The Staton Jones Report

July 05, 2007

Olbermann on Bush

By Keith Olbermann

Jul. 04, 2007 | Finally tonight, as promised, a Special Comment on what is, in everything but name, George Bush's pardon of Scooter Libby.

"I didn't vote for him," an American once said, "But he's my president, and I hope he does a good job." That -- on this eve of the Fourth of July -- is the essence of this democracy, in 17 words. And that is what President Bush threw away yesterday in commuting the sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

The man who said those 17 words -- improbably enough -- was the actor John Wayne. And Wayne, an ultra-conservative, said them when he learned of the hair's-breadth election of John F. Kennedy instead of his personal favorite, Richard Nixon, in 1960.

"I didn't vote for him but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job." The sentiment was doubtlessly expressed earlier. But there is something especially appropriate about hearing it, now, in Wayne's voice: The crisp matter-of-fact acknowledgment that we have survived, even though for nearly two centuries now, our commander in chief has also served, simultaneously, as the head of one political party and often the scourge of all others.

We as citizens must, at some point, ignore a president's partisanship. Not that we may prosper as a nation, not that we may achieve, not that we may lead the world, but merely that we may function.

But just as essential to the 17 words of John Wayne is an implicit trust, a sacred trust: that the president for whom so many did not vote can in turn suspend his political self long enough, and for matters imperative enough, to conduct himself solely for the benefit of the entire republic.

Our generation's willingness to state "We didn't vote for him, but he's our president, and we hope he does a good job" was tested in the crucible of history, and earlier than most.

And in circumstances more tragic and threatening. And we did that with which history tasked us. We enveloped our president in 2001. And those who did not believe he should have been elected -- indeed those who did not believe he had been elected -- willingly lowered their voices and assented to the sacred oath of nonpartisanship.

And George W. Bush took our assent, and reconfigured it, and honed it, and shaped it to a razor-sharp point and stabbed this nation in the back with it.

Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.

Did so even before the appeals process was complete. Did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice. Did so despite what James Madison -- at the Constitutional Convention -- said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes "advised by" that president.

Did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told, "Break the law however you wish -- the president will keep you out of prison"?

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental compact between yourself and the majority of this nation's citizens, the ones who did not cast votes for you.

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the president of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the president of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party.

And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander in chief who puts party over nation. This has been, of course, the gathering legacy of this administration. Few of its decisions have escaped the stain of politics. The extraordinary Karl Rove has spoken of "a permanent Republican majority," as if such a thing -- or a permanent Democratic majority -- is not antithetical to that upon which rests our country, our history, our revolution, our freedoms.

Yet our democracy has survived shrewder men than Karl Rove. And it has survived the frequent stain of politics upon the fabric of government. But this administration, with ever-increasing insistence and almost theocratic zealotry, has turned that stain into a massive oil spill.

The protection of the environment is turned over to those of one political party who will financially benefit from the rape of the environment.

The protections of the Constitution are turned over to those of one political party who believe those protections unnecessary and extravagant and quaint.

The enforcement of the laws is turned over to those of one political party who will swear beforehand that they will not enforce those laws.

The choice between war and peace is turned over to those of one political party who stand to gain vast wealth by ensuring that there is never peace, but only war.

And now, when just one cooked book gets corrected by an honest auditor, when just one trampling of the inherent and inviolable fairness of government is rejected by an impartial judge, when just one wild-eyed partisan is stopped by the figure of blind justice, this president decides that he, and not the law, must prevail.

I accuse you, Mr. Bush, of lying this country into war. I accuse you of fabricating in the minds of your own people a false implied link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. I accuse you of firing the generals who told you that the plans for Iraq were disastrously insufficient. I accuse you of causing in Iraq the needless deaths of 3,586 of our brothers and sons, and sisters and daughters, and friends and neighbors. I accuse you of subverting the Constitution, not in some misguided but sincerely motivated struggle to combat terrorists, but to stifle dissent. I accuse you of fomenting fear among your own people, of creating the very terror you claim to have fought. I accuse you of exploiting that unreasoning fear, the natural fear of your own people who just want to live their lives in peace, as a political tool to slander your critics and libel your opponents. I accuse you of handing part of this republic over to a vice president who is without conscience and letting him run roughshod over it.

And I accuse you now, Mr. Bush, of giving, through that vice president, carte blanche to Mr. Libby to help defame Ambassador Joseph Wilson by any means necessary, to lie to grand juries and special counsel and before a court, in order to protect the mechanisms and particulars of that defamation with your guarantee that Libby would never see prison and, in so doing, as Ambassador Wilson himself phrased it here last night, of becoming an accessory to the obstruction of justice.

When President Nixon ordered the firing of the Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre" on October 20th, 1973, Cox initially responded tersely, and ominously.

"Whether ours shall be a government of laws and not of men is now for Congress and, ultimately, the American people."

President Nixon did not understand how he had crystallized the issue of Watergate for the American people. It had been about the obscure meaning behind an attempt to break in to a rival party's headquarters, and the labyrinthine effort to cover up that break-in and the related crimes.

And in one night, Nixon transformed it. Watergate -- instantaneously -- became a simpler issue: a president overruling the inexorable march of the law, insisting -- in a way that resonated viscerally with millions who had not previously understood -- that he was the law.

Not the Constitution. Not the Congress. Not the courts. Just him. Just, Mr. Bush, as you did, yesterday.

The twists and turns of Plamegate, of your precise and intricate lies that sent us into this bottomless pit of Iraq; your lies upon the lies to discredit Joe Wilson; your lies upon the lies upon the lies to throw the sand at the "referee" of prosecutor Fitzgerald's analogy, these are complex and often painful to follow and too much, perhaps, for the average citizen.

But when other citizens render a verdict against your man, Mr. Bush, and then you spit in the faces of those jurors and that judge and the judges who were yet to hear the appeal, the average citizen understands that, Sir.

It's the fixed ballgame and the rigged casino and the prearranged lottery all rolled into one, and it stinks.

And they know it.

Nixon's mistake, the last and most fatal of them, the firing of Archibald Cox, was enough to cost him the presidency. And in the end, even Richard Nixon could say he could not put this nation through an impeachment. It was far too late for it to matter then, but as the decades unfold, that single final gesture of nonpartisanship, of acknowledged responsibility not to self, not to party, not to "base," but to country, echoes loudly into history.

Even Richard Nixon knew it was time to resign. Would that you could say that, Mr. Bush. And that you could say it for Mr. Cheney. You both crossed the Rubicon yesterday. Which one of you chose the route no longer matters. Which is the ventriloquist, and which the dummy, is irrelevant. But that you have twisted the machinery of government into nothing more than a tawdry machine of politics is the only fact that remains relevant.

It is nearly July Fourth, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a king who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them -- or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them -- we would force our independence and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time -- and our leaders in Congress, of both parties -- must now live up to those standards which echo through our history. Pressure, negotiate, impeach: get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our democracy, away from its helm.

And for you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone -- anyone -- about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, "I didn't vote for him, but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

Posted by Steven at 10:22 AM | Comments (0)

November 10, 2006

Bush Falls Back on Old Ways

The Washington Post reports that Shrub is now calling up 41's old guard to help him bail out his failed Presidency.

How typical is that? In every enterprise that Chimpy ruined in his long and lame career, he's consistently followed this pattern. Step one: be handed a job he can't handle. Step two: take bad advice and generally ruin the company/country. Step three: call Baker & Co. and get a bailout going.

Déjà vu all over again.

Posted by Steven at 02:11 AM | Comments (0)

July 14, 2006

Guitarist Refused Entry By DHS

Update: I mischaracterized Emperor — it's a "black metal" band, which is distinctly different from "death metal". (Hat tip to Rich Boy.)

Death Black metal is style of pounding rock music that is particularly popular in Scandinavia. Apparently, the Department of Homeland Security are too busy listening to Christian Lite Rock and soliciting sex from minors to figure this out. I suspect they think "black metal" is Plutonium or something. (Plutonium is actually dull gray in color.)

This suspicion arises out of the fact that a member of the Norwegian death metal band, Emperor, has been blocked from entering the U.S. for a tour by the DHS. Why? No one knows. The other four members of the band have been issued visas, but despite appeals through diplomatic channels, guitarist, Samoth, has been denied. According to a news item at Blabbermouth.net:

Norwegian black metal legends EMPEROR arrive on U.S. soil for the first time in years one member short. Due to continued delays via the U.S. Immigration Services, guitarist Samoth is currently awaiting approval for legal entry into the United States. The process for the band's arrival started months ago and despite daily calls from both Norwegian and U.S. representatives of the band to multiple departments in the U.S. embassy in Oslo and Stateside governmental departments and agencies, his status still pends.

Samoth comments, "What can I say? As things stand today, I'm not allowed to enter the U.S. It's an extremely unfortunate situation and totally out of my control. The reality is that I'm still waiting for a 'waiver' that apparently has to come from the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. We have done everything we can and continue the dialogue with all agencies involved. It has been an exhausting and very costly process. I've had several visas issued in the past, and technically there should be no reason for them not to grant one now."

Uff da! Could our country get any dumber? Answer: yes.

Posted by Winston Smith at 07:08 AM | Comments (0)

June 22, 2006

Bush Incites Insurgency

President Bush is in Hungary doing what he does best: acting like an imbecile. To wit, he actually said this:

"The lesson of the Hungarian experience is clear," Bush said in the courtyard of Buda Castle where he celebrated the coming 50th anniversary of Hungary's bloody revolt against communist rule. "Liberty can be delayed, but it cannot be denied,"

...

"From this spot, you could see tens of thousands of students and workers and other Hungarians, marching through the streets," Bush said. "These Hungarian patriots tore down the statue of Josef Stalin and defied an empire to proclaim their liberty."

...

"You never lost hope," Bush said. "You kept faith in freedom, and 50 years after you watched Soviet tanks invade your beloved city, you now watch your grandchildren play in the streets of a free Hungary."

Well what's wrong with that? Nothing really, except that Bush held this up as an example to the Iraqi people. Note to Bush: the Iraqis are already following that example, it's called "the insurgency," idiot.

