Easter Lemming Liberal News

Sunday, November 30, 2003

Iraq's Nuclear Mirage - Khaduri Makes The AP


el - Of course if you read me from before the war you would know that Saddam's 'real nuclear bombmaker' said Iraq had quit it's nuclear program in 1991. He couldn't get most U.S. media to listen. "Emerging from low profile" indeed. Even now less than 30,000 people have read my site.




Archive Trouble


I had been noticing I couldn't get to some of my archives. I found it trying to investigate any reasons why four weeks ago was my top week. It was hard to see if this was general Blogspot flakiness or something else.

Finally, I realized that the archived days I could usually go to all had no images on them.

My putting on images has been controversial as it uses the hosting site's bandwidth. I justified it by always providing links to the site - where the link image could be thought of as advertising, and by only using commercial site images. Well, perhaps blogspot doesn't like it and won't retrieve the archived pages now. Oddly, some with images show up in google cache.

The problem is I know of no way of correcting this, if this is not just Blogspot being flaky today. If you want archived pages that happened to have images you can't get there from my daily archive index. You will have to try google and use the cache which has about 270 of my 394 archives, some with images!

This is better than Google's Internet Archive Wayback Machine which has only four views of my main page and where the last view of the archive page was February 15.

I am still investigating this and don't know how my Search box is affected.

Added - it is partially Blogspot being flaky, some days where I get 'page not found' will come up if I manually type the url. This includes October 24, 2003 that had two images - I just removed one - and other days with no images.

Still more added: it seems it is general flakiness of blogspot. Clicking on archived day will sometimes generate a 'page not found error.' Often you can get to it directly, easiest by clicking on a day that does work and then inserting the correct date in the url. Search works the same way, sometimes clicking the day from the archive will generate the 'page not found' error. No solution except trying the date manually if it says not found. Today - Monday - Most days are fine, sometimes they generate file not found. This will take a while but I will republish the entire archives to try to correct the links. -- Worked.



Kerry Attacks Dean For His Own Positions


Kerry vs. Kerry - He's schizoid about Medicare. By Timothy Noah

Kerry boasts on his Web site that he "has the courage to take on special interests to get health care costs under control." In the Nov. 24 presidential debate in Iowa, Kerry called the just-passed Medicare prescription-drug bill a "special interest giveaway" containing "$139 billion worth of slush fund money that's going to go directly to the drug companies." Kerry criticized the Medicare bill for, among other things, not allowing the federal government "to actually negotiate bulk purchases for states, which would lower prices."

el - Kerry vows to get "health care costs under control" but then attacks Dean for not promising unrestricted growth in Medicare. I originally didn't support Kerry because every time I saw him talk about Iraq he bought into the Cheney lies, since then I realize he is an old-style promise the voters anything politician.



Bush plans new nuclear weapons

The Observer -- Generating controversy:

'The administration's actions are having the opposite effect by erasing the taboo on the use of nuclear weapons. Russia has already indicated that it will develop new "tactical" weapons in response and no one doubts our enemies will follow suit.'

'Why are they even talking about this now, unless something is planned? It makes no sense to us. America has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, but it did not stop 9/11.'


Saturday, November 29, 2003

Hipper DOMAI


Suicide Girls.

el - They were covered by an HBO special that also included an anal sex class, Latino male strippers, and a high-class sex party.




Comments About Libertarians Brought On By Opus Debut


Expressed by readers at CalPundit.

Libertarianism has two virtues for its adherents, folks who tend to have a high degree of spacial, analytical intelligence and an extremely low degree of empathetic, emotional intelligence:

1. It is simple and clean, architecturally speaking. It offers a small set of building-block axioms with which you can construct political positions--like legos!
2. It makes a virtue of saying "leave me alone," which is what you say when real, messy, emotional interactions with other people baffle and unsettle you. "Just leave me my bubble where I have complete autonomy and no ambiguous obligations." -
...

The libertarian types I've known have all *thought* they controlled their own destinies, and they all thought they got where they were strictly through their own personal efforts, no relation to the state of society, tax-supported public schools and universities, public highways, anything like that. But why do so many of them work for one or another government agency?
...

* No government agency has ever asked me to pee in a cup or tried to tell me what sorts of jobs I could take. Private employers, on the other hand, have asked me to take drug tests and sign insane non-compete agreements. In actual practice, the worst threats to my liberty have involved pointy-haired bosses, lawyers, and economic recessions.
...

Okay, the from-first-principles argument may lead to some economic theories of questionable morality, but it also leads to a firm humanist position on individual social freedoms. (Not all Libertarians are in it for the abolish-the-tax-code stand, I promise.)

If you care about getting more people in your corner to take on the Bush juggernaut -- as you should -- then start from those points of agreement, hold the line on a principled social stance, ACLU style, and gradually chisel away at the economic theory fortress with real-world facts and a solid demonstration that getting the government out of capitalism doesn't always make us freer, happier, or less ripped off.

One hard-left friend of mine in particular has done this patiently to me for a year or two now, and it's really starting to sink in. It also helps, I suppose, that I've been living in California and seeing what a disaster the "starve the beast" stance has become when put into practice.
...

Both religion and libertarianism impose and reduce rather than remaining open and receptive. Both settle for impoverishment while surrounded by riches.

I looked around and realized that the people I truly admired, the ones who were happiest and who created the most good in the world, were those guided by the instinct to be generous and forgiving rather than the instinct to be correct and consistent at all times. They focused less on what they had to do, on duties and laws, and more on what could do, on what uptight male philosophers call "superogatory" acts. They viewed living among people, in a community and a culture, being bound by a whole web of obligations and restraints, as comforting, not as a drag. They enjoyed being rooted rather than longing for some sort of ideal, airy, unbound--and ultimately empty--libertarian 'freedom'.



Heathens Fastest Growing Religion In U.S.


Number of `Nones,' Those Who Claim No Religion, Swells in U.S.

Their numbers have more than doubled in a decade, to nearly 30 million. Organized as a religious denomination, they would trail only Catholics and Baptists in members.

They are the "nones," named for their response to a question in public opinion polls: "What is your religion, if any?"

Some nones are atheists, others agnostics, still others self-styled dabblers in a variety of faiths and philosophies. Despite their discomfort with organized religion, many consider themselves quite spiritual.

Nones are especially prevalent in the Pacific Northwest. In Oregon and Washington, where 21 percent and 25 percent, respectively, claim no particular faith, nones outnumber any single religious category.

"If people are interested in hiking on Sunday morning rather than going to church, that's fine. The culture won't say that's unacceptable. In fact, the culture will say that's perfectly acceptable," said Mark Shibley, a sociologist at Southern Oregon University who has studied and written about nones.

"If anyone in the Bible Belt learns you're a none," said Betsy Lampe, 46, a none from Lakeland, Fla., "they immediately and mistakenly believe that you're either a Satan worshipper or a communist and treat you as such."

Whatever the reason, nones grew from 8 percent of the U.S. population in 1990 to more than 14 percent in 2001.

Young people are more likely to profess no religion. One in three nones is less than 30 years old compared with one in five of all survey respondents. More are single (29 percent) than the adult population as a whole (20 percent). Fifty-nine percent are male. Their education level (23 percent college graduates) is virtually the same as the national average for adults. Seventeen percent are Republicans, 30 percent are Democrats, and 43 percent are independents.

Many nones believe in God. Nearly half "agreed strongly" that God exists. "It is more accurate to describe them as unaffiliated than as non-believers," said Ariela Keysar, study director of the American Religious Identification Survey.

[Catharine Lamm] likes the potential of a new term -- "bright" -- coined to describe people with a naturalist as opposed to a supernaturalist world view. The word has gained popularity through a July op-ed piece in The New York Times arguing for its use.

Leonard, a publicist who works in New York City, came to see religion as "death insurance." She's not willing to pay the premiums.

"I don't worry about it," she said. "I look at it and say, `OK, I know I'm living the best life I can here and now. If nothing happens after I die, fine.

el - I have pagan friends, but I just call myself a heretic. My original headline said Evil but I learned sarcasm doesn't always come across well over the internet.



Did Bush Replace CNN with Fox for Iraq Photo-Op?


The White House uses a rotating system for a pool that includes newspaper, wire-service and television reporters when the president travels, but even news executives were uncertain yesterday whether the standard procedures had been followed.



DeLay the Hammer Put The Hammer Down To Get The Votes


Robert Novak -- Smith, self term-limited, is leaving Congress. His lawyer son Brad is one of five Republicans seeking to replace him from a GOP district in Michigan's southern tier. On the House floor, Nick Smith was told business interests would give his son $100,000 in return for his father's vote. When he still declined, fellow Republican House members told him they would make sure Brad Smith never came to Congress. After Nick Smith voted no and the bill passed, Duke Cunningham of California and other Republicans taunted him that his son was dead meat.

The bill providing prescription drug benefits under Medicare would have been easily defeated by Republicans save for the most efficient party whip operation in congressional history. Although President Bush had to be awakened to collect the last two votes, Majority Leader Tom DeLay and Majority Whip Roy Blunt made it that close. ''DeLay the Hammer'' on Saturday morning was hammering fellow conservatives.

Republicans voting against the bill were told they were endangering their political futures. Major contributors warned Rep. Jim DeMint they would cut off funding for his Senate race in South Carolina. A Missouri state legislator called Rep. Todd Akin to threaten a primary challenge against him.

Intense pressure, including a call from the president, was put on freshman Rep. Tom Feeney. As speaker of the Florida House, he was a stalwart for Bush in his state's 2000 vote recount. He is the Class of 2002's contact with the House leadership, marking him as a future party leader. But now, in those early morning hours, Feeney was told a ''no'' vote would delay his ascent into leadership by three years -- maybe more.

el - the old conservative GOP perspective on the new GOP. FYI - Novak is on my better-off-dead list. More about that soon.







The Marketing of the War


Noam Chomsky -- Recall that the self-appointed rulers of the world -- Bush, Powell, and the rest -- had declared forthrightly that they intended to carry out their war whether or not the United Nations (UN) or anyone else "catches up" and "becomes relevant." Old Europe, mired in irrelevance, did not catch up. Neither did New Europe, at least if people are part of their countries.

Poll results available from Gallup International, as well as local sources for most of Europe, West and East, showed that support for a war carried out "unilaterally by America and its allies" did not rise above 11 percent in any country. Support for a war if mandated by the UN ranged from 13 percent (Spain) to 51 percent (Netherlands).

Particularly interesting are the eight countries whose leaders declared themselves to be the New Europe, to much acclaim for their courage and integrity. Their declaration took the form of a statement calling on the Security Council to ensure "full compliance with its resolutions," without specifying the means.

Their announcement threatened "to isolate the Germans and French," the press reported triumphantly, though the positions of New and Old Europe were in fact scarcely different. To ensure that Germany and France would be "isolated," they were not invited to sign the bold pronouncement of New Europe -- apparently for fear that they would do so, it was later quietly indicated.

Happily for Washington, former communist countries too joined New Europe. Within them, support for the "United States' view," as defined by Powell -- namely, war by the "coalition of the willing" without UN authorization -- ranged from 4 percent (Macedonia) to 11 percent (Romania).

Support for a war even with a UN mandate was also very low. Latvia's former foreign minister explained that we have to "salute and shout, 'Yes sir.' . . . We have to please America no matter what the cost."




As Stimulus, Tax Cuts May Soon Go Awry


Most of the windfall from both fiscal years is packed into the 12 months that started last summer and will end next summer. Not surprisingly, this front-loading of the tax cuts coincides with the improving economy. But then the payout declines gradually, snuffing out the stimulus - unless there is another big tax cut.

A big chunk of the $200 billion will come to people as tax refund checks in the next six months - a timely shot in the arm in a presidential election year. Then the shrinking begins as the tax cuts run their course. For fiscal 2005, which starts next Oct. 1, just a month before the election, the tax windfall for individuals will total only $168 billion.

The $117 billion in fiscal 2003 gives birth to only $40 billion in effective stimulus. Much more of the cuts, perhaps every nickel, would have been spent if the money had been channeled to the states instead, to pay the salaries of teachers who were fired to balance budgets. The economy surged in the third quarter, but as Mr. Slemrod notes, "the tax cuts were not a major part of that growth.''




Last-Minute Life-Changing Bad Bills


Molly Ivins -- Wow! Not one, but two huge, horrible, last-minute life-changing bills, and the second is even worse than the first! Record-shattering bad legislation immediately eclipsed by record-shattering bad legislation. These Republicans have talent: It is not easy to do this much damage to people's lives with a straight face and that unctuous air of piety.

Oh, and as for you senior citizens who believed that amusing little claim that you would all benefit from this bill -- suckers! According to Public Citizen, pharmaceutical companies have given $44 million since 1999 -- 78 percent to Republicans, 22 percent to Democrats -- and spent millions more hiring an army of lobbyists that physically outnumbers the 535 members of Congress. The Health Reform Program of Boston University estimates that of the bill's $400 billion price tag, $139 billion will go to increase drug-company profits over eight years, a 38 percent increase in what is already the world's most profitable industry.

But forget about the Medicare bill -- it won't take effect until 2006 anyway, so you won't even notice what it does ‘til them. Regard the even more amazing energy bill. In case you haven't been keeping up (and you do have to race to keep up), there is a gasoline additive called MTBE that has polluted groundwater across the country. So naturally, the Republicans have put in a provision that would limit the liability of the manufacturers of MTBE -- that means you can't sue them for ruining the water -- and the bill would give the companies up to $2 billion in federal aid.

No wonder the energy companies have given over $71 million in contributions to politicians, over 80 percent to Republicans, since 1999. They're getting a $20 billion return on that little investment just in direct subsidies, and there is much more in the bill in indirect subsidies. Folks, it is time to get serious about fixing this system.



The GOP Is Now The Abusive Party In Power


David Brooks - The Democrats, meanwhile, behave just as the Republicans did when they were stuck in the minority. They complain about their outrageous mistreatment by the majority. They are right to complain. The treatment is outrageous. But the complaints only communicate weakness.




Krugman - There's Some Good News About Globalization


Circa 1975 it seemed that the club of nations with decent living standards was no longer accepting new members.

Now we know that the club isn't that exclusive, after all. South Korea and several smaller Asian economies have made a full transition to modernity. China is still a poor country, but it has made astonishing progress. And there are signs of an economic takeoff in at least parts of India. I'm not talking about arid economic statistics; what we've seen over the past generation is an enormous, unexpected improvement in the human condition.

How was this improvement achieved? Whenever I give talks about my latest book, someone asks whether I still believe in free trade. The answer is yes — not because I have any fond feelings about multinational corporations, but because every one of those development success stories was based on export-led growth. And that growth is possible only if rising economies can expand into new markets.

Latin America has signally failed to replicate Asia's success: Latin nations have liberalized, privatized and deregulated, with results ranging from disappointing (Mexico) to catastrophic (Argentina). Open world markets, it seems, offer the possibility of economic development — but not an easy, universal recipe.

Meanwhile, competition from newly industrializing economies does hurt some workers in advanced countries. I could tell you how sensible government policies could minimize this cost, but since we don't have those policies and aren't about to get them, free trade is, in reality, a morally ambiguous issue.

Yet I keep coming back to the big good news of the past 25 years: in a world with more or less free trade, development is possible. We are not, it turns out, condemned to live forever on a planet where only a small minority of the global population has a decent standard of living.

Will this good news continue? Growing tensions over world trade worry me. The steady trickle of U.S. protectionist moves, against everything from steel to Chinese bras, hasn't yet become a torrent. But there's a definite sense that the grown-ups have left the building.

I was on the staff of the Council of Economic Advisers during the Reagan administration (those were nonpolitical jobs back then); one thing I remember was that if the experts said a proposed trade restriction violated international trade law, that was that. By contrast, just about every protectionist step taken by the Bush administration has been clearly in violation. And if the major economic powers stop honoring the rules that preserve open global markets, the chances of future development in poor nations will be much reduced.

But none of this cancels the fact that over the past 25 years more people have seen greater material progress than ever before in history. That's something to celebrate.



Kinky Friedman Considering Run For Governor Of Texas


He Ain't Kinky, He's My Governor

As a campaign slogan, it leaves something to be desired: "Why the hell not?"

Anyway, the job — heavy on ceremony in Texas, where the real power lies in the lieutenant governor's authority to control the Senate agenda — does not daunt the curly-mopped Mr. Friedman, whose real name is Richard and who gives his age as 59, though adding, "I read at the 61-year level." Given those who have come before him, he said, "how hard could it be?"

Still, garbed in cowboy black, bearing a large silver Star of David on a chain and tooling around in an old white Nissan pickup with a Don Quixote statuette on the dashboard and chewed stubs of Cuban cigars in the ashtray, Mr. Friedman does acknowledge some ambivalence about his quest. This is his second run for elected office; in the first, he campaigned in 1986 for justice of the peace in nearby Kerrville, where "my fellow Kerrverts returned me to the private sector."

This is a man who, once he makes up his mind, is riven by indecision. So, he is often asked, is he serious? "Serious is not a word I would use, because I'm never serious," he said. "Some things are too important to be taken seriously." But, he said, "an alarming number of people think I could win."

Disdaining computers and the Internet as "the work of Satan," he writes it on an electric typewriter, rarely revising as he goes. (Thanks to a computer-literate friend, he does, however, maintain a sophisticated Web site, www.kinkyfriedman.com.)

His new campaign, he said, has won some encouragement from President Bush, a previous occupant of the Statehouse, whom Mr. Friedman calls a great admirer of his books, mostly comic mysteries with titles like "The Love Song of J. Edgar Hoover." He quoted the president as calling Mr. Friedman his favorite fiction writer. " 'Course," he said, "George is not all that voracious a reader." He said Mr. Bush had also volunteered to be his "one-man focus group" for the campaign.

At a recent White House dinner, Mr. Friedman indeed told the president that he was running, the official said, but Mr. Bush replied that he could not endorse him until he knew Mr. Friedman's platform.

That, Mr. Friedman said, is an easy one. He wants to make the declawing of cats illegal.

"People who think this is frivolous should come back as a cat," he said. "I'd be a Buddhist, except for Richard Gere."

He was originally for the war in Iraq, he said, and argued with Willie Nelson about it. "He's a tyrannical bully," he told Mr. Nelson, "and we got to take him out."

"No," he says Mr. Nelson objected, "he's our president, and we got to stick by him."

In a Friedman administration, he said, Mr. Nelson would lead the Texas Rangers, unless he was called to Washington to head the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The campaign has won the support of the author Molly Ivins, who inspired his slogan when she asked why he was running. "Why the hell not?" he replied.

Ms. Ivins said in an interview, "I'm a great believer in entertainment in politics," adding that Texas had a tradition of singing governors. Mr. Friedman may not have much of a shot, she said, "but it's clear he's running, because he recently straightened his hair."

The success of his music and writing career has left him free to devote time to his Utopia Rescue Ranch, which shares the 500 acres of the summer camp left him by his parents and is a haven for some 60 homeless dogs, cats, donkeys, pigs and chickens. He supports it with fund-raisers, including one recently with the first lady, Laura Bush, and profits from his new Politically Incorrect brands of salsa and coffee.

His political campaign is a no-lose proposition, he said: "I'll either come out of it with a book, a wife or be governor."



Seven Myths About Faith & Politics


Beliefnet had this interesting article.

Myth 1: Evangelicals all vote Republican.


People often confuse the words "fundamentalist" and "evangelical." Fundamentalists are very conservative and almost entirely Republican because they view the deterioration of traditional morality as the primary public policy crisis. But fundamentalists are a subset of evangelicals, which is a more diverse group.

There are about 8 million to 10 million [moderate evengelicals]. This group went for Bill Clinton 55 percent to 45 percent over Dole in 1996 and 55 percent to 45 percent for W. over Gore in 2000. That's a swing of about a million votes.

Myth 2: The religious right flooded the polls for George W. Bush in 2000.

Turnout among the members of the "religious right" (that's the goofy way pollsters make people self-identify) was 56 percent, says Green, only slightly higher than the national average-and actually lower than that of devout Catholics, mainline Protestants, and Jews.

Myth 3: Bush's religion talk has appealed to his base but has alienated moderate swing voters.

Myth 4: In this era, no candidate would lose votes just based on his or her religion.


The groups with the most political baggage were atheists, evangelicals, and Muslims.

Myth 5: Most religious extremists are in the GOP. --

Statistically speaking, secular people (atheists, agnostics, etc.) are extreme, too, in the sense that they are well outside the public opinion norm. They tend to be Democrats.

Myth 6: Hispanics are conservative.

Professor Green has found a big difference between Hispanic Catholics and Hispanic Protestants, with the latter group more conservative than the former. American Hispanic Catholics, it turns out, aren't that religious. Professors Louis Bolce and Gerald De Maio put voters into three groups according to religious intensity-"traditionalists," "moderates," and "secularists." Only 10 percent of Hispanics turned out to be traditionalists-this fraction in the African-American community was much larger. So, Republicans shouldn't assume that issues like abortion will lure large numbers of Hispanic Catholics.

Myth 7: The key to the Catholic vote is abortion.

John Kennedy beat Nixon among Catholics by 54 percentage points, and Hubert Humphrey beat Nixon by 26 points; but Reagan won them by 21 points, and from that day forward Catholics were "in play." Clinton won them by 20 points in 1996, but Gore did by only 6 points. So, figuring out how to appeal to swing Catholics is important. For Bush, then, it's important that he still tout "compassionate conservatism," not so much to appeal to conservative evangelicals as to appeal to swing Catholics.

So far Republicans have been far more sophisticated at understanding religious voting patterns than Democrats have. I suspect it's because religion gives the willies to a lot of secular liberals, who just happen to be the folks who run political campaigns and cover them for the media.




Gore says Bush peddling fear for sake of politics


Former Vice President Al Gore told college students last night that the Bush administration is ''using fear as a political tool'' unworthy of the presidency.

''For the president of the United States to claim in a television ad that those who disagreed with the decision to go to war with Iraq are against attacking terrorists is a disgrace,'' said Gore, who lost the 2000 election to President Bush.

''It is a cheap and petty political tactic not worthy of the presidency. It is something you would find in a down-and-dirty sleazy campaign for city council,'' Gore added, drawing laughs from the partisan crowd at Middle Tennessee State University.

''I'm concerned (Bush) is turning out to be a divider, not a uniter,'' Gore told MTSU students and those participating in the 90-minute discussion via satellite at about 30 colleges.

During the discussion, which centered on race and democracy, Gore said it is outrageous that some Arab-Americans have been seized and thrown into prison because one person, Bush, has decided they are enemy combatants.



Iraq Had No Link With Al Qaeda


Spinsanity reviews the issue and says conservative pundits are spinning and "ignore questions about the reliability of the evidence contained in the memo, and unfairly generalize what the evidence suggests. In such a heated debate, commentators must note caveats about such information and fairly represent it to the public rather than making sweeping claims that distort the facts."

Christopher Scheer in the LA Times goes further - 'Evidence' for Link Is Administration Ploy

The leak and publication of the Feith memo, which selectively presented a few dozen raw intelligence items plucked from more than a decade of debriefings by national and foreign intelligence agencies, not only shows a certain desperation on the part of the administration to shore up support for the occupation, but it also fits squarely into the cynical pattern of abusing Americans' trust we have seen since 9/11.

"This is made to dazzle the eyes of [those] not terribly educated" about intelligence methods, said Greg Thielmann, a longtime veteran of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence who retired in late 2002.

For those who have watched this pattern, the modus operandi is familiar: Leak to the media or place in speeches intelligence nuggets of questionable value — aluminum tubes, Nigerian uranium, the undocumented Prague meeting — then retreat when pressed. Keep the story alive in the friendly pockets of the media, like William Safire's column or Fox News. When the factoid's cracks start showing, replace it with a new one. Repeat as needed.

