POWER PLAYERS

Two leading Republicans come out against DeLay. I guess he can’t say it’s just the Dems and liberal media out to get him any more, can he?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/10/delay.ap/index.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay11apr11,1,6405543.story

Why Santorum?
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_10.php#005395

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_10_atrios_archive.html#111315421534900942

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/more-trouble-for-delay.html

Why Shays?
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_10.php#005391
"Do I think Tom DeLay will be the majority leader by the end of this term? No," Shays [R-CT] went on to say. "I don't think Tom DeLay is going to survive.”

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001869.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/10/152834/416

Meanwhile, that Newsweek article (linked yesterday) was even more hard-hitting than I realized

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7446492/site/newsweek/
Jack Abramoff was somber, bitter and feeling betrayed. Once a Washington superlobbyist, Abramoff is now the target of a Justice Department criminal probe of allegations that he defrauded American Indian tribes of tens of millions of dollars in fees. As stories of his alleged excess dribble out—including the emergence of e-mails showing he derisively referred to his Native American clients as "monkeys" and "idiots"—some of Abramoff's old friends have abandoned him and treated him like a pariah. They claim they knew nothing of his questionable lobbying tactics. So last week, glumly sitting at his corner table at Signatures, the tony downtown restaurant he owns that remains his last redoubt, Abramoff lashed out in frustration.

"Everybody is lying," Abramoff told a former colleague. There are e-mails and records that will implicate others, he said. He was noticeably caustic about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. For years, nobody on Washington's K Street corridor was closer to DeLay than Abramoff. They were an unlikely duo. DeLay, a conservative Christian, and Abramoff, an Orthodox Jew, traveled the world together and golfed the finest courses. Abramoff raised hundreds of thousands for DeLay's political causes and hired DeLay's aides, or kicked them business, when they left his employ. But now DeLay, too, has problems—in part because of overseas trips allegedly paid for by Abramoff's clients. In response, DeLay and his aides have said repeatedly they were unaware of Abramoff's behind-the-scenes financing role. "Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff said last week about DeLay and his staffers, according to his luncheon companion. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details." . . .

More: http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/10/131550/118
This is going to get really, really good. . .

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006063.php

http://makeashorterlink.com/?G2F221DDA

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/11/politics/11lobby.html

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001872.html

Matt Yglesias spoils the party

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/04/twilight_of_the.html
The real nuclear option out there, however, pertains to Tom DeLay. Folks should keep in mind that, by going after DeLay, Democrats and their supporters have broken an unwritten truce regarding the use of ethics charges against incumbents. So far, DeLay and his allies have been content to play defense. Now, however, they're hinting that if DeLay isn't left alone, the right will launch a second-strike -- attacking the ethics of any Democrat they can find. I say, "bring it on." Democrats can counter-escalate, bullets will fly, and at the end of the day we'll see who survives. I'm reasonably confident that a Hill gotterdammerung will, more likely than not, benefit the good guys. But liberals shouldn't fool themselves into thinking that our side won't take any casualties. There are dirty Democrats out there. And there are not-really-dirty Democrats who, caught in the crossfire, may go down for things that don't really merit it. Risks abound. I think a minority party in an institution where the minority has no power has good reasons to be risk-friendly, but I hope people appreciate where this is going.

[NB: “Hammerdämmerung” http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_10.php#005392]

Wonder what those secret Guantanamo tribunals are like? Read on. . .

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/10/102758/607
A terror suspect held at Guantanamo Bay asked his U.S. military judge a pointed question: "Is it possible to see the evidence in order to refute it?" In another case, a judge blurted out: "I don't care about international law.". . .

Feroz Ali Abbasi was ejected from his September hearing because he repeatedly challenged the legality of his detention.

"I have the right to speak," Abbasi said.

"No you don't," the tribunal president replied. . .

First, Eric Rudolph, next Saddam Hussein: could his trial and punishment become a pawn in Iraq’s factional government?

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/life-imprisonment-for-saddam-are.html

Allawi resigns (finally) – but is still trying to be a power player

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/allawi-resigns-joins-new-government.html
Allawi was the candidate backed by the CIA and US ambassador John Negroponte. Despite his enormous advantages of incumbency, and his blanket presence on Iraqi television and radio in the run-up to the election, his Iraqiya list got only 14 percent of seats in parliament and did even worse in provincial elections. His only significant support appears to have been the secular-leaning middle classes of Baghdad and Basra, who were easily outvoted by the religious Right among the Shiites. Allawi shot himself in the foot by becoming too associated with the Americans, who are no longer popular in Arab Iraq, and by enthusiastically endorsing the destruction of Fallujah late last fall. . . Allawi's crushing defeat in the open elections engineered by Grand Ayatollah ended President George W. Bush's forward policy in the Middle East.

Troop withdrawals: BS and reality (thanks to Susan Madrak)

BS: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/11/politics/11military.html
Two years after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the American-led military campaign in Iraq is making enough progress in fighting insurgents and training Iraqi security forces to allow the Pentagon to plan for significant troop reductions by early next year, senior commanders and Pentagon officials say.

Reality: http://suburbanguerrilla.blogspot.com/2005/04/timetableyou-mean-they-lied-to-usthe.html
THE US Army plans to remain in Iraq until at least 2009, secret documents obtained by the Mirror reveal. . . Contract tender forms for civilian workers disclose a huge expansion of interrogation and detention centres in Iraq to remain in place for a minimum four more years.

U.S. military shipping back casualties so they arrive in the dead of night (thanks to Buzzflash for the link)

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp
The Pentagon has been accused of smuggling wounded soldiers into the US under cover of darkness to avoid bad publicity about the number of troops being injured and maimed in Iraq. The media have also been prevented from photographing wounded soldiers when they arrive at hospital. . . Records show that flights from military bases in Germany arrive in the US only at night. Officials say this is purely the result of flight-scheduling pressures and is not a deliberate tactic to minimise detrimental publicity. They also say that by leaving Europe later in the day soldiers are given a better chance to sleep well the night before.

Reconstruction in Iraq: ideology over competence

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006057.php
When Jay Garner tried to hire well-regarded experts who had real experience with reconstruction plans, he was turned down because they were too "liberal." When Garner was abruptly replaced by Paul Bremer, Bremer staffed the CPA with inexperienced ideologues recruited from the Heritage Foundation. Foreign contractors were banned from Iraq out of pique, regardless of whether they were the best qualified. Unions were trampled and ignored because they didn't fit the privatization agenda. Naomi Klein, who traveled to Iraq last year to report on the reconstruction for Harper's, found Bremer pursuing plans for Iraq that were so outlandish they tested even her well-known skills for hyperbole. . . The State Department's new report just confirms all the rest: lack of planning, ideological rigidity, and insistence on using administration pals like Halliburton has produced a debacle. Instead of doing what was best for Iraq, the Bush administration has insisted from the beginning on using the war as a means of trying out its pet theories and rewarding its campaign supporters.

Bush’s Social Security lies: even more shameless than you might imagine

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_10_atrios_archive.html#111318466508716361

Corporate support dwindling: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006069.php

AMT: the tax increase you probably haven’t heard about

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/business/yourmoney/10view.html

And the VAT: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_10_atrios_archive.html#111318960501876644

More Bush 101: When the polls are for you, claim a mandate; when the polls are agin’ ya, say that polls don’t matter

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=8134590

John Bolton hearings to begin today. Expect fireworks

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000447.html

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/10/bolton.un.ap/index.html

Ah-nuld no longer looks quite so muscular

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arnold10apr10,0,6750152.story
The broad policy changes that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled with a flourish in his State of the State speech in January have foundered amid a series of missteps, compromises and clashes with a well-organized opposition. . .

