SHAMELESS ACTS OF SELF-PROMOTION

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/29/22360/921
“If you were to name a single political blog . . . that you think progressives should be reading frequently, which would it be?. . .Take the poll.”

Bush’s new Cabinet appointment (first of several new members of his economic team) and a trend is emerging

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/29/124946/64
US President George W. Bush nominated 51-year-old Carlos Gutierrez, the Cuban-born head of cereals giant Kellogg Co., as his new commerce secretary. . . "He knows exactly what it takes to make American businesses grow and create jobs," Bush said.

He knows exactly what it takes to create jobs?

In a move to cuts costs, Kellogg Company said it is considering the closure of the South Operations portion of its Battle Creek, Mich., cereal plant. The closure would eliminate up to 64 percent of the jobs at the facility. . . "Streamlining our operations and avoiding future costs would help keep our North American cereal business cost-competitive going into the 21st century," said Kellogg chief exec Carlos Gutierrez.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2110242/fr/rss/
According to the Post, "Bush aides" see his "background in sales as a crucial credential, since Bush has used his economic team primarily to promote the White House agenda rather than to make policy." The paper also notes that some people appear to be turning down offers to be part of the new economic team. "Why would you want to take a job where you have no influence?" asked one conservative economist. "What's the point?" Meanwhile, Gutierrez immediately began reflecting on deep policy issues, noting at yesterday's unveiling that his experience indicates the president's "ownership society" is "real, and I know it's tangible."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18599-2004Nov28.html
Aides said changing four of the five top economic officials -- including the Treasury and Commerce secretaries, with only budget director Joshua B. Bolten likely to remain -- is part of Bush's preparation for sending Congress an ambitious second-term domestic agenda. . . Republican officials said Bush's economic team has been weaker than his national security advisers, and that the president believes he needs aides who can relate better to Congress and the markets. A more skilled team is essential, the aides said, because of the complex and politically challenging agenda of overhauling Social Security to add private investment accounts and simplifying the tax code. . . Bush aides, who have been debating what parts of his legislative package to send to Capitol Hill first, will start with measures to restrict medical malpractice claims and other lawsuits. Bush will then try to advance his initiative on Social Security, after which will come proposed changes in the tax laws. In the next month or two, Bush plans to name a commission to make recommendations on the tax code that could eliminate some loopholes and even replace the income tax with a sales tax or value-added tax. . . "They need people who have not been drinking the Kool-Aid and are going to come up here and say breathlessly, 'This is what the president wants to do, and isn't it great?' " the aide said. "They need someone like a former senator or former member or former governor who can come up here and say, 'This is going to be hard. There's going to be blood on the floor, but it's going to be worth it.' "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19837-2004Nov29.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing
Rove is revving up to push a series of audacious plans to fundamentally reconfigure the way the government gets and spends money, in a way intended to strengthen the Republican Party's grip on power for decades to come. . .

"On domestic policy, Rove has a theme at the ready: 'the ownership society' he says the president wants to build. It's a bland phrase, but the ideas behind it are hardly status quo. One is to consider abolishing the income-tax system, replacing 'progressive' (meaning graduated) rates with a flat tax or even a national sales tax or value-added tax. Another is to rechannel massive flows of tax money from Social Security to private savings accounts and into expanded medical savings accounts. Yet another is a crusade Bush and Rove have been pursuing since Texas: a national cap on damage awards in lawsuits."

Analysis: http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000602.html

A clear deconstruction of the impending Social Security swindle

http://blogs.salon.com/0000014/2004/11/29.html#a783

Iraqi elections: a complete mess

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2413
[Spencer Ackerman] Iraq's deputy prime minister, Barham Saleh of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, is one of the most sincere and tough-minded advocates of a democratic and federal Iraq. . .Yesterday Saleh made an illuminating argument for why the interim government needed to reject the call by 17 Sunni and (now-ambivalent) Kurdish political parties for a six-month delay of the elections:

[D]elaying elections will be much more difficult because it will have serious ramifications to the political process, to the issue of legitimacy, and surely all of us do not want to give the terrorists the slightest of technical wins in that situation.

But the insurgency has already won a gigantic victory with the call for an electoral postponement--a plea which never had a chance of acceptance, given the overwhelming opposition of the Shia. . . If the insurgency is to achieve its broadest common-denominator goals (ending the occupation through force) and pursue its more ambitious ones (reestablishing Sunni supremacy through force), it needs to cleave the broader Sunni population from the U.S.-backed political process in order to replenish its ranks, its armories, and its political legitimacy for a prolonged campaign. The cry over the weekend for a postponement was effectively the death rattle of moderate Sunni politicians in the new Iraq. For Saleh to argue that delaying the elections would raise "the issue of legitimacy" is effectively to announce that whether the Sunnis consider the elections illegitimate is an irrelevant concern. If the insurgents drank, they would be popping champagne corks.

But it's not as if Saleh has much choice in the matter. What could he--or the United States--really have done? A delayed election runs the tremendously heightened risk of a total Shia divorce from the political process--and considering that the Shia are the numerical majority of the population and (with the Kurds a strong second) the most politically potent force in the country, that would have meant the final collapse of the wheezing U.S.-backed political order. In my first post on this blog back in February I argued that the U.S. badly needed to ensure a buy-in from all three of Iraq's main component groups. If that was ever possible--and I would contend that it was--it no longer is. The January election is now itself on track to deliver what used to be considered the worst-case scenario (but which is now acceptable to some advocates of the war): civil war. . .

"Those of the black turbans"--Iraq's Shia clergy--"are but traitors and agents of America. It is they who have provoked the Americans to attack the Sunni, whom they call extremists and terrorists," Sheikh Ahmed al-Kubaisi told his congregation last Friday.

Mr Kubaisi's sermon is typical of many Sunni mosques across the country, where preachers are delivering fiery attacks on the Shia clergy who, they say, have "sold out" Islam.

For US troops, November is the second bloodiest month since the invasion: five more killed Monday

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/5-us-troops-killed-18-wounded-i-take.html

Military assessment of the “success” in Fallujah, and what it reveals

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/fallujah-report-and.html
The US military seems strangely unaware of the realities of insurgencies. It seems to think there are a limited number of "bad guys," who can all be killed or captured. The possibility that virtually all able-bodied men in Fallujah supported the insurgency, and that many are weekend warriors, does not seem to occur to them. In fact, as Mao noted, guerrillas swim in a sea of supportive civilians. The US military slides suggest that now that the bad guys have been taken care of, the civilians can be won over. That this outcome is highly unlikely does not seem to occur to them. . . Whatever the military rights or wrongs, the political judgment on the Fallujah campaign is easy. It was supposed to make holding elections possible in the Sunni Arab heartland. Instead, it has certainly further alienated the Sunni Arabs and made it more likely that they will boycott the elections en masse. If the Sunni Arabs remain angry and sullen in this way, Fallujah will have been a political failure.

And the press assessment?

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200449#1236
"At the moment, there's real sensitivity about the perceived political nature of every story coming out of Iraq," a Baghdad correspondent for a large US paper told me in mid-October. "Every story from Iraq is by definition an assessment as to whether things are going well or badly." In reality, he said, the situation in Iraq was a catastrophe, a view "almost unanimously" shared by his colleagues. But, he added, "Editors are hypersensitive about not wanting to appear to be coming down on one side or the other."

This is unsurprising, but nonetheless utterly appalling. The Bush administration has succeeded in making facts themselves a matter of partisan contestation. So if the facts reflect poorly on the administration, reporters feel obligated to ignore them completely, or perhaps inject some fantasy into their stories to balance things out.

Our Iraqi allies: “they’ve just about given up”

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/theyve_just_abo.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/30/international/middleeast/30police.html?ex=1259557200&en=e05af2a4ba0fa3a3&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Iraqi police and national guard forces, whose performance is crucial to securing January elections, are foundering in the face of coordinated efforts to kill and intimidate them and their families, say American officials in the provinces facing the most violent insurgency.

The neo-cons incoherent back-and-forth on Iran, Shiites

http://www.tompaine.com/archives/the_dreyfuss_report.php#002863
[Bob Dreyfuss] Here’s a challenge to an enterprising investigative reporter: Why is it that the neoconservatives, who are most loudly demanding a showdown with Iran, are the same ones supporting pro-Iranian radical Shiite fundamentalists in Iraq?. . .

[T]he neocons are increasingly isolated in their overt support for Ayatollah Sistani and the Iran-leaning fundamentalist Shiite parties in Iraq, namely, Al Dawa and the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Sistani, backed (it seems) by Dawa and SCIRI, are insisting that the impossible elections be held on Jan. 30. Although virtually the rest of Iraq, and the rest of the world, favors postponing the date, the neocon-dominated United States continues to support Sistani. Why, exactly? The man is a fanatic, and if the Shiites succeed in this election drive, they could spark a civil war, alienate the Kurds and create an Iraq allied to Iran.

In the most stunning action, the two big Kurdish parties broke with Sistani and joined the coalition of Sunnis demanding that the election be postponed. It is truly an amazing piece of news, since the Kurds had previously given little indication that they intended to break with the majority Shiites. But the Shiite insistence on constitutional provisions that would have marginalized the Kurds seems to have scared them.

Now calling for a postponement are the CIA-linked Iraqis, such as Prime Minister Allawi’s Iraqi National Accord and former foreign minister (from the 1960s) Adnan Pachachi, along with virtually all of the Sunni leadership. It’s clear that this Sunni bloc has the support of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, all of whom fear Iranian (and Shiite power). But for two years the U.S. neoconservatives have been demanding that the United States purge the Sunnis and back the Shiites. And of course, the neocons’ favorite Iraqi, Ahmed Chalabi, is one of those leading the Shiite resurgence—in league with the infamous Muqtada Sadr, another Iranian-linked operative and loose cannon.

The CIA, of course, is being purged of those who supported Pachachi, Allawi et al. The pro-Chalabi, pro-Shiite neocons are taking over the Agency, under Porter Goss. The State Department is soon to follow.

But reality may intrude. The resistance can’t stop the elections entirely, but they can render it illegitimate. How long will Washington tie itself to Jan. 30, and to Sistani?

The case for war, and why it’s wrong

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004886
“A nuclear Iran, however, cannot be tolerated. Iran is well known for its sponsorship of terrorist organizations and has conducted a foreign policy of violence by proxy. The risk that Iran will transfer its nuclear technology to groups such as Hezbollah, whom Iran supports with an estimated yearly stipend of more than $100 million, is great.”

NEW reports of torture at Guantanamo (in a confidential report to the US govt which it has held under wraps since July)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/30/politics/30gitmo.html?oref=login&ex=1259557200&

A simple question for Bush the next time he deigns to go before the press (really, it should have been asked long ago): Does the US, while proclaiming its opposition to torture, export prisoners to other countries to do our torturing for us?

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000211.html

More background on the House GOP refusal to work with Democrats on any bill

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004885
[Jan Reid and Lou Dubose] DeLay prefers a polarized House in which the adversarial relationship between Republicans and Democrats is institutionalized. “A number of times the Republican majority could pass a bill by 300 votes,” said a veteran House staffer who has worked for the Democratic leadership. “A bill that has that type of potential. Then they yank it to the conservative side so it passes 220-210. . . There’s a mentality in the Republican leadership that if a significant number of Democrats support a bill somehow it’s tainted. . . “Part of it goes back to the K Street thing, where they want to be able to say to their funders that the only people who can deliver anything for you are Republicans.” If House Republicans can make their Democratic counterparts irrelevant to the process of passing the nation’s laws, they can make them irrelevant to big political contributors.

Yet more evidence of vote fraud in Ohio: why should one low-level Democratic state candidate have drawn a quarter of a million more votes than the guy at the head of the ticket?

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/new_rumors_swirl_around_ohio_vote_count.html

Good question: with all the subpoenaing of reporters, why hasn’t Bob Novak (the original source of the Plame leak and the one who KNOWS who told him) been hauled before the grand jury?

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001437.html

Harnessing the power of the Internet: Josh Marshall proposes making the language of all bills publicly available three days before voting, then using collective intelligence to review their massive content (although I think a better solution is to constrain opportunities for wedging in hidden last-second provisions that no one ever voted for in the first place)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_28.php#004122

Henry Giroux on Bush’s theocratic vision

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov2004/Giroux1129.htm

Bonus item: a holiday gift for those hard-to-shop-for friends and family members (thanks to Digby for the ink)

http://www.shopmetrospy.com/cgi-bin/sc-v4/catprod.pl?catid=12&client=shopmetro
Support our Marine who Shot the Wounded Insurgent
The US Military can not accept donations from the public to pay for the Marine's defense. So, in lieu of money for that purpose we are assisting local military wives and families while their men are away taking care of the Nation's business.

In addition to helping a worthy cause, it's important to make sure the public does not forget about this brave Marine, who acted swiftly, in defense of his brothers.

Wear this shirt as often as possible. You can even wear it under your work shirt or under your business suit.

The Marine who killed the wounded insurgent in Fallujah deserves our praise and admiration. In a split second decision, he acted valiantly.

CAPTION READS: "The Gods of War Hate those who Hesitate"

Printed on high quality superheavyweight, preshrunk cotton

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***


- posted by Nick Burbules @ 6:19 AM

 
OVERREACHING

Iran: “military option” still in play?

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/6d9ee1bc-3f4f-11d9-8e70-00000e2511c8.html
Over the past month or so the "military option" for Iran has been the hottest topic of debate in Washington. Senior officials say military intervention is not being considered. However, it is an open secret that influential neo-conservatives at least hope Iraq will be sufficiently stable within a year to free up the US military for its next campaign.

Delaying the Iraq vote – will they or won’t they? The fact that the Kurds have joined the Sunnis in these calls is significant

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14424-2004Nov26.html
Influential Sunni Muslim groups and Iraq's two main Kurdish movements requested a delay Friday in nationwide elections set for Jan. 30, fearing that a vote amid persistent violence and a boycott by Sunnis would deprive the results of legitimacy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/27/international/middleeast/27iraq.html?ex=1259298000&en=992e51f854c8af11&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Some of Iraq's most powerful political groups, including the party led by the interim prime minister, called Friday for a six-month delay in elections scheduled for Jan. 30, citing concerns over security…The list of groups includes some that have been among the strongest backers of American policy in Iraq, and their call gives sudden momentum to those arguing for a postponement. The two main Kurdish parties supported the delay request, marking the first time the Kurds, closely allied with the Americans, have taken a clear stand on the issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/international/middleeast/28iraq.html?ex=1259384400&en=d043ad8ff4ab0c97&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Iraq's most powerful Shiite cleric [Sistani] is opposing a drive by prominent Sunni Arab and Kurdish political factions to delay elections scheduled for Jan. 30, an aide to the cleric and Shiite leaders said Saturday…The American ambassador to Iraq, John D. Negroponte, also lent his forceful support to keeping the present election date. "National elections will be taking place on the 30th of January of next year," he said on Saturday, while touring the devastated Sunni city of Falluja…

Other figures are setting out their positions. The interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, is not officially supporting a delay, a spokesman for him said, although his party did back the calls for a postponement.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2411
Administration officials have a strategy for co-opting the Sunnis as well: Ayad Allawi. The Iraqi interim prime minister, though a Shiite himself, is a former member of the Baath Party and maintains contact with some of its Sunni former leaders. In Baghdad months ago, Allawi explained to me his efforts to reach out to what he called the "fringes" of the insurgency in Fallujah and Samarra and separate these secular ex-Baathists from the fundamentalists who increasingly dominate the resistance. ... [T]he hope is to finesse the problem with an Allawi-led slate that is 20 percent Sunni so that they will be represented even if they boycott the balloting.

You should start drinking heavily when you hear that Allawi is the linchpin of any plan to finesse the Sunnis away from the insurgency. Simply put, Allawi is a toxic figure corrupted by his delusions of power and fatally crippled by his reliance on the U.S. occupation to wield it. Ask yourself: Has he succeeded in his "efforts to reach out to what he called the 'fringes' of the insurgency"? No, but he has presided over a strategy that has given the insurgency the Sunni divorce from the political process that it needs to replenish its ranks with popular support. Graffiti in the streets of Mahmoudiya reads, "Death to Allawi and His Puppet Government." Does anyone think that the Sunnis willing to run on a slate with Allawi will command popular support--or even baseline legitimacy?

Analysis: http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/elections-in-iraq-will-be-held-on.html

Fallujah: the long term

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?041129ta_talk_gourevitch
"The city has been seized. We have liberated the city of Falluja,” General John Abizaid declared on November 14th, six days after the Marines began their assault on Iraq’s notorious insurgent stronghold. The Sunni warlords who had run Falluja as their own jihadi fiefdom—terrorizing its inhabitants and using it as a launchpad for a relentless campaign of suicide bombings, ambushes, kidnappings, and assassinations—have been routed. But Abizaid was right to emphasize that it was the battlefield, and not the battle, that was won. In this regard, Falluja appears emblematic of the larger American venture in Iraq, where military superiority has yet to purchase political order. Much of the city was reduced to rubble, and the fighting was not finished when the General claimed victory: even as Iraqi corpse collectors and American reconstruction assessors went to work, marines kept killing and getting killed while trying to mop up neighborhoods that they thought they’d mopped up the day before. I am here,” a defiant insurgent leader told the Washington Post. “You can see me.” Indeed, his comrades were suddenly to be seen all over Iraq. As Falluja fell, the insurgents struck in Baghdad and Baiji and Balad and Baquba and Buhritz and Hawija and Hit and Iskandariyah and Mosul and Qaim and Ramadi and Samarra and Tall Afar and Tikrit…

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/fall-out-of-fallujah-keeps-falling.html
On the other hand, Fallujans are afraid that the mere presence of US troops in the city virtually guarantees a long-term guerrilla war that will disrupt their lives into the distant future. Explosions still wrack the city, and many Fallujans vow to fight the US presence.

Iraq: worse off

http://bodyandsoul.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/juan_cole_and_c.html

One of the consequences of the offensive: number of US “detainees” doubles

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15425-2004Nov26.html
The large influx of prisoners is putting stress on U.S. detention operations, providing the biggest test yet of new facilities and procedures adopted in the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal this past spring…

General Geoffrey Miller, key architect of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib policies, promoted (not punished)

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008865.html

And in the rest of Iraq, civil war without the name

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2410
[Spencer Ackerman] Mosul is now in essence independent from the central government and at war with itself. Thanassis Cambanis of The Boston Globe recently observed that the real power in the city derives from "a constellation of groups--insurgents and Arab nationalists on the west bank of the Tigris River, Kurdish political parties and militia on the east bank, and Turkomen in pockets throughout the city." (Thanks to Eric Umansky.) The stars do not happily exist in that constellation: Just today, a leading figure in the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars was assassinated in the city. The multiethnic Mosul, once considered a model city, is fast becoming Sarajevo.

That won't be anything compared to Kirkuk. As George Packer recently wrote, given the fervent and competing claims on Kirkuk, that city could truly be where the first shots of the Iraqi civil war are fired. (Though it could be contended that Iraq is in the midst of a civil war now, I'd argue that what's been happening over the last several months has put Iraq more into the category of failed state--where the government exists largely on paper and various factions have consolidated control over competing centers of power--while the Hobbesian civil war is just over the horizon.)

US troops: undertrained, under-supplied, over-age, and overwhelmed

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-guard25nov25,1,3316179.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
Members of a California Army National Guard battalion preparing for deployment to Iraq said this week that they were under strict lockdown and being treated like prisoners rather than soldiers by Army commanders at the remote desert camp where they are training…More troubling, a number of the soldiers said, is that the training they have received is so poor and equipment shortages so prevalent that they fear their casualty rate will be needlessly high when they arrive in Iraq early next year. "We are going to pay for this in blood," one soldier said.

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/10/were_killing_ou.html
I have no idea why the United States Army would make us deploy with this old crap," says one officer…The film shows one truck breaking down in route to the base…In another scene, the soldiers go to secure a Iraqi ammo dump--that has been left unguarded for a year. "I don't why somebody hasn't been on top of this," says one officer. "By not securing this we're killing ourselves."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/24/204333/81
A 53-year-old Vietnam veteran from western Pennsylvania has been called up for active service with the U.S. military in the Iraq war…

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/25/2410/1116
Another Marine in the unit I followed—a Democrat's dream, he returned home from fighting in Falluja in time to vote for Kerry—added, "Americans celebrate war in their movies. We like to see visions of evil being defeated by good. When the people at home glimpse the reality of war, that it's a bloodbath, they freak out. We are a subculture they created and programmed to fight their wars. You have to become a psycho to kill like we do. To most Marines that guy in the mosque was just someone who didn't get hit in the right place the first time we shot him. I probably would have put a bullet in his brain if I'd been there. If the American public doesn't like the violence of war, maybe before they start the next war they shouldn't rush so much."

The Intelligence Bill defeat, why it happened, and what it portends

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15423-2004Nov26.html
In scuttling major intelligence legislation that he, the president and most lawmakers supported, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert last week enunciated a policy in which Congress will pass bills only if most House Republicans back them, regardless of how many Democrats favor them…Hastert's position, which is drawing fire from Democrats and some outside groups, is the latest step in a decade-long process of limiting Democrats' influence and running the House virtually as a one-party institution. Republicans earlier barred House Democrats from helping to draft major bills such as the 2003 Medicare revision and this year's intelligence package. Hastert (R-Ill.) now says such bills will reach the House floor, after negotiations with the Senate, only if "the majority of the majority" supports them.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/28/intelligence.bill/index.html
[S]ome Democrats charged that Hastert and other Republican leaders didn't want the minority party to get credit for passing the bill, which is supported by many families of 9/11 victims.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/international/middleeast/28cnd-poli.html?ex=1259384400&en=6c01602a9cb80708&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld denied last week that he was opposing the legislation behind the scenes. "I'm a part of this administration," he said. "I support the president's position."…But even some Republicans have said that Mr. Rumsfeld's opposition to the bill seems clear to them.

Bush AWOL (again)

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/24/911/index.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-outlook29nov29,1,6375755.column?coll=la-headlines-nation
The same question applies even more pointedly to Bush. No president relishes legislative fights within his own party. But for any president, one of the clearest tests of leadership is the willingness to stare down his own supporters to protect the national interest…

One senior House GOP aide, intriguingly, says the picture is so murky that even Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have sent conflicting signals on whether they want Congress to vote on the existing compromise. "I'm sure the president would," the aide said. "I'm not sure the vice president would."

After all the mixed messages from his administration, the best way for Bush to prove he wants reform is to demand that Congress vote it up or down…If Bush doesn't challenge the Hastert Rule now, the White House will reinforce a precedent that could haunt it later…Will Bush give them a veto by allowing the House GOP leadership to shelve any bill that most of their members oppose?

The larger issue in this dispute is whether Bush wants to reach out to all Americans, or just court those at the core of his political coalition. In his first term, Bush chose the second option on most major decisions. If he allows House conservatives to derail the work of the Sept. 11 commission — one of the most successful bipartisan collaborations in years — that will send an early signal that cooperation across party lines may be just as rare over his second term.

The coming Social Security charade

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/politics/28secure.html?ex=1259384400&en=7f629a28d81f4670&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
The White House and Republicans in Congress are all but certain to embrace large-scale government borrowing to help finance President Bush's plan to create personal investment accounts in Social Security, according to administration officials, members of Congress and independent analysts…The White House says it has made no decisions about how to pay for establishing the accounts, and among Republicans on Capitol Hill there are divergent opinions about how much borrowing would be prudent at a time when the government is running large budget deficits. Many Democrats say that the costs associated with setting up personal accounts just make Social Security's financial problems worse, and that the United States can scarcely afford to add to its rapidly growing national debt…But proponents of Mr. Bush's effort to make investment accounts the centerpiece of an overhaul of the retirement system said there were no realistic alternatives to some increases in borrowing, a requirement the White House is beginning to acknowledge.

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2412
Looks like I underestimated the Bush administration's cynicism in my recent piece about Social Security reform. In the piece, I predicted that the Bushies would take advantage of a quirk in the way the Social Security actuaries certify that the trust fund is balanced to help pass what will be a hugely irresponsible privatization bill. The quirk is that the actuaries only look at whether the trust fund's finances add up, not where the money to make them add up comes from. The Bushies can just issue a few trillion dollars in new debt and stick it in the trust fund, and the actuaries will have to consider the trust fund balanced. Despite my firm belief that the Bushies would do this, I still figured they'd have to acknowledge that they were increasing the size of the government's debt, even if they didn't exactly advertise that fact…But that turned out to be a wildly optimistic assumption. While I was on vacation last week, The Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman reported that the Bushies are not, in fact, planning on calling the debt they issue to privatize Social Security "debt." Weisman takes you through the various ways the White House and the congressional GOP might try pulling off this trick. But the bottom line is that any increase in borrowing used to finance personal Social Security accounts is unlikely to show up in the Bushies' accounting of the federal deficit. How did I not anticipate this?

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/nonsense.html
So, it's okay to borrow a bunch of money and raise taxes to "save" social security by demolishing it but not okay to borrow not so much money or raise taxes a wee bit to save it for real…I think we're seeing how this is going to unfold - a combination of putting it off budget and raising taxes on people earning not too much money. The tax increase will be offset by what will be called a "tax cut" - your shiny new personal social security account. So, they'll add a few percentage points onto your income taxes and "cut" your payroll tax, but force you to save the money.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-socsec28nov28,1,33658.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
If President Bush wants to push an overhaul of Social Security through Congress during his second term, he will probably have to do something he rarely did during his first term — get his hands dirty…To revamp the popular retirement program, many allies say, Bush will have to offer detailed proposals to Congress and engage in a broad public campaign to justify the changes and its cost. And he will have to ride herd on legislators to ensure they do not veer from his main goal of shoring up Social Security by allowing younger workers to invest some of their payroll taxes in private accounts.

"It's going to take a lot of personal involvement and a lot of political capital," said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), a proponent of private retirement accounts…That would be a big change in the way Bush deals with Congress. Typically, even on issues as important as last year's Medicare overhaul, Bush has conveyed only broad goals and principles, leaving it to congressional Republican leaders to work out the details. He has become engaged only at the end of negotiations to get wayward Republicans behind him.

The risks of that approach were amply illustrated this month when rebellious House Republicans blocked an overhaul of intelligence operations that the White House backed — despite last-minute lobbying by Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney…Social Security will be different, Republicans say, because Bush has made clear that it is his top domestic priority. Senior White House aides are already consulting members of Congress and conservative activists, weighing options and preparing for early action.

House Republicans may be the toughest to sell on tackling Social Security. Many fear the issue could be used against them in the midterm elections…Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), another advocate of Social Security overhaul, conceded that the political anxiety was so high that, even with a giant push from the White House, the idea might not fly. "This is going to be really, really heavy lifting," said Kolbe.

How the Senate Repubs might try to change the filibuster rule (and why they shouldn’t)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/opinion/28sun1.html?ex=1102647815&ei=1&en=5209e88079bcf038
According to Senate rules, changing the filibuster rule should require a two-thirds vote. But in the "nuclear option," Vice President Dick Cheney, as Senate president, would rule that filibusters of judicial nominees could be ended by a simple majority…That would no doubt put the whole matter in the courts, an odd place for the Republicans - who are fighting this battle in the name of ending activist courts - to want it resolved. The Republicans would have a weak case. The Constitution expressly authorizes the Senate to "determine the rules of its proceedings." That is precisely what it has done…If it came to a vote, it is not at all clear that the Republicans would be able to command even a majority for ending the filibuster. Senators appreciate their chamber's special role, and much of its uniqueness is based on traditions like the filibuster. Senator Charles Schumer, the New York Democrat who has led the opposition to extremist judicial nominees, says as many as 10 Republican senators could vote against changing the rule.

What Goss is doing to the CIA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11262-2004Nov24.html?nav=rss_nation
Tension rose with a rumor that Goss had a hit list of 80 employees and the retirement of an unusually large number of people when he took over. Following Tenet out the door were officials in charge of security clearances, personnel and recruiting, global logistical support, internal management, legislative affairs, and public affairs…Then, two weeks ago, the director of operations quit, as did his deputy, after a blowup with Goss's chief of staff, Patrick Murray, who is perceived by some longtime CIA officials as disrespectful of many people who have spent their lives there. This week the chiefs of the European and South Asia divisions "submitted their papers," according to former and current CIA officials…"The place is boiling," one longtime CIA officer said. "People think it's slash and burn."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/25/politics/25intel.html?oref=login
Under Mr. Goss, it is a cadre of former House Republican aides, not Navy officers, who dominate the new management team. This month, they have toppled Mr. Kappes and his deputy, Michael Sulick, in a way that former intelligence officials say has shown little regard for the tradition-bound clandestine service which has always prized rank, experience and lines of authority…"The C.I.A. is a line organization like the military," said Christopher Mellon, a former intelligence official at the Defense Department and the Senate Intelligence Committee. "When staff guys insert themselves, that causes confusion and discontent."

Under Mr. Goss, the extent of the rebellion in the ranks is not clear. Much of the anger has been focused on a former Congressional aide, Patrick Murray, the chief of staff, who is said to have raised the hackles of some station chiefs around the world. The atmosphere has so deteriorated in the agency that some career officers have begun using derogatory nicknames for Mr. Murray and his colleagues, former intelligence officials said.

Analysis: http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/ap-on-goss-purges.html

Oops! Halliburton misplaces up to a third of the government property entrusted to it (thanks to Best of the Blogs for the link)

http://www.gulfnews.com/Articles/World2.asp?ArticleID=141493

The Plame investigation: not dead yet

http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2004/11/27/the-plame-affair-update/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13258-2004Nov25.html?nav=rss_nation

The assault on reporter confidentiality

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18598-2004Nov28.html?nav=rss_nation

“Superfund" toxic site cleanup program: unfunded, ineffective

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11246-2004Nov24.html?nav=rss_nation

Sweet home Alabama

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/afteraction_report_2004_/2004/11/are_we_sure_secession_was_a_bad_idea.php
You probably missed this in the rest of the Election Day disasters, but Alabama, as it was voting overhwhelmingly for George W. Bush, also rejected an attempt to remove two frankly racist provisions of the state constitution. One would have repealed the constitutional guarantee of racial segregation in the schools, and the other would have repealed a provision (passed in reaction to Brown v. Board of Ed.) explicitly denying that Alabamians have a right to public education.