Feith, who has been playing the cherry-picking role as an amateur intelligence chief for two years, could have just as easily gone into the mountains of intelligence data assembled every year to paint a picture of the much stronger links between Al Qaeda and the Saudi royal house, for example, or the Pakistani intelligence agency — both from nations that are our allies.

Al Qaeda didn't need Iraq to pull off 9/11 or any of its other savage attacks, and even if all the anonymous statements in Feith's memo panned out, there still would be no evidence Iraq significantly aided the extremists. We are, whatever the neocons might want us to believe, waging the wrong war in the wrong way.



Even the Right Thinks The War Rhetoric Is Stupid


In the immediate aftermath of September 11, hawks and doves alike had a tough time encouraging citizens to take any pedestrian, non-heroic action, without warning that if these actions weren't taken, the terrorists will have won. Over the summer, as we were continuously assured by the administration that the bad guys were desperate and on the run, we could not turn on our television sets without hearing that "the noose is tightening."

Now, the most fashionable pre-fab rationalization to use when the news isn't going as swimmingly as we want it to, is to select a place in Iraq, then a corresponding place in America. If the two places start with the same letter, all the better. Next, state baldly that no matter how lousy things are going, you'd rather fight the terrorists / Baathists / whoever-it-is-we're-fighting in the first location, rather than the second. Lastly, sit back with a self-satisfied smile, as if that settles the matter.

Once you get the hang of the Where You'd Like to Fight The Terrorists game, it's easy to play, and lots of fun. Let's try it. Match the Iraqi cities where you'd rather fight the terrorists on the left to the U.S. cities where you don't want to fight the terrorists on the right. Then, check out the answer key below and see how good a terrorist-fighter you are.

(A) Umm Qasr.......................... (1) Kansas City, MO
(B) Nasiriyah............................ (2) Tifton, GA
(C) Karbala.............................. (3) Umnak, AL
(D) Basra................................. (4) Nacogdoches, TX
(E) Tikrit................................... (5) Beaver Falls, PA


A little practice, and you'll know exactly what to do if you find yourself down-wind on some Sunday morning gasbag show. Whenever the Iraq catastrophe of the day is brought up, just look the moderator in the eye, and tell him that you'd rather fight the terrorists in Salman Pak than in the Salmon River of Idaho. That you'd rather fight the terrorists in Safwan than San Antonio.
For there's two things to keep in mind when declaring where in Iraq you'd rather fight the terrorists.

The first, is that we're not altogether sure we are fighting terrorists, in the al-Qaeda sense of the word. As Newsweek recently reported in a piece entitled "War In the Dark," "what the Americans don't know is who, exactly, they're fighting." In a week in which four suicide-bombing attacks in Baghdad killed more than 30 people, one general told reporters "that the attacks were the work of 'foreign fighters.' Yet just 24 hours earlier his division commander . . . told a news conference that he had not seen 'any infusion of foreign fighters in Baghdad.'" A recent Washington Post story reported that at one Baghdad briefing, the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, in the dark himself as to the identity of the guerillas, said that 90 percent of the fighters the U.S. had killed or captured were Hussein loyalists or Iraqi religious militants--and only 10 percent were freelancers from abroad. Meaning that, according to his calculations, there's a decent chance that if we weren't fighting these particular terrorists in Babylon, we wouldn't be fighting them in Bakersfield.

The second thing to remember, for most of the people declaring where they'd rather fight the terrorists, is that they are not personally doing much of the fighting.

George Packer writes in a painful reminder from Baghdad, "All the soldiers suffer from the stress of heat, long days, lack of sleep, homesickness, the constant threat of attack . . . and the simple fact that there are nowhere near enough of them to do the tasks they've been given."

Not to mention the fact that nearly 200 of them have been killed since major combat operations ended. Fight the terrorists where you will. But it's probably best to avoid diminishing the sacrifice of soldiers, by burying them with respectful silence, rather than with idiotic clichés.


Friday, November 28, 2003

The Softer Side Of Dean Rhetoric


On the campaign trail, Dean's throw-down-the-gauntlet mantra is woven with another message, one strikingly different in tone, that preaches the virtue of community and the evil of corporate behemoths unconcerned, he says, with the collective good.

"Bigger and bigger corporations might mean more efficiency, but there is something about human beings that corporations can't deal with, and that's our soul, our spirituality, who we are," Dean told a breakfast crowd in Sidney, Iowa. "We need to find a way in this country to understand and to help each other understand that there is a tremendous price to be paid for the supposed efficiency of big corporations. The price is losing the sense of who we are as human beings."

Dean's message is tactically sharp, capturing what his campaign believes could be an important factor in the 2004 presidential election: Americans' anxiety about the future -- about jobs and financial security -- born of corporate mistrust and an attendant craving for more control over their lives.

The message dovetails with a larger critique of "special interests" -- a loosely-defined group of rich, powerful, entrenched corporations, institutions, and lobbyists -- that virtually all the Democratic presidential hopefuls have been assailing. In California, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned against special interests in unseating Gray Davis as governor.

Dean, in particular, has used the anti-special interests idea as a battering ram. At a rally in Houston this month, the former governor of Vermont railed against the bankrupt Enron and called for greater regulation of industry.

But in the quieter settings, Dean often launches into the theme of uncontrolled power to highlight social policy issues. He points out the importance of structuring the sale of Canadian drugs in the United States without enriching middlemen, so that Main Street pharmacies can be saved. He talks of the need to do away with "No Child Left Behind" legislation, to give control back to local school boards.

Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager, insists Dean's call for community is not a message dreamed up by political consultants. "He was talking about how we had lost a sense of community in this country," Trippi recalled of a talk Dean gave in Iowa last spring, one he said propelled him to sign on to the campaign. "How it's not good enough for me to want health care for my kid. We as Americans have a responsibility to fight for every kid in this country to have health insurance."

Dean points to a visit of his own to Iowa as the genesis of the theme, recalling the eureka moment at a recent brunch with reporters, "I couldn't believe that here was this solid group of Iowans and they are not ranting and raving . . . about evil corporations. They were just calmly telling me the underpinnings of their lives were collapsing under them.

"There was a fundamental fear for the future. They felt that American corporations weren't American anymore and the people they work for didn't value them. They could move their jobs anywhere in the world for the bottom line. It was a complete revelation to me."




Dean - Tough, Savvy, Transforming


He is, I surmise, a tough and savvy politician of the old school--a shrewd, intuitive pol who develops his own sense of where the people are and where events are likely to take public opinion, then has the guts to act on his perceptions. That approach--leading, it's called--seems dangerously unscientific in this era of high-quality polling and focus groups, the data interpreted for politicians by expensive consultants. The press corps has not had much experience with Democrats of this type, so reporters read Dean's style as emotional, possibly a character flaw. He reminds me of olden days when Democrats were a more contentious bunch, always fighting noisily among themselves and often with creative results.

The explanation that Washington candidates voted for the war on principle or were misled by Bush doesn't help them. Their blindness to the potential consequences (now unfolding) is another reason to be for Dean. He, meanwhile, speaks plainly to the error of US imperialism. "America is not Rome. We do not dream of empire. We dream of liberty for all."

The man also stands his ground in a fight. When someone jabs him, he jabs back. Pundits describe this quality as dangerous, and no doubt it gets him into trouble occasionally, but what a refreshing departure from the rope-a-dope calculations of the Clinton era. This trait is what I like about him most. In my experience, it's more revealing than a politician's positions on issues. With issues, Dean is pretty much what he says: a middle-of-the-road moderate, neither left nor right, though middle in Vermont is liberal ground.

Dean is opening the possibility of transforming politics--shaking up the tired, timid old order, inviting plain-wrapper citizens back into an active role--and that's why so many people, myself included, are for him. Full disclosure: I am among the throngs who have been invited to contribute "forward-looking ideas" to his campaign (I was flattered to be asked and pleased to oblige, with no naïve expectations).

Dean, I suspect, learned in the up-close-and-personal politics of Vermont that you don't win elections by keeping the people at a safe distance. You can't do it in that state, even if you try.

Washington's smugness was shattered in the past few weeks as Dean picked up pathbreaking endorsements from Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. and SEIU and AFSCME, the two largest unions and heads-up, aggressive organizations. Dean continues to up the ante for his rivals--calling for reregulation of key industries and confronting the concentrated power of corporations and wealth. These are solid liberal ideas others are afraid to express so directly. The guy is a better politician than the insiders imagined, indeed better attuned to this season than they are.



World Papers React To Bush PR Stunt


"Electoral raid on Baghdad" read the caustic headline in the left-wing Paris daily Liberation which summed up European newspaper editorial reaction to President George W Bush's Thanksgiving Day visit to US troops in Iraq.

As the Arabic media saw the secrecy of Bush's visit as a sign of weakness amid spiraling violence in Iraq, newspapers in Israel said the stunt was bound to help the US president's ratings in opinion polls that had been falling alarmingly.



Iraqis Upset Over Bush Photo-Op Trip


President Bush's surprise visit to Iraq was the talk of Baghdad's teahouses, kebab shops and mosques Friday, with many Iraqis asking why he didn't take advantage of his trip to see firsthand how his rule has treated them.

Many complained that Bush met with few Iraqis during his secret, two-hour stay Thursday evening and never left the grounds of a heavily fortified U.S. base. Several called the trip an electoral stunt, and took offense that he would use their country as his stage.



Tapping into Voter Anger


Bush's biggest threat is the anger American's feel over government and the direction of the country.

Schwarzenegger's campaign song was "We're Not Gonna Take It;" Clinton's was "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow." Democrats need to craft a message that includes both themes in order to tap into one of the most powerful forces in American politics.



The Religious Divide In The U.S.


Voters who frequently attend religious services tilt 63-37 percent to Bush and those who never attend lean 62-38 percent toward Democrats.

President Bush is a churchgoing Christian who often mixes theology with public policies ranging from the war on terrorism to a ban on a specific type of late-term abortion. (el - Sorry, he doesn't often attend church. He is surrounded by a chruch-going staff but he himself goes only several times a year)

In contrast, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, said recently that he prayed privately, but quit being an Episcopalian in a dispute with his parish over a bike path, recently linked God with guns and gays in a list of issues that shouldn't influence voting and doesn't regularly attend church. Nor do most of his chief rivals.

Lieberman, who does speak the language of faith and religion, said his party should set aside its aversion to religion and embrace it as a message harmonious with its core principles. But he insisted that any such stance must be born of principle, not politics.

"I didn't become religious because of a focus group," he said. "I have a sense of mission. ... Republicans act as if they have a monopoly on values or faith-based values. They don't."



Conservative Hatred of Liberal Anger


Orcinus had a long essay on what is happening on wingnut blogs.

His more recent entry is about his political evolution and how conservatism has morphed from old-fashioned solid values to rampant corporatism with increasingly fascist overtones. He has many conservative friends and often voted for moderate Republicans. No more, I believe he thinks the GOP has shown it cannot be trusted with power.

"I no longer much trust in the moral strength of my conservative friends. Whereas once I believed that the basic decency of average, mainstream conservatives was more than an adequate bulwark against the possibility of right-wing fascism from ever manifesting itself, I have been forced to conclude that, when swept along by the combination of a movement and the fearmongering of public officials, they are as susceptible to doing the wrong thing as their ancestors were in 1942, when they shipped off 110,000 Japanese Americans to concentration camps."



Giving the People Hooters


The Hamster noticed Sen. McCain pointing out the Energy Pork Bill is actually subsidising opening a Hooters restaurant in Louisiana.

"One of my favorite green bond proposals [in the energy bill] is a $150 million riverfront area in Shreveport, LA. This Riverwalk has about 50 stores, a movie theater and a bowling alley. One of the new tenants in this Louisiana Riverwalk is a Hooters restaurant. Yes, my friends. Here we have an energy bill subsidizing both hooters and polluters."

The Hamster also saw that Leno is repeating the episode with Triumph the Insult Comic Dog and John Kerry on Friday, FYI. - This was wrong but I was repeating it from the Hamster.



What Was I Thankful For?


That I wasn't as hated as Bush or suffering his karmic burden. Morford has this and many more reasons to be thankful.

11) Molly Ivins. Gore Vidal. Michiko Kakutani. David Foster Wallace. Don DeLillo. Maureen Dowd. Caroline Myss. W.G. Sebald. Tom Robbins. Starhawk. William Rivers Pitt. Rob Brezny. David Attenborough. Dave Eggers. Joseph Campbell. Lewis Lapham. Haruki Murakami. Katha Pollitt. Et al. Thank you.

14) Here is where you make you own list. Here is where you set aside the cynicism and the sighing and the bitterness, just for a moment, and get quiet, look around, look inside, check the karmic inventory and offer up heaping pies of gratefulness for what you find.

Sure it seems clichéd. Of course you don't need some holiday to be deeply thankful for the radiance in your life. But, hey, an opportunity is an opportunity. Just remember, big meaty drumsticks of general gratitude are absolutely fine. But the divine, personal gravy is where the real flavor is.



Conservatives Blasting Bush and Congress For Being Spendthrifts


The Congressional Budget Office reported that nondefense spending rose 7 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, nearly double the 4 percent discretionary spending caps that President Bush insisted Congress honor.

The $31 billion energy bill also has stalled, largely because many in Congress object to the price tag. The president is itching to get the bill to his desk even though it is four times more expensive than what he had proposed.

Even radio host Rush Limbaugh, an unwavering booster of the president and his policies, told listeners Tuesday that after passing the Medicare bill Republicans no longer can contend they are the party of smaller government.



The Continuing Anti-Clinton Propaganda


The two great myths that have settled across the nation, beyond the Hussein-9/11 connection, are that Clinton did not do enough during his tenure to stop the spread of radical terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, and that the attacks themselves could not have been anticipated or stopped.

Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, "threat meetings" were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it "The enemy of our generation."

In America, few people heard anything about this. Clinton's dire public warnings about the threat posed by terrorism, and the massive non-secret actions taken to thwart it, went completely unreported by the media, which was far more concerned with stained dresses and baseless Drudge Report rumors. When the administration did act militarily against bin Laden and his terrorist network, the actions were dismissed by partisans within the media and Congress as scandalous "wag the dog" tactics.

Just before departing office, Clinton managed to make a deal with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to have some twenty nations close tax havens used by al Qaeda. His term ended before the deal was sealed, and the incoming Bush administration acted immediately to destroy the agreement.

This laundry list of partisan catastrophes goes on and on. Far from being inept on the matter of terrorism, Clinton was profoundly activist in his attempts to address terrorism. Much of his work was foiled by right-wing Congressional conservatives who, simply, refused to accept the fact that he was President.

Had the Bush administration not continued this pattern of gross partisan ineptitude and heeded the blitz of domestic and international warnings, instead of trooping off to Texas for a month-long vacation, had Bush's National Security Advisor done one hour's worth of her homework, we probably would not be in the grotesque global mess that currently envelops us. Never forget that many of the activists who pushed throughout the 1990s for the annihilation of all things Clinton are now foursquare in charge of the country today.




Seniors deserve better deal


The $400 billion prescription drug plan for Medicare is so flawed that Congress opted out of the plan.

U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, said the law reminded him of the medieval medical practice of leeching. “Every special interest in Washington is attaching itself to this legislation and sucking Medicare dry,” Sen. McCain said in a statement before the bill passed the Senate Tuesday. “We do not need leeching. What we need is reform.”

The big losers are taxpayers. All of the money used to pay for the prescription drug benefit will be borrowed. We’re talking $400 billion over the next decade — for starters. While grandpa might get a break on his Zocor, his grandchildren, and their grandchildren, are going to be paying for it.



The Coming Job Boom


Demographics will be shaping the economy in unexpected ways the next twenty years. Business 2.0 had the best article - not available online without a subscription. But Google doesn't let me down. Time has a light look:

Though the average retirement age is creeping up--and a growing share of Americans, by choice or necessity, are planning to work at least part time well past 65--demographers say there still will not be enough qualified members of the next generation to pick up the slack. So with 76 million baby boomers heading toward retirement over the next three decades and only 46 million Gen Xers waiting in the wings, corporate America is facing a potentially mammoth talent crunch. Certainly, labor-saving technology and immigration may help fill the breach. Still, by 2010 there may be a shortage of 4 million to 6 million workers.

Motley Fool Covers the Business 2.0 story here: By 2010, analysts in the article estimate a 5.3 million skilled-employee labor "gap," and the shortfall is estimated to balloon to 21 million by 2020.

el - Of course American business has the answer - outsourcing. My brother at Kinko's says they are now going to eliminate over a thousand position and sent computer graphics to India.

Also remember, if this link lasts: Last time there was a labor shortage as deep as the one that looms today, the peasants revolted.



Forty years of Lies - Oswald and the Kennedy Assassination


The official story of the assassination remains pretty much unchanged from just a few days after events of forty years ago: one man with an almost broken-down rifle, no expertise, no resources, and no motive killed the President, and he was himself killed by a man with the darkest background simply out of sympathy for the President's wife. Those with no vested interest and critical faculties intact can never accept such a fable explaining the brutal work of a well-planned conspiracy.

If you can write false history of an event so large as a Presidential assassination, what truly are the limits?

el - Part of how I spent Thanksgiving evening was talking with my brother about the showing on the History Channel of the six hours of The Men Who Killed Kennedy. I reached the conclusion before 1974 that Oswald could not have killed Kennedy based on a Dan Rather hosted television investigation that was supposed to prove he had. The best evidence they could come up with to even make it possible for Oswald to kill the president was that an expert rifleman after much practice was able to use a similar rifle but with a corrected sights to place 3 bullets in moving targets one meter square targetat that distance, ignoring tree leaves, in the amount of time Oswald had. It was a coverup. Since then there is much more evidence that there was an evil conspiracy. I had recorded the History Channel special for him and Amy but the decision to visit him was at the last minute and the tape wasn't available.

You should be able to order the best of the episodes I saw here here - Final Chapter - but comments on both Amazon and other forums says that sales have suddenly been suppressed due to "legal issues." This could relate to Oswald's New Orleans mistress, the mysterious Dallas , or the evidence linking LBJ to the assassination. Other episodes, here or from Amazon here are available.

You might try Blood, Money and Power: How LBJ Killed JFK for a very recent popular book on this subject.



Christmas Gift Idea


The clitoral stimulator designed by Liz Paul from Ilkley, Yorkshire, offers hope to the estimated five million women in Britain who have trouble reaching orgasm.

The device, called Vielle, is a small plastic stimulator with eight nodules which fits over the finger - picture, news article.

Speaking at the award ceremony in Cafi Royal central London, Mrs Paul said clinical tests had proved the device could halve the time it takes for a woman to climax and intensify the orgasm.

3 for $19.95 includes shipping.



Late-Night Political Jokes and Funny Quotes


Daniel Kurtzman's Late-Night Political Jokes and Funny Quotes

"Today President Bush pardoned the White House turkey. Of course the turkey had to donate $100,000 to his reelection campaign first." —David Letterman

"The White House announced that this year the president is going to pardon two turkeys this Thanksgiving. He didn't issue that many pardons when he was governor of Texas!" —Jay Leno

"Let's say they do use suicide donkeys, now would that be 'weapons of ass destruction'?" —Jay Leno

"Wait, is he quoting Hamlet? I'll tell you, for a guy who once equated gayness with bestiality, he's sure awfully familiar with the theater." —Jon Stewart, on Sen. Rick Santorum's remarking, "Methinks thou dost protest too much" during the 30-hour Senate filibuster

"Arnold Schwarzenegger has announced he will refuse his $175,000 salary and will work for free. I believe he will be worth every penny." —Craig Kilborn

The Boston Globe on the late night appearances by candidates:

"Letterman is the Tim Russert of the talk shows. He's the actual test," one Democratic insider says. "On Leno, you can go on and do your bit. Whereas on Letterman, he isn't afraid to ask you legitimately tough questions. He'll do his part to trip you up."

Letterman has done his best to hone that reputation in this new, semiserious phase of his career. His somber post-Sept. 11 interviews made him a sort of national catharsis machine. And his 2000 interview with Republican nominee George W. Bush -- in which he grilled the candidate on the death penalty and the air quality in Texas -- gave him a measure of infamy in the political world.

The Bush interview was "deadly," the equivalent of a harsh grilling on a Sunday news show, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. "It is a very, very effective piece of journalism."

A Leno appearance, by contrast, is seen as a chance for shtick -- a place where John F. Kerry sharpened his man-of-the-people chops by riding a motorcycle onstage on Nov. 11. A Kerry adviser says that the Harley spin was the Leno writers' idea and that the show wanted Kerry on for Veterans Day, all good for his campaign message.

But the visit proved that Leno can be devastating, too. Because Kerry, it turned out, was the second-billed guest, following a cigar-chomping, trash-talking puppet named Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. And the dog, voiced by comedian Robert Smigel, delivered a sharper critique of Kerry than any rival is likely to muster. His humor tends to center on dog waste, and this time he compared it to the Kerry campaign's momentum.

In May, Senator Joe Lieberman, who had just announced his presidential bid, came on the air to read a Top Ten list. There were complex negotiations over the wording, a Lieberman aide said, but the results were suitably goofy: Number one was "Look at me. Do you honestly think there'll be a sex scandal?"

And Clark, the first candidate this year to be a full-fledged Letterman guest, went on after the "Top Ten Perks of Being a Playboy Playmate" (number one: "I bought a house with the money I saved on pants") and the guy who hoped to break a world record by balancing beer glasses on his chin.


Wednesday, November 26, 2003


Medicare Revolts and AARP


From the New York Times -

The New AARP and Novelli

Some Experts Forsee Revolt by Elderly Over Drug Benefits


"There's a real chance of a replay of 1988," said Paul Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change. "It's a real big risk that backers of this legislation are taking."

The Washington Post has the Most Comprehensive Look At the Details

Average recipient would pay $1,745 for drugs costing $3,245 (estimated drug costs in 2006 for average person on Medicare.)

Article does not discuss non-drug costs parts of the bill. Like the Medicare Part B going up for many people.



The Blogging of the President - 2004


Professional news and blog, which right now kicks you back to news so maybe it isn't so professional.



GOP Breaks Into Dem Computers, Leaks Memos, No Media Attention


CalPundit - BURIED....I noted in passing this morning while reading the LA Times that the story about the theft of Democratic computer files was limited to a Reuters dispatch on page 14. The Washington Post ran a few paragraphs on page 23. And the New York Times also limited itself to wire service copy.

Which lead to this comment -- Kevin, reading all the blogs covering this story, I find myself wondering if we haven't entered a new model for a free democracy. Instead of a free press watching over government and business, we now have free bloggers watching over government, business and the news-entertainment conglomerate. - ch2

It has been noted this is against federal law and they know who did it.

From Atrios ...18 USC 1030(a)(2) fits this perfectly:

"Whoever . . . intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains . . . information from any department or agency of the United States" commits a crime.

"Department or Agency of the United States" is defined in the statute as including "the legislative . . . branch of government."

The penalty for violating 1030(a)(2) can be five years if "the offense was committed in furtherance of any . . . tortious act in violation of the Constitution or law of the United States or of any State."



First Bush Commercial Had To Be Dubbed


And the dubbing might violate campaign laws.

When President Bush laid out the potential threat that unconventional weapons posed in Saddam Hussein's hands last year in his State of the Union address last year, he became tongue-tied at an inopportune moment.

The line read, "It would take one vial, one canister, one crate, slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known." But Mr. Bush stumbled between the words "one" and "vial." And when at the word vial, he pronounced the "v" as if it were a "w."

Yet in a new Republican commercial that borrows excerpts from that speech, Mr. Bush delivers that line as smoothly as any other in the address, without a pause between "one" and "vial," and the v in "vial" sounds strong and sure.

The difference between the speech and excerpt was noticed by strategists for former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont. They saw it as they put together their own advertisement attacking the spot, which presents the Democratic candidates as undermining the fight against terrorism. Word trickled back to Democratic officials, who retrieved the tape and confirmed that there was, indeed, a difference.

