Saturday, August 17, 2002

Modo actually might be just a little bit insightful this week.

UPDATE: As Digby points out in the comments, the insightful bit is the possibility that junior might actually NOT be following poppy's directions, and that Scowcroft is the messenger boy.


It's interesting for Wesley Clark to come out so strongly for the necessity of having a coalition. He dealt firsthand with the unpleasant side of such a coalition -- namely the chain of command doesn't always work as it is supposed to. His orders tended to be "lost" occasionally during the Bosnian conflict, as various coalition members disagreed with his direction.
UggaBugga compares the 1860 and 2000 elections.
10 reasons not to invade Iraq, from the 5th columnists at Cato:


1.High casualties may result at home or abroad.

2.Occupation of an Islamic country by the United States could be a recruiting poster for
Islamic terrorists.

3.Occupying Iraq would distract the U.S. government from the vital task of destroying an
enemy that has actually attacked the homeland: al-Qaida.

4.The threat from Iraq is exaggerated.

5.The terrorist groups that Iraq supports do not focus attacks on the United States.

6.Although unsatisfying, the U.S.-led containment policy has worked.

7.An invasion of Iraq could destabilize or topple friendly governments in Turkey, Jordan,
Egypt, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

8.The United States might be isolated diplomatically or have to expend large amounts of
diplomatic capital to gain support for the invasion.

9.An invasion and long-term occupation could cost billions of dollars.

10.The threat of war in the Middle East or a loss of production from actual combat could
cause the world price of oil to skyrocket.

Take it away, State's Rights folks..

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Federal regulators are suing California for defying an order to dissolve the board that oversees much of the state's electricity grid.

The lawsuit was filed Friday, nine days after Gov. Gray Davis' appointees to the board of California's Independent System Operator voted to ignore the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order.

FERC, the nation's top regulator of wholesale electricity, told the ISO to disband and create a board free of political influence, a move that Davis, a Democrat, had charged was "nothing less than a hostile takeover of California's electricity grid by the federal government."

FERC is made up of a majority of Republicans appointed by President Bush.


They're basically ordering Davis to allow the foxes to guard the henhouse.

sweeeet.
trr points us to the Ground Zero Theme Park.
Pop some popcorn, grab a drink, and watch little Ricky Lowry blow a gasket (thanks to Eric M.) all over Chuck Hagel.
Pootie-poot signs $40 billion agreement with Iraq.



MOSCOW, Aug. 16 -- Russia and Iraq plan to sign a new five-year economic cooperation agreement worth $40 billion, reinforcing Moscow's close ties to Baghdad even as the United States weighs a military attack to drive Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power, Iraqi and Russian officials said today.

Russia's apparent refusal to abandon its longtime ally, despite vigorous U.S. efforts to isolate Iraq, could make it even more difficult for the United States to rally Russian and other skeptical world leaders behind any invasion.

The five-year agreement will deal with cooperation in a variety of fields -- foremost oil, but also electrical energy, chemical products, irrigation, railroad construction and transportation, according to officials here. Soviet or Russian specialists built much of the infrastructure in Iraq, and so Baghdad wants Russian expertise to help repair or upgrade it.


The axis of evil grows ever larger. Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Halliburton, Russia...
My friend TBog says:



I want to see if I am clear on this:

The people who want to go to war against Iraq
George Bush
Dick Cheney
Richard Perle
Paul Wolfowitz
Michael Kelly
Rush Limbaugh
Bill Kristol

Those that are opposed
General Norman Schwartzkopf
General Colin Powell
General Brent Scowcroft
Richard Armitage
John Kerry
Tom Daschle

Quiz: What does the first group have in common that is completely different than the second group? And please
answer in the form of a question.


Reynolds notes that 4 of the named defendants in the 9-11 lawsuit are on McKinney's donor list. Actually, her employer, the U.S. government, is too.

Let's see who else these people have given to (to be as "fair" as they are, I'll only list Republicans. Isn't this fun!) in the 2000 and 2002 election cycles.


BARZINJI, JAMAL has given to Tom Campell, Republican Candidate for Senate ($500) . Now Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham ($1000).

TOTONJI, AHMAD gave $1000 to Spencer Abraham.

Abdurahman gave $1000 to Tom Campbell, and some money to Sununu who gave it back. After the campaign. And money to Bush, who gave it back. After the campaign.

OMEISH, MOHAMED Edward Whitfield, $500. $250 to Spencer Abraham.


so, 3 out of the 4 gave money to Spencer Abraham!!!!! I'm too lazy to check the rest of the defendants, but needless to say there could be some more Republican donors on there.











Frank Rich.

Friday, August 16, 2002

Pioneer Party



The president met privately with members of his 214-member "Pioneers" club, each of whom raised at least $100,000 for his 2000 presidential campaign. White House and Republican Party workers also attended the event at Stan and Kathy Hickey's Broken Spoke Ranch, where no money will be raised.

