Thursday, September 16, 2004
“I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal.” – Kofi Annan on the Iraq invasion
Overtime Rules:
A U.S. Senate committee voted on Wednesday to roll back the Bush administration's controversial new overtime regulations, which critics say will deprive an estimated 6 million workers of overtime pay.
The Republican-led Senate Appropriations Committee voted 16-13 to approve a Democratic amendment to repeal the regulations.
Two Republicans, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Colorado Sen. Ben Campbell, joined Democrats in supporting the amendment offered by Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat.
"The economic health of too many workers is at stake," Harkin said.
The amendment is attached to a larger funding bill for the departments of Labor, and Health and Human Services for fiscal 2005.
With Democrats hoping to make the regulations an issue in the Nov. 2 elections, the full House of Representatives approved a similar amendment in its version of the spending bill last week.
Republican leaders, however, are expected to try and eliminate the amendments when the two bills are reconciled in a Senate-House conference. That would repeat a strategy they used last year when they snuffed out an earlier attempt to derail the regulations, despite the fact that both the full House and Senate had voted to block the new rules.
The Bush administration began implementing the regulations last month -- a move welcomed by many corporations but bitterly opposed by organized labor.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6246842
Bush the Failure on the so-called War on Terror Still more evidence…
Three years after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency has fewer experienced case officers assigned to its headquarters unit dealing with Osama bin Laden than it did at the time of the attacks, despite repeated pleas from the unit's leaders for reinforcements, a senior C.I.A. officer with extensive counterterrorism experience has told Congress. The bin Laden unit is stretched so thin that it relies on inexperienced officers rotated in and out every 60 to 90 days, and they leave before they know enough to be able to perform any meaningful work, according to a letter the C.I.A. officer has written to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/15cia.html?pagewanted=all
The Kerry Campaign: Too early for post mortems. But, despsite the stronger voice- today as to hiding truths about Iraq- many remain concerned. Tony Coelho, veteran Democratic operative talks of a “civil war going on” in the campaign between Cahill and Shrum, that “there is nobody in charge”, that the duo don’t talk to one another. Gads.
Meanwhile,
Maureen Dowd mainstreams paranoia
As per my noting last time that someone emailed news media while the CBS report was airing that the documents had problems.
There's no evidence - it's just a preposterous, paranoid fantasy at this point. But it speaks to the jitters of the Democrats that they're consumed with speculation about whether Karl Rove, the master of dirty tricks and surrogate sleaze, could have set up CBS in a diabolical pre-emptive strike to undermine damaging revelations about Bush 43's privileged status and vanishing act in the National Guard, and his odd refusal to take his required physical when ordered.
In this vast left-wing conspiracy theory, Mr. Rove takes real evidence on W.'s shirking and transfers it to documents doomed to be exposed as phony (thereby undermining the real goods), then funnels it through third parties to Dan Rather, Bush 41's nemesis on Iran-contra. A perfect bank shot. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/16/opinion/16dowd.html?hp
Competence: Bi-partisan fury re the Occupation
U.S. Lawmakers blasted the Bush administration Wednesday for its handling of the war in Iraq and said they were confounded only a fraction of $18.4 billion in U.S. rebuilding funds had been spent.
In an unusually nonpartisan hearing, Republican and Democratic senators urged senior State Department officials to try harder to speed up the reconstruction program, which lawmakers said could lead to a more stable environment in Iraq.
They also told officials to be more honest in their assessments of what was going on, with Indiana Republican Sen. Dick Lugar taking aim at what he called the "dancing in the street crowd," who painted an overly positive picture.
"The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning (for Iraq) is apparent," said Lugar, chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6246311
Kuttner on Kerry: It’s getting late. Well said
So what on earth is John Kerry to do? He cannot possibly win a hearing to challenge all that is fake about Bush and his policy particulars unless he first changes the frame. First, he needs to reframe Bush by pounding on all the ways that Bush is a fraud, and he needs to do it with grace and wit. Second, he needs a clear, simple vision of a secure, prosperous America more compelling than Bush's vision.
If Kerry doesn't have the nerve to take on Bush, voters will conclude that he lacks the nerve to protect America. Kerry has about two weeks to break the frame before the election freezes into a lock. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/09/15/kerry_must_reframe_bush____and_fast?mode=PF
Perspective: An Honorable Discharge Means? The White House keeps citing the fact that Bush was honorably discharged. Well…
The Washington Sniper, John Allen Muhammed, received an “Honorable Discharge” from the service in spite of the fact that he was tried and convicted in a court martial on one count of failing to report to his duty station on time, three counts of willfully disobeying an order, one count of striking a noncommissioned officer, one count of wrongfully taking property and one count of being AWOL. It would seem that getting an “honorable discharge” is a very low standard to meet. http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/10/24/muhammad.profile
Polls: So many. Upshot: It’s still close.
*ICR Presidential Tracking Poll:Bush leads Kerry 48% to *44%.Economist poll Bush clings to a small lead over Kerry, 47% to 46%.
*New Democrat Network finds Bush leading Sen. John Kerry, 49% to 45%,
*Harris Interactive poll shows Kerry leading Bush 48% to 47% among likely voters.
And, "The poll also found that a slender 51% to 45% majority doesn't believe that Mr. Bush deserves to be re-elected."
*The Pew Survey also found a deadlock
State polls:
Minnesota: Kerry 50%, Bush 41% (Minneapolis Star Tribune)
Michigan: Kerry 50%, Bush 44% (Gallup)
Florida: Bush 51%, Kerry 45% (Survey USA)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 47% (Rasmussen)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 44% (Strategic Vision)
Nevada: Bush 51%, Kerry 47% (Survey USA)
South Dakota: Bush 51%, Kerry 41
Wisconsin CNN/USA Today Gallup Poll. Bush 50 (46) Kerry 45 (49) Minnesota: Bush 46%, Kerry 45% (Mason-Dixon)
Minnesota: Kerry 49%, Bush 45% (Strategic Vision)
Pennsylvania: Bush 47%, Kerry 44% (Quinnipiac)
And: CNN Headline: Michigan Too Close To Call Data: Kerry up 50 – 44% Huh? http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/14/michigan.poll/index.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: Deterioration. I know I’ve used such words before, but all accounts now portray the security as steadily worsening. Samples:
NY Times front page: Pessimism, deep pessimism. As the Times notes, in sharp contrast to public presentations, it’s been widely known/shared that everyone is fearful as to what’s happened in recent months and no one has answers.
A classified National Intelligence Estimate prepared for President Bush in late July spells out a dark assessment of prospects for Iraq, government officials said Wednesday.
The estimate outlines three possibilities for Iraq through the end of 2005, with the worst case being developments that could lead to civil war, the officials said. The most favorable outcome described is an Iraq whose stability would remain tenuous in political, economic and security terms.
"There's a significant amount of pessimism," said one government official who has read the document, which runs about 50 pages. The officials declined to discuss the key judgments - concise, carefully written statements of intelligence analysts' conclusions - included in the document.
The intelligence estimate, the first on Iraq since October 2002, was prepared by the National Intelligence Council and was approved by the National Foreign Intelligence Board under John E. McLaughlin, the acting director of central intelligence. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/16/politics/16intel.html?pagewanted=print&position
Or, as foreign observers note,
TWO months ago, amid the kind of secrecy more normally associated with Saddam’s illicit arms deals, the US authorities in Baghdad formally handed over power to the fledgling Iraqi government. The ceremony, amid the formidable security of the Green Zone, was done two days ahead of schedule in a bid to wrongfoot insurgents - for whom, it was claimed, it would provide the key rallying moment for a final, last-gasp offensive. Today, with both Ayad Allawi's new government and its coalition backers losing control of the country, it is hard to imagine why anybody bothered with such constitutional conjuring. No force ever attacks when its foes expect it to: instead, as yesterday’s carnage and that of recent weeks shows, the real post-hand-over violence is only truly under way now. http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1080302004
Sid Blumenthal in the Guardian
But, according to the US military's leading strategists and prominent retired generals, Bush's war is already lost. Retired general William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse, he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He adds: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving Bin Laden's ends."
Retired general Joseph Hoare, the former marine commandant and head of US Central Command, told me: "The idea that this is going to go the way these guys planned is ludicrous. There are no good options. We're conducting a campaign as though it were being conducted in Iowa, no sense of the realities on the ground. It's so unrealistic for anyone who knows that part of the world. The priorities are just all wrong."
Jeffrey Record, professor of strategy at the Air War College, said: "I see no ray of light on the horizon at all. The worst case has become true. There's no analogy whatsoever between the situation in Iraq and the advantages we had after the second world war in Germany and Japan." http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5016994-103677,00.html
Or, note this LA Times letter-to-the-Editor:
Re "Violence Escalates Across Iraq," Sept. 13: I have one question. If Iraqis were unhappy with Saddam Hussein, why didn't we see this level of resistance when he was in power? -Frederick Cleveland, Hollywood
Or, Recruitment Problems:
Soldiers say they were told to re-enlist or face deployment to Iraq
Soldiers from a Fort Carson combat unit say they have been issued an ultimatum - re-enlist for three more years or be transferred to other units expected to deploy to Iraq.
Hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team were presented with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies last Thursday, said two soldiers who spoke on condition of anonymity. http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3185596,00.html
As Josh Marshall observes, “Iraq” remains ever-present, but now only as a rhetorical fixture, not a reality. It’s Iraq as a metaphor for toughness, Iraq as a test of consistency, Iraq as a platform for discussing who likes Saddam more and all the rest. But the actual Iraq war is nowhere to be found. http://www.thehill.com/marshall/091604.aspx
Lies: All they can do is spin lies. Here’s a new one.
9/11 is to blame for all: So, the White House says that we’re short a million jobs because of the attack.: "We had an attack on 9/11 where we lost over a million jobs in just about 3 months." - Suzy DeFrancis, White House Deputy Assistant for Communications
Really? If you check the stats, the US Department of Labor notes 125,637 jobs lost as either direct or indirect effects of the attack. http://www.bls.gov/mls/mlsimpac.htm
-R
Overtime Rules:
A U.S. Senate committee voted on Wednesday to roll back the Bush administration's controversial new overtime regulations, which critics say will deprive an estimated 6 million workers of overtime pay.
The Republican-led Senate Appropriations Committee voted 16-13 to approve a Democratic amendment to repeal the regulations.
Two Republicans, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Colorado Sen. Ben Campbell, joined Democrats in supporting the amendment offered by Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat.
"The economic health of too many workers is at stake," Harkin said.
The amendment is attached to a larger funding bill for the departments of Labor, and Health and Human Services for fiscal 2005.
With Democrats hoping to make the regulations an issue in the Nov. 2 elections, the full House of Representatives approved a similar amendment in its version of the spending bill last week.
Republican leaders, however, are expected to try and eliminate the amendments when the two bills are reconciled in a Senate-House conference. That would repeat a strategy they used last year when they snuffed out an earlier attempt to derail the regulations, despite the fact that both the full House and Senate had voted to block the new rules.
The Bush administration began implementing the regulations last month -- a move welcomed by many corporations but bitterly opposed by organized labor.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6246842
Bush the Failure on the so-called War on Terror Still more evidence…
Three years after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency has fewer experienced case officers assigned to its headquarters unit dealing with Osama bin Laden than it did at the time of the attacks, despite repeated pleas from the unit's leaders for reinforcements, a senior C.I.A. officer with extensive counterterrorism experience has told Congress. The bin Laden unit is stretched so thin that it relies on inexperienced officers rotated in and out every 60 to 90 days, and they leave before they know enough to be able to perform any meaningful work, according to a letter the C.I.A. officer has written to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/15cia.html?pagewanted=all
The Kerry Campaign: Too early for post mortems. But, despsite the stronger voice- today as to hiding truths about Iraq- many remain concerned. Tony Coelho, veteran Democratic operative talks of a “civil war going on” in the campaign between Cahill and Shrum, that “there is nobody in charge”, that the duo don’t talk to one another. Gads.
Meanwhile,
Maureen Dowd mainstreams paranoia
As per my noting last time that someone emailed news media while the CBS report was airing that the documents had problems.
There's no evidence - it's just a preposterous, paranoid fantasy at this point. But it speaks to the jitters of the Democrats that they're consumed with speculation about whether Karl Rove, the master of dirty tricks and surrogate sleaze, could have set up CBS in a diabolical pre-emptive strike to undermine damaging revelations about Bush 43's privileged status and vanishing act in the National Guard, and his odd refusal to take his required physical when ordered.
In this vast left-wing conspiracy theory, Mr. Rove takes real evidence on W.'s shirking and transfers it to documents doomed to be exposed as phony (thereby undermining the real goods), then funnels it through third parties to Dan Rather, Bush 41's nemesis on Iran-contra. A perfect bank shot. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/16/opinion/16dowd.html?hp
Competence: Bi-partisan fury re the Occupation
U.S. Lawmakers blasted the Bush administration Wednesday for its handling of the war in Iraq and said they were confounded only a fraction of $18.4 billion in U.S. rebuilding funds had been spent.
In an unusually nonpartisan hearing, Republican and Democratic senators urged senior State Department officials to try harder to speed up the reconstruction program, which lawmakers said could lead to a more stable environment in Iraq.
They also told officials to be more honest in their assessments of what was going on, with Indiana Republican Sen. Dick Lugar taking aim at what he called the "dancing in the street crowd," who painted an overly positive picture.
"The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning (for Iraq) is apparent," said Lugar, chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6246311
Kuttner on Kerry: It’s getting late. Well said
So what on earth is John Kerry to do? He cannot possibly win a hearing to challenge all that is fake about Bush and his policy particulars unless he first changes the frame. First, he needs to reframe Bush by pounding on all the ways that Bush is a fraud, and he needs to do it with grace and wit. Second, he needs a clear, simple vision of a secure, prosperous America more compelling than Bush's vision.
If Kerry doesn't have the nerve to take on Bush, voters will conclude that he lacks the nerve to protect America. Kerry has about two weeks to break the frame before the election freezes into a lock. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/09/15/kerry_must_reframe_bush____and_fast?mode=PF
Perspective: An Honorable Discharge Means? The White House keeps citing the fact that Bush was honorably discharged. Well…
The Washington Sniper, John Allen Muhammed, received an “Honorable Discharge” from the service in spite of the fact that he was tried and convicted in a court martial on one count of failing to report to his duty station on time, three counts of willfully disobeying an order, one count of striking a noncommissioned officer, one count of wrongfully taking property and one count of being AWOL. It would seem that getting an “honorable discharge” is a very low standard to meet. http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/10/24/muhammad.profile
Polls: So many. Upshot: It’s still close.
*ICR Presidential Tracking Poll:Bush leads Kerry 48% to *44%.Economist poll Bush clings to a small lead over Kerry, 47% to 46%.
*New Democrat Network finds Bush leading Sen. John Kerry, 49% to 45%,
*Harris Interactive poll shows Kerry leading Bush 48% to 47% among likely voters.
And, "The poll also found that a slender 51% to 45% majority doesn't believe that Mr. Bush deserves to be re-elected."
*The Pew Survey also found a deadlock
State polls:
Minnesota: Kerry 50%, Bush 41% (Minneapolis Star Tribune)
Michigan: Kerry 50%, Bush 44% (Gallup)
Florida: Bush 51%, Kerry 45% (Survey USA)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 47% (Rasmussen)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 44% (Strategic Vision)
Nevada: Bush 51%, Kerry 47% (Survey USA)
South Dakota: Bush 51%, Kerry 41
Wisconsin CNN/USA Today Gallup Poll. Bush 50 (46) Kerry 45 (49) Minnesota: Bush 46%, Kerry 45% (Mason-Dixon)
Minnesota: Kerry 49%, Bush 45% (Strategic Vision)
Pennsylvania: Bush 47%, Kerry 44% (Quinnipiac)
And: CNN Headline: Michigan Too Close To Call Data: Kerry up 50 – 44% Huh? http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/14/michigan.poll/index.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: Deterioration. I know I’ve used such words before, but all accounts now portray the security as steadily worsening. Samples:
NY Times front page: Pessimism, deep pessimism. As the Times notes, in sharp contrast to public presentations, it’s been widely known/shared that everyone is fearful as to what’s happened in recent months and no one has answers.
A classified National Intelligence Estimate prepared for President Bush in late July spells out a dark assessment of prospects for Iraq, government officials said Wednesday.
The estimate outlines three possibilities for Iraq through the end of 2005, with the worst case being developments that could lead to civil war, the officials said. The most favorable outcome described is an Iraq whose stability would remain tenuous in political, economic and security terms.
"There's a significant amount of pessimism," said one government official who has read the document, which runs about 50 pages. The officials declined to discuss the key judgments - concise, carefully written statements of intelligence analysts' conclusions - included in the document.
The intelligence estimate, the first on Iraq since October 2002, was prepared by the National Intelligence Council and was approved by the National Foreign Intelligence Board under John E. McLaughlin, the acting director of central intelligence. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/16/politics/16intel.html?pagewanted=print&position
Or, as foreign observers note,
TWO months ago, amid the kind of secrecy more normally associated with Saddam’s illicit arms deals, the US authorities in Baghdad formally handed over power to the fledgling Iraqi government. The ceremony, amid the formidable security of the Green Zone, was done two days ahead of schedule in a bid to wrongfoot insurgents - for whom, it was claimed, it would provide the key rallying moment for a final, last-gasp offensive. Today, with both Ayad Allawi's new government and its coalition backers losing control of the country, it is hard to imagine why anybody bothered with such constitutional conjuring. No force ever attacks when its foes expect it to: instead, as yesterday’s carnage and that of recent weeks shows, the real post-hand-over violence is only truly under way now. http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1080302004
Sid Blumenthal in the Guardian
But, according to the US military's leading strategists and prominent retired generals, Bush's war is already lost. Retired general William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse, he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He adds: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving Bin Laden's ends."
