Friday, August 27, 2004
Poverty Up, Uninsured Up.
45 million uninsured. The Administration was smart to release the data weeks early, in quieterAugust.
Some 1.3 million Americans slid into poverty in 2003 despite the economic recovery, and children and blacks were worse off than most, the government said on Thursday in a report certain to fuel Democratic criticism of President Bush.
The percentage of the U.S. population living in poverty rose to 12.5 percent from 12.1 percent in 2002, the Census Bureau said in its annual poverty report, seen by some as the most important score card on the nation's economy and Bush's first term in office. The ranks of the poor rose to 35.9 million, a boost of 1.3 million.
Health care coverage also dropped last year and incomes were essentially stagnant, the Census Bureau said in its annual poverty report, seen by some as the most important score card on the nation's economy and Bush's first term in office. http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6079297
Employers Will Control Costs…how?
Employers believe they can slow the rate of increase of their soaring health-care costs to just under 10% in 2005, but only after shifting even more of the expense to employees, a new nationwide survey said. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109356518789302598,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Krugman: Single payer, yes, but we must be realistic:
Does this mean that the American way is wrong, and that we should switch to a Canadian-style single-payer system? Well, yes. Put it this way: in Canada, respectable business executives are ardent defenders of "socialized medicine." Two years ago the Conference Board of Canada - a who's who of the nation's corporate elite - issued a report urging fellow Canadians to bear in mind not just the "symbolic value" of universal health care, but its "economic contribution to the competitiveness of Canadian businesses."
My health-economist friends say that it's unrealistic to call for a single-payer system here: the interest groups are too powerful, and the antigovernment propaganda of the right has become too well established in public opinion. All that we can hope for right now is a modest step in the right direction, like the one Mr. Kerry is proposing. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/27/opinion/27krugman.html?hp
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The fighting and attendant chaos- has been terrible. One ominous sign (for the Occupiers and the Allawi government) is how opposition forces have been doing some cooperating amongst themselves.
Volunteers from the Sunni resistance stronghold are teaching Shia militants how to fight. Two young men from Fallujah sat in a house in the Baghdad suburb of Sadr City, eating a meal of rice and stew prepared by local women. They had come to this sprawling neighbourhood to give the Mahdi Army militia – supporters of radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr - the benefit of their experience fighting the United States Marines.
Abu Ghraib Reports:
Rather pathetic to hear James Schlesinger insist that “it was only the night shift!; it was an aberration!" and to insist "it was NOT a failure in policy (just behavior).”
The NY Times did better: the editorial:
or anyone with the time to wade through 400-plus pages and the resources to decode them, the two reports issued this week on the Abu Ghraib prison are an indictment of the way the Bush administration set the stage for Iraqi prisoners to be brutalized by American prison guards, military intelligence officers and private contractors. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/opinion/26thurs1.html
..and from guest op ed. columnist Dahlia Lithwick:
Connect the dots and it's all there: the sadism at Abu Ghraib stemmed from "confusion." Confusion sounds accidental - like maybe it just blew in off the Atlantic - but the report is clear that this confusion resulted from systemic failures at the highest levels…
You can choose to connect these dots, or cast your vote in November based on whether Colonel Mustard was in a Swift boat with a lead pipe. But Abu Ghraib can't be blamed solely on bad apples anymore. It was the direct consequence of an administration ready to bargain away the rule of law. That started with the suspension of basic prisoner protections, because this was a "new kind of war." It led to the creation of a legal sinkhole on Guantánamo Bay. And it reached its zenith when high officials opined that torture isn't torture unless there's some attendant organ failure.
There is a sad, familiar echo behind the Abu Ghraib prosecutions. This is precisely the approach the administration has used throughout the so-called terror trials here at home. Behind virtually every prosecution of an Al Qaeda member since Sept. 11, there has been an overhyped, overcharged foot soldier taking the fall for his invisible superiors http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/opinion/26lithwick.html
Casualties: The number of Americans killed in Iraq during 2004 exceeds the number killed in all of 2003.
Don’t think the major media will highlight it; don’t think it’ll be in Bush’s convention speech.
Shameless Rove (Bush) NYC employees as props. Stop this!
President Bush wants to watch the Republican convention from a New York City firehouse and "bond" with the city's Bravest, officials said yesterday.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is also scouting out firehouses so he can watch it with the heroes of 9/11.
"Both Bush and Schwarzenegger want to bond with city firefighters," said one city official who asked not to be named.
…But…
Those same union leaders hope Bush will take notice of the cutbacks that the FDNY has undertaken since 9/11.
"Any firefighter would welcome a visit from President Bush, but maybe President Bush should stop by one of the firehouses Mayor Bloomberg has shut down," said Peter Gorman, president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/225960p-194099c.html
Environment: Administration Makes a Change; Admits Global Warming is Real and Caused by Human Activity
Since Kerry has said so little about the awful Bush record, Rove has orchestrated a change, seeking to get this off the debate table.
In a striking shift in the way the Bush administration has portrayed the science of climate change, a new report to Congress focuses on federal research indicating that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are the only likely explanation for global warming over the last three decades.
In delivering the report to Congress yesterday, an administration official, Dr. James R Mahoney, said it reflected "the best possible scientific information" on climate change. Previously, President Bush and other officials had emphasized uncertainties in understanding the causes and consequences of warming as a reason for rejecting binding restrictions on heat-trapping gases. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/science/26climate.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Yet, Bush had no idea that a change had occurred.
On environmental issues, Mr. Bush appeared unfamiliar with an administration report delivered to Congress on Wednesday that indicated that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases were the only likely explanation for global warming over the last three decades. Previously, Mr. Bush and other officials had emphasized uncertainties in understanding the causes and consequences of global warming.
The new report was signed by Mr. Bush's secretaries of energy and commerce and his science adviser. Asked why the administration had changed its position on what causes global warming, Mr. Bush replied, "Ah, we did? I don't think so."
More low points here, even for those of us who thought we couldn’t be shocked. On North Korea,
Showing none of the alarm about the North's growing arsenal that he once voiced regularly about Iraq, he opened his palms and shrugged when an interviewer noted that new intelligence reports indicate that the North may now have the fuel to produce six or eight nuclear weapons.
He said that in North Korea's case, and in Iran's, he would not be rushed to set deadlines for the countries to disarm, despite his past declaration that he would not "tolerate'' nuclear capability in either nation. He declined to define what he meant by "tolerate.''
"I don't think you give timelines to dictators,'' Mr. Bush said, speaking of North Korea's president, Kim Jong Il, and Iran's mullahs. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/27/politics/campaign/27bush.html?hp
Social Security: Greenspan Has a Solution!
Now that the economy is ridden with debt and deficits, Bush ally Alan Greenspan has a solution. Attention Boomers!
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Friday that the country will face "abrupt and painful" choices if Congress does not move quickly to trim the Social Security and Medicare benefits that have been promised to the baby boom generation.
Greenspan acknowledged that any decisions to trim benefits or boost payroll taxes could be difficult politically, but he said those decisions must be made and made quickly to give baby boomers time to adjust.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38164-2004Aug27.html
Media:
1) CNN is trying to outfox Fox. Anchor Miles O’Brien raised the stakes by saying that Kerry’s saving the life of Jim Rassman is a “point of dispute.” What’s next? Perhaps, as Jon Stewart noted to Kerry this week, ‘I’ve learned from that swift boat ad that apparently you’ve never been in Vietnam.’
2) "We fought the most moral war [Iraq] that has ever been fought by any people."
So said one interviewee in the new documentary This Ain’t No Heartland. Austrian filmmaker and photographer Andreas Horvath visited small towns and rural areas in a half-dozen Midwestern states where he discovered widespread ignorance.
The film returns several times to a bar where a group of increasingly tipsy beer drinkers tell racist jokes and fantasize fending off invading armies. The rowdiest of the group gleefully imagines facing down "two billion screaming Chinamen coming at you," with a certainty that America would win. Feeling no pain, he drops his trousers and moons the camera. We also meet the contestants in a demolition derby whose damaged vehicles are souped up with flags and the name Jesus.
Beneath their jocularity, you sense the underlying anxieties of people who are so intimidated by the outside world that they would rather not contemplate it. Their capacity for denial is encouraged by the ravings of a fire-and-brimstone radio preacher who advises that the remedy for "that sinking feeling" is "to stop thinking twice about the truth." The most pernicious threat to well-being, the preacher says, is the notion of dialogue, a word he sneers as though it meant Satan.
The interviews are edited with snippets of a Civil War re-enactment, scary voice-overs, tabloid headlines about "toddler terrorists" and a parade - all making a collage that has its grimly funny moments. Now and then the camera pauses to linger over desolate farmland, ramshackle cottages and a fading red sunset. In the filmmaker's nightmarish view, the heartland is a decaying citadel of ignorance, boorishness and xenophobia, smugly rotting away in the twilight of the American empire. http://movies2.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/movies/26hear.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Stifling the Vote: The usual charge brings the usual response
In a new report, the NAACP and People for the American Way cite incidents from Florida to Detroit. NAACP Chairman Julian Bond said efforts at intimidation and suppression, once a tool of Democrats in the Jim Crow South, "have increasingly become the province of the Republican Party" as it seeks to counter the overwhelming advantage Democrats enjoy among black voters.
RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie wrote a letter last month to Democratic National Committee Chairman Terence R. McAuliffe offering to send bipartisan teams to precincts to ensure fair play, Iverson said. The offer was rejected. Republicans want every eligible vote to count, she said, and "if Democrats are serious about this, they will join us." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33798-2004Aug25.html
Kerry failings / advice
John, MOCK HIM! When Junior says such things as his opposing 527s, i.e. being an advocate of campaign finance reform, say, “What?! You’re claiming to be…?”
Polls: Dead even, nationally, if even a little tilting to Bush. States tightened up. Pennsylvania was safely Kerry, now may not be; Wisconsin and Missouri moving to Bush...for now
Pennsylvania: Kerry 45%, Bush 43% (Issues PA)
Maryland: Kerry 53%, Bush 42% (Survey USA)
Ohio: Bush 49%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
Missouri: Bush 46%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
Wisconsin: Bush 48%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
-R
45 million uninsured. The Administration was smart to release the data weeks early, in quieterAugust.
Some 1.3 million Americans slid into poverty in 2003 despite the economic recovery, and children and blacks were worse off than most, the government said on Thursday in a report certain to fuel Democratic criticism of President Bush.
The percentage of the U.S. population living in poverty rose to 12.5 percent from 12.1 percent in 2002, the Census Bureau said in its annual poverty report, seen by some as the most important score card on the nation's economy and Bush's first term in office. The ranks of the poor rose to 35.9 million, a boost of 1.3 million.
Health care coverage also dropped last year and incomes were essentially stagnant, the Census Bureau said in its annual poverty report, seen by some as the most important score card on the nation's economy and Bush's first term in office. http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6079297
Employers Will Control Costs…how?
