NEVER WRONG

The story of the day

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm
[Murray Waas] Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, cautioned other White House aides in the summer of 2003 that Bush's 2004 re-election prospects would be severely damaged if it was publicly disclosed that he had been personally warned that a key rationale for going to war had been challenged within the administration. Rove expressed his concerns shortly after an informal review of classified government records by then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley determined that Bush had been specifically advised that claims he later made in his 2003 State of the Union address -- that Iraq was procuring high-strength aluminum tubes to build a nuclear weapon -- might not be true, according to government records and interviews..

Hadley was particularly concerned that the public might learn of a classified one-page summary of a National Intelligence Estimate, specifically written for Bush in October 2002. The summary said that although "most agencies judge" that the aluminum tubes were "related to a uranium enrichment effort," the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research and the Energy Department's intelligence branch "believe that the tubes more likely are intended for conventional weapons."

Three months after receiving that assessment, the president stated without qualification in his January 28, 2003, State of the Union address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.". . .

The White House was largely successful in defusing the Niger controversy because there was no evidence that Bush was aware that his claims about the uranium were based on faulty intelligence. . . But Hadley and other administration officials realized that it would be much more difficult to shield Bush from criticism for his statements regarding the aluminum tubes, for several reasons.

For one, Hadley's review concluded that Bush had been directly and repeatedly apprised of the deep rift within the intelligence community over whether Iraq wanted the high-strength aluminum tubes for a nuclear weapons program or for conventional weapons.

For another, the president and others in the administration had cited the aluminum tubes as the most compelling evidence that Saddam was determined to build a nuclear weapon -- even more than the allegations that he was attempting to purchase uranium.

And finally, full disclosure of the internal dissent over the importance of the tubes would have almost certainly raised broader questions about the administration's conduct in the months leading up to war.

"Presidential knowledge was the ball game," says a former senior government official outside the White House who was personally familiar with the damage-control effort. "The mission was to insulate the president. It was about making it appear that he wasn't in the know. You could do that on Niger. You couldn't do that with the tubes." A Republican political appointee involved in the process, who thought the Bush administration had a constitutional obligation to be more open with Congress, said: "This was about getting past the election.". . .

More: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7008.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/30/bush_knew/index.html

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009645

Release the Hadley memo: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003946.html

The US is becoming irrelevant in Iraq

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2794

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7005.html

And in Afghanistan? http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114380661951517592

Excuses for the war

New strategies: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/23/BL2006032300803.html

Old lies: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7003.html
[Dick Cheney] "Well, some of us didn't. I think there are — there's been a debate, obviously, and we've got a lot of folks who don't believe that there was any kind of a relationship there between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. I think the record is abundantly clear that Saddam Hussein was, in fact, a prime sponsor of terror. This is the guy who was making $25,000 payments to the families of suicide bombers. This is the guy who provided a safe haven for Abu Nidal. The track record there is very clear.”

Rumsfeld to go? http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003948.html

“Three simple questions”

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/30/141412/890
[Kos] 1. How does sending our troops to Iraq, separating them form their families and loved ones, putting them in harm's way, and keeping them there equal "supporting the troops"?

2. Why do those who claim to "honor their sacrifices" want them to continue sacrificing?

3. Why don't those who bloviate about "supporting" and "honoring" the troops against an enemy they think threatens Western civilization actually, you know, put on combat boots and join them?

Wonderful: the Army can’t get proper body armor to its troops – and now blocks soldiers (or their families) from buying their own

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/army_body_armor_5

Senate hearing on censure today

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/30/94444/0419

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/does-white-house-nsa-defense-come-from.html

Fristed

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-frist31mar31,1,559062.story
As he prepares to leave the Senate and position himself for a presidential bid, Bill Frist faces mounting criticism that he has proved an ineffectual majority leader whose legislative agenda increasingly is dictated by his White House ambitions. . .

Kaloogian’s new photo “proof” that the media isn’t telling us the good side of Iraq is a shot taken (a) a year ago and (b) from the safety and comfort of the fortified Green Zone – he never even went out onto the streets of Baghdad (hmmm. . . why? not safe?)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008046

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/30/14344/6926
This picture was apparently taken last year, and one of the buildings in that picture has been bombed to pieces. . .

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/was-gop-candidate-kaloogian-who-claims.html

Typical Republican bamboozlement: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008063
The candidate said he hadn't recognized the error because "the military asked us to use our discretion and put things on the Internet that were nondescriptive ... (because) if we posted something that was easily identifiable, it could be a target."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008065
[Kaloogian] "Last night I wrote to you to give you a heads up on the fact that there was a growing attack on our campaign by the news media and liberal political activists.

And the good news is that despite their best efforts, their attacks are backfiring. . ."

Blue America

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/30/85148/1711
This is not Bush Country. It's blue from sea to shining sea.

Yes, that's right, you can now travel through the US from the Atlantic to the Pacific without setting foot in a state where Bush's approval tops 45%. . .

More: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003944.html
Bush's approval rating is below 40% in 23 states, below 30% in eight, and below 50% in 47 states of the Union. He is at or below 40% in fourteen states that went for him in 2004. . .

Richard Cohen shocked – SHOCKED – to learn that Bush has been lying about the war

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009652
[Ezra Klein] If you don't think Bush is a liar, you simply haven't been paying attention. And if you haven't been paying attention, maybe you shouldn't be a Washington Post political columnist. . .

Judicial temperament

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_26_atrios_archive.html#114372925437010648
“The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, ‘To my critics, I say, ‘Vaffanculo,’ ” punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said. . .

Smith said the jurist “immediately knew he’d made a mistake, and said, ‘You’re not going to print that, are you?’ ”. . .

They really are the “f-ck you” administration: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7010.html

Bonus item: a waste of space

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found. . .

[NB: A waste because no one who believes in prayer will be persuaded by such a medical study – and because no one who DOESN’T believe in it needs empirical “proof”]

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:49 AM

 
WHO’S RESPONSIBLE?

I love this headline

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/30/international/middleeast/30iraq.html
Beleaguered Premier Warns U.S. to Stop Interfering in Iraq's Politics

Bush explains Iraq violence this way (no I’m not kidding): it’s all Saddam’s fault

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/29/politics/main1453138.shtml

The US plans for Iraqi oil (thanks to David N for the links)

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=483&row=0

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=417&row=0

Nuclear proliferation

http://www.forbes.com/finance/feeds/afx/2006/03/28/afx2629000.html
Saudi Arabia is working secretly on a nuclear program, with help from Pakistani experts, the German magazine Cicero reported in its latest edition, citing Western security sources. . .

[NB: And let’s remember where 15 of the 19 9-11 hijackers came from]

Will the WH mini-shakeup stem Republican anxieties about Bush policies?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6989.html
[Steve Benen] Are Republicans on the Hill happy now that the Chief of Staff who wouldn't return their phone calls has stepped aside? At this point, it seems the Card-to-Bolten transition is not what most of the GOP had in mind. . . Roll Call had a detailed report today reflecting widespread disappointment among Republicans in DC. They seemed pleased that Card is leaving, but they're dissatisfied with his replacement and wanted a more sweeping change. . .

What next? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/29/BL2006032901057.html

Senate fight over who gets to draft NSA legislation

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003937.html

FISA judges don’t want to be cut out of the loop: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/politics/29nsa.html

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/what-fisa-judges-really-said.html

The evolution of a Republican lie. Howard Kaloogian, GOP candidate for Congress in California, posts a photo he says he took in Baghdad that “proves” that life is peaceful and happy in Iraq (see? the media is lying to us about how bad things are over there)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/29/13339/2816

Only one problem: the photo wasn’t taken in Iraq, but in Turkey! So, how does Kaloogian respond? Witness the seven stages (okay, six stages) of Republican “confession”

Denial: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008037
Kaloogian defended the picture as genuine. . .

Blame someone else: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008035
Kaloogian blames the "Baghdad" picture bamboozlement on the webmaster. . .

Silence: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008038
Kaloogian no longer speaking to the press about "Baghdad" bamboozle. . .

Obfuscation, then trivialization: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008040
Kaloogian speaks: "Everybody in the group, we all shared pictures. I'm sorry, I don't know who took it ... You're being really picky on this stuff. It's not that big a deal. It was a mistake. I'm sorry."

Compound the error: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008045
[Josh Marshall] The picture was evidence, Kaloogian claimed, of how the pro-terror press is misleading the American public about how well things are going in Iraq. Called on his error, he told TPMmuckraker.com that it was just a simple mistake. . . So fair enough. Now all he has to do is go back and get one of peaceful pictures from Baghdad.

So this is what he came up with. And just to be clear, no, I'm not joking. This is his new picture. . .


The Senate’s phony “ethics reform” bill

http://www.slate.com/id/2139022
[Justin Peters] The Washington Post, the New York Times, and USA Today lead with the Senate's 90-8 passage of a lobbying reform bill. The bill bans lobbyist gift-giving and makes earmarks more difficult, but critics contend the legislation is riddled with loopholes. . . [T]he bipartisan bill mandates broader disclosure of lobbyists' activities and says that former lawmakers must now wait for two years before they can lobby their former colleagues. An enthusiastic WSJ makes much of the requirement that disclosed data be stored in Internet databases, while the NYT, the LAT and the Post focus instead on the legislation's failure to ban lobbyist-funded travel or create an independent oversight office to investigate ethical lapses. The NYT and the LAT are the only ones to mention the bill's failure to address lobbyists' roles in campaign fundraising.

Perhaps tellingly, some of Washington's most visible reformers, including Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., came out against the legislation, while advocacy groups blasted the bill as "window dressing." Will the bill have any real effect on how business gets done in DC? Read this Post piece from a couple of weeks ago before you make up your mind. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/18/AR2006031801305.html
Lobbyists Foresee Business As Usual

That liberal media: the Democrats roll out a major new policy statement on national security. What does the news cover?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7000.html

More Americans identify as Democrats

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/gallup-in-shift-more-americans-now.html

Reflections Photography censors more photos

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6997.html

The Goofus Files

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5635

Electronic voting: a disaster

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002619.htm

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002620.htm

God gave us Tom DeLay (no joke)

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6994.html
[Steve Benen] At the ever-entertaining "War on Christians" conference in Washington this week, Tom DeLay was not only presented as a martyr, he was also compared to Jesus and designated God's official lawmaker from Texas. . .

Ann Coulter, busted

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_26_atrios_archive.html#114368849973078810

More: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/29.html#a7713

Bonus item: Bush’s “political capital” gets audited

http://www.slate.com/id/2138948/fr/rss/
In conclusion, we don't think your available political capital is sufficient to support substantial new expenditures, especially in riskier foreign investments . . .

Extra bonus item: Who's Responsible?



***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:03 AM

 
CHANGES IN LEADERSHIP

The Bush gang loses faith in yet another Iraqi leader they had previously championed: those darn democratic elections are such a nuisance

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/international/middleeast/29iraq.html
The American ambassador has told Shiite officials that President Bush does not want the Iraqi prime minister to remain the country's leader . . .

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-says-iraqi-prime-minister-is-no.html

RNC urges Republicans not to abandon Bush

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/28/20535/7650
[Ken Mehlman] The President is seen universally as the face of the Republican Party. We are now brand W. Republicans. The following chart shows the extremely close correlation between the President's image and overall ratings of the party.

President Bush drives our image and will do so until we have real national front-runners for the '08 nomination. Attacking the President is counter productive for all Republicans, not just the candidates launching the attacks. If he drops, we all drop.

[Georgia10] If he drops? IF he drops? I'd love to see that correlation chart he attached to the memo. Maybe he was looking at it upside down?

This is what happens to a party that spends so much effort on branding and not enough effort on, you know, actually implement a decent policy. Republicans can't splinter off from Bush because they don't have anything to independently stand on. What will GOP incumbents point to? The soaring deficits? The lack of funding for national security? Their failure to demand an exit strategy for Iraq? There is no independent record to run on when you're a rubber-stamp Republican.

Indeed, what we are witnessing with the Republican Party is a case of separation anxiety. They know they have to distance themselves from the President--after all, he is one of the most unpopular Presidents ever. But gosh darn it, they just...can't...do it. Because without the specter of Bush looming over them, Republicans feel naked and vulnerable. Little do they know that specter casts over the entire party a dark shadow of discontent and incompetence.

Let them cling to Bush for their political lives. Let them cling to the sinking ship and hope they can keep their head above water. If this President keeps up his ratings free-fall and his dangerous incompetence, Republicans will be gasping for air come election day.

More: http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/03/post_6.html

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/rnc-warns-in-memo-congressional.html

Throw ‘em an anchor: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008514.php
[Kevin Drum] So how is the Republican Party doing since George Bush started his second term?. . .

Dis-Carded

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6986.html
[Steve Benen] Andy Card may have resigned as WH Chief of Staff today, but according to Insight magazine, he wasn't the White House staffer Republicans on the Hill are worried about. . .

More: http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001312.php

Who is Josh Bolten? http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6982.html
[Steve Benen] As the president's budget director, Josh Bolten has helped add $2 trillion to the national debt in less than three years. He's also helped oversee a dramatic rise in government spending and a series of irresponsible tax cuts for the wealthy that the country couldn't afford.

Bolten has sold reckless tax cuts as fiscal responsibility, defended absurd budget tricks as sensible governing, argued falsely that tax cuts can pay for themselves, made demonstrably-false claims about the budget deficit, and embraced misleading scare tactics to promote privatization of Social Security. Bolten also made quite an impression with a memo last year arguing that the administration could ignore legal restrictions and spend as much as it pleases on fake news segments and pundit payola.

Only Bush would see Bolten as the kind of official in need of a promotion. Anyone hoping that today's staff shake-up might represent a change in direction for the Bush White House is likely to be disappointed.

What next for Card? http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/28/cards_next_move.html

US lied about Iranian nukes (dog bites man)

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009611

Republican corruption continues to astonish. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/28/111912/415
[WSJ] Current securities law and congressional ethics rules don't prohibit lawmakers or their staff members from buying and selling securities based on information learned in the halls of Congress. . .

Halliburton. . . just read it

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/international/middleeast/29halliburton.html?

Grain of salt

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014407.html
Investigative journalist Jason Leopold writes that sources at the State Department, the CIA and the National Security Council, as well as lawyers close to the Valerie Plame investigation have told him that Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is getting ready to indict Karl Rove or Stephen Hadley, or both, perhaps in about a month. . .

John McCain, erstwhile “maverick” and “moderate,” turns out to be just another. . .

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008019.php
[Josh Marshall] The transformation is almost complete. . . John McCain once called Jerry Falwell an "agent of intolerance." Now he's going to be the graduation speaker at Jerry's Liberty University.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2006/03/28/mccain-taps-his-inner-wingnut-flipflops-on-gay-marriage/
McCain Taps His Inner Wingnut, Flipflops on Gay Marriage, According to Falwell

More: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6988.html

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009608
E.J. Dionne hits the nail on the head today when he says that the positions that John McCain will need to take in order to win the Republican primary may very well lose him the support of the more moderate voters who've hailed him as a maverick, to his perhaps permanent electoral or reputational detriment. . .

GOP imploding over immigration

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6980.html
A “train wreck”. . .

More: http://www.samefacts.com/archives/microeconomics_and_policy_analysis_/2006/03/six_theses_on_immigration_policy.php

Let’s see: Bush holds special off-the-record sessions with favored reporters. He doesn’t really tell them anything, they can’t report on what he does tell them, and now it emerges that they aren’t even supposed to report that they met with Bush at all. So, what IS the purpose of these sham encounters?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-white-house-press-corps-make-nice.html
[Joe] Give them a tour of the White House, tell a few jokes, serve some lemonade. They can't report on it, but they can tell their friends. No wonder Karl Rove thinks the media are a bunch of patsies. . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6987.html
[Steve Benen] But there's limited, if any, upside for journalists to engage in these personal chats. Bush isn't their "buddy," and he probably isn't asking about their families because he's deeply interested in their personal lives. The White House is struggling to communicate, it knows it, so it's beginning to try and charm reporters. News outlets shouldn't play along.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009609
[Greg Sargent] Did anyone else notice something intriguing about The Washington Post's article today. . . about President Bush's private off-the-record sessions with reporters? . . The Post obviously viewed the president's campaign as newsworthy -- after all, they wrote a story about it. At the same time, though, The Post reporters who first knew about the sessions -- the ones that were invited -- were constrained from talking about them. So Post reporter Charles Babington went to outside sources to get a story that his newsroom colleagues already knew about. . .

Does that strike others as a bit strange? The Post (or at least its employees) agreed to withhold information from readers that it clearly viewed as news, in exchange for whatever it would gain from these private sessions. . . But will readers really benefit from this, given that these alleged insights are based on conversations the reporters can't disclose in the first place?

Billmon on lessons learned from the WP/Domenech affair

http://billmon.org/archives/002364.html

More repercussions from that phony Kyl/Graham “colloquy”

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114356609250841712
[Digby] They knew that the entire Senate did not intend that the court be stripped of jurisdiction in pending cases. It probably wouldn't have passed if that had been the case. So they cheated. This has been the story over and over and over again with this rubber stamp Eunuch Caucus. If they can't deliver for their Dear Leader by following the rules --- even with a majority --- they ignore them. They are the outlaw party.

More: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007217.php

Bonus item: I like it!

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114357842375033394

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:45 AM

 
PART OF THE SOLUTION, OR THE PROBLEM?

They don’t want us in Iraq any more

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/28/03230/0734
Jan. 27 - President Bush said in an interview on Thursday that he would withdraw American forces from Iraq if the new government that is elected on Sunday asked him to do so, but that he expected Iraq's first democratically elected leaders would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/FRI741255.htm
Baghdad provincial governor Hussein al-Tahan said on Monday he would suspend all cooperation with U.S. forces. . .

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18631622-38201,00.html
IRAQ'S ruling parties have demanded US forces cede control of security. . .

Why we won’t leave

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/03/27/waging_a_long_peace.php

The most dangerous place to be in Iraq is in any town that Bush cites as a “success story”

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1772000

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12016224/site/newsweek/

It is becoming pretty clear that the US has no clear counterterrorism strategy

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/27/terror/main1442811.shtml
"If I were grading I would say we probably deserve a 'D' or a 'D-plus' as a country as to how well we're doing in the battle of ideas that's taking place in the world today," [Rumsfeld] told his questioner.

More: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/28/strategies_for_a_global_counterinsurgency/

Rifts between the US and UK?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008504.php

What Bush and Blair said in private, then said in public

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002236591

Is Rove giving up Libby (and Cheney) to protect himself?

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Roves_cooperation_seen_to_advance_inquiry_0327.html

Yes, he is: http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001310.php

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/27/234921/484

Senate Intelligence Committee still refusing to investigate lies about prewar intelligence

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/24/thinkfast-march-24-2006/

The “new” Bush media strategy: honey and vinegar

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/27/231913/118
Editor & Publisher reports that for the first time in his presidency, George Bush is holding private meetings with selected reporters, with at least one at his private residence--on the condition that those meetings be off the record. . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6968.html
Media Matters and Peter Daou have done some terrific work lately highlighting the latest Iraq defense embraced by the Bush White House and its allies: it's the media's fault. . .

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002236478
After the latest round of blaming the media for distorted coverage in Iraq, which emerged this week from top Bush administration officials, war reporters and editors strongly defended their coverage. . .

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603270010
During a March 26 roundtable discussion on NBC's Meet the Press, New York Times reporter Elizabeth Bumiller uncritically repeated Bush administration assertions that the administration was not attempting to blame the media for negative public opinion about the Iraq war. But while President Bush and White House press secretary Scott McClellan have stated that Bush's recent public comments should not be taken as "criticism" of the media, the full context of those remarks -- as well as comments made by other administration members -- suggests that the White House is attempting to have it both ways: Bush and McClellan have repeatedly suggested that the media have painted a distorted and disproportionately negative picture of Iraq while simultaneously stating -- in Bumiller's words -- that "[w]e're not blaming the media for the war in Iraq.". . .

Molly Ivins, national treasure

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060327_propaganda_pentagon_torture_ivins/
The Pentagon has once again investigated itself! And—have a seat, get the smelling salts, hold all hats—the Pentagon has once again concluded the Pentagon did absolutely nothing wrong and will continue to do so. . .

Those reality-challenged Republicans

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/fictitious-kylgraham-floor-debate.html
Today the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. . . . Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and John Kyl have filed an amicus brief with the Court.

This amicus brief argues that the legislative history of the DTA supports the Government's position. Specifically, the brief cites a lengthy colloquy between Senators Kyl and Graham themselves which purportedly took place during a Senate floor debate just prior to passage of the bill. In the exchange, both Kyl and Graham suggest that the bill will strip the courts of jurisdiction over pending detainee cases such as Hamdan. But here's where the story gets interesting.

Apparently this entire 8 page colloquy--which is scripted to read as if it were delivered live on the floor of the Senate, complete with random interruptions from other Senators--never took place. It was inserted into the Congressional Record in written form just prior to passage of the bill. . .

Theocracy watch

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/27/politics/main1439663.shtml
The Georgia legislature seems poised to endorse just such a course. Though students in many states enroll in classes related to the Bible, Georgia would become the first to require its Department of Education to put in place a curriculum to teach the history and literature of the Bible. Schools would use the book itself as the classroom textbook. Specifically the bill would establish electives on both the New and Old Testaments.

Associated Press plagiarizes blog reporting

http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2006/03/ap_plagiarises_.html
When . . .confronted . . . the officials admitted to using the information without permission, saying: "We don't credit blogs."

Bonus item: Lovely

http://www.slate.com/id/2138811/fr/rss/
[Eric Umansky] The papers go inside with congressional investigators smuggling some radioactive goodies across the border from Canada, enough to make two dirty bombs. The investigators purposely drove through border checkpoints that had radiation scanners, and, thankfully, were noticed by customs agents. Then they showed radiation licenses they had downloaded from the Internet. They were quickly waived on. . .

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:58 AM

 
BAD NEWS

Thanks, one last time, to everyone for their support in the Koufax awards. We got swamped by some of the bigger blogs but it’s an honor just to be included in their company as a finalist. Winning ISN’T the most important thing – your support has been very gratifying.

Stop, news media: YOU’RE HURTING AMERICA! Please, just focus on good news coming out of Iraq

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/25/AR2006032501003.html
Wednesday, armed insurgents burst into the classroom of Khidhir al-Mihallawi, an English teacher at Sajariyah High School, accused him of being an agent for the CIA and Israeli intelligence and beheaded him in front of his students. . . One teacher, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because he feared retaliation from insurgents, said that most students ran from the classroom but that some stayed to watch. . .

http://www.slate.com/id/2138728
American and Iraqi forces raided a Shiite neighborhood in northern Baghdad, killing at least 16 followers of Shiite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr. Iraqi security officials are reporting that the U.S.-led team entered a mosque and killed 17 Iraqis, including an imam. The American military denies entering the mosque, but confirms that 16 insurgents were killed in combat with a Shiite militia cell that had kidnapped Iraqi civilians. The U.S. military is increasingly blaming Sadr for the sectarian bloodshed that is ravaging the country. The NYT calls the incident "the most serious confrontation in months," and all the papers make sure to point out that the killings are inflaming an already volatile situation that many Iraqis are already calling a civil war.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/213049/105

Why do these kinds of things follow John Negroponte around?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/middleeast/27iraqcnd.html
The bodies of 30 beheaded men were found on a main highway near Baquba this evening, providing more evidence that the death squads in Iraq are becoming out of control. . .

Public opinion on the war shifts decisively

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/politics/27war.html

Bush to Thomas

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/22/150252
HELEN THOMAS: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war?. . .

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist, is that, you know, I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect. . . No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. . .

Bush to Blair

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html
In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush's public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war. . . But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons. . .

Will the Supreme Court rule that it has become irrelevant?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/politics/27scotus.html

The six major problems of the US economy

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/25/125924/886

Their true colors: the Republican immigration bill inspires massive protests

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/massive-rally-in-la-republicans-hate.html

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/25/122813/668

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114334145740807831



Police state watch

http://www.slate.com/id/2138728
The LAT reports that the FBI keeps watch lists of activists, including antiwar and environmental protesters. The FBI stressed that it targets people who commit crimes and does not single groups out based on their ideologies. But the ACLU, which FOIA'd the FBI's documents, said, "Any definition of terrorism that would include someone throwing a bottle or rock through a window during an antiwar demonstration is dangerously overbroad."

Today’s must-read

http://hnn.us/articles/23297.html
“The Founders Never Imagined a Bush Administration”

Republican corruption keeps finding new ways to astonish. . .

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2006/03/the_scoundrels_prayer.php

Katherine Harris’s (R-FL) meltdown continues

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/26/harris_campaign_in_free_fall.html
As Rep. Katherine Harris' (R-FL) "rocky Senate campaign takes an increasingly evangelical Christian bent, her remaining top campaign staffers are preparing to jump ship," the St. Petersburg Times reports.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/25/harris_backtracks_on_pledge.html
Though Rep. Katherine Harris (R-FL) pledged to sell all of her assets to finance her Senate bid, the Orlando Sentinel reports her campaign is now saying she will not use her inheritance from her father.

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_26.php#008006

Har-de-har-har

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/26/131011/562
"I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy....I was able to get a sense of his soul."

--George W. Bush, after meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, June 16, 2001

From The Australian today:

THE career of Russian President Vladimir Putin was built at least in part on a lie, according to US researchers. . . A new study of an economics thesis written by Mr Putin in the mid-1990s has revealed that large chunks of it were copied from an American text.

Bonus item: From a reader

WMR writes: “Now I understand why Bush thought he could get a line-item veto for the budget: as far as he's concerned, signing statements give him a line item veto on everything else.”

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:28 AM

 
SHINING EXAMPLES

Well, folks, thanks to your efforts, PBD is a finalist for “Best Blog” in the Koufax awards. Just to make the top ten is quite an honor, and I really appreciate it. There is now a final round of voting to determine a winner, and if you are so inclined, please go to this site, scroll to the bottom, and vote for “Progressive Blog Digest” via the Comments section:

http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002506.html

There are a lot of deserving blogs in this category.

I am out of the country right now, but I will keep posting whenever I can get reliable Internet access. By Monday March 27 I will be back on my regular daily schedule again.

***SUNDAY IS THE LAST DAY OF VOTING***

Just read this

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/03/24/bush_shuns_patriot_act_requirement/
When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.

Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it ''a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a ''signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.

In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

Our lawless government

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/administration-tells-congress-again-we.html
[Glenn Greenwald] Can that be any clearer for you - Congressmen, Senators, journalists? The President is bestowed by the Constitution with the unlimited and un-limitable power to do anything that he believes is necessary to "protect the nation." Thus, even if Congress passes laws which seek to limit that power in any way, and even if the President agrees to those restrictions and signs that bill into law, he still retains the power to violate it whenever he wants.

Thus, Sen. DeWine can pass his cute little bill purporting to require oversight, or Sen. Specter can pass his, or they can do nothing and leave FISA in place. None of that matters, because no matter what Congress or even the President do with regard to the law, the law does not restrict what the President can do in any way. They are telling the Congress to its face that all of the grand debates it is having and the negotiations it is conducting are all irrelevant farces, because no matter what happens, the President retains unlimited power and nothing that Congress does can affect that power in any way.

The reality is that the Administration has been making clear for quite some time that they have unlimited power and that nothing -- not even the law -- can restrict it. But here, they are specifically telling Congress that even if Congress amends FISA and the President agrees to abide by those amendments, they still have the power to break the law whenever they want. As I have documented more times than I can count, we have a President who has seized unlimited power, including the power to break the law, and the Administration -- somewhat commendably -- is quite candid and straightforward about that fact.