Fun: http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2005/04/how_the_thing_is_done.php

The state of war in Congress: bad and getting worse

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-outlook11apr11,1,5331746.column
George W. Bush may be more comfortable operating with a lower public approval rating than any president in modern times. That sounds like a source of strength, but it also may be a weakness that is pushing Bush and the GOP toward a dangerous confrontation with Senate Democrats over the courts.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-judges11apr11,1,5744462.story
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), breaking from his party's Senate leadership, said Sunday that he would oppose any move to prohibit filibusters against judicial nominations. . . Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," McCain said a ban on filibusters for judicial nominations could spread to other legislative issues, fundamentally changing the Senate.

[NB: That isn't an unintended consequence -- it's the POINT]

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116317/fr/rss/

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/04/11/foes_cite_progress_vs_bush_agenda/

What’s the Matter With Kansas?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-kline11apr11,1,4172722.story
Atty. Gen. Phill Kline predicts a more righteous future for this nation. A future shaped in Kansas. . . In his future, women facing unwanted pregnancies would receive support, not abortions. Gay couples would not defile marriage by exchanging vows. And citizens with God in their hearts would stand up as one to insist that their government reflect their morality. . .

Clearly, Kline, 45, is no ordinary attorney general. . . He travels the state preaching from church pulpits, with a firebrand charisma that has earned him a reputation as the state's best orator. He declares that some of the laws he's sworn to enforce are repugnant to him — especially a woman's right to abortion. He says he will uphold that right, but he interprets it narrowly. . .

Bad days for the GOP?

http://www.newdonkey.com/2005/04/so-where-were-we.html
If you add it up, the president and his party appear to be in a whole heap o' trouble, with no obvious relief in sight. . .

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/04/hope_for_the_wo.html
Indeed, I think any decent person needs to hope that over the next few years the GOP does things that will wind up making it hard for the Democrats to win. . . If we're lucky as a country, Democrats will really and truly need to address their various political problems to win, which will be difficult, but it's a price well worth paying for good things to happen.

The converse is that I think there's a non-trivial chance that we'll see things go so badly that the Democrats wind up getting swept into power despite their many flaws. In particular, on the economic front between the budget deficit, the current account deficit, the oil situation, and the housing market there's at least some chance that things will really fall apart in the sort of way that just naturally aids the opposition in such an overwhelming manner that they wind up winning no matter what they say and do on the campaign trail. That would be a bad outcome, but it at least could happen, and if it does happen, liberals will want to make the most of it. . .

[NB: Interesting paradox. I think a lot about the contradictions of wishing for the worst, which will really hurt people, just because I want to see Bush and the GOP fail. But since hoping does nothing to actually bring those outcomes to pass one way or the other, there is no moral responsibility (or praise) for hoping per se – it’s a moral freebie. So I work to make things better, but I hope they get worse. That’s just me, I suppose]

How the press failed the nation in its coverage of the stolen 2004 election (thanks to Buzzflash for the link)

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2488

Bonus item: What blogs can do that the press can’t, and vice versa

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116498/fr/rss/

***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.***

OVER THE EDGE

The wackos who want to turn the judiciary into a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party are so far out there that even Anthony Kennedy (a Reagan appointee to the Supreme Court) is too moderate for them. Here’s why you should worry

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38308-2005Apr8.html
[Dana Milbank] Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is a fairly accomplished jurist, but he might want to get himself a good lawyer -- and perhaps a few more bodyguards. . . Conservative leaders meeting in Washington yesterday for a discussion of "Remedies to Judicial Tyranny" decided that Kennedy, a Ronald Reagan appointee, should be impeached, or worse. . .

Ominously, [Edwin] Vieira continued by saying his "bottom line" for dealing with the Supreme Court comes from Joseph Stalin. "He had a slogan, and it worked very well for him, whenever he ran into difficulty: 'no man, no problem,' " Vieira said. . . The full Stalin quote, for those who don't recognize it, is "Death solves all problems: no man, no problem." Presumably, Vieira had in mind something less extreme than Stalin did and was not actually advocating violence. But then, these are scary times for the judiciary. An anti-judge furor may help confirm President Bush's judicial nominees, but it also has the potential to turn ugly.

[NB: Well, we can’t say we haven’t been warned. These are people who invoke Stalin as their model of governance. Bush should be pressed to disassociate himself from them and their views absolutely and without qualification]

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111308913057056588
[Atrios] As many of noted, the key line in Dana Milbank's article is this one:

This was no collection of fringe characters.

For too long the mainstream media has either ignored these people, marginalized them as kooks, or mainstreamed them by having them on while ignoring their creepier beliefs/statements/pasts. . . I think one reason (and there others) for this is that by cloaking their wingnuttery in religion they shield themselves from criticism. They've fought long and hard to make sure we know that in this overwhelmingly Christian country, anti-Christian bigotry is the number one problem. The media just will not go there.

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/out-of-control-absolutely-out-of.html

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006060.php

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/9/22422/04135

Harry Frankfurt’s classic essay explains how bullsh-t is worse than lying. If you are wondering why this twenty-year old article is now being republished and quoted everywhere, just reflect on the times in which we live

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/9/195544/5246

Bush’s Social Security plan is all but dead, even with his own party

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/9/112913/2583

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/national/nationalspecial/10social.html
After spending months seeking to convince the nation that Social Security faces serious problems that demand immediate action, President Bush will pivot to a new message next month, working in coordination with Congressional leaders to begin setting out the menu of potentially painful solutions, White House officials said.

Despite polls showing growing resistance to the centerpiece of Mr. Bush's approach to overhauling Social Security, his call for investment accounts, administration officials said they were succeeding in their first goal, which is establishing that Congress needs to act now to deal with the financial strains that the aging population will put on the system in coming decades.

"Phase 1 is heighten the sense that this is a big issue worthy of immediate consideration by Congress," said Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff for policy and Mr. Bush's political strategist. "We have some ways to go in the calendar on that, but the movement on that has been very good."

[NB: Talk about bullsh-t!]

Ouch

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005388
[St. Petersburg Times] "The Bush administration might not appreciate the difference between campaign events that are paid for through private donations and official events put on with the public's money, but the Constitution surely does."

The GOP in Ohio gives a glimpse of how they would handle private accounts for the rest of us if they had their way

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/major-gop-scandal-developing-in-ohio.html
Since 1998, Ohio has invested millions of dollars in the unregulated world of rare coins, buying nickels, dimes, and pennies. Controlling the money for the state? Prominent local Republican and coin dealer Tom Noe, whose firm made more than $1 million off the deal last year alone. . . The Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation has continued to be the sole investor in Mr. Noe's Capital Coin funds despite strong concerns raised by an auditor with the bureau about possible conflicts of interest and whether the state's millions were adequately protected.

More: http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2005/04/ohio_portfolio_.html

Read and laugh: A Confidential Business Proposal

http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/09/confidential-business-proposal/

How DeLay’s corruption continues to spread and infect the entire House GOP membership

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005387

Coming up next: conservatives shackle themselves to DeLay’s ankle (go right ahead, boys)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40496-2005Apr9.html
Allies and friends of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Tex.) have concluded that public attention to his ethics is unlikely to abate for months to come, and they plan to try to preserve his power by launching an aggressive media strategy and calling in favors from prominent conservative leaders, according to Republicans participating in the strategy sessions.