Counts, recounts, and election challenges…in Texas (thanks to Atrios for the link)

http://www.stephenbates.com/yellowdoggereldemocrat/doggerel_200411a.htm#200411250037
[Steve Bates] This is so disgusting I can scarcely contain myself. Former State Representative Talmadge Heflin, having lost the count, having lost the recount in his run against Hubert Vo, has decided to contest the election in the Texas House. The House is of course Republican-dominated. Its Speaker, Tom Craddick, can appoint a committee, invested with subpoena power, to investigate the matter, and he has already stated that Vo will never be seated in "his" House. In fairness, Craddick, pro forma, replaced Heflin in his committee chairmanship. But we all know where this one is going: a legitimate, demonstrable electoral victory by a Democrat is on its way to being summarily overturned by fiat. Some democracy we have here!…Vo won the election, by 32 votes... certified by our oh-so-Republican county clerk. If Vo is not seated in the House, then we have a totalitarian one-party government in Texas...a Republican "right to rule" that supersedes any popular vote to the contrary.

More statistical analyses of e-vote fraud (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=7028

http://www.math.temple.edu/~paulos/exit.html

http://www.berkeleydaily.org/text/article.cfm?issue=11-23-04&storyID=20155

Old link but I can’t resist including it here: US condemns “vote fraud and abuse”…in Ukraine

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/24/powell.ukraine/index.html

Anthony Wade on why the media have failed us on this story (thanks to Blog Left for the link)

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=18803&mode=nested&order=0

And Todd Gitlin on why the media have failed us more generally

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/11/10_402.html

Karl Rove’s plan for permanent realignment

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/28/roves_plan.html

Is he succeeding?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16756-2004Nov27.html

Ugh…what an image

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_28.php#004124
Aides said many other such moves will be announced, because Bush and senior adviser Karl Rove are determined to "implant their DNA throughout the government," as one official put it.

More on Bush at the Clinton library dedication: charming and gracious, as always

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1358966,00.html

Education news: charter school students less likely to meet state standards

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/education/23charter.html?oref=login&ex=1258866000&

In case you heard about that Declaration of Independence controversy over the holiday

http://seetheforest.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_seetheforest_archive.html#110134337110716232

Bonus item: on Bush’s “mandate”

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/man-date_28.html
BLITZER: Does President Bush have a mandate to advance the Republican agenda? Twenty-nine percent of the respondents in this CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll said yes. Sixty-three percent said no.

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 6:23 AM

 
PBD will be on hiatus until Sunday, November 28.

Meanwhile, give thanks for the sacrifices and risks being endured by our troops overseas. I wish they had a government as brave and loyal to them as they are to it.
- posted by Nick Burbules @ 10:37 AM

 
MAKE THEM PAY

The Dems should start working on their version of the Contract with America, and make the GOP style of governing (secrecy, deception, cronyism, and arrogance) the issue of the campaign in 2006.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004111
Ahhh the trials of rising in the House ranks and securing a prized chairmanship: toeing the party line, schmoozing the right lobbyists, raising money for the party, campaigning for other members, raising money for the Majority Leader's Legal Defense Fund…

Payback for those who failed to support the DeLay Rule: no dessert or committee chairmanships for you
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004109

Shays, elected in 1987, said he realizes his opposition could cost him a committee chairmanship in the next Congress…"They don't have to tell you these things,'' he said. "The people you're passing judgment on are the people who are making the decisions.''
http://www.kmbz.com/listingsEntry.asp?ID=274791&PT=National%2BNews

Ronnie Earle on Tom DeLay

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/23/85045/716
“[N]o member of Congress has been indicted in the investigation, and none is a target unless he or she has committed a crime. The grand jury will continue its work, abiding by the rule of law. That law requires a grand jury of citizens, not the prosecutor, to determine whether probable cause exists to hold an accused person to answer for the accusation against him or her.

Politicians in Congress are responsible for the leaders they choose. Their choices reflect their moral values…The open contempt for moral values by our elected officials has a corrosive effect. It is a sad day for law enforcement when Congress offers such poor leadership on moral values and ethical behavior. We are a moral people, and the first lesson of democracy is not to hold the public in contempt.”

Here’s a start for the Democrats’ “Contract”: #1. The Honesty in Government Act: “No provisions can be added to bills in conference committee that weren't part of one of the two original bills.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/24/politics/24spend.html?oref=login
The $388 billion spending bill approved by Congress in the last few days is a cornucopia full of money designated for specific highway projects, locks and dams, parks, libraries, airports, museums, zoos, hospitals, schools and universities in every corner of the country, from the northernmost reaches of Maine to the southern tip of Texas and the most remote islands of Hawaii…The projects are so numerous, so diverse and so scattered through the legislation that no one - not even Congressional aides responsible for the programs - knows all that has been stuffed into the bill.

The Istook amendment: watch Senator Stevens’ carefully chosen words

http://www.news-miner.com/Stories/0,1413,113~7244~2553242,00.html
Sen. Ted Stevens on Monday showed reporters a handwritten legislative proposal from an IRS employee that slipped into and nearly stopped the massive appropriations bill passed by Congress this weekend…Stevens said the note proves that neither he nor any other Republican had crafted the potentially privacy-invading language…Given the speed of the work, few people, if any, had read the whole bill by the time it came to the Senate floor Saturday evening. But it was too late for amendments because the House had already passed the bill…He acknowledged that the language had entered the bill because of a "breakdown of our procedure." No senator actually looked at the language before it was inserted, he said.

[So, what’s significant here is what he DOESN’T say]

Frist apologizes for the whole mess…apologizes to ISTOOK

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004113
"I have spoken with Congressman Istook and he assures me that his office is not responsible for inclusion of the IRS provision into the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005, the so-called omnibus bill. I regret any confusion my earlier remarks may have created."

Okay, you big phony: so if you think Istook isn’t responsible, tell us who is

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/21/tax.provision/index.html
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday that "accountability will be carried out" against whoever slipped a provision into an omnibus spending bill…

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004115
Doubts remained yesterday over exactly how the controversial tax-return provision -- which allows Appropriations Committee chairmen or their "agents" access to Internal Revenue Service facilities or "any tax returns or return information contained therein" -- got into the omnibus spending bill late last week. House Republicans blamed committee staff aides and the IRS…Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr. (R-Okla.), chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the IRS, denied any role…

Are we allowed to comment on how ridiculous this is?…Four days later and they can't figure out who put the thing in the bill? Just some aides, but it's not clear which ones or who they worked for, and someone at the IRS and maybe they handwrote a note and dropped it off at Rayburn and somehow it got into the bill…Really, give me a break. Give all of us a break…Which aides? At whose direction were they working? And which IRS employee and what were they asked to write? Presumably it shouldn't hard to find out the identity of the IRS employee. Just ask the mystery staffer since that he or she asked them to write it.

And look at the procedural somersaults they need to go through now to get this provision OUT of the bill before Bush signs it (but it’s “no big deal,” right?)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/23/tax.provision/index.html

[NB: And by the way, check out CNN’s title: “House leaders make deal to keep tax returns private” – as if this is some great accomplishment, and not a matter of undoing their own stupid mistake]

You know, they aren’t just corrupt, dishonest, and self-serving. They’re also a mean-spirited bunch of snots

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_21_digbysblog_archive.html#110124163756283442
Mr. Daschle is the first Senate party leader in more than half a century to lose a re-election campaign. His emotional talk, in which he also urged his colleagues to find "common ground," was attended by nearly all of the Senate's Democrats, who gathered him in their arms and hugged him afterward.

But only a few Republicans showed up, and Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, who broke with Senate tradition to campaign against Mr. Daschle in his home state, South Dakota, did not appear until after Mr. Daschle finished speaking.

The scant Republican showing provoked Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, to speak out. "I don't know why, why in the closing days, some element of comity, some element of grace, some element of respect for a human being, could not have gotten some of our friends out of their offices," Mr. Lautenberg said.

Maureen Farrell summarizes the evidence documenting election fraud, and the stunning irresponsibility of the media in failing to cover the story. Read this and tell me it’s all just loony paranoia

http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/04/11/far04040.html

The GAO intends to investigate voting irregularities (good news) the bad news is, WHEN?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/23/election.investigation/index.html
The GAO said it will not investigate every charge listed by the Democrats, but will examine "the security and accuracy of voting technologies, distribution and allocation of voting machines and counting of provisional ballots."…

"We are hopeful that GAO's nonpartisan and expert analysis will get to the bottom of the flaws uncovered in the 2004 election," said a statement released by Conyers and five other members of Congress…

As part of the inquiry, the group said it will provide copies of specific incident reports received in their offices regarding the election, including more than 57,000 complaints provided to the House Judiciary Committee…Those reports include allegations of computer and voting machine problems that added votes to totals, as well as malfunctions that resulted in votes being thrown out.

"We are literally receiving additional reports every minute," said a November 5 letter from lawmakers to the GAO. "The essence of democracy is the confidence of the electorate in the accuracy of voting methods and the fairness of voting procedures.”

Republican officials challenge voting results because they don’t match exit poll data – unfortunately, this is in Ukraine, not in Ohio or Florida

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=396&row=0

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&ncid=584&e=4&u=/nm/20041122/pl_nm/ukraine_election_usa_dc
Yanukovich led Yushchenko by 49.42 percent of the vote to 46.69 percent, with 99.14 percent of ballots tallied, although an exit poll released immediately after polls closed on Sunday put Yushchenko in the lead by 54 to 43 percent…"The United States is deeply concerned over the elections in Ukraine," State Department spokesman Adam Ereli told reporters. "We call on the Ukrainian authorities to curb additional abuse and fraud, to uphold its international commitments to democracy and human rights and to act to ensure an outcome that reflects the will of the Ukrainian people.

A recount the GOP likes

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/23/173423/97

But that’s not all. Sit down, take a calming breath, and then read this

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004108
At the same time, the Texas Republicans' hotshot election lawyer Andy Taylor -- the guy who handled the redistricting business for Craddick and DeLay -- is representing Heflin and tossing around charges of voter fraud…Taylor's presence makes Democrats understandably suspicious about whether Craddick and Co. have really given up on the thought of trying to seat Heflin by any means necessary…And here's how they'd do it.

Under Texas law, in addition to asking for a recount, Heflin can challenge the validity of the election by filing an official challenge with the secretary of state. Based on that challenge Speaker Craddick would appoint a member of the House as a "special master" to investigate the election. If that 'investigation' finds irregularities and fraud, as Andy Taylor is already alleging, they order that a new election be held -- effectively invalidating the results of the election…Needless to say, the Texas state House is now in Republican hands. So what all of that means is that Tom DeLay's local sub-boss, Speaker Craddick, gets to decide whether Hubert Vo's election gets tossed out on the basis of spurious charges of 'irregularities' and 'voter fraud.'

Of course, these are just the things Craddick could do if he chose. For Craddick and DeLay and the rest of them to actually try pulling this off would be amazingly bold and brazen…But, then, look who we're talking about ...

Typical gobbledygook: Rumsfeld denies undermining Intelligence Bill, says he supports Bush’s position, but also says that position is “evolving”

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/23/congress.intelligence/index.html
"I support the president's position," he said…Rumsfeld said the president's position was evolving as the details of the bill are being worked out…"It looks like the House and Senate are having a typical conference where you have a lot of differences, and they've been sorting through those and kind of working their way along," he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7858-2004Nov23.html?nav=rss_nation
[T]he nation's top military officer stood by his opposition to a key provision that would shift budget authority over defense intelligence agencies from the defense secretary to a new national intelligence director.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7858-2004Nov23.html?nav=rss_nation
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday that the White House knew of a Pentagon letter that criticized key aspects of a now-stalled bill to revamp the nation's intelligence community. House Republicans who blocked the legislation said the comments bolster their claim that the administration's support of the measure has been tepid at best, and that prospects for a breakthrough are not strong.

Asked by reporters if he was aware last month that Gen. Richard B. Myers was planning to send lawmakers a letter endorsing House GOP opposition to major points in the Senate version of the bill, Rumsfeld replied: "Not only was I, but the White House was. I mean, we had discussed this matter internally."…

Rumsfeld said he stands with Bush in calling for the bill's passage. But his comments about Myers's letter -- which the White House has never disavowed -- appeared to undermine administration claims that Bush and Vice President Cheney have fought for passage of the measure, which would create a director of national intelligence.

“Evolving” but “unchanged”: what a bunch of nonsense

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/24/politics/24panel.html?ex=1258952400&en=5326644dfce0a9b8&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
In Crawford, Tex., a White House spokeswoman said that Mr. Bush's stance remained unchanged...

One example of Bush’s “evolving” position: now, in the middle of all this debate, he calls for an EXPANSION of Pentagon covert activities

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/politics/23covert.html?hp&ex=1101272400&en=ce1cd1320b5e57fd&ei=5094&partner=homepage
"I have heard it said that there is a conspiracy within the Department of Defense to go and rip off the agency's capabilities, and I can assure you that nothing could be further from the truth," Mr. O'Connell said.

The idea of transferring paramilitary authority from the intelligence agency to the Pentagon was among several fundamental changes that the Sept. 11 panel proposed in the summer. In public testimony in August, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and John E. McLaughlin, who was the acting intelligence chief, expressed reservations about the idea, and the recommendation was not included in the measures that Congress set aside over the weekend…

Some officials said they believed that civilians in the Pentagon, including the under secretary of defense for intelligence, Stephen A. Cambone, had pressed for the interagency review as part of a quest for a wider role for the Pentagon and the military services in intelligence and counterterrorism.

Bush also, vaguely, calls for expansion of the CIA but offers no money or timetable: this is all just more smoke and steam to cover up their abject failure to support the Intelligence Bill

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cia24nov24,1,5037383.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Rumsfeld 101: how a Master Liar operates. Rummy tries to pooh-pooh the Air Force procurement scandal – it’s all just an unfortunate mistake caused by staffing problems. Watch his lips move – and check out that quintessential photo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8689-2004Nov23.html?nav=rss_nation

Remember “A.Q. Khan,” the example Bush raised repeatedly during the debates as proof of the success of his anti-terror policies?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/24/politics/24weapons.html?ex=1258952400&en=3713cb41c7ef825f&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
A new report from the Central Intelligence Agency says the arms trafficking network led by the Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan provided Iran's nuclear program with "significant assistance," including the designs for "advanced and efficient" weapons components…American intelligence agencies now believe that the bomb-making designs provided by the network to Iran in the 1990's were more significant than the United States government has previously disclosed.

In a recent closed-door speech to a private group, George J. Tenet, the former director of central intelligence, described Mr. Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, as being "at least as dangerous as Osama bin Laden" because of his role in providing nuclear technology to other countries…

Mr. Khan remains in Pakistan, where he was pardoned last year by President Pervez Musharraf.

Some good questions for Bush on the future of Iraq

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/23/15545/307

And here’s another one: why are you and Rumsfeld too busy to at least handwrite your own signatures on letters to the families of those killed? (Or are there just too many of them for you to keep up with?)

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001093.html

US now talking about keeping troops in Iraq until 2010 (yet another post-election surprise)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0411230217nov23,1,5329071.story?coll=chi-news-hed

Growing pressure on US to set a withdrawal date (NOT 2010)

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/23/iraq_pullout/index.html?source=RSS

New CSIS study: things in Iraq are…NOT…getting…better

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/csis-report.html

You can have “elections” on January 30, or you can have legitimate and fair elections; you can’t have both

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/23/iraq_election/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/23/iraq.main/index.html
Iraq's interim defense minister was quoted by an Arabic-language newspaper Tuesday as saying he cannot guarantee the safety of voters or candidates in the country's elections scheduled for January 30…"You ask me as defense minister, will I be able to provide safety for candidates and voters? I say no, I have no plan until now…The Iraqi citizen doesn't know what elections are and doesn't know who the candidates are or who the voter is."

What the rest of the world thinks of the US right now, and how they will let us know it

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000203.html
In my view, we are about to be taught a lesson by a world that wants America to be tethered down. And the world is going to hit America where it has a serious blindspot at the moment -- on the economic front. We are on our way to becoming a much poorer, on relative terms, superpower with the Chinese, Japanese and Europeans using currency management and debt dependency to constrain our options.

And on the proposed shell game to cover Social Security costs, a little Economics 101

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/max-speak.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/23/debt/index.html
Paul Krugman, who actually is an economist, has an even scarier warning: We're turning into Argentina. In an interview, Krugman told Reuters he's most concerned Bush will ignore the advice of economists and push through more tax cuts while also trying to privatize Social Security. 'If you go back and you look at the sources of the blow-up of Argentine debt during the 1990s, one little-appreciated thing is that social security privatization was a important source of that expansion of debt,' said Krugman. 'So if you ask the question do we look like Argentina, the answer is a whole lot more than anyone is quite willing to admit at this point. We've become a banana republic.'"

David Noreen, one of our readers, offers a nice seminar on what “off budget” means

What your remarks made me realize is that there are many
different meanings for the term "off-budget".

(1) I immediately thought of G.W.'s father getting rid of the
whole Savings & Loan trillions in losses by making them
disappear "off-budget", without their ever appearing in the
figures for the National Debt.

(2) The example that you mentioned, funding for the Iraq War,
however, is also "off-budget", because it was done in terms of
Supplemental Appropriations. However, since the money is still
appropriated (albeit Supplementally), it still is recorded and
counts against the national debt. It seems like Congress uses
this scheme a lot, because it gets around budgeting rules and
makes it look like it represents "emergency expenditures" that
simply couldn't be foreseen, etc. (Yeah, right! -- Who could
have ever guessed the Iraq War would actually have to be paid
for! ;-) )…

(3) There is yet another category of expenditures that never
seems to appear anywhere. A show on the History Channel last
night estimated that some $30 to $40 billion is spent annually
on "black projects" that include funding for what goes on in
research and security at Area 51, for example, yet there
obviously is no line item for this, at least that anyone seems
to know about…

Anyway, back when Bush 41 was in office, I remember
reading that he was going to take care of the Savings & Loan
losses by issuing bonds, but that he was going to do it
"off-budget" so that it wouldn't count against his
already-record-breaking deficits…

According to several of Al Martin's columns, what Bush
actually did was raid the 44 different U.S. Government trust
funds. (The Social Security trust fund is probably the most
well-known of these 44 funds; the others include such things
as oil and gas revenue held in trust for Native American
reservations, etc.) As Martin explains it, Bush 41 took the
U.S. Government negotiable securities (like U.S. treasury
bonds, for example) that were held in those trust funds and
replaced them with non-negotiable securities…Bush 41 then used the
negotiable securities that he raided to pay off the Savings &
Loan losses and other expenditures that represented money he
had chosen to spend that exceeded what had been appropriated
by Congress.

[NB: Like father, like son]

And what does all this phony budgeting mean for the future?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/23/20201/136
Stephen Roach, the chief economist at investment banking giant Morgan Stanley, has a public reputation for being bearish…But you should hear what he's saying in private.

Roach met select groups of fund managers downtown last week, including a group at Fidelity…His prediction: America has no better than a 10 percent chance of avoiding economic "armageddon."…

Roach sees a 30 percent chance of a slump soon and a 60 percent chance that ``we'll muddle through for a while and delay the eventual armageddon.''…The chance we'll get through OK: one in 10. Maybe.

In a nutshell, Roach's argument is that America's record trade deficit means the dollar will keep falling. To keep foreigners buying T-bills and prevent a resulting rise in inflation, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan will be forced to raise interest rates further and faster than he wants.

Wow. Roach sounds as if he’s channeling Paul Krugman, who today called the U.S. a “banana republic”…OK. So Roach is a notorious bear. And I’m sure Harry Dent will take him to the woodshed. But even Dent says that after 2008 or maybe 2010 we’re in for a 15-year-long crash.

New 15-year study on criminal sentencing: evidence of racial, ethnic (and gender) bias

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008854.html

http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2004/11/a_few_highlight.html

Jessica Wilson on the shameful caving by the “liberal” media to the Bush Co. party line

http://wilsonhellie.typepad.com/for_the_record/2004/11/carving_out_the.html

And Michael Massing on their pathetic Iraq reporting

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/massing-on-iraq-press-coverage-way-in.html

And Stephen Pizzo on their superficial economics reporting

http://www.newsforreal.com/

Bonus item: David Meyer on the bad news for Bush buried in the recent NYT poll: proof that people had no idea what they were voting for, and certainly no “mandate”

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/proof.html
"Nearly two-thirds of all respondents - including 51 percent of Republicans - said it was more important to reduce deficits than to cut taxes," "a majority continue to say they want [abortion] to remain either legal as it is now... or to be legal but under stricter limits," "a majority continue to support allowing either same-sex marriages or legally recognized domestic partnerships for gay people," "nearly a fifth said [Bush's tax cuts] had done more harm [than good], and just under half said the tax cuts had made little difference," "45 percent said a proposal to permit people to invest their Social Security withholding money in private accounts was a bad idea," and "51 percent said that Mr. Bush was unlikely to 'make sure Social Security benefits are there for people like me.'"

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:35 AM

 
BAD GOVERNING

Still pushing the Istook scandal, and still marveling that the serious media is mostly ignoring the story, except for CNN’s “something happened, but we don’t know what it really was, and here’s a string of quotes from people saying what they think about it” style of coverage. If not for Josh Marshall, this outrageous story would already be fading away

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/22/tax.provision/index.html

Finally
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5738-2004Nov22.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/politics/23explain.html

Istook denies he had anything to do with it, blames the IRS
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004093
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004092

The IRS says, “no way”
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004097

At the very least, this story reveals what happens under one-party government, where a few hand-picked people can hide in a room, make decisions, and share them with no one else until the time comes for the majority to ratify them in a vote where no one has actually read or debated the provisions. WHERE ARE THE DEMOCRATS ON THIS ISSUE?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004106
For the moment, set aside the civil liberties and privacy issues raised by the Istook Amendment. What does it say about the majority's management of the legislative process in Congress at present that it's been two and half days since this line item was discovered and no one has been able to determine who wrote it or who put it in the bill?

More: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/22/congress/index.html

Lies, lies, lies

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004105
[Tom DeLay] "Frankly, the media is making a lot out of nothing. I did not know it was in the bill. My staff usually catches these kinds of things, but it was one sentence and we missed it."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004104
The Times has a brief piece on the Istook Amendment. But they hit on the key point early, if a tad obliquely: Rep. Istook changed his story from Sunday to Monday…On Sunday Istook explained that the tax-snooping language was basically innocuous. But, as the Times notes, he made no attempt to deny his responsibility for the language in the bill, even though the claim that he was behind the provision had been included in numerous press accounts…Only on Monday did he make any claim that he wasn't involved at all.

Oh, and by the way, a reminder about the anti-abortion provision also slipped in

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004102
"Also included in [i.e., slipped in furtively into] the final [omnibus spending] bill was a major provision barring states from enforcing laws that require health care providers, hospitals, HMOs or insurers to pay for, provide or give referrals for abortion."…California, Massachusetts, Illinois, New York -- none of them can make their own reproductive rights policy.

And something GOOD buried in the bill, a cut-off of funding for “mini-nukes” (but this is still no way to run a government)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/23/34140/146

Still more on the DeLay Rule: how it was “voted on” in secret session, and why here again no one is being very specific about how the decision was made and who is accountable for it

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004099
One of the fringe benefits of the DeLay Rule brouhaha is that it has exposed the sheer level of disorganization, absenteeism and management deficiency that seems to prevail in the 230+ offices that make up the House Republican caucus. Again and again, TPM-reader-constituents would tell us that for days on end staffers were unable to make contact with their given representative. In other cases, messages to contact him or her to find out their vote on the DeLay Rule would again and again go missing. Equally troubling, in many offices the staffer authorized to comment on the DeLay Rule would be 'away from his/her desk' or 'at lunch' for days on end.

Some reports that DeLay won’t be indicted after all

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/22/delay_may_be_off_the_hook.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004090

That Ronnie Earle, he’s no shrinking violet

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004107
"The thinly veiled personal attacks on me by Mr. DeLay's supporters in this case are no different from those in the cases of any of the 15 elected officials this office has prosecuted in my 27-year tenure."…And a line that might serve well as a choice quote just below the title on the first page of some future biography of Tom DeLay: "There is no limit to what you can do if you have the power to change the rules."

More on the failed Intelligence Bill. It is becoming more and more clear that Bush didn’t really try very hard to get it passed. And for all the hand-wringing, there are still enough votes to pass it, with Democratic support – so why isn’t it coming up for a vote? Read the Hastert aide’s quote, a real jaw-dropper

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004850
When assessing blame for House Republicans’ scuttling of the intelligence bill, it’s important not to get suckered into thinking that this all comes down to the intransigence of two powerful committee chairmen, Duncan Hunter and James Sensenbrenner. The president’s expressed "disappointment" needs to be considered in the context of his original foot-dragging on the matter of intelligence reform legislation (not to say his initial opposition to the 9/11 commission that inspired the reform bill) and of the lackadaisical quality of his recent intervention into the conference negotiation process…One phone call to a congressman does not exactly amount to a robust demonstration of the power of the presidency. And it pales in comparison to the lobbying that Bush and co. routinely engage in when they’re really determined to pass something…

As Sheryl Gay Stolberg puts it in the Times today, “[m]embers of both parties, and independent analysts, said Sunday that they had no doubt Congress would have passed the measure had President Bush flexed his muscle.” But with at least one of his top administration officials -- Donald Rumsfeld -- openly opposing the legislation and likely more officials quietly advising Bush on the matter, the president wasn’t about to flex his muscle. All he needed to do was let the bill die, then furrow his brow in concern…Stolberg’s piece seems to indicate that the House GOP leadership's hearts weren't in this legislation, either. Even if Dennis Hastert and Tom DeLay had been strong personal supporters of the bill, however, their aversion to reaching out for Democratic support would apparently have trumped all other considerations. After all, the official reason offered by Hastert's spokesman for the Speaker's decision not to bring the bill to a vote is rather bracing in its open admission that the Democrats simply don't count to the GOP leadership, even when their votes would ensure the passage of a bill the leadership insists it supports:

In the House, the leadership probably could have cobbled together a coalition of Democrats and Republicans to muster the 218 votes necessary for passage…."I am convinced that had the speaker brought the bill to the floor, it would have passed," Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and chief author of the measure, said in an interview on Sunday. "That's what's so frustrating. Here we have a bill that's been endorsed by the White House, by the 9/11 commission, by the 9/11 family groups, by the speaker of the House, and we can't get a vote."

But Mr. Hastert did not want to split his caucus and did not want the bill to pass with less than ''a majority of the majority," said his spokesman, John Feehery. "What good is it to pass something," Mr. Feehery said, "where most of our members don't like it?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5739-2004Nov22.html?nav=rss_nation
Key legislators on opposite sides of the deadlocked effort to reorganize the nation's intelligence community said yesterday that they will not compromise their positions to give Congress a chance to pass the measure at a special two-day session early next month.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/politics/23panel.html?ex=1258952400&en=a6be2704a32d0ede&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
A number of Congressional Republicans and members of the Sept. 11 commission called on President Bush on Monday to force Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and his military commanders to offer public support for a bill, blocked by House Republicans, that would overhaul the way government spy agencies gather and share intelligence…They said that Mr. Bush, who has vowed to revive the bill, also needed to put pressure on a handful of House members aligned with the Pentagon who defied the president over the weekend and blocked a final vote on the legislation.

No, Jane

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004851
Um, who can see what's wrong with the stated reaction of Democrat (and ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee) Jane Harman to the Republicans' scuttling of the intelligence reform bill? This one's easy:

"If there is another major terrorist attack on our soil -- and sadly, there will likely be one -- we will have only ourselves to blame. Congress had a chance to protect America, and Congress failed."

No, "we" are not to blame. "Congress" -- in the sense of the Democrats and Republicans that comprise the U.S. House of Representatives -- isn't to blame, either. House Republicans are to blame for this…

Nancy Pelosi gets it…

When the 9/11 Commission issued its recommendations, it did so with urgency. But that urgency was never matched by House Republicans, who did not want the 9/11 Commission in the first place, and who never truly wanted to pass a meaningful reform bill…Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House, and the blame for this failure is theirs alone.

Okay, David Noreen told me this would happen, and I didn’t believe it. I STILL don’t believe it. Bush now wants to take the massive Social Security transition costs off the budget, to hide his own ballooning deficit. This cannot stand

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000576.html
President Bush isn't likely to include costs for overhauling Social Security in the 2006 budget he presents to Congress in February, which some supporters say could hurt the White House drive to pass bipartisan legislation next year…

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), the incoming chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said concerns about the deficit should not be allowed to stand in the way of an overhaul that would put the ailing Social Security system on the path to solvency...Gregg's thinking mirrors sentiments within the White House, according to administration officials and White House advisers. "The budget should reflect that this is an investment, a down payment that will have very positive implications," said White House spokesman Trent Duffy…

"We're entering the theater of the absurd, where you spend money, but it doesn't count, you borrow money, but you deny it," said Kent Conrad (N.D.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee. "Republicans are becoming further and further detached from reality."

To cope with the cost, while still helping the White House at least appear to be moving toward its goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, White House and congressional budget experts are looking at a variety of accounting mechanisms…They include treating the cost of Social Security reform not as a present-day expenses, but more as a prepaid benefit for future retirees that should not be counted against current deficits. Or they may take the costs "off-budget," meaning Social Security spending would not be included in the calculation of the annual budget deficit…"How they label it is going to be somewhat of an exercise in creative budgeting," Tanner said.

Some “mandate.” Americans still don’t support Bush agenda

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/22/politics/22cnd-poll.html?oref=login&ex=1258866000&
Americans are at best ambivalent about Mr. Bush's plans to reshape Social Security, rewrite the tax code, cut taxes and appoint conservative judges to the bench. There is continuing disapproval of Mr. Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, with a plurality now saying it was a mistake to invade Baghdad the first place.

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_22_bestof.html#110117830300966788
More Americans still think the country is going in the wrong direction and Bush is too cozy with business and the economy is not good and the war in Iraq was a mistake than have favorable opinions on these issues. Bush was about as beatable as it gets. Forget all the soul searching and navel gazing and moral values analysis; we lost because we nominated a man that the majority of voters didn't trust and didn't like and they were not entirely wrong.

Goss is damaging the CIA. It’s as simple as that

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000201.html

The failure of Fallujah: who has the courage to say so?

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000200.html

In Iraq: this upcoming “vote” is going to be a travesty

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/international/middleeast/23vote.html?ex=1258952400&en=897890ebf9ac6274&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Iraqi officials and American commanders plan to rely on Iraqi security forces to protect 9,000 polling places during the coming elections, but there are far fewer trained security officers than Iraqi officials estimate are needed. Moreover, many have performed poorly in the Sunni Arab areas where the worst violence is expected…

Security is crucial to ensuring the legitimacy of the elections in Iraq, particularly in Baghdad and the so-called Sunni triangle north and west of the capital, which includes the cities of Falluja and Ramadi. If violence depresses turnout, it will be easier for Sunni voters or other Iraqis to challenge the results…In recent weeks, about 90 of more than 540 registration centers around the country have been closed because of potential violence.

