Monday, February 14, 2005
Venezuela: Candidate for Axis of Evil? Reports from the Moonie-owned Washington Times, the Miami Herald, & NY Times:
The Bush administration has lodged a formal protest with Russia for agreeing to provide the government of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez more than 100,000 AK-47 rifles that U.S. officials believe could be used to aid left-wing uprisings in Latin America.
The administration in December sent a secret letter of protest (formally called a demarche) to the Russian Embassy in Washington, according to senior U.S. officials. The officials say the warning was followed up by concerns expressed directly to the Russian defense and foreign ministers. http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050210-123420-3113r
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has long been known for his harsh anti-Bush rhetoric. But now he's stepping up military plans and weapons purchases to match his combative tone, and he is worrying U.S. policymakers.
Within the past two weeks the leftist populist leader has called himself a ''socialist'' and ''Fidelista,'' and offered a muscular new course for his self-described ''revolution'' on behalf of Venezuela's poor.
''I propose that we move to the offensive, just like the imperialists have moved to the bloody and ruthless offensive. If you don't believe me, look at Iraq . . .'' Chávez told a news conference in Brazil late last month. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/10881582.htm?1c
President Fidel Castro warned the United States on Saturday against plotting to kill his ally President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela.
"I say to world public opinion: if they assassinate Chávez, the responsibility will fall squarely on the president of the United States, George W. Bush," Mr. Castro said.
The Cuban leader, who was the target of C.I.A. assassination plots after his 1959 revolution steered Cuba toward Communism and the Soviet Union's sphere of influence, offered no evidence that Mr. Chávez's life was in danger.
But he said the United States would be responsible for killing Mr. Chávez even if the Venezuelan military carried out an assassination. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/international/americas/13castro.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Times Critiques Bush Fiscal Policy Overdue, but better now than…
Congress can avert this crisis-in-waiting by forcing Mr. Bush to be serious about deficit reduction. The first-term tax cuts should be allowed to lapse. Cuts that are not yet in effect should not be allowed to begin. And no new programs should be started that require megaborrowing. If the president doesn't see that he has more important tasks than cutting taxes for the rich and undermining Social Security, Congress should set him straight. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/opinion/14mon1.html?hp
What’s Happening, Iraq: The elections, the elections. Despite ongoing reports of “fewer” (60/day), but larger attacks, the Shiites getting under 50% is the big headline. There’s no consensus whether this means a “weak government” or whether they’ll be an effective alliance with the Kurds and, ultimately, a strong Islamic state.
Follow-up: Iran: The Oil Issue
Iran's perch on the Strait of Hormuz, a potential choke point for Persian Gulf crude oil shipments, will complicate the Bush administration's thinking on possible action on Iran, a U.S. foreign policy think tank said Thursday.
About 40 percent of the world's crude oil exports pass through those sea lanes — a two-mile channel flanked by Iran on one side and Oman and the United Arab Emirates on the other.
Crude oil supply concerns will be at the forefront as President Bush contemplates action over Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons program, said experts at the Iran Policy Committee, a think tank made up of former government officials. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/business/3034389
What’s Happening, Iran: Road to Confrontation?
Despite the Bush administration's insistence that, at least for now, it remains committed to using diplomatic means to halt Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, war drums against the Islamic Republic appear to be beating more loudly here.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice assured Europeans on her trip this past week that Washington does indeed support the efforts of France, Britain and Germany (EU-3) to reach a diplomatic settlement on the issue. However, she also made it clear that Washington has no interest in joining them at the negotiating table or extending much in the way of carrots.
And her consistent refusal to reiterate former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's flat assertion in December that Washington does not seek "regime change" in Teheran has added to the impression that the administration is set firmly on a path toward confrontation.
Whether the administration is pursuing a "good cop/bad cop" strategy – in which Washington's role is to brandish the sticks and the EU-3 the carrots – remains unclear, but the voices in favor of an "engagement" policy are being drowned out by crescendo of calls to adopt "regime change" as U.S. policy.