Posted by Winston Smith at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)

June 19, 2006

Republicans: Supporting the Terrorists

Republicans support terrorists? Well, not all the terrorists, just the ones who only kill Americans.

Last week, an aide to Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki told reporters that the PM was considering an deal to end the insurgency that would include pardoning any insurgents who had "not shed Iraqi blood." That's kind of a roundabout way of saying that the amnesty would cover only insurgents who's IEDs sent home American soldiers in wheelchairs and body bags.

Although another aide confirmed that this had been discussed, Maliki was furious at the leak and prompty fired the aide who originally spoke to reporters. What kind of an asshole would think that pardoning people one the basis that they only killed Americans was a good idea?

The kind of asshole that gets elected to office by Republicans.

SENATOR TED STEVENS - “IF THAT’S AMNESTY, I’M FOR IT:” “I really believe we ought to try to find some way to encourage that country to demonstrate to those people who have been opposed to what we're trying to do, that it's worthwhile for them and their children to come forward and support this democracy. And if that's amnesty, I'm for it. I'd be for it. And if those people who are, come forward… if they bore arms against our people, what's the difference between those people that bore arms against the Union in the War between the States? What’s the difference between the Germans and Japanese and all the people we’ve forgiven?”

SENATOR LAMAR ALEXANDER COMPARED IRAQI AMNESTY FOR TERRORISTS TO NELSON MANDELA’S PEACE EFFORTS. “Is it not true that Nelson Mandela's courage and his ability to create a process of reconciliation and forgiveness was a major factor in what has been a political miracle in Africa…Did not Nelson Mandela, win a - the co-winner of - a noble Nobel Peace Prize just for this sort of gesture?”

SENATOR SAXBY CHAMBLISS: AMNESTY IS OK FOR EX-INSURGENTS AS LONG AS THEY ARE ON OUR SIDE NOW. “Is it not true today that we have Iraqis who are fighting the war against the insurgents, who at one time fought against American troops and other coalition troops as they were marching to Baghdad, who have now come over to our side and are doing one heck of a job of fighting along, side by side, with Americans and coalition forces, attacking and killing insurgents on a daily basis?”

Support the troops! The insurgent troops!

Meanwhile, the Republicans continue to play politics with the war by introducing straw-man resolutions and blocking any debate or amendment on them. This leaves legislators with the choice of voting for a bullshit resolution or appearing to take a radical "anti-troop, defeatist" position. John Murtha's proposals are not only taken out of context by his opponents, but often manufactured entirely. Whenever a Democrat proposes a sensible troop redeployment, the Republicans raise a mindless "cut-and-run" proposal and pretend that Congress is voting on the Democrat plan. They're not.

Only three Republican House members had the cajones to vote against last week's fluff -- revealing how desperate and mercifully unburdened by honesty the Republican leadership has become.

You see, when there's a real issue that actually affects the troops, kleptocrats like Ted Stevens show that they don't really care about this country as long as they get their billion dollar bridge to nowhere pork projects.

Covering for Iraqis who kill U.S. soldiers is a Republican tradition that dates back to the 80's. When Saddam Hussein's forces sank the USS Stark, Reagan squelched any talk of repercussions. What's a few dead sailors and a sunken Navy ship between friends?

Posted by Winston Smith at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)

May 19, 2006

Settle Down Now

President Bush has finally figured out why the American people don't like him, and like most things President Bush figures out, he's got it wrong. Apparently, we're just "unsettled." As Bush explained it to NBC's David Gregory:

Gregory: They’re not just unsettled, sir. They disapprove of the job you’re doing.

President Bush: That’s unsettled.

So settle down, people! You're endagering the smooth operation of the Bush Decidership!

Posted by Winston Smith at 09:21 AM | Comments (0)

May 18, 2006

Give Rumsfeld a Banana

Seeing as how the Republican Party has mastered the fine art of crapping in their hands and flinging it, you'd think that there wasn't much our fellow primates, the knuckle-dragging great apes, could do to one-up our other fellow primates, the knuckle-dragging Republicans. But you'd be wrong.

It turns out that apes can apes can plan ahead. If you've heard anything about Iraq — oh, since about March, 2003 — it would become clear that we'd have been better off letting Orangutans plan the invasion of Iraq. Oh well, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you go to war with the chimps that are in power, not the chimps you wish were in power.

Posted by Winston Smith at 07:50 PM | Comments (0)

April 07, 2006

Scott McClellan Won't Comment on an Ongoing Investigation

Does Scott McClellan ever say anything different? Ever?

Posted by Winston Smith at 04:41 PM | Comments (0)

February 15, 2006

The Disappearing Beers

If you haven't read about the Cheney hunting mishap yet, there's an interesting article on MSNBC. What's interesting about it is not the information, but how it changes an hour after it was posted. Below is a before/after screen shot. Can you see the difference (hint, it's not the banner ads):

(Click for full-size image)	(Click for full-size image)
Before	After

Update

Firedog Lake has a synopsis of the Cheney interview clips released so far. Turns out, Cheney admits to "having a beer with lunch" — several hours before the incident. Meanwhile, on Planet Freeper, we have morons who are insisting:

Investigators have said there was no indication that alcohol was involved.

What investigators? The ones who were held at bay for 14 hours?

Posted by Winston Smith at 12:08 PM | Comments (0)

The New Faces of Abu Ghraib

A lot of people (read: wingnuts) missed Donald Rumsfelds confession in front of Congress that there were photos of the torture at Abu Ghraib that would shock and horrify anyone who saw them — even heartless "conservative" fucktards. The photos that were released should have lead to a call for Rumsfeld head, but they lacked the obvious brutality needed to prevent assholes like Rush Limbaugh from comparing the torture to fraternity hijinks.

The Syndney Morning Herald has just published 15 of the 60 photos that the ACLU is suing to have released by the DOD. Here's one:

What would the wingnuts say to that? Probably "let's invade Austrailia."

Here is a different image in much higher resolution.

Yeah... just like my college days.

Posted by Winston Smith at 09:14 AM | Comments (0)

February 13, 2006

Fully Involved

"I reject outright the suggestion that President Bush was anything less than fully involved," said White House homeland security adviser Frances Fragos Townsend.

Posted by Winston Smith at 06:31 PM | Comments (0)

February 03, 2006

Justice Delayed

Scooter Libby's trial date has been set ... two months after the general election in November. "Justice delayed ... is justice denied" as the old saying goes, but this doesn't refer to Scooter. Rather, the U.S. is being punished by letting this miscreant and traitor remain free on bond while the truth is delayed until it cannot do damage to the GOP.

District Judge Reggie B. Walton said jury selection will begin on Jan. 8, 2007. Judge Walton said that he had hoped the trial could begin next September, but that Mr. Libby's lawyer, Theodore V. Wells Jr., will be tied up with another case. Republicans are likely to be pleased that the trial will be held after the Congressional elections.

Yes, that's right. His trial is delayed because it's inconvenient for this lawyers to hold it sooner. Oh, I'm sorry! We're oh so upset we put Mr. Libby in such an awkward spot. Maybe he can ask the judge to drop the charges as he claims he's innocent and thus a trial is almost certainly going to cause his distress! Vapors, even!

What the FUCK is going on here? Why does Libby's defense team get to set the date? Oh, maybe because of the heavy rollers funding his defense.

Meanwhile, efforts to raise money for Mr. Libby's defense are moving ahead briskly. Mr. Libby has pleaded not guilty to five charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the exposure of a C.I.A. operative's identity.

But the managers of the fund-raising effort on behalf of Mr. Libby say they have already reached the $2 million mark and expect to increase the pace when they start a fund-raising Web site. "It's a particularly excellent start," said Mel Sembler, the chairman of the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust.

Mr. Sembler, a Florida developer who is the former finance chairman of the state's Republican Party and the Republican National Committee, said Mr. Libby's lawyers had estimated that a solid defense would cost at least $5 million or $6 million.

The fund is not obliged under the law to disclose any details, including the number of donors, their identities or the amounts given. Barbara Comstock, a Republican communications strategist and an official of the fund, declined to disclose any of those details, except to say that there had been "hundreds of individuals."

Mr. Sembler said that there was a practical limitation in that federal law requires that taxes be paid on any gifts over $11,000 given in 2005 and over $12,000 this year. He said several donations had been made in those amounts.

The fund's steering committee is composed of several prominent Republicans, a few Democrats and several friends of Mr. Libby. It includes three former Republican senators, Fred Thompson of Tennessee, Alan K. Simpson of Wyoming and Spencer Abraham of Michigan; two former Republican presidential candidates, Jack F. Kemp and Steve Forbes; and Prof. Bernard Lewis of Princeton and Prof. Francis Fukuyama of Johns Hopkins.

And justice for all. In a pig's eye. This man should be hanged for damaging the U.S. and instead he's collecting $12K donations from the powerful. Tell me that's the patriotic thing to do, I dare you.

Posted by Steven at 11:02 AM | Comments (0)

November 29, 2005

The Ghosts of Nixon

Hey, guess which U.S. President is more paranoid: Bush or Nixon? Give up? You needn't, it's obvious.

Bush is coming unglued, according to several reports based upon interviews with government officials who have been in "the presence" of His Majesty, George the 2nd. He thinks God put him in power. He thinks the war in Iraq is going well. He thinks his friends are out to get him (one out of three isn't that awful a record).

The president returns to Washington today after another vacation in Crawford, Texas, and the White House hopes that talk of immigration reform and the Samuel Alito nomination will distract the public from worries over the war in Iraq and continuing developments in the CIA leak case.

As for George W. Bush? He doesn't need any distracting. Two new reports -- one in the New Yorker, one in the New York Daily News -- suggest that the president is living in a state of denial about the troubles facing him and the country he is supposed to lead for three more years.

In the New Yorker, Seymour Hersh tells the tale of a former senior administration official who visited Iraq after the 2004 presidential election and returned to inform Bush that the war wasn't going well. "I said to the president, 'We're not winning the war,'" the official told Hersh. "And he asked, 'Are we losing?' I said, 'Not yet.'" Bush was "displeased" with the answer, the official told Hersh. "I tried to tell him. And he couldn't hear it."

