Bush describes Cunningham's actions as "Outrageous."

From a NY Times article today, found HERE:

Mr. Bush, answering a question about Mr. Cunningham's resignation from a reporter in El Paso, said members of Congress must take their legal and ethical obligations seriously.

"The idea of a congressman taking money is outrageous," the president said. "And Congressman Cunningham is going to realize that he has broken the law and is going to pay a serious price, which he should."

Flamboyant Incompetence

I love this phrase “flamboyant incompetent,” used in the following article to describe yet another Representative (Dana Rohrabacher) who is under investigation for fraud in connection with optioning a $23,000 screenplay about Homeland Security.

Another California Republican, Representative Dana Rohrabacher from Orange County, has acknowledged receiving a $23,000 option on a screenplay from a Hollywood producer who last month was charged with multiple counts of fraud in connection with an investment scheme.

Mr. Rohrabacher acknowledged introducing the producer, Joseph Medawar, to several officials in Washington, with the understanding that Mr. Medawar was working on a television series about the Department of Homeland Security.

Mr. Rohrabacher said that the House ethics committee had approved his screenplay deal with Mr. Medawar and that he was unaware of any possible fraud.

"I have not seen all the evidence," he said. "Whether he is a flamboyant incompetent or he's a con man will be determined by the jury."

Flamboyant Incompetence. . .that could describe a lot of things: the president, our “representatives” in congress as a whole, Hollywood, the F.B.I. . .you name it, the list would go on, and on. . .

Randy Cunningham's $1.675 Million Crib

HERE is a link to a news story from July 1st when the Feds raided U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham's home. Of course, he denied any wrong doing at the time. I do not recall hearing about the Feds raiding his home, which is interesting because in the article it states:

Agents spent hours combing Cunningham's home, an action his attorneys called "strong-arm tactics" designed to generate headlines.

Here is a picture of his $1.675 million Home.

An Example of "Unwarranted Influence" by the Military-Industrial Complex

I think the following excerpts from Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation on January 17, 1961 provide a good backdrop for the story that follows it:

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

The following story is from the NY TIMES:

Lawmaker Quits After He Pleads Guilty to Bribes

By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: November 29, 2005

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 28 - Representative Randy Cunningham, a Republican from San Diego, resigned from Congress on Monday, hours after pleading guilty to taking at least $2.4 million in bribes to help friends and campaign contributors win military contracts.

Randy Cunningham "enriched himself through his position and violated the trust of those who put him there," U.S. Attorney Carol Lam said.
Mr. Cunningham, a highly decorated Navy fighter pilot in Vietnam, tearfully acknowledged his guilt in a statement read outside the federal courthouse in San Diego.

"The truth is, I broke the law, concealed my conduct and disgraced my office," he said. "I know that I will forfeit my freedom, my reputation, my worldly possessions and, most importantly, the trust of my friends and family."

Mr. Cunningham, 63, pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion and one count of conspiracy to commit bribery, tax evasion, wire fraud and mail fraud. He faces up to 10 years in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and forfeitures.

Prosecutors said he received cash, cars, rugs, antiques, furniture, yacht club fees, moving expenses and vacations from four unnamed co-conspirators in exchange for aid in winning military contracts. None of this income was reported to the Internal Revenue Service or on the congressman's financial disclosure forms, the government said.

Mr. Cunningham, who is known as Duke, lived while in Washington on a 42-foot yacht, named the Duke-Stir, owned by one of the military contractors that received tens of millions of dollars in federal contracts that prosecutors said Mr. Cunningham helped steer its way.

Mr. Cunningham, who is known for his combative conservatism and his emotional outbursts, served on the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee and as chairman of the House Intelligence subcommittee on terrorism and human intelligence.

"He did the worst thing an elected official can do," Carol C. Lam, the United States attorney, said in a statement. "He enriched himself through his position and violated the trust of those who put him there."

Mr. Cunningham's plea adds to the ethics cloud over the Republican-controlled Congress and the Bush White House.

In the Senate, Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee and the majority leader, is under scrutiny by the Securities and Exchange Commission for the timing of his trades in the stock of his family's health care company. In the House, Representative Tom DeLay, Republican of Texas, was forced to step down as majority leader after he was indicted on conspiracy and money laundering charges.