Bush’s shining example of success in the Iraq War (Tal Afar)? Well. . .

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2773
[Reuters] "I say that Bush is 100 percent a liar because the city of Tal Afar has become a ghost town rather than the example Bush spoke about," said Ali Ibrahim, a Shi'ite Turkmen laborer. . .

Sunni Turkmen Rafat Ahmed, 35, a shop owner said: "As I'm talking now the Americans and the Iraqi army are surrounding my neighborhood. If we leave our houses we could be arrested." . . .

The deployment last year of Iraqi troops, who were widely perceived locally as Shi'ite Arab outsiders, prompted the Sunni mayor of Tal Afar to tender his resignation in protest at what he described as a sectarian operation. The involvement of ethnic Kurdish forces was also a source of tension, local people said.

"Anyone who says Tal Afar is good and safe actually knows nothing because the reality is we are unsafe, even inside our houses, because we don't know when we'll be arrested," said pensioner Abdul Karim al-Anizi, 60, a Shi'ite Turkmen.

Nice analysis

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009565
[Michael Singer] I don't think our collective national mind can contain the two opposing ideas of (1) it's going fine and we're gonna win, (2) it's not going fine and we need an entirely new goal. For this reason, by concentrating the national mind (or by attempting to) so intensely on #1, the Administration is actually hurting us and the Iraqis.

When you start caring mostly about a political win -- as in the President's current five-day long political campaign to turn around public opinion on the war (and, in doing so, to attack the media) -- you stop attending to events. Opinion and events, like oil and water, don't mix. The aesthetic of the win -- of massaging and pushing and pulling public opinion -- becomes your paradigm, the way you see the world. It becomes binary -- your friends and foes -- with a sliding scale between (people who you can persuade to become a friend). . . [read on]

Oh, how Karl and the boys must chuckle over their cocktails. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/213049/105

This is ILLEGAL

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/85918/0245
[The Hill] Democrats have suspected that Bush was aware when he signed the legislation that the House and Senate had passed slightly different versions. A Wall Street Journal article published Wednesday bolstered those suspicious by quoting a senior House GOP aide as saying congressional leaders consulted the White House about the discrepancy.

The House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote a letter to the president that included a primer on congressional procedure: "A bill is not a law unless the same version is passed by both the House and Senate and signed by the President," they wrote.

"There is now growing evidence that your action on February 8 breached this fundamental tenet of our democracy with the full knowledge of high-ranking congressional and White House officials," Pelosi and Waxman assert.

Waxman wrote at letter to White House Chief of Staff Andy Card last week, asking the same questions: if the administration knew there was a discrepancy between the two versions of the bill.

The unraveling MZM scandal has the potential to blow the lid off a huge mess of troublesome details about phony pre-war intelligence, corruption, Iranian links, and more of the sort of thing we’ve come to expect from the Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Feith Dept of Defense. That’s why they are pressing so hard to keep the investigation internal and secret. Read on

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#007989

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#008000

More: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/politics/14180681.htm

Who’s doing the Pentagon’s domestic spying?

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003904.html

The Department of Justice is still refusing to turn over information to Congress on domestic spying

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014376.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/ats-ap_top13mar24,0,6215902.story
The National Security Agency could have legally monitored ordinarily confidential communications between doctors and patients or attorneys and their clients, the Justice Department said Friday of its controversial warrantless surveillance program.

Responding to questions from Congress, the department also said that it sees no prohibition to using information collected under the NSA's program in court. . . "Because collecting foreign intelligence information without a warrant does not violate the Fourth Amendment and because the Terrorist Surveillance Program is lawful, there appears to be no legal barrier against introducing this evidence in a criminal prosecution," the department said in responses to questions from lawmakers released Friday evening. . .

VERY suspicious: http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014374.html

This Ben Domenech affair is important, not because the fate of this lying plagiarist matters, but because of what it tells us about conservative dishonesty, cronyism, and the pathetic way in which respectable news institutions are allowing themselves to be bullied and intimidated by the Right into giving platforms to people who could never earn a column or talk show based on merit. Call it “reactionary affirmative action”

Domenech resigns over plagiarism charges

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redamerica/2006/03/ben_domenech_resigns.html
[WP] In the past 24 hours, we learned of allegations that Ben Domenech plagiarized material that appeared under his byline in various publications prior to washingtonpost.com contracting with him to write a blog that launched Tuesday.

An investigation into these allegations was ongoing, and in the interim, Domenech has resigned, effective immediately. . .

Of course, like all good conservatives, Domenech does nothing but make excuses, portraying HIMSELF as the victim in all this (I have no doubt it will help his career – the wingnuts love the narrative of a courageous voice of the Right who has been silenced by the dastardly liberals)

http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/3/24/151255/259

[Short version: “My Editor did it”]

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5597

The narrative begins: http://redstate.org/story/2006/3/24/231749/503

“Resigned” or fired?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/did-post-fire-republican-blogger.html
[Human Events] Domenech said he was disappointed washingtonpost.com pulled the plug so quickly after the blog was launched.

“I guess the thing that bothers me the most about this is that the Post didn’t give this a chance to either blow over or work itself out,” he said. “And I feel that if they had done that, the blog would have been a great addition to their site.”

What is the status of his excuses? Not worth the paper they are written on

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114324546006128042
In his excuse making Box Turtle Ben implied that when he ripped off PJ O'Rourke that it was labeled with "as inspired by O'Rourke's original." I'm not entirely sure if he intended to make that claim or if it was just sloppy writing (as this was something he wrote himself it's hard to tell). Either way no such disclaimer was on it.

O’Rourke speaks: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114326698342038222
[NYT] Contacted at his home in New Hampshire, Mr. O'Rourke said that he had never heard of Mr. Domenech and did not recall meeting him. . . "I wouldn't want to swear in a court of law that I never met the guy, Mr. O'Rourke said of Mr. Domenech, "but I didn't give him permission to use my words under his byline, no."

More: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/24/domenech/index.html

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/national-review-finds-even-more-pieces.html
The National Review Online, for whom the Post blogger wrote previously, has now found numerous questionable cases of possible plagiarism while writing for the National Review, which pretty much blows the "college indiscretion" argument out the window. . .

[NB: So much for “My Editor did it”]

How about the excuses made by others? Risible

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114323067041235652
[Jeff Goldstein] Ben, for what ever mistakes he may have made, at least appended his own name to whatever he posted or wrote publicly.

[NB: Domenech posted at Red State under the pseudonym “Augustine”]

http://billmon.org/archives/002364.html
[Billmon] The Post, it seems, isn't so far gone it's willing to ride out the storm with a serial plagiarist. But the obvious reluctance of the paper and its editorial minions to face the facts, either before or after hiring Baby Ben, is rather telling -- as is the absurdity of their lies:

We obviously did plenty of background checks" on Domenech, Brady said . . . . Plagiarism, though, is not an easy thing to spot, Brady suggested.

So hard, in fact, it took a few left-wing bloggers three whole days to come up with about twenty zillion examples of Ben's journalistic offenses. (Note to Jim Brady: Google. Check it out.)

UPDATE: [Jim Brady] We appreciate the speed and thoroughness with which our readers and media outlets surfaced these allegations.

[NB: That’s funny. It’s like knowingly distributing a buggy 1.0 version of an application to users, expecting them to find the problems and then bring them to your attention. I’m sure Brady “appreciates” progressive bloggers doing the Post’s job of vetting its job applicants for them – AFTER they’ve been hired]

So how did an underqualified, 24-year old college dropout land a plum assignment at one of the nation’s most prestigious news organizations? The Myth, and the Reality

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114321870838185527
[WP – The Myth] At 18, Benjamin Domenech, of Round Hill, has landed himself a plum assignment in the world of inside-the-Beltway journalism. He writes a column, "Any Given Sunday," recapping the political talk television programs for the World Wide Web site of the conservative National Review magazine.

If there was a Top 10 list of young Loudoun County people to watch, he’d be on it. And agree with him or not, you would be hard pressed to deny that Domenech is a sharp writer with an obvious command of his national politics beat–especially considering that this is the first year he is eligible to vote.

"He really shows maturity beyond his years," said Richard Lowry, editor of the National Review.

Lowry said he runs into a lot of George Will-wannabes trying to break into national journalism circles at a very young age, but "few of them can actually pull it off. [Domenech] just seems to be just a couple steps in front of everyone else."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/141635/041
[DHinMI – Reality] Ben Domenech did not get his position at the Washington Post based on merit. He got his position because of connections. He was home-schooled in part because his family--unlike most American families--could maintain a comfortable living with only one parent working outside the home. He got in to William and Mary, but he did not come close to graduating. (And given his penchant for plagiarism, one would have to wonder if intellectual thievery prompted a forced departure from William and Mary.) Nevertheless, despite no degree or significant life accomplishments, he got some patronage jobs in the Bush administration, no doubt because his father is an upper level GOP apparatchik. . . And he parlayed all those connections in to getting the Washington Post gig while still in his mid-20's. . .

What has the Washington Post learned from this experience? Not much, apparently

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/183323/642

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5594
[Athenae] Now, of course, the questions begin.

Who made the decision to hire him? What was the vetting process?

What does this say about the journalism of the Washington Post? Who will be held accountable for this debacle?

What can the rest of us learn from it?

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-movement-is-unburdened-by.html
[Glenn Greenwald] But Domenech loves George Bush and works as a Republican operative. He worked for Sen. Jon Cornyn, was a RedState regular, and edited Michelle Malkin's book. So behavioral standards don't apply to him. By definition, nothing that he does can be wrong -- certainly not that wrong -- because he's a person at his core who is incapable of doing anything truly blameworthy, and the proof of that is that he is a Bush supporter. As a result, in the face of this truly disturbing and facially conclusive evidence that Domenech is a serial plagiarist, his comrades at RedState are searching around desperately for some rationale to defend and justify his conduct, literally insisting that there is nothing wrong with overt acts of deliberate plagiarism. . .

There are now posts up at RedState entitled "We Must Defend" and "We Must Attack," insisting that Domenech did nothing wrong and demanding that Bush followers defend him regardless of whether he did. The former actually claims that all of this seems like plagiarism "only because permissions obtained and judgments made offline were not reflected online by an out dated and out of business campus newspaper"-- as though all of the magazines and journals in which his plagiarized articles appear, including magazines such as National Review, really did arrange permission with all of the authors from whom Domenech stole but simply forgot to include that permission. They resort to every excuse, every justification, every false defense in order to shield their comrades. . .

It is a base, tribal mentality where group allegiance cleanses any and all wrongdoing and immunizes the individual from any accusations of wrongdoing. We have seen this play out over and over with every Bush scandal, where no conduct is too extreme and too facially wrong to be beyond their willingness to defend it away and justify it. If you support George Bush, you can do anything -- including stealing, like Domenech did repeatedly and extensively -- and still be defended, because your allegiance to the Leader means that anything you do is good, right and justifiable. That is the mentality that has been governing our country for five years now, and it is vividly apparent with this tawdry debacle.

More: http://billmon.org/archives/002364.html

Chris Matthews is shocked – SHOCKED – to realize that the Bush administration lied to get us into war, and are still lying about it

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114323423672688447
[CM, from the Imus newsletter] "Well I am just going to stick to this point that the president led us in there with the background music of American culture. Everybody was led to believe that we were getting payback, we were avenging what happened on 9/11 and that we are going to get them. Vice President Cheney said we are going to attack terrorism at its base. Over and over the language was, this is where it came from, in fact most recently the President suggested that it was always the hot pursuit, like a new York police chase, we chased them back into their country. We pursued the terrorists back to Iraq and it's all nonsense. The reason there are terrorists in Iraq today like Zarqawi is we created the opening by blowing the country apart. From the beginning it's been not true. Now you can't prove motive and you can't prove somebody lies, but from the beginning everything about how they've got WMD's, they are a threat to us, they are going to bomb us with a nuclear weapon, this country is going to be an easy liberate, it's going to be a cake walk. As Cheney said as recently as ten months ago the insurgents are in their last throws. Everything that is said is not true. And right to the end here, here we are now and it's not a civil war and when Allawi the prime Minster is saying it is a civil war and here is the president quoting his own people that it's not a civil war. I mean the denial has been continuous. So you really can't count on the administration to tell you what is going on. That is just the fact. You've got to check it out. By the way, the president said this week that he wants the whole truth about what is going on in Iraq, the whole truth and that the media isn't telling the whole story. I'll tell you what we are not telling. We are not showing pictures of the twenty five hundred bodies coming back because they won't let us show the pictures. They don't want the whole truth out and that's the fact."

"I think the president made a big mistake this week, and maybe I'm the only one that caught it, but when he came out and said he never said that we went to Iraq because of what happened on 9/11, that Saddam was never involved in 9/11, that whole mentality, the whole culture, the country music, everything, was saying this was payback. We are getting them in Iraq because of what they did to us on 9/11, and now they come out and say I never claimed that. Well you know it's in the actual language of when he said to congress, I'm now going to pick you up on that authorization to go to war, but we are going to war tomorrow, this is in 2003 in March, we are going to war tomorrow and the reason we are going is because we are going to get the countries attacked us on 9/11 we are going to get them. . . . To come out now and say I never said this was payback is B.S." . . .

"He said in the statement he gave to Congress when he said ok boys we are going to war tomorrow morning, in that statement he said I'm operating under the authorization that allows me to go after organizations or countries that attacked us on 9/11. Many times he said we can't distinguish between the people who attacked us on 9/11, we can't separate the two. The vice president was very clear, continually talking about coordination between the Iraqi intelligence and Muhammad Atta, who was the chief hijacker, it's right there in the tapes, and then Cheney comes out and denies it even though it's right on tape. Remember Gloria Borger interviewed him, I'm not sure if she was CBS at the time, but she interviewed him and he directly lied about it, and said that he did not say that. A number of times we have showed the tape and when he actually said exactly what he was denying on tape, we got the tape of what he was denying."

Video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/24.html#a7654

Bad news for Republicans in 2006

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/senate-race-poll-numbers-bad-for-gop.html
The latest survey released by SurveyUSA shows that Americans continue to lose confidence in their Republicans Senators. With Conrad Burns and Rick Santorum leading the pack, five of the Republicans facing strong Democratic challengers this November find themselves with approval ratings in the bottom fifth of the U.S. Senate. The following are the highlights of the latest survey. . .

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1176860,00.html
TIME's latest poll finds American voters heading into November's election dissatisfied with the Republican-dominated status quo, but not necessarily convinced that the answer lies in voting Democratic. The poll, conducted March 22-23, finds Americans unhappy with the performance of the Republican-controlled Congress — 39% approve, versus 49% who disapprove — and gives Democrats a 9-point lead when voters are asked to state which party's candidate they would choose for a House of Representatives seat (50% answered Democrat, 41% chose Republican). Voters favor Democratic control of Congress by 49% compared with 38% for Republican control.

More: http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/24/144842/261

Republican candidates are running away from Bush as fast as they can

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/24/gop_senate_campaigns_avoid_bush.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/24/1241/83460

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/24/171956/007
[Georgia10] The GOP is scared. . .

I guess now he has to quit, too

http://www.senatemajority.com/node/142
[Ken Mehlman] “The position of the Republican National Committee is simple: we will not tolerate fraud; we will not tolerate intimidation; we will not tolerate suppression. No employee, associate, or any person representing the Republican party who engages in these kinds of acts will remain in that position.”

That letter, dated August 9, 2005, was sent just two days before the RNC admitted they were paying for James Tobin’s legal defense. . .

More: http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/8/11/105918/618

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/06/03/ale06035.html
The Union Leader today reported that "court records show Ken Mehlman's office received more than 75 telephone calls from now-convicted phone-jam conspirator James Tobin from Sept. 30 to Nov. 22 of that year." At the time, Mehlman--the current RNC Chair--was White House political director. [Union Leader, 3/23/06] This raises the disturbing question of whether Tobin, who worked for the RNC and the NRSC at the time and has since been convicted on two criminal charges for his role in the scheme, discussed the plan with one of the President's most important political strategists.

More on the tax implications of Barbara Bush’s donation to “charity” (her son Neil’s charity)

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/barbara-bushs-compassionate-tax.html
[Joe] Looks likes W's mother managed to pull a double tax dodge with her "gift" to Katrina. She contributed to a non-profit, so gets to take that as a charitable deduction. But, she earmarked the gift to her son's company via the non-profit. . . The reality of the transaction is that instead of giving Neil a direct gift, he gets the money funneled via the non-profit. Therein lies the second part of the dodge -- if Barbara gave the money directly to Neil, she'd have to pay a gift tax. . . Big tax deduction for her gift. Neil benefits from his mother's earmark. No gift tax. She's a shrewd one that Barbara Bush.

It's good to be Barbara Bush and not pay taxes...only the little people do that.

Good news: FEC won’t regulate blogs

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/24/22335/2064

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/24/fec_backs_down_on_blogs.html
[Rick Hasen] "As a matter of substance, this is about everything that the Internet political community could hope for: broad exemptions for most political activity on the Internet... On the whole, I think these are very good rules in preserving robust political speech on the internet that takes place without much danger of the corruption of candidates."

Sunday talk show line-ups

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#114325186024040311
Meet the Press hosts Sec/State Condoleezza Rice and a roundtable of Washington Post's David Broder, New York Times' Elisabeth Bumiller, Cook Report's Charlie Cook, and Wall Street Journal's John Harwood.

Face the Nation hosts NSA Stephen Hadley and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA).

This Week hosts Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D-MT) and a roundtable of George Will, Fareed Zakaria and Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel.

Fox News Sunday hosts Rice and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI).

Late Edition hosts Rice and Sens. Jack Reed (D-RI) and Pat Roberts (R-KS).

Bonus item: Big Oops!

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/24/inconvenient-facts/
[President Bush, 9/16/05] We’ve got a strong ally in Russia in fighting the war on terror….we understand we have a duty to protect our citizens, and to work together and to do everything we can to stop the killing.

[AP, 3/24/06] The Russian government provided Saddam Hussein with intelligence on U.S. military movements and plans during the opening days of the war in 2003.

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:29 AM

 
EXTERNAL EVENTS

Well, folks, thanks to your efforts, PBD is a finalist for “Best Blog” in the Koufax awards. Just to make the top ten is quite an honor, and I really appreciate it. There is now a final round of voting to determine a winner, and if you are so inclined, please go to this site, scroll to the bottom, and vote for “Progressive Blog Digest” via the Comments section:

http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002506.html

There are a lot of deserving blogs in this category.

Of course, wouldn’t you know it, I am out of the country right now and missing my daily schedule; but I will keep posting whenever I can get reliable Internet access. By Monday March 27 I will be back on my regular daily schedule again.

Another smooch-athon from Adam Nagourney and Elisabeth Bumiller at the times

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/23/123254/373

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/politics/23rove.html

But here’s the best line from the article

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009553
[NYT] One person who met Mr. Rove said he attributed Mr. Bush's problems more to external events, in particular Hurricane Katrina and Iraq, than to anything the White House did wrong. . .

[Greg Sargent] The president's problems aren't attributable to anything the White House did wrong? Only to external events? Jeez. Aren't the president's problems due to the fact that he's being held accountable for reacting wrongly to these external events, in both New Orleans and Iraq?

More coming attractions

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/23/bush20/index.html
[Tim Grieve] "Democrat leaders' talk of censure and impeachment isn't about the law or the president doing anything wrong. It's about the fact that Democrat leaders don't want America to fight the War on Terror with every tool in our arsenal."

That's the pitch Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman made in a fundraising solicitation sent to GOP supporters today. And when we saw it, we thought of it as little more than a particularly stark example of the straw-man politics favored by George W. Bush. . .

So straw men? They're everywhere. But Newsweek's Howard Fineman suggests that there's something else going on here, too. . . [T]he White House is making a pivot to Plan B: Forget the Global War on Terror; now it's time for the War Against Terrorists Inside the Homeland. And as part of the usual "with us or with the terrorists" theme, the War Against Terrorists Inside the Homeland also means the War Against the Traitor Media and those Spineless, Security-Hating Democrats, Too.

As Fineman explains it, the White House and the GOP are fixing to set up Bush as some sort of tough-guy cop fighting against the "wussie lovers of legalistic niceties that get in the way of investigations and MSM news organizations that focus obsessively on explosions and mayhem in Iraq, even as they print or broadcast classified information and ask nasty, argumentative questions at hastily called press conferences." The underlying strategy: Move away from all the Iraq talk and get back to the question of homeland security.

Now, we'll admit that we're not sure how this is different from what the Bush administration has been doing all along. Dick Cheney used to complain that John Kerry wanted to show terrorists our "softer side." Cheney and Bush both talk often about the Democrats' "pre-9/11 mindset," and Karl Rove has been known to say that Democrats want only "therapy and understanding" for those who attacked the United States. . .

More: http://mediamatters.org/items/200603240001
As part of the White House's current public relations blitz, President Bush and senior aides have claimed that Americans are increasingly disillusioned about the Iraq war because the mainstream media report only the violent and tragic events occurring there. Bush has said that the negative coverage provoked him to explain directly to the public why he remains optimistic about the U.S. mission in Iraq. . . [read on]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/23/BL2006032300803.html

Straw man alert: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6937.html

Gee, the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq was rampant with party hacks, incompetence, and unbelievable corruption. Who knew?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11965317/site/newsweek/

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008489.php
[Newsweek] There is much more to come, especially on the little-noticed issue of contracting in Iraq, which the watchdog group Transparency International last year warned could become “the biggest corruption scandal in history." The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction is expected to issue a harshly critical report in May concluding that the CPA did not have disciplined contracting procedures in place, according to several people involved in drafting the report. If the Democrats manage to get control of the House later this year, it's all going to come in an avalanche of subpoenas and new investigations.

[Kevin Drum] It's not censure or impeachment that Republicans are really worried about if they lose control of Congress. It's subpoenas. If they lose the ability to block Democrats from conducting genuine investigations backed by the subpoena power of Congress, the jig is up. And they know it.

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#007980

Here’s why Bush has started hinting that troops will be Iraq after he leaves office: THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PLAN

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-usiraq24mar24,1,6914932.story
Even as military planners look to withdraw significant numbers of American troops from Iraq in the coming year, the Bush administration continues to request hundreds of millions of dollars for large bases there, raising concerns over whether they are intended as permanent sites for U.S. forces.

U.S. to Iraq: we can do it, but don’t you dare

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/24/international/middleeast/24detain.html
Three years after the invasion of Iraq, American troops are no longer simply teaching counterinsurgency techniques; they are trying to school the Iraqis in battling a Sunni-led rebellion without resorting to the tactics of a "dirty war," involving abductions, torture and murder.

Is there a link between the White House and the illegal phone-jamming scheme in New Hampshire? Sure looks like it

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/06/03/ale06035.html

Nice work if you can get it

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#007978
[Josh Marshall] The Houston Chronicle reports this morning that the donation Barbara Bush made to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund was 'earmarked' for the educational software company Ignite!

As some of you probably know that's the junk company owned by her ne'er-do-well son Neil Bush.

Actually, though, it's way better, or worse, depending on your turn of mind.

Ignite!'s has a unique business model, which works like this. Neil goes around the world finding international statesmen, bigwigs and criminals who want to 'invest' in Ignite! as a way to curry favor with the brother in the White House.

[NB: What I want to know is if she took a deduction as a charitable donation for money she donated to her son’s company. That, presumably, would be a crime.]

Will there ever be a proper inquiry into illegal wiretapping? The battle between Roberts and Specter

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/23/111420/093

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/waiting-for-non-existent-nsa.html

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003898.html

The Goofus Files

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5572

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/03/23/national/w073533S33.DTL

Ben, we hardly knew ye (and it looks like we won’t have the chance to get to know him better via the Washington Post). Within hours of being announced as the new voice of the Right for the Post, multiple plagiarism charges abound against Domenech. (This boy will be gone by next week)

Numerous examples of unambiguous plagiarism cited over at: http://atrios.blogspot.com/

More: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/03/24/domenech/

Domenech BLAMES HIS EDITORS: http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/24/06/56/the-editor-did-it/

What a creep! http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/03/24/domenech_blog/index.html

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/23/181857/404

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009555

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603230012

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5576

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6928.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/23/161748/570

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114316574590601750

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5585

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/washington-post-republican-blogger.html

But don’t expect the WP ombuds(wo)man to do anything about it – it’s someone else’s problem, she says

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/wash-post-ombudsman-blows-off.html

Being a conservative means never having to say you’re sorry

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/23/154315/434

A sorry state, indeed

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603230006

Theocracy watch

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1737214,00.html
[Sidney Blumenthal] In American Theocracy, Phillips describes Bush as the founder of "the first American religious party"; September 11 gave him the pretext for "seizing the fundamentalist moment"; he has manipulated a "critical religious geography" to hype issues such as gay marriage. "New forces were being interwoven. These included the institutional rise of the religious right, the intensifying biblical focus on the Middle East, and the deepening of insistence on church-government collaboration within the GOP electorate." It portended a potential "American Disenlightenment," apparent in Bush's hostility to science.

Even Bush's failures have become pretexts for advancing his transformation of government. Exploiting his own disastrous emergency management after Hurricane Katrina, Bush is funneling funds to churches as though they can compensate for governmental breakdown. . .

Has Chris Matthews gotten even worse?

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11345

An example: http://mediamatters.org/items/200603230009
McMAHON: His approval ratings have dropped to a level you haven't seen since Richard Nixon. People don't believe this president, they don't trust this president, and it's moved over in to character issues.

MATTHEWS: How can you not trust a man who says "I won't be able to win this war in my presidency; I'm leaving it up to other presidents in the future"? You're basically taking a real -- what do they call it? Not an umbrella defense. A prevent defense. You're saying basically, "OK, I'm not going to win this war."

ROGERS: He's moved the goal post.

MATTHEWS: He's moved the goal post. He said, "I'm not going to win this in the next three years, boys and girls. You're gonna have to live with this." . . . [read on]

[NB: This is a reason to TRUST Bush?]

Handy rundown of open House seats

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/23/133939/847

Annals in the fine art of redaction

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008486.php

Bonus item: Why has the treasonous mainstream media ignored this story?

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46450/print/
Rumsfeld: Iraqis Now Capable Of Conducting War Without U.S. Assistance
WASHINGTON, DC—Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Monday that escalating violence in Iraq demonstrates that the Iraqi population is now capable of waging the Iraq war without outside military aid, and pronounced the American mission there "a complete success.". . . [read on!]

[NB: Oh, it’s the ONION – never mind. . .]

More:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/cnns-cafferty-lays-knock-out-punch-on.html

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:53 AM

 
THE PRESIDENT WE HAVE

Well, folks, thanks to your efforts, PBD is a finalist for “Best Blog” in the Koufax awards. Just to make the top ten is quite an honor, and I really appreciate it. There is now a final round of voting to determine a winner, and if you are so inclined, please go to this site, scroll to the bottom, and vote for “Progressive Blog Digest” via the Comments section:

http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002506.html

There are a lot of deserving blogs in this category.

Of course, wouldn’t you know it, I am out of the country right now and missing my daily schedule; but I will keep posting whenever I can get reliable Internet access. By Monday March 27 I will be back on my regular daily schedule again.

