Election Projection makes no bones about being a Bush blog. Call it the "bull case scenario" for his campaign - the reasons why if Bush were a stock, you should be leveraged to get in now. But even his numbers, with everything he can spin towards Bush aren't particularly strong - not even getting a straight majority of the popular vote. But his posts have been an invaluable meter of the right leaning Zeitgeist and talking points. Top of the list is to try and exploit the mismatch between Kerry's aloof style, and Bush's more genial style. Kerry, the meme goes, is dislikable. It's not a bad angle to play, given what I have heard many Kerry supporters say about him.

But, in truth, the two men are not that much different up close. Imperious, self-assured and desiring to hold the reigns of power - they are also both sprinters. Neither man likes long grinding swings before the public, preferring, instead, blitzes where they are everywhere for short periods of time - enough to tilt public opinion, and then use it for their purpose. Unlike Clinton and Reagan - who basked in the light, Kerry and Bush are both very operational in their approach to campaigning. This means that the prediction of

From Diarist "It is simple if you ignore the complexity"

And as to why this is questionable timing - read the top independent election lawyer in the country, Edward Still Esq. on the GOP accusing Kerry of coordination, a big no no, with the 527's.

Barry L. Ritholtz is Market Strategist for the Maxim Group, which manages over $5 Billion in assets. He also writes "The Big Picture:Macro perspectives on the Capital Markets, Economy, and Geopolitics."

The Bureau of Labor Statistics weighs in on what should be a thoroughly resolved debate: Which is the more accurate and reliable measure of Job creations, the Payroll or Household Survey?

Economists Arnold Kling and Steve Antler both referenced a recent Bureau of Labor Statistics analysis (BLS) on the divergence between the payroll survey and the household survey of employment. The BLS observed:

"As part of its annual review of inter-censal population estimates, the U.S. Census Bureau determined that a downward adjustment should be made to the household survey population controls. This adjustment stemmed from revised estimates of net international migration for 2000 through 2003. In keeping with usual practice, the new controls were used in the survey starting with data for January 2004. Estimates for December 2003 and earlier months were not revised to reflect the new (lower) population controls.

...As a convenience to its data users, BLS created a research series that smoothes the level shifts in employment resulting from the January 2000, 2003, and 2004 population control adjustments."

-Bureau of Labor Statistics

It is somewhat perplexing to see controversy still dogging this statistical oddity.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has noted that the Payroll survey is much more reliable than the household survey:

"I wish I could say the household survey were the more accurate,'' Alan Greenspan, the Fed chairman, said in his testimony at a House hearing on Feb. 11. "Everything we've looked at suggests that it's the payroll data which are the series which you have to follow.''

That hasn't stopped several economists – arguably with political agendas from claiming the divergence between the two surveys is understating the strength of the economy.

Rice is allowed to smile in news photos again.

With the announcement this morning that Rice will testify in public under oath, a significant defeat to the Bush executive's handling of the 911 scandal has occured. Only last night they were offering a "modified limited hang out" where only private, unsworn, testimony would be offered. However, this collapsed in the face of a unanimous demand for Rice to be "under penalty of perjury". But telling the truth isn't really in the cards, even as much as reasonable people wish it might be.

The reason Rice has been released, is, of course, because they have found someone else to go head to head with Clarke... Because they need it, according to the New York Times his book is "Too good to be ignored."

The Kos blogger who writes under the name "Meteor Blades", had a close call with the grim reaper - he tells his story here in "back from the dead".

Rasmussen reports that Bush's surge stopped. It is now Kerry 47/Bush 45/Other 4 in the Presidential Race. The GOP congress slid with the Democrats now leading 42 to 37 - with a high 16% undecided. This indicates that the showdown over 911 hearings is important in the next few days. The coattail number of 5 for Kerry would indicate that the wind favors the Democrats slightly.

