more purposeful, and perhaps more useful, in the sense of actionable exchange.</p>
<p>The people I read and interact with in the blogosphere are typically people I respect and admire, and from whom I can learn a lot.  I&#8217;ve decided, some time ago, to become <em>aggregarious</em>, reaching out in my own way to make more real the richness I get, personally, from the magic in the people I have met in the blogosphere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/aggregarious/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Very Clear Question From Juan Cole</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/a-very-clear-question-from-juan-cole/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/a-very-clear-question-from-juan-cole/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/a-very-clear-question-from-juan-cole/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Josh Marshall is suspicious that this major screw-up has been known to the Bush administration for some time, and that it may have pressured the Iraqi government not to mention it.
If Bush cannot even protect our troops from explosives at a sensitive facility in a country he had conquered, how is he going to protect [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.juancole.com/2004_10_01_juancole_archive.html#109868953200404436">Josh Marshall is suspicious that this major screw-up has been known to the Bush administration for some time, and that it may have pressured the Iraqi government not to mention it.</p>
<p><strong>If Bush cannot even protect our troops from explosives at a sensitive facility in a country he had conquered, how is he going to protect the American public from terrorists who have not even yet been identified?</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/26/a-very-clear-question-from-juan-cole/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I Was Going To Title This Post &#8220;Unfuckingbelieveable&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/i-was-going-to-title-this-post-unfuckingbelieveable/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/i-was-going-to-title-this-post-unfuckingbelieveable/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/i-was-going-to-title-this-post-unfuckingbelieveable/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230; and then I said to myself &#8220;oh, well &#8230; it&#8217;s just more of the same&#8221;
Even though the story is from www.cnn.com, it&#8217;s still unfuckingbelievable.
Halliburton may keep disputed money
Report: Army may let company retain billions of dollars from Iraq work, despite auditors&#8217; questions.
October 22, 2004: 7:51 AM EDT
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Army is laying [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; and then I said to myself &#8220;oh, well &#8230; it&#8217;s just more of the same&#8221;</p>
<p>Even though the story is from www.cnn.com, it&#8217;s still unfuckingbelievable.</p>
<p><em><strong>Halliburton may keep disputed money</strong></p>
<p>Report: Army may let company retain billions of dollars from Iraq work, despite auditors&#8217; questions.</p>
<p>October 22, 2004: 7:51 AM EDT</p>
<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - <strong>The Army is laying the groundwork to let Halliburton Co. keep several billion dollars paid for work in Iraq that Pentagon auditors say is questionable or unsupported by proper documentation, according to a report published Friday. </strong></p>
<p>According to Pentagon documents reviewed by the Wall Street Journal, the Army has acknowledged that the Houston-based company might never be able to account properly for some of its work, which has been probed amid accusations that Halliburton&#8217;s Kellogg Brown &#038; Root unit overbilled the government for some operations in Iraq. </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/i-was-going-to-title-this-post-unfuckingbelieveable/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nixon Was A Liberal &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/nixon-was-a-liberal/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/nixon-was-a-liberal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/nixon-was-a-liberal/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230;. who&#8217;da thunk it ?
Hunter S. Thompson weighs in, in this month&#8217;s Rolling Stone, on the absurdities of this year&#8217;s event called the election  (reminiscent of Rageboy&#8217;s style, but cleaned up to go out in public).
If Nixon were running for president today, he would be seen as a &#8220;liberal&#8221; candidate, and he would probably [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;. who&#8217;da thunk it ?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6562575?pageid=rs.Home&#038;pageregion=single7&#038;rnd=1098381631874&#038;has-player=true&#038;version=6.0.11.780">Hunter S. Thompson weighs in, in this month&#8217;s Rolling Stone</a>, on the absurdities of this year&#8217;s event called the election  (reminiscent of Rageboy&#8217;s style, but cleaned up to go out in public).</p>
<p><em>If Nixon were running for president today, he would be seen as a &#8220;liberal&#8221; candidate, and he would probably win. He was a crook and a bungler, but what the hell? Nixon was a barrel of laughs compared to this gang of thugs from the Halliburton petroleum organization who are running the White House today &#8212; and who will be running it this time next year, if we (the once-proud, once-loved and widely respected &#8220;American people&#8221;) don&#8217;t rise up like wounded warriors and whack those lying petroleum pimps out of the White House on November 2nd.</p>
<p>Nixon hated running for president during football season, but he did it anyway. Nixon was a professional politician, and I despised everything he stood for &#8212; but if he were running for president this year against the evil Bush-Cheney gang, I would happily vote for him.</p>
<p>You bet. Richard Nixon would be my Man. He was a crook and a creep and a gin-sot, but on some nights, when he would get hammered and wander around in the streets, he was fun to hang out with. He would wear a silk sweat suit and pull a stocking down over his face so nobody could recognize him. Then we would get in a cab and cruise down to the Watergate Hotel, just for laughs.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/nixon-was-a-liberal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Blogging and Smarter Conversations Will Crowd Out Mainstream PR &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/why-blogging-and-smarter-conversations-will-crowd-out-mainstream-pr/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/why-blogging-and-smarter-conversations-will-crowd-out-mainstream-pr/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/why-blogging-and-smarter-conversations-will-crowd-out-mainstream-pr/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230; more on an emerging theme, about how connected voices and minds help spread messages to the audiences that want to hear and find out.
Hugh Macleod of GapingVoid and the Hughtrain is on a roll these days, speaking out clearly about why the advertising and PR games are changing in this interlinked environmen.
