Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Reason Writers Around Town
Has the U.S. played right into Osama's hands? In his column for FoxNews.com, Radley Balko fears the worst.
|9.12.07 @ 4:01PM|#
There is some evidence that Iraq had WMD and was responsible for 9-11 because they were known to have bought aluminum, and maybe uranium.
Marcvs|9.12.07 @ 4:06PM|#
I'm sorry, I was going to make a reasoned argument, but after 6
years there is only one thing you can say to people that state
things like you did George:
You are a fucking idiot.
|9.12.07 @ 4:06PM|#
Hey, I thought FoxNews was supposed to be a mouthpiece for
Bush.
Anyway, good article, it articulates the point without sounding
shrill. I'm happy to see it on Fox and hope it'll have some
impact.
Marcvs|9.12.07 @ 4:11PM|#
If so, then I apologize, and my sarcasm detector is on the fritz. It's hard to tell sometimes on here, though.
|9.12.07 @ 4:16PM|#
Just for the sake of argiment, let's concede that the president truly believed than Saddam eas cooperating with Al Queda and posessed WMDs. Let's also concede that he desired to bring (force?) a secular democratic government to Iraq. He knows better now, he knew better years ago. His actions indicate either delusion or an immoral disregard for the live s of Iraqis and U.S. servicemenbers alike. I see no reason to forgive him or his supportters in congress. Those who have said "I was wrong, let's get out." I'll give credit for honesty and the ability to doubt their own infallibity. We will be reaping what he has sown for decades to come. Worst president ever? He's in the bottom three.
|9.12.07 @ 4:27PM|#
J sub D:
Just curious, who do you consider the two other worst presidents?
Lincoln & FDR?
Episiarch|9.12.07 @ 4:34PM|#
They published that on FoxNews.com? Wow. That's
surprising.
Radley has had articles on Fox for years. If you actually think Fox
is any worse in its way than any of the other networks, you're
delusional or partisan. In fact, other than Stossel on ABC(?), Fox
is the only outlet I've seen ever give any real space to
libertarian ideas.
|9.12.07 @ 4:44PM|#
Yeah well, try finding the link to Balko's article from the Fox home page. No fair doing a search. Here's a hint, it's wedged between "What is Robert Redford's Problem with America" and "Mourning, Remembering Jennifer Dunn"
|9.12.07 @ 4:46PM|#
Fox is the only outlet I've seen ever give any real space to
libertarian ideas.
Which they then all have a good laugh at
|9.12.07 @ 4:49PM|#
I'll grant you though, I also hate all major news networks. CNN
is just a bunch of hacks.
I'm a personal fan of CSPAN, expecially when they have those
call-in sessions where they have 3 lines (1 for republicans, 1 for
democrats, and 1 for independents). They really crawl out of the
woodwork for that one!
Episiarch|9.12.07 @ 4:49PM|#
Which they then all have a good laugh at
For all I know, that may be, but at least they did it. When you see
a libertarian piece on CNN you let me know, laughs or no.
I'm not saying Fox is TEH GRE4TEST, but at least give them credit
for printing something their competition won't even let see the
light of day.
|9.12.07 @ 4:55PM|#
ust curious, who do you consider the two other worst
presidents? Lincoln & FDR?
James Buchanan and Richard Nixon.
|9.12.07 @ 5:02PM|#
Buchanan let the Union dissolve like a prick. I'd replace Nixon with Wilson, but Buchanan is definitely the worst.
|9.12.07 @ 5:03PM|#
Radley, please, please, please post the mail you get for
this one. Please.
Especially the ones you get from the people on Little Green
Footballs.
I need something to depress me.
Seriously, though: Good post, Radley.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 5:04PM|#
We were a Republic, you can't blame him for the civil war. If you want to blame anyone for it try Lincoln, he didn't even appear on any ballot in any of the states that formed the confederacy.
|9.12.07 @ 5:06PM|#
I was gonna say...
HATE MAIL FEST!!!
I wonder if the word 'demoncrat' will appear. I wait with baitin'
breath.
|9.12.07 @ 5:07PM|#
I prefer demonrat, myself. Bonus points if it's written in full caps, double bonus if it's written in partial caps, like: demonRAT.
|9.12.07 @ 5:09PM|#
WTF did Buchanan do?
