Friday, February 18, 2005
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The war in Iraq is helping to recruit terrorists. But we already knew that.
The insurgency in Iraq continues to baffle the U.S. military and intelligence communities, and the U.S. occupation has become a potent recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, top U.S. national security officials told Congress yesterday.
"Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists," CIA Director Porter J. Goss told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28876-2005Feb16.html
Negroponte: The former ambassador was known as The Ostrich, as he looked the other way when terror was being spread in Central America in the ‘80’s. Yet, this has been addressed in previous confirmation hearings, so it’s old news and won’t slow his confirmation as new intelligence chief. The NY Times reported that it was “known” that Negroponte was looking to exit Iraq. The LA Times summarizes that the position of “spy chief” has “immense burdens, meager authority.” http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-assess18feb18,0,2956388.story?coll=la-home-headlines
“Jeff Gannon”: No one has yet focused on his connections to the White House, although Dina Powell who heads the personnel office is married to one Richard Powell who is on the board of GOPUSA whose head started Talon News... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64575-2005Jan10.html
Major media are beginning to cover it, with NBC Nightly News and much of MSNBC (yes, that’s major). Hopefully they will fasten on to Gannon’s being a White House presence before his “news organization”, Talon News, was created.
Salon is doing its part. Eric Boehlert and Joe Conason:
Thanks to the continued digging by online sleuths, there's now documented evidence that Guckert attended White House briefings as early as February 2003. Guckert, using his alias "Jeff Gannon," once boasted online about asking then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer a question at the Feb. 28, 2003, briefing. The date is significant because in order to receive a White House press pass, Guckert would have needed to prove that he worked for a news organization that, in the words of White House press secretary Scott McClellan, "published regularly," in itself an extraordinarily low threshold. Critics have charged that while Talon News may publish regularly, it boasts a nearly all-volunteer news team that includes not a single person with actual journalism experience. (The team does, though, have quite a bit of experience working on Republican campaigns.) In other words, the outfit is not legitimate or independent, two criteria often used in Washington to receive press credentials.
But what's significant about the February 2003 date is that Talon did not even exist then. The organization was created in late March 2003, and began publishing online in early April 2003. Gannon, a jack of all trades who spent time in the military as well as working at an auto repair shop (not to mention escorting), has already stated publicly that Talon News was his first job in journalism. That means he wasn't working for any other news outlet in February 2003 when he was spotted by C-Span cameras inside the White House briefing room. And that means Guckert was ushered into the White House press room in February 2003 for a briefing despite the fact he was not a journalist. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/02/17/gannon/print.html
Long before "Jeff Gannon" became a household pseudonym in the nation's capital, he had earned considerable recognition among the political elites of South Dakota. During that state's closely contested Senate race last year, the Talon News writer -- whose real name is now known to be James Dale Guckert -- dug his claws deep into Tom Daschle, the former Senate minority leader narrowly defeated by Republican John Thune.
In 2004 Republican leaders placed no higher price on any head, besides John Kerry's, than on the Senate Democratic leader's. For years, conservative organizations had attacked Daschle with campaigns that included notorious ads that paired the Army veteran with Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. The smear efforts damaged Daschle's standing with the state's voters, and as the election grew nearer, Republican blogs and Web sites took up the dirty work. In what has now been exposed as a blatant Republican strategy, the seemingly independent bloggers had in fact been paid by the Thune campaign. http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2005/02/18/gannon/print.html
Greenspan and Social Security: He’s a hack, a shill for the Administration, pure and simple. As Krugman notes (below), the Democrats have to cease their deference: “They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice.”
Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, gave his blessing on Wednesday to the creation of individual investment accounts in Social Security but expressed unease that the change could lead to trillions of dollars in additional government borrowing in the next few decades. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/17/business/17fed.html?
Prior to his testimony, Greg Anrig, Jr., vice president of programs at The Century Foundation, warned us of Greenspan’s history with Social Security.
When Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan testifies before the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday, it will be the first time he will comment publicly on President George W. Bush's proposal to privatize Social Security. Great weight will be given to his statements. But in light of Greenspan's long, tortured relationship with Social Security, his views should be treated with the same skepticism that Dr. Phil shows toward his guests.
Over the past two decades, Greenspan has repeatedly argued that Reagan's "ironclad commitment" should be broken. Year after year, he has said that the benefits promised to future retirees are unaffordable, that the retirement age should be delayed further, and that other ways of reducing benefits should be considered. And yet in 2001, Greenspan endorsed the Bush tax cuts, which mainly benefited the highest income Americans. If made permanent, those tax cuts would amount to more than three times the size of Social Security's projected shortfall over the next 75 years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In Greenspan's view, the Social Security benefits that his own commission promised to future retirees are not affordable, but tax cuts for the wealthy are.
