Let the Record Show

2006-09-10T10:59:00.000-07:00

2004-01-16T09:23:00.000-08:00

ABCNEWS.com : White House Missed Chance to Kill Osama: "Missed Opportunity
Officials: Bush Administration Was Slow to Approve Drones to Kill Bin Laden

By Ted Bridis and John Solomon
The Associated Press

W A S H I N G T O N, June 24? When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones had recently spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the al Qaeda leader.

But the administration failed to get drones back into the Afghan skies until after the Sept. 11 attacks later that year, current and former U.S. officials say."

2003-09-21T20:12:00.000-07:00

Country for Sale

Economic Overhaul for Iraq : "The new policy, enacted on Saturday by U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer, allows foreign firms to enter and potentially dominate key elements of the economy, from banking to manufacturing, that had been off-limits to outside ownership. Although the sale of businesses to foreigners could prove controversial in this fiercely nationalistic country, U.S. Treasury Secretary John W. Snow said the plan offered a 'real promise' of economic revival in Iraq, which is struggling to cope with rampant unemployment, crumbling infrastructure and unproductive state-run industries."

That didn't take long. Apparently everything is up for sale except the state run oil industry. Wow. Is it just me, or does this seem a bit premature given that the U.S. is still running the country? Shouldn't they have, like, elected officials and laws in place before they (as in the Iraqi's, not us) decide to sell off the entire country (or not?). Maybe I'm wrong, but wouldn't the American people resent it if a foreign government came in and decided to basically sell off our country to a huge assortment of non-American companies? Democracy apparently lost out to the concept of "free markets - American style."

2003-09-21T19:56:00.000-07:00

Deja' vue all over again

Bush Open To U.N. Oversight of Iraq Election: "President Bush said yesterday that he is prepared to allow the United Nations to oversee the first postwar election in Iraq, a limited concession to demands that he give the world body a more vigorous role in rebuilding the country.

Bush made the offer as he prepared to address the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, when he plans to challenge reluctant allies to show the relevance of the world body by increasing international financial and military support for Iraq."

Why is the U.N. only deemed "relevant" to the Bushies if the U.N. is towing the Bush party line? Surely this kind of thing is as offensive to the U.N. as the continual conservative cry that opposing Bush is unpatriotic is to Americans. If the goal is to secure aid for Iraq in order to ease the burden on the U.S. it's difficult to see how these kind of statements will further our efforts.

2003-09-20T12:00:00.000-07:00

Can I get some fries with that?

We've seen lots of "news" stories about the $87 billion dollars Bush is requesting for Iraq. We know that 66% of the public says nope, they aren't at all happy with the big, unexpected bill. Yet it's widely assumed that Congress will ultimately approve the request anyway. Can't screw over the boys in battle - Congress really has no choice but to approve it.

Meanwhile, the press reports on what we could've gotten for our money instead. (Not that we would have spent it on any of that stuff - after all the republicans are in charge of everything).

Then we have Bush, who seems concerned that he's "having trouble getting the message out," I guess because only 36% of us broke out into a rousing chorus of "I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free" upon hearing the cost. Others, in the same article, expend oxygen we'll never get back explaining why the speech didn't bump up his poll numbers (as if in some strange universe, it should have).

Lost in the flurry of the obvious and inane is the fact that one of the main reasons the appropriations request is so large is that the Bushies are undoubtly hoping the money will last for 14 months -- until the presidential election is over. Let's do the math.... [4 billion/mth x 14] + $20 billion for all the reconstruction we can do in a year = $76 billion, plus an $11 billion dollar fudge factor (or the graf built in to transfer money from the U.S. treasury to Halliburton) = $87 billion dollars.

Indeed, the memory hole of the American public is a huge bottomless pit and something dropped down into it a year before the election is likely to be long forgotten by the voters before they head to the polls in '04. Now if they could just do something about all the dead soldiers and the huge budget deficits.

2003-09-19T07:27:00.000-07:00

Why We Fight

Big lie on Iraq comes full circle: ''War on terror'' is a metaphor. It is not an actual war, like the World War or the Vietnamese or Korean wars. It is rather a struggle against fanatical Islamic terrorists, exacerbated if not caused by the conflict in Palestine. When one turns a metaphor into a national policy, one not only misunderstands what is going on, one begins to slide toward the big lie. One invades Iraq because one needed a war."

That's the real reason. But not one, of course, that the Bushies were willing to make a case for.

2003-09-19T06:33:00.000-07:00

So-called liberal media strikes again!

Natasha over Pacific Views brings us a description of John Edwards by a CNN reporter:

"The millionaire trial lawyer promised to [fight for the working class.]"

And then give us a few examples of what we might hear IF the Bush / Cheney team got the same treatment from the press:

The two former energy company executives promise to respect the environment.

The ticket, with three drunk driving arrests between them, promises to encourage a culture of personal responsibility.

The veteran of several failed companies promises to bring the best traditions of the business world into the Oval Office.

The man who called a reporter an ***hole on mic promises to end the climate of bipartisan rancor in our nation's capital.

The former governor who mocked a woman on her way to be executed promises to serve as a compassionate conservative.

This wealthy son of a wealthy family claims direct knowledge of the concerns of those who have a hard time feeding their children."

How right you are, Natasha!

2003-09-17T15:24:00.000-07:00

Oh just impeach him already...

Barely a day goes by lately that Bush or one of his cronies doesn't come out with a big, steaming, stinking to high heaven lie. Today, Bush was finally able to bring himself to admit that Iraq was not actually linked to 9/11, after implying otherwise for the better part of a year, yet he couldn't seem to help himself from recycling another oft repeated fabrication - the supposed link between Iraq and Al Qaida.

From the transcript today:

Q Mr. President, Dr. Rice and Secretary Rumsfeld both said yesterday that they have seen no evidence that Iraq had anything to do with September 11th. Yet, on Meet the Press, Sunday, the Vice President said Iraq was a geographic base for the terrorists and he also said, I don't know, or we don't know, when asked if there was any involvement. Your critics say that this is some effort -- deliberate effort to blur the line and confuse people. How would you answer that?

THE PRESIDENT: We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th. What the Vice President said was, is that he has been involved with al Qaida. And al Zarqawi, al Qaida operative, was in Baghdad. He's the guy that ordered the killing of a U.S. diplomat. He's a man who is still running loose, involved with the poisons network, involved with Ansar al-Islam. There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaida ties.

Sorry, Mr. President, but there is most definitely a "question" about that assertion. In fact, no one seems to really believe it but you. Not your CIA, not your allies (including Great Britain), no one.

Exhibit A:

Guardian | CIA had doubts on Iraq link to al-Qaida:"The debunking of the Bush administration's pre-war certainties on Iraq gathered pace yesterday when it emerged that the CIA knew for months that a connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida was highly unlikely.

As President George Bush was forced for the second time in days to defend the decision to go to war, a new set of leaks from CIA officials suggested a tendency in the White House to suppress or ignore intelligence findings which did not shore up the case for war.

The interrogation reports of two senior al-Qaida members, both in US custody, showed that the CIA had reason to doubt the allegations of a connection between Saddam's regime and the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon."

Exhibit B:

Report Cast Doubt on Iraq-Al Qaida Connection : "The president said some al Qaida leaders had fled Afghanistan to Iraq and referred to one 'very senior al Qaida leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year.' It was a reference to Abu Mussab Zarqawi, a Jordanian. U.S. Intelligence already had concluded that Zarqawi was not an al Qaida member but the leader of an unaffiliated terrorist group who occasionally associated with al Qaida adherents, the sources said.

As for Bush's claim that Iraq had trained al Qaida members in bomb-making and use of poisons and deadly gases, sources with knowledge of the classified intelligence estimate said the reports conclusion was that this had not been satisfactorily confirmed.

'We've learned,' Bush said in his speech, 'that Iraq has trained al Qaida members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.' But the president did not mention that when national security adviser Condoleezza Rice had referred the previous month to such training, she had said the source was al Qaida captives."

Exhibit C:

Allies Find No Links Between Iraq, Al Qaida: "Of all the intelligence services in the world, British agencies probably work the closest with U.S. spies. The sharing of sensitive information appeared evident in a British government dossier in September that laid out charges about Hussein's program to develop weapons of mass destruction. The report closely resembled Washington's accounts of Iraq's arsenal.

The British have been much quieter when it comes to any alliance between Iraq and Al Qaida, however. Asked about the matter Wednesday, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw sounded diplomatic.

'It could well be the case that there were links, active links, between Al Qaida and the Iraqi regime before Sept. 11,' Straw said. 'What I'm asked is if I've seen any evidence of that. And the answer is: I haven't."

Zarqawi is arguably connected to Al Qaida through Ansar al-Islam, but unfortunately for Bush, no evidence has ever surfaced to show a connection between Ansar al-Islam and Saddam. In fact all evidence seems to point to the contrary. They were reported to be mortal enemies of one another. Perhaps that is why Ansar al-Islam made its home in the north, in Kurdish controlled territory:

U.S. scours for Saddam-al-Qaida link:"Proving a link between Saddam and Islamists in a region not controlled by the Iraqi leader will be difficult for the Bush administration. Iraq's Kurdish minority has controlled the north for a decade, though Saddam's intelligence agents regularly pass back and forth, according to Kurdish officials. "

So what we have is Bush making a claim that has been thoroughly debunked, for which he never had any evidence in the first place. Which begs a very important question:

Is this really the standard of information the Bushies feel is acceptable to carry out their doctrine of preemptive war?

Here's an even scarier thought. If a despotic dictator like Saddam Hussein is telling the truth here, and Bush is lying, what in Jeebus' name does that say about Bush?

BBC report:"Saddam Hussein himself denied on Tuesday having any weapons of mass destruction. He told Mr Benn in the interview broadcast by Channel 4 News: 'These weapons do not come in small pills that you can hide in your pocket.

'These are weapons of mass destruction and it is easy to work out if Iraq has them or not.' Denying any connection with aQaidada, he said: 'If we had a relationship with aQaidada and we believed in that relationship, we wouldn't be ashamed to admit it."

Update: MSNBC has already decided to provide Bush with yet another pass on a huge lie. To read this article reporting Bush's statement today you would never know the Al Qaida link had ever been (and in fact still is) in dispute.

2003-09-17T13:28:00.000-07:00

DNC gets its blog on...

Check out the new DNC blog, DNC: Kicking Ass. You know, not too long ago I sent them a check and on the memo line I put "kick some ass, please!" Clearly, they have stolen the name of the blog from my plea. I'm 47% sure of it. Anyway, check it out - great stuff so far from what I can tell.

2003-09-16T22:40:00.000-07:00

Stealing Democracy

Stuck in traffic in Seattle again, so what do I do? Turn on Rush Limbaugh, have a laugh, get the gist, and then speed scan down the dial to listen to two or three other right wing whackos, 3 minutes at a time. I just know they will be busting blood vessels over the 9th circuit court's decision to postpone the California recall election until state approved machines are in place in all counties. Maybe I'll get lucky and catch one of them having an aneurysm right on the air.

Rush is talking about the vast left wing conspiracy to destroy democracy in America, as if making sure that every vote counts is against everything this country stands for. The others are using the Ann Coulter method of argument -- citing absurd statistics in one breath, and then reputable institutions in another (MIT, Cal Tech), without ever informing their audience that the later is not actually the reference for the former.

Naturally, the strawman arguments abound among all of them. What democrats are actually saying, they tell us, is that the poor and the minorities are too stupid to fill out their ballots correctly. (No, what we're actually saying is that elections have become too close to using voting machines that have a 2% margin of error. That would seem fairly obvious given the increasing number of electoral contests decided by one percent or less). But never mind the facts. Their callers buzz the lines with hearty agreement. All in all it's a master rendition of the "hey, look over there..." style of political gamesmanship. Because here is what's really happening...