The Pioneers club includes Ken Lay, the disgraced former chairman of bankrupt energy giant Enron Corp. and a long-time Bush ally. A White House spokesperson could not say whether Lay was in attendance.
Wow.

Wow.

Trifecta Wow.

This is apparently the new justification for invading Iraq, from Richard Perle.


The failure to take on Saddam after what the president said would produce such a collapse in confidence in the president that it would set back the war on terrorism.



(picked up by Charles Dodgson)

Update: Chris Nelson is on this.
New Blogger Nick Kessler on Spinsanity.

And don't forget GeekPol on the same issue..

And Avedon Carol, but you should ALREADY be reading her every day.

..and Pandagon has a new tagline.
Sullywatch picks a part the bewildered American's (?!) latest drivel in the [London] Times . My guess is he'll lose his gig there too fairly soon.

I liked this part:


[H]e resorts (as he always does) to waving the bloody shirt ... in this case referring to “the mass grave of 3,000 Americans in the middle of New York City."


This one stretches tolerance even for one accustomed to Sully’s histrionics.


First off, uh, it wasn’t three thousand (the exact count is 2,823, not including Atta & Co.).


OK, he rounded up, but that doesn't excuse the second point, which is: not all of those killed in the crash and collapse of the World Trade Center were Americans. There were Canadians, Russians, Israelis, Indians, and ... dare we say it, quite a few of his fellow Brits. In fact, more Britons died in this than in any other terrorist attack, anywhere, ever (yes, even more than Pan Am 103).


Sully could actually use this as the base of a better argument to Europeans, but it's very telling that he doesn't.




A Charles Pierce two-fer Friday.


Name: Charles Pierce
Hometown: Newton, Mass.
One: Who in god’s name is Robbie Fulks?
Two: As a matter of fact, yes, if you’re going to criticize Steve Earle for his JWL ballad, you better damned well have an opinion on all those other murder ballads-including the ones on Harry Smith’s anthology that celebrate the assassinations of William McKinley and James Garfield, and the dozens that celebrate the sinking of the TITANIC-or else your argument is little more than shoddy narcissism.
Three: I guess if we can’t have ballads from the point of view of people who took up arms against the lawfully constituted government of the United States, there go an awful lot of Civil War ballads, especially from the Southern side.
and, finally,
Four: Had JWL gone off and bombed an abortion clinic, he might not have had Steve Earle write a song about him-don’t count on it, by the way-but he also would have had the following:
a) a lawyer.
b) the rights guaranteed under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution.
c) people to make his bail.
and
d) prominent clerics to give him the, “We don’t approve of the tactics but...” defense.
Not to mention that:
If he’d killed a cop in Idaho, he’d get a couple of million bucks and an apology from the government.
If he’d been a lunatic apocalyptic who’d immolated children in rooms packed with gasoline, he’d be a martyred hero whose example prompted people blow up federal office buildings.
In fact, if he were a guy who’d bombed a clinic and then bombed a crowded park during the Olympics, he’d have people who’d hide him from the law, and he’d have an FBI that isn’t really looking that hard, and he wouldn’t even be in custody yet.
Given the choice, I think he’d trade in the song.



From Altercation.

The Rittenhouse Review notes that Nixon's comments about eye-talians are about the same as his comments about Jews. I do wonder why this isn't getting more media play, and why hereditary Democrat, and tireless crusader for Italian-American rights, Camille Paglia hasn't weighed in yet...

Charles Pierce letter to Media News:



From CHARLES PIERCE: Once, a long time ago, some Boston sportswriters helped to deprive Ted Williams of several shiny trophies by leaving him off their ballots out of personal spite. It should be noted that these people are now reckoned to be historic embarrassments. Yet, there's Mr. Milbank, right there at the pinnacle of American political journalism, admitting to Mr. Kurtz that the coverage of what only was the election of the President of the United States was corrupted root-and-branch by a petty, pre-adolescent animus toward one of the candidates. ("He thinks he's SO WICKED SMART. We'll get him at recess.") And Mr. Kurtz sits there and nods like a ceramic dog in the back window of a car. Apparently, he was exhausted, poor man, from the Herculean effort required to make sure that my friend and neighbor Karla Hailer-Fidelman didn't destroy the credibility of American journalism from the pages of the Newton TAB. Pardon me if I believe that the whole craft has gone out of its mind.




Look who Jeb has chosen to run Florida's child welfare agency.

TALLAHASSEE - The man named Thursday by Gov. Jeb Bush to head Florida's notoriously inept child welfare agency is an evangelical Christian who views spanking that causes ''bruises or welts'' as acceptable punishment.

The revelation did not come to Bush's attention until hours after the governor introduced Jerry Regier, a former Oklahoma Cabinet secretary and aide to Bush's father, as the new chief of the state's Department of Children and Families.

[,,]

In a 1989 essay entitled The Christian World View of the Family, Regier and co-author George Rekers railed against abortion and gay couples forming families, and emphasized that husbands have ``final say in any family dispute.''