The Republicans said the strategy combines leaks from DeLay allies about questionable Democratic trips and financial matters; denunciations of unfavorable news stories as biased, orchestrated rehashes; and swift, organized responses to journalists' inquiries.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_10.php#005390
According to Mike Allen's piece. . . David Keene and a gaggle of conservative leaders "will show their solidarity by announcing this week that they are holding a tribute dinner for DeLay on May 12 at the Capital Hilton, complete with a film 'summation of what Tom has done for conservatives.' Keene said 1,000 people are expected, and tickets will be about $200.". . . Actually, if I were down in DC on the 12th, I could see laying down $200 to be on hand for this train wreck.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_10.php#005389
And if there's any more evidence needed to know that the defining motif of all conservative politics is victimization, see this graf at the end of the piece. . .

Becky Norton Dunlop, a Heritage Foundation vice president who was formerly Virginia's secretary of Natural Resources, attended the meeting, and said charges similar to those that have been made about DeLay could be made about Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.).

"And yet, these are not happening. Why? Because they're liberals," Dunlop said. "We think that those who are so intent about making charges against Tom DeLay should also take a look at Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and some of the liberal leaders."

Poor conservatives: embattled and vilified in the town they run.

More: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/top-right-wing-priority-saving-tom.html

[NB: You don’t think this is total war? The last thing these right wingers will do is back off when they see total domination within their grasp]

And now this. . .

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001866.html
[Laura Rozen] "DeLay knew everything," Abramoff tells a lunch companion interviewed by Newsweek's Michael Isikoff. "He knew all the details."

It is a Washington melodrama that has played out many times before. When political figures get into trouble and their worlds collapse, they look to save themselves by fingering others higher in the food chain. Will Abramoff attempt to bargain with federal prosecutors by offering up DeLay—and does he really have the goods to do so? Abramoff has at times hinted he wanted to bargain—possibly by naming members who sought campaign cash for legislative favors, says a source familiar with the probe.

I suspect Abramoff is the kind of guy who has the goods and the bads. Let the fun begin.

In Iraq, tens of thousands protest U.S. occupation: and just remember, the target of their protest isn’t us, but their own new government

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/up-to-300000-demonstrate-in-baghdad.html
Edmund Sanders reports that the crowds in downtown Baghdad protesting the US troop presence in the country may have been as large as 300,000. If it were even half that, these would be the largest popular demonstrations in Iraq since 1958!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/international/middleeast/10iraq.html

Photos: http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2755

Who Bush will shake hands with, and who not

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/09/international/worldspecial2/09prexy.html

Why Paul Wolfowitz IS the perfect choice for the World Bank (thanks to Jan Pieterse for the link)

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0405-25.htm

Big Bonus item: Bushisms (thanks to Gale Troy Ronning for these)

"A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Palm Beach Post)

"I have made this decision with great care and I pray it is the right one"

— G. W. Bush (Source: BBC News)

". . . some babies are born where people just don't love them like they should."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country."

— G. W. Bush (Source: ADVFN)

"Had we to do it over again, we would look at the consequences of catastrophic success . . ."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The State)

"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Lancaster Online)

"I never saw any intelligence that indicated there was going to be an attack on America— at a time and a place, an attack."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Wired)

"I don't know what you're talking about, about international law. I've got to consult my lawyer."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"I was just looking for a warm meal somewhere."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Common Dreams)

"You're working hard to put food on your family."

— G. W. Bush (Source: DubyaSpeak.com)

"We gave [Saddam] a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Newsday)

"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Washington Post)

"So who is in charge of finding weapons of mass destruction?"

— G. W. Bush (Source: Time Magazine)

"For years the freedom of our people were really never in doubt."

— G. W. Bush (Source: DubyaSpeak.com)

"With a robust package of at least $550 billion in across-the-board tax relief, we will help create more than a million new jobs by the end of 2004."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"I'm the commander, I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation...."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Independent)

"...as you know, I like to keep expectations low."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"We need an energy bill that encourages consumption."

— G. W. Bush (Source: AP News)

"We wage a war to save civilization, itself. We did not seek it, but we must fight it — and we will prevail."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"Listen, I can assure you we won't be putting money into a society which is not transparent and corrupt. And I suspect other countries won't either. "

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"My most important job is to defend the homeland, to protect innocent Americans from the deaths of the killers."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"America is leading the world in a titanic struggle against terror."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"Is there ever any time where the budget might have to go into deficit? I said only if we were at war, or had a national emergency, or were in recession. (laughter) Little did I realize we'd get the trifecta. (laughter)"

— G. W. Bush (Source: Bush's Mouth)

"I'm gonna talk about the ideal world, Chris. I've read—I understand reality. If you're asking me as the president, would I understand reality, I do."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"Not over my dead body will they raise your taxes."

— G. W. Bush (Source: CNN)

"...when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not—to uphold the laws of the land"

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"We see the same intolerance of dissent; the same mad, global ambitions; the same brutal determination to control every life and all of life."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"I understand people's willingness to protest, but they should not protest the decisions our coalition is making, because it is in the best interest of freedom and humankind."

— G. W. Bush (Source: US Newswire)

"And there's no doubt in my mind, not one doubt in my mind, that we will fail. Failure is not a part of our vocabulary."

— G. W. Bush (Source: US Newswire)

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

"More and more of our imports come from overseas."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"My administration has been calling upon all the leaders in the—in the Middle East to do everything they can to stop the violence to tell the different parties involved that peace will never happen."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"...the true greatness of America are the people."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe—I believe what I believe is right."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"This is what I'm good at. I like meeting people, my fellow citizens, I like interfacing with them."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"If a person doesn't have the capacity that we all want that person to have, I suspect hope is in the far distant future, if at all."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"There's no question that the minute I got elected, the storm clouds on the horizon were getting nearly directly overhead."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Strom Watch)

"For every fatal shooting, there were roughly three non-fatal shootings. And, folks, this is unacceptable in America. It's just unacceptable. And we're going to do something about it."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"Laura and I really don't realize how bright our children is sometimes until we get an objective analysis."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"We're concerned about AIDS inside our White House —make no mistake about it."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"This administration is doing everything we can to end the stalemate in an efficient way. We're making the right decisions to bring the solution to an end."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"Redefining the role of the United States from enablers to keep the peace to enablers to keep the peace from peacekeepers is going to be an assignment."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"The California crunch really is the result of not enough power-generating plants and then not enough power to power the power of generating plants."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I do not believe . . . that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Washington Post)

"I hope we get to the bottom of the answer. It's what I'm interested to know."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I have a different vision of leadership. A leadership is someone who brings people together."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"If he's—the inference is that somehow he thinks slavery is a—is a noble institution I would—I would strongly reject that assumption—that John Ashcroft is a open-minded, inclusive person."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I think we ought to raise the age at which juveniles can have a gun."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"They misunderestimated me."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I am a person who recognizes the fallacy of humans."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"I am mindful of the difference between the executive branch and the legislative branch... and that difference is, they pass the laws and I execute them."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"The administration I'll bring is a group of ...decent men and women, women who will see service to our country as a great privilege and who will not stain the house."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"There ought to be limits to freedom."

— G. W. Bush (Source: GWBush.com - MP3)

"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

— G. W. Bush (Source: CNN)

"I think we agree. The past is over."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"We must all hear the universal call to like your neighbor just like you like to be liked yourself."

— G. W. Bush (Source: Slate)

"You're probably wondering why somebody who has been in politics is talking about Social Security. After all, it's been called the third rail of American politics. You grab a hold of it, and you get electrified."