Bush’s press conference, by any objective fact-check standpoint, was a catastrophe. But the media, by and large, doesn’t seem interested in much of that any more

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603220011
[Candy Crowley, CNN] [H]e's very good at zingers. He's good at jokes. He looks comfortable. He can be in command, and, but the strange thing is, Wolf, I saw that George Bush in 2000 when he was running for president, when he had to be out there, when every day was a news conference, so he's kind of in that groove. . . [A]n unusually animated and upbeat President Bush had answers for all of the issues that are dragging him down ... starting with Iraq. . . “

CROWLEY: Wolf, there's no mistaking that the president is in a full-court press on Iraq policy. It's an effort really to seize back control through words and through actions both big and small. . . Sometimes, and this is one of those times, there is substance to the style. A president in free fall in the polls needs to be and look and sound in charge. . .

CROWLEY: And a president depicted as isolated from criticism needs to seek it out. . . He's begun to do a lot more of this lately, going before not entirely friendly audiences, with not entirely scripted questions, trying to counter the image of a president detached from reality, allergic to challenge. The White House says the president is best in these public forums, and yesterday in Cleveland, he responded to the criticism and showed some game. . .

In fact, how did the press conference go?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11926202/#060322
[Eric Alterman] Sure, I’m obsessed. Why shouldn’t I be? The most powerful man in the world tells bald-faced lies that result in the death of tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of people and the mainstream media which is charged with informing citizens of such things pretends it hasn’t happened. It keeps happening, and nobody seems to think it’s a big deal. Well, I do. On a day when the Washington Post editorial board found the president’s press conference to be "sometimes blunt, sometimes joking and sometimes unpolished" but "sounded authentic," I found it to be “lying.” Here’s yesterday’s lie, note: not “mistake.” Not “difference of interpretation.” Lie.

We worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny the inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did. And the world is safer for it.

Bush’s Big Mistake

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2767
[Fubar] Sometimes I'm just a little slow. It took me a day and several readings of the same passage before it hit me that during his press conference George W. Bush just might have handed the Democrats a fantastic 2008 election gift:

Bush said he would call home the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq if he was not confident about his victory plan. U.S. commanders in Iraq will determine when troop levels can be lowered, he said, suggesting that some will remain beyond January 2009. Asked if a day will come when there are no U.S. troops there, Bush said "that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq."

What Bush just did was to hand the first person who is willing to stand up and commit to getting U.S. out of the Iraq mess the keys to the oval office, since he obviously believes he isn't the person to do it. Will that person be a Democrat or a Republican in the unenviable position of having to decide between supporting an increasingly unpopular war and President or contradicting him publicly?

Thank you Mr. Bush. You just made life a living hell for the next GOP candidate. Now if we could only find a Democratic candidate willing to stand up.

Watch Scotty try to explain it away: http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5569

And how did that Cleveland town hall meeting go?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6927.html

Glenn Greenwald demolishes the myths against censuring Bush

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/myth-making-and-excuse-making-on.html

The perilous future of our economy (and what is Bush doing about it?)

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032101133.html

The Goofus Files

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/22/bush/index.html

This could be good: MZM (tied to the Cunningham/Wade/Wilkes scandal) may have helped staff the Silberman-Robb intelligence review panel!

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000155.php

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003879.html

What the IRS wants to do with your 1040 form

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008478.php

Joe Lieberman (D-CN), Dubya’s new best buddy across the aisle (Bush’s ONLY buddy across the aisle) is facing a serious primary challenge: and he’s not taking it very well

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/23/184/02009

[“The bloggers are out to get me! The bloggers are out to get me!”]

More: http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/03/22/no-shit-holy-joes-cracking/#more-1522

The Washington Post, like CNN and too many other mainstream news outlets, has hired yet another ugly, hateful voice on the right to try to insulate themselves from the criticism that they are too “liberal.” Look, represent conservative views: hire another George Will or two: but importing the rhetoric of hate radio and wingnut blogs only pulls down the general level of political discourse even further. Folks, meet Ben Domenech. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/22/104154/380

Why this won’t help the Post: http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009512

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009514

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009521

Why the Post should be ashamed: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007960.php

Domenech, Domenech – doesn’t he have a Dad. . . ?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#007962

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_19.php#007969

Bonus item: Creepy

http://www.blogenlust.net/2006/03/president-tourettes/

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 8:41 AM

 
HARD PRESSED

Well, folks, thanks to your efforts, PBD is a finalist for “Best Blog” in the Koufax awards. Just to make the top ten is quite an honor, and I really appreciate it. There is now a final round of voting to determine a winner, and if you are so inclined, please go to this site, scroll to the bottom, and vote for “Progressive Blog Digest” via the Comments section:

http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002506.html

There are a lot of deserving blogs in this category.

Of course, wouldn’t you know it, I am out of the country right now and missing my daily schedule; but I will keep posting whenever I can get reliable Internet access. By Monday March 27 I will be back on my regular daily schedule again.

I don’t know why the pundits characterize Bush’s recent press conference comments on the war as reflecting some “new realism” – as far as I can tell, he is as delusional as ever

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032100452.html
With a series of polls showing Bush and the war less popular than ever, he rejected calls to change the U.S. military strategy or shake up the White House staff and war cabinet. "I am happy with the people I surrounded myself with," he said. . .

The chief aim of the White House news conference, Bush's second this year, was to make his case again that Iraq is progressing toward a viable democracy despite daily images of car bombings and sectarian violence. . .

Bush said he disagrees with former Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi, a man who had been handpicked by his administration, and others who say that the country is already engaged in a civil war in which dozens of people are killed each day. "The way I look at the situation," Bush said, "the Iraqis took a look and decided not to go to civil war." If a civil war erupts, he said, Iraqi forces will be in charge of ending it, with assistance from U.S. troops.

As the debate over whether a civil war is at hand has shown, Bush's optimistic assessments are often contradicted by Iraqi and other U.S. officials and sometimes by the conditions on the ground three years after the invasion. But Bush rejected the notion that his Iraq policy is based on wishful thinking. "I say that I am talking realistically to people," he said. . .

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y17722FCC
"I am confident — I believe, I'm optimistic we'll succeed," the president said. "If not, I'd pull our troops out. If I didn't believe we had a plan for victory I wouldn't leave our people in harm's way."

More “realism”

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007956.php
[GWB] I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences ... and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.

[Josh Marshall] Of course, that's not what happened. . . [read on]

More: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/21/bushpc/index.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/21/BL2006032100573.html

http://www.ericumansky.com/2006/03/notes_on_the_pr.html

“I am ashamed. . .”

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/21/175132/005

Passing the buck. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032100452.html
Bush said he would call home the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq if he was not confident about his victory plan. U.S. commanders in Iraq will determine when troop levels can be lowered, he said, suggesting that some will remain beyond January 2009. Asked if a day will come when there are no U.S. troops there, Bush said "that will be decided by future presidents. . .”

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008473.php
[Harry Reid] Three years into the war in Iraq, with that country now experiencing a low-grade civil war, it has become increasingly clear that President Bush is content with an open-ended commitment with no end in sight for our U.S. troops and taxpayers....President Bush must accept that he has to change course, reject the notion of an open-ended commitment in Iraq, and finally develop the plan that allows our troops to begin to come home. . .

http://www.slate.com/id/2138476/fr/rss/
[Emily Biuso] Mission: Indefinite

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5563
[Holden] I don't know about your local paper, but the bold, above-the-fold headline in mine reads US Troops To Stay Through Bush Term, with a sub-head reading President Says Future Leaders Will Decide When To Leave Iraq.

That can't be the message they wanted coming out of yesterday's presser.

And here it is, the President’s showdown with Helen Thomas: full of laughs

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5559
THE PRESIDENT: . . .Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --

Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.

THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --

Q I'm talking about Iraq --

THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans. . . [read on]

I was going to blog this, but fubar got there first: on the great “new” policy of Clear, Hold, and Build

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2762

Think Progress creates a great resource: a timeline of the Bush gang’s foolish, failed Iraq War policies

http://www.thinkprogress.org/iraq-timeline

OK, Iraq, not so good maybe – but what about our glorious success in Afghanistan?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/20/14122/6637
[Armando] Taliban supreme leader Mullah Mohammed Omar announced that "all countrymen are seriously notified that any Muslim Afghan will be sentenced to death if he accepts Christianity and has converted to this nullified religion or is seen inviting people to Christianity and Judaism as well as propagating and distributing their books." Thus, anyone who converts from Islam to another religion or attempts to convert others will be executed. [January 8, 2001]

Successful societies guarantee religious liberty -- the right to serve and honor God without fear of persecution. . . These vital principles are being applied in the nations of Afghanistan and Iraq. With the steady leadership of President Karzai, the people of Afghanistan are building a modern and peaceful government. Next month, 500 delegates will convene a national assembly in Kabul to approve a new Afghan constitution. The proposed draft would establish a bicameral parliament, set national elections next year, and recognize Afghanistan's Muslim identity, while protecting the rights of all citizens. [Bush, November 2003]

An Afghan man is being prosecuted in a Kabul court and could be sentenced to death on a charge of converting from Islam to Christianity, a crime under this country's Islamic laws, a judge said Sunday. The trial is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what shape Islam should take here four years after the ouster of the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban regime. During the one-day hearing, the defendant confessed that he converted from Islam to Christianity 16 years ago while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in the Pakistani city of Peshawar, Mawlavezada said.

"We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law," the judge said. "It is an attack on Islam." . . . Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death, said Ahmad Fahim Hakim, deputy chairman of the state-sponsored Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. [ABC, March 19]

The Goofus Files

http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/21/12/46/highlights/

Straw men

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6916.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/21/bushpc2/index.html

Remember the case in Denver, in which someone was posing as a Secret Service agent to oust some unwanted audience members from a Bush event? It was never tracked down who the person was, or whether they were punished for this illegal act. Now it comes out – the person was a White House staffer. Who? And what happened to him?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6897.html

Theocracy watch

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032101723.html
Under the auspices of its religion-based initiatives and other federal programs, the administration has funneled at least $157 million in grants to organizations run by political and ideological allies, according to federal grant documents and interviews. . .

The last refuge of scoundrels (and desperate losers)

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6896.html
[Katherine Harris] also said that she never would have entered politics if she did not believe that God wanted her to make public service part of her life. She added, "Everything is possible with God.". . .

[NB: Everything, that is, except rescuing your pathetic, shameless campaign]

[Steve Benen] The Reclaiming America for Christ conference, hosted annually at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, is a chance for the Taliban-wing of the conservative movement to talk about, literally, "reclaiming" the country and making it a "Christian nation.". . .

The prospects for dumping the Republicans in 2006

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/20/144040/028

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/20/125915/638

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009500

The Washington Post’s new right-wing blogger (to balance out. . . whom?)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603210017

Bonus item: Quote of the day

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/21/enemy/index.html
[Tim Grieve] During his press conference this morning, George W. Bush asked Americans to "imagine an enemy that says: 'We will kill innocent people because we're trying to encourage people to be free.'" . . [read on]

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:57 AM

 
THREE YEARS

I am traveling over the next several days, with uncertain Internet access, so PBD may be a bit sporadic until I get back next Sunday (Nick)

Did anyone believe they would actually stop after Abu Ghraib?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/international/middleeast/19abuse.html
As the Iraqi insurgency intensified in early 2004, an elite Special Operations forces unit converted one of Saddam Hussein's former military bases near Baghdad into a top-secret detention center. There, American soldiers made one of the former Iraqi government's torture chambers into their own interrogation cell. They named it the Black Room.

In the windowless, jet-black garage-size room, some soldiers beat prisoners with rifle butts, yelled and spit in their faces and, in a nearby area, used detainees for target practice in a game of jailer paintball. . . The Black Room was part of a temporary detention site at Camp Nama, the secret headquarters of a shadowy military unit known as Task Force 6-26. Located at Baghdad International Airport, the camp was the first stop for many insurgents on their way to the Abu Ghraib prison a few miles away.

Placards posted by soldiers at the detention area advised, "NO BLOOD, NO FOUL." The slogan, as one Defense Department official explained, reflected an adage adopted by Task Force 6-26: "If you don't make them bleed, they can't prosecute for it." According to Pentagon specialists who worked with the unit, prisoners at Camp Nama often disappeared into a detention black hole, barred from access to lawyers or relatives, and confined for weeks without charges. "The reality is, there were no rules there," another Pentagon official said.

The story of detainee abuse in Iraq is a familiar one. But the following account of Task Force 6-26, based on documents and interviews with more than a dozen people, offers the first detailed description of how the military's most highly trained counterterrorism unit committed serious abuses. . .

The new account reveals the extent to which the unit members mistreated prisoners months before and after the photographs of abuse from Abu Ghraib were made public in April 2004, and it helps belie the original Pentagon assertions that abuse was confined to a small number of rogue reservists at Abu Ghraib. . .

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/18/134410/597

http://billmon.org/archives/002361.html

Three years of war, and they’ve learning NOTHING

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/three-years-later-bush-iraq-strategy.html
[WP] On the eve of the third anniversary of the Iraq invasion, President Bush yesterday promised to "finish the mission" with "complete victory," urging the American public to remain steadfast but offering no indication when victory may be achieved.

"More fighting and sacrifice will be required," Bush said in his weekly radio address. "For some, the temptation to retreat and abandon our commitments is strong. Yet there is no peace, there's no honor and there's no security in retreat. So America will not abandon Iraq to the terrorists who want to attack us again."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/18/112142/656
[Rumsfeld] Some have described the situation in Iraq as a tightening noose, noting that "time is not on our side" and that "morale is down." Others have described a "very dangerous" turn of events and are "extremely concerned."

Who are they that have expressed these concerns? In fact, these are the exact words of terrorists discussing Iraq -- Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his associates -- who are describing their own situation and must be watching with fear the progress that Iraq has made over the past three years. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/opinion/19sun1.html
[NYT] Three years ago, the United States invaded Iraq. We can all run the story through our minds: Shock and Awe, Coalition of the Willing, Mission Accomplished, looting, "Stuff happens," no W.M.D., suicide bombers, purple fingers, blasted shrine.

Many who supported the invasion have taken this anniversary to argue that it all would have been worthwhile if things had been run better. They argue that if the coalition forces had been large enough to actually secure the country, to keep insurgents from raiding Saddam Hussein's ammunition depots, to give the people a sense of safety, the country might well be on the road to a hopeful future.

We doubt it. The last three years have shown how little our national leaders understood Iraq, and have reminded us how badly attempts at liberation from the outside have gone in the past. Given where we are now, the question of whether a botched invasion created a lost opportunity might be moot, except for one thing. The man who did the botching, Donald Rumsfeld, is still the secretary of defense. . .

More: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114276716424406844

Worst President ever? A debate

http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/27975

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007939

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/18/163845/666

Making it up

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/washington-post-editorial-repeats-as.html
Here's what the Post claimed in today's editorial:

In Iraq -- where American soldiers are dying from Iranian-supplied roadside bombs. . .

Powerful sentence. Only problem? It's not true. . .

Another lazy news story that leaves out the key word: REPUBLICANS

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/business/19pension.html
With a strong directive from the Bush administration, Congress set out more than a year ago to fashion legislation that would protect America's private pension system, tightening the rules to make sure companies set aside enough money to make good on their promises to employees.

Then the political horse-trading began, with lawmakers, companies and lobbyists, representing everything from big Wall Street firms to tiny rural electric cooperatives, weighing in on the particulars of the Bush administration's blueprint. . . In the end, lawmakers modified many of the proposed rules, allowing companies more time to cover pension shortfalls, to make more forgiving estimates about how much they will owe workers in the future, and even sometimes to assume that their workers will die younger than the rest of the population. . .

As a result, the bill now being completed in a House-Senate conference committee, rather than strengthening the pension system, would actually weaken it, according to a little-noticed analysis by the government's pension agency. . .

Lobbyists have zero concern that GOP “lobbying reform” will do a thing to inhibit business as usual

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/18/AR2006031801305.html

Scooter Libby’s defense strategy looks more and more to be threatening to leak damaging information on the Bush gang, so they’ll pardon him first

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/18/115937/706

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014331.html

Juan Cole debunks those documents supposedly “proving” a Hussein/Al Qaeda link

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/right-blogosphere-scammed-by-bogus.html

Theocracy watch

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html
Kevin Phillips. . . presents a nightmarish vision of ideological extremism, catastrophic fiscal irresponsibility, rampant greed and dangerous shortsightedness. . . In an era of best-selling jeremiads on both sides of the political divide, "American Theocracy" may be the most alarming analysis of where we are and where we may be going to have appeared in many years. It is not without polemic, but unlike many of the more glib and strident political commentaries of recent years, it is extensively researched and for the most part frighteningly persuasive.

Although Phillips is scathingly critical of what he considers the dangerous policies of the Bush administration, he does not spend much time examining the ideas and behavior of the president and his advisers. Instead, he identifies three broad and related trends — none of them new to the Bush years but all of them, he believes, exacerbated by this administration's policies — that together threaten the future of the United States and the world. One is the role of oil in defining and, as Phillips sees it, distorting American foreign and domestic policy. The second is the ominous intrusion of radical Christianity into politics and government. And the third is the astonishing levels of debt — current and prospective — that both the government and the American people have been heedlessly accumulating. If there is a single, if implicit, theme running through the three linked essays that form this book, it is the failure of leaders to look beyond their own and the country's immediate ambitions and desires so as to plan prudently for a darkening future.

Sunday talk shows

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/18/AR2006031800965.html
FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.); Gen. George W. Casey Jr.; and Mark B. McClellan, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.); authors Michael Gordon, Christopher Hitchens and Jackie Spinner; and Olympic speed skater Joey Cheek.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Vice President Cheney.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) and Casey.

LATE EDITION (CNN): Sens. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Chalabi, Afghan Foreign Affairs Minister Abdullah Abdullah, former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, former secretary of state Henry A. Kissinger and Casey.

Bonus item: AP calls Bush on his phony, dishonest arguments (don’t miss it!)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/03/18/national/w095252S08.DTL
Bush Using Straw-Man Arguments in Speeches

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2752

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 9:15 AM

 
OPERATION OVERBLOWN

I am traveling over the next several days, with uncertain Internet access, so PBD may be a bit sporadic until I get back next Sunday (Nick)

War as theatre, again

http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/2006/03/operation_overblown.php
[Chris Allbritton] “Operation Swarmer” is really a media show. It was designed to show off the new Iraqi Army — although there was no enemy for them to fight. Every American official I’ve heard has emphasized the role of the Iraqi forces just days before the third anniversary of the start of the war. That said, one Iraqi role the military will start highlighting in the next few days, I imagine, is that of Iraqi intelligence. It was intel from the Iraqi military intelligence and interior ministry that the U.S. says prompted this Potemkin operation. And it will be the Iraqi intel that provides the cover for American military commanders to throw up their hands and say, “well, we thought bad guys were there.”

It’s hard to blame the military, however. Stations like Fox and CNN have really taken this and ran with it, with fancy graphics and theme music. The generals here also are under tremendous pressure to show off some functioning Iraqi troops before the third anniversary, and I won’t fault them for going into a region loaded for bear. After all, the Iraqi intelligence might have been right!

But Operation Overblown should raise serious questions about how good Iraqi intelligence is. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told by earnest lieutenants that the Iraqis are valiant and necessary partners, “because they know the area, the people and the customs.” But when I spoke to grunts and NCOs, however, they usually gave me blunter — and more colorful — reasons why the Iraqi intelligence was often, shall we say, useless. Tribal rivalries and personal feuds are still a major why Iraqis drop a dime on their neighbors.

So I guess it’s fitting that on the eve of the third anniversary of a war launched on — oh, let’s be generous — “faulty” intelligence, a major operation is hyped and then turns out to be less than what it appeared because of … faulty intelligence.

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2750
[Swopa] The U.S. military command has pronounced Operation "Look! Helicopters!" an unqualified success. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/18/61818/3260
[Time] Not a shot was fired, or a leader nabbed, in a major offensive that failed to live up to its advance billing. . . [C]ontrary to what many many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. . . In fact, there were no airstrikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What's more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders.

Fox and CNN love it, of course

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603170014

The “Terrorist Surveillance Act” – you know it’s going to be bad when Senate bills take their titles from WH talking points, but it’s even worse than you imagine

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/17/104044/097
[Georgia10] The bill is co-sponsored by four so-called "moderates" in order to hide its radical and catastrophic nature. What these four extremists accomplish with their bill is to amend the Constitution unilaterally--without the consent of the states--by nullifying the Fourth Amendment. Warrant? Reasonable cause? Psssh. Remnants of a pre-9/11 world, my friends.

Their bill, by making congressional notification optional, also effectively repeals the National Security Act of 1947, which requires the President keep the House and Senate Intelligence Committees "fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities." If the administration does chose to inform the Intelligence Sub-Committee, the members on that committee cannot disclose any abuses they may learn of. They can't order the government to stop the spying and they can't hold the government accountable for any abuses. Their mouths are sealed shut. Their hands are bound with inaction. They can do nothing but serve as audience for an all-powerful King. As Senate Judiciary Chairman Specter commented, this bill lets the administration "do whatever the hell it wants.". . .

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/new-nixon-law-is-introduced-that-which.html
[Glenn Greenwald] In sum, the bill authorizes and makes legal precisely the illegal conduct in which the Administration has been continuously engaging since September or October of 2001. The Administration claims that it reviews its warrantless eavesdropping every 45 days, so that's precisely what the bill authorizes. Or, as Richard Nixon says: "when the president does it that means that it is not illegal." . . . [read on]

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/trying-to-deliver-fatal-blow-to-fisa.html
[Anonymous Liberal] Glenn and Marty have already done a great job picking apart DeWine's bill, so I won't repeat what they've said. There is, however, one provision in the bill that neither of them touched upon that I think is particularly troubling. Section 2(f)(2) of the bill provides as follows:

USES OF INFORMATION.--No information acquired from electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to this section may be used or disclosed by Federal officers or employees except for lawful purposes, including the provision of a factual predicate for an order for electronic surveillance under section 104 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 . . . and use in a criminal proceeding consistent section 106 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

This is exactly the sort of provision I feared would be included in this bill. It is the fatal blow to FISA. . . [read on]

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/03/reward-for-lawbreaking-act-of-2006.html
[Marty Lederman] Nominations are open for alternative titles, such as:

The "Congressional Capitulation Act of 2006"

The "Twilight of Checks and Balances Act of 2006"

The "Did We Enact FISA? Just Kidding! Act of 2006"

The "We Negotiated for Endless Hours with the Vice President and All We Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt Act of 2006"

The "Chip ('Thank You Sir . . . May I Have Another?') Diller Commemoration Act of 2006"

Coming next: warrantless physical searches too

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014329.html
U.S. News & World Report, according to its press release read on-air Friday night by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, will report on its website Saturday night that Bush Administration lawyers advocated the President had the power to authorize warrantless physical searches two weeks after September 11, using the same arguments adopted by Bush for his NSA warrantless surveillance program.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/18/93926/4816
[Georgia10] I'd like to provide some background for just why the administration's claim is so appalling. Let's look at the text of the Bill of Rights the administration thinks it can unilaterally delete from the Constitution. . .

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114264535199163884
[Atrios] Cue wingers screeching Clinton/Aldrich Ames. I actually don't agree with what Clinton did with Aldrich Ames, but it nonetheless isn't the same thing as at the time the FISA law had no provision for dealing with physical searches. After the FISA law as amended the Clinton administration didn't argue they could violate the law.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/17/23535/7214

Big Story: Cunningham associate linked to phony Iraq intelligence for the WH

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000125.php

More: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003857.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007936

Attack on Iran: good politics

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603180001

Disgusting, dishonest reporting from the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/18/politics/18budget.html
Politics Drives a Senate Spending Spree
The largess demonstrated by the Senate in padding its budget with billions of dollars in additional spending this week showed that lawmakers are no different from many of their constituents: they don't mind pulling out the charge card when money is tight.

Just hours after opening a new line of credit through an increase in the federal debt limit, the Senate splurged on a bevy of popular programs before approving a spending plan that was as much a political document as an economic one, its fine print geared to the coming elections.

Forced to choose between calls for renewed austerity and demands for more money, many Republicans joined Democrats in reaching deeper into the Treasury. . .

[NB: Yeah, that’s how things run in Washington these days, Republicans “joining with Democrats” to pass the bills they want. The only honest title would be, “Politics Drives a Republican Spending Spree”]

Charlie Cook, no flaming liberal

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/anti-gop-tidal-wave-developing.html
In his weekly National Journal column, NBC political analyst Charlie Cook notes that by "almost every relevant measurement, national polls indicate that Republicans are at least as bad off as Democrats at this point in 1994, before suffering devastating midterm losses. . .

Theocracy watch: the Christian Right is frustrated because the Republicans aren’t obedient ENOUGH

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/17/12522/6388

The intellectual dishonesty of the right-wing punditocracy on Iraq

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/death-of-shame-in-our-pundit-class.html

On the issue of whether blogs can do political advocacy and fundraising, or whether they need to be regulated

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114263095407744055

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009475

Bonus item: Govt agents pose as Fox News reporters (or is there a difference, really?)

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/17/posing/index.html
The next time a kidnapped American journalist has to persuade his captors that he's not really a government agent in disguise, he'd better hope that the people holding him haven't read today's news from Mississippi. Raw Story points us to the report in today's Sun Herald: Government officials doing advance work for the president's trip to the Gulf Coast last week fooled at least one local resident into believing they were reporters from Fox News. . .

More: http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/14119840.htm

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6889.html

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 10:26 AM

 
MINORITY REPORT

Pre-emptive war, pre-emptive arrests: the dawn of a new fascist era. It doesn’t matter if you have done anything wrong, or are planning to do anything wrong – all that matters anymore is that they think you MIGHT do something wrong

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/bush-affirms-policy-of-preemptive.html
[Juan Cole] There is a real problem of definition here. If Bush means that he will strike at terrorists whom he has good reason to suspect of imminently carrying out an attack on the US, then that is in accord with the United Nations Charter. States can always engage in self-defense from imminent threat.

But if he means he can go around invading other countries because he doesn't like the looks of them--which is what he actually does seem to mean-- then that is a war crime both in US law and in international law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/17/nyregion/17police.html
In five internal reports made public yesterday as part of a lawsuit, New York City police commanders candidly discuss how they had successfully used "proactive arrests," covert surveillance and psychological tactics at political demonstrations in 2002, and recommend that those approaches be employed at future gatherings. . . Among the most effective strategies, one police captain wrote, was the seizure of demonstrators on Fifth Avenue who were described as "obviously potential rioters."

Oh, those crazy, blog-driven liberal Democrats: so out of touch with the sentiments of the American people

http://americanresearchgroup.com/
Do you favor or oppose the United States Senate passing a resolution censuring President George W. Bush for authorizing wiretaps of Americans within the United States without obtaining court orders?

All Adults
Favor 46%
Oppose 44%

[Republicans: 29%!!]

Now what?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6874.html
When Republicans began criticizing Sen. Russ Feingold's censure resolution, one of their principal talking points was the notion that a formal rebuke for Bush over wireless searches was, well, nuts. Common descriptions included words like "extreme" and "over the top.” . . Of course, this argument was more compelling before polling data debunked it. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/16/91111/4734
Slowly, Senators are publicly standing up against the President's blatant lawlessness. . .

Feingold on the press coverage of his censure proposal (don’t miss it!)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/16/141510/751

Mark has a point

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/_/2006/03/wei_wuwei_.php
[Mark Kleiman] Much as I hate to interrupt a nice round of Democratic fratricide and mutual loathing, would it be utterly unreasonable to suggest that not interfering as George W. Bush pours political gasoline all over himself and his party and strikes a match might in fact be the wisest strategy the Democratic leadership could pursue? It does, after all, seem to be working.

