Friday, July 02, 2004
Administration’s (Typical) Reply re Fahrenheit 9/11:
“We don’t do movie reviews.” - Presidential Press Secretary Scott McClellan.
---consistent with:
“I don’t do quagmires. “- Donald Rumsfeld.
“We don’t do body counts.” - former war commander Tommy Franks
Krugman on Fahrenheit 9/11
Mr. Moore's greatest strength is a real empathy with working-class Americans that most journalists lack. Having stripped away Mr. Bush's common-man mask, he uses his film to make the case, in a way statistics never could, that Mr. Bush's policies favor a narrow elite at the expense of less fortunate Americans — sometimes, indeed, at the cost of their lives…
"Fahrenheit 9/11" is a tendentious, flawed movie, but it tells essential truths about leaders who exploited a national tragedy for political gain, and the ordinary Americans who paid the price. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/02/opinion/02KRUG.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Florida ‘Felons List’ in Public DomainIt’s out there, via CNN vs Florida Department of State, allowing for invaluable checking.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Violence unabated
Saddam Holds Court
He’s ‘holding up.’ The Iraqi public is split over this detention / trial. Dexter Filkins in Friday’s NY Times:
The images of a once-omnipotent dictator charged with mass murder seemed to open up a conversation on every street and in every home.
Some Iraqis celebrated what they hoped would be Mr. Hussein's impending punishment, even his death. Others said they felt humiliated that Mr. Hussein's arraignment in a courtroom here had been brought about by the Americans. While some Iraqis cheered Mr. Hussein's public humiliation, others seemed uncomfortable watching their former president being treated like a common criminal. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/02/international/middleeast/02REAX.html
Juan Cole on the ‘mixed feelings’:
Saddam Hussein was legally surrendered to the Iraqis by the Americans. Since the US is no longer in international law the Occupying power, it has little right to continue to hold Saddam. Since the Americans do not, however, trust the Iraqis to guard him properly, their surrender of Saddam is just as much a sham as their surrender of sovereignty. A new opinion poll in Iraq suggested that over forty percent of Iraqis want him executed, while a similar proportion want him just to be let go. This sign of the extreme polarization of the Iraqi public over this issue is a very bad omen. www.juancole.com
End of the Occupation, Limited Sovereignty, Sorry Condition
From Emad Mekay, Asia Times.
A barrage of binding decrees passed during the United States occupation of Iraq, combined with a lack of resources, heavy debt and the continuing presence of a massive US force, provide clear evidence that the recent handover of authority to Iraqis does not equal real control over the economy…
In May 2003, Bremer declared Iraq "open for business" and for the past 14 months the now defunct Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) promoted major changes to the country's regulatory and legal frameworks, entered into long-term contracts and appointed oversight committees with multi-year terms. As a result, the country's economy looks set on a path that Iraqis will find hard - if not impossible - to alter.
A report by the Institute of Policy Studies estimated that Bremer had passed nearly 100 orders that, among other things, give US corporations "virtual free rein over the Iraqi economy while largely excluding Iraqis from a reconstruction effort which has failed to provide for their basic needs".
Meanwhile, a recent report by the Open Society Institute's (OSI) program to monitor Iraq's reconstruction said that the US-controlled CPA was engaged in a last-minute spending spree, committing billions of dollars to "ill-conceived projects just before it dissolves", in an apparent attempt to pre-impose those deals on any future Iraqi government. The US-controlled Program Review Board, the body in charge of managing Iraq's finances, approved the expenditure of nearly US$2 billion in Iraqi funds for reconstruction projects in just a single meeting…
Juan Cole, an Iraq expert at the University of Michigan, sees limited sovereignty for the Iraqis from another perspective. He says the new US ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte, will maintain control over some $18.3 billion in US aid to Iraq.
"The caretaker government is hedged around by American power," Cole wrote on his online blog Wednesday. "Negroponte will control $18 billion in US aid to Iraq. [US Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld will go on controlling the US and coalition military. There isn't much space left for real Iraqi sovereignty in all that. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FG02Ak01.html
Employment: “Robust” job growth slows
We’re still down about a million during Bush’s term- actually, well over 7 million, if you remember (please do!) that 150,000 must be added each month to keep up with population growth.
The pace of U.S. hiring slumped sharply in June after several months of robust gains, the government reported on Friday as employers added fewer than half the number of payroll jobs forecast and hours of work shrunk.
The Labor Department said only 112,000 jobs were created last month, far fewer than the 250,000 that Wall Street analysts had anticipated. April and May new-job totals were revised down, to 324,000 and 235,000 respectively, from 346,000 and 248.000.
The unemployment rate was unchanged, as expected, at 5.6 percent.
June still represented a 10th straight month of job growth that has added about 1.5 million workers to payrolls, but the unexpectedly steep slowdown last month may make it harder for President Bush to campaign for re-election in November on a claim of accelerating economic momentum.
In a sign of broader weakness, the average workweek eased to 33.6 hours in June from 33.8 in May , the shortest since a matching 33.6 hours in December. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/business/business-economy-employment.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=
Health Insurance:
In September we’ll have the figures for 2003, which undoubtedly will show that the numbers have risen above 44 million. This piece addresses those who’ve been chronically without. Its message: in a year when the economy grew by 4%, 2.6 million more were without insurance for more than a year, now totaling 24.5 million. The major issue: Jobs are less and less likely to guarantee access to health insurance.
"As we lose jobs in the manufacturing sector to jobs in the service economy and small businesses, we're losing the stability of big employers and replacing it with a much more fragile system," said Diane Rowland, executive director of the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-insure1jul01,1,344117.story
Polls:Whoops. He’s losing his “integrity” issue.
New surveys by The New York Times and the Washington Post reveal a perilous plunge in the commander-in-chief's credibility. The Times found that 79 percent of the public thinks Bush either is hiding something about Iraq, or worse, is "mostly lying" about it. The Post asked whether Bush or Kerry is "honest and trustworthy," and the president was judged to be honest by 39 percent. Kerry came in at 52 percent.
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-vpcoc013874764jul01,0,7049200.column?coll=ny-news-columnists
Others:
Colorado “in play” (Bush up 5), Florida still even.
Why Bush is in Trouble: One take: [Barry Ritholtz]
Two recent polls/anecdotal surveys reveal disturbing realities about what should be near automatic support for the President amongst GOP voters in the upcoming election. They are not good news for the incumbent.
The first is a 1H 2004 CNBC poll of 30 professional money managers. This group manages over $320 Billion dollars -- a third of a trillion bucks. They were questioned about the market, the economy and the upcoming election. While 92% of these pros thought the stock market would do better under Bush than Kerry, a surprising 37% of them were supporting Kerry anyway.
For the incumbent, this amounts to a very large vein of discontent running through what should be a heavily GOP stronghold. Republican presidents do not typically get re-elected when they are only polling a 63% support on Wall Street.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2004/06/bush_slipping_a.html
Bush’s Military RecordHere’s a thorough record, compiled by Paul Lukasiak. Some basic facts are laid out as to his non-performance. As per the Moore movie, mainstream journalists can access the same material. Will they?
When you compare the Bush records to the United States Statutes, Department of Defense regulations, and Air Force policies of the early 1970s, only one conclusion can be reached: that 30 years ago, George W. Bush shirked his sworn duty as a member of the United States Armed Forces to the national security of the United States of America.
However, Bush’s desertion from the Armed Forces thirty years ago is not terribly relevant. Lots of people make mistakes in their early twenties, and those mistakes do not necessarily reflect on the character of individuals when they are in their fifties.
What is relevant is Bush’s continued lies about his service, and his insistence upon presenting his service in the US Military as “honorable”. It was not. Bush simply blew off his last two years of required service, and was able to get away with it because he came from a politically influential family.
There is no other explanation for Bush’s records. None.http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm#rehab
Ashcroft: The Supeme Court is giving rights to terrorists
Attorney General John Ashcroft said Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court gave more rights to terrorists in three recent decisions, and Justice Department lawyers are poring over the rulings to determine their consequences.
The orders issued Monday on Guantanamo detainees and enemy combatants Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi indicate "that certain terrorists have more rights," Ashcroft said after a meeting with a regional anti-terrorism advisory council.
"The Supreme Court accorded to terrorists, in a variety of cases this week, a number of additional rights," he said. "We're digesting those opinions in terms of making sure that we adjust or modify what we do, so that we accommodate the requirements as expressed by the Supreme Court." http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20040701&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=407010402&SectionCat=&Template=printart
S.C. decisions a boon for Bush! Elaine Cassel:
Forget what the media’s talking heads have told you about these three Supreme Court decisions that tested the power of George W. Bush. The President won far more than he lost, so administration “officials” who pronounce themselves victors are more on target than the press who tell you that the decisions represent a defeat for the Administration, or rein in its power. Taken together, the decisions are more important for what they did not do. Their significance for the future, particularly if Bush is reelected, cannot be underestimated.
