American Politics, pt. 11

5009. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/3/2004 3:25:18 PM

5010. jexster - 12/3/2004 3:27:43 PM

Decades of Dominance - GOP Pipe Dream

5011. jexster - 12/3/2004 3:32:14 PM

Of Useful Idiots...

The civil rights movement split that fissure wide open. Second, the Vietnam War — and the Democrats' reaction to it — destroyed the party's credibility on foreign policy.

Republicans have social fissures of their own. A huge part of the GOP base (the religious right) votes Republican in the hope of enacting a radical social agenda that another part of the GOP base (suburbanites and the business elite) has no intent or desire to carry out.

5012. thoughtful - 12/3/2004 3:34:47 PM

jex on air america, they call it the talibush.

5013. jexster - 12/3/2004 10:51:24 PM

Kevin Drum's CABINET RESHUFFLE UPDATE....Tommy Thompson has resigned as secretary of the Health and Human Services Department. We're now up to eight cabinet resignations, with a ninth expected soon. Here's a scorecard:


State: Resigned.


Treasury: "Can stay as long as he wants, provided it is not very long."


Defense: Rummy forever!


Attorney General: Resigned.


Interior: Gale Norton.


Agriculture: Resigned.


Commerce: Resigned.


Labor: Elaine Chao.


HHS: Resigned.


HUD: Alphonso Jackson.


Transportation: Norm Mineta.


Energy: Resigned.


Education: Resigned.


Veterans Affairs: Anthony Principi.


Homeland Security: Resigned.


Only six left to go for a clean sweep!

5014. jexster - 12/3/2004 11:09:36 PM

Dumb and Dumber Dumbs Down the Hotchpot Security Department


Bush, sensibly, gave Kerik a pre-hire tryout in the summer of 2002 in a gig that his experience prepped him much better for, training Iraqi police. So how'd Kerik do? Pretty poorly. Kerik's credited with upping the equipment of the forces, but he also neglected to run any background checks, meaning that, after Kerik left, the Iraqi police were so corrupt and insurgent-friendly that American leaders eventually demanded a purge. I write "after Kerik left" because he only stayed in Iraq for three months, leaving with no public announcement and for reasons which remain a mystery and which Newsday, among other outlets, has been trying to uncover ever since. The job, of course, was far from finished. In October, Prime Minister Iyad Allawi complained that the American training of his force was insufficient: "[The police's] capabilities are not complete and the situation is very difficult now in respect to creating the forces and getting them ready to face the challenges." That's not all Kerik's fault, but the problem he was assigned to fix probably deserved a stay of more than ninety days.

So what does Kerik have going for him?


Bernie Gives Good Schtick

5015. jexster - 12/4/2004 12:33:21 AM

DEMO Crack Ho's...

GUTLESS GRANHOLM ENDS BENEFITS FOR GAYS....On November 2, Michigan voters approved Proposal 2 to ban same-sex marriage. Here it is in its entirety:

To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

5016. robertjayb - 12/4/2004 1:59:48 PM

Star Tribune nails Coleman on U.N. flapdoodle...

...This is really all about Annan's refusal to toe the Bush line on Iraq and the administration's generally unilateral approach to foreign affairs. The right-wingers hate Annan and saw in the food-for-oil program a possible chink in his armor. They went after it with a venomous fury. Coleman seems only too eager to aid their cause.

5017. concerned - 12/4/2004 8:21:48 PM

Give me a break. The corruption of the UN Oil for Food scandal makes Enron look like nothing by comparison and was far, far more serious in its consequences, since the corruption reached high into the levels of European governments as well as involving Kofi Annan's son, and allowed Saddam to augment his military while impoverishing the very Iraqis it was supposed to help.

To attempt to whitewash all of this UN wrongdoing and point fingers at the Bush Administration who were innocent bystanders in all of that is ridiculous and hysterical.

5018. concerned - 12/4/2004 8:46:05 PM

How times have changed. The US Left used to stand up for the little guy. Now they are calling him a stupid, bigoted religious nutcase.

5019. wonkers2 - 12/4/2004 8:47:41 PM

Granholm's action and the UAW's acquiescence in it surprised me. She opposed the constitutional amendment as did the GOP, and allegedly she hopes the court ruling will turn out favorably for partner benefits. Polls before the election indicated, as I recall, that a majority of Michigan voters support civil unions but are opposed to gay marriage. The amendment was sold on the basis that it would preclude same sex marriages but the words don't sound good for benefits, etc, for gay partners. I'm not sure what her rationale was for suspending the benefits her administration only recently negotiated.

5020. arkymalarky - 12/4/2004 11:11:22 PM

The US Left used to stand up for the little guy. Now they are calling him a stupid, bigoted religious nutcase.

I somewhat agree with this. The left really needs to reconnect as true equals with the people it used to claim to most represent. I know liberals who were stunned at the results of the election and those same liberals have the alienating attitude toward working class people that contributed to our defeat.

5021. wonkers2 - 12/4/2004 11:42:05 PM

The Dems need another Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter or Huey Long!

5022. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2004 12:47:58 AM

I'll take Carter.

5023. arkymalarky - 12/5/2004 1:50:01 AM

They need to do like the Republicans and let their message transcend the idiocy of their candidate.

5024. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2004 1:56:35 AM

5025. jexster - 12/5/2004 2:53:36 PM

Daniel Pipes is an academic partisan of the Bush Wing of the Likud Party...a prominent Crusader and outspoken IraQ warmonger..

By their deeds ye shall know them

Card wins Legal Action against Pipes Juan Cole

Daniel Pipes and Jonathan Schanzer settled a libel suit out of court with University of Oregon instructor Douglas Card. They had accused Card of being anti-semitic (i.e. a racist) and of being a leftwing extremist.

Pipes has a history of levelling wild charges against academics, and of being unreliable (he said in 2002 that Saddam was 2-5 years away from having an atomic bomb). He appears to have become concerned that Card had an excellent case and would win a big settlement, so he backed off and withdrew the charges, settling with Card.

Pipes had also put up a dossier on yours truly in 2002, accusing me of being unpatriotic, and asking that people who knew me (including presumably students and colleagues) to spy on me for him, and send him surveillance reports (he had helpfully included a web form for their submission). As a result of this targetting of me and 7 other academics, Israeli hackers nested illegally in US servers and set up spam robot programs that targetted our email addresses with 1400 offensive messages a day, in an attempt to cripple us on the internet. Like Card, I responded legally, by pointing out to Pipes that his actions could be construed as a form of cyberstalking, which is illegal in Michigan. He took down the dossier, saving me the trouble of initiating a court action. And the FBI got involved in tracking down the mass automated spammers, who felt the heat and disappeared.

5026. jexster - 12/5/2004 2:57:51 PM

Give me a break...Enron alone ripped off 750 Million Bucks pure profit in the six months that Bush let the fox into the chicken coop.

The sheer hypocrisy of it all...If Sen. Hack Coleman really wants to do something about lies, incompetence and crony capitalis corruption - try investigatin Bush/Cheney, Halliburton, the War on Iraq

5027. PelleNilsson - 12/5/2004 3:01:11 PM

Pipes is a strange fellow who has never achieved the academic credibility his father, Richard Pipes, enjoys.

5028. jexster - 12/5/2004 3:18:25 PM

I didn't know that R was his dad...I have read every book Pipes The Elder has published...There's none better on Russian history

5029. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2004 3:58:24 PM

I have read every book Pipes The Elder has published...There's none better on Russian history

And you don't even bother to acknowledge Stalin II?

5030. concerned - 12/6/2004 12:50:36 AM

Re. 5026, wrt hypocrisy, what a self-referential post.

Europe, Inc. allowed Saddam to rip off 20 billion bucks that were subsequently used to murder Iraqis and Coalition troops. No telling how many billions in corrupt money wound up in Eurobureaucrat pockets.

5031. jexster - 12/6/2004 1:45:41 AM

Spare us the crocodile tears.

The corruption in Iraq is every bit as bad now as it was under Saddam. With or without Oil for Food, corruption is how business is done in Iraq and George Bush's Washington

5032. jexster - 12/6/2004 2:10:50 AM

Kerik on critics of the war: "Political criticism is our enemies' best friend."

(As quoted in Newsday, Oct. 20, 2003)

5033. jexster - 12/6/2004 2:13:04 AM

That's because he isn't Stalin

Il Duce II

5034. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/6/2004 2:25:42 AM

5035. jexster - 12/6/2004 3:12:40 PM

Bush: 'Terrorists Still on the Move'

Gunmen attack US consulate in Jeddah, at least eight killed

Well DUH

5036. jexster - 12/6/2004 3:15:55 PM

5037. jexster - 12/6/2004 3:41:28 PM

From Chief of IraQ State Security to VaterLand Security - the Meteoric Rise of Another Bush Hack

Terrorist are truly on the move

5038. alistairConnor - 12/6/2004 3:56:53 PM

Hey, he was sent to Iraq as part of the War on Terror.
To fix up security.

Now, he's going to do for the USA what he did for Iraq...

5039. jexster - 12/6/2004 5:04:44 PM

TD..when Sen Hack of Minnesota starts investigating the lies, incompetence, and crony capitalist corruption of the NeoFascist-in-Chief you be sure to let me know.

DeLay Salts a Load of NASA Pork

Without a separate vote or even a debate, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) has managed to deliver to a delighted NASA (news - web sites) enough money to forge ahead on a plan that would reshape U.S. space policy for decades to come.

5040. jexster - 12/6/2004 5:10:45 PM

Coalition of the Willing - Mad as Hell....Not Gonna Take It Anymore!

Drafted De Facto - Soldiers Challenge Enlistment Extensions

5041. thoughtful - 12/6/2004 5:21:04 PM

More scary stuff courtesy of frank rich...red ruling the airwaves.

A creepier example of the shift toward red news could also be found last weekend when ABC's prime-time magazine show "20/20" aired an hourlong "investigation" into the brutal 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard in the red state of Wyoming.....The reporter, Elizabeth Vargas, told us that while the pair had been "variously portrayed in press reports as 'rednecks' and 'trailer trash,' " they were actually just all-American everymen with "steady jobs, steady girlfriends and classically troubled backgrounds." Aaron McKinney, the killer who beat Shepard into an unrecognizable pulp, wasn't even challenged on camera when he said he had "gay friends" (none of whom were produced or persuavely vouched for by ABC) and that he had only invoked a homophobic "gay panic" defense in his trial because that's what the lawyers told him to do. What's not to like about the guy?

5042. thoughtful - 12/6/2004 5:21:26 PM

and...

Kevin Sites, the freelance TV cameraman who caught a marine shooting an apparently unarmed Iraqi prisoner in a mosque, is one such blogger. Mr. Sites is an embedded journalist currently in the employ of NBC News. To NBC's credit, it ran Mr. Sites's mid-November report, on a newscast in which Mr. Williams was then subbing for Mr. Brokaw, and handled it in exemplary fashion. Mr. Sites avoided any snap judgment pending the Marines' own investigation of the shooting, cautioning that a war zone is "rife with uncertainty and confusion." But loud voices in red America, especially on blogs, wanted him silenced anyway. On right-wing sites like freerepublic.com Mr. Sites was branded an "anti-war activist" (which he is not), a traitor and an "enemy combatant." Mr. Sites's own blog, touted by Mr. Williams on the air, was full of messages from the relatives of marines profusely thanking the cameraman for bringing them news of their sons in Iraq. That communal message board has since been shut down because of the death threats by other Americans against Mr. Sites.

5043. judithathome - 12/6/2004 5:40:49 PM

Wonder how the news that Tillman was killed by friendly fire will be received by the Reds?

5044. thoughtful - 12/6/2004 5:55:39 PM

ironic isn't it, that the party that made it's hay for decades fighting the 'commie reds' is now picking up the same 'reds' moniker!

5045. jexster - 12/6/2004 7:06:09 PM

Its a Baleful BushWorld we live in but somebody's got to take responsibilty even as he won't...

Reaching into a void
For mayor's team of street crusaders, getting the chronically homeless into housing requires patience as they battle their addictions -- and persistence if they relapse

5046. jexster - 12/6/2004 7:14:27 PM

When the going gets tough, the BushShitters get the shit out of Dodge or Baghdad as the case may be....

Remember that on August 7th, the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad was bombed -- the first high-profile terrorist act since the war. Then on August 19th a truck bomb destroyed the UN compound in the Iraqi capital killing seventeen, including the head of the UN mission, Sérgio Vieira de Mello.

Then, only a few days later, a few press reports noted for the first time -- in most cases just in passing -- that Kerik was preparing to leave the country.

Feeling safe yet?

Maybe Sen. Hack of Minnesota will investigate!

5047. robertjayb - 12/6/2004 7:20:51 PM

Ten points* about the U.N. oil-for-food kerfuffle...

*concerned should avoid these as they conflict with his rightist talking points.

5048. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/6/2004 8:28:58 PM

Thanks for that link, robert.

5049. jexster - 12/6/2004 10:59:59 PM

Yes Robert No Five is interesting....I am sure it will be in Sen Hack hatchet job..err report

5. The Bush administration dropped the ball (dozens of times). The United Nations Security Council was responsible for oversight of the program. Specifically, it was the role of a Security Council subcommittee to monitor all contracts awarded under the Oil-for-Food Program. The United States had a representative on that committee during the entire duration of the Oil-for-Food Program, yet failed to blow the whistle. UN administrators identified at least 70 cases for potential over-pricing of oil between 2001 and 2002. None of these cases were held up for pricing issues by the UN Security Council, where Ambassador John Negroponte represented the United States, and most were later approved

5050. jexster - 12/6/2004 11:00:42 PM

As Coleman's hometown paper puts it, "Good old Norm; it appears there's nothing he won't do for a headline."

5051. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/6/2004 11:17:39 PM

Coleman's twice as odious because he replaced Wellstone - what a dark time!

5052. thoughtful - 12/7/2004 10:08:16 AM

talk about your dark times, not only is it awful that they're talking about replacing snow with andrew card, but now they're speculating who will replace greenspan, and the slate so far doesn't look good.

5053. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/7/2004 12:39:37 PM

And wtf . . .

Reid Says He Could Back Scalia for Chief Justice - Comments Anger Liberals And Thomas Supporters

5054. jexster - 12/7/2004 4:04:41 PM

First IraQ, now Social Security..its Deja Vu Bush-Shit all over again..


OP-ED COLUMNIST
Inventing a Crisis
By PAUL KRUGMAN


The first cost hundreds of billions...this scam runs to 13 figures

5055. jexster - 12/7/2004 4:07:12 PM

there is a long-run financing problem.

But it's a problem of modest size. The report finds that extending the life of the trust fund into the 22nd century, with no change in benefits, would require additional revenues equal to only 0.54 percent of G.D.P. That's less than 3 percent of federal spending - less than we're currently spending in Iraq. And it's only about one-quarter of the revenue lost each year because of President Bush's tax cuts - roughly equal to the fraction of those cuts that goes to people with incomes over $500,000 a year.

Do the arithmetic...see the scam

5056. robertjayb - 12/7/2004 4:08:35 PM

See Atrios on Family Values...

Just teaching her how to have fun without drinking and dancing...

5057. jexster - 12/7/2004 5:36:38 PM

The Company's Warm Langley Welcome for its New Hack-of-"Intelligence", Porter the Pitiful

2 C.I.A. Reports Offer Warnings on Iraq's Path

A secret cable sent by the C.I.A.'s chief in Baghdad warned that the situation in Iraq is deteriorating and may not rebound soon

Meanwhile on Capitol Hill, Sen Hack of Minnesota announced that he will convene a comprehensive investigation of the Bush Regime's latest IraQ lies..








April FOOL!

5058. jexster - 12/7/2004 5:40:44 PM

What oh what is to be done?!?!?!?


Together, the appraisals, which follow several other such warnings from officials in Washington and in the field, were much more pessimistic than the public picture being offered by the Bush administration before the elections scheduled for Iraq next month, the officials said. The cable was sent to C.I.A. headquarters after American forces completed what military commanders have described as a significant victory, with the retaking of Falluja, a principal base of the Iraqi insurgency, in mid-November.



I got it!


Call for Kofi Annan's resignation!

5059. wonkers2 - 12/7/2004 6:23:55 PM

Too bad more people don't read Krugman!

5060. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/8/2004 2:22:51 AM

5061. Macnas - 12/8/2004 11:06:48 AM

Just for jolly:

Top ten most amazing proposed amendments to the constitution, that, for better or worse, never passed:

1. An attempt to abolish the U.S. Senate. (1876)
2. An Executive Council of three, to replace the President. (1878)
3. Renaming the country, "The United States of the Earth." (1893)
4. Acknowledging that the constitution recognize God and Jesus Christ as the supreme authorities in human affairs. (1894)
5. A proposition that all acts of war be put to a national vote. Anyone voting yes would have to register as a volunteer. (1916)
6. An attempt to limit personal wealth to $1 million. (1933)
7. The forbidding of drunkenness in the United States and all of its territories. (1938)
8. The income tax for an individual shall not exceed 25%. (1947)
9. American citizens should have the right to an environment free of pollution. (1971)
10. Defining marriage as strictly between men and women. (2003)

5062. thoughtful - 12/8/2004 5:19:29 PM

Hahahahahaha....Just announced, snow will remain sec of treasury...you don't suppose it's because they couldn't find anyone else who'd take the job, do you?


hahahahahaha

5063. jexster - 12/8/2004 11:52:58 PM

Torture, Lies, Incompetence - One of the Top Strategic Blunders in US History

Sen Hack of Minnesota: "Let's Fire Kofi Annan"

5064. jexster - 12/9/2004 1:51:54 PM

Guess who's being mentioned again for Energy Sec.


Guess who received another DO NOT missive from me

5065. Ronski - 12/9/2004 11:45:53 PM

I'm still thinking about numbers 5 and 8.

5066. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 3:27:58 AM

Deck The F**kin' Halls!

5067. alistairconnor - 12/10/2004 6:04:03 AM

Ronski : I'm still thinking about numbers 5 and 8.

Add 2, 6 and 9 and you've got a deal.

5068. thoughtful - 12/10/2004 12:11:24 PM

All this bit about the soldier vs. rummy. Who cares that the reporter had talked to the soldier ahead of time about the question. The soldier has a mind of his own, no? He could have clearly ignored the reporters suggestion. And certainly the reaction of those in the crowd was spontaneous...not like some prearranged tgiving dinner where if you don't swear fealty to the pres you get k-rations in your tent vs. a turkey dinner.

And of course rummy answered with lies. You go to war with the army you've got if you have NO CHOICE but to go to war. They were planning for this one since w took office. They had 100% choice as to when to go in and how to go in. They had all the time in the world to get as prepared as they wanted. They clearly didn't want to...rummy's 'war on the cheap' experiment.

Despite all the cabinet changes already made, it's clear to me there haven't yet been enough!

5069. judithathome - 12/10/2004 12:16:18 PM

If there were more Congressional member's children over there risking their lives, you bet your ass there were be armor on those HumVees...the company that makes those things said they could armor them on no time but they haven't received orders (or money) from the Pentagon to do so...I guess that $87 million was eaten up by Halliburton.

5070. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 1:10:02 PM

Afraid to look in the moral abyss

By James Carroll | December 7, 2004

WHY DON'T we Americans look directly at the war? We
avert our gaze, knowing that the situation in Iraq
grows more desperate by the day. Vaunted "coalition"
efforts to "break the back" of the "insurgency" have
only strengthened it. The violence among Iraqis would
surely qualify as civil war -- except that only one
side is fighting. The structures of relief and repair
are gone. Whole cities are destroyed, populations
displaced. The hope of Iraqi elections is mortally
compromised. "Coalition" members are dropping out.

The mission of American force is to secure the
country, but it can't secure itself. The performance
of US intelligence has been consistent: Its strategic
failures caused the war, and its tactical ignorance of
the enemy is losing the war.

Meanwhile, in America, this, the gravest foreign
policy crisis in a generation, source of a crisis of
conscience for tens of millions of citizens, is not a
subject of political debate. For many months, overt
opposition to the war was sublimated in the effort to
defeat George W. Bush in the November election.

5071. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 1:10:47 PM

John Kerry's fatal ambivalence about Iraq sealed the
war off from the great quadrennial decision, with the
result that the voices of those who hated the war were
muted, and the uneasiness of those who were troubled
by it was never addressed.

Astoundingly, the Democrats cooperated with the
Republicans in assuring that the war in Iraq -- the
one thing that might have defeated Bush -- was not an
issue. That marginalization of the anti-war impulse
continues in the suspended animation of a period after
the American election and before the Iraqi election.

The new Bush administration has moved to reconfigure
itself in most ways but one. The president's
affirmation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld,
in combination with his naming of Condoleezza Rice as
secretary of state, reflects a blind determination to
"stay the course" in Iraq, never mind that the course
is heading off a cliff.

The main US news media treat the "story" of Iraq as if
it is a morality tale about 20-year-old Americans -- a
few of whom are shown making bad choices, but most of
whom are lionized as heroes. When their deaths are
mourned on television each night -- that heartbreaking
silence under those smiling commissary snapshots --
the effect is to deepen the paralysis of the American
public, which can only look away.

5072. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 1:11:53 PM

The barbarity of the Iraqi insurgency has been a
particular source of repugnance. First it was
hostage--taking, and beheading -- low-tech "shock and
awe" assaults aimed at "foreigners," pr ecisely to
terrorize their sponsoring populations. The apparent
murder of the admirable Margaret Hassan, war-opponent
and humanitarian worker, was especially deplorable.

Then it was systematic attacks on Iraqis themselves,
anyone daring to cooperate with the "coalition"
occupiers. The execution-style murders of Iraqi police
recruits and soldiers in recent weeks has been
chilling, and now workers on a bus are massacred. What
makes these tactics so appalling is their intensely
personal character.

But it takes a disciplined imagination to acknowledge
that the less personal savageries of bombs, missiles,
artillery, and heavy weapons are, to those blown to
smithereens, also barbaric. The main horror of what
the "coalition" is doing is not a matter of the
occasional soldier who, in the heat of battle, commits
a war crime, but the steady destruction rained on
cities, villages, the Iraqi people. This violence is
wreaked calmly , from a distance, within the rules of
engagement.

5073. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 1:12:29 PM

The war itself is the American war crime. But that is
lost in the "normalcy" of the news.
On the other side, it is the proliferation of
suicide-bombing that has come to seem normal. Soldiers
commonly risk their lives for nation, honor, or buddy
-- but they will not kill themselves with forethought,
in large numbers, except for the most transcendent of
reasons. The United States has given itself an enemy
that shows by its central tactic that it is fighting
for God.

Americans, meanwhile, are so confused about religion
that we have just been through an election in which
"religious values" were defined as key, but precisely
in ways that kept the war out of the discussion.
America's purpose in Iraq is a compound of such
deflection, self-deception, half-measures, and shallow
thinking. The opposition, meanwhile, is absolute and
unblinking. That difference partly answers the
question with which this column began, but mainly we
avert our eyes because the war is a moral abyss. If we
dare to look, as Nietzsche said, the abyss stares back.


James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe.

5074. jexster - 12/10/2004 2:42:32 PM

Amen..."Kerry's fatal ambivalence...." The greatest strategic blunder and moral outrage that the US has perpetrated in 3 decades ...elections are about klieg lights..

5075. jexster - 12/10/2004 2:43:25 PM

How sad...

The Post discusses the president's domestic policy plans and particularly the effort to phase out Social Security.

One nice passage: "To build public support and circumvent critics in Congress and the media, the president will travel the country and warn of the disastrous consequences of inaction, as he did to sell his Iraq and terrorism policies during the first term, White House officials said."

This would seem to be an analogy critics could use to some good effect.

-- Josh Marshall

5076. jexster - 12/10/2004 2:49:53 PM

THE KINGDOM OF KRONY KAPITALIST KORRUPTION
Security Post Would Put Kerik Atop Field That Enriched Him

5077. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 3:52:29 PM

Ask Senator Doormat . . .

5078. robertjayb - 12/10/2004 4:15:33 PM

MoveOn to Dems: "We bought it, we own it."

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Liberal powerhouse MoveOn has a message for the "professional election losers" who run the Democratic Party: "We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."

A scathing e-mail from the head of MoveOn's political action committee to the group's supporters on Thursday targets outgoing Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe as a tool of corporate donors who alienated both traditional and progressive Democrats.

5079. jexster - 12/10/2004 4:25:59 PM

Know Your Bush Hack
Who in the Fuck is Bernard Kerik?

5080. Wombat - 12/10/2004 5:34:41 PM

Too bad the soldier couldn't riposte: we go to war with the incompetent leadership we have, not with the competent leadership we would like to have.

5081. judithathome - 12/10/2004 6:02:11 PM

Amen!

5082. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/10/2004 10:59:51 PM

5083. jexster - 12/10/2004 11:59:48 PM

SOCIAL SECURITY AROUND THE WORLD....Airy fairy theorizing is one thing, but how about some concrete data in the great Social Security privatization debate. In particular, how has Social Security privatization fared in other countries that have tried it? After all, the United States isn't the first country to think about doing this. Let's take a peek.

5084. robertjayb - 12/11/2004 1:39:29 AM

Kerik Abandons. Nanny trouble. Sure.

WASHINGTON -- In a surprise move, former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik abruptly withdrew his nomination as President Bush's choice to be homeland security secretary Friday night, saying questions have arisen about the immigration status of a housekeeper and nanny he employed.

The decision caught the White House off guard and sent Bush in search of a new candidate to run the sprawling bureaucracy of more than 180,000 employees melded together from 22 disparate federal agencies in 2003.

5085. judithathome - 12/11/2004 1:44:48 AM

Heh...guess it's back to the storage unit for all those statues of old Bern.

5086. clydefo - 12/11/2004 4:50:52 AM

I'll wager that this tough old bird will also swear in Bush's successor.


Rehnquist to swear in President Bush
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/10/rehnquist/index.html

5087. jexster - 12/11/2004 3:24:03 PM

Its every Hack for himself....

5088. jexster - 12/11/2004 3:40:34 PM

A certain large canine has asked a certain former congressman to run for DNC chair...that's all I can say for now

5089. jexster - 12/11/2004 3:42:26 PM

In all the flurry of stories about Bernard Kerik, I must confess that I missed this one in Wednesday's Post about his time in Saudi Arabia. This had been one of the many apparent feathers in Kerik's cap.

But according to the Post article ...

Since he was nominated last week to be homeland security secretary, however, nine former employees of the hospital have said that Kerik and his colleagues were carrying out the private agenda of the hospital's administrator, Nizar Feteih, and that the surveillance was intended to control people's private affairs. Feteih became embroiled in a scandal that centered in part on his use of the institution's security staff to track the private lives of several women with whom he was romantically involved, and men who came in contact with them, the ex-employees said.

5090. jexster - 12/11/2004 3:49:18 PM

Newsweek's Mark Hosenball suggests that his investigation may have been what scotched the Kerik nomination. And he may be right. According to this story on the Newsweek website, early this evening Newsweek reporters faxed the White House documents detailing an arrest warrant that was issued for Kerik in 1998, stemming from a dispute over unpaid bills for a condo he owned in New Jersey.

-- Josh Marshall

5091. Ronski - 12/11/2004 6:22:06 PM

Kerik clearly had more baggage than an illegal nanny.

But he was pretty good in the NYC Corrections Department, despite a couple of bad hires and promotions. Peter principle, I suppose.

5092. wonkers2 - 12/11/2004 6:48:21 PM

The job requires a more broad gauge person.

5093. robertjayb - 12/11/2004 7:20:15 PM

That sweetheart stock option deal that netted several million sounds an awful lot like dubya's golden experience as an "owner" of the Texas Rangers baseball team. Shouldn't have been a problem for the bushies.

5094. thoughtful - 12/12/2004 12:23:41 PM

Required reading...frank rich on The Plot Against Sex in America

In tune with the "moral values" crusaders, the Web site for the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has obscured and downplayed the important information that condoms are overwhelmingly effective in preventing sexually transmitted diseases. (A nonprofit organization supporting comprehensive sex education, Advocates for Youth, publicized this subterfuge and has been rewarded with three government audits of its finances in eight months.)

and

you can turn on CNN in December 2004 and watch Genevieve Wood of the Family Research Council repeatedly refuse - five times, according to the transcript - to disown the idea that masturbation can cause pregnancy.

Ms. Wood was being asked about that on "Crossfire" because a new Congressional report, spearheaded by the California Democrat Henry Waxman, shows that various fictions of junk science (AIDS is spread by tears and sweat, for instance) have turned up as dogma in abstinence-only sex education programs into which American taxpayers have sunk some $900 million in five years. Right now this is the only kind of sex education that our government supports, even though science says that abstinence-only programs don't work - or may be counterproductive. A recent Columbia University study found that teens who make "virginity pledges" to delay sex until marriage still have premarital sex at a high rate (88 percent) rivaling those that don't, but are less likely to use contraception once they do. It's California, a huge blue state that refuses to accept federal funding for abstinence-only curriculums, that has a 40 percent falloff in teenage pregnancy over the past decade, second only to Alaska.

5095. jexster - 12/12/2004 1:46:57 PM

The Responsibility President Puts Blame on Kerik

5096. jexster - 12/12/2004 1:47:49 PM

From Rikers Island to infamy

5097. jexster - 12/12/2004 1:51:12 PM

The Homeland Security Dept is a huge mess. The story isn't the sort to make headlines in newspapers but lemme tell ya it is the Case Study du Jour in Public Admin journals and trade magazines.


For Bush to even think about putting a hack like Kerik in charge of HSD speaks volumes for the incompetence, worse - the utter contempt for competence that this regime has

5098. robertjayb - 12/12/2004 3:09:06 PM

Josh Marshall has goods on Cash-N-Kerik...

5099. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/12/2004 4:10:02 PM

5100. jexster - 12/12/2004 5:33:58 PM

Any hope that his sabatical had cleared the cotton candied cob webs from Friedman's brain, he dashed in today's rant cum OpEd wondering why no one wants to help Bush out of his mega mess in IraQ...

5101. jexster - 12/12/2004 5:36:44 PM

Leaked by rogue elements in the Bush regime...

IAEA Leader's Phone Tapped
U.S. Pores Over Transcripts to Try to Oust Nuclear Chief

Washington Post



The Bush administration has dozens of intercepts of Mohamed ElBaradei's phone calls with Iranian diplomats and is scrutinizing them in search of ammunition to oust him as director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to three U.S. government officials.

But the diplomatic offensive will not be easy. The administration has failed to come up with a candidate willing to oppose ElBaradei, who has run the agency since 1997, and there is disagreement among some senior officials over how hard to push for his removal, and what the diplomatic costs of a public campaign against him could be.

Although eavesdropping, even on allies, is considered a well-worn tool of national security and diplomacy, the efforts against ElBaradei demonstrate the lengths some within the administration are willing to go to replace a top international diplomat who questioned U.S. intelligence on Iraq and is now taking a cautious approach on Iran.

The intercepted calls have not produced any evidence of nefarious conduct by ElBaradei,
...
"However this effort is justified by the administration, the assumption internationally will be that the United States was blackballing ElBaradei because of Iraq and Iran," said Robert Einhorn, who was assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation until 2001.

5102. alistairConnor - 12/12/2004 6:23:35 PM

This is worrying because it appears that they are determined to sink the deal brokered by the Europeans, and adds weight to the thesis of a planned Israelo-American strike on Iran. Which, obviously, would be a disaster, of Iraqi proportions or worse.

5103. jexster - 12/12/2004 6:27:33 PM

Most definitely the Grand Plan...that's why Bush sent Sen Hack HatchetMan Coleman after Kofi Annan

Bush thinks he can steamroller the world into submission just like he did the Democrats in Congress...

Hubris..a killer every time

5104. jexster - 12/13/2004 1:58:24 AM

Puppets of the Likud: AIPAC/Bush Spy Case Heats Up - Juan Cole



Richard Sales, veteran UPI terrorism correspondent, reveals the explosive information that

' In 2001, the FBI discovered new, "massive" Israeli spying operations in the East Coast, including New York and New Jersey, said one former senior U.S. government official

5105. jexster - 12/13/2004 1:47:43 PM

Strained Ties With the President

The collapse of Bernard Kerik's nomination has strained the relationship between former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and President Bush.

5106. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/13/2004 2:11:16 PM

GOP May Target Use of Filibuster


Republicans say that Democrats have abused the filibuster by blocking 10 of the president's 229 judicial nominees in his first term -- although confirmation of Bush nominees exceeds in most cases the first-term experience of presidents dating to Ronald Reagan. Describing the filibusters as intolerable, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has hinted he may resort to an unusual parliamentary maneuver, dubbed the "nuclear option," to thwart such filibusters.

"One way or another, the filibuster of judicial nominees must end," he said in a speech to the Federalist Society last month, labeling the use of filibusters against judicial nominees a "formula for tyranny by the minority."

Ironic, huh? Ten blocked judges out of 229 is 4%. (Clinton would have done back flips with that ratio) and the real tyrants have the audacity to call their opponents "tyrants!" Only in Orwellian AmeriKKKa!

5107. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/13/2004 2:11:41 PM

Toys

5108. PelleNilsson - 12/13/2004 5:32:52 PM

As usual Dave Barry pinpoints the crucial issue of today's America in this blindingly insightful analysis:

As Americans, we need to stay here in America and work things out, because regardless of what color or hue of state we live in, we are all, deep down inside our undershorts, Americans. And as Americans, we must ask ourselves: Are we really so different? Must we stereotype those who disagree with us? Do we truly believe that ALL red-state residents are ignorant racist fascist knuckle-dragging NASCAR-obsessed cousin-marrying roadkill-eating tobacco-juice-dribbling gun-fondling religious fanatic rednecks; or that ALL blue-state residents are godless unpatriotic pierced-nose Volvo-driving France-loving left-wing communist latte-sucking tofu-chomping holistic-wacko neurotic vegan weenie perverts?

Yes. This is called "diversity," and it is why we are such a great nation - a nation that has given the world both nuclear weapons AND SpongeBob Squarepants.

The whole piece

5109. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/13/2004 5:45:27 PM

5110. robertjayb - 12/13/2004 5:56:34 PM

Epaulets?

I'm reminded of the comically outlandish uniforms Nixon introduced for his formal palace guard.

5111. robertjayb - 12/13/2004 6:10:40 PM

Described here in the 9/27/00 Baltimore Citypaper:

On a hilarious note, look at the ostentatious White House guard uniform commissioned by President Richard Nixon in 1970. The outfits were worn by the guards at a reception for British Prime Minister Harold Wilson, and then never worn again because of the ensuing media mockery. The gold button-studded white jacket looks like something a buffoonish character in an operetta would wear--not to mention that the uniform was made of polyester. Nixon's royal aspirations certainly got the better of him here.

Photos anyone?

5112. Wombat - 12/13/2004 6:35:33 PM

The Ruritanian shakos were made of plastic, as well.

5113. thoughtful - 12/13/2004 6:37:12 PM

That total rat! Why on earth didn't he say something BEFORE the election...why come out with it now!! That #*&$@**@ bush hugger!!!

McCain: 'No confidence' in Rumsfeld

By BETH DEFALCO
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

PHOENIX -- U.S. Sen. John McCain said Monday that he has "no confidence" in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, citing Rumsfeld's handling of the war in Iraq and the failure to send more troops.

McCain, speaking to The Associated Press in an hourlong interview, said his comments were not a call for Rumsfeld's resignation, explaining that President Bush "can have the team that he wants around him."

"I have strenuously argued for larger troop numbers in Iraq, including the right kind of troops - linguists, special forces, civil affairs, etc.," said McCain, R-Ariz. "There are very strong differences of opinion between myself and Secretary Rumsfeld on that issue."



So much for mr. integrity.....

#*&%*#*((#

5114. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/13/2004 6:53:54 PM

"Who's yer Daddy?"

5115. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/13/2004 7:11:54 PM

5110.& 5111

And yes, I do indeed recall those ludicrous outfits. They made the poor guards look like dualing high school drum majorettes in an old Marx Brothers' movie.

5116. arkymalarky - 12/13/2004 8:08:04 PM

The Dave Barry's great. Thanks for posting it, Pelle.

5117. wonkers2 - 12/13/2004 9:52:38 PM

Yeah, Barry's right on! Let's everybody go out and beat up a redneck, fascist, NASCAR-obsessed fundamentalist asshole.

5118. wonkers2 - 12/13/2004 9:56:11 PM

Thank goodness we don't have to put up with Barry's pap in the Detroit Free Press.

5119. wonkers2 - 12/13/2004 10:10:33 PM

(Barry writes for the Miami Herald, a Knight Ridder paper, as is the Detroit Free Press. I guarantee he would never go over in Detroit. Apparently the Free Press editors agree, because I've never seen a Dave Barry column in the Free Press.)

5120. jexster - 12/13/2004 11:11:01 PM

Kerik's Love Shack

5121. wonkers2 - 12/13/2004 11:19:45 PM

Next to Ashcroft, Kerik is Bush's worst pick!

5122. jexster - 12/13/2004 11:31:13 PM

Clouseau for Homeland Security

As the unanswered questions about now-abandoned Homeland Security Secretary nominee Bernard Kerik continue to mount, I've stopped thinking about Kerik and started thinking about the rich irony of an administration that can't seem to conduct a competent background check trying to appoint this guy as head of the department whose ability to conduct competent background checks is kind of important to the task of keeping the rest of us alive.

I mean, I don't know the ultimate truth about Kerik, and I gather he was a pretty good Top Cop, but Lord-a-mighty: forget the nanny stuff, which by now should be a basic part of the vetting process. You've got allegations of mob links, financial improprities, violations of ethics rules, threats against a former romantic interest, cronyism, and who knows what's next? And nobody was able to ferret out any of this damaging material, unless Kerik brought it forth himself?

Makes you wonder if the sleuthing model of this admninistration is Inspector Clouseau.
- Ed Kilgore

5123. judithathome - 12/14/2004 12:09:07 AM

This is an interesting little article:

Bush's Votergate Mandate?

In 2000, Representative TOM FEENEY (R-FL) hired Yang Enterprises computer programmer CLINT CURTIS to devise a program to suppress Democratic votes on touch screen voting machines.

According to a notarized affidavit signed by Clint Curtis, Rep.Tom Feeney solicited him to write a program to "control the vote." At the time, Curtis thought the program was to be used for preventing fraud in the 2002 election in Palm Beach County, Florida. His mind was changed, when the true intentions of Feeney became clear: the computer program was going to be used to suppress the Democratic vote in counties with large Democratic registrations. Feeney told Curtis to design a vote switching program to operate in Windows, and be portable to Unix-based vote tabulation systems, to be "undetectable" to voters and Election Supervisors.

In the autumn of 1999, Clint Curtis first became aware of Feeney's interest in election rigging when Feeney "bragged that he could reduce the minority vote and deliver the election to 'George.'" Tom Feeney also said he had "implemented a list that would eliminate thousands of voters that would vote for Democratic candidates" and that "a proper placement of Police Patrols could further reduce the black vote by as much as 25 percent."

5124. wonkers2 - 12/14/2004 12:53:43 AM

Feeney might change my mind about capital punishment. A truly heinous crime.

5125. thoughtful - 12/14/2004 10:41:00 AM

Flipping channels last night and I came across keith oberman's countdown. Anyway one of the stories was all about ohio vote count. Apparently they have been doing lots of stuff to delay any recount of votes until after the electoral votes have been submitted as it then creates much higher hurdles to overturn the vote on election error. Included in the story was the fact that the green party was counting votes and the secy of state (also head of bush reelection committee) stopped it saying any recounting must be done in the presence of both the dems and the reps and ordered all ballots and voting machines immediately locked up until further notice. Green party went back the next day and found the building unlocked and the ballots and machines completely unsecured...

5126. thoughtful - 12/14/2004 10:56:29 AM

sorry it's Keith Olbermann...see more here.

5127. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/14/2004 11:56:32 AM

5128. jexster - 12/14/2004 1:28:24 PM

Good move...

Democrats Planning Watchdog Role
Senators' Hearings Will Scrutinize Administration Policies

"The congressional watchdog remains fast asleep, and we intend to wake him up," said Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (N.D.), who announced the party's plan at a Capitol Hill news conference.