President Bush's proposal would raise the national debt by $4.5 trillion over its first 20 years—substantially more than the shortfall projected for Social Security over the next 75 years—because new money would be needed to pay for the accounts while continuing to pay current beneficiaries. On the surface of it, that added federal debt in and of itself should be anathema to a Federal Reserve chairman who has long preached the virtues of fiscal responsibility. But remember, Alan Greenspan "doesn't like the present Social Security system." We will soon find out how much he dislikes it. http://www.tcf.org/4L/4LMain.asp?SubjectID=4&ArticleID=873
In general, it’s in trouble. The NY Times reports on Tom DeLay and Denny Hastert opposing it. The LA Times summarizes as to the lack of popularity for the “idea.”
President Bush's push to transform Social Security is in trouble, despite intense salesmanship designed to build support in Congress and with the public.
Democrats are united against the president on the issue. A new national poll shows the idea is losing ground with taxpayers. Many Republicans in Congress remain hesitant to promote letting workers under 55 privately invest a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes.
And Thursday, Bush's political challenge became more daunting as one of his key constituencies — economic conservatives — fumed at his new willingness to consider a tax increase to pay for the changes. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-social18feb18,0,6502267,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Krugman: Social Security and Iraq: The Similarity. Good explication.
Let me make a detour here. The way privatizers link the long-run financing of Social Security with the case for private accounts parallels the three-card-monte technique the Bush administration used to link terrorism to the Iraq war. Speeches about Iraq invariably included references to 9/11, leading much of the public to believe that invading Iraq somehow meant taking the war to the terrorists. When pressed, war supporters would admit they lacked evidence of any significant links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, let alone any Iraqi role in 9/11 - yet in their next sentence it would be 9/11 and Saddam, together again.
Similarly, calls for privatization invariably begin with ominous warnings about Social Security's financial future. When pressed, administration officials admit that private accounts would do nothing to improve that financial future. Yet in the next sentence, they once again link privatization to the problem posed by an aging population.
And so it was with Mr. Greenspan. He painted a dark (and seriously exaggerated) picture of the demographic problem, and said that what we need is a "fully funded" system. He then conceded that Bush-style privatization would do nothing to improve the system's funding.
But privatization "as a general model," he said, "has in it the seeds of developing full funding by its very nature." Nice metaphor, but what does it mean? Clearly, he was trying to create the impression of links where none exist. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/opinion/18krugman.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=
Missile Defense. They keep spinning the test failures, and the billions pour into the (latest incarnation of the) nutty 20 year old idea.
A test of the national missile defense system failed Monday when an interceptor missile did not launch from its island base in the Pacific Ocean, the military said. It was the second failure in months for the experimental program.
A statement from the Missile Defense Agency said the cause of the failure was under investigation.
A spokesman for the agency, Rick Lehner, said the early indications was that there was a malfunction with the ground support equipment at the test range on Kwajalein Island, not with the interceptor missile itself. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/12/national/main666433.shtml
-R
The war in Iraq is helping to recruit terrorists. But we already knew that.
The insurgency in Iraq continues to baffle the U.S. military and intelligence communities, and the U.S. occupation has become a potent recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, top U.S. national security officials told Congress yesterday.
"Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists," CIA Director Porter J. Goss told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28876-2005Feb16.html
Negroponte: The former ambassador was known as The Ostrich, as he looked the other way when terror was being spread in Central America in the ‘80’s. Yet, this has been addressed in previous confirmation hearings, so it’s old news and won’t slow his confirmation as new intelligence chief. The NY Times reported that it was “known” that Negroponte was looking to exit Iraq. The LA Times summarizes that the position of “spy chief” has “immense burdens, meager authority.” http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-assess18feb18,0,2956388.story?coll=la-home-headlines
“Jeff Gannon”: No one has yet focused on his connections to the White House, although Dina Powell who heads the personnel office is married to one Richard Powell who is on the board of GOPUSA whose head started Talon News... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64575-2005Jan10.html
Major media are beginning to cover it, with NBC Nightly News and much of MSNBC (yes, that’s major). Hopefully they will fasten on to Gannon’s being a White House presence before his “news organization”, Talon News, was created.