More troops, or fewer? Looks like Bush will have to make a decision on this one, with perils either way

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/22/more_vs_less.html

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001426.html

November the worst month for US deaths in a year and a half – and have you read this figure anywhere before today?

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001090.html
106

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-kinsley21nov21,0,7794529.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
[Michael Kinsley] Has there ever before been a war that so many people disapproved of but so few wanted to stop? Have the reasons for starting a war ever been so thoroughly discredited without turning into reasons for ending it?

The Vietnam-era antiwar movement had an agenda: Bring the troops home. Or, in two words — suitable for a picket sign or a T-shirt — "Out now."

What seems to be today's antiwar position — it was a terrible mistake and it's a terrible mess, but we can't just walk away from it — was actually the pro-war position during Vietnam. In fact, it was close to official government policy for more than half the length of that war.

Today's antiwar cause doesn't even have a movement, to speak of, let alone an agenda. It consists of perhaps 47% of the citizenry — the ones who voted for John Kerry — who are in some kind of existential opposition to the war but don't know what they want to do about it.

Meanwhile, U.S. soldiers die by the hundreds and Iraqis — military and civilian — by the thousands in a cause these people (and I'm one of them) believe to be a horrible mistake...

Kevin Sites writes about the Marine video he shot, and responses to it

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000199.html

In Iran, US has a new worry: what if European intervention actually works?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/22/171933/97
But instead of claiming success for pressuring the Iranians to agree to the suspension, Bush almost seemed disappointed at the news

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001424.html

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/22/iran/index.html?source=RSS
Sources close to the Bush administration have warned that British Prime Minister Tony Blair will have to choose between the E.U.'s pursuit of the diplomatic track and a more hard-line approach from the White House. While President Bush clearly favors more stick and less carrot, it is not yet clear what the stick might be: U.S. administration sources say targeted airstrikes -- by either the U.S. or Israel -- aimed at wiping out Iran's fledgling nuclear program would be difficult because of a lack of clear intelligence about where key components are located.

Does it really matter who’s in Bush’s Cabinet?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2110032/fr/rss/

The consequences of rampant privatization

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/11/22/private/index.html?source=RSS
Except, the current trend in government is precisely the opposite -- to take things out of the public sector and move them to the private. For decades, privatization enthusiasts, such as the Reason Public Policy Institute and the Mackinac Center, have been engaged in a full-bore campaign to persuade us that private is better than public. In the Bush administration, such enthusiasts have some of the strongest support they've ever had…But privatization has a dark underbelly that the public is only now becoming aware of. We see glimpses of this in the ongoing investigations into fraud, profiteering, misfeasance…

For example, what happens when government agencies aren’t independent enough from corporate influences to provide adequate review and oversight? Create new agencies to oversee the ones that aren’t doing their job

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/national/23fda.html?ex=1258952400&en=0dc876125f4ebd3c&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

Speaking of ineffective government agencies: the wrong Powell quit

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200448#1216

Steve Freeman revises his definitive study of exit-poll discrepancies

http://www.dakotatechnics.com/downloads/Steve_Freeman.zip

Bad demographic news

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fast22nov22,1,645361.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
In this month's election, President Bush carried 97 of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties, most of them "exurban" communities that are rapidly transforming farmland into subdivisions and shopping malls on the periphery of major metropolitan areas…Together, these fast-growing communities provided Bush a punishing 1.72 million vote advantage over Democrat John F. Kerry, according to a Times analysis of election results. That was almost half the president's total margin of victory.

Bonus item: US-style democracy reigns in the Ukraine

http://slate.msn.com/id/2110055/fr/rss/
The Los Angeles Times and New York Times lead with the democracy showdown in the Ukraine, where the official results say Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych won—but there's widespread evidence the count was cooked. Republican Senator Richard Lugar, who led a U.S. delegation to check out the vote, described a "concerted and forceful program of election-day fraud and abuse." A range of independent (and apparently trustworthy) exit polls suggest the real winner is the reformer and pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko. Tens of thousands of protestors have taken to the streets of Kiev demanding a recount…In response to the protestors in the capital, the Ukrainian government channeled Orwell: "We want to assure everyone that in the event of any threat to constitutional order and the security of our citizens, we are prepared to put an end quickly and firmly to any lawlessness." Prime Minister Yanukovych said he has been asked to crack down "by many Ukrainian mothers to prevent street disorders where their children may get hurt." Russian President Putin is buddies with Yanukovych and called to congratulate him on his faux-success—before the vote count had finished, notes a Post editorial. "The battle had been hard-fought," Putin cooed, "but open and honest, and his victory was convincing."

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:34 AM

 
CAUGHT RED-HANDED

CNN finally gets around to mentioning the tax-return scandal, managing to write the entire article without mentioning the author of the provision (Ernest J. Istook, Jr. R-OK) or addressing how it got buried in the appropriations bill

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/21/tax.provision/index.html
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday that "accountability will be carried out" against whoever slipped a provision into an omnibus spending bill that would have allowed two committee chairman to view the tax returns of any American…"I have no earthly idea how it got in there," Frist said on CBS's "Face The Nation…Nobody is going to defend this."

Sen. John McCain said Sunday that the episode points up the problems created when Congress passes gigantic spending bills at the end of a session, before anyone has time to read them…”If there is ever a graphic example of the broken system that we now have, that certainly has to be it…How many other provisions didn't we find in that 1,000-page bill?"

Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York called Sunday for a "full and complete" investigation into how the language got into the bill, followed by "appropriate punishment" for those responsible…"This harkens back to the days of [FBI Director] J. Edgar Hoover, when some unknown person could go and snoop on you," he said…

What were the motivations behind the Istook provision (not an amendment, strictly speaking)? Josh Marshall pieces some clues together

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004079

Today, Istook and the House Appropriations Committee are scrambling to redefine the whole matter as a misunderstanding and “no big deal" – the problem is that their excuses are belied by the plain language of what they tried to sneak through

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004085

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004086

The earth movers roll in, trying to cover it all over

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004084
SCHIEFFER: Do you even know who put it in the bill?

Sen. FRIST: I personally don't know but obviously somebody's going to know and accountability will be carried out. It was wrong. Everybody says--nobody's going to defend this. I wouldn't even spend any more time on it. It was fixed…

Sen. Hutchison...
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that that clause that was inserted about IRS documents or people's tax returns being able to be gotten to by any member of Congress or any staff -- can't be blamed on the right wing. That's totally inappropriate. I don't think we know how that got in, and I can't -- it's not fair to put blame. It's just not fair.

The Istook controversy shines light on the explosion of secret provisions added during conference committee sessions intended to reconcile House and Senate bills (from a stunning Boston Globe series, published last month)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004088
The panels, made up of a small group of lawmakers appointed by leaders in both parties, added a record 3,407 "pork barrel" projects to appropriations bills for this year's federal budget, items that were never debated or voted on beforehand by the House and Senate and whose congressional patrons are kept secret. This compares to just 47 projects added in conference committee in 1994, the last year of Democratic control.

Bush cuts Pell grants, but finds money to try to buy back Nixon’s old Presidential yacht. Isn’t this the kind of thing the Repubs would kill a Democratic President for?

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/presidential-yacht.html

Yes, you read that right: “Mr. Education” decimates one of the few truly successful federal education programs

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/education/21pell.html
Nearly 100,000 more students may lose their federal grants entirely…

Rumor: Bush to appoint Joe Lieberman head of Homeland Security? I seriously doubt it – we all know that only Republicans can keep us safe

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/21/104642/18

Lest there be any doubt who torpedoed the Intelligence Bill

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-hunter22nov22,1,1077643.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
The Pentagon controls about 80% of the intelligence agencies' annual estimated budgets of $40 billion.

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001417.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/politics/21cnd-inte.html?ex=1258779600&en=692e3085f191383f&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

[NB: It really does speak volumes about this administration that, close on the heels of his election “mandate,” Bush couldn’t override Rummy’s efforts to block this bill…But there’s another possible reading, that while Bush had to make a show of lobbying to get the bill passed, his heart wasn’t really in it. (Difficult to believe he couldn’t have put on a harder full-court press if he’d really wanted to.) Support for this latter hypothesis: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/21/congress.intelligence/index.html "Some of it is turf, you know, quite frankly," the Kansas Republican said on "Fox News Sunday." "Some of it is from the Pentagon. Some of it, quite frankly, is from the White House, despite what the president has said."]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/22/politics/22panel.html?oref=login&ex=1258866000&
"It was clear that I wanted the bill passed," the president said. He declined to respond directly to a question about whether reports of opposition by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had contributed to the bill's collapse not quite three weeks after Mr. Bush won a second term and his party expanded its control over Congress.

More on Porter Goss’s “astounding” memo to CIA staffers (thanks to Laura Rozen for the link)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-cia21nov21,1,4124491.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

And a glimpse into the kind of folk Goss has brought into the organization

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/patrick-murray.html
Until a few weeks ago, Patrick Murray was just another ambitious Capitol Hill staffer. As a top aide to Rep. Porter Goss, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, Murray had a reputation as a sharp-tongued partisan lawyer. When Democrats on the committee asked the CIA for information, Murray would cut them off, reminding the agency that only requests backed by the Republican majority should be honored. "He was just impossible," says one staffer who dealt with him. "He was sarcastic, snide and had this uncanny ability to push people's buttons." One former CIA official told NEWSWEEK that Murray leaned on him more than once to declassify information so he could use it to "embarrass the Democrats." Murray was irritated when the agency declined. He regarded much of the CIA as a nest of obstructionist bureaucrats, time-servers who had schemed to undermine the administration's policies—especially in Iraq.

In Iraq: those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it

http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref21.html
During World War I, Britain invaded Mesopotamia (as the three neglected Turkish provinces were called) for oil and only for oil. Despite this, the British declared in their May 18, 1918, proclamation, read aloud in Baghdad: ''Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators.''…This invasion enabled Britain to cobble three ethnically separate provinces together -- Kurdish Mosul, Sunni Baghdad and Shiite Basra -- into a single land that London would rename Iraq. The name ''Iraq'' came from the ancient Arab cartographic designation.

The British then established Iraq as a nation for the sole purpose of structuring the exploitation of its oil. Arnold Wilson, the British civil administrator of Mesopotamia, the man who authorized General William Marshall's unauthorized push into Mosul, wrote, ''Thanks to General Marshall, we had established de facto, the principle that Mosul is part of 'Iraq,' to use the geographical expression. . . . Whether for the woe or weal of the inhabitants, it is too soon to say.''…

But Arab and Islamic nationalists in the newly invented Iraq did not want to share their land with infidel European Christians. Nor did they choose to share European values of democracy and pluralism…It did not take long for the Iraqis to rise up in terror raids, burning, bombing, kidnapping and massacring Westerners, including those sent to commercially develop the land and its waterways.

The outraged British response to such horrors was aerial bombardment to shock and awe the villages. But the Iraqi violence and the British resolve to combat it with troops and tanks persisted, all for the oil wealth of Iraq…The British worked hard to instill democratic values in Iraq, thus creating a stable environment for the oil to flow. But it was a governance disaster because the people did not want it. Genocide against minorities, ethnic cleansing, repression, corruption and neglect were the rule in Iraq for years.

Major John Glubb, the British officer who organized the Arab Legion, complained bitterly in a letter to Whitehall. ''We . . . imagined that we had bestowed on the Iraqis all these blessings of democracy. ... Nothing could be more undemocratic than the result. A handful of politicians obtained possession of the machinery of government, and all the elections were rigged. . . . In this process they all became very rich.''

For eight more decades, the West -- now with the United States joining France and Britain -- has tried to hang onto its oil lifeline in the Middle East, using our diplomats, corporate surrogates and militaries. That has only fueled the cycle of insurrection and now world terrorism from a people who resent our presence and resource exploitation, and have always understood better than anyone exactly why we are there. It is not sand we crave in Iraq, it is oil.

Speaking of history: from Colin Powell’s memoir

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/opinion/21danner.html?ex=1258779600&en=6fe51440fb8517e3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
"Our senior officers knew the war was going badly. Yet they bowed to groupthink pressure and kept up pretenses. ...Many of my generation, the career captains, majors, and lieutenant colonels seasoned in that war, vowed that when our turn came to call the shots, we would not quietly acquiesce in halfhearted warfare for half-baked reasons that the American people could not understand."

Iraq elections set for January 30

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/international/middleeast/21cnd-iraq.html?oref=login&ex=1258779600&
On Jan. 30, Iraqis will vote for members of a 275-seat national assembly, which will then install an executive government and draft a permanent constitution. Elections for a full-term government are planned for the end of 2005.

The same day, Iraqis will also vote for members of provincial councils in the country's 18 provinces. In the northern Kurdish region, residents will vote in a third election, one for a Kurdistan Assembly.

Expatriate Iraqis in at least 14 countries are expected to be able to vote in the National Assembly elections. Smaller countries such as Jordan and Great Britain will have a voter registration and polling center in the capital, said Safwat Rashid, an electoral commissioner. Larger countries, like the United States, Australia and Iran, will have multiple centers, he added.

[Fill in punch line here…]

Analysis: http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/vote-set-for-january-30-interim.html

International outrage over Fallujah offensive

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/large-protests-against-fallujah.html
World revulsion against the US attack on Fallujah reached a crescendo during the past five days, with significant street protests breaking out in the Middle East and Latin America. Turkey, Palestine and Libya in the region, and Chile in the New World saw thousands of angry protesters come out against the US.

The brutal way the US conducted the assault, and the continual aerial bombardment of civilian neighborhoods in the weeks leading up to the attack, suggested to many observers that the operation was intended as a form of collective punishment against the people of Fallujah, and a warning to the residents of other Iraqi cities not to let the guerrillas operate freely in their urban areas. Collective punishment is forbidden by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 governing militarily occupied territories.

So NOW they tell us: the election safely behind them, need for troop increases finally announced

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2565-2004Nov21.html?nav=rss_nation

A really sad story: why you didn’t see this quote plastered over every major paper before the election – you had to read blogs like this one to hear about it

http://www.houston-press.com/issues/2004-11-18/news/news_print.html#
According to Baker's report, Herskowitz said that Bush felt frustrated with his image as an "underachiever" compared to his father, that he had "failed" to complete his National Guard requirement during the Vietnam War and that his private business efforts had been "floundering."…Herskowitz said that Bush had Iraq on his "to do" list as early as 1999. "[Bush] said, 'If I have a chance to invade…if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it,' " Baker writes…

I ran a piece like this once before, but this is pretty funny (thanks to Matt Yglesias for the link)

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark/2004/11/the_iranian_pro.html
There's a lot of talk these days about a possible confrontation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States. Leaving aside the admittedly big question of nuclear weapons for a moment, it's pretty easy to see the reasons for concern.

The country is ever more dominated by conservatives and advocates of political religion. There was a time in the 1990s when the country seemed to be moving in a more liberal direction, but those days are long past. Conservatives and religious movements have spent the last few years consolidating their control over the major political institutions - the executive branch, the legislative branch, the judiciary, even the media. Indeed, in the most recent elections, the conservatives routed their liberal counterparts. These conservatives and their religious base express open contempt for liberals and their values. Pretty much the only remaining opposition seems to be among university students and among some liberal newspapers, but their limited power doesn't really threaten the ruling coalition. What's more, the country has recently been very active inside of Iraq, which threatens important national security interests. Leading conservative figures, including some known for very close ties to senior government leaders, have openly declared their hostility and have even spoken about the need for military action. Even relatively moderate foreign policy officials have been sounding pretty hawkish lately.

You can see why the Iranians might be worried about a country like the United States these days.

What can the Dems learn from Colorado successes?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A821-2004Nov20.html

On the need for a “shadow government”

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/22/31512/197

Arnold’s national aspirations

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/21/schwarzeneggers_plan.html

Clarence Thomas for Chief Justice? You can see how the cynical Bush advisors think: even though he is a mediocre justice by any measure, little more than a rubber stamp for Scalia’s decisions, they would try to frame any opposition to him as racist in origin (and Ted Olson may finally get his reward for running the Clinton witch hunt)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak21x.html
Thomas is reportedly unwilling to undergo another confirmation battle.

Justice Dept enforcement of civil rights laws “plummets”

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-civilrights22nov22,1,2655186.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

[I’m sure Alberto Gonzales will get right on it]

“Hello Alberto”

http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/fiore/

[I know, I know, opposition to him is “anti-Latino”]

Colin Powell really did want to stay on, apparently, but was…ahem…not invited back (thanks to Laura Rozen for the link)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/21/wpow21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/21/ixnewstop.html

The New York Times just can’t stop ridiculing protests over election regularities

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/weekinreview/21word.html?ex=1101618000&en=a58484a5621642f7&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1

Comment: http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00000979.htm

And a reminder: “The election’s already over, we’ve won. It’s all over but the counting, and we’re taking care of the counting”

http://homepage.mac.com/duffyb/nobush/iMovieTheater256.html

Ohio vote to be challenged in court

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/11/con04509.html

In Ohio, Blackwell’s foot-dragging

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240
The…recount effort was underscored last week by their letters to Blackwell insisting he hurry up and finish certifying the count well before the announced deadline of December 6, because otherwise, there won’t be enough time for the recount before the voting of the Electoral College on December 13.

Meanwhile, in Washington (sound familiar?) GOP goes to court to STOP a recount

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-washgov22nov22,1,6319393.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

John Pilger: The Greatest Political Scandal of Our Time (thanks to Megan Boler and Doug Kellner for the link)

http://www.counterpunch.org/pilger11152004.html

David Meyer writes a great summary of why we are RIGHT and they are WRONG – I’m just going to clip the whole thing

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/power-mad.html
The GOP has again fallen prey to an old vice: believing their own spin, acting as though they have a mandate for revolutionary change. After a bruising election determined by a litany of ultimately insurmountable GOP distortions, conservatives have renewed their assault on the weary American people. Congress came back for a five day lame-duck session less than a week ago. In that brief time, Republicans have again revealed their true colors: contempt for the American people and disdain for the rule of law.

As evidence of criminality continues to accumulate against House Majority Leader Tom Delay, the GOP erected a shield around their wayward leader. "In an unrecorded voice vote conducted behind closed doors," the Republican Caucus voted to change an 11 year old rule prohibiting Congressional leaders from enjoying their positions while under indictment. Three of Delay's underlings were indicted in September for illegally funneling corporate contributions to Texas state politicians, an effort "engineered" by Delay himself. Delay's defenders have responded with a formal smear campaign against Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who is leading the criminal investigation. Unsurprisingly, the smears have already percolated into the press, despite the complete lack of supporting evidence. Delay gloats that the "crushing defeat" suffered by Democrats because of "Democrat (sic) obstruction and vicious personal attacks should show them that the American people are tired of a politics of personal destruction." A majority of the GOP voted to protect this unethical man because the GOP won the election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

Again scoffing at the people's right to hold their representatives accountable, the Republican Congress has passed an omnibus spending bill loaded with egregious riders. They have authorized the pillaging of the environment. They have undermined health care for women and families. They tried to hand unfettered access to our private tax information to Republican legislators. They, at the request of the President, allowed the Department of Education to reduce student loan spending by as much as $300,000,000, cutting off aid for as many as 100,000 lower middle class students and reducing aid for a million more. The bill is 3000 pages long and it was finalized in the dark of night, mere hours before it was voted on. Rest assured that more contemptible riders will come to light. The GOP won the election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

While the GOP fiddled with its stealth riders, intelligence reform burned. The 9/11 Commission's intelligence reform proposals are not going to become law, allegedly because of objections from Republican Congressmen Duncan Hunter (California) and James Sensenbrenner (Wisconsin). Hunter supposedly ignored the Department of Defense's support for the reform, deciding that it would hurt our military intelligence capabilities. Sensenbrenner's objection was even more facile: he wanted to make sure illegal immigrants didn't get driver's licenses. It is inconceivable that a bill supported by the President, the Vice President, the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Majority Leader could be blocked on such weak grounds. After spending the final months of the campaign courting reform advocates, the GOP sent them packing without the courtesy of breakfast. President Bush won his election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

While the GOP was submarining real intelligence reform, Bush's Director of Central Intelligence surfaced to launch his own reforms: driving objective and professional civil servants from the CIA, to be replaced by GOP loyalists. The Republican staff he put in place to head the agency insulted the professional staff to the point of resignation. Porter Goss responded by circulating a memo admonishing analysts and operatives to toe the Party line. Take no action to defend the American people from administration perfidy, support administration allegations, truth be damned. Bush won his election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

While Goss was busy protecting the administration from truth, Bush elevated to his cabinet two more partisans of fantasy. "In nominating Alberto Gonzales to be the next attorney general, President Bush has selected a man with a long record of giving him the kind of legal advice he wants, [WP]" especially when Mr. Bush wants to torture, execute, or evade international law and public accountability. In nominating Condoleezza Rice to be the next Secretary of State, President Bush has selected a woman with a long record of telling him exactly what he wants to hear, especially when Mr. Bush wants to go to war, blame Clinton, or save face. In even considering promoting the likes of Danielle Pletka and John Bolton, the administration is flaunting its distaste for rationality. Bush won his election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

While Bush was elevating friendly fabulists, old stories were being retold. At the same time that the administration was declaring victory in Fallujah (despite on the ground intelligence), Iraq erupted in flames and insurgents remobilized, leaving Iraq on the brink of formal civil war. Afghanistan is again dominated, socially, economically, and politically, by the opium trade. Following a European diplomatic breakthrough on Iran's nuclear weapons development, the administration leaked dubious intelligence to "preemptively sabotage" any real progress, escalating tensions. Bush won his election, and has a mandate for more of the same.

Democrats, on the other hand, have merely reaffirmed their decency. Former President Clinton asked if he was the "only person in the entire United States of America who likes both George W. Bush and John Kerry, who believes they’re both good people, who believes they both love our country and they just see the world differently?" Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, in his farewell address to a room virtually devoid of Republicans, nonetheless embraced the "firm middle ground based on common sense and shared values." New Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has pledged to "work with [Bush] 'to get things done so that we might actually fulfill the promises we hear so often on the campaign trail.'" Unfortunately, the GOP views decency as a character defect, an invitation to abuse. Senator Kerry is correct to place the burden of bipartisanship on Bush.

The GOP has misinterpreted the results of the 2004 election. A people too preoccupied to wade through innumerable lies reelected a President based on misconceptions, yet the GOP hears this muddled cry for help as vindication for its deplorable politics. They have managed to repeat four years worth of mistakes and malfeasance in less than three weeks. I once heard an old saying from Texas: "fool me once, shame on you - fool me [twice] - you can't get fooled again." Let's make sure the saying is true, and that the American people can't get fooled again.

Bonus item: the power of boycotts

http://www.adnausea.org/

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 6:59 AM

 
WHAT THEY DO IN THE DARK

More on the “party of sleaze” trope, which has been given even more ammunition in the past couple of days. When the GOP surged to dominance in Congress in the 90’s, it was built on three principles: term limits, promoting a balanced budget, and criticizing the Democrats’ complacency and arrogance in power. Well, we know what they did as soon as THEY got into office. A clever and coordinated Democratic assault on GOP corruption and how it has failed to enact its OWN principles could make 2006 into our 1994. (No, I'm not suggesting the Dems advocate term limits; but hold the GOP's feet to the fire for going back on its "Contract.") Is “clever and coordinated” an oxymoron for the Dems? We’ll see

Rumsfeld’s marionettes in the House find excuses to scuttle the Intelligence Bill: even the slanted version agreed to in conference went too far in compromising his power – and Bush’s personal intervention was not enough to get it passed. (So exactly where is all this “political capital” he had accumulated, and if he has no leverage even in overriding his own Cabinet official why should anyone else listen to him either?)

House leadership won’t even allow a vote

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/politics/21panel.html?oref=login&hp&ex=1101013200&en=8062b82eec4a69ec&ei=5094&partner=homepage
House Republican leaders blocked and appeared to kill a bill Saturday that would have enacted the major recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, refusing to allow a vote on the legislation despite last-minute pleas from both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to Republican lawmakers for a compromise before Congress adjourned for the year.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2110012/fr/rss/
The WP quotes 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas H. Kean, who points out that with the support of Democrats and a fair number of Republicans, the bill probably would have passed had it come to a vote. But the notion of relying on Democrats to pass the bill was evidently too humiliating for House leaders to contemplate.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20041120/ap_on_go_co/congress_intelligence
Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House, and the blame for this failure is theirs alone," added House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California…The agreement had been reached between Collins and Lieberman and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., and Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., early Saturday…Harman, D-Calif., said the Pentagon has worked to scuttle the bill…"The forces in favor of the status quo are protecting their turf, whether it is in Congress or in the bureaucracy. And at a time when we are in a war we can't allow turf concerns" to triumph, Collins said.

The things they do when no one is watching. GOP hides provision (the Istook Amendment) in the massive spending bill, giving committee chairmen and their staffs access to YOUR tax returns. When caught at it, everyone says it was a “mistake” – yeah, you bet it was

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/20/tax.returns.ap/
Conrad said the measure's presence in the spending bill was symptomatic of a broader problem -- Congress writing legislation hundreds of pages long and then giving lawmakers only a few hours to review it before having to vote on it…Some Democrats didn't accept the assertion that the provision was a mistake and demanded an investigation…"We weren't born yesterday, we didn't come down with the first snow," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California. "This isn't poorly thought out, this was very deliberately thought out and it was done in the dead of night."

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008828.html
“Hereafter, notwithstanding any other provision of law governing the disclosure of income tax returns or return information, upon written request of the Chairman of the House or Senate Committee on Appropriations, the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service shall allow agents designated by such Chairman access to Internal Revenue Service facilities and any tax returns or return information contained therein”

Analysis
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004073

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004077
[Josh Marshall] So I guess the questions on the Istook Amendment are pretty straightforward.

What is Rep. Istook's explanation for inserting the provision in the omnibus spending bill?…Subject to the quality of that explanation, will Rep. Istook face any disciplinary action, either formal or informal?

On the Senate floor, Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens said that neither he nor House Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young knew that provision had been inserted into the bill. Beside Istook, which members of congress and/or congressional staffers knew about the Istook Amendment prior to the matter being brought up by Senate Democrats?…Who gave the sign off to insert the provision into the bill?

How GOP House members voted on the DeLay Rule

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_21.php#004075
According to [the] latest tally, only 42 reps. have been willing to say publicly that they voted for the DeLay Rule -- a rule which reportedly passed overwhelmingly on a voice-vote in a caucus of over 230 members.

http://dailydelay.blogspot.com/2004/11/votes-on-delay-rule.html

Back in Texas, DeLay’s proxies go after Earle in a big way. Only one person is surviving this death match – let’s see who it will be

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004072

Hey, how are things going in Iraq? Just great, great

Baghdad explodes

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041120/D86FN52G0.html

http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en74048&F_catID=&f_type=source

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/one-road.html
One of the things I actually find a bit confusing is... why the hell can't we even secure the road to the Baghdad airport?

Losing the battle for hearts and minds

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/engagement-of-rules-rod-nordland-and.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6542346/site/newsweek/

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK20Ak01.html
Beneath this general problem lie three key problems that made the attack on Fallujah a desperation measure in the first place, and which is now creating a new and deeper crisis for the US military in its aftermath.

First, and most important, the people of Fallujah hate the Americans and support the guerrillas (even if they may have complaints about much of what they do). This means that as soon as the people return, so will the resistance…

Second, the US cannot depend on Iraqi police or military to fight this next phase of the "battle of Fallujah". Here's how this problem was reported by the Times: "Senior officers have said that they would keep a sizable American military presence in and around Fallujah in the long reconstruction phase that has just begun, until sufficiently trained and equipped Iraqi forces could take the lead in providing security…

The key thing here is that when the Americans entered the Fallujah battle they believed that the Iraqi forces would be ready to take over immediately after the city was cleared. But the mass defections and unwillingness to fight exhibited by the Iraqis have forced a drastic revision in these estimates…

The third problem is that the US simply does not have enough troops to hold Fallujah and also do all the other fighting that is now necessary…the only remedy for the third problem is a vast increase in the number of US troops in Iraq. And that means a draft in the United States.

How desperate for warm bodies are they? Military prepares AMPUTEES to return to duty (no this isn’t a joke)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4626234,00.html

Marine commander says zero Iraqi civilian deaths in Fallujah (Red Cross says 800, at least)

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000724487

A range of opinions on the Marine shooting of a wounded Iraqi prisoner

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109853/fr/rss/

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_14_digbysblog_archive.html#110100158214458173

Bush threatens Iran and North Korea (and manages to tick off Russia in the process)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/politics/21prexy.html?oref=login&ex=1258693200&

Remember that State Dept report on progress in the war on terror? The one that said things were getting better, then Powell had to come out a few days later and admit the analysis was wrong and the numbers actually showed things were getting much worse? On closer review, even the corrected version isn’t worth the paper it's printed on

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-terror21nov21,1,5730705.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
The department's independent investigative unit concluded, however, that politics played no role in allowing so many mistakes to be published in the original version of the "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report for 2003.

More people who don’t seem to be able to count

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000573.html
Dan Morgan of the Post:
Domestic spending controlled by Congress in annual spending bills began growing sharply in the final two years of the Clinton administration when budget surpluses replaced years of deficits. But after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, the Bush administration began applying the brakes.