While the union was disintegrating and the southern states were
seceding, not a goddamn thing.
|9.12.07 @ 5:09PM|#
"""Their best hope is to scare us into rash, ill-considered
actions like overextending our military, alienating our allies, and
doing away with the open society and civil liberties that define
who we are."""
It's interesting how much Bush has contributed to make it a job
well done.
|9.12.07 @ 5:11PM|#
I'd replace Nixon with Wilson,...
If we were talking the four worst presidents, Wilson makes my list
too.
|9.12.07 @ 5:14PM|#
They published that on FoxNews.com?
The fun begins when Radley posts the letters to the editor.
|9.12.07 @ 5:18PM|#
Radley, please, please, please post the mail you get for
this one. Please.
Seconded. Please do it!
|9.12.07 @ 5:22PM|#
Marcvs,
I have to agree, I'm afraid that I voted for GW Twice! Although,
given the choices I had I can still make the argument that he was
at least nominally better. Plus, I live in California so my vote
didn't count.
Gee is that the most pathetic rationalization you ever read or
what.
Yes, I am afraid marcvs is correct Bush is a fucking idiot. I'll
add the evidence:
1) squandared a trillion dollar surplus, by giving a great tax
break to his buddies.
2) Failed to close the deal on Afganistan, Fuck what would it have
taken, another six months of concerted effort?
3) Failed to listen to his generals. Several said it would take at
least 250,000 troops to conquer and pacify Iraq. Bush tried to do
it on the cheap and created a quagmire.
4) Installed Paul Bremmer as the head of Iraqi reconstruction.
Bremmer brought in a bunch of neocons, a bunch of homeschooled
ninies who wanted to play monopoly in Iraq by privatizing the whole
fucking country. The result being they treated Iraq as a giant
chance to create the perfect neocon utopia. When that didn't work
they went home, leaving Iraq in ruins.
5) Failed to fire George Tenet on September 12.
6) Failed to fire George Tenet six months after no weapons of Mass
destruction in Iraq.
7) Gave George Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom. My god
WTF?
8) When the army and Marines were beginning to be stretched thin in
2004 and 2005 failed to ask Congress to increase defense spending
to increase the overall size of the armed forces. Thus, in 2007
with some progress in Iraq the US is unable to continue combat
operations in Iraq at current levels without actually hurting our
national security.
9) Hired and listened to Donald Rumsfeld, who's "light footprint"
strategy in Iraq sent in a force too small to pacify the country.
Remember Don was the same Moron who brought us the end of the Viet
Nam War.
10) Failed to Fire Don Rumsfeld after the 2004 Presidential
election when it was safe to do so, instead kept him in office for
another two years to further destroy our armed forces.
11) Failed to reconfigure our armed forces. Although the U.S. has
been facing asymetrical warfare for over two decades the U.S. still
fails to adequately train our troops in counter insurgency.
Regards
Joe Dokes
|9.12.07 @ 5:25PM|#
One thing that's unmistakable throughout the book is that without Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri, there could not have been a Sept. 11
OMG! That's not the 9/11 Truth! Radley must be one of the insiders
who planned the 9/11 false flag op!
:-)
|9.12.07 @ 5:27PM|#
Dokes-
I agree with everything you wrote except the tax cuts, which I
think were good--of course he didn't cut spending so, that kind of
makes it a wash. I can add to your list
The so-called "No Child Left Behind", a huge federal intrusion into
what should be a state and local issue, education
Medicare Part D, the biggest entitlement program since Lyndon
Johnson pushing us further down to the road towards federal
bankruptcy
Signing McCain-Feingold, a huge affront to freedom of speech
Expanding the powers of the executive branch enough to make Richard
Nixon blush
Choosing two of the worst attorney generals in modern memory
In short, hes combined the big government spending of Lyndon
Johnson with the paranoid, over-reaching executive branch of
Richard Nixon.
|9.12.07 @ 5:36PM|#
JBinMO--
The United States is not a league, and hasn't been since the
Articles of Confederation. States can't enter and leave as the
please, it would lead to nothing but strife and war. I don't like
Lincoln's over-reaching in civil liberties, but he made the right
decision in not letting the lower south seceede.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 5:38PM|#
I understand that, my point was that you can't blame James Buchanan for the Civil War.
|9.12.07 @ 5:40PM|#
I understand that, my point was that you can't blame James
Buchanan for the Civil War.
