GOP lawmakers block intelligence overhaul

CNN.com

This must be the bill that I brought up below - why CNN doesn't feel the necessity of naming the bill or at least providing the bill's identifying number is beyond me.

So now I'm wondering what's going on, and in Washington, how can you be sure? First, the news breaks that a clause was slipped in to ease financial disclosure laws on every executive branch official. Now the Republicans are divided over immigration policies and are holding up the bill, while Bush is grandstanding them to pass it.

What it appears to be now: the bill isn't going to pass this year, and people are casting around trying to pin the political fallout on somebody else. The financial disclosure measure could have been bait for the Democrats (not many bit, and those that did made the reason for their opposition clear). Now Sensenbrenner's severe restrictions on legal and illegal immigrants getting driver's licenses are making him the whipping boy.

The real issue in this debate is the power of the new director of national intelligence, particularly budgetary power. The less budgetary power, the more the new post will be a figurehead. Three guesses as to what Bush's first position on this bill was.

The bill would have forced the Pentagon, which controls an estimated 80 percent of the government's $40 billion annual intelligence budget, to cede much of its authority on intelligence issues to the new national intelligence director.

"What you are seeing is the forces in favor of the status quo protecting their turf, whether it is Congress or in the bureaucracy," said Senator Susan Collins, the Maine Republican who was the chief Senate author of the failed compromise bill, in what amounted to a slap at her Republican counterparts in the House.

New York Times (link later)

By hook or by crook, this bill died. Without somebody knuckling under, the issue will be passed to the next Congress, who must begin the whole process over. Meanwhile, the Pentagon still has its money, Bush is pinning it on Sensenbrenner, and the problems identified by the 9/11 Committee still hobble our intelligence community.

This is what you elected, America.

Slip-Happy Republicans: Abortion in Spending Bill

NYTimes.com

Republicans have slipped an anti-abortion clause into an omnibus spending bill that would bar federal, state, and local governments from blocking funding to health care providers who refuse to accomodate or support women who seek out a legal procedure. Women all over this country will be denied their right to a safe and legal abortion because of this measure. The smart investor will grab all the stock in wire hanger factories he can find - that is, if millionaire televangelists haven't snatched it up already.

This is a common tactic of politicians, by the way: attaching a controversial measure to a bill that has little or no connection to its import. It's shameful when Democrats do it, and it's shameful when Republicans do it (unless they can meet in secret and get those rules changed, too). So Slip-Happy Republicans will become a running feature around here. Somebody else can document the Democratic abuses.

Senator Boxer will be doing what she can to stop this part of the bill from becoming law. Go tell her thanks.

GOP Uses 9/11 Bill To Neuter Financial Disclosure Laws

LATimes.com

Welcome to Bush 2.0, where a bill named for the 9/11 attacks and intended to improve the intelligence processes in this country is being used to gut financial disclosure laws, not just for top level intelligence officials, but for all executive branch officials.

Tucked within the House's 497-page version of the "9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act" is a provision to repeal the requirement that senior-level officials report their personal financial assets valued at more than $2.5 million. It also would end the practice of disclosing the dates of stock transactions.

The mask has truly slipped. What can I say, my fellow Americans?

You asked for it.

Enjoy your picture show.

Mother Upset Over Cross-Dressing Day

campusreportonline.net

I remember back in Demopolis, AL, we had a yearly event where the girls would play football and the football players dressed as cheerleaders. It was just goofy and fun.

It didn't last the whole day, though. And apparently the school principal had promised last year that it wouldn't happen again.

But the kids weren't being required to dress as the opposite sex. And they could bring a canned good for charity if they weren't going to cross dress. So the point is: there seems to be some cause for disappointment with the school, but some other people need to get a grip. Didn't any of these people see Tootsie?

Tutankhamum's Mummy To Be CAT Scanned

Reuters

They hope to discover cause of death. More later...

Peterson v. Fallujah

The American Street

When it comes to money, there's no such thing as a free press. News networks charge ad revenues based on viewership, and the event that people will watch is what is on the air. When the Peterson trial is on the air, people watch that instead of Fallujah. So that's where the networks will go.

They'll cover the Fallujah of the moment for a while, but dart back to the latest trial of the century. That's the way a capitalistic press works. The only way you'll get good coverage of Fallujah is if some reporter finds a way to get a career-making Watergate-style story out of it. Otherwise, it's on the back burner.

That's what Dan Rather thought he had with the Killian memos, by the by. Bush's Guard record was always on that back burner, but it needed that extra kick to get onto the front page. The story's subsequent flameout ensured that no reporter will ever make waves unless the proof is 100% solid.