Salon is doing its part. Eric Boehlert and Joe Conason:
Thanks to the continued digging by online sleuths, there's now documented evidence that Guckert attended White House briefings as early as February 2003. Guckert, using his alias "Jeff Gannon," once boasted online about asking then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer a question at the Feb. 28, 2003, briefing. The date is significant because in order to receive a White House press pass, Guckert would have needed to prove that he worked for a news organization that, in the words of White House press secretary Scott McClellan, "published regularly," in itself an extraordinarily low threshold. Critics have charged that while Talon News may publish regularly, it boasts a nearly all-volunteer news team that includes not a single person with actual journalism experience. (The team does, though, have quite a bit of experience working on Republican campaigns.) In other words, the outfit is not legitimate or independent, two criteria often used in Washington to receive press credentials.
But what's significant about the February 2003 date is that Talon did not even exist then. The organization was created in late March 2003, and began publishing online in early April 2003. Gannon, a jack of all trades who spent time in the military as well as working at an auto repair shop (not to mention escorting), has already stated publicly that Talon News was his first job in journalism. That means he wasn't working for any other news outlet in February 2003 when he was spotted by C-Span cameras inside the White House briefing room. And that means Guckert was ushered into the White House press room in February 2003 for a briefing despite the fact he was not a journalist. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/02/17/gannon/print.html
Long before "Jeff Gannon" became a household pseudonym in the nation's capital, he had earned considerable recognition among the political elites of South Dakota. During that state's closely contested Senate race last year, the Talon News writer -- whose real name is now known to be James Dale Guckert -- dug his claws deep into Tom Daschle, the former Senate minority leader narrowly defeated by Republican John Thune.
In 2004 Republican leaders placed no higher price on any head, besides John Kerry's, than on the Senate Democratic leader's. For years, conservative organizations had attacked Daschle with campaigns that included notorious ads that paired the Army veteran with Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. The smear efforts damaged Daschle's standing with the state's voters, and as the election grew nearer, Republican blogs and Web sites took up the dirty work. In what has now been exposed as a blatant Republican strategy, the seemingly independent bloggers had in fact been paid by the Thune campaign. http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2005/02/18/gannon/print.html
Greenspan and Social Security: He’s a hack, a shill for the Administration, pure and simple. As Krugman notes (below), the Democrats have to cease their deference: “They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice.”
Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, gave his blessing on Wednesday to the creation of individual investment accounts in Social Security but expressed unease that the change could lead to trillions of dollars in additional government borrowing in the next few decades. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/17/business/17fed.html?
Prior to his testimony, Greg Anrig, Jr., vice president of programs at The Century Foundation, warned us of Greenspan’s history with Social Security.
When Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan testifies before the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday, it will be the first time he will comment publicly on President George W. Bush's proposal to privatize Social Security. Great weight will be given to his statements. But in light of Greenspan's long, tortured relationship with Social Security, his views should be treated with the same skepticism that Dr. Phil shows toward his guests.
Over the past two decades, Greenspan has repeatedly argued that Reagan's "ironclad commitment" should be broken. Year after year, he has said that the benefits promised to future retirees are unaffordable, that the retirement age should be delayed further, and that other ways of reducing benefits should be considered. And yet in 2001, Greenspan endorsed the Bush tax cuts, which mainly benefited the highest income Americans. If made permanent, those tax cuts would amount to more than three times the size of Social Security's projected shortfall over the next 75 years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In Greenspan's view, the Social Security benefits that his own commission promised to future retirees are not affordable, but tax cuts for the wealthy are.
President Bush's proposal would raise the national debt by $4.5 trillion over its first 20 years—substantially more than the shortfall projected for Social Security over the next 75 years—because new money would be needed to pay for the accounts while continuing to pay current beneficiaries. On the surface of it, that added federal debt in and of itself should be anathema to a Federal Reserve chairman who has long preached the virtues of fiscal responsibility. But remember, Alan Greenspan "doesn't like the present Social Security system." We will soon find out how much he dislikes it. http://www.tcf.org/4L/4LMain.asp?SubjectID=4&ArticleID=873
In general, it’s in trouble. The NY Times reports on Tom DeLay and Denny Hastert opposing it. The LA Times summarizes as to the lack of popularity for the “idea.”
President Bush's push to transform Social Security is in trouble, despite intense salesmanship designed to build support in Congress and with the public.
Democrats are united against the president on the issue. A new national poll shows the idea is losing ground with taxpayers. Many Republicans in Congress remain hesitant to promote letting workers under 55 privately invest a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes.
And Thursday, Bush's political challenge became more daunting as one of his key constituencies — economic conservatives — fumed at his new willingness to consider a tax increase to pay for the changes. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-social18feb18,0,6502267,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Krugman: Social Security and Iraq: The Similarity. Good explication.