Gaffe casts doubts on electronic voting: "The strange case of an election tally that appears to have popped up on the Internet hours before polls closed is casting new doubts about the trustworthiness of electronic voting machines.

During San Luis Obispo County's March 2002 primary, absentee vote tallies were apparently sent to an Internet site operated by Diebold Election Systems Inc., the maker of the voting machines used in the election. At least that's what timestamps on digital records showed."

Just a mistake -- a gaffe, as it were.

Or not.

Democrats want election machine firm thrown out: Democratic leaders want a major Republican fund-raiser blocked from becoming the state's new voting machines supplier, saying his presence puts in doubt the fairness of all Ohio elections.

Wally O'Dell, CEO of Diebold Inc., this week sent out letters to central Ohio Republicans asking them to raise $10,000 in donations in time for a Sept. 26 Ohio Republican Party event at his home.

His company, which specializes in security and election machinery, is one of three under consideration to supply new, electronic voting machines to replace punch card machines still in use in 71 Ohio counties.

[...]

In his invitation O'Dell states his support for the Republican Party and notes he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year."

But hey, we're dems... we're tolerant, and it's a free country. Why shouldn't a political activist for the republican party be the one to supply the voting machines - even if they are machines we know can be easily tampered with? No reason not to give them the benefit of the doubt. Right? Sure wish Wally was a dem though, don't you? Yeah.

Anyway, it's not like republican politicians run the companies that are providing the machines. Now that would be bad. Right? Oops....

Hagel's ethics filings pose disclosure issue: "One underlying issue is whether Hagel properly disclosed his financial ties to Election Systems & Software (ES&S), a company that makes nearly half the voting machines used in the United States, including all those used in his native Nebraska.

ES&S is a subsidiary of McCarthy Group Inc., which is jointly held by the holding firm and the Omaha World-Herald Co., which publishes the state's largest newspaper. The voting machine company makes sophisticated optical scan and touch-screen vote-counting devices that many states have begun buying in recent years.

An official at Nebraska's Election Administration estimated that ES&S machines tallied 85 percent of the votes cast in Hagel's 2002 and 1996 election races.

In 1996, ES&S operated as American Information Systems Inc. (AIS). The company became ES&S after merging with Business Records Corp. in 1997.

In a disclosure form filed in 1996, covering the previous year, Hagel, then a Senate candidate, did not report that he was still chairman of AIS for the first 10 weeks of the year, as he was required to do."

This doesn't bother me at all either. I'm sure Sonny Perdue is as honest as a republican gets.

Forget about the debacle in Florida in 2000. Forget about the republican financed recall in California. Forget about the precedent setting redisticting being done in Texas. Let's play Colmes to the republican's Hannity, and agree that republicans are not assaulting democracy daily. There are still huge problems with this new voting technology being foisted upon us with little or no debate:

A compendium of errors in November 2002

These problems could all be easily solved by adding printers to touchscreen machines in order to provide a paper trail or using optical scan systems that read paper ballots. That, coupled with the reform of laws to mandate hand recounts when elections are decided by less than half of one percent of the total vote, is what people who are worried about the preservation of democracy should be talking about. Call your representatives... bitch, moan, complain and demand reform. Unless you're a republican -- then you're probably safe. Wally and Chuck have got you covered.

2003-09-16T22:35:00.000-07:00

Reductio ad absurdum

Busy, Busy, Busy gets busy with this shorter version of Will Saletan's latest, greatest ridiculous article at Slate

But Digby gives the article the absolutely scathing treatment it deserves.

Pandagon weighs in as well.

My impression of Saletan has always been that he's a self loathing neoliberal, with a libertarian bent. An elitist yuppie without a cause, who hates all things political; particularly the people who objectively share his politics. He reminds me of progressives I run into in the course of political activism who spend entire meetings criticizing the specks in our eyes while the side with the logs in theirs (and not giving a damn about it) is busy kicking our ass.

2003-09-15T17:45:00.000-07:00

Big Day for Bushie Lies

Last night I was reading the transcripts of Cheney on MTP earlier that day and I thought to myself, "my god, this is full of lies. I simply must save this transcript for tomorrow when I will have the time to pick it apart piece by piece on my mighty blog!" Imagine my surprise to wake up this morning and find that the Washington Post had already done it. But, wait, there's more:

David Corn reports on Cheney's most recent lies, and a bonus Bush whopper about education spending in a recent stump speech.

CalPundit focuses on the education whopper in Corn's article.

Brad DeLong has simply had enough. And so has Josh Marshall

Sigh... nothing left to post about. Oh well.

Update 9/17: Damn everyone seems to realize Cheney is lying, and lying, and lying, and lying...

LA Times: Cheney in Wonderland

Star Tribune Editorial:Truth / Too little of it on Iraq

Boston Globe: Cheney link of Iraq, 9/11 challenged

2003-09-14T18:11:00.000-07:00

This is what happens to your blog on drugs

Do you ever read Glenn Reynolds over at Instapundit and think "so what?"; "hey, that's total bullshit"; or perhaps, "this guy's a prof - doesn't he have any classes to teach?"

Yeah, me too. Well here's the cure.... an instapunditathon

2003-09-14T12:45:00.000-07:00

WMD? What WMD?

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo brings us this revelation:

"Enough already! For a week or more I and others have been getting word that the long-awaited Kay Report -- the systematic investigation into Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction programs -- might be delayed or never even issued at all.

The administration has been telling us for months that it would be released in mid-September. And now, of course, it's mid-September.

Then a couple days ago NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported that Kay's survey had come up short, but implied that a report would indeed be issued when Kay returns to Washington this week.

But this morning the Sunday Times of London is reporting (subscription required) that "Britain and America have decided to delay indefinitely the publication of a full report on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction after inspectors found no evidence that any such weapons exist."

Just days ago I posted on the NBC story and Bush's personal weapons inspector, David Kay, "coming up short" when it comes to finding WMD in Iraq. I predicted, like many others, that a heavy duty industrial sized spin job was in the works. If Marshall and the Sunday Times of London are correct it would seem that the Bushies have determined that not even their best spinners can turn this story around. Instead, down the memory hole it will go.

Setting aside the incredible arrogance of an administration that blithely decides we don't need to know anything that might shed a bad light on them (and make no mistake, that is a pretty huge thing to set aside), just how bad does the news have to be if even the Bush spinners won't take it on? Did they all get together in a back room somewhere and decide, "aw, shit, we can't make this fly; better bury it instead?"

Now back to the arrogance. Clearly, WE the PEOPLE, have an inalienable right to know if a combination of lies and incompetence were used to justify this war. If the press and the Congress let them get away with bagging this report, then democracy, already in a persistent vegetative state, will need a brain scan to determine if the last vestiges of life support should be removed, and democracy left to die peacefully.

Update: This story has still not made it to the US press as far as I can tell (will it ever?) but here's a non-subscription news site that sums up the UK story.

The Bushies seem to be sticking to their story, for now. Today on Meet the Press:

"Speaking of the chief U.S. weapons hunter, Cheney said: “David Kay’s task is to look for the people that were involved in the program, to find documentary evidence to back it up, to find physical evidence when he can find that. It’s a hard task, but I’ve got great confidence that he can do this.”

2003-09-14T12:02:00.000-07:00

Dizzying Dive to Red Ink Poses Stark Choices for Washington | NY Times

"Mr. Bush had campaigned on the promise of returning the surplus in the form of a big tax cut, and Democrats disagreed only on the size and distribution of the cut, preferring to direct more to middle-class taxpayers. (Democrats proposed a tax cut of $750 billion that year.) The budget had been balanced in the late 1990's using a combination of spending controls and higher taxes on the wealthy. But by 2001, the controls had expired and seemed unnecessary. Mr. Bush's election, giving Republicans control of both Congress and the White House, broke a stalemate that had long prevented the adoption of major tax legislation."

Choices? Did someone say choices? I wonder how many times a day Al Gore says to himself, "I told you."

Debate Transcripts: 2000 Debates, Gore: "Now, here is how that connects with all the rest of what we've been talking about. If you have -- if you squander the surplus on a huge tax cut that goes mostly to those at the top, then you can't make education the top priority. If the tax cut is your number one, two, three and four priority, you can't do education. You can't do both. You have to choose. I choose education and health care, the environment and retirement security, and I ask for your support. "

2003-09-14T11:56:00.000-07:00

Misinformation - an epidemic

The Top Ten Conservative Idiots at Democratic Underground:

"A shocking poll revealed last week that almost 70 percent of Americans now believe that Saddam Hussein is linked to 9/11. Despite the lack of any evidence to make this case, the American people appear to have been led by the nose directly down George W. Bush's path, and its all thanks to the media. Why exactly do 69 percent of people think that Saddam and 9/11 are linked? Presumably because the Bush adminstration has been constantly mentioning them in the same sentence for the last two years, and the media has simply abrogated its responsibility to keep the people informed and done absolutely nothing to contradict this position. So for anyone out there who still believes that there is a liberal bias in the media, ask yourself why they have been willing participants in the farce which has allowed to Bush consistently mislead the American people and send us into an insane conflict from which there is now no obvious escape. Thanks guys."

Misinformation, a disease spread by the republican party and the media, has reached epidemic proportions. Unfortunately, duct tape and plastic sheeting offer no protection whatsoever. So far, the disease has not spread beyond U.S. borders, however, American citizens are urged to keep their heads up and be careful out there.... don't let it happen to you.

2003-09-13T22:29:00.000-07:00

Pacific Views: No Lieberman

I've always been against the "circular firing squad" method of primary campaigning - I won't dog out any democrat, though I clearly favor Dean, and would gag on the way to the polls if Lieberman would turn out to be the nominee. Natasha at Pacific Views finds something nice to say about virtually everyone seeking the democratic nomination - all deserved. Nicely done.

2003-09-13T12:29:00.000-07:00

Go Get 'em, George

... or not.

2003-09-13T10:25:00.000-07:00

Good Economy. Bad Job Market. Huh? | NY Times

"IT was like waiting for Godot. We waited for years for productivity to accelerate, and now, unlike Godot, who never showed up, that day has finally arrived. Productivity is soaring, holding out the promise of rising prosperity. Unfortunately, now we're waiting for the prosperity to kick in. A second term for President Bush could ride on whether it does, and how soon.

The United States economy has not experienced anything like this since World War II. Normally, a spike in productivity is accompanied by an even greater spike in demand. Simply put, productivity rises when workers produce more and sell more each year, and do so without putting in extra hours. The production part is working just fine. The demand, however, is lacking."

Really? Say it ain't so.... because if it's a demand problem and not a supply problem, man we just blew $200 billion this year (and more in the years to come) on supply side tax cuts that aren't going to do a damn thing to promote job growth. Oh wait, we already knew that back in May of 2001 when the first tax cuts were passed.

2003-09-13T10:22:00.000-07:00

Iraq WMD search: Coming up short | MSNBC

"THE HUNT for weapons of mass destruction, so far, has been a bust. Intelligence officials told NBC News there is no smoking gun. They thought they’d discovered a biological weapons lab, but it wasn’t one.

A massive CIA investigation, led by former U.N. weapons inspector Kay, is turning up only what former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein planned — not what he produced.

“He’s not finding the kinds of things the administration expected to find — large quantities of biological and chemical weapons or evidence that they were destroyed prior to the war,” said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector."