Hersh paints the picture of a president who believes that he was chosen by God to lead the United States after 9/11, a man whose faith blots out any concern over setbacks in Iraq. "The president is more determined than ever to stay the course," a former defense official tells Hersh. "Bush is a believer in the adage 'People may suffer and die, but the Church advances.'" The former official tells Hersh that Karl Rove and Dick Cheney reinforce the president's delusions by having him appear only in front of friendly audiences and keeping him "in the gray world of religious idealism, where he wants to be anyway." Bush, the former official says, has no idea that he's living in a bubble.

In the Daily News, Thomas DeFrank and Kenneth Bazinet say the state of denial extends well beyond Bush. They quote a "card-carrying member of the Washington GOP establishment with close ties to the White House" who dined recently with several senior presidential aides and left shaking his head. "There is just no introspection there at all," he said. "It is everybody else's fault -- the press, gutless Republicans on the Hill. They're still in denial." Another "close Bush confidant" says: "The staff basically still has an unyielding belief in the wisdom of what they're doing. They're talking to people who could help them, but they're not listening."

Meanwhile, the Daily News says, the president is growing paranoid about the people around him, furious over leaks about the mood inside the White House but unsure which of his aides is spreading the stories. One "knowledgeable source" says: "He's asking [friends] for opinions on who he can trust and who he can't."

Posted by Steven at 10:01 AM | Comments (0)

November 28, 2005

Another GOP House Member Busted

In case you hadn't heard, GOP Rep. Cunningham pleaded guilty to bribery (and other) charges today, and (mirableu!) resigned from the House.

Over at TPM, they are cataloging this guy's crimes, and they go well beyond petty theft and bribery.

On the other hand, you gotta admit, it takes guts for a GOP member to say:

"The truth is I broke the law, concealed my conduct and disgraced my office," he told reporters, his voice strained with emotion. "I know I will forfeit my reputation, my worldly possessions -- most importantly the trust of my friends and family."

Almost makes me wanna hug the lug, for being honest for the first time in so long, he can't remember. And then send him to the Big House.

Can't wait for DeLay's turn at the screw.

Posted by Steven at 09:17 PM | Comments (0)

September 28, 2005

About F***ing Time!

Tom Delay, the "Hammer", is INDICTED.

FINALLY.

Read about it here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Posted by Steven at 11:39 AM | Comments (1)

September 08, 2005

"What Didn't Go Right?"

In Salon Sidney Blumenthal has penned a scathing essay on the Bush Administration's failure to deal with Hurricane Katrina.

Even as the floodwaters poured into New Orleans, unimpeded by any federal effort to stanch the flow, the White House mustered a tightly coordinated rapid response of political damage control. Karl Rove assumed emergency management powers. The strategy was to dampen any criticism of the president, rally the Republican base, and cast blame on the mayor of New Orleans and governor of Louisiana, both Democrats. It was a classic Bush ploy against the backdrop of crisis. The object was to polarize the nation along partisan lines as swiftly as possible. While policy collapsed, politics reigned. Once again, Bush the divider, not the uniter, emerged.

The White House released a waterfall of themes. No matter how contradictory, administration officials maintained message discipline. The first imperative was to disclaim and deflect responsibility. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan admonished the press corps, "This is not a time to get into any finger-pointing or politics or anything of that nature." The president down to the lowliest talk show hosts echoed the line that criticism during the crisis and reporting its causes were unseemly and vaguely unpatriotic.

After establishing that line, the White House laid out other messages to avoiding responsibility. Bush declared, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." From his bully pulpit he intended to drown out the reports trickling into print media that he had cut the funding for rebuilding the levees and for flood control. Then Bush assumed the pose of the president above the fray, sadly calling the response "unacceptable." Meanwhile, he praised "Brownie."

The mendacity and sheer selfishness of the GOP has never been cast in such bright light. They are shameless, and will never accept the "blame" that they struggle to shift to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. They are the worst sort of people this nation breeds.

Posted by Steven at 10:09 AM | Comments (0)

September 07, 2005

Katrina Timeline

Here is an excellent Katrina timeline, for those wondering who said what to whom, first.

Thanks to Lane for providing this link.

Posted by Steven at 08:28 PM | Comments (0)

Lawyers, Guns and Money

Alas, Warren is not alive to re-write his anthem to George W. Bush. The song, obstensibly about a rich-kid partying in Central America, piteously calls for his dad to "send lawyers, guns and money. The shit has hit the fan."

Sound familiar? As we all read in Shrub: The Short But Happy Political Life of G. W. Bush, our chimp-in-command is famous for his "bail me out, Daddy!" plea. Every single business or venture that this guy has had the reins has failed (he never had any control of the Texas Rangers Baseball team, not that they've done spectacularly well under Tom Hicks) and now the United States itself is has been brought to it's knees by this master of disaster. Even his closest friends created Enron and nearly destroyed the economy of Houston.

I'd love to hear Warren's updated version of Lawyers, Guns and Money, but I dread the final bars of this Bush Administration.

Posted by Steven at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)

September 04, 2005

Congress: Reject ALL Bush SC Nominees

Here's a staggeringly good idea: reject all Bush Supreme Court nominees. The man has shown staggering incompetence in selecting individuals for high office, why let him destroy the SC for the next thirty years?

Posted by Steven at 11:32 AM | Comments (0)

August 08, 2005

Bush Takes Heat Off Of Abramoff

President Bush demoted a federal prosecutor who was pursing a kick-back investigation aimed at Jack Abramoff, effectively ending the investigation.

A U.S. grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor and the inquiry ended soon after.

The previously undisclosed Guam inquiry is separate from a federal grand jury in Washington that is investigating allegations that Abramoff bilked Indian tribes out of millions of dollars.

...

A day later, the chief prosecutor, U.S. Atty. Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.

The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status, Black had held the acting U.S. attorney assignment for more than a decade.

The acting U.S. attorney was a controversial official in Guam. At the time he was removed, Black was directing a long-term investigation into allegations of public corruption in the administration of then-Gov. Carl Gutierrez. The inquiry produced numerous indictments, including some of the governor's political associates and top aides.

Black also arranged for a security review in the aftermath of Sept. 11 that was seen as a potential threat to loose immigration rules favored by local business leaders. In fact, the study ordered by Black eventually cited substantial security risks in Guam and the Northern Marianas.

Abramoff, who then represented the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, alerted his clients in a memo about the expected report and warned: "It will require some major action from the Hill and a press attack to get this back in the bottle."

It didn't turn out to be that hard to end the investigation, now did it? Scumsucking "the rules apply to others" GOP pull another one. Maybe this time Bush will get what he deserves for it? Fat chance.

Posted by Steven at 11:46 AM | Comments (0)

August 07, 2005

"Douchebag of the Year" Blows HIs Last Gasket on CNN

We're a bit late in repeating this story about Robert Novak popping off a "bullshit" comment and storming (slowly -- he's an old fuck) off the CNN set. But better late than never!

So why did Robert Novak flee the set of "Inside Politics" Thursday? Jame Carville said last night that his CNN colleague has "probably got a lot going on in his life." But the Progress Report, Mickey Kaus and a lot of others are speculating today that Novak's blow-up just might have been related to the book that was sitting on a table on the set: A fine looking, hardbound volume of "Who's Who in America."

Now, we've always thought that "Who's Who" was a little cheesy, but it's not the sort of thing that was send us stomping off national TV. For Novak, though, "Who's Who" raises a thorny question: Is he intentionally trying to spread a false story about how he came to know that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

In his column on the Valerie Plame case earlier this week, Novak said -- as he did in a column back in October 2003 -- that anyone could have learned the name of Joseph Wilson's wife by looking up Wilson's listing in "Who's Who." Although Novak hasn't said explicitly that he learned Plame's name that way, the New York Times said earlier this week that Novak's repeated references to the book seemed to be a suggestion that administration officials weren't as involved in Plame's outing as other reports would have us believe. "In drawing renewed attention to the published listing," Anne Kornblut wrote in the Times, "Mr. Novak seemed to suggest more directly than ever before that the scrutiny that has focused on which of his sources provided him the name might have been misplaced, and that he might well have figured it out by himself."

Poor Novak. He's getting beaten up by his own MSM folks! Boo-hoo-hoo. Don't miss Jon Stewart's hilarious sendup of the whole event on The Daily Show's website.

Posted by Steven at 12:52 PM | Comments (0)

August 01, 2005

"Douchebag of the Year" Extends His Reign

Robert "Douchebag of the Year" Novak has broken his silence after reports emerged that he was warned by the CIA not to reveal Valerie Plame's identity.

In his syndicated column, Novak did not dispute that former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow told him he should not print the covert officer's name, Valerie Plame, during conversations they had prior to Novak's July 14, 2003 column.

But Novak reasserted that no CIA official ever told him in advance ''that Valerie Plame Wilson's disclosure would endanger her or anybody else.''

So, Bob Novak, patriot, writer and (no doubt it's on his blog) lover, has said that he went ahead and exposed a CIA agent because even though the Agency called him and told him not to do it, they didn't threated to rip his nuts off if he did? Man, these guys use torture for everything, don't they?

Novak has once again put in a stellar performance and does (in fact) deserve the "Douchebag of the Year" award from The Daily Show for two years running.

Posted by Steven at 02:13 PM | Comments (0)

Chickenhawk President Sends Psycho to Represent Us at UN

Our chickenshit President 'recess appointed' John "Psycho" Bolton to be the U.S. representative at the United Nations (a governing body that Bolton claims 'doesn't even exist') over the objections of Democratic and Republican Senators (thanks a million, Vonovitch). Bush, unable to get his dirtbag appointee through the cheesecloth Senate approval process, has show once again that he's more than willing to "be the Man" and ignore the rules and decorum of government in favor of his 'My Way or the Highway' ("This would be a lot easier if I was a Dictator" - G. W. Bush) approach of "leadership".

Like Molly Ivins said, the GOP doesn't know how to govern, only rule. God help us all now that a certified crazy is representing us at the UN.

Posted by Steven at 10:28 AM | Comments (0)

July 26, 2005

Prosecutor's Net Widens in Plame Investigation

It just got a little bit hotter in the Bush White House today, as the Washington Post is reporting that the number of Bush WH staff interviewed by the investigation is wider than previously thought.