Will Greenspan be reappointed to his Federal Reserve post this summer, or will the White House seek someone even more pliant? From John Crudele in the New York Post:

Libya and Algeria join Venezuela and Saudia Arabia in backing production cuts for OPEC. This move was generally expected as the Oil Settle price has been rising for some time, but today a spike in the spot market versus the futures market indicates that traders are expecting high volatility as negotiations in OPEC determine the details.

The other immediate reaction is a sharp drop in the dollar, which had previously climbed out of lows by rebounding 5% since February - and risen to early fall levels. Meanwhile - the price of gas climbed, though it is still about a dollar a gallon short of the "pinch point."

LZM for today is 65, up 2 from yesterday.

Breaking News - Rice agrees to testimony, in public and under oath. Bush and Cheney to testify before whole board of inquiry, though in private.

If you went to sleep last night, shame on you - the overnight news cycle is suddenly busy. After hours a fresh batch of moves were offered in the Clarke scandal. The Executive offered a "modified limited hangout" compromise: Clarke's testimony would be editted by the CIA to embarrass him, and Rice would "meet" with the Commission, in private, and not under oath. Kevin Drum has launched a discussion and JMM almost hits tilt. Adding coal to the fire: MSNBC gave a list of precedents for aids testifying, contradicting Rice's assertion.

While it is almost certainly for the short term political benefit of Bush to let this go away, it is not clear that it is in his long term benefit. The image that the US is lead by someone who has something to hide on National Security weakens him abroad - where an avowedly aggressive Saudi Arabia has just called for production cuts in OPEC, in the wake of the collapse of an Arab League Summit on Reform.

And that is the ultimate hammer: America's image abroad as strong cannot return until the questions are cleared up. Which is why the mantra of the 911 comission has become "in public, under oath".

In Pennsylvania, a seat written off by some as a safe hold for the incumbent Republican Arlen Specter, has become like an old Flyer's game - the kind where you went to a fight and a hockey game broke out. With two challengers taking on an increasingly embittered, embattled and embarassed Arlen Specter - from the right in his own party, and from a Democratic Party that seems reborn. Pat Toomey and Joe Hoeffel have embarked on using the internet to "get the word out" to their most hard core supporters.

Their nominations, particularly in the politics and economics department are, idiosyncratic, shall we say. The Warblog nominations, however, are, off the mark completely. Kos hasn't been a war blog for sometime, and indeed, this should be known to anyone covering the blog beat.

But, then, at least Forbes has started to come to terms with the idea, and has gone deeper into the subject - Argmax, for example, is listed on their list of best economics blogs. Let's hope they continue this, because the departed Elder Forbes in his "Fact and Comment" section was clearly "blogging in print", with a terse style of sharp one liners, mixed in with explantory talking points and cogent ideas on business directions.

From MSNBC:

U.S. officials told NBC News that the full record of Clarke’s testimony two years ago would not be declassified. They said that at the request of the White House, however, the CIA was going through the transcript to see what could be declassified, with an eye toward pointing out contradictions.

This seems like an overtly political use of intelligence. I'm not surprised, but generally I would think you'd at least want to disguise your agenda.

Have a touch of pity for a wit that is no longer with us, Peter Ustinov, who has been old for as long as I can remember - has left, exit stage left. He said "I became English without a drop of English blood" and liked to joke that he found England the most conducive place to be a misfit in of any country in the world.

In 1943 his first play opened, he then became an actor in the epic historicals of the 1950's, a novelist and short story writer, and monologist. In 1958, he was Samuel Johnson on television, back when you could put that on network television.

This is part of a series using the history of the feuilleton—a somewhat analogous practice to the blog, only without the links—to reflect on some of the issues that make blogs important today. Click here for the first post, in which I gave an overview of the feuilleton.

Czech writer Václav Havel tells a story in his famous essay “Power of the Powerless.”