Stand by.... the Bush propaganda spinmeisters are no doubt gearing up to convince us that documents about weapons of mass destruction programs are just as good as actual WMD themselves. This will be quickly followed by the "We told you so..." conservative pundits, as in "We told you Iraq had WMD....programs, er, um, I mean plans for programs. That's what Bush and Cheney said all along! These liberals are simply revisionist historians!"

2003-09-13T01:30:00.000-07:00

Krugman - tells you everything you need to know about tax cuts

This article is long, but a veritable primer on how tax cuts work and don't work, and how republicans have hood winked the public for years on the subject of taxes. It is absolutely required reading for those in the middle class persuaded to vote republican based on the promise of ever bigger and better tax cuts.

Tim Noah at Slate nails it too

2003-09-13T00:38:00.000-07:00

Disaster in the Making | Eleanor Clift

"So far, the Bush White House has just $2 billion in pledges. “Why should anybody fund this?” says a Senate Democrat. “In the eyes of the world this is our baby, this is our mistake.”

The true cost of reconstruction is closer to $300 billion, says Michele Flournoy, a senior advisor for international security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. The $20 billion won’t cover much more than repairing infrastructure damaged by sabotage. “We’re coasting rather than developing,” she says. Of the top 20 security concerns confronting America, toppling Saddam wouldn’t have made her list. “And because of Iraq, we’re not doing other things” like funding homeland security and protecting U.S. ports.

Bush has the bully pulpit, and if he says something often enough, it becomes common wisdom. As long as people believe Iraq is the “central front” in the war against terrorism, they’re very forgiving. Iraq has become a haven for Al Qaeda, a development that a Hill Republican dubs “the flypaper theory.” Having failed to rout the opposition in Iraq, Bush would have us believe the bad guys are now flocking to their destruction, making our job easier, not harder. This administration has great powers of self-delusion. The neocons are isolated from reality, but they run the government, and they’re unrepentant."

My only disagreement with this article is with the title. Iraq is already a disaster. It became a disaster on 9/12/01 when they decided to invade it and occupy it - facts, costs, complications, and risks be damned. They can't conceive of the possibility that they might be wrong about anything so there is no need for an examination of the facts or other bothersome details. Ideology rules above all else.

2003-09-13T00:14:00.000-07:00

Murray fends off criticism of her 9/11 fund-raiser | Seattle PI

This a local story about democratic Senator Patty Murray here in Washington state...

"The event, which raised $10,000 for Murray's campaign against George Nethercutt, was denounced by Republicans as tawdry. Even some Democrats privately questioned the wisdom of holding a fund-raiser on what is still a mournful day.

"I think this says a great deal about Senator Murray's judgment and priorities," Washington state Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance said.

A senior Republican strategist in Washington, D.C., expressed disbelief that anyone would hold a fund-raiser that day. He said he knew of no Republicans who held events."

The mendacity of the republican party here in Washington, like the rest of the country, knows no bounds. Vance never misses an opportunity to slam a democrat, and the "liberal" Seattle paper never misses a chance to make it a story.

Here's my letter to the editor at the Seattle PI in response:

I have to call a pot, kettle, black on Republican party chairman Chris Vance's comment that a fundraiser held for Patty Murray on the 9/11 "says a great deal" about her "judgment and priorities." If he truly feels that way perhaps he should have a talk with President George W. Bush. According to the Washington Post, Bush recently invoked 9/11 as the justification to raise $170 million in campaign funding for a primary race in which he faces no opponent.

"'Every day, I'm reminded about what 9/11 means to America,' Bush said when asked in July about the $170 million budget for his primary campaign, where he has no opponent. 'We're still threatened,' he said, explaining that he wants to 'continue doing my job, and my job will be to work to make America more secure.'"

In addition, the Republican party has decided to hold it's convention in New York City days before 9/11 next year, even though presidential nominating conventions are traditionally held in August.

Clearly, these are examples of the exploitation of a horrible tragedy for political gain by the republican party and its candidate for president. I was working the morning of 9/11 this year; Chris Vance was working the morning of 9/11 this year; and Patty Murray was doing a part of her job that is no doubt a necessary evil - raising money to beat back unfounded, hypocritical, attacks. Vance and the other "republican strategists" mentioned in the article should spare us the pale comparison of Murray's paltry $10,000 fundraiser.

*****************************************************************

Her opponent in the Senate race is a Congressman who ran on a term limit promise in the era of the "Gingrich Revolution" and then promptly broke his promise when the term limit he agreed to was up. Here was his response during the 2000 campaign when a group of citizens dared criticize him for breaking his term limit pledge:

Nethercutt fights term limits group with negative ad

"After facing months of negative advertising from a pro-term limits group, Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Wash., is lashing back with an attack ad of his own.

U.S. Term Limits Executive Director Paul Jacob 'is a convicted felon who served a long prison sentence. ... So when you see the next U.S. Term Limits ad, recognize it for what it is -- lies from convicted felons,' Nethercutt's radio ad says.

Jacob served 5 1/2 months in prison in 1980 after he refused to register for the draft. President Carter reinstated the draft for 18- to 25-year-olds after Soviet troops entered Afghanistan."

Those are the kind of lies they tell about the people who criticize them, so you can imagine the kind of attacks they will perpetrate on anyone who dares to defend their incumbent seat in the Senate.

2003-09-12T22:54:00.000-07:00

How to save 20 billion in 20 minutes...

Bush’s bloated defense budget

2003-09-12T20:03:00.000-07:00

Pentagon Official Retracts Assertion of al-Qaida Involvement in Iraq | VOANews.com

"We know a great many of Bin Laden's key lieutenants are now trying to organize in cooperation with old loyalists from the Saddam regime to attack in Iraq," he said.

Mr. Wolfowitz gave no details. And when asked about the new claims, Pentagon officials indicated at first that Mr. Wolfowitz was referring to sensitive new intelligence information. Intelligence officials contacted by VOA said they were unable to corroborate his comments.

Late Friday, Mr. Wolfowitz spoke to a reporter from the Associated Press and acknowledged he had misspoken. The bin Laden lieutenants he mentioned were in fact just one man, Abu Mussab Zarkawi, who was reported to have gone to Baghdad for medical treatment before the war.

As for the alleged al-Qaida fighters in Iraq, Mr. Wolfowitz indicated he was actually referring to unspecified foreign fighters and members of Ansar al-Islam, the Iraqi terrorist group linked to al-Qaida.

Defense officials declined comment when asked if they thought Mr. Wolfowitz had intentionally used interviews with national and international media to underscore the Bush administration's contention that Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism."

The lies never stop.

Update: Digby gets it. Oh yes he does.

2003-09-12T01:30:00.000-07:00

TBOGG takes on Ann Coulter

Tom gets a load of Ann's latest column and wonders:

"...who pays for this shit? I mean, are there papers that really think that she has anything to offer to political discourse? She's not funny or even ocassionally witty. She's a notorious liar. She has never written a column that has shown any evidence that she has any knowledge about the subject at hand, and besides, she can't write for shit. Her work is a collection of disjointed slurs strung together by misrepresentations and non-sequential outbursts. I've met people who have Tourette's Syndrome, I've just never met anyone who typed out their impulses."

Who indeed?

August J. Pollak does a little butt kicking of his own.

Nicely done, gentlemen!

2003-09-12T00:53:00.000-07:00

Middle East Math | NY Times Editorial

"At the Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday night, Senator Joseph Lieberman criticized former Gov. Howard Dean for calling on Israel to dismantle most of its settlements. 'That's up to the parties in their negotiations, not for us to tell them,' the senator said.

We strongly disagree. True support for Israel means helping it see through its pain and rage to its own best interest. You do not have to believe in Mr. Arafat's sincerity or the Palestinians' good will to grasp the need for a radical course shift. You need only understand the meaning of self-preservation."

It's nice to see that even a consistent voice for the pro-Israeli position like the NY Times can recognize that the situation in the Middle East is unsustainable. The very definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Bombing apartment buildings full of people to get one guy will not result in peace any more than blowing up school busses full of children will. That is the sad truth that must be faced at some point.

2003-09-12T00:41:00.000-07:00

Busy, Busy, Busy points out a bogus hit on Howard Dean

... they distort, and hope you don't notice.

2003-09-11T23:08:00.001-07:00

Anger builds over EPA’s 9-11 report | MSNBC

"Two years after the World Trade Center attacks, New Yorkers say they’re outraged by reports that the White House influenced the Environmental Protection Agency to downplay hazards posed by the toxic dust that fell in an avalanche over the city. The EPA’s acting chief defends the agency’s actions after the attacks, saying it hopes to be better prepared for “the next time.”

I wish someone could explain to me how lying is going to be corrected by being better prepared "next time." But no, it gets better. From the same article...

"The EPA presented “an overriding message that there was no significant threat to human health” even though there was cause for caution, it concluded.

[...]

Workers have to bear some of the blame, says Horinko. “Many did not wear professional gear despite our best efforts.”

Their "best efforts" might have included telling the truth. Just a thought.

2003-09-11T21:26:00.000-07:00

Remembering 9/11 - We Will Never Forget

There have been countless memorials today, honoring all the innocent victims who died at the hands of crazy extremists. We know who the "evil-doers" are and we condemn them and their murderous extremism. But here is what no one in the media has dared mention and did not "remember" today, and it's just as painful for the victims...

DC 9/11 - a review by a victim's widow: "It is understandable that so little time is actually devoted to the president's true actions on the morning of 9/11. Because to show the entire 23 minutes from 9:03 to 9:25 a.m., when President Bush, in reality, remained seated and listening to 'second grade story-hour' while people like my husband were burning alive inside the World Trade Center towers, would run counter to Karl Rove's art direction and grand vision. "

Bush, as commander in chief, is the only person within the government authorized to have a fighter jet shoot down a commerical airliner. Yet he sat in a classroom for 25 minutes, casually reading to students while the second tower burned, and while we knew there were other hijacked planes in the sky, surely targeting other buildings. Did he summon his courage even after the next crash, this time into the Pentagon? No, instead he ran scared all over the country for another 9 hours before returning to Washington.

Was it not the most cowardly act by a President in the history of this nation?

I will never remember 9/11 without remembering his cowardice. I didn't like him before 9/11, but I certainly loathed him after that. George W. Bush - the most cowardly man to ever hold the office of the president in this nation.

2003-09-11T17:55:00.000-07:00

ABC Ships Uranium Overseas for Story | WaPo

More atrocities from the Bush administration....

"ABC News says it has exposed a crucial weakness in the nation's port security system by shipping depleted uranium from Jakarta, Indonesia, to Los Angeles. Federal officials say the network seems to have committed a crime.

'We feel this is a very valid and important test,' ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider said yesterday. 'This is what journalists do. . . . It was not our intent to defraud the U.S.'

But Homeland Security Department spokesman Dennis Murphy said that 'it appears they violated the law, and the Justice Department is taking a look at that. Does a news organization have a right to break the law? Can a reporter rob a bank to prove that bank security is weak? My understanding of journalistic ethics is you don't break the law in pursuit of news."

It's not bad enough that the Bushies are lying to us about homeland security and placing more emphasis on the national grid in Iraq than on protecting our borders. Now they are going to condemn and prosecute anyone who tells us the truth?

Here is the original ABC News story: How Secure Are U.S. Borders?

2003-09-11T17:53:00.000-07:00

Lobbyist Discord Muddies Energy Bill Talks on Hill | WaPo

"As congressional negotiators begin trying to resolve differences between House and Senate versions of major energy legislation this week, many of the big business lobbies that often help shape such measures are divided, battling one another over key provisions.