Prosecutors have questioned former CIA director George J. Tenet and deputy director John E. McLaughlin, former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow, State Department officials, and even a stranger who approached columnist Robert D. Novak on the street.

In doing so, special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has asked not only about how CIA operative Valerie Plame's name was leaked but also how the administration went about shifting responsibility from the White House to the CIA for having included 16 words in the 2003 State of the Union address about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium from Africa, an assertion that was later disputed.

Most of the questioning of CIA and State Department officials took place in 2004, the sources said.

The suspense is killing me ... when will Rove be Frog Marched?

Posted by Steven at 11:36 PM | Comments (0)

July 24, 2005

"Eight Days in July"

Frank Rich, writing in the New York Times this Sunday, has succinctly summarized the Rove/Plame situation.

But the scandal has metastasized so much at this point that the forgotten man Mr. Bush did not nominate to the Supreme Court is as much a window into the White House's panic and stonewalling as its haste to put forward the man he did. When the president decided not to replace Sandra Day O'Connor with a woman, why did he pick a white guy and not nominate the first Hispanic justice, his friend Alberto Gonzales? Mr. Bush was surely not scared off by Gonzales critics on the right (who find him soft on abortion) or left (who find him soft on the Geneva Conventions). It's Mr. Gonzales's proximity to this scandal that inspires real fear.

As White House counsel, he was the one first notified that the Justice Department, at the request of the C.I.A., had opened an investigation into the outing of Joseph Wilson's wife. That notification came at 8:30 p.m. on Sept. 29, 2003, but it took Mr. Gonzales 12 more hours to inform the White House staff that it must "preserve all materials" relevant to the investigation. This 12-hour delay, he has said, was sanctioned by the Justice Department, but since the department was then run by John Ashcroft, a Bush loyalist who refused to recuse himself from the Plame case, inquiring Senate Democrats would examine this 12-hour delay as closely as an 18½-minute tape gap. "Every good prosecutor knows that any delay could give a culprit time to destroy the evidence," said Senator Charles Schumer, correctly, back when the missing 12 hours was first revealed almost two years ago. A new Gonzales confirmation process now would have quickly devolved into a neo-Watergate hearing. Mr. Gonzales was in the thick of the Plame investigation, all told, for 16 months.

Thus is Mr. Gonzales's Supreme Court aspiration the first White House casualty of this affair. It won't be the last. When you look at the early timeline of this case, rather than the latest investigatory scraps, two damning story lines emerge and both have legs.

Joe Bob sez, "check it out!"

Posted by Steven at 02:31 PM | Comments (0)

July 11, 2005

Dogpile on Scotty McClellan

Today's White House Press conference sounded almost like a real one, with grown up reporters asking hard questions even!

MCCLELLAN: If you’ll let me finish.

QUESTION: No, you’re not finishing. You’re not saying anything.
You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson’s wife. So don’t you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn’t he?

MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.

QUESTION: Do you think people will accept that, what you’re saying today?

MCCLELLAN: Again, I’ve responded to the question.

QUESTION: You’re in a bad spot here, Scott…
(LAUGHTER)
… because after the investigation began — after the criminal investigation was under way — you said, October 10th, 2003, I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this, from that podium. That’s after the criminal investigation began.

Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.

MCCLELLAN: No, that’s not a correct characterization. And I think you are well aware of that.
We know each other very well. And it was after that period that the investigators had requested that we not get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation.

And we want to be helpful so that they can get to the bottom of this. Because no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.

I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I’m just not going to do that.

Sucks to work for lying liars, don't it Scotty?

Watch the video here.

Posted by Steven at 04:51 PM | Comments (0)

July 08, 2005

UK Home Secretary On Drugs

The UK Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, says that there is no connection between the War in Iraq and yesterday's bombings in London. Suuuuure. Riiiiiight. What a delusional git.

He said the bombers wanted to destroy the "very essence of our society".

Mr Clarke said: "There is no evidence [it] had anything to do with the Iraq war... of course it may have done and we'll have to see."

Anti-war MP George Galloway has said Londoners "had paid the price" of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr Clarke told the BBC that any conflicts or wars could increase tensions, but said those tensions could exist anyway.

He said: "The fact is that the people who make these kind of attacks are about destroying the very essence of our society: our democracy, our media, our multicultural society and so on.

"That's not about Iraq or any other particular foreign policy issue, it's about a fundamentalist attack on the way we live our lives."

You keep thinking that, Mr. Secretary, while Al-Qaeda prepares another round of bombing.

Posted by Steven at 11:04 AM | Comments (0)

June 28, 2005

Bush's Ambassador to Canada Is An Idiot

It's no secret that Presidents choose many ambassadorial picks from the ranks of large political donators, but Bush has gone the extra mile with his choices. Witness Bush's selection of David Wilkins for the ambassador to Canada. NPR did a story today about him and his staggering lack of knowledge of Canada and how the Canadians perceive his selection. Pay close attention to the answer he gives about where he went when he last visited Canada. What a maroon.

Posted by Steven at 11:26 PM | Comments (0)

June 23, 2005

Reasonable Seizure Becomes Less Reasonable

Thanks to the increasingly irrelevant FifthAmendment, the government may seize your property if there is a public interest in doing so, in which case, they must also compensate you for it.

Traditionally, "public interest" meant, well, "public interest." In other words, it was limited to things of clear value to the public, such as roads or schools. It was later extended to included blighted areas that were too far gone to gentrify.

Today, then the Supreme Court ruled that this could include shopping malls and office parks. Don't believe me? Read this. The argument is that these facilities will increase tax revenue. Unfortunately, that's iffy.

What isn't iffy is that building office parks and shopping malls will enrich the developers who build them. In her dissenting opinion, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor pointed out that the only guaranteed benecificaries of these projects will be the kind of people who have the money and influence to push for them. Justices Renquist, Scalia, and Thomas joined in the dissent.

Holy fuck. I agree with Justices Scalia, Renquist and Thomas.

Posted by Winston Smith at 11:38 AM | Comments (0)

June 07, 2005

Bush Era Ethics: Gansta Intimidation of Whistle-Blowers

Remember when every bad thing that happened during the Clinton Years was personally his fault? Well, we're applying that standard today. A whistle-blower from Los Alamos labs was beaten nearly to death and told to "keep his mouth shut." This sure sounds like the kind of gangster-level malevolence the Rethuglicans would do, doesn't it? I wonder if the President himself ordered the "hit".

A Los Alamos lab whistle-blower scheduled to testify before Congress was badly beaten in an attack outside a Santa Fe bar.

Tommy Hook was in a hospital recovering from a fractured jaw and other injuries, his wife, Susan Hook, said Monday.

Hook's wife and his lawyer believe the attack was designed to keep him quiet.

Susan Hook said the assailants told her husband during the attack early Sunday that "if you know what's good for you, you'll keep your mouth shut."

Tommy Hook has a pending lawsuit against the University of California alleging whistle-blower retaliation. He had been scheduled to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee later this month about alleged financial irregularities at the nuclear weapons lab.

Police and the FBI said they are investigating.

According to Hook's wife, the 52-year-old lab employee got a telephone call late Saturday night -- after he was already in bed -- wanting to meet with him at a Santa Fe bar about 45 minutes from their home.

She said her husband told her the man never showed up, but as he was leaving the topless bar's parking lot, a group of men pulled him from his car and beat him.

"They left him in the parking lot for dead," Hook's lawyer, Robert Rothstein, said Monday at a news conference where pictures of Hook's bruised and swollen face were passed around.

His wife, who sobbed when the pictures were distributed, said the attackers "beat him up with their feet first, because he has shoe marks on his face, and then used their fists."

Remember, we're just using the GOP's own standards here in blaming the guy at the top.

Posted by Steven at 08:47 PM | Comments (0)

June 06, 2005

Idiocy Roundup #200

There were some things that I was going to blog about, but Democratic Underground got them all in todays, Top 10 Conservative Idiots. This issue is their 200^th edition of the Top 10, and it's a really gem. Congrats DU!

Posted by Winston Smith at 01:48 PM | Comments (0)

May 26, 2005

DeLay PAC Treasurer Indicted

The Washington Post is reporting that Bill Ceverha, treasurer of TRMPAC, violated Texas election code by not reporting $600,000 in income to the Texas Ethics Committee.

State District Judge Joe Hart, in a letter outlining his ruling to attorneys in the case, said the money, much of it corporate contributions, should have been reported to the Texas Ethics Commission.

The ruling means Bill Ceverha, treasurer of the group, called the Texans for a Republican Majority political action committee, will have to pay nearly $200,000. It will be divided among those who brought the suit against Ceverha, five Democratic candidates who lost legislative races in 2002.

The Democrats who sued TRMPAC claimed Ceverha violated the state election law, designed to keep elections free from "the taint of corporate cash."

The Democrats alleged that some $600,000 in corporate money was illegally used to influence Texas House races in 2002, the year Republicans won control of the House for the first time in 130 years.

I'm getting pretty tired of the "defense" that this is revenge from the Democrats. We're out of power, so the only weapon we have left is a strange little notion called "the Law" which, clearly, the GOP doesn't respect anymore.

How long is it going to take before the noose goes around DeLay's neck?

Posted by Steven at 02:20 PM | Comments (0)

Keeping the Nightmare Alive

If the Democrats take back the majority in Congress in 2006, followed by the Whitehouse in 2008, don't be too surprised if the stench of Bush's failed Iraq adventure still clings tenaciously to our foreign policy. Remember that a sizeable number of the Democrats in the Senate voted — on their own accord — to authorize the disaster, so someone or something must have convinced them it was a good idea. Even if the Republican majority dissapates, there will still be pressure on lawmakers to continue their support of Bush's agenda.

If this pressure comes from no one else, it will certainly come from the newly formed lobbying firm, The Ashcroft Group.

The Ashcroft group opened for business last week, offering its services to clients who want to promote agendas related to "homeland security." Former attorney-general, John Ashcroft, created the new firm with two other partners, David Ayres, his former chief of staff, and Juleanna Glover Weiss who... well, who seems to have slept with the entire Legion of Evil. Her husband, Jeffrey Petruzzello, works for Black, Kelly & Scruggs, the PR firm that helped criminal, and enemy agent, Ahmed Chalabi, campaign to have his Iraqi National Congress installed as the new Iraqi government. Luckily, that didn't happen, and Chalabi has had to settle control of Iraq's sole asset as head of its Oil Ministry.