And the essay declares that ''biblical spanking'' that leads to ``temporary and superficial bruises or welts do not constitute child abuse.''

The essay also said Christians should not marry non-Christians, that divorce is acceptable only when there is adultery or desertion and that wives should view working outside the home as ''bondage.'' The ''radical feminist movement,'' the essay adds, ``has damaged the morale of many women and convinced men to relinquish their biblical authority in the home.''

Max says all that needs to be said about Mickey and MWO.
Jeff Kramer, in Max's comments, has the best description I've seen of USS Clueless's (his name, not mine) latest diatribe:


When I read a Guardian's editorial saying (roughly) "capitalism-as-practiced results in poverty," I may say to myself "No, that's not the cause of poverty, and changing it won't be a cure," but it doesn't naturally occur to me to doubt that their motivation for wanting to do away with capitalism-as-practiced is because they want less poverty. Now you say I'm hopelessly naive, for they don't really want less poverty, they actually know that their prescription will destroy the Western world and they want us destroyed because we are what stands in the way of their real goal which is a global takeover by the faction they are really working for, which is of course AAAAAAAAAARRGGGGGHHH [the deadly shot from the hidden sniper finds its mark].

I'm sorry, but I don't know how else to take this talk about institutions of the left being "deliberately designed" for the ""long term goal" of "destroying our economy, because our economic might is part of what makes us formidable," and how all this seems self-evidently true to anybody obtaining his knowledge of the left from "Zmag and the Guardian." To me, OTOH, it seems self-evidently true that this is all a horseshit cocktail mixed from equal parts "Protocols of the Learned Elders of the Liberal Media" and the out-takes from "Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me."


TAPPED discusses t he efforts by states to reduce drug prices. This is kind of a no brainer. States are large customers so there is no reason they shouldn't use their bargaining power to get the deep discounts large customers always get.
Hesiod corrects the firefighter story. They did not decide to boycott the 9-11 tribute, just considered it. They are pissed.

He also points to Jeanne D'Arc's realization that the BBC has reported that the recent lawsuit by 9-11 victims' families also "targets the US government for failing to pursue the Saudis thoroughly enough because of oil interests."

This was left off every news report I heard, though it may have appeared in print versions.
Any conservative-libertarian bloggers comment on Rohrabacher or Barr? ANY?

Not that they need me to advertise, but MWO has their response to Brendan Nyhan up.


Without delving too much into the substance of Nyhan's work -- others have done that (off the top of my head) -- I have a "final" comment.

Spinsanity is a good site when they research and explain factual misrepresentations (you know, lies) by politicians or others. Where they always lose me is when they attempt to Broderize politics and the media. A bit of hyperbole, harmless exaggeration, or colorful humor should not be out of bounds of legitimate political discourse. In fact, it makes it all a bit fun.

I wish there was a higher level of political discourse in this country. But the problem isn't with MWO, or even Rush Limbaugh, it's on the pages of the Post and Times, every day on MSNBC, Fox, and CNN. There is no shortage of places to get wonky discourse, but as we've all learned screaming loudly works. It doesn't just work because the masses hear it -- it works because it is the only way for outsiders to get the mainstream media to pick up and trumpet their stories.

Here's an oldie but goodie by Dan Kennedy about MoDo. (submitted by Jeff Hauser).

Thursday, August 15, 2002

Daily Kos on how Rove Bush has managed to piss off Mexico, Firefighters, and Vets all in about 24 hours.
If I had a site called Spinsanity, I might write an article about someone who wrote this statement:

In these attacks, MWO echoes Limbaugh's "feminazi" epithet and Ann Coulter's claim in Slander that "the left is itching to silence conservatives once and for all".

The Hamster has some commentary on whether Americans are more comfortable with homosexuals in the workplace or the morality of Bob "3 wives" Barr.
Hesiod discovers that the Air Marshall Training Program has become no better than that for mall security.

He also makes the point that whatever one might think of Mineta and the job he's doing, the responsibility in the end falls on Bush. Or, to put it another way, rather than this whole Impeach Mineta idea that is being pushed by the usual suspects, wouldn't calling on Bush to Fire Mineta make more sense?

Or maybe Impeach Bush for Not Firing Mineta? That sounds okay too...


Look, the reason why one might feel inclined to impeach a president or supreme court justice is that these people can't be fired. Mineta can be - direct your ire at the man who keeps him there.

Max notes that General Schwarzkopf, no 5th column peacenik and who I believe took a trip or two to Iraq, said on Imus that there's no justification for invading.
Spinsanity says MWO are a bunch of meanies.



I started writing a critique of this, but I found it lacking at so many levels I really didn't know where to begin. I'll just say -- who cares what they think?

Josh Marshall has a fascinating post, which is a follow-up to the story about Rohrabacher's opponent accusing him of negotiating with the Taliban.