The lack of consensus, especially in the electricity industry, has complicated the lawmakers' work, raising concerns that the final product could be a patchwork of compromises that does not solve such urgent problems as how to streamline the nation's power grid to avoid blackouts such as the one that crippled the Northeast in mid-August.

The divisions may also force Republican lawmakers, who have taken charge of drafting the final package, to pick and choose among industries and companies that are among their party's largest and most loyal supporters."

How bad does it have to be; how whorish is our republican controlled congress if something like this can be reported so non-chalantly, like it was the most natural thing in the world to allow industry lobbyist to write legislation? Just when you thought you couldn't get any more disgusted.... [sigh]

2003-09-11T06:08:00.000-07:00

Foreign Views of U.S. Darken Since Sept. 11 | NY Times

"In the two years since Sept. 11, 2001, the view of the United States as a victim of terrorism that deserved the world's sympathy and support has given way to a widespread vision of America as an imperial power that has defied world opinion through unjustified and unilateral use of military force.

'A lot of people had sympathy for Americans around the time of 9/11, but that's changed,' said Cathy Hearn, 31, a flight attendant from South Africa, expressing a view commonly heard in many countries. 'They act like the big guy riding roughshod over everyone else."

[...]

"America has taken power over the world," said Dmitri Ostalsky, 25, a literary crtic and writer in Moscow. "It's a wonderful country, but it seized power. It's ruling the world. America's attempts to rebuild all the world in the image of liberalism and capitalism are fraught with the same dangers as the Nazis taking over the world."

... which tends to back up this article in Slate.

2003-09-11T05:31:00.000-07:00

Bush Cites 9/11 On All Manner Of Questions | WaPo

"In the past six weeks, Bush has cited '9/11' or Sept. 11, 2001, in arguing for his energy policy and in response to questions about campaign fundraising, tax cuts, unemployment, the deficit, airport security, Afghanistan and the length, cost and death toll of the Iraq occupation.

Bush's aides said his persistent references to the attacks reflect his identification with them as a searing personal experience. Some analysts said he sometimes appears to depend on such references in times of trouble or uncertainty.

'Every day, I'm reminded about what 9/11 means to America,' Bush said when asked in July about the $170 million budget for his primary campaign, where he has no opponent. 'We're still threatened,' he said, explaining that he wants to 'continue doing my job, and my job will be to work to make America more secure."

No shit, he really said that. He's gonna whore for the maximum legal donation of $2000 per person from every wealthy greed head on the planet and use $170 million to smear the democrat opponent with every lie Rove can think of because it's his patriotic duty in memory of 9/11! This from the absolute coward who sat in a classroom for 25 minutes while planes continued to crash into buildings. Unbelieveable.

2003-09-10T21:39:00.000-07:00

William F. Buckley: Bush is evil

Because getting a BJ is evil, but lying, and lying, and lying, and lying, about, well..... everything else, is not.

2003-09-10T19:20:00.000-07:00

Bush Calls for End to 'Past Bickering' Among Allies on Iraq | NY Times

"President Bush called today for an end to 'past bickering' so that the way can be cleared for a United Nations resolution to send more soldiers from other countries to bolster peacekeeping forces in Iraq.

'Let us not get caught up in past bickering, let us move forward,' Mr. Bush said at a brief question-and-answer session with reporters at the White House."

Bummer, I missed the TV version of this (if there was one), but I just know it had to sound as absolutely lame as it reads. First he humiliates the better part of the globe with his complete arrogance, then he humiliates the U.S by trying to shirk it off as nothing, least of all his fault. Some days you just have to shake your head and ask, just how bad can it get?

2003-09-10T19:11:00.000-07:00

It would be funny if it weren't essentially true

A special speech to the nation:

"My fellow Americans: I come before you today to ask for all the money in your wallet, your checking account and your 401(k). And do you have one of those spare change jars on top of the dresser? I'd like that too.

I am planning to spend $100 zillion to fight international terrorism in Iraq -- and all this without raising taxes. I am therefore asking Americans to make a sacrifice. I am asking them to support their aging relatives, because I'm not going to have any money to fund Social Security right now. Or Medicaid. "

2003-09-10T18:48:00.000-07:00

Americans think Bush riles terrorists | MSNBC

Just to get it on the record:

"Most Americans think the U.S. administration’s aggressive military pursuit of the war on terrorism has made further terrorist attacks more rather than less likely, according to polls released this week before Thursday’s second anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

SIXTY-FOUR PERCENT of respondents said that the U.S. military presence in the Middle East increased the likelihood of terrorism, 77 percent thought there were widespread negative feelings towards the U.S. in the Islamic world that enhanced terrorist recruiting, and 54 per cent thought the US had been too assertive in its foreign policies.

In addition, 81 percent thought a key lesson of September 11 was that the U.S. needed to work more closely with other countries to fight terrorism, up from 61 percent in a similar poll more than a year ago."

Unfortunately, Dubya doesn't seem to be one of the 81% who "get it." Another key component of "winning the war on terrorism" would seem to be not squandering nearly all the resources we have where terrorism isn't (or wasn't, at least). Lastly, they may want to consider the fact that breeding roaches is not the most effective way to rid yourself of them.

2003-09-10T06:48:00.000-07:00

How dumb do they think we are? | Molly Ivins

"But naturally, we're not supposed to mention that the administration has reversed itself -- no, no. As Paul Wolfowitz, who now has all the credibility of Ken Lay, explained, the new U.N. resolution 'didn't sort of emerge out of nowhere a few days ago. It's been on our agenda ever since the fall of Baghdad.'

He said the bombing of U.N. headquarters was 'a breakthrough -- a sad one. The bombing, I think, changed the atmosphere in New York, and it looks like we can move forward in that area.'

Right. The United Nations changed its position, we didn't change ours. How dumb do they think we are? I am tired of being asked to swallow lies by this administration. For 87 billion bucks, the least we deserve is some candor. I want to know who was responsible for the whole weapons of mass destruction fiasco, and I want to see some accountability for it -- resignations and firings. In May of this year, President Bush said, 'We found the weapons of mass destruction.' No, we didn't. We have yet to find any evidence of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons in Iraq."

Indeed, how dumb do they think we are? Great question, and it's one I bring up with republicans every time the subject of politics and George W. Bush comes up. Aren't they offended, at some point, by the unending lies this administration tells as a tool to advance their agenda? How can they stand to be treated like absolute idiots by these guys? And what does that say about what this administration thinks of its supporters? Don't they have enough respect for themselves to think they deserve to be told the truth -- at least once in awhile?

I've never once gotten a straight answer from a republican to any of those questions. I get the feeling it is just too painful for them to contemplate. But in the meantime, Bush is making fools of them all.

2003-09-10T05:59:00.000-07:00

Democrats Demanding Answers From Bush on His Plans for Iraq | NY Times

"I got things that need to be rebuilt in Louisiana,' said Senator John B. Breaux, a centrist Democrat who occasionally sides with the administration on economic issues. 'And I certainly don't want to give money we don't have to a faraway country to the neglect of the domestic demands we have here. I mean, $87 billion for Iraq and zero for better security at our ports? That's not exactly balanced.'

Republican leaders dismissed the criticism as election-year posturing and said that after the fireworks, the president would get the money."

Yes, he probably will get the money, if only because it would be immoral for the congress to make our soldiers pay for the blunders of their commando in chief. On the other hand, it's important for the country to understand just how much money this is on top of the $80 billion already spent, regardless of the sycophantic tendencies of the republicans in congress who don't quite seem to understand the democratic process.

At the very least, people need to understand just how much of this new $87 billion will be funneled to no-bid contracts for corporate cronies who donate (or perhaps we should say invest) large sums of campaign money to Bush and company.

2003-09-09T08:51:00.000-07:00

Spy Agencies Warned of Iraq Resistance | WaPo

"Intelligence reports told them at some length about possibilities for unpleasantness,' said a senior administration official, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity. 'The reports were written, but we don't know if they were read."

Given what we know about this administration, it's entirely possible that they did not read the reports. As we now know, they started talking about using 9/11 as a justification to invade Iraq in the days following the World Trade Center attack. One high level senior correspondent for a national news network was telling folks in February of 2002, in private, that the idea of invading Iraq would be rolled out in August of that year, and indeed it was.

Bottom line - bad idea or not, it's not as if they didn't have time to plan the war's aftermath. So when the right wing pundits claim that the war went too fast and we just weren't prepared for such a quick and awesome victory -- that the lack of planning is somehow connected to great military skill.... well, that's just plain bullshit. Incompetence and arrogance are the hallmarks of this administration.

2003-09-08T23:40:00.000-07:00

Rumsfeld Is Muted On Weapons Hunt | WaPo

An example of lying / misleading / exaggerating / embellishing with lots of words:

"At a final news conference in Baghdad Saturday, reporters asked Rumsfeld twice about the weapons search. 'Can you please give us at least one example of what is the result today' of the search, one journalist said.

'I'm inclined not to,' the secretary replied. 'I'll tell you what the situation is: The situation is that it's an important question.'

Kay's teams 'are visiting various sites periodically,' he said. 'And rather than dribbling out pieces of information in a way that, oh, causes confusion, debate or discussion, it strikes me that it's useful to let the leadership of that team . . . proceed in an orderly way and at the right moment bring forward the information they have to the people of the world. And they will do so."

An example of telling the truth:

U.S. military officers were slightly more forthcoming about the absence of weapons of mass destruction. 'We're still looking,' said one brigadier general. 'We haven't found any yet, but it's a big place. If you wanted to hide something, you could."

Wouldn't it be refreshing if the Bushies could learn the difference?

2003-09-08T23:33:00.000-07:00

Many Americans, Iraqis unsure how road from Sept. 11 led to Baghdad | Boston Globe

"Rabia Ibrahim, an Iraqi, says the Sept. 11 attacks were ''horrible for the whole of humanity,'' but he sees no connection to Saddam, nor any evidence that the U.S. invasion has removed the terrorist threat.

He contends that four deadly car and truck bombings in Iraq last month at the Jordanian embassy, the U.N. headquarters, the country's holiest shrine in Najaf and Baghdad's police headquarters show that the U.S. military has created a terrorist problem rather than eliminated it.

''We did not have this kind of attacks before. America must recognize that they helped allow them to happen,'' said the 33-year-old electronics dealer. ''They deliberately broke down our security forces and now the Iraqi police are not capable of protecting the people.''

Prior to Bush's address on Sunday, the television media made a big deal out of informing us that for the first time, Iraqis would be able to listen to a U.S. president's speech (lucky them, apparently). What a breakthrough for freedom, Mom, apple pie... the whole bit. And what did Iraqis see if they tuned in? They saw Bush lie about their country and again imply that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 when there isn't the smallest shred of evidence that this is true. I'm sure that must have left a wonderful impression of America's great democracy with the Iraqis. Way to go, Dubya.

2003-09-08T21:27:00.000-07:00

It's gonna require a sacrifice...

Gotta love this from RonK over at Daily Kos:

Put a Price Tag on that Price Tag!:

"What pound of shame-faced POTUS flesh should Congress, Kofi Annan, the Axis of Chocolate, the CIA or the 4th ID non-com's demand in return for their sign-off on Plan Iraq, Version 2.0?

Your favorite neo-con's head on a stick? Repeal of the Estate Tax repeal? Aggressive SUV fuel efficiency standards?

Mandatory french fries with every order off the House menu? Public disclosure of Condi's old family yellowcake recipe?

A pledge not to seek reelection?

Remember -- ya don't ask, ya don't get."

Paul Krugman elaborates on the same general theme albeit lighter on the sarcasm and heavy on details.

Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, spent a portion of his radio show today declaring that the huge deficit is the sacrifice Americans are making, and liberals should "now shut up about Bush's calls for sacrifice" (empty and inane as they may be). Apparently, in conjunction with the fine republican tradition of redefining words as needed, the word sacrifice is now defined as running up a few trillion on your kid's credit card. Like "personal responsibility, sacrifice seems to be for everyone but them.

Update: Calpundit has some thoughts on this, and also manages to round up plenty of links to pundits commenting on the same issue (many of which discuss the related NY Times editorial ).

2003-09-08T20:55:00.000-07:00

Court ponders campaign finance law | MSNBC

Look who's trying to convince the USSC that "one dollar, one vote" ought to trump "one person, one vote"...

"The law “intrudes deeply into the political life of the nation” and “goes too far,” said Kenneth Starr, the former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton, who now is serving as an attorney for challengers to the law."

Versus the guy who relentlessly supports the most whorish admininstration the United States has ever seen in action:

But Solicitor General Theodore Olson, defending the law, said it was a response to a perception of corrupt politics — “the breakfasts, the lunches, the receptions, the dinners ... the relentless pursuit of big contributions.”.

Gee, sounds a lot like republicans writing energy legislation. In this case perception is reality.

2003-09-08T20:12:00.000-07:00

Eunuch no more?

Just when you thought the NY Times editorial board had been permanently castrated, they come out with this:

Presidential Character: "Other wrong turns, however, were chosen because of a fundamental flaw in the character of this White House. Despite his tough talk, Mr. Bush seems incapable of choosing a genuinely tough path, of risking his political popularity with the same aggression that he risks the country's economic stability and international credibility. For all the trauma the United States has gone through during his administration, Mr. Bush has never asked the American people to respond to new challenges by making genuine sacrifices.

He committed the military to war, but he told civilians they deserved big tax cuts. He seems determined to remake the Middle East without doing anything serious about reducing our dependence on Middle East oil. His energy policy is a grab bag of giveaways to domestic oil and gas lobbyists. He refuses to ask for even the smallest compromise when it comes to fuel-efficient cars.

The pattern goes further....."

This doesn't make up for all their bad editorials... not by a long shot. I'm holding out for their next editorial - "We were duped!"

2003-09-08T13:11:00.000-07:00

Identity Politics

Not to go Eschaton crazy today, but this is too good to pass up. Read the whole thing. It's arguably better than anything you will find in Tapped or TNR, particularly on the subject of indentity politics:

Atrios: "In their example, Tapped hits at the central issue. Paranoid Texan politicians, from the House Majority Leader on down to the governor and the Texas Legislature are indeed engaged in 'identity politics,' while a bunch of fringe activists are with no political power are... a bunch of fringe activists with no political power. When the dominant group, and in this case the dominant political group, abuses its power to marginalize the political power and discourse of other racial/ethnic groups, it's puzzling that all of the attention is then put on the attempts of the powerless to organize against it. They've already been identified by the dominant group. The socio-political-economic structure has already grouped them together, and told them to go to the back of the bus. When you're marked and labeled by your race or ethnicity, it's very odd to expect those individuals not to organize around it. In fact, arguably they have little choice."

Can I give a two hearty Amen's to the same guy in one day? Absolutely.

2003-09-08T12:09:00.000-07:00

Rumsfeld: Criticism of Bush Strengthens U.S. Foes | WaPo

This nugget, brought to our attention by the incomparable Atrios (who must read the news as a career - I want a job like that):

"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Monday opposition to the U.S. President was encouraging Washington's enemies and hindering his 'war against terrorism'."

Atrios makes the following comments, to which I would give a hearty Amen:

"I suppose I should be honored that Donald Rumsfeld thinks my Mighty Blog has the power to change the course of world events, but frankly I'm getting a little tired of being told I'm a traitor and that I'm responsible for getting our troops killed by the guys who created this whole mess in the first place.

This is the sickest kind of political discourse imaginable, and the fact that it's standard stuff these days and not being met with universal outrage by our liberal media shows how low we've gone."

Not too put too fine a point on it, but I would also add that Rumsfeld's comments stink of the nationalism of fascism. Dave Neiwert writes an excellent article on the fascist techniques of the right that discusses the following characteristics of fascism that seem particularly apt here in describing Rumsfeld's comments:

1. Disagreement is treason

2. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy

3. Life is eternal warfare

At some point it makes you wonder what we are fighting for, if in fighting for it, we abandon every principle on which this country was founded, in favor of the nationalistic behavior apparently expected by those on the right. Not only am I tired of seeing comments like Rumsfeld's in the paper, reported uncritically by the press as if they were natural facts, I'm tired of hearing the likes of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Ann Coulter, et al constantly telling the country that "liberals hate America."

There is certainly an assault on the founding principles and values of the United States being perpetrated on this country daily, but it isn't being spearheaded by liberals, that's for sure.

2003-09-07T22:07:00.000-07:00

Master of events or at their mercy? | MSNBC

The BS spin from the press begins:

"Now the 2004 election — little more than a year away — is shaping up as a referendum on Bush’s doctrine of pre-emptive war, the argument that he made in the year leading up to the invasion of Iraq that it would be too dangerous for the United States to wait until Saddam Hussein’s regime had developed weapons of mass destruction."

Here's some pure BS from the press. "the invasion of Iraq that it would be too dangerous for the United States to wait until Saddam HusseinÂ’s regime had developed weapons of mass" - is that what Bush said? No, what he said was that Saddam had endless supplies of WMD, poised at the ready, to attack us at any moment. The press are shaping up to be the chief revisionist historians.

Update: Kudos to Digby, who was somehow able to hold his breath long enough to wade through the complete pile of manure that is this article, and bring you the unspun reality in its entirety.

2003-09-07T18:12:00.000-07:00

Bush: $87 billion for Iraq | WaPo

"President Bush said Sunday night he will ask Congress for $87 billion to fight terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, appealing for troops and money from other countries, even those who opposed the U.S.-led war.

Bush, in a speech from the Cabinet Room, said the United States would not intimidated into retreat by violence."

And so the spin begins. Nothing in the speech that explains where the phantom WMD have gone; nothing in the speech to link 9/11 to Iraq; nothing in the speech to explain why we should spend nearly twice what we spend on education in this country to build Iraq's infrastructure.

Bush claimed that Iraq was the central front on terror - if so, only because we made it so. This administration has yet to identify one Al Qaeda terrorist with an Iraqi connection, yet now we are told Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists of every ilk imaginable. We've turned into in a larger version of the Israeli / Palestinian war.

Yes, we broke it, so we bought it. But it was a very costly mistake. When you add in the $80 billion we have already spent and all that we will likely spend after this new $87 billion runs out, it becomes a staggering mistake.

And you can rest assured that any attempt at all to hold him accountable for these tremendous mistakes will be shouted down by right. They want you to live in a fantasyland with them, where Bush never dissed the UN; never lied about WMD; never pulled us into a war that will take every resource we have and drain our government of much needed funds during a bad economy. It either never happened, or it doesn't matter now .

2003-09-07T14:54:00.000-07:00

White House Approved Departure of Saudis After Sept. 11, Ex-Aide Says | NY Times

"Top White House officials personally approved the evacuation of dozens of influential Saudis, including relatives of Osama bin Laden, from the United States in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks when most flights were still grounded, a former White House adviser said today.

The adviser, Richard Clarke, who ran the White House crisis team after the attacks but has since left the Bush administration, said he agreed to the extraordinary plan because the Federal Bureau of Investigation assured him that the departing Saudis were not linked to terrorism."

The Vanity Fair article this story was drawn from (unfortunately not available online) delves deeply into the long standing connections between the Bushies, the bin Ladens, and the House of Saud, in a much more detailed way than can ever be accomplished in a single news article. Suffice to say that the connections run deep and revolve around money and oil. If you still can't wrap your brain around the missing 28 pages in the 9/11 report, read this article and it will all become clear.

The fact is that this extraordinary article will not be widely read and newspapers will under-report the story or ignore it entirely. Consequently, the vast majority of the country will never hear about it, and the outrage that should materialize will never see the light of day. Had Clinton been the connection instead of Bush, the republicans would have had an investigative committee in place long, and within weeks, be assuring us that Clinton personally approved 9/11 in collusion with the Saudis.

Running all branches of government and major segments of the news media certainly does have its privileges, doesn't it?

2003-09-07T08:10:00.000-07:00

Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them

In a stunning revelation this weekend, a tape of Bush's speech to rescue workers at ground zero was recently played backwards, revealing a coded message to New Yorkers from Bush.

"I'm lying my ass off about the air quality here. You're all going to get sick and possibly die. But I don't really give a shit. Fuck you all - the markets must be open so my pals can get back to making money."

Republican leaders on capital hill declined to investigate the charge against Bush, claiming that airborne dioxins and other pollutants at levels up to 1500 times normal were much ado about nothing. "It's just another case of the democrats trying to take an itty bitty lie by Bush and politicizing it for their own purposes," claimed Tom Delay, republican bag man and former pest exterminator.

Update: Digby has some thoughts on the latest Bush atrocities

2003-09-05T07:42:00.000-07:00

Hill Braces For Iraq Request | WaPo

"In a sign of growing friction between Bush and the military establishment, retired Marine Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, a Gulf War commander, said in an interview during the meeting in Arlington that he is hearing an unprecedented amount of concern among retired officers over how the Bush administration has handled Iraq. Their criticism focused on Rumsfeld, he added.

'I've never seen so such discontent among the retired community,' Van Riper said. Last week, he said, he was at a breakfast with eight retired generals at which one asked about Rumsfeld, 'When are they going to get rid of this guy?"

Hopefully before the country is bankrupt. Worse case scenario.... Jan 20th, 2005.

2003-09-05T07:21:00.000-07:00

Bush Foreign Policy and Harsh Reality | NY Times

"Few administrations enjoy making midcourse corrections in their foreign policies, much less admitting to making them. But this week it has become unmistakable that President Bush's team has had to rethink its approaches on Iraq and North Korea after a succession of setbacks and pressures at home and abroad."

Rethink, in this case, means figuring out how to repair some incredible blunders. The root cause of the problem that rears its ugly head when republicans control government is that they operate under faith based illusions (aka dogged ideology) instead of relying on fact based solutions. Where was the threat in Iraq? We have yet to see any evidence of it. Yet now we must remain in this hotbed of terrorism of our own creation, and spend untold billions of dollars over what is likely to be many, many years in order to get the situation there under control. Even then, there is no guarantee that we will ever truly be able to control the violence and terrorism in Iraq and mold it into a peaceful democracy.

The greater implications are even worse. Huge deficits here at home will hurt the economy and the long term prospects for the future of this country. And of course these blunders have left us with a much weaker hand to play with North Korea. Surely they realize that our military has been stretched to the breaking point, as has our budget. We shot the wad on Iraq, and have little left to deal with the actual threats this country faces.

2003-09-03T23:25:00.000-07:00

"The Post-Modern President" by Joshua Micah Marshall

"This summer, when it became clear that Iraq had no active nuclear weapons program--indeed showed no apparent evidence of any weapons of mass destruction at all--that the economy was still losing jobs, and that the administration's own budget office predicted deficits as far as it dared project, Bush's reputation for honesty took a turn for the worse. By the middle of July, only 47 percent of adults surveyed by Time/CNN said they felt they could trust the president, down from 56 percent in March. The president's response to all this was to make yet more confidently expressed, undisprovable assertions. He simply insisted that his tax cuts would create jobs--and who knows? Perhaps someday they will--and that American forces would eventually turn up evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But by then, the press was beginning to pick up on deceptions in other policy areas--the redaction of evidence of global warming in EPA reports, the administration's refusal to provide Congress with any estimates whatsoever about the costs of the occupation of Iraq.