Retired general Joseph Hoare, the former marine commandant and head of US Central Command, told me: "The idea that this is going to go the way these guys planned is ludicrous. There are no good options. We're conducting a campaign as though it were being conducted in Iowa, no sense of the realities on the ground. It's so unrealistic for anyone who knows that part of the world. The priorities are just all wrong."
Jeffrey Record, professor of strategy at the Air War College, said: "I see no ray of light on the horizon at all. The worst case has become true. There's no analogy whatsoever between the situation in Iraq and the advantages we had after the second world war in Germany and Japan." http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5016994-103677,00.html
Or, note this LA Times letter-to-the-Editor:
Re "Violence Escalates Across Iraq," Sept. 13: I have one question. If Iraqis were unhappy with Saddam Hussein, why didn't we see this level of resistance when he was in power? -Frederick Cleveland, Hollywood
Or, Recruitment Problems:
Soldiers say they were told to re-enlist or face deployment to Iraq
Soldiers from a Fort Carson combat unit say they have been issued an ultimatum - re-enlist for three more years or be transferred to other units expected to deploy to Iraq.
Hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team were presented with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies last Thursday, said two soldiers who spoke on condition of anonymity. http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3185596,00.html
As Josh Marshall observes, “Iraq” remains ever-present, but now only as a rhetorical fixture, not a reality. It’s Iraq as a metaphor for toughness, Iraq as a test of consistency, Iraq as a platform for discussing who likes Saddam more and all the rest. But the actual Iraq war is nowhere to be found. http://www.thehill.com/marshall/091604.aspx
Lies: All they can do is spin lies. Here’s a new one.
9/11 is to blame for all: So, the White House says that we’re short a million jobs because of the attack.: "We had an attack on 9/11 where we lost over a million jobs in just about 3 months." - Suzy DeFrancis, White House Deputy Assistant for Communications
Really? If you check the stats, the US Department of Labor notes 125,637 jobs lost as either direct or indirect effects of the attack. http://www.bls.gov/mls/mlsimpac.htm
-R
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go to war. -Bush
Underemphasized Fact of the Week: The Bush disappearance from his National Guard duty back in ’72 just happened to coincide with the beginning of random drug testing.
Kerry, Edwards and Daschle May Face Vote on Flag
Good, disgusting politics at work.
For some Republicans it is the perfect political storm: a Senate vote on a constitutional amendment to protect the U.S. flag that would put Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry, running mate John Edwards and Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle on the spot just a few weeks before the Nov. 2 elections.
The Senate GOP leadership has not scheduled a vote on the proposed amendment, but Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) noted last week that it is a high priority for veterans groups. Other Republicans say a vote is likely before the Senate's Oct. 8 target date for adjournment.
As senators, Kerry (Mass.), Edwards (N.C.) and Daschle (S.D.) have voted against the amendment and are described by colleagues as still opposed to it. But Kerry and Edwards, who rarely leave the campaign trail for Senate votes, are not expected to show up for the flag debate unless it appears their votes would be decisive. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16779-2004Sep12.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: Getting worse. Terrible casualties, 70% without electricity, etc.
Rare media acknowledgment:
American forces appear to be facing a guerrilla insurgency that is more sophisticated and more widespread than ever before. Last month, attacks on American forces reached their highest level since the war began, an average of 87 per day.
In an appearance on Sunday on the NBC News program "Meet The Press," Secretary of State Colin L. Powell acknowledged that the United States faced a "difficult time" in Iraq but had a plan to "bring it under control" before nationwide elections scheduled for January. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/13/international/middleeast/13iraq.html
First-hand account of U.S. Helicopter attack: Columnist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad, who was injured in the attack, describes the carnage. Helicopters returned to blow up a disabled U.S. vehicle and inflicted numerous civilian casualties. Painful account, so, only a tiny amount provided.
More kids ventured into the street, looking with curiosity at the dead and injured. Then someone shouted "Helicopters!" and we ran. I turned and saw two small helicopters, black and evil. Frightened, I ran back to my shelter where I heard two more big explosions. At the end of the street the man in the orange overall was still sweeping the street.
The man with the bent knee was unconscious now, his face flat on the curb. Some kids came and said, "He is dead." I screamed at them. "Don't say that! He is still alive! Don't scare him." I asked him if he was OK, but he didn't reply.
We left the kids behind the bent-knee guy, the cellphone guy and the blue V-neck T-shirt guy; they were all unconscious now. We left them to die there alone. I didn't even try to move any with me. I just ran selfishly away. I reached a building entrance when someone grabbed my arm and took me inside. "There's an injured man. Take pictures - show the world the American democracy," he said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1303827,00.html
And the incompetence. Revealing article in the WaPost describes how the White House overrode the military commanders, ordering attacks in Fallujah then compounded their mistake by ordering a premature (pre-“success”) halt. Mind-boggling.
Still another winner for the Kerry campaign, but not to assume that they’ll use it.
White House first ordered the assault on the city (in response to the killing and mutilation of four US military contractors) over the advice of the commanders on the ground. Then, again over the advice of those same commanders, they ordered the end of the assault before the mission had been accomplished. The outgoing U.S. Marine Corps general in charge of western Iraq said Sunday he opposed a Marine assault on militants in the volatile city of Fallujah in April and the subsequent decision to withdraw from the city and turn over control to a security force of former Iraqi soldiers.
That security force, known as the Fallujah Brigade, was formally disbanded last week. Not only did the brigade fail to combat militants, it actively aided them, surrendering weapons, vehicles and radios to the insurgents, according to senior Marine officers. Some brigade members even participated in attacks on Marines ringing the city, the officers said.
The comments by Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, made shortly after he relinquished command of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force on Sunday, amounted to a stinging broadside against top U.S. military and civilian leaders who ordered the Fallujah invasion and withdrawal. His statements also provided the most detailed explanation -- and justification -- of Marine actions in Fallujah this spring, which have been widely criticized for increasing insurgent activity in the city and turning it into a "no-go" zone for U.S. troops. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16309-2004Sep12?language=printer
Krugman to Kerry: Attack the Myth of Bush as Leader. Good advice for John:
If Senator John Kerry really has advisers telling him not to attack Mr. Bush on national security, he should dump them. When Dick Cheney is saying vote Bush or die, responding with speeches about jobs and health care doesn't cut it.
Mr. Kerry should counterattack by saying that Mr. Bush is endangering the nation by subordinating national security to politics...
The truth is that Mr. Bush, by politicizing the "war on terror," is putting America at risk. And Mr. Kerry has to say that. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/14/opinion/14krugman.html?hp
Cheney in Charge: ‘Circle the Wagons’. From Seymour Hersh’s book:
"In May of 2004, at the height of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, a senior political Republican Party operative was given the reassuring word that Vice President Dick Cheney had taken charge, with his usual directness. The operative learned that Cheney had telephoned Donald Rumsfeld with a simple message: No resignations. We're going to hunker down and tough it out. Cheney's concern was not national security. This was a political call--a reminder that the White House would seize control of every crisis that could affect the re-election of George Bush." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5981265/
More Hersh:
Equally secret interrogation centres would be set up in allied countries where harsh treatments were meted out, unconstrained by legal limits or public disclosure. The programme was hidden inside the defence department as an "unacknowledged" special-access programme (SAP), whose operational details were known only to a few in the Pentagon, the CIA and the White House.
The SAP owed its existence to Rumsfeld's desire to get the US special forces community into the business of what he called, in public and internal communications, "manhunts", and to his disdain for the Pentagon's senior generals. In the privacy of his office, Rumsfeld chafed over what he saw as the reluctance of the generals and admirals to act aggressively. Soon after September 11, he repeatedly made public his disdain for the Geneva convention. Complaints about the United States' treatment of prisoners, Rumsfeld said, in early 2002, amounted to "isolated pockets of international hyperventilation".
One of Rumsfeld's goals was bureaucratic: to give the civilian leadership in the Pentagon, and not the CIA, the lead in fighting terrorism. Throughout the existence of the SAP, which eventually came to Abu Ghraib prison, a former senior intelligence official told me, "There was a periodic briefing to the National Security Council [NSC] giving updates on results, but not on the methods." Did the White House ask about the process? The former officer said that he believed that they did, and that "they got the answers".
By the time of Rumsfeld's meeting with Rice, his SAP was in its third year of snatching or strong-arming suspected terrorists and questioning them in secret prison facilities in Singapore, Thailand and Pakistan, among other sites. The White House was fighting terror with terror. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5014360-111575,00.html
Hersh is being constantly interviewed. If you missed, just go to NPR and WBUR sites for interviews on Terry Gross and On Point.
More Prison Abuse Reported:
Allegations that American soldiers routinely tortured and maltreated detainees have emerged from a third Iraqi city, renewing fears that abuse similar to that inflicted in Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad has been systematic and widespread.
American soldiers in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul beat and stripped detainees, threatened sexual abuse and forced them to listen to loud western music, according to statements seen by the Guardian.
Lawyers investigating the claims have sent details to the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence and have demanded an inquiry. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1304042,00.html
Bush: Soft on “Terror”
Since this is a refrain of mine, I’m happy to see it in print. Here, Craig Unger addresses one aspect of this laxness, as he re-visits the Saudi issue. [The Administration spokespersons, including congressional allies keep putting out how North Korea, bin Laden et al want a Kerry victory. Kerry, thus far has been too ‘gentlemanly’ to deal with such accusations.]