[Nowhere near true – read on]

Rick Santorum’s woes: couldn’t happen to a nicer guy

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/20/233427/51

Vote fraud update

A nice wiki on all Ohio shenanigans (thanks to Kos)
http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/2004_Ohio_Irregularities

Why recount Ohio?
http://www.votersunite.org/info/mapflyerohio2004.pdf

The Ohio recount: where things stand
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/20/151250/92

Thorough review of exit poll data, and what it does (and doesn’t) prove
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/20/9555/0527

Kerry conceded too soon (thanks to Doug Kellner for the link)
http://www.observer.com/pages/frontpage8.asp

Recounting NH (a Kerry state), and why it could be important
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041129&s=baker

One of Rove’s evil insights was that they could use gay marriage as a wedge issue to drive a larger proportion of African-American votes into the Bush camp. Now, a scurrilous insert included with the Washington Post – why they agreed to run it, I can’t tell you – continues the lies

http://americablog.blogspot.com/archives/2004_11_01_americablog_archive.html#110097728685621475

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/27/BAGQM8VI8E1.DTL

Bonus item: Me first! Me first! (thanks to BuzzFlash for the link)

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/11/19/national/19library.4.583.jpg
Bush Tries to Push His Way Past Clinton to be the First to Emerge from the Door for Clinton's Library Opening

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:38 AM

 
THE PARTY OF SLEAZE

The nerve. House Ethics Committee, while upholding charges against DeLay, does say that his accuser “exaggerated” some assertions. DeLay then claims this finding “vindicates” him

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/politics/19cnd-delay.html?ex=1258606800&en=1eb4487839dec75f&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

Read on, if your blood pressure can take it

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004054

Supporters of “DeLay Rule” say, jaw-droppingly, they would still apply the principle to others (i.e., Democrats), but THIS case is different because the charges against DeLay are “politically motivated”

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004063

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004067

Oh to be a fly on the wall

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004068
Bob Novak on the DeLay Rule ...

The closed-door meeting of House Republicans Wednesday that was supposed to quickly protect House Majority Leader Tom DeLay from a political indictment turned into a contentious debate lasting several hours. Rep. Rob Portman of Ohio, the appointed chairman of the House Republican Leadership, came up with a compromise that won assent…The original proposal would have simply repealed the 1993 Republican rule requiring the resignation from the House party leadership of any member who is criminally indicted. The Portman compromise sets up a review by the House Republican Steering Committee of each case…At Wednesday's conference, several Republican House members expressed fear that a straight repeal of the rule would send a bad political message.

David Brooks on DeLay

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/20/opinion/20brooks.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=
Tom DeLay is bleeding and he doesn't even know it…This week, House Republicans bent their accountability rules to protect their majority leader from what they feel is a partisan Texas prosecutor. But they hated the whole exercise. They sat in a conference room hour after hour wringing their hands. Only a few members were brave enough to stand up and say they shouldn't bend the rule. But afterward, many House Republicans came up to those members and said that secretly they agreed with them…Somewhere in the psychology of the caucus something shifted. That ineffable thing called political capital began seeping away from DeLay. Someday people will look back and say this could be the moment when his power begins to ebb.

It's shifted because many House Republicans know that DeLay has been playing close to the ethical edge for years. They've noticed the number of scandals - the latest involving lobbying fees for some Indian casinos - that trace back to DeLay cronies. They still remember that delicious feeling of possibility when they arrived in Washington and vowed they would not turn into the corrupt old majority they had come to replace. They know Delay symbolizes their descent from that reformist ideal…Tom DeLay is a scandal waiting to happen. He casts himself as the enemy of Washington, but he's really a conventional (if effective) pol who wants to use dollars to entrench power. He represents the greatest danger the Republicans face, bossism. He wants to be the G.O.P.'s Boss Tweed…Deep in the recesses of their minds, many Republicans know that voters around the country may never hear of Tom DeLay, but if the Republicans become just another self-dealing power clique, there will be hell to pay.

House, Senate negotiators hide last-minute anti-abortion provision in $388 billion spending bill

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-spending20nov20,1,1922730.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/19/23225/191

Two ways to cut taxes: (1) cut taxes, (2) make it easier to evade them

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004847

http://www.davidsirota.com/2004/11/still-letting-them-off.html

Framing the GOP as the Party of Sleaze

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/the_party_of_sleaze.html
It ties so many threads together: secret energy task force, Haliburton, tax breaks for the millionaires, DeLay, and many more.

Greenspan warns of the dire consequences of Bush’s spendthrift policies

http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/19/news/economy/fed_greenspan/index.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Greenspan.html?oref=login&hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

Don’t you realize that the deficit is the Democrats’ fault?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/19/congress.spending.debt.ap/index.html
"The president commends the Congress for passing the debt limit increase," the White House said in a written statement that did not mention the magnitude of borrowing involved or its causes. "Passage of this legislation was important to protect the full faith and credit of the United States."…Republicans said they were being responsible because the increased borrowing will let the government pay Social Security benefits and its other bills. They blamed Democratic spending for the problem, and accused them of playing politics by opposing the measure…

Democrats said the red ink was due to GOP tax cuts and their refusal to require budget savings to pay for tax reductions or spending increases. They accused Republicans of passing the buck to future generations.

[NB: Not that anyone asks my opinion, but I think this trope -- not passing off problems to the future and caring for our children and their children, is a framework for a progressive agenda: not passing on deficits, not passing on environmental problems, making a commitment to education and health care and good jobs, and so on. This has resonance to people and a clearly “moral” core. Let’s get started….]

Pre-election report (held and released after the election): 12 million families “worried about not being able to feed everyone”

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_19_bestof.html#110092302966064776

Kerry’s next campaign

http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/everychild.php

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/19/152117/74

Kerry criticized for ending campaign with $15 million unspent

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004839

And his wobbly semi-endorsement of election fraud theories (thanks to Gale Ronning for the link)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

More on future Democratic strategy: on the pros and cons of “obstruction”

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8863

GOP moderates, an endangered species: why isn’t the Democratic game plan to forge an alliance with them?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/19/203041/42

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=18100

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/11/20/gop_preps_stage_for_bush_agenda/

And an important issue emerging, with the abortion amendment, the intelligence bill, etc: why is the Senate letting the House set the agenda?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/20/politics/20spend.html?oref=login&ex=1258693200&
Ms. Boxer said that she complained to Senator Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican who is the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, but that he told her that House Republican leaders insisted that the provision, which was approved by the House in July but never came to the Senate for a vote, be included in the measure…"He said, 'Senator, they want it in, and it's going in,' "

Conason nails Frist (thanks to Doug Kellner for the link)

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/11/19/frist/

Why the Specter “loyalty oath” is such a bad precedent

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109983/fr/rss/

Carlyle Group ties to new Army Sect’y

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/11/19/BUGVD9TQA71.DTL&type=printable

Shady procurement dealings by the Air Force Sect’y

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63815-2004Nov19.html
Air Force Secretary James G. Roche asked a lobbyist for Boeing Co. to use the company's Washington contacts to "quash" a deputy undersecretary of defense and make him "pay an appropriate price" for objecting to the Air Force's decision to lease Boeing 767 tanker aircraft, according to e-mails released yesterday by a Republican senator critical of the tanker deal…Roche also pressured independent military cost analysts who questioned the high price of the lease, described other internal Pentagon critics as "animals," and ridiculed executives at European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. (EADS) and its Airbus division, the consortium that offered a competing plan, the e-mails show. He told his top public relations aide to "blow . . . away" the EADS chairman for raising questions about the Air Force decision to work with Boeing…At one point in the three-year Air Force campaign for the lease, Roche e-mailed a friend at Raytheon Co., "Privately between us: Go Boeing!"

McCain at his best (which has been rare lately) – I guess this means he won’t be Rumsfeld’s replacement after all

http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewSpeech&Content_id=1332
Nearly three years ago, behind closed doors, appropriators slipped a $30 billion rider in the FY2002 Defense Appropriations Bill. This rider authorized the Air Force to lease from Boeing up to 100 767s for use as aerial refueling tankers. Before the rider appeared in the bill, Air Force leadership never came to the authorizing committees about it. In fact, tankers have never come up in either the President’s budget or the Defense Department’s unfunded priority list…The rider was in fact the result of an aggressive behind-the-scenes effort by the Boeing Company, with considerable assistance from senior Air Force procurement official Darleen Druyun and others. After the President’s signed that bill into law, the Air Force embarked on negotiating with Boeing on a lease that would have cost taxpayers about $6 billion more than buying them would have…

[I recommend reading the whole speech – it’s too long to clip here. But the extent of the scandal and lying about it is astonishing even by cynical Washington standards]

Iraq…I mean Iran…I mean Iraq…I mean Iran…

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/international/middleeast/19diplo.html?hp&ex=1100926800&en=ad2df99dcfb9e1cc&ei=5094&partner=homepage
In an eerie repetition of the prelude to the Iraq war, hawks in the administration and Congress are trumpeting ominous disclosures about Iran's nuclear capacities to make the case that Iran is a threat that must be confronted, either by economic sanctions, military action, or "regime change."

Source of Powell’s claims about Iranian nuclear plans termed “unreliable” (gee, this all sounds terribly familiar)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/19/powell.iran/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6525369/

Who might be the source of this shady intelligence? Hmmm…

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/leaker.html

But here is the upshot: the CIA has now asked the Justice Dept to investigate who leaked that story. So, we are starting to see the worm turn. Bush Co. uses the pretense of a Plame investigation to shatter the precedent of reporter confidentiality, then – without following through on that investigation – starts applying the same principle to leaks it DOES care about

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001412.html

In Iraq, a bad time to be Sunni

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/11/19/mosque/index.html?source=RSS

Marine intelligence report on the “success” of Fallujah

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041118/wl_mideast_afp/us_iraq_falluja_report
Marine intelligence officials have issued a report warning that any significant withdrawal of troops from the Iraqi city of Fallujah would strengthen the insurgency…The assessment, distributed to senior Marine and Army officers in Iraq, also said that despite the heavy fighting with coalition forces, the insurgents would continue to increase in number, carrying out attacks and fomenting unrest in the area…One officer said the seven-page classified report -- parts of which were provided to Thursday's edition of The New York Times -- was "brutally honest" and appears to contradict the US government's victorious account of the US-led fight against insurgents in Fallujah and other parts of northern Iraq.

Troop levels to be raised before the elections – but where will they come from?

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008819.html

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/troop-levels.html

War costs: $6 billion a month

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_cost_111804,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl

One way to think about how the US is trying to pacify Iraq: controlled civil war, turning the Kurds loose as part of the coalition to smash the Sunnis for us

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004846

David Gergen on Bush’s “hubris”

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/19/the_power_of_one.html
“By closing down dissent and centralizing power in a few hands, he is acting as if he truly believes that he and his team have a perfect track record, that they know best, and that they don't need any infusion of new heavyweights.”

More deep reading of Bush’s character and foibles

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/19/12381/034
Those of us who've spent at least five minutes thinking about the family dynamics of the Bush dynasty have almost all concluded that one of George W. Bush's strongest personal motivations is to show up his dad. Unlike his father, Dubya never served in combat, so he seems compelled to prove to his dad he's sufficiently bellicose. Unlike his father, he's never accepted responsibility for anything, including his class privileges. (In at least one way Prescott Bush appears to have been a better father than his son George HW Bush, because George HW Bush appears to have lived by the earlier generation's ethos of noblesse oblige, but he apparently never inculcated it in his son George W Bush, who probably thinks the term noblesse oblige is Frenchish for "atheist gay communist.") And in too many instances, he's openly defied his father's positions and policies, be it internationalism, respect for the intelligence agencies, the occasional necessity to raise or at least not lower taxes, and most obviously in regard to invading and occupying Iraq…Filial rivalry and rejection seems an obvious factor in George W. Bush's actions and beliefs. But until reading Bob Herbert's column this morning, I had never associated filial rivalry and rejection with which staff Bush relies on and with whom he allies himself. Herbert suggests it is, and his exhibit A is Condoleezza Rice…

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/opinion/19herbert.html?hp

[More: http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/scowcroft.html]

Why Social Security “reform” won’t happen: you can’t pass it without doing two things. (1) Explaining what will happen to people who make bad investment choices – will they be SOL, or will they be covered anyway? (2) How do you cover the massive transition costs? Since Bush won’t answer those questions (and you know why he won’t), he’ll never get it passed

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000569.html

Dems won’t fight Gonzales nomination

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/19/alberto/index.html

Ben Nelson says no to Bush Cabinet post

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/19/nelson_will_stay_in_senate.html

[Nelson won’t give GOP another Senate seat; also touted as a possible red-state candidate for President in 2008: http://www.politics1.com/]

Who will become Condi’s deputy, if it isn’t John Bolton?

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001411.html

An insight into Doug Feith’s “thinking” (could he really become the next Homeland Security chief?)

http://gadflyer.com/warandpiece/index.php?Week=200447#1203
...Q: Neocon influence on the rise for second term?
A: Neocon used to mean someone who believed (1) peace thru strength and (2) ideas matter; now is just used to mean "hawk, or Jew". [Said just like that.]

Q: Israel/Palestine two-state question.
A: Main problem in that conflict is the disastrous Palestinian
leadership over the last 80 years. If the Palestinians can pick
leaders now who are "untainted by terror" and not corrupt, then
prospects for a solution are quite bright. Israel will engage with
the right Palestinian leadership.

On topic of goals...3 overarching goals for war on terror:

(1) Homeland protection
(2) Attack & disrupt terrorist organizations
(3) Counter the ideological support for terrorism

If all we do is (2), we're on a treadmill that will only accelerate from here. More terrorists will get created, etc. So ideological component of the war is the essence.

"We need to change the way millions of people think" about the acceptability of terror. "There have been examples in history" of successfully changing the way millions of people think, specifically fascism, communism, and his favorite analogy (which he returned to later), the 19th century British war on the slave trade, which took 50+ years.

The goal is to get people thinking that terrorism is unacceptable, much the same way that slavery, piracy, and genocide are unacceptable.

He really does want to eliminate the whole idea of targeting civilians with violence for political purposes, like the idea of slavery and the slave trade were eliminated by the British in the 19th century.

[I found this the most interesting part. People are wrong to think that when neocons say "war on terror" they are mistaking a tactic for an enemy or that they are simplifying the war on radical Islam for mass consumption. He really does mean "war on terror" in the sense of "war on terror as an idea that anyone sensible in any society will accept". He was very clear about that.]

[Left unaddressed was the possibility that US invasion of Iraq has been a huge setback in his pursuit of this goal.]

Q: Iraq
A: Goal is for Iraqis to run their own country. Most important part of this is building Iraqi security capability. Security and intimidation are a huge problem, which he attributes primarily to Iraqi peoples' fear that the Baathist regime will return. Our major problem in the country is fear of the Baathists.

Insurgency -- we're making progress -- Najaf, Samarra, and now hopefully Falluja are largely under the control of the Iraqi government.

Key is still political progress... Iraq "moving toward elections"; "we hope" there will be elections in January...

Q: Abu Ghraib
A: Dreadful; hurt us with many people; will hurt us for a long time. Terrorists clearly exploiting it.

Q: Geneva Convention applied to prisoners in war on terror and in Iraq.
A: "Glad you asked that question", have worked on the issue for a long time. [Check this out:] "I'm a very strong supporter" of the Geneva Convention. But -- it is in accordance with the GC that the US is not extending POW status to all detainees. GC has incentive system built in where POW status is only given to combatants who behave the right way in war -- wear uniform, display weapons openly; obey laws of war -- incentive system is there to protect the interests of noncombatants. It's against the GC to grant POW status to detainees who disobey those rules, and doing so would weaken the incentive system and hence be against the interest of noncombatants.

Q: Iraq/WMD.
A: "Strategic rationale" for invading Iraq still correct despite lack of WMD.

Q: Iran strategy
A: Wouldn't say much. Did say that in Iran, the population is discontented with the "oppressive and corrupt" clerical leadership, and implied that would be the leverage point somehow.

Said that military action "not a sensible option" for Syria, Iran, or North Korea.

[I will post the full transcript if I can find it]

GOP consumer profiling – and what I want to know is, how did they get this data?

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/19/bushs_secret_for_victory.html
In a speech described as "boastful and at times revealing," Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman revealed the "unusual methods" that Republicans used to get out the vote, the New York Times reports…Specifically, Mehlman said the campaign "had moved away from traditional operations, adopting the tactics of corporate America to identify potential Bush supporters." Instead of "dispatching troops to knock on doors in neighborhoods known to be heavily Republican... the Bush campaign studied consumer habits in trying to predict whom people would vote for in a presidential election."…Said Mehlman: "We acquired a lot of consumer data... Based on that, we were able to develop an exact kind of consumer model that corporate America does every day to predict how people vote - not based on where they live but how they live."

Vote fraud updates

Ohio (Blackwell) dragging feet on recount
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/112004W.shtml

Re-analyzing the data from the UC Berkeley study, cited yesterday
http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/002890.html

Nicholas Kristof offers a number of perfectly sensible suggestions on election reform (none of which will happen)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/20/opinion/20kristof.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

Clinton’s interview with Peter Jennings (hope you read this far)

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008817.html
Clinton added that he doesn't care about what his detractors think about him. Jennings then said it seemed to him that Clinton did care.

The former president responded, "You don't want to go here, Peter. You don't want to go here. Not after what you people did and the way you, your network, what you did with Kenneth Starr. The way your people repeated every, little sleazy thing he leaked. No one has any idea what that's like."

"You never had to live in a time when people you knew and cared about were being indicted, carted off to jail, bankrupted, ruined, because they were Democrats and because they would not lie," he said. "So, I think we showed a lot of moral fiber to stand up to that. To stand up to these constant investigations, to this constant bodyguard of lies, this avalanche that was thrown at all of us. And, yes, I failed once. And I sure paid for it. And I'm sorry. I'm sorry for the American people. And I'm sorry for the embarrassment they performed."

Bonus item: something to cheer you up after the election (thanks to A.G. Rud for the link)

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0445/fiore.php

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 9:17 AM

 
SHINING LIGHT ON DARK PLACES

Okay, the vote fraud story moves back to the lead. For anyone with an open mind, this study has got to raise some serious questions

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/18/florida/index.html
It’s not proof of voter fraud -- at least not yet -- but it seems that somebody has some explaining to do about the election results from Florida. In a report released this morning, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, say that George W. Bush received 130,000 more votes in Florida in 2004 than he should have received, and that the only real explanation has something to do with electronic voting machines…Through multiple-regression analysis, the Berkeley researchers examined the increase in Bush’s support, on a county-by-county basis, between 2000 and 2004. Their conclusion: A county’s use of electronic voting machines resulted in a "disproportionate increase" in votes for Bush which "cannot be explained away by other factors."

http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/new_web/VOTE2004/index.html
- Irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 excess votes or more to President George W. Bush in Florida.
- Compared to counties with paper ballots, counties with electronic voting machines were significantly more likely to show increases in support for President Bush between 2000 and 2004. This effect cannot be explained by differences between counties in income, number of voters, change in voter turnout, or size of Hispanic/Latino population.
- In Broward County alone, President Bush appears to have received approximately 72,000 excess votes.
- We can be 99.9% sure that these effects are not attributable to chance.

[NB: Note that this analysis is NOT based on exit poll disparities]

More vote fraud news

Public testimony in Ohio reports numerous violations (thanks to Doug Kellner for the link). And did you know that Sect’y of State Blackwell, like Katherine Harris from Florida, was chair of the Bush-Cheney Re-elect?
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/886

Ohio Democrats start showing some spine
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/110077402787260.xml

League of Women Voters adds its voice
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0411/S00225.htm

In California, one of the few states that DOES require a paper record of e-votes, a move to abolish the practice (thanks to Megan Boler for the link)
http://www.pe.com/localnews/riverside/stories/PE_News_Local_election16.a0e78.html

Do exit polls ALWAYS overcount Democratic support?
http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2406

One of the silliest defenses of e-voting written so far: if you don’t worry about your ATM why worry about e-voting?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55691-2004Nov16.html

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/how-low-can-bar-go.html
Yesterday's column by Anne Applebaum is perhaps the stupidest thing ever published in a major paper.

http://dailyhowler.com/dh111704.shtml
Applebaum is more than a Washington journalist; she’s also part of a ruling elite, and her cohort has been busy this week mocking those who question the systems by which we conduct our elections.

If you read the DeLay rule story carefully, you probably noticed that it was passed in a secret meeting, by voice vote. I can’t link to all the entries, but Josh Marshall has a hilarious series of posts on who admits to voting for the rule, with their absurd justifications, who now claims to have voted against it, and who isn’t saying. This stinks so bad that people are running away from it as fast as they can (and even red state newspaper editorials are condemning the move)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/how_did_gop_representatives_vote_on_the_delay_rule.html

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2004/11/delay_rule_update_legs.php

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/19/73328/793

Ha ha – good one, Mark

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2004/11/st_john_on_the_delay_twostep.php
...men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

That's from the Gospel According to John, Third Chapter, Verses 19 through 21.

Killing the messenger

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ethics19nov19,1,4167027.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
The House Ethics Committee turned the tables on Majority Leader Tom DeLay's accuser Thursday night, rebuking Rep. Chris Bell (D-Texas) for allegedly exaggerating misconduct allegations against the GOP leader…Although the complaint by Bell led to an ethics report that admonished DeLay (R-Texas), Bell nonetheless violated a rule barring "innuendo, speculative assertions or conclusory statements," a committee letter said.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411180003
Republicans have claimed that Travis County, Texas, District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who is investigating DeLay, is doing so for purely partisan reasons. This charge was dutifully echoed on FOX News Channel, and most other news outlets have reported it -- without noting that Earle has, in fact, prosecuted more Democratic politicians than Republican politicians.

Flu vaccine, Vioxx, etc. This is what happens when govt regulators are in the pocket of the drug companies: oversight gets overlooked. That’s no surprise, but will people start connecting the dots to the larger picture of Bush Co. policies?

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/dr-david-graham-blows-whistle-on-fda.html
Dr. David J. Graham, "a 20-year FDA veteran who is the associate director for science at its Office of Drug Safety," claimed before the Senate Finance Committee that "26,000 to 55,600 patients might have died as a result of taking Vioxx," and that "the FDA, as currently configured, is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx." He pointed to five other currently on-market drugs that present similar risks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58470-2004Nov17?language=printer

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/business/19fda.html

Marine shooting of unarmed, wounded Iraqi called a “tragic incident.” Now this is a meaning of “tragic” that is new to me. Let’s see, he intentionally shoots the guy in the head after saying “He’s faking he’s dead, he’s faking he’s dead…Well, he’s dead now.” Not an accident, but a deliberate act. In what way is this “tragic”? Well, tragic for the victim, certainly. And perhaps tragic that a young, overstressed, possibly undertrained soldier has been plunked into the middle of an urban combat zone. But somehow I don’t think that’s what was meant

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wopent174044858nov17,0,3209118.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines
The killing of a wounded Iraqi by a U.S. Marine in Fallujah was termed a "tragic incident" by the U.S. military commander in Iraq yesterday as Arab satellite channels replayed unedited footage of the shooting as often as every half-hour.

A defense, of sorts
http://slate.msn.com/id/2109904/fr/rss/

How it’s playing throughout Iraq (hint: not well)
http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/more-on-marine-mosque-killing-iraqis.html

Red Cross counts 800 civilian dead in Fallujah (thanks to Megan Boler for the link)

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/17/1524239

But, it’s all been worth it: here is a forceful, definitive argument for why the whole invasion was a success. I am sure it will persuade you

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/dept_of_questio.html
"Based on some of the records that we've been able -- and ledgers we've been able to uncover, we feel right now that we have, as I mentioned, broken the back of the insurgency and we have taken away this safe haven." - Marine Lt. General John Sattler, commander of forces in Fallujah

In fact, argues Juan Cole, Fallujah has now made the elections much less likely to be successful

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/did-fallujah-sink-elections-among.html

And this cheerful bit of news: why we CAN’T start withdrawing troops from Fallujah

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/international/middleeast/18troops.html?oref=login&ex=1258520400&

When will the govt be held accountable for its policy of outsourcing torture to other countries – in this case, the torture of a US CITIZEN?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60916-2004Nov18.html?nav=rss_nation

Gee, when I said Specter would have to sign a loyalty oath to get his chairmanship, I thought I was joking. But he DOES - no joke

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/18/specter.judges.ap/index.html

http://www.electablog.com/2004/11/washing-his-mouth-out-with-soap-not.html
Specter's latest effort to get his judiciary chairmanship and prove his loyalty to W and Jesus is a letter he is writing wherein he will promise to be predisposed to quickly approve all of W's judicial nominees (regardless of their opinions on Roe v Wade)…Specter also plans to write "I will not be moderate, I will not be reasonable," a thousand times on the Senate chalkboard.

A moment of schadenfreude: far Right very, very unhappy that he got the post

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008810.html

Intelligence Bill, like so many others, being larded up with horrific provisions in conference that have nothing to do with its main purpose

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008814.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/politics/19panel.html?oref=login&ex=1258520400&
Congressional aides said the compromise would allow the Pentagon to maintain significant power over how tens of billions of dollars are spent each year for intelligence gathering, as House Republican leaders had insisted.

Bush fiscal mismanagement: criminally negligent

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000563.html
The international financial markets have voted since Bush's re-election, and the verdict is thumbs down. The dollar is weaker than ever, and could start dropping like a stone if America doesn't get its fiscal acts together. Of course, that must mean it's time for another tax cut, right? Let's expand our deficits, and play chicken with the global economy. This could all get ugly, and all too soon.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/18/taxes/index.html
So many times over the past four years, we've thought ourselves beyond the point where we could be shocked by the administration's schemes. Each time, though, we've misunderestimated our president, who continues to amaze us with his audacity.

The latest example comes from a plan for overhauling the tax code floated in today's Washington Post. According to the paper, Bush wants to " shield interest, dividends and capitals gains from taxation," and expand tax breaks for business investment. Of course, we knew all that -- this is a president who, in the words of John Edwards, believes in taxing work, not wealth. The stunner comes from how the administration is thinking of paying for these giveaways. According to a Bush advisor, the Post says, "the administration is considering eliminating the deduction of state and local taxes on federal income tax returns and scrapping the business tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance."

The first part would screw the blue states, especially urbanites who pay high city taxes to support municipal services. The truly evil surprise, though, is the second part. At a time when millions of Americans are without health insurance, the Bush administration is actually talking about eliminate the tax incentive for employers to cover their workers, in order to give even more tax breaks to the rich. Says Atrios, the blogger and economist, "bye bye health insurance for a hell of a lot of people."

More
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59947-2004Nov18.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing
http://markschmitt.typepad.com/decembrist/2004/11/red_state_tax_r.html
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004838
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004835

One third of the top fundraisers in Bush’s 2000 campaign received government posts

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/18/fund.raiser.perks.ap/index.html

Everyone notes the weird paradox that “red state” voters by and large have suffered under Bush’s policies, even as they support him by huge margins. Part of this, I suppose, is the imperviousness of religious and quasi-religious faith to the impediment of facts. But you might think that for a short time after the election, at least, Bush would be favoring those who put him in power (aside from the elite fundraisers who are his buddies) – but huh-uh

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/18/155249/54

Inside baseball on the struggle over John Bolton (from the Nelson Report)

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000194.html
In the foreign policy community, TOTAL focus is on whether Undersecretary of State John Bolton can force Secretary-designate Condi Rice to take him as the Deputy, replacing Rich Armitage. Bolton has been working Capitol Hill for support (not the kind of thing the Bush White House likes), and his former AEI colleagues are trying to create the image of a done deal. For example: rumors at State today have Bolton with his own list of new INR staffers, ready to clean house.

Reality check: Rice has made it clear she is aware of, and does not want to endure, the leaks and separate agenda behavior which characterized Bolton's service to Powell. Outsiders are portraying this as a "test" of whether VP Cheney is the "real" foreign policy boss, or does Condi truly have the mandate from President Bush that Powell never secured.

Some "insiders" argue that to put it that way shows how little one understands the real play in the Bush Administration. For what it's worth, Rice deputies are telling friends that she is not a neo-con, but a realist in the Scowcroft tradition, from whence she came originally.

And some interesting theories on why Bush likes to promote loyalty over competence

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2404
[Noam Scheiber] I count two schools of thought on why the Bush administration tends to reward people who screw up (Condoleezza Rice, Don Rumsfeld, Stephen Hadley, etc.) while dismissing those who speak out when they see mistakes being made (Colin Powell, Paul O'Neill, much of the upper ranks of the CIA). In one camp are those, like the editors of TNR, who argue that, since the administration values loyalty above all else, it's only natural that it would promote or extend the tenures of toadies and yes-men while showing internal critics the door. In the other camp are those, like Matt Yglesias, who argue that the administration has to hang on to the screw-ups because to fire them would be to admit mistakes, something this administration is incapable of doing.

But there's a third, hybrid option I don't think anyone's considered: What if the administration sticks with people who've screwed up because having screwed up makes you even more loyal to the administration, while having not screwed up would tend to make you disloyal. This occurred to me while reading yesterday's profile of Hadley in The Washington Post. Hadley, you may recall, is the guy who took responsibility for the erroneous uranium-from-Niger claim in the president's 2003 State of the Union Address. In most cases, that would not only be a firing offense, it'd be the kind of thing that prevented you from working for future administrations--maybe even limited your career options outside government.

But, then, maybe that's exactly the point as far as this White House is concerned. Because Hadley is such damaged goods, he owes much more to this administration than would someone who had other employment options, meaning he'll be even more loyal than even your standard administration yes-man. I don't think it's crazy to suspect that the White House actually prefers people whose career prospects would be grim the second they fell out of the president's good graces. Conversely, the people who manage to keep their reputations intact and avoid screwing up must scare the hell out of this White House, since they don't owe the president anything and since, for that matter, it's in their interest to distance themselves from any screwing up that goes on there in order to preserve future career options.

Bush’s strategy of “perception management”

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/111804.html

Goss’s “secret” address to the troops at CIA (almost immediately leaked, of course)

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004841
A simple rule of thumb should always apply - all Agency business with the media or Congress should be conducted solely through these elements to ensure that we protect against the release of unauthorized documents, sources or methods. We remain a secret organization.

In other words -- no leaking! And, of course, the intelligence community really shouldn't leak information that's being kept secret for some important national-security reason. Time and again, however, the information that's been coming out of these leaks has been secret only because the administration is trying to cover up something embarrassing. A team that had less to fear from the truth might have the time to focus on some more substantive reform issues.

Afghanistan drug trade reaches record levels

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/international/asia/19afghanistan.html?oref=login&ex=1258606800&

Déjà vu all over again. Step one, Powell (!!?) shovels out reports that Iran “may be” developing nukes – based on a single, unverified source. Step two, Bush Co. immediately starts talking about the need for military action

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61079-2004Nov18.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/international/middleeast/19diplo.html?ex=1258606800&en=d4828ade7ffd1848&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
In an eerie repetition of the prelude to the Iraq war, hawks in the administration and Congress are trumpeting ominous disclosures about Iran's nuclear capacities to make the case that Iran is a threat that must be confronted, either by economic sanctions, military action, or "regime change."