Oh, my fault. I thought you were one of those "LINCOLN IS TEH EVIL"
types.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 5:40PM|#
I do wonder however if the representatives from the colonies knew their states could not leave when they joined. Right now all the european counrties think they will be able to leave the EU if they want. I bet in a few hundred years their decendants will find that is not the case.
|9.12.07 @ 5:42PM|#
I do wonder however if the representatives from the colonies
knew their states could not leave when they joined.
They probably believed they could leave if they were ever denied
effective political representation, or suffered real tyranny. I.e.,
some dictatorial President says they no longer have representation
in Congress or something along those lines. But the South left for
a very petty reason--because their sectional party lost an
election.
|9.12.07 @ 5:42PM|#
You can blame him more than Lincoln. The real people to blame, though, are the bellicose idiots in the South who were perfectly willing to destroy the country.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 5:51PM|#
When I talk to europeans, they tell me they can leave the EU whenever they want. I wonder if you would have gotten the same answer from the people of South Carolina in 1790.
|9.12.07 @ 5:52PM|#
When I talk to europeans, they tell me they can leave the EU
whenever they want. I wonder if you would have gotten the same
answer from the people of South Carolina in 1790.
South Carolina always thinks they can leave.
Outside of there, it probably would depend on who you ask.
|9.12.07 @ 5:54PM|#
Good article Radley...the only thing missing is what should be done about the situation we find ourselves in.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 5:57PM|#
Neither our constitution nor the EU charter/constitution say you can or cannot.
|9.12.07 @ 5:58PM|#
Radley (or other educated commenter),
Just curious. You mention in the piece that "we now know" that the
Iraq war was planned before the 9/11 attacks. Where's the evidence
on that? I'm not claiming to know it's not the case, I'd just like
to know if there really is solid proof that Bush would have made
the pitch to go into Iraq without 9/11 to grease the wheels.
|9.12.07 @ 5:58PM|#
Cesar,
Excellent post particularly this--
"In short, he's combined the big government spending of Lyndon
Johnson with the paranoid, over-reaching executive branch of
Richard Nixon."
Probably the best criticism of GW EVER!!
As far as worst presidents. GW has to rank right at least in the
top ten, if not the top 5. Let's see who else sucked:
Lyndon Johnson-- Vietnam fiasco and the Great Society. Liberals try
to pin Vietnam on Ike, but there were fewer than five hundred
advisors in Vietnam when Ike left office. The civil rights act and
voting rights act were perhaps the most important social gains made
(although most on this board would disagree since it usurped state
power.) The Great Society has had the distinction of almost undoing
all the gains of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts.
Nixon-- He really didn't have any secret plan to end the Vietnam
war, so he let it drag on another five years so another 25K men
could be killed. Watergate was perhaps the most serious and
substantial breech of trust and the constitution by any elected
official.
U.S. Grant-- Proof that competence in one area does not mean
competence in all areas. Scandal ridden adminstration.
Andrew Johnson-- Almost impeached due to political incompetence.
Nearly destroyed the office of the President.
Regards
Joe Dokes
|9.12.07 @ 5:58PM|#
Radley, please, please, please post the mail you get for
this one. Please.
Seconded. Please do it!
Me three!
|9.12.07 @ 6:03PM|#
Another vote for posting the hate mail, Radley. Work's stressful lately. Need to laugh.
|9.12.07 @ 6:04PM|#
Buchanan arguably allowed the Civil War to happen. Speaking of
that period, Lincoln could be simultaneously labeled good and
terrible, depending on how much you credit or blame him for certain
actions.