Yet the truth is that Bush is actually soft on terror. When it comes to going after the men who were behind 9/11 and who continue to wage a jihad against the US, Bush has repeatedly turned a blind eye to the forces behind terrorism, shielded the people who funded al-Qaida, obstructed investigations and diverted resources from the battle against it.
One key reason is the Bush-Saudi relationship, the like of which is unprecedented in US politics. Even after the success of Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, the subject is largely taboo in the American media. Never before has a president of the US - much less two from the same family - had such close ties with another foreign power.
Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the US and a powerful member of the royal family, has been a close friend of George Bush Snr for more than 20 years. Nicknamed Bandar Bush, he drops by the Bush residences in Kennebunkport, Maine, and Crawford, Texas, not to mention the White House. He and Bush senior go on hunting trips together. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5013608-103677,00.html
Saudis Keep the Oil Coming: At least through November 2
Saudi Arabia sought to regain some control of oil markets Tuesday, promising to make available 800,000 barrels a day of new oil by the end of the month and to keep pumping crude vigorously.
Saudi officials also said they might support a move to raise the official oil output target of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries when the cartel meets here Wednesday. Such a move wouldn't likely result in more oil, but would signal that the cartel is uncomfortable with today's prices of more than $40 a barrel.
Saudi officials, who asked not to be named, added that they opposed a move to raise OPEC's target price of $25 a barrel for a basket of crude-oil types.
The push by OPEC's largest producer to calm markets comes amid supply constraints and rising demand that have left the cartel with virtually no spare oil-producing capacity, thus minimizing the Saudi's ability to sway markets and making oil prices vulnerable to sudden moves this year. That is in sharp contrast to the last several years, when under Saudi leadership, OPEC was able to keep the price of oil at just under $30 a barrel. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109518024258517457,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Attention Football Fans: Al Michaels, conservative shill
Mediamatters.org, the progressive monitoring group, looks at Al Michaels, announcer for Monday Night Football and his history of pro-Bush, anti-Kerry comments and actions, on the air and off. Rush Limbaugh praised the pair the next day on his radio program.
Last Thursday’s transcript:
Following two consecutive turnovers in the September 9 game, which took place in Foxboro, Massachusetts, Michaels and "expert analyst" John Madden had the following exchange:
MICHAELS: What a wacky series.
MADDEN: This is what you call a flip-flop.
MICHAELS: You're in the right state for that.
Additionally, the Center for Responsive Politics records show that Michaels contributed $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign in June 2003 and that Michaels “has a history of pro-conservative comments”, including praising Peggy Noonon, conservative columnist and Reagan speechwriter as someone who gave him “goose bumps. http://mediamatters.org/items/200409100009
Lawless Florida:
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader's name can appear on Florida ballots for the election, despite a court order to the contrary, Florida's elections chief told officials on Monday in a move that could help President Bush in the key swing state.
The Florida Democratic Party reacted with outrage, calling the move "blatant partisan maneuvering" by Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's younger brother, and vowed to fight it.
"I'm in disbelief," said Scott Maddox, chairman of the Florida Democratic Party. "This is blatant partisan maneuvering on the part of Jeb Bush to give his brother a leg up on election day."
"They are trying to get ballots printed with Nader's name on them," said Maddox. "I am astounded that Jeb Bush is willing to defy the judiciary to help his brother." http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278
Nader’s the Issue…that people can rally around Maybe they can also send a memo to Kerry on how to call Bush on his lies, his miserable role in the so-called ‘war on terror.’
Ralph Nader's bid for the presidency suffered a huge snub from the left Monday when more than 70 prominent supporters of his previous presidential campaign urged voters to swallow their doubts and vote for John Kerry.
They included such heroes of the intellectual left as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Cornel West, writers Barbara Ehrenreich and Studs Terkel, actors Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins, and musicians Jackson Browne and Bonnie Raitt.
They were aiming at voters in battleground states where Nader's candidacy is seen as a direct threat to Kerry.
"We urge support for Kerry-Edwards in all swing states, even while we strongly disagree with Kerry's policies on Iraq and other issues," they said. "For people seeking progressive social change in the United States, removing George W. Bush from office should be the top priority."
The statement was signed by 78 of the 113 prominent Americans who were personally recruited by Nader to endorse his candidacy in 2000. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/14/nader/print.html
Budget B.S.: Bush the Big Spender. And costs are hidden, of course.
The expansive agenda President Bush laid out at the Republican National Convention was missing a price tag, but administration figures show the total is likely to be well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade.
A staple of Bush's stump speech is his claim that his Democratic challenger, John F. Kerry, has proposed $2 trillion in long-term spending, a figure the Massachusetts senator's campaign calls exaggerated. But the cost of the new tax breaks and spending outlined by Bush at the GOP convention far eclipses that of the Kerry plan.
Bush's pledge to make permanent his tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of 2010 or before, would reduce government revenue by about $1 trillion over 10 years, according to administration estimates. His proposed changes in Social Security to allow younger workers to invest part of their payroll taxes in stocks and bonds could cost the government $2 trillion over the coming decade, according to the calculations of independent domestic policy experts. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18876-2004Sep13.html
Polls: Variability, but on average, some of the bounce definitely gone.
Investors Business Daily: Bush 47-46%, a dead heat.
AP/Ipsos: Bush "significantly ahead" of Kerry for the first time, 51% to 43%.
Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll Bush 47.1%, Kerry 46.5%. [This one is updated daily, and tracks Kerry slowly recovering from his lows just after the Republican Convention.]
State Polls: Kerry slippage
Pennsylvania: Bush 49%, Kerry 48% (Rasmussen)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 45% (Gallup)
Indiana: Bush 54%, Kerry 38% (Research 2000)
Alabama: Bush 54%, Kerry 34% (Capital Survey
In S. Dakota, Daschle is slipping, now a few points behind.
-R
Underemphasized Fact of the Week: The Bush disappearance from his National Guard duty back in ’72 just happened to coincide with the beginning of random drug testing.
Kerry, Edwards and Daschle May Face Vote on Flag
Good, disgusting politics at work.
For some Republicans it is the perfect political storm: a Senate vote on a constitutional amendment to protect the U.S. flag that would put Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry, running mate John Edwards and Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle on the spot just a few weeks before the Nov. 2 elections.
The Senate GOP leadership has not scheduled a vote on the proposed amendment, but Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) noted last week that it is a high priority for veterans groups. Other Republicans say a vote is likely before the Senate's Oct. 8 target date for adjournment.
As senators, Kerry (Mass.), Edwards (N.C.) and Daschle (S.D.) have voted against the amendment and are described by colleagues as still opposed to it. But Kerry and Edwards, who rarely leave the campaign trail for Senate votes, are not expected to show up for the flag debate unless it appears their votes would be decisive. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16779-2004Sep12.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: Getting worse. Terrible casualties, 70% without electricity, etc.
Rare media acknowledgment:
American forces appear to be facing a guerrilla insurgency that is more sophisticated and more widespread than ever before. Last month, attacks on American forces reached their highest level since the war began, an average of 87 per day.
In an appearance on Sunday on the NBC News program "Meet The Press," Secretary of State Colin L. Powell acknowledged that the United States faced a "difficult time" in Iraq but had a plan to "bring it under control" before nationwide elections scheduled for January. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/13/international/middleeast/13iraq.html
First-hand account of U.S. Helicopter attack: Columnist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad, who was injured in the attack, describes the carnage. Helicopters returned to blow up a disabled U.S. vehicle and inflicted numerous civilian casualties. Painful account, so, only a tiny amount provided.
More kids ventured into the street, looking with curiosity at the dead and injured. Then someone shouted "Helicopters!" and we ran. I turned and saw two small helicopters, black and evil. Frightened, I ran back to my shelter where I heard two more big explosions. At the end of the street the man in the orange overall was still sweeping the street.
The man with the bent knee was unconscious now, his face flat on the curb. Some kids came and said, "He is dead." I screamed at them. "Don't say that! He is still alive! Don't scare him." I asked him if he was OK, but he didn't reply.
We left the kids behind the bent-knee guy, the cellphone guy and the blue V-neck T-shirt guy; they were all unconscious now. We left them to die there alone. I didn't even try to move any with me. I just ran selfishly away. I reached a building entrance when someone grabbed my arm and took me inside. "There's an injured man. Take pictures - show the world the American democracy," he said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1303827,00.html
And the incompetence. Revealing article in the WaPost describes how the White House overrode the military commanders, ordering attacks in Fallujah then compounded their mistake by ordering a premature (pre-“success”) halt. Mind-boggling.
Still another winner for the Kerry campaign, but not to assume that they’ll use it.
White House first ordered the assault on the city (in response to the killing and mutilation of four US military contractors) over the advice of the commanders on the ground. Then, again over the advice of those same commanders, they ordered the end of the assault before the mission had been accomplished. The outgoing U.S. Marine Corps general in charge of western Iraq said Sunday he opposed a Marine assault on militants in the volatile city of Fallujah in April and the subsequent decision to withdraw from the city and turn over control to a security force of former Iraqi soldiers.