The latest such urging was released here Thursday by the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), a group headed by a former National Security Council staffer Ray Tanter, several retired senior military officers, and a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia. http://lewrockwell.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Iran+War+Drums+Beat+Harder+by+Jim+Lobe&expire=&urlID=13184573&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2Fips%2Flobe194.html&partnerID=10
What’s Happening, Palestine / Israel: More Peace Talk. The NY Times even headlined Abbas saying that ‘war with Israel is effectively over’. Potentially the best news of the decade, …but still early… http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/international/middleeast/14abbas.html?ei=5094&en=f125821a2a5e5115&hp=&ex=1108357200&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&position=
Social Security: Corporate America and Privatization: Don’t Forget They’re invested in this
With billions of dollars at stake, a large network of influential conservative groups is mounting a high-priced campaign to help the White House win passage of legislation to partially privatize Social Security and limit class-action lawsuits.
Corporate America, the financial services industry, conservative think tanks, much of the Washington trade association community, the Republican Party and GOP lobbyists and consultants are prepared to spend $200 million or more to influence the outcome of two of the toughest legislative fights in recent memory.
This diverse coalition is bound by economic, ideological and partisan concerns. Many of the groups, for instance, are staunch advocates of free-market policies and reducing dependence on government. Some of the corporate group leaders also believe that the economic health of their industries hinges on the long-term solvency of the Social Security system and on restraining costly litigation.
Motivation:
Some business groups have calculated that if the Bush Social Security plan fails, pressure will grow to raise payroll taxes to pay future costs of the program. Every percentage point increase would cost corporate employers about $50 billion annually. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19782-2005Feb12.html
Barbara Boxer:
Is it true that Social Security is in crisis? Is bankrupt? Is collapsing?
The answer is a resounding NO. According to the most conservative estimates, Social Security will be able to pay full benefits for 38 years. In other words, a 37-year-old worker today will get full benefits until he or she is 75 years old if we do nothing to make adjustments to the Trust Fund. A 47-year old worker today will get full benefits until he or she is 85 years old if nothing is done.
So clearly, Social Security is not in crisis, is not bankrupt, and is not collapsing.
Yes, there is a challenge we should address.
Have we ever faced a similar Social Security challenge before? Yes. During the Reagan presidency in 1983. Working together, Democrats and Republicans, we resolved the challenge then just as we can do now. So why would an otherwise optimistic George Bush turn into a prophet of pessimism on Social Security? http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=232056
Social Security and Language: The Nation’s Katrina Vanden Heuvel
But here is the really funny thing about the personal/private accounts debate. Not only are they not personal accounts, they're not private accounts either. They are in fact US government loans. (Bear with me now, because this will only hurt for a moment.) You see, your payroll taxes will still be used to cover the benefits of current retirees, but under Bush's scheme the government will place a certain "diverted" amount into an account in your name. It sounds like a personal retirement account, but it's not. It's a loan. Because if your account does really well (above 3 percent), when you retire the government will deduct the money it lent you (plus 3 percent interest) from your monthly Social Security check leaving you with almost the same amount you would have received under the current system. If your account does really poorly (below 3 percent), you are out of luck. According to Congressional Budget Office, the expected average return will be 3.3 percent, so the net gain will be zero.
But wait, it gets better. These personal accounts aren't exactly US government loans either, because our government under the fiscal stewardship of George W. Bush no longer is running a surplus and therefore does not have the $4 trillion or so needed to cover the transition costs, and Bush refuses to raise taxes on his base (BUSH'S BASE, n. the wealthy).http://www.alternet.org/story/21248/
CNN Flap: The Right Strikes Again. In between broadsides against Howard Dean, they also organize to trash occasional truth tellers at CNN. Summary from Danny Schechter:
CNN's top news exec Eason Jordan resigned after a ton of bricks and rightwing pressure fell on his head after he opined at a closed OFF THE RECORD meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos two weeks ago that he believed that as many as 12 journalists had been killed by US military forces in Iraq. His remarks triggered a controversy in the room, and once the exchange was made public, he began rapidly backing away from the statement.
CNN's competitors went on the attack with Fox News and the NY post in the lead lambasting Jordan for "sliming our troops." A Michelle Malkin column in the Post (She is also a Fox contributor) actually conflated Jordan's personal comments into CNN policy and made it appear that CNN was attacking our troops. As politicians spoke out condemning any such suggestion, Jordan went silent and has now resigned, forced out it seems clear. He is being punished for deviating from the official line woven though demands for independent investigations of journalists killed by the military have gone underanswered. http://www.newsdissector.org/blog/
Follow-up: The Draft. Rolling Stone warns its constituents:.