Don't forget Carter, either.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 6:13PM|#
Buchanan was a lame duck president, lincoln had already been elected jst hadn't taken office yet and his mittary was in "the West", even if hed had disptched notices to recall them right away, they probably would not have made it back before Buchanan left office.
|9.12.07 @ 6:55PM|#
although most on this board would disagree since it usurped
state power
Not to get too far OT here, but that is not the (real, at
least) reason most people on this board would give for opposing
something. In case you haven't noticed, libertarians are not all
that infatuated with state power of any kind, be it national or
local. Most libertarians are concerned with federalism, to the
extent they are, only for pragmatic reasons tied to the most
practical way of defending individual freedom. True philosophical
opposition from libertarians is founded on a government usurping
individual power, if you will, not from usurping another
government's power.
|9.12.07 @ 7:01PM|#
Don't forget Carter, either.
Carter doesn't make my list. He was completely ineffectual, but
he's got a lot of company among the 42 who have held the
office.
JBinMO|9.12.07 @ 7:02PM|#
"True philosophical opposition from libertarians is founded on a
government usurping individual power, if you will, not from
usurping another government's power."
That is correct on its' face, but when the states had more power it
sort of extended the seperation of powers. If the state government
had more power, than it would not be as big a deal if the excutive
brance tried to increase its' powere over the ledistative and
judicial.
|9.12.07 @ 7:12PM|#
I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but it's a sad day when Reason is referring to Fox for the news.
|9.12.07 @ 7:17PM|#
Fox News is not a mouthpiece for Bush. Fox News is not a
mouthpiece for conservatism.
Fox News is the volunteer house organ of the Republican Party. When
it helped the Republicans to build up Bush's image, they fellated
him. Now that he's unredeemable damaged goods, they kick him
around.
iih|9.12.07 @ 7:22PM|#
JLE:
Indeed -- especially that it is 2 days after Dr. Paul gets
mistreated by Bill O'Reilly. And 9 days after he was setup by Fox
in the GOP debate. Sad indeed.
|9.12.07 @ 7:22PM|#
Worst three presidents, in alphabetical order:
Bush the Lesser, Andrew Jackson, Richard Nixon
So far, on the Minnesotans have taken that criminal, idiot
genocidaire's name off the annual party dinner. Good for them.
|9.12.07 @ 7:33PM|#
Anyway, about the topic at hand, Balko's is a fantastic article
and probably the best short piece I've seen on the topic for
concisely laying out just how terribly wrong the US has been in its
actions since 9/11. It would be comical if it wasn't so deadly
serious just how inept this administration has been in dealing with
Al-Qaeda.
Actually inept is too kind - if it were only inept we'd be much
better off. But, as Balko explains, Bush's actions actually
produced precisely the best-case scenario for Al-Qaeda while
simultaneously destroying the lives of tens of thousands and
squandering hundreds of billions of dollars.
As some others have pointed out, I could even forgive an honest
mistake about the relevance of Iraq and the need to remove Saddam
fueled in part by the anger and confusion following 9/11. But,
blindly refusing to reflect on the situation in the years since and
come to some re-evaluation in a desperate attempt to save face for
that initial mistake is simply criminal.
The sad fact is that it would have been much better had Bush simply
done nothing after 9/11. That isn't to say doing nothing was the
correct response - I think going after and killing or capturing
Osama and his lieutenants and dismantling the Taliban was entirely
justified. It is only a testament to how disastrously wrong his
response has been that doing nothing would have been so vastly
superior to his actual actions these last six years.
|9.12.07 @ 7:37PM|#
joe, worst three presidents ever:
FDR, Wilson, Harding
The three you named aren't even close (well, OK, maybe Nixon
...)
|9.12.07 @ 7:39PM|#
I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but it's a sad day
when Reason is referring to Fox for the news.
Uh, they weren't referring to Fox for the news, they were linking
to Reason Senior Editor Radley Balko's column which Fox has
published for several years. Unless you think Balko is a mouthpiece
for the GOP I see no reason to lament linking to them (and, if you
do think Balko is a mouthpiece for the GOP you obviously
haven't been paying attention).
|9.12.07 @ 7:42PM|#
Yeah, the FDR and Lincoln things just advertise your
lunacy.
Sorry, that's just the truth.
Skoal|9.12.07 @ 7:49PM|#
FOX NEWS? CNN? BAH. THE URKOBOLD GETS ALL OF HIS NEWS FROM
HSN.