The manager of a fruit and vegetable shop places in his window, among the onions and carrots, the slogan: ‘Workers of the World, Unite!’ Why does he do it? What is he trying to communicate to the world? Is he genuinely enthusiastic about the idea of unity among the workers of the world? Is his enthusiasm so great that he feels an irrepressible impulse to acquaint the public with his ideals? Has he really given more than a moment’s thought to how such a unification might occur and what it would mean?

Of course not, Havel answers his own questions. The greengrocer puts the sign up to make his life easier, to avoid trouble with the authorities. Havel uses the story to demonstrate how ideology depends on many individual acts to sustain its structure. But the story has always said as much to me about the very concrete nature of the discourses that make up ideology. Right there, next to the radishes, is a little placard with words that hold up the entire communist infrastructure. Take it away, and that infrastructure starts to crumble.

When I try to describe to people what characterizes periods when the feuilletons were really important, it’s always this notion of concrete discourse. They are moments when, for a variety of reasons, words take on new weight. They’re no longer simple signifiers; rather, they are tangible: The signs next to the root vegetables. The brand names on our sneakers. The empty words coming from our President’s mouth. There are, in my understanding, three things that have contributed to such an environment for the feuilletons (all of which resonate for us today):

According to Rassumussen polling reports - the Republican Congress has surged by 3 points and the Democrats have slid by three - only one point separates them.

Via Digby, the Daily Show beats all cable news in its time slot, and is in a booking war with 'real' news shows. A couple of questions, all in the service of a basic contention that the Daily Show has been an important real news show for two years now.

Since news has become commodified, why does analysis need the veneer of savvy to be credible? What's the difference, news-wise, between needling your guests (as Tim Russert does) about irrelevant inconsistencies and making funny jokes about them? Why do conventions, which are staged media circuses, deserve serious coverage as if matters will be decided there? Finally, why is being funny about the world inherently less useful than any other form of punditry?

Rice is losing the War of Images - CNN has her looking positively bedraggled here. And when even a Bush loyalist is using the word "public" it means there are more bad hair days in store for the embattled National Security Advisor.

Another glowering Rice photo sits above the next hammer blow in the Clarke scandal - with a staunch ally of President Bush wheedling for her to testify without being subpoenaed. Clearly there is pressure for more, they don't want to become involved in a showdown, which might well lead to a "Saturday Night Massacre" of the Presidentially appointed commission. And perhaps renewed calls for an independent counsel to investigate. Having sabotaged the old law, which was allowed to sunset, the Republicans are now feeling the flip side. The old law made it so that the rules themselves were not in play, and thus vented off political pressure over exactly this kind of situation.

As the Arab League summit collapses the rumor from Saudi Arabia that a rift between states that want greater links with the West - particularly smaller ones - and the richer and more powerful states want a continuation of the status quo, though under another name. "Reform" was the word which created the need for a summit. It was also the word that lead to its collapse. Since "reform" to the larger states meant a larger role for their policy.

Iraq has again proven a worthless card - supposedly the creation of a "Democratic Iraq" would have lead to pressure on oilarchies to change their ways. It is not so, simply because the states of the Middle East know that the US is as extended as it can be, and that, rather than being a pressure for change, it is a chance to upend the US, shake it vigorously, and pick up the loose change that falls out. The UN warning that Afghanistan is on the verge of becoming a terrorist haven again, only underscores that Iraq is the central affront to the War on Terrorism - even if a few scalps are taken.

This is the background essay for the BloggerCon session I will be leading April 17 at Harvard Law School. I expect this post to change as comments come in and I re-think it. Got an idea? Hit the comment button and speak.

No One Owns Journalism

By "journalism" we ought to mean the practice of it, not the profession of it. Journalism can happen on any platform. It is independent of its many delivery devices. This also means that journalism is not the same thing--at all--as "the media." The media, or Big Media as some call it, does not own journalism, and cannot dispose of it on a whim.

Manhattan, March 28 --

It's the search, stupid, without which the infinite bits of info on the Internet would be as inaccessible as Egyptian hieroglyphics before the Rosetta Stone. Google made the cover of Newsweek last week. It is whispered that their IPO, when it comes, will value the company somewhere in the range of $12 billion. Yet they cannot rest on their laurels: Steve Ballmer has announced (shudder, shudder, quake) that Microsoft is playing catch-up.