According to an internal Selective Service memo made public under the Freedom of Information Act, the agency's acting director met with two of Rumsfeld's undersecretaries in February 2003 precisely to debate, discuss and ponder a return to the draft. The memo duly notes the administration's aversion to a draft but adds, "Defense manpower officials concede there are critical shortages of military personnel with certain special skills, such as medical personnel, linguists, computer network engineers, etc." The potentially prohibitive cost of "attracting and retaining such personnel for military service," the memo adds, has led "some officials to conclude that, while a conventional draft may never be needed, a draft of men and women possessing these critical skills may be warranted in a future crisis." This new draft, it suggests, could be invoked to meet the needs of both the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security.
The memo then proposes, in detail, that the Selective Service be "re-engineered" to cover all Americans -- "men and (for the first time) women" -- ages eighteen to thirty-four. In addition to name, date of birth and Social Security number, young adults would have to provide the agency with details of their specialized skills on an ongoing basis until they passed out of draft jeopardy at age thirty-five.
Testifying before Congress two weeks after the meeting, acting director of Selective Service Lewis Brodsky acknowledged that "consultations with senior Defense manpower officials" have spurred the agency to shift its preparations away from a full-scale, Vietnam-style draft of untrained men "to a draft of smaller numbers of critical-skills personnel." http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6862691?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1106949643712&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.872 0
Follow-up: Budget Cuts
In the new list, the president asked legislators to eliminate programs worth $4.3 billion from education, $1 billion from health and $1.5 billion from law enforcement.
Reductions include cuts totaling $2.5 billion from agriculture, $690 million from health and $470 million from housing.
In all, the targeted programs include 99 that the White House wants to eliminate, for a total of $8.8 billion in savings. The president wants to clip an additional $6.5 billion from the budget by cutting spending on 55 programs.
More than half of the identified programs had been flagged for cuts or elimination in previous years. The president last year asked Congress to eliminate 130 programs. Four were terminated.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002178492_bushcuts12.html
-R
The Bush administration has lodged a formal protest with Russia for agreeing to provide the government of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez more than 100,000 AK-47 rifles that U.S. officials believe could be used to aid left-wing uprisings in Latin America.
The administration in December sent a secret letter of protest (formally called a demarche) to the Russian Embassy in Washington, according to senior U.S. officials. The officials say the warning was followed up by concerns expressed directly to the Russian defense and foreign ministers. http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050210-123420-3113r
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has long been known for his harsh anti-Bush rhetoric. But now he's stepping up military plans and weapons purchases to match his combative tone, and he is worrying U.S. policymakers.
Within the past two weeks the leftist populist leader has called himself a ''socialist'' and ''Fidelista,'' and offered a muscular new course for his self-described ''revolution'' on behalf of Venezuela's poor.
''I propose that we move to the offensive, just like the imperialists have moved to the bloody and ruthless offensive. If you don't believe me, look at Iraq . . .'' Chávez told a news conference in Brazil late last month. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/10881582.htm?1c
President Fidel Castro warned the United States on Saturday against plotting to kill his ally President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela.
"I say to world public opinion: if they assassinate Chávez, the responsibility will fall squarely on the president of the United States, George W. Bush," Mr. Castro said.
The Cuban leader, who was the target of C.I.A. assassination plots after his 1959 revolution steered Cuba toward Communism and the Soviet Union's sphere of influence, offered no evidence that Mr. Chávez's life was in danger.
But he said the United States would be responsible for killing Mr. Chávez even if the Venezuelan military carried out an assassination. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/international/americas/13castro.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Times Critiques Bush Fiscal Policy Overdue, but better now than…
Congress can avert this crisis-in-waiting by forcing Mr. Bush to be serious about deficit reduction. The first-term tax cuts should be allowed to lapse. Cuts that are not yet in effect should not be allowed to begin. And no new programs should be started that require megaborrowing. If the president doesn't see that he has more important tasks than cutting taxes for the rich and undermining Social Security, Congress should set him straight. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/opinion/14mon1.html?hp
What’s Happening, Iraq: The elections, the elections. Despite ongoing reports of “fewer” (60/day), but larger attacks, the Shiites getting under 50% is the big headline. There’s no consensus whether this means a “weak government” or whether they’ll be an effective alliance with the Kurds and, ultimately, a strong Islamic state.