There's too much to C&P, so go read it, but there's a couple bits:


Now, I did a little research on this and based on my interviews and wire reports I've read, the story is actually true. In April 2001, Rohrabacher travelled to Doha, Qatar to attend a conference on "Free Markets and Democracy." While there, he met with a Taliban delegation led by Muttawakil. Al Jazeera reported that the two discussed Osama bin Laden, the situation of women and civil liberties. Rohrabacher told Agence France Presse that the conversation was "frank and open." And he told the Associated Press that Muttawakil's response to his plan was "thoughtful and inquisitive."

[...]


It turns out there's more. The Muttawakil meeting was attended by several members of the United States Congress, according to AP and AFP reports. Who those other members of Congress were is not clear. They don't seem to be jumping forward. Who are they? I'd like to know.

Still more interesting are the two groups who sponsored Rohrabacher's trip: the Egypt International Forum and the Islamic Institute. Those who follow Republican politics will recognize the Islamic Institute as the group Republican power broker Grover Norquist established to help corral American Muslims into the Republican party. Norquist has been a close friend and political ally of Karl Rove for a couple decades and he is now a close advisor to President Bush.




UPDATE: G Cabot notes that:



Muttawakil was interviewed in Saira Shah's Beneath the Veil and was asked why a football stadium, funded by international organizations, was being used for public executions.

Muttawakil replied, "Help us to build a place to conduct executions and we will not use the stadium."



At least Dana didn't get any donations from some out of state people with "arab-sounding names." Oh, wait, actually he did.


UPDATE 2: Chris Nelson has more on this.

Firefighters vote to boycott Bush's 9-11 Tribute.



The International Association of Fire Fighters voted unanimously on Wednesday to boycott a national tribute to firefighters who died on Sept. 11, in an angry response to U.S. President George Bush's rejection of a bill that included $340 million to fund fire departments.

Bush is expected to speak at the Oct. 6 ceremony in Washington D.C., where the National Fallen Fire Fighters Foundation is hosting its annual tribute to those who died in the line of duty during the prior year.

The ceremony will honor 343 firefighters who died responding to the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, as well as about 100 others who also died in the year.

The IAFF, the umbrella organization for the nation's professional firefighter unions, is enraged by the president's rejection of a $5.1 billion appropriations bill that included $150 million for equipment and training grants requested by some of the nation's 18,000 fire departments.

Wednesday, August 14, 2002

Digby on what Ail[e]s The Press:


This is a very interesting theory but it presupposes a certain self awareness and introspection on the part of the Washington pep squad and there is absolutely no evidence that Ashley Blitzer and Panchito Connolly have ever spent more than 30 seconds examining their motives about anything. Who has the time when you are rushing from newsroom to greenroom and practicing your derisive eye rolling for the camera?

The problem with the political press is obvious. It's Maureen Dowd.

She has single handedly created a new style of political writing that is best compared to a Mean Girls high school slumber party. Her "cultural" take on politics has devolved the entire press corp into a group of puerile social climbers who get points for how ruthlessly they are able to kick the designated geek (Crazy Al Gore.)

It's a sociological experiment gone horribly bad. The washington press corp, as demonstrated so perfectly by Dana Milbank last week-end, are a bunch of snide little bitches who have disposed of any responsibility for seriousness, substance or respect in order to curry favor with other "Maureen's"

The media are not rewarded for being serious, substantive or respectful. They are rewarded for being entertaining to each other. And 14 year old girls are entertained by social dramas.

Thanks Maureen. I sure wish she hadn't been stood up for the prom or whatever disappointment it was that stuck her in permanent adolescence. It would have made a big difference in this world.


[from my comments]
Smarter Andrew Sullivan has some new commentary, and Uncle Sam seems pretty interesting too.
One day someone should explain the obsession with Cornel West, and why there isn't similar scrutiny of the academic credentials of other Harvard University Professors. I'll suggest Robert Merton as a good place to start.

Hey, a fight! Max and Instapundit go head to head.



Biological Warfare and the Buffy Paradigm.



The characters in Buffy constantly try to create unrealistic plans and models, and live in a world where they never really face the level of uncertainty they must deal with. They do not live in a world of total denial, but they do seek predictability and certainty to a degree that never corresponds to the problems they face. In short, they behave as if they could create and live with the kind of strategy and doctrine that is typically developed by the US joint chiefs, could develop and implement an NSC decision memorandum, or solve their problems with the equivalent of a Quadrennial Defense Review, Now, if this use of a TV series to describe biological threats and biological warfare seems somewhat unusual, I invite you to consider the more conventional alternatives. We can speculate on scenarios, delivery methods, and lethality, we can conduct studies and exercises, and we can write doctrine until hell freezes over, but our chances of really being much better than Buffy are simply not that great – at least until we have a much clear picture of what kind of biological attacks actually materialize, how effective they really are, and how biotechnology evolves over the coming decades.


(Sent in by The Hauser Report)
Take it away libertarian law professors...