Let me make a detour here. The way privatizers link the long-run financing of Social Security with the case for private accounts parallels the three-card-monte technique the Bush administration used to link terrorism to the Iraq war. Speeches about Iraq invariably included references to 9/11, leading much of the public to believe that invading Iraq somehow meant taking the war to the terrorists. When pressed, war supporters would admit they lacked evidence of any significant links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, let alone any Iraqi role in 9/11 - yet in their next sentence it would be 9/11 and Saddam, together again.
Similarly, calls for privatization invariably begin with ominous warnings about Social Security's financial future. When pressed, administration officials admit that private accounts would do nothing to improve that financial future. Yet in the next sentence, they once again link privatization to the problem posed by an aging population.
And so it was with Mr. Greenspan. He painted a dark (and seriously exaggerated) picture of the demographic problem, and said that what we need is a "fully funded" system. He then conceded that Bush-style privatization would do nothing to improve the system's funding.
But privatization "as a general model," he said, "has in it the seeds of developing full funding by its very nature." Nice metaphor, but what does it mean? Clearly, he was trying to create the impression of links where none exist. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/opinion/18krugman.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=
Missile Defense. They keep spinning the test failures, and the billions pour into the (latest incarnation of the) nutty 20 year old idea.
A test of the national missile defense system failed Monday when an interceptor missile did not launch from its island base in the Pacific Ocean, the military said. It was the second failure in months for the experimental program.
A statement from the Missile Defense Agency said the cause of the failure was under investigation.
A spokesman for the agency, Rick Lehner, said the early indications was that there was a malfunction with the ground support equipment at the test range on Kwajalein Island, not with the interceptor missile itself. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/12/national/main666433.shtml
-R
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
The War on Science. Ideology Rules The Union of Concerned Scientists’ study of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Large numbers of agency scientists reported political interference in scientific determinations.
Nearly half of all respondents whose work is related to endangered species scientific findings (44 percent) reported that they "have been directed, for non-scientific reasons, to refrain from making jeopardy or other findings that are protective of species." One in five agency scientists revealed they have been instructed to compromise their scientific integrity—reporting that they have been "directed to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information from a USFWS scientific document," such as a biological opinion;
More than two out of three staff scientists (70 percent) and nearly nine out of 10 scientist managers (89 percent) knew of cases "where U.S. Department of Interior political appointees have injected themselves into Ecological Services determinations." A majority of respondents also cited interventions by members of Congress and local officeholders. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1601
In other words, Right wing “science”, only.
Wal-Mart:
Can this be? Wal-Mart and the U.S. Department of Labor playing footsie ?
Here's why the deal smells like rotting corporate sludge:
1) The deal to let the Wal-Mart corporate office look at all minimum wage and overtime complaints was kept secret until the New York Times confronted DOL about it. There was no public announcement prior to this date, despite the fact that the DOL usually announces such compliance deals with great fanfare.
2) As far as anyone can tell, no Wal-Mart employees were informed of the compliance agreement, even though it had been implemented as early as January 10 (see the email).
3) While the headlines talk about child labor violations, the email is much broader and says any information on any fair labor standards violation investigation should be turned over to Wal-Mart.
4) Were Wal-Mart employees ever informed that their complaints about their employer to the DOL were just being passed off to Wal-Mart corporate headquarters in Arkansas? Giving Wal-Mart this information secretly is a recipe for employees to face retaliation. Notably, there is no instruction in the email to assure the confidentiality of the employees who might make a complaint. http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002185.shtml
Some Democrats are upset.
After disclosure of a secret agreement between the U.S. Department of Labor and Wal-Mart giving the giant retailer the authority to conduct its own investigations of employee wage and hour complaints, Representative George Miller (D-California) today requested an investigation by the DOL's Inspector General to determine whether the arrangement represents a sweetheart deal between the Bush Administration and one of the nation’s most frequent violators of labor laws...
Miller said that such an arrangement could allow the giant employer to cover up evidence of a violation and would discourage aggrieved employees who might fear retribution from the company. Miller also sent a letter to Labor Secretary Elaine Chao today asking for more information about the arrangement. http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002185.shtml
Jeff Gannon: The Media are rather quiet, doing zip investigative reporting, apparently. As Joe Conason notes, “… our supposedly liberal media becomes quite squeamish when reporting anything that might humiliate the Bush White House and the Republican Party.” http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp
For now, here’s the beginning of Tuesday’s letter from Reps. Conyers and Louise Slaughter to Tom Ridge, submitted as a request under the Freedom of Information Act for release of Homeland security records relating to Jeff Gannon /James Guckert and his access to Bush.
Dear Secretary Ridge:
This letter constitutes a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. S 552 (FOIA). The request is submitted on behalf of the Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee and Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee.