The Democrats asked whether the Republican National Committee had gone to the White House with sound equipment to have Mr. Bush recite the line anew for what was the first Republican commercial of the campaign season here. That might have meant that the party was not being truthful when it said it had not coordinated with Mr. Bush when it made the advertisement, a possible violation of law.



The Dean Online Organizing School


If you can't go to Dallas or the 12 other cities across the country for the live class.

The goal of this school is to help as many people as possible with the nuts and bolts of grassroots campaigning. So take a few minutes to survey it, or set aside an hour and go through every course.

For some of you, this information is all new. For others, you may already know it well. Over the coming months we will be adding and changing these courses, so keep coming back and have fun!

Course 1: Reaching Out in Your Community
Figure out who to talk to about the Dean campaign

Course 2: How to Build your Personal Precinct
How to approach your friends and neighbors about Governor Dean

Course 3: Legal Guidelines for Volunteers
What you've got to know when you start telling your friends about Dean

Course 4: Understanding PACs
What you should know before thinking about forming a PAC.

Course 5: GOTV Basics
Understanding the basics of Getting Out The Vote

Course 6: GOTV: Get to know your area
Get to know your area to most effectively get out the vote

Course 7: Outreach Events
Organize supporters effectively to pound the pavement for Governor Dean

Course 8: Speaking up for Dean
Talking points for the front lines: responding to questions and challenges



The Insider -- Pied Piper of the Pissed Off


The Houston Press, Houston's metropolitan independent weekly, has an article on Dean and the Dean rally. The Houston Chronicle, in fact all of Houston media, buried or ignored the rally. There was an excuse. Houston was recovering from flooding and tornadoes the night before. As if that doesn't happen at least twice a year. Well, the weather did disrupt most of the leadup PR events and transportation to the rally planned by the Dean volunteers.


Tuesday, November 25, 2003

An Over-The-Counter Morning-After Pill For The U.S.?


Federal health officials are debating if it’s time to put emergency contraception — also called the morning-after pill — on pharmacy shelves right next to the aspirin, available without a prescription.

Contraception advocates are pushing hard for no restrictions. They say easy over-the-counter access could spur wider use of emergency contraception, in turn preventing up to 1.7 million unplanned pregnancies each year and hundreds of thousands of abortions.

“Emergency contraception is extremely safe. It needs to be on the shelf beside aspirin,” says Dr. Vanessa Cullins of Planned Parenthood.



Founding Fathers Confront and Confound Religious Right


An Easter Lemming digest of another history lesson from Thom Hartmann. The religious right is again spreading falsehoods on the history of our country. The founding father's wanted a clear separation between political power and religion. All religions and even no religion was to be equally respected but none recognized as superior or funded in any way.

This article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog, or web media so long as this credit is attached and the title is unchanged.

The Founders Confront Judge Moore

The Founders clearly divided power into four categories: military, religious, wealth/corporate, and political. The interaction of these types of power produced the three historic types of tyranny - warlord kings; theocratic popes; and wealthy feudal lords or monopolistic corporations like the East India Company.

Every past tyrannical government in the history of civilization, our Founders realized, had oppressed its citizens because it had combined political power with one or more of the other three categories. This, they believed, was the fatal flaw of past forms of governance, and they were determined to isolate political power from each and all of the other three to prevent America from repeating the mistakes of previous nations.

Thus, political power would only be held by "We the People," and never again shared with military, corporate, or religious agencies.

el - I am a seperationofpowersacrat.

Ben Franklin fled Boston when he was a teenager in part to escape the oppressive environment created by politically powerful preachers, and for the rest of his life was openly hostile to the idea of secular political power being wielded by those who also hold religious power. Although he was enthralled by the "mystery" of the spiritual experience, Franklin had little use for the organized religions of the day. In his autobiographical "Toward The Mystery," he wrote, "I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies."

Franklin - like most of the more well-known Founders - was a Deist, a philosophy made popular by early Unitarians who held that the Creator made the universe long ago and has since chosen not to interfere in any way, that neither Jesus nor anybody else was divine (or, alternatively, that we are all divine and shall all do as Jesus did and said we would), and that there is only one God and not three.

Another founding Deist who resisted giving political power to those with religious power was George Washington.

President George Washington supervised the language of a treaty with African Muslims that explicitly stated that the United States was a secular nation.

The Treaty With Tripoli, worked out under Washington's guidance and then signed into law by John Adams in 1797, reads: "As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

On February 21, 1811, President James Madison vetoed a bill passed by Congress that authorized government payments to a church in Washington, DC to help the poor. Faith-based initiatives were a clear violation, in Madison's mind, of the doctrine of separation of church and state, and could lead to a dangerous transfer of political power to religious leaders.

In Madison's mind, caring for the poor was a public and civic duty - a function of government - and must not be allowed to become a hole through which churches could reach and seize political power or the taxpayer's purse.

Thomas Jefferson was perhaps the most outspoken of the Founders who saw religious leaders seizing political power as a naked threat to American democracy. One of his most well known quotes is carved into the stone of the awe-inspiring Jefferson Memorial in Washington, DC: "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny imposed upon the mind of man."

el - He made this quote in a letter in opposition to preachers hoping to establish some recognized American Christian religion.

In later years, Jefferson would put together what is now called "The Jefferson Bible," in which he deleted all the miracles from the New Testament and presented Jesus to readers as an inspired philosopher. His Jefferson Bible is still in print, and well received, if amazon.com sales and readers' comments are any indication.

But it wasn't just religious tolerance that was the issue for Jefferson - it was preventing any one religion from claiming it was uniquely the American religion, and then using that claim to grasp at political power. Thus, secular government must allow even pagans and pantheists to coexist, while at the same time rigorously preventing any of them from gaining power over it. In his "Notes On Virginia," Jefferson laid it out clearly: "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

Because our system of laws was founded on the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments, the religious leaders said, they and their Commandments should play a large and powerful role in government and be able to both take from the public purse and influence the courts and laws.

This assertion - that British common law and American law derived from the Ten Commandments - was particularly infuriating to the Founders.

First, there's the simple fact that there isn't that much overlap. Our laws don't specify a single god who must be worshipped, ban graven images, require us to take a day off work every week, mandate that we "honor" our parents, make it illegal for men to "covet" other men's wives or sleep with unmarried women, or make it illegal to lie (in fact, corporations have recently asserted the explicit "right to lie" under the First Amendment). The only things in common between the Commandments and most state or federal laws are prohibitions on killing and stealing, which most people figure have always been pretty obvious.

In a January 24, 1814 letter to John Adams, Jefferson went through a detailed lawyer's brief to show that the entire idea that the laws of both England and the United States came from Judaism, Christianity, or the Ten Commandments rests on a single man's mistranslation in 1658, often repeated, and totally false.

In a modern revival of religious leaders seeking political power, emails fly around the internet saying that Founders like Madison claimed the United States was founded on either Christianity or the Ten Commandments. Many originate in the writings of a right-wing group whose president helped prepare the History and Social Studies standards for Texas and California schoolchildren, and are so badly taken out of context that they can only be called deliberate attempts to fool people. Others are simple fabrications, quotes created from nothing.

The United States and our laws were not founded on the Bible, or even on biblical principles. Moral precepts against killing or stealing are found not only in the Bible, but exist among every tribe on earth, some of whose cultures and languages date back over 60,000 years. They're part of the social code of animals ranging from prairie dogs to gorillas. They're rooted in the biological imperative of survival.



Krugman - The Uncivil War


The campaign against "political hate speech" originates with the Republican National Committee. But last week the committee unveiled its first ad for the 2004 campaign, and it's as hateful as they come. "Some are now attacking the president for attacking the terrorists," it declares.

Again, there's that weasel word "some." No doubt someone doesn't believe that we should attack terrorists. But the serious criticism of the president, as the committee knows very well, is the reverse: that after an initial victory in Afghanistan he shifted his attention — and crucial resources — from fighting terrorism to other projects.

All this fuss about civility, then, is an attempt to bully critics into unilaterally disarming — into being demure and respectful of the president, even while his campaign chairman declares that the 2004 election will be a choice "between victory in Iraq and insecurity in America."

And even aside from the double standard, how important is civility? I'm all for good manners, but this isn't a dinner party. The opposing sides in our national debate are far apart on fundamental issues, from fiscal and environmental policies to national security and civil liberties. It's the duty of pundits and politicians to make those differences clear, not to play them down for fear that someone will be offended.



Galbraith - JFK Was Getting Out Of Vietnam, There Was A Conspiracy in Dallas


Salon - I believe the evidence now available shows that Kennedy had decided, in early October of 1963, to begin withdrawing 17,000 U.S. military advisers then in Vietnam. One thousand were to leave by the end of 1963; the withdrawal was scheduled to be completed by the end of 1965. After that, only a military assistance contingent would have remained. The withdrawal planning was carried out under cover of an official optimism about the war, with a view toward increasing the effort and training the South Vietnamese to win by themselves. But Kennedy and McNamara did not share this optimism. They were therefore prepared to press the withdrawal even when the assessments turned bad, as they started to do in the early fall of 1963. This was a decision to withdraw without victory if necessary, indeed without negotiations or conditions.

Did the U.S. Military Plan a Nuclear First Strike for 1963? The answer turns out to be: Yes, it did.

Though Johnson told Russell that a war could cost "40 million American lives in an hour," in late 1963 the Soviet Union did not have a nuclear force that could have destroyed more than a few major cities in the United States (and possibly not even that much). But we did possess, by that time, an overwhelming first-strike power. There were those who wanted to use it.

Johnson knew this. His task, overriding all others, was to prevent even an event so grave as the murder of the president from becoming the pretext for a preemptive nuclear war. J.Edgar Hoover had told Johnson, who told Russell, that an effort was underway to blame Castro and Khrushchev – an effort that involved falsified evidence linking Oswald’s trip to Mexico City in September, 1963 to the KGB. Johnson says of Khrushchev, truthfully: "He didn't have a damn thing to do with it." The stated task of the Warren Commission was to save the world from a punitive nuclear war, by exculpating the innocent. It did as much, by inculpating a dead man.

What does this prove? So far as what actually happened in Dallas, only one thing long obvious to many others on many grounds: that the Warren Commission report cannot be trusted. Whatever the underlying history, the commission acted under orders, for reasons of state.

Did Lyndon Johnson participate in a plot to kill Kennedy? Though this view is getting play on cable television this week, I don't believe he did. Was Castro or Khrushchev involved? Of course not. Did Lee Harvey Oswald fire three shots, from an old rifle, along a difficult line of sight, striking Kennedy at least twice and Texas Governor John Connally at least once, as well as a bystander some distance away? No serious person can believe that, either.



THE NIGHT TIME IS THE RIGHT TIME


From Center for American Progress - The GOP gets it's way in votes late Friday nights where the stories get buried in low circulation Saturday newspapers.

On Friday, March 21 at 2:54 AM , the House voted to cut veterans benefits by 3 votes. On Friday, April 11 at 2:39 AM , the House voted to slash education and health care funding by 5 votes. On Friday, May 23 at 1:56 AM , the House passed a tax cut for millionaires by 31 votes. On Friday, June 27 at 2:33 AM , the House passed a Medicare privatization bill by 1 vote. At 12:57 AM on Friday, July 25, the House passed a controversial Head Start bill by one vote.




Columnist has Enough - The anti-GOP diatribe


Cory Farley - Things you have to believe to be a Republican today

o Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you’re a conservative radio host. Then it’s an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

o The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.

o Government should relax regulation of Big Business and Big Money but crack down on individuals who use marijuana to relieve the pain of illness.

o “Standing Tall for America” means firing your workers and moving their jobs to India.

o A woman can’t be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

o Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

o The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans’ benefits and combat pay.

o Group sex and drug use are degenerate sins unless you someday run for governor of California as a Republican.

o If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won’t have sex.

o A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.

o HMOs and insurance companies have the interest of the public at heart.

o Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

o Global warming and tobacco’s link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

o Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush’s daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a “we can’t find Bin Laden” diversion.

o A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

o Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

o The public has a right to know about Hillary’s cattle trades, but George Bush’s driving record is none of our business.

o What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the ’80s is irrelevant.

o Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.





Medicare Loss Proves GOP Ruthless Extremists and Hill Dems Hapless


Senate Approves Medicare Overhaul

el - The one good thing about the Medicare bill is that it establishs that drugs should be covered. How they are covered and how it is paid for are very bad things in this bill.

E. J. Dionne Jr has it right.

The battle over a Medicare prescription drug benefit proves that Republicans are ruthless and determined and that Democrats are divided and hapless. Republicans have changed the rules in Washington, but some Democrats still pretend to be living in the good old days.

"It's a combination of political stupidity and substantive gutlessness," said one influential Democratic congressional aide.

What Democrats failed to understand, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in an interview yesterday morning, is that Republicans "are on an ideological march. They have no intention of playing fair. They want what they want when they want it." And they get it.

If anyone doubted the rules had changed, House Republican leaders ended all illusions in the early hours of Saturday morning by holding open a 15-minute roll call vote for an unprecedented two hours and 51 minutes. At the end of the normal time for voting, Republican leaders faced defeat on the drug bill by a two-vote margin. Eventually, two Republicans were hammered into switching their votes.

"I don't mean to be alarmist, but this is the end of parliamentary democracy as we have known it," said Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts. The new system amounted to "plebiscitary democracy" in which leaders of the House have imposed such a strong sense of party discipline that they will ultimately pass whatever legislation they bring to the floor. "The Republican Party in the House is the most ideologically cohesive and disciplined party in the democratic world," Frank said. In response, House Democrats were more united in opposition to the bill than Democratic senators, who are operating as if the older system of give-and-take were still in force.

Whatever discontent liberals expressed toward Kennedy [for initially trying to work with the GOP this summer] was mild compared with their irritation toward Sens. John Breaux of Louisiana and Max Baucus of Montana.

Breaux and Baucus were the only two Democrats allowed to negotiate the Medicare bill with the Republicans, House Democrats having been totally excluded. Would Republicans have put up with such an arrangement?

el - This is another demonstration of why Democrats need a fighter like Dean and not one from Washington like Gephardt or Kerry.



Weird News


Getting Pregnant on TV. Swedish Big Brother contestant is pg from intimate encounters shown on TV.

Doctors confirm fakir had no food or water for ten days. He claims a fast of decades.

'You Shouldn't Have' Executives Reveal the Most Unusual Business Gifts They've Received

-- "A gold tooth."
-- "A pick axe."
-- "A ketchup bottle."
-- "A container of fake worms."
-- "A dancing statue of Hank Williams Jr."
-- "A pair of shoes with a hole in the bottom."
-- "One shoe."
-- "A hat with a fish sticking out of it."
-- "A baseball helmet with holders for beer cans on top."


Chaplain Charged With Assisting Terrorists Recharged - with adultery and having pornographic material.

Free to return to work as long as he avoids terrorists. So instead of an Islamic extremist he is a Western philandering pornmeister?







Monday, November 24, 2003

The Rabbi and the First Known Jewish Centerfold


Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, author of 'Kosher Sex,' has a combative conversation with Playboy's 2001 Miss November, Lindsey Vuolo.

SB: How does your rabbi feel about the pictures in the centerfold?

LV: That's why I want to go see him when I come home for Thanksgiving, because I haven't spoken to him. I was home for Yom Kippur services, but we have such a large congregation that there was really no time to speak with him after services. I did talk to some of the ladies in my congregation. The rabbi was the one to tell them [about me being Playmate] because they came to me when I was outside. I was getting a drink of water. And they said to me, you know, the rabbi told us that you were in Playboy. Congratulations. I was, like, really nervous. I'm going, what does he think? Does he hate me? Is he mad at me? What are his views on it? And they were just, "Oh, he seemed really happy when he told all of us." So when I go home, I plan on speaking with him and asking him, because I do want to know what he thinks.

The Rabbi continues the hostile interview in Part 2

Another rabbi's opinion.

Q: So this is a true watershed for American Judaism?

Absolutely. It forces us to put down all the weird self-loathing about Jewish bodies and all the Woody Allen-Phillip Roth routine about the fact that the Jewish mind of Jewish men, of course, are superior...but it's hot gentile bodies that we want.

And, of course, part of what's important about getting past that is...is it's actually not just bad for what it says about what Jews feel about ourselves; it's also implicit there that Gentile women are essentially objects to be used.

That's the whole thing. I don't know whether you've ever heard this before, but growing up, like in Jewish camps and Jewish youth groups, it was always kind of a joke that "shiksas" were for practice. And in all honesty, I don't want to be part of a community that can think that way. And there is a direct line between saying, "Jewish girls shouldn't be in Playboy" -- subtext: it's okay for Gentile girls -- and raising a whole generation of Jewish men who think shiksas are for practice.

So in that way, yeah, I think it's a real step forward. When you can go to Yad Vashem [,the Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem,] and see [photos of] naked Jewish women who really were thought of as vermin and then you can open up Playboy and see a beautiful Jewish body that's actually being fantasized over by millions of men. I absolutely understand this is not the highest level to reach, but it is the next level in our development.

Lindsey Voulo Playboy picture. And Here. Or Google Image Search.

Playboy


USAJewish online tabloid (photo) and Forward - Playboy Playmaydl of the Month.

Sexy at Last - The pendulum has swung - Jewish girls are sexy.

This story had gotten lost in the post 9/11 coverage. I decided to play it up because Jewish women have always been sexy. So are Arab women. So are agnostic liberal women. So are...



Not all New Democrats and DLC are anti-Dean


Donkey Rising - If Democrats Don’t Watch Out, They Might Start Agreeing with Each Other

Ruy also had Moderates Not Moderate On Bush


Moderate voters constituted 50 percent of the voters in the 2000 election.

Start with the classic right direction/wrong track question: the public thinks, by 50 percent to 40 percent, that we’re on the wrong track. Pretty negative in and of itself, but moderates think we’re on the wrong track by double the margin: 55 percent to 36 percent.

Move on to the question of whether Bush “understands the problems of people like you”. The public thinks he doesn’t by 51 percent to 42 percent—bad enough, but moderates are a stinging 58 percent to 34 percent against Bush on the question. Ouch

And how about these figures: by 59 percent to 31 percent the public now says the outcome of the Iraq war has not been worth the cost in US military lives. And moderates agree with this sentiment by an amazing 73 percent to 17 percent, a 56 point margin. Similarly, by 57 percent to 35 percent the public believes the outcome of the Iraq war hasn’t been worth the financial costs to the US; moderates agree by a 69 percent to 25 percent margin.

el - Wow, if that keeps up I may have to rename this moderate news.



Conservative Revolution? No -- just dazzlingly effective PR


The conservative declaration of victory is itself part of a large, complex process that gives the impression of a cultural revolution without actually effecting one. It is the phenomenon of a phenomenon — a great postmodernist gambit in which the buzz about something overwhelms the thing itself. It works, because what rivets and energizes the media doesn't have to be a real, measurable change in the cultural landscape, but the idea of a new phenomenon on that landscape. The media are in the phenomenon business, and if they turn the phenomenon into a revolution, so much the better.

One can see this postmodernist process at work nearly everywhere in the culture. Take "The Osbournes." Most everyone in America today knows who the Osbournes are, has read about them, heard about them or seen them on commercials or hosting award shows. But when you examine the ratings of their MTV television series that generated all the notoriety, you discover something remarkable. Even before its recent dip, almost no one watched the show. In a nation of roughly 280 million people, "The Osbournes" gets an audience of just about 3 million viewers, or slightly above 1% of the populace.

Frankly, one can say the same thing about almost everything in America today, save for films and television programs that do appeal to a sizable audience. Though this process is little remarked upon, it has profound implications for the culture, suggesting a psychological shift at least as important as the supposed one after 9/11: that watching entertainment now seems less gratifying than knowing about it.

el - The Conservative PR machine is much better at creating discussions about nothing or great victories out of small numbers.

Fox News is unquestionably a cable success story, but, excluding major news stories, at best it attracts an audience of 2 million — not even in the same league as the least-watched broadcast news report and a blip on the larger demographic screen.




Opinions on Chalabi


Sally Quinn is not as bad as Judith Miller, who seems to be giving him hummers between typing

In his long history in dealing with the U.S. government, Chalabi has had a string of successes. He was ruthlessly single-minded about urging the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

So far he's gotten everything he's wanted. He got money from the CIA. When it dumped him, he got money from the State Department. He urged Congress to pass the Iraq Liberation Act, a policy initiative to overthrow Hussein, and it did. After the invasion, he encouraged the formation of a governing council with sovereign power. He got a seat on the council, albeit with less power than he sought, and became one of the nine rotating presidents. He requested sovereignty sooner rather than later, and that's exactly what Bremer has just offered. Many think that he is the person most likely to be elected president under the new plan.

Yet there is a great well of animosity and suspicion toward Chalabi emanating from some quarters of the U.S. government -- primarily the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency. Many Democratic members of Congress also view him with mistrust. These detractors say he is corrupt and out for himself, and that in any case he would never last as president of Iraq. Various people blame him for everything from betraying a 1996 coup attempt against Hussein to orchestrating the August bombing of the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad.

His patrons, who call him a courageous and dedicated fighter against Hussein who has been unfairly maligned, are mainly in the Pentagon, and he is a darling of the neoconservatives in the Republican Party. Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, says of Chalabi: "Some think he is a menace. Some think he is a savior. He's a Rorschach test around this town."

"Our biggest allies and friends in Washington," says Chalabi, "are [Vice President] Cheney, [Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul] Wolfowitz and [Defense Policy Board member Richard] Perle." He adds that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage "was ambivalent, but now he's negative."

Perle is Chalabi's most vociferous supporter in Washington. His view is that "people who love Chalabi know him and people who hate him don't know him." He contends that the CIA and the State Department continue to vilify the man but have no evidence. "It's all whispers and innuendoes," he says.

Nobody knows how the president will finally come down on Chalabi. Right now Bush reportedly remains unconvinced that Chalabi is the one to lead Iraq into a democratic future. Jordan's King Abdullah didn't help matters: When he met with Bush recently, he is said to have delivered a broadside against his old nemesis, who was convicted of embezzling millions from a Jordanian bank. According to a friend of Abdullah's, the president reacted to the information with outrage at Chalabi.




Slams on Dean Make Him Stronger


Dean is a confirmed, even radical, follower of Clintonomics - which means balancing budgets even if you have to break some liberal crockery along the way, something he did repeatedly in his years as governor of Vermont.

Mark Halperin of ABC News recently wrote: "Whatever doesn't kill Dean makes him stronger." That's because every attack has made Dean look more and more like the outsider, the guy who runs against Washington and who tells it like it is. Dean should take the advice of the Establishment the way [American Idol winner] Ruben Studdard should go on Weight Watchers.




Bush's 9/11 Cover-up


David Corn -- The current battle over Bush's PDBs is important. They can show what Bush knew before 9/11 about al Qaeda's designs. They can provide a foundation for evaluating – finally – whether he and the federal government acted responsibly and reasonably in the weeks and months before the attacks.




Neil Bush - $2 million for Taiwan Business 'Advice'


I almost missed this Houston Chronicle article: Sex, lies and computer chips By RICK CASEY
Maybe the president of Taiwan did pay presidential younger brother Neil Bush a million bucks for a recent 30-minute meeting in New York.

I expressed skepticism in a recent column, but that was before I saw Exhibit 24 in the files of Bush's contentious divorce.

I didn't realize Bush's advice was so valuable.

The exhibit is a two-page contract between Bush and Grace Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., which recently opened a $1.6 billion computer chip production plant in Shanghai.

The co-founder and CEO is Winston Wong, son of a wealthy Taiwanese plastics magnate. The contract bears Wong's and Bush's signatures.

Under the contract Bush has two duties:

· "To provide GSMC from time to time with business strategies and policies; latest information and trends of the related industry, and other expertized advices (sic)."

· "To attend Directors Board Meetings."

For this the contract provides that Bush be paid $400,000 a year in company preferred stock for five years -- a total of $2 million worth of stock.