The run off rounds in France are over - and the results are clear. As with Spain, the governing party has been soundly thrashed - the left attained an absolute majority of votes according to early counts, and almost complete control of the regional councils. The right lost 11, and perhaps 12 councils - from 14 down to 1 or 2.

[ed. France has a vibrant online political community, complete with a growing blogsphere, one site I use is politique online.]

John Doty is running for the Oregon House of Representatives, District 6 seat. Where did Dean for America go? Where is the energy from DailyKos heading? Perhaps into local races across the country, into districts like the following.

Q: Can you tell me a little about your district, and why you are running?

Jeff Jarvis wants comments on a new project on local news and blogs he's working on. And if you're in the mood, go help Jay Rosen with bloggercon.

Thomas Friedman is a columnist for the New York Times, and an avid factoid collector. He did not write this column, but he might as well have.

The world faces a choice, the most important choice it's ever faced since my last column. And the color of the choice is orange.

Sometimes we get asked - what's funny on the internet? Well, Joelle over at Tenth Muse has attitude. In Pink. And sometimes blue.

And if you liked Slackers, then Cafe Etiquette is for you.

But better for my hard wasted time at work - proving that there is nothing to trivial to get its own critic - that's right. Banner Critics.

But where do I go when I need a laugh? To the place where Kerry has an agenda and Rice actually testifies. That's right, Ott's one onionship of the news, Scrappleface.

Daily Kos is democratic political junkies sports page. In line with this, and since there really isn't anything similar on the right with diaries and surveys - I will be running a "liberal zeitgeist" survey and tracking the results.

The survey is simple - what will be the final partisan breakdown of control for the Presidency, the Senate and the House.

Preliminary from today below, though the final number is tomorrow:

The classic chess opening, the "Spanish Game", is described as "a bitter struggle for the center, with attacks extending to each side's king." This is, also, a description of politics, where attacks on the other side's leader are through a broad center. While some people feel that the next step is low-level revelations about mishandling, or even altering, of intelligence - the more likely next step is a bitter war in Congress for control over the debate.

Frist's demand for declassifying selected portions of Clarke's previous testimony, Daschle's statement that unless Bush stopped making recess appointments, the Democrats would hold up all judicial nominations - and now Charlie Rangel's threat to take the Drug Benefit Scandal to the floor of the house - are part of a pattern. The struggle is not going downward - to details - but upwards - as Clarke joins the call to release his email and testimony.

Because each side knows that with control of the center, they can defeat any attacks from the flank that are not supported by heavy pieces.

With Rasmussen reporting that Bush's slide versus Kerry has reversed - and Kerry is now only ahead by one point, it might seem that, as the pollster says "the frenzy is over". But the numbers don't say that, in fact, they agree more with fellow Bopster Rick Heller that this is not about the Republican Democrat divide but between the right and centrists. With Patrick Buchanan defending Richard Clarke, it seems hard to disagree.

How so? Let's do the numbers.

While not quite "marriage" it goes farther than civil unions.

With the use of riot police to disperse a demonstration of at least 350,000 - and probably closer to half a million Taiwan is going down the road which the US did not in 2000. What happens if Gore had contested? The Pan-Blue alliance clearly has the ability to mobilize in a manner which Gore did not, or at least chose not to avail himself. The Pan-Blue has chosen to bring up both voting irregularities and imply that, perhaps, the assassination attempt on President Chen and his Vice-President were somehow tainting the election. Gweilo Diaries speaks for many calling this selfish - but supporters seem to be remaining firm in wanting to put the pressure on Chen.

With all attempts to end the impasse early having collapsed - a bill that would have allowed a fast recount was stalled - the Straight Times predicts "the stage is set for months of legal wrangling".