In a separate Justice Department investigation, Michael Scanlon, a former spokesman for Mr. DeLay, pleaded guilty last week to bribery. Prosecutors said Mr. Scanlon was part of a conspiracy to defraud Indian tribes and win legislative favors from lawmakers in return for campaign donations, meals, entertainment and other benefits. A former White House aide has also been indicted in that investigation, which is centered on Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist and an ally of Mr. DeLay who worked with Mr. Scanlon. As part of his plea, Mr. Scanlon agreed to cooperate in the investigation.

In addition, I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was indicted last month on charges of perjury and false statements in the investigation of the leaking of the name of a C.I.A. operative. Other White House officials, including the senior political adviser Karl Rove, remain under investigation in that case.

Democrats in Congress hope that the legal and ethical woes afflicting Republicans will weaken the party in policy debates and at the polls next November. Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, called Mr. Cunningham's acceptance of bribes an "egregious act" that was symptomatic of Republican values.

"This offense is just the latest example of the culture of corruption that pervades the Republican-controlled Congress, which ignores the needs of the American people to serve wealthy special interests and their cronies," Ms. Pelosi said in a statement.

The charging document said that in addition to the other gifts and services, Mr. Cunningham received from several unnamed co-conspirators a Rolls Royce, a graduation party for his daughter, a $200,000 down payment on a condominium and the payment of capital gains taxes.

Federal authorities said that Mr. Cunningham was cooperating with the continuing investigation and that further charges involving the bribery conspiracy were likely.

Mr. Cunningham entered his plea before Judge Larry A. Burns of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. He was fingerprinted and photographed and released on his own recognizance.

Judge Burns set sentencing for Feb. 27. Mr. Cunningham, in his statement, said he expected to do time in prison. "In my life, I have known great joy and great sorrow. And now I know great shame," he said. "I cannot undo what I have done. But I can atone."

Under California law, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has 14 days to call a special election to fill Mr. Cunningham's seat. The election must occur within 120 days.

Mr. Cunningham's troubles began last summer when the Copley News Service and The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that Mitchell J. Wade, the founder of MZM Inc., a military contracting firm, bought Mr. Cunningham's home in Del Mar for $1,675,000 in 2003 and sold it nine months later for $975,000, a $700,000 loss.

Mr. Cunningham denied any wrongdoing in the house sale, but announced a few weeks after the reports appeared that he would not seek a ninth term in Congress in November 2006.

Mr. Cunningham used the profits from the sale to buy a luxury home in Rancho Santa Fe for $2.55 million, which he and his wife, Nancy, have since put up for sale. Under the plea agreement announced on Monday, he will forfeit the Rancho Santa Fe house and nearly $2 million in cash and home furnishings.

Iraq on the Record

HERE is a link to the "Iraq on the Record" database, which is:

. . .a searchable collection of 237 specific misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq made by the five Administration officials most responsible for providing public information and shaping public opinion on Iraq: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice.The Iraq on the Record Report is a comprehensive examination of these statements.

No Exit Strategy

Door thwarts quick exit for Bush

President George W Bush tried to make a quick exit from a news conference in Beijing on Sunday - only to find himself thwarted by locked doors.

After answering just six questions from a group of US reporters, the president strode away heading towards the door.

President Bush tugged at both handles on the double doors before admitting: "I was trying to escape. Obviously, it didn't work."

Mr Bush was in China in the latest stop of his East Asia tour.

His earlier meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao did not permit media questions.

Mr Bush answered a range of questions before one reporter said: "Respectfully, sir - you know we're always respectful - in your statement this morning with President Hu, you seemed a little off your game, you seemed to hurry through your statement. There was a lack of enthusiasm. Was something bothering you?"

The president answered: "Have you ever heard of jet lag? Well, good. That answers your question."

The reporter asked for a follow-up question but the president then thanked the attending journalists and said "No you may not" as he walked away.

He strode from the lectern to the door, trying both handles and then breaking into a laugh.

An aide escorted him to the correct exit and on to dinner at the Great Hall of the People.