That security force, known as the Fallujah Brigade, was formally disbanded last week. Not only did the brigade fail to combat militants, it actively aided them, surrendering weapons, vehicles and radios to the insurgents, according to senior Marine officers. Some brigade members even participated in attacks on Marines ringing the city, the officers said.
The comments by Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, made shortly after he relinquished command of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force on Sunday, amounted to a stinging broadside against top U.S. military and civilian leaders who ordered the Fallujah invasion and withdrawal. His statements also provided the most detailed explanation -- and justification -- of Marine actions in Fallujah this spring, which have been widely criticized for increasing insurgent activity in the city and turning it into a "no-go" zone for U.S. troops. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16309-2004Sep12?language=printer
Krugman to Kerry: Attack the Myth of Bush as Leader. Good advice for John:
If Senator John Kerry really has advisers telling him not to attack Mr. Bush on national security, he should dump them. When Dick Cheney is saying vote Bush or die, responding with speeches about jobs and health care doesn't cut it.
Mr. Kerry should counterattack by saying that Mr. Bush is endangering the nation by subordinating national security to politics...
The truth is that Mr. Bush, by politicizing the "war on terror," is putting America at risk. And Mr. Kerry has to say that. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/14/opinion/14krugman.html?hp
Cheney in Charge: ‘Circle the Wagons’. From Seymour Hersh’s book:
"In May of 2004, at the height of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, a senior political Republican Party operative was given the reassuring word that Vice President Dick Cheney had taken charge, with his usual directness. The operative learned that Cheney had telephoned Donald Rumsfeld with a simple message: No resignations. We're going to hunker down and tough it out. Cheney's concern was not national security. This was a political call--a reminder that the White House would seize control of every crisis that could affect the re-election of George Bush." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5981265/
More Hersh:
Equally secret interrogation centres would be set up in allied countries where harsh treatments were meted out, unconstrained by legal limits or public disclosure. The programme was hidden inside the defence department as an "unacknowledged" special-access programme (SAP), whose operational details were known only to a few in the Pentagon, the CIA and the White House.
The SAP owed its existence to Rumsfeld's desire to get the US special forces community into the business of what he called, in public and internal communications, "manhunts", and to his disdain for the Pentagon's senior generals. In the privacy of his office, Rumsfeld chafed over what he saw as the reluctance of the generals and admirals to act aggressively. Soon after September 11, he repeatedly made public his disdain for the Geneva convention. Complaints about the United States' treatment of prisoners, Rumsfeld said, in early 2002, amounted to "isolated pockets of international hyperventilation".
One of Rumsfeld's goals was bureaucratic: to give the civilian leadership in the Pentagon, and not the CIA, the lead in fighting terrorism. Throughout the existence of the SAP, which eventually came to Abu Ghraib prison, a former senior intelligence official told me, "There was a periodic briefing to the National Security Council [NSC] giving updates on results, but not on the methods." Did the White House ask about the process? The former officer said that he believed that they did, and that "they got the answers".
By the time of Rumsfeld's meeting with Rice, his SAP was in its third year of snatching or strong-arming suspected terrorists and questioning them in secret prison facilities in Singapore, Thailand and Pakistan, among other sites. The White House was fighting terror with terror. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5014360-111575,00.html
Hersh is being constantly interviewed. If you missed, just go to NPR and WBUR sites for interviews on Terry Gross and On Point.
More Prison Abuse Reported:
Allegations that American soldiers routinely tortured and maltreated detainees have emerged from a third Iraqi city, renewing fears that abuse similar to that inflicted in Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad has been systematic and widespread.
American soldiers in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul beat and stripped detainees, threatened sexual abuse and forced them to listen to loud western music, according to statements seen by the Guardian.
Lawyers investigating the claims have sent details to the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence and have demanded an inquiry. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1304042,00.html
Bush: Soft on “Terror”
Since this is a refrain of mine, I’m happy to see it in print. Here, Craig Unger addresses one aspect of this laxness, as he re-visits the Saudi issue. [The Administration spokespersons, including congressional allies keep putting out how North Korea, bin Laden et al want a Kerry victory. Kerry, thus far has been too ‘gentlemanly’ to deal with such accusations.]
Yet the truth is that Bush is actually soft on terror. When it comes to going after the men who were behind 9/11 and who continue to wage a jihad against the US, Bush has repeatedly turned a blind eye to the forces behind terrorism, shielded the people who funded al-Qaida, obstructed investigations and diverted resources from the battle against it.
One key reason is the Bush-Saudi relationship, the like of which is unprecedented in US politics. Even after the success of Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, the subject is largely taboo in the American media. Never before has a president of the US - much less two from the same family - had such close ties with another foreign power.
Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the US and a powerful member of the royal family, has been a close friend of George Bush Snr for more than 20 years. Nicknamed Bandar Bush, he drops by the Bush residences in Kennebunkport, Maine, and Crawford, Texas, not to mention the White House. He and Bush senior go on hunting trips together. http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5013608-103677,00.html
Saudis Keep the Oil Coming: At least through November 2
Saudi Arabia sought to regain some control of oil markets Tuesday, promising to make available 800,000 barrels a day of new oil by the end of the month and to keep pumping crude vigorously.
Saudi officials also said they might support a move to raise the official oil output target of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries when the cartel meets here Wednesday. Such a move wouldn't likely result in more oil, but would signal that the cartel is uncomfortable with today's prices of more than $40 a barrel.
Saudi officials, who asked not to be named, added that they opposed a move to raise OPEC's target price of $25 a barrel for a basket of crude-oil types.
The push by OPEC's largest producer to calm markets comes amid supply constraints and rising demand that have left the cartel with virtually no spare oil-producing capacity, thus minimizing the Saudi's ability to sway markets and making oil prices vulnerable to sudden moves this year. That is in sharp contrast to the last several years, when under Saudi leadership, OPEC was able to keep the price of oil at just under $30 a barrel. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109518024258517457,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Attention Football Fans: Al Michaels, conservative shill
Mediamatters.org, the progressive monitoring group, looks at Al Michaels, announcer for Monday Night Football and his history of pro-Bush, anti-Kerry comments and actions, on the air and off. Rush Limbaugh praised the pair the next day on his radio program.
Last Thursday’s transcript:
Following two consecutive turnovers in the September 9 game, which took place in Foxboro, Massachusetts, Michaels and "expert analyst" John Madden had the following exchange:
MICHAELS: What a wacky series.
MADDEN: This is what you call a flip-flop.
MICHAELS: You're in the right state for that.
Additionally, the Center for Responsive Politics records show that Michaels contributed $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign in June 2003 and that Michaels “has a history of pro-conservative comments”, including praising Peggy Noonon, conservative columnist and Reagan speechwriter as someone who gave him “goose bumps. http://mediamatters.org/items/200409100009
Lawless Florida:
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader's name can appear on Florida ballots for the election, despite a court order to the contrary, Florida's elections chief told officials on Monday in a move that could help President Bush in the key swing state.
The Florida Democratic Party reacted with outrage, calling the move "blatant partisan maneuvering" by Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's younger brother, and vowed to fight it.
"I'm in disbelief," said Scott Maddox, chairman of the Florida Democratic Party. "This is blatant partisan maneuvering on the part of Jeb Bush to give his brother a leg up on election day."
"They are trying to get ballots printed with Nader's name on them," said Maddox. "I am astounded that Jeb Bush is willing to defy the judiciary to help his brother." http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278
Nader’s the Issue…that people can rally around Maybe they can also send a memo to Kerry on how to call Bush on his lies, his miserable role in the so-called ‘war on terror.’
Ralph Nader's bid for the presidency suffered a huge snub from the left Monday when more than 70 prominent supporters of his previous presidential campaign urged voters to swallow their doubts and vote for John Kerry.
They included such heroes of the intellectual left as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Cornel West, writers Barbara Ehrenreich and Studs Terkel, actors Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins, and musicians Jackson Browne and Bonnie Raitt.
They were aiming at voters in battleground states where Nader's candidacy is seen as a direct threat to Kerry.
"We urge support for Kerry-Edwards in all swing states, even while we strongly disagree with Kerry's policies on Iraq and other issues," they said. "For people seeking progressive social change in the United States, removing George W. Bush from office should be the top priority."
The statement was signed by 78 of the 113 prominent Americans who were personally recruited by Nader to endorse his candidacy in 2000. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/14/nader/print.html
Budget B.S.: Bush the Big Spender. And costs are hidden, of course.
The expansive agenda President Bush laid out at the Republican National Convention was missing a price tag, but administration figures show the total is likely to be well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade.
A staple of Bush's stump speech is his claim that his Democratic challenger, John F. Kerry, has proposed $2 trillion in long-term spending, a figure the Massachusetts senator's campaign calls exaggerated. But the cost of the new tax breaks and spending outlined by Bush at the GOP convention far eclipses that of the Kerry plan.