Rumsfeld v. Padilla
To begin with, the Court dodged the most important case—the case of Jose Padilla. Padilla, recently vilified by a highly-placed Department of Justice attorney, is the American citizen arrested on a material witness warrant in Chicago two years ago. The government’s story then was that he was planning to detonate a dirty bomb. Attorney General John Ashcroft held a press conference and announced the incarceration of Padilla and told us what a dangerous man he was. Of course, if they had evidence that he was planning to detonate a dirty bomb, they would have charged him with a host of crimes, and tried him. But they never charged him with anything. What does that tell you? A couple of weeks ago, Ashcroft sent out one of his top deputies to change the story on Padilla. That story may have influenced the Court’s decision, though we will never know this. Though the official denied that the press conference—at which he announced that Padilla had “confessed” to plotting to blow up high-rise apartment buildings—may have been held when it was to punctuate the government’s belief that Padilla was a very, very dangerous man. So if he is so dangerous, why is he not being charged. Of, you have to love this reason: because the government denied him his rights and repeatedly interrogated him without an attorney (and, maybe even tortured him, for all we know) his confession is no good! Can’t be used in court. So since we denied him his rights, we cannot try him, but we can hold him without charging him forever. Because we say he is dangerous.
And what did the Supreme Court have to say about that? In a 5-4 decision, it said...nothing. It ruled that Padilla’s court’ appointed attorney, Donna Newman, filed the petition for writ of habeas corpus (challenging the detention of her client without charge, without access to her) in the wrong federal court. She sued Rumsfeld, on whose order Padilla was named an “enemy combatant” in the Southern District of New York, where he was brought and incarcerated and where she was appointed. But after she got into the case, and without notice to her, the government moved him to a brig in South Carolina. So the government argued that the warden of the brig is the party to be sued, not Rumsfeld. As if that warden does not answer to Rumsfeld, at least if she is holding an enemy combatant—so-called. So with Rehnquist writing for the majority, the court threw out his petition. Altogether. Padilla has to start all over again, suing the warden wherever he or she is. Ah, but keep in mind, that once his attorneys file a another petition, the government just has to move him again. And again. And again. To avoid answering for his detention.
So the most important of the three cases was not decided. In not deciding, the Court fully sanctioned the continued detention of Padilla, without a charge, without a lawyer (Newman is now out of the case, since the suit was dismissed), for years to come.
http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/ecassel/intro
July 4: The State of the Nation.
Bob Herbert in the NY Times wishes us a happy July 4 celebration.
There is no exit strategy for American troops in Iraq. There is no plan in our insane tax-cut environment for paying for the war. The situation in Afghanistan, which is part of the real war against terror, has deteriorated. The U.S. military is stretched dangerously thin, lacking sufficient troops to meet its obligations around the world. Homeland security is deeply underfunded. And with the terror networks energized, the feeling among intelligence experts with regard to a strike in the U.S. is not if, but when.
Thanks, Bob.
-R
“We don’t do movie reviews.” - Presidential Press Secretary Scott McClellan.
---consistent with:
“I don’t do quagmires. “- Donald Rumsfeld.
“We don’t do body counts.” - former war commander Tommy Franks
Krugman on Fahrenheit 9/11
Mr. Moore's greatest strength is a real empathy with working-class Americans that most journalists lack. Having stripped away Mr. Bush's common-man mask, he uses his film to make the case, in a way statistics never could, that Mr. Bush's policies favor a narrow elite at the expense of less fortunate Americans — sometimes, indeed, at the cost of their lives…
"Fahrenheit 9/11" is a tendentious, flawed movie, but it tells essential truths about leaders who exploited a national tragedy for political gain, and the ordinary Americans who paid the price. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/02/opinion/02KRUG.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Florida ‘Felons List’ in Public DomainIt’s out there, via CNN vs Florida Department of State, allowing for invaluable checking.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Violence unabated
Saddam Holds Court
He’s ‘holding up.’ The Iraqi public is split over this detention / trial. Dexter Filkins in Friday’s NY Times:
The images of a once-omnipotent dictator charged with mass murder seemed to open up a conversation on every street and in every home.
Some Iraqis celebrated what they hoped would be Mr. Hussein's impending punishment, even his death. Others said they felt humiliated that Mr. Hussein's arraignment in a courtroom here had been brought about by the Americans. While some Iraqis cheered Mr. Hussein's public humiliation, others seemed uncomfortable watching their former president being treated like a common criminal. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/02/international/middleeast/02REAX.html
Juan Cole on the ‘mixed feelings’:
Saddam Hussein was legally surrendered to the Iraqis by the Americans. Since the US is no longer in international law the Occupying power, it has little right to continue to hold Saddam. Since the Americans do not, however, trust the Iraqis to guard him properly, their surrender of Saddam is just as much a sham as their surrender of sovereignty. A new opinion poll in Iraq suggested that over forty percent of Iraqis want him executed, while a similar proportion want him just to be let go. This sign of the extreme polarization of the Iraqi public over this issue is a very bad omen. www.juancole.com
End of the Occupation, Limited Sovereignty, Sorry Condition
From Emad Mekay, Asia Times.
A barrage of binding decrees passed during the United States occupation of Iraq, combined with a lack of resources, heavy debt and the continuing presence of a massive US force, provide clear evidence that the recent handover of authority to Iraqis does not equal real control over the economy…
In May 2003, Bremer declared Iraq "open for business" and for the past 14 months the now defunct Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) promoted major changes to the country's regulatory and legal frameworks, entered into long-term contracts and appointed oversight committees with multi-year terms. As a result, the country's economy looks set on a path that Iraqis will find hard - if not impossible - to alter.
A report by the Institute of Policy Studies estimated that Bremer had passed nearly 100 orders that, among other things, give US corporations "virtual free rein over the Iraqi economy while largely excluding Iraqis from a reconstruction effort which has failed to provide for their basic needs".
Meanwhile, a recent report by the Open Society Institute's (OSI) program to monitor Iraq's reconstruction said that the US-controlled CPA was engaged in a last-minute spending spree, committing billions of dollars to "ill-conceived projects just before it dissolves", in an apparent attempt to pre-impose those deals on any future Iraqi government. The US-controlled Program Review Board, the body in charge of managing Iraq's finances, approved the expenditure of nearly US$2 billion in Iraqi funds for reconstruction projects in just a single meeting…
Juan Cole, an Iraq expert at the University of Michigan, sees limited sovereignty for the Iraqis from another perspective. He says the new US ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte, will maintain control over some $18.3 billion in US aid to Iraq.
"The caretaker government is hedged around by American power," Cole wrote on his online blog Wednesday. "Negroponte will control $18 billion in US aid to Iraq. [US Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld will go on controlling the US and coalition military. There isn't much space left for real Iraqi sovereignty in all that. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FG02Ak01.html
Employment: “Robust” job growth slows
We’re still down about a million during Bush’s term- actually, well over 7 million, if you remember (please do!) that 150,000 must be added each month to keep up with population growth.
The pace of U.S. hiring slumped sharply in June after several months of robust gains, the government reported on Friday as employers added fewer than half the number of payroll jobs forecast and hours of work shrunk.
The Labor Department said only 112,000 jobs were created last month, far fewer than the 250,000 that Wall Street analysts had anticipated. April and May new-job totals were revised down, to 324,000 and 235,000 respectively, from 346,000 and 248.000.
The unemployment rate was unchanged, as expected, at 5.6 percent.
June still represented a 10th straight month of job growth that has added about 1.5 million workers to payrolls, but the unexpectedly steep slowdown last month may make it harder for President Bush to campaign for re-election in November on a claim of accelerating economic momentum.
In a sign of broader weakness, the average workweek eased to 33.6 hours in June from 33.8 in May , the shortest since a matching 33.6 hours in December. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/business/business-economy-employment.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=
Health Insurance:
In September we’ll have the figures for 2003, which undoubtedly will show that the numbers have risen above 44 million. This piece addresses those who’ve been chronically without. Its message: in a year when the economy grew by 4%, 2.6 million more were without insurance for more than a year, now totaling 24.5 million. The major issue: Jobs are less and less likely to guarantee access to health insurance.
"As we lose jobs in the manufacturing sector to jobs in the service economy and small businesses, we're losing the stability of big employers and replacing it with a much more fragile system," said Diane Rowland, executive director of the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-insure1jul01,1,344117.story
Polls:Whoops. He’s losing his “integrity” issue.
New surveys by The New York Times and the Washington Post reveal a perilous plunge in the commander-in-chief's credibility. The Times found that 79 percent of the public thinks Bush either is hiding something about Iraq, or worse, is "mostly lying" about it. The Post asked whether Bush or Kerry is "honest and trustworthy," and the president was judged to be honest by 39 percent. Kerry came in at 52 percent.
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-vpcoc013874764jul01,0,7049200.column?coll=ny-news-columnists
Others:
Colorado “in play” (Bush up 5), Florida still even.
Why Bush is in Trouble: One take: [Barry Ritholtz]
Two recent polls/anecdotal surveys reveal disturbing realities about what should be near automatic support for the President amongst GOP voters in the upcoming election. They are not good news for the incumbent.
The first is a 1H 2004 CNBC poll of 30 professional money managers. This group manages over $320 Billion dollars -- a third of a trillion bucks. They were questioned about the market, the economy and the upcoming election. While 92% of these pros thought the stock market would do better under Bush than Kerry, a surprising 37% of them were supporting Kerry anyway.
For the incumbent, this amounts to a very large vein of discontent running through what should be a heavily GOP stronghold. Republican presidents do not typically get re-elected when they are only polling a 63% support on Wall Street.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2004/06/bush_slipping_a.html
Bush’s Military RecordHere’s a thorough record, compiled by Paul Lukasiak. Some basic facts are laid out as to his non-performance. As per the Moore movie, mainstream journalists can access the same material. Will they?