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008441.php

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/16/AR2006031601303.html

The new proposed law on wiretapping gives the American people FEWER, not more, protections of their liberties, and enshrines the currently illegal Bush policy as suddenly. . . legal! (See? Problem solved)

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y17722FCC

Bush discloses “new data” supposedly proving that Saddam was linked to Al Qaeda – but which really shows quite the opposite

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-releases-documents-showing-saddam.html

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bushs-new-evidence-re-saddam-and-al.html

Astounding (if true)

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2745
[AP] Security officials foiled a plot that would have put hundreds of al-Qaida men at guard posts around Baghdad's Green Zone, home to the U.S. and other foreign embassies as well as the Iraqi government. . . A senior Defense Ministry official confirmed the plot, and said the 421 al-Qaida fighters involved were actually recruited to storm the U.S. and British embassies and take hostages. . . Interior Minister Bayan Jabr, in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, said the al-Qaida recruits were one bureaucrat's signature away from acceptance into an Iraqi army battalion whose job it is to control the gates and main squares in the Green Zone. . . [read on]

C-I-V-I-L. W-A-R.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/03/16/civil_war_is_here.php
[Robert Dreyfuss] It is no longer possible to say that there is no civil war in Iraq. It’s here. It has begun. . .

Raising the debt ceiling

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/16/13159/6853
[Bloomberg] The U.S. Congress approved a $781 billion increase in the federal government's debt limit, the fourth time lawmakers have raised the cap since President George W. Bush took office. . . [read on]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1732997
The increase to $9 trillion represents about $30,000 for every man, woman and child in the United States. . .

And then. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/17/politics/17spend.html
The Senate narrowly approved a $2.8 trillion election-year budget Thursday that broke spending limits only hours after it increased federal borrowing power to avert a government default. . .

Saving wisely: GOP blocks spending for port security

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/16/port-security-funding/

[NB: Imagine, for the umpteenth time, what would happen if the party positions were reversed on this]

A rough day for Scotty at the gaggle

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5528
Q Does the President know that he's in violation of international law when he advocates preemptive war? The U.N. Charter, Geneva, Nuremberg. We violate international law when we advocate attacking a country that did not attack us. . .

Q Scott, can I ask you a question about this operation underway in Iraq? Does the President think that an offensive like this, high profile, is necessary, in part to turn public opinion around in this country about the war? . . .

Q But my question -- I'm sorry, but you aren't done with my question, which is, beyond the merits of this particular operation, we are coming to the three-year anniversary of the war. Support for the President is at rock bottom; support for this war is at rock bottom in this country. Does the President think it's important as a show of U.S. and Iraqi force to mount these kinds of operations, to try to change public opinion in this country?. . .

Q In his speech on Monday, the President claimed that the Iranian government shares a responsibility for anti-coalition attacks in Iraq because, the President said, Tehran is providing the capability for building IEDs used in those attacks. On Tuesday, however, General Peter Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he had no evidence of Iranian government involvement in such activities. And Defense Secretary Rumsfeld also declined to stand by the claim. . .

More: http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1236

The gay science

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2006/02/26/1
One of the five new appointees to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS is a conservative Baptist minister who advocates a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, the Washington Blade reported Friday. . .

How do people who want to prevent abortions rationalize blocking programs intended to limit unwanted pregnancies in the first place?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6871.html
It seems hard to imagine, but in Missouri, state GOP lawmakers have voted to ban county health clinics from providing family planning services. This isn't about access to abortion — it's about access to contraception. . .

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008434.php
[LAT] Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Patty Murray of Washington announced Wednesday that they would block a floor vote on the nomination until the FDA made a firm decision on the controversy — whether or not to allow Plan B, the "morning after" birth control pill, to be sold without a prescription. . .

Hey, what do you know? The Republicans don’t like Bush much either

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/16/AR2006031602430.html
President Bush's troubles with congressional Republicans, which erupted during the backlash to the Dubai seaport deal, are rooted in policy frustrations and personal resentments that GOP lawmakers say stretch back to the opening days of the administration.

For years, the Bush White House and its allies on Capitol Hill seemed like one of the most unified teams Washington had ever seen, passing most of Bush's agenda with little dissent. Privately, however, many lawmakers felt underappreciated, ignored and sometimes bullied. . . The White House at times has been "non-responsive and arrogant," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.). "There are a thousand small cuts," he added, that are ignored when things are going well but "rear their heads when things are not going well.". . .

Congressional scholar Norman J. Ornstein has written that the recently vented anger, after being suppressed for years out of loyalty or fear, might be seen in psychological terms. He called the condition "battered-Congress syndrome.". . .

Chris Matthews “amazed” that Bush is as unpopular as he is

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603160012

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/17/02555/0510
[McJoan] Matthew's world is crumbling around him.

MATTHEWS: I always thought Bush was more popular than his policies. I keep saying it, and I keep being wrong on this. Bush is not popular. I'm amazed when 50 percent of the people don't like him -- just don't like this guy. Thirty-nine percent like him. Are you surprised? Does that fit with the world you walk in?

It almost makes you feel sorry for him. . .

Bonus item: Joke of the day

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/16/political_joke_of_the_day.html
"Everybody excited about March Madness... the big NCAA tournament? Here's how it works: It starts at 65, then 64, then 32, then 16. It's just like Bush's approval rating."

- David Letterman

Extra bonus item

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/17/1830/19711
[Newsweek] "Right now, I wouldn't vote Democratic if Jesus Christ was running." Judy Deats, a Texas Republican, who is standing by Rep. Tom DeLay in his re-election bid despite the fact that his association with lobbyist Jack Abramoff has made him vulnerable to political opposition for the first time in more than 20 years

[Kos] I'm glad she realizes that Jesus would be a Democrat.

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 4:58 AM

 
DON’T BRING A KNIFE TO A GUN FIGHT

OF COURSE the Republican response to Feingold’s censure resolution is, “This is great for us.” Hasn’t anybody been paying attention to how they play these things? That’s no reason for the Democrats to curl up in the fetal position (again)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/politics/16impeach.html
Republicans, worried that their conservative base lacks motivation to turn out for the fall elections, have found a new rallying cry in the dreams of liberals about censuring or impeaching President Bush. . .

Analysis: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114248781907353494
[Digby] What an interesting article. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/lesson-my-friends.html
[John Aravosis] [N]o matter what you do, Rush Limbaugh is going to crow about it, Ken Mehlman is going to do a mass-mailing about it, and the American Family Association will launch a boycott over it. . . And even if you choose to do nothing, all of them will still attack you, claiming that you did something you didn't do. . .

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114248674205623197
[Atrios] Maybe Feingold's censure resolution was a dumb idea. Maybe Senator Reid had a superior judo move planned and Feingold derailed it. Maybe the universe would be improved if Feingold hadn't chosen such a strategy. Maybe there were better ways to approach this basic issue. . . I don't know. I have no idea. But I do know that whether or not Feingold's plan was a dumb one, a dumber plan was to run from it once he did it. . .

A useful debate over the politics of censure: Drum and Benen vs Greenwald, Digby, and Kavanagh

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008426.php
[Kevin Drum] Everyone wants to know how I feel about Russ Feingold's motion to censure President Bush over the NSA's domestic spying program. . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6864.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/stirring-defense-of-indecision-and.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114246500620393659

http://billsrants.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/03/standing_up_wit.html

20 Democrats come out for censure

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/15/94037/1854
Daniel Akaka, Max Baucus, Byron Dorgan, Dick Durbin, Dianne Feinstein, Daniel Inouye, Jim Jeffords, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Chuck Schumer, Ron Wyden

[NB: Oh, forget it, sorry, that was against Clinton in 1999]

Ann Coulter is now drafting GOP talking points

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6862.html
[Steve Benen] National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru is about to publish the right-wing's new favorite book. It's called — I'm not kidding — "The Party of Death: The Democrats, the Media, the Courts, and the Disregard for Human Life."

The pitch seems straightforward enough. According to the publisher, Ponnuru's latest will be "the first book to expose the real agenda of the liberal Democrats," which apparently is to kill people through abortion and euthanasia.

The right couldn't be more excited about the book. Michelle Malkin has called it "the most important book of the year, if not the decade," and said it will help defeat "the death cult of Planned Parenthood, Howard Dean, and the New York Times.". . . [read on]

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6861.html
[Ken Mehlman] This week, liberal Democrat Russ Feingold called on the Senate to censure the President for a program that is successfully stopping terrorists. After months of searching, Democrat leaders are finally beginning to find their agenda: take away the tools America needs to fight terror. In the last 24 hours, fringe groups like MoveOn.org and Democrat leaders from John Kerry to Harry Reid to Dick Durbin have rallied to Feingold's side, praising his grandstanding as a "catalyst" for the investigation of the President. . . Weakening our national security is their agenda. Is it yours? Sign the petition to tell the Democrat leaders to stop undermining the War on Terror with cheap political stunts.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114238153413354256
[Bill Frist] George, what was interesting in listening to my good friend, Russ, is that he mentioned protecting the American people only one time, and although you went to politics a little bit later, I think it's a crazy political move and I think it in part is a political move because here we are, the Republican Party, the leadership in the Congress, supporting the President of the United States as Commander in Chief, who is out there fighting al Qaeda and the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and the people who have sworn, have sworn to destroy Western civilization and all the families listening to us. And they're out now attacking, at least today, through this proposed censure vote, out attacking our Commander in Chief. Doesn't make sense. . .

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/cornered-rats.html
Paul at Powerline calls for the impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. . .

Conservative groups still calling for death of Supreme Court justices

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/republican-talk-of-activist-judges-is.html

Pro-life? http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/15/22/01/pro-life-2/

The utter mess that Bush policies have made of our national economy

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/15/81144/9148
$43 TRILLION

It is now realistically possible to imagine Bush’s poll numbers descending into the 20’s

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=271
33%

Word choice: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114245583920130720
Currently, 48% use a negative word to describe Bush compared with just 28% who use a positive term, and 10% who use neutral language. . . Until now, the most frequently offered word to describe the president was "honest," but this comes up far less often today than in the past. Other positive traits such as "integrity" are also cited less, and virtually no respondent used superlatives such as "excellent" or "great" terms that came up fairly often in previous surveys.

The single word most frequently associated with George W. Bush today is "incompetent," and close behind are two other increasingly mentioned descriptors: "idiot" and "liar." All three are mentioned far more often today than a year ago.

[NB: I can think of some others. . . ]

Scotty bobs and weaves on a possible WH staff shake-up

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5519

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/16/shakeup_at_the_white_house.html

Ain’t it innerestin’?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html
[Dan Froomkin] It may rank up there as one of the greater Bush understatements of all time. . . Taking his talk-show-style, no-dissenters-allowed road show to upstate New York yesterday -- this time to defend his administration's Medicare prescription drug benefit -- President Bush uncorked a whopper about the program's botched rollout: "Anytime Washington passes a new law, sometimes the transition period can be interesting," he said.

Deeply concerned about the corrosive effects of big money in politics, the Republicans get serious: going after Democratic 527 groups

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000109.php
Two months after congressional leaders pledged wholesale reforms of government ethics and lobbying rules following the guilty plea of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the leading proposals are less extensive than the initial promises . .

Next: those radical left-wing bloggers

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/washington-post-unilaterally-declares.html

Did Chris Matthews accept big speaking fees from conservative organizations? Sure looks like it

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/chris-matthews-accepted-huge-speaking.html

More: http://mediamatters.org/items/200603150012

Today’s chin-pulling must-read

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/20/opinion/meyer/main584753.shtml
[Dick Meyer] Is political persuasion mostly useless? Is the percentage of people essentially immune to rational argument about political things increasing? . . .

Whee! Katherine Harris will stay in the Florida senate race, sink $10 million of her own money into the effort

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/15/harris_will_stay_in_senate_race.html

http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060315/NEWS01/60315041/1075
Harris appeared to be choking back tears as she discussed spending her father's money on the coming race as a tribute to his legacy.

"When I lost him I said I would win this for my father," she said.

More: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000109.php

Whoops: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/03/14/State/More_signs_of_disarra.shtml
Even as word spread that Katherine Harris was about to pump millions of her own money into her U.S. Senate campaign, evidence of disarray mounted.

Plans for a "major campaign announcement" today were suddenly scrapped as Harris reportedly decided to announce her plans on national TV [NB: Fox News, of course] rather than face questions from Florida reporters.

And late Tuesday came reports that one of Harris' top advisers, pollster Ed Goeas, was the latest to quit her campaign. . .

Serving your constituents

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/tools/story_pf.asp?ID=121201
U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, received more than twice as much money in donations from people in the U.S. Virgin Islands than from his home state last year, according to the Federal Elections Commission. . .

Quote of the day: It’s ALWAYS Clinton’s fault

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114247931002192143
Former Senator Nickles:

He [Bush] inherited 9/11.

Bonus item: I don’t watch this show but – wow

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/15.html#a7532

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:37 AM

 
FIGHTING LIKE LOSERS

Well, we know the script: a “liberal Senator” states openly what everyone knows, that Bush BROKE THE LAW, and proposes a resolution of censure to say – well, you know – that that’s NOT OKAY. But “sensible heads” say this is an overreaction and pre-ordain that it has no chance of winning; his own party distances themselves from the idea; and the Republicans leap like rabid dogs to say you can’t question the Commander in Chief during wartime. Another sad rerun. . .

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/following-script.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/censure-resolution-goes-to-judiciary.html

The lazy, crapulous media coverage

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/washington-post-sloppy-journalism-stop.html

[NB: Yeah, I know that isn’t exactly what “crapulous” means – but it’s too perfect a word not to use here]

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/14/AR2006031401752.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/game-without-referees.html

The spineless Democrats

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/14/225320/187

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/14/AR2006031401519_pf.html

A refreshing dose of Molly: http://www.progressive.org/node/3142

Ahem: BROKE – THE – LAW

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/14/223137/907

The first Republican to call Russ Feingold’s censure resolution an act of treason

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/14/173822/900

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/14/15566/6597

Rick Santorum: “I’m not worried about illegal wiretapping, why should you be?”

http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/14/11/45/excuses/

Feingold: why are people so afraid of standing up to an UNPOPULAR and INEFFECTIVE President?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/sen-feingold-blasts-fellow-democrats.html

More: http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/15/05348/4125

Polls, polls, polls – and they all say the same thing

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/14/131417/928

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5508

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/14/more_polls_show_bush_slipping.html

And given recent events, why is every major poll afraid to ask this simple question: “Do you believe President Bush should be censured for wiretapping Americans without a warrant?”

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/14/12156/8385

Greenwald – don’t miss it!

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know.html
This Feingold Censure Resolution is unmaking the hideous underbelly of almost every Washington institution as vividly as anything that can be recalled. Each of the rotted Beltway branches is playing so true to form that the distinct forms of corruption and dishonesty which characterize each of them are standing nakedly revealed. As ugly of a sight as it is, it is highly instructive to watch it all unfold. . .

How the Dems fight

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114239690073591942
[The Daily Show, Ed Helms] I got mugged the other day. . . and this bum was beating me with a bottle. And I said, you know what? I'm going to sit back and wait for him to accidentally hit himself with the bottle. Sure enough, he did! I mean, I was unconscious, but I think I won that battle.

A good time to look at “Crashing the Gates”

http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2006/03/crashing_the_ga_3.html

Blowing the Moussaoui case

http://www.slate.com/id/2138112
[Eric Umansky] The Los Angeles Times and Washington Post lead with a judge barring government aviation experts from testifying in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui after the prosecution said one of their lawyers coached the witnesses. As the Post puts it, the decision "guts the case that prosecutors had been building.". . .

The prosecutors in Moussaoui's trial argue that had Moussaoui told investigators that he knew al-Qaida was interested in suicide hijackings, the FAA could have tightened security and thus thwarted 9/11. The now-tainted and banned security experts were going to explain how that would have worked. The judge also pointed to other shenanigans by the prosecution lawyer who coached, saying, "I don't think in the annals of criminal law there has ever been a case with this many significant problems."

The LAT focuses on the administration's near-perfect record of blowing—and overselling—terrorism cases. "There have been a lot of flubs," said one law prof. "The good news may be that there are not as many threatening people out there as we once thought."

How the Bush admin is preparing for a potential bird flu epidemic (NOT!)

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AvianFlu/story?id=1716820
Ready or not, here it comes.

It is being spread much faster than first predicted. . . "There's no way you can protect the United States by building a big cage around it and preventing wild birds from flying in and out," U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Michael Johanns said.

U.S. spy satellites are tracking the infected flocks, which started in Asia and are now heading north to Siberia and Alaska, where they will soon mingle with flocks from the North American flyways. . .

http://makeashorterlink.com/?C1AC35CCC
[AP] Don't count on a vaccine to protect against bird flu during the first six months of a pandemic. Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said Monday it would take at least that long to produce a vaccine because the virus is changing and there's no way to know which strain might become capable of human-to-human transmissions.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q4CC25CCC
"When you go to the store and buy three cans of tuna fish, buy a fourth and put it under the bed," Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said. "When you go to the store to buy some milk, pick up a box of powdered milk, put it under the bed. When you do that for a period of four to six months, you are going to have a couple of weeks of food. And that's what we're talking about."

[NB: "And then, when the bird flu comes, you can HIDE under the bed. That's what we're talking about"]

Oh yeah, and that too. . .

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003842.html
[Laura Rozen] "The International Monetary Fund says a global bird flu pandemic is likely to hurt the world's economy significantly if it is severe." Well, that's true. That's because it would kill millions of people, which might be a greater concern.

When will the media change its language on Iraq from “sectarian fighting” to “civil war”?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/ap-iraq-edges-closer-to-open-civil.html

Bombs away! http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008423.php

C/O Salon magazine: the complete Abu Ghraib photos and videos (if you can stomach them)

http://www.salon.com/news/abu_ghraib/2006/03/14/introduction/

Come back, Billmon, we miss you!

http://billmon.org/archives/002360.html
Iraq is more free every day. The lives of the citizens are improving every day. And one thing is for certain; there won't be any more mass graves and torture rooms and rape rooms.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
January 12, 2004

Daylight Tuesday brought the discovery of at least 86 shot or strangled men across the city, most of them with hands tied and many of them tortured, according to police. They included 27 corpses in one of the first mass graves to be found in the capital since the U.S. invasion three years ago..

Washington Post
At Least 86 Found Shot Or Strangled In Baghdad
March 12, 2006

Will the Senate Intelligence Committee ever finish “Phase Two” of their investigation into prewar intelligence manipulation?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel15mar15,1,3447239.story

How the Republicans practice fiscal discipline

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5514
Monday: Budget Restraint Emerges as G.O.P. Theme for 2008.

Wednesday: Senate G.O.P. Blocks Tight Budget Rule.

Are you surprised? Dubai Ports World isn’t actually in much of a hurry to find that “U.S. partner” to avoid a congressional block of their ports takeover

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/that-dubai-deal-to-give-up-us-port.html

The other shoe: WH reshuffling ahead?

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/14/is_snow_planning_his_exit.html

When did the WH find out that Claude Allen was a crook, and when did they decide to do something about it?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/white-house-knew-top-aide-claude-allen.html

Please Katherine, please: stay and fight it out, won’t you?

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114237065811451366
[NRO] Looks like the widespread expectation that Katherine Harris will announce this week that she is abandoning her Florida Senate race against Bill Nelson is wrong. The latest? Rep. Harris is planning on resigning from the House to underscore her determination to knock off Nelson in a race she has no intention of quitting. . .

“Looking for a villain”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/14/BL2006031400745.html
[Dan Froomkin] President Bush always does better against an enemy. His strongest public support has come when demonizing Osama bin Laden (not hard), Saddam Hussein (a bit harder) -- and then John Kerry (his finest achievement). . .

More: http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2742
One Bush adviser sees political promise for the President in a nuclear peril. "Certainly, there's going to be a serious showdown on Iran," he said. "He's very relevant on that, and that may help his numbers a little bit." . .

Our treasonous press: now the Bush admin is directly (and dishonestly) accusing the LA Times of aiding the enemy

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009429

Here’s how the Republicans are getting prepped for the 2006 elections: TV coaching

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/14/prepping_for_the_sunday_shows.html

Time to sell Plan B over the counter (as the FDA recommended)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/14/202915/989

Pat Robertson: religious bigot

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6847.html
[Steve Benen] TV preacher Pat Robertson recently conceded that he needs to be more cautious in his choice of words. He told one magazine, "With these people trying to destroy me I can't step into their trap anymore…. I've just got to be more careful." . . That lasted about two weeks.

Television evangelist Pat Robertson said Monday on his live news-and-talk program "The 700 Club" that Islam is not a religion of peace, and that radical Muslims are "satanic." . . He remarked that the outpouring of rage elicited by cartoons "just shows the kind of people we're dealing with. These people are crazed fanatics, and I want to say it now: I believe it's motivated by demonic power. It is satanic and it's time we recognize what we're dealing with." . . Robertson also said that "the goal of Islam, ladies and gentlemen, whether you like it or not, is world domination."

In an interesting twist, Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network decided not to show the comments in its online video feed of The 700 Club. You saw Robertson's remarks if you watched the program live, but if you went back to check it later, you saw an "edited" version.

Jerry Falwell too: http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014307.html

Bonus item: ANOTHER “evil twin” excuse from the Republicans (no, I am not kidding)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007898

Extra bonus item: Bush’s socks

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5501

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:31 AM

 
EVIL TWINS

THANKS to everyone who voted for PBD for a Koufax award. I hear Diebold’s doing the vote count, so who knows what might happen? We’ll see.

Hmmm. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031300785.html
President Bush vowed for the first time yesterday to turn over most of Iraq to newly trained Iraqi troops by the end of this year, setting a specific benchmark as he kicked off a fresh drive to reassure Americans alarmed by the recent burst of sectarian violence.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051130-9.html
"Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a message across the world that America is a weak and an unreliable ally. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies - that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends. And setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would vindicate the terrorists' tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder - and invite new attacks on America." (President Bush, Remarks On The War On Terror, Annapolis, MD, 11/30/05)

In the only trial to actually convict a terrorist, the Bush gang SCREWS UP the prosecution by witness tampering

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/13/national/13cnd-moussaoui.html
The sentencing trial of Zacarias Moussaoui teetered on the brink of a mistrial today, as the judge in the case angrily said she might spare him the death penalty following the disclosure that a government lawyer had improperly coached some witnesses. . . "In all my years on the bench, I've never seen a more egregious violation of the rule about witnesses," Judge Leonie M. Brinkema said.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?C23122BCC
[AP] U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said it was "very difficult for this case to go forward". . .

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/114923/128
[Georgia10] You have a defendant accused of planning and assisting in executing the 9-11 attacks. You have international media scrutinizing your every move. You have argued that this monster should received the death penalty for intentionally misleading the government so as to help the attacks go forward. You're the government seeking retribution for the deaths of thousands, you have an unsympathetic defendant, an emotional jury case...and you possibly just blew it.

On censure

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031301094.html
Democrats sharpened their attack yesterday on President Bush's warrantless surveillance of Americans, with a liberal senator introducing a censure resolution and party leaders showing a willingness to debate the matter. . .

[NB: A “liberal” senator. . . ]

The case for censure

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/92636/8829
[Georgia10]
• The President admitted to conducting a domestic spying program outside the scope of FISA, despite knowing that FISA is the exclusive means of such surveillance inside the United States. President Bush broke the law, and this is the only way this Republican Congress can hold him accountable.

• President admitted he did not brief the full intelligence committees. This is against the law.

• We don't have to wait for an investigation before censure. President Bush admitted to his crimes publicly. An investigation is needed, but that should not preclude censure at this time.

• Andrew Jackson was censured in 1834 for refusing to hand over papers to Congress and assuming power not granted by the Constitution. With his stonewalling of the investigation and by ignoring FISA, this is exactly what President Bush has done, and he should also be censured accordingly.

The case against censure

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/124456/415
[Georgia10] CNN's Soledad O'Brien's interview with Russ Feingold today would have made Kyra Philips proud. In a magnificent feat of bimbotude, O'Brien goes from claiming censure is a "kind of a slap on the wrist" to "something quite serious" in one minute flat. "The jury's not back" on the program, she claimed, to which Feingold replied "the jury's been dismantled". Feingold brilliantly called her on her ignorance, telling her the RNC intimidated her, because that's the only way someone would think there is a serious debate about the legality of the program (almost all legal scholars have declared that the program is blatantly illegal).

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/13/mcclellan/index.html
[Tim Grieve] There's arguing and then there's lying. As Glenn Greenwald notes today, Scott McClellan has just crossed that line.

Asked about Russ Feingold's plan to introduce a resolution censuring George W. Bush for instituting a warrantless spying program and then misleading the country about its existence, the White House press secretary said: "I think it does raise the question, 'How do you fight and win the war on terrorism?' And if Democrats want to argue that we shouldn't be listening to al-Qaida communications, it's their right and we welcome the debate. We are a nation at war."

We didn't catch McClellan's press briefing today, but we sure hope some enterprising reporter asked him to name one Democrat -- just one -- who is arguing that the government "shouldn't be listening to al-Qaida communications." . .

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/advocacy-v-lying.html

http://www.hoffmania.com/blog/2006/03/white_house_to_.html

Hypocrites

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/17121/1563

The execrable press coverage

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/surprise-dems-pretty-much-wimp-out-on.html
[NYT] Though polls on surveillance are mixed, Republicans say the public generally backs the idea of eavesdropping on people suspected of being in contact with terror suspects. . .

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/204023/691

In Iraq, what we’ve wrought

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2739
[NYT] The United States faces the possibility that it has been arming one side in a prospective civil war . .

The (in)competence argument

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009409
[Greg Sargent] The Hillarys and the Rahm Emanuels seem to think that it's correct political strategy to proclaim continued support for the vote empowering the president to invade while criticizing faulty management of the war because the one thing Dems can't be held accountable for is the war's execution. Their basic operating premise appears to be that it's a political winner if Dems can persuade voters that they shared Bush's stomach for deposing Saddam -- in other words, that they agreed with Bush's foreign policy idea -- because then (so goes the calculation) voters will distinguish between Dems and Republicans solely on the competence question, with the added benefit that Dems won't be easily tarred as weak. . .

More: http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009403

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009402

Will the Carlyle Group get into the port ownership business?

http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2006/03/06/daily30.html
DP World will transfer the operations to a "U.S. entity," Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said Thursday. . . The Carlyle Group, however, doesn't want to be that entity, says spokesman Chris Ullman. "We have zero interest in that deal, and we will continue to have no interest."

One of the ways that the Bush gang gets rid of troublesome scandal prosecutors is “promoting” them out of those positions into some other job. Here, they’re doing it again

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000088.php

Milosevic: murder? suicide? accident?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008412.php

Ken Mehlman and Jack Abramoff

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000085.php
". . . according to documents obtained by Vanity Fair, Mehlman exchanged email with Abramoff, did him political favors (such as blocking Clinton-administration alumnus Allen Stayman from keeping a State Department job). . . "

[Paul Kiel] Stayman had been on Abramoff's hit list for a long, long time, because, as a higher-up at the Interior Department, he had been an ardent advocate for bringing the sorts of labor and immigration reforms to the Northern Mariana Islands that Abramoff had been hired to squelch. How do I know that Abramoff wanted Stayman gone? Because Abramoff said so in one of his famous emails - this one leaked long before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee began investigating him. . . [read on!]