The Chronicle taking after the Bush family, what is going on here? The story also talks about Neil's sexual escapades in Hong Kong and Thailand.



MoveOn.org Launches Online Fox Watch Group to Track Fox News’s Partisan Bias


The wall between objective journalism and partisan politicking at Fox News fell last week when it became clear that Fox News staff contributed to the orchestration of the Republican-led 39-hour Senate talk-a-thon intended to counter the Democrat filibuster against four of President Bush’s most radically conservative judicial nominees.

The idea for the food-and-cot political spectacle, also known as “Justice for Judges Marathon,” had its origins on the editorial pages of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Weekly Standard. Also owned by Murdoch, Fox News took the idea a step further. Fox News anchors Brit Hume and Tony Snow pitched the idea outright to Senator Majority Leader Bill Frist on the October 26th broadcast of Fox News Sunday. Two weeks after Frist appeared on the show, the two-day marathon was announced.

To chart this alarming disintegration of journalistic standards, MoveOn.org recently created an online “FoxWatch” group made up of thousands of Americans who have signed up to monitor Fox News daily and hold it accountable for specific instances of manipulations or distortions of truth and partisan bias.



Iraq Liberators and Occupiers


The New Yorker - - Flash Audio and Slides The article details bureaucratic bungles by the military, including how a plan for securing Baghdad after the fall -- the museum was number two on a list and the Oil Ministry was last -- never made it out of Kuwait.







Monday Monologue


Politics with a twist of lime - When you're president in a world where most people don't like you, it sure is good to be home again -- where only half the people don't like you... [During a protest rally] protesters toppled a giant effigy of Bush, which had a smaller Tony Blair head poking out of Bush's pocket. And, if you looked really closely, there was also a miniature Dennis Miller kissing its ass...



Climate Change Is Now - Energy Bill Is Looking Backwards


Real audio interview - Bill McKibben: You know, we should probably no longer talk about climate change as something that's coming in the future. It clearly is here on top of us now. This summer in Europe they recorded the highest temperatures they'd ever recorded, in some cases seven, eight, nine degrees hotter than it had been before. And in the course of that summer, something like 25,000 Europeans died. These people were just exactly like us -- they had modems and refrigerators and telephones, and all the accoutrements of a modern life. Their bodies were just not prepared to cope with that kind of temperature.

Between The Lines: They didn't have air conditioning, I guess, for the most part.

Bill McKibben: Probably not, or the funds to run it enough, or whatever. We see all kinds of big changes now occurring in the natural world. Every glacial system in the world is in rapid retreat. Arctic ice is about 40 percent thinner than it was 40 years ago. This is with about one degree Fahrenheit of human-caused global warming. The temperature is about 60 degrees globally averaged now, up from 59 degrees. It doesn't sound like much, but it turns out the earth's physical systems are finely balanced, and that small changes can yield large results. And now the climatologists tell us that without dramatic changes in the way we power our lives, this century will see a further increase of, best guess -- not the worst case scenario, best middle-course guess -- about 5 degrees F. before 2100. Just to give some frame of reference, the earth hasn't been that warm, as far as anyone can tell, for 300 million to 400 million years. Temperature goes up, wind speeds increase because they follow, you know, pressure gradients -- borders between warm and cold. Sea levels rise because warm water takes up more space than cold water does. Seasons begin to shift in dramatic ways. Ice melts... on and on and on down the list.



Dean - Conservative At Heart


According to a new book by the reporters who covered his administration, Dean's fiscal record and policies were those of a textbook conservative—and Dean would be proud to say so.

This fiscal conservatism extended to all areas in government except one: health care. When Dean became governor, prior state administrations laid the groundwork for what would become one of his biggest selling points in 2003, his expansion of state Medicaid and other social welfare programs to extend health care to children and young families. Dean has spoken of this achievement on the presidential campaign trail, adding a flinty Yankee asterisk: that it's cheap to increase care for people who are basically healthy.

[Opponents and the press speak of Dean] as a 'loud, eager-to-spend Liberal,' Davis said. "A lot of guys that I speak to—they say if they can get him so wrong, what are they saying [that's wrong] about the other guys?"

Howard Dean: A Citizen's Guide to the Man Who Would Be President

$10.36 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25




More On Medicare Bill


From the Center For American Progress -- Who Could Support This?

With so many harmful side effects, who wants this legislation? According to an op-ed by Robert Samuelson in today's WP, the bill has support in part because: a) "The White House wants more elderly voters in 2004"; b) Drug companies think sales and profits may improve, demand will rise and they'll be paid (by Medicare) for some drugs they now give away; and c) Corporate America sees a way to drop retiree drug insurance. And, although President Bush has repeatedly claimed he doesn't want to pass problems to future generations, it's the children of today who are going to be stuck with the tab. "By 2030, the number of Medicare beneficiaries rises almost 90% to 77 million. As a share of national income, spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid...is already projected to jump about 80%...To pay for this spending would require a tax increase of roughly 35% that, in today's dollars, is about $700 billion annually." But, he concludes, "the young aren't paying attention, so they're ignored." Former Sen. Warren Rudman (R-NH) said, "The only thing I can tell you is evidently the word 'tomorrow' no longer exists in the vocabulary of otherwise responsible members of Congress...They are acting as if there is no tomorrow."

AARP PULLS MATERIAL OFF WEBSITE: In recent years, AARP had been critical of efforts to kill President Clinton's health care reform and prescription drug proposals. Specifically, the group posted criticism of the now-infamous "Harry and Louise" and "Flo" ads that helped kill those reforms. But just this week, AARP pulled that material off its Web site as it launched its own advertising blitz for the drug/insurance-industry backed Medicare bill. To see a preserved version of what was pulled off their Web site, click HERE.

AND THE 2003 HYPOCRITE AWARD GOES TO: What's good enough for the goose, sadly, is not good enough for the gander: While the original Senate version of the prescription drug bill " limited Congress's government-provided prescription drug care benefit so that it would be no more generous than the benefit provided under the Medicare legislation," the House and Senate negotiators decided to look out for Number One and removed that restriction.

el - both this and previous are digested mainly from the Center For American Progress's Daily Progress Report. You can subscribe to that.



Dean attacks Bush on drug bill


Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean attacked President Bush on Sunday on the Medicare bill passed by the House, calling it an unacceptable piece of legislation that does the opposite of what it says.

"The bill that's before Congress essentially undoes health care in many ways," Dean said. "That's not a Democratic issue -- to undo health care."

el - He's absolutely right. The legislation keeps drug prices artificially high; doesn't kick in until 2006; potentially harms poorer, sicker seniors; will cause millions of seniors to be dropped from coverage by previous employers; leaves a giant "donut hole" in coverage; increases premiums and deductibles for many; and spends billions in subsidies to insurance companies and large corporations. $125 Billion of the the $400 billion cost goes to companies in subsidies and tax rebates, not for drugs for people.

The Politics -- Some Republicans see a potential backlash from senior citizens when they discover that the prescription drug benefit is far less than they expect, want or need." One conservative, Rep. Dick Armey , called the bill a "fig leaf" for the conservatives' failure to enact real reform. Part of the problem – the congressional leadership's unwillingness to work in a bipartisan fashion. As American Progress President John Podesta writes in his newest column, "Over the last few years, conservative leaders hell-bent on consolidating power have taken every political and legislative opportunity to push an ideological agenda – never letting a commitment to democratic principles or bipartisanship get in the way of a chance to score political points." (For more on the Medicare bill, see American Progress Fellow Jeanne Lambrew's talking points and analysis.)

The Payoff -- Lobbyists and heads of companies getting the $125 billion are some of the Bush reelection biggest donors. Tom Scully, the administrator of Medicare, said employers "should be having a ticker-tape parade." The legislation provides an estimated $86 billion to subsidize them for benefits many already provide.

The Debate -- Some of the fiercest debate is focused on a section of the bill that prohibits the government from negotiating lower drug prices for the 40 million people on Medicare. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said he would lead a filibuster against the measure. The filibuster would likely be subject to cloture. Senators Dianne Feinstein of California, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Kent Conrad of North Dakota, all Democrats, announced on Sunday that they would vote for the bill. Other Democratic senators who have endorsed it include Max Baucus of Montana, John B. Breaux and Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Ben Nelson of Nebraska. But Senator Don Nickles, Republican of Oklahoma, said he would vote against the $400 billion bill.

The good reason it may pass - Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, "This historic opportunity may never come again, and we cannot afford to let it pass," she said.

The bad reasons are above. Bush promised a drug bill as good as what members of congress and private employers get. But you already know about Bush promises.



Federal GOP Spending 'Out of Control'


As Congress rushes to conclude its 2003 session, Republican leaders are trying to garner votes for controversial legislation by loading the bills with billions of dollars in added costs that analysts said would expand the budget deficit for years to come. The year-end binge has alarmed analysts in Washington and on Wall Street, coming as it does after three years of presidential and congressional initiatives that have both substantially boosted government spending and shrunk its tax base.

“THE U.S. budget is out of control,” the Wall Street investment firm Goldman Sachs & Co. warned Friday in its weekly newsletter to clients.

In the final days of the congressional session, GOP leaders added billions of dollars to energy and Medicare bills to help persuade key factions to support the legislation. Overall, the energy bill would cost $33 billion and the Medicare bill $400 billion.

Less noticed were congressional moves to expand veterans’ benefits by $22 billion and increase spending on forest-thinning projects from $420 million a year to $760 million to ensure passage of forest legislation promoted by the White House. Lawmakers are also trying to extend 14 expiring tax cuts through 2004, at a cost to the Treasury of more than $7 billion.



Gephardt blasts Dean on 'compassion'


Shouldn't he be attacking Bush?

In a prelude to a potentially contentious debate among Democratic presidential contenders, Dick Gephardt accused rival Howard Dean on Sunday of governing Vermont "without compassion" by resorting to cuts in services for the poor and disabled to try to balance his state's budget.

But Dean countered that "Gephardt has delivered empty rhetoric" during his 26 years as a congressman from Missouri while "as a governor, I worked hard to make the tough choices to deliver results."

Dem debate today on MSNBC.




Byrd On Medicare Bill - 'A Classic Bait and Switch'


I had hoped to be extolling the virtues of a bill that would give needed relief to our nation's elderly. Instead, the Congress is voting on a measure that could undermine Medicare -- the most successful program the country has ever had. One that today's seniors know and trust.

The Congress should be fashioning a real prescription drug benefit. That is what the American people have been told we are doing. Instead, the Congress debates a major restructuring and a step toward the privatization of Medicare. It is a debate that has largely been hidden from the public. A debate that our nation's seniors did not ask for.

The conference report before us today was hatched behind closed doors. Most members of Congress have been largely excluded from the backroom deals that produced this conference report. Some have asserted this legislation is merely a Trojan horse designed to get rid of Medicare. I hope that that is not true. But there is something awfully suspicious about this particular horse that is galloping through the Congress.



Congress Expands FBI Spying Power


Wired News -- Congress approved a bill on Friday that expands the reach of the Patriot Act, reduces oversight of the FBI and intelligence agencies and, according to critics, shifts the balance of power away from the legislature and the courts.

A provision of an intelligence spending bill will expand the power of the FBI to subpoena business documents and transactions from a broader range of businesses -- everything from libraries to travel agencies to eBay -- without first seeking approval from a judge.


Sunday, November 23, 2003

David Brooks Is So Big A Marriage Fan He Is For Gays Having It


Or is it that he is so anti-fooling around?

"Anybody who has several sexual partners in a year is committing spiritual suicide. He or she is ripping the veil from all that is private and delicate in oneself, and pulverizing it in an assembly line of selfish sensations."




Frist Is Confident Medicare Bill Will Pass


Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., expressed confidence Sunday that he has the votes to pass a landmark Medicare prescription drug package, perhaps as early as Monday, before the Senate heads home for the Thanksgiving holiday.

Call or Fax your Senator - doubtful that Texas Senators will respond.




INAUGURAL SPEECHES FROM OUR ACTION HEROES


G. XAVIER ROBILLARD in McSweeney's

He-Man

Although I realize that I was not elected by a majority, I pledge to represent the interests of all. I have also retained many of my father's advisers to guide my way.

I will cut taxes, balance the budget, and rid the world of Skeletor. Skeletor is evil. Skeletor does not believe in free trade. Perhaps my words are too moralistic, too black and white. But look at him—his face is a skull! He sits on a throne made of bones. This is an evil man, working in evil times. And I know, from various intelligence sources, including my trusted aide Man-at-Arms and my Security Adviser Generic-Noun-Name, that Skeletor has been working on a new weapon: a weapon that could destroy the nation. You in the media don't believe me. Some have cynically reported that I am using fear to gain votes. If any members of the press corps wish to find out what Skeletor is up to, they can take a trip to Castle Grayskull, expenses paid from my Mattel stock options. Any takers? I didn't think so.

Jem

It's Truly Outrageous that you've elected me to this position. As many of you have learned from my memoir—Jem—Truly Revealing!—it was a long hard road from the orphanage to become a rock star whose songs touch people's hearts. Armed with little more than great hair, superpower earrings, a keen fashion sense, and a sizable inheritance, I was able to make my way to be here with you today. And I won't let you down.

Optimus Prime

As the first robot/semitruck to be elected to these hallowed halls, I pledge to rebuild America. To repair our crumbling roads and bridges, to lower gas prices, and to increase the speed limit. Things that all Americans need.

Our military is stretched too thin, and we need to increase spending to combat the Decepticon menace. It will be expensive—the liberals and the media complain that $87 billion is too much to construct a fleet of vehicles that transform into fighting robots. But we didn't ratify the Decepticon Proliferation Treaty, and now they're everywhere, threatening our very way of life. And, might I remind you, not a single Decepticon is made in America. The Central Intelligence Agency has suggested that some were built by the French.



'I believe that George W. Bush is stealing my country'


Salon interview Booby Kennedy Jr. - I believe that George W. Bush is stealing my country, that he is absolutely stealing the environment from our children, stealing the breath from my children's lungs and stealing the Bill of Rights, selling off the sacred places, and trashing all the things I value about America. Our reputation across the globe, the love and admiration that other peoples and nations once had for America, the safety of our nation, the security of our children, the economy, the ability of our children to educate themselves for the future -- it's all being liquidated by this president for his wealthy friends and contributors. And I am so furious at this man for stealing the thing I love most, which is America, my country.



My Current NY Times Links Expire, Working on Fix


I may switch to this utility to make them supposedly work forever. Much earlier this year I had a post on this but NYT then announced that they would support bloggers and I thought the problem went away. I didn't notice the details, like I had to use an RSS feed for the permalinks.

I got this from Pacific Views, Mary does some back linking but I had also seen it elsewhere.



"Show me the dead Canadians!"


Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) Thursday said the federal government should allow the Gopher state to move forward with plans to help its residents buy prescription drugs from Canada: “Let us try,” he said.

“Importation from Canada and perhaps other developed countries is not the ideal solution. It is probably not the long-term solution, but it is in the spirit of trying something,” Pawlenty said.

Calling it the “prescription drug equivalent of the Boston Tea Party,” Pawlenty said the biggest hurdle to implementing his plan are warnings from the pharmaceutical industry and the Food and Drug Administration, which say the practice of re-importing virtually all medicine that U.S. manufacturers have sold to Canadian pharmacies is illegal and unsafe.

“My first response to that is show me the dead Canadians. Where are the dead Canadians?” Pawlenty said.



While McAuliffe is a lousy spokesman he makes a good administrator


Daily Kos -- McAuliffe is transforming the DNC from a fundraising operation for paying for advertising into an operation that raises funds to create and maintain a campaign infrastructure.

Among the highlights are "Demzilla," a database that started with about 400,000 names but now has the names and contact information of over a million Democratic activists and donors. The DNC has also consolidated voter files from the various state and local party organizations. Supplemented by commercial databases, DataMart has information such as voting history, party registration, responses to voter identification efforts conducted by campaigns, and demographic information on over 150 million voters.

While staying steady over recent years at 14% of the workforce, since 1994 voters from labor families have supported Democrats 2-1 and increased their share of the overall vote from 14% to over 26% in 2000. Much of labor's success came from field activity and direct voter contact, so transferring what has worked among union members to the electorate at large is an exciting prospect.

Working largely under the radar, McAuliffe has actually made the DNC better prepared for a presidential election than it may ever have been. While the innovations in fund raising and communications of Howard Dean's presidential campaign and MoveOn.org have been widely noted, the analogous changes at the DNC have largely escaped attention. So, too, has the ramping up of its 2004 field campaign, which, under the direction of general election strategist Teresa Vilmain, is taking place earlier than ever before. -- Harold Meyerson, American Prospect



Beaners Pro Dean and Queen


Latest Massachusetts Poll Shows Kerry Losing to Dean in his home state

The poll shows Dean getting 27 percent of the 400 likely Democratic primary voters, with Kerry receiving 24 percent. The two are far ahead of seven other candidates, with retired Army General Wesley K. Clark running a distant third with 6 percent.

Because the poll's margin of error is plus or minus 5 percentage points, Kerry and Dean are in a statistical tie in the race for the state's March 2 presidential primary.

But that Kerry apparently cannot hold off Dean in his own home state is a reflection of the deep political problems faced by the senator, whose campaign for the Democratic nomination has been hit with internal turmoil and criticism that the candidate has failed to ignite any passion.

The Globe/WBZ survey echoes a University of Massachusetts poll taken early last week, in which Dean held a six-point lead among Bay State primary voters over Kerry. Dean was backed by 29 percent of the 400 Democrats and independents who were surveyed in the UMass poll, while Kerry got 23 percent.

The UMass survey also shows that Dean runs slightly stronger against President Bush, leading 58 percent to 34 percent. Kerry leads Bush by 56 percent to 38 percent.

Massachusetts residents, by a solid margin, said they supported the Supreme Judicial Court's landmark decision legalizing gay marriage, according to a Boston Globe/WBZ-TV poll.

The poll of 400 people, the first survey of Bay State residents since the court's historic ruling, indicated that 50 percent agreed with the justices' decision, and 38 percent opposed it. Eleven percent expressed no opinion.

The poll also indicated that a majority opposed efforts by the Legislature, Governor Mitt Romney, and Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly to block same-sex marriages and allow civil unions instead.

A majority, 53 percent, also opposed a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would ban same-sex marriages by defining marriage as an institution between a man and a woman. Thirty-six percent supported the amendment.

Among women, 55 percent agreed with the justices' decision, and 35 percent disagreed, the Globe/WBZ poll showed. Men are more evenly split, with 44 percent agreeing and 42 percent disagreeing.

The court's decision also draws strong support from Democrats, young and middle-age people, registered independents, and college graduates.

Catholics surveyed were evenly divided on the ruling, as were Protestants.



Shadows of Mogadishu


Whiskey Bar -- MOSUL, Iraq - Gunmen killed two American soldiers driving through this northern Iraqi city Sunday, and then a crowd swarmed the scene, looting the soldiers' vehicle and pummeling their bodies, witnesses said. Another soldier was killed in a roadside bombing north of Baghdad.

After the soldiers' bodies fell into the street, the crowd pummeled them with concrete blocks, Jassim said.

Associated Press
Attackers shoot two U.S. soldiers in northern Iraq

November 23, 2003


I think it is worth emphasizing that these guys lack ... the sympathy of the population...
Paul Wolfowitz
Washington Post Interview

June 26, 2003

I've demonstrated to my own satisfaction that the people of Iraq do not support the violence that we're seeing right now.
Gen. Tommy Franks
Testimony Before the House Armed Services Committee

July 10, 2003

"I still firmly believe that there is no popular support" for the attackers.
Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez
Press Interview

October 9, 2003



Ann Coulter, anti-Semite


Ann - "In addition to having a number of family deaths among them, the Democrats' other big idea – too nuanced for a bumper sticker – is that many of them have Jewish ancestry. There's Joe Lieberman: Always Jewish. Wesley Clark: Found Out His Father Was Jewish in College. John Kerry: Jewish Since He Began Presidential Fund-Raising. Howard Dean: Married to a Jew. Al Sharpton: Circumcised. Even Hillary Clinton claimed to have unearthed some evidence that she was a Jew – along with the long lost evidence that she was a Yankees fan. And that, boys and girls, is how the Jews survived thousands of years of persecution: by being susceptible to pandering."

Atrios.



Blair Allies to Target Trade Tariffs Against Bush


Acting with the tacit approval of Blair supporters, who were enraged when Mr Bush imposed tariffs on imports of British steel to shore up his vote, the former trade and industry secretary will call for sanctions to be imposed on four key marginal states which the president will need to win.

The states - and the exports to be targeted - are:

· Florida and its citrus products. The state was the scene of the "hanging chad" saga in the 2000 presidential election, after Mr Bush and Al Gore virtually tied there;
· Wisconsin and its apples and paper. Mr Gore won this state by a tiny margin;
· Tennessee and its chemicals. Mr Bush scored a narrow victory in Mr Gore's home state;
· Iowa and its agricultural equipment. This state will play a key role when the nominations battle starts in January.

Mr Byers also calls for tariffs to be imposed on exports of textiles, which would hit states across the American south.



"Time to Hit Back"


Clinton got beaten for Governor after a vicious negative campaign that he tried to rise above. He attributes his comeback to a new philosophy about negative ads, "when someone hits you on the head with a hammer, you take a meat cleaver and chop their hand off." We have to stop whining about how Bush is being mean and start chopping his hand off.



U.S. Actions in Central Asia Spell 'Blowback'


Many of the ingredients necessary for Islamic radicalism exist in Central Asia -- especially U.S. support for repressive regimes.

Kazakhstan, a former Soviet Republic in Central Asia and the world's ninth-largest country, is oil-rich and pro-American, has an increasingly repressive government awash in corruption and a 47 percent Moslem population. Those are many of the conditions that have allowed radical Islam to take root in the Middle East.

The Bush administration, by appeasing Kazakhstan for its oil and accommodation of U.S. troops, risks contributing to the creation of a new Iraq or Afghanistan on a giant scale.

This is just the beginning of a plausible Central Asian nightmare scenario. Numerous other former Soviet republics, including Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrkyzstan, are similarly ripe for Islamic radicalization in a region that stretches from Europe to China.

Should Islamic guerrilla warfare come to the area, American forces intent on fighting a "war on terror" could be drawn into battle in close proximity to Russia and China, in a resource-rich region where the world's three largest nuclear powers are already jockeying for control.

el - Far from supporting democracy around the world, Bush has been increasing support to tyrants who boil their opponents alive increasing hatred of America among the population.



Bush Using Social Security Lockbox as Cookie Jar


The news on the federal budget deficit for fiscal 2003 was encouraging, wasn't it? In July 2003, the Office of Management and Budget projected a record deficit of $455 billion. But when the fiscal year ended in October, the shortfall was only $374 billion, equivalent to 3.5 percent of gross domestic product.

If we factor out the so-called Social Security surplus - payroll taxes collected by the government but not paid out in benefits - the deficit in fiscal 2003 was actually far larger: $531 billion, or 4.9 percent of gross domestic product. For the current fiscal year, the administration expects that this figure, also called the on-budget deficit, will be even higher: $639 billion, or a whopping 5.4 percent of gross domestic product.

Every year since 1983, workers have paid more in Social Security payroll taxes than Social Security has paid out to beneficiaries. The surplus was supposed to be used to pay down the national debt. "That way, when the baby boomers are retired, our other debt will be lower and we'll be in a better position to borrow funds to pay for benefits," said Richard Kogan, senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning group in Washington.

The figures show that the personal and corporate income taxes that are supposed to fund government operations no longer come within shouting distance of doing so. And the refusal of the administration or its Congressional allies to acknowledge this reality has left normally mild-mannered deficit hawks on the verge of apoplexy.

"The last time the situation reached this point, in the early 1990's, we had bipartisan agreement that we were reaching a fiscal crisis," said Maya MacGuineas, executive director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget in Washington.