Bush's pledge to make permanent his tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of 2010 or before, would reduce government revenue by about $1 trillion over 10 years, according to administration estimates. His proposed changes in Social Security to allow younger workers to invest part of their payroll taxes in stocks and bonds could cost the government $2 trillion over the coming decade, according to the calculations of independent domestic policy experts. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18876-2004Sep13.html
Polls: Variability, but on average, some of the bounce definitely gone.
Investors Business Daily: Bush 47-46%, a dead heat.
AP/Ipsos: Bush "significantly ahead" of Kerry for the first time, 51% to 43%.
Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll Bush 47.1%, Kerry 46.5%. [This one is updated daily, and tracks Kerry slowly recovering from his lows just after the Republican Convention.]
State Polls: Kerry slippage
Pennsylvania: Bush 49%, Kerry 48% (Rasmussen)
Wisconsin: Bush 49%, Kerry 45% (Gallup)
Indiana: Bush 54%, Kerry 38% (Research 2000)
Alabama: Bush 54%, Kerry 34% (Capital Survey
In S. Dakota, Daschle is slipping, now a few points behind.
-R
Sunday, September 12, 2004
War on Terror: Assessments:
According to recent articles, they’ve re-organized, bin Laden and others have made their headquarters in Afghanistan (this sounds familiar…) and they’re biding their time for key moments. 3 takes from stellar thinkers.
Syed Saleem Shahzad (Asia Times)
Since the disintegration of the Taliban regime at the end of 2001, the Afghan resistance has endured, managing, if nothing else, to keep US-led occupying forces and the Afghan National Army engaged in small pockets. But much bigger things are planned.
You take a ride to Chaman and you will find black and white turbans everywhere, a sort of propaganda tactic to show their strength. Just go to a football stadium in the evening and you will find hundreds of black turbans, a hallmark of the Taliban," Malik Nabi adds. Nowadays, as far as the Taliban are concerned, there are two types of Taliban: those who are on the frontline battlefields, and those who are waiting for a call to become cannon fodder once the word goes out for a mass mobilization. As far as al-Qaeda is concerned, a new, dispersed, generation of cells are involved in plotting attacks worldwide. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/FI11Ag01.html
Pepe Escobar (Asia Times)
Three years after September 11, President George W Bush's crusade is a failure. "War on terror" is a meaningless myth: you can't combat a supple attack machine like al-Qaeda with shock and awe. What should have been a long, meticulous police operation was turned by Bush - instigated by his foreign policy adviser, God - into an illegal, preemptive attack on a nation that had nothing to do with terror. This policy has actually increased terror attacks around the world. Last year in Cairo, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Sheikh Yamani, a man who knows one or two things about Arabs, violence and oil, said the invasion would produce "one hundred bin Ladens". They are here, and they have no one else but Bush to thank.
The bottom line: since Bush proclaimed his "crusade" or mission from God against terror, the United States, the Middle East and the world are immensely less safe. Bush-Cheney '04 are afraid US voters will start making these connections as the November elections draw closer. For the apocalyptic Cheney - as on the campaign trail in Iowa - there's nothing left but the language of fear:
Al-Qaeda subscribes to no political strategy, other than the strategy of total opportunism: as any kind of attack can happen any time, anywhere, it rules by fear - while at the same time demonstrating it is immune to any large-scale US war, from Afghanistan to Iraq. The rule-by-fear tactic also serves the Bush administration well, as fear is constantly used as a powerful political argument to justify the administration's policies ("Be afraid, be very much afraid, but you can count on us to protect you"). Unlike the Bush administration's spin, European intelligence experts in Brussels assured Asia Times Online that the Madrid bombing was only accidentally tied to Spain's national elections. It was not the case that "Spaniards had bowed to terror" (Washington's version), but that Bush ally Jose Maria Aznar's conservative government was mendacious enough to lie to the country, blaming Basque separatists when it already had evidence to the contrary.
As nihilistic as it may be, al-Qaeda, from a business point of view, is a major success: three years after September 11, it is a global brand and a global movement. The Middle East, in this scenario, is just a regional base station. This global brand does not have much to do with Islam. But it has everything to do with the globalization of anti-imperialism. And the empire, whatever its definition, has its center in Washington. Bin Laden is laughing: Bush's crusade has legitimized an obscure sect as a worldwide symbol of political revolt. How could bin Laden not vote for Bush? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI11Ak03.html
Juan Cole:
Bin Laden's dream of a united Muslim state under a revived caliphate may well be impossible to accomplish. But with the secular Baath gone, it could be one step closer to reality. If you add to the equation the generalized hatred for US policies (both against the Palestinians and in Iraq) among Muslims, that is a major step forward for al-Qaeda. In Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda has emerged as a dissident political party. Before it had just been a small group of Bin Laden's personal acolytes in Afghanistan and a handful of other countries.Although the United States and its Pakistani ally have captured significant numbers of al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a whole new generation of angry young Muslim men has been produced. Al-Qaeda has moved from being a concrete cell-based terrorist organization to being an ideal and a model, for small local groups in Casablanca, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and elsewhere.The US is not winning the war on terror. Al-Qaeda also has by no means won. But across a whole range of objectives, al-Qaeda has accomplished more of its goals than the US has of its.
http://www.juancole.com/2004_09_01_juancole_archive.html#109487993311862124
Good Terrorists: Welcome to the US of A!
A little-noticed but chilling scene at Opa-locka Airport outside Miami last month demonstrates that the Bush administration's commitment to fighting international terrorism can be overtaken by presidential politics — even if that means admitting known terrorists onto U.S. soil.That's what happened when outgoing Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso inexplicably pardoned four Cuban exiles convicted of "endangering public safety" for their role in an assassination plot against Fidel Castro during a 2000 international summit in Panama.After their release, three of the four immediately flew via private jet to Miami, where they were greeted with a cheering fiesta organized by the hard-line anti-Castro community. Federal officials briefly interviewed the pardoned men — all holders of U.S. passports — and then let them go their way.The fourth man, Luis Posada Carriles, was the most notorious member of this anti-Castro cell. He is an escapee from a prison in Venezuela, where he was incarcerated for blowing up an Air Cubana passenger plane in 1976, killing 73. He also admitted plotting six hotel bombings in Havana that killed one tourist and injured 11 others in 1997. Posada has gone into hiding in Honduras while seeking a Central American country that will harbor him, prompting Honduran President Ricardo Maduro to demand an explanation from the Bush administration on how a renowned terrorist could enter his country using a false U.S. passport. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-op-sweig12sep12,1,3912945,print.story
Seymour Hersh: Abu Ghraib’s roots
He’s doing his part to connect the dots.
Mr. Hersh's thesis is that "the roots of the Abu Ghraib scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists" who have been charged so far, "but in the reliance of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld on secret operations and the use of coercion - and eye-for-eye retribution - in fighting terrorism."
In particular, Mr. Hersh has reported that a secret program to capture and interrogate terrorists led to the abuse of prisoners. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/international/middleeast/12abuse.html
ELECTION
Democrat’s Aides Agree on Need to React Strongly but Not on How
Still? Awfully disturbing. The story behind the NY Times headline:
As a first step, the Kerry campaign this week dispatched the Democratic National Committee to go after Mr. Bush on his military record, and to begin criticizing Mr. Bush as a liar and a sheltered "son of privilege" who used connections to avoid combat in his youth and was out of touch with ordinary Americans.
Officials said these attacks were being made through the party and not the campaign to provide a measure of distance from Mr. Kerry, who is described by many officials as reluctant himself to impugn the president's character.
Now, the more difficult question, officials say, is just how the Kerry campaign - even if Mr. Kerry does not take part directly - should go after Mr. Bush. Some of Mr. Kerry's closest friends and longtime political operatives from Boston, who have now set up shop at Democratic headquarters in Washington, are pressing for more, saying the campaign and the candidate must go on the offensive, to restore Mr. Kerry's own character as a political asset and to hold Mr. Bush accountable for attacks on Mr. Kerry.
These friends and former aides, led by David Thorne, a Yale classmate, fellow Navy veteran and brother of Mr. Kerry's first wife, are agitating for the candidate himself to answer what they called the character-assassination attacks of people like Vice President Cheney and members of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They are pushing for Mr. Kerry to make a dramatic statement of his own to settle voters' doubts about Mr. Kerry's Vietnam War period.
Officials in the campaign, however, including both longstanding consultants like Bob Shrum and new additions like Joe Lockhart and other veterans of the Clinton administration, have balked at such a move, saying it could be a disaster and alienate too many swing voters who would view such an approach as mean-spirited. They said Mr. Kerry would do better to concentrate on issues where he outperforms Mr. Bush in polls, like jobs and health care.
A critical concern, several campaign officials said, is that polls have already shown Mr. Kerry's negative ratings rising recently, making it an exceptionally dangerous moment for him to attack Mr. Bush personally, since voters typically react with disapproval when candidates do so. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/11/politics/campaign/11campaign.html?hp
Post-Election: Todd Gitlin prepares for defeat, urges organizing.