— G. W. Bush (Source: The Whitehouse)

More (if you can stand it): http://www.etrend.ch/fundgrube/win_zitate/gwbush.htm

***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.***

BOMB THROWING

I’m not pro-death penalty, but I can’t help asking: if an Islamic terrorist was on trial for bombing U.S. health clinics and killing people, would the Right accept for an instant giving him a plea bargain for life in prison?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/08/rudolph.plea/index.html
Doug Jones, the former U.S. attorney in Birmingham, said he was "ecstatic" about the agreement. . . He said he never had any doubt Rudolph would be convicted, but he said "cultural factors," such as opposition to abortion among jurors, could have made a death sentence difficult to obtain.

In Iraq: anti-U.S. occupation protests about to boil over (they thought Bush really MEANT it when he said we favored a free and independent Iraq)

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/1271

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/9/5944/51528

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/protests-called-for-saturday-against.html

U.S. STILL diddling around with reconstruction funds

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-rebuild9apr09,0,4376370.story

CIA stonewalling Congress on intelligence questions

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel9apr09,1,4825918.story
“We're interested to know: Did [CIA officials] ignore us, not understand us or deliberately keep things from us? We don't want agencies to think they can play cute" with requests for information.

Bush violates the Constitution. No, this isn’t hyperbole -- the fact is that it’s an outrage that should be a headline event across the country. Really

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/6/21482/42154
[Bush] “There is no trust fund -- just IOUs that I saw firsthand. Imagine, the retirement security for future generations is sitting in a filing cabinet."

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4. “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

Bush’s “personal accounts” are dead – now the GOP is trying to resuscitate their assault on Social Security without them

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-social9apr09,1,2253844.story

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/08/social/index.html
If George W. Bush's plan for privatizing Social Security isn't dead yet, it's on all sorts of life support -- and this time, Senate Republicans are the ones who may pull the plug. The Associated Press reports that Republicans in the Senate are "considering temporarily sidetracking President Bush's plan for personal investment accounts under Social Security, hoping Democrats will then join compromise talks on legislation to restore the program's solvency."

United opposition from Democrats -- and a lot of skepticism from Republicans -- has Bush's plan for private accounts stalled and sinking. But as the AP explains, Republicans on Capitol Hill are "wary of leaving the impression they intend to abandon the president's proposal to allow younger workers to invest a portion of their payroll taxes independently" -- even if that's exactly what they're fixing to do. . .

While the Right punditry and blogosphere are still trying to blame the Dems and the media for the (GOP-produced) Schaivo memo (hereafter to be called the Martinez memo), serious questions remain

http://mediamatters.org/items/200504080010

GOP dealing with open fractures over Schiavo case

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/04/09/rift_emerges_in_gop_after_schiavo_case

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/8/112033/7715
One-third of Republicans say Democrats in Congress should prevent Mr. Bush and party leaders from "going too far in pushing their agenda," and 41% oppose eliminating filibusters against Mr. Bush's judicial nominees -- the "nuclear option" that Senate Republican leaders are considering.

[NB: you read that right: these are numbers WITHIN the Republican party]

Let’s see, Social Security, Schaivo. . . what would be the next really stupid issue for the GOP to take on to placate their far right constituents, while scaring the rest of the country – including moderate Republicans – into opposition? Yeah, let’s take on the independence of the courts and try to turn them into a venue for theocratic control over the law!

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/9/23543/68024
In an interview, Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Republican of Wisconsin and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the panel was likely in some way to take up the issue of how the federal judges handled Ms. Schiavo's case. . . But Mr. Lungren said Mr. DeLay had not requested a hearing and the committee had not decided on a course of action. "There does seem to be this misunderstanding out there that our system was created with a completely independent judiciary," he said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002234834_judges08.html
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, stepped up his attack on federal judges yesterday, telling a gathering of religious conservatives that the judiciary has "run amok" and demanding that Congress assert authority over the courts.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111298464371105450
Christian conservatives and a core group of congressional supporters are launching a significant new push to restructure the federal judicial system to reflect a more explicitly biblical world view. . .

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2005/04/the_mystery_of_the_disappearing_paragraph.php
The print version, and early internet versions, of this New York Times story record a quite extraordinary threat by a senior Senate staffer (albeit of a junior senator) against Federal judges. That threat has been omitted from the current on-line edition. The difference between the two stories is whether Tom Coburn's chief of staff called for the mass impeachment of federal judges who make rulings he dislikes, or whether he called for them to be imprisoned as well.

Here's the original version:

"I am in favor of impeachment," Michael Schwartz, chief of staff to Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, said in a panel discussion on abortion, suggesting "mass impeachment" might be needed.

Mr. Schwartz later singled out some of the federal judges who ruled in the Schiavo case as the first targets and said, "I hope they serve long sentences."

The version now on line omits the second paragraph entirely.

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005386

http://suburbanguerrilla.blogspot.com/2005/04/raping-lady-libertythey-dont-actually.html

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2005/04/is_judicial_independence_unlimited.php

Tom DeLay’s legal defense fund: he needs your help!

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/08/delay_defense/index.html

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2005/04/index.html

Who is Jack Abramoff? http://slate.msn.com/id/2116389/

Abramoff worked for the apartheid govt of South Africa: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001865.html

Joe Klein’s bad advice for the Democrats

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/8/134216/9047

“Jeff Gannon” at the National Press Club: what a buffoon

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/08/gannon/index.html
The line from Gannon that brought the most unintended laughter this morning? "You can hardly call Fox News conservative."

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_digbysblog_archive.html#111299662987915254

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006055.php

Video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/08.html#a2369

Bonus item: Curious George goes to the Pope’s funeral. A photo essay

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2751

***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.***

ADMITTING MISTAKES

Throwing good money after bad: how much is the Bamboozlepalooza Tour costing the nation? (We know what it’s costing Bush.)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005371
The Post says that the Bamboozlepalooza Tour "may be one of the most costly in memory, well into the millions of dollars, according to some rough, unofficial calculations." And even Republicans on the Hill seem to be getting concerned. . . Remember, too, that that money comes into a whole different light when you see that Americans are being systematically excluded from these taxpayer-funded tour events on the basis of political ideology.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34078-2005Apr7.html
House Appropriations Committee Republicans have quietly asked the administration for an accounting of its '60 Stops in 60 Days' [Social Security] blitz. And yesterday, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee, formally asked the Government Accountability Office not only for the cost but also 'whether the Bush Administration has crossed the line from education to propaganda. . . Even Republicans raised their eyebrows when they heard new employees were brought on for the campaign, said a House Republican staff member, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid embarrassing the president.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32389-2005Apr6.html

(It’s costing others too.) Bush is pulling others in the GOP down with him

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/07/arnie/index.html

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050407/pl_nm/politics_schwarzenegger_dc

The Dems are learning from their mistakes (I think)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005379
[AP] Senate Republican leaders are considering whether to seek Democratic support for Social Security legislation without the personal accounts sought by President Bush, aiming to restore them later, officials said Thursday.

Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) finally gets something right!

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2733
U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar has asked for a federal and a state investigation into whether a Republican Party staffer should be charged with impersonating a Secret Service agent at a Denver town hall meeting on Social Security held by President Bush last month.

GOP war supporter lays into one of the war’s chief architects (unfortunately not one of the ones still working in the administration)

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2736
Jones, who said he has signed more than 900 condolence letters to kin of fallen soldiers, pronounced himself "incensed" with Perle. "It is just amazing to me how we as a Congress were told we had to remove this man . . . but the reason we were given was not accurate," Jones told Perle at a House Armed Services Committee hearing. Jones said the administration should "apologize for the misinformation that was given. To me there should be somebody who is large enough to say 'We've made a mistake.' I've not heard that yet.". . . Jones, nearly in tears as he held up Perle's testimony, glared at the witness. "I went to a Marine's funeral who left a wife and three children, twins he never saw, and I'll tell you, I apologize, Mr. Chairman, but I am just incensed with this statement."