Employers believe they can slow the rate of increase of their soaring health-care costs to just under 10% in 2005, but only after shifting even more of the expense to employees, a new nationwide survey said. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109356518789302598,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Krugman: Single payer, yes, but we must be realistic:
Does this mean that the American way is wrong, and that we should switch to a Canadian-style single-payer system? Well, yes. Put it this way: in Canada, respectable business executives are ardent defenders of "socialized medicine." Two years ago the Conference Board of Canada - a who's who of the nation's corporate elite - issued a report urging fellow Canadians to bear in mind not just the "symbolic value" of universal health care, but its "economic contribution to the competitiveness of Canadian businesses."
My health-economist friends say that it's unrealistic to call for a single-payer system here: the interest groups are too powerful, and the antigovernment propaganda of the right has become too well established in public opinion. All that we can hope for right now is a modest step in the right direction, like the one Mr. Kerry is proposing. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/27/opinion/27krugman.html?hp
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The fighting and attendant chaos- has been terrible. One ominous sign (for the Occupiers and the Allawi government) is how opposition forces have been doing some cooperating amongst themselves.
Volunteers from the Sunni resistance stronghold are teaching Shia militants how to fight. Two young men from Fallujah sat in a house in the Baghdad suburb of Sadr City, eating a meal of rice and stew prepared by local women. They had come to this sprawling neighbourhood to give the Mahdi Army militia – supporters of radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr - the benefit of their experience fighting the United States Marines.
Abu Ghraib Reports:
Rather pathetic to hear James Schlesinger insist that “it was only the night shift!; it was an aberration!" and to insist "it was NOT a failure in policy (just behavior).”
The NY Times did better: the editorial:
or anyone with the time to wade through 400-plus pages and the resources to decode them, the two reports issued this week on the Abu Ghraib prison are an indictment of the way the Bush administration set the stage for Iraqi prisoners to be brutalized by American prison guards, military intelligence officers and private contractors. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/opinion/26thurs1.html
..and from guest op ed. columnist Dahlia Lithwick:
Connect the dots and it's all there: the sadism at Abu Ghraib stemmed from "confusion." Confusion sounds accidental - like maybe it just blew in off the Atlantic - but the report is clear that this confusion resulted from systemic failures at the highest levels…
You can choose to connect these dots, or cast your vote in November based on whether Colonel Mustard was in a Swift boat with a lead pipe. But Abu Ghraib can't be blamed solely on bad apples anymore. It was the direct consequence of an administration ready to bargain away the rule of law. That started with the suspension of basic prisoner protections, because this was a "new kind of war." It led to the creation of a legal sinkhole on Guantánamo Bay. And it reached its zenith when high officials opined that torture isn't torture unless there's some attendant organ failure.
There is a sad, familiar echo behind the Abu Ghraib prosecutions. This is precisely the approach the administration has used throughout the so-called terror trials here at home. Behind virtually every prosecution of an Al Qaeda member since Sept. 11, there has been an overhyped, overcharged foot soldier taking the fall for his invisible superiors http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/opinion/26lithwick.html
Casualties: The number of Americans killed in Iraq during 2004 exceeds the number killed in all of 2003.
Don’t think the major media will highlight it; don’t think it’ll be in Bush’s convention speech.
Shameless Rove (Bush) NYC employees as props. Stop this!
President Bush wants to watch the Republican convention from a New York City firehouse and "bond" with the city's Bravest, officials said yesterday.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is also scouting out firehouses so he can watch it with the heroes of 9/11.
"Both Bush and Schwarzenegger want to bond with city firefighters," said one city official who asked not to be named.
…But…
Those same union leaders hope Bush will take notice of the cutbacks that the FDNY has undertaken since 9/11.
"Any firefighter would welcome a visit from President Bush, but maybe President Bush should stop by one of the firehouses Mayor Bloomberg has shut down," said Peter Gorman, president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/225960p-194099c.html
Environment: Administration Makes a Change; Admits Global Warming is Real and Caused by Human Activity
Since Kerry has said so little about the awful Bush record, Rove has orchestrated a change, seeking to get this off the debate table.
In a striking shift in the way the Bush administration has portrayed the science of climate change, a new report to Congress focuses on federal research indicating that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are the only likely explanation for global warming over the last three decades.
In delivering the report to Congress yesterday, an administration official, Dr. James R Mahoney, said it reflected "the best possible scientific information" on climate change. Previously, President Bush and other officials had emphasized uncertainties in understanding the causes and consequences of warming as a reason for rejecting binding restrictions on heat-trapping gases. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/science/26climate.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Yet, Bush had no idea that a change had occurred.
On environmental issues, Mr. Bush appeared unfamiliar with an administration report delivered to Congress on Wednesday that indicated that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases were the only likely explanation for global warming over the last three decades. Previously, Mr. Bush and other officials had emphasized uncertainties in understanding the causes and consequences of global warming.
The new report was signed by Mr. Bush's secretaries of energy and commerce and his science adviser. Asked why the administration had changed its position on what causes global warming, Mr. Bush replied, "Ah, we did? I don't think so."
More low points here, even for those of us who thought we couldn’t be shocked. On North Korea,
Showing none of the alarm about the North's growing arsenal that he once voiced regularly about Iraq, he opened his palms and shrugged when an interviewer noted that new intelligence reports indicate that the North may now have the fuel to produce six or eight nuclear weapons.
He said that in North Korea's case, and in Iran's, he would not be rushed to set deadlines for the countries to disarm, despite his past declaration that he would not "tolerate'' nuclear capability in either nation. He declined to define what he meant by "tolerate.''
"I don't think you give timelines to dictators,'' Mr. Bush said, speaking of North Korea's president, Kim Jong Il, and Iran's mullahs. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/27/politics/campaign/27bush.html?hp
Social Security: Greenspan Has a Solution!
Now that the economy is ridden with debt and deficits, Bush ally Alan Greenspan has a solution. Attention Boomers!
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Friday that the country will face "abrupt and painful" choices if Congress does not move quickly to trim the Social Security and Medicare benefits that have been promised to the baby boom generation.
Greenspan acknowledged that any decisions to trim benefits or boost payroll taxes could be difficult politically, but he said those decisions must be made and made quickly to give baby boomers time to adjust.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38164-2004Aug27.html
Media:
1) CNN is trying to outfox Fox. Anchor Miles O’Brien raised the stakes by saying that Kerry’s saving the life of Jim Rassman is a “point of dispute.” What’s next? Perhaps, as Jon Stewart noted to Kerry this week, ‘I’ve learned from that swift boat ad that apparently you’ve never been in Vietnam.’
2) "We fought the most moral war [Iraq] that has ever been fought by any people."
So said one interviewee in the new documentary This Ain’t No Heartland. Austrian filmmaker and photographer Andreas Horvath visited small towns and rural areas in a half-dozen Midwestern states where he discovered widespread ignorance.
The film returns several times to a bar where a group of increasingly tipsy beer drinkers tell racist jokes and fantasize fending off invading armies. The rowdiest of the group gleefully imagines facing down "two billion screaming Chinamen coming at you," with a certainty that America would win. Feeling no pain, he drops his trousers and moons the camera. We also meet the contestants in a demolition derby whose damaged vehicles are souped up with flags and the name Jesus.
Beneath their jocularity, you sense the underlying anxieties of people who are so intimidated by the outside world that they would rather not contemplate it. Their capacity for denial is encouraged by the ravings of a fire-and-brimstone radio preacher who advises that the remedy for "that sinking feeling" is "to stop thinking twice about the truth." The most pernicious threat to well-being, the preacher says, is the notion of dialogue, a word he sneers as though it meant Satan.
The interviews are edited with snippets of a Civil War re-enactment, scary voice-overs, tabloid headlines about "toddler terrorists" and a parade - all making a collage that has its grimly funny moments. Now and then the camera pauses to linger over desolate farmland, ramshackle cottages and a fading red sunset. In the filmmaker's nightmarish view, the heartland is a decaying citadel of ignorance, boorishness and xenophobia, smugly rotting away in the twilight of the American empire. http://movies2.nytimes.com/2004/08/26/movies/26hear.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Stifling the Vote: The usual charge brings the usual response
In a new report, the NAACP and People for the American Way cite incidents from Florida to Detroit. NAACP Chairman Julian Bond said efforts at intimidation and suppression, once a tool of Democrats in the Jim Crow South, "have increasingly become the province of the Republican Party" as it seeks to counter the overwhelming advantage Democrats enjoy among black voters.
RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie wrote a letter last month to Democratic National Committee Chairman Terence R. McAuliffe offering to send bipartisan teams to precincts to ensure fair play, Iverson said. The offer was rejected. Republicans want every eligible vote to count, she said, and "if Democrats are serious about this, they will join us." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33798-2004Aug25.html
Kerry failings / advice
John, MOCK HIM! When Junior says such things as his opposing 527s, i.e. being an advocate of campaign finance reform, say, “What?! You’re claiming to be…?”
Polls: Dead even, nationally, if even a little tilting to Bush. States tightened up. Pennsylvania was safely Kerry, now may not be; Wisconsin and Missouri moving to Bush...for now
Pennsylvania: Kerry 45%, Bush 43% (Issues PA)
Maryland: Kerry 53%, Bush 42% (Survey USA)
Ohio: Bush 49%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
Missouri: Bush 46%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
Wisconsin: Bush 48%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)
-R
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Kerry: While Kerry gave his talk at the historic Cooper Union (site of an important Abe Lincoln talk in early 1860), right wing talk radio and cable folk expropriated his language in asserting, repetitively, that Kerry is "smearing the President."
Kerry was very laid-back on Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, saying little beyond the usual campaign riffs and minimizing the swift boat episode. A lost opportunity.
North Korea: The International Herald Tribune had a brief “report” as to “The United States has scheduled naval exercises off the coast of North Korea at the end of October.”
...which leads to a new 'paranoic' thought: How about an updated Gulf of Tonkin incident during the week before the election?
Swift Boat notes
The major media have said little over the report from the Dallas Morning News that confirmed that Bob Perry, the principal funder of the Swift Boaters for Bush, is listed as a “co-host” of a Bush fundraiser in New York.
Media Re-focusing on Bush? USA Today:
*Why did Bush, described by some of his fellow officers as a talented and enthusiastic pilot, stop flying fighter jets in the spring of 1972 and fail to take an annual physical exam required of all pilots?
* What explains the apparent gap in the president's Guard service in 1972-73, a period when commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama?
* Did Bush receive preferential treatment in getting into the Guard and securing a coveted pilot slot despite poor qualifying scores and arrests, but no convictions, for stealing a Christmas wreath and rowdiness at a football game during his college years? http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-23-bush-service_x.htm
Al-Qaeda are NOT Going to Attack Us: Since 9/11, we’ve all been primed to worry about the next attack. Some of us have countered that 9/11 was a unique circumstance, that even mediocre security and intelligence would have stopped it, and with the improvements at airports and with an alert, if minimally improved intelligence capacity, a repetition is far from likely.
Additionally, there is the notion that bin Laden would see such an attack as bad strategy, that it would reverse his momentum and take us back to the days when countries sympathized with the U.S. instead of their current loathing of our invasion and occupation of Iraq. The fellow below expands on that notion.