Camps for Citizens: Ashcroft's Hellish Vision

Attorney general shows himself as a menace to liberty.

By JONATHAN TURLEY
Jonathan Turley is a professor of constitutional law at George Washington University.

August 14 2002

Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft's announced desire for camps for U.S. citizens he deems to be "enemy combatants" has moved him from merely being a political embarrassment to being a constitutional menace.

Ashcroft's plan, disclosed last week but little publicized, would allow him to order the indefinite incarceration of U.S. citizens and summarily strip them of their constitutional rights and access to the courts by declaring them enemy combatants.

The proposed camp plan should trigger immediate congressional hearings and reconsideration of Ashcroft's fitness for this important office. Whereas Al Qaeda is a threat to the lives of our citizens, Ashcroft has become a clear and present threat to our liberties.
I really don't know what to make of the fact than an "executive jet" was trailing flight 93, and why we're just finding out about this now.
It took me a minute to understand why a search query for "cities in brazille" brought someone here.

I know the Mighty Casio doesn't work too well, but Sisyphus wonders why the story about Charles Shwab layoffs and closures in Texas wasn't used to frame stories about Bush's laughably bad PR stunt. The coverage, relative to the normal sycophantic drooling anyway, has been pretty negative as Josh Marshall points out, but this would have been an ideal hook.
Critiques of Editorials discusses what has to be the most wretchedly stupid editorial in history -- the Dallas Morning News extolls virtues of the telemarketing profession.

Don't read unless you have a bloody mary handy or are used to having your brain sucked out through your belly button with a straw.
Jane Galt wonders why we care about the Gore/Springsteen ticket flip. I have no idea why you right-leaning folk care, but us left-leaning folk care because we are tired of Anonymous Claims with Multiple On the Record Denials being put out there as fact even though they are HORSESHIT.

I'm sure Ceci and the Spite Girls will be writing about this a year from now.



Hesiod pays a visit to America's Premier Discussion Forum for Compassionate Conservatives and discovers the whole lot is in the advanced stages of syphilitic dementia.

Tuesday, August 13, 2002

Great column by Signorile:


But let’s get back to that pass the Bushies seem to get from the press and what the reasons for it might be. It’s been said that the media realized, far too late, just how ugly they got with Bill Clinton, sensationalizing, packaging andn selling a nothing scandal, ultimately greatly damaging our political system and affecting us all in detrimental ways. Now, this argument goes, they’re afraid of ever doing it again, so they’re being hyper-cautious with Bush–to the point of letting him off scot-free. Maybe that is true: The Washington Post, which railed endlessly against Clinton over Whitewater–the investigations of which cost millions of our taxpayer dollars and netted nada–wrote an editorial recently imploring us all to lay off of Bush regarding his Harken Energy scams (for the good of the country, you understand). And the Democrats, as it’s often been said, just don’t go for the jugular in the way the Republicans do, wimping out right when they should be thrusting forward, thus not helping the media to get a story with more bite.

Whatever the reasons, you can rest assured that if this were the Clinton administration in office rather than the W administration, the blaring attack headlines would be nonstop and tv news would be on the administration’s butt like there was no tomorrow. If Clinton and Gore were in the White House right now and were involved in the same corporate scandals, two independent investigations–one for Harken, one for Halliburton–would be under way. There would be congressional hearings about why we’ve failed to meet the primary mission in Afghanistan, why we didn’t get the leader of Al Qaeda and the leader of the Taliban, which would shift the entire debate on the effectiveness of the "war on terror." And there would be another investigation into why the administration was asleep at the switch from the get-go, as Time magazine’s cover story last week showed, stalling the previous administration’s antiterrorism activities.
[bold mine]

Regarding the bit in bold - I could buy that explanation except for one thing - they're STILL on Clinton/Gore as they were during Zippergate.

"This country's been through hard times before. And now we're going to go through them again."

-George W. Bush, demonstrating he is as crappy a cheerleader as he is businessman or president.
My Waco Bureau Chief, Snotglass, has this to say:


Tax and spend liberals have been desperately trying to play the old-style Washington blame game by attributing the recent recession to President Bush's economic policies. But recent reports released by the prestigious Byron ("Low Tax") Looper Center for Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute demonstrate that Presidential policies actually have little effect on the actual American economy. In spite of this illuminating report, radical Democrats insist on pathetically pursuing the failed and discredited strategy of seeking higher taxes, in the form of repealing the President's visionary tax-cut, in a forlorn hope of instituting bigger government and permanently establishing a socialist welfare state.

In accordance with his overwhelming electoral mandate, President Bush held an economic conference today that, in stark contrast to the exclusionary and secretive schemes of the previous administration, included Americans from all segments of society. This successful forum affirmed the support for the President's economic policies that his poll numbers indicate.

Disgruntled Democrats complained that they had not been invited, but most thoughtful observers realize the President's wisdom in not including those whose policies are directly responsible for the current Clinton recession. The President has evidently decided to make a clean break from the reckless economic policies of the failed Clinton administration that had such a dramatically negative effect on the American economy.