Analysis: http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/powell-and-iran-nukes.html

Bush/Rove reach out across aisle in spirit of open bipartisanship (and if you believe that…)

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/18/white_house_seeks_democrat_for_cabinet.html

Regular like the sunrise: Ann Coulter slithers out to accuse liberals of "racism" for questioning Condi Rice’s qualifications for Sect’y of State

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_14_digbysblog_archive.html#110084144116825396
COULTER: Dick Clarke, the flamboyant opponent of the Bush administration, came out with a book earlier this year, claiming that Condoleezza Rice, when he talked to her about Al Qaeda, her face showed that she was perplexed, that she had never heard of Al Qaeda before…Can you imagine somebody saying that about, you know, Wolfowitz? No. That's my fourth example now of liberals having a problem with blacks.

[Just the facts, ma’am: http://mediamatters.org/items/200411180004]

Bonus item: Eeeeeeew! This gives me a queasy feeling

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/18/quote_of_the_day.html

"It has taken my ego decades to recover."
-- Karl Rove, quote by the Houston Chronicle, on being rejected for a date in 1982 by Education Secretary-desginate Margaret Spellings.

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 8:07 AM

 
BASTARDS

As I have said here before, my vocabulary of cynicism and hypocrisy is starting to fail me: I need new words to describe how despicable and dishonest these people are, how totally devoid of principle, how shameless in trumpeting their “values” while continually implementing policies that go against them

House GOP reverses rules (which it wrote and applied to Dems) to let DeLay off the hook

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay18nov18,1,6400972.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
"The Democrats have decided that they're going to use the politics of personal destruction to gain power," DeLay said. "What we are doing is protecting ourselves from those assaults."…Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), one of the few Republicans who spoke out publicly against the new rule, said: "For the life of me, I don't know why we're doing this now."…Shays said it was wrong to change the decade-old rule, which was put in place to show that Republicans could live by a "higher standard than our Democratic colleagues."

A House Republican aide, defending the change, said: "The rule we had before today essentially said, 'You're guilty until proven innocent.' "

[Nice of them to decide that now, since it was THEIR invention]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/politics/18house.html?oref=login&ex=1258520400&
Mr. DeLay said he did not expect to be indicted, but added, "This has nothing to do with whether I was going to be or not going to be.''

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004011
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) criticizes the DeLay Rule: "Republicans have reached a new low. It is absolutely mind-boggling that as their first order of business following the elections, House Republicans have lowered the ethical standards for their leaders."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004006
Rep John Dingell (D-MI) on Majority Leader Tom DeLay (TX-R): "These folks talk about values and decency, but then think it’s okay to change the rules once it appears one of their own may have broken them. This amounts to a work release program for the ethically challenged. We should all remember that a decade ago, Mr. DeLay helped to create this rule. Republicans said at the time they were the party of reform and good government. Now they’ve become the party of moribund hubris."

And what happens if he is convicted?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004007
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004008

Fiscally irresponsible Congress puts off debt ceiling vote until after the election to mask just how awful the Bush deficit is becoming

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/politics/18debt.html?ex=1101358800&en=63db472665d67a47&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY
The bill, if approved by the House in a vote expected on Thursday, would authorize the third big increase in the federal borrowing since President Bush took office in 2001. Federal debt has ballooned by $1.4 trillion over the past four years, to $7.4 trillion, and the new ceiling would allow borrowing to reach $8.2 trillion…With no end in sight to the huge annual budget deficits, which hit a record of $412 billion this year, lawmakers predicted on Wednesday that the new ceiling would probably have to be raised again in about a year.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/17/debt/index.html
And if you think we're in deep debt doo-doo now, just wait for President Bush's second term agenda to kick in: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that his proposed 2005 budget would nearly double our current debt to about $14.5 trillion by 2014.

Frist announces the GOP is prepared to “go nuclear” in fighting future Dem filibusters on judicial nominees (which of course they used repeatedly in blocking Clinton appointments when they were in the minority)

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004828

Intelligence Bill may (finally) pass, but at the price of looking more like the terrible House version

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel17nov17,1,1148901.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58630-2004Nov17.html?nav=rss_nation

Goss just getting started at CIA

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cia18nov18,1,6282573.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
In the wake of high-level departures in the CIA's clandestine service, intelligence officials are bracing for an even more aggressive overhaul of the agency's analytic ranks by Director Porter J. Goss.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/17/cia.memo/index.html
CIA officials angrily insisted Wednesday that a memo from intelligence chief Porter Goss did not order his staff to "back Bush," as a newspaper headline put it Wednesday…According to an official in possession of the memo, Goss told his staff:

"I also intend to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road. We support the administration, and its policies in our work as agency employees. We do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies.”

http://slate.com/id/2109870/
What to make of Porter Goss and the turmoil at the Central Intelligence Agency?…What does Goss want, and is what he's doing the best way of accomplishing it?…

The more important question is what Goss will do with the agency's analytical branch, the directorate of intelligence. That's the branch where integrity and independence are vital…The personnel shufflings haven't yet spread to the analytical shop. But signs are starting to point to a broad shake-up, charged by political motivations. And it's in this context that Goss' actions take on a darker tint.

Today's New York Times, in a story headlined "New C.I.A. Chief Tells Workers to Back Administration Policies," reports on a leaked memo that Goss circulated on Monday within the CIA…This directive reinforces a general uneasiness about Goss, who after all auditioned for his current job by doing political hackwork for the president. In June 2003, when Sen. Kerry—who was clearly running for president already—gave "a major speech" on national-security issues, the Bush-Cheney campaign tapped Goss to write the official critique. And he wrote a blazer, denouncing the speech as "political 'me-tooism' " and complaining that Kerry "neglected the president's historic achievements" and "remarkable progress" at combating terrorism.

Goss also helped Bush during the early days of the Joseph Wilson-Valerie Plame scandal. As chairman of a Senate oversight committee and as a former CIA case officer himself, Goss should have been dismayed that a White House aide might have exposed the identity of an undercover agent as an act of political retaliation against the agent's spouse. But, although the Justice Department took the reports seriously enough to mount a grand-jury probe, Goss dismissed them as "wild and unsubstantiated" and added, as a jab at the Democrats, "Somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I'll have an investigation."

[So, I guess this means we won’t be hearing any complaints from Langley over the stalled Plame investigation]

“Condoleezza” – so now we know

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/17/rice_profile/index.html?source=RSS
Condoleezza (the name derives from the musical term con dolcezza, which means "to play with sweetness")

Is John Bolton going to be Condi’s #2 at State? Apparently, this will be the first test of whether she is really in charge, or not: she doesn’t want him, the neo-cons do

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004004

Who is John Bolton, and why do so many people hate him?

http://www.cla.sc.edu/POLI/faculty/rosati/ttp.bolton.kaplan.nrep.32904.htm

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=252863#2

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=252671

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000190.html
When it comes to loyalty oaths and tests, what Porter Goss is doing to the CIA will be nothing if Bolton gets the chance to rip apart the senior echelon at State…He's been the neocon mole at the State Department for the last several years.

Who is Stephen Hadley?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57114-2004Nov17.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing

So much for the “moderation” of Bush’s second term (why did ANYONE believe that?)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-heilbrunn17nov17,1,6181464.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004831

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000190.html

New Sect’y of Education named: Margaret Spellings. May be his best appointment so far (of a very, very grim lot)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cabinet18nov18,1,7124198.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
Congressional Democrats and some state governments say the administration has undermined the bipartisan consensus on No Child Left Behind by failing to fund the reforms. But even administration critics do not blame Spellings for that failure; instead, they said her nomination offered an opportunity to improve implementation of the bill, especially since she had experience at the state level…"Margaret enjoys a lot of support from both Democrats and Republicans on the Hill," said James Manley, spokesman for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who rallied Democratic support for the bill but later complained that the White House reneged on funding promises. "Sen. Kennedy has a lot of respect for Margaret's abilities, and it's obvious she has the ear of the president."

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004829

[Couldn’t resist this one: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/17/14539/475]

And here is the best analysis I have seen about the pattern of new appointments, nearly all of which are WH staffers being sent out to manage supposedly independent Cabinet departments

http://slate.com/id/2109870/
President Bush's second-term Cabinet is shaping up to be not a collection of separate agencies but a political arm of the Oval Office. Bush's appointments so far—Alberto Gonzalez at Justice, Condoleezza Rice at State, and today Margaret Spellings at Education—all come from his White House staff.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bushteam18nov18,1,4478649.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
The personnel changes he has announced would install some of his closest confidants from the White House, and even from his years as Texas governor, atop key Cabinet departments.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004002

Bush’s great Tax Reform proposal: horrible and regressive, of course (and forget “simplification”)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58554-2004Nov17.html
The Bush administration is eyeing an overhaul of the tax code that would drastically cut, if not eliminate, taxes on savings and investment…

Just after the election he signaled that tax policy would be a centerpiece of his domestic agenda, reiterating his pledge to name a bipartisan panel to draft a fundamental tax reform proposal…But before the tax panel is even named, administration officials have begun dialing back expectations that they will move to scrap the current graduated income tax for another system.

Instead the administration plans to push major amendments that would shield interest, dividends and capitals gains from taxation, expand tax breaks for business investment…The changes are meant to be revenue-neutral. To pay for them, the administration is considering eliminating the deduction of state and local taxes on federal income tax returns and scrapping the business tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance, the advisers said.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/holy-crap.html
scrapping the business tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance, the advisers said.

bye bye health insurance for a hell of a lot of people.

Police chiefs scoff at Ashcroft’s claim that the US is safer today

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008794.html

US knew about flu vaccine problems a year ago, did nothing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58482-2004Nov17.html?nav=rss_nation

Was Richard Perle telling people in 2002 that we would probably never find WMD in Iraq?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004003
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004005

Who were the Undecideds? A fascinating, and frightening account

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_14_digbysblog_archive.html#110072695816314559

In Iraq: Sistani-led coalition likely to dominate elections. Allawi chooses not to join (what game is HE playing?)

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004833

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/322/world/Iraq_s_al_Sistani_spearheading:.shtml

Forty-seven parties, mostly Sunni, will boycott elections

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/election-boycott-announced-forty-seven.html

US election fraud updates (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

In Florida: poll tapes hidden from auditors
http://blog.democrats.com/node/690

In Ohio, double counting of votes
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ohio18nov18,1,5363964.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

In Ohio, most of those forced to use “provisional ballots” (which haven’t been counted yet) were legitimate voters
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/17/most_provisional_ballots_were_legitimate.html

In Indiana, widespread e-voting errors
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5261

Attacks on Keith Olbermann, the only tv analyst to make an issue of vote fraud
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/steigerwald/s_271992.html
http://mediamatters.org/items/200411160006

Bonus item: Good ol’ Tony, always in proper judicial tone

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/17/quote_of_the_day.html
"I'm inclined to say it's been four years and an election. Get over it."
-- Justice Antonin Scalia, quoted by Knight Ridder, on the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 election.

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:42 AM

 
A PLAIN AND CLEAR AGENDA

Well, the outrage quota is certainly well-filled today

Goss to CIA: our job is to give the administration what it wants, not to argue with them. You know, like, if they want to start a war, we give them “intelligence” to justify it – that sort of thing

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/politics/17intel.html?oref=login&ex=1258434000&

The inside story on the CIA purges

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/16/cia/
Since his appointment, Goss has given his top aides -- basically, his former staff from the intelligence committee -- the green light to draw up lists of people to fire. The zeal with which Goss' enforcers are exercising their power has led to angry resignations by top CIA veterans like Stephen Kappes, who had taken over as deputy director of operations just this summer, and brought the brutal shakeup onto the front pages. The CIA's case officers and analysts, meanwhile, are extremely distressed by Goss' slashes at the professional staff. "I do nothing but talk to disgruntled and sick people there," says a recently retired senior CIA official…And that suits the White House just fine. Many conservatives in and outside the administration, especially the neoconservatives, view the CIA as a subversive element bent on stymieing Bush's agenda…Now, with the arrival of Goss as DCI, they see the Bush administration intent not so much on reforming the CIA as crushing it. And as is already clear, many intelligence veterans don't plan on going quietly into the night.

House GOP planning to rewrite rules so that an indicted Tom DeLay can retain his position

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/politics/17cong.html?ex=1258434000&en=301eee72824ddf07&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Republicans adopted the rule in the 1990's, when they were in the minority and were trying to put the focus on investigations of prominent Democrats.

Comment:
http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2004/11/the_delay_twostep.php
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#004001

Busy GOP beavers also bury in the Intelligence Bill a provision relieving US officials of financial disclosure requirements (hey, it’s a national security issue!)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-disclose16nov16,1,7580713.story?coll=la-news-politics-national

And, with their spare time, they are also bullying K Street lobbying firms not to hire any of Tom Daschle’s former staffers (because, you know, they believe in a spirit of bipartisan comity)

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004820

Alberto Gonzales: as bad a hack as you think he is, it just keeps getting worse

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/16/16825/624

A manic obsession with secrecy

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/16/secrecy/index.html
"The Department of Homeland Security is requiring thousands of employees and contractors to sign nondisclosure agreements that prohibit them from sharing sensitive but unclassified information with the public."

"The department was rebuffed, however, when it also tried to require congressional aides to sign the secrecy pledges as a condition for gaining access to certain materials, majority and minority spokesmen for the House Select Committee on Homeland Security said yesterday."

Sect’y of State nominee Condoleezza Rice lied before the 9-11 commission. Will any of this come out during her confirmation hearings?

http://dailyhowler.com/dh041704.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52730-2004Nov15?language=printer
The Sept. 11 commission report was particularly tough on Rice, portraying her as failing to act on repeated warnings in the first part of 2001 about the likelihood of a major terrorist attack on the United States.

For example, it noted that on Jan. 25, 2001, a few days after Bush took office, Richard A. Clarke, who had been held over from the previous administration as the counterterrorism coordinator for the NSC, wrote to Rice stating that "We urgently need . . . a Principals level review on the al Qaeda network." The report noted that Rice did not respond directly to Clarke's memo, and no such meeting of principals, or top officials, was held on terrorism until Sept. 4, 2001, although they met frequently on other issues, such as the Middle East peace process, Russia and the Persian Gulf.

The report also detailed several more specific warnings from Clarke to Rice in the spring and summer of 2001:

• On March 23, he told Rice that he thought terrorists might attack the White House with a truck bomb and also that "he thought there were terrorist cells within the United States, including al Qaeda."

• On May 29, Clarke wrote to Rice and her deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, about possible assaults by a Palestinian associate of al Qaeda, adding that, "When these attacks occur, as they likely will, we will wonder what more we could have done to stop them."

• On June 25, Clarke informed Rice and Hadley that "six separate intelligence reports showed al Qaeda personnel warning of a pending attack," the report said.

• Three days later, he added that the pattern of al Qaeda activity indicating preparations for an attack "had reached a crescendo."

• On June 30, a briefing was given to top officials titled, "Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks."

The spike in reported al Qaeda activity ended in July, but senior intelligence analysts continued to be deeply concerned, the report noted, causing them to include in the Aug. 6 "President's Daily Brief" an article titled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US."

And what will her tenure at State be like?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52730-2004Nov15?language=printer
“State Department officials dislike her intensely because they love Powell and believe her staff demeaned the State Department," said one former State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he frequently interacts with Rice.

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001391.html
With Condoleezza Rice at the helm--and, in all likelihood, with Undersecretary of State John Bolton as her deputy--the State Department will now be run by a team known for its rigid loyalty to the president…Rice, to be sure, is neither a great thinker nor a great manager. But she is a great lieutenant--that is, someone who can be relied on to convey and translate the president's inclinations into official policy.

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001389.html
I don't think there is any question that Rice will not go to bat on policy issues where Cheney and Rummy are aligning on the other side. Rice has had the president's ear for four years of foreign policy disaster and reactiveness. She appears the consummate yes-person for her bosses. When has she ever shown an iota of independence?…

Update: James Wolcott gets this just right:

Rice's face is the game face of the Bushies, bony with Unwavering Resolve, eyes fanatical, mouth tensed. She has shown herself to be not a listener but a dictation machine on playback. "The President believes..." "The President has always said..." "The President has very consistent in arguing that..." "The President has said all along..." And now the dictation machine is in a position to dictate to other nations how they can fight terror and help make America a bigger, better empire. It'll be the President wants this, the President wants that, the President is firm in his belief that...

But her incompetence precedes her, as does her presumptuous statement that for their failure to support the U.S. in Iraq, France should be punished, Germany ignored, and Russia forgiven. Punished, ignored, and forgiven for being right in the first place and refusing to take part in this debacle?--such nerve.

As America gets more militarized and messianic under Bush, it's being economically and diplomatically outmaneuvered by the rest of the world...

One final indignity for Colin Powell. In case you were puzzled about why he would leave just when we may be on the brink of a major breakthrough in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, read on

http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/111404.htm#111604

And, later in that same piece

[O]fficials tell NBC News Mr. Bush wants his National Security Adviser [Condi Rice] to oversee a top to bottom housecleaning of the State Department…"They're going to purge the State Department," said one of the senior [Administration] officials, adding that he'd heard White House officials say: "The State Department doesn't get it. They're not on the president's message."

[Sound familiar?]

Bush’s narrowing scope of input. Seriously, for all the talk about “loyalty,” this is bad management. You need some friction and diversity of views to open up new perspectives on the issues. Instead, all matters get transformed into simply HOW to achieve certain policies that are not open to question. We know that Bush hates being challenged or even disagreed with, but this risks transposing his greatest personal weakness into a very dangerous public policy mistake

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53915-2004Nov16.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing
In fact, all signs are pointing toward Bush's top advisers…tightening their grip on power by removing outliers and installing loyalty-tested aides from the first term into all the key positions for the second.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004811
U.S. officials and foreign policy analysts said Monday that by agreeing to Powell's departure and approving a purge by new CIA chief Porter Goss, Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney appear to be eliminating the few independent centers of power in the U.S. national security apparatus and cementing the system under their personal control.

Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge rumored to resign, and his replacement…no, oh please god no…this is a joke, right?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/16/ridge.status/index.html

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/ridge-gone.html

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Douglas_Feith

http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2004/10/21/news/intel.html

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/politics/9595471.htm

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0410.marshallrozen.html

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=181113

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq&iraq_themes=officeOfSpecialPlans

Vote fraud updates (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

Palast and Manjoo: The Great Debate
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/11/16/palast/index.html

RECORD
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1115-24.htm

Complete national exit poll data
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm
In the data which is shown below in tabulated form, and above in graph form, we can see that 42 of the 51 states in the union swung towards George Bush while only nine swung towards Kerry…There has to date been no official explanation for the discrepancy….Ordinarily in the absence of an obvious mistabulation error, roughly the same number of states should have swung towards each candidate…Moreover many of the states that swung against Democratic Party hopeful John Kerry swung to an extent that is well beyond the margin of error in exit polls. Exit polls by their nature - they ask voters how they actually voted rather than about their intentions - are typically considered highly accurate.

Bonus item: feeling a draft?

George Bush: “We're not going to have a draft, period,” October 8th, 2004
http://www.patriotblog.com/index.php?id=299

November 15: http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/ts_more.php?id=62232_0_10_0_C
The Selective Service System (SSS) and the U.S. Department of Education now are gearing up to compare their computer records, to make sure all men between the ages of 18 and 25 who are required to register for a military draft have done so….The SSS and the education department will begin comparing their lists on Jan. 1, 2005, according to a memo authored by Jack Martin, acting Selective Service director…While similar record checks have been done periodically for the past 10 years, Martin’s memo is dated Oct. 28, just a few days before the Nov. 2 presidential election, a hard-fought campaign in which the question of whether the nation might need to reinstate a military draft was raised in debates and on the stump.

http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/111304ccjrwwllicense.542a75cb.html
When Larry Chevalier took his son to get his first driver's license, he was floored to discover that to get it, the boy had to preregister for a nonexistent military draft…"I just can't believe it," said Chevalier, whose 16-year-old son, Nathan, did fill out the form to register with the Selective Service so he could get his license…"They wouldn't let him get it otherwise," Chevalier said Saturday…Even a 15-year-old boy who wants a learner's permit in Louisiana must provide information to be forwarded, when he turns 18, to the Selective Service System, which would run a military draft if one is set up again.

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:14 AM

 
THE LEASH IS OFF

Powell out

http://slate.com/id/2109772/
And so the other shoe has dropped on the sad career of Colin Powell…Powell's "resignation" this morning was one of the surest bets of a second Bush term. He had long endured a string of humiliating defeats at the hand of his Pentagon rival Donald Rumsfeld. For well over a year now, he's been out of the loop on every high-profile issue of foreign policy—Iraq, Iran, North Korea, nuclear arms control, Middle East peace talks…In recent months, he's been hammering his own coffin, making little effort to hide his displeasure while serving a president who famously demands loyalty.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50926-2004Nov15.html
A White House official said Powell, who helped persuade Bush to seek approval from the United Nations before invading Iraq, indicated to the president weeks or months before Nov. 2 that he planned to leave soon after the election. But one government official with personal knowledge of the situation said Powell had second thoughts and had prepared a list of conditions under which he would be willing to stay. They included greater engagement with Iran and a harder line with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon…Powell and Bush met at the White House on Friday, the date on the secretary's letter of resignation. Details of the meeting could not be learned, but White House officials said the secretary was not asked to stay...

[NB: Personally, I have little sympathy with the two major tropes being dished to describe Powell’s tenure at the State Dept. One is the tragic figure, sacrificing his integrity on the altar of loyalty to George Bush. The other is the stoic hero, holding out despite all the indignities in order to counterbalance and moderate the influence of the Neanderthals in Cheney and Rumsfeld’s camp. I see little evidence of success in that regard. Instead, to me the story is that he refused to stand up to policies he knew to be wrong, sometimes even openly defending them, and because his credibility was so much higher than others, giving them public legitimacy. That, to me, is the key story. The fact that he didn’t resign a hundred times over, most conspicuously after the horrific Abu Ghraib scandal, indicates a failure of true moral courage. He let Rumsfeld dictate foreign policy, and undermine his own efforts, over and over again. He can’t be proud of what happened under Bush’s first term, and now he’s distancing himself from the consequences. That’s all this is.]

Juan Cole gives a different analysis, suggesting that a Powell/Tony Blair alliance DID derail a number of truly stupid initiatives from Rumsfeld’s “brain trust”

http://www.juancole.com/2004/11/powells-resignation-colin-powells.html

Chirac on Blair

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003994
JACQUES CHIRAC dealt a blow to Tony Blair’s attempt to heal the wounds between the US and Europe last night by saying that the Prime Minister had won nothing for supporting the war against Iraq. As Mr Blair used a keynote speech to present Britain as a “bridge across the Atlantic”, President Chirac doubted whether anyone could play the “honest broker”…“Well, Britain gave its support but I did not see anything in return. I’m not sure it is in the nature of our American friends at the moment to return favours systematically.”

Rumsfeld wins: his opponents gone, intelligence consolidation defeated, and not a single member of his cabal affected (yet) by the consequences of their miserable war planning, torture policies, entanglements with Chalabi, and misuse of US troops

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/rumsfeld_stays.html

It turns out that not only does the US routinely ship prisoners to proxy nations to do their torturing for them – they have a designated airplane to transport them

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1357699,00.html
AN executive jet is being used by the American intelligence agencies to fly terrorist suspects to countries that routinely use torture in their prisons…The movements of the Gulfstream 5 leased by agents from the United States defence department and the CIA are detailed in confidential logs obtained by The Sunday Times which cover more than 300 flights.

[300 flights!]

Powell out, Rice in. It’s bad enough when this administration doesn’t want to hold people accountable for their failures – but REWARDING them? Once again for this gang, loyalty trumps competence

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/15/152639/05

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/condi.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003993
The lede from a piece in tomorrow's Post ...

Condoleezza Rice, who will be named as Colin L. Powell's replacement as early as today, has forged an extraordinarily close relationship with President Bush. But, paradoxically, many experts consider her one of the weakest national security advisers in recent history in terms of managing interagency conflicts.

I'm gonna assume there was a smirk on someone's face.

http://slate.com/id/2109772/
In her four years as national security adviser, Rice has displayed no imagination as a foreign-policy thinker. She was terrible—one of the worst national security advisers ever—as a coordinator of policy advice. And to the extent she found herself engaged in bureaucratic warfare, she was almost always outgunned by Vice President Dick Cheney or Rumsfeld. Last year, for instance, the White House issued a directive putting her in charge of policy on Iraqi reconstruction; the directive was ignored.

[More: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=7597]

Rice’s replacement? Stephen Hadley

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/15/194013/66
Who is Hadley? He was Condi Rice's deputy -- a prime suspect of the Plame outing, and the guy who took the fall (the blame) for the "yellowcake" reference in Bush's 2003 SOTU address.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109801/fr/rss/
Hadley is the seemingly absentminded White House official who said he forgot to warn the president that the CIA didn't think buy reports that Saddam had sought uranium from Nigeria. "I should have recalled that there was controversy associated with the uranium issue," Hadley told the Post last year.

What these departures mean

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/041122/usnews/22bush.htm
The president is moving briskly to seize the moment. He is consolidating power at the White House, channeling ever more influence to Vice President Dick Cheney, his closest confidant, and counselor Karl Rove, architect of his November 2 victory. Senior White House officials tell U.S. News that Bush plans to replace at least half his cabinet over the next few months. His aim is to remove officials who have become lightning rods for controversy or who seem to have lost their desire to serve in Washington.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000185.html
DANIELLE PLETKA, AEI FOREIGN & DEFENSE POLICY PROGRAMS CHIEF, will be appointed Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs…That must have given Colin Powell and Dick Armitage some heartburn since Pletka has been part of the attack-Powell neocon squad for some time.

The realist crowd, what little of it existed in the administration, is thinning. Colin Powell and Richard Armitage have declared themselves out. Robert Blackwill resigned. Richard Haass left some time ago to head the Council on Foreign Relations…CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin quit, as has the CIA's Osama bin Laden tracking chief Michael Scheuer, a.k.a. ANONYMOUS…Former NSC staffers Richard Clarke and Rand Beers quit.

Have any neoconservatives quit?…To all those who keep asking me whether the neoconservatives are going to be constrained in Bush's next term, what does the math tell you?

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/a_most_ingenius.html
I'm with Josh, there's nothing especially "paradoxical" about President Mismanagement wanting to promote his inept National Security Advisor. It's exactly what one would expect. Meanwhile, I assume Stephen "Where's the Memo?" Hadley is not about to bring a new level of professionalism to the NSC…

UPDATE: This post couldn't be complete without a link to David Adesnik's hilarious-in-retrospect suggestion that Bush consider appointing Richard Lugar or Richard Armitage to head up the State Department. Either would be solid choices for a conservative president interested in running a sound foreign policy. But of course we can stop right there. The issue isn't that Lugar's "personal relationship with Bush" isn't "strong enough to get him the job" the issue is that the plan for the second administration is that the now mandate-possessing Bush can crush all elements of independence and critical thought inside the administration and stock the government entirely with toadies. It's one of those don't-know-whether-to-laugh-or-cry kind of moments.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003995
Neither Ms. Rice nor Mr. Gonzales are the neo-cons' or the conservatives' choice for their respective offices-to-be…In each case they're acceptable; but no more.

What distinguishes each is their connection to the president, their loyalty and their fealty. Neither has any base in the city or standing anywhere else absent their connection to him. And in appointing them he has placed the State Department and the Justice Department under his direct and unmediated control as surely as the various members of the White House staff already are…Which is certainly a good thing since if there is one thing this president sorely needs it is more yes-men.

Watch for CIA-style purges at the State Dept now

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/the_sooner_the_.html

Speaking of the CIA, purges there probably doom real intelligence reform

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/16/politics/16intel.html?ex=1258347600&en=aacf8a6356fa0819&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Mr. Kappes and Mr. Sulick are highly regarded within the C.I.A. Their departures, which prompted loud protests from former intelligence officials, suggest that Mr. Goss is confident of having a mandate from the White House to make sweeping changes. The resignations of other senior officials within the operations directorate may follow, the former officials said.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/15/cia/index.html
Meanwhile, the Pentagon, House Republican allies, and the White House are among the chief obstacles to getting intelligence reform, based on the 9/11 commission's recommendations, through Congress before the end of the year. "We have a critical window in the next few days to try and pass these recommendations," 9/11 commission member Tim Roemer said. "These recommendations are bipartisan. They're unanimous, without dissent." And yet, they'll likely die with this Congress. Good thing those political purges at the CIA are underway, though. We're feeling safer already.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003984
But the larger point is simple and clear. On every significant point of conflict between the Bush administration and the country's cadre of intelligence professionals, the Bush political appointees turned out to be wrong. Often very wrong, and with disastrous consequences…And the upshot of all that we've seen, the result of all those struggles over the last three years is that the 'appointees' are purging the 'professionals'…The answer to politicized intelligence, it turns out, is a more thorough politicization of intelligence and the elimination of those who resisted political pressure.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004805
Porter Goss' record over the past few years indicates approximately zero interest in actually improving intelligence gathering and analysis, and a great deal of interest in working for partisan advantage. His -- and the president's -- beef with the CIA is that its analysts refused to go along with the line that the bad Iraq WMD intelligence was all the result of screw-ups by CIA analysts rather than White House, Pentagon, and vice-presidential pressure.

Goss tries oh-so-deftly to reassure CIA employees

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51301-2004Nov15.html
Hours after the two top clandestine service officers at the CIA resigned yesterday, Director Porter J. Goss asked employees to remain loyal to the agency…Goss told them to expect "a series of changes" in the days and weeks ahead, "in the organization, personnel" and mission of the agency…Goss has said he believes the CIA's clandestine service is dysfunctional and needs changes.

Will discussions of the WH war against the CIA reopen curiosity about their outing of agent Valerie Plame, and raise the question of WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO THAT INVESTIGATION? One thing to look forward to: these CIA folks aren’t going to STOP talking once they’re out of the government

http://www.nydailynews.com/11-15-2004/news/gossip/story/252712p-216383c.html
Should Condoleezza Rice be worried about the memoir that ex- CIA director George Tenet is peddling?…The former spy chief "trashes" the national security adviser in his book proposal, one publishing insider tells us…"He claims she was incompetent, that she didn't do her job" when it came to protecting the country from terrorists, the source says.

Arlen Specter twisting, twisting slowly in the wind

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004807

A touch of “humor”: should Specter be required to convert to Christianity?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003997

[NB: Will the apparent willingness of far-right Republicans to cannibalize even their own moderate colleagues finally drive the half dozen or so reasonable GOP Senators into alliance with the Dems? No, I’m not holding my breath, but a la Jim Jeffords, wouldn’t it serve them right?]

