Nearly 60% Think Bush Misleads The Public On Iraq
by Steve Soto
Image courtesy of ThinkProgress
After a weekend of Foley fallout and last week’s NIE and Woodward-related hits to the president’s credibility, the latest CNN poll out this afternoon shows Bush’s approval rating falling by three points in one week, from 42% to down to 39%. His disapproval rating increased four points in a week from 55% to 59%. His approval rating on Iraq fell four points from last month to 32%; it’s lowest level ever in a CNN poll.
Moreover, the generic ballot question showed the following:
Which party’s candidate would you vote for in your congressional district?
Likely Voters:
Democrat: 53%
Republican: 42%
Given that Democrats usually need a five-point advantage to offset the GOP turnout operation, this finding is huge a month before the election.
Do you think most Democratic members of Congress deserve to be reelected?
Yes: 53%
No: 41%
Do you think most Republican members of Congress deserve to be reelected?
Yes: 38%
No: 57%
And here is the talking point question for the Democrats the rest of the way:
Do you think the Bush administration has deliberately misled the American public about how the war in Iraq is going, or don’t you think so?
Yes, deliberately misled: 58%
No, don’t think so: 41%
Note the spin from CNN:
President Bush has been unable to reassure Americans about the war in Iraq, with nearly 60 percent of those surveyed in a new CNN poll saying his administration has "deliberately misled" the public about the progress of the war.
Despite a recent speaking tour aimed at bolstering support for the conflict, only 32 percent told pollsters they approve of Bush's management of the war. And support for the war itself slipped to 38 percent, down from 40 percent in a CNN poll last week.
Ouch.
Foley Send IMs To Page During Iraq Funding Vote In 2003
by Steve Soto
ABC News is reporting at this hour they have obtained additional instant messages from congressional pages that originated from Mark Foley back in 2003.
Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.
ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.
This message was dated April 2003, at approximately 7 p.m., according to the message time stamp.
Foley may have been sending these messages to underage boys from the House floor that night, during the floor vote.
The House voted that evening on HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations.
According to another message, Foley also invites the teen and a friend to come to his house near Capitol Hill so they can drink alcohol.
I’m glad to see his work on such matters didn’t distract him too much.
But here is my question: It isn't clear if Foley sent these messages during the votes on the floor, or left the floor to do so. Each party sits within its caucus on its own side of the House floor, so it's possible that Foley was sitting next to another Republican while he was engaging in these “conversations” that night. So which GOP House member was sitting next to Mark Foley in 2003?
Better Ratings, But Still In Third
by Steve Soto
Although her newscast generates higher ratings for CBS than Bob Schieffer did, after a month on the air Katie Couric has fallen back to third place behind NBC's Brian Williams and ABC's Charles Gibson.
The GOP Finger-Pointing Continues on Foley
by Steve Soto
As a follow-up to my Open Thread earlier today, here are some updates to the Foley cover-up:
It looks like the GOP caucus is scurrying for the exits. Majority Leader John Boehner is pointing the finger at Hastert, as is NRCC chair Tom Reynolds, both of whom also knew about Foley’s messages but did nothing themselves to protect the pages or deal with Foley.
For his part, Hastert is doing everything possible to bring down his party and make the base stay home: he says he will not resign, and more GOP strategists say the mess will cause major problems for the party next month in both houses. The scandal will also deprive the White House and its Capitol Hill enablers of its campaign strategy of bashing the Democrats for being weak on protecting the country and wanting to raise taxes. That hasn’t stopped Bush from trying anyway, but he is preaching to cultists who may not be listening much longer, defending GOP incumbents who until recently were considered safe bets for reelection.
As far as Boehner is concerned, he may be toxic too: endangered Pennsylvania GOP representative Jim Gerlach cancelled a fundraiser last night with Boehner.
One of the right-wing talking points is that the Democrats somehow sprung these messages and emails upon the GOP as a campaign ploy, but the FBI has had this evidence since July and has sat on it.
And an excellent Wall Street Journal piece today notes that two key constituencies for the GOP may be united against its candidates as a result of the Foley cover-up: Christian conservatives and soccer moms.
Perfect storm, anyone?
9/11 Commission a Sick Whitewash
by paradox
The Left Coaster and all the liberal blogs have been abuzz about Woodward’s revelation that Condi Rice met with Tenet and Black July 10th, 2001, for a frantic meeting warning of imminent Al Queda attack on US soil.
Members of the 9/11 have been outraged they did not know of the meeting, some calling it a crime. Yesterday Condi was thrown under the bus (motives unclear) by the White House, who confirmed the meeting did in fact take place.
Then we learn this morning from a Kos diary that the 9/11 commission did know of this meeting, (Rumsfeld and Ashcroft got the same Tenet briefing too) from “secret testimony.”
“Former CIA Director George Tenet gave the independent Sept. 11, 2001, commission the same briefing on Jan. 28, 2004, but the commission made no mention of the warning in its 428-page final report.”
I’m as flabbergasted and incredulous as I have ever been—what in name of holy Jesus, Mary & Joseph is going on here? How is it possible for 9/11 commission members not to know of this meeting after Tenet testimony, or to lie so easily in the last few days? Just what the fuck else was so “secret” about 9/11 that they’d leave something so critical deliberately out!?