Dr. Frank Richter, a terrorism expert based in Detroit, had been touring Louisiana pointing out some of the irregularities inherent in America's War on Terrorism. In an interview with The Louisiana Weekly, the former professor of international politics at Wayne State University and advisor to presidential candidates such as John Glenn and H. Ross Perot commented that the many seemingly pointless "yellow alerts" have proven fruitless for a reason.
"The Bush administration has even been charged with hiking the terror alert status for political gain. But that makes no sense. Since the alerts began, President Bush' poll ratings have plunged. No evidence of a political plot there.
"Why then have terrorist alerts been issued with such regularity in an election year?" Richter asked rhetorically. "It's simple. The Bush administration cannot afford to keep quiet about even a slight up-tick in terrorist chatter that may precede an attack. Americans would be outraged if the Homeland Security folks failed to warn us and a real terror attack killed dozens of unsuspecting victims who had been kept in the dark…
Al Qaeda, long ago, made a strategic decision not to attack Americans again in their homeland. But why? We know they hate us. The answer is that the war on terrorism is not really about terror attacks at all. Terror is only a tactic, albeit a very effective one. The purpose of Al Qaeda's attack on America, our allies and pro-Western Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia is to divide the Muslim world from the modern, secular world embodied by globalization.
"The reason the Islamist terrorists have not attacked America again at home is that bin Laden believes that Al Qaeda is winning the war. Because of American military responses to 9/11 in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Muslim world is nearly united in its anti-American attitudes." http://www.louisianaweekly.com/cgi-bin/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20040823p
However, Al-Qaeda has NOT been weakened:
The information, which reveals the immense resilience of al-Qaeda and its remarkable ability to reconstitute itself, negates yet again claims made by the administration of US President George W Bush that al-Qaeda has dispersed and is now on the run. While it is true that al-Qaeda has lost several of its operational commanders, such as the masterminds of the September 11, 2001, attacks - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Walid Muhammad Salih bin Attash, who have been captured - al-Qaeda has been able not just to survive this loss, but to thrive in difficult circumstances. This is because it has quickly adapted itself to the changed situation. The recent arrests have revealed that there has been an infusion of young blood into al-Qaeda. At the same time, the younger operatives have strong links with the old guard. http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FH25Df05.html
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Bombing: Struck me that as our troops retreat to enclaves- reminiscent of Vietnam, I’m afraid- other areas of Iraq become occupied by “enemy” forces, and thus subject to bombing. So, now Fallujah, completely OUT of our control, is bombed with regularity. This regular bombing is precisely what we were doing to Iraq between 1991 and 2003.
So, Saddam is gone, but…
Democracy? Limited Sovereignty, indeed. U.S. control continues.
In what had been touted as Iraq’s first democratic election, last week’s tumultuous Iraqi National Conference closed with a four-judge panel selecting a list of candidates for the Interim National Council, leaving the hundreds of delegates invited to the conference to approve the decision with only a show of hands. In the end, the same former exile groups currently holding the highest seats in Iraq’s appointed interim government will also dominate the country’s newest temporary body.
” Last week’s conference was suppose to elect 81 Iraqis to a new 100-member Interim National Council, responsible for oversight of US-installed Prime Minister Iyad Allawi’s transitional government until elections planned for early 2005. The council will have veto power over Allawi’s policy decisions and approve next year’s budget. The US already appointed the other nineteen members to the National Council before handing partial sovereignty to a group of Iraqis in June. http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=868
Business Mobilizes to Retain their Boy
The political ad wars are about to get nastier.
A group of well-connected Republicans, backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has formed a new group to run advertisements in battleground states attacking Sen. John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, and his ties to trial lawyers.
The group, called The November Fund, intends to raise several million dollars to spotlight the damage they believe abusive lawsuits cause the economy, and to highlight Sen. Edwards' career as a trial lawyer and his ties to the trial bar.http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109330329959799090,00.html?mod=politics%5Fsecondary%5Fstories%5Fhs
Krugman
How have they been able to get away with it? The answer is that we have been living in what Roger Ebert calls "an age of Rambo patriotism." As the carnage and moral ambiguities of Vietnam faded from memory, many started to believe in the comforting clichés of action movies, in which the tough-talking hero is always virtuous and the hand-wringing types who see complexities and urge the hero to think before acting are always wrong, if not villains.
After 9/11, Mr. Bush had a choice: he could deal with real threats, or he could play Rambo. He chose Rambo. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/24/opinion/24krugman.html?hp
Double Dealing Pakistan
While Mr. Musharraf, playing host to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, vowed that anyone seeking to act against Afghanistan from his soil would be stopped, the diplomats said Pakistan was turning a blind eye to just such activity.
"They are training, financing and organizing these operations on Pakistani soil," said a Western diplomat in Kabul, the Afghan capital. "There is evidence from people who have been picked up in Afghanistan that they are receiving training in Pakistan."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/24/international/asia/24stan.html?pos=&pagewanted=print&position=
Frist and Hillary offer little on Health Care
Glad to see that these two agree that consumers are the key to “radical” change.
The marketplace also has an important role. Consumers must demand quality health care and the tools to provide it, such as pricing and performance information powered by robust information technologies. If these things are done, we believe the quality of care we receive in this country can be radically improved. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30277-2004Aug24.html
Arundhati Roy: Do U.S. voters have a real choice?
It's true that if John Kerry becomes president, some of the oil tycoons and Christian fundamentalists in the White House will change. Few will be sorry to see the back of Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld or John Ashcroft and their blatant thuggery. But the real concern is that in the new administration their policies will continue. That we will have Bushism without Bush.
Those positions of real power - the bankers, the CEOs - are not vulnerable to the vote (. . . and in any case, they fund both sides).
Unfortunately the importance of the U.S elections has deteriorated into a sort of personality contest. A squabble over who would do a better job of overseeing empire. John Kerry believes in the idea of empire as fervently as George Bush does.
The U.S. political system has been carefully crafted to ensure that no one who questions the natural goodness of the military-industrial-corporate power structure will be allowed through the portals of power.
Given this, it's no surprise that in this election you have two Yale University graduates, both members of Skull and Bones, the same secret society, both millionaires, both playing at soldier-soldier, both talking up war, and arguing almost childishly about who will lead the war on terror more effectively.
Like President Bill Clinton before him, Kerry will continue the expansion of U.S. economic and military penetration into the world. He says he would have voted to authorize Bush to go to war in Iraq even if he had known that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. He promises to commit more troops to Iraq. He said recently that he supports Bush's policies toward Israel and Ariel Sharon 100 percent. He says he'll retain 98% of Bush's tax cuts.
So, underneath the shrill exchange of insults, there is almost absolute consensus. It looks as though even if Americans vote for Kerry, they'll still get Bush. President John Kerbush or President George Berry. http://www.democracynow.org/static/Arundhati_Trans.shtml
Poll: Swift Boat Stuff an apparent plus for Bush
LA Times poll has Bush over Kerry 49-46%. While still in the margin of error, it’s clearly a change.
-R
Kerry was very laid-back on Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, saying little beyond the usual campaign riffs and minimizing the swift boat episode. A lost opportunity.
North Korea: The International Herald Tribune had a brief “report” as to “The United States has scheduled naval exercises off the coast of North Korea at the end of October.”
...which leads to a new 'paranoic' thought: How about an updated Gulf of Tonkin incident during the week before the election?
Swift Boat notes
The major media have said little over the report from the Dallas Morning News that confirmed that Bob Perry, the principal funder of the Swift Boaters for Bush, is listed as a “co-host” of a Bush fundraiser in New York.
Media Re-focusing on Bush? USA Today:
*Why did Bush, described by some of his fellow officers as a talented and enthusiastic pilot, stop flying fighter jets in the spring of 1972 and fail to take an annual physical exam required of all pilots?
* What explains the apparent gap in the president's Guard service in 1972-73, a period when commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama?
* Did Bush receive preferential treatment in getting into the Guard and securing a coveted pilot slot despite poor qualifying scores and arrests, but no convictions, for stealing a Christmas wreath and rowdiness at a football game during his college years? http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-23-bush-service_x.htm
Al-Qaeda are NOT Going to Attack Us: Since 9/11, we’ve all been primed to worry about the next attack. Some of us have countered that 9/11 was a unique circumstance, that even mediocre security and intelligence would have stopped it, and with the improvements at airports and with an alert, if minimally improved intelligence capacity, a repetition is far from likely.
Additionally, there is the notion that bin Laden would see such an attack as bad strategy, that it would reverse his momentum and take us back to the days when countries sympathized with the U.S. instead of their current loathing of our invasion and occupation of Iraq. The fellow below expands on that notion.
Dr. Frank Richter, a terrorism expert based in Detroit, had been touring Louisiana pointing out some of the irregularities inherent in America's War on Terrorism. In an interview with The Louisiana Weekly, the former professor of international politics at Wayne State University and advisor to presidential candidates such as John Glenn and H. Ross Perot commented that the many seemingly pointless "yellow alerts" have proven fruitless for a reason.
"The Bush administration has even been charged with hiking the terror alert status for political gain. But that makes no sense. Since the alerts began, President Bush' poll ratings have plunged. No evidence of a political plot there.
"Why then have terrorist alerts been issued with such regularity in an election year?" Richter asked rhetorically. "It's simple. The Bush administration cannot afford to keep quiet about even a slight up-tick in terrorist chatter that may precede an attack. Americans would be outraged if the Homeland Security folks failed to warn us and a real terror attack killed dozens of unsuspecting victims who had been kept in the dark…
Al Qaeda, long ago, made a strategic decision not to attack Americans again in their homeland. But why? We know they hate us. The answer is that the war on terrorism is not really about terror attacks at all. Terror is only a tactic, albeit a very effective one. The purpose of Al Qaeda's attack on America, our allies and pro-Western Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia is to divide the Muslim world from the modern, secular world embodied by globalization.
"The reason the Islamist terrorists have not attacked America again at home is that bin Laden believes that Al Qaeda is winning the war. Because of American military responses to 9/11 in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Muslim world is nearly united in its anti-American attitudes." http://www.louisianaweekly.com/cgi-bin/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20040823p
However, Al-Qaeda has NOT been weakened:
The information, which reveals the immense resilience of al-Qaeda and its remarkable ability to reconstitute itself, negates yet again claims made by the administration of US President George W Bush that al-Qaeda has dispersed and is now on the run. While it is true that al-Qaeda has lost several of its operational commanders, such as the masterminds of the September 11, 2001, attacks - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Walid Muhammad Salih bin Attash, who have been captured - al-Qaeda has been able not just to survive this loss, but to thrive in difficult circumstances. This is because it has quickly adapted itself to the changed situation. The recent arrests have revealed that there has been an infusion of young blood into al-Qaeda. At the same time, the younger operatives have strong links with the old guard. http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FH25Df05.html
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Bombing: Struck me that as our troops retreat to enclaves- reminiscent of Vietnam, I’m afraid- other areas of Iraq become occupied by “enemy” forces, and thus subject to bombing. So, now Fallujah, completely OUT of our control, is bombed with regularity. This regular bombing is precisely what we were doing to Iraq between 1991 and 2003.