From HERE.

Withdrawal of Troops: No Matter When, It's Not Going to be Good

The following are excerpts from an NY TIMES article titled "Fast Withdrawal of G.I.'s Is Urged by Key Democrat," published November 18, 2005.

Representative John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, a Vietnam combat veteran who voted for the Iraq war, said that after more than two years of combat, American forces had united a disparate array of insurgents in a seemingly endless cycle of violence that was impeding Iraq's progress toward stability and self-governance. He said the 153,000 American troops in Iraq should be pulled out within six months.

"Our military has done everything that has been asked of them. It is time to bring them home," Mr. Murtha said, at times choking back tears. Mr. Murtha's proposal, which goes well beyond the phased withdrawal of United States forces from Iraq that other moderate Democrats have proposed, stunned many Republicans who quickly held their own news conference to criticize the plan.

[President Bush, in South Korea, continued on Friday to be questioned by reporters about the debate over Iraq. His press secretary issued an unusually blistering statement responding to Mr. Murtha's call for a pullout, declaring that the Democrat was "endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party." Page A16.]

Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois said in a statement that Mr. Murtha and Democratic supporters had "adopted a policy of cut and run."

"They would prefer that the United States surrender to terrorists who would harm innocent Americans," Mr. Hastert said.

[. . .]But the talk of Washington was Jack Murtha, 73, a blunt former Marine drill instructor who served a combat tour in Vietnam and retired as a colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve after 37 years of service.

[. . .]"Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency," said Mr. Murtha, who visited Iraq in late August. "We have become a catalyst for the violence."

If approved by the House and Senate, Mr. Murtha's resolution would force the president to withdraw United States troops "at the earliest practicable date," which he said could be six months. Under his plan, the Pentagon would retain a quick-reaction force in the region, as well as marines within a few sailing days.

When asked about Mr. Cheney's remarks on Wednesday, Mr. Murtha replied sarcastically: "I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

In the Vietnam era, Mr. Cheney had five deferments and did not serve in the military.

When it comes to the withdrawal of troops, I don’t know what to think other than the fact that they should have never been sent there in the first place.

It’ not going to be good no matter when the troops are withdrawn. From everything I read it appears that the number of “insurgents” is growing, not dwindling. The idea that Iraq could ever have been stabilized after such an “intervention” is a joke. Whenever we leave there we are going to look like we left the Iraqis to clean up the mess that we created. What a black mark on our nation’s history.

His Noodly Appendage

The following is an open letter to various school boards from The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster arguing that an alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution:

I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.

It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.

Some find that hard to believe, so it may be helpful to tell you a little more about our beliefs. We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. What these people don’t understand is that He built the world to make us think the earth is older than it really is. For example, a scientist may perform a carbon-dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon-14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen-14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half-life of Carbon-14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.

I’m sure you now realize how important it is that your students are taught this alternate theory. It is absolutely imperative that they realize that observable evidence is at the discretion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to teach our beliefs without wearing His chosen outfit, which of course is full pirate regalia. I cannot stress the importance of this enough, and unfortunately cannot describe in detail why this must be done as I fear this letter is already becoming too long. The concise explanation is that He becomes angry if we don’t.

You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.

In conclusion, thank you for taking the time to hear our views and beliefs. I hope I was able to convey the importance of teaching this theory to your students. We will of course be able to train the teachers in this alternate theory. I am eagerly awaiting your response, and hope dearly that no legal action will need to be taken. I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.

Sincerely Yours,

Bobby Henderson, concerned citizen.

P.S. I have included an artistic drawing of Him creating a mountain, trees, and a midget. Remember, we are all His creatures.

The drawings are located on the site's homepage.

The Panspermia Hypothesis

Did life arise from an "extraterrestrial seed"? New research on this "Panspermia Hypothesis" indicates that microorganisms could have survived a journey from Mars to Earth.

Most scientists have long assumed that life on Earth is a homegrown phenomenon. According to the conventional hypothesis, the earliest living cells emerged as a result of chemical evolution on our planet billions of years ago in a process called abiogenesis. The alternative possibility--that living cells or their precursors arrived from space--strikes many people as science fiction. Developments over the past decade, however, have given new credibility to the idea that Earth's biosphere could have arisen from an extraterrestrial seed.