But not so fast. just breaking is the other prong of Chen's strategy. All in: he would agree to a total recount, he had set up an inquiry - though not an independent one, and asked for talks with the two leaders of the Pan-Blue ticket. The opposition is saying that Chen Shui-ban is all wet, but Chen takes the hardline.

The problem with the Clarke testimony is not that it's damning, for it is, but that it's just damning. I am overwhelmed by scandal, and another person coming forward to say what many people have said may push this administration slightly closer to defeat. I couldn't really tell how far these guys would be pushed, whether Clarke would make that big a difference in a few weeks, when he has dropped out of the news cycle. The lack of WMDs seems more like a paper cut than a real political travesty.

I suspect Clarke's testimony will have more legs, because I just read this article in Salon.

A former FBI wiretap translator with top-secret security clearance, who has been called "very credible" by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has told Salon she recently testified to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States that the FBI had detailed information prior to Sept. 11, 2001, that a terrorist attack involving airplanes was being plotted.

Referring to the Homeland Security Department's color-coded warnings instituted in the wake of 9/11, the former translator, Sibel Edmonds, told Salon, "We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001. There was that much information available." Edmonds is offended by the Bush White House claim that it lacked foreknowledge of the kind of attacks made by al-Qaida on 9/11. "Especially after reading National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice [Washington Post Op-Ed on March 22] where she said, we had no specific information whatsoever of domestic threat or that they might use airplanes. That's an outrageous lie. And documents can prove it's a lie."

Powerline is a blog that has been on the cutting edge of the attempts to discredit Richard Clarke. Its posts have been featured by the Wall Street Journal's Best Of The Web, David Horowitz's FrontPage Magazine, and as well as numerous blogs, including Instapundit.

Now, Powerline reports Clarke Fallout Hurts Bush

This afternoon Fox News reported that in its poll, 52% of respondents found Clarke's allegations credible, compared to 36% who didn't. That 36% basically represents the hard core of Bush's support; it appears that nearly all "swing" (i.e., uninformed) voters, basing their judgments on superficial headlines, are not aware of the problems with Clarke's credibility.

A lot has been made of the seeming discrepancy between Dick Cheney's characterizations of Richard Clarke's involvement in counter terrorism: "Well, he wasn't -- he wasn't in the loop, frankly, on a lot of this stuff," and Condi's: "I would not use the word 'out of the loop'....He was in every meeting that was held on terrorism. All the deputies' meetings, the principals' meeting that was held and so forth, the early meetings after Sept. 11." The discrepancy was taken by a lot of commentators as evidence of White House disorganization in their response to Clarke's book.

I agree that such seeming a contradiction don't look good (and this from the Administration of message discipline!!). But I've just finished Clarke's book, and I'm not sure there is a contradiction. Rather than a contradiction, the seeming discrepancy demonstrates (to me, anyway) just how distinct terrorism is from Cheney's grand strategy. Here's what I mean:

The rank odor of fear hangs over the right wing blog space about Clarke. TLB #1 Blogger - and right wing giant, Instapundit, just plain lies when he links to Oxblog's assertion that the Washington Post is flip flopping

This isn't spin, this isn't a stretcher, it is an outright deceptive post. Oxblog claims that the Washington Post is "flip flopping like John Kerry", when it claims in two articles disagree. The two articles: the first by Eggen and Pincus and the second by by Milbank and Eggen, with Pincus listed as a contributor hammer home the same points. The first is that Clinton didn't do enough to fight terrorism according to Clarke, but held it as a high priority. The second is that Bush followed the same policy, but with far less vigor.

The New York Times reports that PM of Israel Ariel Sharon is about to be indicted.

Word from Taiwan is that negotiations are going on behind the scenes - out of fear of awakening the PRC's interest in pressing on Taiwan. Pan-Blue functionaries are rumored to be being told that there will be some shouting, but to accept the party defeat in the Presidential race. This despite Soong's PFP holding demonstrations and demanding "revolution".