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007878

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007880

A study in contrasts

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/13/BL2006031300759.html
[Dan Froomkin] What explains the different White House reactions to the criminal charges lodged against two top aides? . . The embarrassed response to felony theft charges against Claude Allen -- President Bush's recently departed top domestic policy adviser -- contrasts sharply with the protective response to the October indictment of former vice presidential chief of staff Scooter Libby on charges of intentionally obstructing the investigation into the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. . .

Claude Allen blames his evil twin?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007891

Woodward’s Plame source was Richard Armitage, VF article reports

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003833.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031301904.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_11_20_digbysblog_archive.html#113251424617433366
[Drudge] Richard Armitage, Colin Powell's former deputy, who has been known to be critical of the administration and who has a blunt way of speaking. 'That Armitage is the likely source is a fair assumption,' former WASHINGTON POST editor Ben Bradlee said." . . . 'I had heard about an e-mail that was sent that had a lot of unprintable language in it.'"

One thing that recent weeks have taught us is that the “maverick” Republicans, when push comes to shove, are still Republicans

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/one-more-time-mccain-is-not-moderate.html
[Paul Krugman] So here's what you need to know about John McCain.

He isn't a straight talker. His flip-flopping on tax cuts, his call to send troops we don't have to Iraq and his endorsement of the South Dakota anti-abortion legislation even while claiming that he would find a way around that legislation's central provision show that he's a politician as slippery and evasive as, well, George W. Bush.

He isn't a moderate. Mr. McCain's policy positions and Senate votes don't just place him at the right end of America's political spectrum; they place him in the right wing of the Republican Party.

And he isn't a maverick, at least not when it counts. When the cameras are rolling, Mr. McCain can sometimes be seen striking a brave pose of opposition to the White House. But when it matters, when the Bush administration's ability to do whatever it wants is at stake, Mr. McCain always toes the party line. . .

[Joe] Krugman also directs his readers to www.voteview.com which ranks McCain "as the Senate's third most conservative member." He's behind only Sununu and Kyl which means he's ahead of Brownback and Santorum. Think about that for a second. . .

More on McCain: http://www.samefacts.com/archives/john_mccain_/2006/03/mccain_and_lott.php

On Arlen Specter: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007882.php
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007884.php
Sen. Frist pushing Feingold's censure motion to the floor. . . Sen. Feingold spoke, powerfully and eloquently. . . Responding to Sen. Feingold, Sen. Specter is now arguing on the floor of the senate that FISA is unconstitutional. Ergo, President Bush couldn't have been violating the law because it's not valid law.

Quite a way for Specter to end his career.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/20331/1414

Holden does the gaggle

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5497
If it's Monday, the it must be time for another slap-fight between Little Scottie and David Gregory. . .

Why the GOP is scrambling to find a replacement for Jean Schmidt (R-OH)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_12.php#007875

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/13/in_ohio_schmidt_touting_false_endorsements.html
Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) was asked by Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) to remove a claim from her website that he had endorsed her reelection; Tancredo made no such endorsement. . . In addition, Schmidt's website also touted the endorsement of Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH). “There's only one problem. Chabot says he didn't endorse Schmidt. . .”

Bonus item: New poll results

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114228404214958275
36% [approval] in new CNN/Gallup poll. . . 41% disapproval among conservatives. . .

[NB: And Gallup has tended to be on the high side of all the major polls]

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:50 AM

 
A STUDY IN CONTRASTS

VOTING EXTENDED TO MONDAY NIGHT: Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

These sites are working again:

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

A gutsy move: Russ Feingold (D-WI) to file a censure motion against Bush’s illegal wiretapping

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/12/10579/0414

Video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/12.html#a7493

Analyses: http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014276.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-to-take-stand-for-your-country.html
[Glenn Greenwald] I really encourage everyone to listen to the full interview which Sen. Russ Feingold gave today. . . As you listen to it, just imagine where this scandal would be if Democrats had simply come out from the beginning and taken a strong stand in defense of the rule of law and our constitutional principles, instead of listening to those worthless, fear-driven Beltway consultants who -- as Feingold pointed out -- counseled that Democrats should just allow Bush to break the law because it was too risky politically to oppose it. . . [read on]

How Frist replies

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/12/131611/304
FRIST: Well, George, this is the first I've heard about it. I really am surprised about it because Russ is just wrong. He is flat wrong. He is dead wrong. And as I was listening to it, I was hoping deep inside that that the leadership in Iran and other people who have the U.S. not in their best interest are not listening because of the terrible signal it sends.

[Georgia10] What a terrible signal it sends to those who seek to destroy our freedoms when Congress exercises its right to censure to the President. How dare we remind the terrorists that we're a democratic society, with rules and accountability. What a terrible signal, indeed. Let's move on.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You're saying that censure resolution weakens America abroad?

FRIST: Yes. Well, I think it does because we are right now in a war, in an unprecedented war, where we do have people who really want to take us down and we think back to 9/11 and that war on terror is out there. So the signal that it sends that there is in any way a lack of support for our Commander in Chief, who is leading us with a bold vision in a way that we know is making our homeland safer is wrong. And it sends a perception around the world and, again, that's why I'm saying as leader at least of the Republican side of this equation, that it's wrong, because leadership around the world of our sworn enemies are going to say, well, now we have a little crack there. There is no crack. The American people are solidly behind this president in conducting this war on terror.

[Georgia10] "There is no crack" except the crack Frist must be smoking to make the wildly inaccurate claim that Americans are "solidly behind" Bush on the War on Terror. Only 52% of Americans support Bush's handling of the War, a 30 point drop since the invasion of Iraq. . . Frist is doing what all Republicans do when they are weak and faced with accountability: they lie. . . This is the same Frist who pursued impeachment as President Clinton exercised his Commander-in-Chief authority to bomb Iraq in 1998. . . And this is the same Frist who had no qualms about making this statement while our Commander-in-Chief publicly outlined a strategy for U.S. ground troops in Kosovo:

[Frist] I will have no part in the creation of a constitutional double-standard to benefit the President. He is not above the law. If an ordinary citizen committed these crimes, he would go to jail. Many senators have voted to remove federal judges guilty of perjury, and I have no doubt that the Senate would do so again. Those who by their votes today confer immunity on the President for the same crimes do violence to the core principle that we are all entitled to equal justice under law. . . The President broke his oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God. He likewise broke his oaths to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

How the Republicans prefer to deal with the issue

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/criminalizing-exposure-of-government.html
[Glenn Greenwald] This article from Editor & Publisher reports that the proposed legislation for the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Act of 2006 to be introduced by Ohio Sen. Michael DeWine -- the principal purpose of which is to legalize the Bush Administration's illegal warrantless eavesdropping on Americans -- contains unprecedented provisions which create whole new categories of crimes designed to punish any future discussion of the President's eavesdropping activities, including by reporters. . .

More: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002157186

“Crisis” on the Intelligence Committee? http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/12/14569/8060

Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “an assault on the people’s right to know”

http://makeashorterlink.com/?X468229CC

More treasonous disloyalty from the media: Why do they KEEP running these stories, when it only undermines the war effort?

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2736
[AP] Car bombs — one detonated by a suicide attacker — and mortar rounds ripped apart two markets Sunday in a Shiite slum in Baghdad, killing at least 41 people and wounding 140. . . .

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/12/124539/613

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114218344221108867

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/80-killed-over-200-wounded-in-black.html
Dawn estimates that mortar attacks and bombings in Iraq killed 80 persons on Sunday. Other sources suggest the number of wounded may exceed 200. . .

Stop telling us! We don’t want to know!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/12/181726/296
[K-R] Senior Iraqi officials Sunday confirmed for the first time that death squads composed of government employees had operated illegally from inside two government ministries. . . "The deaths squads that we have captured are in the defense and interior ministries," Minister of Interior Bayan Jabr said during a joint news conference with the Minister of Defense. "There are people who have infiltrated the army and the interior."

[SusanG] Rumors about the Shiite death squads targeting Sunnis have been floating around for more than a year, according to the article. . . The Knight Ridder account also has a round-up of the past few deadly days in Iraq, focusing on the Sadr City bombings earlier today that are causing fears of a backlash.

Perhaps Rumsfeld is right and this is not civil war. Perhaps it's anarchy, chaos and outright carnage. While our political spinmeisters churn, splitting hairs over political terms and definitions, it becomes more clear with each passing day that American forces, even with the best intentions, are utterly clueless as to who exactly we're training and supplying with weaponry, and who will be the next targets. . .

More: http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2737

How the U.S. lost the Iraq War in the first days and weeks following the invasion

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11711506/
MR. RUSSERT: Coming next: the inside story of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, chronicled in a new book “Cobra II.” What went right, what went wrong with Iraq? We’ll ask the authors, Michael Gordon of The New York Times, and retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Bernard Trainor. . .

Michael Gordon, General Trainor, welcome, both. The new book, “Cobra II.” And this is what you write: “The violent chaos that followed Saddam’s defeat was not a matter of not having a plan but of adhering too rigidly to the wrong one. ... President Bush and his team committed five grievous errors.” And we’ll try to go through them.

The first, you write: “They underestimated their opponent and failed to understand the welter of ethnic groups and tribes that is Iraq.”. . .

General Trainor, you also write, “They did not bring the right tools to the fight and put too much confidence in technology.”. . .

In terms of a midcourse correction, and this is particularly striking in your book, Michael, “They failed to adapt to developments on the ground and remained wedded to their prewar analysis even after Iraqis showed their penchant for guerrilla tactics in the first days of the war.” And you go on to write, “[CENTCOM Commander] Tommy Franks never acknowledged the enemy he faced, nor did he comprehend the nature of the war he was directing. He denigrated the Fedayeen as little more than a speed bump on the way to Baghdad and never appreciated their resilience and determination.” And then you write, “They presided over a system in which differing military and political perspectives were discouraged.”. . .

There is a paragraph, I think, that pretty much summarizes what you have found in your book, Michael Gordon, and I’ll read it. “There’s a direct link between the way the Iraq War was planned and the bitter insurgency the American-led coalition subsequently confronted. The ambitious plans that the president announced to transform American defense proved at to be at odds with his bold plan to transform a region.”. . .

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/13/international/middleeast/13command.html

More doubletalk from Bill Frist on the Dubai Ports deal

http://makeashorterlink.com/?M229129CC
[AP] Congress will closely watch a Dubai-owned company to be sure it transfers its U.S. port operations to an American company, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday. . . But Frist, R-Tenn., acknowledged that if an American buyer is not found, and the Bush administration determines there are no security risks, a deal for DP World to manage and operate major U.S. ports still could go through. . . "If everything that the president, the administration has said, and that is that there is absolutely no threatening or jeopardy to our security and safety of the American people ... I don't see how the deal would have to be canceled," Frist said on ABC's "This Week."

Milosevic: heart attack, or foul play?

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014280.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/international/europe/12cnd-milosevic.html

Preparing for a staff changeover? Story suddenly comes out about how “tired” Bush staffers have become

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/12/AR2006031200821.html

But not George: HE vacations!

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0102-03.htm
The 43rd president put the vacation record out where it poses a serious challenge for his second term. Back in the spring, prior to his August slumber, Bush had spent 40 percent of his time away from the White House . . .

More on the Claude Allen resignation

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/lying_in_politics_/2006/03/a_distinct_odor_of_fish.php

More details on Wilkes/CIA corruption links

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2006/03/corruption_among_bush_appointees_at_the_cia.php

More: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11787155/site/newsweek/

The Dems plan for the 2006 fall elections

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/magazine/312midterm1_.1.html

The Repubs plan for the 2008 elections

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/13/politics/13repubs.html
As prospective Republican presidential candidates search for themes to distinguish their prospective campaigns, and distance themselves from the embattled incumbent in the White House, they appear to be in agreement on what one central issue should be in 2008: Curbing the federal spending that has soared under President Bush. . .

[NB: Because, you know, THEY had nothing to do with it. . .]

Quote of the day

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/12/105917/420
"If I had a choice and Bush were running today against (Democratic President) Bill Clinton, I'd vote for Bill Clinton," said Bruce Bartlett, a former Reagan administration Treasury Department official whose book, "Impostor: How George Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," is making the rounds of conservative think tanks and talk shows. "He was clearly a much better president in a great many ways that matter to me."

Bonus item: Mary Carey (porn star) reportedly coming back for a SECOND visit to see Bush and Rove

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/republicans-invite-porn-star-back-to.html

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:54 AM

 
MEN OF PRINCIPLE

VOTING CLOSES SUNDAY NIGHT: Progressive Blog Digest (the blog version of “Today’s News”) has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment (please vote for “Progressive Blog Digest” – they don’t know what “Today’s News” is).

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

[NB: These sites haven’t been working for the past few hours. You can also vote by email:
wampum@nic-naa.net, dwight-wampum@triad.rr.com]

The maneuvering begins among senior Republicans for who gets to wear the crown that Bush has dropped. The prize is great, the egos enormous – and since Republicans seem to believe they can never lose a national race again, the stakes are huge. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/senior-republicans-want-bush-to-dump.html
[NYT] Some senior Republicans with ties to the White House, who asked for anonymity because they did not want to be identified describing internal White House deliberations, said there was a widespread feeling in Republican circles here that Mr. Bush would be well served to bring in some new senior advisers, either replacing Andrew H. Card Jr., Mr. Bush's chief of staff, or Karl Rove, his senior political adviser, both of whom have been in the administration since Mr. Bush came to Washington.

[Joe] Well, well, well, they are a catty little bunch down at the big GOP meeting in Memphis this weekend. They're backstabbing Card and Rove to Ad Nags -- all off the record, of course. . . It sure is fun to watch them fight each other. Think Karl knows which "senior Republicans" are trashing him?

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/politics/12repubs.html
Republicans gathered here this weekend acutely concerned with the elections ahead and distressed by the White House's performance since President Bush's re-election. They listened as a parade of prospective presidential candidates wrestled with how much to associate their campaigns with an increasingly unpopular sitting president. . .

And more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030902288.html
When President Bush and senior adviser Karl Rove mapped out plans for a political comeback in 2006, this was nowhere on the script. Suddenly, the collapse of a port-management deal neither even knew about a month ago has devastated the White House and raised questions about its ability to lead even fellow Republicans. . .

McCain: two views (the heroic version)

http://mydd.com/story/2006/3/11/14642/0847
John McCain, one of the clear front-runners for the 2008 nomination, decided to throw a monkey wrench into the whole process by telling conference-goers not to vote for him, but rather to write-in President Bush's name instead. "For the next three years," McCain said, "with the country at war, he's our President, and the only one who must have our support today.". . .

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_05_atrios_archive.html#114210759093664909
[NYT] The extent of Mr. McCain's embrace of Mr. Bush was striking, and several Republicans here suggested it reflected two political facts. The first is that he needs to reassure conservatives of his loyalty to Mr. Bush, and the second is that, at this point, he is in a strong enough position in this inchoate field to have flexibility in presenting himself.

Mr. McCain went so far as to condemn the collapse of the port deal, saying that Congress had served Mr. Bush poorly by not permitting a 45-day review of security concerns to proceed, though he did not mention that the deal was sunk by fellow Republicans.

"The president deserved better," Mr. McCain said.

Mr. McCain praised the president for his failed effort to rewrite the nation's Social Security system, said he supported the decision to go into Iraq and blistered critics who suggested the White House had fabricated or exaggerated evidence of unconventional weapons in Iraq in order to justify the invasion.

"Anybody who says the president of the United States is lying about weapons of mass destruction is lying," Mr. McCain said.

Or, the snarky version. . .

http://drudgereport.com/flash2mc.htm
MCCAIN IN REPUBLICAN STRAW POLL EMBARRASSMENT
Facing a loss at a 2008 straw poll event this weekend, Senator John McCain of Arizona told his supporters to write in President Bush as a sign of support, leaving many sputtering. . .

More: http://www.samefacts.com/archives/_/2006/03/ticket_to_ride.php

Did McCain violate his own campaign finance law?

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006/03/explain-this-one-to-me-john.html




Make my day: Frist as frontrunner?

http://makeashorterlink.com/?C207138CC
With home-field advantage, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist placed first in an informal poll of 2008 presidential hopefuls at a Republican conference Saturday night. . .






U.S. port security is a hopeless mess: it isn’t just the Dubai Ports deal

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/under-bush-there-is-no-port-security.html
[AP] The previously undisclosed results from the study found that cargo containers can be opened secretly during shipment to add or remove items without alerting U.S. authorities. . .

The opportunity this represents for Democrats: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008403.php

And let’s re-examine that India nuclear deal too

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/11/17230/8458
[SusanG] The American public, like children asleep in the backseat of a car, long ago left Daddy to do the driving on this long BushCo journey, content to listen to his fairy tales as the background of their lollipop dreams. What the DPW deal did was jerk them awake as Daddy-in-Chief slid into a ditch, and we need to take advantage of this wide-awake moment of the Great American "Wha..." before the citizenry goes a-napping again.

Let's start with the India nuclear deal. . .

WP article describes Senate Intelligence Committee meltdown as “partisan infighting” – but it’s only partisan on one side

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101029.html

How Conservatism devolved into Bushism

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/trip-down-right-wing-memory-lane.html
[Glenn Greenwald] One of the most truly extraordinary spectacles to witness is the way in which so many self-proclaimed conservatives have shed their core defining "principles" in order to justify and defend the ever-expanding powers of the Federal Government under the Bush Administration. Throughout the 1990s, conservatism was defined by its fear of expansive powers seized by the Federal Government -- particularly domestic law enforcement and surveillance powers. Conservatives vigorously opposed every proposal to expand government investigative and surveillance power on the ground that such powers posed intolerable threats to our liberties. . .

Claude Allen: clearly he was shoved out the door a month ago, before his shoplifting charges hit the news. But why is there such a difference between a story reporting “a Bush administration official was arrested today. . .” and “a former Bush administration official was arrested today”?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/11/142029/054

Allen’s weird rise to power: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101358.html

How Bush tiptoed around the story: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007869.php

Who next? http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5486

Forestalling the inevitable

http://www.sptimes.com/2006/03/11/State/Harris_adds_more_unce.shtml
In the latest sign of uncertainty surrounding her beleaguered Senate campaign, Katherine Harris canceled plans to attend a Republican conference in Tennessee Saturday to take stock of her political future. . . "Unfortunately, I am unable to join you this weekend, as I prayerfully prepare with my family, friends and advisers to finalize the strategy for a major announcement next week concerning my candidacy for the U.S. Senate," Harris said in a statement addressed to delegates to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in Memphis. "I will continue to look to our Founding Fathers, who pursued their vision with integrity and perseverance, to discern the best course of action for the state of Florida and our nation."

Quote of the day

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/nyt-outgoing-baghdad-bureau-chief-says_11.html
[E&P] A day after returning to the U.S., after another long term as bureau chief in Baghdad, John Burns of The New York Times said on Bill Maher's Friday night HBO program that he now feels, for the first time, that the American effort in Iraq will likely "fail."

Asked if a civil war was developing there, Burns said, "It's always been a civil war," adding that it's just a matter of extent. . . Burns said that he and others underestimated this problem, feeling for a long time that toppling Saddam Hussein would almost inevitably lead to something much better.

Sunday talk show lineups

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101099.html
FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.); Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) and Mike Pence (R-Ind.); and Placido Domingo, general director of the Washington National Opera.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Bill Frist (R-Tenn.).

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.).

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Sens. George Allen (R-Va.) and Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.); Michael R. Gordon , author; retired Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard Trainor, author.

LATE EDITION (CNN): Sens. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.); Zalmay Khalilzad , U.S. ambassador to Iraq; Howard Dean , chairman of the Democratic National Committee; John Edwards, former Democratic vice presidential candidate; Jack Kemp , former Republican vice presidential candidate.

Bonus item: Condi Rice busted at US Customs for smuggling in coca leaves (okay, no, not really – but don’t try this unless you’re Sect’y of State)

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2731

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 8:04 AM

 
MARCH MADNESS

VOTING CLOSES SUNDAY NIGHT: Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

Bush says blocking the Dubai Ports deal “sends the wrong message.” Actually, I agree that irrational opposition to dealing with Arab countries is a problem. But who created that problem? HIS administration’s continual fearmongering and racial profiling. HIS administration’s failure to vet this sale properly and in accordance with their own rules. HIS refusal to talk honestly about the genesis of this deal and the way in which it was being snuck through under the radar. When a Republican President loses his own party so completely over an issue like this, there can only be one place for blame

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/international/middleeast/10cnd-port.html

And by the way. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/10/111740/663
[ABC] The White House asked Dubai Ports World, a company owned by the United Arab Emirates, to give up its management stake in U.S. ports, to save President Bush from the politically difficult position of vetoing a key piece of legislation to protect America's ports, ABC News has learned. . .

[CBS] CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports the announcement came about after the company's consultations with White House political strategist Karl Rove. . .

[SusanG] Color me officially confused. By their own misguided logic then, doesn't that mean Bush just made the call to expose us to more risk in the war on terror? I thought he was the "stay the course" guy, determined to protect as at any political cost, no matter what the polls say. . . I'm so relieved that we've finally openly acknowledged that the national security apparatus is being run in this country by an unelected political strategist . .

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009393
[Greg Sargent] So what exactly happened? Bottom line: Though we don't yet know the full story, it seems clear that at the least, Bush was caving in his meeting with Republican senators, and at most, his aides may even have been engineering Dubai's drop-out -- even as the White House was publicly clinging to an unyielding posture in defense of the deal. . . And so, in the wake of this political disaster, it will be interesting indeed to see how much longer commentators keep describing George Bush as unbending in the face of political pressure. . .

Media declare issue “over” – but it’s not over. . .

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603100009

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/10/port_deal_still_coming_to_a_vote.html
According to Reuters, the U.S. House of Representatives "will forge ahead with a vote on blocking an Arab-owned company from managing U.S. ports, to ensure the firm sheds its U.S. holdings as promised.” . . . The Republican-run House's "refusal to back away from the showdown vote was another blow to President George W. Bush, who suffered a stinging defeat on Thursday when Dubai Ports World said it intended to back out of the deal his administration had approved.”

“Groundhog Day”: I think they’re just recycling news stories now

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031001949.html
Bush Goes on Offensive To Explain War Strategy
President Bush plans to begin a series of speeches next week again explaining the administration's strategy for winning the war in Iraq. . .

Talabani/Jaafari: steel cage match

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraqduo11mar11,0,6823017.story

Interior Sect’y Gale Norton to step down – and in this administration, that usually means something scandalous is about to break

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_05_atrios_archive.html#114201660538573100
[Atrios] To be clear, Abramoff tendrils of course reach to Norton but that's not necessarily why she resigned. If she resigned because of that it means more than tendrils, it means the investigation is bumping up against her and she's gotta bail before it makes King George look bad. . .

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007863

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/28/photo-abramoff-norton/

A man named Claude. . .

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_05_atrios_archive.html#114203402761947437
[Slate] When Claude Allen, President Bush's longtime domestic-policy adviser, resigned suddenly on Feb. 9, it baffled administration critics and fans. The White House claimed that Allen was leaving to spend more time with his family, while the Washington Times speculated that the 45-year-old aide, a noted social conservative, might have quit to protest a new Pentagon policy about military chaplains. Allen himself never publicly explained the reason for his departure.

News today may shed light on the mystery of Allen's resignation. According to the Montgomery County Police Department, Allen was arrested yesterday and charged in a felony theft and a felony theft scheme. According to a department press release, Allen conducted approximately 25 fraudulent "refunds" in Target and Hecht's stores in Maryland. . . Allen is charged with practicing a form of shoplifting called "refund fraud." . . . [read on]

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007866
As you may have read this evening, White House domestic policy adviser Claude A. Allen, one of the more surreal players in the Bush White House, was arrested this evening and charged with a bizarre retail fraud scheme in which he would buy items from Target or Hecht's, deposit them in his car and then return to the store with the receipts. Then he'd grab the identical item off the shelf, head to the return desk and 'return' the item for a refund. . .

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007867
[Josh Marshall] Allen's lawyer, Mallon Snyder, tells WaPo he's confident he'll be able to prove the incidents were "a series of misunderstandings." . . Lotta misunderstandings. More than 25, according to the police.

Much, much more: http://www.slate.com/id/2137895/?nav=tap3

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114204452215863975

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007868

“New Patriot Act Gives Bush More Power to Execute Prisoners” (thanks to Buzzflash for the link)

http://karenas.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/03/new_patriot_act.html

Ah, we miss our weekly Krugman

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114201886323495581
[Paul Krugman] Never mind; better late than never. We should welcome the recent epiphanies by conservative commentators who have finally realized that the Bush administration isn't trustworthy. But we should guard against a conventional wisdom that seems to be taking hold in some quarters, which says there's something praiseworthy about having initially been taken in by Mr. Bush's deceptions, even though the administration's mendacity was obvious from the beginning.

According to this view, if you're a former Bush supporter who now says, as Mr. Bartlett did at the Cato event, that "the administration lies about budget numbers," you're a brave truth-teller. But if you've been saying that since the early days of the Bush administration, you were unpleasantly shrill.

Similarly, if you're a former worshipful admirer of George W. Bush who now says, as Mr. Sullivan did at Cato, that "the people in this administration have no principles," you're taking a courageous stand. If you said the same thing back when Mr. Bush had an 80 percent approval rating, you were blinded by Bush-hatred.

And if you're a former hawk who now concedes that the administration exaggerated the threat from Iraq, you're to be applauded for your open-mindedness. But if you warned three years ago that the administration was hyping the case for war, you were a conspiracy theorist.

The truth is that everything the new wave of Bush critics has to say was obvious long ago to any commentator who was willing to look at the facts

Sandra Day O’Connor, retired SC Justice, tees off

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Retired_Supreme_Court_Justice_hits_attacks_0310.html
[Nina Totenberg] In an unusually forceful and forthright speech, O’Connor said that attacks on the judiciary by some Republican leaders pose a direct threat to our constitutional freedoms. . . The nation’s founders wrote repeatedly, she said, that without an independent judiciary to protect individual rights from the other branches of government those rights and privileges would amount to nothing. But, said O’Connor, as the founding fathers knew statutes and constitutions don’t protect judicial independence, people do.

And then she took aim at former House GOP leader Tom DeLay. She didn’t name him, but she quoted his attacks on the courts at a meeting of the conservative Christian group Justice Sunday last year when DeLay took out after the courts for rulings on abortions, prayer and the Terri Schiavo case. This, said O’Connor, was after the federal courts had applied Congress’ onetime only statute about Schiavo as it was written. Not, said O’Connor, as the congressman might have wished it were written. This response to this flagrant display of judicial restraint, said O’Connor, her voice dripping with sarcasm, was that the congressman blasted the courts.

It gets worse, she said, noting that death threats against judges are increasing. It doesn’t help, she said, when a high-profile senator suggests there may be a connection between violence against judges and decisions that the senator disagrees with. She didn’t name him, but it was Texas senator John Cornyn who made that statement, after a Georgia judge was murdered in the courtroom and the family of a federal judge in Illinois murdered in the judge’s home. , ,

I, said O’Connor, am against judicial reforms driven by nakedly partisan reasoning. Pointing to the experiences of developing countries and former communist countries where interference with an independent judiciary has allowed dictatorship to flourish, O’Connor said we must be ever-vigilant against those who would strongarm the judiciary into adopting their preferred policies. It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, she said, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings. . .