Could overturning Roe v. Wade turn out to be a boon for progressive politics? Some people seem to think so

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004809

GOP still wants to have it both ways on gay issues: new head of RNC is gay (or isn’t he?) – not that there’s anything wrong with that

http://americablog.blogspot.com/archives/2004_11_01_americablog_archive.html#110054430011866748

In Iraq, January vote may be postponed, says Deputy PM (well, DUH – the only interesting thing here is that US media gives zero coverage to this story)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1351481,00.html

In Fallujah, U.S. troops turn away relief agency, saying (a) there aren’t any civilians left in there and (b) they don’t need you

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1351332,00.html
Much of Falluja has been destroyed and hundreds of thousands of residents are refugees but the attack seems only to have deepened the city's anger and antagonised much of the Sunni minority.

And in the hospitals…

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq15nov15.story
Iraqi national guardsmen and U.S. Marines, the manager said, had entered the hospital, handcuffed the doctors and were forcing the patients out to the parking lot.

The guardsmen "stole the mobile phones, the hospital safe where the money is kept and damaged the ambulances and cars," said Ghanim, an orthopedic surgeon who normally works at the General Hospital. "The Americans were more sympathetic with the hospital staff and … untied the doctors and allowed them to go outside with the patients."

But the worst was yet to come…"What happened in Fallouja in April was a walk in the park compared to this time," Ghanim said, referring to the spring siege of the city by Marines, an offensive that was called off after five days amid reports of heavy civilian casualties.

The latest fight for Fallouja began Nov. 7. The hospital, the city's main medical facility, was seized that night by U.S. and Iraqi troops. Commanders said it was taken over to ensure that there was a medical treatment facility available to civilians and to make sure that insurgents could not exaggerate casualties.

“Victory” in Fallujah – what did it gain us? (nothing at all, except greater enmity) Now what?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/15/politics/15military.html?oref=login&ex=1258261200&
American military commanders say the weeklong assault that has wrested most of Falluja from insurgent control has achieved nearly all their objectives well ahead of schedule and with fewer pitfalls than anticipated…But where do the United States and the government of the interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, go from here?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/15/international/middleeast/15cnd-iraq.html?ex=1258261200&en=6162fec2b1d9a3e7&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
A rebel counteroffensive roiled central and northern Iraq today, with guerillas storming police stations and setting oil wells ablaze, as American troops tried to flush the remaining insurgents from the debris-strewn cityscape of Falluja.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/15/fallujah/index.html
But to what degree do Americans know of the awful cost of the battle? From the start of the war, the Bush administration -- with a complicit mainstream media shuffling along behind it -- has done whatever it can to keep the vivid images of the war out of view, from banning pictures of flag-draped coffins carrying fallen U.S. soldiers, to almost zero public discussion of Iraqi civilian casualties. For the latter, one recent estimate had the death toll at more than 100,000 since the war's beginning…But with the digital era's unblinking eye and ever-growing bandwidth, even the furtive Bush White House can't keep all the bad stuff locked away…One blogger (whose identity is not readily apparent on the site) has collected some recent images at Fallujah In Pictures, most of which come from Reuters, AP, AFP and Al Jazeera. For those seeking more documentary evidence of what's happened there -- and not for the faint of heart.

And now, this…

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/11/15/marine_shooting/index.html?source=RSS
A U.S. Marine shot and killed a wounded prisoner in a Fallujah mosque, according to a television pool report broadcast Monday. A Marine spokesman said the shooting was being investigated…Pool pictures taken by NBC correspondent Kevin Sites embedded with the Marines 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment, were recorded Saturday as the Marines returned to an unidentified Fallujah mosque…The video, according to a version aired by CNN, showed a Marine raising his rifle toward the prisoners but neither NBC nor CNN showed the shooting itself. The video was blacked out but the report of the rifle could be heard.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6496898/
Sites was present when a lieutenant from one of the units asked a Marine what had happened inside the mosque. The Marine replied that there were people inside.

“Did you shoot them?” the lieutenant asked.

“Roger that, sir,” the second Marine replied.

“Were they armed?” the lieutenant asked.

The second Marine shrugged in reply.

Sites saw the five wounded men left behind on Friday still in the mosque. Four of them had been shot again, apparently by members of the squad that entered the mosque moments earlier. One appeared to be dead, and the three others were severely wounded. The fifth man was lying under a blanket, apparently not having been shot a second time…One of the Marines noticed that one of the severely wounded men was still breathing. He did not appear to be armed, Sites said.

The Marine could be heard insisting: “He’s f---ing faking he’s dead — he’s faking he’s f---ing dead.” Sites then watched as the Marine raised his rifle and fired into the man’s head from point-blank range.

“Well, he’s dead now,” another Marine said.

Still in denial about troop needs, Pentagon starts recalling members who have completed their tours of duty – but now the soldiers are fighting back

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/15/113116/80

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/16/national/16reserves.html?oref=login&ex=1258347600&

What about Iran? The usual suspects already start laying the groundwork

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001382.html

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109744/fr/rss/
According to one official, Iran's involvement in Iraq and the knowledge of nuclear capabilities begins "to tip the balance in the direction of pre-emptive military strikes" against Iran.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-heer15nov15,1,4394716.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
With President Bush elected to a second term, and the neoconservative architects of the Iraq war firmly in the driver's seat of U.S. foreign policy, Iranian Americans are contemplating a stark choice similar to that faced by Iraqi Americans a few years ago — whether they want to work with Washington to liberate their home country.

Although almost all Iranian Americans want to see democracy flourish in their native land, there are intense and divisive debates on how to achieve this goal and what a future Iranian government should look like. These debates are certain to grow only more intense in the coming months, as Iran's accelerating nuclear program vaults it to the top of the U.S. foreign policy agenda.

The activities of Michael Ledeen, one of the most prominent of the Washington neoconservatives advocating that the U.S. back a plan to overthrow the mullahs, illustrate some of the complexities of modern-day regime change…Ledeen first came to public prominence during the Reagan administration. While serving as a consultant to national security advisor Robert C. McFarlane, he became entangled in the arms-for-hostages trade that became part of the Iran-Contra scandal. It was Ledeen who brought the U.S. government into contact with the Parisian-based Iranian arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar, who claimed he would be able to win the release of U.S. hostages held in Lebanon by the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in exchange for U.S. weapons.

In the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, Ledeen has resumed contact with Ghorbanifar, as he has set about gathering information to lobby the Bush administration, private constituencies and public opinion to back a plan to destabilize the Iranian regime and support dissident forces. In a December 2001 meeting in Rome, first reported in Newsday, Ledeen introduced Ghorbanifar to two Pentagon officials interested in discussing the regime change idea.

More unbelievable voting numbers from Florida

http://www.ecotalk.org/Florida2004.htm

Missing ballots in Ohio (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1686/

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2004/985

And is this “the smoking gun”? Everyone saw the story about 4000 extra votes in a Ohio precinct, and the reaction was “small potatoes” – but does the figure 93,000 extra votes raise anyone’s curiosity?

http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html

Mainstream bloggers still express skepticism

http://blogs.salon.com/0000014/2004/11/15.html#a771
[Scott Rosenberg] So here's my position, plain and simple, and maybe we can move on:

There's no question that the paper-trail-free, unaccountable, closed-source model of electronic voting is flawed, precisely because it leaves no room for after-the-fact authentication, and allows rumors and suspicions of skulduggery to ferment. We need to change that system. Salon, and particularly our reporter Farhad Manjoo, have been at the forefront of coverage of this issue since long before the current election.

When complaints of problems at the polls arise, it's the duty of responsible journalists, including us here at Salon, to take them seriously and try to evaluate them. If reported patterns of voting raise questions of any kind, that's worth looking into. Nothing is more important than assuring ourselves that our elections are won fairly.

But elections are messy exercised in democracy -- there's no such thing as a perfect one. There's always some conniving local official trying to win an edge for his side; the history of voter intimidation and voter-roll tweaking and political-machine tampering is endless…The inevitability of problem precincts and questionable tallies is a given. They demand our inquiry nevertheless. But their presence does not, in and of itself, offer proof of electoral crookedness or a stolen election.

My beef is with the legions of outraged and aggrieved e-mail correspondents who are utterly convinced that the election was stolen. Why? They got an e-mail that told them! They read an article by Greg Palast! And they're not going to be satisfied by the work of some Salon reporter who went out and actually reviewed the evidence and talked to the participants. (Here's the most recent back and forth between Palast and Manjoo.)

There's a dynamic at work here that people really ought to be recognizing by now -- the "I have no idea if this is true, but I'll pass it on anyway" meme-propagation that the Internet so efficiently accelerates.

[So there!]

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 6:21 AM

 
STALIN, 1935

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1936purges.html

He’s making a list, checking it twice…

The news of the day (thanks to Huey-li Li for the link): Bush’s hatchet man Porter Goss isn’t just restructuring the CIA, he’s been ordered to purge every “enemy” (i.e. independent analyst) in the agency. This low-intensity conflict is about to erupt into all-out war

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia1114,0,707331.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

Now, there’s nothing really surprising about this development – it is par for the course for this hardest of hardball administrations. We all know how they treat their “enemies.” But it will be interesting to see whether they succeed, and how much damage (like that suppressed Inspector General’s report) they will have to weather before it is all over. Laura Rozen gives the best one-line summary of what’s going on:

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001376.html
Is this all about revenge, and nothing to do with US intelligence reform? It appears so.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/14/161139/55
This is not freaking believable. When I first saw an article about purges in the intelligence community, I (naively) thought it was a purge of those responsible for intelligence failures. My mistake. The story which follows is not unique, only we are used to hearing about it after military coups in countries whose names many of us are not entirely sure how to pronounce. But this is happening right here. I am not one easily given to hyperbole, and I have avoided words like "junta" in the past, but does this sound like the behavior of a democratically elected leader of a free nation?…Purging the intelligence community of those disloyal to the president? Purging liberal Democrats? Scared yet? You should be. Bush likes to operate in secret. Information is the enemy.

Will the Congressional oversight committees stand by and watch this happen? And what does this war mean for the larger project of intelligence reform?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/politics/14cnd-intel.html?oref=login&ex=1258174800&

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel15nov15,1,231393.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/14/cia.resignations/index.html

More on Richard Lawless and his ties to the Bush network

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001379.html

The “Liberation” of Fallujah: of course Bush Co. will present this as a great victory, even though the bulk of the insurgents, and all their leaders, slipped away. But this is a harbinger of the long-term future in Iraq – and that ain’t good news

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/test-of-fallujah.html
I think it's fair to consider Fallujah the final test of the Bush administration's strategy of Whack-a-Mole. Even now, the Bush administration will not admit failing our troops by not having enough of them there. Their attempts to pass the buck by blaming the generals (except for Franks, who clearly deserves blame) were truly depraved. So, if after sending dozens of our soldiers to their deaths nothing really improves, can we finally say that without a doubt the current leadership has failed our troops, the people of Iraq, and us.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/14/94610/398
Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assures us that U.S. and Iraqi government forces have moved steadily through the insurgent stronghold and that the assault has been "very, very successful." Last night, even as troops fought to secure the final section of the Sunni city, senior Iraqi officials declared it "liberated." But it's hardly surprising that the measure of success in Fallujah is elusive: There's no uniformed enemy force, no headquarters, no central command complex for the troops to occupy and win. At the end, there will be no surrender.

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110049835972305681
Most Americans do not realize that Fallujah is celebrated in Iraqi history and poetry for its defiance of the British in the Great Rebellion of 1920. The 1920 revolution against the British is key to modern Iraqi history. One of the guerrilla groups taking hostages named itself the "1920 Revolution Brigades." Western journalists who don't know Iraqi history have routinely mistranslated the name of this group…Meanwhile, The Guardian hints around that the number of civilian casualties in the US assault on the city is enormous and will only come out as hospital authorities begin counting the dead and wounded.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/199290_thomas12.html
Do Americans of good conscience really believe that we are making the United States more secure by bombing and killing the people of Fallujah?

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1100213410054&call_pageid=968256290204
Many British people regard the battle beginning at Falluja and last week's casualties among the Black Watch with dismay, even revulsion. They perceive an ugly predicament in Iraq growing worse by the day, and Tony Blair allowing hapless British troops to be dragged ever deeper into it. Here, they say, are the first fruits of the re-election of George W. Bush, an ignorant and dangerous man. Heaven help those shackled to his chariot wheels.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/15/04615/165
Jackie Spinner, the Washington Post embed with the Marines in Fallujah, said in an online chat from the battleground (the mind boggles) on Thursday: "No one I've talked to believes that solving the Fallujah problem will end the violence in Iraq.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/15/international/middleeast/15falluja.html?oref=login&ex=1258261200&
American military commanders were reluctant to declare the invasion a total success and were forced to contend with insurgent violence spreading elsewhere, particularly in the northern city of Mosul…As the battle for Falluja wound down, however, clashes continued for the fourth day between insurgents and American and Iraqi forces in Mosul. American commanders said guerrillas remained deeply rooted in the heart of that city. The revolt also appeared to be spreading to the town of Tal Afar, near the Syrian border, forcing American forces to encircle the area. In Ramadi, the insurgent stronghold 30 miles west of Falluja, violence against American troops continued as well. There were several attacks with small-arms fire, and insurgents fired a rocket-propelled grenade at troops. American commanders said many rebels who had fled Falluja were now in Ramadi.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2392
"EVERY DAY WE'RE GAINING MORE CONTROL OVER THE SUNNI TRIANGLE REGION": That's a flat-out lie told by an anonymous senior defense official to the Los Angeles Times.

[CNN changes title: the heading of this story was originally “U.S. Still Bombing in ‘Liberated’ Fallujah” – then they changed it: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/15/iraq.main/index.html]

AP photographer witnesses civilians being massacred by US forces

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=251539
Hussein moved from house to house dodging gunfire and reached the river…"I decided to swim…but I changed my mind after seeing U.S. helicopters firing on and killing people who tried to cross the river."…He watched horrified as a family of five was shot dead as they tried to cross. Then, he "helped bury a man by the river bank, with my own hands."…"I kept walking along the river for two hours and I could still see some U.S. snipers ready to shoot anyone who might swim. I quit the idea of crossing the river and walked for about five hours through orchards."

A question no one has asked yet: does Allawi have any plans to LIFT the state of martial law?

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2393

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/the_war_in_iraq_/2004/11/iraqi_democracy_and_its_practical_implications.php

The falling dollar, the rise of Europe, and the long view of the American Empire

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/the_sleeper_issue_that_should_keep_you_awake_at_night.html

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/a_new_superpowe.html

Ashcroft’s legacy – and a scary comment about Gonzales

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008757.html
I think his legacy is going to be as one of the worst attorney generals we’ve ever had, not only in terms of the constitutional freedoms this country stands for but also in terms of national security…We also know from a New York Times account of the debates that surrounded the development of the military tribunal policy down in Guantanamo that in those debates John Ashcroft was actually the voice of reason and Alberto Gonzales was lined up with the most extreme right-wing voices arguing that there should be virtually no rights to the people who are being tried—in some cases for the death penalty.

The erosion of civil liberties: a potentially unifying issue?

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/where_left_meets_right.html

If Arlen Specter still wants to chair the Senate Judiciary committee, looks like he will have to sign a loyalty oath

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/separation-of-powers.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003979

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_14.php#003982
Dignity loss watch (from AP/CNN)...

Sen. Arlen Specter must prove to his Republican colleagues that he is the right man to head the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday…Frist, R-Tennessee, would not say if he backed Specter, R-Pennsylvania, for the job. Specter will make his case to GOP colleagues this week when Congress returns for a postelection session.

To be a fly on the wall ...

Will Bush succeed in packing the Court? (thanks to Talk Left for the links)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/weekinreview/14jeff.html?ex=1258088400&en=a869f7805a71a146&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/14/BUSHJUDGES.TMP

Making a recount happen

http://www.opednews.com/thoreau_111304_help_fight.htm

Inside report on the Kerry campaign

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/11/14/on_the_trail_of_kerrys_failed_dream/

Bonus item: What hit the Pentagon on 9-11? This video raises some perplexing questions (thanks to Megan Boler and Stefan Ramaekers for the link)

http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/pentagon.htm

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 5:57 AM

 
THE POWER OF WORDS

“For four years George W. Bush has used the power of words to overcome insurmountable facts”
- George W. Bush: Words Speak Louder than Actions
- The Daily Show

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/bushvideos/v/bushwords.htm

Bush praises “significant progress” in Iraq

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/13/bush.radio/index.html

But look how many times he has used the phrase: you would think after months and months of “significant progress,” things would actually be getting better there, instead of worse

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/progress.html

Meanwhile, the facts on the ground? Not so good

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/13/iraq.main/index.html
As many as 1,000 insurgents have been killed in the six-day battle for Falluja, an operation that is "almost finished," Iraqi national security adviser Kasim Dawood said Saturday…But terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and a lieutenant, Abdullah Junabi, both escaped, he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4008619.stm
Aid agencies say they are increasingly concerned about Iraqi civilians trapped in the besieged rebel city of Falluja…Relief workers say no drinking water or electricity is available and food is short after days of street battles between US-led forces and insurgents.

[More: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=582722]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/international/middleeast/14allawi.html?oref=login&pagewanted=print&position=
As Ayad Allawi, Iraq's interim prime minister, starts to position his party for the coming national elections, rising public denunciation of the invasion of Falluja by prominent Iraqi groups has put his political support at risk when he needs it most…Dr. Allawi will almost certainly run for one of the 275 national assembly seats up for grabs in January. His party, the Iraqi National Accord, and other politicians have begun jockeying to form coalitions in order to secure as many votes as possible…

Dr. Allawi, by ordering the invasion, has affirmed his image as an ardent supporter of the American presence here. That is enough to keep politicians from wanting to be linked to him…"The Allawi government has full responsibility for whatever happens in Falluja," said Redha Jowad Taki, a senior official in the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful Shiite party…"Support for the government has been eroding since last summer," Mr. Taki said. "It had big backing among the people then, but it's failed to deal with gangs of terrorists, and that has led to the loss of support."

Further, public condemnation of Dr. Allawi's role in the invasion has come from across Iraq's political spectrum…"The Iraqi clerics place on the government of Ayad Allawi the entire legal and historical responsibility for what Falluja is going through, which is genocide at the hands of the occupiers," said Harith al-Dhari, the association's leader…What may do more political harm to Dr. Allawi, who is a Shiite, is the fact that Shiite leaders are also condemning the invasion. Shiites make up at least 60 percent of Iraq and are the largest voting bloc.

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/another_cost_of.html
An increasing number of Kurdish militiamen have begun appearing on the streets of [Mosul], which is divided along ethnic and religious lines, and their battles with insurgents have led many residents to wonder whether ethnic conflict could soon break out and why the American military does not have a larger presence in such a critical city.

This isn't anything new: U.S. commanders began turning to ethnic-based milititas last December. It's a dangerous move, but then, probably a necessary one if your boss is blowing off calls for more troops.

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/jumping_gi_casu.html
More than 400 wounded soldiers have been transported to the U.S. military's Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, a hospital spokeswoman said…Meanwhile, as of last night, the military was saying 170 U.S. troops had been seriously wounded inside Fallujah. Assuming the time-frames roughly agree, that leaves 230 troops wounded elsewhere--more than in Fallujah itself. Can that be?

Landstuhl: no “embedded press” there!

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/no-embeds-at-landstuhl.html

War crimes in Fallujah?

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/marines_not_let.html
Human rights experts said Friday that American soldiers might have committed a war crime on Thursday when they sent fleeing Iraqi civilians back into Falluja…Citing several articles of the Geneva Conventions, the experts said recognized laws of war require military forces to protect civilians as refugees and forbid returning them to a combat zone.

“Chaos”

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110032845909927018
Al-Hayat reported incidents all over the country. A US Black Hawk helicopter was downed near Taji (20 km northwest of Baghdad), hurting 3 of the 4-man crew. Another US serviceman was killed in Baghdad. 8 Iraqis were killed in Hilla and 5 in Kirkuk. In al-Hawijah near Kirkuk, 5 persons were killed and many others wounded in clashes Friday morning between US troops and armed guerrillas…Az-Zaman reports that telephone calls with residents of Mosul reveal that the guerrillas who took control of the city's streets the day before yesterday have burned all the police stations in the city and have released from jails all the criminals that had been incarcerated in them…All signs of Iraqi national guardsmen and police had disappeared. The police chief of Ninevah province resigned (other reports say he was fired by the Allawi government)…

A troubling bit of ethnic politics emerged when it became apparent that the remaining Iraqi troops fighting alongside the Americans against guerrillas in Mosul were mostly Kurds. Mosul, a city of about 1 million, is largely Sunni Arab but is up north near the Kurdish areas. Arab-Kurdish relations hit a new nadir at the news, and AP reported that "Gunmen attacked the headquarters of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan party in an hourlong battle that a party official said left six assailants dead." This attack on the PUK HQ was probably in revenge for the Kurdish national guardsmen cooperating with US troops…

On a lighter note, it is hard to avoid observing that al-Baghdadi castigated Bush's administration as "fundamentalist" and "right-wing." When even the Sunni Salafis of Mosul consider you too fundamentalist and right-wing, you have probably gone too far.

This is important: while stories tend to get framed in Sunni/Shiite terms, the restive Kurds are certain to become a problem before all this is over

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001372.html

US and UN still at cross-purposes

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/international/14annan.html?ex=1258088400&en=85d6a219d6bf1b85&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

Cheney hospitalized: is this yet another crisis Bush Co. put off until after the election, knowing that the truth would hurt their chances?

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008743.html

New stories on vote fraud

http://www.redefeatbush.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=293

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20041112-112037-7263r.htm

The election fight goes on: another petition and a $100,000 reward (thanks to Megan Boler and Colleen Vojak for links)

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-ohio13nov13,0,6697342.story?coll=la-home-politics

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4306

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/11/ale04091.html

FINALLY…a recount will happen….wait…WAIT!…in a KERRY state??!!??

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041113/NEWS02/111130045/-1/news02

The NYT (finally) puts its weight behind recount campaigns (sort of)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/opinion/14sun1.html?oref=login
The blogosphere, in particular, has been full of questions: Why did electronic voting machines in Ohio add nearly 4,000 phantom votes for President Bush, and why did machines in Florida mysteriously start to count backward? Why did the official vote totals for Ohio's largest county seem to suggest that there were more votes cast than registered voters? Why did election officials in yet another part of Ohio lock down the building where votes were being counted, turning away the press and public?…Defenders of the system have been quick to dismiss questions like these as the work of "conspiracy theorists," but that misses the point. Until our election system is improved - with better mechanics and greater transparency - we cannot expect voters to have full confidence in the announced results.

Defenders of the system like…the Times!

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html?hp&ex=1100235600&en=83d4630220167002&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The growing war between Bush and the CIA

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200446#1163

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/opinion/13brooks.html?hp

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/politics/14cia.html?ex=1258088400&en=e0b271a45f2b55d2&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
Deep, unresolved tensions between new leaders and senior career officers at the Central Intelligence Agency threaten to set off a rebellion within the agency's clandestine service, according to current and former intelligence officials…The tensions pit the new intelligence chief, Porter J. Goss, against the C.I.A.'s directorate of operations, the most powerful and secretive part of the agency. Winning allegiance from the career spies within the clandestine service is widely regarded as essential to the success of any intelligence chief…The officials said that discontent had reached a point not seen at the C.I.A. for more than 25 years, and they expressed concern that an atmosphere of ill-will and apprehension could distract the agency from its work in the fight against terrorism, where it plays a leading role.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48254-2004Nov13.html?nav=rss_nation
Within the past month, four former deputy directors of operations have tried to offer CIA Director Porter J. Goss advice about changing the clandestine service without setting off a rebellion, but Goss has declined to speak to any of them…The four senior officials represent nearly two decades of experience leading the Directorate of Operations under both Republican and Democratic presidents. The officials were dismayed by the reaction and were concerned that Goss has isolated himself from the agency's senior staff, said former clandestine service officers aware of the offers…The senior operations officials "wanted to talk as old colleagues and tell him to stop what he was doing the way he was doing it," said a former senior official familiar with the effort.

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/cia_under_goss_train_wreck_in_the_making.html
In Deputy Chief Resigns From CIA, the Washington Post gives us a peek at the train wreck in the making at the CIA…It’s obvious that Bush has nominated a partisan hack. He brought with him four aides, people I don’t know much about, but whom the CIA people depict as having much to be modest about…I wish I could stop there, and just pen another Bush-administration-incompetence story (which this seems to be), but it’s more complicated than that. I actually think that a significant fraction of what Goss says is wrong with the CIA is likely to be right…The problems at the CIA are pervasive. They start with a general lack of brilliance among the people who’ve been promoted in the agency. They run through bloat and hide-bound ways of work. The agency never recovered from the last purge, so it lacks ‘assets’ in key parts of the world, and is still shaking off its cold-war-centered focus. The CIA tortures people, which is no trivial matter…The agency is a serious mess and nowhere more than the dark side, the clandestine service. It needs a cleanup; it’s just not at all likely that the ham-handed methods being used by Goss and his merry henchmen are likely to improve matters much. They might even make things worse.

“Lawless”

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001374.html

Molly Ivins says farewell to Ashcroft

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=miv

And Jack Balkin says hello to Albert Gonzales

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008742.html
It is time for those who think the Bush Administration has gone too far to stand up to the President, to make the legal case against his Administration's policies and appointments. For years conservatives railed against judicial activism. It is time for liberals to start railing against government officials-- including judges-- who show disrespect for basic Rule of Law values, who flout basic protections of American constitutional law and international human rights law, and who seek to concentrate ever greater power in an unaccountable executive.

“Strict constructionist” a totally bogus term (but hey, you KNEW that)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/weekinreview/14jeff.html?oref=login&ex=1258088400&

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-kinsley14nov14,1,4692322.column?coll=la-util-op-ed
What does President Bush mean, if anything, when he says that his kind of judge "knows the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law"? Every judge sincerely believes that he or she is interpreting the law properly…Judges make decisions and impose their will all the time. That's their job. When does this generally salutary activity turn into the dread judicial activism? If activism has any specific meaning, it means judges overruling laws and policies put in place by the democratically elected branches of government. It also refers to federal judges overruling policies enacted by the individual states…

Complaints about judicial activism are a habit left over from powerlessness. They seem especially retro when held up against today's ambitious Republican judicial agenda. With one apparent exception, the major items on it are demands for federal judges to override Congress or states' rights. Republicans cheer, for example, when courts overturn state or federal — or even private — affirmative action programs, and they boo when such programs are allowed to continue unmolested.

More on the subjugation of news to network entertainment divisions: CBS producer FIRED for breaking in to “CSI” to report Arafat’s death

http://reuters.myway.com/article/20041113/2004-11-13T031059Z_01_N12145163_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-MEDIA-ARAFAT-DC.html
"Arafat had been literally on his deathbed for a week. Everyone knew he was going to die. It was just a matter of when," the source said.

Is this the time to turn “conservative” into our version of the “liberal” label?

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110604X.shtml

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008741.html

Fallout from the Peterson verdict (you saw this coming, didn’t you?) – if killing the fetus (“Connor”) was murder, what does that mean for abortion?

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008749.html

Trying to clear the way for an eventual Presidentinator

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041114/D86BAJ8O0.html

Meanwhile, the DNC seems trapped in internecine finger-pointing

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003978

Bonus item: a delightful video resource called "Crooks and Liars"

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008740.html

Bonus bonus item: good to see that Bob Dylan still has the power to rock the State

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110032687244066206

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 8:23 AM

 
BEHIND THE MASK

Freed now from needing to maintain even the appearance of fairmindedness and moderation, John Ashcroft reveals the true nature of the Bush Co. view on human rights and international law. Judges who dare to question policy on legal grounds are “activists” who betray American security and serve the interests of terrorism

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46434-2004Nov12.html?nav=rss_nation
Ashcroft told a meeting of conservative lawyers here that court decisions limiting President Bush's powers are part of "a profoundly disturbing trend" in which the judicial branch is injecting itself into matters that should be up to the executive branch…"The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war," Ashcroft said in a speech at the Federalist Society's national convention. He added later: "Our nation and our liberty will be all the more in jeopardy as the tendency for judicial encroachment and ideological micromanagement are applied to the sensitive domain of national defense."

Questions for Gonzales

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/12/senate.gonzales.ap/index.html

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=100480

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003972
Despite the fact they weren't resolved before the election, high level administration officials are still the targets of or implicated in a number of potentially damaging criminal investigations…Whether or not he's conservative enough, tolerant or intolerant enough of torture, or anything else, Mr. Gonzalez is one thing for President Bush: reliable…Democrats won't be able to prevent his appointment. But they should take the opportunity of his confirmation hearings to put him on the record about how he will handle these various on-going investigations, at least one of which directly involves the White House and thus also involves him.

And a little indication of the level of Gonzales’ professional ethics

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109623/fr/rss/

More erosions to civil liberties: TSA demands airline passenger information

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-screening13nov13,1,1977935.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46610-2004Nov12.html?nav=rss_nation

Michael Scheuer: How NOT to catch a terrorist

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200412/anonymous

[ps. On his way out from the CIA, along with a number of other professionals: http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20041111-050116-4438r]

What Goss Hath Wrought

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46580-2004Nov12.html?nav=rss_nation
The deputy director of the CIA resigned yesterday after a series of confrontations over the past week between senior operations officials and CIA Director Porter J. Goss's new chief of staff that have left the agency in turmoil

The growing difficulties of Bush Co. as far-right evangelicals start demanding their due

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_12_bestof.html#110028943514174607

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200446#1162

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_12_bestof.html#110029284835680386

http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2004/11/on_borrowed_tim_1.php
Does that sound like the kind of America that reelected Bush last week? A country open to science, skepticism, dissent, tolerance, liberal values, and sexual diversity? The evangelical ascendance in America is yet another indicator of decline and sullen pouting. Unable to tell the world what to do, it's going to tell other Americans what to do, how to live, and how to get right with God.

Another blow to science-based policy: researcher kicked off review panel for inconveniently concluding results the drug companies didn’t like

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/12/evidence/index.html

AARP once again rolls over for Bush Co., agrees not to call it Social Security “privatization”

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/aarp-newspeak.html

In Iraq: building US-style democracy one step at a time

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/let_freedom_rei.html
Iraq's media regulator warned news organizations Thursday to stick to the government line on the U.S.-led offensive in Fallouja or face legal action.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/12/leaving/index.html
As we noted last week, even the few international aid groups remaining in Iraq have been bailing out recently as the security situation has steadily worsened. The International Rescue Committee, while citing other factors in addition to security concerns, is the latest to call it quits…"I've been doing this for 11 years," IRC Middle East director Mark Bartolini said…"and I've never seen a security situation as dangerous as the one in Iraq."