With the "fast recount" bill dead, the next steps are uncertain, but the pressure is on President Chen to make some sort of concession, and for the opposition pan-blue to behave "more responsibly".

Do you ever just feel overwhelmed by what's going on?

Scanning down BOPnews, Atrios, American Footprint, even the New York Times, and it's just like, outrage fatigue. This country is in serious trouble - global warming if nothing else creeps me out - and our institutions are under attack, but then, voting machine problems and a heavily conservative judiciary makes it seem like all corners are being covered by the other side.

I'm with Arthur Schlesinger - this country has never been in more danger. It's times like these that I realize that this is still an American experiment.

UPDATE: Blake has a good comment:

More developments on this story at Ruy Lopez - Clarke has urged his 2002 testimony be released.

When Senator Bill Frist called for declassification of Clarke's earlier testimony, alledging, or at least implying, that perjury could be in the offing - he opened the floodgates.

JMM called for everything to be opened up. Kevin Drum called Cheney's attack a smear of Olympian proportions, Daily Kos called it Character assassination and Atrios has simply begun a relentless barrage.

However, the root of the story is none of the above. It isn't the intent, or the specific actions that are the story. Instead, it is the break down of what Terry Neal of the Post called "message discipline", the sense from public and press, that any attempt to dig deeper will meet with a blank wall.

This post, most particularly, can only be said to represent my own views on the matter. Matt Y, of the American Prospect and his own blog asks what pro-free trade people can do to build consensus for free trade. Kevin Drum, adds his thoughts on the matter and touches off an excellent discussion, featuring many top bloggers and sharp thinkers.

My simple answer? Preach the word, and then practice what you preach.

Von, the "moderate" over at Obsidian Wings starts a discussion on his "political top 20."

Can we really fit people's politics into their stances on wedge issues? On what divides us?

Tacitus has gone over to Scoop as did Kos last fall. Will Bop join them? I hope so.

Ralph Nader's national field coordinator for 2000 now works for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Blog. And politician and author Mark Green, who spoke with Nader every night for years, has told Nader "not to run". And yet Democrats are understandably angry about Nader's decision to run. So how many of the Naderites are in play for the Democrats?

Zogby gives us a clue.

Life can be funny sometimes. You think you have the good guys and the bad guys all sorted out. And then one of the bad guys turns around and does something--motivated though it may be out of pure self-interest--invaluable.

In that vein, I thought it appropriate to point out that the media conglomerate the left blogosphere has spent the last several months accusing of partisan bias has become its latest corporate hero.

I'm talking, of course, about Viacom, the parent company of Simon & Schuster, Richard Clarke's publisher. It's not clear yet how the Clarke book and testimony will shake out. But by publishing Clarke's book and giving him the platform of 60 Minutes, Viacom guaranteed that his 9/11 Commission testimony would be a blockbuster. (For example, did CNN and NPR pre-empt their regular schedules to broadcast this week's testimony before the Clarke earthquake hit--or did the Clarke promotional tour give the testimony media coverage it should have had in any case?) Clarke's testimony alone would not have had the effect it has had and will continue to have, but turned into a media property the likes of Harry Potter, it became a huge event.

The popularity of the book is also having an associative effect, raising sales of other anti-Bush books. (I'm curious how this works. I shouldn't be--I actually got suckered into one of Amazon's 2-for-specials when I pre-ordered Clarke's book last week; but do people in Barnes and Nobles recall that they were also planning on reading Susskind and Franken and Ivins and so on?? Or do people get so angry after seeing Clarke on 60 Minutes that they turn, much in the way Howard Stern apparently has, into rabid Bush haters, buying anything in sight that supports their new cause? More likely something so banal as book placement in the store...)

So all of a sudden, Viacom has contributed to what is certainly an important political moment and stimulated the anti-Bush book market.