Plan B

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6825.html

The IRS wants to let people buy your tax information (thanks to John Aravosis for the link)

http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2006/03/irs-wants-to-allow-third-parties.html

March Madness

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/basketball/ncaa/03/10/bc.bkc.ncaa.terrorthrea.ap/index.html
The FBI said Friday there is no specific, credible threat of a terror attack aimed at college basketball arenas or other sports stadiums. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/another-sort-of-terror-threat.html
[Chris] Could something happen? Of course. Am I sick and tired of this administrations games with scaring the hell out Americans when serious threats don't really exist? Definitely. Maybe that's why the US public is turning away from the Bush administration and their claims of protecting America. The public has turned but the administration doesn't get it yet. Why should we believe anything that they have to say? How did such a non-story actually become a story? Who's pulling strings to try and play the fear card once again?

60% disapproval!

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003816.html
[AP] Bush's job approval among Republicans plummeted from 82 percent in February to 74 percent, a dangerous sign in a midterm election year when parties rely on enthusiasm from their most loyal voters. The biggest losses were among white males. . .

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/10/14448/9926
[Jonathan Singer] Again, as noted above, just 37 percent of Americans approve of the job that George W. Bush is doing as President. Among those are just 18 percent of Americans who are in the strongly approve column. Included in the 60 percent of Americans who disapprove of President Bush, however, are a whopping 41 percent who strongly disapprove. Indeed, there are more Americans who strongly disapprove of the President than there are who approve of him at all -- including those who only lean towards approval.

Time warp: George Bush the candidate, in 2000

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009372
I'm worried about overcommitting our military around the world. I want to be judicious in its use. You mentioned Haiti. I wouldn't have sent troops to Haiti. I didn't think it was a mission worthwhile. It was a nation building mission, and it was not very successful. It cost us billions, a couple billions of dollars, and I'm not so sure democracy is any better off in Haiti than it was before. . .

I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be. We can help. And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I want to empower the people. I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do. I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, we do it this way, so should you. . . maybe I misunderstand where you're coming from, Mr. Vice President, but I think the United States must be humble and must be proud and confident of our values, but humble in how we treat nations that are figuring out how to chart their own course.

GOP losing interest in reform (what a surprise)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/politics/11lobby.html

“Political decadence”

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114188541533132822

Pat Roberts: a complete tool

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/law-an-important-tool.html

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/09/BL2006030901158.html

Rick Santorum, lying crook: don’t miss the video

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/7821894/detail.html#

Katherine Harris: sooner or later she is going to have to quit

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007865

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/10/in_florida_republicans_woo_another_candidate.html

Jean Schmidt, an absolute horror – but she’s the GOP’s problem now

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/10/173811/541

Trent Lott: revenge is a dish best served cold. . .

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/10/lott_says_straw_poll_is_rigged.html

Does anyone need more proof of vote fraud in Ohio in 2004?

http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/10/16/51/another-one-2/

“Hello, we’re from Fox News Security”

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603100005

The sorry state of CNN: Democratic leaders “indicted”?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007864.php

The sorry state of Democratic Party leadership

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/10/BL2006031000532.html

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/10/15241/7822

Republicans (in the era of Boehner, Hastert, and Frist): no better off

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/10/19217/6758

Bonus item: the NRSC’s racist AND homophobic ad posted against Harold Ford

http://jesseberney.com/?p=95

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009399

The response: http://www.veryfancyfrist.com/

The kind of people they are: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/09.html#a7458

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 8:13 AM

 
MISDIRECTIONS

I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html (Comments on this site are now working – they were down for a while)

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

Do not be deceived (part 1): the latest cover for the Dubai Ports deal changes nothing

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/9/134852/1118
Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner, just read a press release from DP World in which the state-owned company says it had agreed to divest itself of all American interests in the interests of the U.A.E.-American relationship. . .

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114193263475926061
[Digby] John Warner says that DP World has agreed to transfer the operation of their US ports to a US "entity." They are guaranteed, apparently, not to suffer any financial loss in the deal. One must wonder exactly how that will be accomplished --- and who will be paying for it.

It appears on the surface that they are going to set up a shell company in the US in which the US taxpayer will guarantee DP World that it won't lose money. Nice deal. It will be interesting to see if that passes muster with the public. . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6816.html
[Steve Benen] Dubai Ports World has given up operation of the ports. Lawmakers who have proposals that would block ownership of the ports may move forward with their plans anyway. Stay tuned.

http://www.slate.com/id/2137858/
[Eric Umansky] Everybody leads with Dubai announcing it will, as the Wall Street Journal puts it, "sell or spin out" the company it just bought that manages some U.S. ports. In unveiling the pullback, the company kept it vague, saying it will "transfer fully the U.S. operations" to "a United States entity."

As the New York Times puts it, the company refused to say whether it plans to "actually sell the American operations or had some other transaction in mind." It could create a kind of stand-alone subsidiary staffed by Americans, a deal suggested last month by conservative commentator Michael Ledeen. Of course, that's just theoretical. As the Journal notes, "any step short of divestiture is considered unlikely, largely because it carries significant political risk."

It's long been clear that the deal was DOA, but if you're interested in the death throes: GOP congressional leaders headed to the White House yesterday morning and delivered an offer the president couldn't refuse: Kill the deal or we will. According to the Post's David Ignatius, at another point yesterday, Karl Rove told an exec at the company in Dubai the White House couldn't hold out any longer. A few hours later, Dubai's crown prince pulled the plug. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/politics/09cnd-ports.html
The decision came just hours after a delegation of Republican leaders in Congress told President Bush in an Oval Office meeting that Congress would act within days to block the company's acquisition of the United States port terminals in the name of national security, lawmakers present said. . .

It’s not over yet: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060310/ap_on_go_co/ports_security

Is the Dubai Ports deal linked to US Iran plans?

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/06/03/con06094.html

What’s the link here?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aX6bvP4aV27c&refer=us
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suspended debate on overhauling lobbying rules after the chamber refused to prevent a vote on blocking a state-owned Dubai company from taking over terminals at six American ports. . .

Do not be deceived (part 2): US “closes” Abu Ghraib prison – but only because they’ve transferred the crimes that were going on there to other locations

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/9/131226/7274
[Georgia10] As one gate to hell closes, too many more remain open. . .

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/09/abu/index.html?source=war_room.rss
[Tim Grieve] The U.S. won't tear down Abu Ghraib, as some have encouraged. Instead, it will turn it over to the Iraqi government. That may be cold comfort: As Lawrence Kaplan wrote recently, Iraqis today may actually prefer to be taken to Abu Ghraib by American forces -- at least when the alternative is being placed in the hands of Iraqi security forces infiltrated by Shiite militia.

In Iraq, back to usual: secret government executions

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5471

Oh, how reality bites. After all the triumphalist language of victory in the Iraq War, poor Rummy is reduced to this

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/09/rumsfeld/index.html
"The plan is to prevent a civil war, and to the extent one were to occur, to have the, from a security standpoint, have the Iraqi security forces deal with it to the extent they're able to."

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/international/middleeast/09cnd-military.html

Molly Ivins: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060308_molly_ivins_iraq_rumsfeld/

The growing, ominous trade deficit

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1aa3ffec-af6f-11da-b417-0000779e2340.html
The US trade deficit ballooned to a record $68.5bn in January, far surpassing expectations and raising the prospect of a large drag on economic growth in the first months of the year.

The sensitive bilateral trade deficit with China climbed to $17.9bn in January from $16.3bn, a figure that is likely to hinder administration efforts to contain mounting frustration in Congress over the rising deficit, and create a tense backdrop for the official visit of Hu Jintao, the Chinese president, next month.

With President George W. Bush facing a revolt from congressional Republicans over the Dubai ports deal, the administration could find itself in a weakened position in its long-standing efforts to stave off punitive trade legislation against China. The Republican chairman of the Senate finance committee said last month he would begin drawing up a bill to deal with the growing array of US trade frictions with China. . .

Increasing GOP resistance to Bush policies

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=13066
[Bob Novak] All the evidence suggests that the Bush Administration now has an all-out rebellion on its hands from the GOP Congress. This is not isolated in any single issue, such as the ports deal, but in fact extends to that and numerous other issues as well. Republican congressmen are tired of being bullied and ignored by a heavy-handed executive, and they are playing hardball with their President. Given his unpopularity, many of them find it useful to distance themselves from Bush anyway.

In short, Bush has little leverage left within his own party, and his transformation to lame-duck status is all but complete. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/top-gop-consultant-on-bush-he-has-no.html
[WP] "He has no political capital," said Tony Fabrizio, a Republican pollster. "Slowly but surely it's been unraveling. There's been a direct correlation between the trajectory of his approval numbers and the -- I don't want to call it disloyalty -- the independence on the part of the Republicans in Congress."

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/politics/09assess.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030902288.html

Bush’s numbers keep dropping and dropping

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1708827
More and more people, particularly Republicans, disapprove of President Bush's performance, question his character and no longer consider him a strong leader against terrorism, according to an AP-Ipsos poll documenting one of the bleakest points of his presidency. . .

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-continues-to-sink-in-latest-poll.html

And yet, in the midst of all this, a call for an even stronger Unitary Executive

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003806.html
This is what the [WH] aide has to say: "The powers of the presidency have been eroded and usurped to the breaking point. We are engaged in a new kind of war that cannot be fought by old methods. It can only be directed by a strong executive who alone is not subject to the conflicting pressures that legislators or judges face. The public understands and supports that unpleasant reality, whatever the media and intellectuals say."

Oh, really? http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/window-into-bush-administrations-legal.html

[NB: Sounds like Rove, doesn't it? I think these polls show that the public does NOT support that "unpleasant reality"]

"The Death of the Intelligence Panel”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/opinion/09thur1.html
The Senate panel has become so paralyzingly partisan that it could not even manage to do its basic job this week and look into President Bush's warrantless spying on Americans' international e-mail and phone calls. Senator Pat Roberts, the chairman, said Tuesday that there would be no investigation. Instead, the committee's Republicans voted to create a subcommittee that is supposed to get reports from the White House on any future warrantless surveillance.

It's breathtakingly cynical. Faced with a president who is almost certainly breaking the law, the Senate sets up a panel to watch him do it and calls that control. This new Senate plan is being presented as a way to increase the supervision of intelligence gathering while giving the spies needed flexibility. But it does no such thing.

The Republicans' idea of supervision involves saying the White House should get a warrant for spying whenever possible. Currently a warrant is needed, period. And that's the right law. The White House has not offered a scrap of evidence that it interferes with antiterrorist operations. Mr. Bush simply decided the law did not apply to him. . .

More: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nsa10mar10,1,2935622.story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030902181.html

Bush, Abramoff, and $25,000

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/politics/10abramoff.html

WH links to Mitchell Wade?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007855

The Justice Dept was onto Brent Wilkes’ illegal doings in 2000, but did nothing about it. Why?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007849

More on faith-based initiatives within the Dept of Homeland Security

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/katrina-faith-based-disaster-recovery.html
[Rob] I don't want to sound cheap, but why are we reimbursing these religious organizations? Didn't their donors get tax deductions when they gave to them in the first place? Didn't they raise the money from their supporters to do the work they are doing? Why are federal tax dollars going to these organizations? This looks an awful lot like a Religious Right cash grab to me. . .

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030900248.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1703640&page=1
In the budget year that ended Sept. 30, religious charities received $2.15 billion in federal grants to administer a range of social service programs for the needy. That represented 10.9 percent of the total grants from the seven federal agencies such charities were eligible to apply to. . .

[NB: As near as I can tell, Bush is (1) channeling federal money to them, (2) exempting them from taxes and regulations other service groups are subject to, (3) urging corporate and private donations to them, AND then (4) reimbursing them for their expenditures]

Rick Santorum (R-PA): just can’t stop lying

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000067.php

More: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003801.html

30 (!!) books to come out on Hillary Clinton in the coming months

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009368
"Liberal! Lesbian! Carpetbagger! Liar! Fat ankles! Bitch!"

Michael Berube isn’t ready to let this go, and neither am I: for all the Nader supporters who said there wasn’t any big difference between Bush and Gore. . .

http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/south_dakota_special/
[2000] Mr. Nader said he did not think there would be much difference between the justices Mr. Gore would choose and those Mr. Bush would appoint. After all, Democrats had helped confirm Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, hadn’t they? Besides, “You can’t really predict how Supreme Court justices will behave.”

And he called the possibility that a court packed with Republican appointees could overturn Roe v. Wade a “scare tactic.” On Sunday, Mr. Nader said in a television interview that even if Roe v. Wade was overturned, the issue “would just revert to the states.” Just?. . .

Bonus item: the fascinating tension between blogs and traditional media

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/are-nyt-and-adam-nagourney-running-hit.html

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:29 AM

 
CHECKS AND BALANCES?

I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html (Comments on this site are now working – they were down for a while)

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

Woo hoo! In Vanity Fair interview, Jack Abramoff shows how all those people who now say they barely know him are. . . well. . . you know. . . LYING

http://www.vanityfair.com/pdf/pressroom/advance_Abramoff.pdf

Burns, McCain, Bush, Mehlman, DeLay, Ney, Gingrich. . .
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/11633/33597

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/08/abramoff-vanity-fair/

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/08/abramoff2/index.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007844

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000057.php

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000064.php

Conrad “Burns”: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007841
Spokesman calls Abramoff "a pathological liar who has no credibility and belongs in jail."

Today’s must-read: Digby on Abramoff

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114188541533132822
This is the real modern Republican party in all its glory. . .

“Trust us”?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/politics/09terror.html
The Federal Bureau of Investigation found apparent violations of its own wiretapping and other intelligence-gathering procedures more than 100 times in the last two years, and problems appear to have grown more frequent in some crucial respects, a Justice Department report released Wednesday said.

While some of these instances were considered technical glitches, the report, from the department's inspector general, characterized others as "significant," including wiretaps that were much broader in scope than approved by a court and others that were allowed to continue for weeks or sometimes months longer than was authorized. . .

House committee votes overwhelmingly to block Dubai Ports deal

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/08/politics/08cnd-port.html
62-2. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/politics/09assess.html

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/08/port_showdown_set_for_next_week.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/08/AR2006030800257.html

Meanwhile, over in the Senate. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/frist-blocking-vote-to-stop-bushs-port.html
CNN is reporting that White House puppet/GOP Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist blocked a vote this afternoon on an amendment offered by Senator Chuck Schumer that would stop the deal Bush cut with the UAE to run American port security. . .

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060309/ap_on_go_co/ports_security

What the State Dept thinks of the UAE: http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5458

And coming next. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/154646/8798
[CBS] After weeks of negotiations and closed door meetings, Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, said he would soon introduce the Terrorist Surveillance Act of 2006 with three other moderates who have helped shaped the debate on intelligence issues: Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. . .

[NB: And then Georgia10 cuts loose on these “spineless, submissive . . . moral simpletons” – don’t miss it!]

More: http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009351

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/als-observations-on-surveillance-deal.html

Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) caves -- again

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/sen-rockefeller-praises-gops-actions.html
[Glenn Greenwald] I'm glad to see that Sen. Rockefeller feels bad about his impetuous remarks where he insinuated that Sens. Hagel, Snowe and DeWine -- "three of the most independent Republicans" in the Senate -- buckled under to White House pressure. That was a completely unfair accusation that had no basis to it at all. Why ever would he think that?

The NYT’s credulous coverage

http://www.slate.com/id/2137777/
[Eric Umansky] Yesterday, the NYT reported: "G.O.P. SENATORS SAY ACCORD IS SET ON WIRETAPPING." The niggling details the Times buried: The GOP blocked an investigation of the program, while as TP noted, the "accord" would let the no-warrant-needed poking around to continue. Or as the NYT puts it this morning, "PLAN WOULD ALLOW LONG-TERM SPYING WITHOUT WARRANTS."

What will happen when the Bush gang’s arguments for illegal spying are tested in the courts?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/08/AR2006030802360.html

The Big Dog

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/08/BL2006030801142.html
[Dan Froomkin] Faced with the frightening prospect of public hearings and active Congressional oversight into President Bush's contested domestic spying program, the White House sent out its big dog -- Vice President Cheney -- to bring straying moderate Republicans to heel. . . Indeed, no matter what you have may have heard lately, the fact is that Cheney is still the Bush Administration's most ferocious warrior. . .

The administration that believes in “conversation” as a way of resolving differences – except when they don’t

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5459

Rummy: why does the media keep running inaccurate numbers on Iraq War civilian casualties? Here’s one reason, Don

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/9/0313/11703

[NB: That’s right – they’re not too HIGH, they’re too LOW]

More on possible WH links to Cunningham/Wade/Wilkes

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000058.php

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/_/2006/03/afishrotsfromthehead_dept.php

GOP tries to block funding for housing program in Louisiana

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5453

GOP does block food warning labels

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N146234CC
The House voted Wednesday to strip many warnings from food labels, potentially affecting alerts about arsenic in bottled water, lead in candy and allergy-causing sulfites, among others. . . Pushed by food companies seeking uniform labels across state lines, the bill would prevent states from adding food warnings that go beyond federal law. . .

[NB: Once again, they believe in states’ rights, except when they don’t]

“Science under attack”

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/9/43525/44811

The kind of people they are

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/elizabeth-dole-sends-out-gop.html
Elizabeth Dole sends out GOP fundraising letter disguised to look like federal tax form, "requires" you to respond "or else". . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6800.html
[Steve Benen] The White House has latched onto a meme that Republicans seem particularly fond of: the president's critics are "angry." Bush is the optimistic visionary, the argument goes, while his political opponents are wild-eyed cynics, fueled by hate, who use over-the-top rhetoric. . .

Just yesterday, for example, a couple of the president's critics appeared at an event in DC and blasted Bush "unconscionable," "irresponsible," "vindictive," and "inept." Another described the White House as "pathetic" and said Bush "is not a responsible human being; he is a phenomenally reckless human being.". . . Of course, these comments didn't come from liberals — they came from conservatives. . .

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6803.html
[Steve Benen] Two weeks ago, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist announced that the Senate will vote in June on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. It doesn't have the votes to pass, and Senate Dems don't see the point in wasting time on a measure that will simply help a few far-right groups' fundraising efforts, but we'll see the amendment on the Senate floor in June anyway.

Apparently, it's going to be that kind of summer. Yesterday, Frist announced that he's scheduled a vote on a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning for the same month. . .

Rick Santorum (R-PA): is there a more sanctimonious, lying hypocrite in the Congress?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008383.php

Ahh, sweet schadenfreude. . .Katherine Harris reportedly getting ready to drop out of FL Senate race

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/03/harris_dropping.html

Or not?

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060308/APP/603080895

DeLay’s prospects in Texas: electorally

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6797.html

http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/03/tx_22_delay_more_vulnerable_th.html

DeLay’s prospects in Texas: legally

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014233.html

Bonus item: quote of the day

http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/08/21/52/quote-of-the-week-2/
"Bush speaks to the audience as if they’re idiots. I think the reason he does that is because that’s the way these issues were explained to him."

- Graydon Carter

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 7:00 AM

 
MORAL COWARDS

I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html (Comments on this site are now working – they were down for a while)

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

Well, the famously “nonpartisan” Senate Intelligence Committee proves once again that deference to the Bush gang is more important to them than their responsibilities to the American people. Faced with clear evidence that NSA spying broke the FISA law, circumvented their own oversight role, and gathered data on countless innocent Americans, their party-line vote said, “Uh, well, okay then, if you insist. . . .”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/08/politics/08nsa.html
Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that they had reached agreement with the White House on proposed bills to impose new oversight but allow wiretapping without warrants for up to 45 days. . .

The agreement would reinforce the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which was created in 1978 to issue special warrants for spying but was sidestepped by the administration. The measure would require the administration to seek a warrant from the court whenever possible.

If the administration elects not to do so after 45 days, the attorney general must certify that the surveillance is necessary to protect the country and explain to the subcommittee why the administration has not sought a warrant. The attorney general would be required to give an update to the subcommittee every 45 days.

[NB: Air-tight, wouldn’t you say?]

Democrats called the deal an abdication of the special bipartisan committee's role as a watchdog, saying the Republicans had in effect blessed the program before learning how it worked or what it entailed.

"The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House," said Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is vice chairman of the panel. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/7/19117/18144
[Georgia10] The administration is threatening members of Congress, it is strong-arming them like never before--in short, like a cornered animal it has pulled out every last stop, every last fang and growl to dissuade Congress from investigating this matter. The inference is obvious: the more fervent the desire to cover up, the more heinous the crime.

This is not just a surveillance program. This is not just data-mining. There is something much greater here beneath the surface, an action that not only runs afoul our Constitutional rights, but that undermines the very core of our democracy.

This is not the end of the road. Attorney General Gonzales is likely to be recalled to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Several lawsuits are well underway. And when the truth is exposed, Senator Snowe, Senator Hagel, and every Republican member of Congress who has assisted in this cover-up will be exposed as aiders and abetters to one of the most fundamental betrayals of the American people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701549.html
Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) told reporters after the closed session that he had asked the committee "to reject confrontation in favor of accommodation". . .

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003797.html
[Harry Reid] “It is no surprise that the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee has once again caved to the wishes of the White House and refused even to open an investigation into President Bush’s domestic spying program. One is left to wonder what it would take to make this Congress stop rubberstamping the Bush Administration and actually do real oversight. We cannot effectively legislate on the NSA spying issue if we do not know the facts, and we will not know them if the Republican-controlled Intelligence Committee persists in refusing to do its job.”

[Pat Roberts] "Today we reached an accommodation with the White House to expand the number of members involved in overseeing this important program to seven, just about half of the Committee. The Committee voted to create a seven member subcommittee to conduct enhanced oversight of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Including myself, there will be four Republicans on the Subcommittee. I have appointed the Members. They are: Senator Hatch, Senator DeWine, and Senator Bond."

So much for the “moderates” like Olympia Snowe: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/fake-moderate-gop-senators-cave-to.html

All you need to know: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003799.html
[Laura Rozen] This quote from White House spokeswoman Dana Perino really says it all, "We're eager to work with Congress on legislation that would further codify the president's authority."

Glenn Greenwald (of course): don’t miss it

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/post-mortem-on-intelligence-committee.html
[I]t is almost unfathomable how little personal dignity these compliant GOP Senators have. . .

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/intelligence-committee-votes-not-to.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/moving-into-cover-up-phase.html

Mad, desperate lies: Rummy says the only reason we think Iraq isn’t going well is because the media is deceiving us about it. And why should the media deceive us? Oh, you know why

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/rummy-blames-medias-exaggerations-for.html
[WP] Rumsfeld, citing information from his top commander in Iraq, said the news media has exaggerated the number of attacks on mosques in the latest sectarian violence, the number of Iraqi deaths and has mischaracterized the actions of government security forces. . . "Interestingly, all of the exaggerations seem to be on one side. It isn't as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues. On the contrary, the steady stream of errors all seem to be of the nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030700792.html
"We do know, of course, that al-Qaeda has media committees. We do know that they teach people exactly how to try to manipulate the media. They do this regularly. We see the intelligence that reports on their meetings. Now I can't take a string and tie it to a news report and then trace it back to an al-Qaeda media committee meeting. I'm not able to do that. . .”

More from Rummy: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/07/rumsfeld/index.html

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2721

More media deceptions: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/18-dead-found-in-iraq-or-is-this-just.html

The war with no name (thanks to Eric Alterman for the link)

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=65191
[Tom Engelhardt] Look at the polls. When Gallup's pollsters go out to ask Americans about the Bush administration and Iraq, they frame their questions this way: "Do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?"; "Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war with Iraq?"; "Who do you think is currently winning the war in Iraq?" Mind you, never the Iraq War -- like the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or the Gulf War -- but the war in Iraq. . . What we're doing there, it turns out, is "working to defeat… every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq." Our goal is to make Iraq in victory our "strong ally" in the only war in town -- not the one in Iraq, even though the President that evening was grimly assuring his audience that "this is a moment of choosing for the Iraqi people" -- but the "war on terror." Only in the context of that great "global war," that multigenerational conflict which, according to the Vice President's office, gives the President all those commander-in-chief powers as a "unitary executive," can he say in no uncertain terms, "[W]e remain a nation at war." . .

In not naming the "situation in Iraq," the media and the public seem to have followed in the administration's footsteps. You can search the press, for instance, almost in vain for "the Iraq War”. . .

The lack of a name for our "effort" in Iraq should not be seen as some kind of bizarre oversight, or even a reflection of the confusing or nondescript nature of that conflict. After all, the Bush administration regularly puts great time and effort into naming things. It has, for instance, created various Orwellian names for its programs in a game of opposites -- the Clear Skies Act, the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, and so on. And much thought went into what to label the actual invasion of Iraq. After, at least one rumored false step -- Operation Iraqi Liberation (with its obviously unacceptable acronym) -- it was dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), a name the President has proudly used many times since, but which officially was over when he landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003 and declared "major combat operations" ended.

Not naming something can be as much an act as naming it. . . As a result, we have the following strange "situation." The most obvious war we're fighting goes unnamed, as does the lower-level conflict in Afghanistan which no one even thinks of calling our second Afghan War (the first being the one we organized and funded against the Soviets in the 1980s when Osama bin Laden and his ilk were our allies). . .

On the other hand, GWOT, a "war" that bears no resemblance to anything ever historically recognized as "war," is constantly being given that name. . . Recently, Thomas Ricks of the Washington Post visited Patrol Base Swamp, "the forwardmost American position in the so-called Triangle of Death southwest of Baghdad" and offered this quote from Sgt. Chad Wendel of the 101st Airborne Division on fighting Sunni insurgents: "It's like trying to track down a bunch of ghosts." That line that could have come straight out of Vietnam or perhaps a host of other counter-guerrilla wars. But, in fact, there is no more ghostly "war" than the President's war on terror, fought against neither army, nor state, not even scattered guerrilla forces. It is the ultimate asymmetric conflict between the superpower that has the most advanced military on the planet and a scattered movement that is little short of virtual (and whose most imposing presence, when terror bombs don't go off, is on-line). Think of us, then, as fighting a war without a name and a name without a war.

OK, so, from now on I will use its name (let’s “brand” it): the Iraq War price tag

http://www.slate.com/id/2137724
The Journal does the budget numbers and concludes that U.S. spending for the Iraq war is still heading north and currently running $5.9 billion per month. The administration has requested $117.6 billion for Afghanistan and Iraq for this fiscal year, 18 percent more than last year. It's all done outside the normal budget and in "emergency" appropriations.

Coming next: Iran?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/07/international/middleeast/07cnd-iran.html

Bush’s disastrous trip to India and Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/07/opinion/07tue1.html

GOP starting to line up against Dubai Ports World deal

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Ports-Security-Politics.html
"For all of us who are believers in our president, these are trying times," says Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican whose Florida district includes the Miami port.

"This ports issue has ricocheted around the country and made it to people's dinner tables like nothing I've ever seen," said Scott Reed, a GOP consultant. "It's now an out-of-control political problem." . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/08/politics/08ports.html
Republican members have been bombarded with protests from constituents alarmed at the proposal, and the agreement for a 45-day review has done little to slow the outpouring.

"This is a very big political problem," Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House majority leader, said Tuesday. . .

http://www.slate.com/id/2137724
"We do not believe the U.S. should allow a government-owned company to operate American ports," said a spokesman for Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. . .

More: http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009345

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5443
[Insight] At least three security agencies raised objections to a takeover by a United Arab Emirates state-owned company of the operations of six major U.S. ports.