The White House seemed guilty of what might be called persistent, chronic up-is-downism, the tendency to ridicule the possibility that a given policy might actually have its predictable adverse consequences, to deny those consequences once they have already occurred, or--failing that--to insist against all evidence that those consequences were part of the plan all along. By late July, even a paragon of establishment conservatism like Barron's columnist Alan Abelson was lamenting the president's 'regrettable aversion to the truth and reality when the truth and reality aren't lovely or convenient."

Attacking Bush's credibility is key to this election. Bush will spend $200 million trying to get elected. That is on top of what taxpayers will spend as he makes a 15 minute "official" speech next door to his campaign stop so he can charge the trip to us. By attacking his credibility, it will be money much less effectively spent. Let's see some party sponsored advertising about Bush's lies. Foreign policy, the war, the environment, school funding, and tax cuts - there are no end of lies to expose.

2003-09-03T23:12:00.000-07:00

Salon.com | Why Dean and Franken are so hot right now | Salon.com

"Nothing is so gratifying to a movie audience as the moment when a sorely abused hero (man, woman or animal) finally feels his strength and gives his tormentors what they richly deserve. From 'High Noon' to 'Rocky' to 'Seabiscuit,' America loves to see a comeback, a righting of wrongs, a bully brought to his knees. Which is why, I think, Al Franken and Howard Dean are the men of the hour. For years, we have suffered while right-wing bullies hijacked American politics and media -- persecuting a president for a consensual sex act; stealing the 2000 election; trashing the country's economy, environment and constitutional safeguards; handing the government over to the highest corporate bidders; deceiving the public into a bloody quagmire; and then brazenly smearing anyone who dared to criticize this orgy of dreadful leadership as un-American. "

Indeed. Enough is enough.

2003-09-01T21:21:00.000-07:00

Bush Visits U.S.S. Truman For Dramatic Veterans'-Benefits-Cutting Ceremony | The Onion

"NORFOLK, VA—With more than 5,400 jubilant Marines and sailors cheering him on, President Bush landed on the deck of the U.S.S. Harry S Truman in a Navy jet Monday to preside over a historic veterans'-benefits-cutting ceremony.

'Your brave and selfless service to your country will not soon be forgotten,' Bush told the recently returned Operation Iraqi Freedom soldiers. 'At least, not for another five or ten years.'

After congratulating the soldiers on their victory over Saddam Hussein, Bush announced that the new budget passed by the Senate includes a $14.6 billion reduction in veterans' benefits. He then held aloft a pair of oversized scissors and snipped a ribbon bearing the words 'Veteran's Benefits."

... if what happened to Jim Cary in the movie "Liar, Liar" happened to Bush.

2003-09-01T19:42:00.000-07:00

Absent From the Korea Talks: Bush's Hard-Liner | NY Times

"Mr. Bolton, who has been in and out of government for two decades, most recently emerged from the ranks of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative research center with ties to the White House. He graduated from Yale Law School, where he struck up a friendship with Clarence Thomas, the future Supreme Court justice.

Mr. Bolton's induction into politics occurred when, as a teenager, he worked for Barry Goldwater's presidential campaign in 1964. After law school, Mr. Bolton established a relationship with Senator Jesse Helms, the North Carolina Republican. In the 1980's he worked on a campaign to counter voter registration efforts that were undertaken on behalf of blacks and organized labor.

He worked for the Agency for International Development under President Reagan, then was named assistant attorney general under Edwin Meese, where he struggled to beat back inquiries into matters including the Iran-contra scandal. "

With a resume like that, no wonder Bush adores the guy.

2003-09-01T15:37:00.000-07:00

Schwarzenegger: I'll do one debate | CNN.com

"Campaign aides said Schwarzenegger, the leading Republican in the field of more than 100 candidates vying to replace California Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, in the October 7 recall, won't participate in a debate scheduled for Wednesday.

But Schwarzenegger told CNN he would participate in a debate sponsored by the California Broadcasters Association, set for the third week in September.

'We're going to do one of the debates. It's going to be great for the California broadcasters,' Schwarzenegger told CNN as he toured the California State Fair in Sacramento. 'There's going to be a fantastic debate."

Uh huh. He'll do the one debate where the candidates get the questions ahead of time. Sadly, republicans are just stupid enough to vote for him.

2003-09-01T14:18:00.000-07:00

Carve First Amendment in some stone | Leonard Pitts Jr.

"But the point is, this is not a theocracy, not a nation where the rulings of holy men carry official weight. The Framers made that impossible when they wrote a First Amendment forbidding the government from endorsing any religion.

If you want to know why this is a good thing, you have only to recall how tenderly the Taliban once ruled Afghanistan. Or look to Nigeria, where religious leaders are debating whether a woman should be stoned to death. To consider those nations is to be convinced that separating the functions of church and state was one of the brighter things the founders did.

This is not complicated stuff. It is the stuff of eighth-grade civics. "

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick.....What the hell is this guy thinking?

2003-09-01T08:53:00.000-07:00

Democrats want election machine firm thrown out | Port Clinton News Herald.com

"Democratic leaders want a major Republican fund-raiser blocked from becoming the state's new voting machines supplier, saying his presence puts in doubt the fairness of all Ohio elections."

It's not just Ohio, either.

2003-09-01T07:14:00.000-07:00

Rumsfeld key player in Iraq policy shift | MSNBC

"State Department cables and court records reveal a wealth of information on how U.S. foreign policy shifted in the 1980s to help Iraq. Virtually all of the information is in the words of key participants, including Donald Rumsfeld, now secretary of defense."

You know, when you think about it, it's not revisionist historians that republicans need to worry about, it's just historians in general that are a problem for them.

2003-09-01T00:50:00.000-07:00

Northrop Grumman settles overbilling claim for $60 million | Government Executive Magazine

"Northrop Grumman will pay the government $60 million to settle claims that one of its shipbuilding subsidiaries overcharged the Navy tens of million of dollars.

The Justice Department sued the defense contractor in February, claiming its subsidiary, Newport News Shipbuilding, had overbilled the Navy $72 million on shipbuilding contracts in the 1990s. "

Well, as long as they only get to keep $12 million of the money they stole, I guess that's fair.

2003-09-01T00:06:00.000-07:00

Looks Like a Recovery, Feels Like a Recession | NY Times

"One factor above all has fueled the insecurity: the nation has lost 2.7 million jobs over the last three years. The recovery has been so weak since the recession ended in November 2001 that the nation's payrolls are down one million jobs from when economic growth resumed.

Indeed, the current economic expansion is the worst on record in terms of job growth. The average length of unemployment, more than 19 weeks, spiked this summer to its highest level in two decades.

'American workers are doing very badly,' said Carl Van Horn, director of the Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University. 'All the trends are in the negative direction. There's high turnover, high instability, a reduction in benefits and a declining loyalty on the part of employers. At the same time, expectations for productivity and quality are going up. It's a bad situation from a worker's standpoint."

Dubya better hurry up and get that new law passed that wipes out overtime. If he doesn't, boy are his campaign donors gonna be pissed!

2003-08-31T23:22:00.000-07:00

Charm and cash may help Bush widen Iraq coalition | MSNBC

No, we swear this is not a headline from the Onion.

2003-08-31T23:11:00.000-07:00

U.S. Presses for Aid to Iraq, but Few Give -- or Give In | LA Times

Shocking, isn't it? Revisionist historian version: "We never said the UN was irrelevant. We have no idea where people would have gotten that idea. And if we did say it, we didn't mean it, and you can't prove it. "

2003-08-31T13:40:00.000-07:00

We may not actually be "over" it....

Grand theft America

2003-08-31T10:09:00.000-07:00

We the People!

Blog for America: "On the Cheney lunch: the Vice President had something like 125 people who gave him $2000 each, for a total of $250,000. We had 9700 people, giving roughly $53 on average, totaling $508,000. "

Not We the Corporations.

2003-08-31T10:05:00.000-07:00

Take Your Country Back!

Joe Trippi, Dean campaign manager:

"What we need to do is to get people to participate in their democracy again. If people did that, and if thousands of them take small actions — a few hours of their time, a few dollars out of their wallet — there's a real chance that when a candidacy like ours wins the White House, the people will actually own their government again. And we'll actually have an honest discussion about all the issues that always get ground-down by the powers that don't want them to be raised. "

2003-08-30T15:22:00.000-07:00

VodkaPundit Sez: 50 Things al Qaeda Hates about America

What's scary is that conservatives hate a lot of the exact same things! Here's part of his list:

Freedom of speech - Faux News, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, Rush Lim.... aw, you know what I'm talking about

Unhindered scientific inquiry - stem cell research, anyone?

Recent advances in airline security - Bushies flip flop on air marshals

Your lewd women - the Christian Right

Worshipping false idols not punishable by death - ibid

The seduction of youth by Demi Moore - ibid

Louis Farrakhan's geeky little bowties make us look bad - the southern redneck contingent of the party

Trampy "Sex in the City" girls won't stick around for a seventh season - the Christian Right in their typical full blown hypocrisy mode

On pilot school admission essay question, spelling counts - Bush, taking his pilot's exam to skip ahead of the actual smart people in order to get into the National Guard

Can no one make Al Franken shut up? - Conservatives in general

Not one Arab on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" - ibid, the fact that it is even on television at all

Suspicious looks when loading a van full of manure and diesel oil - the Tim McVeigh / Ann Coulter wing of the party

You bastards fight back - Faux News, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, Rush Lim.... you know the drill, on "liberals"

2003-08-30T15:07:00.000-07:00

Dean Invites More Scrutiny By Switching Key Stances | WaPo

The mainstream media smear begins. At least you can clearly tell Dean is the frontrunner.

"Howard Dean, who sells himself as the presidential campaign's straightest shooter, is starting to throw voters some curves.

As he transitions from insurgent to the man to beat in the Democratic primary, Dean is modifying or switching his positions on several political issues. In recent weeks, Dean, the former Vermont governor, has softened his support for lifting the trade embargo on Cuba -- an important issue in voter-rich Florida -- and suggested he might opt out of the public campaign finance system he endorsed weeks earlier."

Trifling shifts in position, to be sure, but they won't let that stop them. He's a dem, so apparently he must be smeared. But let's flashback to these Bush statements all through his campaign, and even after, claiming he supported a patient's bill of rights in Texas as governor.

Bush Speaks on Patient Bill of Rights: "First, I was presented a bill that gave special interest treatment to selected HMOs. So I vetoed it. (Applause.) And then worked with our insurance commissioner to write new patient protections that I proudly signed into law the next legislative session. I don't want that to happen again. This time I hope we can get it right the first time."

Here's reality: "To the very first debate question, Gore said Bush does not support a strong patient’s bill of rights. Bush said he pushed through just such a law in Texas. Bush was wrong. He opposed the legislation.

In 1995 Bush vetoed a patient’s bill of rights, one that contained many of the provisions that he praised last night: report cards on health maintenance organizations, liberal emergency room access, and the elimination of a gag clause forbidding doctors from telling patients about more costly treatment options than HMO coverage."

The press basically ignored the issue. Yep, the SCLM strikes again.

2003-08-30T14:26:00.000-07:00

‘We Just Want to Live’ | Newsweek

"Before Gatta, 17, knew it, the Americans had slipped a hood over his head and cuffed his hands. “If you told them that the cuffs were hurting you, they would tighten them,” he says, holding out wrists that still bear the marks of captivity. “They kicked us and hit us.”