Recent news reports indicate that James D. Guckert, a Republican activist gained access to the White House press briefing room and Presidential press conferences in violation of standard security procedures and was allowed to work under the assumed name, "Jeff Gannon." News reports also indicate that Mr. Guckert would not be considered a bona fide journalist by his peers in the press corps, as most of his claims to legitimacy have already been discredited. Access to the President and his press corps is highly competitive, and many seasoned journalists have not had the honor of attending the events or enjoying the access Mr. Guckert has. http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/002170.html
Howard Kurtz writes about Gannon in Wednesday’s WaPost, chasing the gay escort angle, but does allude to the more important matter:
Gannon is also embroiled in the Valerie Plame story. In 2003 he interviewed Plame's husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson, after unnamed administration officials leaked her role as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak. According to his Talon News story, Gannon asked Wilson about "an internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel [detailing] a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports."
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) this week questioned how Gannon got access to the documents and asked the special prosecutor investigating the Plame leak to include Gannon in his probe. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27730-2005Feb15.html
Right Lies: It’s a 24/7 operation. O’Reilly is numero uno, but he has competition.
On the heels of Brit Hume, the Fox News anchor, claiming that FDR was in favor of transforming Social Security to private accounts- and many Right commentators repeating the lie- Sean Hannity asserts that there is “an absence of evidence” that Kerry saw combat in Vietnam.
What’s Happening, Iraq: The Elections We Didn’t Want. [Robin Wright]
When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq two years ago, it envisioned a quick handover to handpicked allies in a secular government that would be the antithesis of Iran's theocracy -- potentially even a foil to Tehran's regional ambitions.
But, in one of the greatest ironies of the U.S. intervention, Iraqis instead went to the polls and elected a government with a strong religious base -- and very close ties to the Islamic republic next door. It is the last thing the administration expected from its costly Iraq policy -- $300 billion and counting, U.S. and regional analysts say.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21679-2005Feb13.html
Edward Herman adds his:
So with media assistance the election may have helped enable the Bush administration to fight the insurgency more aggressively for an extended period; and by domination of a technically flawed election built on an unlevel playing field, by taking advantage of the various modes of power available to the occupation (rules, agents within the government, vast sums of money), and by means of deals with Shia influentials, the election may facilitate the establishment of a parent-client relationship that will allow the achievement of major Bush aims. This all requires that the insurgency be brought under control without too great an expenditure of time, money and U.S. casualties, that the election-based deal-making and government are sufficiently accommodating, and that the Iraqi people will accept more pacification and political clienthood without widening and intensifying the resistance.
Some might argue that as the United States committed aggression in Iraq, built on a system of lies, and then proceeded to perform so poorly that a major insurgency ensued, that it ought to get out or be thrown out quickly, just as Saddam was thrown out of Kuwait in 1991. But we are dealing here with a superpower, whose aggression and occupation rights are even given sanction by the UN, IMF, and “international community.” As the officials of these governments and institutions, and others, applaud the election and ignore the occupation’s influence on its results we can hardly expect the media to do otherwise. Here, as in the past, the media provide what is now standard demonstration election apologetics: the media leopard never changes its spots. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=7240
$:Another $82 billion. Kudos to the WaPost for noting that this sum is “nearly five times the savings Bush is seeking next year in cuts to discretionary spending”.
Waste/Fraud: A few Democrats are on it, but it’s ignored by the Repubs and saved for the last 2 paragraphs in a NY Times article:
As the Bush administration sought more spending for military operations in Iraq, Congressional Democrats held a session on Monday aimed at exposing what they characterized as widespread waste and fraud in the handling of contracts for the reconstruction there.
One former official of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, Frank Willis, described a "wild West" atmosphere with lax accounting over billions of American dollars, often packaged in crisp new $100 bills. "There was leakage, no doubt," said Mr. Willis. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/politics/15spend.html
What’s Happening, Syria: You just know that the neocons are gleeful that they have a fresh club to use on Syria, the “low-hanging fruit compared to Iran”, as one analyst put it. One state Department official noted that “We’re going to turn up the heat on Syria, that’s for sure… even though there’s no evidence” that currently links Syria to the assassination of Lebanon’s former prime minister. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/international/middleeast/15syria.html?
Krugman on Dean: Paul gets it exactly right. Dean is perpetually portrayed by the Right Media as an aggressive Leftie, something he’s never been. But the Republicans do fear his backbone… what the Democrats have sorely lacked.
The Republicans know the America they want, and they are not afraid to use any means to get there," Howard Dean said in accepting the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee. "But there is something that this administration and the Republican Party are very afraid of. It is that we may actually begin fighting for what we believe." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/opinion/15krugman.html?hp
Budget Reminder, i.e. that there’s plenty to Speak out on: for example, the Budget problem, a developing crisis for all except very wealthy Republicans.