From the AP (via Jeff Jarvis):

"Most children and parents do not realize that choosing satellite television could mean their children are not protected from more aggressive and inappropriate advertising," said Cheryl Leanza, deputy director of the Media Access Project, a public-interest law firm. "All media should be on a level playing field, and all children should be protected, no matter how their programming is delivered to their homes."

The FCC is turning into a gorilla; this is precisely what the FCC is not supposed to do, regulate speech, all speech, ALL MEDIA. There isn't a level playing field; some media is broadcasted to lots of people, some isn't, and some places, like strip clubs, have certain rules on indecency, while others, like circuses, have different rules.

My question: Is this a preemptive strike on a Howard Stern move to satellite?

While his allies in Congress do the dirty work of throwing mud at Clarke, George Bush Jr. gets to look like a million dollar trooper.

But, he isn't looking like Gary Cooper in the polls.

With Delay's possible indictment, and a budget deficit which has angered old style conservatives - who don't believe in big deficits, big government or big spending packages - Congress is in play. But that has been true since last year, as a significant number of people were unhappy with both leaderships. However, the recession has shambled on, and people are now blaming the GOP leadership for the great herds of jobs not returning.

To repeat: Congress, is in play.

Jeremy Rifkin and I must be cribbing from the same ouiji board. Last fall, I predicted that the huge spending plan that Bush had engaged in by releasing federal moneys for defense, AKA the Iraq appropriation, would, in fact, have no net gain for the economy. Instead, it seemed that the conditions for stagflation were just about set – declining value of manufactured goods, which the use produces, along with rising commodity prices, which the US, directly and indirectly, imports. This dragon, tamed since the wicked recessionary spike of Paul Volker’s Fed Chairmanship in the 1970’s has reawakened. With gasoline at the pump bumping up against all time highs – and the summer driving season not yet upon us – it’s time to look at the caged dragon that is thrashing beneath us.

Tom Manatos works for House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi just sent out an e-mail called "Republican March Madness" which is unique and hilarious! Check out the site and vote for the Republican special interest action that you think is SO shocking that it deserves to be crowned the Republican “March Madness” Finalist! This is the first round in the competition. Also, with the budget on the House floor today, check out fact sheets on how the Republican budget relates to education, veterans and the armed forces, the environment, homeland security, and health care. To receive information like this an a daily basis, e-mail Tom.Manatos@mail.house.gov

This morning, on WNYE (one of several public radio stations in New York), during a discussion of Richard Clarke's testimony, a caller made some interesting observations that were consistent with the galvanic skin response I had to doings "Inside the Beltway" during my brief stay in Washington.

He said, in effect, that the proof of the 9-11 Commission's value is not what questions they ask, but what kind of action they will take. And he is not sanguine. He believes that there is a Washington insiders' equivalent of the Blue Wall of Silence. That the commission members are all members of the "club." He said it doesn't matter which party they belong to. The fact is, they have lunch together, they go to the same chiropractor, they have coded language and codes of behavior toward others on the inside. And they will protect their own.

He'd have liked to have seen academics and other independent experts sitting on the panel, and I agree. I thought of Richard Feynman and his O-ring epiphany during the investigation into the loss of the Challenger. No CYA insider would have exposed the problem, even if he or she had considered it. Or so I believe.

What do you think?

Yesterday, a nation got its history back. For three years we have felt we were in suspended in an unprecedented moment, one whose narrative left us only to draw comparisons with cataclysm, or totally new order. Now, in an instant, we have come back to earth, and, feet firmly planted on that earth of history, and armed with a story, there has been unleashed all of the pent up anger and energy of a people who have been waiting to understand. Clarke's testimony was a giant "you are here" sign on a map we did not know was there. One could compile a book of the response in words and images - from the classically straight lines of Tabassum Zakaria's Reuters report, to the ever readable Ryan Lyzza's anatomy of a smear. There is just too much out there to read as it pours in.

Oh dear lord.

The house of Bush/Delay is imploding. Tom Delay stepping down?!??!