5129. jexster - 12/14/2004 3:48:02 PM

All Elements of a Working Fascist Ideology Are Now In Place



(December 14, 2004 -- 12:57 PM EDT)
A week or two back Andrew Sullivan called attention to Gerald Allen, the Alabama state legislator who introduced a bill to ban funds for any books "that recognize or promote homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle." If the bill passed, Allen said, "novels with gay protagonists and college textbooks that suggest homosexuality is natural would have to be removed from library shelves and destroyed."

At the end of the post, Sullivan asked "But in Karl Rove's Republican party, how is this in any way out of place?"

Well, it seems he didn't know the half of it.

According to an interview Allen gave to The Guardian, just a few days after word of his proposed legislation hit the news, President Bush invited him up to the White House. Allen was supposed to be there just yesterday, Monday the 13th.

Perhaps Allen was just blowing smoke. But I'd be curious to know more about this meeting and whether it took place. Did Karl want pointers on how he could bring Allen's bill to the big leagues?

-- Josh Marshall

5130. thoughtful - 12/14/2004 3:54:56 PM

What can I say? Bushworld: diversity is out; repression of individual freedom is in. Brother, you asked for it.

5131. jexster - 12/14/2004 5:50:06 PM

Spare Change?



WASHINGTON - Michael Leavitt, President Bush (news - web sites)'s choice to be secretary of Health and Human Services (news - web sites), may have to cut billions of dollars from the government's mammoth health programs for the elderly, poor and disabled to pare the budget deficit.


The Medicare and Medicaid programs, consuming nearly $500 billion a year and growing quickly, could be vulnerable in the context of last year's $413 billion budget deficit, the ongoing war in Iraq (news - web sites), costly domestic security commitments and administration plans to revamp Social Security (news - web sites) without raising taxes.


Bush selected Leavitt, the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) chief, on Monday, filling one of the last two openings in his second-term Cabinet. Bush praised Leavitt as a "fine executive" and "a man of great compassion ... an ideal choice to lead one of the largest departments of the United States government."


Leavitt, Utah's governor for 11 years before joining the administration in late 2003, would succeed Tommy Thompson if confirmed by the Senate.


Before becoming governor, he was chief operating officer of the Leavitt Group, a family insurance firm in which he maintains an investment worth between $5 million and $25 million, according to a financial disclosure report he filed in 2003.

5132. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/14/2004 9:01:10 PM

5133. jexster - 12/15/2004 1:43:32 AM

The competition is heating up in the TPM-Giuliani "I really never knew Kerik all that well" TPM-Shirt contest

5134. jexster - 12/15/2004 2:08:30 AM

Choice Language
Abortion is a right that ends in sorrow. Democratic rhetoric in the future must acknowledge this fact.

5135. wonkers2 - 12/15/2004 12:22:15 PM

There's some truth in the writer's thesis on Democrats and the abortion dialog. There is a need for a middle ground. Most people cringe at the thought of late term abortions. The GOP has gotten mileage out of beating the drum on "partial birth" abortions, creating the misleading impression with some that Democrats think late term abortions are fine because of their insistence on a provision safeguarding the health of the woman. We have been out-maneuvered on the issue.

5136. wonkers2 - 12/15/2004 12:25:26 PM

Dems have allowed themselves to be labeled in the simplistic minds of too many voters as pro abortion, even though most of us consider it a last resort and shrink from late term abortions absent compelling circumstances.

5137. robertjayb - 12/15/2004 1:58:43 PM

Gene Lyons on the rightists' social security flim-flam...

Here we go again. Yet another

stage-managed "crisis" has

arisen requiring the heroic intervention of George W. Bush, the action-figure president. This time, it’s Social Security, the most successful government program in U.S. history, that has been singled out for the now-familiar Bush treatment. According to The Washington Post, Bush hopes to get his way "by essentially replicating the formula he used to reshape foreign policy in the first [term]. This includes creating a small, loyal and trustworthy team to press for broad changes largely dictated by the White House." In short, a team of ideologues and yes-men. First comes a propaganda barrage, a rhetorical shock-and-awe campaign to convince the American public of something that’s manifestly untrue: that Social Security faces a funding crisis threatening its very existence.

5138. robertjayb - 12/15/2004 4:38:35 PM

5139. thoughtful - 12/15/2004 5:00:55 PM

I wish someone would tell me one thing the bushies have improved in this country since taking power...

5140. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/15/2004 5:07:35 PM

Millionaires' portfolios.

5141. jexster - 12/15/2004 7:04:11 PM

Chronicles of Crony Corruption - From the Pig Sty

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A former U.S. House of Representatives committee chairman, who earlier this year ended negotiations to head the pharmaceutical industry's top lobby after critics questioned the ethics of the move, has now accepted the post, the group said on Wednesday.



Rep. W. J. "Billy" Tauzin, a Louisiana Republican, announced in February that he would step down as the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman and leave Congress because of a bleeding ulcer.


Democrats criticized him for considering the high-profile post leading the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which lobbies Congress on behalf of drug companies, while he was still chairman of the committee that regulates the drug industry.


He ended talks with the group, saying the controversy was a distraction. The issue had threatened to create headaches for Tauzin's Republican party in this year's election campaign, which featured a fierce debate over the price of prescription medication.


At the time, Tauzin's spokesman Ken Johnson said the congressman had no second thoughts. "Billy decided to put it behind him. He has served in Congress for nearly 24 years with honor and distinction and he does not want to leave with a cloud over his head," Johnson said in February.

5142. thoughtful - 12/15/2004 7:08:49 PM

hahahah wiz...i meant for the rest of us mooyucks.

5143. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/15/2004 8:17:36 PM

Is this what a "mooyuck" looks like?

5144. jexster - 12/15/2004 8:52:01 PM

From the Oldies-But-Goodies Bin of Bush Boondoggles...

NMD: Another Test Another Failure


Well, time was that tens of billions of dollars poured down the crapper would have more than qualified for Bill Proxmire's Golden Fleece Award.

Then Bush bombed in Baghdad...

5145. jexster - 12/15/2004 8:58:06 PM

Robert...

Thanks for the toon...my Budget prof forwarded to the class.

On second thought, thanks for the well polished apple

5146. PelleNilsson - 12/16/2004 2:53:57 AM

The fellow standing to the left of Bush is the Swedish prime minister.

5147. alistairconnor - 12/16/2004 9:21:57 AM

... is he buggering Bush, or just waiting in line for a blow job?

5148. thoughtful - 12/16/2004 12:36:57 PM

Seems to be a lot of that going around...

5149. Wombat - 12/16/2004 12:49:07 PM

That's not a worm you're trying to gobble, Turkey.

5150. jexster - 12/16/2004 1:02:10 PM

Or is it?

5151. PelleNilsson - 12/16/2004 1:48:58 PM

Taking a peck at the First Pecker.

5152. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/16/2004 2:18:43 PM

The First PeckerHEAD [. . . an anal-retentive Swede should appreciate the distinction].

5153. PelleNilsson - 12/16/2004 2:29:39 PM

Better to be anal-retentive than suffering from diarrhea, in particular if it is of the verbal kind.

5154. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/16/2004 3:48:33 PM

Verbal is not my thing, pucker-pants and remember, you started this.

5155. PelleNilsson - 12/16/2004 4:17:53 PM

How?

5156. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/16/2004 6:15:01 PM

2389. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/15/2004 3:01:42 PM

pp"Why not step back and see what The Mote could become?"

The Mote will become what it becomes -- its always been a communal garden and the soil nourishes the fruit that can tolerate it.


2393. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/15/2004 3:15:45 PM

This is a place I share some of my life and thoughts . . . and some of yours. I'm filled with many happy memories. It's like bearing witness digitally and globally . . . but I'm all for whimsy and change if it improves the quality of life.

2396. PelleNilsson - 12/15/2004 3:40:14 PM

No Wiz, the Mote will not become what it becomes. It will become what we want it to become. No doubt you want it to become a Bush-hating circle jerk where your infantile Photoshop "artistry" will be widely admired, but I doubt that that is the general wish of posters here, see for example wonkers' post above.

5157. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/16/2004 6:37:08 PM

5158. jexster - 12/16/2004 10:50:39 PM

I can now share what I learned last Friday evening ie that last Friday, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Big Dog each called former Indiana Congressman and 911 Commissioner Tim Roemer and asked that he be a candidate for DNC chairman.

Roemer has decided to run and is pursuing a secret strategery that I am not presently authorized to discuss.

5159. robertjayb - 12/16/2004 11:12:48 PM

We won't tell. Honest.

5160. Ronski - 12/17/2004 3:08:06 AM

Anyone But Dean?

5161. jayackroyd - 12/17/2004 3:19:58 AM

Hey Ronski--

It's good to see you back. I've seen your other recent posts, and they reminded me that I, at least, have missed your pov.

jexster--

that kind of teaser is pretty damn dumb-assed. If you can't say, don't say.

5162. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:03:38 AM

If I tole yalls I'd have tuh kill yall's ...I tell ya after Bro Tim is Bro Chairman

5163. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:05:10 AM

Jay...some folks are cut out for the inside shit and some aren't

Its the Lord's doin and I ain't got nuthin more to say about it...

For now

:)

5164. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:07:02 AM

OK you got my balls in a vice there J

no big deal...You won't hear the news on CNN ...we're goin bottom up...when you hear on CNN, the deal will have been sealed....can't say any more...

Ronski's close..ABD is the better part of it

5165. jayackroyd - 12/17/2004 4:08:50 AM

My point simply is that if can't say no more, say less.

5166. jayackroyd - 12/17/2004 4:09:05 AM

"you", that is.

5167. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:11:10 AM

I got your point Jay..and your point WAS my point

Case you missed it

Bottom line is recall Pelosi's defeat of Gephardt. When first you heard Pelosi was running you heard the next day that she'd won...essentially..

Leading Authorities..Dr. Tim Roemer

5168. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:15:15 AM

Last Friday night, the bro-in-law told me that earlier that day Roemer had taken calls from Pelosi, Reid, McAuliffe and Big Dog urging him to run..last Thurs night, DNC chair wasn't on his mind ..not even close...

This from Roll Call earlier in the week...

5169. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:16:01 AM

Hill Leaders Push Roemer for DNC
December 14, 2004
By John Bresnahan and Mark Preston,
Roll Call Staff

The top two Democrats on Capitol Hill, incoming Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), are urging former Rep. Tim Roemer (D-Ind.) to get into the race to become next chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Roemer said he has made no decision whether to get into the race.

"I have been approached very recently by several prominent Democrats inquiring about my interest in seeking the post of DNC Chair," Roemer said in a statement. "While I am flattered by their confidence in me, I have made no formal decision to seek the post. I am, however, consulting with my family, friends and Democrats around the country to assess this potential opportunity, and expect to make a decision very soon."

Reid and Pelosi are looking “to jump-start” the debate over the next head of the DNC by pushing Roemer, a 9/11 commission member, to join the race, said Democratic insiders. A number of other candidates, including former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, are openly campaigning for the job, but Reid and Pelosi think Roemer is a better choice for the post.

“[Roemer] is a skilled communicator, a formidable fundraiser and a government reformer on everything from a balanced budget to national security,” said Susan McCue, Reid’s chief of staff.

Pelosi “thinks Tim Roemer is one of many talented Democrats who could head the DNC,” Brendan Daly, director of communications for the House Minority Leader, said Tuesday.

While stopping short of a formal endorsement of Roemer for party chairman, Reid and Pelosi spoke to him this morning, according to several sources familiar with the discussions.

5170. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:16:24 AM

The 48-year old Roemer, a one-time aide to former Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.) and the son-in-law of former Sen. J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.), was first elected to Congress in 1990 and served six terms. Roemer left Congress in 2002, saying he wanted to spend more time with his wife and four children. In October 2003, he was named president of the Center for National Policy, a non-profit think tank in Washington.

5171. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:16:36 AM

Roemer also maintained a high public profile as a member of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, better known as the 9/11 commission. Roemer and the rest of the commissioners played a pivotal role in the passage for the recent intelligence reform bill.

Roemer, a centrist, often went his own way while serving in the House. Although he voted against the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Roemer supported military action against Iraq in 1998 when allegations surfaced that Iraqi intelligence agents were behind an assassination attempt against former President Bush.

Roemer voted against the North American Free Trade Agreement and granting “fast track” authority to White House for trade deals, but supported a free-trade agreement with China. Roemer was also opposed to the impeachment for then-President Bill Clinton, but backed censure.

Roemer also voted in favor of the 1996 welfare reform bill, and supported GOP efforts to eliminate the so-called “marriage penalty” and reduce estate taxes. He also was in favor of using federal funds for charter schools, which angered teachers’ unions.

On abortion, Roemer diverges from the traditional Democratic line. A Catholic who did his graduate and Ph.D. studies at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind., Roemer was strongly supportive of banning late-terms abortions. Roemer called the procedure “a moral blind spot that this nation can no longer allow” and voted with most Republicans when Clinton vetoed the so-called “partial birth abortion” bill in 1998.

But Roemer’s acknowledged political skills helped him survive for more than a decade in a conservative Indiana district that he since gone Republican. Roemer was a prolific fundraiser and has good communication skills, qualities that will be critical for whoever takes over the DNC in the wake of the Democrats’ losses at the polls in November.

5172. jexster - 12/17/2004 4:17:09 AM

Today, I learned that he's goin for it....

5173. jayackroyd - 12/17/2004 10:41:40 AM

Now that's what I'm talkin' about. Thanks, jex.

5174. wonkers2 - 12/17/2004 11:58:23 AM

From "Fiddling as Iraq Burns" by Bob Herbert NYT op-ed 12-17

Bush's "Catastrophic" Success

"A third medal was given to General Tommy Franks, who led the invasion of Iraq, which Mr. Bush, in his peculiar way, has characterized as a 'catastrophic success.' It's an interesting term. Some people have applied it to the president's run for re-election."

5175. wonkers2 - 12/17/2004 11:59:50 AM

The wolves continue to nip at Rumsfeld's heels. The latest is Evan Bahy conservative Democrat from Indiana who said yesterday he thinks Rumsfeld should resign.

5176. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/17/2004 12:09:02 PM

Bush says: "Bend over again, America!"


Buying Into Failure - By PAUL KRUGMAN


. . . the U.S. news media have provided their readers and viewers with little information about international experience. In particular, the public hasn't been let in on two open secrets:

Privatization dissipates a large fraction of workers' contributions on fees to investment companies.

It leaves many retirees in poverty.

5177. jexster - 12/17/2004 12:45:45 PM

The Today Show did a number on Bush and Dumbsfeld this morning listing all of the rats - Billy Krisol, Stormin Norman Coleman, Stormin Norman SchiestKopf, Two Timin Johnny McCain all of whom are calling for DUmmy's head...


Seems, according to Tim Hardballs, that they all see the caca headed for the fan on EyeRak and they're lookin for scapegoats

5178. jexster - 12/17/2004 12:48:04 PM

Speaking of rats


NYPD Rat Squad Opens Kerik Investigation

5179. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/17/2004 1:55:33 PM

5180. jexster - 12/17/2004 3:53:49 PM

Letter from the Chairman

Dear California Democrat:

On behalf of our entire Democratic family we wish you all a joyous holiday season. In the past few days I served as the chair of a Post-Election Committee representing the Association of State Democratic Chairs (ASDC) to help determine the qualities we wish for a new Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair.

We had a very good representation of leaders wishing to take our Party to victory in 2006 and 2008, in Orlando, Florida this past weekend. We endorsed structural reform for our DNC Charter which will make our national Party more representative of America and our values, as well as being more financially accountable to the grassroots efforts.

After a two and one half hour session, we heard from eight of the leaders who are candidates or who are considering becoming a candidate for DNC Chair (in alphabetical order): former Michigan Governor James Blanchard; former Vermont Governor and presidential candidate Howard Dean; Don Fowler, Jr.; former Texas Congressman Martin Frost (defeated by De Lay reapportionment tricks); Harold Ickes, former counsel to President Clinton; Ron Kirk, former Mayor of Dallas; Simon Rosenberg, head of the New Democratic Network; and Wellington Webb, former Mayor of Denver. No women candidates... yet. Former Chair of the Texas Democratic Party Molly Beth Malcolm is rumored to file soon. Also, former Congressman Tim Roemer of Indiana has indicated his interest. The election is at our national meeting in Washington, D.C. on February 10-12, 2005. Voting members of the DNC who will elect the next Chair will be meeting in four regional caucuses around the country in January to meet with these candidates.



Sincerely,


Senator Art Torres (Ret.)
Chairman, California Democratic Party

5181. wonkers2 - 12/17/2004 7:35:11 PM

Blanchard is solid but not brilliant.

5182. jexster - 12/18/2004 1:21:09 PM

Kerik FOR Sec DEF!!!

Democrats Blame Rumsfeld for Mistakes in Iraq


GOP leaders join chorus of Rumsfeld detractors

5183. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/18/2004 6:18:11 PM

From Lewis Lapham's Notebook in the January issue of Harper's.

"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere."
—Thomas Jefferson

5184. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/19/2004 4:41:33 PM

Orwell would have loved this . . .

AUSTIN, Texas -- "The aide (a senior adviser to President Bush) said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors ... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." -- Ron Suskind, New York Times Magazine, Oct. 17, 2004.

5185. judithathome - 12/19/2004 5:17:08 PM

That's a great column. But I think 99% of hers are.

5186. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/19/2004 5:28:14 PM

I loved the Sinclair Lewis quote in the last line.

5187. robertjayb - 12/19/2004 5:29:47 PM

5188. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/19/2004 5:49:10 PM

That reminds me, robert, thanks!

5189. robertjayb - 12/19/2004 5:54:22 PM

Unusually satisfactory editorial page in the local rag today. Overlooking the typically useless David Broder "on the one hand this, on the other hand that" discourse on the obvious, they ran the Ben Sargent cartoon above, the Molly Ivins column, and two fine local letters, one on the social security raid and this one sure to warm Arky's heart:

As superintendent of Mumford ISD for 28 years, I would like to respond to Rep. Fred Brown’s bill to consolidate small schools (Eagle, Dec. 12). Mumford is a small school district located in Robertson County. Mumford ISD is a Recognized School District. Research has shown that small schools make a valuable and noticeable difference in students’ educations.

The belief that one big, centralized school is more efficient, and therefore, better, is not true. Researchers have found that the relationship between size and cost varies depending upon individual school circumstances. Many small schools are operated very economically, while large ones have exorbitant per-pupil cost. In a large consolidated school students must be bused long distances from their homes, so there is no sense of community investment in the school, and furthermore, parent and community participation in school affairs suffers because the school district is so distant.

Students in small schools have higher attendance and graduation rates, participate more in extracurricular activities, and perform at or above the academic level of students at large schools. Students of small schools are more likely to go on to college and small schools narrow the achievement gap between poor children and their more affluent classmates.

(continued)

5190. robertjayb - 12/19/2004 5:59:23 PM

(more letter to ed)

The solution to public education is not consolidation. The answer is smaller schools. Rep. Brown should be looking at how Texas can create smaller schools, not larger schools. If we want to reduce the cost of education, then give the schools more local control and less legislation. Schools should be more accountable to the local community and not to Austin.

Mumford ISD has built three new schools and paid for them without a bond. Mumford ISD has a tax rate of $1.38. If there are too many administrators in the public schools, I suggest we look at the large schools first. Bigger is NOT always better.

PETE J. BIENSKI JR.
Superintendent
Mumford ISD

5191. wonkers2 - 12/19/2004 6:01:38 PM

Amen to small schools!

5192. robertjayb - 12/19/2004 6:07:47 PM

(the other letter)

...There is a problem with Social Security, all right: People with a whole lot of money already can’t get their hands on it. They really, really want to. They behave like money, attempting to destroy anyone and anything to get with this money.

Social Security is also, well, social security. It’s not a financial instrument; it’s not a bank account to be drawn from when you need a new car. Social Security is not your “gambling money” whether in Vegas or on a stock tip or business idea. Social Security is not a problem.

It’s no doubt being strained by the Baby Boomers, but like anything that’ll pass. This won’t be the last strain either. Social Security is social insurance. It’s the most successful insurance that has ever been known. We’re still trying to figure out “how many slaves” private insurance companies and banks long since reorganized and renamed kept back in the slave days. Money was merciless back then. We have it under tenuous control now.

If Social Security wasn’t built as a last bastion, then it sure turned out that way. I’ve visited my grandparents. These are the people living on Social Security now who worked through the Great Depression to put it away. This last bastion is being attacked now. Let these attacks pass. Social Security is and should be here to stay. And not only that, a new Health Security system should be modeled after it.

KEDREN READE SITTON
Bryan

5193. arkymalarky - 12/19/2004 6:14:30 PM

Thanks!

Great letter. Everything Mr. Bienski says is absolutely true. I've researched for almost two years now and work with an excellent national rural advocacy group, and the more education is studied (interest has greatly increased with state reforms addressing NCLB) the more they find to support small schools and districts for disadvantaged students, in particular. What he says has been essentially unrefuted, especially in practice. Some studies using models have suggested savings through consolidation, but the savings have been minimal and narrow and all the studies I've seen have been flawed in the lack of consideration for off-setting expenses, even transportation costs. In actuality I don't know of a single study that shows decreased costs as a result of an implemented consolidation.

But I feel for that supt, even though he's right, because there are factors at work that have nothing to do with educating children but instead have much to do with shutting down poor voices and local influence and increasing central control and corporate policy making, and they will very likely win, especially in Texas. Maybe not here, but we still have a huge fight on our hands.

I won't feel good about where we are in AR until this spring, at least, and in reality I probably won't again. I'll be very surprised if I'm teaching two years from now, and I'm certain I won't be five years from now unless things change a whole lot really fast.

5194. judithathome - 12/19/2004 6:14:47 PM

loved the Sinclair Lewis quote in the last line.

So did I but it was the other Sinclair, Upton.

5195. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/19/2004 6:49:36 PM

j- There goes my lesdyxia again, thanks.

Wonkers- good luck and best wishes wrt the guy with the knife!

5196. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/19/2004 7:35:09 PM

5197. robertjayb - 12/19/2004 8:03:52 PM

Texas schools got some 'splaining to do...

DALLAS (AP) -- Dozens of Texas schools appear to have cheated on the state's redesigned academic achievement test, casting doubt on whether the accountability system can reliably measure how schools are performing, a newspaper found.

An analysis uncovered strong evidence of organized, educator-led cheating on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills at schools in Houston and Dallas, along with suspicious scores in hundreds of other schools, The Dallas Morning News reported.

Texas education policies on student accountability became the model for the federal No Child Left Behind law enacted after President Bush's election in 2000.

5198. wonkers2 - 12/20/2004 1:00:41 AM

Cheating is almost an inevitable result of high stakes testing or reporting of information. The company I worked for for many years used to require all plants to report data on industrial illness and accidents to headquarters which published the results ranking the plants from high to low each year. The reports were worthless until OSHA was passed requiring that accurate health and safety records be kept. That stopped most of the fudging.

5199. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/20/2004 2:13:59 AM

Cost of the Iraq War in Dollars - Not Lives

$549,537,770,860

5200. jexster - 12/20/2004 2:10:51 PM

"Mandate" Sandwich

President Bush (news - web sites)'s second-term plans to reshape Social Security (news - web sites), immigration laws and other domestic programs are facing a stiff challenge from a group that was reliably accommodating in the president's first four years: congressional Republicans.


Life on the Third Rail
Cross Cutting Cleavages Threaten to Shred Bush Domestic Agenda - WaPo

5201. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/20/2004 3:21:44 PM

5202. Dubai Vol - 12/20/2004 3:55:10 PM

At this point it would be well to point out that Hitler was also a Time "man of the year." It's not an award.

5203. angel-five - 12/20/2004 4:07:01 PM

You aren't watching the man behind the curtain if you're making a lightning rod out of Rumsfeld.

That Von Rumsfeld deserves it is assured. Still, we have to keep our eye on the ball, and right now it's the environment. Bush is proposing a 'clear skies' initiative that will actually gut the Clean Air Act, but it's being roundly touted as pro-environment. Bush is proposing an oceans policy group that pretty much just serves to divvy up fishing stocks between political supporters. It is ludicrous how these two initiatives are being represented as environmental policy; if you pay attention to them you'll quickly see that it's smoke and mirrors.

The EPA hasn't just been neutered; it's become part of the chorus for Bush. Bush's 'guidance document' on the Clean Water act -- which is, once again, touted as environmental leadership -- strips CWA protection from a third of those waters previously protected by it. That is, quite literally, all it does. It amounts to a backdoor amendment to a law that passed thirty years ago, which Congress cannot check, as the 'guidance document' is a directive straight from the Executive to federal agencies and state and local government.

The EPA is, also literally, releasing directives allowing sewage plants to directly dump 'partially treated sewage' directly into waterways. Partially treated sewage just means the solids have been physically filtered out. The DOE is relaxing laws on the storage of toxic waste -- including nuclear waste!!! -- and calling on private industry to take on a larger role in protecting it from falling into the hands of terrorists. The EPA is relaxing laws on heavy metal contamination of waterways. Their latest idea is to test for contaminants such as selenium by checking levels not in the water, but in the fish living in the water. This is mighty handy if all the fish are dead.

5204. angel-five - 12/20/2004 4:07:18 PM

Bush has even done his best to kill the Kyoto treaty, which we haven't even signed! Individual American states are actually trying to comply with Kyoto provisions and engage in energy and credit trading with foreign powers. Industrial states. That's how far off base the President is. We are stepping back to 1850.


I could literally go on for hours on what the man behind the curtain is doing right now. People need to start paying attention.

5205. arkymalarky - 12/20/2004 4:21:34 PM

No shit. I could do the same for education. He's undermining the public education system while claiming to fix it, and he's doing much the same with other areas of government services, at the state and federal levels.

5206. jexster - 12/20/2004 6:01:52 PM

Bush Defends Rumsfeld As 'A Caring Fellow'

We Care Alot - Faith No More

We care a lot
We care a lot
We care a lot about disasters, fires, floods and killer bees
We care a lot about the NASA shuttle falling in the sea
We care a lot about starvation and the food that Live Aid bought
We care a lot about disease, baby Rock, Hudson, rock, sing!
And it's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it
We care a lot
We care a lot
We care a lot about the gamblers and the pushers and the geeks
We care a lot
We care a lot about the welfare of all you boys and girls
We care a lot about you people cause we're out to save the world
And it's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it
Oh-oh-oho oh-oh-oho, the right stuff
We care a lot about the army, navy, air force and marines
We care a lot about the NY, SF and LAPD
We care a lot about you people, about your guns
about the wars you're fighting gee that looks like fun
We care a lot about the Garbage Pail Kids, they never lie
We care a lot about Transformers cause there's more than meets the eye
We care a lot about the little things, the bigger things we top
We care a lot about you people yeah you bet we care a lot
Arrggh!
Well, it's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it
And it's a dirty song but someone's gotta sing it

5207. jexster - 12/21/2004 12:13:35 AM

How do you say "Ein Totaller Reinfall" in the Ayrab tongue?

Bush: Iraq Bombers 'Are Having an Effect' - 14 minutes ago
Allawi Says Rebels in Iraq Seek Civil War - 18 minutes ago
Bush Defends Rumsfeld As 'A Caring Fellow' - 15 minutes ago

5208. jexster - 12/21/2004 1:02:11 AM

Thoughtful..

Dumbsfeld is no lightning rod for anything, but a sign, a sign of the times.

The Busheviks have reached the manifest level of their incomptence...

Iraq was and is the achilles heel....Cheney, always the main target...the Puppet's Master, well co-puppeteer with the Sharonista fascisti..

The GOP's sudden breakout in hives over Dummy hides a much deeper malignancy...


Lies and incompetence, incompetence and lies

This is the lightning....as yet there is no rod to direct it to ground

WAPO - For First Time Most Say Bush's Bloody Eyerak Bungle Was a Mistake

Next up..SS..keep your eye on the Third Rail

Stay the course..

5209. jexster - 12/21/2004 1:10:00 AM

Have Hubris Will Travel..

President Bush (news - web sites) heads into his second term amid deep and growing public skepticism about the Iraq (news - web sites) war, with a solid majority saying for the first time that the war was a mistake and most people believing that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld should lose his job, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.



70 percent of Americans think these gains have come at an "unacceptable" cost in military casualties. This led 56 percent to conclude that, given the cost, the conflict there was "not worth fighting" -- an eight-point increase from when the same question was asked this summer, and the first time a decisive majority of people have reached this conclusion.

5210. robertjayb - 12/21/2004 5:28:31 PM

Will the true social security "reformers" please stand?

As President Bush prepares to disclose the details of his plan to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars of future Social Security funds into privately held investment accounts, Wall Street has begun a muted lobbying campaign, chastened by bolder forays that failed in years past.

So far, the chief executives of most financial firms have refused to take a public stand in support of private accounts, wary of being seen as too eager to embrace a potential new revenue stream.

At last week's White House economic meeting in Washington, they were conspicuous in their absence from the Social Security panel. Even in direct meetings with President Bush, who actively campaigned on the issue of Social Security, executives have shied away.

From the village board to Washington, nothing motivates rightist free-enterprisers more than the prospect of tapping a steady source of tax money.

5211. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/21/2004 7:24:31 PM

FBI E-Mail Refers to Presidential Order Authorizing Inhumane Interrogation Techniques

5212. wonkers2 - 12/21/2004 7:33:39 PM

Surprise! Wall Street is supporting Social Security "reform." What is needed is more Wall Street reform!

5213. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/21/2004 10:33:03 PM

5214. jexster - 12/21/2004 11:22:57 PM

Those Social Security Poll numbers are Third Rail stuff.


62% say they wouldn't put a dime into any type of private account.

Of those who say they'd use the option, only 7% say they'd put everything in stocks; 57% some, 23% just a little.

5215. jexster - 12/21/2004 11:30:18 PM

Lots of new news on the Franklin-AIPAC espionage story from the JTA -- new details involving CBS reporter Adam Ciralsky, and how Franklin was flipped by the FBI and helped "set up a sting against AIPAC" as well as "initiating contact with some neoconservative defense experts, several of them Jewish, who supported Ahmad Chalabi ... [and] Chalabi’s political adviser," Francis Brooke.

This piece is lengthy, detailed and a must-read.

-- Josh Marshall

5216. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 10:17:24 AM

It's official - Bill O'Reilly is beyond parody:

"Well, the giant has awakened. Millions of Americans are now aware that the traditions of Christmas are under fire by committed secularists . . .

"'The Factor' has been exposing these anti-Christmas people and they are under heavy fire. So this weekend, some in the media stepped up to attack me. . . .

[Here, some whining about negative commentary about O'Reilly's antics]

"So why is this stuff happening? Two reasons. First, my argument that Christmas is a tradition that belongs in the public arena is a strong one. If these smear merchants can diminish me personally, they don't have to deal with the argument.

"And second, intimidation. The FOX News Channel and its commentators stand in the way of the secular agenda. Demonizing us sends a message to others who may challenge the secular cabal. Do it and we will slime you badly. So that's what's going on. Another vicious battle in the American culture war. Somewhere Jesus is weeping."

Yes, O'Reilly actually wrote "Somewhere Jesus is weeping" about criticism of his self-righteous self. To which I can only add, "Jee-ZUSS!"

Beyond parody? You can't even see parody in O'Reilly's rear-view mirror.

5217. Wombat - 12/23/2004 10:19:29 AM

Long time no post, Ohio! So what's with your state vis-a-vis the election?

5218. Wombat - 12/23/2004 10:20:27 AM

How a religion that comprises well over 80% of the US population can feel "threatened" is beyond me.

5219. alistairconnor - 12/23/2004 11:30:21 AM

Somewhere Jesus is weeping.

Jesus wept... tears of laughter.

5220. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 11:42:42 AM

Hi, Wombat! Yeah, I haven't posted for a while. I shut down following politics after the disappointing Kerry loss. I also stopped watching stuff like O'Reilly and Fox News Sunday, which is probably good for my blood pressure! (Jexster's been advising me to lay off that stuff for years.)

But I'm as disgusted with Bush as ever - this Social Security "reform" is the right-wingers' biggest scam yet - so I won't stay away forever!

5221. alistairconnor - 12/23/2004 11:54:54 AM

How a religion that comprises well over 80% of the US population can feel "threatened" is beyond me.
... maybe it's the Jewish influence?

5222. alistairconnor - 12/23/2004 12:08:47 PM

... that was a JOKE by the way...

merry Chr... sorry...

Solstice greetings to fellow Wiccans everywhere...

5223. Wombat - 12/23/2004 12:15:56 PM

Alistair:

I figured it was. Although as a member of the Mosaic minority in the US, I did not laugh until I fell out of my chair.

5224. thoughtful - 12/23/2004 12:17:22 PM

Quite awhile back someone posted an article about xtian fundamentalist and their constant discussion of how they are under threat of outside evil forces. It's a fundamental part of how they stay united. This technique has clearly bled over into american politics...you are either with us or the terrorists...criticizing bush is treasonous aiding of the enemy...even on this a.m.'s npr a xtian family was talking about why they are homeschooling their child...seems they were appalled that a first grade teacher had the gall to warn children against drug dealers!

This same family was talking about the gay marriage issue as a fundamental assault on american culture and that it was just a small representation of all the ways the american culture is being attacked. I guess to them it's like the spotted owl in the forest...a signal species representative of the damage to the entire forest.

It was educational for me to hear, however scary too.

What I don't understand is why these people don't realize that their core drive for battling an enemy leads them to turn on each other once they've silenced the rest. I've always wanted to carry on that discussion in religion, but am always short of the time required.

I mean that is the point of the salem witch trials. These people were so hell-bent on ousting satan that they ended up murdering their own... their own xtian neighbors and good standing members of their own community. And the only evidence required was the shrieks of young girls drunk on their own power to manipulate the entire fabric of society. After all, there is no real evidence of anything required in a faith-based community. And for those with grudges, it released an opportunity for neighbor to seek revenge on neighbor, or those to seek economic advantage for their own gain, all under the guise of fighting satan.

Truly a toxic combo.

5225. alistairconnor - 12/23/2004 12:26:25 PM

the Mosaic minority

so that's the PC term? Ok....

for a moment I thought you were talking about diehard users of a first-generation web browser.

5226. Wombat - 12/23/2004 12:34:06 PM

No, I made the term up. Of course, it could also mean that I am from Ravenna.

5227. alistairconnor - 12/23/2004 12:57:00 PM

Etymologically, what's the connection between tesselated pictures and Moses?

5228. Wombat - 12/23/2004 2:00:03 PM

Dunno. That's a Pelle sort of question to answer.

5229. PelleNilsson - 12/23/2004 2:14:14 PM

I rise to the occasion. Here in Sweden 'believer in the Mosaic faith' was for a long time an euphemism, even an official one, for 'Jew'. In some cities you can still find signposts to the 'Mosaic cemetary'.

5230. Wombat - 12/23/2004 2:17:37 PM

Pelle:

The question was how works of art made from shiny bits of stone or tiles became known as "mosaics." Please rise to the occasion again.

5231. Linnea - 12/23/2004 2:27:26 PM

My dictionary tells me that the art works are named for their connection to the Muses, not Moses. Just a coincidence.

5232. Wombat - 12/23/2004 2:29:51 PM

So they should be "musaics?"

5233. PelleNilsson - 12/23/2004 2:51:18 PM

I just fell flat on my face.

5234. PelleNilsson - 12/23/2004 2:59:16 PM

Hello, Linnea!

M-W:

Main Entry: mo·sa·ic
Pronunciation: mO-'zA-ik
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English musycke, from Middle French mosaique, from Old Italian mosaico, from Medieval Latin musaicum, alteration of Late Latin musivum, from Latin museum, musaeum

5235. jexster - 12/23/2004 3:00:38 PM

Judith, Robert...

Sell the house, kill the cats..HEAD FOR THE HILLS
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES

There were certainly reasons to despair after the 2004 election -- chiefly, the awful thought that George W. Bush and a Republican Congress could find the means to exceed the egregious irresponsibility, the xenophobia, the sheer partisan pettiness, and the callous disregard for life and law of Bush’s first term...

Outside the Deep South, however, the Democrats made inroads. In Arkansas and Colorado, they won impressive Senate victories. Democrats also continued to dominate the nation’s postindustrial metropolitan areas, or “ideopolises,” increasing the pro-Democratic bias of these areas relative to the rest of the country by a point (three quarters of Bush’s net-vote gains, in fact, came outside of ideopolis areas). Kerry predictably racked up large margins in Illinois’ Cook County and California’s Bay Area, but he also increased the Democrats’ margin in Texas’ Travis County (from a 5-point deficit to a 14-point lead), North Carolina’s Mecklenburg County (from a 3-point deficit to a 4-point lead), and northern Virginia’s Fairfax County (from a 1-point deficit to a 6-point lead). It is voters in these ideopolis areas of the solid red states (those Bush carried by 6 points or more in 2000) that are increasing their share of nation’s vote, while the non-ideopolis areas of these states, where Bush made big gains in 2004 (more than two-fifths of his overall increase in vote margin), remain stagnant.

5236. jexster - 12/23/2004 3:31:24 PM

Social Security Privatization: The Reform That Isn't Needed for a Public That Doesn't Want It

5237. arkymalarky - 12/23/2004 4:42:32 PM

Hey Linnea! Good to see you back in the Mote!

Ohio, I need your help. Very important: What can you tell me about the Ohio education facilities construction program? I've got some old stuff but haven't been able to Google anything recently. Are there any problems with it (besides the $23 billion price tag)? I'm actually working with a guy from Ohio, but I haven't talked to him about that and we're busy on something else at the moment, but I thought you might have heard gripes, praises, etc.

5238. arkymalarky - 12/23/2004 4:43:02 PM

And very important is an exaggeration. It's just a little important but I'm very curious.

5239. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 6:06:58 PM

Arky, I'll see what I can find out.

5240. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 6:35:36 PM

Here are some links with information about Ohio's "Rebuilding Ohio's Schools" plan:

This link contains the following description of the program:

In 1997, the Ohio Supreme Court found that construction for Ohio schools was underfunded and the State created the Ohio School Facilities Commission to modernize Ohio's schools. Since then, Ohio has enacted the $23 billion, 12-year "Rebuilding Ohio's Schools" plan. The state will provide $10.2 billion over the next 12 years which, when combined with matching contributions from the Local Education Agencies, will total $23 billion. By 2012, the "Rebuilding Ohio's Schools" program will have fully funded the state's share for every school building need across the state.

Here’s a May 2004 press release from Governor Taft describing the program”

Here’s a news story from 1999 regarding the creation of the program.


And here’s the website of the Ohio Schools Facilities Commission, which oversees the fund and the construction.

(continued)

5241. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 6:35:51 PM

Commentary I've read suggests that Taft and the Republican-controlled legislature have been somewhat stingy in actually allocating money for the fund. And note that the locality must match the state's contribution for any construction (thus it's described as a "$23 billion program" even though the state of Ohio's contribution is $10.2 billion).

As noted above, the impetus for this program was a state Supreme Court decision that found that the state’s failure to adequately fund public education (leaving most funding responsibility to localities) was a violation of the state constitution.

Hope this is helpful!

5242. arkymalarky - 12/23/2004 7:41:02 PM

Thanks!

I knew a lot of the basics, but I wondered if (and much of it I can pretty easily find out, but wondered how much it was getting attention from typical Ohioans--not that you're typical, much less a typical Ohioan) 1) it's fair to poor districts, which And note that the locality must match the state's contribution for any construction makes it sound like it definitely isn't, 2) if it's completely centrally controlled and the state determines contract bids, etc, rather than allowing districts to hire contractors locally and have a voice in their own facilities needs, and especially if certain companies are favored or have received large bids on the projects from the state and 3) if it contains standards of construction that encourage the closure of small schools and districts.

But what I wanted from you mostly was 4) DIRT. ;-)

You know the Ohio group did AR's analysis stemming from a similar lawsuit and our estimate was a decimal removed from y'all's, at $2.3 billion. It's getting a lot of gasps here because of the expense, but some things about the analysis and estimate itself are being criticized.

5243. OhioSTOPAS - 12/23/2004 9:36:23 PM

Gregoire wins!

"SEATTLE - Democrat Christine Gregoire has won the Washington governor's race by 130 votes over Republican Dino Rossi, according to final recount results from King County.

"King County was the last county to report in the statewide hand recount, the third count of ballots in the governor's election. The election results have not been certified and probably will be challenged in court."

Will the Rehnquist Five ride to the rescue?