For President Bush, the budget sent to Congress last week outlines a painful path to meeting his promise to bring down the federal budget deficit by the time he leaves office in 2009. But for the senators and governors already jockeying to succeed him, the numbers released in recent days add up to a budgetary landmine that could blow up just as the next president moves into the Oval Office.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21721-2005Feb13.html
Follow-up: Venezuela: U.S. officials express grave concern; Chavez reacts:
Mr. Chávez has reacted angrily to the criticism, saying that Venezuela has the right to purchase arms from any suitable seller and that the United States lacks the moral heft to question the arms sales.
"They sold weapons to Saddam Hussein, and they armed Al Qaeda, but the serpent turned against them," Mr. Chávez said http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/international/americas/15venezuela.html
Doesn’t he know Latin America is ours? Doesn’t he understand the Monroe Doctrine?
Kyoto Takes Effect:
As the agreement takes effect on Feb. 16, worries about its fairness are mixed with mild resentment. Europeans have set some of the most stringent targets for reducing greenhouse gases, which trap heat in the earth's atmosphere and have been linked by climate experts to global warming.
It is bad enough, in their view, that American and Chinese companies will not bear these extra costs. But worse, the ultimate goal of curbing greenhouse gases will not be realized because carbon dioxide emissions, unlike polluted rivers, are a global rather than a local problem.
"We have already done so much in the past that we feel others should not get a free ride," Mr. Strube said. "We could reach a situation where the leader is a lonely rider going into the sunset, and everyone else sits back and says, O.K., let's wait and see when he will return."
The pressure, he says, should be on the United States, which generates a fifth of the world's greenhouse gases but is staying out of the Kyoto system, or on nations with rapidly growing economies like China and India, which approved the agreement but are not required to reduce emissions - even though together, they already account for 14 percent of the world's total. .http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/16/business/worldbusiness/16kyoto.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Breaking Ranks: 'We Don’t Really Care About Faith-Based…’
It’s rare to see even a former Administration official to come clean. David Kuo, former deputy director of the faith-based office makes clear that the interest in such doesn’t survive the campaign, i.e. the Religious Right was used by those who only care about political power and $ being funneled to themselves and their wealthy supporters. So, they scream and get a brief nod of ‘I support a protect marriage amendment’ in the State of the Union speech, and now will do zip until the 2006 campaign is well underway..
Can’t forget that Kuo’s resignation was preceded by John DiIulio’s (from the same position), so there’s plenty of 'smoke' here.
A former White House official said yesterday that President Bush has failed to deliver on his promise to help religious groups serve the poor, the homeless and drug addicts because the administration lacks a genuine commitment to its "compassionate conservative" agenda.
David Kuo, who was deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives for much of Bush's first term, said in published remarks that the White House reaped political benefits from the president's promise to help religious organizations win taxpayer funding to care for "the least, the last and the lost" in the United States. But he wrote: "There was minimal senior White House commitment to the faith-based agenda." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24561-2005Feb14.html
-R
Large numbers of agency scientists reported political interference in scientific determinations.
Nearly half of all respondents whose work is related to endangered species scientific findings (44 percent) reported that they "have been directed, for non-scientific reasons, to refrain from making jeopardy or other findings that are protective of species." One in five agency scientists revealed they have been instructed to compromise their scientific integrity—reporting that they have been "directed to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information from a USFWS scientific document," such as a biological opinion;
More than two out of three staff scientists (70 percent) and nearly nine out of 10 scientist managers (89 percent) knew of cases "where U.S. Department of Interior political appointees have injected themselves into Ecological Services determinations." A majority of respondents also cited interventions by members of Congress and local officeholders. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1601
In other words, Right wing “science”, only.
Wal-Mart:
Can this be? Wal-Mart and the U.S. Department of Labor playing footsie ?
Here's why the deal smells like rotting corporate sludge:
1) The deal to let the Wal-Mart corporate office look at all minimum wage and overtime complaints was kept secret until the New York Times confronted DOL about it. There was no public announcement prior to this date, despite the fact that the DOL usually announces such compliance deals with great fanfare.
2) As far as anyone can tell, no Wal-Mart employees were informed of the compliance agreement, even though it had been implemented as early as January 10 (see the email).
3) While the headlines talk about child labor violations, the email is much broader and says any information on any fair labor standards violation investigation should be turned over to Wal-Mart.