When you compare the Bush records to the United States Statutes, Department of Defense regulations, and Air Force policies of the early 1970s, only one conclusion can be reached: that 30 years ago, George W. Bush shirked his sworn duty as a member of the United States Armed Forces to the national security of the United States of America.
However, Bush’s desertion from the Armed Forces thirty years ago is not terribly relevant. Lots of people make mistakes in their early twenties, and those mistakes do not necessarily reflect on the character of individuals when they are in their fifties.
What is relevant is Bush’s continued lies about his service, and his insistence upon presenting his service in the US Military as “honorable”. It was not. Bush simply blew off his last two years of required service, and was able to get away with it because he came from a politically influential family.
There is no other explanation for Bush’s records. None.http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm#rehab
Ashcroft: The Supeme Court is giving rights to terrorists
Attorney General John Ashcroft said Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court gave more rights to terrorists in three recent decisions, and Justice Department lawyers are poring over the rulings to determine their consequences.
The orders issued Monday on Guantanamo detainees and enemy combatants Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi indicate "that certain terrorists have more rights," Ashcroft said after a meeting with a regional anti-terrorism advisory council.
"The Supreme Court accorded to terrorists, in a variety of cases this week, a number of additional rights," he said. "We're digesting those opinions in terms of making sure that we adjust or modify what we do, so that we accommodate the requirements as expressed by the Supreme Court." http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20040701&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=407010402&SectionCat=&Template=printart
S.C. decisions a boon for Bush! Elaine Cassel:
Forget what the media’s talking heads have told you about these three Supreme Court decisions that tested the power of George W. Bush. The President won far more than he lost, so administration “officials” who pronounce themselves victors are more on target than the press who tell you that the decisions represent a defeat for the Administration, or rein in its power. Taken together, the decisions are more important for what they did not do. Their significance for the future, particularly if Bush is reelected, cannot be underestimated.
Rumsfeld v. Padilla
To begin with, the Court dodged the most important case—the case of Jose Padilla. Padilla, recently vilified by a highly-placed Department of Justice attorney, is the American citizen arrested on a material witness warrant in Chicago two years ago. The government’s story then was that he was planning to detonate a dirty bomb. Attorney General John Ashcroft held a press conference and announced the incarceration of Padilla and told us what a dangerous man he was. Of course, if they had evidence that he was planning to detonate a dirty bomb, they would have charged him with a host of crimes, and tried him. But they never charged him with anything. What does that tell you? A couple of weeks ago, Ashcroft sent out one of his top deputies to change the story on Padilla. That story may have influenced the Court’s decision, though we will never know this. Though the official denied that the press conference—at which he announced that Padilla had “confessed” to plotting to blow up high-rise apartment buildings—may have been held when it was to punctuate the government’s belief that Padilla was a very, very dangerous man. So if he is so dangerous, why is he not being charged. Of, you have to love this reason: because the government denied him his rights and repeatedly interrogated him without an attorney (and, maybe even tortured him, for all we know) his confession is no good! Can’t be used in court. So since we denied him his rights, we cannot try him, but we can hold him without charging him forever. Because we say he is dangerous.
And what did the Supreme Court have to say about that? In a 5-4 decision, it said...nothing. It ruled that Padilla’s court’ appointed attorney, Donna Newman, filed the petition for writ of habeas corpus (challenging the detention of her client without charge, without access to her) in the wrong federal court. She sued Rumsfeld, on whose order Padilla was named an “enemy combatant” in the Southern District of New York, where he was brought and incarcerated and where she was appointed. But after she got into the case, and without notice to her, the government moved him to a brig in South Carolina. So the government argued that the warden of the brig is the party to be sued, not Rumsfeld. As if that warden does not answer to Rumsfeld, at least if she is holding an enemy combatant—so-called. So with Rehnquist writing for the majority, the court threw out his petition. Altogether. Padilla has to start all over again, suing the warden wherever he or she is. Ah, but keep in mind, that once his attorneys file a another petition, the government just has to move him again. And again. And again. To avoid answering for his detention.
So the most important of the three cases was not decided. In not deciding, the Court fully sanctioned the continued detention of Padilla, without a charge, without a lawyer (Newman is now out of the case, since the suit was dismissed), for years to come.
http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/ecassel/intro
July 4: The State of the Nation.
Bob Herbert in the NY Times wishes us a happy July 4 celebration.
There is no exit strategy for American troops in Iraq. There is no plan in our insane tax-cut environment for paying for the war. The situation in Afghanistan, which is part of the real war against terror, has deteriorated. The U.S. military is stretched dangerously thin, lacking sufficient troops to meet its obligations around the world. Homeland security is deeply underfunded. And with the terror networks energized, the feeling among intelligence experts with regard to a strike in the U.S. is not if, but when.
Thanks, Bob.
-R
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
Crossfire’s Bob Novak said on Monday that Fahrenheit 9/11 shows Michael Moore to be ‘anti-American’. This from the “journalist” who revealed the name of a CIA operative, caused untold damage, and showed zero remorse.
Irony? Chutzpa? Your call.
Supreme Court: Rule of Law Prevails, or habeas corpus IS important
Basics: The courts do so have jurisdiction over Guantanamo. Congress gave considerable power re warring on and apprehending persons associated with the 9/11/01 attacks, enough to hold people as enemy combatants. But, such detentions are challengeable in court, though by what standard of evidence is not clear.
Highlight: from Scalia- really! "The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive…The writ of habeas corpus was preserved in the Constitution—the only common-law writ to be explicitly mentioned." "[i]t follows from what I have said that Hamdi is entitled a habeas decree requiring his release unless (1) criminal proceedings are promptly brought, or (2) Congress has suspended the writ of habeas corpus." And, “ "If civil rights are to be curtailed during wartime, it must be done openly and democratically, as the Constitution requires, rather than by silent erosion through an opinion of this Court."
Right and Left- interchangeable
Nick Kristof of the NY Times seeks to underscore his “moderate” label by equating the Right’s accusation that Clinton murdered Vince Foster and others with Michael Moore’s “attack” on Bush. Today’s article:
In the 1990's, nothing made conservatives look more petty and simple-minded than their demonization of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who were even accused of spending their spare time killing Vince Foster and others. Mr. Clinton, in other words, left the right wing addled. Now Mr. Bush is doing the same to the left. For example, Mr. Moore hints that the real reason Mr. Bush invaded Afghanistan was to give his cronies a chance to profit by building an oil pipeline there.
"I'm just raising what I think is a legitimate question," Mr. Moore told me, a touch defensively, adding, "I'm just posing a question."
Right. And right-wing nuts were "just posing a question" about whether Mr. Clinton was a serial killer. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Jim McDermott, (D-WA): The Big Lie The Washington Rep. on the "Floor":
Mr. Speaker, this administration is out of control. They have made obeying the law a thing of the past.
They have implemented "the big lie" theory of communications. This theory takes propaganda to a whole new level.
Under the big lie, you fabricate a story and call it the truth. You disseminate the story as widely as possible. You wrap the propaganda in the mantle of national symbols, and you prey upon the fears and emotions of your citizens. You repeat the propaganda every day in every way. You say it over and over and over again, knowing if you say it long enough people will believe it.
Anyone who dares to question the propaganda becomes the enemy. Any evidence to the contrary is hidden, called tainted or dismissed as the work of your enemies.
This is a portrait of America today painted by this administration. In the face of overwhelming evidence presented by members of its own party, the administration keeps reporting the same old false story. They say anything, and they have.
War Secretary Don Rumsfeld first told the American people, we do not have to abide by the Geneva Conventions. Then after Abu Ghraib he said, America supports the Geneva Conventions.
Now the truth emerges. Rumsfeld personally ordered an Iraqi suspect held in solitary confinement at a secret location for 7 months. The inmate was hidden from the International Red Cross and any other human rights organization. Rumsfeld made someone disappear. Rumsfeld personally committed a violation of the Geneva Conventions that is so egregious, it could qualify as a war crime. http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/sp040618a.shtml
Energy Security: It’s not only about us
Short-term thinking focuses on gas prices being at their lowest in 2 months. Thinking more broadly, Paul Roberts, foremost authority, addresses our future.
Asia's undeclared oil war is but the latest reminder that in a global economy dependent largely on a single fuel -- oil -- "energy security" means far more than hardening refineries and pipelines against terrorist attack. At its most basic level, energy security is the ability to keep the global machine humming -- that is, to produce enough fuels and electricity at affordable prices that every nation can keep its economy running, its people fed and its borders defended. A failure of energy security means that the momentum of industrialization and modernity grinds to a halt. And by that measure, we are failing.
In the United States and Europe, new demand for electricity is outpacing the new supply of power and natural gas and raising the specter of more rolling blackouts. In the "emerging" economies, such as Brazil, India and especially China, energy demand is rising so fast it may double by 2020. And this only hints at the energy crisis facing the developing world, where nearly 2 billion people -- a third of the world's population -- have almost no access to electricity or liquid fuels and are thus condemned to a medieval existence that breeds despair, resentment and, ultimately, conflict…
This escalation (rivalry for remaining oil) will not only drive up the risk of conflict but will make it harder for governments to focus on long-term energy challenges, such as avoiding climate change, developing alternative fuels and alleviating Third World energy poverty -- challenges that are themselves critical to long-term energy security but which, ironically, will be seen as distracting from the current campaign to keep the oil flowing.