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004785
The Center for Strategic and International Studies has released an update (PDF) to their "Progress or Peril" report measuring reconstruction in Iraq. The bad news is that on four out of five metrics -- governance, services, health care, and education -- Iraqis believe things are getting worse…[E]ven in those sectors where CSIS thinks we're improving, we're nowhere near the "tipping points" they've identified where progress becomes a self-reinforcing virtuous circle…The rapid deterioration of Iraq's health care system along with epdidemiological data indicating a large increase in mortality among the Iraqi population should be regarded as very disturbing in light of the humanitarian arguments that have been presented on behalf of this war.

Someone shows Sistani the newspaper

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110032942698280284
Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the leading Shiite spiritual authority, called Friday for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Fallujah…Sistani has been criticized recently for not speaking out against US attacks on Sunnis in the way he had with regard to Najaf, a Shiite center. Sistani likes to present himself as concerned for the welfare of all Iraqis, not just of his Shiite followers. But he is only called for peace in Fallujah when the fighting is already largely over with. That move will look cynical to a lot of Sunni Arabs.

Counting the dead

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003975
It's a page on the Washington Post website. I hate to use a word as banal or cheap as 'interactive'. But it's an interactive page, searchable by dates or name, of every American soldier, sailor, airmen or marine who's been killed in Iraq over the last twenty months or so. Every one. The picture, the name, their age, service, where they were from; how they died.

More AEI/Bush admin links?

http://gadflyer.com/warandpiece/index.php?Week=200446#1160

Yes, THAT Danielle Pletka

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/29/wbr.01.html
DANIELLE PLETKA, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: “I'm glad to know that Michael Moore is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”

Election updates: still more suspicious numbers, and other irregularities

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000175.html

http://www.cincinnati.com/text/local/2004/11/10/loc_warrenvote10.html

A fantastic one-stop site for vote fraud data

http://ideamouth.com/voterfraud.htm

Contrary views on exit poll numbers

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/that_iisi_inter.html

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/11/12/hysteria/
The exit polls that are currently on news sites like CNN have been re-weighted to match the final results -- a standard practice. This means that they no longer show a Kerry victory.

http://www.salon.com/tech/letters/2004/11/12/fraud_watch2/index.html?source=RSS

How blogs are driving the story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44908-2004Nov12.html

And why isn’t it a bigger deal?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43630-2004Nov11.html
Informed that I was writing about voter disenfranchisement, a Democratic friend admitted, "I'm trying not to care about that."…Come on. If Republicans had lost the election, this column would be unnecessary because Karl Rove and company would be contesting every vote. I keep hearing from those who wonder whether Democrats are "too nice," and from others who wonder whether efforts by the mainstream media to be "fair and balanced" sometimes render them "neutered and less effective."…

Why aren't more Americans exercised about this issue? Maybe the problem is who's being disenfranchised -- usually poor and minority voters…

Still fighting….

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ohio13nov13,1,3070194.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.alternet.org/election04/

Bush Co. can’t keep all their lies straight on “the bulge”

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/12/vest_nothing/index.html

Bonus item: In response to “Sorry Everybody,” a new site, “Apologies Accepted”

http://www.apologiesaccepted.com/

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:52 AM

 
CONSOLIDATING POWER

The mess we’ve made in Iraq

In Fallujah

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20041111-1404-iraq.html
An Iraqi journalist in the city reported seeing burned U.S. vehicles and bodies in the street, with more buried under the wreckage…"People are afraid of even looking out the window because of snipers," he said, asking that he not be named for his own safety. "The Americans are shooting anything that moves."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1111-03.htm
Fighting in Falluja has created a humanitarian disaster in which innocent people are dying because medical help cannot reach them, aid workers in Iraq said today.

“Phantom Victory”
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1109-01.htm
While experts here are united in the conviction that the 10,000 - 15,000 U.S. troops and a reportedly diminishing number of Iraqi auxiliaries will militarily crush the estimated 1,000 - 4,000 insurgents who remain in the city, they also believe the eventual outcome will mark yet another political setback to stabilizing the country…In particular, the operation, especially if bloody and protracted, will almost certainly further alienate the Sunni population, who constitute about 20 percent of Iraq's 25 million people, not to mention the much larger Sunni communities in neighboring countries, including Saudi Arabia, the Gulf emirates, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2385
General Thomas Metz, the ground commander in Iraq, briefed Pentagon reporters by teleconference yesterday…"I'm very pleased at the position that we have the force in right now and the situation that the enemy is facing," Metz said. "He doesn't have an escape route because we do have the cordon around the city very tight." Of course, "It wasn't until night before last that we really began to seal off the city completely. And before that time, I think some leaders went in and out periodically. I personally believe that the -- some of the senior leaders probably have fled."

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2386
Politically, the insurgents have significantly advanced what could be called the Sunni persecution strategy: That is, to gather recruits, material, and political support for the insurgency by aggravating the sense among Sunnis that they have no future in the U.S.-sponsored political process. The only Sunni political party in the Allawi government has quit in protest and the largest Sunni religious organization has formally called for their adherents to boycott the January elections. One member of the Iraqi Islamic Party who refused to resign his position--and who has since been renounced by the party--explained his decision: "It will be a big mistake not to have the Sunnis' participation in the election. We would have problems for decades to come."…Exactly. That's the insurgents' strategy: Ensure that the U.S.-backed process takes on an overwhelmingly sectarian character, with the Shia dominating outright alongside a restive Kurdish delegation waiting in the wings to seek independence. Since the insurgency will by all estimates continue on into January, a Shia victory sets the stage for pushing the vicious cycle of Sunni alienation and violent resistance forward.

More on the effectiveness of the Bush Co. “wedge” policy of securing Shiite (Sistani) compliance with the invasion by splitting off and marginalizing the Sunni opposition

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/crackdown-on-fallujah-critics.html
US troops and Iraqi security forces raided the homes of three prominent Sunni critics of the Fallujah assault, and have detained one. The Association of Muslim Scholars called for a boycott of the elections "described as being held 'over the corpses of those killed in Fallujah, and the blood of the wounded.'

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110024233932136395
Sistani's silence has been thunderous, as has that of most other Shiite leaders with the exception of Muqtada al-Sadr. Tellingly, there have been no sympathy demonstrations in cities like Basra or Nasiriyah. The Shiites know that the guerrillas in Fallujah had mostly supported Saddam, and that they are responsible for attacks on Shiites. Only if this fissure were overcome could an Iraqi nationalist movement emerge. Until then, the US can successfully divide and rule.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2375
What's more, the consolidation of Shia political factions in anticipation of elections feeds this dynamic perfectly: The Sunnis increasingly come under attack as the Shia increasingly take power.

[More: http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2389]

Meanwhile, in Mosul

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/international/middleeast/12mosul.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/international/middleeast/12iraq.html?oref=login&ex=1258002000&

And not just Mosul: the “whack-a-mole” war

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/mosul-not-alone.html

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008725.html

Our guy, Allawi

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000717958
Speaking at New York University this week, famed investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi a "straw man" and a "criminal" and said the key story the press is missing in Iraq is the recent upsurge in U.S. bombing -- even before the Fallujah operation…"One story the press doesn't touch is this criminal -- this straw man that's been put in -- Allawi, this ridiculous figure that we've installed as the prime minister," Hersh said. "To keep him in power, we've exponentially increased the bombing...

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/002856.html
“Allawi the thug”

Elections in January? Don’t make me laugh

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-fg-insurgency12nov12,0,1829618.story?coll=la-home-headlines

U.S. election theft updates (thanks to Megan Boler and David Noreen for these links)

A summary of the case so far

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm

http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/04/11/far04038.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6368819/#0411010c
[Video: http://www.truthout.org/multimedia.htm]

http://www.oilempire.us/stolenelection2004.html

http://consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/11/10/internet_buzz_on_vote_fraud_is_dismissed/

New evidence

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005147.php
[Kevin Drum] The table below comes from a paper written by Steven Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania. The paper is called "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy" and it's about the now famous fact that the exit polls showed John Kerry leading in practically every battleground state but then losing in the final tally. Here's the key data…What does this mean? Take a look at the top line for Colorado. The first colored column shows what the exit polls predicted: Bush would win by 1.8%. The second colored column shows the actual results: Bush won by 5.2%. The third colored column shows the difference between the two: Bush won by 3.4 percentage points more than the exit poll predicted…In fact, Bush won 10 out of 11 battleground states by more than the exit polls predicted. The odds of this happening by chance are essentially zero.

Why the media doesn’t care

http://www.counterpunch.org/swanson11082004.html

http://www.opednews.com/cardinale_111004_votergate_media.htm

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6368819/#041109a

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6446237/

The “newspaper of record” reassures us that there’s nothing to worry about

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html?hp&ex=1100235600&en=83d4630220167002&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Who does care

Dennis Kucinich and a handful of Democratic congressmen
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1110-31.htm

MoveOn
http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

People for the American Way
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/11/election/index.html

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001059.html

Or you can just look at this to indicate what’s really going on. As everyone knows now, exit polls are the only safeguard against rampant vote fraud, especially given electronic machines that leave no physical evidence of the actual vote. Advocates for e-voting have ferociously resisted creating a paper-trail of votes to allow a manual recount. As everyone also knows, the major companies that produce e-voting equipment are run by conservative and in some cases fiercely partisan Republicans. This year, exit polls didn’t match the voting results in several key states, which has thrown the outcome into question, and we’re still waiting for an analysis of which were better indicators of the actual vote. But GOP chair Ed Gillespie has a different solution: STOP EXIT POLLING ALTOGETHER

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/11/ana04027.html

The Gonzales nomination: Here is a person who signed off on policies designed to undermine Geneva Convention protections for US prisoners — a decision that can be connected with a straight line to Abu Ghraib torture. He along with a number of other people should be fired, not promoted. Yet he is being discussed seriously now on a fast track for the Supreme Court

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/balkin_on_gonzales.html
But however fine a fellow he is, he has done something that is, in my mind, inexcusable. He commissioned and put his name on a series of despicable legal memos that justified torture and prisoner abuse and that tried to avoid America’s obligations under international law. In ordinary times, this would in itself be disqualifying. But, alas, these are not ordinary times…

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109495/

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0411.carter.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12cabinet.html?hp&ex=1100322000&en=899cd95cc164b854&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Republicans close to the White House said on Thursday that the choice of Alberto R. Gonzales as attorney general was part of a political strategy to bolster Mr. Gonzales's credentials with conservatives and position him for a possible Supreme Court appointment.

Bush’s Mr. Fix-It

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42396-2004Nov11.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing

Should the Dems filibuster, or use his nomination to make a political point?

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/gonzales.html

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/opposition_not_.html

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/opposition-to-gonzales.html

Frist vows to end filibusters

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=4&u=/ap/20041112/ap_on_go_co/frist_judges

GOP accountability: so THIS is what gets you fired in this administration

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43756-2004Nov11.html
Robert D. Blackwill, who resigned last week as the White House's top official on Iraq policy, was recently scolded by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice after Secretary of State Colin L. Powell told her that Blackwill appeared to have verbally abused and physically hurt a female embassy staffer during a visit to Kuwait in September, administration officials said…Blackwill then turned in fury to an embassy secretary who had accompanied him to the airport and demanded that he be given a seat on the flight, grabbing her arm at one point, the officials said.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003971
Something else in the piece caught my eye, however -- a point the authors mention only in passing…Blackwill has taken a job with the lobbying firm of Barbour Griffith & Rogers…As you'll recall from our reporting on this matter from September of last year, this is an excellent fit, since BG&R has spent the last couple years making a specialty of the Iraq contracting and logrolling racket…Last year when President Bush's right-hand-man Joe Allbaugh resigned as FEMA chief and wanted to get into the Iraq business, he went to BG&R, where his wife then worked. They set Allbaugh up as New Bridge Strategies ("your bridge to success in Iraq")…In reality, New Bridge is just the Iraqi money-chase subdivision of BG&R.

Goss begins the purge at CIA, brings back the cowboys

http://fugop.blogspot.com/2004/11/goss-appoints-dusty.html

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001349.html

The bill comes due: Bob Jones III tells Bush what is expected of him now that the evangelicals put him back in office

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_07_digbysblog_archive.html#110019053126442090
“In your re-election, God has graciously granted America—though she doesn't deserve it—a reprieve from the agenda of paganism. You have been given a mandate. We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet…Don't equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ. Honor the Lord, and He will honor you…

It is easy to rejoice today, because Christ has allowed you to be His servant in this nation for another presidential term. Undoubtedly, you will have opportunity to appoint many conservative judges and exercise forceful leadership with the Congress in passing legislation that is defined by biblical norm regarding the family, sexuality, sanctity of life, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and limited government. You have four years—a brief time only—to leave an imprint for righteousness upon this nation that brings with it the blessings of Almighty God.

…Pull out all the stops and make a difference. If you have weaklings around you who do not share your biblical values, shed yourself of them. Conservative Americans would love to see one president who doesn't care whether he is liked, but cares infinitely that he does right.”

How did this happen? Tough recriminations in the Kerry campaign

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-huffington11nov11,1,6882822.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

http://www.tnr.com/blog/campaignjournal?pid=2382

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=%2FWAOQoLsGzQE5FcT6qGE0x%3D%3D

The “echo chamber” responds

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/leon/2004/11/11/echo_chamber_two/index_np.html

Bonus item: For all our friends outside the US, “we’re sorry – it’s not our fault” (thanks to A.G. Rud for this wonderful link)

http://www.sorryeverybody.com

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:37 AM

 
BACK TO WORK

A useful collection of e-vote fraud and other election theft news

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04%2F11%2F08%2F1910250

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000715.html

http://wilsonhellie.typepad.com/for_the_record/2004/11/anyone_surprise.html

The prime media’s reaction? “We don’t do conspiracy theories”

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/2004/11/abc-news-online-news-breaking-news.php

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41106-2004Nov10.html

“The Big Sleep”

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_10_bestof.html#110008300996689767

The fight isn’t over: “Help America Recount,” a new 527

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000723.html

Why the invasion of Fallujah is ahead of schedule, and why that isn’t a good sign

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35979-2004Nov9_2.html
But Sheik Abdul-Sattar Edatha, the spokesman for the shura council, said most foreign fighters had already left the city…"Militarily speaking, the city falls under the U.S. forces' control," Edatha said. "The foreign fighters won't stay here and die. They lost the battle. They spread in other places."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/10/international/middleeast/10insurgency.html?pagewanted=all&position=

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-fg-iraq10nov10,0,1346626.story?coll=la-home-headlines

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/10/fallujah/index.html?source=RSS

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/10/145618/69
And regardless of whatever "gains" the US may be making in Falluja, we are still losing control in other parts of the country.

By stalling the invasion until after the election, Bush’s planners probably blew the reason for going in the first place

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/10/here_we_come/index.html
If this report from the New York Times is any indication, the pre-invasion P.R. campaign looks like just the latest in a series of Bush administration blunders that have set back the already Herculean task of reconstruction…"Insurgent leaders in Falluja probably fled before the American-led offensive and may be coordinating attacks in Iraq that have left scores dead over the past few days, according to American military officials here…"But other military officials in Baghdad and Washington are expressing concern that the operation could end up being both a public relations disaster and strategic setback if some top leaders are not captured. 'This is causing some concern because if Falluja comes up a "dry hole," after all the operations, we will have to explain it,' said a military official in Baghdad. 'We will have to address it if this happens. If we don't retain any senior leadership, it may cause backlash.'"

FUBAR

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/10/iraq_insurgency/index.html?source=RSS

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#110014443159172172

Pentagon won’t release US casualty figures

http://www.ericumansky.com/2004/11/awol_gi_casualt.html

Allawi declares two months of martial law, which will hold right up to start of voting (an interesting definition of “free and fair” elections)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31732-2004Nov7.html

Sunnis withdraw from govt, may boycott those “free and fair” elections

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/10/international/middleeast/10election.html?pagewanted=all&position=

Bush picks Gonzales to replace Ashcroft. Let’s see, a long-time personal friend, the WH lawyer, and noted for his “loyalty” (and SC ambitions): say bye-bye to an independent Justice Dept

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-profile11nov11,1,7372552.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/11/politics/11justice.html?oref=login&ex=1257915600&

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008709.html
But his failure to fight aggressively against some of those positions points up Gonzales' principal weakness, which is that he not likely to be a strong Attorney General, willing to stand up to the President and others within the Administration when it is required. Certainly nothing in his record as White House counsel suggests that he will have the independence necessary to preserve public faith in the nonpartisan nature of law enforcement. Rather, there is ground for fear that the Department - already highly politicized under Ashcroft - will become even more so because of Gonzales' close links to the White House. And there is also ground to fear that the White House will be able to have more influence over the course of sensitive political investigations than is appropriate.

Who is Alberto Gonzales?
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008707.html

Gonzales and Abu Ghraib
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/10/121431/38
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004769

Gonzales and Enron
http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_10_bestof.html#110011982786966483

Gonzales and the Plame leak (are we going to see yet another of these investigations scuttled?)
http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/lest_we_forget_gonzales_appeared_to_obstruct_justice_in_the_plame_affair.html

“Gonzales is a disastrous choice”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gonzales11nov11.story

Ashcroft resignation letter claims “The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved”

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/09/politics/09wire-ashcroft-letter.html

Halliburton returning as a problem for Bush Co.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35234-2004Nov8?language=printer

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=5&u=/nm/20041110/ts_nm/iraq_halliburton_dc_4

A radical agenda: Bush, Repubs, see an opportunity to rewrite the rules, undermine checks and balances, and consolidate power

Line item veto
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/10142211.htm?1c

Eliminating filibuster rules
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004770

Bush moving fast on Social Security

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/10/23441/075

Bush’s new appointment to the FDA: a real horror

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/10/14337/831
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.

The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.

Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.

The AEI, emboldened, goes back on the warpath

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004761

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/the_old_gang_at_aei.php

Oh-oh, maybe global warming IS real after all…

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/09/10/bush/
The planet's getting hotter, ecosystems are going haywire, government scientists know it -- and still the president denies there's a problem. Guess which industry continues to fuel his campaign?

http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2004/11/10/arctic/index.html?source=RSS
Scientists say changes in the earth's climate from human influences are occurring particularly intensely in the Arctic region, evidenced by widespread melting of glaciers, thinning sea ice and rising permafrost temperatures.

School curriculum reports (thanks to Tom Callister for some of these links)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/11/06/evolution.schools.ap/index.html

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/09/creationism/index.html

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2004/11/10/textbooks/index.html?source=RSS

http://www.salon.com/mwt/wire/2004/11/06/marriage_textbook/index.html

Arlen gets spanked

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004771

McCain stabs his “friend” Kerry in the back, now surprised he isn’t getting his phone calls returned

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/10/kerry_snubs_mccain.html

Bush’s “landslide”: second lowest Electoral College vote margin in 90 years (and guess who’s first?)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003954

Wake-up call for the Democrats

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/9/113744/542
Carville said that the party's concern about interest groups had resulted in "litanies, not a narrative."…"The party needs a narrative," he said. adding later that one possibility would to become "an aggressively reform, anti-Washington, anti-business-as-usual party."

Bonus item: the blog “echo chamber” – why we were caught surprised that Kerry didn’t win

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/leon/2004/11/03/echo_chamber/

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 7:04 AM

 
HIATUS

I will be away from Internet access for a few days, so "PBD" will be on hiatus until next Thursday.

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 8:59 AM

 
CREDIBLE SOURCES

Okay, I think the election fraud story is passing over from blogosphere speculation to a real set of serious questions. We’ll see when the "official" media decide to pick it up.

I’ve been frankly reluctant to press this too hard, because it can seem like sour grapes and denial of the political unpopularity of some key Democratic positions, which need to be confronted too. But through resources sent to me and the emerging consensus among credible sources, something is terribly wrong here.

Longtime readers of this newsletter know that we have been railing for months that electronic voting without a verifiable paper trail was foolhardy. Now I will say what I have said before, that unless this issue is addressed, the very legitimacy of democracy is at stake. This election shows why.

Let’s start with the exit polls. Yesterday Dick Morris (no friend of the Democrats) said

http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx
Exit polls are almost never wrong. They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the state…So reliable are the surveys that actually tap voters as they leave the polling places that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries…

[Third World!]

Attempts to explain away the exit poll results don’t hold water

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109310/fr/rss/

Hard numbers. Exit polls as compared with paper vs e-voting across states (yes, I know it depends on which precincts were using e-voting, but look at the overall pattern)

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_05_bestof.html#109971664457412978

And look at these numbers from Florida: the chart is a bit confusing, but it shows registered R and D, expected vote numbers based on those numbers and turnout, and the actual tabulated votes. With touch screen, and especially the opti-scan, you see unbelievable results: in precincts with 80% registered Democrats and 70-75% turnout, you see vote totals that favor Bush by as much as 2 to 1. Do you believe that? I don’t

http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm

We know this: in one Ohio precinct, Bush got 4000 extra e-votes

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041105/D865R1DO0.html
An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said…Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct…Bush actually received 365 votes in the precinct, Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, told The Columbus Dispatch…State and county election officials did not immediately respond to requests by The Associated Press for more details about the voting system and its vendor, and whether the error, if repeated elsewhere in Ohio, could have affected the outcome.

Is there any hope in challenging these questionable results?

http://blackboxvoting.org/

http://michiganimc.org/feature/display/7644/index.php

Tricks, dirty tricks, and “cyber-war”

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8837

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110604.html

Other post-mortems and post-election polls: trying to explain Kerry’s “loss” in other terms – and maybe the “morality” issue wasn’t as important as Rove et al have presented it to be. Plus, other reasons to hope

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/campaign/06poll.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_10_31_digbysblog_archive.html#109970670188023054

http://www.slate.com/id/2109275/

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004728

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004734

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200445#1097

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_31.php#003946
[Subscription only]

Did national images of gay marriages in SF cost Kerry the election?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/politics/campaign/05newsom.html?ex=1257397200&en=b6dbd00cc7918a95&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland
"I believe it did energize a very conservative vote," Ms. Feinstein said of the same-sex marriages here. "I think it gave them a position to rally around. I'm not casting a value judgment. I'm just saying I do believe that's what happened…I think that whole issue has been too much, too fast, too soon,'' she added. "And people aren't ready for it."

Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who was a witness at the first same-sex marriage at San Francisco City Hall, said she received a flurry of angry e-mail messages on Thursday from people upset about Ms. Feinstein's public dressing down of [SF Mayor] Newsom.

The topic was also raised with Mr. Newsom himself at a news conference on Wednesday and when he was a guest on a radio talk show here Thursday morning. He said he had no regrets.

Some of his backers were less restrained. In an interview, Ms. Kendell accused Ms. Feinstein of looking for "easy scapegoats."

"Shame on Senator Feinstein and other Democratic leaders for latching to the most facile and shallow of explanations for the results," she said. "What Mayor Newsom did really accelerated the conversation and the movement, and I will never accept an analysis that says a leader who stands for equality and fairness and who has the courage of his convictions is doing the wrong thing."

One openly gay member of Congress, Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, disagreed. Mr. Frank was opposed to the San Francisco weddings from the start and told Mr. Newsom as much before the ceremonies began. He urged the mayor to follow the Massachusetts path, which involved winning approval for the marriages in court before issuing licenses.

Karl Rove: a “genius” again

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/politics/campaign/05rove.html?ex=1257397200&en=762883ab9e916fea&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

Religion, politics, and “the day the Enlightenment went out” (thanks to A.G. Rud for the link)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/politics/campaign/05religion.html?ex=1257397200&en=5c62d06e7164c7aa&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/05/viguerie/index.html?source=RSS

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/opinion/04wills.html

But does this very trend create a political opportunity?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29205-2004Nov5.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/5/163731/178

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001326.html

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109203/

Have the Dems already decided they need a “red state” candidate in 2008?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dems6nov06,1,99254.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Arlen Specter on the hot seat. Once again, proof of Kinsley’s Law: you only really get in trouble in Washington when you speak the truth

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/06judges.html?ex=1257483600&en=a3be8143b0979780&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

http://www.electablog.com/2004/11/and-you-thought-theyd-rest-on-7th-day.html

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004732

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_31.php#003943

The coming storm: invasion of Fallujah will cost us more in lives and international credibility than anyone has acknowledged – no wonder they put it off until after the election

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#109972590872233869
[Kofi Annan says, don’t do it]

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008643.html
Knights Ridder reports that Marine officials are preparing for casualties at "levels not seen since Vietnam."

But boy won’t it all be worth it when we have those elections…NOT!

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004726

Allawi seeks international legitimacy in advance of consolidating power

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iraq-eu.html?ex=1257397200&en=b6aec166d26f1f94&%2338;ei=5090&%2338;partner=rssuserland

More Bush departures: someone you probably never heard of, but crucial to saving Bush’s Iraq policy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29206-2004Nov5.html?nav=rss_nation
White House officials said Blackwill's departure less than three months before the crucial elections should not be interpreted as a sign of disarray or disagreement in its Iraq policy.

The “bulge,” a final word

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005107.php

Bonus item: “17 reasons not to slit your wrists,” from Michael Moore

http://www.michaelmoore.com/

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 8:38 AM

 
FIGHTING BACK

First, the news, then a little discussion about “where do we go from here?”

Bush’s opening to his press conference

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_04_bestof.html#109960088091668736
A day after declaring victory in an especially divisive election, President Bush said at a news conference that "I'll reach out to everyone who shares our goals,'' adding that "I earned capital in this election, and I'm going to spend it.''

Look at the first quote: this is typical Bushspeak; it sounds conciliatory, bipartisan; it is exquisitely crafted to say what it doesn't say to the unclued and to say what it means to the elect…Here's what it means: agree with me and I'll work with you

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25285-2004Nov4.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing
“I'll reach out to everyone who shares http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifour goals," he said, enigmatically.

[NB: There’s nothing “enigmatic” about it – for once Bush was saying precisely what he meant]

The CNN version

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/bush.agenda/index.html
Bush vows to work with Democrats

So much for modesty and humility

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/will.html
It's gonna be a crazy four years:

PRESIDENT BUSH: Now that I've got the will of the people at my back, I'm going to start enforcing the one-question rule. That was three questions….

PRESIDENT BUSH: Again, he violated the one-question rule right off the bat. Obviously you didn't listen to the will of the people.

Maureen Dowd speaks our hearts

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/opinion/04dowd.html
W. doesn't see division as a danger. He sees it as a wingman.

The president got re-elected by dividing the country along fault lines of fear, intolerance, ignorance and religious rule. He doesn't want to heal rifts; he wants to bring any riffraff who disagree to heel…W. ran a jihad in America so he can fight one in Iraq - drawing a devoted flock of evangelicals, or "values voters," as they call themselves, to the polls by opposing abortion, suffocating stem cell research and supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.

Mr. Bush, whose administration drummed up fake evidence to trick us into war with Iraq, sticking our troops in an immoral position with no exit strategy, won on "moral issues."

The president says he's "humbled" and wants to reach out to the whole country. What humbug. The Bushes are always gracious until they don't get their way. If W. didn't reach out after the last election, which he barely grabbed, why would he reach out now that he has what Dick Cheney calls a "broad, nationwide victory"?

You think we haven’t been here before? “Positive polarization”

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_31.php#003941

If Bush owned the “values” issue, what about all the lies?

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_04_bestof.html#109958664863968222
Why is nobody talking about the lies told by the Bush team and the factions who support him? The lies in the ads, the lies in the mailings, the lies told to reporters, the lies everywhere. And accepted as gospel by the uninformed or ideological part of the electorate the lies are designed to appeal to.

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_04_bestof.html#109957837987975495
It’s a big mistake to think of moral values only in terms of issues like abortion, gay marriage and limits on stem-cell research. Or even going to church and reading the Bible. True, these are red meat issues for Red States, but moral values are much broader and much more subtle.

Let me remind you of something: every two-term President since Eisenhower has suffered a major, debilitating scandal in the second term. Bush will get his turn

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005098.php

[NB: There are other buried stories too: the Franklin scandal, Halliburton inquiries, and others. They succeeded in putting them off until after the election, but now what? Still, here is a pessimistic view – that just as they appointed a hack like Goss to go over to the CIA to sit on the Inspector General’s report, they will find a replacement for Ashcroft who takes a less “independent” view of the DoJ’s responsibilities: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_10_31_digbysblog_archive.html#109960785194716989. Here we see one of the major fights brewing in the second term, between the WH, the independent agencies, and the press]

The press? How will they react to the Bush re-elect?

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2004/11/03/op_press.html

Bush re-elected: financial markets worry

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_31.php#003942

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/were-all-keynesians-now.html

Those poor reality-based economists still don’t get it

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/008629.html
Analysts say [Bush’s] promises likely are a mathematical impossibility

The Sharonification of America

http://www.juancole.com/2004_11_01_juancole_archive.html#109962883115505790

More pull-outs to come from the Coalition of Whoever is Left

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/11/04/willing/index.html?source=RSS

Arlen Specter: has there ever been a more two-faced weasel?

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004705
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation…Sen. Arlen Specter, fresh from winning a fifth term in Pennsylvania, also said the current Supreme Court now lacks legal "giants" on the bench…"When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely," Specter said…"The president is well aware of what happened, when a bunch of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster," Specter added, referring to Senate Democrats' success over the past four years in blocking the confirmation of many of Bush's conservative judicial picks. "... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/specter.html
“Contrary to press accounts, I did not warn the President about anything and was very respectful of his Constitutional authority on the appointment of federal judges…As the record shows, I have supported every one of President Bush’s nominees in the Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor.”

Will Bush try to change the filibuster rules?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_31.php#003940

Bush’s re-election: the view from overseas

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109242/fr/rss/

Tom Friedman

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001323.html
Despite an utterly incompetent war performance in Iraq and a stagnant economy, Mr. Bush held onto the same basic core of states that he won four years ago - as if nothing had happened. It seemed as if people were not voting on his performance. It seemed as if they were voting for what team they were on…This was not an election. This was station identification. I'd bet anything that if the election ballots hadn't had the names Bush and Kerry on them but simply asked instead, "Do you watch Fox TV or read The New York Times?" the Electoral College would have broken the exact same way.