5244. robertjayb - 12/23/2004 9:54:41 PM

Good news! It's gratifying what can happen when all votes are counted.

5245. lemwalker - 12/23/2004 11:13:45 PM

I voted for the Republican candidate. Figure the state is broke. Feds are not going to bail us out. He promised to "balance" the budget, no other choice, without raising taxes. This is something I wanted to see. Not that I believe it can be done without seriously goring many people's Ox.

5246. lemwalker - 12/23/2004 11:15:03 PM

P.S. Mine is about bled out.

5247. Ronski - 12/23/2004 11:27:45 PM

Gregoire is not some crazy lefist, though, right?

5248. Ronski - 12/23/2004 11:29:38 PM

(leftist).

5249. jexster - 12/24/2004 1:37:29 AM

Breaking News - W. Commits Honesty {The Bull Moose - More Moose, Less Bull)

The Moose applauds the President for taking the first step toward recovery.

Now that the election is over, the truth is returning from holiday. Republicans are bickering over their long suppressed differences and they are kvetching about the conduct of the war. The November triumph has lost its luster.

And today the President stepped forward, ever so timidly and cautiously, to declare "Hi, I'm George W. Bush and I'm presiding over a failing war." At today's surprise news conference (aren't they all), the President described the situation in Iraq this way as reported by the Washington Post,

"No question about it, the bombers are having an effect. . . . They're trying to shape the view of the Iraqi people and they're trying to shape the view of the American people."

And he expressed frustration that Iraqi troops trained by Americans had sometimes refused to fight. "There have been some cases when the heat gets on they leave the battlefield. That's unacceptable."

So, it isn't "Mission Accomplished" after all, is it Mr. President? One step down, eleven to go!

5250. wonkers2 - 12/24/2004 3:02:21 AM

Gregoire is a moderate to right wing Democrat.

5251. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/24/2004 2:43:59 PM

Happy Holly Daze, everyone!!!!

5252. jexster - 12/24/2004 3:09:27 PM

For those of you interested in the subject, I fowarded Ed Kilgore's post Do Corporate Subsidies Violate the Constitution?

The answer "probably not" is not the real subject of the post which treats of the race to the bottom that state and local governments often engage in by offering incentives to businesses for moving operations to their jurisidictions.


I sent Kilgore's piece to a professor friend who teaches an Economic and Community Development Seminar..

Shit - that's my whole class summed up in a single email.

cdc

5253. jexster - 12/24/2004 3:30:11 PM

Kevin Drum on Abortion, Democrats, and Tim Roemer

5254. wonkers2 - 12/24/2004 7:35:56 PM

Interesting article and comments on it. We let the GOP outsmart us on abortion.

5255. wonkers2 - 12/24/2004 7:36:30 PM

We may be able to do the same to them on Social Security.

5256. jexster - 12/24/2004 8:55:12 PM

He said he's bringing democracy to Iraq.

The (900 Fallujah) returnees were entering an apocalyptic backdrop of flattened city blocks and bullet-scarred homes, where wild dogs and cats have feasted on corpses and the sour smell of the dead filled the streets for weeks.

5257. jexster - 12/25/2004 12:57:28 PM

UNFIT FOR COMMAND

Official US Army Historian: Bush Had No Plan

MERRY CRIMMUS!

5258. jexster - 12/26/2004 12:54:30 AM

The Mission Bush Accomplished in IraQ, He Wants to Accomplish With YOUR Social Security - The Risky Assumptions of the Social Security "Privatizers"
NyT Business


I say, ride the lying shit outta town on the Third Rail.

5259. jexster - 12/26/2004 1:29:29 PM

Governors Unite Against Bush
Arky's Favorite Gov. Leads Bi-partisan Effort to Fight Medicaid Cuts

5260. jexster - 12/26/2004 1:31:58 PM

Governor Huckabee of Arkansas, where nearly a quarter of the population is on Medicaid, said the governors' objective in the coming months would be to ask the federal government to "first do no harm."

He said the soaring federal budget deficit had made federal officials realize "their house is on fire, and they're probably so consumed with the flames around them that they're unaware as they look to us for water that our tanks are empty.

"Folks, our house is on fire too," Mr. Huckabee added, "and asking us to put out your fire is probably not the solution."

5261. jexster - 12/26/2004 1:34:29 PM

At Christmas, Bush Urges Aid to the Needy (Post, Dec. 26)

5262. thoughtful - 12/26/2004 1:50:58 PM

Friedman nails it again. He lists 10 news stories about the bushies and asks what they have in common. At the risk of giving away the punchline, though clearly it's no surprise, I'll put the answer in white below:



So what is the common denominator of all these news stories? Wait, wait, don't tell me. I want to tell you. The common denominator is a country with a totally contradictory and messed-up set of priorities.

We face two gigantic national challenges today: One is the challenge to protect America in the wake of the new terrorist threats, which has involved us in three huge military commitments - Afghanistan, Iraq and missile defense. And the other is the challenge to strengthen American competitiveness in the wake of an expanding global economy, where more and more good jobs require higher levels of education, and those good jobs will increasingly migrate to those countries with the brainpower to do them. In the face of these two national challenges, we have an administration committed to radical tax cuts, which, one can already see, are starting to affect everything from the number of troops we can deploy in Iraq to the number of students we can properly educate at our universities. And if we stay on this course, the trade-offs are only going to get worse.

5263. jexster - 12/27/2004 12:26:54 PM

Wompum n Fire Water - The Grand Old Pigpile's Indian Gaming Scandal

5264. jexster - 12/27/2004 6:27:33 PM

Captured Le Figaro Correspondent Confirms the Obvious:
IraQi Jihadists Rooted for Bush Win

5265. robertjayb - 12/28/2004 1:04:06 PM

So the rightist bushie government is putting up $15 million for tsunami relief. Swell.

And the inaugural doings will cost about $40 million?

What would Jesus do?

Weep, I think.

5266. jexster - 12/28/2004 1:30:38 PM

Get Right With Allah Robt...after all we are already spending 200 Billion in disaster relief to IraQi Muslims...

5267. jexster - 12/28/2004 2:25:23 PM

Sorry this is TNR...

Southern Liberalism
The Gavin Stevenses have disappeared and the Snopeses have won Walker Percy

It's hard, looking at the region's deep red hue, to remember that, until the 1960s, there was a clear, liberal (as opposed to merely Democratic) streak running through the region's middle class. These days, white Southern liberals tend to be either transplants or cosmopolitans, people who grew up in Atlanta or Nashville and therefore have easy access to competing political ideas. But the middle-class liberalism of the mid-twentieth century was different. Relatively isolated from national intellectual currents, it grew from a mix of Christian and classical philosophy, catalyzed by a disaffection with the region's aristocratic mythologies and an abiding sense of guilt over its recent, horrible past. Think of Cordell Hull, an FDR brain-truster and Nobel Peace laureate, or Estes Kefauver, an early civil rights advocate and Adlai Stevenson's 1956 running mate--both started life as Tennessee farm boys. Renowned historian (and New Republic contributing editor) C. Vann Woodward grew up in rural Arkansas. Or consider the characters that populate the novels of the Southern renaissance: Faulkner's Gavin Stevens went off to school at Harvard and Heidelberg, while the men in James Agee's A Death in the Family are devoted tnr readers.

Mid-century Southern liberals saw racial justice not as a philosophical problem but as a concrete ill that needed immediate redress. But they also understood that the solutions, should they ever come, would be neither simple nor painless, because reactionary, know-nothing whites--embodied by Faulkner's infamous anti-heroes, the Snopeses--would fight violently to stop them...

5268. jexster - 12/28/2004 2:27:06 PM

And many of those who stayed were seduced by the constant stream of anti-liberalism emanating from everyone from George Wallace to Lynyrd Skynyrd; as Walker Percy wrote in 1965, "Ten years of indoctrination by the Citizens' Councils, racist politicians, and the most one-sided press north of Cuba has produced a generation of good-looking and ferocious young bigots." By the late '60s, liberalism had suffered a mighty blow nationwide. In the South, it never recovered.

White Southern liberals still exist, but they are too rarely a viable political or social presence, particularly in the Deep South of Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, and rural Georgia. Back home in Nashville, I had lunch with one such rarity David Carlton is a history professor at Vanderbilt University (and a Presbyterian church elder) who grew up in a South Carolina mill town before escaping north to Amherst. But he was drawn back, both by his intellectual pursuits and his regionalist pinings. Over sandwiches and coffee, he foretold of dark times. "I don't believe the political realignment of the region is complete yet," he said. "What appears to be an increasingly toxic blend of traditional conservatism and 'Christian' moralism continues to gain strength."

5269. jexster - 12/28/2004 2:27:45 PM

I heard Carlton's pessimism repeated in conversations throughout my trip. The fear is not simply that Republicans will continue to control the vast majority of the region's political offices; conservatism, as it is conventionally understood, tends not to draw the same ire from Southern liberals as it does nationally. Rather, it's that things like the Alabama amendment vote or the recent flap over anti-evolution disclaimers affixed to Cobb County, Georgia, textbooks show the powerful grip that religiously charged, anti-enlightenment conservatism has on the region, and that, without the moderating voice that the region's liberals once presented, these forces will eventually roll back even the modest social gains made during the heyday of Southern liberalism.

In 1965, Percy wrote that "to use Faulkner's personae, the Gavin Stevenses have disappeared and the Snopeses have won." The plight of the Southern liberal is that, 40 years later, Percy's conclusion is more, not less, accurate.

5270. robertjayb - 12/28/2004 3:00:57 PM

Powell: We are not cheap fucks...

Herald Sun (Au)---US Secretary of State Colin Powell insisted today that the US has not been "stingy" in its response to the Asian tsunami disaster but admitted that much more international aid would have to be given.

"The United States is not stingy," Powell told CNN television after a top UN official appeared to criticise the world's rich countries for the amount of aid they give each year.


"We will do more. I wish that comment hadn't been made," Powell said on ABC.

5271. jexster - 12/28/2004 5:46:29 PM

Had to save some money not only for the massive humanitarian effort and war against Satan in Iraq but what about the Inaugural?

Massive Crony Capitalist Donations Pour into Imperial Coronation Coffers

Its all a matter of priorities Robert...When Bush makes the world safe for the Rapture and jewish blood flows on the plain at Armaggedon, we shall all realize this.

Meanwhile, anyone know where I can cop a coupla invites to the Snopes' inaugural bash?

I here its the hottest ticket in Bushville

5272. arkymalarky - 12/28/2004 7:27:35 PM

Did you all know that the second most giving state (percentage/per capita) in the country is Arkansas? And guess which the first is.

That's right. Mississippi. The second poorest and poorest states in the nation rank the same in charity giving.

5273. wonkers2 - 12/28/2004 11:38:06 PM

The more you have the more you want and the less charitable you become.

5274. jexster - 12/30/2004 12:40:54 AM

SOOEY PIG!
Special Interest Lobbying Hits Record $1.1 billion for First Six Months

Funny how K St influence peddling is a growrh industry among "small government" Republicans!

Ronald Reagan made K St the Crony Capitalist Hog Trough It Is Today...Bush is taking the Gucci crowd to ever loftier heights of corruption

WASHINGTON — As President Bush campaigned for reelection pledging to protect doctors and insurance companies from patient lawsuits while easing the tax burden on businesses (what "burden"???), industry groups spent record amounts of money lobbying to influence the White House, Congress and their constituents.

Special interests spent $1.1 billion during the first half of 2004 on lobbyists and advertising campaigns, according to public records that interest groups are required to file with the Senate.

So far in 2004, businesses and interest groups are paying their lobbyists at a record pace. This was the first year in which spending during the first six months topped $1 billion; businesses and interest groups spent about $963 million during the same period in 2003.


And the new figures demonstrate how the cash flow to lobbying firms on Washington's K Street is accelerating — up from an average of $128 million a month during the first half of 2000, the last year of the Clinton administration, to the 2004 monthly average of $176 million.

5275. thoughtful - 12/30/2004 9:53:18 AM

I'm home on vacation this week and was sipping my wine and eating my cheese with old M*A*S*H reruns on the tube when it dawned on me....W is Frank Burns!!!! Weasly, insecure, incompetent, spoiled, mean-spirited, hypocritical, no lips....

5276. wonkers2 - 12/30/2004 12:35:06 PM

Please don't insult Frank Burns!

5277. jexster - 12/30/2004 2:39:21 PM

President's latest response to the tsunami tragedy: badmouth Bill Clinton.

From the Post ...

Earlier yesterday, White House spokesman Trent Duffy said the president was confident he could monitor events effectively without returning to Washington or making public statements in Crawford, where he spent part of the day clearing brush and bicycling. Explaining the about-face, a White House official said: "The president wanted to be fully briefed on our efforts. He didn't want to make a symbolic statement about 'We feel your pain.' "
Many Bush aides believe Clinton was too quick to head for the cameras to hold forth on tragedies with his trademark empathy. "Actions speak louder than words," a top Bush aide said, describing the president's view of his appropriate role.



Actions speak louder than words? Actions?

-- Josh Marshall

5278. thoughtful - 1/1/2005 11:37:42 AM

so I'm not sleeping with the history channel on tv about armageddon. Show was talking to religious (john hagee for one) and scientific types about the end of the earth. Talked about how many fundies give $$ to jews to rebuild the temple in jerusalem which they interpret as being a necessary precursor to christ's return. Talked about parallels which could be drawn between descriptions from revelations about the end of the earth and science-described disasters potentially coming from global warming. Talked about the interpretation of which valley is considered to be Armageddon...in the middle east of course... where the necessary battle must take place.

Then it dawned on me. These people WANT the end of the earth to come. The sooner the better. The pieces start to fall...they want to instigate unrest in the middle east. They want to see the culture deteriorate into total amorality. That's why they are constantly looking for sign of such things, as these will be a precursor to the resurrection.

All of this wouldn't necessarily be a problem, except we have an angry, unresolved alcoholic, "born again" running the country who has instigated an unnecessary war in the middle east which he referred to as a crusade and has significant damage to any efforts on the environment who claims to get direction directly from god and who believes is doing god's work. Someone who's initial response was so niggardly to the terrible tsunami tragedy. Suffering is god's will. Taking the world to armageddon. Encouraging the return of christ.


Scary, very scary scenario (reality?)

5279. wonkers2 - 1/1/2005 12:19:03 PM

How Bush Really Won

5280. judithathome - 1/1/2005 12:24:39 PM

Scary, very scary scenario (reality?)

I think it's reality, frankly. I think he believes the end is near and if he can help it along...why not? More points for him the Big Book.

5281. arkymalarky - 1/1/2005 3:15:53 PM

That's the scary problem with that Fundamentalist movement. They've come think they ARE God. If they bring on Armageddon with their lunacy, does that prove God doesn't exist or that He bows to their bidding?

5282. jexster - 1/2/2005 12:42:46 AM

It's called Idolatry Arky..and you hit that one out of the park

5283. jexster - 1/2/2005 12:45:11 AM

If It's Right, It's Wrong
Social Security Privatization Theories Don't Hold Up

By Michael Kinsley

As I wrote last week, I'm convinced that Social Security privatization is not merely a bad idea but a certain failure, and I offered to provide a logical proof, challenging supporters to find the flaw or give up.

My argument, as condensed as possible, defines success as bringing in more money than the current system does. More money is necessary either to reduce the gap between projected benefits and revenue or to make retirees better off. Supporters variously promise both of these benefits.

More money can come from only two places: increased economic growth and other people. Increased growth can come only from higher private investment or smarter private investment.

Privatization would deflect some money from the Social Security trust fund into private investment, but the government would have to borrow an equal amount to replace it. As for investment decisions, the only change caused by privatization would be a new role for millions of small, naive investors. There is no credible theory that this would improve the overall wisdom of capital investment decisions.

Many people believe that stocks pay better than bonds in the risk-adjusted long run. If so, letting people buy stocks with part of their Social Security tax payments would improve the Social Security system's overall return. The cost would be borne by people who bought bonds instead of stocks.

Privatization, in other words, rests on persuading Americans to accept a theory that must be widely disbelieved in order to be true. It's like Tinker Bell in reverse: If too many people are convinced that the theory is right, it's wrong. .

5284. thoughtful - 1/2/2005 10:51:17 AM

Recommending Frank Rich's column

So the soldiers soldier on, and we party on. As James Dao wrote in The New York Times, "support our troops" became a verbal touchstone in 2004, yet "only for a minuscule portion of the populace, mainly those with loved ones overseas, does it have anything to do with sacrifice." Quite the contrary: we have our tax cuts, and a president who promises to make them permanent. Such is the disconnect between the country and the war that there is no national outrage when the president awards the Medal of Freedom to the clowns who undermined the troops by bungling intelligence (George Tenet) and Iraqi support (Paul Bremer). Such is the disconnect that Washington and the news media react with slack-jawed shock when one of those good soldiers we support so much speaks up at a town hall meeting in Kuwait and asks the secretary of defense why vehicles that take him and his brothers into battle lack proper armor.

5285. thoughtful - 1/2/2005 10:51:18 AM

Recommending Frank Rich's column

So the soldiers soldier on, and we party on. As James Dao wrote in The New York Times, "support our troops" became a verbal touchstone in 2004, yet "only for a minuscule portion of the populace, mainly those with loved ones overseas, does it have anything to do with sacrifice." Quite the contrary: we have our tax cuts, and a president who promises to make them permanent. Such is the disconnect between the country and the war that there is no national outrage when the president awards the Medal of Freedom to the clowns who undermined the troops by bungling intelligence (George Tenet) and Iraqi support (Paul Bremer). Such is the disconnect that Washington and the news media react with slack-jawed shock when one of those good soldiers we support so much speaks up at a town hall meeting in Kuwait and asks the secretary of defense why vehicles that take him and his brothers into battle lack proper armor.

5286. thoughtful - 1/2/2005 10:56:06 AM

Also, for those fans of "guns, germs & steel", op ed by Jared Diamond "the ends of the world as we know them".

Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it promises to be interesting:

History warns us that when once-powerful societies collapse, they tend to do so quickly and unexpectedly. That shouldn't come as much of a surprise: peak power usually means peak population, peak needs, and hence peak vulnerability. What can be learned from history that could help us avoid joining the ranks of those who declined swiftly? We must expect the answers to be complex, because historical reality is complex: while some societies did indeed collapse spectacularly, others have managed to thrive for thousands of years without major reversal.

When it comes to historical collapses, five groups of interacting factors have been especially important: the damage that people have inflicted on their environment; climate change; enemies; changes in friendly trading partners; and the society's political, economic and social responses to these shifts. That's not to say that all five causes play a role in every case. Instead, think of this as a useful checklist of factors that should be examined, but whose relative importance varies from case to case.

5287. wonkers2 - 1/2/2005 1:08:34 PM

Excellent op-eds by Frank Rich and Jared Diamond!

5288. judithathome - 1/2/2005 6:18:12 PM

Another thing about "supporting the troops": wonder how many of those women being quoted in the paper the other day who were bemoaning their fate of not finding the right gowns yet to wear to Bush's inaugural balls have yellow ribbons on their swanky cars? Evidently, it's really difficult to find enough wonderful gowns so they can change for each ball. Poor things.

5289. robertjayb - 1/3/2005 2:39:52 AM

R.I.P., Shirley Chisholm

MIAMI (AP) -- Shirley Chisholm, the first black woman elected to Congress and an outspoken advocate for women and minorities during seven terms in the House, died Saturday near Daytona Beach, friends said. She was 80.

5290. wonkers2 - 1/3/2005 11:40:30 AM

The Social Security Fear Factor--Just another of Bush's lies

5291. robertjayb - 1/3/2005 11:41:53 PM

Wot's this then?

WASHINGTON - House Republicans suddenly reversed course Monday, deciding to retain a tough standard for lawmaker discipline and reinstate a rule that would force Majority Leader Tom DeLay to step aside if indicted by a Texas grand jury.



The surprise dual decisions were made by Speaker Dennis Hastert and by DeLay — who asked GOP colleagues to undo the extreme act of loyalty they handed him in November. Then, Republicans changed a party rule so DeLay could retain his leadership post if indicted by the grand jury in Austin that charged three of the Texas Republican's associates.

5292. jexster - 1/4/2005 1:39:23 AM

They don't think he'll be indicted and are going to press for the ethics investigation relaxation so that the GOP majority can kill any unwanted ethics inquiries..that's my bet

5293. jexster - 1/4/2005 1:42:45 AM

An excellent, thorough critique of our fairly unbalanced and cowardly US media from the NY Review of Books

Iraq, the Press and the Election
By Michael Massing

5294. robertjayb - 1/4/2005 3:22:28 PM

Let the plunder begin!

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Future Social Security benefits could be cut almost in half for some younger workers under a plan President Bush is considering for overhauling the nation's retirement system.

Bush so far has refused to discuss the difficult financial trade-offs that would be required to remake the system to let younger workers divert some of their payroll taxes into personal investment accounts. He has said he will use as a model proposals from his 2001 Social Security commission to craft a proposal that Congress will consider this year.

Under the commission plan that lawmakers said Tuesday was being discussed as the framework for the overhaul, Social Security benefits for younger workers would be cut by 0.9 percent to 45.9 percent from traditional benefits. Investments in the personal accounts would be counted on to make up the loss in income.

Pssst! Wanna buy a nice mutual fund, young man? How about you, Auntie?

5295. thoughtful - 1/4/2005 3:33:27 PM

And from Wapo

But by embracing "price indexing," the president would for the first time detail the painful costs involved in closing the gap between the Social Security benefits promised to future retirees and the taxes available to fund them. In late February or March, the administration plans to produce its proposed overhaul of the system, including creation of personal investment accounts and the new benefit calculation.

"This is going to be very much like sticking your hand in a wasp nest," said David C. John, a Social Security analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation and an ally of the president. "And the reaction will be similar."



Get it? That last bit is from a guy at the Heritage Foundation!

A friend stopped by yesterday and we had a long interesting chat about politics. Surprisingly, he's a dyed-in-the-wool goper and had no reluctance whatsoever to call w a liar and condemn the bushies for their trashing any sense of community in the states and in the world. What a pleasant surprise. Maybe over the next 4 years more will come around.

Of course, he then proceeded to trash the dems, and rightly so, for not even knowing what they stand for. Bush co-opted their stand-by solution of throwing more govt money at it, and they were left with nothing. Because they didn't define themselves, rove did, and not in a flattering way.

I likened it to me playing chess with Bobby Fisher...by the time I sat down at the board, the game was lost. Same thing with rove vs. the dems.

Time to dump the primary process and go back to the smoke-filled room with party bosses selecting the next guy.

5296. Wombat - 1/4/2005 3:51:06 PM

Of course, given the stringent antismoking regulations in the US, the room would have to be metaphorical.

5297. jexster - 1/4/2005 3:57:07 PM

Weapons of Mass Deception..

The first part of the plan that was supposed to SAVE Social Security calls for a 1/3 cut in benefits!

Put that stupid fuck on the Third Rail and watch him squirm

5298. jexster - 1/4/2005 3:59:40 PM

One GOP proponent of the Great Social Security Rip Off 2005 was reported as having conceded that the plan would not pass but that "it was a fight worth having"

Comments like that lead me to believe that there is a fair chance that the legislation may not even be brought to the Floor of the Senate at least, or that if it is, death will come done swiftly on an up or down basis

5299. thoughtful - 1/4/2005 4:17:45 PM

Krugman is back and is planning on spending several columns on the soc sec issue. Today's, Stopping the Bum's Rush:

The people who hustled America into a tax cut to eliminate an imaginary budget surplus and a war to eliminate imaginary weapons are now trying another bum's rush. If they succeed, we will do nothing about the real fiscal threat and will instead dismantle Social Security, a program that is in much better financial shape than the rest of the federal government....

5300. iiibbb - 1/4/2005 4:25:26 PM

I think anyone under 35 who's banking on Social Security is going to die poor as a ward of the state.


I've been operating under the expectation that SS will not be there for me when I retire. At that point what difference does it make if it goes away because it runs out of money... or it goes away because Bush is an idiot.

5301. iiibbb - 1/4/2005 4:26:26 PM

At least I know how to hunt and kill deer now.

5302. wonkers2 - 1/4/2005 6:22:47 PM

Bush administration weighing sending U.S. Army advisers to serve with Iraqi army units. Sound familiar? Here.

5303. robertjayb - 1/4/2005 6:46:35 PM

What's next, wonkers2?

Strategic hamlets...anyone?

5304. robertjayb - 1/4/2005 6:56:20 PM

Our Spudboy on the Washington Governor's election and GOP bullying...

The GOP's outrageous tactics -- essentially trying to game the system by short-circuiting the legitimate outcome of the established process through a public-relations campaign waged largely over the right-wing talk airwaves -- made it absolutely essential to get behind Gregoire's recount. The principles at stake, particularly regarding respect for the process and the final count, as well as of the right of citizens to have their legally cast votes be counted, were the same ones that had been disregarded so easily four years before in Florida.

5305. wonkers2 - 1/4/2005 7:11:32 PM

Independent judiciary jeopardized by GOP partisan political hacks

5306. thoughtful - 1/4/2005 7:29:56 PM

re washington gov's election, I can't help but compare it to the presidential election in 2000 and how quick the gopers were to call an end to the counting. Same thing in OH this go round. Let alone all the trashing they did of the dems for not graciously accepting the inevitable outcome.

Hypocrisy, thy name is gop.

5307. jexster - 1/4/2005 11:21:35 PM

Greedy Old Pigs Fixin the Trough for Corporate Crony Sows
Set to Roll Back Sarbanes-Oxley Enron Reforms

5308. lemwalker - 1/4/2005 11:54:49 PM

The news now is Washington has 8,500 or so votes more than are on rolls in 5 counties. Personal poll of those I come in contact with is; 'let's just vote again'. I think we should try 4 years without a govenor and see how we do.

5309. jexster - 1/5/2005 12:12:45 AM

Thanks for the heads-up on Krugman's return, Thoughtful

His extended Economist's Voice article on the Bush SS Scam is worth checking out as is the Journal itself.

First time I'd heard of it...impressive editorial cast


The Economists' Voice

Editor: JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ, Columbia University
Co-Editors: BRADFORD DeLONG, University of California, Berkeley
AARON EDLIN, University of California, Berkeley

5310. thoughtful - 1/5/2005 10:44:16 AM

As a fan of delong, i've known about the econ voice since before its inception. Krugman posting there will certainly help improve traffic.

5311. thoughtful - 1/5/2005 10:50:59 AM

Beware of the new technique being deployed around house ethics rules....talk about making a terrible change then rescind it under the guise of, see we're really ethical and we're not going there. Use that to bury the fact that they are in fact proposing significant changes easing ethics rules in the house and making it harder to investigate violations. Wiley bunch.

GOP plan on ethics complaints

5312. judithathome - 1/5/2005 11:14:58 AM

Wiley bunch.

That's not the first adjective to come to mind.

5313. jexster - 1/6/2005 2:16:33 AM

So far, everyone – and I mean everyone –
who has signed on to Bush administration plans in the hope that they can be converted into something better has ended up used, abused, and discarded. It happened to John DiIulio, it happened to Colin Powell, it happened to Greg
Mankiw, and it’s a safe prediction that those who think they can turn the Bush drive to dismantle Social Security into something good will suffer the same fate.


The list is truly impressive especially if you count legislators who have tried to work with the sleazebucket.
Hosed on No Child Left Behind, on Iraq, on Homeland Security, on taxes, on Prescription drug benefit, on and on...

5314. thoughtful - 1/6/2005 10:21:54 AM

What is the significance of jeb bush going to se asia to view the tsunami damage? Poppy and the silver fox are lining him up for '08.

Have you noticed bush's ability to string words together seems to have significantly improved since the election? They must have adjusted his meds....

5315. wonkers2 - 1/6/2005 10:30:26 AM

To the Editor:

The administration's "sky is falling" depiction of Social Security's future is all too familiar. It's the same tactic that the administration used to get us into the mess in Iraq.

Stress an imminent crisis despite information to the contrary, and continuously drum fear into the American people so that they are unable to see beyond the hype. It worked before, so why shouldn't it work with the gathering "mushroom cloud" over Social Security?

Conservatives have wanted to dismantle Social Security since it began, and privatization is their means to reach that goal.

Barbara Bellantonio
East Meadow, New York

NYTimes 1-6-05

5316. thoughtful - 1/6/2005 10:34:24 AM

Looks like our boy thomas has been quite busy after all!

Justice Thomas Reports Wealth of Gifts

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has accepted tens of thousands of dollars worth of gifts since joining the high court, including $1,200 worth of tires, valuable historical items and a $5,000 personal check to help pay a relative's education expenses.

After all, you can't expect a guy to live on only $200,000 a year, can you?

5317. wonkers2 - 1/6/2005 10:36:51 AM

Yes, and Bush would clone Thomas for his next Supreme Court appointee if he could. Or maybe a combination with Scalia's brains and Thomas's brawn or whatever.

5318. wonkers2 - 1/6/2005 10:46:24 AM

More wisdom from the people:

To the Editor (NYT):

Not irrlevant to the current assessment of Alberto Gonzales for attorney general in regard to prisoner torture is his record as counsel to George W. Bush in Texas, when he advised the governor against granting pardon in every one of 97 executions. Mercy is evidently absent from Mr. Gonzales [and from Mr. Bush's] conception of justice.

Charles Blyth
Cambridge, Massachusetts

5319. jexster - 1/6/2005 11:26:30 AM

Josh Marshall: stakes (from Thursday's Journal ...)

Senate Republicans signaled their wariness yesterday in a private retreat on the year's legislative agenda with White House adviser Karl Rove. An attendee said the senators gave Mr. Rove "a subtle but clearly identifiable message that the GOP [Grand Old Party] would go along...but they were scared to death." The senators indicated that the president "had to step up his activity" to sell his initiative to Americans, which Mr. Rove said Mr. Bush would do. But the attendee said senators also warned the Social Security proposal "needed to be bipartisan or else no go."
Still, some Republicans are resigned to uniting behind the president, given his determination. "The president is going to go ahead," said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a Republican leadership lieutenant. "He cannot afford to fail. It would have repercussions for the rest of his program, including foreign policy. We can't hand the president a defeat on his major domestic initiative at a time of war."

Lets agree to pass over that last comment, the implication of which is if Social Security is preserved it would be a win for the terrorists, and just note the following ...

The prerequisite for defending and preserving Social Security is Democratic unity. As the senators apparently told Mr. Rove, down-the-line opposition from the Democrats raises the stakes on them dramatically. Then the demise of Social Security becomes a Republican deed through and through. And all the political coverage of the Social Security debate will center on divisions among Republicans, their internal discussions of strategy, who has cold feet about sthe phase-out and who's pushing full steam ahead.

5320. jexster - 1/6/2005 11:26:48 AM

Like in the New York Times today. To read the Times account the Republicans are just divided between the privatizers and the SUPER sized privatizers, but Bull Moose, a former GOP House Staffer who returned to the sanity of the Real World, claims tha there is also a group he calls The Naysayrs who are too afraid at this point to voice their opposition

Interestingly, the group includes Tom Delay who thinks they'll all be fried on the Third Rail...or a Bull Moose put it...Try two quagmires

5321. jexster - 1/6/2005 11:34:48 AM

More than just a reflection of his moral compass, Gonzalez performance on torture and on those clemency memos reflects poorly on his skills as an attorney.

He obviously is an ass kisser who is going to give his client anything that might tend to tax his limited intellect or broaden his ideological tunnel vision but it is precisely in those cases where the lawyer needs to work a bit, sweat a little, to make certain that the client appreciates the implications of the decision.


The clemency memos were a travesty.

Gonzalez is a mediocrity.

5322. jexster - 1/6/2005 12:01:30 PM

SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION IN PICTURES....Like Ross Perot, we're all about visual aids here at Political Animal. After all, a chart is worth a thousand words, right?

So here's a chart everyone ought to pay attention to. As we all know by now, George Bush's favored Social Security privatization proposal is rumored to be Plan 2 of the President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security — known to its friends as CSSS Plan 2. This plan diverts one-third of payroll taxes to private accounts and cuts guaranteed future benefits by one half. (It does a couple of other things too, but these are the biggies.)

So: how does CSSS Plan 2 compare to the alternative of doing absolutely nothing? The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office produced a report last July that examined exactly that. The chart below summarizes their findings.



Keep in mind that this chart is a worst case estimate for the "do nothing" alternative. It assumes there are no changes whatsoever to the system and that the trust fund becomes insolvent in 2053, at which point benefits would suddenly be cut by about 20%. Here's how that compares to CSSS Plan 2:




Hmmm. CSSS Plan 2 doesn't look too good, does it? Maybe good old fashioned Social Security is a better bargain after all..

Now, tell me again why anyone aside from Wall Street brokers is supposed to like this plan?

—Kevin Drum

5323. wonkers2 - 1/6/2005 12:12:16 PM

For once, I hope DeeLay is right!

5324. Wombat - 1/6/2005 12:21:38 PM

Part of the Marshall quote that Jexter omitted refers to the political atmosphere being open to SS "change" for the first time in 60 years, which gives one an idea about how certain Republicans feel about Social Security in general.

5325. thoughtful - 1/6/2005 3:15:56 PM

WH memo on strategy behind soc sec reform is now available on Brad DeLong's site

I don't need to tell you that this will be one of the most important conservative undertakings of modern times. If we succeed in reforming Social Security, it will rank as one of the most significant conservative governing achievements ever. The scope and scale of this endeavor are hard to overestimate....

Our strategy will probably include speeches early this month to establish an important premise: the current system is heading for an iceberg....

For the first time in six decades, the Social Security battle is one we can win -- and in doing so, we can help transform the political and philosophical landscape of the country. We have it within our grasp to move away from dependency on government and toward giving greater power and responsibility to individuals....



intent is clear. success is not yet a given. regardless of the facts, this will all boil down to a media war. Not clear IMHO who wins.

5326. wonkers2 - 1/6/2005 3:16:49 PM

Barbara Boxer has just joined with Michigan congressman John Conyers in questining the fairness of voting procedures and conditins in Ohio--eg not enough machines in minority precincts where voters waited in line until 4am to vote, etc. According to her voting machines were moved from inner-city precincts to the suburbs.

5327. jexster - 1/6/2005 4:07:12 PM

WMD: Bush's SS "Crisis" - Center for Budget & Policy Priorities

The cost of the tax cuts (if made permanent) over the next 75 years will be three to five times the size of the Social Security shortfall; the cost of the Bush Pharmaceutical Company Welfare and Relief Act of 2003 aka prescription drug benefit will be at least twice the size of the shortfall.

5328. jexster - 1/6/2005 4:13:14 PM

THIS is a Turd of Great Price....Bush had a difference of opinion with the actuaries!

Jeezusaleezus...he wouldn't know an actuary from Miss Laura's anus

At his December 20 press conference, the President suggested the prescription drug bill would reduce Medicare expenditures for hospitalizations, but the Medicare trustees disagree. In their 2004 report, the trustees specifically stated that enactment of the drug bill had enlarged the long-term shortfall in the Medicare Hospital Insurance program.[2] The drug bill included provisions increasing payments to various health care providers.
What President Bush Said About Medicare at His Press Conference

Q: Why did you choose to take on Social Security and not Medicare, which some people believe is a worse problem?

A: Well, I appreciate that, Ed, but we did take on Medicare. And it was the Medicare Reform Bill that really began to change Medicare as we knew it. In other words, it introduced market forces for the first time; it provided a prescription drug coverage for our seniors, which I believe will be cost effective. I recognize some of the actuaries haven't come to that conclusion yet. But the logic is irrefutable. It seems like to me, that if the government is willing to pay $100,000 for heart surgery, but not a dime for the prescription drug that would prevent the heart surgery from happening in the first place, aren't we saving money when we provide the money necessary to prevent the surgery from being needed in the first place. I think we are. That's one of the differences of opinion that I had with the actuaries.a

a Source: White House website, transcript of press conference of December 20, 2004.

5329. jexster - 1/6/2005 4:20:05 PM

this will all boil down to a media war

Isn't that always the case..The WarLord does have 55-45 - a wee advantage

This will boil down to holding enough Democratic Senators for a filibuster at worst..

There is a chance that if he doesn't steamroller the thing through Congress that he will lose significant numbers of republicans in both houses ...Look forward to another of those trips to the Bully Bullshit..er Pulpit ...thank ya Jesus.

Trouble in Paradise - BullMoose

5330. jexster - 1/6/2005 5:20:16 PM

Gee Jay..guess you missed the episode of Ali as the Kahzakstani visiting the Brotherhood of the Vine in Jackson MS..

"My mother she don't love me much"

"Oh I am sure she does, she just shows it in different ways"

"Well just the other day she told me she wished she was raped by someone else"

5331. jexster - 1/7/2005 12:09:46 AM

This guy could be trouble for the Grand Old Nazis


Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record) of South Carolina told Gonzales he would vote for him but said, "When you start looking at torture statutes and you look at ways around the spirit of the law ... you are losing the moral high ground."



Contrast the well whipped Specter:

"Do you support torture?"


This isn't the first instance either....they need to git dat boy in line quick...he's got a hankerin for lame ducks

5332. jexster - 1/7/2005 12:23:26 AM

Regular TPM readers know, can't miss, Josh Marshall's crusade against the Fainthearted Faction, the handful of demos who might bolt on Killing SS.

He also has a few words about the Conscience Caucus, Republicans who ain't gonna gut the program, a group "much larger" than the FF group.



(Hold on to that Chairmanship with both hands, Arlen.)

5333. jexster - 1/7/2005 2:33:27 AM

The long arm of the GOP Geheime Staatspolizei, Dept C. (Party Affairs)

House GOP Shit Cans Ethics Committee Chair
Heffley Neutered for Heading Up DeLay Ethics Investigation, Opposing Leadership "reforms"

Ein reich, ein volk, ein Moron

5334. robertjayb - 1/7/2005 2:33:56 AM

Krugman previews forthcoming bad novel...

I've been thinking of writing a political novel. It will be a bad novel because there won't be any nuance: the villains won't just espouse an ideology I disagree with - they'll be hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels.
................................................

How did we find ourselves living in a bad novel? It was not ever thus. Hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels have always been with us, on both sides of the aisle. But 9/11 created an environment some liberals summarize with the acronym Iokiyar: it's O.K. if you're a Republican.

The public became unwilling to believe bad things about those who claim to be defending the nation against terrorism. And the hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels of the right, empowered by the public's credulity, have come out in unprecedented force.

5335. wonkers2 - 1/7/2005 11:32:14 AM

Democrats Can Learn from Shirley Chisholm Here

"When Bush taunted Kerry with 'My opponent hasn't answereed the question of, knowing what we know now, would he have supported going into Iraq.' Kerry shot back, 'Yes I would.'

"Kerry could have said: Knowing what we know now about the nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, no one in their right mind would have given Bush the green light for U.S. mass destruction."

5336. thoughtful - 1/7/2005 12:02:00 PM

As much as I detest ann coulter, she was on imus this am and said the most unbelievable part of the gonzales hearing was ted kennedy talking about 'waterboarding' torture and how he would never want to bring anyone so close to the point of drowning. Sure enough she sent imus the tape who played it.

Un-freakin'-believable.

5337. thoughtful - 1/7/2005 12:04:30 PM

wonks, when i heard kerry's response to that, the first time, my heart sank and i knew the election was lost. You know darned well dean's response would've been much different.

i had the same sensation when i heard furman from the oj trial lie on the stand saying he never used the 'n' word. I knew at that point oj would get off.

5338. wonkers2 - 1/7/2005 12:08:26 PM

Yep.

5339. thoughtful - 1/7/2005 2:32:19 PM

I'm in the middle of this and finding it an interesting read.

How Bush Really Won
By Mark Danner

I was struck again by how precisely the campaign had managed to define Bush's strengths in perfect contradistinction to what they had defined as Kerry's weaknesses, and then to devote all its resources to emphasizing both. Every repetition of what Bush was—and the repetitions were unending, and intricately varied —was crafted to be a perfect reminder of what his opponent was not. Practically every word emitted by the campaign, whether through the thousands and thousands of television and radio commercials, or the words of the campaign spokesmen, or the speeches of the candidate himself, moved in gorgeously disciplined lockstep to drive home to voters not only who George W. Bush was but who his opponent was not. As Bush became more and more Bush ("STRENGTH! LEADERSHIP! CHARACTER! INTEGRITY!"), Kerry, little-known, chilly, distant, was turned into the anti-Bush, a weak, shallow, flipflopping, shillyshallyer whose every word was an attempt to deceive Americans about who he really was.