The response then was an unpalatable, but ultimately successful, mix of spending restraints and tax increases. But in the past few years - with the sums involved far greater than they were in the early 1990's, and with the baby boomers nearing retirement - Washington has raised spending sharply and cut taxes even more sharply.



Democrats Angrily Call on G.O.P. to Withdraw Bush Ad


The advertisement shows President Bush delivering his State of the Union address in January. As he speaks, such phrases as "Some are now attacking the president for attacking the terrorists" flash across the screen.

The ad urges viewers to call members of Congress and ask them to "support the president's policy of pre-emptive defense."

Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, denounced the advertisement as "repulsive and outrageous."

His comments, made on the NBC News program "Meet the Press," drew attention to what could be one of the most contentious campaign themes in the 2004 presidential contest: the question of which party has a better response to terrorist threats to the United States and its interests abroad.

Several Democrats, including the presidential hopefuls Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut and Gen. Wesley K. Clark, have strongly criticized the advertisement. Some have said that Republicans were violating a presidential promise not to use the campaign against terrorism for political gain.

General Clark, like Mr. Daschle, called for the advertisement to be dropped. He said on the CBS News program "Face the Nation" that it violated "the pledge the president made to not exploit 9/11 for political purposes."

Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, speaking on the ABC News program "This Week," said that by challenging Democrats' patriotism the advertisement amounted to an "attempt to stifle dissent."
Some Democrats have taken a sort of perverse comfort in the advertisement, saying that it demonstrated that their criticisms of Mr. Bush, on his handling of the war in Iraq and on the larger battle against terrorism, were beginning to be felt.

Senator Lieberman, who has been criticized by some of his fellow Democratic candidates for supporting the war in Iraq, criticized the Republican advertisement as "very misleading" and said today that if anything, Mr. Bush was not doing enough to fight terrorism.

"I don't know of anybody who's attacking the president for attacking the terrorists," Mr. Lieberman said on the CNN program "Late Edition."



Bush - Scaring Up Votes


Maureen Dowd -- Flashing the words "terrorists" and "self-defense" in crimson, the Republican National Committee spot urges Americans "to support the president's policy of pre-emptive self-defense" — a policy Colin Powell claimed was overblown by the press.

"Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?" Mr. Bush says.

With this ad, Republicans have announced their intention: to scare us stupid, hoping we won't remember that this was the same State of the Union in which Mr. Bush made a misleading statement about the Iraq-Niger uranium connection, or remark that the imperial idyll in Iraq has created more terrorists.

Richard Clarke, the former U.S. counterterrorism chief, told Ted Koppel that Mr. Bush's habit of putting X's through the pictures of arrested or killed Qaeda managers was very reminiscent of a scene in the movie "The Battle of Algiers," in which the French authorities did the same to the Algerian terrorists: "Unfortunately, after all the known Algerian terrorists were arrested or killed, the French lost. And that could be the thing that's happening here, that even though we're getting all the known Al Qaeda leaders, we're breeding new ones. Ones we don't know about and will be harder to find."

This view of Al Qaeda was echoed by a European counterterrorism official in The Times: "There are fewer leaders but more followers."


F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies


The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.

The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.

But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

The abuses of the Hoover era, which included efforts by the F.B.I. to harass and discredit Hoover's political enemies under a program known as Cointelpro, led to tight restrictions on F.B.I. investigations of political activities.

Those restrictions were relaxed significantly last year, when Attorney General John Ashcroft issued guidelines giving agents authority to attend political rallies, mosques and any event "open to the public."



Bush goes for votes with trade protection


President Bush is gambling that he'll gain more votes than he'll lose in 2004 by bending his commitment to free trade to protect beleaguered industries and workers from foreign competition in states crucial to his re- election.

But the White House calculation could backfire if Bush's trade protection for the steel and textile industries sparks the retaliation threatened by Europe and China that would target U.S. industries in states that are just as essential to Bush's re-election.



Bush eliminates overtime for millions


Foes of Bush overtime rules abandon effort to kill regulations

Foes of the Bush administration's proposed rules changing which workers would qualify for overtime pay abandoned their fight on Friday in the face of unrelenting pressure from the White House and the House.

The end of the overtime fight spelled a legislative and political victory for President Bush, whose aides had repeatedly threatened a veto for any legislation attempting to kill the overtime regulations.

The monthslong battle pitted big business and its GOP allies against organized labor and congressional Democrats, who contend that the regulations would give leeway to employers to deny overtime to 8 million workers.


Saturday, November 22, 2003

The Medicare Drug Gap


"Seniors felt they had been promised the kind of prescription drug coverage that members of Congress have," said Judith Feder, dean of public policy at Georgetown University. "What they're getting doesn't even remotely resemble that."

Just last week, President Bush implied that the new benefits would be much like those enjoyed not only by many working average Americans, but also by their elected representatives.

"Every member of Congress gets to choose a health-care plan that makes the most sense for them. And the same for federal employees. If choice is good for members of the Congress, then choice is good for America's seniors," he said.

Drew Altman, president of the Menlo Park-based Kaiser Family Foundation, an independent health-care philanthropy, said seniors were expecting the bill to create a benefit similar to employer coverage — a patient makes a co-payment of perhaps $10 or $20 toward each prescription, and insurance picks up the rest. But the plan in Congress is very different, Altman said, resulting in what he called an "expectations gap."

Great article from the LATimes.



Two Bills Would Raise Billions For Top Bush Fundraisers


More than three dozen of President Bush's major fundraisers are affiliated with companies that stand to benefit from the passage of two central pieces of the administration's legislative agenda: the energy and Medicare bills.

The energy bill provides billions of dollars in benefits to companies run by at least 22 executives and their spouses who have qualified as either "Pioneers" or "Rangers," as well as to the clients of at least 15 lobbyists and their spouses who have achieved similar status as fundraisers. At least 24 Rangers and Pioneers could benefit from the Medicare bill as executives of companies or lobbyists working for them, including eight who have clients affected by both bills.



DeLay, Barton Subpoenaed In Texas Redistricting Case


The subpoenas were served Wednesday and demanded that DeLay and Barton give depositions in the case next week. But the two Texas Republicans are planning to ask a federal district court in Washington to quash the subpoenas, according to a lawyer for the Democratic plaintiffs.

"Every time the process seemed to stall or the Texas legislature seemed to feel it didn't have the stomach to do this, Joe Barton and Tom DeLay came down and twisted arms," said J. Gerald Hebert, a lawyer for the Texas Democrats who issued the subpoenas. "And they bragged about it. They brought the maps down and obviously played an active role in the redistricting process. We believe we are entitled to ask them about that role."

Subpoenas were also issued for Jim Ellis, director of DeLay's political action committee, and Craig Murphy, a political consultant to Barton. Murphy said he was told yesterday that he would not be required to testify.

Several lawsuits challenging the Texas redistricting plan were filed and have been consolidated into a single case that will be heard by a panel of three federal judges in Austin. The trial is scheduled to begin Dec. 11.




Neo-Con Expects Dean to Turn Conservative On National Security


Kagan - No George McGovern

Dean has been portrayed, especially by Republicans, as the new George McGovern. But judging by Dean's public statements at least, there is a big difference between the nature of his antiwar critique and the anti-Vietnam critique offered by McGovern and his followers three decades ago.

"There are two groups of people who support me because of the war," Dean told Mara Liasson a few months ago. "One are the people who always oppose every war, and in the end I think I probably won't get all of those people." The other group, Dean figures, simply "appreciates the fact" that he "stood up early" and spoke his mind and opposed Bush while other Democrats were cowed. Dean may not be offering a stark alternative to Bush's foreign policy, therefore, so much as he is simply offering Democrats a compelling and combative alternative to Bush himself.

The Bushies are planning to run against a dovish McGovern, but there's a remote possibility they could find themselves running against a hawkish Kennedy. The bigger implication, which the rest of the world should note well, is that the general course of American foreign policy is fairly stable and won't be soon toppled -- not even by Howard Dean.

&c. believes it will lead to a Sister Souljah moment with Dean attacking ANSWER or some other group. More likely it will lead to Dean directing more attention to his moderate hawkish foreign and military policy positions. Before recent Iraq related special spending the US was already responsible for 44% of the world military budget, more than the next 15 strongest countries.

Dean does not plan to reduce the military budget. This is not a position I support but is a realistic accessment of where the country is and what is necessary to win the White House.



Government of Georgia Collapsing


Opposition supporters in Georgia broke into Parliament on Saturday, forcing President Eduard A. Shevardnadze to flee the hall with his bodyguards, according to reports from the capital, Tbilisi.



Operation Iraqi Freedom displaced by Operation Iron Hammer


Analysis of a Gallup Poll of Iraqis finds that fewer than 10 percent of them believe that the US invaded to help Iraqis, and even fewer believe that the US objective was to establish a true democracy in their land.

Meanwhile, the Philadelphia Inquirer got hold of a highly classified CIA report warning that an increasing number of Iraqis believe that the insurgents can defeat the American-led forces, and that the majority Shiite Muslim population might join the Sunnis to achieve that objective.

When George Bush decided to invade and occupy Iraq with only Britain as a major ally, he went against the earlier best judgments of most people with any experience in the region, including that of his own father during his own time of war against Iraq.

The grand vision of a pacified, democratized Iraq, with vast oil reserves enabling it to pay its own way and shine the light for the rest of the region, must have seemed quickly achievable. Clearly, it did to Mr. Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz - the architects of this adventure.

But they were wrong. And every day of every week, more Americans are being maimed and killed because of their wrongness.

Even the most committed opponents of the invasion recognize that leaving too soon would add another wrong to the first wrong. Rumsfeld was right to ask for help from abroad. Every member of this administration should ask for help, from every quarter, to help stabilize Iraq, even if it means Washington doesn't have full control.

And come next November, Americans should remember this November - and who took us on this ill-fated, deadly adventure.

el - Iraq, the Vietnam War on Speed.



Death by Dividend - Foreigners Die to Support American Business


Guatemala and Honduras avoid using generic antiretrovirals for fear of offending the U.S. Guatemala, for example, has 67,000 people, including 5,000 children, with H.I.V. or AIDS. Most will die. Astonishingly, the country spends most of its scarce AIDS money on brand-name drugs rather than cheaper generics, which could treat three times as many people. Honduras does the same, preferring to let people die than use generics.

Why would these countries do this? The doctors and public health officials I interviewed said that Central American nations had a strong desire to curry favor with Washington, which is perceived as hostile to generics.



House Narrowly Passes Medicare Drug Bill - Bush hard presses wavering Reps.


Democrats held a slight lead in the vote count for most of the session. But the Republicans, who control the chamber, refused to close the vote. That allowed GOP leaders and President Bush -- who made several middle-of-the-night phone calls to wavering members -- to scour the floor for votes.

In the end, at about 6 a.m., they persuaded two junior members, Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter, R-Idaho, and Rep. Trent Franks, R-Arizona, to vote yes, tipping the scale in favor of the GOP-written bill.

"The president and I had a conversation and I did what I think was the right thing for the country," a visibly distressed Franks told a reporter while leaving the Capitol. "I don't have any other comment."

Insult was added to injury when a handful of Democrats switched their votes from "no" to "yes" once the GOP had its victory.

The final tally was 220 to 215.

16 Democrats voted Yes - 25 Republicans voted No.

In Texas 1 Democrat Conservative Stenholm -Y, GOP-Libertarian Ron Paul - N



Molly Ivins - Corporate Ethics In a State of Rot


I suggest the epitaph for this entire era should be, "The fish rots from the head down." The latest round of corporate scandals -- Hollinger, the growing mutual fund mess and the foreign exchange dealers who ripped off their own companies -- provide an elegant summary of the pattern... At the top of the corporate and economic worlds, ethical standards seem to be rotting out -- greed, self-righteousness, fatal certitude. And, of course, beware of those with no humor.



AARP Rigs Its Own Poll


With national polls showing only 18% of members agreeing with the Medicare Drug bill, AARP executives conduct a rigged poll showing 75% approval.

They rigged their own poll, lied to their own members, and tried to cover up the fact that the management of an organization dedicated to helping their retired members—will actually place those members in harm’s way. It may well be more than a betrayal—it may be fraud. Consider that AARP CEO William Novelli, wrote a letter in July on minimum acceptable standards, then turned around and endorsed a bill that violated his own standards!

This link and previous from BuzzFlash.



John F. Kennedy Speech on Being a Liberal

American Experience -- PBS -- What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."


Friday, November 21, 2003


Former Air Force General Backs Dean


Retired Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak, the former Air Force chief of staff who endorsed George W. Bush in 2000, has left the Republican fold and is backing Democrat Howard Dean in the 2004 race for president.

McPeak, who headed the Air Force during the Persian Gulf War in 1991, criticized the Bush administration's policy toward Iraq before the invasion in March. He also said he has become disenchanted with the president's economic policies.

"I don't think the younger Bush has put a foot right since he entered the White House," said McPeak, who changed his registration from Republican to independent in April.

When it comes to Iraq, "we couldn't have sat around a kitchen table and designed a policy that was stupider," McPeak said. He argued that there was no evidence of a connection between Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, "absolutely zero evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and the planning of the formation of the coalition (to support the war in Iraq) was very clumsily done."

From Off the Kuff who picked it up from Hoffmania.



Religion as Baseball


Calvinists believe the game is fixed.

Lutherans believe they can't win, but trust the Scorekeeper.

Quakers won't swing.

Unitarians can catch anything.

Amish walk a lot.

Pagans sacrifice.

Jehovah's Witnesses are thrown out often.

Televangelists get caught stealing.

Episcopalians pass the plate.

Evangelicals make effective pitches.

Fundamentalists balk.

Adventists have a seventh-inning stretch.

Atheists refuse to have an Umpire.

Baptists want to play hardball.

Premillenialists expect the game to be called soon on account of darkness.

The Pope claims never to have committed an error.

Some beliefnet.com humor.



Award promotes 'beautiful' nudes


BBC - A society championing 'beautiful' female nudes is handing out its inaugural award on Monday.

The Society for the Appreciation of the Female Nude (SAFN) wants to encourage artists who paint traditional nudes rather than "ugly" figures, it said.

The society will hand out their first Venus Award to artist Ulla Plougmand-Turner for her work Woman With Flame Coloured Hair.

A society spokesman said it was a reaction to contemporary nudes.

Jonathan Rush said the society was a group of "art lovers who are bored with looking at geometric or ugly nudes in galleries".

He said the society had surveyed 300 people visiting galleries and said 50% of them had said they did not like modern nudes.

The link was from DOMAI, which promotes simple nude photographs of women.

Nudity is natural,
Beauty is important,
Looking is good
.




Calif. will require voting-machine receipts


el - As a precinct judge - its about time some state looked into the e-voting machines.

In a major victory for voting rights advocates, Secretary of State Kevin Shelley announced Friday that all electronic voting machines in California must provide paper receipts by 2006.

Shelley also introduced stricter requirements for testing and auditing of the software used to record and tabulate votes in the nation's most populous state.

California's reforms address concerns of computer scientists and voting rights advocates who have been warning that paperless voting systems are vulnerable to hackers, software bugs and mechanical breakdowns.

Earlier this month, a state agency began an investigation of uncertified software allegedly used in California's Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall election.



Best of Late Night Political Humor This Month


"President Bush is also the first U.S. president to spend the night in Buckingham Palace at the request of the royal family. As he was showing the president around, Prince Charles asked President Bush if he wanted to see Big Ben, and Bush said, 'Whoa, I'm from Texas, don't try any of that funny stuff with me.'" —Jay Leno

"President Bush says his visit to England is going so well, if time permits, he wants to visit the United Kingdom and Great Britain as well." —Jay Leno

"Last night in London, President Bush had dinner at Buckingham Palace with Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales. Everything was going fine until the president told the Prince of Wales, 'I loved free Willy.'" —Conan O'Brien

"In England they are furious over President Bush's visit. In fact, in a speech the mayor of London described President Bush as 'the greatest threat to life on this planet.' After hearing this President Bush said 'That is ridiculous, what about Godzilla?" —Conan O'Brien

"Democratic front-runner Howard Dean being called a hero this week. It seems he was going to a campaign rally in Iowa and one of his campaign volunteers collapsed from a seizure and since he was a doctor he ran over and treated the guy until the ambulance came. He is not the only candidate that helped. Since he was a trial lawyer, John Edwards chased the ambulance all the way to the hospital." —Jay Leno

"Today was Arnold Schwarzenegger's inauguration as Governor of California. Arnold was told to 'Raise your right hand and butcher the English language after me.'" —Craig Kilborn

"There was one tricky moment — to get Arnold to put his hand on the Bible, they stuck it in Paris Hilton's bra." —Craig Kilborn

"Some Democrats are talking seriously about Hillary Clinton running for president in 2004. I don't think they are serious. I think they are trying to get Rush Limbaugh to go back on drugs." —Jay Leno

"Rush Limbaugh went back to work today. Rush said that the five weeks he spent in rehab were the best weeks of his life. And Democrats say the five weeks he was off were the best weeks of their lives too." —Jay Leno

"We begin tonight with national security — an issue President Bush has emphasized here at home and is utterly disrupting across the Atlantic. Tomorrow the president flies to England for a three-day state visit with coalition partner Tony Blair. In preparation, British officials are stepping up security measures and putting more police on the streets than at any time since the end of World War II in anticipation of possible violence. Remember this is England, our ally — I guess all the cops and troops are there to make sure things don't get too friendly. ... British Intelligence services have even taken the step of raising England's terror alert level to 'severe general,' which is — I hate the metric system — I think it is orange." —Jon Stewart

"In a Veteran's Day speech, President Bush vowed, 'We will finish the mission. Period.' Afterwards, he was advised he doesn't have to read the punctuation marks." —Jimmy Fallon, Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update"

"The UN nuclear watchdog group said in a confidential report Monday that it has found no evidence of an atomic bomb program in Iran, leaving the U.S. no choice but to attack." —Tina Fey, Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update"

"The Bush administration announced that it is starting its own news channel in Iraq so they can deliver the administration's point of view without any interference. Not surprisingly they are gonna call it the Fox News Network." —Conan O'Brien

"Good news — Rush Limbaugh is out of rehab after being gone for a month. He sobered up and realized he is a liberal Democrat." —David Letterman

"Rush Limbaugh announced he is going back to work on Monday. Doctors say his rehab was successful but it may be weeks before he is 100 percent self-righteous." —Jay Leno

"There is talk now that the U.S. may start pulling out of Iraq in the next eight weeks. What, are they are out of oil already?" —Craig Kilborn

"American officials in Iraq are reportedly very frustrated with the Iraqi government because instead of making progress, the Iraqis are fighting about who's gonna be in charge and who's gonna make the most money. We said we wanted to give them American style democracy — sounds like they got it." —Jay Leno

"Scary development down in Washington yesterday. A small plane entered White House airspace. It's always scary when that happens. President Bush was rushed to an undisclosed fundraiser." —David Letterman

"CNN admitted that they planted a question in the Rock The Vote debate last week. Seems they gave a college student from Brown University questions they had written. Luckily it was a Democratic debate so no one saw it." —Jay Leno

"Democratic candidate Wesley Clark said he has a plan for catching Osama bin Laden. Osama bin Laden? He can't even catch Howard Dean....Clark says he has plans to deploy Saudi Arabian commandos to catch the terrorists — the only problem is the Saudi Arabian commandos are the terrorists." —Jay Leno

"President Bush has blamed the problems over there on foreign groups that have arrived in Iraq with the goal of setting up their own style of government, to which Cheney said, 'That's us.'" —Jay Leno

"The Democratic presidential campaign is heating up. Yesterday Democratic Senator John Kerry announced that he fired his campaign manager. Kerry made the decision after he overheard his campaign manager asking 'Which one is John Kerry again?'" —Conan O'Brien

"Democratic hopeful John Kerry fired his campaign manager when a poll revealed that if the election was held today John Kerry would lose to his campaign manager." —Craig Kilborn

"CBS canceled their Reagan miniseries. CBS said they did not cave into pressure from conservatives. Now you know what the BS stands for in CBS." —Jay Leno

"Leading Democratic contender Howard Dean says he stopped drinking 22 years ago and hasn't touched a drop of alcohol since. On the other hand, Joe Lieberman took a look at his poll numbers and started drinking pretty heavily." —Jay Leno

"CBS cancelled its miniseries on the life of Ronald Reagan after the Republican National Committee protested what it called 'historical inaccuracies.' The RNC also objected to the networks unflattering look at George Bush, until they realized it was just a live press conference." —Tina Fey, Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update"

"CBS has cancelled its miniseries the Reagans after complaints that it portrayed Ronald Reagan as nothing more than a bumbling B-list actor controlled by a domineering wife. What are the odds that James Brolin would get a role like that?" —Jay Leno

"In a recent interview, Howard Dean admitted that he used to drink and smoke pot. So, now all he needs to put him over the top is a sex scandal." —David Letterman

"In his new book, 'Winning Back America,' Dean talks about his wealthy prep school and how he used to get drunk. Let me get this straight — he had rich parents, drank a lot, went to prep school, and avoided Vietnam. He's the alternative to George Bush? I think he is George Bush." —Jay Leno

"Last night during a Democratic presidential debate, candidates John Kerry, John Edwards and Howard Dean all admitted they had smoked marijuana and Al Sharpton admitted that his barber smokes marijuana." —Conan O'Brien

"The new 'Matrix' movie opened today -- here is the plot: Neo is the one and Morpheous must find the oracle to stop the last outpost of Zion from being destroyed. No, wait a minute, I'm sorry, that is why we went into Iraq." —David Letterman

"A new erectile dysfunction drug claims it will allow men to last seven times longer than Viagra. In a related story, Elizabeth Dole has gone into hiding." —Conan O'Brien

"This week the federal government announced that the U.S. economy grew by 7 percent in the 3rd quarter — that is the largest increase in 20 years. The White House is already taking credit for it. Today President Bush landed on an aircraft carrier dressed as an accountant." —Conan O'Brien

"Senator John McCain recently compared the situation in Iraq to the Vietnam era — to which President Bush replied, 'What does Iraq have in common with drinking beer in Texas?'" —Craig Kilborn

"Earlier in the week, at the dedication of the new religious youth center in Texas, President Bush said that Congress has stalled his faith-based initiative. Congress said they are not stalling, it's just hard to come up with some language to get around that annoying U.S. Constitution." —Jay Leno

"Governor-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger met with Vice President Dick Cheney before leaving Washington yesterday. Why meet with Bush when you can meet with the guy who is really in charge?" —Jay Leno

Compiled by Daniel Kurtzman




Uggabugga Has the Calculations and the Graphs on Medicare Drug Bill


If your drug costs are less than $830/yr ($70/mo), you are paying more than you would if there were no drug plan.

Our best summary of the program is that is appears to be "half a loaf" (actually, more like 40% of a loaf). And that may not be good enough. We don't know what the general situation is for seniors, but we suspect that paying up to $3,500 for drugs (premiums, deductables, patient-share) may well be beyond the budgets of those who are not poor, but not well-off either.

You need to go down for the graphs. He didn't have tbe $25 update on this, they have lowered the deductable to $250.

Other uggabugga:

Who says Saddam had connections with al Qaeda? Bush 11 times in 6 days while campaigning for GOP candidates.

Who said Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction? Bush 14 times in 22 days while campaigning for the GOP.



The Big Battles on the Hill and the Real Power


Senators Block Energy Bill

Medicare too close to call


Meanwhile Cheney the Radical continues his absolutist paranoid control of foreign policy.


Far from fitting into 41's foreign policy team, Cheney was its ideological outlier. On the greatest issue of the day--what to do about a declining Soviet Union and America's place in a unipolar world-- Cheney dissented vigorously. His Pentagon argued, again and again, that the only true guarantee of U.S. security lay in transforming threatening nations into democratic ones--a radical notion to the realists in the first Bush White House. Cheney's policy allies were not national security adviser Scowcroft and Secretary of State Baker but rather a set of intellectuals on the Pentagon policy staff who shared and helped him refine his alternative vision of U.S. power and purpose. In the '90s, this worldview came to be known as neoconservatism. Cheney was there first.