Follow-up: Iran: The Oil Issue
Iran's perch on the Strait of Hormuz, a potential choke point for Persian Gulf crude oil shipments, will complicate the Bush administration's thinking on possible action on Iran, a U.S. foreign policy think tank said Thursday.
About 40 percent of the world's crude oil exports pass through those sea lanes — a two-mile channel flanked by Iran on one side and Oman and the United Arab Emirates on the other.
Crude oil supply concerns will be at the forefront as President Bush contemplates action over Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons program, said experts at the Iran Policy Committee, a think tank made up of former government officials. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/business/3034389
What’s Happening, Iran: Road to Confrontation?
Despite the Bush administration's insistence that, at least for now, it remains committed to using diplomatic means to halt Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, war drums against the Islamic Republic appear to be beating more loudly here.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice assured Europeans on her trip this past week that Washington does indeed support the efforts of France, Britain and Germany (EU-3) to reach a diplomatic settlement on the issue. However, she also made it clear that Washington has no interest in joining them at the negotiating table or extending much in the way of carrots.
And her consistent refusal to reiterate former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's flat assertion in December that Washington does not seek "regime change" in Teheran has added to the impression that the administration is set firmly on a path toward confrontation.
Whether the administration is pursuing a "good cop/bad cop" strategy – in which Washington's role is to brandish the sticks and the EU-3 the carrots – remains unclear, but the voices in favor of an "engagement" policy are being drowned out by crescendo of calls to adopt "regime change" as U.S. policy.
The latest such urging was released here Thursday by the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), a group headed by a former National Security Council staffer Ray Tanter, several retired senior military officers, and a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia. http://lewrockwell.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Iran+War+Drums+Beat+Harder+by+Jim+Lobe&expire=&urlID=13184573&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2Fips%2Flobe194.html&partnerID=10
What’s Happening, Palestine / Israel: More Peace Talk. The NY Times even headlined Abbas saying that ‘war with Israel is effectively over’. Potentially the best news of the decade, …but still early… http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/international/middleeast/14abbas.html?ei=5094&en=f125821a2a5e5115&hp=&ex=1108357200&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&position=
Social Security: Corporate America and Privatization: Don’t Forget They’re invested in this
With billions of dollars at stake, a large network of influential conservative groups is mounting a high-priced campaign to help the White House win passage of legislation to partially privatize Social Security and limit class-action lawsuits.
Corporate America, the financial services industry, conservative think tanks, much of the Washington trade association community, the Republican Party and GOP lobbyists and consultants are prepared to spend $200 million or more to influence the outcome of two of the toughest legislative fights in recent memory.
This diverse coalition is bound by economic, ideological and partisan concerns. Many of the groups, for instance, are staunch advocates of free-market policies and reducing dependence on government. Some of the corporate group leaders also believe that the economic health of their industries hinges on the long-term solvency of the Social Security system and on restraining costly litigation.
Motivation:
Some business groups have calculated that if the Bush Social Security plan fails, pressure will grow to raise payroll taxes to pay future costs of the program. Every percentage point increase would cost corporate employers about $50 billion annually. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19782-2005Feb12.html
Barbara Boxer:
Is it true that Social Security is in crisis? Is bankrupt? Is collapsing?
The answer is a resounding NO. According to the most conservative estimates, Social Security will be able to pay full benefits for 38 years. In other words, a 37-year-old worker today will get full benefits until he or she is 75 years old if we do nothing to make adjustments to the Trust Fund. A 47-year old worker today will get full benefits until he or she is 85 years old if nothing is done.
So clearly, Social Security is not in crisis, is not bankrupt, and is not collapsing.
Yes, there is a challenge we should address.