5340. robertjayb - 1/7/2005 2:40:51 PM

Kevin Drum is reminded of The Godfather. Again.

PAY FOR PLAY....Eduwonk calls it "sleazy." ABC's Note is having trouble picking its jaw up from the floor. Why? Because USA Today has confirmed via a Freedom of Information request that the Department of Education has been paying commentator Armstrong Williams to shill for the No Child Left Behind Act and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots.

So what's the fuss, anyway? As I recall, that's sort of like how the Godfather worked too. "We got newspaper guys on our payroll. They might like a story like that." It's amazing how often the Bush administration reminds me of that movie.

5341. thoughtful - 1/7/2005 2:45:05 PM

More from Danner:

The war may well be President Bush's greatest wound; but for candidate Bush the ability to depict Iraq as "the central front of the war on terror" and trumpet his willingness to confront the war and "stay the course" to victory was an audacious and astonishing act of political legerdemain. He took what looked to be his greatest weakness and made it his opponent's.

5342. jexster - 1/7/2005 3:07:08 PM

In my bad novel, crusaders for moral values will be driven by strange obsessions. One senator's diatribe against gay marriage will link it to "man on dog" sex. Another will rant about the dangers of lesbians in high school bathrooms.

In my bad novel, the president will choose as head of homeland security a "good man" who turns out to have been the subject of an arrest warrant, who turned an apartment set aside for rescue workers into his personal love nest and who stalked at least one of his ex-lovers.

In my bad novel, a TV personality who claims to stand up for regular Americans against the elite will pay a large settlement in a sexual harassment case, in which he used his position of power to - on second thought, that story is too embarrassing even for a bad novel.



I give him a chapter on the KulliganMan's adventures in homosexual sado-masochism

5343. robertjayb - 1/7/2005 9:44:16 PM

Pro-Life or Pro-Birth? The blogger kos shares this e-mail:

I wanted to pass on a term that I heard a Benedictine nun use when she was being interviewed on Bill Moyers' PBS show "Now." She accused those evangelicals who touted "pro-life" positions of actually being "pro-birth" only because they abandoned responsibility for maintaining infrastructure for deteriorating schools, health care, etc.--as well as ignoring the plethora of war dead, which always includes so many children.

5344. jexster - 1/7/2005 10:47:19 PM

Give the Idiot 2 quagmire sandwiches toasted on a Third Rail

GOP Opposition Lining Up to Bush Plan to Kill Social Sec.

Before President Bush (news - web sites) begins selling his overhaul of Social Security (news - web sites) to Americans, he may have to convince fellow Republicans that voting for the changes he wants won't end their political careers.

David John, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, says a minority of House Republicans supports Bush now. "At least as many and probably more just don't know enough one way or another," he says, and some "are absolutely convinced that this is the wrong thing to do."



Hell if God told them to get up that obstacle...

Strike that..

I hear tell Bush IS God or at least YHWH made him Lord Over Us. World without end, to ages of ages Amen

5345. jexster - 1/7/2005 11:16:24 PM

Leave No Little Bush Fascist Behind

Looks like Il Duce's boyz have busy little beavers coordinating an end to a free media

U.S. Pays Commentator to Tout School Law

27 minutes ago Top Stories - AP


By BEN FELLER, AP Education Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration paid a prominent commentator to promote the No Child Left Behind schools law to fellow blacks and to give the education secretary media time, records show.





A company run by Armstrong Williams, the syndicated commentator, was paid $240,000 by the Education Department. The goal was to deliver positive messages about Bush's education overhaul, using Williams' broad reach with minorities.

5346. jexster - 1/9/2005 7:03:45 PM

The look of love...



Dean and Roemer at Southern Region DNC

5347. jexster - 1/9/2005 7:51:20 PM

Ex-Rep. Roemer Joins Race for DNC Chairman


The Associated Press
Sunday, January 9, 2005; 2:00 PM


WASHINGTON - Former Rep. Tim Roemer said Sunday that he's joining the race to lead the Democratic National Committee - a move certain to spark a heated debate about the abortion issue.

Roemer, a Catholic who opposes abortion, wants to lead a party whose platform supports abortion rights.

The former Indiana congressman said he respects the position of the many Democrats who favor abortion choice. "But I think we should not only be more inclusive on this issue, especially in the Midwest and the South," Roemer said on ABC's "This Week."

He said he's joining the race to expand the party both geographically and ideologically.

In the last election, "the Democratic Party lost 97 of the 100 fastest-growing counties in the United States. We have four senators, Democrat senators, left in the Deep South," Roemer said. He said Democrats also have lost ground with Hispanic voters, "churchgoing African-American voters" and Catholics.

Kate Michelman, a leading advocate for abortion choice, said "the election of such a staunchly anti-choice leader would signal that the Democratic Party is retreating from one of its core principles."

Roemer joins a field that includes former Texas Rep. Martin Frost, Democratic activists Simon Rosenberg and Donnie Fowler, former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb and former Ohio Democratic Party chirman David Leland. Howard Dean, a former Democratic presidential candidate, is considering whether to join the race.

Senior Democrats have approached current chairman Terry McAuliffe about staying in the job.

Democrats will vote on the choice in February.

5348. arkymalarky - 1/9/2005 8:37:27 PM

Surely McAuliffe won't stay. Surely.

5349. arkymalarky - 1/9/2005 8:38:57 PM

What about whatserdrip--African-American woman who ran Gore's campaign? Is she not going for it? She didn't seem too interested.

5350. jexster - 1/9/2005 9:46:48 PM

No McAuliffe is out. And no, Donna Brazille isn't in the race either..no women running at all in fact.

Its kind of a thankless job...fundraising, party building mostly..occasional spin appearances with your opposite number on talk shows..long hours fertilizing the grass roots and hand holding nervous Demos from Saginaw to Yakima

5351. wonkers2 - 1/9/2005 11:39:30 PM

Nearly all of the commentators' on Bush's bribing of Armstrong to support his education program said that he's only the tip of the ice berg.

5352. wonkers2 - 1/9/2005 11:40:31 PM

[And, to be fair, that the practice preceded the Bush administration.]

5353. arkymalarky - 1/9/2005 11:48:11 PM

I'm sure the practice of having affairs with interns preceded the Clinton administration. I think this really needs a thorough investigation. The media's bad enough without the administration outright buying it.

5354. alistairconnor - 1/10/2005 10:56:58 AM

I heard Spike Lee say, on French TV, that he had been offered several million to make a clip for the Bush campaign... asked whether this means he's incorruptible, he said no, it just means he'll never make a clip for Bush...

5355. jexster - 1/10/2005 3:40:58 PM

WASHINGTON MEMO
Hot Topic: How U.S. Might Disengage in Iraq


WASHINGTON, Jan. 9 - Three weeks before the election in Iraq, conversation has started bubbling up in Congress, in the Pentagon and some days even in the White House about when and how American forces might begin to disengage in Iraq.

The rumblings about disengagement have grown distinctly louder as members of Congress return from their districts after the winter recess, and as military officers try to game out how Sunni Arabs and Shiites might react to the election results. The annual drafting of the budget is a reminder that the American presence in Iraq is costing nearly $4.5 billion a month and putting huge strains on the military. And White House officials contemplate the political costs of a second term possibly dominated by a nightly accounting of continuing casualties


And the Mote, substantially ahead of the curve.....again

5356. thoughtful - 1/10/2005 4:09:22 PM

did y'all hear that newt is thinking of running for pres??? newt????

5357. Dubai Vol - 1/10/2005 4:17:05 PM

I know this isn't going to be popular, but I feel compelled to point out that the time to voice disapproval of Bush was November 2nd. Anything you say now is, in the words of Robert Heinlein, equivalent to the whining of a bunch puppies in a basket. You couldn't get the votes out when it mattered, and that's all that counts.

Look, I completely sympathise, even though I still think the Iraq war was the right thing to do. And let me point out once again that EVERY government in the Gulf region supported, and continues to support, the war in real and material ways. Rhetoric aside, Bahrain is still the center for US military command. Qatar is a major base for US troops, the UAE has USN and USAF bases, etc. Consider that just maybe if all Iraq's neighbors are supporting the war then just maybe it's not such a huge mistake.

Please note that I'm not trying to score points here, just giving some opinion and some facts. From the point of view of the US, I think the most valuable effect is to make Iraq a lighning rod for your beloved Islamic extremists. Now they don't have to travel to America to fight the great satan, they can just go to Iraq. And before you start crying about the poor American soldiers (as if you would) thats what they get paid for. I should know as I'm a vet myself.

Gotta love a good rant!
:)

5358. jexster - 1/10/2005 4:17:08 PM

Yes..posted in Lies...

I thought that was the more appropriate thread...

5359. jexster - 1/10/2005 4:20:06 PM

Democrats United in Plans to Block Top Bush Initiatives

As President Bush prepares for his second term, Democrats in Washington and around the country are organizing for a year of confrontation and resistance, saying they are determined to block Bush's major initiatives and thereby deny him the mandate he has claimed from his reelection victory last November.

The Democrats' mood and posture represent a contrast to that of four years ago, after Bush's disputed victory over Al Gore. Then, despite anger and bitterness over how the 2000 election ended, Democrats were tentative and initially open to Bush's calls for bipartisan cooperation. Today, despite Bush's clear win over Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), Democrats across the ideological spectrum say they are united in their desire to fight.
....The Democratic National Committee must pick a new leader to replace outgoing chairman Terrence R. McAuliffe before the national party can provide real help.




ROEMER FOR RULER!

5360. Dubai Vol - 1/10/2005 4:52:37 PM

Personally, I see the Democrat/GOP initiatives as little more than maneuvering for political power. None of them have a real interest in the well-being of the average American or the nation as a whole. JMO

5361. jexster - 1/10/2005 5:54:16 PM

Tim Roemer, next up on Judy Woodruff's Inside Politics

5362. jexster - 1/10/2005 5:59:08 PM

Dubai...Its Time for ChickenHawks To Pay the Piper


Uh oh. We're being stretched thin:
Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist said the U.S. military is struggling to keep up the fight against insurgents who want to disrupt the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq for a new national assembly....

We need more troops, and where, oh where, can we find people who think the war is peachy, justified, and going great to help fill the ranks?

Atrios suggests the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, and that's a wonderful idea! I mean, they argue that things are improving, right? So they should have nothing to fear. How many war supporters in Congress and the White House have sons, daughters, and grandchildren aged 18-35? A bunch, I bet. And let's not forget the civilian leadership in the Pentagon.

And all those Bush voters who stood at attention when words like "freedom is on the march" were uttered? Time to ship out. Cause, really, Bush needs you....

Hey I can even suggest some recruit targets..AlD wanted to volunteer to head up an Old Farts Brigade...


Find him

5363. jexster - 1/10/2005 6:47:17 PM

The Way Bush's Bidniss Gets Done

#8 on Jim Cramer's list of ten business predictions for the coming year (in New York magazine ...)

8. The president will ram Social Security “reform” through Congress by getting brokerage houses to lobby for the change.
George Bush will promise Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Schwab, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns the contract to privatize Social Security and let them be the administrators of the project. These firms will then get their employees to give millions to politicians who are on the fence. Their stocks will triple in value from the prospect of the new business, they’ll pressure the Republican-led Congress for swift passage in the fall of 2005, and the deal will get done.

5364. robertjayb - 1/10/2005 7:20:59 PM

So reports the Chicago Tribune (May need registration)

Investment pros see bonanza

Social Security proposal would add billions to investments and fees

5365. thoughtful - 1/10/2005 7:41:15 PM

so how are the bushies going to sell this soc sec canard?

"You're either with us or you're against the elderly!"

5366. thoughtful - 1/10/2005 7:42:33 PM

and you ain't seen nothin' yet. just wait til the tax reform crew comes along. There are so many ways to obfuscate tax increases on the lower classes and tax breaks on the wealthy that it will be an absolute frenzy of joy for the bush donors!

5367. judithathome - 1/10/2005 8:51:07 PM

Has anyone posted this story?

Bush may appoint Moonie to Trade Board

The Washington Post reports today that Josette Shiner is among five potential picks to replace her boss, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, who has himself been tapped to be Condi Rice's #2 man.

Once described as the most "enigmatic" of the Moon operatives in the Washington Times newsroom, Shiner was appointed by George W. Bush to a lesser U.S. trade ambassador post earlier in his administration, raising eyebrows in D.C., MSNBC reported at the time.

Shiner joined Moon's organization early on, as a college student in 1975, when Moon was much more frank about calling for his followers to take power in the U.S. government, and forge an "automatic theocracy to rule the world."

5368. wonkers2 - 1/10/2005 11:55:54 PM

Whatever happened to AlDavis? I hope he's basking comfortably on the beach at Waikiki.

5369. jexster - 1/11/2005 2:45:49 AM

News From the Third Rail: GOP Opposition Building to Bush Plan to Kill Social Security

5370. jexster - 1/11/2005 2:46:54 AM

I hope the old fuck is soon sunin hissef in Baghdad where he belongs.

Put his dentures where his mouth is

5371. judithathome - 1/11/2005 10:07:08 AM

I hope he's basking comfortably on the beach at Waikiki.


Trust me. he wouldn't be comfortable on Waikiki...too crowded with tourists.

5372. thoughtful - 1/11/2005 12:03:42 PM

Ah yes, the administration of moral values:

D.C. officials said yesterday that the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent and forcing the city to divert $11.9 million from homeland security projects.

Federal officials have told the District that it should cover the expenses by using some of the $240 million in federal homeland security grants it has received in the past three years -- money awarded to the city because it is among the places at highest risk of a terrorist attack.

5373. jexster - 1/11/2005 1:17:33 PM

The Iceberg Cometh



The administration expects us not to notice, however, that the supposed solution would do nothing to reduce that cost. Even with the most favorable assumptions, the benefits of privatization wouldn't kick in until most of the baby boomers were long gone. For the next 45 years, privatization would cost much more money than it saved.

Advocates of privatization almost always pretend that all we have to do is borrow a bit of money up front, and then the system will become self-sustaining. The Wehner memo talks of borrowing $1 trillion to $2 trillion "to cover transition costs." Similar numbers have been widely reported in the news media.

But that's just the borrowing over the next decade. Privatization would cost an additional $3 trillion in its second decade, $5 trillion in the decade after that and another $5 trillion in the decade after that. By the time privatization started to save money, if it ever did, the federal government would have run up around $15 trillion in extra debt.

These numbers are based on a Congressional Budget Office analysis of Plan 2, which was devised by a special presidential commission in 2001 and is widely expected to be the basis for President Bush's plan.
...
There's an iceberg in front of us, all right. And Mr. Bush wants us to steam right into it, full speed ahead.

WaPo ran a story of how all of Bush's plans are "crises"...Well almost. They all have a strange habit of becoming crises.

As Harry Truman wondered, "How many times do you have to get hit over the head before you figure out who's hittin ya?"

5374. Max Macks - 1/11/2005 2:07:14 PM

What's with this story I saw on the Jim Liar News Hour
yesterday.

Several media CEO's were practically peeing in their pants
over the firing of some top executives of CBS
because of the Dan Rather story regarding W.Bush's not
serving his Natl Guard commitment.
The story by Rather was based on documents that were
not the ORIGNAL documents.

ok I guess that is true , but what gets me is
that the facts about his going AWOL and
getting his papa to get him into the
Texas N.Guard and thus avoid going to Vietnam.
are true arent they??

So the documents were facimile of originals.
so what??

Ain't the issue as to whether the Chimp did or did not
go AWOL and whether or not strings were pulled
to get him into the Texas guard.

Surely others beside me must be of this opinion...

5375. wonkers2 - 1/11/2005 2:29:55 PM

Count me in. But you may want to check today's NY Times on-line for complete coverage of the issues raised about the CBS/Rather story. Their journalism was not up to par, even though the story was essentially true. Also there was the matter of the inappropriate heads-up on the story given to the Kerry campaign by somebody in CBS.

5376. jexster - 1/11/2005 2:31:38 PM

Mister Popularity or Buyers' Remorse?

Bush’s approval rating is at 49 percent in the AP poll, with 49 percent disapproving. His job approval is in the high 40s in several other recent polls — as low as any job approval rating for a re-elected president at the start of the second term in more than 50 years.
Presidents Reagan and Clinton had job approval ratings of around 60 percent just before their inauguration for a second term, according to Gallup polls.

President Nixon’s approval was in the 60s right after his 1972 re-election, slid to about 50 percent right before his inauguration and then moved back over 60 percent. President Eisenhower’s job approval was in the low 70s just before his second inauguration in 1957.

5377. jexster - 1/11/2005 3:00:40 PM

OH THE HORROR!

True Enough
by Andrew Sullivan
The proper debate isn't over whether Lincoln was gay. It's over how gay he was.


The very thought is enuf to turn a gay man straight

5378. judithathome - 1/11/2005 9:06:46 PM

Max, you see, as long as the story is about what CBS did, they can avoid talking about what Bush didn't do!

5379. concerned - 1/11/2005 9:12:36 PM

So the documents were facimile of originals.

No, they weren't. And how about the legal penalties that should apply to forging military documents and signatures?

5380. concerned - 1/11/2005 9:15:01 PM

No originals, therefore no facsimiles. Only crude forgeries.

5381. judithathome - 1/11/2005 9:16:39 PM

And how about the illegalities Bush committed? Those are just peachy keen, huh?

5382. concerned - 1/11/2005 9:18:23 PM

I don't know what you're talking about here, JAH.

5383. concerned - 1/11/2005 9:22:48 PM

But your guy Rather skates, although he's discredited himself at least as much as Richard Nixon has.

5384. judithathome - 1/11/2005 9:24:26 PM

Oh please...Nixon is making a comeback as a benchmark. Bush is making him look good!

5385. wonkers2 - 1/11/2005 11:09:37 PM

Rather was broomed earlier than he had planned.

5386. thoughtful - 1/12/2005 10:42:12 AM

Flipping channels last night happened to come across John Hagee speaking. He actually said that many professors in harvard are calling themselves marxists and teaching marxism. Well marxism is a code word for communist and how dare they teach to our children under the masquerade of being something other than the communists that they are!!!!

The theatre was absolutely full of hundreds of nodding heads. Downright frightening.

5387. thoughtful - 1/12/2005 10:43:32 AM

Then, driving to work this am my mind wandering in and out and caught the tail end of a story, so i didn't catch who said it, but someone has come out and said there was nothing wrong with the pic of abu graib with the human pyramid...after all, this is something our most frail of the frailest high school cheerleaders do all the time!!! I nearly drove off the road!!!

Where do these people come from?

5388. wonkers2 - 1/12/2005 11:42:30 AM

Yeah, cheerleaders are at least minimally clothed!

5389. thoughtful - 1/12/2005 12:23:29 PM

So now the bushies have appointed a totally non-economist to head the nat'l economics council, Al Hubbard. Apparently his main claims to fame are that he's a free-marketeer idealogue out to destroy soc sec and he's a bush loyalist and successful fund raiser.

Lovely.

5390. PelleNilsson - 1/12/2005 12:40:26 PM

Abuse no worse than cheerleading?

FORT HOOD, Texas A lawyer for Specialist Charles Graner Jr., the accused ringleader in the Iraq prisoner abuse scandal, on Monday defended piling naked prisoners in pyramids as valid prisoner control and compared it to performances by cheerleaders at sporting events in the United States.

"Don't cheerleaders all over America form pyramids six to eight times a year? Is that torture?" said Guy Womack, Graner's attorney, in opening arguments to the 10-member military jury at the reservist sergeant's court-martial

Is there no shame in the world anymore? Is there no minimum ethical standard for lawyers? I wanted to throw up when I read the above.

5391. judithathome - 1/12/2005 12:48:40 PM

This amazed me, too...I suppose the main point of his defense from that loon will be he taught the prisoners to do "Gimme an A, gimme a B..."

5392. thoughtful - 1/12/2005 2:27:00 PM

I never thought they'd start here, but I guess I should've expected it from this crowd. The BLS wants to stop collecting employment data by sex. Said women are half the workforce now, what else do you need to know.

Unfreakin' believable.

Back to being 2nd class citizens.

Anyone want to guess when they're going to argue that women don't need to vote anymore as good xtian women let the husband make the intellectual decisions anyway?

Anyone want to guess when homeland security is going to make terrorism its #1 priority? Terrorism against the unborn that is.

It seems every time in the past i made some off the wall prediction, the reality has unfolded even worse than i thought. So now it's no holds barred...

5393. robertjayb - 1/12/2005 2:47:34 PM

That attorney, Guy Womack, is a real cute fellow. In an editorial today the Houston Chronicle reports his involvement in a scheme to sell high-tech divining rods to school districts and cops. The Quadro Tracker supposedly could track down missing people and discover drugs, weapons, etc. Turned out to be simply an antenna attached to an empty plastic box. More than 1,000 were sold at $8,000 a pop.

When investigated Womack resigned as an assistant U.S. attorney and paid $5,000 in settlement...without admitting wrongdoing.

The editorial concludes: "A lawyer who could market $8,000 divining rods to street-smart lawmen just might be able to sell Specialist Graner as a cheerleader in uniform to a military jury."

5394. robertjayb - 1/12/2005 3:04:58 PM

That was then, this is now...(Gene Lyons)


Funny, but the last time CBS’ "60 Minutes" broadcast an

unsubstantiated, ultimately discredited story embarrassing to the president of the United States, there was no investigation and nobody got fired. Well, let me amend that. Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr investigated star witness Kathleen Willey’s allegations against Bill Clinton to a fare-thee-well before concluding what any halfway skeptical reporter would have suspected from the first: that she was an unreliable, self-dramatizing person with a habit of embroidering her own history.

Even that great American, Linda Tripp, told Starr’s investigators that Willey, whose 1998 interview accusing Clinton of "groping" her in the Oval Office turned the pretty Richmond widow into a celebrity, was closer to being a presidential stalker. That Willey was not exactly an innocent flower would have been clear to anybody who’d run a simple Nexis search, as my partner Joe Conason and I did the morning after her dramatic oneon-one interview with CBS’ Ed Bradley.

5395. PelleNilsson - 1/12/2005 3:24:16 PM

Amazing about the divining rod, robert. Any chance of a link?

5396. wonkers2 - 1/12/2005 3:43:32 PM

RJB, thanks for the great article by Lyons.

5397. robertjayb - 1/12/2005 3:51:29 PM

August 1996 Quadro Tracker article...

5398. robertjayb - 1/12/2005 3:57:21 PM

Today's Womack/Quadro Tracker editorial...

5399. PelleNilsson - 1/12/2005 4:03:19 PM

Tnaanks, robert. The background article is subscriber only, but never mind.

5400. PelleNilsson - 1/12/2005 4:05:33 PM

But for anyone curious about the Quadro Tracker a Google search will be rewarding.

5401. jexster - 1/12/2005 4:23:39 PM

Here's a wrenching fact: If the U.S. had an infant mortality rate as good as Cuba's, we would save an additional 2,212 American babies a year.

Cuba Si! Jorge NO!


Save some REAL babies KulliganMan

5402. jexster - 1/12/2005 4:28:09 PM

Ah but what about other age cohorts...

Yes Virginia there IS a Santa Claus...the Best Health Care System on the Planet gives all citizens over 80 the best life expectancy...


As for the rest....you'll be just about as well off in Turkey

5403. iiibbb - 1/12/2005 4:30:11 PM

Supreme Court Rejects Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines

5404. thoughtful - 1/13/2005 2:40:58 PM

Frank Rich's new column is available on line and it looks to be a good one....

Last year Mr. Novak had failed to fully disclose - until others in the press called him on it - that his son is the director of marketing for Regnery, the company that published "Unfit for Command," the Swift boat veterans' anti-Kerry screed that Mr. Novak flogged relentlessly on CNN and elsewhere throughout the campaign. Nor had he fully disclosed, as Mary Jacoby of Salon reported, that Regnery's owner also publishes his subscription newsletter ($297 a year). Nor has Mr. Novak fully disclosed why he has so far eluded any censure in the federal investigation of his outing of a C.I.A. operative, Valerie Plame, while two other reporters, Judith Miller of The Times and Matt Cooper of Time, are facing possible prison terms in the same case. In this context, Mr. Novak's "full disclosure" of his friendship with Mr. Williams is so anomalous that it raised many more questions than it answers.

5405. Max Macks - 1/13/2005 3:59:14 PM

Andy Borowitz: Bush Accuses Saddam of Telling the Truth
Evildoer Knowingly Came Clean on WMD's, President Charges
By: Andy Borowitz
Published: Jan 13, 2005
Email this article

This was on the Google News today

did you see it .?

ROFLMAO



Just hours after confirming that the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was over, President George W. Bush leveled his harshest charge ever at Saddam Hussein, accusing the former Iraqi dictator of "knowingly telling the truth" about not possessing WMD in the months leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Andy Borowitz writes a daily humor column at www.borowitzreport.com and is the author of a new book, THE BOROWITZ REPORT: THE BIG BOOK OF SHOCKERS.

5406. wonkers2 - 1/13/2005 6:50:10 PM

Novak is a major league sleazeball who is very well connected to the GOP. He hasn't been targeted in the Plame case because he holds enough Bush/Cheney IOUs and secrets to buy his way out off of death row (which would be too good for him).

5407. thoughtful - 1/13/2005 7:05:49 PM

but the scary part is that that means the bushies own the judges.

Call me naive, but i would laugh at gopers who accused clinton of sending out his goon squad to silence people or 'sanction' them like vince foster.

Now i realize that the reason they believed it because would certainly seem to be true of their own team.

nothing stuck to reagan as he was so likable. apparently nothing will stick to w because his enforcers are so capable, and rove has so well stacked the deck.

And, if you read the ny review of books piece i linked, cognitive dissonance won't let people who are smart enough to know better believe otherwise of the bushies:

Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58 percent of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61 percent assume that in this case the president would not have. To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions is difficult to bear, especially in light of the continuing costs in terms of lives and money. Apparently, to avoid this cognitive dissonance, Bush supporters suppress awareness of unsettling information.

5408. wonkers2 - 1/13/2005 7:08:49 PM

Aside from a majority on the Supreme Court, Bush doesn't own all the judges. But, if memory serves me, the special prosecutor or investigator who was looking into the Plame fiasco came out of the Bush Justice Department. Of course he has impeccable credentials.

5409. wonkers2 - 1/13/2005 7:12:50 PM

It's obvious that if Bush wanted to know who outed Valerie Plame to Novak he could find out in two seconds, if he hasn't already. I've heard several knowledgable people point their fingers at Scooter Libby, Cheney's neocon assistant. I wondered also why they zeroed in on Judith Miller. I thought her recent activity consisted of serving as a stenographer for Chalabi's self-serving lies.

5410. robertjayb - 1/13/2005 7:25:35 PM

See The Poor Man blog on Rather-Gate v. Miller/WMD-Gate.

5411. Max Macks - 1/13/2005 9:56:40 PM

robertjay

surely there must be someone writing somewhere

that though CBS might have used documents
that were not the orignal

the facts about W. going AWOL etc, etc.

are true ...

but I havent seen any ..

5412. jexster - 1/14/2005 1:34:06 AM

NMD May Never Be Declared Ready

5413. alistairconnor - 1/14/2005 8:57:26 AM

Cool! but it already has a limited capability against a small-scale attack, a Pentagon official said Thursday.

Reading the fine print : At some point the interceptor missiles will be placed on permanent alert — a condition in which they will be capable of being fired from their silos at any time of day or night, on short notice.

Until then, the capability depends on the co-operation of the enemy : advance notice, and presumably launching the attack during business hours.

5414. thoughtful - 1/14/2005 10:44:25 AM

and the other piece about rather-gate that points suspicion directly at the white house is, if the doc was fake, why was the white house faxing it out to reporters after the letter first came to light?????

5415. thoughtful - 1/14/2005 11:19:15 AM

compassionate conservatism at work. From today'wapo

The White House will seek to drastically shrink the Department of Housing and Urban Development's $8 billion community branch, purging dozens of economic development projects, scrapping a rural housing program and folding high-profile anti-poverty efforts into the Labor and Commerce departments, administration officials said yesterday.

Problem is, this is just the first step. No way can you balance the budget with permanent tax cuts and the soc sec transition costs and the iraqi war on the back of the nondefense discretionary income, even if it's cut to zero. Only problem is, they'll use it as an excuse to cut it to zero anyway.

How much money from needy communities do you think went into bush campaign coffers? Think Flint Michigan is funding one of the inaugural balls?

5416. thoughtful - 1/14/2005 11:40:08 AM

Heard on the news this a.m. that they are releasing some material from the pentagon on chemical weapons. You just can't make this stuff up.

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.

5417. robertjayb - 1/14/2005 12:22:00 PM

To laugh or to cry? Ceorge W Bush and the getting of wisdom...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush says he now sees that tough talk can have an ``unintended consequence.''

During a round-table interview with reporters from 14 newspapers, the president, who not long ago declined to identify any mistakes he'd made during his first term, expressed misgivings for two of his most famous expressions: ``Bring 'em on,'' in reference to Iraqis attacking U.S. troops, and his vow to get Osama bin Laden ``dead or alive.''

``Sometimes, words have consequences you don't intend them to mean,'' Bush said Thursday....

5418. robertjayb - 1/14/2005 1:07:03 PM

Salon weighs in on
CBS v. WMD...

For a group accused of liberal bias, it's surprising so many news outlets harped on "Memogate" while burying the story on the failure to find Saddam's weapons.

5419. Max Macks - 1/14/2005 2:09:07 PM

great link robet jay

interesting the way to get to that story in Salon.

Did any of you happen to watch the Lehr Newshour
last night?

I dont watch regulary anymore, but did see
Lehr interviewing at lengh Colon Powell

...that guy either still doesn't get it,
or he is told to repeat the Karl Rove spin
on Bush invading Iraq using the excuse for
a unilateral attack on a country posing no
threat to the USA
that Saddham was building WMD's or had them
hidden.

Powell says that he was acting on
the information they had at the time.
Never acknowledging that they were using
any information that would serve the purpose
for a War on Iraq ,
and no mention that some in the CIA
were saying that info. was not accurate.

btw not much news on Condi Rice , at least
I have not seen any.

Has the Bush Administrtion EVER admitted to a mistake
in judgement???

5420. thoughtful - 1/14/2005 2:12:00 PM

I expected Krugman to trash all the 'facts' the bushies have been pushing about soc sec, but his primary argument here is that even in situations much better than Amer's, privatization attempts have failed.

Even so, it all went wrong. "Britain's experiment with substituting private savings accounts for a portion of state benefits has been a failure," Ms. Cohen writes. "A shorthand explanation for what has gone wrong is that the costs and risks of running private investment accounts outweigh the value of the returns they are likely to earn."



and this was especially interesting:

Meanwhile, there is a growing consensus in Britain that privatization must be partly reversed. The Confederation of British Industry - the equivalent of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce - has called for an increase in guaranteed benefits to retirees, even if taxes have to be raised to pay for that increase. And the chief executive of Britain's National Association of Pension Funds speaks with admiration about a foreign system that "delivers efficiencies of scale that most companies would die for."

The foreign country that, in the view of well-informed Britons, does it right is the United States. The system that delivers efficiencies to die for is Social Security.

5421. wonkers2 - 1/14/2005 3:16:22 PM

Another key Krugman point:

"Reductions in yield resulting from providers' charges" the British Pensions Committee says, "can absorb 20-30 percent of an individual's pension savings...

"Never mind their promises aren't credible. Even if the initial legislation tightly regulated investments by private accounts, it would be followed by intense lobbying to loosen the rules. The lobbying would come from the usual ideologues and from financial companies eager for fees. In fact the lobbying has already started: The financial services industry has contributed lavishly to next week's inauguration festivities." Krugman op-ed NYT 1-14-05

5422. jayackroyd - 1/14/2005 3:19:22 PM

What is missing in Krugman's analyses is the recognition that SS is an insurance program, not an investment program. You have to live to a retirement age to get the money, and the longer you live the more you receive. If I die young, then my payments support those who did not die. If I die young with privately held funds not drawn down, my estate receives those assets, not other people in my cohort who were luckier than I was. Leaving aside the enormous inefficiencies in adminstering these small accounts, it is certain to cost more to support the same population of retired recipients.

5423. thoughtful - 1/14/2005 3:40:51 PM

Jay, this is one of a series of articles he's doing on soc sec and he's been making those kinds of points right along.

I agree the insurance aspect of this is widely misunderstood. In fact I spent part of yesterday explaining it to a younger guy who was under the mistaken impression that you should get out at least as much as you put in, thus it's better to have private accounts so that's more likely to happen.

The other piece that's widely misunderstood is the risk aspect...who bears it.

5424. robertjayb - 1/14/2005 4:10:59 PM

Big surprise! Molly Ivins has thoughts on social security:

Let's try this again, slowly, for those who, like the president, seem to be having difficulty with reality. Social Security will not be bankrupt, will not be flat bust in 2042 or 2052 or even, as the president has also claimed, by 2018. According to the deliberately alarmist projections of the fund's trustees, it will have exhausted the trust fund in 2042. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Social Security will be able to rely on the trust fund until 2052 and after that will still be able to pay 81 percent of scheduled benefits.

5425. jexster - 1/15/2005 9:45:36 AM

Well I guess Bush's favorite third-string-blow-dried-publicity-hungry whore has better things to do these days.

What a sorry sack of shit Stormin Norman Coleman is...He lets Bush use him to attack Kofi Annan and the UN on Oil For Food in a yet another nativist pasting worthy of the Bushie KKK/Italo-fascist heritage.

[Norman conveniently forgot to tell us that Oil for Food was created by the US and administered by the US and its allies throughout. And when I say "administered" I mean ADMINISTERED. The members of the "oversight" group ratified virtually every operational decision of the Program. The US sponsored. UN Security Council Resolution defined the mission...and to me most incredible of all, the UN furnished copies of EVERY CONTRACT, bill of lading, justification, proposal to the US and its chums ..

Not one single decision of the UN Oil for Food Program was made without the knowelege, tacit approval or outright endorsement of the US/GB..

Worse....most of the bakshish Saddam managed to skim came from three sources EACH under the control of the US...

1) Most of his ill-gotten gains came from tanker smuggling...patroled by 99 ships of the US Sixth Fleet (Britain had a handful, followed by Denmark -1)

2) Jordan

3) Turkey

The UN was bitching and clamping down on Saddam's smuggling through these two countries until each complained to the US that the crackdown was hurting the ecoomiies of these US "allies"

Guess what

5426. jexster - 1/15/2005 9:46:19 AM

Now to the REAL World..

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S. handling of Iraq (news - web sites)'s oil money after the defeat of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was marked by weaknesses including problems tracking oil production and cash, a watchdog told the U.N. Security Council on Friday, diplomats said.


Reuters Photo




Latest headlines:
· Iraq to OK Voter Registration on Jan. 30
AP - 1 minute ago
· Ancient Babylon site wrecked by US-led forces: British Museum
AFP - 20 minutes ago
· Iraqi government announces election day security plan
AFP - 23 minutes ago
Special Coverage





The criticisms follow accusations by U.S. policymakers that the United Nations (news - web sites) mismanaged a separate oil-for-food program for Iraq under Saddam. "These shortcomings (in the U.S. management) have to be kept in mind when we judge the management of other programs such as oil-for-food," said one council diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.


U.N. Controller Jean-Pierre Halbwachs, who heads the International Advisory and Monitoring Board set up to oversee U.S. management of Iraqi oil, briefed the Security Council on the issue in a closed-door meeting.


He discussed problems tracking how much oil was produced and how the proceeds were spent, and how noncompetitive contracts were awarded to Halliburton Co., formerly led by Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites), the envoys said. Several said he repeatedly used the term "weaknesses" to characterize problems with the U.S. management.

5427. thoughtful - 1/15/2005 11:41:45 AM

Why the big push for tort reform? Why suddenly now is this thing, which by all reliable accounts is marginal in terms of driving costs of health care, drugs, etc. Why?

Well, follow the money. Who benefits? Trial lawyers. Which party do trial lawyers support? Dems.

Part of the rovian plan is to gut any organization that is a key source of funding for the dems.

Why do you suppose they push so hard on this no child left behind which by all accounts is a disaster? Gutting the NEA. Who does the NEA fund? Dems

Why do they chronically trash hollywood, despite their favorite rep governator and the most hollywood pres of all reagan? Who does hollywood generally support? the dems.

This is nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of anything. It's all about cutting the funds to the dems so they become a total nonentity.

5428. wonkers2 - 1/15/2005 12:26:40 PM

Also, most doctors and a lot of other people are convinced tort judgments are a significant component of rising health care costs.

5429. judithathome - 1/15/2005 3:04:47 PM

Why people can't look at the state of Texas education and see that Bush hasn't a clue about how to run the education system is beyond me. He wrecked it down here; he'll do the same thing to the nation.

5430. jexster - 1/15/2005 10:32:08 PM

From Porter Goss, to Condimima, to Gonzales, to Chertoff/Kerik, an endless stream of Bush Hacks. ...like a swarm of flying cockroaches on a muggy New Orleans summer night

The Revolt of the Professionals was real. So to the Counterattack of the Hacks, the Insurgency of the Incompetents, Vanguards of the Bush Booboisie

mediocrity on the move

Another example...creeping crony corruption

Downright criminal.

Just out from the Times ...

Over the objections of many of its own employees, the Social Security Administration is gearing up for a major effort to publicize the financial problems of Social Security and to convince the public that private accounts are needed as part of any solution.
The agency's plans are set forth in internal documents, including a "tactical plan" for communications and marketing of the idea that Social Security faces dire financial problems requiring immediate action.... agency employees have complained to Social Security officials that they are being conscripted into a political battle over the future of the program. They question the accuracy of recent statements by the agency, and they say that money from the Social Security trust fund should not be used for such advocacy.

5431. wonkers2 - 1/15/2005 10:37:27 PM

As my granddad would say if he were alive, Bush is breedin' a scab on the end of his nose, fuckin' around with Social Security.

5432. jexster - 1/15/2005 10:39:05 PM

Its bigger than Demo interest groups but not unrelated....the bogus tort reform is a red herring in two respects..first a cover for Bush's dismal record of corporate corruption in health care...Second, the proposal is a stalking horse for other similar efforts to relieve business of the cost of doing business...more corporate cronyism, which in this case really amounts to corporate welfare ...


Bend over, here they come again...war on the middle and lower classes..you pay, they profit

5433. jexster - 1/15/2005 10:50:04 PM

A similar move..the transfer of CDBG grant funding from HUD to the Dept of Commerce, touted as a "reform" because it consolidates Community Development funding with business enterprise grant programs, it really is a move to set up a gutting of CDBG, of HUD, and with it the most reliable forum and resource in the Federal government for cities to collaborate in solving urban problems.

Why else would you fold a $4 Billion/yr operation into a tiny $300 million Commerce Dept Office?

Not to save the taxpayer administrative costs..if anything the duplication and inefficiencies will increase ..

You wanna save money and "streamline"..you do the exact opposite, unless you are lying

5434. jexster - 1/15/2005 10:57:51 PM

Krugman shies away from the word "insurance" when talking about Social Security..

Technically it isn't insurance,it is a generational transfer payment. Even though as presently constituted "this generational contract" functions much like insurance, it isn't for the simple reason that "premiums" are not actuarily determined. Economists don't like to use the term when speaking of SS.

TO me though Social Security and Social Security Disability Insurance are exactly that

5435. jexster - 1/15/2005 10:59:06 PM

And the other reason...no insurance company can lower your benefits when they lose money on the risk

5436. jexster - 1/15/2005 11:40:01 PM

Bloody Mess - The article by the Senior Pensions Correspondent of the Financial Times that Krugman features..

In contrast to WeaponsofMassDeception I and II, at least the Rather story had the advantage of being factually correct and didn't cost us a friggin dime

5437. jexster - 1/15/2005 11:51:48 PM

5387..the story you heard was closing argument in the court martial of the Abu GHraib fellow...

Featured also...a just following orders defense; a claim that the pyramid and other activities were "creative" and "innovative" implementation of those orders, and a plea that a guilty verdict would make him the poster boy for the failure o of Bush policy in IraQ...

After the summation, the news report I saw switched to a reporter's question to the defendant following the verdict:

Do you feel that you received adequate representation from competent defense counsel?