How is it possible these scumbags, these lowest form of life sonzabitches asshole maggots, how could they ever think of lying to the American public about 9/11? Didn’t they possess any idea of the rage and fury such behavior would provoke among every American?
If you own a copy of 9/11 Commission Report use it to start fires, that’s all it’s good for. I still can hardly believe I have written the above words, but I have.
How dare they. How dare they do this to Americans and our country.
Open Thread - Heads Roll Or Else Edition
by Steve Soto
The wingers have been quiet for a couple of days now about the Foley cover-up, but according to a Page One in Tuesday's Post, the GOP is worried that the winger base will stay home unless heads roll within the GOP caucus.
Republican strategists said yesterday that public revulsion over the sexually graphic online conversations between Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) and former House pages could compound the party's problems enough to tip the House to the Democrats in November -- and could jeopardize the party's hold on the Senate as well.
As House GOP leaders defended their role in handling revelations that forced Foley on Friday to give up his House seat, party strategists said the scandal threatens to depress turnout among Christian conservatives and could hamper efforts to convince undecided and swing voters that Republicans deserve to remain in the majority.
[snip]
Republican operatives closely following the battle for the House and Senate said that they are virtually ready to concede nearly a third of the 15 seats the Democrats need to recapture control of the House, and that they will spend the next five weeks trying to shelter other vulnerable incumbents from the fallout of the Foley scandal in hopes of salvaging a slender majority.
Read the rest of the piece, and you will get a sense of doom and gloom amongst the GOP's base that could only be fixed by Hastert and others stepping down. The Democrats will be hanging this around the GOP’s neck for the next five weeks, and the cultists will have to deal with it on Election Day.
OK, it’s your turn.
Why Does The GOP Want The Taliban Back In Power?
by Steve Soto
First, the Bush Administration encourages Pervez Musharraf to back off of pursuing Al Qaeda and Bin Laden in Waziristan, thereby letting the Taliban come across the Afghanistan border in strength and take control of the Afghan side of the border, increasing the level of attacks against NATO and our own troops.
Then, the Brits cut their own deal with the Taliban over the weekend to slink away and ditch Bush’s war on terror, allowing the Taliban to eventually take over southern Afghanistan and provide a sanctuary for Bin Laden.
Our local commanders in southern Afghanistan have on their own initiative decided to focus more on nation-building than pursuing the Taliban, in a perhaps-too-late effort to win over the locals.
Then today, Mullah Frist says it is time to trust the Taliban again and let them into the Karzai government.
I think it is time for Hamid Karzai to get on a plane and get out of town before he gets killed by Bush and Blair’s new allies.
Tell me again, which political party appeases terrorists?
Update: Mullah Frist now says the media got it wrong. Poor Billy; he is so misunderstood.
White House Throws Condi Under The Bus
by Steve Soto
This morning, Condi told the media traveling with her to the Middle East that she had no recollection of a meeting with George Tenet and Cofer Black on July 10th, 2001, as reported by Bob Woodward:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she cannot recall then-CIA chief George Tenet warning her of an impending al-Qaida attack in the United States, as a new book claims he did two months before the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
“What I am quite certain of is that I would remember if I was told, as this account apparently says, that there was about to be an attack in the United States, and the idea that I would somehow have ignored that I find incomprehensible,” Rice said.
[snip]
“I don’t know that this meeting took place, but what I really don’t know, what I’m quite certain of, is that it was not a meeting in which I was told there was an impending attack and I refused to respond,” Rice said.
[snip]
Rice referred to the session as “the supposed meeting” and noted that it is not part of the independent Sept. 11 Commission’s report.
This afternoon, while she was overseas, someone in the White House threw Condi under the bus:
A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did indeed brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001 about looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said on Monday evening.
The account by the spokesman, Sean McCormack, came hours after Ms. Rice, the secretary of state, told reporters aboard her airplane that she did not recall such a meeting and said it was “incomprehensible” she ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. McCormack also said the Bush administration had determined that the Sept. 11 commission had been briefed about the meeting, even though no mention of it appears in the commission’s report.
Except, the commissioners don’t remember being told anything about a special meeting on July 10th, 2001.
Ms. Rice told reporters aboard her plane on Sunday evening, as she began a trip to the Middle East, that she regarded that account as “simply ludicrous.” Mr. McCormack, in confirming later that the meeting had taken place, said that the White House review had found that Ms. Rice had asked Mr. Tenet to provide the same briefing to Donald H. Rumsfeld, the defense secretary, and John Ashcroft, the attorney general. Among those who attended the meting, Mr. McCormack said, was Stephen Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser.
So she doesn’t remember a meeting in which her Number Two was in attendance and where she in fact asked Tenet to say the same things again to Rummy and Ashcroft?
Who in the White House pulled the records to prove Condi a liar today? And how much fun did Cheney and Rumsfeld have in doing it?
Abramoff Knew About Iraq War A Year In Advance
by Steve Soto
Among the many reasons the White House is petrified at the thought of losing the House to the Democrats is the certainty that Henry Waxman will take over the House Government Reform Committee. Rove knows that Waxman will want to know about Susan Ralston and how close Rove really was to Abramoff. But I suspect that Rove also fears that Waxman will open an inquiry as to why Jack Abramoff knew about the Iraq war a year before Bush certified to Congress that he had done all he could to avoid war.