So, instead of Black, Kelly & Scruggs, the new Iraqi regime is being represented by another firm, Clark & Weinstock. The person who actually handled this task was — well, look at that! — Juleanna Glover Weiss! Although she's leaving to start the Ashcroft Group, I'm sure that Juleanna will keep in close touch with her new pal, Rend al Rahjim, the Iraqi ambassador.

You might be thinking, "Isn't Petruzzello CEO of Qorvis, the PR firm which represents the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?" That's a common mistake. The CEO of Qorvis is Michael Petruzzello, Jeffrey's brother. I'm sure her brother-in-law helped Juleanna develop her noted friendship with Adel al Jubair, a close advisor to Saudi crown prince Abdallah.

With Juleanna's connections as their "secret weapon," The Ashcroft Group promises to become the leading firm lobbying on issues of Homeland Security. I mean, when you think of Homeland Security, what are the first things that spring to mind? That's right, Iraq and Saudi Arabia! Thanks to the Ashcroft group, Iraq and Saudia Arabia will be affecting American security, not just in their countries, but in ours as well, even after the Republicans leave office.

Look, you're so happy you're crying! How touching.

Posted by Winston Smith at 11:55 AM | Comments (0)

May 19, 2005

Republican Spending Priorities: $1.5 Million Bus Stop

While Americans have to find creative ways to fund the purchase of proper armor for our troops in Iraq, the Republican party has found better uses for our tax dollars. No, it's not another bonus for Halliburton! It's a $1.5 million bus stop.

Disgusted yet?

Posted by Winston Smith at 09:55 AM | Comments (0)

May 18, 2005

I Like Ike

In all the wrangling over the "nuclear option" it's important to keep in mind that power grabs have always been a part of the GOP agenda. Ironically, Ike warned us about this long ago:

Now it is true that I believe this country is following a dangerous trend when it permits too great a degree of centralization of governmental functions. I oppose this--in some instances the fight is a rather desperate one. But to attain any success it is quite clear that the Federal government cannot avoid or escape responsibilities which the mass of the people firmly believe should be undertaken by it. The political processes of our country are such that if a rule of reason is not applied in this effort, we will lose everything--even to a possible and drastic change in the Constitution. This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon "moderation" in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas.⁵ Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

Kudos to Paul C. for sharing this with us.

Posted by Steven at 01:58 PM | Comments (0)

May 16, 2005

President Useless

Where have I heard this before? Planes are menacing the nation's capital, and people are running through the streets for their lives and meanwhile, the President is essentially goofing off. There was a difference this time, however. This time, they didn't bother telling Chimpy what was going on so that he could sit on his ass the better part of an hour.

Once again, those of us who contend that George W. Bush is too stupid to run the country have been vindicated by the actions of his staff, which indicate that they, too, think he's too stupid to be running the country. Normally, the fact that the President completed a 47-minute bike ride, blissfully unaware that the capital was under full alert, would spur outrage and worry. In this case, however, Americans can rest assured that the important people in the government were on top of the problem.

Posted by Winston Smith at 04:32 PM | Comments (0)

May 12, 2005

Vonovitch Chickens Out

Saying he's a poster child for what not to send to the UN does not get you off the hook. Sen. George Voinovich, R- Ohio offered a stinging rebuke of John Bolton before voting to allow him to be nominated before the full Senate for an "up-and-down" vote. So now Bush is poised to send another fucking lunatic, flake Neo-Con to represent the United States in the surprisingly relevant United Nations.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send John Bolton's nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to the Senate for a vote, despite stinging criticism from a key Republican on the panel.

Members of the committee, which has a Republican majority, voted 10-8 to send the nomination to the full Senate, but without a recommendation.

According to a Senate aide, the committee could send it with a positive or negative recommendation -- or none at all, as it has done.

Committee member Sen. George Voinovich, R- Ohio, told reporters that even though he voted to send the nomination on, he would not vote for Bolton on the Senate floor.

"It is my opinion that John Bolton is the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be," Voinovich said.

The former Ohio governor appeared to suggest that Bolton's nomination would not be approved by the full Senate membership, and said he would encourage other senators not to approve it. Republicans have a 55-45 majority in the chamber.

"I have every faith in my colleagues," Voinovich said. "No one's really excited about him going to the United Nations."

No one in high position in the Bush Administration has shown the slightest competency, so Bolton will fit right in. What this will do to further erode the US before the World awaits to be seen, but I feel confident in predicting some serious diplomatic fuckups. And don't think for a moment that our European Allies will sit idly by while Bolton is there -- they'll make sure he's a fucking laughingstock before the rest of the world.

Posted by Steven at 03:47 PM | Comments (0)

May 09, 2005

Herbert Nails Bush on the Head

Read Bob Herbert's column today in the NY Times:

When Bob Woodward asked President Bush if he had consulted with his father about the decision to go to war in Iraq, the president famously replied, "There is a higher father that I appeal to."

It might have been better if Mr. Bush had stayed in closer touch with his earthly father. From the very beginning the war in Iraq has been an exercise in extreme madness, an absurd venture that would have been rich in comic possibilities except for the fact that many thousands of men, women and children have died, and tens of thousands have been crippled, burned or otherwise maimed.

The world now knows that the weapons of mass destruction were a convenient fiction. Less well known is that bumbling administration officials eagerly embraced the ravings of a foreign intelligence source known, believe it or not, as "Curveball." He helped promote the fantasy that Iraq had mobile laboratories for the manufacture of biological weapons.

The C.I.A. was warned that Curveball was as crazy as a Peter Sellers character, but the administration wanted this war in the way that a small child wants candy. Curveball's information was swallowed whole.

Amateurs and incompetents have run the war from the start, and fantasy has trumped reality at every turn. If a movie were to be made of the war, the appropriate director would be Mel Brooks. Even as the administration was listening to the likes of Curveball, it was showing the door to the Army's chief of staff, Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, who made the mistake of speaking the plain truth to officials fluent only in self-serving gibberish.

General Shinseki said it would take hundreds of thousands of troops to pacify Iraq. That was the end of his career.

Bush & Co. sent far fewer troops into the war, and many of them were never properly trained or equipped. The results have been nightmarish. Roadside bombs have caused 70 percent of American casualties in Iraq. The military was not prepared for this tactic and has had a miserable record providing protective armor for Humvees and other vehicles carrying soldiers and marines.

So G.I.'s from the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the history of the world have been dying because their nation wouldn't give them up-to-date combat vehicles.

As for training and preparedness, the scandal at Abu Ghraib is instructive. The problems there went far beyond the photos of Lynndie England and others humiliating the Iraqis under their control. We learned last week that Janis Karpinski, the brigadier general whose reserve military police unit was in charge of the prison, had been arrested for shoplifting at a military base in Florida in 2002. The same army that's scouring Iraq for insurgents and terrorists was apparently unaware of the arrest record of the woman assigned to such a sensitive position at Abu Ghraib.

Abu Ghraib was not an aberration. It was a symptom. This is a war in which the people in charge have had no idea what they were doing. One of the recommendations of Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who investigated the scandal at Abu Ghraib, was that a team be sent to Iraq to teach some of the soldiers how to run prisons. How's that for an innovative step?

The United States is now stuck with a war it should never have started. The violence continues to rage out of control. The latest fantasy out of Washington is that somehow, miraculously, Iraqi troops will be able to take over and win the war that we couldn't.

The American public is becoming fed up and with good reason. Support for the war is declining and the reputation of the military is in jeopardy. The Army has been unable to meet its recruitment goals and the search for new soldiers is becoming desperate.

Last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers, told Congress that the war in Iraq was taking a toll on the military and would make combat operations elsewhere in the world more difficult. That was hardly a comforting thought as the administration was ramping up its rhetoric about North Korea.

If President Bush had consulted with his father before launching this clownish, disastrous war, he might have gotten some advice that would have pointed him in a different direction and spared his country - and the families of the many thousands dead - a lot of grief.

Posted by Steven at 04:58 PM | Comments (0)

May 05, 2005

May We See Your Four Forms of ID, Please?

The Bush Administration wants you to provide four types of ID when applying for or renewing a driver's license.

States now typically require new drivers to produce proof of age and one or two other forms of ID, usually including a photo. Less is required of those renewing licenses; Maryland and a few other states allow renewals by mail. That could change under the Real ID Act, which along with extra security at airports and workplaces could represent the most significant differences in daily lives to stem from post-9/11 security concerns.

The act is likely to be passed by the House today and the Senate next week as an attachment to an $81 million emergency spending bill for the military in Iraq and Afghanistan. If states did not comply within three years, their driver's licenses could not be used as ID to board a plane or to enter certain federal buildings.

President Bush has expressed support for the act, which has created an uproar among state officials and civil liberties groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union. The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates that it would cost states more than $500 million. "The number of documents is staggering," says the conference's Cheye Calvo. "You're not going to get your license in one day anymore. Over-the-counter driver's licenses will no longer exist."

The ACLU says the act threatens' Americans' privacy by creating links between databases that could be used to make licenses into de facto national ID cards that could be used to track residents' activities.

Tell me this isn't the most Orwellian thing you've heard this week.

Posted by Steven at 12:31 AM | Comments (1)

April 25, 2005

Privatize This!

Posted by Steven at 09:04 PM | Comments (0)

April 21, 2005

A Billboard is Worth 1000 Blogs

Democracy for America, an anti-DeLay PAC, recently held a vote (how democratic of them!) to choose a billboard design to put up in Tom DeLay's district in Houston. Here's the winner:

Democracy for America are currently soliciting donations to fund the billboard campaign. On NPR this morning, they were interviewing Texans, few of which had even heard there was a problem. DeLay is skating on the ignorance instilled by Fox News. Like the millions of cockroaches that he's killed, DeLay will run for cover the moment someone shines light on him.

Posted by at 11:35 AM | Comments (0)

April 15, 2005

Oil is Thicker Than Water

Actually, oil is thinner than water, but it does seem to tie the scummiest people together in the scummiest ways. And you can't get scummier than the Bush family, Don Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney, in this regard.