MORE From an article in Scientific American titled: "Did Life Come from Another World?"

Use of White Phosphorus in Iraq

MPs are worried by the admission by US forces that they used the controversial substance in the Iraqi city of Falluja - something they had previously denied.

White phosphorus can burn flesh and some MPs say its use will hand a propaganda victory to Iraqi insurgents.

Both the US and UK Governments deny using the weapon against civilians but there are calls for a UN inquiry.

. . .

Fellow anti-war Labour MP Alan Simpson told BBC News there was hypocrisy over the issue as Tony Blair had sent troops to war over Iraq's alleged chemical weapons.

"What we are forced to address is that in a post-war occupation of Iraq, the coalition forces - British and American - have also used chemical weapons."

Mike Gapes, the Labour chairman of the Commons foreign affairs select committee, said white phosphorus was defined as an "incendiary", not a chemical weapon.

He suggested treaties on chemical weapons should be strengthened so they covered the substance.

Mr Gapes said the way the Americans had mishandled the issue by initially denying using white phosphorus was a "public relations disaster for them".

From a BBC NEWS story titled: "UK used white phosphorus in Iraq"

Orphaned Radiation

I posted this on my blog, but I thought I'd post it here as well to give you yahoos something to talk about:

The following excerpts are from an old article, titled “Database exposes threat from ‘lost’ nuclear material.” It was published in the Stanford Report on March 6th, 2002.

Steinhausler, a visiting scholar at Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation, said that orphaned radioactive material presents a real threat because victims may not know that they have been exposed. "Many countries don't even have a central register of radioactive materials," he said. "If they don't know what they have, they don't know what they've lost."

A case in point: In 1997, La-Z-Boy Inc. made about 6,000 recliner chairs with steel from Brazil that was accidentally contaminated by radiation. About 1,000 chairs were sold in the United States before the contamination was discovered.

"The best description of the threat scenario is the U.S. itself," which has one of the best registration systems for radioactive material, said Steinhausler. Every year, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission receives 200 reports of lost, stolen or abandoned radioactive sources. "If the U.S. loses control of a registered source almost every second day, what do you expect goes on in the rest of the world? Whether it is in scrap metal or in terrorism, you will meet it again."

I love the fact that we lose control of nuclear weapons material “every second day,” yet we were concerned that Saddam had non-weapons grade low-enriched uranium (as indicated HERE) that is commonly used in power reactors (as indicated HERE).

Bush's New "Stra-t-jer-ee"

It appears that Bush’s new strategy for deflating the critique of his Administration's “use” of prewar intelligence is to do one of two things:

1) Assert that democrats saw the same threat to Iraq that his administration saw, or more pointedly, that they voted to go to war based on the exact same evidence he had.

This is simply not the case. Recall that:

When the resolution authorizing force came up in October 2002, 29 Democrats in the Senate and 81 in the House voted in favor, versus 21 in the Senate and 126 in the House who voted against it.

. . .

At a news conference Monday on Capitol Hill, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, ran through a list of topics the administration had cited to show that Iraq was a threat that had to be dealt with, including Mr. Hussein's efforts to acquire nuclear material and aluminum tubes that could be used in a nuclear program and terrorist training camps in Iraq.

"All of these things simply were not true," Mr. Reid said. "The administration knew that, but they did not share that with me or anyone else in Congress that I know of."

You see - the democrats did not have the exact same evidence that the Bush Administration had. They were presented with the Administration’s spin on the evidence.

2) Point to two government studies, which find that prewar intelligence, while admittedly flawed, had not been twisted by the political pressure of his Administration: the Senate Intelligence Committee, in 2004, and the Robb-Silberman commission, in March 2005.

But

. . .neither panel compared public statements by Mr. Bush and his aides with the intelligence available at the time, or reviewed internal White House documents, including a draft of a speech to the United Nations Security Council later delivered by Colin L. Powell, then the secretary of state, for further evidence of how intelligence had been used.