From: Jack Abramoff
To: 'octagon1'
Monday, March 18, 2002 8:31 AM
Subject: RE: Sunday
I was sitting yesterday with Karl Rove, Bush's top advisor, at the NCAA basketball game, discussing Israel when this email came in. I showed it to him. It seems that the President was very sad to have to come out negatively regarding Israel, but that they needed to mollify the Arabs for the upcoming war on Iraq. That did not seem to work anyway. Bush seems to love Sharon and Israel, and thinks Arabfat [sic], is nothing but a liar. I thought I'd pass that on.
But of course, neither Rove nor Bush knew Abramoff very well, right? Or for that matter, Kenny-boy Mehlman? Uh, wait. That defense may not fly anymore either.
Hat tip to Kos diarist jorndorff
Nothing More Than "Simply Naughty Emails?"
by Steve Soto
The Foley scandal has the potential to not only take down the GOP House leadership, but to also paint the Bush White House as a morally bankrupt enterprise as well. Democrats can argue that the GOP House leadership was more interested in maintaining their power than they were in adhering to a moral compass, and that to the GOP, this was more of a political problem than a moral one. As Kos notes, it seems clear that Denny Hastert, Tom DeLay, Tom Reynolds, and John Boehner were more interested in keeping a seat in Republican hands and maintaining the GOP cash flow than they were in dealing with a sexual predator in their midst. Hastert today is trying to spin his behavior by saying that he didn’t see the “lurid emails” that Foley sent out, which doesn’t address the fact that Hastert was told about them and still did nothing. Just because you didn’t see the emails doesn’t mean you didn’t have a responsibility for acting upon the information and protecting the pages.
Calling for independent investigations of others and cries for help will not change the political calculus that the GOP made in this matter, which Democrats can use to paint the whole GOP Congress as morally bankrupt and power hungry, by showing how their behavior in this matter tracks with their “look the other way” enabling behavior on Iraq, Halliburton, Big Oil, the Medicare Part D fiasco, 9/11, and Katrina. And outlandish statements by Newt Gingrich, Brit Hume and others are another sign of a broken moral compass within the GOP chattering class.
But doesn’t this tawdry matter also cause problems for the White House as well? It most certainly does, if today’s disgusting comment from Tony Snow is any indication of how the White House feels. For Snow, the matter can be summarized as “simply naughty emails.” If that is an accurate reflection of the White House’s thinking on the matter, then I think that Democrats can extend the “lack of moral compass” argument to the White House as well, especially if they really think these are nothing more than naughty emails.
The truth is that Hastert and the White House will try and sweep this under the rug and they may incredibly try and make it an issue of gay persecution of a troubled drunk, rather than their moral and legal obligations and knowledge of Foley's actions for years. Such rank hypocrisy, coming from a party that has painted itself as more moral that their opponents while vilifying gays for political benefit should not be surprising, any more surprising that Foley condemning Clinton for having a relationship with someone much younger than him, like Foley tried to do multiple times with underage boys. But then again, this is the same White House that let a gay prostitute pose as a journalist, so anything goes with these guys. Winning is all that counts to Snow, Rove, and their bosses, and any real concern about doing the right thing and moral values are of little or no importance, except to bamboozle the cultists every day in Red State America.
There is one additional dynamic to take into account as a result of the Foley coverup. Karl Rove's strategy was to fear-and-smear the Democrats in all red-state and swing districts around the country by using the GOP leadership and incumbents to hammer a message of "terrorists and taxes". He was planning on having the GOP incumbents compare their virtues against the unknown, immoral, tax-raising, appeasing Democratic challengers. As Josh Marshall noted this morning, the Foley coverup has neutered the GOP leadership, who will now try and avoid media scrutiny over this matter and will be unable to go on the offense against Democrats. Furthermore, even the leadership may now have competitive races in their own districts, and the White House can no longer count on the leadership in both houses to carry a message of moral superiority and protection against the Democrats.
It will be hard for the GOP to argue they are best prepared to protect us from terrorists when they don't care enough to protect the pages who work for them. But I guess we shouldn't be too surprised at a political party that feels both our troops and their pages are expendable items to maintain political power.
Condi Trots Out The "I Don't Remember" Defense Once Again
by Steve Soto
The woman who said that no one could have imagined that Al Qaeda would use planes as missiles here in the United States, and who said that no one knew at upper levels the Niger uranium story was suspect when Bush spoke his “sixteen words” in 2003’s SOTU, now says that she doesn’t remember receiving a warning from George Tenet and Cofer Black two months before 9/11 about an imminent Al Qaeda threat inside the country.
Actually Condi, given your record of lies, lack of imagination, and ineptitude in carrying out your jobs in this administration it isn’t incomprehensible to the rest of us that you would say you don’t remember receiving such a warning. It’s easy for the rest of us to believe that you were told by the intelligence community of their alarm and did nothing. It is quite comprehensible to the rest of us that because Tenet and Black didn’t give you a crayon drawing showing exactly where and when the attacks would occur, you simply brushed them off and told them the threat was too nebulous to worry your well-coifed head about.