The President had already instituted many far-sighted policies that will stimulate growth in the economy. He has laid a strong foundation by providing tax cuts to the American tax payers and eliminating the wasteful Federal surplus. He has provided a morally honorable and dignified example for American business leaders to emulate, and demonstrated his basic sense of compassion by refusing to bend to the talking heads of the elite liberal media who are demanding unjust retribution fo right-thinking corporate executives who were
tempted by the promiscuious excesses of the Clinton administration.

In addition to his bold tax-stimulus plan, the President had opened many opportunities to working American families by eliminating the low-paying, dead-end jobs desperately created by the failed policies of the Clinton administration. In this far-reaching stroke, the President has provided motivation for Americans to seek and obtain more and better-paying jobs.

You people should be grateful for such visionary leadership in our elected President. In one afternoon, he has solved the American economic conundrum for decades to come, leaving this administration free to devote its considerable energies to the War on Iraq.
Bob Barr is attacking his conservative primary opponent for being too nice to gays. Just when I was starting to think I might miss the guy...

You'd think that on a day he's being featured as a prominent guest at Bush's little dog and pony show Charles Schwab would have put off making layoff and closure announcements. In TEXAS, no less.


Schwab to Lay Off 375, Close Texas Center

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Discount broker Charles Schwab Corp.(NYSE:SCH - News) on Monday said it will lay off 375 employees, or about 2 percent of its staff, and close its Austin, Texas, customer service center, to slash costs in the prolonged stock market downturn.

San Francisco-based Schwab, the biggest U.S. discount broker, expects to take a $36 million charge in the third quarter, but cut 2003 operating costs by about $26 million. Schwab said it also plans to consider other steps in the next few months to reduce expenses by $200 million a year.

...

Schwab, which earlier this month put out a memo forecasting more job cuts from its staff of 19,100, had axed 25 percent of its work force last year in a restructuring. Schwab also shed about 490 jobs in the first half of 2002. Schwab Chief Financial Officer Christopher Dodds last month told Reuters the company would likely end the year with about 18,000 employees.

Shuttering the Austin center would eliminate about 300 jobs. In addition, Schwab said it is cutting about 75 support and administrative jobs at four other client telephone service centers located in Denver, Indianapolis, Orlando and Phoenix.

Over the next 30 to 60 days, Schwab said it executive committee will consider further actions -- including more job cuts and cuts in discretionary spending.


oops

Reminds us of another Charles Schwab, president of Bethlehem Steel, who said in December, 1929:

[N]ever before had American finances been so soundly prepared for prosperity than now.





I do find it absolutely incredible that as far as I've seen, no mainstream news outlet picked up on Salon's story about America's Most Wanted handling calls for TIPS. Maybe I missed it.
Blogger's Block today for some reason. Maybe it is the heat.
As Matthew Yglesias points out, Kristoff asks the question:


Moreover, what was a man like Dr. Hatfill who had served in the armed forces of two white racist governments (Rhodesia and South Africa) doing in a U.S. Army lab working with Ebola? With a new wave of funding for smallpox and anthrax research, we must be doubly careful that the spread of pathogens to new labs solves problems rather than creates them.


But, we have a long history of employing unsavory types for unsavory jobs.

Monday, August 12, 2002

Though I appreciate Lou Dobbs' epiphany, I do have to wonder just how much Enron stock he owned..
U.S. to begin fingerprinting some foreign visitors, but not Saudis.
Jim, I think I know what you're getting at, BUT JUST COME RIGHT OUT AND TELL US WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
Baltimore Sun, 9/12/2001.

"In apparent terrorist attacks four commercial jetliners were hijacked. "

Atlanta Journal Constitution, 9/12/2001.

"Analysts say Tuesday's apparent terrorist attacks in New York and Washington will likely add more damage to investor confidence."

Boston Herald, 9/12/2001. Photo Caption:

"An apparent terrorist attack flattened the New York City landmark."

George W. Bush, on 9/11/2001

"Two planes have crashed into the World Trade Centre in an apparent terrorist attack on our country."

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 9/12/2001.


"The NFL closed its offices in midtown Manhattan after two planes were crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack. "

American Muslim Political Coordination Council, 9/11/2001.


"The American Muslim Political Coordination Council (AMPCC), today condemned the apparent terrorist attacks in New York and Washington and offered condolences to the families of those who were killed or injured. "




Tom Tomorrow finds this great quote by Ann Coulter.



Richard Blow, the former executive editor of George magazine, who is just back from a book tour promoting his book on John F. Kennedy Jr., comes over to ask how Miss Coulter is holding up, where she's been on her book tour.


"I told my publicist I'm an aspiring agoraphobic," she says. "So I've been to L.A., Washington and New York. It just gets overwhelming, all those crazy people out there."