Cheney gave his national security staff far greater responsibilities than had traditionally been accorded the vice president's team. His regional specialists wouldn't be involved only in issues relevant to the vice president--they would participate fully in the policymaking process and attend almost every interagency meeting. When Cheney first created this new structure, some Bushies openly described the operation as a "shadow" NSC. For those in the NSC itself, it often seemed like the "shadow" had more power than the real deal.

Even before September 11, 2001, Cheney's staff was convinced Iraq could be a democratic outpost in the region--much as they had hoped Ukraine would become--albeit through a U.S.-funded insurgency, not an invasion. According to his aides, Cheney had grown more convinced throughout the '90s of the futility of containing Saddam. In the early '90s, while Cheney was holed up at the American Enterprise Institute, his think-tank colleagues say he met Ahmed Chalabi and increasingly lent the Iraqi National Congress (INC) leader a sympathetic ear.

The attacks of September 11 violently accelerated Cheney's nascent vision of a democratic Middle East. As the ruins of the Twin Towers smoldered, Cheney decided the administration needed to change the strategic framework that had left the nation vulnerable to mass murder. He unveiled his thinking at the first NSC meeting after the attack. "To the extent we define our task broadly, including those who support terrorism, then we get at states," Cheney said, according to Bob Woodward's account of the meeting. The night before, Bush had told the nation he would make "no distinction" between Al Qaeda and its state sponsors. Cheney was pushing the president's reasoning to its next stage. As a friend recollects, Cheney now understood that "what you had to do was transform the Middle East."

As one former colleague of many OVP officials puts it, "They so believed that the CIA were wrong, they were like, 'We want to show these fuckers that they are wrong.'"

Any doubts expressed by the intelligence community about the OVP's sources, especially Chalabi, were ignored.

In the view of many at Langley, the OVP wasn't simply highlighting what it considered weaknesses in CIA analysis. Rather, it was trying to stifle information that it considered counterproductive to the case for war. The tone of the questioning, some analysts felt, was less inquisitive than hostile. "It was done along the lines of: 'What's wrong with you bunch of assholes? You don't know what's going on, you're horribly biased, you're a bunch of pinkos,'" says a retired analyst close to his active-duty colleagues.

In an August 2002 speech in Nashville, Cheney asserted, "The Iraqi regime has in fact been very busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue the nuclear program they began so many years ago." The intelligence community was in fact deeply divided over whether the nuclear program was again active, and a classified DIA report a month later indicated that the Agency had "no reliable information" about Iraq's chemical weapons program. But these doubts never seeped into Cheney's public statements.

The OVP never considered that it could be wrong, despite the fact that none of its senior members had intelligence training. The CIA, on the other hand, rather than behaving as a rigid and unshakable bastion of unquestionable truth, subjected its judgments to rigorous criticism. On Iraq, the CIA had what is known as the "red cell," a team of four highly regarded retired analysts who conducted alternative assessments of Iraq's ties to terrorism. The OVP, by contrast, put its judgments through no comparable wringer. Perhaps that is why so much of what they embraced was wrong.

A classified study prepared by the National Intelligence Council in early 2003 found that only one of Chalabi's defectors could be considered credible, The New Republic has learned. A more recent investigation undertaken by the DIA has found that practically all the intelligence provided by the INC was worthless.

There is no evidence the vice president has reconsidered either the ideological vision that has taken him this far or the process he has used to implement it. And, of course, there are enormous foreign policy challenges remaining on the U.S. agenda: the nuclear crises in North Korea and Iran, America's estrangement from the rest of the world, and above all the unfinished war on terrorism.

This is no mere intoxication with ideas of the moment, spurred by a zealous staff or the pain of September 11. This is who Dick Cheney--the most powerful vice president in history--is.

TNR has the article on Cheney.



Houston Politics


Is Green really a Democrat?

While Green says he has never represented himself as a Republican or a conservative in his campaigning, veteran Houston political consultant Mary Jane Smith disagrees vehemently. She claims she met Green at a Republican gathering during the campaign, where he was wooing conservatives.

"You would like the way I vote," she recalls Green saying. "He went on telling me how Republican he was, how conservative he was -- that he would be voting with all those other conservatives on council."

According to Smith, she later learned that Green was giving Democratic women's groups the opposite message: that he was a loyal party member and did not seek the endorsement of KSEV or other conservatives.

HUD hammers the city for botched house repairs for seniors and the disabled

A report completed this month by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and obtained by the Houston Press found mismanagement of the city's $5 million Home Repair Program to be rampant -- so rampant that HUD sent an enforcement letter two weeks ago ordering the program suspended.

"Due to the very serious nature of this finding, the fact that it is a repeat finding, and the city's continued failure to resolve timely and satisfactorily the complaints made by homeowners about the repair work done on their homes…the city is to discontinue immediately its…housing repair program," wrote Katie S. Worsham. She is director of HUD's Department of Community Planning and Development regional office, based in Fort Worth.

Daisy Stiner, the director of the city's Department of Housing and Community Development, did not reply to repeated requests for an interview. Her department has 30 days to respond to HUD's report, which examined 26 homes where repairs had been made and found problems with all of them.

DNA retests fail to match HPD's results

The latest retests bring the number of cases retested by private labs to 102, with problems such as insufficient samples or statistical discrepancies arising in 23 cases. The retests were ordered after HPD suspended DNA testing at its crime lab last year amid concerns about the quality and accuracy of its work.

Poe enters race for House seat

Former state District Judge Ted Poe, known for imposing unusual sentences during two decades on a Houston felony court bench, has announced as expected that he will seek the Republican nomination in the new 2nd Congressional District.

Poe, 55, resigned from the 228th District Court last month, prompting speculation that he would run for the U.S. House seat. He unofficially confirmed his plans when Harris County commissioners honored him Nov. 4.

el - I was wondering about Poe last night. Someone came into La Madeleine on Kirby where we were having a SF book meeting wearing a Poe for Congress button. I had my cap with the Dean button. La Madeleine has good soup, salad and pastries. Jim says he once had a bad experience with them but I didn't get details.




Another Study - Republicans Bad for the Stock Market


Professors Santa-Clara and Valkanov look at the excess market return - the difference between a broad index of stock prices (similar to the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index) and the three-month Treasury bill rate - between 1927 and 1998. The excess return measures how attractive stock investments are compared with completely safe investments like short-term T-bills.

Using this measure, they find that during those 72 years the stock market returned about 11 percent more a year under Democratic presidents and 2 percent more under Republicans - a striking difference.

One interesting finding is that although both large and small companies do better under Democratic administrations, small companies do especially well, while larger ones do only a little better. The return on the smallest 10 percent of traded companies is 21 percent higher during Democratic administrations, while the return on the largest 10 percent is only 7.7 percent greater.

Democrats - better for workers, better for the stock market, better for small business.

For at least 72 years, the stock market did far better under Democratic presidents than under Republicans. How can it be that investors have failed to take advantage of this seemingly predictable pattern?

Professors Santa-Clara and Valkanov wrote the first draft of their paper in 1999, and they admit that they could have profited handsomely by selling stocks after the 2000 election. Alas, like most investors, they didn't sell at the most opportune time. Even finance professors sometimes misjudge the market.



Iraq - al Qaeda Contacts Leak Smells of Neocon Desperation


The leaked memo consists mainly of 50 excerpts culled from raw intelligence reports by four US intelligence agencies about alleged al-Qaeda-Iraqi contacts from 1990 to 2003.

Some of the reports include brief analysis, but most cite accounts by unnamed sources, such as "a contact with good access," "a well placed source," "a former senior Iraqi intelligence officer," a "regular and reliable source," "sensitive CIA reporting," and "a foreign government service."

Although the article's author, Weekly Standard correspondent Stephen Hayes, concludes that much of the evidence is "detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources," the only example of real corroboration is with respect to several reports regarding contacts between al-Qaeda and Iraqi agents in Afghanistan in 1999.

W. Patrick Lang, former head of the Middle East section of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Washington Post the article amounted to a "listing of a mass of unconfirmed reports, many of which themselves indicate that the two groups continued to try to establish some sort of relationship."

At the same time, he added, it raises the question: "If they had such a productive relationship, why did they have to keep trying?"

Other retired officers stressed that, to the extent that virtually all of the excerpts consist of raw intelligence unvetted by professional analysts, the article appeared to prove precisely what critics had been saying: Feith's office simply picked those items in raw intelligence that tended to confirm their preexisting views that a relationship must have existed, without subjecting the evidence to the kind of rigorous analysis that intelligence agencies would apply.

"This is made to dazzle the eyes of the not terribly educated," Greg Thielmann, a veteran of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) who retired in 2002, told IPS.



Revolutionizing Politics - Dean's Internet Marketing Campaign


Teachout is a key architect of one of the most effective marketing efforts in the history of national politics, and the most sophisticated online campaign to date. Using a variety of Internet tools, from the electronic journals known as weblogs to social networking sites, the Dean campaign has propelled the Vermont doctor from near-anonymity to the front of the Democratic pack aiming to replace George W. Bush as chief executive of the United States.

The marketing of presidents and even state and local political candidates may never be the same. By early November, the Dean campaign claimed 500,000 online supporters, up from zero at the start of the year.

Just as important, he has been able to raise large amounts of money, a critical element in any national campaign. Dean pulled in a record $7.4 million in online donations during the third quarter of 2003, almost half his total for the period.

The lessons of the Dean campaign do not just apply to politics. Teachout and her compatriots have laid bare the essential power of the Internet to marketers of all types, from clothing to industrial equipment to financial services.

Television, radio, print and mail can create awareness and desire for a product. Senders control the presentation and, if intelligently worded and presented, the messages cause an individual or company to vote with its dollars, by buying the product. But the lesson of Dean's campaign is that the Web is not for micromanagers. With the Internet, an effective campaign creates a community that will on its own begin to market your product for you. Properly done, you won't be able – or want — to control it.

The payoff is a powerful multiplier effect that turns anyone into a potential campaign worker. It gives Dean a national network of troops on the ground, unpaid but on task. This is the great innovation of the Dean campaign: using the Internet to raise both support and funding, before rivals figure out how to do the same.

The two most effective tools for Dean have been a Web site that allows users to set up meetings with individuals of similar interests, known as Meetup.com; and the easy-to-use online diaries known as weblogs, or blogs.

Many of the campaign's principles have been developed in books like David Weinberger's "Small Pieces Loosely Joined," which explores the role of individuals connected by the Internet, and "The Cluetrain Manifesto," by Weinberger, Doc Searls, and Christopher Locke, which describes how to think of the way markets work in the online world, as well as "Smart Mobs" by Howard Rheingold. ("Moral Politics" by George Lakoff is cited as another key text for the campaign.)

"Cluetrain" describes markets as conversations, in which companies engage customers with an authentic human voice and respond to their needs, rather than pushing one-size-fits-all information out to them in mass broadcasts. "They are as close as I've seen to structuring a political campaign around the Cluetrain themes," says Weinberger, who is working as a consultant to the Dean campaign.



"The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq"


A BuzzFlash Interview with Robert Scheer And Christopher Scheer

Al Qaeda's Ties to Iraq
Iraq's Chemical and Biological Weapons
Iraq's Nuclear Weapons
The War Will be a "Cakewalk"
Iraq As a Democratic Model


As Christopher assured us in the interview, these five lead to many other lies, which lead to additional deceptions.

BUZZFLASH: These are not just deceptions that you document; they are something more than that. They are deliberate lies. You're very insistent on drawing a distinction between something that might have been the result of a careless assertion and lies.

ROBERT SCHEER: The five specific ones that the book singles out are cases where just too much information was known that what they were saying was not believable. For example -- and remember, this is not a question of "Are there old weapons in Iraq which may be found 15 years from now?" -- the president said there’s an imminent threat of deployed weapons that can be used within 45 minutes. They had to know that was a lie. There is enough intelligence data. And we knew there was no evidence. The claim on the nuclear [weapons] reconstitution had to be known as a lie. There was not a scintilla of evidence [to prove the threat].

The biggest lie of all was the connection between Hussein and al-Qaeda and 9/11. That’s just the most vicious lie, and one of the most vicious lies maybe in American history. Here you have this horrible traumatic event that not only killed people in this country, but threatens our civil liberties and threatens our whole system of government because of the over-reaction to it. And you know without any evidence whatsoever -- this they knew right in that first week or two -- they kept trying to link Hussein to it.

CHRISTOPHER SCHEER: Powell is completely implicated in this whole pattern of lying. His presentation to the UN about the threat of Iraq just before the war, in which he famously refused some of the data he was fed as "bullshit" -- as it was quoted in "U.S. World News and World Report" -- was received with rave reviews. But he went out and presented a whole bunch of new stuff that day which, in the book, we very carefully describe and pick apart: He went out and made a case for biochemical weapons labs in areas that Iraq didn’t even control. He talked about different individuals that were supposedly links between al-Qaeda and Hussein. And all this stuff was just as shaky and un-backed-up by the intelligence as the stuff that had come out in the previous six months, since the marketing campaign for the war in Iraq had begun.

And what’s astonishing in reviewing the book was to find out just how little they really had. They really took a few little pieces and milked them to the extent that it was clear they didn’t have much evidence at all. I mean, with a $27 billion intelligence budget, you think we could have come up with some more convincing evidence, even if it was manufactured.



Modern Republican Party closer to Peron than Adam Smith


Whiskey Bar -- Why is DeLay supporting the new Medicare Drug benefit?

The doctrine of supply side infallability -- cut taxes and revenues will always grow -- is one of the crucial fictions that allows conservatives to indulge their inner statist. It allows them to reconcile ideological conviction (if we're cutting taxes, we must be against big government) and political necessity (interest group coalitions can't live by tax cuts alone.)

In the process, however, the Republicans are digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole -- making progressively more extravagant promises to a widening circle of interest groups, in hopes it will help them secure their majority in a country still split relatively evenly between the two parties.

More great Billmon



Krugman: AARP Bought Off


NYTIMES -- This is a good bill that will help every Medicare beneficiary," wrote Tom Scully, the Medicare administrator, in a letter to The New York Times defending the prescription drug bill. That's flatly untrue. (Are you surprised?) As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, the bill will force millions of beneficiaries to pay more for drugs, thanks to a provision that cuts off supplemental aid from Medicaid. Poorer recipients may find previously affordable drugs moving out of reach.

That's only one of a number of anti-retiree measures tucked away in the bill. It contains several Trojan horse provisions that are clearly intended to undermine Medicare over time — it will allow private insurers to cherry-pick healthy clients in selected cities, and it will heavily subsidize private plans competing with traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, the bill prohibits Medicare from using its bargaining power to cut drug prices; drug company stocks have soared since the bill's details became public.

But as Jonathan Cohn points out in The New Republic, drug and insurance companies got exactly what they wanted: no efforts to limit prices, generous subsidies and lots of additional business. For example, insurance companies that offer an alternative to Medicare will not only be able to pick and choose their customers, but will also get 30 percent more per client than the government spends on the average Medicare recipient.

So do AARP executives support this bill because they hope to share in the bounty? Maybe, but it probably runs deeper than that. Once an advocacy group becomes as much a business as a service organization, its executives are likely to start identifying more with industry interests than with the groups they are supposed to serve.

Medicare "reform" appears likely to be another triumph for the coalition of the bought-off — a coalition that, sadly, includes AARP.

Center For American Progress -- According to a new report by Public Citizen, the group – which purports to be a seniors advocacy group – in fact has "become a business deriving a large portion – about 60% - of its annual revenue from selling insurance products, such as Medigap supplemental drug insurance policies; selling mail-order prescription drugs; and offering prescription drug discount cards." Membership dues, in contrast, comprise "only 29% of AARP's total revenues." Right now, the group pulls in at least $161.6 million a year in insurance-related income; the "AARP would stand to gain many millions of dollars in new income under the Republican Medicare bill." For example, if the AARP, "with 35 [million] members, captured just 5 percent of the new $400 billion Medicare prescription drug market over the next 10 years, it would collect an additional $20 billion in insurance premiums."

The LA Times writes that there's a big expectations gap, as "analysts say many seniors will find that the plan fails the what's-in-it-for-me test." President Bush led many seniors to believe they were getting health care benefits similar to those held by their elected representatives: "Every member of Congress gets to choose a health-care plan that makes the most sense for them...If choice is good for members of the Congress, then choice is good for America's seniors." However, what seniors will actually get from the bill is nothing like that: A) the prescription drug benefit doesn't kick in until 2006; B) the "donut" effect kicks in, leaving seniors responsible for all expenses after $2,250 in drug costs until expenses reached $5,100, leading more seniors paying more for drugs in 2007 than they did in 2003; C) even with the substantial $71 billion subsidy/bribe to employers to keep seniors in retirement coverage plans, "roughly 2 million seniors would likely lose it anyway" and D) there are no provisions containing the underlying cost of prescription drugs. (Click HERE to see American Progress's analysis of the Medicare bill.)

Leaders in Congress so far are ignoring the wishes of average Americans by refusing to back down to the powerful drug lobbyists and allow reimportation of inexpensive drugs from Canada . While versions of the reimportation bill have passed both the House and Senate, the conference report leaves it out. That has many conservative lawmakers threatening to withhold their votes and some state lawmakers threatening to buck the federal government.

USAToday -- although the bill was originally "intended to cost no more than $400 billion over 10 years...tax breaks for businesses and individuals will drive the figure higher." And according to Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, " it would cost between $1.7 trillion and $2 trillion in the second decade." The expense will be disproportionately paid by poorer Americans.

This week eighty-five lawmakers, led by Rep. Lynn Woolsey, renounced "their current or future membership in AARP," saying "There is no reason that an organization that purports to protect the needs of the elderly should accept a plan that will undermine Medicare."

Today's Progress Report was the source of most of this on Medicare but also contain information on the $140 Billion Dollar Energy Bill cost, who's winning the war on terror and much more.


Thursday, November 20, 2003

Protesters topple Bush statue in London

A Real Big Crowd Topples Bush StatueUp to 100,000 protesters have marched through London and torn down a mock statue of visiting US President George W Bush, many of them convinced his policies were to blame for bombings targeting British interests in Turkey.

Demonstrators of all ages beat drums and blew whistles along a three-mile route that took them past Parliament and the end of Downing Street, where crowds paused to jeer towards British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office.

When they reached Trafalgar Square, protesters felled a six-metre papier mache statue of Bush in a parody of the toppling of a statue of Saddam Hussein when US and British troops swept into Baghdad. In the statue's top pocket was a puppet with a grinning Blair face.









War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal


International lawyers and anti-war campaigners reacted with astonishment yesterday after the influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal.

In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."

link from BuzzFlash.



More from the LA TIMES Poll


Those voters expressed markedly different preferences than those Democrats who aren't yet tuned in. Among those following the race closely, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean leads with 20%, followed by retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark with 14% and Massachusetts Sen. John F. Kerry with 10%.

Among those not closely following the race, the leaders are Sen. Joe Lieberman, Gore's 2000 running mate, with 13% and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, the former House Democratic leader, with 10%; Dean draws 4%.



Save the Environment, Save Medicare, Fight Pork


Tell the people who represent you how you feel about the Energy Bill and the Medicare Bill. Use toll-free 1-800-839-5276 to contact your Representative and Senators. You can also visit the local offices of your Representative.

More numbers -

AARP TX Branch: 713-267-2226
National hotline: 1-800-424-3410

Instead of quiting cancel the magazine and say you will vote against every AARP leader who does not immediately vote to recall the national leadership. This proposal is only supported by 18% of AARP members.

More Houston area numbers -

Representative R. Christopher Bell
DC Phone: 202-225-7508

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
DC Phone: 202-224-5922

Senator John Cornyn
DC Phone: 202-224-2934

And yet more gets added: Move On want to know how you feel about this -- they are collecting
individual comments to share with the media, at:

http://moveon.org/aarp.html?id=2136-1452234-qgM855vgx1m7Ra7pUxn48w


The AARP has endorsed a bill that would make two fundamental changes
in Medicare:

1. First, it would force people to make a stark choice: either pay
sharply increased premiums to stay in traditional Medicare, where
they can choose their doctor; or be forced out, into an HMO.

Newt Gingrich, the former House Republican leader, said in 1995
that he wanted to let Medicare to "wither on the vine." This
change would lead to that result, with cost incentives driving
people out. (Not coincidentally, AARP CEO William Novelli
recently wrote the forward to Gingrich's book. [2])

2. Second, it offers a prescription drug benefit, but requires people
who want this coverage to buy it from private insurance plans.

This part of the bill also bars the government from doing the one
thing it could do to actually reduce the cost of these drugs --
negotiate for lower prices, using the size of the Medicare program
as leverage. Drug prices are soaring now, and unless they're
brought under control, they will eventually bankrupt Medicare.

AARP itself sells insurance and also sells prescription drugs, so
the group stands to reap huge financial gains from this change.



Bush Trailing in Re-Elect Poll


LA Times -- When the poll asked registered voters whether Bush deserved reelection, 42% said yes and 46% said no, a difference within the survey's margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. When asked whether they were more likely to support Bush or the Democratic nominee in 2004, voters again lined up in almost equal camps, with the president trailing, 38% to 42%, also within the margin of error.

On one axis, voters appear to be weighing generally positive assessments of his personal characteristics — from likability and leadership to honesty — against a more ambivalent view of his policies and their impact on the country.

Along another axis, the poll indicates voters are balancing the first flickers of optimism about the economy against growing anxiety over America's progress in Iraq.

Together, these forces have left Bush in an unstable, though not precarious, position for 2004. His showing against a generic Democrat for 2004 is the same as that of his father, President George H. W. Bush, when the Times asked that question in January 1992. Ten months later, Bill Clinton ousted the elder Bush from the White House.

Single voters give the Democrat a 20-point edge, while married voters narrowly prefer Bush.

Church attendance, a critical predictor of support in 2000, remains telling: Bush leads by 13 points among voters who attend church at least once a week, while trailing narrowly among those who attend monthly, and running 15 points behind among those who rarely or never attend.

Urban voters prefer the Democrat by 2 to 1, while rural voters back Bush by more than 2 to 1.

Voters who think abortion should be illegal, gay marriage banned and gun control laws loosened all strongly prefer Bush; those on the opposite side of those issues bend even more sharply toward the Democrats.

In another measure of the evolving social structure of U.S. politics, those who drink wine with dinner prefer a Democrat over Bush for 2004 by 7 percentage points. Those who drink beer back Bush over a Democrat by 23 percentage points.

el - my new political strategy - encourage wine drinking.



Dean, sunny-side up


Now begins a real battle for Dean's image: his opponents want voters to see him as an inconsistent supporter of key Democratic causes and an unreconstructed, unelectable liberal. And Dean, who has made a concerted effort in recent days to broaden his message beyond a central anti-war, anti-Bush theme, is attempting to show more of the free-thinking, ideologically moderate policy wonk he was when he ran Vermont.

Hence, on a day when former Gen. Wesley Clark criticized him for proposing too much new government regulation of business, Dean talked about his own proposal to roll back the federal government's regulation of schools.

After beginning his day at the National Congress of American Indians in Albuquerque, Dean jetted to a middle school in Davenport, Iowa, to talk about his plan for education, which consists largely of undoing what he considers to be the "huge mistake" of President Bush's reform, No Child Left Behind. In front of a library room full of teachers, parents and reporters, he outlined a plan to do away with much of the currently mandated regimen of standardized testing for public schools, saying that it was essentially a recipe for undermining the public school system.

"What this is about is undoing public schools," he said.

He also proposed spending $25 billion to fund training programs for teachers, support programs for parents and extra help for students. Pointing to the administration's spending of federal money on tax cuts and Iraq, he said, "I think we can find $25 billion for education." As in most of his deliveries, much of the energy was spent painting President George Bush as incompetent, dishonest, uncaring. "As with almost everything from this president, this is purely political" he said. "This isn't meant to be good policy."