They should, like the Republican Party after the Goldwater cataclysm of 1964, sigh, shudder, mourn--and organize. They'll pick themselves up and get back to work building their start-up think tanks and media and Internet networks, from the Center for American Progress through Air America Radio through MoveOn.org and various 527 soft money distributors, all of which, despite starting late, made up for a good deal of Democratic organizational weakness in 2004.
That is, if they're smart. The post-Goldwater Republicans were smart. Despite what looked like a calamity, they didn't bolt from the GOP. They didn't break off as a third party, though some of them dearly wanted to. Will the rebellious left discipline itself, cool its boiling blood, and decide that the pleasures of sectarianism are worth less than the steady resolve of infrastructural work? http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.gitlin.html
Those Bush Crowds: More Spin
This is the time in the political calendar when soothsayers point to the size of crowds at rallies to see which candidate is producing more enthusiasm. The campaigns, well aware of this practice, can't resist putting their thumbs on the scale.
On Tuesday, correspondents from The Washington Post and the Washington Times counted the crowds at President Bush's three stops in Missouri, then compared the actual figure with the official Bush campaign figure:
It seems that the Bush campaign is inflating its crowd counts by 45 to 75 percent. Some of this may be the result of people walking through metal detectors more than once, but there's clearly some old-fashioned crowd padding going on. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6628-2004Sep8.html
Fading Import of Network News: Tom Rosenstiel in the WaPost
Network news was built around the carefully written and edited story, produced by correspondents and vetted in advance to match words and pictures. On the network evening newscasts, 84 percent of the time is taken up by such packages, according to content analysis by the Project for Excellence in Journalism's annual State of the News Media study.
Cable news is a live and extemporaneous medium built around talk. Only 11 percent of the time is devoted to edited stories. Eighty percent is given over to in-studio interviews, studio banter, "anchor reads" and live reporter stand-ups, in which correspondents talk off the top of their heads or from hasty notes.
What is lost in the cable obsession with "live" is the chance to double-check, to rewrite, to edit -- and often to even report. What is lost with the passing of network TV, in other words, is the journalism of verification. It is gradually yielding place to a journalism of assertion. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13017-2004Sep10.html
Flashback: 1988
Remember when Bush Sr.’s co-chair John Sununu went on national television to attack Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX) claiming Bentsen had improperly helped get his son into the Texas National Guard during Vietnam. Bentsen's son just happened to serve in the very same National Guard unit at the very same time as George W. Bush. That same week, the Bush campaign had attacked Dukakis for receiving a draft deferment during the Korean War.
Typewritergate: While we await Kerry turning it up a few notches...
The fuss about the authenticity of the CBS-secured documents has overshadowed the Globe’s story re Bush not showing up in Massachusetts; it hasn’t been challenged. And no one is talking about how the challenge to the CBS story began with an email that was dispatched while the program was still on the air. How did anyone decipher from the program’s stills that the type might not be from that era?
CBS stands firm:
After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.
But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/11/authenticity_backed_on_bush_documents?mode=PF
Dan Payne in the Globe: The Democrat consultant weighs in: He has advice for Kerry, but also addresses 9/11 more than Kerry does…and must.
A "catastrophe" is how national security professionals describe Bush administration's response to 9/11 in James Fallows's piece in current Atlantic. Bush ignored clear warnings from outgoing Clinton officials that terrorism was serious threat. Ignored Aug. 6, 2001 briefing paper, "Osama bin Laden Determined To Strike inside US." On 9/11, when told "America is under attack," Bush froze in Florida classroom for seven long minutes reading "My Pet Goat."
Bush's anti-terrorism plan is simple: Kill Iraqis. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but Bush knew most Americans felt someone had to pay for it. We don't like Saddam, let's blame him. Kerry needs anti-terrorism proposal. Thanks in large part to Bush, most of world's one billion Muslims now hate us. Senseless slaughter in Beslan, Russia, makes global anti-terror action urgent. Kerry's Grand Canyon doctrine of no regrets for voting to let Bush invade Iraq has got to go. Saying Iraq is "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" is first step. But Kerry has to oppose Iraq war. Forget flip-flop charge. Supporting unjustifiable war that's killed 1,000 Americans and 12 to 15,000 Iraqis is worse. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/09/11/bush_shamefully_exploits_tragedy?mode=PF
Polls: Time now an outlier; range is 3 – 6 points. Bush Bounce fading?
Time: Bush 50%, Kerry 39%
Newsweek: Bush 49%, Kerry 43%
Democracy Corps: Bush leading Kerry 48% to 45%.
Associated Press Poll: Bush leading Kerry 51% to 46%.
Zogby: Bush leading Kerry 46% to 42%.
Electoral Vote tallies (270 needed to win):
Electoral Vote Predictor: Kerry 273, Bush 233
Intrade State Futures: Bush 274, Kerry 254
state polls:
Pennsylvania: Kerry 49%, Bush 47% (Survey USA)
Missouri: Bush 48%, Kerry 46% (Survey USA)
Kansas: Bush 60%, Kerry 35% (Survey USA)
Indiana: Bush 60%, Kerry 36% (Survey USA)
Kentucky: Bush 56%, Kerry 39% (Survey USA)
North Carolina: Bush 55%, Kerry 42% (Rasmussen)
-R
According to recent articles, they’ve re-organized, bin Laden and others have made their headquarters in Afghanistan (this sounds familiar…) and they’re biding their time for key moments. 3 takes from stellar thinkers.
Syed Saleem Shahzad (Asia Times)
Since the disintegration of the Taliban regime at the end of 2001, the Afghan resistance has endured, managing, if nothing else, to keep US-led occupying forces and the Afghan National Army engaged in small pockets. But much bigger things are planned.
You take a ride to Chaman and you will find black and white turbans everywhere, a sort of propaganda tactic to show their strength. Just go to a football stadium in the evening and you will find hundreds of black turbans, a hallmark of the Taliban," Malik Nabi adds. Nowadays, as far as the Taliban are concerned, there are two types of Taliban: those who are on the frontline battlefields, and those who are waiting for a call to become cannon fodder once the word goes out for a mass mobilization. As far as al-Qaeda is concerned, a new, dispersed, generation of cells are involved in plotting attacks worldwide. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/FI11Ag01.html
Pepe Escobar (Asia Times)
Three years after September 11, President George W Bush's crusade is a failure. "War on terror" is a meaningless myth: you can't combat a supple attack machine like al-Qaeda with shock and awe. What should have been a long, meticulous police operation was turned by Bush - instigated by his foreign policy adviser, God - into an illegal, preemptive attack on a nation that had nothing to do with terror. This policy has actually increased terror attacks around the world. Last year in Cairo, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Sheikh Yamani, a man who knows one or two things about Arabs, violence and oil, said the invasion would produce "one hundred bin Ladens". They are here, and they have no one else but Bush to thank.
The bottom line: since Bush proclaimed his "crusade" or mission from God against terror, the United States, the Middle East and the world are immensely less safe. Bush-Cheney '04 are afraid US voters will start making these connections as the November elections draw closer. For the apocalyptic Cheney - as on the campaign trail in Iowa - there's nothing left but the language of fear:
Al-Qaeda subscribes to no political strategy, other than the strategy of total opportunism: as any kind of attack can happen any time, anywhere, it rules by fear - while at the same time demonstrating it is immune to any large-scale US war, from Afghanistan to Iraq. The rule-by-fear tactic also serves the Bush administration well, as fear is constantly used as a powerful political argument to justify the administration's policies ("Be afraid, be very much afraid, but you can count on us to protect you"). Unlike the Bush administration's spin, European intelligence experts in Brussels assured Asia Times Online that the Madrid bombing was only accidentally tied to Spain's national elections. It was not the case that "Spaniards had bowed to terror" (Washington's version), but that Bush ally Jose Maria Aznar's conservative government was mendacious enough to lie to the country, blaming Basque separatists when it already had evidence to the contrary.
As nihilistic as it may be, al-Qaeda, from a business point of view, is a major success: three years after September 11, it is a global brand and a global movement. The Middle East, in this scenario, is just a regional base station. This global brand does not have much to do with Islam. But it has everything to do with the globalization of anti-imperialism. And the empire, whatever its definition, has its center in Washington. Bin Laden is laughing: Bush's crusade has legitimized an obscure sect as a worldwide symbol of political revolt. How could bin Laden not vote for Bush? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI11Ak03.html
Juan Cole:
Bin Laden's dream of a united Muslim state under a revived caliphate may well be impossible to accomplish. But with the secular Baath gone, it could be one step closer to reality. If you add to the equation the generalized hatred for US policies (both against the Palestinians and in Iraq) among Muslims, that is a major step forward for al-Qaeda. In Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda has emerged as a dissident political party. Before it had just been a small group of Bin Laden's personal acolytes in Afghanistan and a handful of other countries.Although the United States and its Pakistani ally have captured significant numbers of al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a whole new generation of angry young Muslim men has been produced. Al-Qaeda has moved from being a concrete cell-based terrorist organization to being an ideal and a model, for small local groups in Casablanca, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and elsewhere.The US is not winning the war on terror. Al-Qaeda also has by no means won. But across a whole range of objectives, al-Qaeda has accomplished more of its goals than the US has of its.
http://www.juancole.com/2004_09_01_juancole_archive.html#109487993311862124
Good Terrorists: Welcome to the US of A!