More fallout on the Right’s mistaken efforts to label the Schaivo memo a fake. Nice to see they’re big enough to admit it when they were WRONG

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/discredited-gop-bloggers-still-say.html

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006047.php

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/the_wayward_press_/2005/04/the_bloggers_and_the_fake_fake_memo_story.php

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005380

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/schiavo_/2005/04/the_martinez_schiavo_memo_not_really_that_hard_to_figure_out.php

The best overview: http://billmon.org/archives/001812.html

Who made a fool of themselves? Quite a list

http://mediamatters.org/items/200504070005

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/07.html#a2344

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/7/105734/3484

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/read-rush-limbaugh-make-ass-of-himself.html

The DeLay link

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/7/193456/7469

Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) learned from his WH masters – never admit, never apologize (thanks to Steve Smoot for some of these links)

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/07/memo/index.html

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/7/11732/92411

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2005/04/08/m1a_martinez_0408.html
It is not the first time Martinez has disavowed the actions of those working for him.

A handy scorecard: can’t keep all the DeLay scandals straight without one

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116392/fr/rss/

Still blaming the courts for his troubles: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2005/04/08/delay_escalates_war_against_judges.html

New Education Sect’y admits, sort of, that the NCLB law’s requirements are unrealistic – but not that the whole enterprise is killing public schools

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/07/education/07cnd-nochild.html

Plame: not with a bang, but a whimper

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/04/07/plame/index.html
In a follow-up piece this morning, the Washington Post says unidentified sources close to the case say Fitzgerald is unlikely to seek an indictment of anyone for revealing that Plame's identity as a CIA agent, but that he may charge "a government official with giving conflicting information to prosecutors."

In Iraq, now that the major govt posts have been filled, all the bickering and suspiciousness can be left behind, right? Right?

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/1268

http://www.tnr.com/blog/iraqd?pid=2626

Is it okay to question the Pope now?

http://billmon.org/archives/001811.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.***

DELAYING THE INEVITABLE

“DeLaying the Inevitable” (wish I’d thought of that)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005364

MORE DeLay scandals (thanks to John Aravosis for some of these links)

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/6/125126/0586

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=647725&page=1

http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/delay_baby_shower_reliant_abramoff_406.htm

And isn’t this a lovely scam? (thanks to Colleen Vojak for the link)

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111283027560175159
The good news reached the Jamestown, N.Y., office of Dr. Rudolph Mueller in a fax from a congressman in Washington. Mueller had been named 2004 Physician of the Year. . . "My secretary came running in and said, 'Dr. Rudy, look at what you've won, you're Physician of the Year,' " said Mueller, an internist.

But to receive the award in person at a special two-day workshop in Washington last month, Mueller found out that he would have to make a $1,250 contribution to the National Republican Congressional Committee. It was a disturbing discovery, he said. . . To see what the award process was all about, Mueller sent in his $1,250 contribution and ABC News paid for his travel to Washington for the scheduled events March 14-15, which included a tax-reform workshop as well as appearances by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and President Bush.

Mueller soon found he was not the only winner. There were hundreds of Physicians of the Year present, many of whom found the criteria for being selected equally as opaque.

An excellent and important point

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005367
[Josh Marshall] If I'm not mistaken, this new story about Tom DeLay's junket to the Marianas back in the late 1990s is pretty much the same story we read in the late 1990s. . . The reporter with the byline on the ABC report -- Brian Ross -- is one of the journalists who reported on the story back at the time. . . This is the case where DeLay and his family got a luxe trip to a resort in Saipan so he could help make the US territory safe for sweatshop labor.

Don't get me wrong. It stinks to high heaven.

But the resurrection of this story does seem to suggest that we're in that phase of the battle where all the stuff that was long written up about DeLay, but routinely ignored, is getting written up again. And now we're shocked, shocked that this hustler has been polluting the people's House with his neo-Tammany shenanigans.

Going deeper. . .

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2005/04/index.html#006030
[Garance Franke-Ruta] Rereading The Washington Post's masterful reconstruction of the cash flow behind House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's 1997 Moscow junket -- "underwritten by business interests lobbying in support of the Russian government" -- what jumped out at me was the final section about the ultimate source of the cash that paid for the trip. In case you just scanned it, reread it and consider the highlighted portions below. They suggest that more is at play here than simply another lobbying scandal. . .

The United States of America cannot have one of its top congressional leaders taking money from people advocating for Russian military-intelligence and defense interests as part of a lobbying deal. It simply cannot. It is unacceptable for a critical leader in the U.S. government to be taken on a junket by groups working for foreign military interests or lobbying on their behalf, even if indirectly and without his knowledge. He should have known. . . There is doubtless a lot more here to be uncovered as this story about the nexus between movement conservatives, lush overseas junkets, and foreign interests moves forward. But this is clearly no longer just a story about DeLay's relationship with a couple of American lobbyists; it's about the relationship of a cadre of movement conservative lobbyists with foreign business and government interests.

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006041.php

http://makeashorterlink.com/?U15B226DA

DeLay defends his wife and daughter (hey, Tom, no one is criticizing your wife and daughter: they’re criticizing YOU)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/07/politics/07delay.html
"My wife and daughter have any right, just like any other American, to be employed and be compensated for their employment," Mr. DeLay said

[NB: But here is how it goes – when he resigns. . . WHEN. . . it won’t be because he admits any wrongdoing. It will be “to spare my family members from further attacks and embarrassment”]

The sad excuse for a news organization that used to be CNN

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005363
News Flash: CNN reports latest DeLay stories on front page!. . . Oh, no, wait. . . They report DeLay's calling the reports "seedy" on the front page.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/06/delay.reponse/index.html

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005365
Lou Dobbs insta-poll question tonight is: "Do you believe House Majority Leader Tom Delay is the victim of a campaign by the 'liberal' media to embarrass him?"

And is Karl Rove behind this steady leak of increasingly sordid scandal stories? (the GOP version of a horse’s head: “Time to go, Tom”)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005360

http://www.bullmooseblog.com/2005/04/end-times.html
For you Kremlinologists, what is fascinating about the quote is that it is from a highly respected denizen of K Street and a former prominent staffer in both the Bush Administration and Capitol Hill. The Rove fix likely is in. . . Tom DeLay should consult with Trent Lott, immediately.

Revised: The WRETCHED excuse for a news organization that used to be CNN. The infamous GOP “Schaivo memo” (which the wacko right blogosphere has been claiming for days is a devious Dem forgery) turns out to be -- from the GOP. But the story here is about CNN: read on. . .

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/7/01457/63972
After repeated attempts by Republicans to blame Democrats for the crass Schiavo memo -- the one that argued the GOP would reap great rewards by meddling in another family's business -- the real author has stepped forward.

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

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/7/1443/22558
Now that Brian Darling of the Alexander Strategy Group has been penned as the author, it connects the dots to why Tom DeLay also used the talking points. The Alexander Strategy Group is a firm created by former DeLay chief of staff Ed Buckham (and yet another place from where DeLay's wife has cashed checks). Tom DeLay used the talking points at least on three occasions. . .