And because you likely told the president about this “I would remember if I was told” warning in July, he was all-too-ready to dismiss the CIA briefer on August 6, 2001 with an “All right; you’ve covered your ass now” retort, because the threat you received in July was now in writing directly to the president. Condi, Bush wouldn’t have made such a statement unless he was told by you about the warning given by Tenet and Black a month before. And efforts by you or anyone else in the Administration to undermine Woodward’s reporting here conflict with the glowing praise you and others showered on Woodward previously.
For his part, Woodward is sticking to his story on NBC’s “Today” show this morning, safe in the knowledge that George Tenet’s memoirs will be out soon confirming that the July 10th, 2001 meeting took place. And as damaging as the Mark Foley story is for the GOP’s chances of holding onto the House, it will be more lethal for the GOP if the public sees evidence that this administration was negligent in protecting this country in the months prior to 9/11, and that they have withheld this information from the 9/11 Commission. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will have a much easier time making the case for a new Congress that will no longer rubber stamp whatever this administration wants, or be so willing to abdicate its oversight responsibility to maintain political power while leaving the country unprotected in the process.
Critics often say that the Democrats need to offer voters an alternative in order to close the sale next month. But if this story and the Foley story get any worse for the GOP, which they will, all Democrats will have to say in the coming weeks is that they are not Republicans.
Will The Foley Cover-Up Take Down The GOP House Leadership?
by Steve Soto
John at Americablog has caught the east coast feed of the Sunday night ABC news broadcast, and says it is a major kneecapper for Denny Hastert. It turns out that pages on the Hill were being told to watch out for Mark Foley as far back as 2001, and yet Hastert, DeLay, Boehner, Reynolds, and the rest of the GOP leadership not only did little or nothing to stop Foley from having more contact with pages, but they sat by while he was appointed to chair a select committee where he would come into contact with children at risk. It appears the media is picking up the scent of a GOP House leadership that spent more time on Terri Schiavo that they spent on preventing a predator from preying on pages within their midst. Yet these same GOP leaders claim a moral superiority over their Democratic opponents.
This story, and the leadership’s lack of response to the threat years ago have the potential to swing the House. Pelosi has already taken the weekend's revelations and immediately called for an Ethics committee inquiry, and in response Hastert now wants to run to the smothering embrace of Abu Gonzales to have his Justice Department sit on it until after the election. It won't work; Democrats can hammer this for the next month and weave it into their "rubber stamp Congress" message and add to it a "cover-up and negligent Congress" message as well.
Remember:
They couldn't protect us against Al Qaeda.
They can't protect our soldiers in Iraq.
Now, they can't protect children in the halls of Congress.
And don’t forget to watch Woodward on “60 Minutes” tonight.
The Left Coaster: Election 2006 State of the States Roundup
by eriposte
CA: Say No To Pombo has two good blog posts about the CA-11 race to unseat perhaps the most corrupt Republican congressman from California - Richard Pombo (yeah, I know it's really hard to certify the most corrupt GOP congressman from CA, but Pombo is close enough). One post is about the role that Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund is playing in helping marshall grassroots activism against Pombo in his district, something Pombo is whining about. The second post is about the huge amounts of money that the NRCC has been dumping into the race - over $400,000 in just 2 months. Of that, $30K+ has been on internal polls, the results of which Pombo and the NRCC have not released - you can guess why. You can find progressive Democrat Jerry McNerney, who is trying to unseat Paid-For-Pombo, here. [BTW, have you checked out Power PAC's Tracking Arnold?]
CO: Talking of former Florida Congressman Mark Foley (R-Predator), Colorado Confidential has more on a former GOP rising star in Colorado who has been arrested for multiple counts of sexual assault on a child - not long after he came out of prison on attemped sexual assault charges. In election news from CO-05, the campaign manager of far right GOPer Doug Lamborn, who has been shunned by many prominent Republicans in his district, claimed endorsements from some of Lamborn's primary opponents - except they haven't endorsed him. Make sure you check out Lamborn's Democratic challenger Lt. Colonel Jay Fawcett.
IL: Talking of IL-06, is the Republican Peter Roscam or Peter Roscum? This is why I'm asking. Tammy Duckworth, the Democratic challenger has a few words to say.
MD: I thought this was a good ad from the DCCC against GOPer Michael Steele, running for Senate against Democrat Ben Cardin.
MT: Is this guy Tester smart or what? (Latest poll here, Tester's website is here)
NH: Republican Charlie Bass' policy director Tad Furtado resigned recently due to his sockpuppetry thanks to progressive NH state blogs. Blue Granite has a summary. [Bass' challenger is Democrat Paul Hodes, who seems to be making some inroads].
NJ: PocketAces at Blue Jersey writes about the Democrats "endorsing" corrupt Republican Tom Kean Jr. for Senate: "For those of you keeping score at home, "Democrats for Junior" now consist of astroturfers posing as Democrats, a racist and a federal prisoner. With friends that dirty, Junior can't claim that he's clean as a whistle."
P.S. Most of the blogs featured in this update are listed in The Left Coaster Election 2006 Progressive State Blogs list.
A Disgusting, Revolting Reality
by paradox
H/t to Atrios for this stunning interview on Fox News. Bill Kristol finally got eviscerated for the lying evil war crime that is Iraq.