Hair Style Network?
|9.12.07 @ 7:50PM|#
Naming FDR or Lincoln is like naming Reagan, or Carter, or
Clinton.
Fine, you don't like them. A little perspective, please!
|9.12.07 @ 7:52PM|#
Worst three: James Buchannan, Woodrow Wilson, and believe it or
not James Madison. Yes, Madison did great things before
the Presidency but he was very ineffective in office. He did not
conduct the War of 1812 all that well.
I will add that I also think Bush the Elder is the most under-rated
President.
|9.12.07 @ 7:56PM|#
Bush the Elder is very underrated. Ford, too.
But you've got to do better than "undistinguished" to get into the
bottom tier, at least in my book.
For example, Andrew Jackson distinguished himself by refusing to
enforce a Supreme Court decision, so that the ethnic cleansing of
Georgia could take place, on behalf of gold prospectors, resulting
in the deaths of tens of thousands. And that's just for a
start.
Undistinguished? No news is good news, know what I mean?
|9.12.07 @ 8:20PM|#
But you've got to do better than "undistinguished" to get
into the bottom tier, at least in my book.
Undistinguished? No news is good news, know what I
mean?
Or even "ineffective."
Absolutely. I'd only differ in saying that not only does being
ineffective or undistinguished not get you to the bottom tier, but
quite the contrary - it elevates you to the top tier.
x,y|9.12.07 @ 8:22PM|#
Radley has had articles on Fox for years. If you actually
think Fox is any worse in its way than any of the other networks,
you're delusional or partisan. In fact, other than Stossel on
ABC(?), Fox is the only outlet I've seen ever give any real space
to libertarian ideas.
This is quite true. I often get into arguments with the partisan
Democrats in my office about this. I say look, FOX is biased as
hell. But have you ever seen CNN? MSNBC?
|9.12.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Oh, yeah, bin Laden. Whoops, pulled a Bush there, got distracted
by ideology.
In so many ways, the Bush administration misunderstands terrorism,
the post-9/11 security environment, and how to fight the War on
Terror.
Contrary to what we were told, bin Laden didn't expect us to cower
under our beds after 9/11. His object wasn't to intimidate us, but
to provoke us. That's what dissident terrorists - as opposed to
state terrorists - do; they goad their enemies into oppressive
security measures (which provokes further dissent from the
population that bears the brunt of those "security" efforts), and
into making tactical missteps out of rage and frustration.
The Iraq War was both.
Rhywun|9.12.07 @ 9:43PM|#
Anyway, about the topic at hand, Balko's is a fantastic
article and probably the best short piece I've seen on the topic
for concisely laying out just how terribly wrong the US has been in
its actions since 9/11.
I second that statement. Excellent article. And if the notion that
Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to hurry up pre-existing plans to
invade Iraq, well I say that's not only criminal but depending on
the long-term results which we don't even know yet, it's easily
enough to give Bush fils a shot at worst president ever.
PS. I too read Balko on Fox and the Agitator long before he showed
up around here.
|9.12.07 @ 10:06PM|#
We can leave whenever we want.
We just changed our mind in 1865. Maybe we'll change it back
tomorrow.
Though seriously there is a group of people that want to move to
South Carolina, take control of politics and seceed. Personally I
think they underestimate the eccentricity of South Carolinians.
Just because we agree with your goals doesn't mean we will agree
with you; expecially when it's a bunch of damn yankees moving down
here and trying to do stuff.
GW: Definate top 5 worst.
I don't place FDR in the bottom 5, but maybe bottom 10.
Buchanan has to be there; he basically watched the country fall
apart.
Grant and Harding get nominated for pure allowing of graft.
Madison doesn't make the consideration for me. He was not an
effective president for sure and his handling of the War of 1812
and the events that lead to it were subpar, but we have had some
way crappier presidents than him.
Jefferson gets a lot of points with Libertarians, but I come away
very unimpressed. Yes he allowed the Alien and Sedition Acts to
expire; however the rules that he allowed to fall in place after
them were probably actually worse since truth was not allowed as a
defense. His embargo was a horrible move. I know the Democratic
party did not like a navy, however his complete refusal to have one
left the US commercial fleet at the mercy of pirates and the
British and the French. He certainly had a hypocritical part to
him. Still even after the rant he doen't make the bottom 10 for me.