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/6/231857/6068
Couldn't have happened to a more deserving shill. Howie the Shill [Howard Kurtz, on CNN’s “Reliable Sources”] decided that he trusted Powerline MORE than. . . Mike Allen of his own newspaper, and ran with the ridiculous "fake GOP Schiavo Talking Points" 'story' - which turned out to be as bogus as a 3 dollar bill. . . Of course, in tomorrow's Post, Allen says it was a GOP memo. . . How big a shill is Howard Kurtz? This big a shill - from Powerline:

I [Hinderaker] had been scheduled to appear on CNN's "Reliable Sources" with Howard Kurtz Sunday morning to talk about the Schiavo "talking points memo" and press coverage thereof, but I've been bumped by the Pope's apparently impending demise.

So Kurtz was going further to spread this bullsh-t, and basically call his fellow Post reporter Allen a liar, on the basis of Hindrocket's "sterling" analysis and speculation?. . . Hindrocket is Kurtz's own personal Curveball.

[NB: And the right wing press and blogosphere is still lying about it, even after the Martinez story has been confirmed: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111286975529413393]

More: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006042.php

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/7/0825/82781

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005366

By the way: Martinez lied too (from the Center for American Progress "Daily Grill")

"I reject those. I've never seen them before today. And I'll tell you, they're not a part of what I think this case is about.…This is not a political issue." – Senator Mel Martinez, in response to a question on the Schiavo "Talking Points" memo, 3/20/05

VERSUS

"…Martinez handed [Sen. Tom Harkin] the memo on the Senate floor, in hopes of gaining his support for the bill giving federal courts jurisdiction in the Florida case in an effort to restore the brain-damaged Florida woman's feeding tube. 'He said these were talking points – something that we're working on here.'" – Washington Post story revealing that the very real Schiavo memo came from Sen. Martinez's office

Bush’s growing willingness to threaten government default in order to whip up fears to support his Social Security plans: isn’t this the most irresponsible kind of brinksmanship?

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/6/203341/1836
[Nancy Pelosi] This is the first time that a President of the United States has declared that we, the United States Government, will not put the full faith and credit of the federal government behind the Social Security trust fund. What this President is saying is, we have two kinds of debt. Let's see how we get the debt first. It is in deficit spending, so we have to go borrow in order to keep the government going. . . So where does he borrow? He borrows from the Chinese. He borrows from the Japanese. He borrows from the trust fund. And what he is saying now to the American worker: "We will honor our debt to the Chinese and the Japanese, but we are treating you differently. We are not honoring our debt to you."

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111281815408413672
[Peter DeFazio] Mr. Speaker, well, the President was on the road again today with yet another tightly controlled scripted, so-called town hall, before a carefully screened, invitation audience to tout to his plan to privatize Social Security.

Now, that is not unusual; in fact, the scripted town halls are all so similar that they can save the taxpayers a lot of money if he just stayed at Camp David or Crawford, Texas, and they just replayed the recordings of his earlier scripted, rehearsed town halls.

But the President did say today something extraordinary, in Parkersburg, West Virginia, and suggested something unconscionable. The President said, ``There is no trust fund.'' And then he went on to suggest that our Nation might not honor its debt to Social Security. This is what the President said does not exist.

Let me read from this. This is a Social Security Trust Fund bond, considered the best investments in the world, U.S. Treasury Bond. This is the most privileged of Treasury bonds issued to Social Security, redeemable at any time at full face value, unlike any other bond that they issue. These are the most privileged of their bonds. The President says it is nothing but an IOU. Well, here is what it says: This bond is incontestable in the hands of the Federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund. The bond is supported by the full faith and credit of the United States. And the United States is pledged to the payment of the bond with respect to both principal and interest.

The President questions that? He is questioning whether we are going to repay our most privileged debt to Social Security. We have $7.9 trillion of debt. He is adding to it at a record rate, borrowing $1.3 million a minute. Who is he saying we are going to repay and not repay?

Are we going to repay the Chinese but not the Social Security Trust Fund? Are we going to repay President Bush, he happens to have some U.S. Treasury Bonds in his personal portfolio, but not the Social Security Trust Fund? Are we going to repay other wealthy investors around the world and in the U.S., but not the Social Security Trust Fund? We are going to selectively default on our debt.

Suggesting something like that, if the bond markets believed the President, the dollar would drop to near zero tomorrow, and there would be an economic catastrophe, but they do not believe him. They know this is just politics and rhetoric on his part. There is no intention of the Government of the United States defaulting on its debt.

This year Social Security will collect $170 billion more than it needs to pay Social Security benefits, and they are invested in the trust fund. If what the President said is true, there is no trust fund, and we are not going to honor it, then Congress and the President are perpetrating a fraud of extraordinary magnitude on the working people of America, extorting through taxes $170 billion more than they need to pay current benefits that this President has no intention of repaying. That is unbelievable.

Every minute, every minute, this President and this Congress are borrowing $320,000 of Social Security taxes and spending it on something else. And the President says he is replacing it with worthless IOUs; they are not bonds, they are not investments. He questions whether they will be repaid. He questions the full faith and credit of the Government of the United States of America and its willingness, our willingness, to meet our obligations and our debt.

If what the President says is true, then we ought to give the working people of America, instead of the rich people of America, the biggest tax cut in history. Reduce the Social Security tax, which falls more heavily on working people. More working Americans pay more in Social Security taxes than they do income taxes to the Federal Government.

If he has no intention of repaying that $170 billion that he is borrowing this year of excess Social Security taxes, then we should not collect it under false pretenses. We should give people a big tax break. That would stimulate small business, employment, and put a lot of money in the pockets of working people. I am not advocating that.

But if he does not repay it, he should be advocating it, and instead of trying to switch the game and having an irrelevant debate over a so-called privatization plan which actually makes the funding problems of Social Security worse and would require another few trillion dollars of borrowing, in which I guess people would get these worthless bonds that the President questions.

Now, who is going to buy those worthless bonds? How is he going to continue to run the Government of the United States borrowing $1.3 million a minute if the bonds of this country are worthless?

This is an extraordinary and reckless statement for the elected President of the United States to make.

Payolagate

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/6/15738/84342
[Chris Bowers] We knew all along that the little bits of payolagate and the Bush propaganda machine we had uncovered or at least heard about were just the tip of the iceberg. It now appears that literally every single government agency has produced fake news reports that do not acknowledge they were produced by the government. . .

Revised again: The PATHETIC excuse for a news organization that used to be CNN

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/bush-less-popular-than-dick-nixon.html
Bush Less Popular than Dick Nixon

http://mediamatters.org/items/200504060006
CNN political analyst Bill Schneider opined that President Bush's 48 percent approval rating, as measured by a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, "isn't too bad." But Schneider did not mention Gallup's own observation. . . that "Bush's public support is significantly lower than support for all other two-term presidents at similar points in their second terms."

Justice Dept admits abuse of “Patriot Act” powers. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32447-2005Apr6.html

. . . nevertheless, they want to make it PERMANENT

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-patriot7apr07,1,7491020.story

[NB: As regular readers know, I have been complaining about this for a long time: the great danger of being in a perpetual “war against terror” – a war that by its very nature can NEVER be won – is that “necessary” compromises against personal freedoms justified by the “emergency” of the terrorist threat gradually, over time, become part of the permanent fabric of society. Now, there it is in black and white]

There STILL aren’t enough armored humvees in Iraq

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2717

Beneath the surface: turmoil in Iraq

http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/provincial-elections-stir-trouble-my.html

The “big” Plame story, promised yesterday, wasn’t so big: but it might hint at something very, very big indeed

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=9473
The special prosecutor investigating whether any Bush administration official may have violated federal law by leaking the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak recently informed a federal court that his investigation has been “for all practical purposes complete” since October 2004. . .