Even at that, Gatta was one of the lucky ones. He was released after nine uncomfortable days of incarceration in a U.S. Army prison, but 19 other men from his village of Al Bushnaydikh remain in custody six weeks after the raid. Their relatives have no idea where they’re being held, why they’ve been detained or how to get in touch with them. All that would be bad enough. But in Al Bushnaydikh, with its traditional rural economy, the absence of the men hasn’t only frightened and enraged the villagers left behind. It’s also made them poorer.

The tactics used by U.S. forces in places like Gatta’s village obviously aren’t winning friends among the Iraqi population. Plenty of media reports have made the point that the indignities suffered by locals caught up in the antiguerilla dragnet are helping to fuel widespread resentment of the U.S. presence in Iraq."

Which is exactly the plan of those attacking troops in Iraq. This adminstration cannot seem to help playing into the hands of the opposition. If they would focus on defense and not offense while restoring basic services to the Iraqi, their mission will be much easier to accomplish. This part is not rocket science is it?

Meanwhile, blogger Salam Pax in Iraq got a taste of the American jackboot method of winning hearts and minds in Iraq.

2003-08-30T09:44:00.000-07:00

Your Tax Dollars and Mine.... Bush's Crony Capitalism

As we predicted it would here, and here, the crony capitalism of the Bush administration has gotten completely out of control. They simply cannot resist the opportunity to enrich themselves at the expense of both the people of Baghad, and the American taxpayer, while 65% of the Iraq public remains unemployed and newly destitute.

A blogger from Iraq brings us this not so amusing anecdote in Baghdad Burning:

"Yesterday, I read how it was going to take up to $90 billion to rebuild Iraq. Bremer was shooting out numbers about how much it was going to cost to replace buildings and bridges and electricity, etc.

Listen to this little anecdote. One of my cousins works in a prominent engineering company in Baghdad- we’ll call the company H. This company is well-known for designing and building bridges all over Iraq. My cousin, a structural engineer, is a bridge freak. He spends hours talking about pillars and trusses and steel structures to anyone who’ll listen.

As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn’t too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc.

Let’s pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let’s pretend he hasn’t been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let’s pretend he didn’t work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let’s pretend he’s wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let’s pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let’s just use our imagination.

A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves- $50,000,000 !! "

These are your taxes dollars and mine paying for this, folks. Never before in the history of this country has an administration so blatantly ripped off the public. The greed is palpable, yet the so called "liberal" media stands nearly silent.

2003-08-30T09:30:00.000-07:00

Bringing new meaning to the term, Freudian Slip...

Whiskey Bar / Billmon: How Provincial

2003-08-29T17:16:00.000-07:00

Unfair and unbalanced? | The Independent, UK

"Cast your mind forward to the morning of 3 November 2004. Imagine, just for a moment, that George W Bush has gone down to ignominious defeat in the US presidential election, his once sky-high popularity ratings pickaxed and bludgeoned into the ground like some rotten fencepost on a Texas ranch. All across the nation, people are asking where it all went wrong for the chief executive who had seemed so immune from criticism for so long.

And the answer, they all agree, is the moment that the mighty Fox News Channel - the red-meat chomping, propaganda-spewing, flag-waving, all-screaming, ratings-topping cable station doubling as chief baggage carrier for the Bush administration - was reduced to utter humiliation by a single pesky New York comedian."

Dare to dream. Seriously though, having read the book I can testify to the fact that it utterly slays the right and the propaganda spewing liars who support them. Franken's book is a great read -- as funny as the whole sordid tale is revolting. Buy it -- you'll be glad you did.

2003-08-29T16:15:00.000-07:00

Money Troubles | Newsweek / Eleanor Clift

"After May 1, when Bush declared major combat operations in Iraq over, the White House with great fanfare announced it was shifting gears to focus on tax cuts. Bush pushed through his second round of tax cuts primarily benefiting the Dick Cheneys of the world, and now he’s pinching pennies on the backs of federal workers to stem the flow of red ink. Bush will get money from Congress for Iraq. No credible lawmaker proposes bailing out. But the question now is whether Bush will pay a political price for bungling the aftermath of an easy military victory and losing the peace through a combination of arrogance, naiveté and incompetence."

Gotta love how all the journalists have now adopted the revisionist "end to major combat operations" line of the Bushies. I guess revising the White House web site, and all the posted copies of his previous speeches really did the trick.

That it's even a question as to whether Bush will indeed pay a political price for his continuing "arrogance, naiveté and incompetence" is a sad commentary on both the public's apathy toward politics and the craven press who continually gives him a pass no matter what bungling, stupid mistakes he makes.

2003-08-29T15:14:00.000-07:00

Lawmakers and Lobbyists Mingle on Trip to London | WaPo

"The congressional contingent -- which travels for free, compliments of the Ripon Educational Fund -- was an impressive one. It included Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (N.Y.), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee; Rep. Michael G. Oxley (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee; Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.); and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). A bevy of top GOP aides also tagged along, including the chiefs of staff for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (Ill.), House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Tex.), House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) and Republican Conference Chairman Rep. Deborah Pryce (Ohio)."

Whores everyone of them, owned by K street, fulfilling the promise of America -- one dollar, one vote.

Wait, that's not right, is it?

2003-08-28T23:03:00.000-07:00

You go, girls!

2003-08-28T18:35:00.000-07:00

Campaign loopholes | SacBee

"Under the incumbent-friendly accounting rules written into Proposition 34 by veteran pols who sponsored it (and in fact wrote it to thwart an earlier flawed but less incumbent-friendly reform), as long as the transfers can be credited to actual individual donors to the old committee and in amounts not exceeding the Proposition 34 limits, they are legal.

Here's how this giant loophole works in practice. Bustamante recently accepted $300,000 from a wealthy Indian gambling tribe to his old lieutenant governor campaign committee. Then the money was transferred to his new gubernatorial campaign. According to his campaign manager, Richie Ross, Bustamante will be able to raise and transfer about $4 million in this way."

We'll never have true campaign finance reform unless someone other than the politicians writes it. Foxes and hen houses and all that.

2003-08-28T06:00:00.000-07:00

Halliburton's Deals Greater Than Thought | WaPo

"Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President Cheney, has won contracts worth more than $1.7 billion under Operation Iraqi Freedom and stands to make hundreds of millions more dollars under a no-bid contract awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, according to newly available documents.

The size and scope of the government contracts awarded to Halliburton in connection with the war in Iraq are significantly greater than was previously disclosed and demonstrate the U.S. military's increasing reliance on for-profit corporations to run its logistical operations."

Is that what it demonstrates? Because I think it demonstrates that the whole Bush adminstration has turned into a big money grab to transfer tax dollars from working people (and working people's children, 'cause that's how long it will take to pay the debts they are ringing up) to their wealthy cronies.

2003-08-28T00:11:00.000-07:00

Schwarzenegger Uses Talk Radio to Start Spelling Out His Views | LA Times

"'I'm pretty conservative,' he said on Hannity's show Wednesday. 'You know, I don't believe in spending. The first thing I'm going to do is go into Sacramento and put a spending cap on the politicians, because they can't help themselves, because it's ridiculous to spend money that you don't have.'"

Well duh, even our 10 year old knows that. Too bad the Bushies persist in the belief that spending money you don't have is good for the economy. Spend, spend, spend.

2003-08-28T00:01:00.000-07:00

U.S. Suspects It Received False Iraq Arms Tips | LA Times

"Frustrated at the failure to find Saddam Hussein's suspected stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, U.S. and allied intelligence agencies have launched a major effort to determine if they were victims of bogus Iraqi defectors who planted disinformation to mislead the West before the war.

The goal, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official, 'is to see if false information was put out there and got into legitimate channels and we were totally duped on it.' He added, 'We're reinterviewing all our sources of information on this. This is the entire intelligence community, not just the U.S.'"

And so the blame game continues, because it would be so unseemly to admit that they lied to us, over and over and over again. Totally duped, my ass.

2003-08-27T23:10:00.000-07:00

Right Wing Extremists - Onward Fascist Soldier

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore is not just a nutball about the ten commandments. Let's flashback to March 2002:

Roy Moore Speaks Out on Gays: "Moore described homosexuality as 'abhorrent, immoral, detestable' in a unanimous Alabama Supreme Court ruling last month denying a lesbian mother custody of her three children.

Several gay rights groups rallied against Moore and said he couldn't act as a fair judge, particularly when he noted that Alabama criminal laws prohibit sodomy. He added later that the state 'carries the power of the sword ... to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution.'

That was simply a statement of the states range of powers not an endorsement of using the death penalty or imprisonment against people because of their sexual orientation, Moore said."

Slip of the tongue, I'm sure.

2003-08-27T22:40:00.000-07:00

Bush Holds Federal Pay Raise to 2% in 2004 | WaPo

But wait, I thought Bush said that the way to stimulate the economy was to put money into the hands of the people? Are Federal workers just not considered "people" anymore? Or perhaps he just meant wealthy people when he said that.

George Bush, man of the (wealthy) people.

2003-08-27T21:11:00.000-07:00

Out of Step | Newsweek / Martha Brant

"Why is it politicians are always the last to know? The more time I spend in Washington, the more I realize that social change takes root everywhere but here.

While politicians and judges dither over legislation, small but radical shifts are taking place outside the political arena. It’s like Gandhi famously said and Martin Luther King Jr. famously quoted: “There go my people. I must catch them, for I am their leader.”

Let us pause here for a moment and simply say... No kidding! And this particular anomaly is no respector of party either. WTF is up with that?

"This week, the Human Rights Campaign, a gay advocacy group, came out with its second annual “Corporate Equality Index” report. The index scores the largest companies on issues like nondiscrimination policies and same-sex partner benefits. This year, the number of U.S. corporations winning a 100 percent rating nearly doubled to 21. Most telling, 198 of Fortune 500 companies now offer benefits to their employees’ gay and lesbian partners. In 1992, there was just one publicly traded company—software maker Lotus Development Corp. (now part of IBM, which has the same policy)—that did so. “Domestic-partner benefits have become a competitive issue,” says Kim Mills, HRC’s education director and editor of the report."

Corporations certainly seem to be getting it, but yet our many of our politicians still don't seem to notice. Or, more likely, said politicians (who choose the judges) are either: a) bigoted ideologues, b) pandering to right wing hate groups, or c) simply afraid of the wrath of these extremist groups. Let's face it, all Max Cleland had to do to rate being pictured next to Saddam Hussien in ads by republicans was to vote in favor of labor on the homeland security bill he first proposed.

Corporations, however, always seem to understand which side their bread is buttered on, and cutting gays out of the the potential talent pool from which to draw just isn't in the best interest of companies. Kudos to enlightened corporations. But even more kudos to all those who were "out" so that Corporate America could get a good look at just who their talented employees are and decide it doesn't make any difference if they're gay.

2003-08-27T19:26:00.000-07:00

Lights, Camera, Exploitation | The Village Voice

""DC 9/11 subtly rejiggers these events so that Cheney is hustled into the White House basement only after Bush is aloft—the inference being that the entire leadership was equally dazed and confused, and that relocating Bush was part of the solution rather than one of the problems. According to The Washington Post, Cheney, seconded by Condoleezza Rice, instructed Bush not to return to Washington. Nevertheless, the movie does attempt to deal with the circumstances that had the president largely incommunicado for the rest of the day. According to the Post account, there was little debate on Air Force One—the plane banked sharply and flew south to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, where Bush's first official statement was made at 12:36. He appeared hesitant and nervous—as does Bottoms in the movie. Within the hour, Air Force One had taken off for another base, and not until that evening, after eight hours flying from Florida to Louisiana to Nebraska to Washington, did the president address the nation.