He's like Madison a man out of his element with Executive
power.
I find it one of the more interesting aspects of the 1790's to 1812
that the Democratic Republicans railed against the Federalists for
many things that once they entered office they found out were very
useful.
Guess I went off topic there.
But to sum up:
I think Bush the Lesser and Buchanan fit the bottom very well
followed by Grant, Harding, Nixon, Wilson, and maybe Carter.
Fluffy|9.12.07 @ 11:11PM|#
Joe, I don't think we can dismiss out of hand critiques that
place either Lincoln or FDR high on the "worst" list.
After all, Andy Jackson was nearly universally admired as a fine
President for a century and a half. But as noted above, he had the
least respect of the rule of law of any President, ever [unless we
want to talk about Jefferson Davis]. He also is essentially the
equivalent of a Nathan Bedford Forrest for Native Americans.
If Jackson's reputation can disintegrate over time, so can FDR's.
OK, Lincoln I grant you may be untouchable. Washington and
Jefferson will have their monuments torn down before Lincoln.
|9.13.07 @ 1:12AM|#
J Dokes wrote: "Yes, I am afraid marcvs is correct Bush is a
fucking idiot. I'll add the evidence:"
(squalid litany deleted)
Honestly, it makes me suspect that W only ran in order to
rigorously shit on everything his father ever touched. W doesn't
have an actual family business to run into the ground, so he did it
with the closest thing handy.
I bet W used to wipe his ass on his father's pillowcase, too, when
Mom and Dad were out of town.
|9.13.07 @ 1:18AM|#
"I say look, FOX is biased as hell. But have you ever seen CNN?
MSNBC?"
Those networks are primarily biased towards the stupid. CNN goes
for freakshow news and celebrity nonsense, plus that rightwing Beck
jackass. MSNBC is mostly right wingers, apart from Keith Olberman,
and on weekends it's unwatchable because it's mostly stupid reruns
of celebrity bio shows from NBC's tape library.
MSNBC is the network that canned Phil Donohue, who was their
highest rated show, and replaced him with a string of feckless
right wing ideologues who couldn't beat a Ron Popeil infomercial
for ratings.
Bee|9.13.07 @ 2:45AM|#
FDR not one of the worst? Obviously not a lot of Westerners or
people of Japanese descent voting here. Manzanar.... Heart
Mountain.... Topaz ..... much worse than Guantanamo, in my opinion.
FDR was a four-letter word in my family.
May we never see the like again.
Oh, and yes, W is a fucking idiot.
|9.13.07 @ 9:33AM|#
Undistinguished? No news is good news, know what I mean?
Yup. Personally, I think Calvin Coolidge was the best president
ever. Seriously.
|9.13.07 @ 10:07AM|#
"""Bush.
Like a rock.
Only dumber.""
Bush as smart as Miss Teen South Carolina.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXRUbJ87abc
This is funny, Or really sad. Ok, it's pretty funny
|9.13.07 @ 10:43AM|#
Randolph Carter at 5:06:
"I wait with baitin' breath."
Should be bated (or perhaps 'batin', depending upon what you're
actually doing while you wait.)
|9.13.07 @ 10:47AM|#
7) Gave George Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom. My god
WTF?
When I read they gave Yosarian a medal for bombing the ocean, I
thought that was wry and ironic, but a bit over the top. I mean
c'mon, in real life no one gets a medal for screwing up. Fast
forward thirty years and we've become Bizarro World.
RIP Joseph Heller
|9.13.07 @ 12:54PM|#
"""I mean c'mon, in real life no one gets a medal for screwing
up."""
You can get a silver star for being a victim of a screw-up.
|9.13.07 @ 12:55PM|#
"""7) Gave George Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom. My
god WTF?"""
It's important to Bush for things to look better than what they
really are.
|9.13.07 @ 6:01PM|#
Give the devil his due.
Tenet did a bang-up job with Afghanistan, and that was what the
medal was ostensibly awarded for.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245