The Robb-Silberman commission was established by the White House, not Congress, and in releasing its report last March, Judge Laurence Silberman, one of the two co-chairmen, said, "Our executive order did not direct us to deal with the use of intelligence by policy makers, and all of us were agreed that that was not part of our inquiry."

The scope of the initial Congressional review, by the Senate Intelligence Committee, was limited in March 2004, under an agreement between Republicans and Democrats, after Republicans blocked Democratic efforts to address issues involving the administration's use of intelligence.

Republicans regarded that issue as too sensitive for a presidential-election year, but their stance prompted sharp protests from Democrats, including Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the panel. This month, Democrats closed the Senate for two hours and threatened to shut it down if Republicans did not agree to move ahead with that part of the inquiry.

The above block quotes (written in red) in this post are from an NY Times article titled "A Reminder of How Debate Over Prewar Intelligence Continues to Shadow Bush," by RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL, published: November 15, 2005.

Those Wishy-Washy Democrats

The follow excerpts are from a NY TIMES article titled

"His Image Tarnished, Bush Seeks to Restore Credibility" by RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DAVID S. CLOUD (Published: November 11, 2005).

================================

But even as they begin to address what comes next, Democrats are drawing blood with new attacks on how the nation got into the war in the first place. A poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan research group, found that 43 percent of Americans believe that the American and British governments lied about Iraq's weapons to justify the invasion, up from 31 percent early last year.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted last week found that 40 percent of Americans believe Mr. Bush is honest and trustworthy, down from 53 percent 18 months ago and 70 percent three years ago.

The White House's effort to stop the erosion is centered on defining the president's critics as Democrats who voted for the war based on the same intelligence Mr. Bush saw but have switched positions, often under pressure from their party's left wing.

"I point out that some of the critics today believed themselves in 2002 that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction," Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, said Thursday at a news briefing. "They stated that belief, and they voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq because they believed Saddam Hussein posed a dangerous threat to the American people. For those critics to ignore their own past statements, exposes the hollowness of their current attacks."

================================

Despite Bush's plummet in popularity, I think the Democrats are going to have a hard time shaking off this "hypocrite" label that Bush and the Republicans are going to try branding them with. . .in part because it actually carries some weight. None of the so-called "evidence" I've seen ever justified going to war with Iraq when we should have been seeking Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. I don't know what the Democrats were thinking when they voted for the war. . .people were pointing out holes in the evidence before, during and after it was presented (including the "fact" that Saddam was seeking uranium from Africa). Maybe it will serve the Democrats right to feel the sting of this accusation, but hopefully it won't take away from Bush's plummet in popularity. I'm curious. . .how bad do things have to get before people start calling for Bush's impeachment. . .do you think there is any chance of that happening?

"Intelligence Failures"

The following are excerpts from a NY Times article “Official Reveals Budget for U.S. Intelligence” by SCOTT SHANE, published on November 8, 2005.
Mary Margaret Graham, a 27-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency and now the deputy director of national intelligence for collection, slipped up and reveled that the annual intelligence budget was $44 billion.

“Last year, a federal judge refused to order the C.I.A. to release its budget totals for 1947 to 1970 - except for the 1963 budget, which Mr. Aftergood showed had already been revealed elsewhere.”

“In court and in response to inquiries, intelligence officials have argued that disclosing the total spying budget would create pressure to reveal more spending details, and that such revelations could aid the nation's adversaries.”

"Maybe there's a fear that if the American people knew what was being spent on intelligence, they'd be even more upset at intelligence failures," Loch K. Johnson, an intelligence historian said.

At Least They're Trying

I’ve been out of the loop and just about missed this news story:

Heated day in D.C. leads to more prewar probes: Following unusual closed Senate session, Democrats claim victory

The Democrats can "claim victory" all they want, but the results of this closed-door session aren’t likely to go anywhere with the strangle hold that the Republicans have. At least the Democrats are trying to press the issue. I’ll give them that.

Check this out

Follow these steps:

1) Go to Google's website (http://www.google.com/)
2) Type in the word "failure"
3) Instead of pressing "Google Search," press the adjacent button titled: "I'm Feeling Lucky."