[NB: That’s right, pre-election!]

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2710
[Holden] Fitzgerald must have some indictments in his back pocket. Otherwise why wait until after the election? If he had no case to make he would have let it be known in October. But if he were to indict "two senior administration officials" in the month before the election his prosecution would have been labeled "political" by every winger in wingerdom, and the press would have latched onto the spin like there was no tomorrow. . . Indictments are coming soon, count on it.

http://whateveralready.blogspot.com/2005/04/novak-news.html
Did Novak co-operate with the grand jury, and if he did, what did he say?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32380-2005Apr6.html
"This would lead me to probably conclude that Mr. Novak testified and did not provide nearly the treasure trove that Fitzgerald expected," [Lucy Dalglish, of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press] said.

It’s official: Bolton hearings delayed

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000438.html

Five Republican Sect’ys of State endorse Bolton – but not the one he worked for!

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000436.html

Here’s why I think the hearings will never take place. Not only is there a real chance that Bolton will be rejected because of his rabid anti-UN views: the hearings represent a chance for the Dems to dig into the sources of WMD lies, the Office of Special Plans, in-house State Dept battles, and other subjects in which Bolton was centrally involved. No one wants him to testify under oath about all of that

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/07/politics/07bolton.html

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000439.html

http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=414

Why the Democrats should call the GOP’s bluff on the “nuclear option”

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2623

USA Today: public wary of GOP theocrats’ agenda (thanks to Doug Kellner for the link)

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050406/1a_offlede06.art.htm

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/6/164428/3297
The latest Gallup poll, which actually has more Republicans in it than Democrats, shows clear realignment potential. . . If this persists, it will serve as a wedge driving directly into the Republican coalition. There is simply no way that Republicans can keep close to parity among moderates, or maintain their current two-thirds majority among reformers, if they are viewed as the party of abusive, intrusive government, and Democrats are not. It also will not help Republicans that their leader is now viewed as misleading by a majority of the country. . .

And, a similar WSJ poll: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005368

Right-wing attack dogs of the blogosphere (including “blog of the year” Powerline) get all foamy at the mouth because of a Pulitzer prize awarded to AP photojournalists for their Iraq coverage (thanks to Atrios for the link)

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/001686.html

Bonus item: no comment

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/07/politics/07breast.html
In documents made public on Wednesday, health regulators estimated that up to 93 percent of silicone breast implants ruptured within 10 years.

***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.***

KEEP IT COMING

U.S. is losing its last coalition partner

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2697
Our remaining ally, who just yesterday revealed plans to cut their losses in Iraq, blames American brutality and ham-handed planning for the loss of the War on Iraq.

U.S. troops in Iraq are provoking civilians and hampering rebuilding with an excessive use of force, British lawmakers said in a report Tuesday.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee also found that the slow pace of reconstruction had fueled the insurgency in Iraq and suggested the country had replaced Afghanistan as a training ground for international terrorists.

“Excessive use by the U.S. forces of overwhelming firepower has also been counterproductive, provoking antagonism toward the coalition among ordinary Iraqis,'' the report said, echoing the concerns of British officials.

[snip]

The committee said U.S.-led forces had clearly failed to stem the violence and suggested the new Iraqi government should try to negotiate with the insurgents.

“We conclude that to date the counterinsurgency strategy has not succeeded. This may reflect an overriding focus on a military approach to the detriment of political engagement ... While negotiations with al-Qaida and foreign fighters are out of the question, it might be possible to address some of the Iraqi insurgents' grievances through political negotiations,'' the report added.

Why meet when Karl is making all the decisions anyway? Bush holds just his SECOND cabinet meeting of the year

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2706
And here is your afternoon incoherence.

Q Yes, sir. Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the attack on Abu Graib prison. Is this a sign that they're becoming more sophisticated in Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I think it's a sign that they're still deadly, that these people will kill. They kill innocent life. Their strategy hasn't really changed. Their strategy has been one to kill as many innocent people as they possibly can, in the hopes that it shakes our confidence and shakes our will and, equally importantly, shakes the will and confidence of those brave souls who are helping lead this new country -- lead this new democracy. . . And we are -- we're after them. And equally importantly, the Iraqi citizens are after them now. More and more citizens understand that these terrorists, like al Qaeda and Zarqawi, don't have their interests at heart. They don't believe in democracy, these killers. They believe in a society in which people aren't going to be free to practice their religion, or free to speak in the public square. . . And so I think the American people ought to take heart to know that we have now more allies in defeating these few, and those allies are the Iraqi citizens. And perhaps the most notable step that the Iraqi citizens took toward complete defiance of the point of view of Zarqawi, who is an al Qaeda type, was when they went to the polls.

Bush approval ratings at lowest for any newly elected second-term President

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000866232

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/05/MNGOF9MKHV1.DTL
Bush staked his claim to a broad mandate and announced his top priorities at a post-election news conference, saying his 3.5 million vote victory had won him political capital that he would spend enacting his conservative agenda. . . "I earned capital in this campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it," Bush told reporters. "It is my style."

Don’t ask, don’t tell: Bush Co. withholding CIA detention policies and practices from Congressional oversight committees

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/national/06detain.html

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2005/04/congress_enjoys_the_sgt_schultz_defense.html
[Michael Froomkin] My first reaction was, ‘these people don’t care at all about the law.’. . . My second reaction was, ‘Congress could force disclosure if it wanted to. The problem here is that Congress is being supine.’. . . But then there’s a third reaction, and that one is if anything worse than the first two: Congress doesn’t want to know. Could it be that lots of Senators — especially the Republicans who, were they guilty with knowledge might have to take part in internecine warfare — are secretly grateful to have the secrets kept away?

TWO new DeLay scandals, and there’s no recovering from this

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28319-2005Apr5.html
A six-day trip to Moscow in 1997 by then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was underwritten by business interests lobbying in support of the Russian government, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the trip arrangements. . . DeLay reported that the trip was sponsored by a Washington-based nonprofit organization. But interviews with those involved in planning DeLay's trip say the expenses were covered by a mysterious company registered in the Bahamas that also paid for an intensive $440,000 lobbying campaign. . . It is unclear precisely how the money was transferred from the Bahamian-registered company to the nonprofit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/politics/06delay.html
The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay's home state, Texas. . . Most of the payments to his wife, Christine A. DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money.

[NB: Geez, who does he think he is, Dick Cheney?]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/5/232011/3363
[Kos] Now, it would be nice if we could say these things are coming to light thanks to the intrepid reporting of the WaPo and NYT. But who'd be kidding who?. . . DeLay's opponents inside the GOP are offering reporters the dirt, aiming to take him down. They don't want him as the party's albatross in 2006. . . I'm actually rooting for him to survive another six months, but things don't look so good.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005344
[Josh Marshall] Even if the White House tries to get rid of DeLay (which would not surprise me) I doubt he'll go that easily. And even if he goes, actually make that when he goes, the truth is (and anybody who covers the Hill knows this) that his corruption has seeped all through the House GOP caucus.

There's a reason they call it the DeLay machine. It's not just DeLay. It's a system of organized corruption that many, many Republican members of the House have benefited from. Not all corruption is illegal or even against congressional ethics rules, mind you. But enough of it is, as we're now seeing with DeLay. And he's splashed his mud all over the House.

Late Update: Two other points about DeLay, or rather one question with possibly two answers. Who's turning on the bug man? Call me cynical: but Drudge is playing this story awfully prominently. That makes me wonder whether a thumb at the White House that used to be turned up just turned down. More concretely, a lot of DeLay's lieutenants are now under indictment or on their way there.