So, Saddam is gone, but…
Democracy? Limited Sovereignty, indeed. U.S. control continues.
In what had been touted as Iraq’s first democratic election, last week’s tumultuous Iraqi National Conference closed with a four-judge panel selecting a list of candidates for the Interim National Council, leaving the hundreds of delegates invited to the conference to approve the decision with only a show of hands. In the end, the same former exile groups currently holding the highest seats in Iraq’s appointed interim government will also dominate the country’s newest temporary body.
” Last week’s conference was suppose to elect 81 Iraqis to a new 100-member Interim National Council, responsible for oversight of US-installed Prime Minister Iyad Allawi’s transitional government until elections planned for early 2005. The council will have veto power over Allawi’s policy decisions and approve next year’s budget. The US already appointed the other nineteen members to the National Council before handing partial sovereignty to a group of Iraqis in June. http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=868
Business Mobilizes to Retain their Boy
The political ad wars are about to get nastier.
A group of well-connected Republicans, backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has formed a new group to run advertisements in battleground states attacking Sen. John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, and his ties to trial lawyers.
The group, called The November Fund, intends to raise several million dollars to spotlight the damage they believe abusive lawsuits cause the economy, and to highlight Sen. Edwards' career as a trial lawyer and his ties to the trial bar.http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109330329959799090,00.html?mod=politics%5Fsecondary%5Fstories%5Fhs
Krugman
How have they been able to get away with it? The answer is that we have been living in what Roger Ebert calls "an age of Rambo patriotism." As the carnage and moral ambiguities of Vietnam faded from memory, many started to believe in the comforting clichés of action movies, in which the tough-talking hero is always virtuous and the hand-wringing types who see complexities and urge the hero to think before acting are always wrong, if not villains.
After 9/11, Mr. Bush had a choice: he could deal with real threats, or he could play Rambo. He chose Rambo. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/24/opinion/24krugman.html?hp
Double Dealing Pakistan
While Mr. Musharraf, playing host to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, vowed that anyone seeking to act against Afghanistan from his soil would be stopped, the diplomats said Pakistan was turning a blind eye to just such activity.
"They are training, financing and organizing these operations on Pakistani soil," said a Western diplomat in Kabul, the Afghan capital. "There is evidence from people who have been picked up in Afghanistan that they are receiving training in Pakistan."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/24/international/asia/24stan.html?pos=&pagewanted=print&position=
Frist and Hillary offer little on Health Care
Glad to see that these two agree that consumers are the key to “radical” change.
The marketplace also has an important role. Consumers must demand quality health care and the tools to provide it, such as pricing and performance information powered by robust information technologies. If these things are done, we believe the quality of care we receive in this country can be radically improved. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30277-2004Aug24.html
Arundhati Roy: Do U.S. voters have a real choice?
It's true that if John Kerry becomes president, some of the oil tycoons and Christian fundamentalists in the White House will change. Few will be sorry to see the back of Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld or John Ashcroft and their blatant thuggery. But the real concern is that in the new administration their policies will continue. That we will have Bushism without Bush.
Those positions of real power - the bankers, the CEOs - are not vulnerable to the vote (. . . and in any case, they fund both sides).
Unfortunately the importance of the U.S elections has deteriorated into a sort of personality contest. A squabble over who would do a better job of overseeing empire. John Kerry believes in the idea of empire as fervently as George Bush does.
The U.S. political system has been carefully crafted to ensure that no one who questions the natural goodness of the military-industrial-corporate power structure will be allowed through the portals of power.
Given this, it's no surprise that in this election you have two Yale University graduates, both members of Skull and Bones, the same secret society, both millionaires, both playing at soldier-soldier, both talking up war, and arguing almost childishly about who will lead the war on terror more effectively.
Like President Bill Clinton before him, Kerry will continue the expansion of U.S. economic and military penetration into the world. He says he would have voted to authorize Bush to go to war in Iraq even if he had known that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. He promises to commit more troops to Iraq. He said recently that he supports Bush's policies toward Israel and Ariel Sharon 100 percent. He says he'll retain 98% of Bush's tax cuts.
So, underneath the shrill exchange of insults, there is almost absolute consensus. It looks as though even if Americans vote for Kerry, they'll still get Bush. President John Kerbush or President George Berry. http://www.democracynow.org/static/Arundhati_Trans.shtml
Poll: Swift Boat Stuff an apparent plus for Bush
LA Times poll has Bush over Kerry 49-46%. While still in the margin of error, it’s clearly a change.
-R
Monday, August 23, 2004
Swift Boat 'Controversy' Kerry’s Waterloo?
How to Get Rid of This? Can’t; Stuck in a country that has a debased political discourse, featuring a dumbed-down public, a ‘non-journalistic’ press, and an official “opposition”- the Democrats- who aren’t as good at gutter politics as Republicans. It’s so nuts that the most powerful country in the world determines its elections by focusing on this nonsense. By these rules, the know-nothings tend to win. They will this time, unless Kerry makes Bush’s inveterate cowardice the issue, not Kerry’s military record. Tuesday will tell much, as he’s reported to be approaching such a position.
And, McCain: Please no more lionizing of him; he was a brave, honorable POW; he impressed me by his forging a close, respectful relationship with anti-Viet vet Kerry. But he loathes Bush, who not only said he betrayed the other POWs and had a black illegitimate child, but also targeted spouse Cindy McCain as a drug addict. Yet, he’s endorsing Bush, either so as to ‘help clean up the GOP or to consider running for Prez as a 70 year old in 2008. So, self-interest trumps principle. A politician.
The content? All the military records back up Kerry. That record has always been presumed to be accurate, yet the media plays it as ‘he said, she said,’ that there are two sides. So those who have been shown to be either inconsistent or liars and Kerry are assumed to be equally credible. This perfectly captures the right-wing talk show tact. Sean Hannity- for those who don’t listen, he’s popular. He has a refrain- “I don’t know what to believe”. Bob Dole, a true partisan, joins the fray and no one questions as to where he got his talking points, i.e. why should we be hearing from him?
If Kerry survives this and wins on November 2- it’s still early- he will face the ongoing noise machine of the Right. They’ve been at this since Nixon’s time. Chuck Colson and Murray Chotiner were there long before Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.
Now, we have hard core folk like Floyd Brown David Bossie and Citizens United.
Somerville’s own Chip Berlet has written about these guys.
The web banner for Citizens United explains that the group is dedicated to "Reasserting Traditional American Values: limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, national sovereignty and security."85 The group claims 150,000 members, but that is most likely a count of anyone who has sent money for projects touted in frequent direct mail appeals. The group has a member newsletter, Citizens Agenda, and a specialty periodical, ClintonWatch, sent to selected reporters and political activists.86
Citizens United is the project of Floyd G. Brown who published "Slick Willie:" Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton, a slim paperback book distributed as part of a direct mail fundraising effort. The book is a right-wing tirade designed to document Clinton's lack of character. What it also showed was that Brown unabashedly mixes sexism and homophobia in his conservative analysis http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/clinton/Clintonculwar8-12.html#P247_69030
Media: And as Bush makes the appallingly misleading comment, “I hope my opponent joins me in condemning all such activities”, at least some of the media fall for this line and make him sound righteous and resolute.
MSNBC: "Bush: Vets Should Halt anti-Kerry Ads”
CNN: “Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads."
Uh, Kerry did that about 12 days ago. No shame, no shame.
Time’s Joe Klein on the straight-jacketed Kerry: He’s controlled by his consultants/handlers, says Joe.
And yet, when Kerry spoke to the VFW two days later, he attacked Bush's position, using an argument with some merit but of microscopic import in the midst of a presidential campaign: he said it was a "hasty" and "political" plan and certainly not a good negotiating tactic to withdraw troops from Korea while we are trying to get the North Koreans to drop their nuclear program.
But oops. Some two weeks earlier, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Kerry had taken a different position: "I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just [in Iraq] but ... in the Korean peninsula, perhaps, in Europe, perhaps." As you might imagine, the Bush campaign quickly pointed out the inconsistency.
The stumble raises two basic questions about Kerry's campaign. First, is he a latter-day Ron Burgundy—the idiot 1970s anchorman of Will Ferrell's recent film who would read anything that appeared on his TelePrompTer? Did Kerry not remember what he had said to Stephanopoulos? No, it was, apparently, yet another Kerry nanonuance: he is in favor of redeployments, just not now. The second question is far more dire: Why is Kerry wasting breath on such periphera? Why isn't he hammering Bush on his conduct of the Iraq war and the larger war against Islamist radicalism, which is the most important issue in this election? The answer is politics. His political consultants don't want him to do it. Their focus groups tell them that the public wants an "optimistic" candidate who offers a "positive plan" rather than a "negative" candidate who criticizes the President. http://www.maxlogan.com/klein.0822.htm
Election Irregularities: The Florida – New York Connection
Is this true? If so, is it bad news?
Some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, a shocking finding that exposes both states to potential abuses that could alter the outcome of elections," a New York Daily News investigation shows."Registering in two places is illegal in both states, but the massive snowbird scandal goes undetected because election officials don't check rolls across state lines." http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/224449p-192807c.html
Kerry tried to focus on this today; it got a bit of coverage.
With the Bush campaign reportedly releasing another misleading ad tomorrow attacking John Kerry's plan to cut taxes for the middle class, the Kerry-Edwards campaign will pressure Bush to come clean about why he is shifting more of the tax burden on to working families, cutting overtime pay for six million people and covering up key details about his health care claims.
The campaign will also release a new report on what the impact of the new overtime rules will be on working families
Colombia: Oil, Violence, etc. It isn’t a pretty picture
Why has Arauca been singled out for "enhanced" security? One answer is oil. It is home to the Caño Limón oilfield, which accounts for 30% of Colombia's oil production. The oil is pumped to the Caribbean through a pipeline that has been a major target for guerrilla forces. Now a complex mosaic of armed groups - rightwing paramilitaries and the army, often working closely together, and leftwing guerrillas - struggle for control of the lucrative pipeline and cocaine routes.
The civil war is decades old but has grown more complex in recent years.
It’s too late for three citizens of the oil-rich north-east region of Arauca, on the border with Venezuela. They were murdered by the army on August 5. The men were all trade unionists, and their killings bring to 30 the number of unionists killed in Arauca so far this year. Last year, the US gave Colombia $99m to protect the pipeline, to be split between the 18th Brigade and a new mobile unit. President Bush also sent 60 US special forces personnel to Arauca to train the brigade http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=9&ItemID=6082
Israel - France: 2 notes
* New homes on the West Bank are being built. The U.S. does not oppose.
* The worst incident of recent anti-Semitism in France, as a cultural center was defaced and wrecked “in response to racist acts by Jews in France against Islam and the Muslims…and as a simple response to the racist and savage acts by Jews in Muslim countries like Palestine.”
North Korea:
Can’t forget them. They remind us of their presence by releasing striking statements
North Korea described US President George W. Bush as an "imbecile" and a "tyrant" who was worse than Adolph Hitler, and ruled out holding new talks on nuclear weapons with the United States. In an unusually strong attack, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said comments by Bush calling North Korea a tyrant during campaigning last week in Wisconsin were "malignant slanders and calumnies".