Ross Rader of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; more on an emerging theme, about how connected voices and minds help spread messages to the audiences that want to hear and find out.</p>
<p>Hugh Macleod of <a href="http://www.gapingvoid.com">GapingVoid and the Hughtrain</a> is on a roll these days, speaking out clearly about why the advertising and PR games are changing in this interlinked environmen.</p>
<p>Ross Rader of Blogware has picked up on this, and adds his perspective about the changes underway.</p>
<p>From Ross&#8217;s blog (Thanks, Ross):</p>
<p><em><strong>The New Buzz: On replacing analysts and pitchmen </strong></p>
<p>gapingvoid: &#8220;Blogs build market momentum and get adoption. Ask Buzz Bruggeman, CEO of ActiveWords, about this one. He&#8217;s gotten world-class reviews in the newspapers you all love and know (just a week or so ago ActiveWords was in the New York Times). But he gets more downloads of his product when I linked to him than when a famous &#8220;USA&#8221; newspaper wrote a glowing review. They have millions of readers. What am I missing here? Yet I&#8217;ve had product managers for products that make billions every year tell me that they&#8217;ll just advertise in national newspapers and get the same &#8220;kick&#8221; that blogs will get them. (They look at my puny 4,000 readers per day and laugh. Keep laughing, but do your homework and ask Buzz about his experiences &#8212; he&#8217;s not the only one who&#8217;s noticed this. Ask Nokia (or, even the marketers at Microsoft) about how important a good link on Engadget is).&#8221;</p>
<p>This excerpt only shows up in the RSS feed of the article - presumably it has been edited out of the webpage version of the post&#8230;too bad - Hugh hacked out the most compelling part - <strong>read it again: gapingvoid is a better marketing vehicle than USA Today because of the trust relationship that Hugh has with his readers.</strong></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/22/why-blogging-and-smarter-conversations-will-crowd-out-mainstream-pr/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Underground Blogway</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/21/the-underground-blogway/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/21/the-underground-blogway/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/21/the-underground-blogway/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Underground Railway is a famous example of humanitarian support raised against an immoral society, whereby slaves in the U.S. South in the middle part of the 19th Century were helped by many caring people to make their way north, eventually crossing the US - Canada border.  They were then helped to settle in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Underground Railway is a famous example of humanitarian support raised against an immoral society, whereby slaves in the U.S. South in the middle part of the 19th Century were helped by many caring people to make their way north, eventually crossing the US - Canada border.  They were then helped to settle in Canada and begin new lives, adding another rich chapter to the development of a multicultural society of immigrants.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to believe otherwise, but I sense that GWB will win the American presidential election on November 2, 2004.  In that case, my fear for all Americans (and also us Canadians) is that daily life will become much more uncomfortable, in the sense of various aspects of authoritarian control being imposed.</p>
<p>What would make me think that?  Well, in addition to Ron Suskind&#8217;s recent NY Times Magazine piece titled Fear, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush, more and more assertive (polite Candian term) mutterings are being floated each day.  For example &#8230; whilst in Ottawa this morning I read that both Israel&#8217;s Ambassador to Canada (Alan Baker) and the US Ambassador to Canada (Paul Cellucci) stated yesterday that <em>&#8220;Canadians must realize additional restrictions on rights and freedoms are necessary to counter the relative ease with which terror groups can now infiltrate Candian society and launch attacks here, against the United States or on Israel and other foreign interests in Canada&#8221;.</em></p>
<p>The Internet, the Web and the interconnected information systems which pervade and surround our lives used to be called the Information Highway a few years back.</p>
<p>I think it may be time to plant the seeds for a new version of the support provided by the Underground Railway to beleagured people  &#8230; I am calling this the Underground Blogway.</p>
<p>I will undertake to help, in whatever way I can, anyone who wishes to explore the possibilities of moving to Canada.  This help may consist of information, links, connections to people (I know people who may be helpful in Toronto, Montreal, the Maritimes, Vancouver), shelter for periods of time (if I can get enough people interested who would be willing to share a bedroom, a spare garage, a vacant house or apartment, and if it comes to this, food and money.</p>
<p>There are seriously troubling times a&#8217;coming, I think.  I hope not, but I am worried &#8230; for you, my American friends.  And probably &#8230; dammit &#8230; for us up here in Canada.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/21/the-underground-blogway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>William Gibson Cites John Cleese on Bushco</title>
		<link>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/20/william-gibson-cites-john-cleese-on-bushco/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/20/william-gibson-cites-john-cleese-on-bushco/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2004 23:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Main Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/20/william-gibson-cites-john-cleese-on-bushco/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Found on Gibson&#8217;s blog:
How many Bush administration officials does it take to change a light bulb?
None. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with that light bulb.
There is no need to change anything. We made the right decision and nothing has happened to change our minds.
People who criticize this light bulb now, just because it doesn&#8217;t work anymore, supported [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
Found on <a href="http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/blog/blog">Gibson&#8217;s blog:</a></p>
<p><em>How many Bush administration officials does it take to change a light bulb?</p>
<p>None. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with that light bulb.</p>
<p>There is no need to change anything. We made the right decision and nothing has happened to change our minds.</p>
<p>People who criticize this light bulb now, just because it doesn&#8217;t work anymore, supported us when we first screwed it in, and when these flip-floppers insist on saying that it is burned out, they are merely giving aid and encouragement to the Forces of Darkness.</p>
<p>&#8211; John Cleese</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.wirearchy.com/2004/10/20/william-gibson-cites-john-cleese-on-bushco/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