Ethel the Blog has this to say about the report that Hugo Chavez refers to the Venezeulan media as nasty poopy heads, big dumb dorks, and occasionally even putas.


A CPJ report on Venezuela tells us how problems have "escalated" in Venezuela under Chavez, i.e. the physical attacks against journalists under previous presidents have "escalated" to Chavez calling the opposition, which includes the media, names. This is very, very serious, but I don't think another coup attempt is called for until Chavez resorts to dramatic irony or sarcasm. But if that vicious bastard uses litotes, then there's no other rational choice than an immediate invasion.


Chavez does spar with the media, who are unanimously aligned against him, but strangely they haven't been shut down or shot yet.

I have to admit I'm not all that sympathetic to Josh Marshall's understandable annoyance that the Washington Post has started running an online column with the name Talking Points. Had it been Talking Points Memo I'd be more sympathetic, but Talking Points itself is a standard phrase - use it at your own risk.

To put it another way -- if the WaPo had their Talking Points column first, and then tried to STOP Marshall from starting his own Talking Points Memo I'd be on Josh's side.


On the other hand, the Beltway journalist crowd is fairly small so good manners might suggest that the WaPo cease and desist, but only good manners.


Every story about Bush's fundraising greed does two things:

a) Makes it sound like a heroic achievement.

and

b) Frames it with "Even more than [that disgusting blowjob getting pervert scumbug] Clinton!"

Comments are only half working today. Ya get what ya pay for..
Get Your Exx On!

"If I was Saddam Hussein, I'd pay a human rights organization to draft an International Declaration to Have My Ass Overthrown! Cause you know the U.S. wouldn't go along with it!"
Demosthenes talks about pseudo-nymity online.

I don't have much to add to this issue, really. I'm anonymous because I worry about employment and personal consequences of what I write here. Given the excitability of certain online elements, I don't think the latter concern is that unreasonable. As for the former - maybe that's paranoia but given the long memory of Google I don't want my current and future employers being able to hold my words against me. A casual overview of what other Bloggers do tells me that many are either self-employed or otherwise have either financial/job security or careers which appear not too likely to be impacted by doing this type of thing. I don't make a living doing this, so I have to worry about that.

Having said that, I've stated before that I am not in any way a political or media insider. If I were, being anonymous might be an issue.

People are free to like it or not. It's quite silly to use it to undercut anything I say. In addition, contrary to what many in the Blogosphere like to say, there are plenty of pseudonyms on both sides of the political spectrum. People tend to ignore the issue when Bloggers they like have pseuds, and bring it up for Bloggers they don't like. Some people have no-linking (or no perma-linking) policies for "anonymous" Bloggers, which they institute on an inconsistent basis - which is fine, it's their sites.

The Washington Times recently started a regular pseudononymous column and I haven't heard much complaining. Ted Olson, with good reason, used to write with a pseud for The American Spectator, whose editor has chastized me and others for being anonymous. Well, whatever. It's a silly issue. Read my blog or don't, but I really don't care if you care that I'm anonymous. I do think it could be an issue at some point - as I said, if I were a political or media insider it'd be a fair issue. If I started publishing libelous stuff it would obviously be an issue. But, now? I don't think so.

Happy V-J Day to All Rhode Island Residents!
Critiques of Editorials appears to be a promising Salon Blog.
Quote of the Day

What sane person wouldn’t think he was “better than” the Washington press corps?

-Bob Somerby
From my comments:


You missed it, Kaus already explained it. Since the media is liberal it attacks failings in liberals harder than conservatives becasue of its disappointment. So you see, when the media attacks liberals it is actually showing its liberal bias. Of course, when it does the same to conservatives it also shows its liberal bias.


yep.
CHALLENGER GERRIE SCHIPSKE CHARGES CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA46) ILLEGALLY NEGOTIATED WITH TALIBAN


If only Dana were a Democrat... then I'm sure this would send paroxysms of outrage through Blogistan.


Recently released financial disclosure forms and news accounts in the Arab press confirm that Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher conducted secret and illegal negotiations with the Taliban in April 2001 while on a trip paid for by Islamic and Egyptian support organizations, charges his Democratic challenger, Gerrie Schipske.

“Rohrabacher traveled to the United Arab Emirate of Qatar and conducted secret, unauthorized negotiations with Osma Bin Laden’s protégé -- Taliban Foreign Minister Walid Ahmad Mutawakel in April 2001,” says Schipske. The Arab news media reports that Rohrabacher pressured the Government of Qatar to set up a private meeting between him and the Taliban’s Foreign Minister.

“Rohrabacher met with Mutawakel and gave him a document that outlined his own ‘personal peace plan’ and told Mutawakel to take it back to the Taliban,” Schipske explains. “It is simply outrageous that this rogue Congressman engaged in negotiations with the Taliban. He needs to explain why he tried to cut a deal on his own and what he promised the Taliban during the meeting.” Schipske urged Rohrabacher to release whatever documents he handed to the Taliban leader.