Oil:
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times. Always worth the time:
Welcome to peak oil According to HSBC, oil is now 136% - and counting - more expensive than before September 11, 2001. The United States - with 5% of the world's population - gobbles up no less than 26% of the world's oil production. Whatever the spin from the White House and the Pentagon, the fact is one of the key objectives in the whole Iraqi adventure - completely in line with Dick Cheney's 2001 energy report - was to take over the world's second-largest oil reserves, extirpate Iraq from the much-hated OPEC and maybe kill the cartel for good. Last May in Houston, Asia Times Online confirmed that even the oil business didn't think this was a good idea. The crumbling Iraq oil infrastructure - on the most optimistic of days - currently cannot produce more than 1.8 million barrels, and much less export it. The Iraqi resistance knows how formidable a weapon is the regular bombing of either the northern pipeline from Kirkuk to Ceyhan, Turkey, or the southern pipeline from Basra. Whenever there is a bombing - or an interruption in pumping because of workers condemning the offensive against Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf - production in Basra falls to less than 1 million barrels a day. It's always important to remember that even under United Nations sanctions, Iraq exported at least 2.5 million barrels a day.
The strength of the dollar is guaranteed above all by a secret agreement signed between the US and Saudi Arabia in the 1970s that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. Saddam Hussein started selling Iraqi oil in euros (and making a handsome profit) in November 2000 - and that's another crucial reason for the Iraqi invasion. Many OPEC countries, not to mention Russia (President Vladimir Putin already referred to it on the record), flirt with the idea of trading their oil in euros. (OPEC is made up of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.) A recent analysis published by Goldmoney states that OPEC has already switched, in fact, to trading oil in euros - as oil-exporting countries fight to offset the weak dollar, "It seems clear that OPEC and the other oil exporters are already pricing crude oil in terms of euros, at least tacitly. Whether they start invoicing their crude oil sales in terms of euros remains to be seen." So what is Cheney doing in the middle of this crisis? He's blaming the Democrats. The failure of Cheney's Russia strategy will be examined in a separate article. But as far as Iraq is concerned, the blowback is obvious. The neo-cons dreamed of exporting "democracy". Instead, they imported geopolitical instability - reflected in the rising price of oil. The Bush administration has not been rewarded with cheap oil: it is now facing a new, slow, mutating oil shock.
Oil at $50 a barrel, and on its way to $60, is an absolute disaster for oil-importing countries (and this means most of the world). Business costs are automatically higher - leading in many cases to job cuts, which means higher unemployment. The days of cheap oil may be over - as most analysts agree. But beyond the current hysteria over oil at $50 and the failure of Cheney's US energy policy, the world seems to be failing to address at least four extremely important questions on which the common future depends: how much oil - proven reserves - is left in the Middle East? How much oil does Russia have? What is the real amount of proven reserves in the Caspian Sea? How long will all this oil last? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/FH24Dj01.html
Plame Outing: Indictments in the CIA agent case?
Rumors, if not scuttlebutt in D.C. as to Cheney’s chief-of-staff Scooter Libby being one of three to be charged. If so, will those indictments be put off till after the election? And, if Bush wins, would they disappear? And if Kerry won, would he pardon those charged, based on ‘let’s move on’?
But, just rumors.
What’s Happening, Iraq: More deaths, still no resolution of Sadr ‘issue’.
The New Iraqi Army
Iraq's security forces, ordered to prepare for an offensive against the Mahdi Army in Najaf, have been plagued by a desertion rate that exceeded 80 percent.
A U.S. report warned that Iraqi Interior Ministry troops remain unprepared to fight Shi'ite or Sunni insurgents and could not be deemed reliable. The report, published before the current showdown in Najaf, said the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, renamed the Iraqi National Guard, has not been trained to fight insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons. http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/august/08_22_2.html
William Pfaff: Let’s Get Out: The International Tribune resource:
Why then is Ambassador John Negroponte in Iraq? He is now building up what is to become a 3,000-person U.S. mission to a nominally sovereign Iraq, whose new interim government is supposed to be taking political control of the country.It is reported that when the shooting started between the Marines and the Mahdi army, and Negroponte was informed that Sadr was summoning help, he "decided to pursue the case" - apparently meaning that he backed what the Marines had started, leading to the present stand-off in Najaf.The Falluja fiasco took place when Bremer was proconsul. It was Bremer who touched off the original clash with Sadr four months ago when he decided to shut down Sadr's radical newspaper - which "nobody read," as Bremer was warned at the time - and sent forces to arrest "or kill" Sadr. This provoked the earliest uprisings by Sadr's armed sympathizers in Najaf, Baghdad and elsewhere. The United States had subsequently to back down, at least temporarily.As a result, Sadr, who was originally a figure of minor and local consequence, was turned into a national leader of the Shiite community and a threat to that community's existing moderate leadership.This lack of political supervision of the Marines, and the responsibility of both Bremer and Negroponte in these confrontations, adds to an American record in Iraq that has displayed a persistent lack of common sense. The pursuit of Sadr has so far proved a political and military disaster. A policy of attacking large cities with armor, artillery and airpower in order to seize individuals defies reason.The fundamental question in Iraq is whether the United States should simply get out, cutting its losses now. There are many Americans who believe that, including this writer. But neither the Bush government nor the Kerry campaign wants to contemplate so enormous and desperate an act of common sense.The only chance of minimizing current costs is to do everything possible to lend legitimacy to the interim government and its chaotically formed new National Assembly. This means, above all, allowing it, and not the U.S. Marines, to run the country and to make the important security decisions. http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=534962.html
U.S. Forces heading for Azerbaijan?
News that the United States plans a massive redeployment of its armed forces has Azerbaijanis wondering whether their country will soon host US troops. Azerbaijani officials are coy on the base question, prompting some local political analysts to say Baku is trying to leverage the issue to achieve a breakthrough on the stalled talks on a Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement.
Speculation over whether the United States would establish a military base in Azerbaijan began almost immediately after US leaders announced August 16 that up 70,000 US troops in Europe and East Asia would be redeployed. Most US soldiers appear headed back to the United States, but some will staff new facilities, in keeping with the Pentagon’s desire to create a more mobile armed forces. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. http://www.eurasianet.net/departments/insight/articles/eav082304_pr.shtml
Air America Radio: New outlets in Ann Arbor and San Diego
Conservative Disquiet (cont.)
(1) more Buchanan: Review essay by Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com
Buchanan shows how the small clique of neocons in this administration moved within hours of the 9/11 terrorist strike to divert the President's anger, and the nation's, toward Iraq, rather than Osama bin Laden. He strongly implies that the neocons exercised a thinly-veiled threat to abandon the President if he didn't take immediate action against Saddam Hussein:
"Nine days after an attack on the United States, this tiny clique of intellectuals was telling the President of the United States and commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces that if he did not follow their war plans, he would be publicly charged with a 'decisive surrender' to terrorism."
Buchanan tells the story of a President who was deceived into war, lied to by his own top advisors, and then led down the garden path by a bunch of war-maddened ideologues. I would tend to agree, but would add that this view would be strengthened by an analysis of why this course has been politically advantageous to the President and his party, particularly as it relates to the role of the Christian fundamentalist foot-soldiers who play such a vital role in the GOP electoral machine. http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Buchanan+Against+the+Empire-+by+Justin+Raimondo&expire=&urlID=11406120&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antiwar.com%2Fjustin%2F%3Farticleid%3D3429&partnerID=16
(2)Weekly Standard’s Andrew Ferguson: They’re a conservative periodical…which makes this notable.
Yet, in 2004, Republicans find themselves supporting a candidate, George W. Bush, with a slender and ambiguous military record against a man whose combat heroism has never (until now) been disputed. Further--and here we'll let slip a thinly disguised secret--Republicans are supporting a candidate that relatively few of them find personally or politically appealing. This is not the choice Republicans are supposed to be faced with. The 1990s were far better. In those days the Democrats did the proper thing, nominating a draft-dodger to run against George H.W. Bush, who was the youngest combat pilot in the Pacific theater in World War II, and then later, in 1996, against Bob Dole, who left a portion of his body on the beach at Anzio.
Republicans have no such luck this time, and so they scramble to reassure themselves that they nevertheless are doing the right thing, voting against a war hero. The simplest way to do this is to convince themselves that the war hero isn't really a war hero. If sufficient doubt about Kerry's record can be raised, we can vote for Bush without remorse. But the calculations are transparently desperate. Reading some of the anti-Kerry attacks over the last several weeks, you might conclude that this is the new conservative position: A veteran who volunteered for combat duty, spent four months under fire in Vietnam, and then exaggerated a bit so he could go home early is the inferior, morally and otherwise, of a man who had his father pull strings so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam in the first place. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/493kldgc.asp?pg=2
Florida Ballot: Newest problem: AP report:
Palm Beach County has introduced an absentee ballot that requires voters to indicate their choices by connecting broken arrows, sparking criticism that it is even more confusing than the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 election.
Zogby Poll: Battleground States
Taken before the Swift Boat episode fully developed, it has Kerry’s lead in Minnesota and Michigan narrowing, now similar to the very slight leads in Missouri.
Note: New Hampshire is the only battleground state that looks to be safely in Kerry’s column.
All told, Mr. Kerry's lead is outside the margin of error in just three states -- Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington -- and the president in just Ohio. If one considers only those results that are outside the margins of error, Mr. Kerry would cling to a lead of just 211-209 -- with 118 votes still up for grabs
In two crucial states -- Florida and Missouri -- Mr. Kerry's lead is tiny -- less than a percentage point. If both of those states, which have moved back and forth between the candidates over the course of Zogby's polling were to go Mr. Bush's way in the end, Mr. Kerry's lead would shrink to 286-252.
Finally, in five states, the Massachusetts senator leads by fewer than three percentage points. If all of those states went to Mr. Bush on Election Day, the president would win the election 274-264. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-battleground04-an0823.html
But between the Vietnam issue and the GOP convention, you can bet this is changing. The question is by how much?
-R
How to Get Rid of This? Can’t; Stuck in a country that has a debased political discourse, featuring a dumbed-down public, a ‘non-journalistic’ press, and an official “opposition”- the Democrats- who aren’t as good at gutter politics as Republicans. It’s so nuts that the most powerful country in the world determines its elections by focusing on this nonsense. By these rules, the know-nothings tend to win. They will this time, unless Kerry makes Bush’s inveterate cowardice the issue, not Kerry’s military record. Tuesday will tell much, as he’s reported to be approaching such a position.
And, McCain: Please no more lionizing of him; he was a brave, honorable POW; he impressed me by his forging a close, respectful relationship with anti-Viet vet Kerry. But he loathes Bush, who not only said he betrayed the other POWs and had a black illegitimate child, but also targeted spouse Cindy McCain as a drug addict. Yet, he’s endorsing Bush, either so as to ‘help clean up the GOP or to consider running for Prez as a 70 year old in 2008. So, self-interest trumps principle. A politician.