This, ultimately, is the real energy-security dilemma. The more obvious it becomes that an oil-dominated energy economy is inherently insecure, the harder it becomes to move on to something beyond oil. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10714-2004Jun27.html
Pharmaceuticals:
Robert Pear’s NY Times addresses overcharging:
Federal investigators said Tuesday that drug companies had repeatedly overcharged public hospitals and clinics for low-income patients, making them pay more than the maximum prices allowed by federal law.
Such taxpayer-supported hospitals, community health centers and clinics for people with AIDS are supposed to have access to the government's best prices for outpatient drugs. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/politics/30drug.html
Marcia Angell’s essay addresses “the truth about drug companies.”
Over the past two decades the pharmaceutical industry has moved very far from its original high purpose of discovering and producing useful new drugs. Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, this industry uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers, and the medical profession itself. (Most of its marketing efforts are focused on influencing doctors, since they must write the prescriptions.) http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17244
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The New U.S. Embassy: with somewhere between 1,700 – 3,000 on the staff.
Yes, limited sovereignty!
And, Bremer left a calling card. Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Walter Pincus from the Post:
U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer has issued a raft of edicts revising Iraq's legal code and has appointed at least two dozen Iraqis to government jobs with multi-year terms in an attempt to promote his concepts of governance long after the planned handover of political authority on Wednesday.
Some of the orders signed by Bremer, which will remain in effect unless overturned by Iraq's interim government, restrict the power of the interim government and impose U.S.-crafted rules for the country's democratic transition. Among the most controversial orders is the enactment of an elections law that gives a seven-member commission the power to disqualify political parties and any of the candidates they support.
The effect of other regulations could last much longer. Bremer has ordered that the national security adviser and the national intelligence chief chosen by the interim prime minister he selected, Ayad Allawi, be given five-year terms, imposing Allawi's choices on the elected government that is to take over next year.
Bremer also has appointed Iraqis handpicked by his aides to influential positions in the interim government. He has installed inspectors-general for five-year terms in every ministry. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8665-2004Jun26?language=printer
Another from Bremer: Immunity Provision Extended for U.S. Firms With Reconstruction Contracts Ellen McCarthy for the Post.
U.S. contractors working in Iraq will be exempted from the legal processes of the country's new interim government when they are performing official duties and most reconstruction contracts will continue uninterrupted, U.S. officials said yesterday.
Under an order signed Sunday by L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator of Iraq, the contractors' immunity provision covers "official acts that they perform in contracts in support of the Iraq reconstruction effort," said Scott Castle, general counsel for the occupation authority. In matters unrelated to their contract work, they will be subject to Iraqi rules. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A13297-2004Jun28?language=printer
Fisk on the Handover: The Independent’s outspoken correspondent:
So in the end, America's enemies set the date. The handover of "full sovereignty" was secretly brought forward so that the ex-CIA intelligence officer who is now "Prime Minister" of Iraq could avoid another bloody offensive by America's enemies. What is supposed to be the most important date in Iraq's modern history was changed - like a birthday party - because it might rain on Wednesday.
Pitiful is the word that comes to mind. Here we were, handing "full sovereignty" to the people of Iraq - "full", of course, providing we forget the 160,000 foreign soldiers whom the Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, has apparently asked to stay in Iraq, "full" providing we forget the 3,000 US diplomats in Baghdad who will constitute the largest US embassy in the world - without even telling the Iraqi people that we had changed the date. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp
The Lesson of the Invasion/Occupation: Robin Wright comments that the Bush doctrine has taken a hit.
The occupation of Iraq has increasingly undermined, and in some cases discredited, the core tenets of President Bush's foreign policy, according to a wide range of Republican and Democratic analysts and U.S. officials.
When the war began 15 months ago, the president's Iraq policy rested on four broad principles: The United States should act preemptively to prevent strikes on U.S. targets. Washington should be willing to act unilaterally, alone or with a select coalition, when the United Nations or allies balk. Iraq was the next cornerstone in the global war on terrorism. And Baghdad's transformation into a new democracy would spark regionwide change.
But these central planks of Bush doctrine have been tainted by spiraling violence, limited reconstruction, failure to find weapons of mass destruction or prove Iraq's ties to al Qaeda, and mounting Arab disillusionment with U.S. leadership.
"Of the four principles, three have failed, and the fourth -- democracy promotion -- is hanging by a sliver," said Geoffrey Kemp, a National Security Council staff member in the Reagan administration and now director of regional strategic programs at the Nixon Center. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=97af648ae15e69415870ccff1b1b1ea3&lat=1088440258&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW5RH05A3FC53BEBA439543FE422900
The New Number One: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
The new key to terrorism, or at least the “insurgency” in Iraq, according to the Administration, is to kill al-Zarqawi. Osama, we hardly knew ye…
Dominating one wall of the huge room, faced by ranks of soldiers with telephones and monitors, is a screen showing a large map of a substantial chunk of Iraq, direct feeds from predator pilotless surveillance drones, live TV pictures and three slogans: "What has happened? What is happening? What is to be done?"
The screen covers a portion of Iraq populated by nearly four million people. One man is at the top of the "What is to be done?" list.
Fadel al-Khalailah, better known as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is Washington's public enemy number one, almost supplanting Osama bin Laden as the main focus of the global counter-terrorist hunt. The US believes that the 38-year-old Jordanian is the mastermind behind much of the recent violence in Iraq. Kill or capture him, the logic goes, and the insurgency falls apart. The reward for his capture is now US$10 million.
Unlike many senior militants, al-Zarqawi is from a poor background. Of Bedouin stock, he once ran a video shop and his family still live in a rundown house not far from Amman, the Jordanian capital. In the late 1980s, he joined the thousands of young Arabs helping the Afghans to fight the Soviet forces, then returned home determined to continue the battle "against unbelief" there. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/06/28/2003176868/print
Troop Shortage: Ongoing problem; the latest “solution”
The U.S. Army is planning an involuntary mobilization of thousands of reserve troops to maintain adequate force levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense officials said on Monday. The move -- involving the seldom-tapped Individual Ready Reserve -- represents the latest evidence of the strain being placed on the U.S. military, particularly the Army, by operations in those two countries. http://news.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=5536118
The latest to establish distance from Bush: Jesse Helms
"I would not have voted for [President Bush's] tax cut, based on what I know. . . . There is no doubt that the people at the top who need a tax break the least will get the most benefit. . . . Too often presidents do things that don't end up helping the people they should be helping, and their staffs won't tell them their actions stink on ice."
-- Former senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), in a recent interview with Business North Carolina magazine. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13191-2004Jun28.html
Poll: CBS: 42% approval for Bush, yet Kerry disliked more than liked, and more trust Bush in a crisis than Kerry. Still Even.
But, it’s only the end of June… http://www.iht.com/articles/527088.html
French President Chirac is lecturing President Bush (CNN):
French President Jacques Chirac has taken U.S. President George W. Bush to task over his call for Turkey's admission to the European Union.
”"If President Bush really said that in the way that I read, then not only did he go too far, but he went into territory that isn't his," Chirac said of a remark Bush made over the weekend.
"It is is not his purpose and his goal to give any advice to the EU, and in this area it was a bit as if I were to tell Americans how they should handle their relationship with Mexico."
TV Week magazine: PBS is experiencing its worst crisis in history.
“Faced with a major drop in corporate, private and government funding, lower ratings and an ongoing revolt over excessive programming costs by dozens of its 349 member stations, the Public Broadcasting System is in one of the worst crises of its history.
Confession: Michael Ignatieff:
Someone like me who supported the war on human rights grounds has nowhere to hide: we didn't suppose the administration was particularly nice, but we did assume it would be competent. There isn't much excuse for its incompetence, but equally, there isn't much excuse for our naivete either. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/magazine/27WWLN.html
-R
Irony? Chutzpa? Your call.
Supreme Court: Rule of Law Prevails, or habeas corpus IS important
Basics: The courts do so have jurisdiction over Guantanamo. Congress gave considerable power re warring on and apprehending persons associated with the 9/11/01 attacks, enough to hold people as enemy combatants. But, such detentions are challengeable in court, though by what standard of evidence is not clear.
Highlight: from Scalia- really! "The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive…The writ of habeas corpus was preserved in the Constitution—the only common-law writ to be explicitly mentioned." "[i]t follows from what I have said that Hamdi is entitled a habeas decree requiring his release unless (1) criminal proceedings are promptly brought, or (2) Congress has suspended the writ of habeas corpus." And, “ "If civil rights are to be curtailed during wartime, it must be done openly and democratically, as the Constitution requires, rather than by silent erosion through an opinion of this Court."
Right and Left- interchangeable
Nick Kristof of the NY Times seeks to underscore his “moderate” label by equating the Right’s accusation that Clinton murdered Vince Foster and others with Michael Moore’s “attack” on Bush. Today’s article:
In the 1990's, nothing made conservatives look more petty and simple-minded than their demonization of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who were even accused of spending their spare time killing Vince Foster and others. Mr. Clinton, in other words, left the right wing addled. Now Mr. Bush is doing the same to the left. For example, Mr. Moore hints that the real reason Mr. Bush invaded Afghanistan was to give his cronies a chance to profit by building an oil pipeline there.