The very question that came to my mind hearing that crap...followed by "Did DoD set the poor sod up?"

5438. judithathome - 1/16/2005 1:27:46 AM

Well, they gave him 10 years for it.

5439. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/16/2005 1:25:08 PM

Well, they gave him 10 years for it.

And protected the higher ups from exposure.


Ready for the the second coronation of a mad king?

5440. jexster - 1/16/2005 1:54:10 PM

This tactic of anointing new, moderate messengers has led to an interesting development. The candidacy of former U.S. Representative Tim Roemer (D-IN), completely implausible a few weeks ago, has now grown full-fledged legs. Nobody should be surprised if the next chair of the Democratic Party is a smooth-talking, Catholic, anti-abortion, budget hawk with a PhD from Notre Dame.

Swivel Chair American Prospect

5441. jexster - 1/16/2005 3:05:19 PM

I just so happens that I am going over my Thesis references including my main source Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, a polisci classic.
The author asks the question: When does an idea whose time has come, come and go?

The answer in short is during the brief time that policy windows open (policy, political and problem streams merge - the Garbage Can Model of Choice)

Bush has made a HUGE mistake in fooling himself into believing that his election constituted a broad mandate for anything esp. social security (one factor that opens policy windows)

The other thing that opens windows is a growing perception among political elites that a problem exists, thus Bush, having apparently realized that his election don't mean shit, has returned to his arsenal of Weapons of Mass Deception and is about to get thrown back into the primordial policy soup that is the Garbage Can

January 11, 2005

Social Security and "Sam's Club Republicans"


"Sam's Club Republicans" is a term invented (or at least prominently used) by Tim Pawlenty, now governor of Minnesota, to describe socially conservative voters of modest means who vote Republican. According to Reihan Salam, in a perceptive op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, there is now a crisis brewing among these voters, as Bush's second term agenda unfolds

5442. judithathome - 1/16/2005 3:06:01 PM

Jex, check out my last post in the Cafe!

5443. jexster - 1/16/2005 3:06:50 PM

More On Mister Popularity

Bush's poor rating on Iraq is underscored by several other findings from the survey. For the first time in this poll, more people (50 percent) think the US made a mistake sending troops to Iraq than don't (48 percent). In addition, about three-fifths (59 percent) think things in Iraq are going badly for the US, the same number feel it is unlikely a democratic form of government will be established in Iraq in the next year and even more (71 percent) believe it is unlikely peace and internal security will be established in Iraq in the next year.

Not much help for Mr. Popularity there. Perhaps he expects his Social Security scheme to overcome his Iraq problems. That seems highly unlikely given how his idea is apparently playing with the downscale constituencies Bush relies upon politically (see yesterday's post) and the fact that his Social Security approval rating (see above) is actually lower than his anemic Iraq rating.

5444. jexster - 1/16/2005 6:29:17 PM

Well Judith that's one snazzy bracelet, but what you gonna say to Mildred at Sam's Club when she asks what it means?

May I suggest a good real estate agent in Travis Cnty?

5445. judithathome - 1/16/2005 8:30:45 PM

Well, if I went to Sam's Club, I might worry about what Mildred thinks but since I don't go there, I'm safe.

5446. Max Macks - 1/16/2005 10:29:36 PM

Wizard where did you find that picture of
the Chimp as King?

W. must live in his own world , very much removed from the reality. Can you imagine
his latest remark that the election showed
Americans approve of his War on Iraq.!!??

5447. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/17/2005 12:14:33 PM

It's the delusional madness that comes from too much power, Max.

5448. Max Macks - 1/17/2005 4:15:52 PM

I wonder if any of those fools
who voted for the Chimp
realize that he has made the US less safe
from any terroist attacks not more so.

veru much less safe/,
Did you hear the latest
about hundreds of people flocking to Iraq
to join the guerillas?

and Al Queda which was not in Iraq until
after the Bush war began now as thousands
wanting to fight the Americans.

5449. judithathome - 1/17/2005 4:28:56 PM

Some Of That Political Capital Is Going To Be Spent This Way

The Bush administration has been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions to learn about nuclear, chemical and missile sites in Iran in preparation for possible airstrikes there, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.

The effort has been under way at least since last summer, Hersh said on CNN's "Late Edition."

In an interview on the same program, White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said the story was "riddled with inaccuracies."

"I don't believe that some of the conclusions he's drawing are based on fact," Bartlett said.

Iran has refused to dismantle its nuclear program, which it insists is legal and is intended solely for civilian purposes.

5450. wonkers2 - 1/17/2005 4:58:46 PM

I wonder about the accuracy riddled parts.

5451. wonkers2 - 1/17/2005 4:59:21 PM

Sounds like Hersh, as usual, got it mostly right.

5452. judithathome - 1/17/2005 5:15:20 PM

Well, I'd take his word over Bush's...so far, more truth has come from Hersh than from W.

5453. Max Macks - 1/17/2005 6:34:57 PM

what Judith said,

He had some great articles in the New Yorker magazine.

I have always thought it interesting/strange
that the New Yorker
would be one of the few part of the print media
that is anti Bush.

This from a mag noted for it's cartoons
and literature.

5454. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/17/2005 10:40:49 PM

5455. wonkers2 - 1/17/2005 10:45:59 PM

Just about every sentient person in New York City and other civilized locales northeast of the Mississippi is anti-Bush.

5456. alistairconnor - 1/18/2005 7:45:46 AM

The second Bush term is looking very scary indeed for the "rest of the world". Hersh makes it clear that, far from learning from its errors in Iraq, the Bush administration is working hard at eliminating all those off-message moderating influences that sometimes managed to introduce a reality check.

One little consolation : the planned Iran war will surely go no further than air strikes, for want of troops to launch a full invasion, and allies. They were able to find Iraqi exile groups to work with; no Iranians will make that mistake.

5457. thoughtful - 1/18/2005 10:54:30 AM

far from learning from its errors in Iraq...

what errors? You've got to admit you've made a mistake before you can fix it. So far it's taken years for bush to admit he's made any mistakes, and even those are ones of emphasis only.

apparently you don't get what's going on here. Bush is not making these decisions...god is! and bush is just the messenger. So to suggest bush made mistakes is to say god made mistakes and that would be heresy AND unpatriotic.

Now do the responsible thing and throw yourself in prison to punish yourself for your evil thoughts, vow fealty to bush and promise to never do it again. Demonstrate your loyalty by raising lots and lots of money for the gop. Then get a bible and thump it regularly.

5458. jexster - 1/18/2005 3:57:52 PM

Faith-Based Moments of Cheap Grace*
For the Excuse President Accountabity is Momentary, Mandates Eternal

President Bush (news - web sites) will begin his second term in office without a clear mandate to lead the nation, with strong disapproval of his policies in Iraq (news - web sites) and with the public both hopeful and dubious about his leadership on the issues that will dominate his agenda, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.



Bush said in an interview last week with The Washington Post that the 2004 election was a moment of accountability for the decisions he has made in Iraq, but the poll found that 58 percent disapprove of his handling of the situation to 40 percent who approve, and 44 percent said the war was worth fighting.

No other issue, including the economy, education, health care and Social Security, is viewed by a majority of the public as equally pressing.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer on Cheap Grace
Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves.

5459. thoughtful - 1/18/2005 4:38:58 PM

So now we understand what the bushies mean by accountability and responsibility. It's not that it's just for the other guys, it's that it's a matter of timing.

"We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post.

So, I guess that means that, since there will be no more elections for W, he is no longer accountable for anything he did in term 1 or anything he has yet to do in term 2. Long live the king!

5460. jexster - 1/18/2005 4:48:46 PM

Full of cheap grace...

THE COMING WARS
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
What the Pentagon can now do in secret.


George W. Bush’s reëlection was not his only victory last fall. The President and his national-security advisers have consolidated control over the military and intelligence communities’ strategic analyses and covert operations to a degree unmatched since the rise of the post-Second World War national-security state. Bush has an aggressive and ambitious agenda for using that control—against the mullahs in Iran and against targets in the ongoing war on terrorism—during his second term. The C.I.A. will continue to be downgraded, and the agency will increasingly serve, as one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon put it, as “facilitators” of policy emanating from President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. This process is well under way.

Despite the deteriorating security situation in Iraq, the Bush Administration has not reconsidered its basic long-range policy goal in the Middle East: the establishment of democracy throughout the region. Bush’s reëlection is regarded within the Administration as evidence of America’s support for his decision to go to war. It has reaffirmed the position of the neoconservatives in the Pentagon’s civilian leadership who advocated the invasion, including Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Douglas Feith, the Under-secretary for Policy. According to a former high-level intelligence official, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff shortly after the election and told them, in essence, that the naysayers had been heard and the American people did not accept their message. Rumsfeld added that America was committed to staying in Iraq and that there would be no second-guessing.

5461. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/18/2005 7:33:47 PM

5462. wonkers2 - 1/18/2005 8:56:44 PM

Blitzer and CNN are continuing with their nose in Bush's ass. His commentator briefly summarized Boxer's questions to Riceroni but played her response in it's entirety. Lehrer played both Boxer's question and Riceroni's reply in their entirety.

5463. jexster - 1/18/2005 9:09:50 PM

Pre-Inauguration Blues

The public's got those mean old pre-inauguration blues. That's the message of four polls released over the Martin Luther King holiday weekend

Sampler on the Two Big Bush Boogers - The Quagmire and the Third Rail:

• Time - when informed that Bush's plan would include government borrowing of $1-2 trillion over 10 years, in addition to the private accounts and reduction in guanteed benefit, opposition to his plan soared to 69-21.
  
  
  
• Annenberg - on Social Security include startlingly lopsided 86-11 opposition to a proposal worded as "[w]hen current workers retire, giving them lower benefits than what they are now promised".
  
  
• Annenberg - on Bush's alleged election mandate to transform Social Security,just 23 percent think his election victory means the American people support his ideas about changing Social Secuirty, while 65 percent do not... by 50-32, the public says they personally do not support his ideas about Social Security
  
  
• Annenberg - On whether the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over, 54 percent say no and just 40 percent say yes. On whether Bush has a clear plan to bring the situation in Iraq to a successful conclusion, 62 percent say no and 32 percent say yes. On whether the election in Iraq will produce a stable government or not, 60 percent say no and 29 percent say yes.
  
  And here are some particularly eye-opening results. When asked what the US should do if the Iraq election does not produce a stable government, only 39 percent say the US should stay as long as necessary to provide stability while 56 percent say the US should start pulling out its troops right away (31 percent) or set a date for later this year when troop pullouts will start (25 percent).
  
  
  
  

5464. wonkers2 - 1/18/2005 9:10:41 PM

According to Biden on Chris Matthews there are only 4,000 effective Iraqi troops not the 120,000 claimed by Riceroni in her evasive, dilatory Senate testimony today. Very disappointing. More mushroom clouds!

5465. wonkers2 - 1/18/2005 9:12:50 PM

In response to a question from Chris Matthews, Biden opined that Riceroni's evasiveness was due to her reluctance to cross Cheney and Rumsfeld.

5466. judithathome - 1/18/2005 9:20:29 PM

A local NPR guy here mentioned how odd it was to have Biden, who had been talked about as Kerry's SoS, questioning her for that job.

How I wish it was Biden sitting across the table from her. She's a dipwad.

5467. judithathome - 1/18/2005 9:21:02 PM

Sitting on the other side of the table, rather.

5468. jexster - 1/18/2005 11:28:38 PM

BIDEN: Now, how many [Iraqi forces] do you really think are trained that Allawi can look to and say, I can rely on those forces? What do you think that number is?

....RICE: We think the number right now is somewhere over 120,000.

....BIDEN: Well, I thank you for your answer. I think you'll find, if you speak to the folks on the ground, they don't think there's more than 4,000 actually trained Iraqi forces. I strongly urge you to pick up the phone or go see these folks.

5469. Max Macks - 1/19/2005 1:15:54 AM

I made the mistake of turning on TV news
and the Lehr news hour and saw Coni Rice for the first time in a long time.,,,but it was still too much.

What is there about her that causes me to have
such an extreme negative reaction.??

Good for Boxer , but
how many cowardly Democrats will vote
against her confirmation I wonder..

I think I am better off never watching
any TV news when she is on.

Never have figured out why and how Bush got
her to work for him evidentally even before
he became POTUS.

5470. thoughtful - 1/19/2005 10:53:22 AM

Newsweek's evan thomas was on imus this a.m. talking about the campaign...apparently he's written a book on it and his commentary about kerry was apt...it's what the american people felt, and why he had so much trouble getting votes. Thomas said it was impossible for kerry to make a decision. every time they'd decide something, kerry would grab his cell and talk to several more people about it putting everything in flux again. At one point, they actually took his cell away from him so that they could stick with a decision. I remember truman's advice on the presidency...you need to be able to make a decision. Clearly not kerry's strong suit.

I'm not saying we're better off with the bushies in, but the dems clearly ran the wrong guy. I blame it on the primary process. Go back to the smoke-filled room with party bosses selecting the next guy.

Certainly the primary process has not yielded the best candidates from either party.

5471. thoughtful - 1/19/2005 11:38:27 AM

It will be interesting in the next election as I'm sure the bushies are already gearing up to run jeb....more like a back room party selection than a primary run.

Wonder who the dems will run....

certainly not hillary!

5472. wonkers2 - 1/19/2005 11:53:56 AM

Barbara Boxer is in the process of reciting a long list of Riceroni's lies to the American people. She has bigger cojones than any of men on the committee.

5473. wonkers2 - 1/19/2005 11:55:51 AM

NY Times rips Senate Foreign Relations Committee Here

5474. judithathome - 1/19/2005 12:00:43 PM

So the latest meme being floated from the WH is that Bush is a brilliant guy and very engaged in decision making and reads like a librarian on speed....wonder how many of the gulls* out there will buy into that?

*gullible people

5475. wonkers2 - 1/19/2005 1:49:30 PM

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 16-2 in favor of confirming Condi Riceroni. Kerry and Boxer voted NO. Boxer was the only one who had the foresight to vote against the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

5476. Wombat - 1/19/2005 1:54:05 PM

Too bad no one questioned Rice's competence for the job, based on her pre-9/11 performance.

5477. jexster - 1/19/2005 1:55:41 PM

Lower That TET
Support for Bush's War Hit New Lows in LAT Poll
A miniscule 4% Support McCain Proposals for More Troops

Gung Hay Bok Choy

5478. jexster - 1/19/2005 1:57:21 PM

Until it comes to gay marriages in her backyard of SF, then she's just an ole flip flopper..but yes, sometimes she has a pair..they just hide from time to time

5479. jexster - 1/19/2005 2:03:58 PM

Wombat..now that you mention it ...a bullet point in a nasty-gram to DiFi, no balls nice boobs Finestyle (latest in continuing series..

Lead theme..the bitch be a ho for fowlin reasuns..That was first

5480. jexster - 1/19/2005 2:32:26 PM

It is times like these that Amurkuh needs a KILLER(so to speak) slogan...

And I realize that our Glorious Leader been workin hard on that nogural and "Stay the Course" be gettin a bit frayed ...soze let's rally round Mildred for the time bein..he prolly be a givin us a new one on the morrow.

5481. jexster - 1/19/2005 2:37:23 PM

Stop that Wombat...hands on the keyboard

5482. jexster - 1/19/2005 2:54:10 PM

Loyal Republicans needed!

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) predicted yesterday that partisan warfare over Social Security will quickly render President Bush's plan "a dead horse"

5483. iiibbb - 1/19/2005 3:13:00 PM

Anyone catching the History channels series on American Presidents. It's really good.

The more things change... the more things stay the same. George Bush is a kitten compared to the controversy surrounding Andrew Jackson and some of the other early presidents.

5484. jexster - 1/19/2005 3:55:11 PM

Give Us Some of Dat Fine First Term Lovin


I was just reading over the LA Times run-down of Chairman Bill Thomas's free-from policy aria over at the National Journal pow-wow yesterday afternoon. And they give more attention than the other dailies to the Chairman's more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger warning that the Democrats "risked eliminating themselves from a role in the forthcoming [Social Security] debate if they played the issue strictly for short-term political gain," in the words of the Times.

"If you start with the statement that your goal is to sabotage whatever we try to do, to try to put you in the majority [in control of Congress] in the next election," warned Thomas, "then I am forced to try to solve the problem on a partisanship basis."

5485. jexster - 1/19/2005 3:56:45 PM

Yea iiibbb maybe so, but ole Hick'ry wasn't nearly as dangerous..and he had a good horse

5486. iiibbb - 1/19/2005 3:59:14 PM

There are lots of interesting parallels between then and now... especially over things like 'mandates' and such.

5487. robertjayb - 1/19/2005 4:34:43 PM

Lest we forget, Salon has provided a convenient listing of 34 Bush administration er..uh..anomalies:

Scandal Sheet

5488. jexster - 1/19/2005 4:44:58 PM

I will tune in...was disappointed by the French Revolution thing but then again, I am sorta OD'ed on FR histories

5489. thoughtful - 1/19/2005 5:01:53 PM

rjb, very interesting summary of bush scandals.
Only problem is, none of them had anything to do with sex so none of them have captured the headlines in a significant way.

I guess chief qualification for being pres is being able to keep it in your pants.

5490. PelleNilsson - 1/19/2005 5:11:54 PM

Or letting it all hang out.

5491. Max Macks - 1/19/2005 5:14:19 PM

So only two of the Dems voted against Rice

....what's with these people Both Biden and Feingold
express dissatisfaction with Rice and then
go ahead and vote for her!!

Ricearoni , I will have to remember that

She looks to me like one of those trained monkeys
on a chain like the old organ grinders had.

Tho when I said that in another message board
I was almost banned.

5492. wonkers2 - 1/19/2005 7:14:04 PM

Not PC. But it's okay to say Bush looks like a monkey with Cheney as organ grinder.

5493. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/19/2005 8:01:40 PM

5494. wonkers2 - 1/19/2005 8:35:31 PM

Barack Obama struck me as a highly intelligent and credible individual.

5495. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 1:27:34 AM

Interesting NYtimes/CBS poll results Here

5496. jexster - 1/20/2005 1:30:48 AM

Nice catch on American Presidents iiibbb...

James Buchanan and Rufus King....first gay Pres and VP of the US...

Historian "Well there was talk but you really can't know about such things"

Oh no..not if you are a gay historian...

We come equipped with GayDar..standard factory equipment

5497. jexster - 1/20/2005 1:42:53 AM

Babo of the Brass Balls..


SIGN BARBARA BOXER'S PETITION

Throughout the hearings, Barbara Boxer asked Condi the tough questions that Americans deserve to have answered.



She held Condi accountable for the false statements and misjudgments she made about Iraq.

LAST CHANCE to join 60,000+ Americans & show your support for Senator Boxer!
Read More...

5498. iiibbb - 1/20/2005 2:00:03 AM

Message # 5496

I bought the book this evening...

5499. thoughtful - 1/20/2005 10:42:05 AM

the cheneys were on imus this a.m. and they did a nice job. of course imus asked them some pretty soft ball questions, like, what do you do all day. He did venture into some tougher territory though which cheney handled deftly about iraq. Nothing new, lots of glossing over unpleasant details. Talked about how he got to be vp and how he has no ambitions to be pres. He asked, during the debates when edwards brought up his daughter, if cheney was seething. He answered simply, 'yes'. Imus was so flummoxed he had no follow up except to ask mrs. cheney the same thing.

Apparently the cheneys are fans of imus and listen to him, even though he's referred to the vp as 'pork-chop boy'. As a gift, they brought him some pork chops.

5500. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 3:08:57 PM

Historian Michael Beschloss rated Bush's inauguration speech written by Bush's born-again speech writer, Michael Gerson, "very high in terms of elegance" and because it revealed a lot about who George Bush is and where he wants to go in the next four years.

5501. judithathome - 1/20/2005 3:13:41 PM

I would say something but it would just be sour grapes.

5502. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 3:22:06 PM

Go ahead, Judith, tell us what you really think!

5503. judithathome - 1/20/2005 3:24:52 PM

I did...in the Inferno. And before that in the Cafe.

I adore Michael Beschloss but I thought the speech was fairly dull. But all Inauguration speeches are. Beschloss said as much on The Daily Show last night.

5504. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 3:27:18 PM

Michael Gerson actually sounds like a pretty nice guy, for an evangelical, that is!

5505. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 3:29:38 PM

Michael Gerson actually sounds like a pretty nice guy, for an evangelical, that is!

5506. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2005 3:54:10 PM

5507. Max Macks - 1/20/2005 4:07:31 PM

re/ your post 5494
Yes, wonkers , Obama is the coming Democrat
some think.

I heard his speech at the Kerry convention.
Next to Mrs. Kerry's speech it was the best one IMO.

the stupid commercial TV channels who decided
(very wrongly I thought) to limit their coverage
of the conventions to one hour each evening
and one night no coverage at all

picked the night Obama made his speech as the one
with no coverage.

The speech got many Democrats excited
and became even more excited when he won the election
to be Senator from Illinois.

5508. judithathome - 1/20/2005 4:08:01 PM

CNN just showed a bunch of protesters...from the back...and the row upon row of police lined up in front of them.

I guess we'll have to wait for the documentaries to show what their signs said.

5509. Max Macks - 1/20/2005 4:10:45 PM

Message # 5494

I forgot how to do that link
now I remember

5510. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 4:13:16 PM

A Birish commentator just pointed out that Bush could start with Guantanamo if he's really interested in spreading liberty.

5511. Max Macks - 1/20/2005 4:14:40 PM

Gosh Judith you mean you watched that crap?

I thought Rhenquist was close to death.
Did he look it.?

Seeing that Ricearoni the other evening on
the TV was more than enough of
the Bush Gang than I can stomache

There were actuallly some people protesting
the last election or just Bush in general

I read that there was one of the biggest
security forces and largest "secured area"
for any previous swearing in.

5512. wonkers2 - 1/20/2005 4:15:14 PM

He also said that Europeans and Brits didn't like Bush's repeated religious references.

5513. judithathome - 1/20/2005 4:21:39 PM

Bush is addressing people in Statuary Hall after the luncheon and he just welcomed "distinguished members of Congress...and some not so distinguished." WTF?

5514. thoughtful - 1/20/2005 4:27:29 PM

Rhenquist is very ill I'm sure. Regardless of what they say, most thyroid cancer surgeries don't require a tracheotomy. The fact that his did suggests its an aggressive form and has metastisized. All speculation, but not unlikely.

5515. thoughtful - 1/20/2005 6:11:30 PM

Nice talk from bush about the spread of freedom. Do you suppose he could start at home by opening up more govt records to the american people???

5516. judithathome - 1/20/2005 6:16:00 PM

Don't hold your breath.

5517. RickNelson - 1/20/2005 8:10:19 PM

Wiz of Whim,

Crackin' me up.

Mr. Penis head, monkey boy and his second term.

That looks like the back of Rhenquists head? Isn't he dead?
You'ld think his speech would come like lead.

5518. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2005 8:29:24 PM

Thanks Rick, I appreciate the acknowledgement - especially with this stolid bunch of highbrows.



FOUR MORE BEERS, BARTENDER!!!!

5519. wonkers2 - 1/21/2005 1:49:39 AM

Tonight they're probably drinking French champagne.

5520. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/21/2005 9:25:55 AM

The beers were for me.

5521. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/21/2005 2:36:14 PM

I had a tough day yesterday. Bush's policies and what he says makes me nutz - obviously - and I just wanted to apologize to any and all who found my images offensive, tasteless and childish. In retrospect, it seems so and I hope it's written off as aberrant behavior and not chronic.


You folks are all passionate and your brows are all right where they should be. And I'd be better off addressing my own stuck head. Again I'm sorry.

5522. RickNelson - 1/21/2005 9:02:27 PM

That's a LOL!

that giggling lady and stuck head is so goofy.

5523. robertjayb - 1/21/2005 9:59:15 PM

Might as well remain bent over...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Citing a need for domestic energy, the government plans to open for exploratory drilling thousands of acres on Alaska's North Slope that have been protected for decades because of migratory birds and caribou.

The Bureau of Land Management has concluded that oil and gas exploration in the northeastern corner of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska can be conducted with ``minimal impact'' on the area's wildlife.

5524. robertjayb - 1/21/2005 10:18:05 PM

No surprise here...

A coalition representing companies including Boeing, Pfizer and Fidelity Investments will spend "significantly more" than $5 million to promote President Bush's plan for private Social Security accounts, the group's coordinator said.




The companies, concerned that the government will otherwise raise the 12.4 percent payroll tax to plug a funding gap, plan a direct mail and television advertising campaign to back Bush's proposal, said Derrick Max, coordinator of the Washington-based Coalition for the Modernization and Protection of America's Social Security, or Compass.

5525. Max Macks - 1/21/2005 10:43:56 PM

Wizard I for one enjoyed you pictures
altho now I cannot see them
I see only a red x in the upper left corner.

I need pictures like your to counteract
the Bushies and the cowardly Democrats
in Congress.

5526. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/21/2005 11:53:00 PM

Thanks Max, but you didn't miss anything - trust me.

5527. wonkers2 - 1/23/2005 12:44:13 PM

The Fed is about to jerk the rug out from under the Chimp

5528. wonkers2 - 1/23/2005 2:17:43 PM

Pat Buchanan: "Bush is Woodrow Wilson on amphetamines!"

Eleanor Clift: "He's messianic. Moral guardian for the world."

Tony Blankley: "Overreaching. Unrealistic."

With one exception, nobody on the McLaughlin group had much good to say about Bush's inaugural address.

5529. angel-five - 1/23/2005 3:35:06 PM

Commandos Get Duty on U.S. Soil

Interesting.

And it's legal too, since Bush gave a directive saying that Posse Comitatus doesn't effect US special forces.

An excerpt:


WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 - Somewhere in the shadows of the White House and the Capitol this week, a small group of super-secret commandos stood ready with state-of-the-art weaponry to swing into action to protect the presidency, a task that has never been fully revealed before.

As part of the extraordinary army of 13,000 troops, police officers and federal agents marshaled to secure the inauguration, these elite forces were poised to act under a 1997 program that was updated and enhanced after the Sept. 11 attacks, but nonetheless departs from how the military has historically been used on American soil.

These commandos, operating under a secret counterterrorism program code-named Power Geyser, were mentioned publicly for the first time this week...

In the past, the command has also provided support to domestic law enforcement agencies during high-risk events like the Olympics and political party conventions, according to the Web site of GlobalSecurity.org, a research organization in Alexandria, Va.

The role of the armed forces in the United States has been a contentious issue for more than a century. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which restricts military forces from performing domestic law enforcement duties, like policing, was enacted after the Civil War in response to the perceived misuse of federal troops who were policing in the South...

5530. angel-five - 1/23/2005 3:41:28 PM

Secret Unit Expands Rumsfeld's Domain
New Espionage Branch Delving Into CIA Territory

Excerpt:

The Pentagon, expanding into the CIA's historic bailiwick, has created a new espionage arm and is reinterpreting U.S. law to give Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld broad authority over clandestine operations abroad, according to interviews with participants and documents obtained by The Washington Post.

The previously undisclosed organization, called the Strategic Support Branch, arose from Rumsfeld's written order to end his "near total dependence on CIA" for what is known as human intelligence. Designed to operate without detection and under the defense secretary's direct control, the Strategic Support Branch deploys small teams of case officers, linguists, interrogators and technical specialists alongside newly empowered special operations forces...

Military and civilian participants said in interviews that the new unit has been operating in secret for two years -- in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places they declined to name. According to an early planning memorandum to Rumsfeld from Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the focus of the intelligence initiative is on "emerging target countries such as Somalia, Yemen, Indonesia, Philippines and Georgia."

...A recent Pentagon memo states that recruited agents may include "notorious figures" whose links to the U.S. government would be embarrassing if disclosed.

Perhaps the most significant shift is the Defense Department's bid to conduct surreptitious missions, in friendly and unfriendly states, when conventional war is a distant or unlikely prospect -- activities that have traditionally been the province of the CIA's Directorate of Operations...

5531. robertjayb - 1/23/2005 3:45:00 PM

Rummy's secret spies...(WashPost)

The Pentagon, expanding into the CIA's historic bailiwick, has created a new espionage arm and is reinterpreting U.S. law to give Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld broad authority over clandestine operations abroad, according to interviews with participants and documents obtained by The Washington Post.

The previously undisclosed organization, called the Strategic Support Branch, arose from Rumsfeld's written order to end his "near total dependence on CIA" for what is known as human intelligence. Designed to operate without detection and under the defense secretary's direct control, the Strategic Support Branch deploys small teams of case officers, linguists, interrogators and technical specialists alongside newly empowered special operations forces.

5532. robertjayb - 1/23/2005 3:46:40 PM

dupe above...sorry..

5533. robertjayb - 1/23/2005 3:51:29 PM

I remember way back when it was fashionable to scoff at creepy militiamen and their raging paranoia about an overweening federal government.

5534. wonkers2 - 1/23/2005 4:07:13 PM

Whatever happened to the "intelligence czar" recommended by the 9-11 commission?

5535. wonkers2 - 1/23/2005 4:46:59 PM

Tucker Carlson: Abstract notion of ligerty--awfully big unattainable, ludicrous goal. (Bush's inaugural address)

5536. wonkers2 - 1/23/2005 4:47:29 PM

Carlson: "He actually means it!"

5537. robertjayb - 1/24/2005 1:40:47 PM

GOP representative Bill Thomas, on Meet the Press, proposes race and gender as determinants for social security eligibility:

Transcript...To move from 65 to 68, which we did in 1983, was a benefit cut. But it also creates hardships based upon the occupation that you have, and it creates inequities on who you are and how long you live. You could just as easily have a discussion about occupations as to when would be a fair or an unfair time to require. We also need to examine, frankly, Tim, the question of race in terms of how many years of retirement do you get based upon your race? And you ought not to just leave gender off the table because that would be a factor.

5538. ronski - 1/24/2005 1:57:06 PM

So, minorities would get to retire earlier than whites, and men earlier than women?

5539. robertjayb - 1/24/2005 2:11:54 PM

Probable cause is such a quaint concept...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court gave police broader search powers Monday during traffic stops, ruling that drug-sniffing dogs can be used to check out motorists even if officers have no reason to suspect they may be carrying narcotics.

In a 6-2 decision, the court sided with Illinois police who stopped Roy Caballes in 1998 along Interstate 80 for driving 6 miles over the speed limit. Although Caballes lawfully produced his driver's license, troopers brought over a drug dog after Caballes seemed nervous.

Caballes argued the Fourth Amendment protects motorists from searches such as dog sniffing, but Justice John Paul Stevens disagreed, reasoning that the privacy intrusion was minimal.

I'll bet this bit of from-the-bench rewriting of the constitution produces a huge uproar from the strict constructionist crowd. Don't you think?

What will our freedom fighter president do?

5540. judithathome - 1/24/2005 2:53:15 PM

Well, since his days of possibly being sniffed out in a traffic stop are past, he will probably give all of them medals.

5541. thoughtful - 1/24/2005 2:55:34 PM

I read seymour hirsch's NYer piece this weekend and though the media to do was over the thought of attacking iran, the part I found far scarier was also mentioned by a-5 and rjb. Apparently the changes within the CIA and the pentagon have created an independent arm that reports directly to and only to the secdef. No congressional, budgetary or other oversight of any sort. This was precisely the operation that led to iran-contra and was haulted as a result. Changes made by the bushies have reinstated this arm. I'm sure we'll have the same predictable results.

All this talk of freedom at the inauguration really gave me the willys. Bush spoke of 'compassionate conservative' during the first campaign and proceeded to do everything in his power to reverse that...his compassion is only for those who can fund goper causes. Making logical parallels, what do you suppose all this talk of liberty and freedom will mean? Freedom only for those who agree with the pres&co. Liberty only for the campaign contributors.

I mean, i'm trying to find a consistent thread through the creation of medicare rx to environmental and energy policy to soc sec privatization, to tort reform. I found it. As deep throat said, follow the money. Who benefits from medicare rx? drug cos who are big goper supporters. Who benefits from soc sec priv? Wall st which are big goper funders. who is hurt by tort reform? trial lawyers who are big dem supporters.

There it is.

5542. PelleNilsson - 1/24/2005 3:07:47 PM

It's all a bit Orwellian, isn't it? Double-plus good.

5543. Dubai Vol - 1/24/2005 3:10:03 PM

One-note Dubai is out again: what's it gonna take to get more than 60% of the voters to the polls? War on Iraq didn't do it. Cry all day, but until you can muster the votes, which really only means getting young people to the polls, you are no more than puppies whining in a basket. No one cares what you think because it doesn't translate into votes on election day.

[/cynical rant]

5544. thoughtful - 1/24/2005 4:08:44 PM

But according to the polls, even with the turnout higher than in past elections, it didn't matter. It would've only mattered if more dem supporters showed up than gopers. It didn't happen. The polls all said the race would be close. The race was close. Higher turnout alone would not have made a difference.

5545. Max Macks - 1/24/2005 6:19:27 PM

The problem with the Dems is that they can't
seem to get an electable candidate

or when they do have one like Howard Dean
(who they SAID could not be elected
but who really got people excited with his
speeches in stead of being put to sleep with Kerry's

Or think they have to pick
the VP to run next
as with Gore, and Mondale.

t
Then they let the Media trash Dean before
the voters could decide in more Primaries
after Iowa...

and until the Democrats can get some TV network
or major print media for their voice
they will continue to be left behind.

Strange that the New Yorker magazine.
once thought of as only filled with funny cartoons
and book reviews
should be the most anti Bush of the major
print media.

and last but not least they fools
let the electronia voting machines
with no paper record inside
be used.
Even a grade school kid could have
told you about voter fraud potential
in the last election and the first
to use such machines.

5546. Max Macks - 1/24/2005 6:20:51 PM

I probably sounded like a Howard Dean
supporter .

I was not one early , but my vote was
more against Bush than FOR Kerry,

and Lieberman ,,,hand me the barf bag.

5547. robertjayb - 1/24/2005 6:21:59 PM

No social security crisis...(Salon)

"This year, the Social Security system -- the payroll tax, which brings money in, and the pension program, which sends money out -- will bring in about $180 billion more than it sends out. It will go on bringing in more than it sends out until 2028, at which point it will begin to draw on the $3.5 trillion surplus it will by then have accumulated. The surplus runs out in 2042, right around the time George W. Bush turns ninety-six. After that, even if nothing has changed, the system's income will continue to cover seventy-three per cent of its outgo.

5548. Max Macks - 1/24/2005 6:29:53 PM

Message # 5528

I seldom watch the talking heads on TV anymore

but flipped channel during the football game

and watched the last 1/2 of the McLaughlin group.

Someone please tell me when that screaming
McLaughlin changed from being a die hard Republican
to be anti Bush?

and I could hardly believe Reverend Pat Buchanan
saying what a deluded boob Bush showed himself
to be during that speech.

I could not watch any of the Bush stuff
so I didn't see or hear his speech--

but somewhere else someone commented that
with all the Bushshit talk of freedom and democracy

it didn't mesh with the 100 blocks of DC
roped off and untold numbers of security
forces that were employed for the occasion.
And the protestors pushed all but out of sight.

5549. Jenerator - 1/24/2005 6:39:09 PM

Cops have always had leniency with regard to probably cause. A cop can pull you over citing failure to maintain a lane within a lane after the fact.

5550. jexster - 1/24/2005 6:59:59 PM

A Princely Sum for the Little Prince to Play War

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration plans to announce as early as Tuesday that it will seek about $80 billion in new funding for military operations this year in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites), administration and congressional sources said on Monday.


The new supplemental budget request would come on top of the $25 billion in emergency spending already approved for the current fiscal year, pushing total 2005 funding for military operations and equipment close to a record $105 billion.

5551. thoughtful - 1/24/2005 7:12:40 PM

and what's this business about a plane full of money ($300 mil) taking off for no one knows where? the iraqis are saying it went to chalabi but it seems to have disappeared.

5552. robertjayb - 1/24/2005 8:13:32 PM

John Negroponte says he doesn't know what happened to the $300 million and everyone trusts John. Don't they?

5553. jexster - 1/24/2005 8:25:16 PM

Why should Viceroy Negroponte know any more than anyone else inside I-495?

I hope at least some of the 300 million went to help Dumbsfeld's jury-rigged intelligence directorate which has apparently been operating on c.i.a. turf out of the Pentagon basement for two years now.


Y'all recall the c.i.a., the agency formerly known as the CIA before Bush Goss'ed his own people.....

5554. arkymalarky - 1/24/2005 10:06:39 PM

Hahaha. Cute.

5555. jexster - 1/24/2005 10:31:22 PM

Actually, Thoughtful it was Chalabi who accused Defense Minister Hazeem Shaalan of pilfering 300 million and shipping it out to a Beruit Bank. (another Minister did the same with a couple hundred million in oil for food money a few months back..said he was buying food for Ramadan).

Anyway with all the lies and corruption in Iraq these days, its hard to tell the players without a scorecard so here goes:

George W. Bush - Brings Liberty and Justice for All, One Nation Under Allah

Darth Dick - architect of Lady Liberty

George Tenet - Medal of Freedom Winner (fired)
Tommy Franks - Medal of Freedom winner (fired)
Paul Bremmer - Second Viceroy of MessOPotamia & Medal of Freedom Winner (fired)

Donald Dumbsfeld - BogMeister, New Intelligence Chief

Ahmed Chalabi - Former George Washington of IraQ, now spy for Iran, sometime indictee

Hazeem Shaalan - Former Sadaamite Baath Official, now Minister of Defense of the Liberated MessOPotamia

5556. jexster - 1/24/2005 10:32:20 PM

Beruit - Breadbasket and AmmoDump of the New Bush Lands of Liberty

5557. jexster - 1/24/2005 10:33:34 PM

Not to worry though...we've just been given a new batch of slogans and TD says its just like the French Revolution and will resolve itself when the Prussians come and kick some ass

5558. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/25/2005 12:37:17 AM

5559. judithathome - 1/25/2005 1:32:45 AM

I love that one...is it the same size as those W ones?

I must admit...those are about the classiest bumper stickers I've even seen. Very understated and tasteful, unlike the guy they represent.

5560. angel-five - 1/25/2005 6:41:41 AM

Somebody upthread asked what it would take to get more people to the polls. Well, I agree with the principle, but in practice, if your ass couldn't be bothered to vote in the last election, I personally don't want you taking a hand in deciding who runs the free world.

5561. alistairconnor - 1/25/2005 6:51:50 AM

Y'all recall the c.i.a., the agency formerly known as the CIA before Bush Goss'ed his own people.....

That's good!
No doubt you know, Jex, what the Quebecois term "gosses" means?

5562. thoughtful - 1/25/2005 10:14:02 AM

AC, please fill me in...

5563. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/25/2005 10:15:47 AM

5564. alistairconnor - 1/25/2005 1:17:39 PM

"gosses" = testicles

5565. thoughtful - 1/25/2005 1:18:43 PM

oh that's very funny!

5566. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 2:55:07 PM

The Democrats have got their mojo back--Kennedy, Levin and a bunch of other Democratic senators have been flogging Riceroni pretty hard this morning and have indicated their intention to vote against her confirmation tomorrow.

5567. robertjayb - 1/25/2005 3:15:43 PM

Good.

Then they should take the smarmy, weaselly, unctuous, oleaginous, platitudinous Joe Lieberman out behind the capitol and beat the crap out of him.

What a waste of skin...

5568. jexster - 1/25/2005 3:37:52 PM

Amen!

5569. jexster - 1/25/2005 3:39:26 PM

Math for the BushBrained

The BushBoobies are fiscally as well as militarily clueless

Budget Office Predicts $368 Billion Deficit This Year
By JOHN O'NEIL 1:14 PM ET
The figure does not include a request that officials are preparing for $80 billion more for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

5570. jexster - 1/25/2005 3:53:31 PM

Yo wiz thanks...been in search of new wallpaper..very appropriate to the times ..the soul of simplicity 5558

5571. robertjayb - 1/25/2005 4:17:40 PM

Enough trivia, jexster.

Where do you stand on the really big issue? Do you favor grocery bags on demand or do you align with the heartless gougers and ecofreaks who want to charge for them?

SF Chronicle---San Francisco is expected to take a step closer today to becoming the first city in the nation to charge shoppers for grocery bags with the idea of reducing waste.

The San Francisco Commission on the Environment is likely to approve a resolution urging Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Board of Supervisors to impose a 17-cent fee on both plastic and paper bags, said Mark Westlund, spokesman for the Department of the Environment.