The threat to the president's plane was soon recognized as bogus, although it took weeks for the White House to acknowledge it. By September 13, however, presidential image-maker Karl Rove had released his script: 'I'm not going to let some tinhorn terrorist keep the president of the United States away from the nation's capital,' Bush had supposedly complained, a line further improved in DC 9/11 as 'If some tinhorn terrorist wants me, tell him to come and get me! I'll be at home, waiting for the bastard!' Simultaneously, the real Rice was detailing Bush's instant grasp of the situation, explaining that he was the first in his administration to understand the meaning of the events. "

This repetitious propaganda is like spam -- you gotta think they wouldn't do it if it didn't work. But who in the world does this work on? AWOL boy dances around in a flight suit on an aircraft carrier. He postures with phrases like "bring 'em on" all the while knowing he broke his back to get a cushy job in the TX national guard so he didn't have to go to Vietnam. And now we have the fictional story of Bush as a hero on 9/11 because he finally brought his ass back to DC after 9 hours (yes, NINE)? So what would acting like a wussy have looked like? Running off to Crawford for another 30 days off first?

2003-08-26T07:59:00.000-07:00

GAO Cites Corporate Shaping of Energy Plan | WaPo

"The White House collaborated heavily with corporations in developing President Bush's energy policy but repeatedly refused to give congressional investigators details of the meetings, according to a federal report issued yesterday.

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said in the report that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham privately discussed the formulation of Bush's policy 'with chief executive officers of petroleum, electricity, nuclear, coal, chemical and natural gas companies, among others."

So it's official apparently. Sadly though, it makes no difference. Whorish as it is, the republicans are still pushing this version of the energy policy. Apparently they feel sure that energy corporations naturally have the best interests of the public at heart. Or maybe they just work for them instead of us.

2003-08-24T15:18:00.000-07:00

Unspinning the Spin

unmedia: principled pragmatism: "Ultimately though his entire credulity-straining and selective-assumption-laden thesis is that electing a Democrat will be Bad for the CountryTM because the GOP is too fractious and bitter and too moderate and too willing to work in a bipartisan way with the President of the United States. We must therefore appease the GOP for it's petulant threats of disruption by granting them complete control. The lunatics must be placed in charge of the asylum. We must burn the village to save it."

2003-08-24T14:58:00.000-07:00

Experts Doubt U.S. Claim on Iraqi Drones | AP

"Huddled over a fleet of abandoned Iraqi drones, U.S. weapons experts in Baghdad came to one conclusion: Despite the Bush administration's public assertions, these unmanned aerial vehicles weren't designed to dispense biological or chemical weapons. "

We've run out of synomyms for "lie" by now, haven't we?

2003-08-23T23:18:00.000-07:00

White House edited EPA's 9/11 reports | Seattle PI

"At the White House's direction, the Environmental Protection Agency gave New Yorkers misleading assurances that there was no health risk from the debris-laden air after the World Trade Center collapse, according to an internal inquiry. President Bush's senior environmental adviser yesterday defended the White House involvement, saying it was justified by national security.

The White House 'convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones' by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, according to a report issued late Thursday by EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley."

At risk of repeating myself, do these guy tell the truth about anything??

2003-08-23T17:16:00.000-07:00

Inquiry Shows How Blair's Inner Circle Made Case for Iraq War | NY Times

"This kind of activity normally takes place under deep cover in Whitehall, the complex of palatial Victorian and Georgian government buildings in downtown London where secrecy is the traditional norm and modern freedom of information practices have never taken hold.

But for the last two weeks, the inner workings of what has come to be known derisively as the 'spin' machine of Mr. Blair and his powerful communications director, Alastair Campbell, have been laid bare during daily sessions of a judicial inquiry in a packed chamber in the Royal Courts of Justice."

It's unfortunate for Blair that he doesn't live in a country where an entire political party controls all aspects of government and uses that power to ensure that its leaders remain unaccountable.

2003-08-23T11:36:00.000-07:00

Digging out from disaster | The Globe and Mail

"But there are no possible remedies for the fundamental cause of failure: Most Iraqis simply do not believe that the occupation is benevolent, and they therefore refuse to collaborate to make it a success. They do not report guerillas, saboteurs, thieves and traffickers unless they are personal enemies. They do nothing to protect the water pipes and electrical supply on which they themselves depend, let alone oil facilities and such. They are not helping the troops who are repairing schools and hospitals for the Iraqis' own families, and certainly do not warn soldiers if they spot imminent attacks."

[...]

"As it is, they are being asked to believe that U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair -- Christian imperialists both, as the Iraqis see it -- unaccountably want Iraqi Muslims to be prosperous and free. This they consider a childish deception, an insult to their intelligence. The Iraqi editorialists now writing in the newly liberated press do not agree on the real purpose of the occupation -- is it to undermine Islam? Is it to destroy the Arab nation? Is it to hand over Iraq to the Jews? Or is it just to overproduce Iraqi oil fields to wreck both OPEC and Iraq's future?

As for the freedom and equality bit, is it meant to encourage daughters to dishonour their families by talking with boys not their brothers? Or is there a wider aim to demoralize the Muslim community with alcohol, pornography and drugs?"

No, come on. They love us. Dubya says so; Rummy says so; Condi; everyone says so. I don't know where these UK reporters get off. Come on all you patriots... repeat after me.

The Iraqi's love us, this I know, 'cause Herr leader told me so....

/sarcasm

2003-08-23T11:23:00.000-07:00

Bush drops by, snags big check | Tacoma News Tribune

And taxpayers will pick up a nice chunk of the bill since he was able to fit in a 20 minutes speech taking credit for boosting the state's salmon population, even though he didn't have a damn thing to do with it.

2003-08-23T11:19:00.000-07:00

Bush "stupid and dangerous | The Age

"US President George W Bush is a stupid and dangerous man and the Australian government had lost credibility by supporting him, a former intelligence analyst says.

Andrew Wilkie resigned from the Office of National Assessments (ONA) in March and accused the Howard government of exaggerating information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

We know what he means - we feel the same way.

2003-08-23T11:11:00.000-07:00

Dirty Secrets | Tompaine.com

"So why aren't more people aware that George W. Bush is compiling what is arguably the worst environmental record of any president in recent history? The easy explanations -- that environmental issues are complex, that war and terrorism push most other concerns off the front pages -- are only part of the story. The real reason may be far simpler: Few people know the magnitude of the administration's attacks on the environment because the administration has been working very hard to keep it that way.

Like any successful commander in chief, Bush knows that putting the right person in the right place is the key to winning any war. This isn't just a matter of choosing business-friendly appointees for top positions. That's pretty much standard operating procedure for Republican administrations. What makes this administration different is the fact that it is filled with anti-regulatory zealots deep into its rank and file -- and these bureaucrats, unlike James Watt, are politically savvy and come from the very industries they're charged with regulating. The result is an administration uniquely effective at implementing its ambitious pro-industry agenda -- with a minimum of public notice."

There's politics and then there's raping and pillaging -- this administration's forte. Steven Griles, deputy secretary of the Interior, who was previously one of the most powerful energy-industry lobbyists in Washington; the behind-closed-doors Cheney energy task force; the administration's "Clean Skies" plan, which basically guts the Clean Air Act; the gutting of the Clean Water Act of 1972 by proposing rule changes which would allow 60% of the nation's lakes, rivers and streams to be exempted; "Undersecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey -- a veteran timber lobbyist who is now the chief architect of the nation's forest policy"; and the encouragement of sweetheart lawsuits which utilize the courts to very effectively allow gutting of laws without the hassle of public discussion -- the list of secret deals and backhanded tactics goes on and on and on. This is a great read on the extent of the damage that this administration is doing, and has already done, to the environment.

Bush lies, and cheats, and steals. When will enough be enough?

2003-08-23T10:27:00.000-07:00

Simon Quits California Recall Race | NYT

"Forbes denied that Simon's move came in response to any pressure from the party.

"There was absolutely no pressure, no phone calls -- this was a decision made by Bill Simon based on rational conclusions," Forbes said.

He said Simon would not be available for interviews."

My first thought when I read this was "Bullshit" -- of course there was pressure, and Simon's "rational conclusion" was that if he ever wanted any sort of position in the party again, he sure as hell better drop out so that dah-ling Ah-nold could stand alone in the spotlight. (Never mind that he doesn't know what to say whe he's in it.)

Then I got to the part where he wouldn't be available for interviews and I laughed out loud. Yeah, I bet he won't be available.

2003-08-21T22:08:00.000-07:00

Does the GOP Subvert Democracy? - Gray Davis may be onto something | Slate / Timothy Noah

Nice to know someone in the media noticed.

2003-08-21T20:56:00.000-07:00

Inslee's Iraq forum draws 1,100 | Seattle Post-Intelligencer

"A day before President Bush's planned visit to Washington state, about 1,100 people packed a forum organized by U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee and demanded an investigation into the administration's case for invading Iraq.

Inslee, a Democrat, and three panelists offered a litany of complaints about what they described as the administration's exaggerations, including suggestions that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were in cahoots and that Saddam tried to obtain uranium from Africa. 'Why didn't Americans get the straight scoop?' Inslee asked. 'Democracy demands an answer."

Unfortunately its not likely to get one. Just like 9/11 and the secret energy task force it will all go down the memory hole, uninvestigated because republicans hold a majority in the congress and will not allow. It's a good reminder why the American public suffers when one party controls everything.

2003-08-21T20:32:00.000-07:00

Inquiry of U.N. Bombing Focuses on Possible Ties to Iraqi Guards | NY Times

"American investigators looking into the suicide bombing of the United Nations compound on Tuesday are focusing on the possibility that the attackers were assisted by Iraqi security guards who worked there, a senior American official here said today"

But this can't be. They love us? Right? We freed them; we liberated them.

Right?

2003-08-21T20:10:00.000-07:00

This Isn't War - This Media Life

... the Big Dog speaks:

While there was clear bitterness on his part toward the successor who had rushed “to undo everything I’d done,” and the Republicans who “will run over you unless you beat their brains out,” there was a feisty humor too. Of the disputed Harken oil deal, Clinton said Bush had “sold the stock to buy the baseball team which got him the governorship which got him the presidency.”

Clinton kept referring to the media as (contrary to Kinsley’s view) the “supine” media, pointing out that when Bush insulted Helen Thomas (who, by asking a rough question in the infamous prewar press conference had, Clinton said, “committed the sin of journalism”), no “young journalists” stood up and walked out. The media, the supine media, was going to have to “go to the meat locker and take out its brains and critical skills.” Everybody seemed to love this. Clinton was not just the beloved former president, but he had become some sort of sassy oracle."

[...]

"This turned out to be the pivotal moment of the conference—even the primal one. When Clinton took questions, a young man from a technology company who identified himself as chairman of Bush-Cheney 2004 in California said he was offended by Clinton’s partisanship. To which Clinton, without hesitation, and with some kind of predatory gleam in his eye, said, “Good!” From there, Clinton went on, with emotion and anger, at a level seemingly foreign to most everyone here, to rip to shreds the motives, values, and legitimacy of the Republicans.

It was all anyone could talk about the next day. People seemed genuinely taken aback (some people kept offering that since it was late at night, in a bar, it didn’t quite count) that one of their own might have violated the accepted codes of lofty liberal behavior. There was a little current of fear at the sudden recognition that testosterone could fuel politics. It was a shock, apparently, that we might be this close to real feelings. That politics could actually be personal."

Yep, that's why we love him.

(via Cursor.org)