The content? All the military records back up Kerry. That record has always been presumed to be accurate, yet the media plays it as ‘he said, she said,’ that there are two sides. So those who have been shown to be either inconsistent or liars and Kerry are assumed to be equally credible. This perfectly captures the right-wing talk show tact. Sean Hannity- for those who don’t listen, he’s popular. He has a refrain- “I don’t know what to believe”. Bob Dole, a true partisan, joins the fray and no one questions as to where he got his talking points, i.e. why should we be hearing from him?
If Kerry survives this and wins on November 2- it’s still early- he will face the ongoing noise machine of the Right. They’ve been at this since Nixon’s time. Chuck Colson and Murray Chotiner were there long before Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.
Now, we have hard core folk like Floyd Brown David Bossie and Citizens United.
Somerville’s own Chip Berlet has written about these guys.
The web banner for Citizens United explains that the group is dedicated to "Reasserting Traditional American Values: limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, national sovereignty and security."85 The group claims 150,000 members, but that is most likely a count of anyone who has sent money for projects touted in frequent direct mail appeals. The group has a member newsletter, Citizens Agenda, and a specialty periodical, ClintonWatch, sent to selected reporters and political activists.86
Citizens United is the project of Floyd G. Brown who published "Slick Willie:" Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton, a slim paperback book distributed as part of a direct mail fundraising effort. The book is a right-wing tirade designed to document Clinton's lack of character. What it also showed was that Brown unabashedly mixes sexism and homophobia in his conservative analysis http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/clinton/Clintonculwar8-12.html#P247_69030
Media: And as Bush makes the appallingly misleading comment, “I hope my opponent joins me in condemning all such activities”, at least some of the media fall for this line and make him sound righteous and resolute.
MSNBC: "Bush: Vets Should Halt anti-Kerry Ads”
CNN: “Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads."
Uh, Kerry did that about 12 days ago. No shame, no shame.
Time’s Joe Klein on the straight-jacketed Kerry: He’s controlled by his consultants/handlers, says Joe.
And yet, when Kerry spoke to the VFW two days later, he attacked Bush's position, using an argument with some merit but of microscopic import in the midst of a presidential campaign: he said it was a "hasty" and "political" plan and certainly not a good negotiating tactic to withdraw troops from Korea while we are trying to get the North Koreans to drop their nuclear program.
But oops. Some two weeks earlier, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Kerry had taken a different position: "I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just [in Iraq] but ... in the Korean peninsula, perhaps, in Europe, perhaps." As you might imagine, the Bush campaign quickly pointed out the inconsistency.
The stumble raises two basic questions about Kerry's campaign. First, is he a latter-day Ron Burgundy—the idiot 1970s anchorman of Will Ferrell's recent film who would read anything that appeared on his TelePrompTer? Did Kerry not remember what he had said to Stephanopoulos? No, it was, apparently, yet another Kerry nanonuance: he is in favor of redeployments, just not now. The second question is far more dire: Why is Kerry wasting breath on such periphera? Why isn't he hammering Bush on his conduct of the Iraq war and the larger war against Islamist radicalism, which is the most important issue in this election? The answer is politics. His political consultants don't want him to do it. Their focus groups tell them that the public wants an "optimistic" candidate who offers a "positive plan" rather than a "negative" candidate who criticizes the President. http://www.maxlogan.com/klein.0822.htm
Election Irregularities: The Florida – New York Connection
Is this true? If so, is it bad news?
Some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, a shocking finding that exposes both states to potential abuses that could alter the outcome of elections," a New York Daily News investigation shows."Registering in two places is illegal in both states, but the massive snowbird scandal goes undetected because election officials don't check rolls across state lines." http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/224449p-192807c.html
Kerry tried to focus on this today; it got a bit of coverage.
With the Bush campaign reportedly releasing another misleading ad tomorrow attacking John Kerry's plan to cut taxes for the middle class, the Kerry-Edwards campaign will pressure Bush to come clean about why he is shifting more of the tax burden on to working families, cutting overtime pay for six million people and covering up key details about his health care claims.
The campaign will also release a new report on what the impact of the new overtime rules will be on working families
Colombia: Oil, Violence, etc. It isn’t a pretty picture
Why has Arauca been singled out for "enhanced" security? One answer is oil. It is home to the Caño Limón oilfield, which accounts for 30% of Colombia's oil production. The oil is pumped to the Caribbean through a pipeline that has been a major target for guerrilla forces. Now a complex mosaic of armed groups - rightwing paramilitaries and the army, often working closely together, and leftwing guerrillas - struggle for control of the lucrative pipeline and cocaine routes.
The civil war is decades old but has grown more complex in recent years.
It’s too late for three citizens of the oil-rich north-east region of Arauca, on the border with Venezuela. They were murdered by the army on August 5. The men were all trade unionists, and their killings bring to 30 the number of unionists killed in Arauca so far this year. Last year, the US gave Colombia $99m to protect the pipeline, to be split between the 18th Brigade and a new mobile unit. President Bush also sent 60 US special forces personnel to Arauca to train the brigade http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=9&ItemID=6082
Israel - France: 2 notes
* New homes on the West Bank are being built. The U.S. does not oppose.
* The worst incident of recent anti-Semitism in France, as a cultural center was defaced and wrecked “in response to racist acts by Jews in France against Islam and the Muslims…and as a simple response to the racist and savage acts by Jews in Muslim countries like Palestine.”
North Korea:
Can’t forget them. They remind us of their presence by releasing striking statements
North Korea described US President George W. Bush as an "imbecile" and a "tyrant" who was worse than Adolph Hitler, and ruled out holding new talks on nuclear weapons with the United States. In an unusually strong attack, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said comments by Bush calling North Korea a tyrant during campaigning last week in Wisconsin were "malignant slanders and calumnies".
Oil:
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times. Always worth the time:
Welcome to peak oil According to HSBC, oil is now 136% - and counting - more expensive than before September 11, 2001. The United States - with 5% of the world's population - gobbles up no less than 26% of the world's oil production. Whatever the spin from the White House and the Pentagon, the fact is one of the key objectives in the whole Iraqi adventure - completely in line with Dick Cheney's 2001 energy report - was to take over the world's second-largest oil reserves, extirpate Iraq from the much-hated OPEC and maybe kill the cartel for good. Last May in Houston, Asia Times Online confirmed that even the oil business didn't think this was a good idea. The crumbling Iraq oil infrastructure - on the most optimistic of days - currently cannot produce more than 1.8 million barrels, and much less export it. The Iraqi resistance knows how formidable a weapon is the regular bombing of either the northern pipeline from Kirkuk to Ceyhan, Turkey, or the southern pipeline from Basra. Whenever there is a bombing - or an interruption in pumping because of workers condemning the offensive against Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf - production in Basra falls to less than 1 million barrels a day. It's always important to remember that even under United Nations sanctions, Iraq exported at least 2.5 million barrels a day.
The strength of the dollar is guaranteed above all by a secret agreement signed between the US and Saudi Arabia in the 1970s that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. Saddam Hussein started selling Iraqi oil in euros (and making a handsome profit) in November 2000 - and that's another crucial reason for the Iraqi invasion. Many OPEC countries, not to mention Russia (President Vladimir Putin already referred to it on the record), flirt with the idea of trading their oil in euros. (OPEC is made up of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.) A recent analysis published by Goldmoney states that OPEC has already switched, in fact, to trading oil in euros - as oil-exporting countries fight to offset the weak dollar, "It seems clear that OPEC and the other oil exporters are already pricing crude oil in terms of euros, at least tacitly. Whether they start invoicing their crude oil sales in terms of euros remains to be seen." So what is Cheney doing in the middle of this crisis? He's blaming the Democrats. The failure of Cheney's Russia strategy will be examined in a separate article. But as far as Iraq is concerned, the blowback is obvious. The neo-cons dreamed of exporting "democracy". Instead, they imported geopolitical instability - reflected in the rising price of oil. The Bush administration has not been rewarded with cheap oil: it is now facing a new, slow, mutating oil shock.
Oil at $50 a barrel, and on its way to $60, is an absolute disaster for oil-importing countries (and this means most of the world). Business costs are automatically higher - leading in many cases to job cuts, which means higher unemployment. The days of cheap oil may be over - as most analysts agree. But beyond the current hysteria over oil at $50 and the failure of Cheney's US energy policy, the world seems to be failing to address at least four extremely important questions on which the common future depends: how much oil - proven reserves - is left in the Middle East? How much oil does Russia have? What is the real amount of proven reserves in the Caspian Sea? How long will all this oil last? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/FH24Dj01.html
Plame Outing: Indictments in the CIA agent case?
Rumors, if not scuttlebutt in D.C. as to Cheney’s chief-of-staff Scooter Libby being one of three to be charged. If so, will those indictments be put off till after the election? And, if Bush wins, would they disappear? And if Kerry won, would he pardon those charged, based on ‘let’s move on’?
But, just rumors.
What’s Happening, Iraq: More deaths, still no resolution of Sadr ‘issue’.
The New Iraqi Army
Iraq's security forces, ordered to prepare for an offensive against the Mahdi Army in Najaf, have been plagued by a desertion rate that exceeded 80 percent.
A U.S. report warned that Iraqi Interior Ministry troops remain unprepared to fight Shi'ite or Sunni insurgents and could not be deemed reliable. The report, published before the current showdown in Najaf, said the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, renamed the Iraqi National Guard, has not been trained to fight insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons. http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/august/08_22_2.html
William Pfaff: Let’s Get Out: The International Tribune resource:
Why then is Ambassador John Negroponte in Iraq? He is now building up what is to become a 3,000-person U.S. mission to a nominally sovereign Iraq, whose new interim government is supposed to be taking political control of the country.It is reported that when the shooting started between the Marines and the Mahdi army, and Negroponte was informed that Sadr was summoning help, he "decided to pursue the case" - apparently meaning that he backed what the Marines had started, leading to the present stand-off in Najaf.The Falluja fiasco took place when Bremer was proconsul. It was Bremer who touched off the original clash with Sadr four months ago when he decided to shut down Sadr's radical newspaper - which "nobody read," as Bremer was warned at the time - and sent forces to arrest "or kill" Sadr. This provoked the earliest uprisings by Sadr's armed sympathizers in Najaf, Baghdad and elsewhere. The United States had subsequently to back down, at least temporarily.As a result, Sadr, who was originally a figure of minor and local consequence, was turned into a national leader of the Shiite community and a threat to that community's existing moderate leadership.This lack of political supervision of the Marines, and the responsibility of both Bremer and Negroponte in these confrontations, adds to an American record in Iraq that has displayed a persistent lack of common sense. The pursuit of Sadr has so far proved a political and military disaster. A policy of attacking large cities with armor, artillery and airpower in order to seize individuals defies reason.The fundamental question in Iraq is whether the United States should simply get out, cutting its losses now. There are many Americans who believe that, including this writer. But neither the Bush government nor the Kerry campaign wants to contemplate so enormous and desperate an act of common sense.The only chance of minimizing current costs is to do everything possible to lend legitimacy to the interim government and its chaotically formed new National Assembly. This means, above all, allowing it, and not the U.S. Marines, to run the country and to make the important security decisions. http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=534962.html
U.S. Forces heading for Azerbaijan?