The resolution also calls for an independent study -- requested by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi along with the mayor -- of just how much the use of disposable checkout bags, including their disposal, costs the city.

5572. Max Macks - 1/25/2005 4:25:03 PM

Did you see or hear that
the US army in Iraq has arrested about 6 thousand
"suspected" insurgents/terrorists
and is hold them in jails?

And this after the US or Rumsfeld told us
there were only about 3000 insurgents and
that the Army "had them on the run"

5573. iiibbb - 1/25/2005 4:29:47 PM

Play the WiZard oF WhimSey game

5574. Max Macks - 1/25/2005 4:30:51 PM

> Democrats have got their mojo back--Kennedy, Levin and a bunch of other Democratic senators have been flogging Riceroni pretty hard this morning and have indicated their intention to vote against her confirmation tomorrow.

wonkers , good to hear,,,
tho it would have been nice
had Barbara Lee had more of them following her
courages lead.

Sorry not to have indicated that was
a quotation from wonkers.
I dont know how to do it ,
will try the i key
..I did and it worked

5575. thoughtful - 1/25/2005 4:49:01 PM

Screw all the campaign $$$...just spread lyme disease.

A map showing results from the last presidential election is "remarkably similar" to a map of the distribution of cases of Lyme disease, a brief article in the current Lancet medical journal points out.

The 19 "blue states" - those won by Senator John Kerry - account for 95 percent of the cases of Lyme disease reported in 2002, they wrote. The disease, caused by bacteria that are carried by deer ticks, is concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest.

5576. judithathome - 1/25/2005 4:55:09 PM

if your ass couldn't be bothered to vote in the last election, I personally don't want you taking a hand in deciding who runs the free world.

Amen, brother.

5577. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 6:15:57 PM

RJB, you beat me too it. I heard Lieberman on the car radio and intended to post something like "Senator Lieberman's unctuous, smarmy, oleaginous, fatuous endorsement of Condolezza Rice nearly made me puke! He should be deleted from the Democratic Party!" It'll be interesting to see which Democratic Senators have the cojones to vote tomorrow against Riceroni's confirmation.

5578. judithathome - 1/25/2005 6:54:51 PM

I've heard there will be four...Kennedy and Boxer and I don't know who the other two are. Since it will pass regardless, I would think more would take a stance and say no way.

5579. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:03:14 PM

Dear Senator Lieberman:

Your oleaginous, smarmy, cowardly statement today in support of Condolezza Rice's confirmation nearly made me puke.

As I recall you have made similar spineless statements indicating your willingness to compromise with Bush's proposals to privatize Social Security. That amounts to selling our heritage from FDR. What will be next in line for privatization?

For your information, I am a lifelong Democrat who proudly served as a political appointee in the Clinton administration. Regretfully, while there I attended a $100 a head coctail fundraiser which you sponsored.

Sincerely,
W2

5580. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:06:20 PM

Carl Levin our senior senator from Michigan made a strong statemen against Rice's confirmation and indicated he would vote NO. I would be surprized if our other senator, Debbie Stabenow, didn't also vote against confirmation. I think Evan Bayh also announced his opposition.

Our brand new "progressive" AM station was whooping it up this afternoon about the Democratic criticism of Riceroni. So, there may be more who vote no tomorrow. I hope so.

5581. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:09:57 PM

Senator Byrd is also going to vote NO.

5582. judithathome - 1/25/2005 7:22:14 PM

Got this in an e-mail today:

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years.

Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it.

You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many year! s ago they voted in their

own benefit plan .

In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a grea t plan.

For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.

Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments..

This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives.


Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their lives.

Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA....ZILCH...

This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds;

"OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK"!

From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into,-e very payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)-we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement.

Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator! Bill Bradley's benefits!


Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made.

That change would be to:
Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us .
then sit back.....
and watch how fast they would fix it.

5583. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:49:12 PM

Amen, sister!

5584. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:52:22 PM

Byrd: Dr. Rice's statements about WMD in 2002 were not only wrong. They failed to reflect accurately the contemporaneous intelligence reports.

5585. wonkers2 - 1/25/2005 7:54:46 PM

Riceroni is a perfect example of a person who has been willing to make tremendous sacrifices in order to advance herself--of her time in hours of practicing on the piano and on the ice and of her own personal integrity in service to the Bush administration. Whatever works for her.

5586. Max Macks - 1/25/2005 10:44:00 PM

I didn't know Holy Joe recommended Rice o Roni

but that does not surprise me . The guy is a disgrace
and along with Diane Finestein and that clown
whatever his name
Senator from some southern state who the Repug.had
speak at their convention are a puzzle.

And Sen Byrd is a national treasure .

I read on Google news that one of the Senators
Levin (?) had enough stuff to actually call
her a liar.

5587. Magoseph - 1/26/2005 7:25:39 AM

I can't think of anything to say here--I happen to have a serious case of Bush fatigue.

5588. thoughtful - 1/26/2005 10:25:31 AM

Re soc sec for congress...what we have is representation without taxation.

5589. robertjayb - 1/26/2005 1:14:00 PM

Another hired scribbler for the bushies...

(WashPost)---In 2002, syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher repeatedly defended President Bush's push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families.

"The Bush marriage initiative would emphasize the importance of marriage to poor couples" and "educate teens on the value of delaying childbearing until marriage," she wrote in National Review Online, for example, adding that this could "carry big payoffs down the road for taxpayers and children."

But Gallagher failed to mention that she had a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president's proposal.

5590. thoughtful - 1/26/2005 1:40:09 PM

In fact, one of the fixes for soc sec mentioned in the ball commission was to bring all federal workers into the program. What happens now is federal workers don't pay in, retire after 20 years then get a private job where they work for a few years and proceed to receive full soc sec benefits. Better to roll them into the program from day one so they pay in the whole time they're working.

5591. wonkers2 - 1/26/2005 1:50:39 PM

Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, Levin, Byrd have voted no so far.

5592. wonkers2 - 1/26/2005 1:51:58 PM

Jeffords NO.

5593. wonkers2 - 1/26/2005 1:52:45 PM

Reid of RI no. Durbin, No.

5594. wonkers2 - 1/26/2005 1:53:42 PM

Sorry, Jack Reed of Rhode island.

5595. thoughtful - 1/26/2005 2:20:12 PM

So rice was confirmed 85-13. No surprise. Just makes the dems look even more scattered and ineffective. The party of no account.

Anyone watch daily show the other day? They had on this fellow who wrote a book about the new media being the major force behind the gop resurgence including direct mail. He said one difference is the gop took the long view and have made a slow steady march to where they are today. Though he did note the impact of the internet on howard dean's campaign and mentioned that as part of the new media. This guy also said he was NOT a republican, but a conservative. Very interesting take, I thought.

The dems can't get their act together for the next week let alone the next election.

5596. robertjayb - 1/26/2005 2:26:37 PM

Dirty words and how privatization became one...(Salon)

The Social Security debate has devolved into a language-police action, in which the White House desperately tries to stop anyone from calling its proposal "privatization" -- even though, until recently, that was exactly what its supporters actually called it. Apparently, the "p" word didn't poll well, since it had some vague relationship to the reality of the plan to ditch Social Security, so out it goes. And now it's verboten not only to advocates for the plan, but also for those in the media who want to avoid being accused of taking sides.
................................................

Any time you hear a Bush supporter protest that "No one is talking about dismantling Social Security, just reforming it!," you can show them this quotation from a prominent advocate for the president's plan (from Sunday's Times Week in Review):

"Social Security is the soft underbelly of the welfare state," said Stephen Moore, the former president of Club for Growth, an antitax group. "If you can jab your spear through that, you can undermine the whole welfare state."



That doesn't sound like "reform," now, does it? It sounds like the violent release of 70 years of conservative Republican hatred of Social Security and resentment at its success and popularity. In this view, Social Security is not part of a "safety net," at all; Moore wants us to associate the retirement program to which we've all been contributing all our working lives instead with "welfare," a word so unpopular we banished it from the political vocabulary in the mid-'90s. If you want your Social Security, Moore's saying, you're a freeloader! You just want a handout! You're a welfare queen!

5597. thoughtful - 1/26/2005 2:39:44 PM

Well if w expects to take the lead on soc sec, he'd better do it on script. Off script he's inscutable.

The first question was about his agenda for Social Security, and whether he would just be laying out general principles and leaving the details to Congress. “No, not necessarily so,” he said, adding:

That’s part of—that’s part of the advice my new National Economic Council head will be giving me as to whether or not we need to—here is the plan, or here is an idea for a plan, or why don’t you just fix it. I suspect given my nature, I’ll want to be—the White House will be very much involved with—I have an obligation to lead on this issue—I think this will be an administrative-driven idea—to take it on. And therefore, that that be the case, I have the responsibility to provide the political cover necessary for members, I have the responsibility to make the case if there is a problem, and I have the responsibility to lay out potential solutions. Now, to the specificity of which, we’ll find out—you’ll find out with time.



From Hertzberg in the New Yorker

5598. jexster - 1/26/2005 4:23:42 PM

WASHINGTON - Some of President Bush (news - web sites)'s bedrock supporters — Southerners and rural residents — have lost confidence in the likelihood of a stable, democratic Iraq (news - web sites).



Euphoria over the swift toppling of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime has been dimmed by the violent struggle to install a new Iraqi government. If it continues, the decline in optimism among groups that were part of Bush's base vote in November could make it harder to rally congressional support for his Iraq policies.


The Army plans to keep troop strength in Iraq at current levels through 2006, which would include the November midterm elections

5599. thoughtful - 1/26/2005 4:40:11 PM

From Bush's quote above, "I have the responsibility to provide the political cover necessary for members..."

Why would you need to provide cover if it's a GOOD idea???

5600. robertjayb - 1/26/2005 4:40:23 PM

(via Josh Marshall)

5601. Max Macks - 1/26/2005 5:31:41 PM

I tried to find a web page that would show
who the 13 gutsy Dems.were who voted for
the Wretched Rice o Roni.

can someone tell me a web site that shows the votes
in the Senate
and/or the names and state of those 13.

5602. jexster - 1/26/2005 5:36:26 PM

« previous | Main
(January 26, 2005 -- 12:44 PM EDT)
A note from TPM reader Paul Krugman ...

Today's WSJ lead editorial is a classic. It's titled "All you need to know", and shows the CBO projection of declining deficits and stable debt. What they either don't know or believe readers don't know is that this is the *baseline* projection, which assumes that the sunset clauses in the tax cuts actually go into effect, with the whole thing expiring at the end of 2010 (which is halfway through fiscal 2011, in their chart.) It also assumes that nothing is done to reform the alternative minimum tax, which amounts to a stealth tax increase. So what they've proved is that the tax cuts are affordable as long as they go away ...

5603. judithathome - 1/26/2005 6:28:23 PM

Thirteen voted AGAINST her, Max...and I'd like to know who those 13 are, too.

5604. robertjayb - 1/26/2005 6:39:18 PM

Here are the votes:

Voting ``no'' were 12 Democrats and one independent.

Democrats Yes

Baucus, Mont.; Biden, Del.; Bingaman, N.M.; Cantwell, Wash.; Carper, Del.; Clinton, N.Y.; Conrad, N.D.; Corzine, N.J.; Dodd, Conn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Inouye, Hawaii; Johnson, S.D.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Leahy, Vt.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Obama, Ill.; Pryor, Ark.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Sarbanes, Md.; Schumer, N.Y.; Stabenow, Mich.; Wyden, Ore.

Democrats No

Akaka, Hawaii; Bayh, Ind.; Boxer, Calif.; Byrd, W.Va.; Dayton, Minn.; Durbin, Ill.; Harkin, Iowa; Kennedy, Mass.; Kerry, Mass.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Levin, Mich.; Reed, R.I.

5605. arkymalarky - 1/26/2005 8:40:52 PM

My two voted for her, but they didn't get where they are in a red state by taking strong stands on stuff like that. Lincoln, for one, really seems to know how to pick her battles.

5606. jexster - 1/26/2005 11:07:37 PM

A sobering bit in the Financial Times by a clean sober recovering NeoCon, Michael Lind recalls Wallerstein's prophetic "The Eagle Has Crash Landed"

An harmonic convergence of old Marxist and neo-con????

In a second inaugural address tinged with evangelical zeal, George W. Bush declared: "Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world." The peoples of the world, however, do not seem to be listening. A new world order is indeed emerging - but its architecture is being drafted in Asia and Europe, at meetings to which Americans have not been invited.
Consider Asean Plus Three (APT), which unites the member countries of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations with China, Japan and South Korea. This group has the potential to be the world's largest trade bloc, dwarfing the European Union and North American Free Trade Association. The deepening ties of the APT member states represent a major diplomatic defeat for the US, which hoped to use the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum to limit the growth of Asian economic regionalism at American expense. In the same way, recent moves by South American countries to bolster an economic community represent a clear rejection of US aims to dominate a western-hemisphere free trade zone.

Consider, as well, the EU's rapid progress toward military independence. American protests failed to prevent the EU establishing its own military planning agency, independent of the Nato alliance (and thus of Washington). Europe is building up its own rapid reaction force. And despite US resistance, the EU is developing Galileo, its own satellite network, which will break the monopoly of the US global positioning satellite system.

The participation of China in Europe's Galileo project has alarmed the US military. But China shares an interest with other aspiring space powers in preventing American control of space for military and commercial uses. Even while collaborating with Europe on Galileo, China is partnering Brazil to launch satellites. And in an unprecedented move, China recently agreed to host Russian forces for joint Russo-Chinese military exercises.

The US is being sidelined even in the area that Mr Bush identified in last week's address as America's mission: the promotion of democracy and human rights. The EU has devoted far more resources to consolidating democracy in post-communist Europe than has the US. By contrast, under Mr Bush, the US hypocritically uses the promotion of democracy as the rationale for campaigns against states it opposes for strategic reasons. Washington denounces tyranny in Iran but tolerates it in Pakistan. In Iraq, the goal of democratisation was invoked only after the invasion, which was justified earlier by claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was collaborating with al-Qaeda.

Nor is American democracy a shining example to mankind. The present one-party rule in the US has been produced in part by the artificial redrawing of political districts to favour Republicans, reinforcing the domination of money in American politics. America's judges -- many of whom will be appointed by Mr Bush -- increasingly behave as partisan political activists in black robes. America's antiquated winner-take-all electoral system has been abandoned by most other democracies for more inclusive versions of proportional representation.

In other areas of global moral and institutional reform, the US today is a follower rather than a leader. Human rights? Europe has banned the death penalty and torture, while the US is a leading practitioner of execution. Under Mr Bush, the US has constructed an international military gulag in which the torture of suspects has frequently occurred. The international rule of law? For generations, promoting international law in collaboration with other nations was a US goal. But the neoconservatives who dominate Washington today mock the very idea of international law. The next US attorney general will be the White House counsel who scorned the Geneva Conventions as obsolete.

A decade ago, American triumphalists mocked those who argued that the world was becoming multipolar, rather than unipolar. Where was the evidence of balancing against the US, they asked. Today the evidence of foreign co-operation to reduce American primacy is everywhere -- from the increasing importance of regional trade blocs that exclude the US to international space projects and military exercises in which the US is conspicuous by its absence.

It is true that the US remains the only country capable of projecting military power throughout the world. But unipolarity in the military sphere, narrowly defined, is not preventing the rapid development of multipolarity in the geopolitical and economic arenas -- far from it. And the other great powers are content to let the US waste blood and treasure on its doomed attempt to recreate the post-first world war British imperium in the Middle East.

That the rest of the world is building institutions and alliances that shut out the US should come as no surprise. The view that American leaders can be trusted to use a monopoly of military and economic power for the good of humanity has never been widely shared outside of the US. The trend toward multipolarity has probably been accelerated by the truculent unilateralism of the Bush administration, whose motto seems to be that of the Hollywood mogul: "Include me out."

In recent memory, nothing could be done without the US. Today, however, practically all new international institution-building of any long-term importance in global diplomacy and trade occurs without American participation.

In 1998 Madeleine Albright, then US secretary of state, said of the U.S.: "We are the indispensable nation." By backfiring, the unilateralism of Mr Bush has proven her wrong. The US, it turns out, is a dispensable nation.

Europe, China, Russia, Latin America and other regions and nations are quietly taking measures whose effect if not sole purpose will be to cut America down to size.

Ironically, the US, having won the cold war, is adopting the strategy that led the Soviet Union to lose it: hoping that raw military power will be sufficient to intimidate other great powers alienated by its belligerence. To compound the irony, these other great powers are drafting the blueprints for new international institutions and alliances. That is what the US did during and after the second world war.

5607. jexster - 1/26/2005 11:51:55 PM

Bush Education Policy

Late Breaking Margaret Spellings Lesbian Update!

Earlier we noted that fast on the heels of the SpongeBob controversy, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings had come out swinging against another well-known cartoon character (Buster the Rabbit) for associating with lesbians.

In our earlier post, however, we incorrectly stated that she was attacking "lesbian cartoon characters." Not so. In fact, I'm told now by several TPM readers, the lesbians with whom cartoon character 'Buster' met were living, breathing, human lesbians.

Apropos of this point, the topic of cartoon-human interaction itself appears now to be emerging as a source of some controversy and press attention. Here, for instance, is a photograph of a recent meeting between SpongeBob and The Rev. John H. Thomas, general minister and president of the United Church of Christ at the Church's world headquarters in Cleveland.

-- Josh Marshall



The Rev. John H. Thomas, general minister and president of the UCC, welcomes SpongeBob Squarepants to the UCC's national offices in Cleveland. [January 2005]

5608. Max Macks - 1/27/2005 12:58:11 AM

Democrats Yes

Baucus, Mont.; Biden, Del.; Bingaman, N.M.; Cantwell, Wash.; Carper, Del.; Clinton, N.Y.; Conrad, N.D.; Corzine, N.J.; Dodd, Conn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Inouye, Hawaii; Johnson, S.D.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Leahy, Vt.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Obama, Ill.; Pryor, Ark.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Sarbanes, Md.; Schumer, N.Y.; Stabenow, Mich.; Wyden, Ore.

Thanks for that robertjay.

I am not surprised by
Feignstein and Liberman voting yes,
I am surprised by Schumer,NY. Salazar ( who pulled bit
upset in Colorado) and Obama and Rockefeller.

5609. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/27/2005 1:29:04 AM

I worked at a local college last year, with a black woman who had a PhD and hates Rice. She was from the south and whenever she spoke about Condi, she'd say: "But don't worry, God hates ugly!"

At first I thought she meant her facial characteristics, which surprised me. But when I asked her to explain what she meant by "ugly," she said she was talking about God's retribution for people who do "ugly" things.

5610. robertjayb - 1/27/2005 2:34:51 AM

Writer for Hire...(Maureen Dowd)

I'm herewith resigning as a member of the liberal media elite.

I'm joining up with the conservative media elite.

They get paid better.

First comes news that Armstrong Williams got nearly a quarter of a million from the Education Department to plug No Child Left Behind.

The families of soldiers killed in Iraq get a paltry $12,000. But good publicity? Priceless.
.............................................

I still have many Christmas bills to pay. So I'd like to send a message to the administration: THIS SPACE AVAILABLE. I could write about the strong dollar and the shrinking deficit. Or defend Torture Boy, I mean, the esteemed and sage Alberto Gonzales. Or remind readers of the terrific job Condi Rice did coordinating national security before 9/11 - who could have interpreted a memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" as a credible threat? - not to mention her indefatigable energy obscuring information undercutting the vice president's dementia on Iraq.

5611. thoughtful - 1/27/2005 10:44:01 AM

I heard condi on the radio this a.m. in her speech. Y'know she had the nerve to talk about being there when the wall fell and realizing that she was just harvesting the hard work done by people like marshall and truman in the 40s.

Hello! Then why don't you take a page out of their book and work at creating democracy through economic means instead of with bombs and bullets! Why not put marshall plan kinds of funds into rebuilding iraq and afghanistan??? Idiot. Idiocy.

4 years less 6 days and counting.

5612. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/27/2005 2:23:38 PM

The Madness of George W. Bush: A Reflection of Our Collective Psychosis - Bush’s sickness is our own.

Bush has a psycho-spiritual disease of the soul, a sickness that is endemic to our culture and symptomatic of the times we live in. It’s an illness that's in the soul of all of humanity.

. . .

Because of the way the personality self-organizes an outer display of coherence around a pathogenic core, I would like to name Bush's illness ‘malignant egophrenic (as compared to schizophrenic) disease,’ or ‘ME disorder,’ for short. If ME disorder goes unrecognized and is not contained, it can be very destructive, particularly if the person is in a position of power.

5613. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/27/2005 2:25:06 PM

5614. Dubai Vol - 1/27/2005 2:44:17 PM

And in 4 years, despite all your good arguments and just causes, you will again fail to get enough people to the polls to displace the GOP. As much as I would like you to prove me wrong, I don't see it happening.

So says Dubai-one-note.

5615. thoughtful - 1/27/2005 2:47:35 PM

dubai, you may be right, but even a jeb bush is likely to be more moderate than this guy...i doubt very much jeb would surround himself with the likes of condi and rummy, though i could be wrong.

5616. jexster - 1/27/2005 2:51:12 PM

Not personally surprised by Schumer..AIPAC Is circling the wagons..the Likooties are afraid of MessOPotamian fallout, very afraid...meanwhile the settlers and the dreadlocked are giving Sharon all he can handle at the moment it seems

5617. jexster - 1/27/2005 2:55:43 PM

5571...Ross Mirkarimi is MY newly elected supervisor, sorry to say..

Seventeen fuckin cents! sheesh that's higher than a friggin CA bottle deposit....on the bright side, the streets should be quieter when the homeless begin pushing Safeway carts full of plastic bags instead of bottles and cans to the recycling center next to..you guessed it..

SAFEWAY

5618. jexster - 1/27/2005 2:56:09 PM

toys

5619. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/27/2005 2:56:23 PM

Toys!

5620. jexster - 1/27/2005 3:15:28 PM

Speak No Evil
by Husain Haqqani
Bush's inaugural address was supposed to inspire democratic reformers worldwide. But they heard only hypocrisy. TNR


Husain Haqqani is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and an associate professor of international relations at Boston University.

5621. Magoseph - 1/27/2005 3:22:00 PM

BUSH'S HYPOCRITICAL OATH.
Speak No Evil
by Husain Haqqani
Post date: 01.27.05
Issue date: 02.07.05

President Bush's inaugural speech was delivered on the day Muslims around the world celebrated Eid Ul Azha, the festival marking the end of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca, the Hajj. But, as soon as it was over, the state-run news media of authoritarian U.S. allies in the Middle East were quick to criticize it. Egypt's Al Ahram lamented that Bush made no reference to either Iraq or Palestine, the two most important issues in the region Bush hopes most to democratize. In the same vein, Saudi Arabia's Al-Watan noted, "'To end tyranny in our world,' as Bush said in his speech, is a highly rhetorical statement and titillating lyrics. ... Will Bush ever grant Palestinians their rights and return their land?"

Khaled Al Maeena, editor of the Saudi daily Arab News, matched Bush's rhetoric with rhetoric of his own: "No right-minded Arab man, woman, or child would like to live under tyranny. ... We also have a dream--like the American Dream--of upward mobility, of bettering ourselves, of providing a better future for our children. For all this we need peace." But then, turning Bush's words against U.S. support for Israel, Al Maeena wrote, "President Bush said: 'No one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave.' And we want to hold him to his words. The Israelis cannot be masters of a land they occupied in June 1967, and the Palestinians cannot be slaves in their own land."

Coming as they did from the press organs of decidedly undemocratic states, such responses could be written off as self-serving and hypocritical. But pro-Western intellectuals and democracy activists in the Arab world were even more dismissive of Bush's speech. They focused not only on U.S. support for Israel and occupation of Iraq, but also on support for Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other authoritarian governments. "How can one talk of democracy when Washington protects many tyrannical regimes for the sake of its own interests?" asked Rafiq Khouri, a columnist for Beirut's Al Nahar newspaper, questioning Bush's declaration that "America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one." And the London-based Al Quds Al Arabi wrote, "The Arab hates America for two main reasons: first, for its support of repressive, barbaric and backward regimes; and secondly, for its support of the Israeli aggression. As long as US policy remains the same, all US speeches about democracy and freedom will only be pretentious and meaningless."

The Bush administration professes bewilderment at this skepticism and hostility. It apparently feels that people living under the region's authoritarian and semi-authoritarian regimes should greet its rhetoric with the same enthusiasm that cold war dissidents in Eastern Europe once greeted Ronald Reagan's calls for freedom and denunciations of evil. But, during the cold war, the United States openly opposed the communist regimes behind the Iron Curtain. At no time did the United States embrace or prop up Walter Ulbricht's German Democratic Republic or Gustav Husak's Czechoslovakia. At no time were such states treated with the deference accorded critical allies. American officials did not offer false praise for East European rulers, describing incremental political restructuring as "progress toward democracy," in return for specific policy favors.

By contrast, in the Middle East, the United States is seen as the principal backer of rulers like Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak and the Saudi royal family. In Central Asia, America is seen as supporting dictatorships in Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan. In South Asia, Muslim democrats can derive little comfort from the praise Washington heaps upon Pakistan's military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup, purged the country's Supreme Court, arbitrarily amended its constitution, and has never stood for election in a contested campaign.

Indeed, the gap between Bush's pro-democracy rhetoric and his pro-status quo policies was illustrated during a White House meeting the president had with Musharraf in December, during which he called for "a world effort to help the Palestinians develop a state that is truly free: One that's got an independent judiciary; one that's got a civil society; one that's got the capacity to fight off the terrorists; one that allows for dissent; one in which people can vote." Ironically, most of those criteria are not met in Pakistan.

Zayn Al Abidin Al Rukabi, writing in the London-based Al Sharq Al Awsat, suggests that Bush's inaugural address gave his administration "a unique chance, the best ever, to restore trust in true US values, as well as improving an image which has been distorted by its mistakes." But, to seize that chance, Bush will have to find a way to match his words with deeds. He might begin by refusing to allow America's Muslim allies to define democratic progress as cosmetic political changes, such as the creation of rubber-stamp parliaments and the holding of fixed elections. Mubarak, for example, claims that Egypt has been engaged in a gradual transition to democracy for over two decades. As a result, his country receives considerable aid for civil society projects despite little true reform. Muslim liberals understand that temporary alliances with autocrats are sometimes necessary even for democracies. But a friendly dictator should be called just that, and not described as the builder of a future democracy.

Another practical step could be active U.S. engagement with opposition leaders and parties in Islamic countries. The United States could bolster Egypt's conservative Al Wafd party, the newly formed liberal Al Ghad party, and the Islamic democrats in the officially unrecognized Al Wasat party--as well as the popular civilian parties in Pakistan that Musharraf accuses of misgoverning the country before he took power. Since the days of Iran's shah, authoritarian Muslim rulers have demanded that the United States shun their opposition as the price of their alliance, and the United States has obliged them. Administration officials and diplomats try to avoid high-profile meetings with opposition leaders in Washington and abroad for fear of antagonizing U.S.-friendly dictators. Furthermore, democracy-promotion assistance is almost never extended to political parties or media that might threaten existing regimes. Changing this policy would allow U.S. nongovernmental organizations, such as the National Democratic Institute, to use money from the U.S. Agency for International Development to provide logistical help for political party-building activities similar to those undertaken in Eastern Europe and Latin America. To be sure, it would provoke the occasional heated exchange between the regimes and American diplomats. But it is unlikely that regimes like Mubarak's and Musharraf's would withhold cooperation from the United States (and forgo the benefits in economic and military aid) because of increased U.S. engagement with their opposition. And engagement might eventually give Washington's democrats an alternative to dealing with the world's dictators.

5622. Magoseph - 1/27/2005 3:23:01 PM

Jex, I posted the article because not everyone suscribed to TNR.

5623. robertjayb - 1/27/2005 6:03:17 PM

Ever the pol, jexster equivocates on the important San Francisco grocery bag issue Message # 5617 by employing lawyerly misdirectional bafflegab.

Where do you stand, Sir?

5624. Max Macks - 1/27/2005 6:28:29 PM

In the Guardian Talk
some fools keep saying that the opposition
to Rice was because she is black.

Altho twice as many voted against her confirmation
as SoS than did against Kissinger
I still cannot understand why more Democrats
did not cast a no vote.

and I still say she looks like that trained
monkey on a chain the organ grinders had.

Which IMO is no more racist a remark
than calling W. the Chimp.

5625. Max Macks - 1/27/2005 6:31:19 PM

I just went to the link to Molly Ivins
wondering if she has written anything
yet about Rice so wrong- ee

...nothing yet...

5626. PelleNilsson - 1/27/2005 6:37:44 PM

Oh, Alistair, what have you done?

5627. Magoseph - 1/27/2005 7:12:58 PM

Oh, Alistair, what have you done?

Are you referring to the TNR article I posted? If you are, I apologize for it--I must admit that I wanted to test the limit of what we can post.

5628. judithathome - 1/27/2005 8:01:09 PM

I think it's great...it's not like we post reams ALL THE TIME. And if you don't subscribe to TNR, you can't read the articles.

Good job Magos!

5629. Max Macks - 1/27/2005 9:16:41 PM

so once again I am out of the loop

what is TNR

5630. jexster - 1/27/2005 9:22:25 PM

It depends!


I am against regressive taxation and believe that the poor need to use bags more than rich white folk because they have to take the bus.

So will the ordinance provide exemptions for those making <$50K?

How will this be implemented? A City ID? Proof of income requirements? Will there be rebates? Will stores be required to build tasteful dumpsters where customers can retrieve clean, used bags?


All of these are very important questions as I am sure you realize.

I must speak with my Stupidvisor

5631. jexster - 1/27/2005 9:55:18 PM

"I fully understand the power of those who want to derail a Social Security agenda by, you know, scaring people." Bush
(viaTPM)

5632. wonkers2 - 1/27/2005 10:07:17 PM

TNR=The New Republic, a moderate, center-left magazine.

5633. Magoseph - 1/28/2005 8:52:57 AM

Good job Magos!
Thank you, Judith.

5634. robertjayb - 1/28/2005 1:04:46 PM

Third columnist caught with hand in the Bush till...

Michael McManus, conservative author of the syndicated column "Ethics & Religion," received $10,000 to promote a marriage initiative.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Eric Boehlert



Jan. 27, 2005--(Salon)--And three makes a trend.

One day after President Bush ordered his Cabinet secretaries to stop hiring commentators to help promote administration initiatives, and one day after the second high-profile conservative pundit was found to be on the federal payroll, a third embarrassing hire has emerged. Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated column, "Ethics & Religion," appears in 50 newspapers, was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative. McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.

5635. robertjayb - 1/28/2005 1:11:57 PM

Why Texans love Oklahoma...

Jan. 27, 2005 | Oklahoma City -- A state senator has a plan for saving Oklahoma's gamefowl industry now that cockfighters are legally prohibited from pitting birds fitted with razor-like spurs.

State Sen. Frank Shurden, a longtime defender of cockfighting, is suggesting that roosters be given little boxing gloves so they can fight without bloodshed. The proposal is in a bill the Democrat has introduced for the legislative session that begins Feb. 7.

"Who's going to object to chickens fighting like humans do? Everybody wins," Sen. Frank Shurden said.

Oklahoma voters banned cockfighting in 2002. The practice is still legal in Louisiana and New Mexico.

Removing the blood from the sport takes away the main argument animal rights groups have against cockfighting, Shurden said.

5636. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/28/2005 3:24:09 PM

5637. jexster - 1/28/2005 4:19:03 PM

5638. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/28/2005 5:01:16 PM

Fabulous!

5639. jexster - 1/28/2005 5:31:51 PM

Texans "love" Okies because they've no one else to look down their noses at...

What seperates a coon ass from a jackass?

The Sabine River

5640. jexster - 1/28/2005 5:34:04 PM

US Just Says NO to Bush Social Secuirty Privitization Scam

5641. Max Macks - 1/28/2005 6:05:30 PM

It will be interesting to read what some of the
political leaders in Europe will say
after Rice so- wrong-ee
has her first meeting with them at
G7 or whatever.

5642. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/29/2005 5:58:07 PM

Just got this in an email:

SOCIAL SECURITY: (This is worth reading. It is short and to the point.)

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years.
Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it.
You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society .They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan.
In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan.
For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.
Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments..
For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives.
This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries.
Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their lives.
Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA....ZILCH....
This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds;
"OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK"!
From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into, -every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)-we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement.
Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator! Bill Bradley's benefits!
Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made.
That change would be to:
Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us
then sit back.....and watch how fast they would fix it.
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.
How many people can YOU send this to? Better yet.....How many people WILL you send this to?

5643. OhioSTOPAS - 1/29/2005 8:39:54 PM

That e-mail has been making the rounds for years, but it's wrong.

5644. wonkers2 - 1/29/2005 10:18:19 PM

What's wrong with it? The figures may be two high, but I assume you are saying that the original federal retirement program, including health care, is not more generous than what ordinary citizens get.

5645. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/30/2005 10:01:14 AM

Isn't it "wrong" for politicians to be making laws that pertain to everyone but themselves? Who are they serving? - certainly not the public.

5646. OhioSTOPAS - 1/30/2005 10:57:54 AM

Snopes.com debunks the Congressional pension e-mail.

"This piece has been circulating on the Internet since April 2000. So much of it is outdated, inaccurate, or misleading, it's difficult to know where to begin.
• It is not true that Congressmen do not pay into the Social Security fund. They pay into the fund just as most everyone else does. (A few odd exceptions to the Social Security program still exist, both inside and outside of government.)
• It was true prior to 1984 that Congressmen did not pay into the Social Security fund because they participated in a separate program for civil servants (the Civil Service Retirement System, or CSRS), but that program was closed to government employees hired after 1983 . . .
• It is not true that Congressmen "continue to draw their same pay, until they die." The size of their pensions is determined by a number of factors (primarily length of service, but also factors such as when they joined Congress, their age at retirement, their salary, and the pension options they chose when they enrolled in the retirement system) and by law cannot exceed 80% of their salary at the time of their retirement.

(continued)

5647. OhioSTOPAS - 1/30/2005 10:58:50 AM

(concluded)

• The figures given as an example for Senator Bradley (or Senator Byrd, or Congressman White, depending upon which version one reads) — $7,900,000 over the course of his and his wife's lifetime, culminating in a top payout of $275,000 — are simply outrageous amounts with no basis in reality. There is no conceivable way Senator Bradley (or any other Congressman) could draw anywhere near that amount of money though the Congressional pension plan.
• It is not true that Congressmen "paid nothing in on any kind of retirement," and that their pension money "comes right out of the General Fund." Whether members of Congress participate in the older Civil Service Retirement System or the newer Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS), their pensions are funded through a combination of general tax provisions and contributions from the participants. Right now, members of Congress in the FERS plan must pay 1.3% of their salary to FERS and 6.2% in Social Security taxes.
• As of 1998, the average annuity for retired members of Congress was $50,616 for those who retired under CSRS and $46,908 for those who retired under FERS. Not bad, but not the highway robbery this piece makes it out to be."

5648. OhioSTOPAS - 1/30/2005 11:00:51 AM

Of course members of Congress get better pensions and health care than you and I do. They get higher salaries too. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that.

5649. wonkers2 - 1/30/2005 11:37:11 AM

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that unless you believe that universal, single-payer health care would be more efficient and fairer. And I guess there's nothing intrinsically wrong with mediocre CEOs of failed companies walking away with millions if not billions. However, it's true that salaries of Senators, Congressmen and other top government officials pale in insignificance compared with private sector pirates. I believe lower level salaries are based on private sector comparability survey data and, as a result compare more favorably.

5650. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/30/2005 3:41:09 PM

Ohio- I dispute nothing you've said; I'm sure you know what your talking about, however your points still do not address my point.

These people are now representing private interests rather than public concerns. Why should they have better health benefits and retirement options than the people they supposedly serve?

That's the issue.

5651. PelleNilsson - 1/30/2005 4:21:47 PM

'Be most slow to believe what you most want to be true.'

5652. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/30/2005 5:06:47 PM

Are you referring to me or my posts, Pelle?

5653. PelleNilsson - 1/30/2005 5:29:42 PM

Yes. You posted that e-mail, which, as Ohio showed, has been debunked, because you wanted it to be true.

5654. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/30/2005 5:52:18 PM

Pelle, you have a tendency to ascribe to me much more than my posts ( and phototoons) indicate.

If you'd note, I merely said I received that email and I made no mention of how I felt about it - or that I "wanted it to be true."

So, did I jump to conclusions or did you?

I was also grateful for Ohio's clarifications, but wether the email is true or not, my point was overlooked or simply not addressed.

If you don't agree that politicians no longer represent the public fairly, then fine - I'm happy to accept that.

However, what good comes from any of your petty potshots at me? Your compulsion to snipe is an utter bore - I'm sure for others as much as it is for me. So why don't you just give it a rest.

5655. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/30/2005 6:28:30 PM

Or, better yet, why don't you email me and we can discuss it directly.

wizardofwhimsy@yahoo.com

5656. alistairconnor - 1/31/2005 8:00:59 AM

WW, I think you're seeing a personal slight where none is intended.

Pelle is a pathological sceptic, and that 'Be most slow' thing is pretty much his tagline. He used it on me recently, with respect to elephants and earthquakes.

5657. OhioSTOPAS - 1/31/2005 10:05:44 AM

Wiz - I think you're being unrealistic when you ask about members of Congress, "Why should they have better health benefits and retirement options than the people they supposedly serve?" It doesn't follow that a public servant can't be compensated fairly for his or her service because that payment would exceed the salary and benefits received by the average citizen.

5658. Wombat - 1/31/2005 11:51:50 AM

Believe it or not, some members of Congress take a financial hit when they serve in Congress.

5659. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 1:38:24 PM

Alistair- Thanks for your take. I'm sure my history with Pele has flavored my perception of his post. Nevertheless, I still suspect that there is something going on that chafes his sensibilities and I'm just trying to get to the core of the problem. Rather than addressing it directly, he seems to cloak it with arcane comments that muddle the issue at hand.

Yeah I know, I can be dense and "too sensitive," but I'm not trying to judge or affix blame here, I'm just trying to figure out what he's trying to accomplish with his comments. Is he just playing "gotchya?"

As far as: Be most slow to believe what you most want to be true.' - no shit, Dick Tracy! Just what we all need - psuedo-sagacious platitudes that insult one's intelligence.

Ohio- Wiz - I think you're being unrealistic when you ask about members of Congress, "Why should they have better health benefits and retirement options than the people they supposedly serve?" It doesn't follow that a public servant can't be compensated fairly for his or her service because that payment would exceed the salary and benefits received by the average citizen.

Expecting "unfairness" is "realistic?" You and wombat seem to be missing my point. Fair compensation for public service is one thing, but stacking the deck where so called public servants vote on issues that don't affect them - like the war in Iraq, like Social Security - and then vote on issues that stuff their pockets and political coffers - like fat-cat tax cuts, the deregulation of industries of their corporate campaign donors and the whole war profiteering issue - these are the real issues of concern.

That email may be filled hyperbole and bad data, but the issue it points to is still valid and critical. The fact is, the weasels have figured out a way of subverting democracy with unbridled corruption under the guise of Capitalism and "It's good for business."

5660. Wombat - 1/31/2005 2:51:29 PM

The fact that the post is filled with hyperbole and bad data guarantees that the validity of the issue will be disputed.

5661. wonkers2 - 1/31/2005 2:55:37 PM

Thomas Aquinas: 1. Seldom affirm.
2. Never deny.
3. Always distinguish.

Or was it St. Augustine?

5662. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 3:12:25 PM

The fact that the post is filled with hyperbole and bad data guarantees that the validity of the issue will be disputed.

How does it guarantee it? If someone exaggerates and gives false facts about a valid issue then how, exactly, does it make the issue invalid?

If I point to the moon in the opposite direction from where it is in the sky, and you dwell on my finger and see no moon, does it mean there's no such thing as the moon?

5663. Wombat - 1/31/2005 4:34:18 PM

Well gosh, Wiz...The President exaggerated and gave false facts about a valid issue (Saddam's regime in Iraq) and look where it got us.

5664. wonkers2 - 1/31/2005 4:47:28 PM

In the grease!