Mention oil scandal amongst the neo-conned Freepers and they'll start reflexively yelping, "Oil for food! Oil for food!"

Indeed, this allows the brainless twits to heap dirt on two of their favortite targets, the U.N. and its head, Kofi Annan. Although everyone who's ever walked the halls of the U.N. is tarred with guilt, you don't hear much about the oil companies that were in the middle of it. U.N staff are attacked for allegedly taking bribes to "look the other way," but it was the oil traders who actually paid the hundreds of millions in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein, himself.

Well all that changed today with the arrest of David Bay Chalmers, Jr.. Chalmers, is a multi-billionaire who inherited the fortune created by his father's Coral Petroleum. He's not someone you'd have ever heard of unless you were in the oil industry, as he's kept a pretty low profile over the years. That was a wise move because he's a royal scumbag.

If you visit FreeRepublic and search for "Chalmers," you'll get no results. The reason for this is that Chalmers makes a bad Freeper poster-boy for the Oil-For-Food scandal. ( Whatever you do, don't search on "Schiavo," as loading the results page might crash your browser.)

First things first: David Chalmers is a rich white oil man from Houston, and rich white oil men from Houston generally get a "pass" from the Freepers, even when they do really terrible things. We're talking things like — say — dismantling two centuries of American progress.

Another thing is that Chalmers' company, Bay Oil, got into the scandal in October of 2000, so it didn't really operate under the villified Clinton Adminsitration. No, it conducted the majority of its dirty dealings under the watchful eyes of the Bush Adminsitration. While we're expected to believe that the Clintonistas deliberately ignored the scandal, we'll, no doubt, be expected to believe that Bush's crew had no knowledge of the activities of an obscure Houston oil magnate. After all, the Bush Administration had its hands full ignoring Osama Bin Laden and cozying up to the Taliban.

That's a nice story, but key figures in the Bush Administration are veterans of ignoring the obvious, especially when it comes to Saddam Hussein. For example, they keep a straight face when claiming that America didn't arm Hussein. Of course, they covered their tracks pretty well in this regard; although the money trail leads straight to Pappy Bush, the actual weapons Saddam used came from non-American dealers and were non-American products. This also helped get around "official" arms embargoes.

Case in point, the January 30, 1995 issue of Forbes magazine chronicles Saddam's acquisition of weapons from Chilean arms merchant, Carlos Cardoen. Because Iraq was low on cash, Cardoen was paid in oil. Since Cardoen doesn't deal directly in oil, he needed a broker to move the oil, sell it and convert the commodity into cash.

David B. Chalmers and Bay Oil were paid $2 a barrell to broker the trade.

Hmmmmm.

This story is still developing, but if David B. Chalmers hasn't taken tea with Rummy, Cheney, or that guy right down the street, George H. W. Bush, I'll eat my steel-toed boots. Every day, it becomes clearer the Iraq adventure is little more than a money-making scam perpetrated by its most visible beneficiaries (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld). I'm starting to think that it's impossible to be too cynical about these guys.

And note to Freepers: next time you decide to jump on a juicy anti-left scandal, you should probably make certain that it doesn't involve oil, 'cause that's likely to come back to the home team.

Posted by at 04:36 PM | Comments (0)

April 11, 2005

The Problem With Hating Everything

Republicans sure do hate things. They rant about "hate filled" Liberals, but advance their "pro-family" agenda by framing it in terms of families that they hate (e.g. gay families, families where the husband wants to remove his wife from life support). They support peace in the Middle East, and so far their efforts have killed more people than all the suicide bombings combined.

There are two things that a good Republican can almost always be relied on to heap irrational, foaming-at-the-mouth scorn upon: Gay Marriage and Hillary Clinton. This is such "old news" that last month's New York Magazine article noting the formation of an anti-Hillary PAC was quickly forgotten.

Veteran Republican strategist, Arthur Finkelstein — a man who has advised George Pataki and Jesse Helms — announced the formation of "Stop Her Now," which plans to launch a pre-emptive "Swift-Boat Veterans" style smear campaign to sink a possible Clinton presidential bid. In the next few months, Finkelstein hopes to raise $10 million from Hillary-haters everywhere.

It will be interesting to see how successful Mr. Finklestien will be in his fundraising efforts amongst the Republican faithful. You see, it's recently come to light that at the ripe old age of 59, Arthur has finally gotten married... to a guy. The details were printed in last Friday's New York Times. Of course, frothing-at-the-mouth Hillary-hating conservatives don't read the New York Times, so they might miss out on the details:

Mr. Finkelstein, 59, who has made a practice of defeating Democrats by trying to demonize them as liberal, said in a brief interview that he had married his partner of 40 years to ensure that the couple had the same benefits available to married heterosexual couples.

"I believe that visitation rights, health care benefits and other human relationship contracts that are taken for granted by all married people should be available to partners," he said.

He declined further comment on the wedding, which was in December.

Some of Mr. Finkelstein's associates said they were startled to learn that this prominent American conservative had married a man, given his history with the party, especially at a time when many Republican leaders, including President Bush, have campaigned against same-sex marriage and proposed amending the Constitution to ban it. Mr. Finkelstein has been allied over the years with Republicans who have fiercely opposed gay rights measures, including former Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, and has been the subject of attacks by gay rights activists who have accused him of hypocrisy. He was identified as gay in a Boston Magazine article in 1996.

The SJR staff wish Arthur and his partner great joy in their life together, and we hope they aren't too bitter when the people Arthur helped put into office have them burned at the stake for being Soddomites.

Posted by at 09:09 AM | Comments (1)

April 07, 2005

Lobbyists Paid for DeLay Granddaughter Shower

Is there anything this guy didn't get for favorable legislation? DeLay appears to have received a baby shower as part payment, er, donations, from firms representing legislative targets. Abramoff was involved, so you know it was "cash-n-carry".

A Texas energy company being investigated with regards to improper fundraising by those connected with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) held a baby shower for DeLay's daughter Danielle Ferro in May 2002�and the event was attended by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who paid for some of the congressman�s overseas travel, RAW STORY has found.

The shower, reported in the Washington, D.C. newspaper Roll Call Jun. 10, 2002 (article posted here), was held at the Washington offices of Reliant Energy Inc., a Texas-based power company that has given heavily to DeLay and his political action committees.

Donations collected from Reliant by a DeLay-linked political action committee are now the subject of a Texas state probe. DeLay�s daughter Danielle helped manage that committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, and her records have been subpoenaed by an Austin grand jury.

An energy lobbyist who counted Reliant among her clients set up the May 10, 2002 event which she estimated cost $250.

Two hundred and fifty dollars. Remember, the GOP destroyed Wright over a $500 book royalty. Let's set the bar lower ...

Posted by Steven at 03:08 PM | Comments (0)

Author of Schiavo Memo Fingered

Plame's snitch remains a mystery, but Schiavo's has been fingered. The Washington Post is reporting the indentity of the author of the GOP memo urging Republicans to use the Terri Schiavo fiasco for political gain.

The legal counsel to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) admitted yesterday that he was the author of a memo citing the political advantage to Republicans of intervening in the case of Terri Schiavo, the senator said in an interview last night.

Brian H. Darling, 39, a former lobbyist for the Alexander Strategy Group on gun rights and other issues, offered his resignation and it was immediately accepted, Martinez said.

Martinez, the GOP's Senate point man on the issue, said he earlier had been assured by aides that his office had nothing to do with producing the memo. "I never did an investigation, as such," he said. "I just took it for granted that we wouldn't be that stupid. It was never my intention to in any way politicize this issue."

Martinez, a freshman who was secretary of housing and urban development for most of President Bush's first term, said he had not read the one-page memo. He said he inadvertently passed it to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who had worked with him on the issue. After that, officials gave the memo to reporters for ABC News and The Washington Post.

Harkin said in an interview that Martinez handed him the memo on the Senate floor, in hopes of gaining his support for the bill giving federal courts jurisdiction in the Florida case in an effort to restore the brain-damaged Florida woman's feeding tube. "He said these were talking points -- something that we're working on here," Harkin said.

The mystery of the memo's origin had roiled the Capitol, with Republicans accusing Democrats of concocting the document as a dirty trick, and Democrats accusing Republicans of trying to duck responsibility for exploiting the dying days of an incapacitated woman.

Conservative Web logs have challenged the authenticity of the memo, in some cases likening it to the discredited documents about Bush's National Guard service that CBS News reported last fall.

Let's review. The GOP wraps the brain-dead body of Terri Schiavo around Tom DeLay and then claims the moral high ground. When the Democrats, through no fault of their own, acquire the "talking points" memo that explains the GOP tactic, they are accused of making it up. Comparisons to the CBS fiasco are raised (I'd like to take a moment to point out that the memos in the "Rathergate" incident were never proven incorrect -- Bush did get preferential consideration while in the "service") to further distance the GOP from their despicable tactic.

Now it turns out, the GOP lied, lied, and then lied some more. They wrote the memo. They (stupidly -- their own words) gave it to the Democrats. They denied creating it. Now, in what can only be described as a "miracle", they've been caught red handed, and the memo is still smoking. They still don't apologize for the craven use of Schiavo's plight for political gain, I can only hope the Democrats remind the American voter continuously in the Fall of 2006.

Why does anyone trust these lying liars?

Posted by Steven at 10:32 AM | Comments (0)

April 05, 2005

DeLay's Family Paid Half a Million Since 2001 by PACs

DeLay is filthy, filthy, filthy. DeLay's wife and daugther have been paid over one-half a million dollars since 2001 by his political friends.

The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay's home state, Texas.

Most of the payments to his wife, Christine A. DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money. The payments appear to reflect what Mr. DeLay's aides say is the central role played by the majority leader's wife and daughter in his political career.

Although several members of Congress employ family members as campaign managers or on their political action committees, advocacy groups seeking an overhaul of federal campaign-finance and ethics laws say that the payments to Mr. DeLay's family members were unusually generous, and should be the focus of new scrutiny of the Texas congressman.