"I'm just raising what I think is a legitimate question," Mr. Moore told me, a touch defensively, adding, "I'm just posing a question."
Right. And right-wing nuts were "just posing a question" about whether Mr. Clinton was a serial killer. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Jim McDermott, (D-WA): The Big Lie The Washington Rep. on the "Floor":
Mr. Speaker, this administration is out of control. They have made obeying the law a thing of the past.
They have implemented "the big lie" theory of communications. This theory takes propaganda to a whole new level.
Under the big lie, you fabricate a story and call it the truth. You disseminate the story as widely as possible. You wrap the propaganda in the mantle of national symbols, and you prey upon the fears and emotions of your citizens. You repeat the propaganda every day in every way. You say it over and over and over again, knowing if you say it long enough people will believe it.
Anyone who dares to question the propaganda becomes the enemy. Any evidence to the contrary is hidden, called tainted or dismissed as the work of your enemies.
This is a portrait of America today painted by this administration. In the face of overwhelming evidence presented by members of its own party, the administration keeps reporting the same old false story. They say anything, and they have.
War Secretary Don Rumsfeld first told the American people, we do not have to abide by the Geneva Conventions. Then after Abu Ghraib he said, America supports the Geneva Conventions.
Now the truth emerges. Rumsfeld personally ordered an Iraqi suspect held in solitary confinement at a secret location for 7 months. The inmate was hidden from the International Red Cross and any other human rights organization. Rumsfeld made someone disappear. Rumsfeld personally committed a violation of the Geneva Conventions that is so egregious, it could qualify as a war crime. http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/sp040618a.shtml
Energy Security: It’s not only about us
Short-term thinking focuses on gas prices being at their lowest in 2 months. Thinking more broadly, Paul Roberts, foremost authority, addresses our future.
Asia's undeclared oil war is but the latest reminder that in a global economy dependent largely on a single fuel -- oil -- "energy security" means far more than hardening refineries and pipelines against terrorist attack. At its most basic level, energy security is the ability to keep the global machine humming -- that is, to produce enough fuels and electricity at affordable prices that every nation can keep its economy running, its people fed and its borders defended. A failure of energy security means that the momentum of industrialization and modernity grinds to a halt. And by that measure, we are failing.
In the United States and Europe, new demand for electricity is outpacing the new supply of power and natural gas and raising the specter of more rolling blackouts. In the "emerging" economies, such as Brazil, India and especially China, energy demand is rising so fast it may double by 2020. And this only hints at the energy crisis facing the developing world, where nearly 2 billion people -- a third of the world's population -- have almost no access to electricity or liquid fuels and are thus condemned to a medieval existence that breeds despair, resentment and, ultimately, conflict…
This escalation (rivalry for remaining oil) will not only drive up the risk of conflict but will make it harder for governments to focus on long-term energy challenges, such as avoiding climate change, developing alternative fuels and alleviating Third World energy poverty -- challenges that are themselves critical to long-term energy security but which, ironically, will be seen as distracting from the current campaign to keep the oil flowing.
This, ultimately, is the real energy-security dilemma. The more obvious it becomes that an oil-dominated energy economy is inherently insecure, the harder it becomes to move on to something beyond oil. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10714-2004Jun27.html
Pharmaceuticals:
Robert Pear’s NY Times addresses overcharging:
Federal investigators said Tuesday that drug companies had repeatedly overcharged public hospitals and clinics for low-income patients, making them pay more than the maximum prices allowed by federal law.
Such taxpayer-supported hospitals, community health centers and clinics for people with AIDS are supposed to have access to the government's best prices for outpatient drugs. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/politics/30drug.html
Marcia Angell’s essay addresses “the truth about drug companies.”
Over the past two decades the pharmaceutical industry has moved very far from its original high purpose of discovering and producing useful new drugs. Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, this industry uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers, and the medical profession itself. (Most of its marketing efforts are focused on influencing doctors, since they must write the prescriptions.) http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17244
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The New U.S. Embassy: with somewhere between 1,700 – 3,000 on the staff.
Yes, limited sovereignty!
And, Bremer left a calling card. Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Walter Pincus from the Post:
U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer has issued a raft of edicts revising Iraq's legal code and has appointed at least two dozen Iraqis to government jobs with multi-year terms in an attempt to promote his concepts of governance long after the planned handover of political authority on Wednesday.
Some of the orders signed by Bremer, which will remain in effect unless overturned by Iraq's interim government, restrict the power of the interim government and impose U.S.-crafted rules for the country's democratic transition. Among the most controversial orders is the enactment of an elections law that gives a seven-member commission the power to disqualify political parties and any of the candidates they support.
The effect of other regulations could last much longer. Bremer has ordered that the national security adviser and the national intelligence chief chosen by the interim prime minister he selected, Ayad Allawi, be given five-year terms, imposing Allawi's choices on the elected government that is to take over next year.
Bremer also has appointed Iraqis handpicked by his aides to influential positions in the interim government. He has installed inspectors-general for five-year terms in every ministry. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8665-2004Jun26?language=printer
Another from Bremer: Immunity Provision Extended for U.S. Firms With Reconstruction Contracts Ellen McCarthy for the Post.
U.S. contractors working in Iraq will be exempted from the legal processes of the country's new interim government when they are performing official duties and most reconstruction contracts will continue uninterrupted, U.S. officials said yesterday.
Under an order signed Sunday by L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator of Iraq, the contractors' immunity provision covers "official acts that they perform in contracts in support of the Iraq reconstruction effort," said Scott Castle, general counsel for the occupation authority. In matters unrelated to their contract work, they will be subject to Iraqi rules. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A13297-2004Jun28?language=printer
Fisk on the Handover: The Independent’s outspoken correspondent:
So in the end, America's enemies set the date. The handover of "full sovereignty" was secretly brought forward so that the ex-CIA intelligence officer who is now "Prime Minister" of Iraq could avoid another bloody offensive by America's enemies. What is supposed to be the most important date in Iraq's modern history was changed - like a birthday party - because it might rain on Wednesday.
Pitiful is the word that comes to mind. Here we were, handing "full sovereignty" to the people of Iraq - "full", of course, providing we forget the 160,000 foreign soldiers whom the Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, has apparently asked to stay in Iraq, "full" providing we forget the 3,000 US diplomats in Baghdad who will constitute the largest US embassy in the world - without even telling the Iraqi people that we had changed the date. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp
The Lesson of the Invasion/Occupation: Robin Wright comments that the Bush doctrine has taken a hit.
The occupation of Iraq has increasingly undermined, and in some cases discredited, the core tenets of President Bush's foreign policy, according to a wide range of Republican and Democratic analysts and U.S. officials.
When the war began 15 months ago, the president's Iraq policy rested on four broad principles: The United States should act preemptively to prevent strikes on U.S. targets. Washington should be willing to act unilaterally, alone or with a select coalition, when the United Nations or allies balk. Iraq was the next cornerstone in the global war on terrorism. And Baghdad's transformation into a new democracy would spark regionwide change.
But these central planks of Bush doctrine have been tainted by spiraling violence, limited reconstruction, failure to find weapons of mass destruction or prove Iraq's ties to al Qaeda, and mounting Arab disillusionment with U.S. leadership.
"Of the four principles, three have failed, and the fourth -- democracy promotion -- is hanging by a sliver," said Geoffrey Kemp, a National Security Council staff member in the Reagan administration and now director of regional strategic programs at the Nixon Center. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=97af648ae15e69415870ccff1b1b1ea3&lat=1088440258&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW5RH05A3FC53BEBA439543FE422900
The New Number One: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
The new key to terrorism, or at least the “insurgency” in Iraq, according to the Administration, is to kill al-Zarqawi. Osama, we hardly knew ye…
Dominating one wall of the huge room, faced by ranks of soldiers with telephones and monitors, is a screen showing a large map of a substantial chunk of Iraq, direct feeds from predator pilotless surveillance drones, live TV pictures and three slogans: "What has happened? What is happening? What is to be done?"
The screen covers a portion of Iraq populated by nearly four million people. One man is at the top of the "What is to be done?" list.
Fadel al-Khalailah, better known as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is Washington's public enemy number one, almost supplanting Osama bin Laden as the main focus of the global counter-terrorist hunt. The US believes that the 38-year-old Jordanian is the mastermind behind much of the recent violence in Iraq. Kill or capture him, the logic goes, and the insurgency falls apart. The reward for his capture is now US$10 million.
Unlike many senior militants, al-Zarqawi is from a poor background. Of Bedouin stock, he once ran a video shop and his family still live in a rundown house not far from Amman, the Jordanian capital. In the late 1980s, he joined the thousands of young Arabs helping the Afghans to fight the Soviet forces, then returned home determined to continue the battle "against unbelief" there. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/06/28/2003176868/print
Troop Shortage: Ongoing problem; the latest “solution”
The U.S. Army is planning an involuntary mobilization of thousands of reserve troops to maintain adequate force levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense officials said on Monday. The move -- involving the seldom-tapped Individual Ready Reserve -- represents the latest evidence of the strain being placed on the U.S. military, particularly the Army, by operations in those two countries. http://news.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=5536118
The latest to establish distance from Bush: Jesse Helms
"I would not have voted for [President Bush's] tax cut, based on what I know. . . . There is no doubt that the people at the top who need a tax break the least will get the most benefit. . . . Too often presidents do things that don't end up helping the people they should be helping, and their staffs won't tell them their actions stink on ice."