5665. Max Macks - 1/31/2005 4:49:45 PM

I seldom watch the news on TV

...so do any of you know if W.Bush, who I guess
got a bounce because of the large number of people
who voted in that Iraq election (or large numbers
were reported),

Will it(the bounce) last?

And tho this post belongs in some other thread

what's your guess as to whether The Bush Gang
will pull the troops out soon?

5666. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 6:01:20 PM

Well gosh, Wiz...The President exaggerated and gave false facts about a valid issue (Saddam's regime in Iraq) and look where it got us.

wombat- That's evasive - the issue wrt Iraq was were there WMDs there and did it justify going to war?

You also ignore the poor logic of your own argument.

The issue regarding my question was: Is it "unrealistic" to expect fairness when it comes politicians voting for the public's interest rather than their own advantage and self-interest - regardless of that email. Please address my point and answer my question the way I framed it rather than the way you choose to see it..

5667. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 6:05:38 PM

5668. Wombat - 1/31/2005 6:27:48 PM

Wiz:

The answer depends on whether or not one is a cynic or an idealist. Regretfully, I have become more of the former.

5669. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 7:20:08 PM

Fine wombat, but I defer to Oscar Wilde: "A cynic is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nohing." I can't sit by and smugly smile because I can predict humanity's nature while capitalism and oligarchy trumps democracy and good government.

These political thugs are counting on our cynicism and complacency to exploit the system they've perverted. It's still important to rail against injustice, corruption and bad government - if for no other reason than to document their crimes for posterity.

5670. Wombat - 1/31/2005 7:24:46 PM

But when one rails, it is good to be able to back it up. Otherwise you are railing for the sake of railing, which will do nothing for posterity, and will result in the railer being ignored.

5671. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 8:47:49 PM

wombat- I don't get you. First you say an issue is invalid because the facts used in an argument are exaggerated and incorrect, yet you don't support your claim with logical rebuttal - instead, you say it's subjective while you still ignore the fact that politicians have exploited their powers unfairly.

This, as I see it (and as Tom Jefferson would say), is "self-evident." Yet you claim bearing witness to this reality and railing will do nothing for posterity.

Using your logic, Jews shouldn't rant and rail over The Holocaust because they don't have an accurate count of its victims.

And finally, iIf you can't see the unfairness of it all, then fine, just ignore me.

5672. Wombat - 1/31/2005 11:10:38 PM

I usually do, Wiz, which is too bad because your heart is in the right place.

5673. jayackroyd - 1/31/2005 11:33:56 PM

If someone exaggerates and gives false facts about a valid issue then how, exactly, does it make the issue invalid?


Because it undermines the credibility of the argument. Think of creation science.

5674. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:35:33 PM

Oh sure, many thanks Oh Prescient One - for the condescension as well as the pathetic logic!

5675. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:35:55 PM

Toys!

5676. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:37:17 PM

Sorry, jay, but it makes the argumentation invalid not the issue!

5677. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:37:38 PM

Toys!!!!

5678. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:38:42 PM

x What's with this italics thing?

5679. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/31/2005 11:50:34 PM

One last try.

5680. jayackroyd - 2/1/2005 12:50:56 AM

toys?

5681. jayackroyd - 2/1/2005 12:51:40 AM

Are three enough?

5682. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/1/2005 1:21:48 AM

I guess not - thanks!

5683. robertjayb - 2/1/2005 2:21:24 AM

Kids today! They just keep on screwing...

DALLAS (AP) -- Abstinence-only programs like those promoted by the Bush administration don't seem to be working on teenagers in the president's home state, according to a state-sponsored study by Texas A&M University researchers.

The ongoing study, the first evaluation of the abstinence programs across the state, found that students in almost all high school grades were more sexually active after undergoing abstinence education.

Researchers don't believe the programs encouraged teenagers to have sex, only that the abstinence messages did not interfere with customary trends among adolescents.

``We didn't find what many would like for us to find,'' said A&M researcher Buzz Pruitt.

5684. alistairconnor - 2/1/2005 8:42:00 AM

Interesting results :

After taking an abstinence course, the number among those same girls rose to 28 percent, a level closer to that of their peers across the state.

Among ninth-grade boys, the percentage who reported sexual intercourse before and after abstinence education remained relatively unchanged.

Why this effect on girls and not on boys?

Perhaps because sex is a discretionary activity for ninth-grade girls. Information and discussion may arouse their curiosity.

Whereas ninth-grade boys are already doing all they can to get some.

5685. alistairconnor - 2/1/2005 8:44:14 AM

But why are they interested only in quantitative results?

The world wants to know whether, after the abstinence program, they are having better sex.

5686. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/1/2005 10:36:46 AM

Doesn't abstinence make the heart grow fonder . . . and the blood flow stronger?

5687. thoughtful - 2/1/2005 11:59:47 AM

the failure of abstinence only education is well known. But the people who push it never let facts get in their way.

5688. thoughtful - 2/1/2005 1:19:56 PM

Krugman puts another axe directly in the heart of soc sec privatization:

Schemes for Social Security privatization, like the one described in the 2004 Economic Report of the President, invariably assume that investing in stocks will yield a high annual rate of return, 6.5 or 7 percent after inflation, for at least the next 75 years. Without that assumption, these schemes can't deliver on their promises. Yet a rate of return that high is mathematically impossible unless the economy grows much faster than anyone is now expecting....

It really is that stark: any growth projection that would permit the stock returns the privatizers need to make their schemes work would put Social Security solidly in the black.

5689. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/1/2005 3:03:43 PM

Will this garden gnome scare the slugs away, or attract them?

5690. thoughtful - 2/1/2005 5:53:52 PM

A friend of mine always has such an interesting take on things. His attitude is they should get rid of soc sec and medicare and all that stuff. Let the states decide for themselves what kind of state they want to be. The blue states would be far better off seeing how much more money they ship to the feds than the feds give to them in return. He said calif with the stem cell research funding is leading the pack and the rest of the blue states should follow. Let each state fund its own growth and stand on its own merit. watch the northeast and calif continue to blossom. watch mississippi and alabama take on chihuahua!

I always get such a kick out of him!

5691. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/1/2005 6:00:57 PM

Being from CT, of late, I have my doubts, but as Pelle might want me to say: I'd like to believe that it's true.

5692. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/1/2005 6:01:38 PM

Then again, some things have to be true!

5693. Max Macks - 2/1/2005 6:09:22 PM

Wizard yes. I saw all those ads for the erection stuff
during the pro football playoff games and
was somewhat surprised..

I guess sex and beer always sell well.

tho i never have understood why beer can advertise
and whiskey, and other booze may not.

5694. robertjayb - 2/1/2005 8:32:28 PM

NPR says Martin Frost, the former Texas congressman and Tom DeLay redistricting victim has dropped out of the contest to be democratic party chairman.

A big boost for Howard Dean or for the anybody but Dean crowd?

5695. wonkers2 - 2/1/2005 9:04:48 PM

Cap'n Dirty sez, "Born 40 years too soon!"

5696. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 12:12:36 PM

Ayn Rand centennial Here.

5697. jexster - 2/2/2005 1:20:40 PM

Bush HSD a Mess
Disorganization Threatens Security

As its leadership changes for the first time, the Department of Homeland Security remains hampered by personality conflicts, bureaucratic bottlenecks and an atmosphere of demoralization, undermining its ability to protect the nation against terrorist attack, according to current and former administration officials and independent experts.

5698. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 1:32:13 PM

Political joke of the day:

"Pat Buchanan lost an uncle in a WWII concencentration camp....He fell out of a guard tower!"

5699. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 1:34:02 PM

Polical joke #2: "Rush Limbaugh is adertising Christmas neckties....All of them go with a brown shirt."

5700. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 1:49:23 PM

#3 "Joe Biden's plug job looks like a time lapse photo of a Chia Pet."

Above from a card file from my stint in our nation's capital.

5701. jexster - 2/2/2005 2:13:29 PM

Alas Dean has it in the bag Rob't. but contrary to the CW of the ABD crowd, I think he is genuinely committed to the work of party building and has dropped that "us v. them" shit he came up with in 2003 that killed his campaign.

I think he's going to do quite well.

5702. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/2/2005 2:21:33 PM

Those are quite good, wonk!

_______________________


If Dean wants it that bad, and God knows why anyone would, the man has a go from this Progressive Liberal Veteran Patriotic Rabble-rouser! !

5703. jexster - 2/2/2005 2:22:42 PM

Krugman:

To get a 6.5 percent rate of return, you need capital gains: if dividends yield 3 percent, stock prices have to rise 3.5 percent per year after inflation. That doesn't sound too unreasonable if you're thinking only a few years ahead.

But privatizers need that high rate of return for 75 years or more. And the economic assumptions underlying most projections for Social Security make that impossible.

The Social Security projections that say the trust fund will be exhausted by 2042 assume that economic growth will slow as baby boomers leave the work force. The actuaries predict that economic growth, which averaged 3.4 percent per year over the last 75 years, will average only 1.9 percent over the next 75 years.

In the long run, profits grow at the same rate as the economy. So to get that 6.5 percent rate of return, stock prices would have to keep rising faster than profits, decade after decade.

The price-earnings ratio - the value of a company's stock, divided by its profits - is widely used to assess whether a stock is overvalued or undervalued. Historically, that ratio averaged about 14. Today it's about 20. Where would it have to go to yield a 6.5 percent rate of return?

I asked Dean Baker, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, to help me out with that calculation (there are some technical details I won't get into). Here's what we found: by 2050, the price-earnings ratio would have to rise to about 70. By 2060, it would have to be more than 100.

5704. robertjayb - 2/2/2005 4:34:53 PM

Armed Liberals for Dean.

We've got your back!

5705. jexster - 2/2/2005 5:19:15 PM

Blogs...


The debut of ThinkProgress.org, the newest blog on the block, brought to you by the people who bring you The Progress Report.

There will also be insights from fresh new voices on the staff of American Progress, as well as a diverse array of guest posts from progressive religious activists, policy experts, and correspondents from middle America. And with our Think Fast feature, we'll give you a frequently updated list of the hottest news of the day. Another great aspect of the blog is reader comments. We want to hear from you. Talk to us about the posts – tell us we're wrong, agree with us, add a new piece of information you've uncovered. Discuss and debate something you've read in The Progress Report.

Others CAP recommends:


Atrios,
Josh Marshall,
Eric Alterman
DailyKos
MyDD
American Prospect a
Washington Monthly
DonkeyRising (by political analyst and American Progress fellow Ruy Teixeira), Informed Comment (by Juan Cole, professor of contemporary Middle East history at the University of Michigan),
Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal (by DeLong, a deputy secretary in the Treasury Department under President Clinton),
TalkLeft (by Denver-based criminal defense attorney Jeralyn Merritt),
and PoliticalWire (by political consultant Taeggan Goddard).

5706. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/2/2005 7:30:10 PM

That's the wrong link, jexster.

5707. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 7:56:40 PM

I heard on our new liberal talk radio station this afternoon that at least three GOP senators are against Bush's Social Security "reform": Spector, Chaffee and Snowe. Others are dubious.

5708. judithathome - 2/2/2005 8:01:31 PM

Yes, but I bet the wussies will go for it if it comes up for a vote. No one seems brave enough to tell this fool that he's making an enormous mistake.

5709. wonkers2 - 2/2/2005 8:05:23 PM

That's possible. And nobody knows, including Bush, what his program is going to be. Also, some Democrats could defect.

5710. judithathome - 2/2/2005 8:11:57 PM

No one who wants to re-elected in 2006 will vote for this...I hope. Bush doesn't care...he's a lame duck and has nothing to lose if the entire country goes down in flames.

But I doubt many Gray Panthers are going to vote for a Senator or Representative who votes to, in theory, mess with their retirement benefits.

5711. judithathome - 2/2/2005 8:12:26 PM

to BE re-elected

5712. robertjayb - 2/2/2005 9:29:22 PM

No surprise. Bush to open SOU with a lie...

Per Reuters Bush will make the false claim that the Social Security program is headed for bankruptcy.

It is not.

5713. jexster - 2/2/2005 9:39:51 PM

Weapons of Mass Deception

Bush's Bamboozlepalooza USA Tour Set to Kick Off Tonite
Win a "Privatize This T"

5714. jexster - 2/2/2005 9:44:06 PM

There ya go Wizzer

5715. Max Macks - 2/2/2005 10:07:46 PM

jexter
would you post the way one gets to some of those
blogs in your post above
like Donkeky Rising

5716. robertjayb - 2/3/2005 1:56:08 AM

Gene Lyons may storm a Starbucks...

I swear if I hear one more

twentysomething in a power suit smugly assure a

TV interviewer how much better they can handle their money than (snicker) Social Security, things could get ugly. Lately, I’ve been fantasizing about storming a Starbucks armed with fully automatic banana cream pies. "Eat this, yuppie scum!" Listening to these Young Republicans is like hearing your 18-year-old tell you he doesn’t need a seat belt because his reflexes are so superior he couldn’t possibly have an accident. I recently saw some puppy on CBS News boasting about his investment acumen. I couldn’t tell if he was another ringer like last month’s CBS poster child for Social Security "reform." They softpedaled the fact that Tad DeHaven, who opined that he’d never see a dime due to Social Security’s inevitable collapse, works for the National Taxpayers Union, a tycoon-funded Washington think tank devoted to the premise that government benefit checks ruin the character of the roughly 50 percent of old-timers with no other income. Mr. Confident Investor was 27...
.................................................

Look, punk, it's an insurance policy, not an IRA. There’s a reason we’re seeing all these boy-in-the-street interviews, and it’s not simply polls showing that high percentages of young people believe that Social Security is doomed. (Some also show that only 26 percent of Americans 18 to 34 read newspapers, which explains a lot.) Presenting opinions instead of facts makes it easier to avoid mentioning that President Bush’s campaign to "privatize" the most successful government program in U.S. history is based entirely upon shameless falsehoods.

Whoops, I’ve used obsolete terminology. "Privatize" was last year’s buzzword. Apparently because it worried voters that Republicans were fixing to give Social Security a ride on a Wall Street roulette wheel, the mandatory new phrase is "personal accounts."

5717. belle - 2/3/2005 2:10:59 AM

I really don't care what goes on with social security, I don't pay into it anymore. This frightful, apathetic country will once again trust a known liar with their money. Well you know what, it serves them right if they lose their retirement and are forced to work at Wal-Mart until they die, because they won't listen. Now I just have to keep Arnold away from my pension, quick let's offer him a 5 picture movie deal.

5718. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/3/2005 2:51:17 AM

Yes, let the King of the Zombies have his way!

5719. thoughtful - 2/3/2005 1:27:43 PM

Why doesn't anyone bring up the fact that people can already do their own 'privatized' social security by saving their money and investing it??? We did. I mean it's not like soc sec was ever supposed to be a complete retirement plan by itself. It was only supposed to be a supplement.

Of course all the other facts about why privatizing soc sec is a bad idea are circulating widely, but I suspect no one in the admin is listening.

5720. wonkers2 - 2/3/2005 1:33:48 PM

Bush's speech was clever in that he tried to reduce the opposition by promising that there would be absolutely no change for anyone age 55 or older. But that could turn out to be another Bush lie if Congress decides to to tinker with the adjustment formula or move from a wage-based adjustment to adjustments based on the CPI. All in all, his remarks on Social Security were very misleading about at the level of a barker for a carnival freak show.

5721. thoughtful - 2/3/2005 2:40:46 PM

Well w did manage to get me to wish i was older than i am rather than my usual 'wish i were younger' lament.

5722. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/3/2005 3:11:24 PM

It's all about the money his Wall Street cronies will get up front from the SS funds and nothing to do with the smoke & mirrors of this so called crisis.

5723. thoughtful - 2/3/2005 3:14:57 PM

oh i agree...just like all this tort reform poppycock...he...er rather rove...is trying to deprive the dems of one of their key sources of funds...the trial lawyers. there is no litigation crisis.

5724. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/3/2005 3:22:51 PM

It shouldn't be any surprise, rally; evidently it all comes from the shallow end of Bush's genealogical cesspool . . .

Scion of traitors and warlords: why Bush is coy about his Irish links


The US president's now apparent ancestor, Richard de Clare, Earl of Pembroke - known as Strongbow for his arrow skills - is remembered as a desperate, land-grabbing warlord whose calamitous foreign adventure led to the suffering of generations. Shunned by Henry II, he offered his services as a mercenary in the 12th-century invasion of Wexford in exchange for power and land. When he eventually died of a festering ulcer in his foot, his enemies said it was the revenge of Irish saints whose shrines he had violated.

The Bush clan - who pride themselves on a distinguished New England family history that can be traced back to the first English in America - may well be looking for a healthy spin on the news. But it seems that Strongbow is not the worst of Bush's newfound ancestors.

The genetic line can also be traced to Dermot MacMurrough, the Gaelic king of Leinster reviled in history books as the man who sold Ireland for personal gain.

5725. Max Macks - 2/3/2005 6:06:13 PM

I tried to explain to someone

and failed . ...that while I did not
like Reagan and Bush #1
my dislike of them was not as intense
as my dislike of the Chimp , his jerk the head when
he thinks he has made a point in some remark
the sound of his voice ..
everything about him.

what I mean is that I could uderstand
those who appoved of Reagan and Bush-one

, but I just cannot
understand how so many Americans
seem to appove of this asshole.

I did not watch TV last night.

5726. thoughtful - 2/3/2005 6:44:22 PM

i had a lot of trouble watching bush 1...he really generated something in me that made watching him unbearable.

with w, i don't get that feeling, though i do watch his smirking and nervousness and false bravado and wonder what other people see in him...i don't get this 'moral' bit that they see...i see more of a bart simpson.

then again, i caught a short bit of kerry on meet the press and found myself glad that he wasn't pres. Of course, then again, if he were, he might bring peace very quickly to the world simply by speaking...everyone would be asleep in 5 min and thus all wars would end.

5727. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/3/2005 7:36:18 PM

Instead. we get . . .

5728. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/3/2005 8:04:01 PM

5729. arkymalarky - 2/3/2005 9:55:34 PM

Message # 5723 and to support their friends in the insurance business.

5730. jexster - 2/4/2005 3:31:45 AM

Big SOTU Hairball - Bush Says Social Security is in a "Huge Crisis" Then Admits His Privatization "Solution" Contributes Nothing Toward Resolving the "Huge Crisis"


LAT:

"In a significant shift in his rationale for the accounts, Bush dropped his claim that they would help solve Social Security's fiscal problems — a link he sometimes made during last year's presidential campaign. Instead, he said the individual accounts were desirable because they would be "a better deal," providing workers what he said would be a higher rate of return and "greater security in retirement."

A Bush aide, briefing reporters on the condition of anonymity, was more explicit, saying that the individual accounts would do nothing to solve the system's long-term financial problems."







That candid analysis, although widely shared by economists, distressed some Republicans.

"Oh, my God," one GOP political strategist said when he learned of the shift in rhetoric. "The White House has made a lot of Republicans walk the plank on this. Now it sounds as if they are sawing off the board."

5731. jexster - 2/4/2005 4:14:35 AM

From the Axis of Evil to IraQ to the feckless war on terror, to National Missile Defense to No Child Left Behind to Tax Cuts to....to Social Security Reform, Bush Admin public policies are spun from the slogans Rove puts on the Idiot's cue cards. Any connection between policy action and policy problem is purely coincidental...

Bizarre.

A very sad state of the Union indeed.

KRUGMAN:


Gambling With Your Retirement
It's not a nest egg. It's a loan!



A few weeks ago I tried to explain the logic of Bush-style Social Security privatization: it is, in effect, as if your financial adviser told you that you wouldn't have enough money when you retire - but you shouldn't save more. Instead, you should borrow a lot of money, buy stocks and hope for capital gains.

Before President Bush's big speech, a background briefing by a "senior administration official" made it clear that the plan calls for exactly the "borrow, speculate and hope" strategy I described - not just for the system as a whole, but for each individual.

Here's the money quote: "In return for the opportunity to get the benefits from the personal account, the person forgoes a certain amount of benefits from the traditional system. Now, the way that election is structured, the person comes out ahead if their personal account exceeds a 3 percent rate of return" - after inflation - "which is the rate of return that the trust fund bonds receive. So, basically, the net effect on an individual's benefits would be zero if his personal account earned a 3 percent rate of return."

Translation: If you put part of your payroll taxes into a personal account, your future benefits will be reduced by an amount equivalent to the amount you would have had to repay if you had borrowed the money at a real interest rate of 3 percent.

Peter Orszag of the Brookings Institution got it exactly right: "It's not a nest egg. It's a loan."

For years, privatizers - including Mr. Bush - have claimed that people would do better with private accounts than with traditional Social Security even if they played it safe and invested in U.S. government bonds (which yield 3 percent after inflation).

But the official at the briefing made it clear that his boss was fibbing: if you invested your private account in government bonds, you would face benefit cuts equal in value to your investment, so you would be no better off than under the current system.

5732. alistairconnor - 2/4/2005 8:09:18 AM

So, explicitly, working Americans are being asked to gamble their retirement on the stock market.

Individual accounts take the "social" out of social security.

The gambling element takes the "security" out.

Er, what's leftN

5733. alistairconnor - 2/4/2005 8:18:10 AM

Many people's retirement prospects took a severe hit a few years back when the stock market took a dip.

So it's logical that people should be enthusiastic about this new scheme.

5734. alistairconnor - 2/4/2005 8:28:52 AM

In any case, there is a fundamental problem with providing secure, predictable retirement income : it fundamentally isn't possible to keep paying some previously-fixed generous rate if the economy takes a lasting downturn. The money's got to come from somewhere.

Private accounts deal with this by automatically diminishing the pay-out in function of the stock market.

In the current set-up, governments have the unpalatable job of cutting entitlements.

5735. thoughtful - 2/4/2005 4:09:03 PM

Everything old is new again. Back to the Vietnam of the 60s? Nope. Back to the blacklisting days of the 50s!! From today's WaPo:

Not everyone was welcome, apparently, at President Bush's speech in North Dakota yesterday.

The Fargo Forum reported that a city commissioner, a liberal radio producer, a deputy Democratic campaign manager and a number of university professors were among more than 40 area residents who were barred from attending the Bush event. Their names were on a list supplied to workers at two ticket distribution sites.

The "Bush blacklist" is "frightening," Tom Athans, chief executive of Democracy Radio, said after learning that a producer for the liberal "Ed Schultz Show" was among those barred. "To blacklist a local citizen because he produces a radio program at odds with the political agenda of the White House is dangerous for democracy."

City Commissioner Linda Coates, whose husband was also on the list, told the newspaper that the list "is very revealing as to what this administration is all about."

The White House said the list may have come from volunteers; it did not come from the White House.

-- Howard Kurtz

5736. thoughtful - 2/4/2005 4:24:20 PM

Uh-oh. Iran, here we come:

In an earlier conversation with reporters on her plane as she began her weeklong trip, Rice said Iran's approach to human rights and its treatment of its own citizens were loathsome.

"I don't think anybody thinks that the unelected mullahs who run that regime are a good thing for the Iranian people and for the region," she said Thursday. On Friday, she referred to Iran's leaders as "an unelected few." ...

After a meeting with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, Rice was asked directly whether the United States might attack Iran. Doing so could presumably head off the threat that Iran could use a nuclear device against Israel or other nations.

"The question is simply not on the agenda at this point," Rice said at a news conference.

Rice said, "We believe particularly in regard to the nuclear issue that while no one ever asks the American president to take all his options, any of his options off the table, that there are plenty of diplomatic means at our disposal to get the Iranians to finally live up to their international obligations."


From today's WaPo.

5737. thoughtful - 2/4/2005 4:39:54 PM

This would seem to be at odds with comments vp cheney made on the imus show. So, is it that she's lying for the admin again? or is it that anyone in that role is out of the white house loop?

5738. wonkers2 - 2/4/2005 7:27:40 PM

The NYTimes may have killed a story that could have influenced the outcome of the election Here.

5739. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 2/4/2005 9:03:02 PM

5740. jexster - 2/5/2005 2:20:40 PM

A topic we discussed here a few months back ..full article in Lies..

Duce? Not To Us

By William S. Lind

[Serious conservatives, men such as Scott McConnell of The American Conservative and economist Paul Craig Roberts, along with such eminent libertarians as Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com and Lew Rockwell, are raising a surprising question: do the war in Iraq and the Bush administration’s desperate attempts to shore up support for that war have a whiff of fascism about them? In the February 14 issue of TAC, McConnell quotes his old history professor at Columbia, Fritz Stern, writing in The New York Times:

Now the word “freedom” has become a newly invoked justification of the occupation of a country that did not attack us, whose people have not greeted our soldiers as liberators…The world knows that all manner of traditional rights associated with freedom are threatened in our own country…the essential element of a democratic society – trust – has been weakened, as secrecy, mendacity and intimidation have become the hallmarks of this administration…Now “freedom” is being emptied of meaning and reduced to a slogan.

To these wise words, Scott McConnell adds his own:

I don’t think there are yet real fascists in the administration, but there is certainly now a constituency for them – hungry to bomb foreigners and smash those Americans who might object. And when there are constituencies, leaders may not be far behind. They could be propelled into power by a populace ever more frustrated that the imperialist war it has supported – generally for the most banal of patriotic reasons – cannot possibly end in victory.

These voices, which should be heard thoughtfully, are pointing to a real danger. Yet I do not think that danger can rightly be labeled “fascism.” Beyond the facts that W. as dictator suggests not so much Hitler or Mussolini as Charlie Chaplin ...

I would suggest that, instead of fascism, the danger now facing America is one of the many ills released from that Pandora’s Box, the French Revolution: abstract nationalism.As Burke pointed out, conservative patriotism is very different from the abstract nationalism of “la Patrie.” It is a concrete attachment to our own places: our own valleys or towns, our farms, hills or plains. It is local, it is real and it rightly sees Wal-mart as a far greater threat than tin-pot dictators in Third World countries.

5741. wonkers2 - 2/5/2005 2:42:32 PM

Air America Liberal Talk Radio with Al Franken et al is worth a listen if you can get it on your AM dial Read about it here

5742. jexster - 2/5/2005 2:46:18 PM

5738...The sad part is that this could have influence the outcome of the election.

How true, how sad that US elections are trials by klieglight more than they are contests of personalities, ideas, policies...

I mean wouldn't it have been nice to have had a full debate on Social Security or even the WOT or War on IraQ for that matter

5743. jexster - 2/5/2005 3:12:12 PM

Exactly the ilk that William Lind had in mind...

Juan Cole:

Jonah Goldberg Embarrasses Himself Once Again

Jonah Goldberg attacked yours truly in a column recently.

I think it is time to be frank about some things. Jonah Goldberg knows absolutely nothing about Iraq. I wonder if he has even ever read a single book on Iraq, much less written one. He knows no Arabic. He has never lived in an Arab country. He can't read Iraqi newspapers or those of Iraq's neighbors. He knows nothing whatsoever about Shiite Islam, the branch of the religion to which a majority of Iraqis adheres. Why should we pretend that Jonah Goldberg's opinion on the significance and nature of the elections in Iraq last Sunday matters? It does not.

Jonah Goldberg was a cheerleader for the unprovoked, unilateral US attack on Iraq. The reason he repeatedly gave was that Iraq was close to having a nuclear weapon.


...

The reason Mr. Goldberg is alarmed that I pointed this obvious fact out is that he wants to kill thousands of Iranians and thousands of US troops in a war of aggression on Iran. If the American public knows that there is a lively struggle between hardliners and conservatives in Iran, and that an American intervention there would be a huge disaster and would forestall the natural evolution of Iran away from Khomeinism, then they might not support Mr. Goldberg's monstrous warmongering.

That is why he attacked me.

....let me propose to him that we debate Middle East issues, anywhere, any time, he and I.

Otherwise he should please shut up and go back to selling Linda Tripp tapes on Ebay...

5744. wonkers2 - 2/5/2005 5:27:23 PM

Cap'n Dirty sez, "Who'd buy a Linda Tripp tape? The Cap'n'd sooner go fer a Paris Hilton tape."

5745. thoughtful - 2/5/2005 6:04:32 PM

Even if w is more like charlie chaplin, which I'm not sure he is, karl rove is all stalin. Good reason to be afraid. He's managed to gut dissenters from the administration. Only thing is so far he hasn't had any 'sanctioned' at least as far as we know. But like most sociopaths...they do tend to escalate as the continue to drink in their own power.

5746. Max Macks - 2/5/2005 10:50:42 PM

I voted for Kerry but my vote was more against
Bush than for Kerry.

I got turned off of Kerry when he said
(or was told to say?) that tho he was against
the Bush invasion of Iraq.
now that we were in a war there, he would continue the war.


Then the media trashed Howard Dean at the Iowa primary before all the Democrats in other states had a chance to vote for him.

It was said Dean could never win the election.
but who knows...
And even if Dean lost but was the Dem candidate
we could have heard some good speeches
and not the droning on and on which is Kerrys style.

5747. arkymalarky - 2/5/2005 10:53:45 PM

Surely the Democratic Party will work to come up with someone better than either of them in '08. But I'm not holding my breath.

5748. Max Macks - 2/5/2005 11:05:51 PM

at least 35 of the Democrat cowards
voted against Gonzales.

Until the Demorats can get some effective
talking head shows like Fox etc.

I dont have much hope for the Democrats


Message # 5741

gosh wonkers . so W. might have been wired
during the debate(s)
I read that message device
he might have had on his back, in the UKGuardian Talk message board, but
never thought it was actually a possibility.

your link and that story should get a wider
circulation.

please keep posting it.

5749. jexster - 2/6/2005 6:21:32 PM

The Thinker(?)
By Michael Kinsley


The strangest aspect of President Bush's new War on Tyranny is the connection he draws between tyranny and terrorism. It's not the connection you would suspect, or the one Bush was making during his first term. When Saddam Hussein was still in charge of Iraq, it was enough to say that bad guys are bad guys. A sadistic dictator is just the type of person who would also harbor terrorists and stockpile weapons of mass destruction.

But now Bush says that terrorists are actually the victims of tyranny. In his inaugural address, this seemed like a bit of transitory, use-once-and-discard highfalutinism. But Bush returned to the theme in his State of the Union address Wednesday.

In the long term the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America. . . . "

5750. robertjayb - 2/7/2005 2:48:27 AM

War president supports the troops...(NYTimes)

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 - President Bush's budget would more than double the co-payment charged to many veterans for prescription drugs and would require some to pay a new fee of $250 a year for the privilege of using government health care, administration officials said Sunday.

The proposals, they said, are in the $2.5 trillion budget that Mr. Bush plans to unveil on Monday. White House officials said the budget advanced his goal of cutting the deficit, which hit a record last year.

5751. thoughtful - 2/7/2005 9:39:41 AM

I don't think he was wired for sound. From all the pics posted on the net about 'bush's bulge' the most likely is that he has heart disease...why he wouldn't get a physical before the election as he was supposed to...and this was an automatic portable defibrillator. There's a pic on the net of what that looks like and it's very similar. There's also a pic which I think I posted here awhile ago that shows the bulge clearly while he's at the ranch driving a pickup...no need for him to be wired there.

Also, there has been a distinct difference in his ability to speak clearly now vs. during the campaign. Don't know if it was the stress of the campaign or drugs he was on but the difference is quite noticeable. Esp. during the first debate, look at how slack jawed one side of his mouth is. Some argue it is a side effect of some drugs.

Also, heart disease would most likely explain that idiot choking on a pretzel incident which never rang true.

5752. thoughtful - 2/7/2005 9:46:55 AM

article in today's NYT about the budget...nothing new, but it helps publicize the problem. 16% of the budget is nondefense discretionary...and that includes homeland security. You can't balance the budget on the back of this small piece of the budget. That would mean cutting in addition to veteran's benes, education and no child left behind, highways, airports, weather service (any of you want to fly in a plane where the pilot has no idea of what the weather is like??) housing programs and more. It means cutting them indiscriminately without any eye toward how effective or efficient they are. Heck it even means cutting the ag benes which this president so expanded in his first term. And even at that, it simply won't fit.

You can't run a 21st century fed budget on a 1950s tax revenue.

5753. jayackroyd - 2/7/2005 11:20:01 AM

But it is clear they are trying to follow the Norquist strategy. Cut taxes, and say that, because of the deficits, they have to cut programs. Since the started with SS, they seem to pretty serious about this. We should expect to see, shortly, that there will be new fees and still higher premiums for Medicare.

5754. Dubai Vol - 2/7/2005 11:47:46 AM

No doubt that's the agenda, cut taxes, create a deficit, then cut spending accordingly. LOTS of the places they are cutting the budget I disagree with, but the main target HAS to be Social Security. I just wish poeple would do the research and the math to understand what a huge budget-busting disaster this program is. And the solution is so simple: means testing.

OK, go ahead, I've got my flame suit on!

5755. wonkers2 - 2/7/2005 12:07:55 PM

Means testing would not be a good solution. It would be divisive and would unnecessarily disrupt many existing private pension arrangements that are integrated with and premised on receipt of Social Security benefits. There are other much less drastic steps that can be taken to shore up Social Security.

5756. jexster - 2/7/2005 2:50:57 PM

Funny how Bush didn't tell us this in his 2003 SOTU.

In August 2003, shortly after the bombing of the UN Hdq in Baghdad, Friedman wrote one of his Tiny Tim Wilsonian numbers about Iraq. I took to the NyT Friedman Forum to say what I thought of Pollyanna's latest and observed that the very best outcome that we could expect of Bush's War on Iraq was a Shiite Islamic state. I am not sure they save posts that far back but if they do, you should see the howls that drew.

"Spinning like a washing machine"

Who's howling now?


The Republicans' Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Iraq

The Republican Party spin machine was bouncing around the airwaves like an overloaded washing machine on Sunday attempting to obscure from the American public that they had by their actions managed to install a Shiite religious ruling class in Iraq. The New York Times even lead with a headline, "U.S. Officials Say a Theocratic Iraq Is Unlikely." This headline is probably wrong, but in any case it begs the question of what a "theocracy" is.

5757. jexster - 2/7/2005 2:54:27 PM

5707

Wonk..

For the very latest in who's bailing on Bush's Social Security phase out scam..Josh Marshall.

He has devoted his entire blog to following SS for a couple of months...I am a bit weary of it but it is a public service, accurate, and up to the minute

5758. jexster - 2/7/2005 3:07:39 PM

Ain't it the truth!


Even as Cheney was pooh-poohing the notion of Iraqi theocracy, Sistani's close colleague Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Ishaq al-Fayyad said, "We warn officials against a separation of the state and religion." Then Sistani's spokesman came out and said that the Grand Ayatollah Sistani "wants the source of legislation to be Islam."

A lot of Americans believe whatever Cheney says, though I cannot for the life of me understand why, since he lies to them relentlessly. Juan Cole

5759. wonkers2 - 2/7/2005 3:15:08 PM

What about American theocracy. If it's good enough for us why not for Iraqis?

Thanks for pointing me to Josh Marshall on SS.

5760. robertjayb - 2/7/2005 3:55:32 PM

Dean by default...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Tim Roemer, the only remaining opponent of Howard Dean in the race to be chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said Monday he's bowing out of the race -- but he offered a warning to Democrats.

Dean, the former presidential candidate and governor of Vermont, is expected to win the DNC chairmanship at the election Feb. 12.

Roemer, a former congressman from Indiana and a member of the Sept. 11 commission, said Democrats must be more inclusive in their outreach to fast-growing parts of the country.

``I got into this race five weeks ago to talk about the devastating loss we experienced in November,'' Roemer said in an interview. ``It was not about 60,000 votes in Ohio. It was about losing 97 of the 100 fastest growing counties in the country. If that's a trend in business or politics you're in trouble.''

5761. jexster - 2/7/2005 4:08:28 PM

David Kay Warns Emperor of Greater Moronia Not to Repeat Iraq Mistakes in Iran

5762. jexster - 2/7/2005 4:13:40 PM

Your grandchildren's tax dollars at work...



The implementation of religious law could have a deleterious effect on Iraqi women. Bush likes to parade Iraqi women at his official events, trying to imply that he has rescued them from Arab male chauvinism. But Bush is likely to have been responsible for the biggest roll-back of women's rights in the Middle East since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

George W. Bush, Father of the Islamic Republic of IraQ

5763. robertjayb - 2/7/2005 4:17:21 PM

George W. Bush explains it all for you...



(via Salon)---The Bush administration concedes that the president's plan for private investment accounts won't do anything to improve the financial health of the Social Security system. The plan will have a "net neutral effect," the administration says, meaning that, whatever Washington does with Bush's proposal, it will have to come up with some other way to "save" Social Security. Does the president understand that? You be the judge.

As his Social Security roadshow pulled into Tampa, Fla., over the weekend, Bush was asked how his plan would ensure that Social Security won't run out of money down the road. Here, straight from the White House Web site, is the president's answer in its entirety:

"Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised.

"Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.

"Okay, better? I'll keep working on it."

-- Tim Grieve

[12:41 EST, Feb. 7, 2005

Whatever Gods there be...have mercy on us.

5764. Max Macks - 2/7/2005 5:15:19 PM

this may not be the thread for this question

but I'll ask it anyway.

If The Bush Gang keeps talking about the possibility
of Iran developing a nuclear weapon and that this
is bad.

Why is nothing said about Israel having not only
the capability of making a nuclear bomb
but has one or maybe many more than one.

This used to be denied but now I hear it mentioned,
so I dont know when this dirty little secret was
allowed to be spoken of in the mainstream media.

5765. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 12:24:06 AM

What a moron Bush is! Also a liar. He promised no changes for people over 55 and then above says "how benefits are calculated, for example is on the table; for example whether benefits rise based on wage increases or price increases."

Basing adjustments on price increases instead of price increases would result over time in a huge negative difference in benefits.

5766. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 12:25:59 AM

When I heard him make the commitment to people over 55 in his State of the Union address I said to myself I bet he doesn't mean it or doesn't understand it. Sure enough I was correct. Either he didn't mean it or he didn't understand what Rove and his speech writers gave him to say.

5767. robertjayb - 2/8/2005 2:22:10 AM

Spearing the beast...(Krugman)

"Social Security is the soft underbelly of the welfare state," declares Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth and the Cato Institute. "If you can jab your spear through that, you can undermine the whole welfare state."

By the welfare state, Mr. Moore means Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - social insurance programs whose purpose, above all, is to protect Americans against the extreme economic insecurity that prevailed before the New Deal. The hard right has never forgiven F.D.R. (and later L.B.J.) for his efforts to reduce that insecurity, and now that the right is running Washington, it's trying to turn the clock back to 1932.

5768. OhioSTOPAS - 2/8/2005 8:43:27 AM

Although we need to keep our guard up, I don't think this profoundly bad and immoral (endangering the lifeline of Social Security beneficiaries in order to further enrich the already wealthy) proposal is going to get off the ground.

However, I already see Republicans and conservatives starting to maneuver to spin the upcoming defeat of Bush's scam. First, Republicans will repeat the phony promises of Social Security privatization to young workers forever ("Your Social Security taxes COULD be earning big returns in a private, uh, personal account, but back in 2005 the evil Democrats prevented it.") Second, Republicans will point to statements that the upcoming Social Security shortfall (be it 2042 or 2052) can be handled by, among other options, a lifting of the Social Security taxation "cap" or other increase in taxes, and accuse Democrats of planning to raise taxes. (I heard two right-wing radio hosts employ this tactic yesterday. I guess a memo went out.)

If the lies by Bush and others about Social Security and privatization thereof aren't refuted, the Repubs could still win politically even if there are no changes to Social Security. In a debate, the side willing to lie has an advantage.

5769. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 10:01:21 AM

The Beauty and the Beast Here

5770. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 10:34:51 AM

DV, "I just wish poeple would do the research and the math to understand what a huge budget-busting disaster this program is. "

If you'd done the math, you'd realize that soc sec is far from a budget-busting disaster. Medicare/medicaid are the budget-busting disasters, but rather than deal with the real beast, this admin was happy to not only divert attention away from it to soc sec, but it was willing to add a program the size of soc sec to the system by way of the medicare rx plan. Talk about a budget busting disaster!

5771. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 11:03:03 AM

Right on, thoughtful! Put DV in the corner with a dunce cap!

5772. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 11:33:24 AM

I just read krugman's piece and disagree with him. It's not clear to me that medicare will be in this admin's sights at all...I mean why would they have just passed the medicare rx plan if it were. Rather look at who is impacted by their legislative changes.