News that the United States plans a massive redeployment of its armed forces has Azerbaijanis wondering whether their country will soon host US troops. Azerbaijani officials are coy on the base question, prompting some local political analysts to say Baku is trying to leverage the issue to achieve a breakthrough on the stalled talks on a Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement.
Speculation over whether the United States would establish a military base in Azerbaijan began almost immediately after US leaders announced August 16 that up 70,000 US troops in Europe and East Asia would be redeployed. Most US soldiers appear headed back to the United States, but some will staff new facilities, in keeping with the Pentagon’s desire to create a more mobile armed forces. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. http://www.eurasianet.net/departments/insight/articles/eav082304_pr.shtml
Air America Radio: New outlets in Ann Arbor and San Diego
Conservative Disquiet (cont.)
(1) more Buchanan: Review essay by Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com
Buchanan shows how the small clique of neocons in this administration moved within hours of the 9/11 terrorist strike to divert the President's anger, and the nation's, toward Iraq, rather than Osama bin Laden. He strongly implies that the neocons exercised a thinly-veiled threat to abandon the President if he didn't take immediate action against Saddam Hussein:
"Nine days after an attack on the United States, this tiny clique of intellectuals was telling the President of the United States and commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces that if he did not follow their war plans, he would be publicly charged with a 'decisive surrender' to terrorism."
Buchanan tells the story of a President who was deceived into war, lied to by his own top advisors, and then led down the garden path by a bunch of war-maddened ideologues. I would tend to agree, but would add that this view would be strengthened by an analysis of why this course has been politically advantageous to the President and his party, particularly as it relates to the role of the Christian fundamentalist foot-soldiers who play such a vital role in the GOP electoral machine. http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Buchanan+Against+the+Empire-+by+Justin+Raimondo&expire=&urlID=11406120&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antiwar.com%2Fjustin%2F%3Farticleid%3D3429&partnerID=16
(2)Weekly Standard’s Andrew Ferguson: They’re a conservative periodical…which makes this notable.
Yet, in 2004, Republicans find themselves supporting a candidate, George W. Bush, with a slender and ambiguous military record against a man whose combat heroism has never (until now) been disputed. Further--and here we'll let slip a thinly disguised secret--Republicans are supporting a candidate that relatively few of them find personally or politically appealing. This is not the choice Republicans are supposed to be faced with. The 1990s were far better. In those days the Democrats did the proper thing, nominating a draft-dodger to run against George H.W. Bush, who was the youngest combat pilot in the Pacific theater in World War II, and then later, in 1996, against Bob Dole, who left a portion of his body on the beach at Anzio.
Republicans have no such luck this time, and so they scramble to reassure themselves that they nevertheless are doing the right thing, voting against a war hero. The simplest way to do this is to convince themselves that the war hero isn't really a war hero. If sufficient doubt about Kerry's record can be raised, we can vote for Bush without remorse. But the calculations are transparently desperate. Reading some of the anti-Kerry attacks over the last several weeks, you might conclude that this is the new conservative position: A veteran who volunteered for combat duty, spent four months under fire in Vietnam, and then exaggerated a bit so he could go home early is the inferior, morally and otherwise, of a man who had his father pull strings so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam in the first place. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/493kldgc.asp?pg=2
Florida Ballot: Newest problem: AP report:
Palm Beach County has introduced an absentee ballot that requires voters to indicate their choices by connecting broken arrows, sparking criticism that it is even more confusing than the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 election.
Zogby Poll: Battleground States
Taken before the Swift Boat episode fully developed, it has Kerry’s lead in Minnesota and Michigan narrowing, now similar to the very slight leads in Missouri.
Note: New Hampshire is the only battleground state that looks to be safely in Kerry’s column.
All told, Mr. Kerry's lead is outside the margin of error in just three states -- Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington -- and the president in just Ohio. If one considers only those results that are outside the margins of error, Mr. Kerry would cling to a lead of just 211-209 -- with 118 votes still up for grabs
In two crucial states -- Florida and Missouri -- Mr. Kerry's lead is tiny -- less than a percentage point. If both of those states, which have moved back and forth between the candidates over the course of Zogby's polling were to go Mr. Bush's way in the end, Mr. Kerry's lead would shrink to 286-252.
Finally, in five states, the Massachusetts senator leads by fewer than three percentage points. If all of those states went to Mr. Bush on Election Day, the president would win the election 274-264. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-battleground04-an0823.html
But between the Vietnam issue and the GOP convention, you can bet this is changing. The question is by how much?
-R
Sunday, August 22, 2004
The Americans are weak. They fight for money and status and squeal like pigs when they die.”– 12 year old Mahdi militia fighter in Najaf [Independent]
Swift Boat Saga: It’s THE focus, unfortunately; Can’t we focus on the theft of Edvard Munch’s The Scream? Arrrghh!
Globe editorial: The Bush Lies
Nice title; some good points. Still, I take exception:
1) They refer to Clinton as a ‘draft dodger’. Has Cheney been similarly referenced? (No)
2) More importantly, why do they insist on seeing the two parties as equally culpable of whatever? As to the ‘big lie’,
Both parties do it, but Republicans are developing a shocking expertise.
Developing? Willie Horton was 16 years ago. Both parties character assassinate? What’s the Democrat equivalent of the Horton ad, or the accusations that McCain had an illegitimate (black) child and sold out his fellow POWs? http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2004/08/22/big_lies_for_bush?mode=PF
The Right’s control of the media means that we will have incessant moments of ‘balance’, equating the Right’s positions with the Democrats, moveon ads with swift boat liars.
The only solution is an ongoing, aggressive effort to take back the media.
As to the Kerry ad, Kerry is finally responding, and at least partially attacking Bush for the pattern. One waits for one of these Democrats to attack Bush directly- that he hides behind vicious character assassination ads and always pretends to know nothing of the efforts and are, as Junior was w/ McCain, speechless when confronted.
And, can’t we spend a few moments interviewing Ben Barnes, the Texas Speaker of the House in 1968? He was the one who got Junior to the top of the Air National Guard list.
You know, balance, fairness.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Casualties: Up more than 50% since “sovereignty” was passed on at the end of June.
What Europe Thinks: European media remain ‘clear’ as to Iraq, that it’s a failed policy that’s part of a larger mis-direction in U.S. policy. They see Bush as a disaster, and voice disbelief when told that Bush might win re-election.
Meanwhile, a view from Israel, the Jerusalem Post (Eli Valley):
Bad for American security, bad for the Jews
Among a minority of lifelong Jewish Democrats, it comes out like a shameful confession: "I disagree with practically all of George W. Bush's policies, but because he's good for Israel and strong in the war on terror, I might actually vote for him."
Never mind that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has a perfect 20-year voting record on Israel. The "Bush impulse" is at its core an emotional urge. In the aftermath of 9/11, the ongoing Palestinian violence, and the War in Iraq, a minority of Jewish Democrats are convinced that President Bush has kept us, and has helped to keep Israel, out of harm's way.
The Bush impulse would be understandable were it based on the president's solid terror-fighting credentials. Close inspection, however, reveals that Bush has not only failed to protect us but has in fact jeopardized the national security of the United States and of Israel.
After September 11, American national security priorities were clear: In the immediate future, we needed to rout the Taliban, destroy al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan, rebuild civil society in Afghanistan, and protect American cities, ports, and chemical and nuclear facilities against future attacks. Given our limited resources, the objectives would require preternatural focus and commitment.
Unfortunately, Bush has fought to accomplish only the first objective. Each of the remaining priorities has been abandoned in the president's misplaced obsession with Iraq. Indeed, according to a report by the Army War College, the US Army's most distinguished academic institution, the War in Iraq "was a war-of-choice distraction from the war of necessity against al-Qaida." http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1092280011185&p=1006953079865
Of course, Kerry disagrees with this, which leaves him- and many of us- no where.
Australian Intelligence: We said it would be a disaster!
The Federal Government was warned repeatedly by intelligence analysts before the Iraq war that the conflict would harm the war on terrorism by fanning Islamic extremism and spurring terrorist recruiting.
An investigation by the Herald, which has included interviews with several serving and retired intelligence figures, has uncovered that John Howard and his senior colleagues were briefed on the dangers, verbally and in written reports.
Yet the Prime Minister told Australians on the eve of the conflict that the war would lessen the terrorist threat, contradicting his intelligence advice. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/22/1093113058224.html
Hey, why didn’t they tell the CIA and Bush??
Howard’s up for re-election.
What’s Happening, Guantanamo:
The first military tribunal system since the end of World War II to try terrorism suspects begins Tuesday in “Cuba”. Worldwide media and human rights groups will witness the proceedings; are we aware?
Buchanan Knocks Bush…in print.
He’s not on the ballot, but addresses some of the disquiet among conservatives.
Patrick J. Buchanan, the conservative commentator whose Republican primary challenge and divisive convention speech weakened the first President Bush's campaign for re-election in 1992, is publishing a book excoriating the second President Bush over the invasion of Iraq, just in time to grab a share of the limelight at another Republican convention.
The arguments in the book, "Where the Right Went Wrong," which was released late last week, may be familiar, at least to readers of his magazine, The American Conservative, which was founded as a forum for opposition from the right to the invasion of Iraq. Calling the invasion "the greatest strategic blunder in 40 years," Mr. Buchanan writes, "If prudence is the mark of a conservative, Mr. Bush has ceased to be a conservative." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/22/politics/22buchanan.html?ex=1094130243&ei=1&en=22f3aaa029eeda0b
Harris Poll: Some people are waking up
A new Harris poll finds a sharp increase in the proportion of Americans who believe they were misled by the U.S. government's statements about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and Iraq's links to al Qaeda.
Sixty percent of Americans now believe that they were misled by the government on matters surrounding Iraq, up from 51% in June. Just over a third of respondents said they believe that what the public was told was generally accurate, but this is down from 44% in June. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109294542737896373,00.html?mod=special%5Fpage%5Firaq%5F2
Bush Olympics Ad:
Several new feel-good ads from the Rove machine. This one turned off some not-so-usual suspects.
President Bush's re-election campaign will continue to run a television ad that mentions the Olympics by name, despite objections from the U.S. Olympic Committee, a spokesman said Friday.
"We are on firm legal ground to mention the Olympics and make a factual point in a political advertisement," said Scott Stanzel.
USOC officials had protested that federal law gives them the exclusive rights to the name.
The ad shows a swimmer and the flags of Iraq and Afghanistan.
"In 1972, there were 40 democracies in the world. Today, 120," an announcer says. "Freedom is spreading throughout the world like a sunrise. And this Olympics there will be two more free nations. And two fewer terrorist regimes."
Bush campaign aides contend that the law in question gives the committee exclusive rights only to use the Olympics name to sell goods or services or to promote athletic competition. The campaign avoided using the symbol of five rings in the ad, the aides said.
Stanzel said the ad will continue to run for the last two weeks of August.
Some of the players on the Iraqi Olympic soccer team have complained about the ads. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1864173&type=story
One awful rumor has Bush flying to the Olympics to watch the Iraqi soccer team, sort of a reprise of the plastic turkey “serving” that he did last Thanksgiving, which did give him a 5 point bump in the polls.