More: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111275509169633078

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_atrios_archive.html#111275276002037473

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_04/006031.php

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001847.html

http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2005/04/delay-houston-chron-top.html

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_digbysblog_archive.html#111276666612968369

On GOP judge-bashing: Bill Frist, a charter member of the club, is backing off his own inflammatory statements. Guess this one’s not playing well with the public either, huh?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/5/153016/3410

DeLay too: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/did-tom-delay-pull-out-of-judge.html
Yesterday, Tom DeLay was the keynote speaker at a judge-bashing religious right conference in Washington, DC. We reported on it, and today, suddenly, DeLay's name has been scrubbed from the conference's home page - DeLay's no longer the keynote. Hmmm...

The Dems get savvy, start building the meme for 2006

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/5/201354/3628
Congressional Democrats on Tuesday said Republican criticism of the federal courts following Terri Schiavo's death showed an "arrogancy of power" that is leading to a Senate confrontation over filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees. . . "If they don't get what they want, they attack whoever's around," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. "Now they're after the courts, and I think it goes back to this arrogancy of power."

Mark Kleiman says, let’s go after DeLay RIGHT NOW

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/corruption_in_washington_/2005/04/mr_speaker_i_rise_to_a_question_of_the_privileges_of_the_house.php
It's been thirty years since my brief term as a House staffer, so my memory of Jefferson's Manual is dim, but if I recall correctly a motion to expel a member is a Constitutionally privileged motion, and as such can be offered at any time.

Now, for example.

Would it pass? Almost certainly not. But getting all, or virtually all, of the Republicans in the House on record as supporting not just corruption but selling out to the Russians would be a triumph in itself.

And if some Republicans actually voted for the motion, so much the better. DeLay would have the choice of not retaliating and looking weak or retaliating and looking like a thug.

It looks as if DeLay's demise is inevitable, which is something I wouldn't have said even a week ago. His own side is starting to rat him out.

Presumably, he'll eventually be told to get out of the way; the lucrative post-official opportunities available to Republicans have the big advantage that they can be used to make embarrassing problems go away. (Imagine if there'd been a Democratic version of Heritage to which Wright and Rostenkowski could have comfortably decamped, as Gingrich and Livingstone did.)

The Democrats' challenge is to make his fall as expensive as possible for the Republicans. It seems to me that an immediate motion to expel -- before DeLay is ready to resign -- would be a good start.

The List

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2698
[Holden] The Post's Charles Babington recites a litany of problems the GOP has created for itself, including:

-- The Schiavo Intervention

Intervening in Schiavo's case, [Sen. Trent Lott] said, "was the morally right thing to do," but "it really bothered me that the federal government would inject itself into a family medical case."

-- Tom DeLay's Ethical Problems

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) says Democrats suffered major setbacks in the 1990s when an ethics-challenged leader -- House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who resigned in 1989 -- became a larger symbol of his party than its platform issues. "That's a cocktail for disaster," Graham said.

-- Lack of Progress on Social Security Demolition

"I believe it's about where we left off two weeks ago," Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said at the end of the recess..

-- Insufficient Support for the Nuclear Option

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said yesterday that he soon will offer Democrats a compromise on the long-standing impasse, even though a growing number of conservative activists are pressing him to force a showdown now. Democrats predict the offer will be too flimsy to entice them to stop filibustering several appellate court nominees, but the mere fact that Frist is talking of negotiations, they say, convinces them he lacks the 51 votes he needs to change the filibuster rules in a chamber with 55 GOP members.

Governing is hard. It's hard work.

Big Plame news coming (so they say: thanks to Atrios for the link)

http://whateveralready.blogspot.com/2005/04/news-on-plame-grand-jury-right-here.html
[Murray Waas] I am going to soon break some news on the Plame grand jury investigation very soon. . . But in the meantime, here are some other newsworthy articles regarding the various parties to the entire affair. . .

So, now we know the “new phase” of the Social Security sales pitch: it involves ramping up even more mendaciously the scare tactic that “there is no Trust Fund” – again teetering very close to the edge of saying that the govt will default on its own T-bonds (which will not go down well with already-shaky foreign investors)

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2702

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2704
In a very quick gaggle today for the traveling press pool Little Scottie had this to say about the Chimpster's visit to West Virginia.

“He's going to talk about the Social Security trust fund and how there really is not a trust fund.”

"There really is not a trust fund.", eh? Somebody better tell the Social Security Administration, they are under the impression that there are two such funds.

The Social Security Trust Funds are the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund and the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund. The OASI Trust Fund began in 1937; the DI Trust Fund in 1957. These trust funds are managed by the Department of the Treasury

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005342
[Josh Marshall] For two decades your Social Security payroll taxes have been used to offset the cost of upper-income tax cuts. If I'm not mistaken that money has been used at the highest rate (i.e., in absolute dollars terms per year) under this President Bush. The money is supposed to be paid back, with interest.

That's the deal. That's what bonds are.

But now the president stands there holding on to one of these notes and jokes that they're not worth anything.

Foreigners hold quite a bit of US debt. What are theirs worth? Are they going to get their money paid back?

Wealthy Americans do too. In fact, most of President Bush's personal wealth is in the form of US government debt. Is he going to get his money paid back?

He wants to borrow $5 trillion more. Are those folks going to get paid back?

That's what this is all about. Defaulting on that portion of the federal debt. Those folks will all get their money back. But the president figures you can be stiffed.

If you pay most of your taxes in payroll taxes (like the overwhelming majority of Americans) he's trying to play you for a fool.

Simple as that.

Late Update: Here's a number someone should run. President Bush has been president for four years. He's run very big deficits and during that same period, if I'm not mistaken, Social Security has been running very big surpluses. So his government has been sticking the Social Security administration with Treasury notes that he says and believes are worthless. Obviously the debt obligations of the United States government don't begin and end with each new presidency. That would what, at least until recently, differentiated us from the banana republics of the world. But if he really believes these obligations will never be paid back, why did he use that money -- what must amount to hundreds of billions of dollars -- to subsidize his tax cuts?

More: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_04_03.php#005352

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001326.html
"These statements could raise needless doubts among American and foreign investors about the United States' willingness to meet its fiscal obligations. This has potentially broad ranging and damaging implications for our economy," Reid and Pelosi said.

Bolton: a summary of the case against him

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116264/fr/rss/

HUGE development: Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) may turn, blocking the nomination from going forward
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/04/06/gop_senator_may_oppose_un_choice/

And so, like clockwork: hearings may now be “postponed”
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000434.html

Some progress on forming a govt in Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/international/middleeast/06iraq.html

The deeper story: http://www.juancole.com/2005/04/huhn-real-iraq-unfortunate-tendency-in.html

Ha ha. Those border-patrol vigilantes are actually making it HARDER to monitor and prevent illegal border-crossing

http://www.first-draft.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2699

State’s rights: Connecticut wants to sue the federal government over NCLB

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/nyregion/05cnd-child.html
Connecticut's attorney general said today that he was preparing to sue the federal government over President Bush's signature education-reform law, arguing that it forces Connecticut to administer new standardized tests at a cost of millions of dollars and that Washington refuses to pay for them. . . The lawsuit would open a new chapter in a broader struggle between states and the federal government that has seen state legislatures lodge various protests over the law, and at least one state education commissioner, in Texas, issue an order this year that appeared to directly contradict a federal ruling.

Bonus item: you can now get a satellite picture of your home via Google Maps

http://maps.google.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.***