Tort reform = trial lawyers = big dem contributors
Rx Medicare = drug cos = big gop contributors
Soc Sec privatization = wall st = big gob contributors

I wonder when they're going to take the big head-on approach against labor unions...

5773. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 12:04:23 PM

What is interesting as more details are coming out about the bush budget is not just the 150 programs reduced or eliminated, but the ones that will be getting increased funding including (from today's wapo)

"Youth programs advocating sexual abstinence would increase by $39 million, to $206 million, while $161 million would be set aside for grants to faith-based organizations to "mentor children of prisoners and provide a safe place for young pregnant and parenting mothers." In another sign of the times, financing for the apprehension of Army deserters would double. "

5774. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 12:38:42 PM

The GOP majority on the NLRB has made some recent rulings that make it harder for unions to organize.

5775. jayackroyd - 2/8/2005 1:21:24 PM

The problem is not medicare per se. It's health costs in general, especially as we continue to develop more and more expensive technologies and drugs that are effective. That's a pretty intractable problem, compounded by how we pay for our medical care.

5776. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 1:25:53 PM

That's true along with too much cost being bled of by insurance company leeches.

5777. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 1:52:30 PM

i liken medicare to an insurance policy that only insures teenage boys. It includes only the most likely to use it so the costs are driven proportionately higher. A more sensible, more inclusive health insurance policy would make more sense. And as cruel as it sounds, a cost/benefit approach...one I think oregon was trying...also makes more sense, so that we don't have babies being born with spina bifida for want of $5 worth of b vitamins while we have extraordinarily expensive procedures going on to extend the life of an elderly terminal patient for another day or two on the govt tab. (Of course, if you want to pay to keep your own gran alive for another day, that's up to you.)

5778. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 2:06:12 PM

erratum: bled off

5779. PelleNilsson - 2/8/2005 2:18:34 PM

Health care suffers from two inherent problems: (a) demand will always exceed supply, and (b) most people cannot afford to pay the actual costs. So which demand to satisfy? And how to transfer funds to those who cannot pay? I don't think any country has come up with a satisfactory formula.

5780. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 4:18:46 PM

maybe not a satisfactory formula, but there's so much room for improvement in the american system that it's hard to believe we can't do better.

Cost/benefit is harsh, but it is one way of limiting costs. Getting a single govt administered program would also be much cheaper over the current system. And improving coverage for insurance is really key. Makes no sense that there are so many people uncovered. Right now a bunch of US firms are getting together to figure out a way to extend group coverage or discounts to part time and contract workers because so many of them have no coverage at all. It's a step in the right direction, but hardly satisfactory.

5781. PelleNilsson - 2/8/2005 5:40:53 PM

I don't think cost/benefit is workable. How do you define objective criteria for benefit? There seems to be no way of doing that without reducing humans to production units whose anticipated future contributions to GDP would determine the level of care they get. Pensioneers, of course, would be allowed to die off with the additional benefit of simultaneously reducing the strain on the social security system.

5782. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 6:05:46 PM

No doubt it is a difficult choice, but every insurance policy chooses what it will and won't cover. The choice could be made based on likely improvement in one's health vs. the cost of the procedure. The idea would be to minimize these very expensive procedures that yield a low probability of health improvement.

Not that one would eliminate them, only that something that isn't likely to work should be done on the patient's tab, not the taxpayers.

5783. wonkers2 - 2/8/2005 6:56:50 PM

The U.S. health care system is the costliest,unfairest and least effective of the industrialized countries as measured by infant mortality, life expectancy and other measures.

5784. Max Macks - 2/8/2005 10:51:46 PM

when will the dummies realize
that W. Bush is not merely a lier
but one of the most dangerous men ever to
be POTUS???

5785. thoughtful - 2/8/2005 11:59:49 PM

given how the admin continues to keep him out of the white house and on the road...now selling soc sec...it would seem he's not really president at all.

Where do I go to now Dick???

5786. robertjayb - 2/9/2005 3:12:05 AM

$720 Billion...Dassa lotta money...(NYTimes)

WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 - The Bush administration offered a new estimate of the cost of the Medicare drug benefit on Tuesday, saying it would cost $720 billion in the next 10 years.

That is much more than the $400 billion Congress assumed when it passed legislation creating the benefit in late 2003.

But administration officials said the numbers were not comparable. The original estimate was for the years 2004 to 2013. The new estimate covers the period from 2006, when the drug benefit becomes available, to 2015.

The higher figure, which provides the first glimpse of the true cost of the drug benefit, could touch off a political uproar in Congress, where conservative Republicans were already expressing alarm about the costs of Medicare, including the drug benefit.

5787. robertjayb - 2/10/2005 4:34:39 PM

Further closing the courthouse door...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate was poised on Thursday to pass a bill curbing class action lawsuits after blocking attempts to weaken the measure.

The bill, sought by business and part of President Bush's drive to overhaul the legal system, would shift most class action lawsuits from state to federal courts, which have historically been less friendly to such cases.

Opponents, including many consumer and environmental groups and labor unions, fear that already overburdened federal courts won't take many of the cases, making it harder for ordinary citizens to hold big companies to account.

Redress of grievances?

Fuggedaboudit!!

5788. thoughtful - 2/10/2005 4:44:41 PM

It's simply a matter of not who votes as in the old days, but who contributes to the gop...key contributors like big business are favored.

5789. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 10:08:57 AM

One loser in Howard Dean's election to Party Chairman is Hillary Clinton who reportedly was supporting long-time Dem insider Harold Ickes. And when Ickes faded, according to Marrianne Means's column this morning, she tried to persuade Terry McCauliffe to stay on. Dean may well not prove to be a Clinton ally if she decides to run in 2008.

5790. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 10:10:22 AM

Dean may play a more neutral role. At least the Clintons will no longer have "their man" in charge of the DNC.

5791. Magoseph - 2/11/2005 10:35:31 AM

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released this week found that 50 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's approach to Social Security, while 44 percent approve.

5792. Magoseph - 2/11/2005 10:54:51 AM

I see that mortgage rates fell to ten-month low yesterday and ten-year notes are stagnant at around 4%. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve continues to predict that rates are going up and the chatter from the financial columns talks about shortages about everything from oil to steel and almost every other commodity. Can anyone tell me what I am missing? Why are these rates not moving up? I don’t get it!

5793. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 11:30:20 AM

Games Politicians Play: More tax cuts as U.S. faces large deficits Here.

5794. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 11:32:44 AM

Proof that Bush lied in his state of the union address when he promised that people over 55 would not be affected. Here.

5795. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 11:36:58 AM

Actually the NYT article underestimates the effect of changing from wage indexing to price indexing. It is correct that the difference AT RETIREMENT would be small for someone now age 55. However, the difference would grow after retirement to a much more significant amount depending on how long the individual lived.

5796. thoughtful - 2/11/2005 11:37:26 AM

Mags, the only thing they're saying that makes any sense is that there is so much liquidity out there that businesses aren't borrowing much and the chinese are maintaining their currency peg so are sopping up all the debt the US is floating, thus keeping long rates low. Others argue that inflation expectations are also low given international competition and strong productivity growth in the US...so there you go.

Of course, it doesn't make sense to me either...I'm a strong believer in:
a) the fed will keep raising rates at every FOMC meeting at least until they hit 3 1/2 % or so
b) the term structure of interest rates

5797. wonkers2 - 2/11/2005 12:03:52 PM

The birth of another George Bush lie to the American people:

"If you change to a system of price indexing, you save a tremendous amount of money," [w2 How? By REDUCING BENEFITS which would be paid under the current system.]said Kent Smegma, an economist who was on the staff of the president's panel in 2001. So much would be saved, he said that there would even be a modest sum left over after making the system financially sound....

"Mr. Smetters also pointed out that that although price indexing WOULD PRODUCE QUITE LARGE CUTS, it would make them in a way that might be more acceptable [A little vaseline applied to the shaft!] to people, AT LEAST IN THE BEGINNING. 'It does not cut benefits IN THE WAY MOST PEOPLE THINK OF CUTTING BENEFITS," Mr. Smetters said. 'It would cut benefits based on what the law promises today.'"

5798. Magoseph - 2/11/2005 1:54:32 PM

Thanks, thoughtful, everything you say makes sense and I appreciate your input.

5799. Max Macks - 2/11/2005 6:17:30 PM

I was almost amused by N.Korea

rattling the sabes of nuclear bombs within days
of C.Rice's stupid statement about
possibly invading Iran

I suppose I should no longer be surprised
at the stupidity of Americans who can't see
thru the lies of the Bush Gang .

As some clever person posted in
the Guardian Talk

No nukes but oil = Invade.
Nukes but no oil= Don't invade.

5800. OhioSTOPAS - 2/12/2005 9:32:20 AM

Max, if you would listen to right-wing radio (as every good American should do) you'd know that North Korea building nukes in 2005 is all Bill Clinton's fault. And Hillary's too.

5801. OhioSTOPAS - 2/12/2005 9:40:13 AM

Nick Kristof sets the bozos straight:

Since many readers are saying that the North Korea mess is actually Clinton’s fault, not Bush’s (or, in truth, Kim Jong Il’s), let me explain why that’s nonsense.

These readers are confusing the two kinds of nuclear programs in North Korea, one involving plutonium and another involving uranium.

In the early 1990’s, North Korea aggressively pursued its plutonium-based effort to develop nuclear weapons. During the administration of the first President Bush, North Korea apparently extracted enough plutonium for one or (more likely) two nuclear weapons. Then in 1994, Clinton was preparing for military action, including a quarantine and a strike at the North Korean nuclear sites in Yongbyon, when Jimmy Carter achieved a peace deal that emerged as the Agreed Framework. In essence, North Korea froze its plutonium program in exchange for oil and two light-water reactors.

This didn’t work terribly well, and North Korea cheated on the side by starting a separate track to develop uranium-based nuclear weapons. They probably started that at the end of the Clinton presidency, but it’s possible it began at the beginning of the Bush presidency. That was a violation of the Agreed Framework and would have been a problem for any president, but it was also minor compared to the plutonium program. It would have taken many years for the uranium program to develop nuclear weapons, and even then it would have produced only small numbers.

Unfortunately, in the effort to stop this uranium program, Bush pushed the North Koreans out of the entire Agreed Framework. The upshot is that they not only continued with their uranium program, but also revived their plutonium program. Since then, they’ve produced another half-dozen nuclear weapons (the administration believes), and thus gone from two to eight. The bottom line is that under the first President Bush, North Korea produced one or two nuclear weapons, under Clinton it didn’t produce any, and under the second President Bush it’s produced another half-dozen.

Republicans mostly hate the Agreed Framework, and it’s true it wasn’t very palatable. Under it, we gave oil to one of the nastiest countries of the world. On the other hand, without the Agreed Framework, North Korea would have well over 100 nuclear weapons by now. So if we can get back to a nuclear freeze in North Korea, that’s an awful lot better than the Bush course of acquiescing as North Korea becomes a nuclear E-bay.

5802. thoughtful - 2/12/2005 11:54:44 AM

Heck, aren't they still blaming the great flood on Clinton?

And check out Frank Rich in the NY Times...apparently they are going after that republican mayor of carmel, clint eastwood, for being too leftie in his latest movie. When they run out of the dems to trash, they turn on themselves. Cannibals!

5803. wonkers2 - 2/12/2005 12:01:01 PM

Bush Labor Department in WalMart's pocket Here.

5804. jexster - 2/12/2005 3:47:27 PM

Boy that's a shock! To think, the Bush admin in the pocket of a big corporation...i nearly fainted

5805. jexster - 2/12/2005 3:50:24 PM

As fine an analysis as I have seen of the politics and stakes involved with the SS privitization issue, Josh Marshall here

5806. wonkers2 - 2/12/2005 7:59:42 PM

Bush and his Social Security privatizers fail to understand or respect is the history that gave birth to Social Security. In a relatively brief period the United States evolved from a mainly rural, agrarian and small business country where people lived independently on farms and in small towns, to an urban industrial society where workers in Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago, Pittsburgh and other industrial centers were dependent for their livelihood on the state of the economy, the viability of their industry and their employer, the good will of their boss, and their own good health.

Detroit's population increased from 285,000 in 1900 to 1.6 million in 1935 as workers flocked from farms in the South and throughout the Midwest to work for big wages on Henry Ford's assembly lines. The wages were high, but the workers, far from their farms and from their relatives, became subject to new kinds of insecurities. For example, after attracting thousands of workers to Dearborn, Henry Ford shut down the Rouge plant in 1935? in order to re-tool for production of the Model A, dumping 100,000 workers onto the relief rolls of Dearborn and Detroit. They got no severance pay or unemployment compensation to sustain them, far from their farm roots where they could at least have grown some of their own food.

New Deal measures such as the National Labor Relations Act, Social Security, unemployment and workers compensation, and the like were passed in order to provide security to workers subject to layoffs, being arbitrarily fired by their bosses, to injury on the job, illness and loss of income when, as Walter Reuther put it, "they were too old to work and too young to die." Occupational health and safety and anti-discrimination laws came later. As was Social Security, these laws were opposed, in the main, by Republicans, at least those of the stripe of the current Bush supporters.

A remarkable edifice was constructed by Ford and other captains of industry, with the help of union leaders such as Walter Reuther, which included paid holidays and vacations, health care benefits, and pensions, due process in the workplace and among the highest paid jobs in the country. These measures provided answere to universal questions such as

What happens if I'm injured on the job or get sick and can't work?

What happens if I'm laid off because my employer goes out of business?

What happens when I'm too old to work?

What protection do I have against being arbitrarily fired by my boss?

Now, thanks to global competition this industrial edifice has begun to crumble. Detroit's population has fallen from 1.6 million in 1935 to 899,000 today, the lowest since 1917. The car companies' defined benefit pension funds are under-funded, as is the federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, and health care benefits promised to retirees are not funded at all but paid out of pocket only so long as the companies are able.

In the auto industry retirement security came to be viewed as based on a three-legged stool--(1)Social Security, (2)a generous defined benefit pension and (3)employee personal savings. Now, when defined benefit pensions are disappearingand those remaining are in jeopardy, and personal savings are not what they should be, this is hardly the time to weaken the most basic leg of the retirement security stool by subjecting Social Security benefits to the vicissitudes of private securities markets.

There's nothing wrong with private savings IN ADDITION to Social Security and employer pensions. Increasing the savings rate would be desirable, but nothing in Bush's privatization plan would do that. Greater participation in 401k plans and IRAs by low and middle income workers should be encouraged by steps such as immediate eligibility and automatic enrollment in 401ks and providing greater tax incentives or credits to encourage low wage earners to participate. George

Bush's program to "reform" social security comes from longstanding haters of FDR and the New Deal such as the ideologues in the CATO Institute and from political schemers like Karl Rove and his ilk who think they can enhance the appeal of the GOP to young voters.

5807. wonkers2 - 2/12/2005 8:20:39 PM

Please excuse the typos.

5808. robertjayb - 2/12/2005 8:31:32 PM

Standing O, wonkers2!

5809. judithathome - 2/12/2005 8:46:12 PM

Ditto...superb post.

5810. wonkers2 - 2/12/2005 8:54:25 PM

Another factor that Bush never heard of or chooses to ignore is the contribution of FDR and his New Deal to the preservation of free enterprise in the United States. Unemployment in the U.S. was 30 percent when FDR was inaugurated, and many union leaders and others were socialists and communists who looked to Russia or European socialism as a model for the United States. Bush no doubt cut or selpt through his American history or western civ course at Yale.

5811. jexster - 2/12/2005 8:59:09 PM

Joining in the chorus...great post Wonk!

5812. jexster - 2/12/2005 9:02:03 PM

Congressional Budget Offic: Bush's Social Security Plan is a Weapon of Mass Deception
It ain't wurf shit, watchdog declares

5813. arkymalarky - 2/12/2005 10:04:30 PM

I agree--you really captured the big picture, Wonk.

5814. Magoseph - 2/13/2005 8:14:40 AM

Bush shows his true colors in his most recent remarks on Social Security reform. He's willing to listen to any ideas, except a rise in payroll taxes. What he really means is that he'll not accept an increase in the cap, never mind that 67% of the wealthy are in favor of same and 87% of the rest of the population. This man is totally out of touch with the country and he is rapidly moving toward irrelevance and lame-duck status with respect to the Congress.

5815. uzmakk - 2/13/2005 10:27:16 AM

I have "stolen" Wonker's post, given him credit for it, and posted it elsewhere. Many people at the site where I am currently posting know that The Mote is my "spiritual home". I think its time to remind them again.

Suck my ass, Jex.

5816. Magoseph - 2/13/2005 11:40:54 AM

uzmakk, where is that site, if I may ask?

5817. uzmakk - 2/13/2005 12:15:38 PM

Mago:
I don't want to tell you, at least not yet. Simply put, I am ashamed. I suppose with the info I have given you you could find out for yourself if you were really interested. I post on a message board associated with a talk-radio station. The morning show is hosted by a guy and a gal who try to get an open-minded view of things on the air. This does not change the fact that the male half of the duo is an asshole extraordinaire. The rest of the programming is right wing ((scholck) if my motive were to endear myself to Moties).

Some of you may recall that I am involved in a political/court battle. I have both the radio mike and their message board at my disposal. Problems are the same as the Mote has trying to attract new membership. Lots of listeners, lots of lurkers, few people willing to step forward -- the message board indicates how many people are viewing it at any one time. Btw, I talk about the court battle very infrequently. Arky, we have been extremely successful thus far, but as I said on my board, I have purchased a quantity of coffin nails and intend to start using them soon.
Most recently posting has dwindled to a rather lengthy and expansive argument between me and a woman who stands head and shoulders above the rest of the crowd. Our subject has been a court case involving porn depicting the murder, rape and torture of women.

I have also arranged a number of Forum Fandangos which I have found to be very enjoyable.


I'll be back. It IS Sunday and there are things to do.

5818. wonkers2 - 2/13/2005 12:41:45 PM

Thanks Uzmakk, et al. I'm flattered. I wish I could edit the post. I've cleaned it up and strengthened it.

5819. jexster - 2/13/2005 1:36:41 PM

Newsom Calls for Support of Gay Marriage

5820. robertjayb - 2/13/2005 1:45:25 PM

A comment from the blog American Street:

When evaluating what the Bushies do, it is always very important to look for who gets the money. The Iraq invasion makes sense only as a means of transferring a ton of money to Bush supporting corporations. And, the supposed Social Security crisis makes sense only as a means of transferring another ton of money to Wall Street brokers and big stock holders. Bush does very little that is not explainable as a wealth transfer mechanism. I find it astounding that our supposedly free press is unwilling to report this simple fact. Hopkins — February 13, 2005 @ 8:03 am

5821. arkymalarky - 2/13/2005 2:01:26 PM

Congrats on the successes, Uz, and I hope they continue! It's worth it, but it does suck up huge amounts of time. We're doing well, and the legislative session has so far yielded no surprises or major disappointments. Education appears to have become the "third rail" here, at least for the moment, which is good for now--they've done enough in the last two years to last a while.

We're about to move into long-term planning and organization, and that promises to be quite a job, but not nearly so stressful because of the lack of deadline pressures we've been working under, and with summer coming up I won't be working two jobs at once. Our last deadline comes in early March.

Keep us posted--in all senses of the word!

5822. wonkers2 - 2/13/2005 2:45:07 PM

Arky, our Democrat governor, Jennifer Granholm, is now talking about the need to consolidate small school districts due to intense budget problems.

5823. OhioSTOPAS - 2/13/2005 3:21:39 PM

robertjayb (Message # 5820):

You said it. True, it may be somewhat obvious and trite to describe every Republican initiative as a pretext to further enrich the already-rich. But until this hypothesis doesn't explain EVERY Republican policy position, I'm sticking with it.

5824. PelleNilsson - 2/13/2005 3:55:52 PM

The Iraq invasion makes sense only as a means of transferring a ton of money to Bush supporting corporations.

That, I feel, is a far too reductionist point of view.

5825. arkymalarky - 2/13/2005 4:15:34 PM

Wonk, she could really win some red-state minds by not going there. It's not a good solution and it doesn't save money. I promise you, it will cost the state more if they go that route.

I keep saying this, but whenever I get done with that paper I'll send it to you. It should be in a week or so. It's being formatted right now and I've got to add the notes and appendices.

5826. jexster - 2/13/2005 9:01:41 PM

Don't give up the fight. Don't feel discouraged. Don't listen to the president of the United States. Gavin Newsom

5827. robertjayb - 2/14/2005 2:23:03 PM

Ho Hum. Another missile fizzle for the military-industrial-political cesspool.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- 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.

5828. Max Macks - 2/14/2005 9:15:46 PM

Just glanced at the Google news headlines.
and about General Motors debt.

Who was it said years ago, Whats good for General Motors
is good for American?
My reason for asking
is that in the story it said that GM debt made the company
one notch above junk bond status !!

W, Bush is making the US one notch about junk bond
status.

It is bad enough to see what Bush has done and is
doing to this country but it bothes me that
the main stream media are not writing more about it.

5829. wonkers2 - 2/14/2005 9:56:14 PM

According to Ed Schultz on Air America Progressive radio the mainstream TV media amused itself by playing Howard Dean's screaming concession speech over and over, at least CNBC and Fox.

5830. wonkers2 - 2/14/2005 9:57:44 PM

Fortunately, it doesn't matter much since he's not running for public office, but will be working behind the scenes, mostly. He will energize and enlarge the Dem base quite effectively, in my opinion.

5831. jexster - 2/14/2005 11:27:39 PM

The Era of Big Government Being Over is Over
Bush's Spending Twice Clinton's

5832. jexster - 2/15/2005 2:22:38 PM

The Fighting Moderates

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right

Here I am

5833. jexster - 2/15/2005 8:44:03 PM

Can the Bush Shit get any deeper?

Just today...

the ChiTrib reports that the $82 Billion supplemental that Bush doesn't even register as an expenditure in his budget is larded with pork for the military in an attempted end run around Congressional oversight and WaPo reports that Bush's big deficit reduction is a total crock - deficits balloon the day the lying fuck leaves office (oh Happy Day!)

The Big Election in IraQ AT BEST will result in an Islamic State friendly to Iran...Bush's balls are in the hands of Grand Ayatollah Sistani..

The CBO reports that Bush's big SS privatization scam does absolutely nothing to ease the "crisis" in social security

and my favorite Bush stabs "faith-based" gullibles in the back (via KOS recap of WaPo) Bush stabs "faith-based" gullibles in the back

There is no War on Tyranny..there were no WMD...There are only lies and more lies from George Bush...

Do not listen to the President of the US Mayor Gavin Newsom

5834. iiibbb - 2/16/2005 6:29:16 PM

Democrats have no f-ing clue about the things they say... do they?

During a meeting Friday with the Democratic black caucus, Dean praised black Democrats for their work for the party, then questioned Republicans' ability to rally support from minorities.

"You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room?," Dean asked to laughter. "Only if they had the hotel staff in here."

5835. iiibbb - 2/16/2005 6:29:55 PM

What's wrong with Dean's statement... can any of the Dem's in here figure it out?

5836. wonkers2 - 2/16/2005 8:12:51 PM

I'll bite. What's wrong with Dean's statement? It works for me.

5837. thoughtful - 2/17/2005 2:58:55 PM

Greenspan spoke yesterday and came out in strong support of private accounts...only because they were more likely to be fully funded than the current system. But he also noted that the shift to private accounts alone does nothing to put the system on a sounder basis. That can only be accomplished with tax increases or benefits cuts.

Hmmm. At least there is one republican still willing to balk at the party line, however mildly. Helps to be beyond retirement age, independently wealthy and married to a working wife.

5838. jexster - 2/17/2005 3:45:23 PM

Bush Propaganda Machine Takes In-bed Reporting to New Lows

Jeff Gannon, Ace Reporter

5839. wonkers2 - 2/17/2005 5:31:38 PM

Maureen Dowd skewers Bush's fake journalist, Jeff Gannon Here.

5840. thoughtful - 2/17/2005 6:20:12 PM

Where's the outrage?
I remember when the newscasters were all exclaiming that over bill clinton's getting his knob polished.

Where's the outrage now?
Bush lying about his budgets, lying about war.
Bush trying to decimate social security, chopping budgets for veterans, housing, the working poor while preserving his tax cuts for the wealthy?
Presiding over the torture and murder of prisoners?
Running roughshod over the constitution...see for example No Defense:

Just after 9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft gave himself the power to bypass the lawyer-client privilege, which every court in the United States has upheld, and eavesdrop on conversations between prisoners and their lawyers if he had reason to believe they were being used to "further facilitate acts of violence or terrorism." The regulation became effective immediately.

In the good old days, only Congress could write federal criminal laws. After 9/11, however, the attorney general was allowed to do so. Where in the Constitution does it allow that?


Running propaganda machines, increasing secrecy around pentagon/cia activities, losing money right and left into the black hole of halliburton et. al.

Where's the outrage????

What was it krugman called it in one of his op-ed pieces...IOKYAR....It's OK, you're a republican...to highlight the hypocrisy. That outrage over how much time clinton spent campaigning while he was president was appropriate, but bush's far exceeding that? IOKYAR. Outrage over 'selling' the lincoln bedrom, but the bushes doing the same thing...they're just gregarious people with a lot of friends. IOKYAR.

Where's the outrage???

5841. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 11:05:19 AM

Greenspan a partisan hack, still trying to please "Mommy Ayn" Here.

5842. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 11:09:24 AM

Wimp Senate Democrats

"One last point: a disturbing thing about Wednesday's hearing was the deference with which Democratic senators treated Mr.Greenspan. They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice. After the hearing, rather than challenging Mr. Greenspan's testimony, they tried to spin it in their favor."

5843. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 11:31:31 AM

Quote of the day: "I don't think grandmothers should be eating dog food so a couple hundred guys on Wall Street can be driving Mercedeses." (Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com quoted by Floyd Norris in his column in today's NYT.)

5844. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 11:31:33 AM

I misspoke...it's iokiyar....it's ok if you're a republican.

I agree with krugman that the headlines clearly picked up on greenspan's support of private accounts. He said they were more likely to be fully funded...but how in a post-enron, post dot.com crash he can suggest that is beyond me. Especially since soc sec is already fully funded, backed by the full faith and credit of the us govt.

Be that as it may, he made an even more convoluted argument that forced savings through private accounts was an important step toward alleviating the problem of bifurcating income. He was making the claim that with that forced saving and the potential for subsequent generations to then inherit that wealth that it would go a long way toward boosting incomes and assets for lower income groups. There are lots of things we can do about the bifurcation of income, and I certainly would never pick this scheme as the place to start.

First of all, while details of the plan are rare, the early incarnations I've heard are that, in order to keep the plan going, unused assets in the 'personal' accounts would be turned back into the system. Secondly, current plan gives benefits to people who have never worked or who have worked a little or have worked but not made much money well in excess of any amount they'd be able to accumulate in a private account. So their access to income and potential wealth accumulation is a lot greater than it would be through some forced savings plan. Especially since this forced savings plan requires you to turn back any income gains on the assets you invested equal to the amount of benefits you would have rec'd had you not done the private account. In other words, this is really just a loan...leave it with the govt and earn 3%...take it in private account, hope to earn over 3% and get your benefits reduced by that 3%, so you can only keep the excess over what you would've gotten if you stayed fully with the system. And you bear the risk.

And of course, all of this ignores the fact that private retirement accounts are already readily available through iras and 401ks and other investment vehicles.

5845. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 12:32:28 PM

How much does Social Security actually yield? Suppose you are a skilled worker earning $X retiring tomorrow. What percentage of X will you receive?

5846. concerned - 2/18/2005 12:40:36 PM

Off the top of my head, for workers below the top decile or so, I'm thinking maybe 35-50% after taxes, depending on the employment history and whether the worker takes early retirement at 62 which reduces the periodic amount.

5847. concerned - 2/18/2005 12:44:27 PM

For me, it'll be a while yet, but I'm hoping to substantially supplement SS payouts (assuming I don't move into an apartment before then) with a reverse mortgage, as well as with private retirement savings.

5848. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 12:45:24 PM

Not a simple question. Social Security benefit calculator Here.

5849. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 12:49:02 PM

You know, this kind of question is really ticking me off. The administration has been successful in recasting this issue so that people ask things like this.

SS is not an investment program. It's an insurance program ( and a welfare program--there is significant redistributional component). Its "yield" depends on how long you live. If you don't make it to retirement age you get nothing. If you live to be 90, you get more than you put in. One reason this privatization thing makes so little sense is that in a privatized system the cost of a dollar of retirement benefit is much higher than in an insurance environment, because the heirs of the people who die early keep the money. And if you live a long time, you run the risk of exhausting your savings.

In an insurance program, the people who die early fund the retirement of people who live long. In an investment program, everyone is on his or her own. There is, to my mind, a very strong argument for a very broadly based social insurance program. One could make a similar argument for a broadly based medical insurance program, but there are complications in that realm related to the essentially unlimited amount of care that can be provided over a person's lifetime.

5850. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 12:49:30 PM

that was a response to 5845.

5851. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 12:54:24 PM

And of course, all of this ignores the fact that private retirement accounts are already readily available through iras and 401ks and other investment vehicles.

It seems to me that they could get the savings boost they seek by raising the cap on IRAs by 1000 dollars, and requiring employers to permit people to use payroll deductions to contribute to them.

This is not about savings--they're willing to run massive deficits to fund this thing. I am actually not sure what it's really about. It would generate a boatload of revenue for the investment business, but I've never thought of Bush as caring that much about those people.

5852. concerned - 2/18/2005 12:59:05 PM

I think part of it is to make the Federal Government more transparently accountable for its budgeting, plus there may be an expectation that private investors will benefit themselves and the economy more than by disbursing all SS benefits from the existing 'slush fund'.

5853. Wombat - 2/18/2005 1:00:57 PM

Could it be that Bush is one of those Republicans who is ideologically opposed to Social Security?

There are many aspects of his policies that can be interpreted as wishing to return to the era of Republican strength in the late 19th Century.

5854. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 1:02:25 PM

Well, it is about feeding money to key bushie contributors, just like the tort reform is all about depriving trial lawyers, key dem contributors, of income.

But it's also, as evidenced by this white house memo, ideological at its root:

I don't need to tell you that this will be one of the most important conservative undertakings of modern times. If we succeed in reforming Social Security, it will rank as one of the most significant conservative governing achievements ever. The scope and scale of this endeavor are hard to overestimate....

For the first time in six decades, the Social Security battle is one we can win -- and in doing so, we can help transform the political and philosophical landscape of the country. We have it within our grasp to move away from dependency on government and toward giving greater power and responsibility to individuals.

5855. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:05:55 PM

Poor li'l trial shysters. My heart bleeds for them.

5856. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:06:59 PM

Poor li'l trial shysters. My heart bleeds for them.

5857. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:06:59 PM

Poor li'l trial shysters. My heart bleeds for them.

5858. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:07:33 PM

Sorry - looks like my ISP hiccuped.

5859. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:07:34 PM

Sorry - looks like my ISP hiccuped.

5860. concerned - 2/18/2005 1:09:31 PM

Is there an echo here?

5861. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 1:47:29 PM

pelle, jay is right that it is an insurance program so it's not about yield...it's about having a guaranteed riskless pension upon reaching a certain age.

But besides that, the 'yield' if you will is a function of when you joined the system because it was never a funded account. Rather when it began the taxes paid in were immediately paid out to recipients...a pay as you go. So my grandparents paid in very little but collected throughout their dotage. My parents paid in more, but still relatively little and rec'd all that they paid in probably within the first few years of retirement. At some point, people in general will pay in more than they will expect to receive, but i'm not sure when that will be. Us baby boomers have been paying in a lot to build up the current surplus in the system...an attempt to see us through our retirement, only the surplus hasn't grow large enough to do that...it's short by about $3 trillion, give or take.

A lot of this problem is due to the baby boom bulge. The large increase in population post WWII means that, come 2025 or so, there will be more people joining the ranks of the retired than joining the work force. More retirees, fewer workers, pay as you go, means the burden will grow on those workers. Part of the problem is the system is funded only with payroll taxes so the burden rests squarely on the employed. Part of the problem is the taxable income is capped so it is a regressive tax.

Actually there are a LOT of problems with the system and it should be fixed. Only thing is the admin proposals fix nothing.

5862. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 2:05:59 PM

I'm sorry I ticked you off, jay. But as you may recall I'm a Swede. There is no reason why I should know the details of the American SS except that it looks likely to become a big issue here so I would like to understand how it works now and what is being proposed.

5863. judithathome - 2/18/2005 2:06:07 PM

One reason this privatization thing makes so little sense is that in a privatized system the cost of a dollar of retirement benefit is much higher than in an insurance environment, because the heirs of the people who die early keep the money

I read somewhere that if you die early, the heirs don't get to keep the money in the privatized accounts. It reverts to the government. Sorry but I can't remember where I read it....

5864. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 2:10:08 PM

Could it be that Bush is one of those Republicans who is ideologically opposed to Social Security?


Yeah, that's the only theory I've come up with. But why? I can see why, in advance, it looked like communism. But it's worked out really well. I just don't get it. None of the ideas he's floated make any sense at all.

5865. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 2:12:02 PM

I'm sorry I ticked you off, jay. But as you may recall I'm a Swede.

You'll note that I said it is the question that ticked me off. You're by no means alone in asking that question in that way. The administration has managed to get people to think about SS as an investment vehicle. It isn't.

5866. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 2:13:12 PM

I read somewhere that if you die early, the heirs don't get to keep the money in the privatized accounts. It reverts to the government.

Well, since there's no proposal on the table, that could be true. But if that is so, then what makes the accounts private?

5867. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 2:32:04 PM

Thanks for the link, wonkers. Using the simpified calculator it seems to me that a middle-class person can expect 30-40% of the working salary. If that is so, people would either need complementary schemes or else change their lifestyle rather drastically on retirement. Am I right?

5868. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 2:34:52 PM

Bush's motives--take your pick:

1) Please the libertarian idealogues at Cato?

2) Please the fat cats of Wall Street?

3) Please FDR/New Deal haters?

4) Enhance GOP appeal to young voters with false promises?

5) All the above?

5869. wonkers2 - 2/18/2005 2:37:51 PM

Jay is correct. Social Security is a social insurance program, not an investment program. To provide comparable benefits to widows, orphans, disabled, heirs, et al, through a savings and investment program would be much more expensive than SS.

5870. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 3:03:06 PM

What do you mean by not an investment program? The surplus funds don't get invested? They just sit there?

5871. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 3:23:39 PM

5867 Yes, you're right.

5870 It's an old age insurance program. You don't get an account with a balance in it. You get a fraction of your ten highest quarters of earnings on a monthly basis after you retire.

The current surplus is held in treasury bonds by the government. In the past, the system was pay as you go, and benefits were paid to early participants well in excess of their contributions. The problem, to the degree that there is one, is when the boomers were young, the benefits paid to retirees were inconsistent with the amounts they had contributed. My grandmother paid in very little, and drew down a monthly check for 28 years. Because of the ratio of young to old, it was painless, politically, to raise benefits during the sixties and seventies. This problem was recognized in 1986, when payroll tax rates were raised, the cap was raised and the retirement age increased. Those changes keep the system solvent, by which I mean bond holdings plus payroll tax contributions cover the benefits payable, until the middle of this century, assuming moderate levels of GDP growth.

Commentators have pointed out that for the privatized system to do better, GDP growth has to be high. But, if GDP growth is high, so are payroll tax contributions, and the system would remain solvent for a longer period of time.

5872. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 3:32:18 PM

On 5867, practically speaking what happens for most Americans is that when they retire their housing expenses drop dramatically. They sell the three-bedroom two-bath house with the paid off mortgage and move to something smaller and cheaper in Florida, paying cash for a house with savings left over. Most states exempt at least some property taxes for retirees.

Or they do something more sophisticated like concerned's reverse mortgage.

The thing that really is broken wrt SS is that it assumes a labor model that is no longer extant--that you spend most of your working life with one company that pays a pension. In the fifties this was true of white collar workers and unionized blue collar workers. It is less and less true today. (I've been working with a prominent financial services firm providing a program that calculates their employees' pension benefits, and for the past ten years I've watched the benefit shrink.)

Without some other retirement income, most Americans, even cashing out some of their real estate investment and getting some tax breaks, will see their lifestyle diminish.

5873. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 3:38:09 PM

Is there a redistribution effect? Do low-income earners get more out of the system than they pay into it?

5874. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 3:38:50 PM

It's also worth noting that mortgage interest is tax deductible, so there have been longstanding incentives to invest in real estate, and most Americans do. So some of the stuff you read about the low savings rate here is a little misleading. Just a little, mind you. Most people do not save enough, nor do they start saving early enough to support their working year lifestyles. In my family's case, there has been support from the next generation to ameliorate this problem. I don't know what other people do who are in this situation. I do know plenty of people who planned well for their retirement, but that was mostly because they made a fair amount of money during their working years, and most of them live less well than they did.

It will be more difficult for the cohorts with ages under 50. Implementing any of the proposals the President has talked about will make it more difficult still.

5875. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 3:40:57 PM

5873

Low income earners get a larger fraction of their quarterly earnings. Also, the cap makes the tax regressive, but also avoids the problem of people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a quarter from getting large benefits.

People who talk about dropping the cap need to recognize that the way benefits are calculated would probably also have to change.

5876. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 3:44:18 PM

Do low-income earners get more out of the system than they pay into it?

This isn't a well-formed question. People who live a long time get more out than they put into it, regardless of income level. Poor people have to live fewer years after retirement than high income earners to get back what they put in.

But the essence of the program is that you are assured of a monthly check, regardless of how much you've put in, and regardless of how long you live. Privatization simply cannot provide that kind of assurance.

5877. PelleNilsson - 2/18/2005 3:54:07 PM

Here we have a cap on benefits but not on contributions so there is rather significant redistribution. But then, this is Sweden. Otherwise we have much the same problem that plagues the whole western world. The system was not designed for today's realities. People are entering the work force later and are living longer. And in addition there are the baby boomers, in our case the cohort born 1943-48 who will retire soon and strain the system.

The baby boom is interesting. You can see in the statistics that after Stalingrad people started to produce the children they had postponed during the early stages of the war.

5878. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 4:00:25 PM

5866: Well, since there's no proposal on the table, that could be true. But if that is so, then what makes the accounts private?


I've heard the give back of the surplus in the private account bantered about by a goper insider. But as you say there is no proposal on the table yet, so we don't know.

What makes the accounts private is that you get to bear the risk and make the investment choices. So the govt sets up an account with some of your taxes in your name that you get to invest. In exchange, you agree to forego a % of the guaranteed benefit. So if you left the money with soc sec in govt bonds, you'd make 3%. In private accounts, you'd only make out better if your investments performed better than 3% + management fees. And you bear the risk of your investments + mgmt fees being no better or worse than if you left it in the system.

So as far as i can tell, private or 'ownership' means you bear the risk, you bear the costs, and you're SOL if your unfortunate enough to need the money when the market tanks.

Such a deal.

5879. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 4:04:29 PM

I was responding to this claim of judith's:

read somewhere that if you die early, the heirs don't get to keep the money in the privatized accounts. It reverts to the government.

I just don't see what the benefit of this is supposed to be. A 1000 dollars a year of private contribution is gonna make a difference? Regardless of the return, it doesn't amount to much. A guaranteed monthly check regardless of how long you live is a much better deal. And the SS system is sure to be cheaper than any privatized component. It has incredibly low admin costs. Makes you think that maybe a single payer plan might be an improvement for medical care.....

5880. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 4:08:15 PM

Pelle, your baby boom was quite short. Ours was from 1946 to 1964. So you can imagine what an effect this will have on pensions, soc sec, medicare, medicaid and other social programs.

5881. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 4:08:36 PM

5854

Yeah, I saw that memo. Is this just another instance of ignoring the facts on the ground in pursuit of wingnut fantasy? You think that really is all there is to it?

As government programs go, SS is not particularly intrusive. It does decrease wages, maybe by more than the amount of the employer side tax, but I can't see anything else bad that it does, and it really does greatly simplify the lives of both retirees and their children.

5882. thoughtful - 2/18/2005 4:11:01 PM

well, jay, that's the point. their 'fix' doesn't fix anything, unless you're a salivating broker at merrill or prudential waiting to pounce on those private accounts. Then the 'fix' is in!

5883. jayackroyd - 2/18/2005 4:11:59 PM