Oil: Alternating Confidence and Worry For those who’ve been skipping the postings on oil…
An increasing percentage of articles wax concern that we’re heading into unchartered territory; others find cause for reassurance. Regardless, too few focus on the dwindling supply (vs demand) of oil and natural gas (or global warming)
While the current oil crunch is less acute than in the 1970s, it could prove to be more chronic due to rising global demand and a thin cushion of extra supply. World consumption has risen an estimated 2.5% from a year ago.
As oil prices near $50 a barrel, a fundamental difference between this oil crunch and prior ones is becoming clear: This one is less acute, but it may prove to be more chronic.
So far, the current oil-price surge still trails the big blows of the past. In inflation-adjusted dollars, oil peaked in 1981 at $73 a barrel, 55% above where it's trading now. Back then, moreover, the oil crisis sparked a full-blown recession. Today, despite some signs of a slowing, the economy continues to grow -- and, with it, oil demand.
It's precisely the steadily rising demand, however, that is worrying the market. Unlike in the 1970s, the problem this time isn't primarily a supply shock in which the world's biggest oil spigots have been shut off. It's that, even though they're wide open, the world is consuming pretty much everything that comes out of the ground. The resulting fear is that isolated supply disruptions -- a change in government in Venezuela, say, or a terrorist attack in the Middle East -- could push prices even higher. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109294862157996439,00.html?mod=home%5Fpage%5Fone%5Fus
Last week, however, a third market flashed red on the economy: oil. And according to Stephen S. Roach, economist at Morgan Stanley, oil shocks, like the one that may be developing, have an awfully perfect - and perfectly awful - track record. They are always followed by recession.
Last Friday, the price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil hit $48.95 a barrel, then settled back to $47.86 at the close of trading. That is up from around $33 a barrel at the beginning of the year.
A throng of strategists on Wall Street argue that rising crude prices do not hurt as much as they have in the past because the economy is not as energy dependent as it once was. The amount of energy needed to generate $1 in gross domestic product has fallen by roughly 50 percent in the past three decades, according to Morgan Stanley.
But as Mr. Roach pointed out, a price spike like the one that has occurred this year can have consequences. And if the past is any guide, they are not pretty. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/22/business/yourmoney/22watch.html?pagewanted=print&position=
-R
Swift Boat Saga: It’s THE focus, unfortunately; Can’t we focus on the theft of Edvard Munch’s The Scream? Arrrghh!
Globe editorial: The Bush Lies
Nice title; some good points. Still, I take exception:
1) They refer to Clinton as a ‘draft dodger’. Has Cheney been similarly referenced? (No)
2) More importantly, why do they insist on seeing the two parties as equally culpable of whatever? As to the ‘big lie’,
Both parties do it, but Republicans are developing a shocking expertise.
Developing? Willie Horton was 16 years ago. Both parties character assassinate? What’s the Democrat equivalent of the Horton ad, or the accusations that McCain had an illegitimate (black) child and sold out his fellow POWs? http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2004/08/22/big_lies_for_bush?mode=PF
The Right’s control of the media means that we will have incessant moments of ‘balance’, equating the Right’s positions with the Democrats, moveon ads with swift boat liars.
The only solution is an ongoing, aggressive effort to take back the media.
As to the Kerry ad, Kerry is finally responding, and at least partially attacking Bush for the pattern. One waits for one of these Democrats to attack Bush directly- that he hides behind vicious character assassination ads and always pretends to know nothing of the efforts and are, as Junior was w/ McCain, speechless when confronted.
And, can’t we spend a few moments interviewing Ben Barnes, the Texas Speaker of the House in 1968? He was the one who got Junior to the top of the Air National Guard list.
You know, balance, fairness.
What’s Happening, Iraq: Casualties: Up more than 50% since “sovereignty” was passed on at the end of June.
What Europe Thinks: European media remain ‘clear’ as to Iraq, that it’s a failed policy that’s part of a larger mis-direction in U.S. policy. They see Bush as a disaster, and voice disbelief when told that Bush might win re-election.
Meanwhile, a view from Israel, the Jerusalem Post (Eli Valley):
Bad for American security, bad for the Jews
Among a minority of lifelong Jewish Democrats, it comes out like a shameful confession: "I disagree with practically all of George W. Bush's policies, but because he's good for Israel and strong in the war on terror, I might actually vote for him."
Never mind that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has a perfect 20-year voting record on Israel. The "Bush impulse" is at its core an emotional urge. In the aftermath of 9/11, the ongoing Palestinian violence, and the War in Iraq, a minority of Jewish Democrats are convinced that President Bush has kept us, and has helped to keep Israel, out of harm's way.
The Bush impulse would be understandable were it based on the president's solid terror-fighting credentials. Close inspection, however, reveals that Bush has not only failed to protect us but has in fact jeopardized the national security of the United States and of Israel.
After September 11, American national security priorities were clear: In the immediate future, we needed to rout the Taliban, destroy al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan, rebuild civil society in Afghanistan, and protect American cities, ports, and chemical and nuclear facilities against future attacks. Given our limited resources, the objectives would require preternatural focus and commitment.
Unfortunately, Bush has fought to accomplish only the first objective. Each of the remaining priorities has been abandoned in the president's misplaced obsession with Iraq. Indeed, according to a report by the Army War College, the US Army's most distinguished academic institution, the War in Iraq "was a war-of-choice distraction from the war of necessity against al-Qaida." http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1092280011185&p=1006953079865
Of course, Kerry disagrees with this, which leaves him- and many of us- no where.
Australian Intelligence: We said it would be a disaster!
The Federal Government was warned repeatedly by intelligence analysts before the Iraq war that the conflict would harm the war on terrorism by fanning Islamic extremism and spurring terrorist recruiting.
An investigation by the Herald, which has included interviews with several serving and retired intelligence figures, has uncovered that John Howard and his senior colleagues were briefed on the dangers, verbally and in written reports.
Yet the Prime Minister told Australians on the eve of the conflict that the war would lessen the terrorist threat, contradicting his intelligence advice. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/22/1093113058224.html
Hey, why didn’t they tell the CIA and Bush??
Howard’s up for re-election.
What’s Happening, Guantanamo:
The first military tribunal system since the end of World War II to try terrorism suspects begins Tuesday in “Cuba”. Worldwide media and human rights groups will witness the proceedings; are we aware?
Buchanan Knocks Bush…in print.
He’s not on the ballot, but addresses some of the disquiet among conservatives.
Patrick J. Buchanan, the conservative commentator whose Republican primary challenge and divisive convention speech weakened the first President Bush's campaign for re-election in 1992, is publishing a book excoriating the second President Bush over the invasion of Iraq, just in time to grab a share of the limelight at another Republican convention.
The arguments in the book, "Where the Right Went Wrong," which was released late last week, may be familiar, at least to readers of his magazine, The American Conservative, which was founded as a forum for opposition from the right to the invasion of Iraq. Calling the invasion "the greatest strategic blunder in 40 years," Mr. Buchanan writes, "If prudence is the mark of a conservative, Mr. Bush has ceased to be a conservative." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/22/politics/22buchanan.html?ex=1094130243&ei=1&en=22f3aaa029eeda0b
Harris Poll: Some people are waking up
A new Harris poll finds a sharp increase in the proportion of Americans who believe they were misled by the U.S. government's statements about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and Iraq's links to al Qaeda.
Sixty percent of Americans now believe that they were misled by the government on matters surrounding Iraq, up from 51% in June. Just over a third of respondents said they believe that what the public was told was generally accurate, but this is down from 44% in June. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109294542737896373,00.html?mod=special%5Fpage%5Firaq%5F2
Bush Olympics Ad:
Several new feel-good ads from the Rove machine. This one turned off some not-so-usual suspects.
President Bush's re-election campaign will continue to run a television ad that mentions the Olympics by name, despite objections from the U.S. Olympic Committee, a spokesman said Friday.
"We are on firm legal ground to mention the Olympics and make a factual point in a political advertisement," said Scott Stanzel.
USOC officials had protested that federal law gives them the exclusive rights to the name.
The ad shows a swimmer and the flags of Iraq and Afghanistan.
"In 1972, there were 40 democracies in the world. Today, 120," an announcer says. "Freedom is spreading throughout the world like a sunrise. And this Olympics there will be two more free nations. And two fewer terrorist regimes."
Bush campaign aides contend that the law in question gives the committee exclusive rights only to use the Olympics name to sell goods or services or to promote athletic competition. The campaign avoided using the symbol of five rings in the ad, the aides said.
Stanzel said the ad will continue to run for the last two weeks of August.
Some of the players on the Iraqi Olympic soccer team have complained about the ads. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1864173&type=story
One awful rumor has Bush flying to the Olympics to watch the Iraqi soccer team, sort of a reprise of the plastic turkey “serving” that he did last Thanksgiving, which did give him a 5 point bump in the polls.
Oil: Alternating Confidence and Worry For those who’ve been skipping the postings on oil…
An increasing percentage of articles wax concern that we’re heading into unchartered territory; others find cause for reassurance. Regardless, too few focus on the dwindling supply (vs demand) of oil and natural gas (or global warming)
While the current oil crunch is less acute than in the 1970s, it could prove to be more chronic due to rising global demand and a thin cushion of extra supply. World consumption has risen an estimated 2.5% from a year ago.
As oil prices near $50 a barrel, a fundamental difference between this oil crunch and prior ones is becoming clear: This one is less acute, but it may prove to be more chronic.
So far, the current oil-price surge still trails the big blows of the past. In inflation-adjusted dollars, oil peaked in 1981 at $73 a barrel, 55% above where it's trading now. Back then, moreover, the oil crisis sparked a full-blown recession. Today, despite some signs of a slowing, the economy continues to grow -- and, with it, oil demand.
It's precisely the steadily rising demand, however, that is worrying the market. Unlike in the 1970s, the problem this time isn't primarily a supply shock in which the world's biggest oil spigots have been shut off. It's that, even though they're wide open, the world is consuming pretty much everything that comes out of the ground. The resulting fear is that isolated supply disruptions -- a change in government in Venezuela, say, or a terrorist attack in the Middle East -- could push prices even higher. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109294862157996439,00.html?mod=home%5Fpage%5Fone%5Fus
Last week, however, a third market flashed red on the economy: oil. And according to Stephen S. Roach, economist at Morgan Stanley, oil shocks, like the one that may be developing, have an awfully perfect - and perfectly awful - track record. They are always followed by recession.
Last Friday, the price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil hit $48.95 a barrel, then settled back to $47.86 at the close of trading. That is up from around $33 a barrel at the beginning of the year.
A throng of strategists on Wall Street argue that rising crude prices do not hurt as much as they have in the past because the economy is not as energy dependent as it once was. The amount of energy needed to generate $1 in gross domestic product has fallen by roughly 50 percent in the past three decades, according to Morgan Stanley.
But as Mr. Roach pointed out, a price spike like the one that has occurred this year can have consequences. And if the past is any guide, they are not pretty. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/22/business/yourmoney/22watch.html?pagewanted=print&position=
-R