-- Former senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), in a recent interview with Business North Carolina magazine. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13191-2004Jun28.html
Poll: CBS: 42% approval for Bush, yet Kerry disliked more than liked, and more trust Bush in a crisis than Kerry. Still Even.
But, it’s only the end of June… http://www.iht.com/articles/527088.html
French President Chirac is lecturing President Bush (CNN):
French President Jacques Chirac has taken U.S. President George W. Bush to task over his call for Turkey's admission to the European Union.
”"If President Bush really said that in the way that I read, then not only did he go too far, but he went into territory that isn't his," Chirac said of a remark Bush made over the weekend.
"It is is not his purpose and his goal to give any advice to the EU, and in this area it was a bit as if I were to tell Americans how they should handle their relationship with Mexico."
TV Week magazine: PBS is experiencing its worst crisis in history.
“Faced with a major drop in corporate, private and government funding, lower ratings and an ongoing revolt over excessive programming costs by dozens of its 349 member stations, the Public Broadcasting System is in one of the worst crises of its history.
Confession: Michael Ignatieff:
Someone like me who supported the war on human rights grounds has nowhere to hide: we didn't suppose the administration was particularly nice, but we did assume it would be competent. There isn't much excuse for its incompetence, but equally, there isn't much excuse for our naivete either. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/magazine/27WWLN.html
-R
Monday, June 28, 2004
Anniversary: 50 years ago, yesterday, the CIA ousted the government of Guatemala.
Fahrenheit 9/11:
Quite the success! As a movie, it was rather messy, but regardless, it drew huge crowds, and not just the choir. For example, the NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt, Jr. advised his crew to see it, noting ‘it’s a good thing as an American to go see.’
Although it was on less than 1/3 of the screens of its competitors, it was the top grossing movie of the weekend.
We sold out in Fayetteville, home of Fort Bragg," in North Carolina, Mr. Moore said on Sunday. "We sold out in Army-base towns. We set house records in some of these places. We set single-day records in a number of theaters. We got standing ovations in Greensboro, N.C.
"The biggest news to me this morning is this is a red-state movie," he said, referring to the state whose residents voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 election. "Republican states are embracing the movie, and it's sold out in Republican strongholds all over the country."
Harvey Weinstein said: "It's beyond anybody's expectations. I'd have to say the sky's the limit on this movie. Who knows what territory we're in." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/movies/28BOX.html?hp
Arguably the most notable part of the movie is the film of Bush sitting inert and impassive after being told of the SECOND plane having hit the World Trade Tower. It just demolishes the Bush as Leader aura that so many have been invested in. Jack Beatty offers his take:
That moment exposes Bush's character. It reveals what his press conferences proclaim: his incapacity. If he were George W. Smith, what job would he be qualified for? Bush's presidency can be seen as one long cover-up of the most obvious thing about him. A life of upward failure, of being his father's son, left him without "sand," my nineteenth century-born father's word for the residue of strength acquired by "standing on your own two feet" and "taking your medicine." Bush never stood on his own feet, never took his medicine—and he has never been his own man. He's the only president to be related to the Queen of England, and his biography is that of a "royal." Prince Charles would make a sorry prime minister. Like Bush, though, he'd give good strut.
Leaders show what they are made of in a crisis. Bush hid in plain sight with those kids. Later, hiding twice over, he used them as an excuse, saying he did not want to frighten them by ending the reading before finishing the book. Later still, and repeatedly, he said he saw the first plane strike the tower that morning (in fact, no one saw that live; the film was not available until the evening) and that he remarked, "That's some bad pilot"—pure strut. As the Wall Street Journal reported, he also magnified his role in managing the crisis, claiming he gave orders others gave. Conflicting accounts of Bush's communications documented by the 9/11 Commission now raise doubts whether, as he and Cheney told the commissioners, he ordered Cheney to shoot down any hijacked planes still in the air, or whether Cheney, in the White House bunker, acted on his own. http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/polipro/pp2004-06-23.htm
Polls:
A slew of results from Fox that unsurprisingly have Bush ahead in key states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and a 10 point lead in Florida. CNN/USA Today/Gallup has the race essentially tied, and Quinipiac and American Research Group polls have Kerry even or slightly ahead in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.
But it’s only late June.
Bush in Ireland:
How pathetic: Questions put to Bush in the officially granted interview had to be submitted in advance. "The policy of the White House is that you submit your questions in advance, so they had my questions for about three days," said Carole Coleman who interviewed Bush. Still, when she tried to follow-up, Bush ignored her and was ticked. From the Irish press:
However, when RTE put Ms [Carole] Coleman's name forward as interviewer, they were told Mrs Bush would no longer be available.
The Irish Independent learned last night that the White House told Ms Coleman that she interrupted the president unnecessarily and was disrespectful.
She also received a call from the White House in which she was admonished for her tone.
And it emerged last night that presidential staff suggested to Ms Coleman as she went into the interview that she ask him a question on the outfit that Taoiseach Bertie Ahern wore to the G8 summit. http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1205871&issue_id=11063
Bush in Turkey:
Next to no coverage beyond the content of the NATO meeting (see below). But if you look at the foreign press you find headlines like this one in Australia (ABC): Protests, explosions mark Bush visit to Turkey. Seems that 40,000 staged a protest.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Hostages, bombings. But, “limited sovereignty”! How limited? Al Jazeera reports that the Iraqi police and army is (understandably- see below) not trusted by the US and is being stripped of its fire power. "US occupation forces are taking measures to ensure that the emerging Iraqi Army remain a small defensive force with limited capabilities and no armor. For the first time in its 84-year history, the Iraqi Army has been reduced to a nearly impotent force deprived of heavy armaments, armor, and aircraft."
Iraqi Police/Army fight the U.S.
The Telegraph (GB) report that the newly trained army and police don’t always work with us.
An Iraqi journalist went into Fallujah on behalf of the Telegraph on Wednesday, a day on which an orchestrated wave of bloody rebel attacks across the country cost more than 100 lives.
Inside the Sunni-dominated town, he met police officers and units of the country's new army who have formed a united front with Muslim fundamentalists against the Americans, their resistance focused on al-Askeri district on the eastern outskirts of the town.
That morning, US marines had taken up "aggressive defence" positions on one side of Highway One. On the other side, militant fighters were dug in, ready for battle. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/27/wirq127.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/06/27/ixnewstop.html
Yellowcake, revisited:
More is a-stirring about the old story of alleged Iraqi purchases of yellowcake uranium from Niger. The forger of the documents in that case is allegedly a businessman who will surface to explain the particulars. But, according to Josh Marshall at talkingpointsmemo, there’s much more to the story, which will ultimately be revealed… but not yet, for strategic reasons. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_06_27.php#003106 http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373295039&p=1012571727088
Let My People Go!
The Brits remain unhappy as to their charges who are stuck at Guantanamo: From the Guardian (Vikram Dodd). The Administration, weakened and valuing appearances, may relent.
Tony Blair has personally asked President George Bush to send the four remaining Britons in Guantánamo Bay home, amid mounting calls for the government to increase its pressure on Washington to end alleged human rights abuses.
The Guardian has seen court papers revealing the prime minister's direct plea to Mr Bush. They form the government's formal defence to a legal action brought by lawyers for two of the remaining prisoners seeking a court order compelling Britain to formally demand their return.
The government's defence states: "The United Kingdom government is continuing to seek the return of the four remaining prisoners and the prime minister has made a di rect request to President Bush to that effect".
The four prisoners alleged by the US to be terrorists have been held without trial, charge or access to lawyers for up to two and a half years. Mr Blair has been condemned for doing too little to secure their release from conditions that have caused worldwide outrage. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4956955-111575,00.html
Rapprochement w/ Chirac? Not so simple.
The Guardian’s Ian Black and Michael White report that Chirac isn’t ready to play ball. Again, the Administration may need to bend.
President George Bush was facing stiff French-led resistance last night to his efforts to persuade his Nato allies to agree to train Iraqi security forces.
The French president, Jacques Chirac, is determined to thwart any deal that allows the US and Britain to claim that the alliance has a formal role in the disputed occupation.
Tony Blair flew into Istanbul last night intent on talking up the summit's chance of achieving even a modest success in respect of Iraq and in terms of a wider Nato role in "forgotten" Afghanistan, but was keen to say nothing that would further offend France. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4958107-103550,00.html
And, reports from the NATO meeting reinforce the impression that the U.S. has “lost its edge”.
"What we are seeing is other nations joining to resist U.S. unilateralism and exacting a higher price," said Cliff Kupchan, vice president of the Nixon Center, an institute in Washington created by former President Richard M. Nixon that specializes in foreign policy. "We've seen pounds of flesh being exacted before. Now it's an aggregate pound of flesh."
Mr. Kupchan said international skepticism and domestic pressure from Americans seeking a more collaborative role with the world had prompted the administration to adjust its tone. But it may be too late, he said. "I don't think you can turn around three years of U.S. foreign policy with some midnight initiatives," he said. "The image of this president in the public's and the world's eyes is pretty much established." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/politics/28DIPL.html
Anthony Lewis on Torture: ‘We need a criminal investigation.’