Mr. DeLay's national political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, or Armpac, said in a statement on Tuesday that the two women had provided valuable services to the committee in exchange for the payments: "Mrs. DeLay provides big picture, long-term strategic guidance and helps with personnel decisions. Ms. Ferro is a skilled and experienced professional event planner who assists Armpac in arranging and organizing individual events."

In recent weeks, public interest groups have called on the House ethics committee and the Justice Department to review lavish, privately financed overseas trips for Mr. DeLay and his aides, including a 1997 trip to Russia that was underwritten by a conservative education group closely linked to a powerful Republican lobbyist who often boasted of his influence with the majority leader.

The payments to Mr. DeLay's family have continued into 2005; the latest monthly disclosure filed by Americans for a Republican Majority shows Mrs. DeLay was paid was paid $4,028 last month, while Mrs. Ferro received $3,681. Earlier statements show that the two women received similar monthly fees from the political action committee throughout 2003 and 2004.

Mrs. DeLay has been involved in her husband's political career and his fund-raising operations in Washington and Texas. In an interview in 2003 with Roll Call, a newspaper on Capitol Hill, a spokesman for Mr. DeLay explained Mrs. DeLay's role as "the final signoff of Tom's travel schedule, what events he attends and what his name appears on."

Mrs. Ferro has also helped manage Mr. DeLay's charity operations. Financial disclosure statements filed by Mr. DeLay's House campaign committees, which are separate from Americans for a Republican Majority, show that Mrs. Ferro and her political consulting firm, Coastal Consulting of Sugar Land, Tex., received $222,000 from 2001 through last year, reflecting her role in the re-election campaigns.

Although there has been no suggestion from prosecutors that Mrs. Ferro is under investigation by the grand jury in Austin, her records were subpoenaed in the inquiry, which is focused on the fund-raising activities of Texans for a Republican Majority, a state political action committee modeled on Americans for a Republican Majority. Mrs. Ferro received about $30,000 in fund-raising and consulting fees from Texans for a Republican Majority, the committee's records show.

This monster is washing in dirty money; he's sold his power to the highest bidder and lined his nest with the proceeds. When will the nation see how corrupt he is?

Posted by Steven at 11:00 PM | Comments (0)

Flags

I'm looking for a bit of Church/State separation here. Kevin Drum has raised a question that has been nagging me since the Pope died. Why are all these flags at half mast?

I saw a flag flying at half staff yesterday and wondered what it was for. Couldn't be for the pope, could it? Why would an American flag fly at half staff because the leader of the Catholic church had died?

But no: that's exactly what's going on. I don't want to make a big deal out of this, and I don't know if previous presidents have done the same thing, but it sure doesn't seem right. Would we do the same thing if the Archbishop of Canterbury died? Or the Ayatollah Sistani?

...

But it's a red herring. Heads of state die all the time and we don't lower our flags for them. If the pope weren't a religious leader, we wouldn't be flying flags at half staff, would we?

I mean, WTF? The Pope is a religious leader, and yet all these political symbols are being used to recognize a Religion.

Posted by Steven at 10:23 PM | Comments (1)

April 04, 2005

Nuclear War Is Coming

There's going to be a showdown. The GOP is determined to drop the bomb on the Senate and end fillibustering for judicial appointees. Nevermind that they used it (a lot) against Democratic Senates. Nevermind that it violates the spirit and principals of the Senate. Nevermind all that history and tradition ... what matters here is raw, tyrannical power. They have it, and they want more.

Democrats note that most federal judges are Republican nominees � 55%. The proportion on the Supreme Court is even higher, with seven of nine justices Republican appointees. So Democrats contend that Republicans are not just interested in conservative judges or those with a limited view of judicial power, but judges inclined to be activist in the service of conservative ideology.

"They are seeking to take away the independence of the judiciary � the crown jewel in our system of government � so that they can advance their own ideological agenda of the day," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). "That is exactly the kind of tyranny that our ancestors fought to prevent."

As the conflict moves toward its endgame, each side is counting votes. There may be 55 Republicans in the Senate, but a handful � mostly moderates and traditionalists � have expressed concern that the nuclear option is too drastic and would damage Republicans the next time they were the minority.

Frist needs 51 votes to change the rules to deny Democrats the filibuster. Among the senators believed to be weighing whether to oppose the idea are Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.), Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), John McCain (R-Ariz.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.).

Each side also is trying to gauge whether they will be blamed if Republicans overturn the filibuster and Democrats respond by bringing the Senate's work to a near halt.

Democrats are backtracking somewhat from earlier threats to stall the Senate's operations, insisting that they will not block bills to support the troops in Iraq or that provide for other crucial government functions.

They are mindful that the public blamed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) � not former President Clinton � for shutting down the federal government over budget conflicts in 1995.

"Democrats learned their lesson from that and won't go down that road," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Minority Leader Reid. "But the Republicans will know the difference between a cooperative minority and an uncooperative minority."

Republicans are busily trying to lay the groundwork for their case. Frist is expected to spend most of April attempting to highlight what he considers Democratic obstructionism on the judicial issue.

"We will continue to bend over backward and investigate every alley and basement to see if we can work this out with the Democrats," said Frist spokesman Robert Stevenson.

At the moment, both sides have an interest in appearing stalwart in the hope the other side will blink.

But even privately, it's hard to find anyone on Capitol Hill who can envision a deal that could defuse the conflict.

"I think we're going to reach a point where there's no alternative," Hatch said.

Remember, this is how dictatorships start. First the executive, then the legislative, and finally the judicial branches fall.

Posted by Steven at 12:02 PM | Comments (0)

March 22, 2005

"Masters of Sleeze"

Kudos for Brooks, for once. David Brooks is not known for his liberal ways, but his column today in The New York Times tears Jack Abramoff a new one.

Down in the depths of the netherworld, where Tammany Hall grafters and Chicago ward heelers gather amid spittoons and brass railings, a reverential silence now spreads across the communion. The sleazemasters of old look back into the land of the mortals and they see greatness in the form of Jack Abramoff.

Only a genius like Abramoff could make money lobbying against an Indian tribe's casino and then turn around and make money defending that tribe against himself. Only a giant like Abramoff would have the guts to use one tribe's casino money to finance a Focus on the Family crusade against gambling in order to shut down a rival tribe's casino.

Only an artist like Abramoff could suggest to a tribe that it pay him by taking out life insurance policies on its eldest members. Then when the elders dropped off they could funnel the insurance money through a private school and into his pockets.

This is sleaze of a high order. And yet according to reports in The Washington Post and elsewhere, Abramoff accomplished it all.

Yet it's important to remember this: A genius like Abramoff doesn't spring fully formed on his own. Just as Michelangelo emerged in the ferment of Renaissance Italy, so did Abramoff emerge from his own circle of creativity and encouragement.

Back in 1995, when Republicans took over Congress, a new cadre of daring and original thinkers arose. These bold innovators had a key insight: that you no longer had to choose between being an activist and a lobbyist. You could be both. You could harness the power of K Street to promote the goals of Goldwater, Reagan and Gingrich. And best of all, you could get rich while doing it!

...

Abramoff's and Scanlon's Indian-gaming scandal will go down as the movement's crowning achievement, more shameless than anything the others would do, but still the culmination of the trends building since 1995. It perfectly embodied their creed and philosophy: "I'd love us to get our mitts on that moolah!!" as Abramoff wrote to Reed.

They made at least $66 million.

This is a major accomplishment. And remember: Abramoff didn't do it on his own.

It took a village. The sleazo-cons thought they could take over K Street to advance their agenda. As it transpired, K Street took over them.

Keep in mind that Tom DeLay has engineered the K Street lobbying firms to be this way, by forcing them to only do business with Republicans and then shoe-horning these kinds of scams.

Posted by Steven at 11:43 AM | Comments (0)

March 12, 2005

More DeLay Dirty Money

Continued evidence the "Hammer" is all about the Money. Tom DeLay's got his hands stained with yet-another bank-vault ink-bomb, this time from an Indian tribe he tricked into funding one of his many vacations ... I mean ... junkets. He took their money and went golfing in Scotland. I guess the thousands of golf courses across Houston weren't good enough anymore.

An Indian tribe and a gambling services company made donations to a Washington public policy group that covered most of the cost of a $70,000 trip to Britain by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), his wife, two aides and two lobbyists in mid-2000, two months before DeLay helped kill legislation opposed by the tribe and the company.

The sponsor of the week-long trip listed in DeLay's financial disclosures was the nonprofit National Center for Public Policy Research, but a person involved in arranging DeLay's travel said that lobbyist Jack Abramoff suggested the trip and then arranged for checks to be sent by two of his clients, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and eLottery Inc.

The dates on the checks coincided with the day DeLay left on the trip, May 25, 2000, according to grants documents reviewed by The Washington Post. The Choctaw and eLottery each sent a check for $25,000, according to the documents. They now say that they were unaware the money was being used to finance DeLay's travels.

But Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center, said that, when the trip was arranged, Abramoff promised he would secure financial backing. She said that even without Abramoff's efforts, the National Center would have borne the cost of the trip, which was intended to allow the group to network with conservative British politicians and included an outing to the famous St. Andrews golf course in Scotland.

How many times does DeLay get a pass when Jim Wright got the boot? These goddamned lying sacks of shit ought to be run out of Washington on expensive Limos.

Posted by Steven at 12:16 PM | Comments (0)

March 03, 2005

Everything You Wanted To Know About DeLay (But Were Too Disgusted To Ask)

They don't call him "The Hammer" for nothing. Salon has a story about Tom DeLay that is written by the journalist who wrote Bush's Brain. A good overview of DeLay's Texas strategy and how he broke the law.

Joe Bob sez check it out.

Posted by Steven at 10:58 AM | Comments (0)

March 02, 2005

Bush Doesn't Have Bullock To Save His Ass This Time

Or is that he lacks the bollicks? Bush has staked his Presidency on dismantling Social Security, and like his initiatives as the Texas Governor, he's failing without his Lt. Governor Bob Bullock right there behind him. You see, when he was just "Guv", Dubya was useless without the strong arm of Bullock in the state Lege. The few times Bush stepped out of Bullock's shadow, he got his ass whooped.

And, so it appears, he is getting bitch-slapped with his own Social Security reform "plan".