A little-noticed but chilling scene at Opa-locka Airport outside Miami last month demonstrates that the Bush administration's commitment to fighting international terrorism can be overtaken by presidential politics — even if that means admitting known terrorists onto U.S. soil.That's what happened when outgoing Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso inexplicably pardoned four Cuban exiles convicted of "endangering public safety" for their role in an assassination plot against Fidel Castro during a 2000 international summit in Panama.After their release, three of the four immediately flew via private jet to Miami, where they were greeted with a cheering fiesta organized by the hard-line anti-Castro community. Federal officials briefly interviewed the pardoned men — all holders of U.S. passports — and then let them go their way.The fourth man, Luis Posada Carriles, was the most notorious member of this anti-Castro cell. He is an escapee from a prison in Venezuela, where he was incarcerated for blowing up an Air Cubana passenger plane in 1976, killing 73. He also admitted plotting six hotel bombings in Havana that killed one tourist and injured 11 others in 1997. Posada has gone into hiding in Honduras while seeking a Central American country that will harbor him, prompting Honduran President Ricardo Maduro to demand an explanation from the Bush administration on how a renowned terrorist could enter his country using a false U.S. passport. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-op-sweig12sep12,1,3912945,print.story
Seymour Hersh: Abu Ghraib’s roots
He’s doing his part to connect the dots.
Mr. Hersh's thesis is that "the roots of the Abu Ghraib scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists" who have been charged so far, "but in the reliance of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld on secret operations and the use of coercion - and eye-for-eye retribution - in fighting terrorism."
In particular, Mr. Hersh has reported that a secret program to capture and interrogate terrorists led to the abuse of prisoners. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/international/middleeast/12abuse.html
ELECTION
Democrat’s Aides Agree on Need to React Strongly but Not on How
Still? Awfully disturbing. The story behind the NY Times headline:
As a first step, the Kerry campaign this week dispatched the Democratic National Committee to go after Mr. Bush on his military record, and to begin criticizing Mr. Bush as a liar and a sheltered "son of privilege" who used connections to avoid combat in his youth and was out of touch with ordinary Americans.
Officials said these attacks were being made through the party and not the campaign to provide a measure of distance from Mr. Kerry, who is described by many officials as reluctant himself to impugn the president's character.
Now, the more difficult question, officials say, is just how the Kerry campaign - even if Mr. Kerry does not take part directly - should go after Mr. Bush. Some of Mr. Kerry's closest friends and longtime political operatives from Boston, who have now set up shop at Democratic headquarters in Washington, are pressing for more, saying the campaign and the candidate must go on the offensive, to restore Mr. Kerry's own character as a political asset and to hold Mr. Bush accountable for attacks on Mr. Kerry.
These friends and former aides, led by David Thorne, a Yale classmate, fellow Navy veteran and brother of Mr. Kerry's first wife, are agitating for the candidate himself to answer what they called the character-assassination attacks of people like Vice President Cheney and members of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They are pushing for Mr. Kerry to make a dramatic statement of his own to settle voters' doubts about Mr. Kerry's Vietnam War period.
Officials in the campaign, however, including both longstanding consultants like Bob Shrum and new additions like Joe Lockhart and other veterans of the Clinton administration, have balked at such a move, saying it could be a disaster and alienate too many swing voters who would view such an approach as mean-spirited. They said Mr. Kerry would do better to concentrate on issues where he outperforms Mr. Bush in polls, like jobs and health care.
A critical concern, several campaign officials said, is that polls have already shown Mr. Kerry's negative ratings rising recently, making it an exceptionally dangerous moment for him to attack Mr. Bush personally, since voters typically react with disapproval when candidates do so. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/11/politics/campaign/11campaign.html?hp
Post-Election: Todd Gitlin prepares for defeat, urges organizing.
They should, like the Republican Party after the Goldwater cataclysm of 1964, sigh, shudder, mourn--and organize. They'll pick themselves up and get back to work building their start-up think tanks and media and Internet networks, from the Center for American Progress through Air America Radio through MoveOn.org and various 527 soft money distributors, all of which, despite starting late, made up for a good deal of Democratic organizational weakness in 2004.
That is, if they're smart. The post-Goldwater Republicans were smart. Despite what looked like a calamity, they didn't bolt from the GOP. They didn't break off as a third party, though some of them dearly wanted to. Will the rebellious left discipline itself, cool its boiling blood, and decide that the pleasures of sectarianism are worth less than the steady resolve of infrastructural work? http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.gitlin.html
Those Bush Crowds: More Spin
This is the time in the political calendar when soothsayers point to the size of crowds at rallies to see which candidate is producing more enthusiasm. The campaigns, well aware of this practice, can't resist putting their thumbs on the scale.
On Tuesday, correspondents from The Washington Post and the Washington Times counted the crowds at President Bush's three stops in Missouri, then compared the actual figure with the official Bush campaign figure:
It seems that the Bush campaign is inflating its crowd counts by 45 to 75 percent. Some of this may be the result of people walking through metal detectors more than once, but there's clearly some old-fashioned crowd padding going on. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6628-2004Sep8.html
Fading Import of Network News: Tom Rosenstiel in the WaPost
Network news was built around the carefully written and edited story, produced by correspondents and vetted in advance to match words and pictures. On the network evening newscasts, 84 percent of the time is taken up by such packages, according to content analysis by the Project for Excellence in Journalism's annual State of the News Media study.
Cable news is a live and extemporaneous medium built around talk. Only 11 percent of the time is devoted to edited stories. Eighty percent is given over to in-studio interviews, studio banter, "anchor reads" and live reporter stand-ups, in which correspondents talk off the top of their heads or from hasty notes.
What is lost in the cable obsession with "live" is the chance to double-check, to rewrite, to edit -- and often to even report. What is lost with the passing of network TV, in other words, is the journalism of verification. It is gradually yielding place to a journalism of assertion. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13017-2004Sep10.html
Flashback: 1988
Remember when Bush Sr.’s co-chair John Sununu went on national television to attack Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX) claiming Bentsen had improperly helped get his son into the Texas National Guard during Vietnam. Bentsen's son just happened to serve in the very same National Guard unit at the very same time as George W. Bush. That same week, the Bush campaign had attacked Dukakis for receiving a draft deferment during the Korean War.
Typewritergate: While we await Kerry turning it up a few notches...
The fuss about the authenticity of the CBS-secured documents has overshadowed the Globe’s story re Bush not showing up in Massachusetts; it hasn’t been challenged. And no one is talking about how the challenge to the CBS story began with an email that was dispatched while the program was still on the air. How did anyone decipher from the program’s stills that the type might not be from that era?
CBS stands firm:
After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.
But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/11/authenticity_backed_on_bush_documents?mode=PF
Dan Payne in the Globe: The Democrat consultant weighs in: He has advice for Kerry, but also addresses 9/11 more than Kerry does…and must.
A "catastrophe" is how national security professionals describe Bush administration's response to 9/11 in James Fallows's piece in current Atlantic. Bush ignored clear warnings from outgoing Clinton officials that terrorism was serious threat. Ignored Aug. 6, 2001 briefing paper, "Osama bin Laden Determined To Strike inside US." On 9/11, when told "America is under attack," Bush froze in Florida classroom for seven long minutes reading "My Pet Goat."
Bush's anti-terrorism plan is simple: Kill Iraqis. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but Bush knew most Americans felt someone had to pay for it. We don't like Saddam, let's blame him. Kerry needs anti-terrorism proposal. Thanks in large part to Bush, most of world's one billion Muslims now hate us. Senseless slaughter in Beslan, Russia, makes global anti-terror action urgent. Kerry's Grand Canyon doctrine of no regrets for voting to let Bush invade Iraq has got to go. Saying Iraq is "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" is first step. But Kerry has to oppose Iraq war. Forget flip-flop charge. Supporting unjustifiable war that's killed 1,000 Americans and 12 to 15,000 Iraqis is worse. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/09/11/bush_shamefully_exploits_tragedy?mode=PF
Polls: Time now an outlier; range is 3 – 6 points. Bush Bounce fading?
Time: Bush 50%, Kerry 39%
Newsweek: Bush 49%, Kerry 43%
Democracy Corps: Bush leading Kerry 48% to 45%.
Associated Press Poll: Bush leading Kerry 51% to 46%.
Zogby: Bush leading Kerry 46% to 42%.
Electoral Vote tallies (270 needed to win):
Electoral Vote Predictor: Kerry 273, Bush 233
Intrade State Futures: Bush 274, Kerry 254
state polls:
Pennsylvania: Kerry 49%, Bush 47% (Survey USA)
Missouri: Bush 48%, Kerry 46% (Survey USA)
Kansas: Bush 60%, Kerry 35% (Survey USA)
Indiana: Bush 60%, Kerry 36% (Survey USA)
Kentucky: Bush 56%, Kerry 39% (Survey USA)
North Carolina: Bush 55%, Kerry 42% (Rasmussen)
-R