Everyone who everyone reads, reads The Angry Bear. But, when I got a chance to speak with him, he did not come across as angry - instead, he was relentlessly non-controversial. Even when I dangled the red meat of criticizing Alan Greenspan’s backing of tax cuts, he merely said that he thought that Greenspan “crossed his fingers” and had hoped for enough growth to cover deficits. The most he would say is that the “Greenspan two step” of backing the first round, and then not seeming to back the others was interesting.

So what makes this Bear Angry? The same thing that makes his site one of those badly kept secrets on the internet – he’s the kind of guy we should be reading in the major papers, but aren’t. He’s the kind of guy that 30 years ago, a stringer would have called up and said “do these numbers make sense?” and gotten an explanation. Because what makes the bear angry is that he is proud of his profession, and that profession has rules – and those rules have been ignored. And as financial traders will tell you – “don’t bait the bear”.

I'm pseudonymous Simon, who occasionally posts long, critical things in response to posts on BOP news. I convinced Matt to give me a little official airtime -- for which I am grateful -- to put down what I think are the most pressing internal problems that blogs have yet to solve for themselves.

Not coincidentally, I think these same problems are largely ignored or deferred by the blog community. Like protons, sandwiches and the Catholic God, my objections come in three parts, and I'll blog them in three separate, irregular entries. My intent is to take a few truths and push them to the extreme.

This is the third part of Clarke's transcript to the 911 Commission.

The first part is here.

The second part is here.

This is a continuation of the transcript of Clarke's testimony to the 911 Commission. The first part is here.

The third part is here.

"CLARKE: I think it exceeded anything that George Tenet or I had ever seen." - on the intelligence warnings in the summer of 2001.

In the war, they issued decks of cards with the faces of wanted enemies. It seems, however, that the House of Bush has taken a powerful blow from a man named Clarke, a man who in 2002 gave background information to Fox on anti-terrorism record of Bush's executive branch - and now has come forth and slammed that record.

One would expect the progressive press to say this - but the testimony of Clarke left little room. The running transcript from the Washington post has enough bombs in it to run a shock and awe campaign. On to the highlight reel, directly from the transcripts, the full text of which is at the bottom.

Breaking News - reports are saying Kean is pressuring Rice to testify.

Fellow Bopster, and ever alert blogger, Marcy Wheeler started an open thread on Kos on the Clarke testimony. It is clear to everyone, everyone within reach of his words, that this is the defining moment for Bush. However much Bush wants to avoid it, however much he tried to protect against it. All of his photo ops, all of his proxies, the entire Whorlitzer constructed at great expense - are now merely more expensive wheels to come off a dying machine. Move on can smell it and so can the press, which is throwing up twig headlines about Clarke being questioned, but cannot stop the juggernaut

It reminds me of a summer long ago, when the scent of pine hovered over Carlisle Massachusetts and children who should have been out at play, being stung by yellow jackets or having their knees skinned, were, instead, watching the fall of a President.

Yes, this is that moment, where even the normally voluble and insatiable for conversation - are not out and about - but are, instead, transfixed to one man, who, almost alone, is about to be the Sampson in the temple.

The Decembrist, Mark Schmitt serves up two of the most substansive posts back to back you will find in the blogsphere this week. One is on the privacy concerns from contributors being on line. It's a subject I tackled from the other end - how contributions had become virtual support signs across the country, and were in their own way good for the country - but his take is important and worth serious consideration:

Once there was a debate between marxism and capitalism, one that absorbed the passions of the intellectual classes. However, in the present, if there is a fault line issue, it is the question of globalization versus nationalism. Phillip Bobbit argued that "nation-states" were dying and being replaced by "market-states", he was wrong, because market-states had long ago replaced states based on nationalism. The success of a state was the success of its economic shaping of market forces for the benefit of citizens and state. The great ideological wars of the early 20th century were over which market ideology would prevail.

In Harper's, perpetually edgy essayist John Ralston Saul, author of Voltaire's Bastards weighed in with the idea that globalization is dead.