The issues raised by the Bush administration's legal assertions in its "war on terror" are so numerous and so troubling that one hardly knows where to begin discussing them. The torture and death of prisoners, the end result of cool legal abstractions, have a powerful claim on our national conscience. They are described in horrifying detail in a report published recently by Human Rights Watch, "The Road to Abu Ghraib." But equally disturbing, in its way, is the administration's constitutional argument that presidential power is unconstrained by law…
… we cannot look to the Supreme Court for answers to the torture and inhuman treatment of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. The answer will have to come from the political system. It could, conceivably, be a congressional investigation, perhaps by a special joint committee; but so far, at least, members of Congress do not seem to have the appetite for that. Nor can we expect real results from various investigations being undertaken by the armed forces.
The situation calls for a criminal investigation by an independent prosecutor armed with subpoena power— and with the ethical commitment of such a person as Archibald Cox. It goes without saying that Attorney General Ashcroft cannot be in charge. Soon after September 11 he made his idea of constitutionalism plain when he said that those who expressed concern about the impact of administration measures on civil liberties were aiding the terrorists. In Senate testimony on the torture scandal this month he stonewalled attempts to find out who ordered what.
A committed prosecutor would do what investigators of official crimes have done since Nuremberg: apply the principle of command responsibility and work his way up the chain to the source of misconduct. That principle is why Slobodan Milosevic is in the dock in The Hague.
It will hardly be easy to get an independent prosecutor for this task. George W. Bush and Karl Rove will do all they can to prevent a real investigation. It will take great pressure from the public and Congress. But there is no other visible way for America to recover its good name—and its moral sense of itself. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17230
The Disaster of Failed PolicyThe LA Times editorial:
In its scale and intent, President Bush's war against Iraq was something new and radical: a premeditated decision to invade, occupy and topple the government of a country that was no imminent threat to the United States. This was not a handful of GIs sent to overthrow Panamanian thug Manuel Noriega or to oust a new Marxist government in tiny Grenada. It was the dispatch of more than 100,000 U.S. troops to implement Bush's post-Sept. 11 doctrine of preemption, one whose dangers President John Quincy Adams understood when he said the United States "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy."
In the case of Vietnam, the U.S. began by assisting a friendly government resisting communist takeover in a civil war, though the conflict disintegrated into a failure that still haunts this country. The 1991 Persian Gulf War, under Bush's father, was a successful response to Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait — and Bush's father deliberately stopped short of toppling Saddam Hussein and occupying Iraq.
The current president outlined a far more aggressive policy in a speech to the West Point graduating class in 2002, declaring that in the war on terror "we must take the battle to the enemy" and confront threats before they emerge. The Iraq war was intended as a monument to his new Bush Doctrine, which also posited that the U.S. would take what help was available from allies but would not be held back by them. It now stands as a monument to folly. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-iraq27jun27,1,2763257,print.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials
Health Care: Getting Worse
Meanwhile, “We don’t have any national health policy at all in this country.” Bob Herbert’s NY Times column:
Last week I talked with Dr. Starfield, an internationally respected physician, professor and researcher, and asked whether the situation had improved over the last four years.
"It's getting worse," she said, noting, "We've done a lot more studies in terms of the international comparisons. We've done them a million different ways. The findings are so robust that I think they're probably incontrovertible."
The U.S. has the most expensive health care system on the planet, but millions of Americans without access to care die from illnesses that could have been successfully treated if diagnosed in time. Poor people line up at emergency rooms for care that should be provided in a doctor's office or clinic. Each year tens of thousands of men, women and children die from medical errors and many more are maimed.
But when you look for leadership on these issues, you find yourself staring into the void. If you want to get physicians' representatives excited, ask them about tort reform, not patient care. Elected officials give lip service to health care issues, but at the end of the campaign day their allegiance goes to the highest bidders, and they are never the people who put patients first.
To get a sense of just how backward we're becoming on these matters, consider that in places like Texas, Florida and Mississippi the politicians are dreaming up new ways to remove the protective cloak of health coverage from children, the elderly and the poor. Texas and Florida have been pulling the plug on coverage for low-income kids. And Mississippi recently approved the deepest cut in Medicaid eligibility for senior citizens and the disabled that has ever been approved anywhere in the U.S. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/opinion/28HERB.html
And, there are few quality jobs
After 20 months of looking for work and sending out hundreds of résumés, Jeffrey Schwab has given up trying to find another job as a draftsman. He's now taken early Social Security and is considering whether to sell his Bellingham, Wash., home to move to something smaller. "From what I can tell, there's not much to look for," says Mr. Schwab, who has 35 years of pipeline-design experience. "I am standing around with nothing to do."
Even though the economy has created 1.2 million jobs since January, some 265,000 people have dropped out of the job hunt during the same period. They would join some 19.1 million Americans in the same situation as Schwab, who are unemployed and not looking for work largely because they are convinced they won't find it. This figure, at a record level, is up 44 percent from 10 years ago. http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0628/p02s01-usec.htm
Science and The Bush Administration:
Familiar theme. Tom Hamburger of the LA Times:
Administration Tries to Rein In Scientists
The Bush administration has ordered that government scientists must be approved by a senior political appointee before they can participate in meetings convened by the World Health Organization, the leading international health and science agency.
A top official from the Health and Human Services Department in April asked the WHO to begin routing requests for participation in its meetings to the department's secretary for review, rather than directly invite individual scientists, as has long been the case. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-science26jun26,1,7447273.story?coll=la-home-headlines
-R
Fahrenheit 9/11:
Quite the success! As a movie, it was rather messy, but regardless, it drew huge crowds, and not just the choir. For example, the NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt, Jr. advised his crew to see it, noting ‘it’s a good thing as an American to go see.’
Although it was on less than 1/3 of the screens of its competitors, it was the top grossing movie of the weekend.
We sold out in Fayetteville, home of Fort Bragg," in North Carolina, Mr. Moore said on Sunday. "We sold out in Army-base towns. We set house records in some of these places. We set single-day records in a number of theaters. We got standing ovations in Greensboro, N.C.
"The biggest news to me this morning is this is a red-state movie," he said, referring to the state whose residents voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 election. "Republican states are embracing the movie, and it's sold out in Republican strongholds all over the country."
Harvey Weinstein said: "It's beyond anybody's expectations. I'd have to say the sky's the limit on this movie. Who knows what territory we're in." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/movies/28BOX.html?hp
Arguably the most notable part of the movie is the film of Bush sitting inert and impassive after being told of the SECOND plane having hit the World Trade Tower. It just demolishes the Bush as Leader aura that so many have been invested in. Jack Beatty offers his take:
That moment exposes Bush's character. It reveals what his press conferences proclaim: his incapacity. If he were George W. Smith, what job would he be qualified for? Bush's presidency can be seen as one long cover-up of the most obvious thing about him. A life of upward failure, of being his father's son, left him without "sand," my nineteenth century-born father's word for the residue of strength acquired by "standing on your own two feet" and "taking your medicine." Bush never stood on his own feet, never took his medicine—and he has never been his own man. He's the only president to be related to the Queen of England, and his biography is that of a "royal." Prince Charles would make a sorry prime minister. Like Bush, though, he'd give good strut.
Leaders show what they are made of in a crisis. Bush hid in plain sight with those kids. Later, hiding twice over, he used them as an excuse, saying he did not want to frighten them by ending the reading before finishing the book. Later still, and repeatedly, he said he saw the first plane strike the tower that morning (in fact, no one saw that live; the film was not available until the evening) and that he remarked, "That's some bad pilot"—pure strut. As the Wall Street Journal reported, he also magnified his role in managing the crisis, claiming he gave orders others gave. Conflicting accounts of Bush's communications documented by the 9/11 Commission now raise doubts whether, as he and Cheney told the commissioners, he ordered Cheney to shoot down any hijacked planes still in the air, or whether Cheney, in the White House bunker, acted on his own. http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/polipro/pp2004-06-23.htm
Polls:
A slew of results from Fox that unsurprisingly have Bush ahead in key states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and a 10 point lead in Florida. CNN/USA Today/Gallup has the race essentially tied, and Quinipiac and American Research Group polls have Kerry even or slightly ahead in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.
But it’s only late June.
Bush in Ireland:
How pathetic: Questions put to Bush in the officially granted interview had to be submitted in advance. "The policy of the White House is that you submit your questions in advance, so they had my questions for about three days," said Carole Coleman who interviewed Bush. Still, when she tried to follow-up, Bush ignored her and was ticked. From the Irish press:
However, when RTE put Ms [Carole] Coleman's name forward as interviewer, they were told Mrs Bush would no longer be available.
The Irish Independent learned last night that the White House told Ms Coleman that she interrupted the president unnecessarily and was disrespectful.
She also received a call from the White House in which she was admonished for her tone.
And it emerged last night that presidential staff suggested to Ms Coleman as she went into the interview that she ask him a question on the outfit that Taoiseach Bertie Ahern wore to the G8 summit. http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1205871&issue_id=11063
Bush in Turkey:
Next to no coverage beyond the content of the NATO meeting (see below). But if you look at the foreign press you find headlines like this one in Australia (ABC): Protests, explosions mark Bush visit to Turkey. Seems that 40,000 staged a protest.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Hostages, bombings. But, “limited sovereignty”! How limited? Al Jazeera reports that the Iraqi police and army is (understandably- see below) not trusted by the US and is being stripped of its fire power. "US occupation forces are taking measures to ensure that the emerging Iraqi Army remain a small defensive force with limited capabilities and no armor. For the first time in its 84-year history, the Iraqi Army has been reduced to a nearly impotent force deprived of heavy armaments, armor, and aircraft."