Until then, enjoy your bread and circuses. Without the curiousity of the viewing public, no art or media ever thrives.

Hmmm...I May Have To Rethink That Youth Vote Thing

MichaelMoore.com

A majority of all young adults (51.6%) voted in this election - the first time that's ever happened. And they voted for Kerry over Bush by a ten point margin.

No other age group (reckoned by decades) voted for Kerry over Bush. If the 18-29 vote went to the 2006 election, it could overturn Congress.

My sincerest apologies to the majority of the largest youth vote ever. You guys rock.

And They're Doing It Without Invading

Gulf Daily News

France, Germany, and Britain are close to a deal with Iran, ending Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. Bush appears to have no choice but to support the process. Yay for the Europeans.

UPDATE: This story is a couple of days old. Today the deal is endangered. Bush swears that he's being reminded of someone when he looks at Iran, somebody real close to Iran as a matter of fact, and is looking around wondering where he put his big stick. Hold on to your butts...

American Progress: Some General Questions For Alberto Gonzales

American Progress Action Fund

Just got my APAF email today. If you aren't signed up for this powerful resource daily, you need to go over and do so. Take a look at this consise summation of the problems with Bush's nominee to replace Goody Ashcroft.

On Wednesday, President Bush nominated his long-time friend and current White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to be attorney general. Gonzales "has been a Bush confidant for nearly a decade." But it's not enough for President Bush to have confidence in Gonzales. As Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) said during Ashcroft's nomination hearings, "not only must the president trust his attorney general, the nation must also trust him, for, after all, the attorney general is America's lawyer." The nation can't trust Gonzales if they don't know where he stands on important issues. To find out his positions, the Senate Judiciary Committee must ask him some tough questions. Here are our suggestions:

DO YOU THINK THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH TORTURE IS LEGAL?: Gonzales was involved in drafting and approved an August 2002 memo to the president which included the opinion that laws prohibiting torture do "not apply to the President's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants." The memo also said that an interrogation tactic only constituted torture if it resulted in "death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions." In light of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, it would be irresponsible to have an attorney general who believes torture is legal.

WOULD YOU INSIST ON STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS?: In a 1/25/02 memo to the president, Gonzales wrote, "the war against terrorism is a new kind of war" and "this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." The Constitution says that when the United States signs an international treaty it is "the supreme law of the land." The attorney general, our nation's chief law enforcement officer, should understand that.

WOULD YOU RECUSE YOURSELF FROM THE VALERIE PLAME INVESTIGATION?: The Justice Department is currently investigating which senior administration official – in violation of federal law – told columnist Robert Novak that Valerie Plame was a covert CIA operative. Gonzales has appeared before the federal grand jury investigating the case. As White House counsel, Gonzales also advised White House staffers and the president about how to handle the inquiry. As someone who advised potential defendants (and someone who could potentially be called as a witness at trial) it would be highly inappropriate for Gonzales to oversee the investigation.  

WOULD YOU RECUSE YOURSELF FROM ALL ENRON-RELATED MATTERS?: For more than a decade, Alberto Gonzales was an attorney for Vinson & Elkins, the firm that represented Enron. When Gonzales ran for reelection to the Texas Supreme Court, he "received $6,500 in campaign contributions from the company." The Justice Department is currently prosecuting top Enron executives – including former CEO Ken Lay. John Ashcroft recused himself from the Enron investigation "because of contributions he received from the company's executives during his campaign for the Senate." Nevertheless, Gonzales – who had a far more extensive relationship with Enron than Ashcroft – continued to be involved in Enron-related investigations as White House counsel.

WOULD YOU RECUSE YOURSELF FROM ALL HALLIBURTON-RELATED MATTERS?: The Justice Department has launched three investigations of Halliburton: for allegedly overcharging the military $61 million for fuel, for allegedly bribing Nigerian officials to win a contract, and for allegedly doing business with Iran through an off-shore subsidiary. Halliburton was a major client of Vinson & Elkins while Gonzales was a partner at the firm. In 1999, as a member of the Texas Supreme Court, Gonzales accepted a $3,000 contribution from Halliburton just before the court was to hear an appeal of a case where "a Halliburton employee had won a $2.6 million trial verdict" against the company. Gonzales did not recuse himself.