Have we ever faced a similar Social Security challenge before? Yes. During the Reagan presidency in 1983. Working together, Democrats and Republicans, we resolved the challenge then just as we can do now. So why would an otherwise optimistic George Bush turn into a prophet of pessimism on Social Security? http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=232056
Social Security and Language: The Nation’s Katrina Vanden Heuvel
But here is the really funny thing about the personal/private accounts debate. Not only are they not personal accounts, they're not private accounts either. They are in fact US government loans. (Bear with me now, because this will only hurt for a moment.) You see, your payroll taxes will still be used to cover the benefits of current retirees, but under Bush's scheme the government will place a certain "diverted" amount into an account in your name. It sounds like a personal retirement account, but it's not. It's a loan. Because if your account does really well (above 3 percent), when you retire the government will deduct the money it lent you (plus 3 percent interest) from your monthly Social Security check leaving you with almost the same amount you would have received under the current system. If your account does really poorly (below 3 percent), you are out of luck. According to Congressional Budget Office, the expected average return will be 3.3 percent, so the net gain will be zero.
But wait, it gets better. These personal accounts aren't exactly US government loans either, because our government under the fiscal stewardship of George W. Bush no longer is running a surplus and therefore does not have the $4 trillion or so needed to cover the transition costs, and Bush refuses to raise taxes on his base (BUSH'S BASE, n. the wealthy).http://www.alternet.org/story/21248/
CNN Flap: The Right Strikes Again. In between broadsides against Howard Dean, they also organize to trash occasional truth tellers at CNN. Summary from Danny Schechter:
CNN's top news exec Eason Jordan resigned after a ton of bricks and rightwing pressure fell on his head after he opined at a closed OFF THE RECORD meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos two weeks ago that he believed that as many as 12 journalists had been killed by US military forces in Iraq. His remarks triggered a controversy in the room, and once the exchange was made public, he began rapidly backing away from the statement.
CNN's competitors went on the attack with Fox News and the NY post in the lead lambasting Jordan for "sliming our troops." A Michelle Malkin column in the Post (She is also a Fox contributor) actually conflated Jordan's personal comments into CNN policy and made it appear that CNN was attacking our troops. As politicians spoke out condemning any such suggestion, Jordan went silent and has now resigned, forced out it seems clear. He is being punished for deviating from the official line woven though demands for independent investigations of journalists killed by the military have gone underanswered. http://www.newsdissector.org/blog/
Follow-up: The Draft. Rolling Stone warns its constituents:.
According to an internal Selective Service memo made public under the Freedom of Information Act, the agency's acting director met with two of Rumsfeld's undersecretaries in February 2003 precisely to debate, discuss and ponder a return to the draft. The memo duly notes the administration's aversion to a draft but adds, "Defense manpower officials concede there are critical shortages of military personnel with certain special skills, such as medical personnel, linguists, computer network engineers, etc." The potentially prohibitive cost of "attracting and retaining such personnel for military service," the memo adds, has led "some officials to conclude that, while a conventional draft may never be needed, a draft of men and women possessing these critical skills may be warranted in a future crisis." This new draft, it suggests, could be invoked to meet the needs of both the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security.
The memo then proposes, in detail, that the Selective Service be "re-engineered" to cover all Americans -- "men and (for the first time) women" -- ages eighteen to thirty-four. In addition to name, date of birth and Social Security number, young adults would have to provide the agency with details of their specialized skills on an ongoing basis until they passed out of draft jeopardy at age thirty-five.
Testifying before Congress two weeks after the meeting, acting director of Selective Service Lewis Brodsky acknowledged that "consultations with senior Defense manpower officials" have spurred the agency to shift its preparations away from a full-scale, Vietnam-style draft of untrained men "to a draft of smaller numbers of critical-skills personnel." http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6862691?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1106949643712&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.872 0
Follow-up: Budget Cuts
In the new list, the president asked legislators to eliminate programs worth $4.3 billion from education, $1 billion from health and $1.5 billion from law enforcement.
Reductions include cuts totaling $2.5 billion from agriculture, $690 million from health and $470 million from housing.
In all, the targeted programs include 99 that the White House wants to eliminate, for a total of $8.8 billion in savings. The president wants to clip an additional $6.5 billion from the budget by cutting spending on 55 programs.
More than half of the identified programs had been flagged for cuts or elimination in previous years. The president last year asked Congress to eliminate 130 programs. Four were terminated.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002178492_bushcuts12.html
-R