The other sign of Dean's stylistic evolution was a decidedly deliberate emphasis on optimistic language -- borrowing a page from the current president -- in contrast to some of his less-sunny speeches criticizing Bush policy and his Democratic opponents that have earned him the dreaded "too angry" designation from critics in both parties.

"I want to run an administration based on hope rather than fear," he said, standing under a campaign banner that said "A New Day for Democrats; Educating a Generation."

It seemed to achieve the desired effect, politically speaking -- almost on cue, a local school board member, Tim Tupper, said, "We had some representatives of the Bush administration here a couple of weeks ago. It was interesting to hear the difference. Tonight, we heard about a positive vision."



The Neo-Con Defense of Saddam and Al Qaeda Links


The Saddam-Osama Memo, and Its Critics

el - The original tactics of the hard right and the Murdoch media empire was to ignore the DoD statement that the reports were "inaccurate," "not an analysis," and "drew no conclusion." The DoD also strongly condemned the latest example of the right leaking and publishing classified and secret documents.

This is the Weekly Standard's first response to the "inaccurate" charge. They fail to note this report is coming from the unfiltered pro-war pipeline set up to bypass the normal intelligence channels. They fail to note that the great majority of the reports are uncollaborated testimony by people with an agenda to get the U.S. to invade Iraq and instead try to force collaboration by saying there are six separate reports of meetings in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Sure, there is some level of contacts, which the neo-cons are trying to raise to the threat to the United States level. But the basic fact remains that Al Qaeda and Saddam had a hostile relationship and bin Ladin considered Saddam the leader of the main secularist regime in the Middle East that needed to be converted.

There have been a series of articles in the last several weeks, the latest neo-con media campaign, to reassociate Iraq with a terrorist threat to the U.S. The evidence is actually much less strong than before the war.

No word from the standard on the flaunting of national security laws. Of course, as the Plame Game has shown, with Ashcroft as Attorney General the right is not subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

Added - From the Center for American Progress

While the person who published the report, Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard, tried to defend himself, the Saddam-Al Qaeda myth has been debunked before. The NYT reported on 6/27/03 that, “The chairman of the monitoring group appointed by the United Nations Security Council to track Al Qaeda told reporters that his team had found no evidence linking Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein.” The LA Times reported on 7/19/03 that the bipartisan 9/11 commission report “undercuts Bush administration claims before the war that Hussein had links to Al Qaeda.” And National Journal reported on 8/9/03 that “three former Bush Administration officials who worked on intelligence and national security issues said the prewar evidence tying Al Qaeda was tenuous, exaggerated and often at odds with the conclusions of key intelligence agencies.”


Wednesday, November 19, 2003



Limbaugh bank withdrawals under Investigation


Authorities are investigating whether radio host Rush Limbaugh skirted banking laws in getting cash to buy his illegal prescription painkillers, it was reported last night.

Limbaugh made between 30 and 40 cash withdrawals from his account at U.S. Trust in amounts just under $10,000, ABC News quoted law enforcement officials as saying.

At one point, a U.S. Trust employee delivered about $9,900 in cash to Limbaugh at his New York studio, ABC reported. Banks must report withdrawals of $10,000 or more to the federal government.

Law enforcement officials will decide this week whether to prosecute Limbaugh on the felony money-laundering charges, ABC News also revealed.

el - What would Rush say about money laundering for illegal drug purchases? THROW THE BOOK AT HIM!



Dean's Houston Rally Marks Turning Point In Campaign


Dale Napier -- The Houston rally was a big success, although the turnout was subdued by a near-week of rain and then flooding just the night before. Yours truly waded through hip-deep water just to get to the corner convenience store! It not only prevented people from getting to the rally, it pretty well dissolved the well-organized efforts we had planned for getting people to the rally. In that context, 2,000 was a fine turnout. Events and activities also went smoothly in spite of a three-hour power failure that threatened the lighting and sound systems at one point.

At this point the Houston-area operation is switching gears: we are going from being an event-oriented operation to being a precinct organizing operation. All our efforts from here on out will be oriented toward getting Dean supporters to the polls on March 9, and getting them to the precinct conventions that night at 7 p.m. Come to Meetup on Dec. 3, 7 pm, Schlotzsky's, 2929 Kirby, to help us get started and to plan a Holiday Party celebrating the first anniversary of Dean's celebrated speech to the Democratic National Committee.

To that end, the campaign nationally is rolling out Dean Grassroots Organizing Summits. It is also looking for commercials from volunteers. Get creative and get involved.



Enron Economics -- Dean's Houston Speech


If our country is so rich, why am I barely getting by? If our country is so strong, why are we being made to feel so afraid? If our country is so powerful, why do I feel so powerless?

These questions are larger than any one issue or program or policy prescription.

What I have seen and heard across America is that people feel disconnected from their government and our business leaders -- and from one another. They are afraid America is becoming more and more hated across the world. And they worry that they may always be struggling just to make ends meet.

This is where our country is. And this is what has shaped our campaign into what it is today.

We stand here today for all those who feel that Washington has forgotten them.

We stand here today for all those who believe that when our government serves only the big corporations, it betrays everything our country represents.

We stand here today for all those who believe America should not only be feared by the world, but admired.

We stand here today ready to challenge the old political order which has shut the people out of the process. We stand here ready to declare with our voices and our votes: "America is better than this."

Not far from here stands Enron Tower. It symbolizes all that is wrong with our country today.

At Enron, those at the top enriched themselves by deceiving everyone else and robbing ordinary people of the future they'd earned. And the Bush Administration is following their lead. They have created an economic program that enriches their friends and supporters at the expense of ordinary working Americans. A program deserving of the name -- Enron Economics."

We were promised fiscal responsibility. We've gotten a 9 trillion dollar increase in the nation's debt over ten years. We were told that tax cuts would reduce the deficit, but the government's chief auditor -- a Republican -- says that's flat false."

Enron Economics benefits those who make the most -- their share of the tax burden declined from 28 percent in the 1990s to nearly 20 percent today. Meanwhile, everyone else suffers -- cities and states across America are raising property taxes health insurance premiums and college tuition. Schools are closing and teachers and police officers are being laid off. Funding for Medicaid and housing is being cut â'" and our infrastructure continues to crumble.

We know what happened to Enron. Moral bankruptcy led to fiscal bankruptcy. And the ethos of Enron is where our politics and policies have led us in America.

But every one of us here today knows that Enron Tower marks the end of an era, because right here, less than one mile away, the new era is being born.

And it begins with you.



"Bush's Way" Unchallenged in U.S. News & World Report


The most conservative of the general news weeklies has a cover story on the new war in Iraq that relies on administration officials and includes no critics. FAIR is all over it.



Time to Rethink the Disastrous Medicare Legislation


Conservatives are bashing the new Medicare bill. Really this looks like burnt toast for the leadership of both the GOP and the AARP.




Love Wins, Homophobes Freak Out


Morford Rants -- The Love That Killed America / As gay marriage wins even more legal support, Bible-clutching homophobes recoil, violently

And almost every one of them is vowing, right this minute, to vote for Bush in the next election, if for no other reason than because he's a none-too-bright born-again Christian who will protect them from those icky homos and will invoke God's name as it's supposed to be invoked -- you know, as justification for launching ultraviolent bloody hate-filled unwinnable wars over petroleum and corporate power.

The nation is not ready. Even gay rights advocates are worried, as the issue is simply moving and evolving too quickly for the dread-filled, God-fearing, war-drunk nation to absorb.

And, verily, the fear among the gay community is that the issue's amazing momentum could backfire, could divide the nation even more violently and drive more confused citizens straight into the fearmongering tentacles of the hate-filled Right.

It does not matter that gay marriage is so obviously no threat whatsoever to "traditional" marriage or the sanctity of uptight pseudo-Christian missionary-position Budweiser-fueled sex and the spawning of more Republican babies.

It does not matter that gay marriage could, in fact, be the savior of the institution of marriage in this nation in how it gives new life, new breath to our beleaguered notions of love and commitment and family, considering the relentless 50 percent divorce rate among happy heterosexuals.

This is a nation that still, despite its incredibly diverse range of religious belief, despite its array of progressive cities and universities, despite how every nuanced soul anywhere on the planet understands that love is not to be contained by rigid legislation and sanctimonious bile and pious narrow mindedness (hey, just ask the Taliban), this is a nation that still wraps itself in the blind and dangerous cloak of a few misinterpreted, regurgitated lines of the Bible as justification for bashing gays and remaining completely ignorant as to uncontainable energies of love and commitment. It's true.



The $11 Million Picture


Despite the $11 Million poured into the proponents of the Medicare Drug Bill and the corruption of the AARP leadership (who sell their own insurance and drug plans), opposition is swiftly mounting for the bill.

Just like every bill that the GOP controlled House and Senate passes, corporate tax-break pork oozes out. More than a quarter of the money in the 10-year, $400 billion Medicare prescription drug bill that Congress is debating this week would go to employers, private insurers and health care providers.

The bill, which would be the biggest expansion of Medicare in 38 years, contains more than $100 billion in enticements for corporations, insurance companies and protects drug companies who were afraid that the legislation would drive down the price of drugs - and their profits.

Angry and wet, AARP members try to burn cards

Members of the AARP, the influential lobbying group for the elderly, tried in vain to burn their membership cards on Wednesday to protest against the group's endorsement of the Republican Medicare bill.

A few dozen people in their 50s and 60s gathered in the rain outside the AARP's headquarters in downtown Washington and tried to burn their cards, but cut them up instead when the plastic coating would not catch fire.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California at a rally accused the AARP of being in the "pocket" of the Republican leadership. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, demanded that the organization "come clean" if it has a financial stake in the legislation.

A few Democratic lawmakers, while not joining the rain-soaked seniors' protest, said they were also resigning from the AARP. "I destroyed my card," said Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat.

"I cannot in good conscience continue as a member of an organization that ignores the will and best interest of its own membership," Rep. Lois Capps, a California Democrat and former school nurse, wrote in a letter resigning from the group.

Other seniors groups, smaller and less influential than the AARP, have banded together with some consumer and labor groups to try to build opposition to the bill.

A poll commissioned for the AFL-CIO, which opposes the Medicare bill, found that only 19 percent of registered voters at 55 and above supported the Medicare bill. For AARP members, who represented 57 of the poll's 604 respondents, the figure was slightly lower, 18 percent.


Major Provisions of Medicare Legislation are out.

Beginning in 2006, Medicare beneficiaries could sign up for a stand-alone drug plan or join a private health plan that offers drug coverage. They would be charged a premium of $35 per month, or $420 per year. After meeting a $275 deductible, insurance would pay 75 percent of drug costs up to $2,200.

Coverage gap:

No coverage for drug costs between $2,200 and $3,600 out of pocket.

Catastrophic coverage:

When out-of-pocket spending reaches $3,600, insurance covers 95 percent of drug costs or requires a modest co-payment.

Low-income subsidies:

The premium, deductible and coverage gap would be waived for people earning up to $12,123 a year. To qualify for the subsidy, seniors could have no more than $6,000 in fluid assets. The subsidies would be phased out between $12,123 and roughly $13,500 in yearly income.

Retiree coverage:

Would provide tax-free subsidies, perhaps worth as much as $70 billion, to employers who maintain drug coverage for retirees once Medicare drug benefit begins in 2006.

OTHER CHANGES:

Doctor and other out-of-hospital coverage (Medicare Part B):

Premium:

By law, Medicare beneficiaries pay 25 percent of the Part B premium and the government pays the rest. Individuals with incomes greater than $80,000 would pay a larger premium. The size of their premium would increase on a sliding scale, topping out at 80 percent for people with incomes over $200,000.

Deductible:

Would rise from $100 to $110 in 2005 and thereafter be indexed to the growth in Part B spending.

Role of private companies:

Private firms would administer the drug benefit on a regional basis. Would provide $12 billion in subsidies to private insurers that choose to offer basic health insurance. Those include preferred provider organizations (PPOs), which encourage use of certain doctors but allow patients to go elsewhere if they pay extra, and private fee-for-service plans, which allow patients to see any doctor.

Beginning in 2010, traditional Medicare also would face competition from private plans in six metropolitan areas in which at least two private plans enroll at least 25 percent of Medicare beneficiaries. For those who remain in traditional Medicare, premium increases would be capped at 5 percent a year and waived for low-income seniors. The competition would last six years.

The government would provide drug coverage in any region that does not have at least one standalone drug plan and one private health plan.

Rural health:

Would spend about $25 billion to increase payments to rural hospitals and doctors, among others.

Generic drugs:

Would speed generic drugs to the market by limiting ability of pharmaceutical companies to block cheaper equivalents (final details still to be worked out).

Drug importation from Canada:

Would maintain the ban on importing prescription drugs. Would allow such drugs from Canada, but only if Department of Health and Human Services certifies safety, something it has declined to do. Would authorize a study of safety issues.

Doctor and other out-of-hospital coverage (Medicare Part B):

Premium:

By law, Medicare beneficiaries pay 25 percent of the Part B premium and the government pays the rest. Individuals with incomes greater than $80,000 would pay a larger premium. The size of their premium would increase on a sliding scale, topping out at 80 percent for people with incomes over $200,000.

Deductible:

Would rise from $100 to $110 in 2005 and thereafter be indexed to the growth in Part B spending.


BTW - Amount of each US citizen's share of the national debt as of October 21, 2003 = $23,396.




The New Hidden Lobby


How a 'fake grassroots' lobbying firm now owns an internet magazine and an influential pundit.

Lobbying firms that once specialized in gaining person-to-person access to key decision-makers have branched out. The new game is to dominate the entire intellectual environment in which officials make policy decisions, which means funding everything from think tanks to issue ads to phony grassroots pressure groups. But the institution that most affects the intellectual atmosphere in Washington, the media, has also proven the hardest for K Street to influence--until now.

Glassman convinced individual corporations and trade associations to supplement their handshake lobbying with advertisements in the pages of Roll Call, promoting or attacking pending legislation. "It was a singular business insight," says Glenn Simpson, an early Glassman hire who now writes for The Wall Street Journal. "You have a captive audience of 535 of the most powerful people in the world and their 10,000 staff members who all read you closely, and then you have all these people who want to influence those people." Within a year, circulation more than doubled and Roll Call's ad pages increased sevenfold.

As he became more successful, the onetime student radical and McGovernik also moved right. In 1995, by then a business columnist for The Washington Post, Glassman began moonlighting for the op-ed page; there, during the height of Gingrichism, he assailed federal student loans, defended high C.E.O. pay, and agitated for the flat tax. In the fall of 1996, he was named a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a leading conservative think tank and a kind of government-in-exile for Republican officials from the first Bush administration.

Tech Central Station was launched in early 2000, with a smattering of content and one sponsor, AT&T. But Glassman had bigger plans. As he explained during a speech in Los Angeles not long after the launch, "We concentrate on such issues as Internet taxation, broad-band dissemination, privacy, biotechnology, high tech trade, and so on," serving as "a kind of watchdog in an area in which few people seem to be doing long-term principled thinking on public policy." Glassman exulted, "I think in a sense we kind of invented a new sort of institution."

But what sort of institution, exactly? At first glance, TCS does resemble a think tank-cum-opinion magazine--indeed, a successful one. TCS brings all of this off with a relatively small staff, drawing on the brainpower of established think tanks rather than housing and paying its own fellows and scholars, and publishing their arguments in its own "magazine" rather than hawking sound-bites to print reporters and columnists. "We can get the word out much more quickly [than a traditional think tank]," says Glassman, "and it's a lot less expensive not having a lot of bricks and mortar."

TCS combines all the strengths of a modern advocacy think tank with the reach and accessibility of a successful political magazine.

Tech Central Station is organized as a limited liability corporation--that is, a for-profit business. As an LLC, there is little Tech Central Station must publicly disclose about itself save for the names and addresses of its owners, and there is no presumption, legal or otherwise, that it exists to serve the public interest.

On closer inspection, Tech Central Station looks less like a think-tank-cum-magazine than a kind of lobbying practice. Which makes sense: Four of the five co-owners of TCS are also the co-owners of the DCI Group, the Washington public affairs firm founded by Republican operative Thomas J. Synhorst. TCS's fifth owner is Charles Francis, who is also a senior lobbyist at DCI and is listed on TCS's phone directory. And as it happens, three of TCS's sponsors--AT&T, General Motors, and PhRMA--have also retained DCI for their lobbying needs.

Like its publishing arm, DCI's business is to influence elite opinion in Washington. But instead of publishing articles, DCI specializes in what's known as "corporate-financed grass-roots organizing," such as setting up front groups to agitate for a client's position, placing letters to the editor with key newspapers, and using phone banks to generate calls to politicians.

After ExxonMobil became a sponsor the site published a flurry of content attacking both the Kyoto accord to limit greenhouse gasses and the science of global warming--which happen to be among Exxon-Mobil's chief policy concerns in Washington.

TCS's articles have also complemented work being done by DCI. During 2000, Microsoft contracted with DCI to perform various services, among them generating "grassroots" letters opposing a breakup of Microsoft and launching Americans for Technology Leadership, an anti-breakup group funded in part by Microsoft and run out of DCI's office. Meanwhile, down the hall, Tech Central Station went on the offensive, inaugurating an "anti-trust" section that over the coming months would publish little except defenses of Microsoft and attacks on the software maker's corporate and governmental antagonists, with occasional detours into the subject of lawsuit reform.

I asked him whether or not TCS published opinions that contradicted the policy views, of, say, AT&T. "Frankly, we think that other points of view are well represented everywhere else," he responded cheerfully. "To have one point of view on an issue like telecom is something that we don't have a problem with." He added, "We're an advocacy group. There's no doubt about that. I don't think we ever had pretenses of being an academic think tank."

James Glassman has recognized a new and largely untapped opportunity for his journalistic talents. If his past is any guide, two things are likely to happen. Other journalists and pundits will follow suit, touching off a growth market in Washington journo-lobbying--and then that market will crash.

Link from Josh.



The Pork Belly Energy Bill


CalPundit -- This New York Times article summarizes reaction:

Policy analysts across the political spectrum yesterday denounced the energy bill that Republicans in Congress hope to push to approval this week, saying it represented micromanagement of the economy and would open vast new opportunities for tax cheating.

Many experts said they were taken aback by the size of the proposed breaks...


Given the realities of electoral politics, it takes a lot for insiders to be "taken aback" by anything that comes out of Congress, but this legislation does it. The Times lists opposition from the Heritage Foundation, Cato, Citizens for Tax Justice, and Public Citizen, and so far I haven't seen a single non-industry group come out in favor of it. When both Heritage and Citizens for Tax Justice oppose something, you know there's a problem.

The biggest one for me is that there's nothing to blog about. This bill is very plainly nothing but an enormous piece of corporate welfare, with tax giveaways and unneeded incentives for practically every energy-related lobbying group around but practically no actual energy policy. It's just one big pork fest, and the folks who came up with it barely even did us the courtesy of trying to hide it. There's nothing in this bill that deserves any serious analysis.

From the comments: This bill embodies the worst of the democratic process. It's a bill with giveaways to everyone to try to get as many votes as it can. It's just awful and doesn't address the problem. Both liberals and conservatives compromised but not adressing real issues. depressing. -- hoo



Bush fury at gay marriage ruling


The Australian -- George W. Bush interrupted his visit to Britain yesterday to condemn a court ruling that gay couples have the right to marry, and vowed to push for a constitutional amendment to "defend the sanctity of marriage".

"Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," the US President said.

"Today's decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

Democrat presidential frontrunner Howard Dean -- who as Vermont governor established civil unions for same-sex couples -- warned that the decision should not be used to divide Americans.

"Instead, this decision should be viewed as an opportunity to affirm what binds us together -- a fundamental belief in the equality of human beings, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation," Mr Dean said.

"One way or another, the state should afford same-sex couples equal treatment under the law in areas such as health insurance, hospital visitation and inheritance rights."


Tuesday, November 18, 2003

Houston Rally with Governor Howard Dean!!


Miller Outdoor Theater/Hermann Park
Houston, TX
Meet and rally with the next president of the United States! Rally starts at 5 pm, program starts at 5:45 pm. The event is free, but donations will be accepted and encouraged so bring a credit card!

Hermann Park is directly south of downtown and directly north of the Medical Center. Miller Theater is at the north end of the park between the Zoo and the Museum of Natural Science.

Tuesday, November 18, 05:00 PM


Limbaugh not well-liked


A new Gallup Poll conducted Nov. 10-12 shows that just 34% of Americans at this time hold a favorable view of Limbaugh, while 51% hold an unfavorable view.

35% of conservatives now hold an unfavorable view of Limbaugh (along with 75% of liberals).

Among liberals, 29% have a favorable opinion and 12% have an unfavorable opinion of Franken. Among conservatives, 9% have a favorable opinion and 29% an unfavorable one.

Winfrey regularly rates as one of the most admired women in Gallup's annual polls, so it comes as little surprise that 73% of Americans hold a favorable opinion of her. There is a difference in her ratings among various political ideologies (81% favorable among liberals, 75% among moderates, and 68% among conservatives), but they are far less polarized than those of more politically oriented personalities.

el - Oprah would make a great Democratic Senate candidate.

Gallup also have the Bush poll results: Bush Approval at 50%, Tied for Lowest of Presidency



Kerry and Kucinich shine in Iowa.


On a series of issues, Kerry contrasted President Bush's promises with what Bush has delivered, leading the crowd in a refrain against each "raw deal." With a nod to FDR, Kerry promised a "real deal, where we stand up and fight for working people … where we make our economy an economy that's based on people and products."

The word "real" was explicitly aimed at Bush, whom Kerry accused of playing "dress-up" in his famous celebration of victory in Iraq. "I know something about aircraft carriers for real," said Kerry. "If George Bush wants to make national security the issue of this campaign, then I have three words for him that I know he understands: Bring it on!"

"I will not balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable people in America, and I will not raise taxes on the middle class," he pledged.

Hours before the candidates spoke, the wires reported that U.S. forces had suffered their most deadly incident of the war. Yet the only thing Gephardt managed to say about Bush's policy was, "We're losing our allies by the day." Kucinich addressed the day's horrors more directly. He opened his speech by recalling his visits as a newspaper copy boy to families who had lost their sons in Vietnam.



Move-On Becoming Poweful Lobby


Since its founding in 1998 to protest the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, MoveOn.org has grown from its founders' anger into a bottom-up organization that has inserted itself into the political process in ways large and small, using just seven paid employees working out of their homes — only one of them in Washington. This year alone, the group has mobilized hundreds of thousands of Internet-savvy Americans to protest the invasion of Iraq, fight the Federal Communications Commission's stand on media deregulation and lobby against judicial nominees.

Some political scientists say that MoveOn.org may foreshadow the next evolutionary change in American politics, a move away from one-way tools of influence like television commercials and talk radio to interactive dialogue, offering everyday people a voice in a process that once seemed beyond their reach.

Mr. Boyd and Ms. Blades, who together built a company that produced the famous flying-toaster computer screensavers, never imagined they would become so immersed in politics.

Yet drawn in by their anger over the impeachment, they turned the guest house of their hillside home in Berkeley, with a view of the Golden Gate Bridge, into the operational headquarters for MoveOn.org.

After the impeachment votes, the group formed a political action committee to defeat the House impeachment managers in the 2000 elections. After most of them won re-election, Mr. Boyd said, the couple intended to return to their previous lives, with a plan to design educational computer software.

MoveOn.org organizers say they are filling a vacuum left by the Democratic leaders. The organization's e-mail list is larger than the Democratic Party's 1.5 million and the Dean campaign's 500,000, although the Republican Party e-mail list may be greater than the three of those combined.

Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, met Mr. Boyd in April to discuss MoveOn.org's strategies. The party has also expressed interest in buying MoveOn.org's e-mail list, an offer Mr. Boyd rejected as a violation of members' privacy.