I think YouTube video insertion is horribly ugly and a careless blight on many blogs, but this is too good to pass up. Thank you, Duncan.
Billary for Senate Majority Leader
by paradox
Watching Bill Clinton crush Chris Wallace last week naturally lead to meandering thoughts of Hillary and her run for the presidency. Putting aside anything else that might entail was the huge powerful influence of her husband in the scenario; if in fact Hillary were to become president, how much of the office would be possessed solely by her intellect? How much of our leadership, although ostensibly wearing the Hillary label, will in fact be run by Bill Clinton again?
This is precisely the sort of damaging situation the country finds itself in now—how much of our leadership is in fact run by Dick Cheney? Many would say at least 80%; Billmon describes it as the “Cheney Administration.” Before the country can even begin to figure out who’s responsible for real leadership it’s hidden and fractured, leading to lack of accountability and permanent mistrust that all is not what it seems, for the hidden power must be doing something else or pulling strings. It’s not a good place for the Republic to be.
Continue reading "Billary for Senate Majority Leader"No War With Iran?
by soccerdad
I had convinced myself that Bush would authorize an attack on Iran. An article in today’s Times of London suggests that there will be no attack. It reports that was the conclusion of a secret meeting of US intelligence analysts.
Bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities was rejected on the grounds that the intelligence needed for successful air strikes was lacking. “We only have an imperfect understanding of the extent and location of the Iranian programme,” said one source with knowledge of the meeting. “Even if we got the order to blow it up, we wouldn’t know how to.”The White House’s earlier enthusiasm for military strikes if all else failed has cooled after warnings from the Pentagon and intelligence analysts that the risk to reward ratio of taking action was too high. At best 80% of the targets are mapped out and then only sketchily. The “collateral damage” to civilians could be considerable, sources say.
General John Abizaid, commander of US forces in the Middle East, John Negroponte, director of national intelligence, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state have all expressed doubts about attacking Iran.
“President Bush is not going to take military action against the advice of the secretary of state, US generals and the director of national intelligence,” Clawson said.
However, the pessimist and skeptic in me picked up on the following:
“The conclusion is that America is going to have to live with the bomb unless there’s some miracle, such as a major accident, a major defector or an orange revolution,” the source added,
The Tonkin Gulf incident came to mind.
And here’s another route to war with Iran:
The biggest deterrent might come from the Israelis, not the Americans. Israeli defence sources are increasingly convinced that it will fall to them to stop a nuclear Iran. In their view Iran should not be allowed to get to the “point of no return” where it has the know-how to build a bomb.
“The Israelis are going to have to make a decision earlier than we do,” Clawson said. “That’s a real problem for us.”
Of course we would have to come to the aid of our ally.
Open Thread - Modern Macbeth Edition
by Mary
Asking a very apropos question (How did we sink so low in just 6 years? ), Mike Whitney ends with a quote from Shakespeare's Macbeth that describes the Bush dilemma:
"I am in blood
Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more,
Returning were as tedious as go o’er."
Indeed.
Okay, it's over to you, now.
Woodward Book Reveals Potholes For White House
by Steve Soto
It looks like the Woodward book may be the gift that keeps on giving. First, Woodward confirms that General John Abizaid has wanted to get our troops out of Iraq for awhile now, but the White House at Henry Kissinger’s urging sees Iraq as another Vietnam, and refuses to leave until they defeat the insurgency, even if it means that the sectarian violence splits the country apart.
And it appears John Murtha's views aren't that far apart from the senior commanders on the ground.
This March, Abizaid was in Washington to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee. He painted a careful but upbeat picture of the situation in Iraq.
Afterward, he went over to see Rep. John P. Murtha in the Rayburn House Office Building. Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, had introduced a resolution in Congress calling for American troops in Iraq to be "redeployed" -- the military term for returning troops overseas to their home bases -- "at the earliest practicable date." "The war in Iraq is not going as advertised," Murtha had said. "It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion."
Now, sitting at the round dark-wood table in the congressman's office, Abizaid, the one uniformed military commander who had been intimately involved in Iraq from the beginning and who was still at it, indicated he wanted to speak frankly. According to Murtha, Abizaid raised his hand for emphasis, held his thumb and forefinger a quarter of an inch from each other and said, "We're that far apart."
In another revelation from Woodward’s book, the Agency’s George Tenet and Cofer Black became so concerned about a possible Al Qaeda strike against the United States during the months before 9/11 that they requested an immediate meeting with Condi Rice on July 10th, 2001. Keep in mind this was a month before the infamous and ignored August 6, 2001 PDB. But during the meeting Rice appeared to be focused on other issues like Star Wars and dismissed the warnings, and Rumsfeld had openly poured cold water upon the threats within the Administration as a possible ruse by Al Qaeda to test America’s responses.
There’s one major problem about the July 10th meeting: 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a close Rice confidant, knew about this meeting, but never told Commissioners about it, so it never was investigated. No one else inside the administration told the Commission about the meeting either. It was covered up. According to a counsel for the Commission, withholding this information is a possible crime.
No Legs to Foley Story, He’s a Republican
by paradox
All across the blogosphere and to a significant extent the corporate media sex scandal crackles down the wires and prances through the ether, House leadership, homosexuality and criminal offenses caroming quickly through the political word, blood in the water. It’s big, it’s huge, it’s really going to hurt.