Sidney Blumenthal writes in Salon this week:

The coming defeat of President Bush on Social Security will be the defining moment in domestic policy and politics for his second term and for the future of the Republican Party. It will be a central, clarifying event because Bush alone chose to make this fight.

Campaigning in 2004 on the trauma of Sept. 11, he won by the smallest margin of any incumbent president in American history. The Electoral College map was little changed from the deadlock of 2000. While Bush barely took two states he had lost before (Iowa and New Mexico), he lost one to John Kerry -- New Hampshire. Bush's political advisor, Karl Rove, had forecast a fundamental realignment that would establish Republican dominance, but Bush's desperate political position required a series of tactics of character assassination against the Democratic candidate and culture war gambits on gay marriage, atmospherically organized around the fear factor of Sept. 11. The outcome was a strategic victory but not a structural one, and Bush's campaign further polarized the country.

In the chasm between his meager win and his grandiose ambition, Bush might have decided to form a government containing some moderate Republican and Democratic Cabinet members, claiming that the gravity of foreign crisis demanded national unity. But the thought never occurred to him. Instead, he bulled ahead in the hope of realizing the realignment that eluded him in the election.

Bush launched his initiative to privatize Social Security with a bang, promoting it in his State of the Union address and stumping the country at rallies. Rove has been put in charge of organizing the campaign as an extension of the 2004 effort. From the White House, Rove directs the lobbyists of K Street in Washington and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Rifle Association and the religious right. Suddenly, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have reappeared as warriors against the pro-Social Security AARP, smearing the seniors organization as anti-military and pro-gay marriage. And Tony Feather, a Republican consultant with longtime ties to Rove, has reemerged with a war chest of millions to spend through a front group called Progress for America, just as he did against Kerry.

Even the Social Security Administration has been inducted in the campaign. Five years ago, it sent out a routine annual booklet titled "The Future of Social Security": "Will Social Security be there for you? Absolutely." Now a new booklet has been mailed to tens of millions warning: "Social Security must change to meet future challenges." And it suggests that Social Security should not be regarded as a "foundation on which to build your financial future."

And yet the more the public has learned of Bush's plan, the more it has buckled. Poll after poll reveals that increased information leads to heightened resistance. Growing majorities oppose Bush's program, Bush's favorability rating has plunged to the lowest level of any president at this point in his second term, and trust in the Democrats has steadily risen.

In the face of public rejection, Bush retreats and attacks at the same time. He has announced that he is uncertain when or even if he will propose his own bill before Congress, while the White House says that the president will stage new rallies for the Social Security initiative that has yet to take any practical form.

Only Bush as president has attempted to make good on the reactionary rhetoric against Social Security since its inception. He has tried to dress up his effort as a "reform," as a "new idea," but the language, upon historical examination, turns out to be recycled from the 1936 Republican platform, the Landon and Goldwater campaigns, and words that Reagan discarded as president.

Bush's impending defeat on Social Security is no minor affair. He has made this the centerpiece of domestic policy of his second term. It is the decades-long culmination of the conservative wing's hostility against Social Security and the Democratic Party. Projecting images of Roosevelt and Kennedy cannot distract from Bush's intent to undermine the accomplishments of Democratic presidents. The repudiation of Bush on Social Security will be fundamental and profound and will shake the foundations of conservative Republicanism. Bush's agony is only beginning, if the Democrats in the Senate can maintain their discipline.

Stand your ground, Democrats! Man, I love the sound of "Bush's agony is only beginning". Looks like the "third rail" is doing it's magic after all.

Posted by Steven at 11:29 PM | Comments (0)

February 27, 2005

Gannongate: Where's The Outrage?

We know "Where's the Beef?" Eric Boehlert is offering a review of the non-coverage of the Jeff Gannon story.

On Feb. 17, "NBC Nightly News" anchor Brian Williams introduced a report on controversial White House correspondent James Guckert by informing viewers that the saga was "the talk of Washington." Nine days later the mysterious tale of an amateur, partisan journalist who slipped into the White House under false pretenses remains the buzz of the Beltway. Yet most mainstream reporters have opted not to cover the story. Two of the television networks, as well as scores of major metropolitan newspapers around the country, have completely ignored it.

"It's stunning to me that there are questions about the independent press being undermined and the mainstream press doesn't seem that interested in it," says Joe Lockhart, who served as press secretary during President Clinton's second term. "People in the mainstream press have shrugged their shoulders and said, 'It's a whole lot of nothing.'"

"It's difficult to explain," adds John Aravosis, who publishes Americablog.com, which has been instrumental in breaking news on "Gannongate." "What more do we need for this story to be reported on seriously? It's everything Washington loves in a story. But the response is literally, 'Ew, we can't touch this.'" (The story itself refuses to die. On Thursday, while Guckert's former employer Talon News was going dark, Guckert relaunched his Web site, complete with a request for donations to "fight back against the well funded attack machine on the Left.")

Ordinarily, revelations that a former male prostitute, using an alias (Jeff Gannon) and working for a phony news organization, was ushered into the White House -- without undergoing a full-blown security background check -- in order to pose softball questions to administration officials would qualify as news by any recent Beltway standard. Yet as of Thursday, ABC News, which produces "Good Morning America," "World News Tonight With Peter Jennings," "Nightline," "This Week," "20/20" and "Primetime Live," has not reported one word about the three-week-running scandal. Neither has CBS News ("The Early Show," "The CBS Evening News," "60 Minutes," "60 Minutes Wednesday" and "Face the Nation"). NBC and its entire family of morning, evening and weekend news programs have addressed the story only three times. Asked about the lack of coverage, spokeswomen for both ABC and CBS said executives were unavailable to discuss their networks' coverage.

The Daily Show has offered more, and better, coverage than the national press on this story. And it is a story -- not about a male prostitute in the White House Press Room, but rather, a stunningly blantant attempt by Karl Rove to influence the coverage of the President that ran roughshod over the security apparatus of the White House.

Who gave Guckert access to the White House? For that matter, who outted Valerie Plame? All events point to Rove and his cache of "dirty tricks".

Posted by Steven at 02:44 PM | Comments (0)

February 24, 2005

One of the Real Reasons We're at War

What happens in Bushville stays in Bushville. The Independent reports on the real beneficiaries of the Iraq War.

President Bush's uncle, William "Bucky" Bush, who serves on the board of a U.S. defense contractor with over $100 million in business in Iraq, recently cashed in on some of that lucrative work.

The good fortune of Uncle Bucky, as he is known within America's ruling family, has been to hold a seat on the board of Engineered Support Systems Incorporated (ESSI), a St Louis-based company that has flourished mightily as a military contractor to the Pentagon.

Last month, ESSI shares hit a record $60.39 apiece -- more or less exactly the moment the presidential uncle chose to sell 8,438 options worth around $450,000, ...

Dan Kreher, vice president of industrial relations for ESSI, assures us that "the fact [Bush's] nephew is in the White House has absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Bush being on our board or with our stock having gone up 1,000 percent in the past five years either," though Kreher has separately commented about Bucky's placement on the board that "having a Bush doesn't hurt."

Posted by at 11:41 AM | Comments (0)

February 22, 2005

Born Again

Jim Kunstler has another good blog entry today.

"...people who explicitly and programmatically don't believe in the future have no business running a government, the chief task of which is safeguarding the future."

Posted by at 02:30 PM | Comments (0)

February 15, 2005

Appeals Court Never Heard of First Amendment

You can go to jail for not revealing a source to an article you never published. So says "a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Washington". Two reporters who received the same information as Bob Novak (The Daily Show's Douchebag of Liberty), but who didn't reveal the information (in violation of Federal Law) are being prosecuted for not revealing their source, just like grown-up, real journalists do.

The obvious question is, why isn't Bob "Douchebag" Novak being threatened with jail? Two answers leap to mind: it's a political witchhunt, or he's squealed like a pig (and probably claimed that he's a op-ed writer and not a real journalist, just like the Bush Administration lackeys who have been shilling the "No Child Left Behind" bullshit).

In either case, this is a chilling ruling on the Press, and adds further creedence to the conspiracy theories about Bush, Cheney and Rove.

Two reporters who have refused to name their sources to a grand jury investigating the disclosure the identity of a covert C.I.A. agent should be jailed on contempt charges, a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Washington ruled unanimously today.

Citing a 1972 decision of the United States Supreme Court, the panel held that the reporters, Judith Miller of The New York Times and Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, have no First Amendment protection from a grand jury subpoena seeking to learn the identity of their sources. Under a 1982 law, it can be a crime for government officials to divulge the identities of covert agents.

The 1972 decision, Branzburg v. Hayes, considered four consolidated grand jury cases, including one in which a reporter witnessed illegal drugs being made. In today's opinion, the panel said the Supreme Court's "transparent and forceful" reasoning in that case applied to the two reporters before the appeals court now.

"In language as relevant to the alleged illegal disclosure of the identity of covert agents as it was to the alleged illegal processing of hashish," the panel wrote, "the court stated that it could not 'seriously entertain the notion that the First Amendment protects the newsman's agreement to conceal the criminal conduct of his source, or evidence thereof, on the theory that it is better to write about a crime than to do something about it.' "

"Today the Court of Appeals affirmed that reporters do not have a First Amendment privilege to refuse to comply with a grand jury subpoena issued in good faith," the prosecutor said, asserting that there was a "critical need for the reporters to comply with the subpoenas in this case." He added that "we look forward to resuming our progress in this investigation and bringing it to a prompt conclusion."

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the chairman of The Times Company and the publisher of The Times, said in a separate statement: "We are deeply dismayed at the U.S. Court of Appeals decision to affirm holding Judith Miller in contempt, and at what it means for the American public's right to know. If Judy is sent to jail for not revealing her confidential sources for an article that was never published, it would create a dangerous precedent that would erode the freedom of the press.

"The protection of confidential sources was critically important to many groundbreaking stories, such as Watergate, the health-threatening practices of the tobacco industry and police corruption. The Times will continue to fight for the ability of journalists to provide the people of this nation with the essential information they need to evaluate issues affecting our country and the world. And we will challenge today's decision and advocate for a federal shield law that will enable the public to continue to learn about matters that directly affect their lives."

<