Congressional sources said the Defense Department, Homeland Security Department and Coast Guard expressed objections during the review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of the state-owned Dubai Ports World, which bought the British-owned Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. P&O has managed port operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Miami, Philadelphia and New Orleans.

"All of the rules were bent on this one," a congressional source said. "We had a major security review managed by political appointees."

But most of the objections were not recorded in the proceedings of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), the sources said. They said the objections remained off the record for "technical reasons." Later, the heads of some of the agencies denied that their representatives raised concerns. . .

DPW says, Nuts to you: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/dubai-ports-world-tells-congress-to-go.html

More cronyism over competence in the Department of Homeland Security

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=33557&dcn=e_gvet

Why DeLay’s primary win in TX is good news

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001277.php

Jack? Jack who?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007835

A White House link to the Cunningham/Wade/Wilkes scandal?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007831

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007834.php

Simple questions that abortion opponents don’t like to answer

Penalties for the mother: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114175425569326066

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114176844964079664

“The moment of conception”: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840

The rape exception: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_05_atrios_archive.html#114174706349939844

A simple question that abortion opponent George Bush doesn’t want to answer

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/07/bush-abortion-ban
Scott McClellan repeatedly refused to say whether Bush opposes South Dakota’s new abortion ban, which includes no explicit exceptions for victims of rape or incest. . . McClellan justified his stonewall by saying the administration doesn’t comment on “state laws.”

Theocracy watch: actually, I agree that praying is probably appropriate as part of this gang’s approach to Homeland Security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030702065.html
President Bush ordered the Department of Homeland Security yesterday to create a center for faith-based and community initiatives within 45 days to eliminate regulatory, contracting and programmatic barriers to providing federal funds to religious groups to deliver social services, the White House announced last night. . . Bush also called on the department by September "to identify all existing barriers . . . that unlawfully discriminate against, or otherwise discourage or disadvantage the participation" of such groups in federal programs.

[NB: Yes, you are reading this right – using DHS resources to leverage the GENERAL program of subsidizing religious groups with Federal funds]

Bonus item: It doesn’t mean much at this stage but the Democrats’ overall poll numbers against the Republicans continue to grow

http://poll.gallup.com/content/?ci=21793

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:58 AM

 
LEARNING FROM OUR MISTAKES

I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html (Comments on this site are now working – they were down for a while)

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

Ha, ha, ha. . . sorry. . . another laughing attack. . . can’t stop. . . Bush says he wants. . . oh ho ho ho . . . MORE unchecked powers

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/06/politics/06cnd-veto.html
President Bush today proposed legislation to create a line-item veto, a measure he said would help restrain government spending by allowing him to strip out pork-barrel spending. . . Congress passed a line-item veto in 1996, but two years later, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 that it represented an unconstitutional intrusion into powers granted exclusively to the legislative branch. Mr. Bush said his new bill was drafted in a way that would avoid the court's objections.

A few problems: http://susiemadrak.com/2006/03/06/12/59/supreme-being/
[Susan Madrak] That previous ruling said it could be implemented only through a constitutional amendment. So what’s his plan here, other than political posturing?

http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/27533
[Matt Yglesias] The line-item veto is at least an okay idea, but the administration's new push to get one is nothing more than the latest sign of the intellectual and political bankruptcy of contemporary conservatism. It's simply not the case that "pork" is a major component of federal spending or that getting it "under control" would render GOP tax policies viable. And even if those things weren't true, there's been nothing stopping Bush for offering a non-line-item veto of a highway bill or something to show he's serious about cracking down on special interest giveaways. But of course he isn't serious about that (it was the White House, after all, that demanded the porkerific energy bill) so this is what you get. . . . Realistically, nobody on the right has any kind of strategy for shrinking federal spending down to the 16 percent of GDP or less that they insist revenue must be held to. This simply isn't a viable approach to running the country and a line-item veto isn't going to change anything.

Iraq: How we got into this mess

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18771

I said, this MESS

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2718
[Reuters] The Iraqi army is investigating how a gunman managed to kill a senior Iraqi general in an attack that has fuelled concern about the new, U.S.-trained Iraq military's cohesion in the face of brewing sectarian conflict.

"It is a very strange incident and raises many questions," an official in the Defence Ministry press service said on Tuesday after the commander of all Iraqi troops in Baghdad died from a bullet to the head while in a patrol convoy on Monday. . . Another Iraqi general told Reuters it was an assassination that needed inside information and proved the army, recruited by U.S. officers over the past two years, had been infiltrated by factional militia groups ready to turn on fellow soldiers. . .

Civil war

http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/IraqCoverage/story?id=1689688&page=1
As Pentagon generals offered optimistic assessments that the sectarian violence in Iraq had dissipated this weekend, other military experts told ABC News that Sunni and Shiite groups in Iraq already are engaged in a civil war, and that the Iraqi government and U.S. military had better accept that fact and adapt accordingly.

"We're in a civil war now; it's just that not everybody's joined in," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William L. Nash, a former military commander in Bosnia-Herzegovina. "The failure to understand that the civil war is already taking place, just not necessarily at the maximum level, means that our counter measures are inadequate and therefore dangerous to our long-term interest. . . "It's our failure to understand reality that has caused us to be late throughout this experience of the last three years in Iraq," added Nash, who is an ABC News consultant.

Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News, "If you talk to U.S. intelligence officers and military people privately, they'd say we've been involved in low level civil war with very slowly increasing intensity since the transfer of power in June 2004.". . Cordesman, who is also an ABC News consultant, noted that when military leaders speak publicly, "They have to spin the issue — particularly for American and European audiences — and there's often a rather serious lack of realism."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/06/BL2006030600719.html
[Dan Froomkin] If sectarian violence continues to increase in Iraq, what will President Bush do?. . . Nobody knows, of course, because even as the public increasingly sees the situation in Iraq headed toward all-out civil war, Bush's official position is denial. . . [read on]

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008363.php

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-envoy7mar07,0,3620947.story

“Are We Safer?”

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18752
[David Cole] So despite Bush's claims, the "war on terror" at home has resulted in the conviction of hardly any actual terrorists. In Iraq the "war on terror" has in all likelihood resulted in the recruitment and training of more terrorists than have been captured or killed. Benjamin and Simon make it clear that concerns about terrorist attacks throughout the world are often justified; and the convictions in the US suggest that there are at least pockets of ideological resentment here that might pose a threat of violence in the future. . .

It is possible, of course, that some of the administration's measures have produced valuable intelligence, although if that were the case one would expect to see more successful prosecutions for terrorism. It's also possible that these initiatives have deterred some terrorists here from planning attacks on targets in the US and others from coming to the US to do so—but the government has so far produced no evidence that this has been the case.

What can be known is that the administration's tactics—a curious amalgam of outmoded thinking and dangerous new ideas—have created unprecedented levels of distrust toward US law enforcement within the Arab and Muslim communities here as well as intense anti-Americanism abroad. The administration is accurately perceived as unfairly targeting innocent Arabs and Muslims, using coercion against them preemptively and without a solid case, and disregarding fundamental principles of the rule of law and human rights. In the long run the resentment provoked by these measures is the greatest threat to our national security, and the most likely source of the next attack.

Amnesty International: prisoners in Iraq still being tortured

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq6mar06,1,1593900.story

The weak, circumstantial case against Iran, which the US plans to take to the UN (sound familiar?)

http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/27539
[Time] It will rely mainly on circumstantial evidence, much of it from documents found on a laptop purportedly purloined from an Iranian nuclear engineer and obtained by the CIA in 2004. . .

I said, SOUND FAMILIAR?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/and-if-you-believe-this-one-us.html
[John Aravosis] US military and intelligence officials have suddenly "found" evidence of Iran arming the insurgents in Iraq. . . Suddenly after 3 years we conveniently find "evidence" of Iran arming the Iraqi insurgents, only a mere weeks after Bush starts laying the groundwork for attacking Iran. Gee, how convenient is that.

This is EXACTLY how they led us into Iraq under false pretenses. And it's rather disturbing that ABC News reports this as an "exclusive," yet doesn't bother mentioning that critics worry that this may be another ploy to get the US to attack a country in the region based on faulty or doctored intelligence.

More: http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1692347&page=1

Why the ABC story is a crock

#1: It’s an old story, just being recycled now:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/did-abc-get-duped-by-bushies-on-their.html

More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4315924.stm

#2: Even if it’s true that IED’s are being made in Iran and smuggled over the border, that doesn’t necessarily implicate Iran – we already knew that insurgents ran back and forth across the border:
http://cernigsnewshog.blogspot.com/2006/03/abc-and-ieds-from-iran-that-were-made.html
[Cernig] Not once in the entire piece are we presented with any evidence that the bombs are being made with Iranian government materials or even knowledge. . .

The all-out blitz to block an Intelligence Committee investigation into NSA spying

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/one-day-left-for-white-house-to-squash.html

More: http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/14033240.htm
[K-R] Republicans in Congress are trying to limit the scope of any investigation into how President Bush's secret domestic-surveillance program has operated. Some key lawmakers are also working to legalize such spying on U.S. citizens in the future, perhaps with some judicial restrictions. . .

Judiciary Committee to recall Gonzales? (maybe they should put him under oath this time)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060307/ap_on_go_co/eavesdropping
“There is a suggestion in his letter there are other classified intelligence programs that are currently under way," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., told reporters. . .

Dick Cheney, Bush’s anchor

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/060313ta_talk_hertzberg
[Hendrick Hertzberg] According to a CBS News poll released last Monday, the “favorability” rating of Vice-President Dick Cheney has sunk to a new low. How low a low? Well, that evening, John Stewart, as part of the buildup to the “Daily Show” star’s going global on Oscar Sunday, was the guest on CNN’s “Larry King Live. When King barked out the number—“Cheney eighteen per cent”—Stewart, citing another well-known poll result, observed solemnly, “Four out of five dentists surveyed recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum.” That is, the proportion of American who have a favorable opinion of Cheney is outweighed by the proportion of dentists who recommend sugary gum for their patients who chew gum. . . [read on]

http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2006030721918
[Seung-Ryun Kim] How low is 18 percent?� . . .

Michael Jackson, who was alleged of sexually harassing an underage boy, and American football player O.J. Simpson, who caused a huge clamor for being suspected of murdering his wife in 1994, each maintained 25 percent and 29 percent favorable impression rates, respectively.

The paper pointed out that even vice president Spiro Agnew during the Nixon presidency who resigned due to tax evasion allegations still maintained a 45 percent support rate right until he resigned in 1973.

The only person less popular than Vice President Cheney is Paris Hilton, the female actress. Hilton, who is the heiress of the global hotel chain Hilton Group, and who has a blonde party girl� image, only got a 15 percent approval rating.

More: http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5436

Another Cheney

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_05_atrios_archive.html#114167663126978342
[The Australian] THE war in Iraq is her father's business, but Elizabeth Cheney, the US Vice-President's daughter, has been given responsibility for bringing about a different type of regime change in Iran. . .

[NB: And a Mitchell Wade link? http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007822.php]

Bush, the incompetence factor

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009334

The Plame leak: Swopa connects the dots

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2716

How do you feel about South Dakota writing abortion policy for the rest of the country? But it turns out that the politics of this are more complicated than they appear

http://www.slate.com/id/2137676/
[Eric Umansky] The NYT and LAT front South Dakota's governor signing a near-total ban on abortion. The law, which is meant to challenge Roe v. Wade, has no exception for incest or rape. It's not scheduled to take effect until July—and the courts are sure to block it before then. With five pro-Roe votes still on the Supreme Court, the law's backers appear to be hoping one of them retires before it makes its way up there.

The NYT says "abortion rights advocates responded with fury." Only in their press releases, says the LAT, which notes that on the inside those advocates are feeling warm and fuzzy. As USAT also emphasizes, many anti-abortion types are actually bummed about the new law. The reason for the seeming Bizzaro World response: People on both sides think the law will serve as a big banner for abortion rights groups—and then get knocked down by the Supremes. If abortion rights groups play it right, said one such advocate, "this might be the best thing that ever happened to the pro-choice movement."

This is the man working tirelessly to keep us all safe. . .

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007813
[CQ] On many a workday lunchtime, the nominal boss of U.S. intelligence, John D. Negroponte, can be found at a private club in downtown Washington, getting a massage, taking a swim, and having lunch, followed by a good cigar and a perusal of the daily papers in the club’s library. . . “He spends three hours there [every] Monday through Friday,” gripes a senior counterterrorism official, noting that the former ambassador has a security detail sitting outside all that time in chase cars. . .

Imagine these people managing your household budget

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/6/143627/2109
[AP] Treasury Secretary John Snow notified Congress on Monday that the administration has now taken "all prudent and legal actions," including tapping certain government retirement funds, to keep from hitting the $8.2 trillion national debt limit.

In a letter to Congress, Snow urged lawmakers to pass a new debt ceiling immediately to avoid the first-ever U.S. default on its obligations. . . In his letter, Snow notified lawmakers that Treasury would begin tapping the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, which Treasury officials said would provide a "few billion" dollars in extra borrowing ability. . . Treasury has also been taking investments out of a $65.3 billion government pension fund known as the G-fund [part of the Federal Employees Retirement System].

http://www.senatemajority.com/node/97
It seems Majority Leader Bill Frist is up to his old tricks again. Late last week Frist planned a secret vote to raise the nation’s debt limit and place America in further financial peril.

Currently, the nation’s debt limit is $8.18 trillion. Treasury Secretary Snow has urged Congress to increase it to $9 trillion. Frist and Co., would rather you NOT know that he wants to increase the nation’s debt, so he has planned to wait until Senators jet off for yet another recess, and at the last minute call a voice vote, thereby making taking this important debate off the record. (CQ Today, 3/2/06)

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/6/185040/9966

Hey, the "new" House leadership is just as corrupt as the "old" House leadership – but somehow the whole scandal issue has disappeared from the front pages. Why? (oh, right, they’re busy working on “reform”)

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/gop-financial-ties-to-anti-consumer.html

Katherine Harris cancels events, goes into deep hiding

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007817
“Full crisis mode”

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008355.php
[Kevin Drum] I know it's bad form to gloat about such things, but can we make an exception this time?

More Cunningham connections: http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/apps/nl/newsletter2.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=917053

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V5EE220CC

Abramoff sentencing

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-36abramoff,0,85533.story
Abbe Lowell, Abramoff's Washington D.C.-based defense lawyer, warned Huck that he might be obligated at a sentencing hearing to reveal details of the government's pending investigations into the Capitol Hill lawmakers who did business with Abramoff.

"We will name names. We will provide the public with evidence of what is going on out there," Lowell said. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/6/135421/5895
[Georgia10] March 29th. Mark your calendars, and stock up on your popcorn.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/01/AR2006030102193.html
News about GOP political corruption, inept hurricane response and chaos in Iraq has lifted Democrats' hopes of winning control of Congress this fall. But seizing the opportunity has not been easy, as they found when they tried to unveil an agenda of their own. . .

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/if-only-democrats-werent-such-lousy.html
[Anonymous Liberal] If the NSA scandal teaches us anything, it's that most Democratic politicians make lousy poker players; they couldn't spot a bluff if their careers depended on it . . .

Erasing history (part 392): Colorado Republicans pull web photos of Marilyn Musgrave’s campaign event, where she illegally used uniformed military as stage props

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007823

The kind of people they are (this may have to become a new regular feature)

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/06.html#a7412

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/6/17559/89680

Still MORE evidence of e-voting fraud (or at the very least, dangerous unreliability). Thanks to Susan Madrak for the link

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060304/NEWS/603040424/1017/POLITICS
The Herald-Tribune on Wednesday found thousands of mysterious entries in the tally of historic votes that suggested people had already voted in elections that haven’t yet occurred. . .

We still don’t know who forged those Niger uranium documents in the first place – but more pieces are falling in place (for the obsessive only)

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007022.php

Bonus item: Too late for the Oscars

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/07/movies/07green.html
A documentary about the Texas criminal investigation that led to the indictment of Representative Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader, on campaign fund-raising charges is being put to use by Mr. DeLay's political opponents in an attempt to unseat him.

The film, "The Big Buy: How Tom DeLay Stole Congress," will be distributed this spring by the Hollywood producer and liberal provocateur Robert Greenwald, whose last release was a scathing attack on Wal-Mart sponsored by a variety of labor unions and other groups critical of the retailing giant.

A host of liberal organizations in Texas and nationwide, including People for the American Way, Democracy for America and the Pacifica radio station in Houston, are expected to sponsor the film's release. It will not follow a traditional theatrical rollout but will instead open in a few cities before being made widely available on DVD, as was the Wal-Mart movie, Mr. Greenwald said in an interview.

An important aspect of the release plan is to organize hundreds, if not thousands, of house parties in May and June at which the movie will be shown, Mr. Greenwald said. The distribution strategy is to be detailed on Tuesday — primary day in Texas — as a "welcoming gift" to Mr. DeLay, he said. . .

The film: http://tomdelaymovie.com/

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:05 AM

 
WHO LOST IRAQ?

I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html (they seem to be having trouble with this section of the voting)

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html (open)

Who lost Iraq?

The critics: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/5/203142/0169

The media: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008351.php

The Iraqis: http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2715

The right answer: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/5/203142/0169

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-outlook5mar05,1,928221.column

Seven steps? They haven’t even gotten past denial. . .

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/5/16341/86414
[AP] Iraq is not on the verge of civil war, the Pentagon's top general said Sunday, though he acknowledged that "anything can happen" in the beleaguered nation. . . "I do not believe it has deep roots," Pace said of the insurgency. "I do not believe that they're on the verge of civil war.". . .

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060305/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/kirkuk-at-center-of-kurdish-shiite.html

John Murtha, hard-core military supporter, calls the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs a liar

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/murtha-calls-chairman-of-jt-chiefs.html
Murtha expressed skepticism of assurances given by Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on NBC's “Meet the Press” on Sunday. Pace said the war in Iraq was going “very, very well.". . . “Why would I believe him?” said Murtha, D-Pa. “This administration, including the president, has mischaracterized this war for the last two years”

More Murtha

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/05.html#a7402
MURTHA: The public is way ahead of what’s going on in Washington. They no longer believe it. The troops themselves, 70 percent of the troops said we want to come home within a year. The only solution to this is to redeploy. Let me tell you, the only people who want us in Iraq is Iran and al-Qaeda. I've talked to a top-level commander the other day, it was about two weeks ago, and he said China wants us there also. Why? Because we’re depleting our resources, our troop resources and our fiscal resources.

Power Line’s John Hinderaker “responds”: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/05/is-john-hinderaker-nuts/

A hurricane of criticism

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11677332/site/newsweek/

Gee, I guess it’s bad when Republicans are calling you incompetent

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/5/144115/2620
BILL KRISTOL: I think it's become in people's minds an emblem of the administration that just isn't as serious about the competent execution of the functions of government as it should be. And even -- I'm struck talking to conservatives and Republicans -- they agree with the president on basic political philosophy, the they agree with his basic policy agenda, but they are worried that they just don't seem to be able to execute as well as they should be.

More: http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/5/115431/4328
[Scott Shields] While I have no doubt that Kristol is right to say that a growing number of conservatives lack confidence in the Bush administration to effectively manage the basic functions of government, I think the problem goes deeper than Bush administration incompetence. The situation we find ourselves in right now serves as the ultimate test of Republican governance. From President Bush on down to the lowest ranking Republican in the House, Rep. Jean Schmidt, the Republican Party controls the federal government. This has been the case for the better part of the last five years, with a brief period in which the Democrats, held tenuous control of the Senate, thanks to Republican defector Jim Jeffords.

The fundamental failures of government therefore cannot be simply chalked up to George W. Bush's personal incompetence. The problem is that Republican governance doesn't work. Every theory the modern Republican Party bases its policies on has failed the test of realistic implementation. Lower taxes on the wealthy will create jobs and increase revenue? Wrong. People all over the world value Western-style Democracy over nationality? Wrong. Self-regulation of business will be more effective than government regulation? Wrong. And the list goes on. . .

Gee, I guess it’s bad when Republicans are calling you dishonest and secretive

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/05.html#a7401
GERGEN: I am glad you brought that up. This administration has engaged in secrecy at a level we have not seen in over 30 years. Unfortunately, I have to bring up the name of Richard Nixon, because we haven't seen it since the days of Nixon. And now what they're doing -- and they're using the war on terror to justify -- is they're starting to target journalists who try to pierce the veil of secrecy and find things and put them in the newspapers.

Now, in the past what the government has always done is go after the people who leak, the inside people. That's the way they try to stop leaks. This is the first administration that I can remember, including Nixon's, that said -- and Porter Goss said this to Congress -- that we need to think about a law that would put journalists who print national security things to...bring them up in front of grand juries and put them in jail if they don't -- in effect, if they don't reveal their sources. . .

More: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/bushs-attacks-on-press-freedoms.html

http://makeashorterlink.com/?W21952FBC

“Trust us”? You’ve got to be kidding

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/5/12468/62083
[SusanG] Newsweek tells us that a neutered board set up to oversee possible civil liberties violations, mandated more than 15 months ago by Congress and recommended by the 9/11 Commission, is set to hold its first meeting next week. . . Trouble is, from all outward appearances, it is another quadruple double-cross public relations move like the others we've become so familiar with from this administration - instead of focusing on solving the problem, throw some propaganda at it and see if it will disappear from the hearts and minds of Americans. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board now vows to look into domestic wiretapping, data mining and the Patriot Act. . .

But the final clue to this Potemkin panel is the choice of chairperson - Carol Dinkins - the law partner of. . . hold your breath. . . Alberto Gonzales. . .

“Trust us”? (part two): The Dept of Homeland Security can’t even keep their own building secure

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z12922FBC

Tom DeLay: the endgame?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/5/13581/67043

The kind of people they are

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/colorado-republican-house-member.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/now-in-power-conservatives-reverse.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/06/opinion/06mon1.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114150787616563885

Jeb for Senate?

http://sptimes.com/2006/03/05/Perspective/Run__Jeb__Run.shtml

Bonus item: “The Media Firewall” (today’s must-read)

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/media-firewall.html

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:38 AM

 
I will be running this header for the next several days. Progressive Blog Digest has been nominated in two categories for the Koufax Awards for best lefty blogs: “Best Blog” and “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition.” Thanks to everyone for nominating PBD in these categories. Last year PBD was a finalist in the “Most Deserving” category, and that is probably where it has the best chance – but you can vote once (and once only, please) in each category, so you don’t have to choose between them.

There are many other excellent and deserving blogs out there, and by visiting these pages you may discover other good ones too.

It is easy to vote: just follow the links, scroll to the very bottom of the page, and add a Comment.

I am not doing this for any personal credit – as you know, I prefer to keep a low profile. But it is a way of attracting more readers to the blog, and that helps this information reach a wider audience. Thanks for your support.

Best Blog: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/03/002456.html

Most Deserving: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html

CLAMPING DOWN

Here is how petrified the Republicans are about close scrutiny of Bush’s NSA spy policies

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/4/122941/9886

Then and now: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_02_26_atrios_archive.html#114148998828545539

More: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/4/94158/09567

The Bush gang says, “Look, we have enemies. If they can gather information about what we are doing, they can use it to defeat us. So protecting these secrets is in the essential national interest” – but here they mean the U.S. press and the American public!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/04/AR2006030400867.html

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/bushs-attacks-on-press-freedoms.html

[NB: Unless THEY’RE the ones doing the leaking, of course]

Dubai Ports World now being urged to find a US front company to give face validity to their deal

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/396685p-336188c.html

Is opposition to the ports deal racist? (thanks to a loyal reader for this link)

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.arabs28feb28,0,7793239.story

(It is uncomfortable to be lining up with Michael Ledeen, isn’t it?)

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114135628272003379

James A. Baker in the middle of the ports deal (anyone surprised?)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/23/14935/2494

Payback time

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/04/politics/04king.html
Representative Peter T. King's prominent opposition to a proposal to allow a Dubai company to take over some terminal operations at American ports may have earned him some punishment from the Bush administration: He has been grounded.

Which is it?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/iraq/bal-te.troops04mar04,0,3026542.story
The top U.S. commander in Iraq said yesterday that he hopes to make an assessment this spring about whether to reduce the number of American troops in Iraq. But Pentagon officials speaking anonymously said a recent surge in violence there has dampened hopes that force levels can be cut anytime soon.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/04/report_us_uk_to_pull_troops_out_of_iraq.html
"The United States and Britain are planning to pull all their troops out of Iraq by the spring of 2007, two British newspapers reported in their Sunday editions, quoting unnamed senior defense ministry sources," Reuters reports.

[NB: And never forget those four permanent US bases being built – even though the media has]

Oh the price we are paying. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/04/politics/04budget.html
President Bush's budget would increase the federal deficit by $35 billion this year and by more than $1.2 trillion over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office reported on Friday.

The nonpartisan budget office said that Mr. Bush's tax-cutting proposals would cost about $1.7 trillion over the next 10 years and that his proposals to partly privatize Social Security would cost about $312 billion during that period. . .

Ralph Reed, once the Golden Boy of Christian Right politics, now just another sleazy operative

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008346.php

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007803

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6768.html

Plameology (aka, are Jason Leopold’s sources reliable?)

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2712

This is ILLEGAL

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007805
[Josh Marshall] I've heard from a number of active duty and retired members of the military, including a number of JAG lawyers, and unless there's something very different about Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) event in Colorado than the description of it that appeared in her local paper, it clearly violated the law. . .

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007802

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_03_05.php#007807

The end of science-based policy

http://makeashorterlink.com/?D52525EBC
For 35 years, the Environmental Protection Agency heeded the advice of a special panel of scientists set up by Congress to help shape government rules . . .

Sunday talk shows

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/04/AR2006030401005.html
FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. David Johnson, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Michael D. Brown, former Federal Emergency Management Agency director.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark and comedian Stephen Colbert.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.).

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.), former representative Jack Kemp (R-N.Y.) and Pace.

LATE EDITION (CNN): Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, United Arab Emirates Economy Minister Sheikha Lubna al-Quasimi, Gen. James Jones, NATO supreme allied commander, and Iraqi parliament member Adnan Pachachi.

The Olbermann/O’Reilly wars

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/03.html#a7384

CNN: Bush's “so-called War on Terror.” Will someone get fired for this?

http://buzzflash.com/analysis/06/03/ana06012.html

More sarcasm

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2714
[WP] Bush lauds Musharraf’s efforts to hunt down terrorists and his commitment to democracy. Protestors beaten, arrested before Bush’s visit.

Bonus item: Humor break

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2708

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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

 
A HECKUVA JOB

Fascinating: the sharks are starting to eat each other

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/front/14005213.htm

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/03/chertoffs_days_are_numbered.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114145087039248934

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007801

[NB: Let’s watch!]

How many times has this admin suddenly discovered “missing” records (when the timing suits them)?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/3/85234/18223

Now that Gonzales is on record saying that the much-debated NSA spying program is the only domestic surveillance program they’ve got going, it’s time to start listing the counterevidence: the National Guard spying program, cited yesterday, is number one; here might be number two (though it’s Guam). We’ll keep count. . .

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008337.php

Republicans are now accusing Bush of breaking the law

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1141381481204040.xml&coll=2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030201702.html

Oversight? Hindsight? Foresight? What difference does it make when their eyes are closed?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/3/93322/17467

And now this. . .

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/bill-frist-threatens-to-re-structure.html
[Glenn Greenwald] The Senate Intelligence Committee was created in 1976 and, from the beginning, it has been unique in its structure and operation. Due to the urgency of ensuring that our country has nonpartisan and non-politicized oversight over the Government’s intelligence activities, the Intelligence Committee is structured so that -- unlike every other Senate Committee -- the majority is unable to dominate the Committee’s operation and agenda, and the minority has much greater powers than it does on any other Senate Committee.