Horseshit. Foley is a Republican, and the only measure of damage to the GOP is his resignation and loss of House seat next term (not an insignificant hit, that). The corporate media will technically not be mendacious about it, reporting the facts for at most a week. If Foley gets arrested and arraigned they’ll duly report it, but that will emphatically be the end of the matter.
Continue reading "No Legs to Foley Story, He’s a Republican"Letter from California
by paradox
09/30/06 0528.31 pst
San Jose, California
As the leaves turn and the mornings get chilly seasoned California brows furrow and crease heavenward, watching the sky for rain. In a year like this with so much heavy rain just 130 days behind us much less worry and concern is attached to the glances, but Californians still reflexively wait for rain and know the reservoir stat: we’re a third of the way down. We proved last century we can go this winter and even next with no rain, so if the very worst happens currently we’ve only used a third of capacity. That third summer would include severe rationing, of course, but we’d still make it.
Continue reading "Letter from California"The Tortilla Curtain
by paradox
The reprehensible NSA legislation currently weaving through Congress will probably die quietly because the clock runs out, and it’s fervently hoped another viciously stupid idea with alarming support doesn’t make it: 700 miles of new fence along the Mexican border to enforce bigotry, unemployment, and the glaring, arrogant stupidity of the United States. A monstrous barrier to the land of the free, a ridiculous testament to boneheaded follies the species is sadly prone to, a glaring, offensive landmark easily recognized from space starkly demonstrating total futility, this, sadly, is the only outcome possible for the Tortilla Curtain.
If constructed we will instantly join the fraternity of fencing humans, living memory showing the East Germans and Israelis as shining success members. Do we really want to degrade our southern border to the horrifying political and human tactics that Berlin and the West Bank employed? Jesus save us.
Only starkly stupid people in DC would fail to recognize how smart humans are without college degrees and white skin. Those boneheads in Washington, incredibly, think that human beings with 10 million years of hominid evolution can’t figure out how to get around a physical barrier 700 hundred miles long.
Continue reading "The Tortilla Curtain"Open Thread
by Steve Soto
Every time I go away on business for a few days, all hell breaks loose, and it looks like I missed all the good stuff.
The al-Maliki government slapped an immediate curfew on Baghdad Saturday morning, after an aide to a leading Sunni politician was arrested for plotting a major attack inside the Green Zone.
Congress slapped a "no permanent bases/no grab for oil" restriction upon the Bush Administration Friday when it attached such a provision to the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental appropriation bill, bringing the total committed by this government to fighting this failed war to over $500 billion. And two Bush Administration officials admitted today (on the record) that they still have no clue what they are doing in Iraq:
Separately, a senior Pentagon official faulted the U.S. effort in Iraq yesterday, saying that authorities are "struggling" to coordinate various projects and operations there.
"We don't sufficiently have unity of effort yet," said Eric S. Edelman, the undersecretary of defense for policy. Speaking at a State Department conference on how the U.S. government should better conduct counterinsurgency campaigns, he added that he believes it would "take an ongoing adaptive effort" to do better. Specifically, he said, he would like to see more coordination of reconstruction work with military operations.
After Edelman spoke, Meghan O'Sullivan, the deputy national security adviser for Iraqi affairs, stood to say that "the White House sees this as a conference of consequence. We really are in need of new tools."
OK, it's your turn.
...or a live boy
by dj moonbat
Starting sometime yesterday, the Internets got all atwitter with the news that Mark Foley (R-FL) had been using his personal email account to put some (not-that-smooth) moves on a young page who had caught the congressman's eye while working, apparently, for some other congressperson.
The page worked for Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., who said Friday that when he learned of the e-mail exchanges 10 to 11 months ago, he called the teen's parents. Alexander told the Ruston Daily Leader, "We also notified the House leadership that there might be a potential problem," a reference to the House's Republican leaders.
This is where the deeply ironic hurting starts to come in for the GOP, from where I stand. I don't have a strong moral objection to people hitting on sixteen-year-olds; as Atrios (among many others) puts it, it's "creepy" for middle-aged guys to be hitting on teenagers, but I think it's creepy more because it's pathetic than because it's immoral.
But then, of course, there's the whole thing with teh gay. And let's face it, it's the GOP's thing to deal with. They've poisoned the relationship between gays and straights for a while now, and done darned well electorally in the process. So, they'd be well advised to wash their hands of the guy and be done with it.
That would work great, except they knew about it for a year:
So Rep. Alexander knew about this 10 or 11 months ago. And he says he notified the House leadership. That means Hastert and (at the time) either Tom DeLay or Rep. Blunt (R-MO). We don't know it was either of those three men yet. But that's what Alexander means when he says he "notified the House leadership." They're the House leadership.If I'm understanding this correctly, that means that the leaders of the House Republican caucus have known for almost a year that a member of their caucus was having cybersex with an underage congressional page. And apparently they did nothing about it.
So here's the thing: the GOP has invested a helluva lot of energy in getting our press to the point where the only thing that mattered was sex--and in particular, teh gay sex. I get the feeling that this story, as thoroughly undeserving as it is of serious, in-depth coverage, is going to get it. America handing over to the President the power to determine both guilt and the legality of torture? That's just politics. What we have on our hands now is a scandal.