4) Were Wal-Mart employees ever informed that their complaints about their employer to the DOL were just being passed off to Wal-Mart corporate headquarters in Arkansas? Giving Wal-Mart this information secretly is a recipe for employees to face retaliation. Notably, there is no instruction in the email to assure the confidentiality of the employees who might make a complaint. http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002185.shtml
Some Democrats are upset.
After disclosure of a secret agreement between the U.S. Department of Labor and Wal-Mart giving the giant retailer the authority to conduct its own investigations of employee wage and hour complaints, Representative George Miller (D-California) today requested an investigation by the DOL's Inspector General to determine whether the arrangement represents a sweetheart deal between the Bush Administration and one of the nation’s most frequent violators of labor laws...
Miller said that such an arrangement could allow the giant employer to cover up evidence of a violation and would discourage aggrieved employees who might fear retribution from the company. Miller also sent a letter to Labor Secretary Elaine Chao today asking for more information about the arrangement. http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002185.shtml
Jeff Gannon: The Media are rather quiet, doing zip investigative reporting, apparently. As Joe Conason notes, “… our supposedly liberal media becomes quite squeamish when reporting anything that might humiliate the Bush White House and the Republican Party.” http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp
For now, here’s the beginning of Tuesday’s letter from Reps. Conyers and Louise Slaughter to Tom Ridge, submitted as a request under the Freedom of Information Act for release of Homeland security records relating to Jeff Gannon /James Guckert and his access to Bush.
Dear Secretary Ridge:
This letter constitutes a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. S 552 (FOIA). The request is submitted on behalf of the Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee and Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee.
Recent news reports indicate that James D. Guckert, a Republican activist gained access to the White House press briefing room and Presidential press conferences in violation of standard security procedures and was allowed to work under the assumed name, "Jeff Gannon." News reports also indicate that Mr. Guckert would not be considered a bona fide journalist by his peers in the press corps, as most of his claims to legitimacy have already been discredited. Access to the President and his press corps is highly competitive, and many seasoned journalists have not had the honor of attending the events or enjoying the access Mr. Guckert has. http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/002170.html
Howard Kurtz writes about Gannon in Wednesday’s WaPost, chasing the gay escort angle, but does allude to the more important matter:
Gannon is also embroiled in the Valerie Plame story. In 2003 he interviewed Plame's husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson, after unnamed administration officials leaked her role as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak. According to his Talon News story, Gannon asked Wilson about "an internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel [detailing] a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports."
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) this week questioned how Gannon got access to the documents and asked the special prosecutor investigating the Plame leak to include Gannon in his probe. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27730-2005Feb15.html
Right Lies: It’s a 24/7 operation. O’Reilly is numero uno, but he has competition.
On the heels of Brit Hume, the Fox News anchor, claiming that FDR was in favor of transforming Social Security to private accounts- and many Right commentators repeating the lie- Sean Hannity asserts that there is “an absence of evidence” that Kerry saw combat in Vietnam.
What’s Happening, Iraq: The Elections We Didn’t Want. [Robin Wright]
When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq two years ago, it envisioned a quick handover to handpicked allies in a secular government that would be the antithesis of Iran's theocracy -- potentially even a foil to Tehran's regional ambitions.
But, in one of the greatest ironies of the U.S. intervention, Iraqis instead went to the polls and elected a government with a strong religious base -- and very close ties to the Islamic republic next door. It is the last thing the administration expected from its costly Iraq policy -- $300 billion and counting, U.S. and regional analysts say.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21679-2005Feb13.html
Edward Herman adds his:
So with media assistance the election may have helped enable the Bush administration to fight the insurgency more aggressively for an extended period; and by domination of a technically flawed election built on an unlevel playing field, by taking advantage of the various modes of power available to the occupation (rules, agents within the government, vast sums of money), and by means of deals with Shia influentials, the election may facilitate the establishment of a parent-client relationship that will allow the achievement of major Bush aims. This all requires that the insurgency be brought under control without too great an expenditure of time, money and U.S. casualties, that the election-based deal-making and government are sufficiently accommodating, and that the Iraqi people will accept more pacification and political clienthood without widening and intensifying the resistance.
Some might argue that as the United States committed aggression in Iraq, built on a system of lies, and then proceeded to perform so poorly that a major insurgency ensued, that it ought to get out or be thrown out quickly, just as Saddam was thrown out of Kuwait in 1991. But we are dealing here with a superpower, whose aggression and occupation rights are even given sanction by the UN, IMF, and “international community.” As the officials of these governments and institutions, and others, applaud the election and ignore the occupation’s influence on its results we can hardly expect the media to do otherwise. Here, as in the past, the media provide what is now standard demonstration election apologetics: the media leopard never changes its spots. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=7240
$:Another $82 billion. Kudos to the WaPost for noting that this sum is “nearly five times the savings Bush is seeking next year in cuts to discretionary spending”.