Big Newsweek feature on campaign behind-the-scenes: when you read how badly Kerry screwed up the Swift Boat issue, you will weep

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/04/newsweek/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6407226/site/newsweek

Don’t get discouraged – get angry

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_04_bestof.html#109958177474465553
Rock-ribbed Republican Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, proffered a solution, telling us that Democrats must accept the finality of their powerlessness. "Once the minority of House and Senate are comfortable in their minority status, they will have no problem socializing with the Republicans. Any farmer will tell you that certain animals run around and are unpleasant, but when they've been fixed, then they are happy and sedate. They are contented and cheerful. They don't go around peeing on the furniture and such."

Reports of vote theft continue to emerge (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won.php
Kerry Won

http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/4154/
Presidential Votes Miscast on E-Voting Machines Across the Country

http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
States with electronic voting machines gave Bush mysterious 5% advantage

http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=6199
Electronic-Voting Critics Scrutinizing U.S. Election

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit polls that
showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states) weren't
erroneous at all

http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2004/11/04/lost_votes/index.html?source=RSS

A contrary view

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/11/04/touch_screen/index.html?source=RSS
Even if unfounded, the Democratic Underground set's suspicion is understandable. The exit polls were odd. And who can forget the infamous pledge of Wally O'Dell, CEO of touch-screen machine vendor Diebold, to deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Bush this year? (Ohio, however, used few paperless touch-screens.) It's certainly worthwhile to scrutinize how the technology functioned in this year's election, but to date there simply isn't the evidence to conclude that the election was "stolen" using it. One way to make sure future presidential races are above such suspicion would be to add paper trails to all the paperless machines.

Dick Morris agrees with the premise that the exit polls suspiciously didn’t fit the voting, but draws exactly the opposite conclusion

http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx
Exit polls are almost never wrong. They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the state…So reliable are the surveys that actually tap voters as they leave the polling places that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries…

But this Tuesday, the networks did get the exit polls wrong. Not just some of them. They got all of the Bush states wrong. So, according to ABC-TV’s exit polls, for example, Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Iowa, all of which Bush carried…To screw up one exit poll is unheard of. To miss six of them is incredible. It boggles the imagination how pollsters could be that incompetent and invites speculation that more than honest error was at play here…

Next to the forged documents that sent CBS on a jihad against Bush’s National Guard service and the planned “60 Minutes” ambush over the so-called missing explosives two days before the polls opened, the possibility of biased exit polling, deliberately manipulated to try to chill the Bush turnout, must be seriously considered.

Bush’s bulge: a bullet-proof vest?

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/04/bulge/index.html

[No, I don’t believe it either – but they have to give some explanation, because clearly he plans to keep using it]

And predictably, even their “explanation” is a lie

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/the_bulge_was_not_tinfoil_it_was_a_trope.html

Bonus item: A more accurate red-blue map

http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/

Now the question I posed yesterday: what comes next? I am not a political expert, but I think that all of us need to reflect on what the election results mean, what they indicate about the level of support - and opposition - to a progressive agenda, and how to prepare for the political fights ahead.

One thing is not to over-react. This was a shocking defeat because we expected something different; but it wasn’t an overwhelming defeat or a decisive one (even if that’s how the Right and their mouthpieces want to frame it). The question to focus in on is, “How did Bush manage to get votes from so many people who are (objectively speaking) harmed by his policies? Why did the many documented failures and scandals of this administration not have more traction?" What happened was that something happened which trumped all those other things – it wasn’t that people weren’t aware of them or didn’t care.

1. The “morality” issue. Framing this as just a matter of gay marriage, abortion, etc. is surely wrong: poverty is a moral issue, war and peace are moral issues, and so on. Nor is religion the only basis for moral principle. But progressives have failed to articulate a public moral discourse, nor have given it any grounding. “Secular humanism,” rationalism, and various postmodern discourses which SUGGEST relativism are the primary public voices that represent us

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109164/
As for domestic "moral issues:" They seem to leave Democrats in a quandary. The salient "moral" issues—abortion, gay rights, school prayer—aren't issues on which substantial compromise is thinkable. If you imagine a Democratic Party that caves on these, you're imagining a party that has lost both philosophical integrity and vital constituencies.

But compromise on these issues may not be a prerequisite for attracting some voters who care about them. Though these issues are symptoms of moral anxiety in Middle America, I think the anxiety's ultimate source is more diffuse, and includes concerns that even many liberals share.

Especially if they're parents. I've never met an American parent—left, right, center—who seemed enthusiastic about the culture in which children now grow up. Unless you put your kids in an isolation tank, their electronic and social environments will conspire to channel them toward MTV-land: a realm in which sex, money, alcohol, and rock-solid abs jockey for pre-eminence in the hierarchy of human needs. And along the way these kids will encounter lots of glorified violence—more of a concern on the left than the right, maybe, but something very few parents applaud.

This aura of amorality unsettles evangelicals and other conservatives, and energizes their position on the salient "moral" issues.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005099.php
I think support for Bush is about not wanting to be led by East-coast pretensions. It is about not wanting to be led by people who are forever trying to force their twisted sense of morality onto us, which is a non-morality. That is constantly done, and there is real resentment.

Here's the thing: we're never going to win over the hard core evangelicals, the ones who want to ban abortion, teach creationism in biology classes, and recriminalize gay sex. What's more, we shouldn't try. Religious extremism conflicts with the core values of liberalism, and the only thing we can do is continue fighting these folks tooth and nail. No amount of "reaching out" is going to touch them.

But the fact is that we don't need to reach them anyway. We didn't lose the election by much, and there are plenty of red staters who aren't extremists. They're the ones who are uncomfortable with homosexuality, but understand that a steadily increasing acceptance of gay rights is probably inevitable. They don't want to ban abortion, but feel like it's common sense to require parental notification. And they're ready to agree that we need to do something about global warming, but that doesn't mean they take kindly to thinly veiled accusations that they're personally responsible for it just because they drive an SUV or eat a Big Mac.

In other words, they disagree with us, but not so much that they can't be brought around or persuaded to vote for us based on other issues.

“Reality-based values”

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/4/81443/5504

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/3/153544/404

2. Recognize the depth and importance of the religious issue. The US is in fact a far less religious society than many other nations in which the secularism of government is unquestioned. But the discourse of politics in this country is inflected with religion, and always has been. An openly unbelieving politician can never be elected President. This doesn’t mean the US should become a theocracy — and it is important to recognize that Bush’s 51% weren’t all evangelicals. But progressives have to find a way to engage religious beliefs and link them to our aims and purposes

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0306.sullivan.html

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252572&%2338;kaid=127&%2338;subid=170

3. Accept that in a post-9/11 world, many people will vote PRIMARILY on the basis of the “security” issue, and that as long as the threat of terrorism exists (which appears to be a long time to come), the perceived toughness of candidates will trump other factors

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004697

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0211.hurlburt.html

4. LEARN from our mistakes, don’t explain them away, or dismiss the “boobs” who voted for the other guy – they had their reasons, and if we don’t understand and respect what they were, we will never reach them

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/afteraction_report_2004_/2004/11/some_thoughts_from_a_moderate_republican.php
Kerry lost for many reasons, but here are the two at the top of my list:

1) Democrats are cowards. "Moral issues" is just crazy-ass right-wing Republican talk for bigotry. Democrats need to call them on it and capture the moral high ground again. Preventing women from exercising control over their bodies and gay couples from enjoying the same basic rights as everyone else is not moral, it's wrong. Hideously wrong. Rosa Parks-level wrong. And helping poor kids get an education and basic medical care is not "big government." It's the right thing to do, especially when you live in the world's richest country.

2) Democratic strategists have only one game plan: run left and lose. Need proof? Five words: Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. The great exception, of course, was Bill Clinton. Hmmm. The Southern democrat who balanced the budget, reformed welfare, and passed NAFTA won two elections -- impeachment, special prosecutors, thongs, and all. But in a fit of liberal amnesia, democratic gurus in 2004 brought us back to the tried and true loser strategies of elections past.

In particular, the howling Howard Dean forced Kerry to vote against the $87 billion bill for Iraq. This was not a good idea for most candidates, but it was pure disaster for Kerry, because it reinforced the two most damaging Rovian stereotypes: Kerry as flip-flopper and defense wimp. The key to winning elections is not losing them -- and that means playing against the most unappealing perceptions generated by the opposition. Dukakis's answer to the rape question in 1988 wasn't a bad answer, but it was a scream-out-loud bad answer FOR HIM, because it played right into the image Republicans had been peddling of Dukakis as an unfeeling technocrat. Kerry's primary battle against Dean made him tack left and waffle on precisely the worst possible issue: war. He could never shake it off, no matter how many times he talked about his Vietnam medals.

The Democratic party reminds me of the Michigan football team every time it gets to the Rose Bowl. Year after year, decade after decade, the strategy remains steadfast: run the ball, run the ball, run the ball....and lose.

Today, I got an email from a Democratic friend that ended with the call to work even harder for a Hillary/Obama 2008 ticket. Huh? People, did you see the red all over the election map? To win, Democrats need to get a spine, get some discipline, and get a strategy. More of the same will only result in more of the same.

5. Find a new way of framing the abortion issue. No single issue has done more harm to traditional Democratic coalitions, or driven more potential supporters to the other side. Let’s be honest, for starters: anyone who thinks that there isn’t something morally problematic about terminating a developing human life, isn’t thinking hard enough. To frame it simply as a matter of “choice” is dishonest – but even more than this, self-defeating politically. This is NOT a winnable issue, framed in these terms. “Reducing the need for abortions” is a good start – but that does assume there’s something wrong with them, doesn’t it?

Let’s look at it politically. We have seen the blueprint: nationalize wedge issues, then get them on ballot initiatives to maximize non-candidate-driven turnout

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/really-bad-ideas-that-voters-love.html

You think Rove and the GOP are going to lose this coalition now that they’ve put it together? Here is the roadmap for 2008 – I’ll give it to you now. A newly configured Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade, and turn the issue back over to states. Then there will ballot initiatives in every state (that doesn’t already ban abortions), and the national campaign will be: “Finally, we can put an end to the murder.” The turnout will be staggering. People will be voting who never voted before, just on this issue. People who disagree about everything else will come out to support this initiative. And who will benefit? The national Republican candidates.

6. What are the issues WE can own?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109133/fr/rss/
Three critiques tend to dominate this discussion:

1. Democrats need to move right.
2. Democrats need to move left.
3. Democrats should sit tight and await the inevitable demographic shift that will put them on top again.

They're all wrong. Let's take them one at a time...

http://gadflyer.com/articles/index.php?ArticleID=256
[P]rogressives need to do what conservatives did forty years ago: build a movement. Not a campaign, not an organization, a movement. Stop thinking about whether you can win the next election and start thinking about creating something that will lead to victories for decades.

OUR wedge issues: how do we fragment the very fragile alliance Rove has cobbled together?

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004695

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001012.html

7. One thing NOT to do – try to become Republicans Lite

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005084.php

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2004/11/bad_advice.html

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_03_bestof.html#109949865528551740

8. Recognize the good news too: This election has led to the emergence of some very encouraging progressive institutions: beginning to break the right-wing stranglehold on talk radio; the growth of progressive blogdom as a public space not dependent on corporate media; Internet-based fundraising and advertising; the rediscovery of the power of the boycott (Sinclair)

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/11/what-to-do.html
However, 2005 could be an amazing year if we don't sleep through it. We need to continue to support and build the new institutions on the Left. We need to identify candidates for key races as early as possible and build up their war chests. We need to consider how to spend a few hours every now and then - volunteering, writing letters to the editor, gonzo activism, raising money, etc…The good news is that I think that some key people are starting to recognize the importance of the internet and grass roots more generally.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/3/131911/564

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/3/18427/0726

9. Understand that politics IS war by other means, which Rove, Norquist, Reed, and the Right clearly understand and are acting upon. They have a long-term strategy, and are sticking to it. Liberals, progressive academics – people like most of “us” here – are reasonable, self-questioning, given to the complexity and ambiguity of problems. Like other virtues, these are good qualities under some circumstances, and foolhardy under others. Get angry – refuse to give in to fatalism or ambivalence

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_03_bestof.html#109948485958676208
But this is where we find out about courage. Everyone who believes the environment is more important than business profits has been told to sit down and shut up. Everyone who believes that abortion cannot be legislated has been told to sit down and shut up. Everyone who believes that government can and should help the poor and weak has been told to sit down and shut up. Everyone who believes that this war in Iraq should not have happened and has been criminally administered has been told to sit down and shut up. Everyone who believes that criticizing our government is not just our right, it's our obligation -- has been told to sit down and shut up.

You know what? I WON'T SIT DOWN. I WON'T SHUT UP. This is where we find out who has courage and who doesn't.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/opinion/05krugman.html?hp
[Paul Krugman] Democrats are now, understandably, engaged in self-examination. But while it's O.K. to think things over, those who abhor the direction Mr. Bush is taking the country must maintain their intensity; they must not succumb to defeatism.

This election did not prove the Republicans unbeatable. Mr. Bush did not win in a landslide. Without the fading but still potent aura of 9/11, when the nation was ready to rally around any leader, he wouldn't have won at all. And future events will almost surely offer opportunities for a Democratic comeback.

I don't hope for more and worse scandals and failures during Mr. Bush's second term, but I do expect them. The resurgence of Al Qaeda, the debacle in Iraq, the explosion of the budget deficit and the failure to create jobs weren't things that just happened to occur on Mr. Bush's watch. They were the consequences of bad policies made by people who let ideology trump reality.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/the_permanent_campaign_/2004/11/the_duty_of_the_opposition_is_to_oppose.php
Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser…We should give our duly re-elected President the same loyalty the Republicans gave Bill Clinton.

Our goal should be to have Bush leave office with the popularity level of a Nixon (or a Truman) and be a long-term albatross around the neck of his party, as Carter and Clinton are around our necks. No lying is required to accomplish this; we just have to figure out a way of telling the truth persuasively.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/4/153311/541
We can not flee. We can't leave the work of building and strengthening a progressive majority to hold of Bush and the rightwing to someone else. Before we start to tell people that Bush does not have a mandate, we ourselves must internalize that fact. We must remember that this election was, once again, excruciatingly close. For the first time in nearly 200 years, the United States was attacked on the North American continent, and the presiding President squandered 80% approval ratings for his initial response to that attack and had to wait until the morning after the election to find out that the most votes ever cast against an incumbent President were, barely, not enough to drive him from the White House. We must not forget that the momentous meaning of Bush's victory could be great but that the margin was modest. We must remember that even though a narrow majority of voters chose Bush over Kerry, it does not follow that a majority want the kind of nation and government that Bush and his minions surely hope to create. Then, we must stand firm and hold our ground.
Please, no more talk about leaving for Canada. No more searching around for European-born grandparents so you can get an EU passport; leave the dual-citizenship shenanigans to washed-up athletes who can't make the US Olympic team and tax-dodgers hiding out from the IRS. No more talk about giving up on your country, your state, your local community, your party, or on politics. No more thoughts that might lead you to allow an electoral defeat to defeat you.

***If you enjoy PBD and believe in what we are doing, you can help by forwarding a copy of this issue to your friends (using the envelope link below) or by sending them a copy of its URL (http://pbd.blogspot.com).

I don't get anything personally out of this project, except the satisfaction of doing it (I don't run ads, etc). The credit really all goes to the people whose material I copy and redistribute. But if I do have a "mission," it is to get this information into the hands of as many people as I can.***

- posted by Nick Burbules @ 11:17 AM

 
LOOKING AHEAD

Okay, time to move on. No whining, no sour grapes. That’s just not my way. Let’s learn from what happened, and look ahead.

Thanks to everyone who has written to me about this newsletter: No, we’re not going away – the need for progressive news and information is as great as ever. If there is anything good to come out of the past six months, it is the growth of this project. We now reach about 600 people every day, and we are growing steadily. Thanks to everyone who has helped with that.

Judging from the early indicators of Bush’s intentions, we will have plenty of material in the weeks and months to come.

But before moving on, one little, teeny tiny question: Have we just witnessed the most massive election theft in history? (thanks to Megan Boler for some of these links)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/fr/rss/

http://www.baou.com/newswire/main.php?action=recent&rid=1834

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/an_election_spoiled_rotten.php

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/11/tinfoil_or_for_real.html
…on several swing states, and EVERY STATE that has EVoting but no paper trails has an unexplained advantage for Bush of around +5% when comparing exit polls to actual results…In EVERY STATE that has paper audit trails on their EVoting, the exit poll results match the actual results reported within the margin of error.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
Black Box Voting (.ORG) is conducting the largest Freedom of Information action in history. At 8:30 p.m. Election Night, Black Box Voting blanketed the U.S. with the first in a series of public records requests, to obtain internal computer logs and other documents from 3,000 individual counties and townships. Networks called the election before anyone bothered to perform even the most rudimentary audit.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/03/machine_fraud/index.html
[NB: Here is some reassurance] “The paperless machines were (probably) not rigged”

Poor Zogby: he went into this campaign one of the most trusted pollsters, based on getting 2000 right when everyone else got it wrong, but leaves this race the punch line of a joke (unless, of course, you assume that he was polling correctly, and the voting really was fixed)

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/24/95814.shtml

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/11/02/zogby_later/index.html

What happened?

Everyone is pointing to the impact of “moral” issues on voters (god, guns, and gays, as several blogs put it). But this is code language. The underlying passion of Bush’s campaign, the vigor that brought out the masses for him to counterbalance the huge Democratic GOTV effort, was religious. The underlying struggle wasn’t left/right or Democrat/Republican: it was “reality-based” versus “faith-based.” This was George’s Army of Christ at work, and god protect us all.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/
[Eric Alterman] The problem is just this: Slightly more than half of the citizens of this country simply do not care about what those of us in the “reality-based community” say or believe about anything.

They don’t care that Iraq is turning into murderous quicksand and a killing field for our children. They don’t care that the Bush presidency has made us less safe by creating more terrorists, inspiring more anti-American hatred and refusing to engage in the hard work that would be necessary to make a meaningful dent in our myriad vulnerabilities at home. They don’t care that he has mortgaged our children’s future to give trillions to the wealthiest among us. They don’t care that the economy continues to hemorrhage well-paying jobs and replace them with Wal-Mart; that the number without health insurance is over forty million and rising. They don’t care that Medicare premiums are rising to fund the coffers of pharmaceutical companies. They don’t care that the air they breathe and the water they drink is being slowly poisoned and though they call themselves conservatives, they even don’t care that the size of the government and its share of our national income has increased by roughly a quarter in just four years. This is not a world of rational debate and issue preference.

It’s one of “them” and “us.” He’s one of “them” and not one of “us” and that’s all they care about. True it’s an illusion. After all, Bush is a millionaire’s son who went to Yale and Harvard and sat out Vietnam, not even bothering to show up for his cushy National Guard duty, and succeeded only in trading on his father’s name and connections in adult life. But somehow, they feel he understands them. He speaks their language. Our guys don’t. And unless they learn it, we will continue to condemn this country and those parts of the world it affects to a regime of malign neglect at best—malignant and malicious assault at worse.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22221-2004Nov3.html?nav=rss_politics/administration/whbriefing
So how did the Bush campaign pull it off?

Much of the media is justifiably caught up in the dramatic endgame today, but here are some of the possible factors that emerge from the overnight press coverage:

• The Bush campaign super-charged the "moral minority." Exit polls showed 21 percent of voters said moral values were the most important issue -- and 78 percent of them voted for Bush. That's about 18 million Bush votes right there.

• Bush profited hugely from the dramatic social, cultural and geographic divides that we first saw so clearly in 2000, that were if anything deeper this time around, and that assured him of enormous swaths of rock-solid support.

• He was successful at stoking voters' fears about terror, vesting himself with the cloak of a commander in chief at war and defining his opponent as a weak and vacillating leader.

• He kept to his plan and kept his message simple. He didn't get bogged down in details and didn't admit mistakes.

• He divided -- and conquered.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/11/03/the_architect.html
Karl Rove "was behind the risky tactic of essentially ignoring undecided voters to concentrate on motivating the president's base - socially conservative Republicans," Scripps Howard News Service reports.

"It was Rove who developed 'The Final Five Days,' a plan to unleash a flood of Bush volunteers in the election's closing hours and contact every identified potential supporter in the campaign's massive database. It was this get-out-the-vote effort, the most ambitious in GOP history, that swung the balance in Bush's favor."

Furthermore, it was Rove who "early on determined that the best way to defeat the Massachusetts senator, or any other Democrat, was to lacerate the other guy until he was no longer perceived as a credible option."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2004/11/03/second_bush_term/
Rove spread fear and fused its elements. Fear of the besieging terrorist, appearing in Bush campaign TV ads as the shifty eyes of a swarthy man or a pack of wolves, was joined with fear of the besieging queer. Bush's announcement that he favored a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage was underscored by referendums against it in 11 states, including Ohio -- all of which won.

The evangelical churches became instruments of political organization. Ideology was enforced as theology, turning nonconformity into sin, and the faithful, following voter guides with biblical literalism, were shepherded to the polls as though to the rapture…The campaign was one long camp meeting, a revival. Abortion and stem cell research became a lever for prying loose white Catholics…To help in Florida, a referendum was put on the ballot to deny young women the right to abortion without parental approval, and it galvanized evangelicals and conservative Catholics alike.

While Kerry ran on the mainstream American traditions of international cooperation and domestic investment, and transparency and rationality as essential to democratic government, Bush campaigned directly against these very ideas. At his rallies, Bush was introduced as standing for "the right God."…

The new majority is more theocratic than Republican, as Republican was previously understood; the defeat of the old moderate Republican Party is far more decisive than the loss by the Democrats.

http://bestoftheblogs.com/2004_11_03_bestof.html#109950511043708080
This country is deeply divided, not along party lines, or liberal/conservative or red and blue. It's Saved vs. Sinner. What else explains the fact that a majority of voters overlooked their own best interests and a record of performance that can only be characterized as a shameful failure? The Repugs have mastered the dynamics of the tent show and taken it nationwide: Put fear and God in one place, stir vigorously.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2004_10_31_dish_archive.html#109950616544439177
What we're seeing, I think, is a huge fundamentalist Christian revival in this country, a religious movement that is now explicitly political as well. It is unsurprising, of course, given the uncertainty of today's world, the devastating attacks on our country, and the emergence of so many more liberal cultures in urban America. And it is completely legitimate in this country for such views to be represented in public policy, however much I disagree with them. But the intensity of the passion, and the inherently totalist nature of religiously motivated politics means deep social conflict if we are not careful. Our safety valve must be federalism. We have to live and let live. As blue states become more secular, and red states become less so, the only alternative to a national religious war is to allow different states to pursue different options. That goes for things like decriminalization of marijuana, abortion rights, stem cell research and marriage rights. Forcing California and Mississippi into one model is a recipe for disaster. Federalism is now more important than ever. I just hope that Republican federalists understand this. I fear they don't.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005085.php
This, with apologies to Andrew, is hooey. "What we're seeing," writes Andrew Sullivan, "is a huge fundamentalist Christian revival in this country, a religious movement that is now explicitly political as well."

Hate to point this out (no, actually, I don't--I've been saying this for a while now), but the "huge fundamentalist Christian revival" took place about thirty years ago, not last month, and it has always been explictly political. If I may condense a few decades of history into one sentence, the perfect storm that led to what we now call the Christian Right was this combination:

Angry reaction by conservative evangelicals to court rulings on school prayer, Bible-reading in public schools, and abortion motivating them to enter the political realm for the first time
plus
Outrage among Catholics, who had previously kept kind of quiet while focusing on assimilating amid anti-Catholicism, mobilizing them into a politically active force
plus
The realization by Republican strategists that they need to form a cohesive electoral block and that their best bet for winning the South was partnering with white church leaders, since those institutions were the last acceptable bastion of racism
equals
Rock-solid coalition of Christian Right and Republican Party.

And as a result, for a good twenty years now, people have assumed that if you're religious, you're a Republican and that if you're a Democrat, you can't possibly be religious. We know that isn't true. What's more, John Kerry's campaign (particularly in the last stretch of October) made great strides toward knocking down that mistaken belief. But unfortunately, it's going to take more time until perceptions match reality.

I gotta say, it doesn't help much when exit polls and sloppy reporting use terms like "moral values" and "moral issues" as shorthand for very narrow, divisive issues like abortion and gay marriage, feeding into twenty years of Republican rhetoric. Opposition to the war in Iraq is a moral issue. The alleviation of poverty is a moral issue. Concern about abortion is a moral value, yes, but you can stay at the level of empty rhetoric about a "culture of life" or you can talk about how to actually reduce abortion rates, which is what most people care about more. (Did you hear once during this election season that abortion rates have risen under W. after they fell dramatically during Clinton's eight years in office?)

"Religious" does not mean Republican. And "moral" does not been conservative. There's going to be a lot of discussion about all of this over the coming weeks and months, and it's incredibly important to make sure we're neither sloppy about our terms nor overly broad in how we characterize "the faithful."

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109079/fr/rss/
How has Bush pulled it off?

I think this is the answer: Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

Bush is a very simple man. You may think that makes him a bad president, as I do, but lots of people don't—and there are more of them than there are of us. If you don't believe me, take a look at those numbers on your TV screen.

Think about the simplicity of everything Bush says and does. He gives the same speech every time. His sentences are short and clear. "Government must do a few things and do them well," he says. True to his word, he has spent his political capital on a few big ideas: tax cuts, terrorism, Iraq…

This is what so many people like about Bush's approach to terrorism. They forgive his marginal and not-so-marginal screw-ups, because they can see that fundamentally, he "gets it." They forgive his mismanagement of Iraq, because they see that his heart and will are in the right place. And while they may be unhappy about their economic circumstances, they don't hold that against him. What you and I see as unreflectiveness, they see as transparency. They trust him.

The disproportionate impact of the gay marriage issue

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23672-2004Nov3.html?nav=rss_nation

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2363

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/10093049.htm

http://www.thepoorman.net/archives/003425.html
My own non-scientific survey of Bush voter attitudes leads me to believe that "moral values" means "I hate faggots", although I suspect abortion and churchiness have some role for the less computer savvy. Twenty-two percent of the electorate, roughly 30 million Americans, felt that this was the most important issue facing our country. And so here we are.

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001312.html
"I wonder if you noticed that yesterday all eleven states that considered the question of gay marriage voted to ban it. ALL ELEVEN. I think this sends a very clear message -- true Americans do not like your kind of homosexual deviants in our country, and we will not tolerate your radical pro-gay agenda trying to force our children to adopt your homosexual lifestyle. You should be EXTREMELY GRATEFUL that we even let you write a very public and influential blog, instead of suppressing your treasonous views (as I would prefer). But I'm sure someone like yourself would consider me just an "extremist" that you don't need to worry about. Well you are wrong -- I'm not just an extremist, I am a real American, and you should be worried because eleven states yesterday proved that there are millions more just like me who will not let you impose your radical agenda on our country."

[NB: This last quote reveals the dilemma for Bush. If he repays the cultural conservatives who put him in office, he will lose support from moderate Republicans, Log Cabin Republicans, “Main Street” cash-and-carry Republicans, foreign policy “Realists,” and Libertarians. (http://www.reason.com/links/links110304.shtml) The emerging struggle is no longer red versus blue, but the GOP base outside the Beltway, versus “serious and thoughtful” Republicans in the policy apparatus (the ones who, referring to an article quoted here yesterday, have always felt uncomfortable with Bush). Having unleashed and empowered a far-right tsunami, Bush can no longer give them rhetorical support and a wink that he will take care of them “later,” in a second term. This is the second term. File this under, “be careful what you ask for”]

Bush, winner of a 51-49 race that was decided in the 11th hour for want of a few thousand provisional ballots in Ohio, claims a “mandate,” of course, and will do all that he can to establish a theocratic dynasty and structurally dismantle the supports for any political alternative. But horrifying as this sounds, he will encounter major obstacles, each of which is an opportunity for his political opponents

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-agenda4nov04,1,1203901.story?coll=la-home-headlines'
So although the president reached out to defeated Democrats in his brief victory remarks Wednesday afternoon, his aides and supporters were quick to suggest that his bipartisanship might not go far — and that they expected Bush's second term to pursue even more ambitious conservative goals than the first…"People say, 'The country's divided; shouldn't he be less ambitious?' " said Grover Norquist, president of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform. "No. This is a Republican-majority country. He will govern as aggressively as in the first term."…But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) warned that the presidential campaign's focus on international issues meant that the election didn't guarantee Bush a foundation of support for his domestic agenda…"He's got no mandate on domestic issues per se," Kyl said. "Yeah, [voters] knew he wanted some tax reform and Social Security reform, but I don't think he can contend the election was a mandate to do that."…"Is it realistic to think that, after this nasty election, he's going to get everyone in the room and say let's hold hands and reform Social Security?" a Republican lobbyist asked. "I don't see it."

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/002814.html
[William Bennett] Having restored decency to the White House, President Bush now has a mandate to affect policy that will promote a more decent society, through both politics and law. His supporters want that, and have given him a mandate in their popular and electoral votes to see to it. Now is the time to begin our long, national cultural renewal…no less in legislation than in federal court appointments. It is, after all, the main reason George W. Bush was reelected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/politics/campaign/04conserve.html
"Now comes the revolution," Richard Viguerie, the dean of conservative direct mail, told about a dozen fellow movement stalwarts gathered around a television here, tallying up their Senate seats in the earliest hours of the morning. "If you don't implement a conservative agenda now, when do you?"

By midday, however, fights over the spoils had already begun, as conservatives debated the electorate's verdict on the war in Iraq, the Bush administration's spending and the administration's hearty embrace of traditionalist social causes...

"Make no mistake - conservative Christians and 'values voters' won this election for George W. Bush and Republicans in Congress," Mr. Viguerie wrote in a memorandum sent to other prominent conservatives. "It's crucial that the Republican leadership not forget this - as much as some will try," he said, underlining the final clause.

"Liberals, many in the media and inside the Republican Party are urging the president to 'unite' the country by discarding the allies that earned him another four years," Mr. Viguerie continued. "They're urging him to discard us conservative Catholics and Protestants, people for whom moral values are the most important issue.''

Dr. James C. Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family and an influential evangelical Protestant, said he had issued a warning to a "White House operative" who called yesterday morning to thank him for his help…Dr. Dobson said he told the caller that many Christians believed the country "on the verge of self-destruction" as it abandoned traditional family roles. He argued that "through prayer and the involvement of millions of evangelicals, and mainline Protestants and Catholics, God has given us a reprieve."

"But I believe it is a short reprieve," he continued, adding that conservatives now had four years to pass an amendment banning same-sex marriage, to stop abortion and embryonic stem-cell research, and most of all to remake the Supre