Now MoveOn.org has decided to take on Mr. Bush on behalf of its members. In the three weeks since the MoveOn.org Voter Fund was begun, $5 million has been raised from 86,000 donors. The goal is $10 million.

Move-on - The Grassroads Progressive Voice.



Poll: Support for Bush handling of Iraq war drops


Approval for the way the United States, and by implication President Bush, has handled Iraq since the major fighting ended has dropped by nearly half — from a high of 80% as U.S. tanks rolled into Baghdad in late April to 42% now.

Women, minorities, liberals, moderates, independents and Democrats give Bush his lowest scores. Males, whites, conservatives and Republicans are most supportive.

Six of 10 surveyed think the situation will deteriorate into chaos and civil war if troops are quickly withdrawn. That number drops to five in 10 if troops leave in three years.

• Also, just 50% think Iraq can establish a stable government if troops leave in six months. That proportion jumps to 64% if troops stay for three years.

• Even if troops stay three years, more than eight of 10 expect American military casualties to continue at the same rate or higher.

• Most doubt the Iraqi people will ever view the USA as a friendly nation.



New Clergy Group to Counter Conservatives


In an effort to counter the influence of conservative Christian organizations, a coalition of moderate and liberal religious leaders is starting a political advocacy organization to mobilize voters in opposition to Bush administration policies.

The nonprofit organization, the Clergy Leadership Network, plans to formally announce its formation on Friday and will operate from an expressly religious, expressly partisan point of view. The group cannot, under Internal Revenue Service guidelines, endorse political candidates, and it will have no official ties to the Democratic Party.



Tricky Medicare Politics


Liberal Oasis -- The key for Dems is to engage the senior grassroots, so that no matter what happens in Congress, seniors will know Bush and the GOP are out to screw them.

If the outcry from the seniors is loud enough that the bill dies, that’s a bonus.

But the bill can pass and still hurt the Republicans by 2004.

Why? Two big reasons.

Seniors are dead-set against privatization (See LO’s June 20 post), and this bill has more privatization than the earlier June Senate compromise.

And the drug benefit remains pretty chintzy.

According to yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, “critics say it will cover about 25% of seniors’ drug spending over the next decade”.

That is not the comprehensive benefit seniors have been asking for all this time.

And nothing can spark resentment more than not getting what you asked for, while being told that you did.

This is also why the AARP may be in a very precarious position.

It does not appear that the AARP polled its 35M members (many who join for nonpolitical reasons) about this specific bill.

It looks like the GOP simply worked the AARP leadership.

And if the leadership has gotten ahead of its members, the endorsement, which certainly comes with serious lobbying strength, may not protect the GOP in the long-term.

One indication of this comes from Sen. Tom Harkin in UPI:

"I find this bizarre," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said of the AARP endorsement.

AARP had conducted three meetings in Iowa regarding Medicare, he said, including hundreds of seniors.

When those seniors were asked to show hands in support of either bill, "not one senior raised his or her hand to support it," Harkin said.


Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle said the AARP could face a backlash from its own membership.

"Like the AARP's previous decision to support the 1988 catastrophic health bill, this is a mistake that does not serve the interests of its members," he said. "When seniors see the details of this Republican plan, the AARP will undoubtedly regret this ill-advised decision."

Seniors will actually spend more for health care under the bill until they spend over $1100 a year on drugs, $93 a month. This assumes it is 50% co-pay. There is talk this has been changed to 25% in which case you start saving money at about $50 a month in current drug costs.



The Saddam - Al Qaeda Link that wasn't


BuzzFlash has a good long explanation of the weekend campaign to prove by leaked documents that Iraq was working with Al Qaeda before 9/11.

Douglas Feith was later revealed as the author of the memo, which was the pro-war side's version of why to attack Iraq. The DoD issued statements the same day that said the memo was inaccurate but Fox News and the right wing nuts did not mention that. Feith's group were the ones accepting everything the Iraqi deserters feed them at face value.





AARP Members Revolt


1-800-424-3410 or e-mail community@aarp.org.

Or use all the email and phone options at www.aarp.org. Have your member number if you are a member. Canceling your subscription to the AARP magazine really hurts them.

Some numbers and post below from Atrios.

But I am Atrios.





Democrats Blast Republican-AARP Medicare Plan at AARP Forum


When an AARP television ad -- part of a $7 million campaign designed to help push the measure through Congress -- was played in the hall, there were scattered boos and hisses from the 800-strong audience.

AARP Executives Gives Republican Medicare Bill Its Blessing

Starting in 2006, the government would subsidize separate insurance policies and private health plans that covered part of their drug costs. Patients could sign up for either one if they paid about $35 per month and a $275 yearly deductible.

In addition, the agreement would try to steer more Medicare patients into private health plans, including preferred-provider organizations and health maintenance organizations. Under a central compromise, part of the effort to steer people away from the traditional fee-for-service version of the program would take place through an experiment in six metropolitan areas in which the original program would be forced into a direct price competition against private plans.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), widely considered the party's most influential senator on health matters, said AARP had erred, as he redoubled his attacks on the agreement. He singled out a provision that would allot private health plans $12 billion more than either the House or Senate envisioned in the Medicare bills they passed in June. He called the money "a slush fund" that would make Medicare patients "guinea pigs" in an untested form of care.

Several Democratic presidential candidates matched his tone. Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) branded the agreement "a raw deal for America's seniors and a corporate giveaway for HMOs and drug companies." Retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark said, "The bill coming out of Congress violates the basic principle of the Hippocratic oath -- do no harm."



Pork-filled Energy Bill Would Harm National Security


John Podesta, Center for American Progress -- The final form of the energy legislation being considered by congressional negotiators remains uncertain, but what has leaked out of the conference committee to date, if enacted into law, would be a giant step backwards for energy policy and for our nation. Any meaningful energy policy must meet three main goals: it must reduce dependence on unstable forms of energy, advance technologies that create jobs and reduce pollution, and help deliver reliable, affordable energy. The current energy bill fails on all counts.

The energy bill would weaken national security in two major ways. First, the bill fails the crucial goal of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. It creates new loopholes in fuel economy laws and lacks firm deadlines to develop and deploy advanced hydrogen and hybrid vehicles. By remaining overly dependent on foreign oil supplies, especially from the Middle East, it is more difficult to conduct our foreign policy on principle – especially when it involves standing up to countries that are major suppliers of oil to the U.S. Second, it irresponsibly reverses a long-standing U.S. nonproliferation policy, permitting the reprocessing of nuclear waste from commercial reactors.
The bill also deals a severe blow to our economy. While record deficits mount, costs in Iraq spiral out of control, and important domestic programs get slashed, the administration is pushing an energy bill that would add at least $50 billion to the national debt over the next decade – $18 billion through tax breaks alone. Big energy companies enjoy federal largesse at the expense of crucial domestic spending needs like education, housing, and health care. Worse, the tax breaks go to profitable corporations to perform tasks they would do regardless of any subsidy.



In the lion's den -- With The NeoCons in Palm Beach


Salon.com -- The self-regarding humanitarianism that the right wrapped itself in before the war with Iraq is beginning to fray and chafe. At Restoration Weekend there was anxiety about the postwar situation, and anger. Senators and congressional representatives avowed their faith that Bush's fabled steadfastness made victory assured in Iraq, a stance they struggled to reconcile with the White House's recently announced decision to expedite the transfer of power to Iraqis and scale back the occupation by election season. Meanwhile, the right's intellectuals and activists had largely scrapped talk of democracy. Some suggested that the Iraqis themselves are our enemy, that we owe them nothing. Pipes referenced "The Mouse That Roared," the 1959 film in which a poor country declares war on America, hoping to lose and be rebuilt like Germany and Japan. The implication seemed to be that Iraq is both lucky and greedy.

Meanwhile, those troubled by Bush's decision to cut and run blamed it on Democrats and the liberal media, who through their unfair scrutiny of irrelevancies like Bush's uranium claim and the Valerie Plame affair were sapping the national will. Horowitz accused Salon itself of compromising the country's security by sniping at the commander in chief, repeating the phrase "ideas have consequences," over and over. It wasn't quite clear which ideas he was talking about -- that Bush's case for war was mendacious? That it would be preferable to have a different president? Yet the consequences, he was clear, would be catastrophic.

Before the war, Pipes was a proponent of the democracy domino theory. In February, he published a column titled "Why Stop in Iraq: Here's a Chance to Reform the Entire Arab World." In it, he argued with those who suggested that democracy wouldn't work in Iraq, saying, "Japan had about as much affinity for democracy in 1945 as the Arabs do today, yet democracy took hold there ... A US victory in Iraq and the successful rehabilitation of that country will bring liberals out of the woodwork and generally move the region towards democracy."

Now, though, he's contemptuous of the idealistic case for war, the case that wooed some liberals to Bush's side in the first place. "We have no, no moral responsibility to the Iraqi people," he said. "Our moral responsibility is to ourselves. I very much disagree with the name 'Operation Iraqi Freedom.' It should have been 'Operation American Security.'" This met with applause.

"Our goal is not a free Iraq," Pipes continued. "Our goal is an Iraq that does not endanger us." What we need, he says, is a "democratic-minded strongman."

This is exactly the kind of betrayal the war's opponents expected all along.


Monday, November 17, 2003

AARP Caves to GOP Pressure!

Will Support Lousy Medicare Drug Bill

Republicans consulted the politically potent AARP at key moments in negotiations over a Medicare prescription drug bill - and the group responded Monday with the endorsement the GOP and President Bush wanted to counter Democratic critics.

These Republican officials said Novelli made three demands: more money to entice employers to maintain health benefits for their retirees; a temporary, limited program of competition between traditional Medicare and private insurance plans, and the removal of a Senate provision that AARP said would allow employers to eliminate all health benefits for retirees eligible for Medicare or state health plans.

The compromise negotiators and congressional leaders reached Saturday satisfied AARP on all three.

Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota told reporters that AARP had "caved in to the pressures" from GOP leaders. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said AARP's leaders "should not be co-opted in Washington, D.C., but they should do the job they are here to do for America's seniors."

In private meetings, Kennedy told Novelli he was undercutting Democrats' attempts to get the best bargain they could, officials said. And Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., one of two Democrats taking part in the talks, told Novelli it was up to Democrats, not AARP, to be negotiating.

In response to Daschle's tart prediction that he would face a revolt within his organization over this bill, Novelli said, "There's not going to be a revolt within AARP. There's going to be a problem if Congress fails to pass this legislation."




Will Bush Lose on the Character Issue?


From the Whiskey Bar -- Polls are now showing a growing distrust of Bush.

Q: Do you think the Bush administration, before the war, did or did not portray Iraq as an imminent threat to the US?

Did: 87%
Did not: 11%
No answer: 2%

So it seems that in this case, at least, the conservative campaign to rewrite history isn't making much headway.

Q: Do you think that there are other governments existing today that have human rights records as bad as that of Iraq under Saddam Hussein?

Yes: 88%
No: 10%
No answer: 2%


Q: Do you think that President George Bush is honest and frank or do you sometimes have doubts about the things he says:

Honest and frank: 42%
Sometimes have doubts about things he says: 56%

As the PIPA survey notes, Bush's growing credibility gap has some powerful political implications:

Overall, perceptions of honesty are a powerful predictor of the likelihood to vote for the president. Those who said the president is honest and frank are 11 times more likely to say that they plan to vote for him than people who have doubts about things he says. Perceptions of the president’s honesty were the most powerful predictor of the likelihood to vote for the president of all factors analyzed in a binary logistic regression, including party identification.
And, indeed, for the first time since the end of major combat operations, the percentage of Americans who say Bush's conduct of the war has made them less likely to vote for him next year (42%) is now higher than the percentage who say it's made them more likely (35%).


Bush's eroding "honesty" ratings at least suggest the "good father" gestalt is gradually weakening -- hammered by the constant pounding of the Iraq fiasco and the administration's increasingly feeble attempts to insist that two plus two equals five. It also suggests a line of attack for the opposition: Not only is Bush a miserable failure, he's a miserable lying failure.


Sunday, November 16, 2003

The Houston Howard Dean Public Rally


Tuesday, Nov. 18, at 5 p.m., at the Miller Outdoor Theater.



Why Karl Rove Fears Howard Dean


A Dean candidacy is a lot more realistic than people think [because] Dean's appeal is closer to Ronald Reagan's than any other Democrat running today.... The Democratic Party used to chuckle about Reagan and his gaffes, which they believed would marginalize him to the far-right dustbin of history. But when his opponents tried to attack him for some of his more outlandish statements, the folks in the middle simply ignored them. Voters... looked to the bigger picture, where they saw a man of conviction who cared about them and had solutions for their problems. [source: http://www.moore-info.com]

All the top-tier Democratic challengers can beat Bush, but Dean poses the biggest threat. Republicans once hoped Dean would get the nomination to run against Bush. No longer. As Dean continues to gain support and break fund-raising records by drawing on 100,000s of supporters, the Bush brain-trust (Karl Rove) and the pro-Bush media have changed their minds.

How do I know? Because if they really thought Dean would be easy for Bush to beat, they'd build him up to make sure he'd win the Democratic nomination. They were doing that last summer, but no longer. They now fear Governor Dean most of all. That explains why Republicans bash Dean constantly. On right-wing hate radio and on the talking head shows. On the editorial pages and in the "news" sections. As these tactics fail, Republican fear grows.

They fear Governor Dean because Dean thrives on slams and bad press. They just make his support grow wider and deeper. Republicans need Democratic disunity but Dean brings together all corners of the Democratic Party -- even those who defected to Nader in 2000 -- with unmatched passion and intensity. Dean does this without alienating independent "swing voters." Republican pollsters and consultants used to dismiss that as impossible, but Dean is doing it. Already the emerging issues favor Dean as well.

The other anti-war Democrats -- Carol Moseley Braun, Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich -- have no chance to win the nomination. As that becomes clear, even their most ardent supporters must choose between Dean and a pro-war Democrat. Dean will welcome support from the passionate, idealistic Democrats currently backing these other candidates.

With their added strength, Dean can surge in the next round of primaries. If Dean runs away with the nomination -- by winning or placing second in Iowa, winning in New Hampshire, and exceeding expectations in the South -- Dean and the Democrats can unite and begin targeting Bush. Dean has the cure for divisive "wedge" issues -- race, gay rights, guns, abortion -- a plain-spoken appeal on things that really matter. Good jobs. Good schools. Health care.

Dean hopes to re-unite middle class and working families against the greedy elites into a new New Deal Coalition. History shows that real progress is not possible without such an alliance among people of good will from all regions and races. This unity would mark the end of Rove's Republican dreams of domination and a new beginning of a Democratic American dream -- a fresh renaissance of the New Deal and the Great Society.

If Dean pulls off this ambition, he can help remake America, bringing us into the 21st Century with universal health care, access to high quality education for all Americans, investment in our people, millions of good new jobs, strong protections for the environment, workers and consumers, with equality, fairness and justice for women, minorities, GLBT people -- all of us. Almost all Americans want all of this, and Dean is working to unite the vast majority of us against the tiny extreme right wing minority clinging to power by dividing us.

With the stakes this high, increasingly desperate to stop Dean, what can Rove do? Try to elevate an easy mark to thwart Dean and the Democrats.

The Republicans want to run against Rep. Richard Gephardt. They keep building him up, pretending he'd be the toughest opponent. Republican hopes rest with Rep. Dick Gephardt beating Dean in Iowa. If Dean wins that state, he could quickly unite the Democrats for the general election. Watch the pro-Bush media trying to thwart this by putting Gephardt on TV, asking him easy soft-ball questions, trying to breathe life into his campaign.

Most Democrats I know want to like Gephardt. He seems like a nice guy, but he's screwed up too many times. Gephardt's failures stung badly enough, but worst of all, sometimes he seemed unwilling to even try to fight -- or even fought on the wrong side. He was supposed to be our leader, but there he was in the Rose Garden praising Bush's resolve and trusting Bush's leadership and judgment as Bush lied to us about the fabricated threat from Iraq. Gephardt's cheerleading for Bush's war broke my heart and made me ill.

Rove is sure Gephardt would fail to win over voters in a face-to-face contest against Bush. After all, Gephardt never articulated a winning message in the past. He failed to make his case to the American people against Gingrich and now Bush. He failed to head off the abuses in the House or hold Republicans accountable for them. Under his leadership, Democrats lost ground year after year. Bush's hopes for 2004 rest with Richard Gephardt leading the Democrats to one more defeat. Rove fears Dean will lead Democrats to rousing victory.

Reinhard writes, "I've thought for a while that the former Vermont governor deserves the Democratic nomination. He's the exquisite embodiment of Democratic values today. He's opposed to 'George Bush's war' and was before it became hip within the party. And he wants a total repeal of "George Bush's tax cuts." You'll see a pattern here, and it forms the overarching theme of today's Democratic partisans: barely contained anger toward President Bush and his works." Only Dean represents the outrage millions of Americans feel about Bush from the stolen election to the illegal Iraq invasion.



GOP-Christian-Fascist Daydreams


Another Christian GOP supporter has an explicit daydream about a Right Christian group killing 5 Supreme Court Justices and 21 Democratic Senators, those with GOP governors. His upon further reflections:

However, as much as I don't like them, Justice Ginsberg and Senator Clinton aren't Hitlers. We have a flawed but functional democracy and a legal system that generally protects our rights. Were we to advocate the creation of the CLF [a violent Christian Liberation Front], we'd start down the road to anarchy, with militant liberals looking to kill off George Allen so that Mark Warner can name a replacement. It might be a short-term victory for judicial conservatism, but a long term loss for our society and the cause of Christ.

For those of you on the left who want to label me a typically sick Christian, it's your legal right to do so, even if it doesn't reflect reality well.

Oh?

Removed link.



Did Bush Have A Direct Hand In The Worst Decision About Iraq?


Newsweek -- Bush himself, in fact, may have had a direct hand in one of the most disastrous decisions of the postwar period: the move to “de-Baathify” Iraq to the point of dismantling the entire Iraqi Army. U.S. officials now believe that former Iraqi Army officers are among the leaders of the insurgency. When Bremer arrived in Baghdad in mid-May, the insurgency was just getting started, and clots of former Iraqi troops were reappearing, asking to be remobilized. Bremer, who has been widely blamed for reversing the decision of his predecessor, Jay Garner, to hire such men and pay them, was warned he would cause chaos by demobilizing the Army instead. The CIA station chief told him, “That’s another 350,000 Iraqis you’re pissing off, and they’ve got guns.” According to one official who attended the meeting, Bremer replied: “I don’t have any choice ... Those are my instructions.” Then Bremer added: “The president told me that de-Baathification is more important.”



Wal-Mart - American Worker Enemy Number 1?


The giant retailer's low prices often come with a high cost. Wal-Mart's relentless pressure can crush the companies it does business with and force them to send jobs overseas. Are we shopping our way straight to the unemployment line?

The New York Times Looks At Wal-Mart: This Wal-Martization of the work force, to which other low-cost, low-pay stores also contribute, threatens to push many Americans into poverty. The first step in countering it is to enforce the law. The government must act more vigorously, and more quickly, when Wal-Mart uses illegal tactics to block union organizing. And Wal-Mart must be made to pay if it exploits undocumented workers.



Bad Deals In Congress


Republican Leaders Reach Deal On Medicare

The House passed its Medicare bill by just one vote in June, partly because it contained several provisions that are popular with GOP conservatives but now have been altered in the agreement. The Senate's vote was more bipartisan, but Democrats have been denouncing the shape the agreement has assumed in recent days, and 44 senators -- including seven Republicans -- have signed a new letter of protest.

Huge Energy Bill, Huge Tax Cuts, No Impact on Any Energy Problems

The legislation's most far-reaching feature may be the repeal of the 1935 Public Utility Holding Company Act, which limits utility industry mergers. The act's repeal is a top priority for the electric power industry and the Bush administration, and if the bill passes, a wave of mergers and acquisitions could follow.

Whether that would result in needed investments in the power infrastructure, as most Republican lawmakers predict, or the creation of bigger, more dominant energy firms and higher energy prices, as many Democrats fear, is another issue in dispute.



Kathleen Blanco Wins Louisiana Gov. Race


Jindal led narrowly in most polls until about 48 hours before Election Day. Then, with little to separate the two conservative candidates ideologically, Blanco closed out the campaign by launching a blistering attack on Jindal's record as Louisiana's deficit-cutting secretary of health and hospitals in the mid-1990s. The attacks helped eliminate what had been Jindal's edge, and analysts said lingering racism might also have undercut him on Election Day.



For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury


The majority of the uninsured are neither poor by official standards nor unemployed.

Paying for health insurance is becoming a middle-class problem, and not just here. "After paying for health insurance, you take home less than minimum wage," says a poster in New York City subways sponsored by Working Today, a nonprofit agency that offers health insurance to independent contractors in New York. "Welcome to middle-class poverty." In Southern California, 70,000 supermarket workers have been on strike for five weeks over plans to cut their health benefits.

The insurance crisis is especially visible in Texas, which has the highest proportion of uninsured in the country — almost one in every four residents. The state has a large population of immigrants; its labor market is dominated by low-wage service sector jobs, and it has a higher than average number of small businesses, which are less likely to provide health benefits because they pay higher insurance costs than large companies.

State cuts to subsidies for health insurance to help close a $10 billion budget gap will cost the state $500 million in federal matching money and are expected to further spur the rise in uninsured. In September, for example, more than half a million children enrolled in a state- and federal-subsidized insurance program lost dental, vision and most mental care coverage, and some 169,000 children will lose all insurance by 2005.

Ms. Pardo, a 29-year-old from Houston, said that having no insurance meant choosing between buying an inhaler for her 9-year-old asthmatic daughter or buying her a birthday present. The girl, Morgan, lost her state-subsidized insurance last month, and now her mother must pay $80 instead of $5 for the inhaler.

Rent, car payments and insurance, day care and utilities cost Ms. Pardo more than $1,200 a month, leaving less than $200 for food, gas and other expenses. So even though her employer, the Harris County government, provides her with low-cost insurance, she cannot afford the $275 a month she would have to pay to add her daughter to her plan.



The True ANTI-Bush


Why Howard Dean is going to be the candidate.

In 2000, Al Gore lost to George Bush by the margin of Ralph Nader's campaign. I worked for Ralph Nader in 2000, and the result of our protest has been the worst thing that could have happened to the progressive community: military tribunals, faith-based initiative, an attorney general who doesn't dance. In 2000, Democrats and progressives unwilling to compromise on a law-and-order candidate we saw as weak on the environment scuttled Al Gore's presidential hopes. Most of us regretted that as soon as the Bush administration tore up the Kyoto Accord, refusing even to recycle the paper it was printed on. With private prisons packed to bursting and welfare gone the way of the dodo bird, we thought a protest vote was the only option. What can I say? It seemed like a good idea at the time. We're ready to compromise now.

It should have been an easy win. A vote for Gore was a vote for the status quo. But I saw it all over the campaign trail in 2000. Gore's workers were apathetic. Nobody loved Gore, or not enough to make a difference. The Bush supporters were fanatic. They loved their candidate and despised Clinton with an anger that can only be described as apocalyptic. One could say that their anger wasn't enough to win the popular vote, but that hardly matters. They shook the walls of Florida polling places, and if they had to they would have burned them down. The winner is the one sitting in the White House. This time the shoe's on the other foot, minus the peace and prosperity.

Dean accurately pointed it out himself, early in the campaign: You can't beat Bush by running as 80 percent of Bush. You can't be kind of pro-war, kind of pro-tax cuts. Because the voters are going to say if we're going to get 80 percent of Bush let's just take 100 percent and call it a day. In other words, the lessons of the Clinton candidacy no longer apply. Howard Dean has defined himself not by being Bush-light, i.e. supporting the invasion of Iraq, signing off on the Patriot Act, but as the anti-Bush. He was against the war, against deficit spending, and he was against the Patriot Act. He is in favor of something similar to universal health care and he says so. Even peo