Iraqi Police/Army fight the U.S.
The Telegraph (GB) report that the newly trained army and police don’t always work with us.
An Iraqi journalist went into Fallujah on behalf of the Telegraph on Wednesday, a day on which an orchestrated wave of bloody rebel attacks across the country cost more than 100 lives.
Inside the Sunni-dominated town, he met police officers and units of the country's new army who have formed a united front with Muslim fundamentalists against the Americans, their resistance focused on al-Askeri district on the eastern outskirts of the town.
That morning, US marines had taken up "aggressive defence" positions on one side of Highway One. On the other side, militant fighters were dug in, ready for battle. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/27/wirq127.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/06/27/ixnewstop.html
Yellowcake, revisited:
More is a-stirring about the old story of alleged Iraqi purchases of yellowcake uranium from Niger. The forger of the documents in that case is allegedly a businessman who will surface to explain the particulars. But, according to Josh Marshall at talkingpointsmemo, there’s much more to the story, which will ultimately be revealed… but not yet, for strategic reasons. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_06_27.php#003106 http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373295039&p=1012571727088
Let My People Go!
The Brits remain unhappy as to their charges who are stuck at Guantanamo: From the Guardian (Vikram Dodd). The Administration, weakened and valuing appearances, may relent.
Tony Blair has personally asked President George Bush to send the four remaining Britons in Guantánamo Bay home, amid mounting calls for the government to increase its pressure on Washington to end alleged human rights abuses.
The Guardian has seen court papers revealing the prime minister's direct plea to Mr Bush. They form the government's formal defence to a legal action brought by lawyers for two of the remaining prisoners seeking a court order compelling Britain to formally demand their return.
The government's defence states: "The United Kingdom government is continuing to seek the return of the four remaining prisoners and the prime minister has made a di rect request to President Bush to that effect".
The four prisoners alleged by the US to be terrorists have been held without trial, charge or access to lawyers for up to two and a half years. Mr Blair has been condemned for doing too little to secure their release from conditions that have caused worldwide outrage. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4956955-111575,00.html
Rapprochement w/ Chirac? Not so simple.
The Guardian’s Ian Black and Michael White report that Chirac isn’t ready to play ball. Again, the Administration may need to bend.
President George Bush was facing stiff French-led resistance last night to his efforts to persuade his Nato allies to agree to train Iraqi security forces.
The French president, Jacques Chirac, is determined to thwart any deal that allows the US and Britain to claim that the alliance has a formal role in the disputed occupation.
Tony Blair flew into Istanbul last night intent on talking up the summit's chance of achieving even a modest success in respect of Iraq and in terms of a wider Nato role in "forgotten" Afghanistan, but was keen to say nothing that would further offend France. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4958107-103550,00.html
And, reports from the NATO meeting reinforce the impression that the U.S. has “lost its edge”.
"What we are seeing is other nations joining to resist U.S. unilateralism and exacting a higher price," said Cliff Kupchan, vice president of the Nixon Center, an institute in Washington created by former President Richard M. Nixon that specializes in foreign policy. "We've seen pounds of flesh being exacted before. Now it's an aggregate pound of flesh."
Mr. Kupchan said international skepticism and domestic pressure from Americans seeking a more collaborative role with the world had prompted the administration to adjust its tone. But it may be too late, he said. "I don't think you can turn around three years of U.S. foreign policy with some midnight initiatives," he said. "The image of this president in the public's and the world's eyes is pretty much established." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/politics/28DIPL.html
Anthony Lewis on Torture: ‘We need a criminal investigation.’
The issues raised by the Bush administration's legal assertions in its "war on terror" are so numerous and so troubling that one hardly knows where to begin discussing them. The torture and death of prisoners, the end result of cool legal abstractions, have a powerful claim on our national conscience. They are described in horrifying detail in a report published recently by Human Rights Watch, "The Road to Abu Ghraib." But equally disturbing, in its way, is the administration's constitutional argument that presidential power is unconstrained by law…
… we cannot look to the Supreme Court for answers to the torture and inhuman treatment of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. The answer will have to come from the political system. It could, conceivably, be a congressional investigation, perhaps by a special joint committee; but so far, at least, members of Congress do not seem to have the appetite for that. Nor can we expect real results from various investigations being undertaken by the armed forces.
The situation calls for a criminal investigation by an independent prosecutor armed with subpoena power— and with the ethical commitment of such a person as Archibald Cox. It goes without saying that Attorney General Ashcroft cannot be in charge. Soon after September 11 he made his idea of constitutionalism plain when he said that those who expressed concern about the impact of administration measures on civil liberties were aiding the terrorists. In Senate testimony on the torture scandal this month he stonewalled attempts to find out who ordered what.
A committed prosecutor would do what investigators of official crimes have done since Nuremberg: apply the principle of command responsibility and work his way up the chain to the source of misconduct. That principle is why Slobodan Milosevic is in the dock in The Hague.
It will hardly be easy to get an independent prosecutor for this task. George W. Bush and Karl Rove will do all they can to prevent a real investigation. It will take great pressure from the public and Congress. But there is no other visible way for America to recover its good name—and its moral sense of itself. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17230
The Disaster of Failed PolicyThe LA Times editorial:
In its scale and intent, President Bush's war against Iraq was something new and radical: a premeditated decision to invade, occupy and topple the government of a country that was no imminent threat to the United States. This was not a handful of GIs sent to overthrow Panamanian thug Manuel Noriega or to oust a new Marxist government in tiny Grenada. It was the dispatch of more than 100,000 U.S. troops to implement Bush's post-Sept. 11 doctrine of preemption, one whose dangers President John Quincy Adams understood when he said the United States "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy."
In the case of Vietnam, the U.S. began by assisting a friendly government resisting communist takeover in a civil war, though the conflict disintegrated into a failure that still haunts this country. The 1991 Persian Gulf War, under Bush's father, was a successful response to Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait — and Bush's father deliberately stopped short of toppling Saddam Hussein and occupying Iraq.
The current president outlined a far more aggressive policy in a speech to the West Point graduating class in 2002, declaring that in the war on terror "we must take the battle to the enemy" and confront threats before they emerge. The Iraq war was intended as a monument to his new Bush Doctrine, which also posited that the U.S. would take what help was available from allies but would not be held back by them. It now stands as a monument to folly. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-iraq27jun27,1,2763257,print.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials
Health Care: Getting Worse
Meanwhile, “We don’t have any national health policy at all in this country.” Bob Herbert’s NY Times column:
Last week I talked with Dr. Starfield, an internationally respected physician, professor and researcher, and asked whether the situation had improved over the last four years.
"It's getting worse," she said, noting, "We've done a lot more studies in terms of the international comparisons. We've done them a million different ways. The findings are so robust that I think they're probably incontrovertible."
The U.S. has the most expensive health care system on the planet, but millions of Americans without access to care die from illnesses that could have been successfully treated if diagnosed in time. Poor people line up at emergency rooms for care that should be provided in a doctor's office or clinic. Each year tens of thousands of men, women and children die from medical errors and many more are maimed.
But when you look for leadership on these issues, you find yourself staring into the void. If you want to get physicians' representatives excited, ask them about tort reform, not patient care. Elected officials give lip service to health care issues, but at the end of the campaign day their allegiance goes to the highest bidders, and they are never the people who put patients first.
To get a sense of just how backward we're becoming on these matters, consider that in places like Texas, Florida and Mississippi the politicians are dreaming up new ways to remove the protective cloak of health coverage from children, the elderly and the poor. Texas and Florida have been pulling the plug on coverage for low-income kids. And Mississippi recently approved the deepest cut in Medicaid eligibility for senior citizens and the disabled that has ever been approved anywhere in the U.S. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/opinion/28HERB.html
And, there are few quality jobs
After 20 months of looking for work and sending out hundreds of résumés, Jeffrey Schwab has given up trying to find another job as a draftsman. He's now taken early Social Security and is considering whether to sell his Bellingham, Wash., home to move to something smaller. "From what I can tell, there's not much to look for," says Mr. Schwab, who has 35 years of pipeline-design experience. "I am standing around with nothing to do."
Even though the economy has created 1.2 million jobs since January, some 265,000 people have dropped out of the job hunt during the same period. They would join some 19.1 million Americans in the same situation as Schwab, who are unemployed and not looking for work largely because they are convinced they won't find it. This figure, at a record level, is up 44 percent from 10 years ago. http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0628/p02s01-usec.htm
Science and The Bush Administration:
Familiar theme. Tom Hamburger of the LA Times:
Administration Tries to Rein In Scientists
The Bush administration has ordered that government scientists must be approved by a senior political appointee before they can participate in meetings convened by the World Health Organization, the leading international health and science agency.
A top official from the Health and Human Services Department in April asked the WHO to begin routing requests for participation in its meetings to the department's secretary for review, rather than directly invite individual scientists, as has long been the case. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-science26jun26,1,7447273.story?coll=la-home-headlines
-R