The Party of Corruption and Hypocrisy Chances for Keeping the House Just Got Dimmer
by Mary
The election game is changing so fast that it's hard to keep up with all the plays. One really enormous fumble today is the resignation of Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) for indulging in cyber-sex with minors. What makes it even a bigger play is that Rep. Foley has been a major sponsor of some very harsh laws that address sexual predators who use the internet for their sexual pleasure. Can you say hypocrisy?
Anyway, Florida was already a state where the GOP was troubled because of the fumbling candidacy of Katherine "Pink Sugar" Harris which threatened at least one key Republican Congressional seat. With the late withdrawal of Rep. Foley, his safe Republican seat will be much harder to win, especially if the Republicans cannot change the ballot. Of course, it is important to note that Florida has many precincts with touch-screen voting machines and they've passed a law that makes it illegal to hand count any ballots that have already been machine counted. So don't count the Repubs out yet. We may see a Representative Foley and a Senator Harris despite the fact that only 29% of the Floridians will actually vote for them.
Update: Oh gosh, it gets even worse.
So Rep. Alexander knew about this 10 or 11 months ago. And he says he notified the House leadership. That means Hastert and (at the time) either Tom DeLay or Rep. Blunt (R-MO). We don't know it was either of those three men yet. But that's what Alexander means when he says he "notified the House leadership." They're the House leadership.
If I'm understanding this correctly, that means that the leaders of the House Republican caucus have known for almost a year that a member of their caucus was having cybersex with an underage congressional page. And apparently they did nothing about it.
Bob Woodward's New Book
by Mary
So Bob Woodward has a new book, State of Denial, coming out with lots of juicy details about how disfunctional the Bush White House is and more about the people in the administration who can't stand talking to each other.
The book says President Bush’s top advisers were often at odds among themselves, and sometimes were barely on speaking terms, but shared a tendency to dismiss as too pessimistic assessments from American commanders and others about the situation in Iraq.
During this administration Woodward's written a total of three books from the insiders point of view that have been very derogatory of the people in Bush's administration. However, he always gets invited back to dish up the next round of dirt. And why is that? Because he also is very good at fluffing up Bush's image because Bush doesn't care if everyone else looks bad as long as it shows him as a confident, decisive and bold leader.
Here's the assessment from his previous tome, Plan of Attack:
Continue reading "Bob Woodward's New Book"ON April 17, two days before the official publication of Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack, Dana Milbank of the Washington Post appeared on the Today show to discuss the book's political impact. White House officials "have good reason to be worried," said Milbank. "I think we finally found the weapon of mass destruction here." He continued: "The administration will have a much tougher time knocking down Bob Woodward than they have had in dealing with some of their other critics."
Yet the Bush team hasn't tried to knock down Woodward--it's been too busy pumping him up. On the president's reelection website, there's a "suggested reading list." Plan of Attack sits at the top. There's even a link to Amazon.com, for purchasing convenience. The GOP has been called "the stupid party" before, but encouraging people to buy a book like the one Milbank described would be about as smart as screening Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 at a Bush-Cheney fundraiser.
Record Defense Budget of $448 Billion Passed
by paradox
The United States continued a long tradition of squandering an unbelievable fortune on its military-defense establishment today, passing a record $448 billion Pentagon budget with an extra $70 billion for the great successes of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Liberals are not automatically pacifists. Only the most naïve charlatan would put faith in the goodness of man, so defense and deterrence is of course necessary. Currently the Unites States is threatened by no one except for some piqsqueeks our war felon president thinks waging nation-state war will eliminate, so we are embroiled in that futile, bloody, vastly expensive hellhole of Iraq.
The United States could easily defend all of its strategic global interests with a third of the current budget. We have no territorial enemies whatsoever and our nuclear attack submarine force can shut down any major power’s trade in a day.
This society has gone hopelessly military, blinded to the incredible potential wasted every year on instruments of death. We proclaim a need for security yet lie to our allies, give the finger to anyone else and kill, torture and maim precisely as we please. We will never have security as long as we continue to do so. Human security isn’t bought or brutally coerced, it’s earned by respect and peace.
In the few times that won't work, $175 billion annually would be more than enough to cover it.
It’s as if we don’t have schools that desperately need funds, that 48 million Americans don’t have insurance, that our seniors live in fear every month because of drug costs, that millions are hungry, that veterans don’t need help, that everything is so peachy darn and dandy that we can spend half a trillion on death machines.
We have seriously lost our way. After spending half a trillion this year, will we be any more secure in 2007? We could have spent a quarter of that and become independent of middle east oil in 10 years. How long will we insist on continuing with this insanity?
Steve is on the Road
by paradox
I thought he would have been back by now, but obviously he is not. It’s times like these that vividly remind me how easy Steve makes blogging look, and the amazing mental resiliency required to do it well every day.
Yesterday was a dark day, yes, but The Left Coaster is still here, something I too often take for granted. Blogs have evolved into the only power the little people have, and we would never let The Left Coaster wither or stop working for justice in this country.
We might be cranky or spotty about it on occasion, but we will always try the best we can. Pretty soon Steve will be back and the blog will return to its normal state.