Rohrabacher’s secret dealings came to light after his 2001 Financial Disclosure was released in late July 2002 showing a trip to Qatar paid for by both the Egypt International Forum and the Islamic Institute. A quick search of the Arab press turned up several news accounts about Rohrabacher’s “unofficial meeting” with the Taliban. The same press accounts indicate that Rohrabacher admitted his secret meeting with the Taliban was “his own initiative” and did not “represent the position of the U.S. government.”

“Then why was Rohrabacher secretly negotiating with the Taliban?” asks Schipske. “If he had no authority to make a deal with the Taliban, then his negotiations were not only illegal but dangerous to our country.” Federal law – commonly referred to as the Logan Act -- makes it a felony for a citizen to negotiate with any foreign government or agent of a foreign government with the intent to influence the conduct of that foreign government. ...


I'm sure Congressman Surfboard is safe.

True Story: Dana was in Huntington Beach for a July 4 parade. Due to various runoff problems, swimming was banned that day. Dana went surfing anyway.

With the recent redistricting, there's a small chance Dana could get the boot. Dare to dream...Though with both him AND Dornan gone, Orange County would never be the same..

UPDATE: Just wanted to add that someone should at LEAST see if any "arab sounding people from out of state" donated to him. THAT would be damning indeed!!




Chris Nelson on Scalia's belief that he's more Catholic than the Pope.

Sunday, August 11, 2002

As Seeing the Forest reminds us, the Gore Tried to Scam Free Tickets, not that there's anything wrong with that, Story is reminiscent of the Clinton LAX haircut story, which was 100% pure horeshit. There was a real story there -- a delightful tale of a coordianted crap campaign by manipulative politicos, but that story was never as good as the Bill Clinton Got A Haircut And For Some Reasons Airplanes Couldn't Take Off Story.

Which, if you think about it, never made any goddamn sense anyway.

Michael Isikoff is unable to locate any oral sex in Padilla case.
This weekend's Reliable Sources was really full of fun stuff. Here's another:


MILBANK: You know what it is, Howie, I -- and I think that Gore is sanctimonious and that's sort of the worst thing you can be in the eyes of the press. And he has been disliked all along and it was because he gives a sense that he's better than us - he' better than everybody, for that matter, but the sense that he's better than us as reporters.

Whereas President Bush probably is sure that he's better than us -- he's probably right, but he does not convey that sense. He does not seem to be dripping with contempt when he looks at us, and I think that has something to do with the coverage .



Ah the liberal media..
Howard Kurtz teaches us all how to blame the victim:


KURTZ: He's never been successful in the courtship of the press.

Dear Jonah Goldberg,


An interesting travel diary would contain something other than stories about your experiences with bargain hotel minibars.

-A.
Snotglass on the Iraq situation:


President Bush and his trusted, experienced and savvy foreign policy team have presented a viable alternative to the socialist anti-democratic regime of Saddam Hussein. This breathtaking development, achieved through the direct leadership of our elected President, has removed the last obstacle preventing the liberation of the oppressed Iraqi people.

The President has crafted a rock solid coalition of the Iraqi opposition, consisting of a unified group of Iraqi opposition leaders, including representatives from the two main Kurdish factions, an Iranian-backed Shiite group, a monarchist group, a group that includes former Iraqi military officers and the Iraqi National Congress. Analysis by the Nguyen Cao Ky Institute at the Heritage Foundation proves that this group of dedicated and public-spirited Iraqis will provide a solid foundation for the construction of democratic institutions in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq. Independent polling research conducted by noted Middle East expert Jonah Goldberg and Choicepoint, Inc. reveals that the Iraqi opposition enjoys universal public support in Iraq.

The Bush administration foreign team can also draw on the vast experience gained through several weeks of successfully managing the spectacular transition todemocratic institutions in Afghanistan.

You liberals need to realize that America will never be safe until the axis of evil is eliminated and replaced by something else.
Why does Robert George hate America so much?


Following up on Deroy's great column Saudi Arabia on the site today, isn't it about time to turn conventional wisdom on its head? The CW of the last eleven years is that that Bush "41" made a serious mistake by not going onto Baghdad and taking Saddam out. Now even liberals who opposed the Gulf War parrot this line. Maybe everyone was/is wrong. Perhaps Bush 41's biggest mistake was in stopping Saddam from annexing Kuwait and, subsequently, Saudi Arabia. After all, who kept a radical Islamic state (Iran) in check during the '80s? Saddam. Do we really believe that Saddam in control of the Saudi oil fields would be harder to deal with than the current crew? Saddam is in it for regional power. As far as we can tell, he's not interested in launching an ideological Islamist crusade around the world -- unlike the people that the House of Saud are funding. Hmmm....


I have always wondered what changed between the time April Glaspie said "go for it, good buddy Saddam" and our decision that Saddam was The New Great Satan.


Charles Murtaugh notes that seven out of nine of the recently arrested pedophiles came from counties that voted for Bush.