WHY DIDN'T YOU GIVE GOV. BUSH ALL THE FACTS ABOUT DEATH PENALTY CASES?: As chief legal counsel for then Gov. Bush in Texas, Gonzales was responsible for writing a memo on the facts of each death penalty case – Bush decided whether a defendant should live or die based on the memos. An analysis of these memos by the Atlantic Monthly concluded that "Gonzales repeatedly failed to apprise the governor of crucial issues in the cases at hand: ineffective counsel, conflict of interest, mitigating evidence, even actual evidence of innocence." In the case of Terry Washington, a mentally retarded 33-year-old, Gonzales's memo "failed to mention that Washington's mental limitations, and the fact that he and his ten siblings were regularly beaten with whips, water hoses, extension cords, wire hangers, and fan belts, were never made known to the jury."

See what I mean about the APAF memos? Consise, extensive, and powerful. You might want to drop them a nickel while you're there.

It's incredible, isn't it, that Bush nominates someone who will have to recuse himself from so many pressing cases in the Justice Department today...unless the Bush administration plans on easing the urgency of these cases in the first place. Then the nomination of Gonzales makes perfect sense.

However, it seems that the best course for Senate Democrats is to raise these questions, make his answer a matter of public record, and then allow his nomination to proceed. They should vote against this heinous nomination as one, absolutely. But they should save the filibuster for the Supreme Court nominees that matter. Filibuster may be the only tool that Democrats have since Orrin Hatch destroyed decades of senatorial tradition in his naked desire to obstruct Clinton's judicial nominees and grease the path of Bush's. But it's still a weapon that should be used strategically.

As we've learned this election season, a consistent (or consistently explainable) voting pattern against these bullies and tyrants will be the best defense come 2006 and 2008. Air the Bushian dirty laundry, vote against it, and in 2006 we can run against the greater mess that Bush will leave.

The Purple State President

Mookie: 51% Bush, 48% Kerry

Just plain weird.

Just did a Technorati search and discovered some new links to the site...

...so say hello to nv1962, Efficacy, Blogs on Bush (that's not the Republican site), Cheese Monkey, and Steve's No Direction Home Page. They've all taken their place over in the roll.

Hunter Thompson: "Voted The Same Way They Prayed"

5280 Magazine

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

The famous journalist also pointed this out:

Their army is how much bigger than mine? Three percent? Well shucks, Bubba.

Bush is claiming a mandate, but he'll only have one if Democrats roll over. We need to fight.

I hope this doesn't sound like I don't think Kerry fought well, but I did wish I could have seen him do one thing: defend Massachusetts. The people of Massachusetts were fighting and dying for this country's liberty before Sam Houston was a twinkle in his father's eye.

Every time Bush belittled Massachusetts (and that's exactly what he was doing), Kerry should have slammed him for it. But Bush was able to play one part of this country against another over and over again, in the debates, in his stump speechs, and in press conferences. These were not the actions of a uniter.

If 9/11 taught us anything, it's that we are all in this together. So, President Bush?

Back off of Massachusetts.

I'm just sayin'.

Ummmm...A Most Unusual Fact

And it is exceedingly odd.

A chart comparing 2004 exit polls to actual results.

The next place you should go.

Garry Wills: The Day the Enlightenment Went Out

The New York Times

Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?

America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of Enlightenment values - critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11.

The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble those nations less than we do our putative enemies.

We can strike that decent respect for the opinions of mankind part too. Bush promised to reach out to those that share his goals. It really is his way or the highway - with him or against him.

Sorry, Mr. Franklin. It was nice while it lasted...

Bill Frist, 2008 Republican Candidate for President

wate.com

Frist is running, no doubt about it. The Bush machine knifed Trent Lott so Frist could become Majority Leader and get some national publicity. Now Frist isn't running for a third term as Tennessee Senator.

That's because Tennessee's Governor is a Democrat. If Frist runs again, then Phil Bredesen will nominate a Democrat for his seat should Frist win the Presidency. So another Republican must keep that seat.

Job one for Tennessee Democrats - find a candidate who can win that Senate seat.

Aftermath

This election's in the history books. John Kerry concedes.

Three main thoughts are surfacing in my profound disappointment.

(Cue jeramiad music...and lights)

1. Howard Dean, please report to Lost and Found - your party was discovered wandering around dazed and confused.

The oldtimers in the party ankled him for Kerry, and they were almost right...but they weren't. Things aren't as bad as they could be (the country is half full), but they are bad. One quick step down the right path - I don't know if there's any precedent of making a freshman Senator minority whip, but that sounds like a job for Obama to me.

And Howard? If you'd do me a favor and put Wesley Clark on speed dial, I'd be forever grateful.

Something, btw, must be done for the young campaign workers who toiled endlessly this election season, because of a second lesson: we must NEVER, EVER trust the youth vote EVER AGAIN. EVER. If they don't show up at campaign headquarters, we're just going to have to write them off until they wake up from the barrage of advertising and hormones that's throttling their maturity and sense of civil duty.