Open Thread
by Mary
Shocking: this was an outrageous assault on journalists....
Fox News chief Roger Ailes says former President Clinton's response to Chris Wallace's question about going after Osama bin Laden represents "an assault on all journalists"
Yet this was just a joke...
The acerbic host of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" was terrified when he opened a suspicious-looking letter with a California postmark and a batch of white powder poured out. A note inside warned Olbermann, who's a frequent critic of President Bush's policies, that it was payback for some of his on-air shtick.
An NYPD HazMat unit rushed to Olbermann's pad on Central Park South, but preliminary tests indicated the substance was harmless soap powder. However, that wasn’t enough to satisfy Olbermann, who insisted on a checkup. He asked to be taken to St. Luke's Hospital, where doctors looked him over and sent him home. Whether they gave him a lollipop on the way out isn't known.
Thus is life in Murdoch-land.
Iraq for Sale: Bidding for Torture
by Mary
Today was a shameful day for the Senators who were elected to protect and defend the constitution. Will the American public hold them accountable for their deed? Perhaps if they realize that what this Congress has also done is to aid and abet Bush's outsourcing torture to CACI.
You can help spread the word by hosting a screening:
Buy the DVD: http://iraqforsale.org/buy.php
Host a Screening: http://iraqforsale.org/screenings.php
The Dictator Can Now Torture
by soccerdad
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."CNN from 12/18/2000
Well the McCain pro-torture bill has passed. For me its official the American Myth is truly dead. That bright city on the hill has now slide down into the gutter with other 3rd world countries that have no respect for human dignity. President Bush now gets to decide who is an enemy combatant and what torture is, and there is no redress through the legal system. So once you are declared an enemy combatant you enter a brutal world from which there is no escape. The completely ambiguous term "material support" can be applied to American citizens as well as foreigners. And guess who gets to decide what "material support" is? The consolidation of central power in the president is of itself worrisome but in the hands of this set of criminals is truly disturbing. There was no compromise, Bush got all he wanted.
As Jack Balkin asked:
So let me get this straight: The Democrats give up the chance at filibustering one of the worst bills in recent memory because they were afraid that the President would paint them as soft on terrorism.After the bill passes, the President plans to paint them as soft on terrorism.
He then accuses the Dems of being spineless. I think this is where he and others go wrong. They are not spineless, they just agree with the Repubs. I think the Dems would have preferred that Iraq not be invaded, but given that it has they are behind it. Their only complaint appears to be that it’s not being run well.
The Democrats time and time again have been handed clubs by the Repubs (torture being the largest) and instead of beating them over the head with them they just yawn and do nothing. The bottom line is that they are for the war and don't want to do anything to interfere with its progress. One only has to listen to H. Clinton or read the New Republic to see that this is true. The leadership of both parties support the right of the US to do anything it wants, to anyone it chooses, and should not incur any consequences. American Exceptionalism run way amok.
A real feeling of helplessness has settled in as there seems to be little anywhere someone who is against these wars of conquest can turn. The truth of the matter is that neither party cares. They would be happy if only 3 people in the entire country voted as long as their party got 2 of the votes.
Now its time to sit back and watch the war on Iran unfold just as scheduled with the US employing tactical nukes. The US and the world is changing and it certainly is not for the better. My children and their children will bear the brunt of the nasty consequences that are sure to come.
The time for dissent will be limited.
Go see this short video put out by David Neiwert on How Torture Works
Healthcare Costs Driving Offshoring Now
by Mary
Craig Barrett, Intel's CEO, warns that until the United States does something to fix the broken healthcare system, companies who want to remain competitive in the global market place will be forced to move jobs offshore.
Do you think that we can begin fixing this problem while Bush is in office or that the rubber-stamp Republicans in Congress care?
Arnie Signs Greenhouse Gas Bill, Short on Specifics & Personal Sacrifice
by paradox
After cursory initial analysis of the greenhouse gas emission bill signed by Schwarzenegger yesterday it’s easy to see why it passed: none of the details of how the goals are actually accomplished are codified (established by regulation later), there are opt-outs for industry and the governor, and the bill demands no personal sacrifice from ordinary Californians. All to be overseen by somebody else in the future, of course.
It goes without saying yesterday was an utter disaster for Angelides. Tony Blair heaped praise on Gropy signing a landmark environmental law while Angelides’ campaign co-chair chattered praise for Arnie in both English and Spanish—bilingual political suicide. The corporate Sacramento Bee is on its knees this morning, blubbering that when Gropy signs a bill, it’s *Star Time*. Good luck, Phil.
California is supposed to cut emissions with regulations on power plants, utilities, cement makers, and various manufacturing sectors. Screamingly absent are any proposed regulations on container ships, automobiles, home saving elements (insulation, windows, appliances, solar augmentation, lighting), or even home micro-generation models.
This bill can only be a good thing, but it’s a shame its goals are so modest and ask so little from California citizens. Emissions could quite comfortably be cut 75% by 2020 with auto and home elements included. Citizens of this great state would be giddy to help save our planet and get our ridiculously oil-addicted asses out of the Middle East forever if the case is presented properly, but the leadership in Sacramento doesn’t think enough of them to try.