With the March 7 vote looming on Sen. Rockefeller’s motion for the Committee to finally hold hearings to investigate the scope and nature of the Administration’s NSA warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens -- and with several Committee Republicans indicating their intent to vote for hearings -- Majority Leader Bill Frist threatened the Committee yesterday and warned it not to hold any hearings.

Frist specifically threatened that if the Committee holds NSA hearings, he will fundamentally change the 30-year-old structure and operation of the Senate Intelligence Committee so as to make it like every other Committee, i.e., controlled and dominated by Republicans to advance and rubber-stamp the White House’s agenda rather than exercise meaningful and nonpartisan oversight.

Yet again, Republicans are threatening to radically change long-standing rules for how our government operates all because they cannot manipulate the result they want. From redistricting games to changing the filibuster rules, when Republicans are incapable (even with their majorities) of manipulating the political result they want, they use their majority status to change how our government works in order to ensure the desired political outcome. . . [read on!]

This is a serious question: what happens when a weakened and unpopular President needs a foreign policy “success” to change the subject from his troubles at home?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/03/BL2006030300926.html
[Dan Froomkin] In addition to all the predictable reactions (pro and con) to the landmark nuclear agreement reached in India yesterday, a powerful and unexpected new concern has emerged based on a last-minute concession by President Bush.

It appears that, to close the deal during his visit, Bush directed his negotiators to give in to India's demands that it be allowed to produce unlimited quantities of fissile material and amass as many nuclear weapons as it wants. . .

Ports deal myths and falsehoods

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603030005

It ain’t paranoia when you’re right: innocent couple pay off credit card bill, get reported to Homeland Security (no, I am not making this up!)

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/couple-investigated-by-homeland.html

More: http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=RAISEALARM-02-28-06
[A]ll they did was pay down their debt. They didn't call a suspected terrorist on their cell phone. They didn't try to sneak a machine gun through customs. . .

After sending in the check, they checked online to see if their account had been duly credited. They learned that the check had arrived, but the amount available for credit on their account hadn't changed.

So Deana Soehnge called the credit-card company. Then Walter called. . . They were told, as they moved up the managerial ladder at the call center, that the amount they had sent in was much larger than their normal monthly payment. And if the increase hits a certain percentage higher than that normal payment, Homeland Security has to be notified. And the money doesn't move until the threat alert is lifted.

Juan Cole surveys the headlines (funny)

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/friday-headlines-to-make-you-laugh-and.html

The Goofus Files (mini edition)

http://www.first-draft.com//modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5414

Bush’s ongoing assault against the truth

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/03/AR2006030301785.html
A congressional committee will look into a secret program under which federal intelligence agencies have withdrawn thousands of historical documents from public access at the National Archives, even though the records had been declassified.

"We are spending literally millions and millions of dollars to keep secrets from ourselves," said Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), chairman of the Government Reform subcommittee on national security, emerging threats and international relations. "We've got a huge problem."

After further review: Pentagon program to plant fake news into Iraq media gets “reviewed,” but it’s going ahead anyway

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060303/ts_nm/iraq_usa_newspapers_dc_1

After Pirro: I’ve posted my concerns about Hillary as a Presidential candidate, and will again. But if the national GOP doesn’t do any better job in running against her than the NY GOP is doing, then maybe I’m wrong

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2006/03/index.html#009317
[Greg Sargent] One interesting tidbit The Times notes is that Karl Rove is apparently telling other GOP strategists that trying to take down Hillary may not be the national party’s best use of time and money. Seasoned Rove-ologists might theorize that Rove secretly wants the Republican candidate to face her in 2008, and thus wants her to cruise to re-election so it'll be that much easier for her to win the 2008 Democratic Primary. That might be in sync with his recent public attacks on her -- which make Hillary more attractive to a Democratic base that’s unhappy with her hawkishness and centrism -- as well as his statements that she’ll win the primary but might prove “brittle” in the general election. . . Whatever Rove’s machinations, it’s clear that while the looming nightmare of a possible President Hillary may be real enough to many Republicans, it certainly hasn’t proven enough either to attract a real challenger or to get national Republicans to open their checkbooks. Not yet, anyway.

Katherine Harris lawyers up (“as a precaution”)

http://www.tbo.com/news/metro/MGB5MTE1CKE.html

She’ll need it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/03/AR2006030301836.html

Will the Cunningham scandal engulf the CIA?

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/03/cia/index.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007798

Theocracy alert: Missouri wants to become a Christian State

http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/030206ccklrKmovreligionbill.7d361c3f.html

50,000 traitors (ack! they’ve caught me!)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603030013
On MSNBC's Scarborough Country, right-wing activist David Horowitz claimed that "[t]here are 50,000 professors" who are "anti-American" and "identify with the terrorists." There are just over 400,000 tenured and tenure-track full-time university professors in the United States. If Horowitz's numbers are accurate, that means approximately one out of every eight tenured or tenure-track college and university professors is a terrorist sympathizer. . .

Bonus item: Does Laura Know?

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2710

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:54 AM

 
ANGRY YET?

If you aren’t already consumed with contempt for these lying, devious shysters, read today’s items. . .

We always knew that the Bush gang had no intention of complying with John McCain’s “anti-torture” amendment: they stalled over it, watered it down, then put in a loophole big enough to fly a rendition jet through. But I never thought they would be so brazen as this. . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202054.html
Bush administration lawyers, fighting a claim of torture by a Guantanamo Bay detainee, yesterday argued that the new law that bans cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees in U.S. custody does not apply to people held at the military prison. . .

Despite Bush’s 45 day security “review,” the Dubai Ports’ acquisition deal will go ahead in the next few days

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060302/ts_nm/security_ports_deal_dc

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-is-finishing-dubai-port-deal.html

Our friends in Dubai

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/ports-polls-party-divisions.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2137275/fr/rss/

Duncan Hunter (R-CA) will introduce legislation to block the deal

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/top-house-republican-says-he-will.html

Opposition to come over the India deal too

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/politics/03nuke.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2137376
[Eric Umansky] As the Post puts it, the agreement with India "marked a significant break from decades of U.S. nuclear policy." That's because under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the U.S. and other nuke-holding countries are supposed to give nuclear know-how and fuel only to countries that sign on the treaty and promise to skip making weapons. India hasn't exactly done either. Slate's Fred Kaplan recently detailed how the coming deal violates the NNT, U.S. law, and may be unwise to boot.

More: http://www.slate.com/id/2137105/

Let’s see: you have a smoking-gun video that shows Bush (a) being briefed in detail on the prospects for horrific flooding and chaos after Katrina and (b) being told that planning was woefully inadequate. He asks no questions, basically ignoring their concerns, assures everyone that he’s got everything under control, then later says “no one could have anticipated” what actually happened. Hmmm. . . what is the big news story here, and how many ways can the news media miss it?

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603020005

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/2/182421/4013

Better late than never? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202130.html

Engaged

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/quote-of-day-from-wh-on-bush-ignoring.html
Quote of the day: "I hope people don't draw conclusions from the president getting a single briefing," Bush spokesman Trent Duffy said, citing a variety of orders and disaster declarations Bush signed before the storm made landfall. "He received multiple briefings from multiple officials, and he was completely engaged at all times."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008333.php
[Dan Froomkin] Apparently as a rejoinder to the new video, the White House yesterday suddenly sent around a transcript that it previously said didn't exist, from a conference call on the following day. It includes a second-hand account of Bush's activities from Michael Brown, the Bush-appointed FEMA director who later resigned in disgrace, describing the president as engaged, watching TV and asking questions.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

Brownie slips the knife into Chertoff’s back

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/brownie-thinks-chertoff-should-be.html

More pre-war intelligence that the Bush gang ignored, covered up – then lied about

http://hotstory.nationaljournal.com/articles/0302nj1.htm
[Murray Waas] The summaries stated that both the Energy and State departments dissented on the aluminum tubes question. This is the first evidence that Bush was aware of the intense debate within the government during the time that he, Cheney, and members of the Cabinet were citing the procurement of the tubes as evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program.

In his address to the U.N. General Assembly on September 12, 2002, the president asserted, "Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon.". . .

More: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/03/02/bushiraq/index.html

A close reading of Alberto Gonzales’s “clarification” letter on NSA spying

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/nsa-scandal-now-clearly-includes.html
[Glenn Greenwald] (1) As was discussed yesterday and reported by The Washington Post, all evidence points to the fact that the Administration – contrary to the clear and unambiguous assurances given by the President to the country – has been engaged in warrantless eavesdropping beyond merely "international calls" -- i.e., they are intercepting purely domestic calls as well, just as part of a "different program." As Reagan Administration Justice official Bruce Fein put it at yesterday's hearings:

At least one constitutional scholar who testified before the committee yesterday said in an interview that Gonzales appeared to be hinting that the operation disclosed by the New York Times in mid-December is not the full extent of eavesdropping on U.S. residents conducted without court warrants.

"It seems to me he is conceding that there are other NSA surveillance programs ongoing that the president hasn't told anyone about," said Bruce Fein . . . .

One of the principal purposes of Gonzales’ letter was to insist that assurances he gave while testifying about the scope of the Administration’s eavesdropping activities were confined only to what he called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," and not other warrantless eavesdropping programs. As always, Administration officials conspicuously go to great lengths to confine statements they make about warrantless eavesdropping activities only to this eavesdropping program, because there are unquestionably others to which those assurances do not apply.

That the Administration is confining its statements only to the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" is not a new revelation, but what is critically important here is how Gonzales in his letter defines the scope of the "Terrorist Surveillance Program." He defines it as follows:

"interception by the NSA of the contents of the communications in which one party is outside of the United States where there are reasonable grounds to believe that at least one party to the communications is a member or agent of Al Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist organization ("the Terrorist Surveillance Program")."

Thus, any eavesdropping of communications which: (a) are between a person in the U.S. and someone in another country and (b) involve someone for which there is reasonable grounds to believe they are an Al Qaeda agent, are, by definition, part of "the Terrorist Surveillance Program." That means that any warrantless eavesdropping outside of this Program involves intercepting communications that either (a) are entirely domestic, and/or (b) do not require reasonable grounds for believing a party to the call is an Al Qaeda agent.

One cannot even count the number of times since this scandal began that Bush himself and the Administration assured the American public that warrantless eavesdropping is confined to international calls involving Al Qaeda agents. That has been their principal defense all along: "Don’t worry - we only eavesdrop on international calls and calls involving Al Qaeda. So if you only talk domestically, and don’t talk to terrorists, you have nothing to worry about."

But warrantless eavesdropping is plainly occurring beyond the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," which means that there is eavesdropping on domestic calls and/or calls not involving Al Qeada (since international calls involving Al Qaeda are, by definition, part of that Program). That means that the assurances repeatedly given by the President and his officials are just false. . .

(2) Several weeks ago, I noted that Gonazles -- in response to questions from several Senators about whether the Administration has the power to engage in warrantless eavesdropping on purely domestic communications -- testified that the Department of Justice had never conducted a legal analysis of the legality of warrantless eavesdropping on strictly domestic communications. He made that claim several times:

"That analysis, quite frankly, has not been conducted."

"I have said I do not believe we have done the analysis on that."

"The legal analysis as to whether or not that kind of [domestic] surveillance – we haven’t done that kind of analysis . . "

Because of how unambiguous that denial was, and because Gonazles specifically said that such a program would entail a different legal analysis than the analysis for international communications, I concluded at the time that the DoJ was clearly claiming that there was no warrantless eavesdropping on domestic communications -- and I even said I thought that Gonazles' testimony on this topic made it highly unlikely that there ever was a program to eavesdrop on domestic communications.

After all, if a domestic eavesdropping program did exist, Gonzales would never go before the Senate (as he did) and testify that domestic eavesdropping requires a different legal analysis but the DoJ had never conducted that analysis. I reasoned at the time that he would deny having analyzed the legality of domestic surveillance only if there was no domestic eavesdropping, because otherwise, it would mean that the Administration was engaged in domestic eavesdropping while the Attorney General is expressly stating that nobody knows if doing so was legal (since the DoJ never analyzed that question).

In his letter yesterday, Gonzales backed away – completely – from what was his unambiguous (and now clearly false) claim that the DoJ had never analyzed the legality of warrantless eavesdropping for domestic communications. Clearly, the DoJ has analyzed the legality of warrantless domestic surveillance:

Since I was testifying only as to the legal basis of the activity confirmed by the President, I was referring only to the legal analysis of the Department set out in the January 19th paper, which addressed that activity and therefore, of course, does not address the interception of purely domestic communications. However, I did not mean to suggest that no analysis beyond the January 19th paper had ever been conducted by the Department.

I say this advisedly: the Administration is now in full-blown shameless lying mode. Gonzales repeatedly told the Committee that the DoJ had not analyzed the legality of domestic surveillance -- because he wanted to leave the impression that there is no domestic surveillance. In fact, the DoJ clearly has engaged in exactly the analysis Gonazles categorically denied. . .

Is the Senate Judiciary Committee going to tolerate being lied to and misled for eight hours by an Administration that, beginning with the President on down, has misled the Congress for four years about its law-breaking? Are Americans?

What possible excuse exists for the Administration refusing to answer these two questions:

Does the Administration engage in warrantless eavesdropping on purely domestic communications?

Does the Administration engage in warrantless eavesdropping on the communications of Americans where this is no reasonable basis for believing that one of the parties to the call is an agent or affiliate of Al Qaeda?

How can the Senate -- and the media -- possibly allow this matter to be resolved if we don't know whether there is warrantless eavesdropping beyond the limits that the President claimed exist? . . . [read on!]

This has them worried. Gonzales denies it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030201783.html
White House counsel Harriet Miers called Harman on Wednesday, and Gonzales phoned yesterday, Harman said. She said both of them "assured me that there is not a broader program or an additional program out there involving surveillance of U.S. persons."

More on the National Guard spying story in California, and indications that it was a nation-wide program

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/13988400.htm

Big fight over the Bush gang’s attempt to classify (and reclassify) vast amounts of information that ought to be public

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/politics/03archives.html

Bush’s war on history (thanks to David N. for the link) http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/030106.html

Quid pro quo

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_02_26_atrios_archive.html#114131003106239738
The largest known giver to a controversial charity founded by U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum made its $25,000 donation as the senator was working to win as much as $8.5 million in federal aid for the donor's project in Delaware County. Federal tax records show that Preferred Real Estate Inc., the developer of the Wharf at Rivertown project in Chester, wrote the check to Santorum's Operation Good Neighbor Foundation in 2002. . . On his campaign Web site, Santorum boasts of winning $8.5 million in federal aid for the riverfront redevelopment of an abandoned Peco Energy plant - an effort that culminated in the earmarking of $6 million in highway money last year. . . But good-government experts were troubled by the appearance of a developer giving money to the senator's charity at the same time it was lobbying for federal dollars. Unlike a campaign contribution, checks to a charity can be written by a corporation and are not subject to any limit.

[Atrios] Remember that on the payroll of Santorum's charity is the treasurer of his leadership PAC, his finance director, and one of his fundraisers.

Music to my ears. . .

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060301/pl_nm/delay_dc
DeLay fights for his political life in Texas

Bush’s plummeting poll numbers: a state by state analysis

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114135162941578680

More bad news: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/02/bushs_approval_drops_in_three_new_polls.html

http://thinkprogress.org/author/think-progress/

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/2/222245/2648

Another Jason Leopold piece on the Plame emails. Explosive, if true

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030106J.shtml
The emails from Cheney's office that were turned over to Fitzgerald earlier this month were written by senior aides and sent to various officials at the State Department, the National Security Council, and the Office of the President. The emails were written as early as March 2003 - four months before Plame Wilson's cover was blown in a report written by conservative columnist Robert Novak. The contents of the emails are said to be damning, according to sources close to the investigation who are familiar with their substance. The emails are said to implicate Cheney in a months-long effort to discredit Wilson - a fact that Cheney did not disclose when he was interviewed by federal investigators in early 2004, these sources said.

The emails also show I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff who was indicted in October on five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying to investigators related to his role in the leak, Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove, and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, as well as former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton and other top officials in the vice president's office also took part in discussions about ways in which the administration could respond to Wilson's public criticism about the Bush administration's use of intelligence that claimed Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Niger. . .

Cheney and his senior aides did not disclose to federal investigators the fact that they either received or sent emails about either Joseph Wilson or Valerie Plame Wilson when they were first questioned about their knowledge and/or role in the leak in early 2004, people close to the investigation said.

Witnesses who work or worked at the CIA, the National Security Council, and the State Department who have been interviewed in the case, and some of who are cooperating with the probe, said they told Fitzgerald that they had received or sent emails to senior aides in Vice President Cheney's office, the State Department and the National Security Council as early as March 2003 about Joseph Wilson. . . Other emails show that in mid-June 2003 these officials had sent emails that mentioned "Valerie Wilson" - not Valerie Plame - and her employment with the CIA, sources close to the leak investigation said.

One email about Wilson and his wife is said to have been sent by Libby to an unknown senior individual at the National Security Council in early June 2003, after Libby was told by Marc Grossman, then Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and that Grossman's colleagues told him that Plame Wilson was involved in organizing Wilson's trip to Niger in February 2002 to investigate whether Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from the African country.

. . . Rove and Libby both testified that they learned about Plame Wilson from reporters - a fact disputed by the emails and witness testimony - and that they were not involved in a campaign to discredit Wilson. Rove remains under scrutiny. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, did not return calls for comment.

Hadley's role in the leak is also being closely looked at by Fitzgerald and his staff, sources said, adding that new evidence has surfaced showing that the National Security Adviser played an intimate role in the effort to discredit Wilson and that he may be one of the still unnamed administration officials who spoke to reporters about Plame Wilson's work for the CIA.

A tape recording? http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014180.html

South Dakota’s anti-abortion bill and the 2006 elections

http://rockthrower.blogs.com/rockthrower/2006/03/is_south_dakota.html

Thievery on a breathtaking scale: Cunningham scandal leads to review of ONE BILLION DOLLARS of Pentagon spending

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003763.html

Katherine Harris (R-FL): sinking fast

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/katherine-harris-i-am-not-crook.html

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/2/23436/34694

Ethics reform? Ha!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202146.html

Bonus item: a two-tiered Internet?

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/apps/nl/newsletter2.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=917053

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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

 
DEAD MAN WALKING

A blow to the heart

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060301/ap_on_go_pr_wh/katrina_video
In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage. . . Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared.". . .

More: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11626997/site/newsweek

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/new-video-shows-bush-was-warned-levees.html
[John Aravosis] Oh my God. The Associated Press obtained video tapes and transcripts showing Bush and Chertoff being briefed, the day BEFORE Katrina hit, and both Bush and Chertoff were told that the New Orleans levees could breach - a briefing that Bush outright DENIED having been given. Bush said days after the hurricane that NO ONE could have imagined the levees being breached:

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees"

Video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/01.html#a7356

More lies: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/01.html#a7355

The Washington Post wimps out

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/01/AR2006030101731.html
Reactions to the tape, which was obtained by the Associated Press, varied widely. . . Democrats said the tape shows Bush being warned in urgent terms of the potential magnitude of the storm, making it less defensible that the administration did not act with more dispatch to be ready. . .

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-did-washington-post-miss-levees-in.html
[John Aravosis] Am I reading this wrong, or does the Washington Post article entirely miss the point about Bush claiming no one could have imagined the levees breaching, when in fact his own briefing told him it was a possibility? And Bush said no one could have expected the storm to be so large, when in fact the briefing told him it was "the big one." . .

Republican Peter King (NY)

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/cong-king-says-bush-admin-did-not.html
Congressman Peter King, who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, said that the Bush administration did not investigate whether the UAE company had ties to terror. King said there was "no investigation into terror whatsoever." According to Henry, King maintained that he had asked officials at Treasury and Homeland Security whether they had checked out whether the company had ties to Al Qaeda. The response was to King was "You don't understand. We don't conduct a thorough investigation.". . .

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/02/politics/02port.html
The port deal has exploded out of nowhere to become a major bone of contention in an election year that had not lacked driving issues.

It is not clear what kind of staying power the deal has as an issue, but for now Republicans have little choice but to acknowledge the objections they are hearing from voters, distancing themselves from Mr. Bush on national security heading toward the midterm elections.

"I traveled my state last week, and I got it at every stop from people," said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama. . .

More on yesterday’s story that an NIE report warned the Bush gang in 2003 that the Iraq insurgency was big and was going to get bigger

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114124852409410858
[K-R] Robert Hutchings, the chairman of the National Intelligence Council from 2003 to 2005, said the October 2003 study was part of a "steady stream" of dozens of intelligence reports warning Bush and his top lieutenants that the insurgency was intensifying and expanding. . . "Frankly, senior officials simply weren't ready to pay attention to analysis that didn't conform to their own optimistic scenarios," Hutchings said in a telephone interview. . .

In response to recent coal mine tragedies, the Bush gang SOFTENS penalties for mine safety violations

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/02/national/02mine.html

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-kills-miners.html
“Bush Kills Miners”. . .

The GOP helps: http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/3/2/0152/91765
On Wednesday, while members of the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections were holding a hearing about mine safety, GOP Rep. Charles Norwood decided he'd had enough. With a full thirty minutes remaining within the scheduled time frame for the hearing, Norwood, the chairman of the subcommittee, simply shut down the hearing. . .

How much more simple does this need to be? Bush broke the law

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/1/15322/44530

How the Republicans are contriving to give after-the-fact absolution to Bush’s crime

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/1/104247/8879

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/important-developments-in-nsa-scandal.html

Bush: the long slide downward. . .

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/03/01/its_about_bush_stupid.html

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6739.html

Well, THAT didn’t take long: Jaafari already under pressure to step aside

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/02/international/middleeast/02iraq.html

Maybe: http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/kurds-sunnis-attempting-to-dump.html

Massive GOP retirements imminent?

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/030106.html

Katherine Harris (R-FL) lies (again)

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006603010423

DeLay and Abramoff: the truth is coming out

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007777

More to come in the New Hampshire vote suppression trial

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007769

JEB Bush, on the hot seat

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-28-cruise-bush_x.htm

Sam Alito, stealth SC nominee, is already showing his true colors: personally thanking fundamentalist whacko James Dobson for his help in getting him on the Court

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6743.html

Yep: http://www.samefacts.com/archives/alito_nomination_/2006/03/alito_returns_dobsons_favors.php
[Mark Kleiman] But please, let's not hear any more about how Alito was just a fair-minded advocate of politically neutral Constitutional theories, unfairly pilloried as a reactionary by deceived or deceiving liberal politicians. He was, and remains, a diligent and active partisan of the right wing.

E-voting machine whistleblower charged with three felonies (thanks to David N. for the link)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-soby-jr/whistleblower-charged-wit_b_16411.html

Bonus item: Stranger than fiction. Fox News claims that the media is “making up” the Iraq civil war. That is a laughable, ridiculous idea on its face. But here’s the kicker: what has Fox News ITSELF been saying about the civil war?

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603020002
From the February 23 edition of Special Report with Brit Hume, with Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes:

BARNES: I don't think it's so much the Iraqi army. That's what needs to be continued to be built up as a battle ready force, because I think there is a serious risk of a civil war here. It's a lot -- I think we're a lot closer to it than either General Lynch or General Kondracke said.

From the February 23 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

BILL O'REILLY (host): Will there be civil war in Iraq? That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo." This is a big story. And some are even ignoring it. But the attack yesterday on the Golden Mosque in Iraq, a holy Shiite shrine, could ignite a civil war . . . the situation in Iraq is definitely on the edge.

From the February 24 edition of The Big Story with John Gibson:

CARL CAMERON . . . It's a-cup-is-half-full-way of looking at what many in the world have said is the brink of civil war in Iraq. . .

From the February 24 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: All right. You know, I know you have emotion invested in Iraq, since you've been there a number of times. Civil war: I don't think anybody can control that if it breaks out, do you?

From the February 25 edition of The Beltway Boys:

KONDRACKE: President Bush's enemies have been saying two things: Is it Vietnam yet? Or, when's the civil war going to start? And up to now, there hasn't been a civil war, but after last week, when the -- the golden shrine in, the Golden Mosque in Samarra, was destroyed and -- and -- and Shiite militias started attacking Sunnis in -- in retaliation, the possibility of civil war has -- have -- has become ever more threatening. . .

[NB: Then there was this piece on Fox News a few days ago, suggesting that the made-up “civil war” in Iraq was a GOOD thing: http://mediamatters.org/items/200602240003]

http://crookedtimber.org/2006/03/02/oceania-has-always-been-at-war-with-eurasia/
[Tim D] Doublethink is SOP at Fox. As far as I can tell, the official pro-war position now emerging is

• there is no civil war in Iraq
• there will be no civil war in Iraq
• if civil war comes, it won’t be our fault
• when civil war comes, it will be a good thing

***If you enjoy PBD and support 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 @ 6:46 AM

 
FUBAR

We broke it, but we ain’t buyin’ it: stopping civil war is the Iraqis’ problem now

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/02/28/bush/index.html
[Tim Grieve] As new waves of sectarian violence seem to push Iraq closer and closer to civil war, George W. Bush delivered a message to Iraqi citizens today: You're on your own. . .

How bad is it? http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/2700

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/salon-iraqs-worst-week-and-bushs-cole.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060228/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
[AP] “Civil War Looms”. . .

No, it’s EVERYBODY’S problem now

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060301/ap_on_go_co/intelligence_congress
[AP] A civil war in Iraq could lead to a broader conflict in the Middle East, pitting the region's rival Islamic sects against each other, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said in an unusually frank assessment Tuesday. . .

Who could have foreseen this?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_02_26.php#007763
[K-R] "U.S. intelligence agencies repeatedly warned the White House beginning more than two years ago that the insurgency in Iraq had deep local roots, was likely to worsen and could lead to civil war, according to former senior intelligence officials who helped craft the reports. Among the warnings, Knight Ridder has learned, was a major study, called a National Intelligence Estimate, completed in October 2003 that concluded that the insurgency was fueled by local conditions - not foreign terrorists - and drew strength from deep grievances, including the presence of U.S. troops."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008321.php
[Kevin Drum] Golly. Imagine that. The White House ignored some evidence that was politically inconvenient. I sure hope they don't make a habit of that. . .

Great, just great: now in Afghanistan too

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/28/AR2006022800874.html
The director of the Defense Intelligence Agency told Congress yesterday that the insurgency in Afghanistan is growing and will increase this spring, presenting a greater threat to the central government's expansion of authority "than at any point since late 2001”. . .

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008323.php

Listening to the troops: 72% want to come home this year

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_02/008316.php

More: http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Poll_72_percent_of_troops_want_0228.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/28/AR2006022801712.html
More than one in three soldiers and Marines who have served in Iraq later sought help for mental health problems. . .

Tick, tick, tick. . . . Gonzales “clarifies” his NSA testimony, indicating that domestic spying (surprise, surprise) is even more extensive than they’ve admitted so far

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014160.html

More: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003752.html

Patriot Act vote likely today

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014159.html

Today’s must-read: Mark Danner on Bush’s “state of exception”

http://tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=63903

Well, we know how serious THIS investigation will be. Bush “compromises” by allowing a 45-day review of the Dubai Ports deal (a review which should have been done in the first place), but. . .

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Ports-Security.html
''My position hasn't changed,'' Bush sa