Those who did work their hearts out only to have those hearts stomped into the dust by a cruel election must understand – they will never be an inspiration to their peers, but they will always be an inspiration to us.

2. Hillary Clinton must never run for President.

Look what these people did to John Kerry, a war hero. Who in the South or West knows John Kerry? Nobody - he's a "liberal from Taxachussetts". But Hilary is a known factor - she's the Ice Queen, the She-Demon herself.

It doesn't matter that this reputation is wholly undeserved. It doesn't matter that this reputation was crafted because Hillary could be one of the greatest POTUS's ever - EVER - as in knock Teddy Roosevelt off Mount Rushmore and put her up there. It doesn't matter that this would be a terrible waste of one of the finest hearts and minds of our generation - Senator from New York must be our consolation prize...

...because how could we ask her to do it?

How could we ask her to step into that arena? It's too much to ask. We know what these people are capable of. That's why we must bear our burden and let Hillary know that she should never run for President.

And why, should she choose to run, we must fight for her with the last drop of blood in our bodies.

3. Bush is now legitimate.

The last four years were an aberation in American politics. We all know, it’s beyond rational dispute, that more people in Florida went to the polls to vote for Gore. He should have been President. But that changed last night. Last night the American people spoke clearly. Plenty of the electorate wasn’t there, but they never would have been. Those who cared, voted, more than ever. And they said: Bush.

So for good or for ill, George Bush is the 43rd President of the United States.

What have we done? This will be seen as one of the most spectacular mistakes of a people in history. It’s as if...

(God, I hate extended metaphors – for example, the fundamentalist Christian doctrine of the endtimes pegs the rule of the Antichrist at seven years. He’s given a mortal head wound, but the false prophet heals him, to the amazement of the world. The biblical description of the false prophet is uncannily Rovian. And most theologians think that the second three-and-a-half years are worst, so hey! only three more years to go!

I hate extended metaphors. But I digress.)

...as if the American people sat at a table with Bush. All the world suffered because of this boor at dinner, who antagonized all with his table manners and rude jokes and constant degradations of fellow diners. But they remained silent, because everyone looked in pity at the American people, married to this incredible jerk.

But then the Muslim world brought the tab to the table, itemized with names like Abu Ghraib and Fallujah. Bush belched, wiped his mouth with his napkin and glanced idly at the American people. And in horror, the world watched as the American people picked up the tab and wrote: WE WILL PAY.

Why should the Muslim world view yesterday in any other way?

Bush is legitimate, and his mistakes are now America’s. It’s really going to get worse before it gets better.

Ohio

Wisconsin is in the Kerry camp.

Fox and NBC has called Ohio for Bush, allowing Bush talking heads to chide their counterparts to "face reality".

Oh, and Daschle's out, but Obama's in.

Wisconsin and Ohio

That's what it's down to, and it may take days.

Wisconsin is razor-thin for Kerry. Ohio has Bush ahead by 140,000 or so, and it will be in the courts.

Wisconsin and Ohio.

It's Voting Day!

This should be a national holiday, with at least four hours of paid leave for all scheduled workers. It's not, because corporations like to depress the vote themselves.

If you're working late, go get in line now. If you're an 8-to-5 jockey like me, and didn't get to early voting, go get in line after work.

Vote. Because it does matter and you do make a difference.

An Interesting Experiment

ABC News

ABC News producers wore opposing shirts to Bush and Kerry political rallies. Their instructions were to act respectfully and leave when asked. The results were along the same lines, but drastically different in tone and severity.

At two different Kerry rallies, the producers were admitted. One reported remark made towards them was this: "We're not let into your parties because you're exclusive and stupid." At one rally, Kerry workers held up signs to block national media from viewing the producers. At the second, the event organizer politely warned them that they could be removed if they were disruptive, then asked them to enjoy themselves. Someone at the Kerry rally became visibly upset at their presence, but was calmed by her friend, who said, "Feel proud that we let them in. That's what democracy is all about, that's what we're fighting for."

The producers attended two Bush rallies as well, or tried to. The first rally wouldn't admit them, even though they had tickets. A Bush supporter told them as they waited for admission: "You guys know you have to love America to stand in this line, not France. Just letting you know. I don't want you guys to get beat up in there by Americans." They were also told to find the nearest exit and maybe law enforcement could help. At the second rally, they waited until they were inside to reveal the Kerry shirts. They were quickly ejected.

So as you see, all four rallies reacted against the opposing shirts. All four worked to neutralize the message of the shirts, as you would expect. These were private affairs, after all.