Waste/Fraud: A few Democrats are on it, but it’s ignored by the Repubs and saved for the last 2 paragraphs in a NY Times article:
As the Bush administration sought more spending for military operations in Iraq, Congressional Democrats held a session on Monday aimed at exposing what they characterized as widespread waste and fraud in the handling of contracts for the reconstruction there.
One former official of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, Frank Willis, described a "wild West" atmosphere with lax accounting over billions of American dollars, often packaged in crisp new $100 bills. "There was leakage, no doubt," said Mr. Willis. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/politics/15spend.html
What’s Happening, Syria: You just know that the neocons are gleeful that they have a fresh club to use on Syria, the “low-hanging fruit compared to Iran”, as one analyst put it. One state Department official noted that “We’re going to turn up the heat on Syria, that’s for sure… even though there’s no evidence” that currently links Syria to the assassination of Lebanon’s former prime minister. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/international/middleeast/15syria.html?
Krugman on Dean: Paul gets it exactly right. Dean is perpetually portrayed by the Right Media as an aggressive Leftie, something he’s never been. But the Republicans do fear his backbone… what the Democrats have sorely lacked.
The Republicans know the America they want, and they are not afraid to use any means to get there," Howard Dean said in accepting the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee. "But there is something that this administration and the Republican Party are very afraid of. It is that we may actually begin fighting for what we believe." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/opinion/15krugman.html?hp
Budget Reminder, i.e. that there’s plenty to Speak out on: for example, the Budget problem, a developing crisis for all except very wealthy Republicans.
For President Bush, the budget sent to Congress last week outlines a painful path to meeting his promise to bring down the federal budget deficit by the time he leaves office in 2009. But for the senators and governors already jockeying to succeed him, the numbers released in recent days add up to a budgetary landmine that could blow up just as the next president moves into the Oval Office.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21721-2005Feb13.html
Follow-up: Venezuela: U.S. officials express grave concern; Chavez reacts:
Mr. Chávez has reacted angrily to the criticism, saying that Venezuela has the right to purchase arms from any suitable seller and that the United States lacks the moral heft to question the arms sales.
"They sold weapons to Saddam Hussein, and they armed Al Qaeda, but the serpent turned against them," Mr. Chávez said http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/international/americas/15venezuela.html
Doesn’t he know Latin America is ours? Doesn’t he understand the Monroe Doctrine?
Kyoto Takes Effect:
As the agreement takes effect on Feb. 16, worries about its fairness are mixed with mild resentment. Europeans have set some of the most stringent targets for reducing greenhouse gases, which trap heat in the earth's atmosphere and have been linked by climate experts to global warming.
It is bad enough, in their view, that American and Chinese companies will not bear these extra costs. But worse, the ultimate goal of curbing greenhouse gases will not be realized because carbon dioxide emissions, unlike polluted rivers, are a global rather than a local problem.
"We have already done so much in the past that we feel others should not get a free ride," Mr. Strube said. "We could reach a situation where the leader is a lonely rider going into the sunset, and everyone else sits back and says, O.K., let's wait and see when he will return."
The pressure, he says, should be on the United States, which generates a fifth of the world's greenhouse gases but is staying out of the Kyoto system, or on nations with rapidly growing economies like China and India, which approved the agreement but are not required to reduce emissions - even though together, they already account for 14 percent of the world's total. .http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/16/business/worldbusiness/16kyoto.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Breaking Ranks: 'We Don’t Really Care About Faith-Based…’
It’s rare to see even a former Administration official to come clean. David Kuo, former deputy director of the faith-based office makes clear that the interest in such doesn’t survive the campaign, i.e. the Religious Right was used by those who only care about political power and $ being funneled to themselves and their wealthy supporters. So, they scream and get a brief nod of ‘I support a protect marriage amendment’ in the State of the Union speech, and now will do zip until the 2006 campaign is well underway..
Can’t forget that Kuo’s resignation was preceded by John DiIulio’s (from the same position), so there’s plenty of 'smoke' here.
A former White House official said yesterday that President Bush has failed to deliver on his promise to help religious groups serve the poor, the homeless and drug addicts because the administration lacks a genuine commitment to its "compassionate conservative" agenda.
David Kuo, who was deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives for much of Bush's first term, said in published remarks that the White House reaped political benefits from the president's promise to help religious organizations win taxpayer funding to care for "the least, the last and the lost" in the United States. But he wrote: "There was minimal senior White House commitment to the faith-based agenda." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24561-2005Feb14.html
-R
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