But which of these rallies sounds like the America you grew up in? Which of the rallies epitomized the American values that we've always known in this country?

There is a difference in these two candidates. Tomorrow, vote for everything America can be. Take the first step in taking back our country.

Breslin: Why Kerry Will Beat Bush

Newsday.com

The reasons are pretty simple: Bush started 500,000 votes behind, Nadar's not a factor, new voter registration is up like gangbusters, and there are 170 million cellphones being used in America.

It's a lock.

Give Bush A Brain

beatgreets.com

Hi-sterical. It's given me a great idea for a cup and ball game to give to my friends...

Osama Threatens Red States?

New York Post

This is being pumped by Fox on the air as well. An organization that monitors Arabia media, MEMRI, says that Osama specifically threatened states that vote for Bush.

He's full of crap. Voting for Al Gore didn't save New York and Washington, D.C. in 2001. Now we're supposed to accept his solemn word to not attack states that vote Democratic? Puh-lease. An attack on any individual state is an attack on every state, and there's no American, John Kerry and George Bush included, that would consider it any other way. If he thought he could threaten any individual state, he's delusional.

You want to know what this is really about? Osama, like most observers of the election, sees that John Kerry is about to win. He wants to claim credit for it and so he's released this idiotic threat to appear even more powerful in the Arabic world. He's a meglomaniac, and he lost any right he might have had to plead grievances when he directed 19 men to hijack airplanes and crash them into our buildings.

Your day is long overdue, bin Laden, and come this January, when John Kerry is sworn in as President, you are going to find out what being Public Enemy No. 1 really means.

UPDATE: Juan Cole disputes this interpretation. He makes a good case for Osama using a fundamentalist anarchism. So Osama isn't necessarily singling out red states. He's still a dangerous twerp.

"Accident and Force"

The Federalist Papers No. 1

The Democratic Veteran whipped out the Federalist Papers on Preznit Dictator-Wanna-Be. I clicked over to read the source document, and was struck by a sentence myself:

It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.

First off: oh, for the days when our political leaders could use sentences like that and actually be understood. Hamilton, that firebrand and genius among many of the Revolution, would never be on CNN with a mouthful like that. That's most definitely our loss.

To the point: "Accident and force". Is there anything else to ascribe the ascendancy of the right-wing Republican faction in American politics? For the record, I consider the hyper pushing of false information about their motives and about their opponents "force", especially with the pliant national media we currently enjoy in America.

Reflection and choice is something that the Bush Administration fears. Is there any better reason to toss them out, on principle alone?

Funny Republican Ads

Just saw a Republican mail ad. Let's read it together, shall we?

Front: large picture of pinocchio puppets with strings draped around them to create the appearance of marionettes

Edward North...

...Another Puppet on a String

Reverse Side: detail of pinocchio puppet

Edward North tells us he will stand up and fight for our Tennessee values...

...But Edward North's values cannot stand up on their own - because he's just another puppet controlled by Liberal Millionaire Trial Lawyer J. Stanley Rogers.

What do Edward North, J. Stanley Rogers and John Kerry's running mate all have in common?

They're all liberal Trial Lawyers!

Liberals Raise Taxes and Trial Lawyers Sue.

High Taxes hurt our families and our economy.

Frivolous lawsuits run up the cost of health insurance.

Liberal Trial Lawyer Edward North does not represent our Tennessee values - he represents the values of the tax raising liberals!

VOTE NO AGAINST LIBERAL TRIAL LAWYER EDWARD NORTH

Paid for by the Tennessee Republican Party.

Question: who is Edward North running against?

Question: what office is Edward North running for?

Here's his website: Edward North

My wife and I both come from small business backgrounds. Small businesses are the economic backbone of rural communities like ours, and small businesses create over 80 percent of the new jobs in Coffee and Warren Counties. I know what it takes to strengthen small businesses:

· Low taxes, so businesses can expand and create new jobs in our communities

· Lower health insurance premiums, so businesses can afford to provide adequate health benefits to all of their employees

· A well educated workforce, so we can recruit the high-tech jobs of the future into our rural communities today. This means more and better-paid teachers in K-12 education and more investments from the state level into our community and technical colleges.

When I am elected to the Tennessee House of Representatives, I will work with Governor Bredesen, not against him, to bring insurance premiums down, keep taxes low, invest in education and recruit more and better jobs to Coffee and Warren Counties.

Question: which of these candidates (North and the ghost Republican) is talking about the issues?

Which relies completely on PR-driven schlock?

Vote for the candidate that's not insulting your intelligence. Vote for the candidate who's not afraid to put his picture on his ads. Vote for Edward North, State Representative, Tennessee District 47.