The Fulcrum

Saturday, July 24, 2004

Molasses in January 

After claiming, prior to the release of the final 9/11 Commission report, that they likely wouldn't have time to act on the report's findings until after the first of the year, the Republican leadership of Congress has "flip-flopped." Sensing that their constituents would not look kindly on them recessing for summer vacations while the country remained - or seemed to remain - vulnerable to another attack, they decided on reconvening for a rare August session.

"If the Congress and the president delay unnecessarily, and it's difficult again for me to say exactly when they should act,'' Mr. Kean said, "but if it seems that they are delaying, I think they are going to be held responsible by the American people, especially if the experts are right and there is another terrorist attack."
So perhaps, just maybe, we may see some substantive changes and improvements in the defense of our country.

To show just how important this is to him, Bush was, again, AWOL:

Mr. Bush, who began a weeklong vacation on Friday at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., ordered his chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., to lead an administrationwide review of the recommendations and to report to him "as quickly as possible," a spokeswoman said.


Friday, July 23, 2004

Friday Bloggered 

I've got a half-day meeting this morning and then I'll be on the golf course this afternoon (I know, it's a tough work day). So blogging will be basically non-existent today. So have a great weekend, I hope to get a couple of posts up over the weekend.

In the mean time, how come I've had so many visitors over the past three days, yet hardly any comments? Leave your thoughts in the comments!!


Thursday, July 22, 2004

Bill Mahr on Larry King 

Mahr was, as usual, brilliant.

What stuck with me most? "There are those following the compass and those reading the chicken entrails. I'm with the compass people."

Damn straight.


"Fanatics Unconstrained by Democratic Politics" 

From former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich's website, via AMERICABlog, comes the most frightening article I've read in... well, maybe ever.

Musings about a second Bush term typically assume another four years of the same right-wing policies we've had to date. But it'd likely be far worse. So far, the Bush administration has had to govern with the expectation of facing American voters again in 2004. But suppose George W. Bush wins a second term. The constraint of a re-election contest will be gone. Knowing that voters can no longer turn them out, and that this will be their last shot at remaking America, the radical conservatives will be unleashed.
That's just the opening paragraph; the rest is worse. Much worse. If you think your vote doesn't count, if you're not planning on voting this year, or if you think that Nader deserves your vote regardless of who's supporting him or if it ensures that BushCo. gets another term, read this.

Then think again. Really hard.

WARNING: Don't read this in the dark or just before you go to bed.


Bush Receives Final 9/11 Report 

Washington D.C. - President Bush accepted a substantially edited copy of the 9/11 Commission's report in a Rose Garden Ceremony this morning from the Commission's co-chairs, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton. The report, resized from the original 8.5" x 11" size to the proportions of a small paperback, was rewritten, consolidated and summarized for the President. The 700+ page document was reduced to approximately 7 pages of text and, reportedly, 10 pages of photographs and illustrations.

Said Hamilton, "We know the president doesn't read and that he usually only glances at his Presidential Daily Briefs, so we thought we'd make it easy for him." Kean agreed, noting "We think the pictures will really help drive home our points. We borrowed several illustrations from Dr. Seuss because of their simplicity and directness." A White House source, who asked not to be named, also said that even a couple of illustrations from "My Pet Goat" made the cut. "We knew he was familiar with the story and so the illustrations wouldn't be too intimidating," said the source.

Walking back into the White House, President Bush was asked if he'd actually read the full report. Looking momentarily confused, Bush quickly recovered and, holding the Readers Digest version aloft, said "I'll have Condi and Dick summarize this for me in the morning." He disappeared inside before any further questions could be asked.


Texas: "It's Like a Whole Other Country" 

That would be a third world country.

Of the four state high school health textbooks under consideration in Texas this summer, one says teenagers should “get plenty of rest” if they want to avoid sexually transmitted diseases. It also suggests students can help prevent pregnancies by respecting themselves. The book avoids any discussion of condoms.

[snip]

"Texas has the nation’s highest teen birth rate among girls age 15 to 17, and nearly half of all new sexually transmitted disease infections occur among people age 15 to 24,” Dan Quinn, a spokesman for the Texas Freedom Network told the Dallas Morning News.


Bush: "War Preznit" 

Bush is destroying the military.

From The Washington Post via MSNBC:

The U.S. military has spent most of the $65 billion that Congress approved for fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and is scrambling to find $12.3 billion more from within the Defense Department to finance the wars through the end of the fiscal year, federal investigators said yesterday.

[snip]

The strain is beginning to add up, the GAO said. The hard-hit Army faces a $5.3 billion shortfall in funds supporting deployed forces, a $2 billion budget deficit for the refurbishing of equipment used in Iraq and a $753 million deficit in its logistics contract. The Army also needs $800 million more to cover equipment maintenance costs and $650 million to pay contractors guarding garrisons.

The Air Force has decreased flying hours for pilots, eliminated some training, slowed civilian hiring and curtailed "lower priority requirements such as travel, supplies and equipment," the report said.
From this morning's Wall Street Journal (subscription):

Despite public claims that recruiting is on track, senior military officials involved in U.S. Army recruiting say that the service is cutting deeply into its delayed-entry pool of recruits, which likely will create a shortfall later this year.

[snip]

Already, the strains of those deployments are showing. Last month, Army officials announced that thousands of active-duty soldiers who are nearing the end of their volunteer service could be forced to serve an entire 12-month tour overseas if their units are tapped for duty in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"We are facing a serious manpower crunch," said a senior defense official.
War President my ass.


Distraction and Deceit 

BushCo. have become masters of misdirection. If some event threatens to spot the administration in a bad light you can be certain that The Department of Homeland Security or the FBI will issue some vague, nonspecific warning about possible terrorist attacks. Or perhaps they will leak the name of a CIA operative to a certain opinion writer. It seems there is no depth to which they will not sink in order to keep the public from seeing them as they really are, from seeing the man behind the curtain.

With the release of the final report from the 9/11 Commission today, they are already at their game:

By the time the 9/11 commission releases its final report today, President Bush will be well into a day of White House events designed to bolster his image as a defender of the homeland.

In the Oval Office this morning, Mr. Bush will sign a law giving police officers added authority to pack weapons while off duty. By midafternoon, Mr. Bush will have beaten a trail to a police training academy in Illinois, where he plans to deliver a speech on domestic security. The theatrics underscore the lengths to which the White House will go to protect what have been Mr. Bush's biggest political assets: his launching of the war on terrorism and his image of resoluteness. But the need to go to such lengths also suggests that the Bush team worries that the president's edge on national-security issues may be eroding.
But in this instance, their actions, far from looking like the underhanded distraction of an administration in the full flush of power, are looking rather "desperate," to borrow one of their favorite words. Rather than manufacturing a threat, or hyping an existing, low-level threat, aWol is left to talk to small groups of First Responders in some out of the way police academy. There are reasons they should be desperate:

The tightness of the race and diminished backing for Mr. Bush's handling of the war on terror underscore the danger the commission's final report poses for Mr. Bush, particularly if voters conclude the administration was negligent in handling the terror threat. Mr. Bush's leadership in the war on terror "is the underpinning of Bush's support right now," says Frank Luntz, a pollster who has worked with top Republicans in past elections. "If that underpinning comes apart, then so does his support."


NOTE: Speaking of distractions, don't forget the reports that BushCo. have pressured Pakistan to produce - "Dead or Alive" - a major al Qaeda figure during the first three days of next week's Democratic National Convention.


A Dangerous Man 

John Edwards is a very dangerous man.

If you saw him last night on Larry King, you may know what I'm talking about. Unlike the current VP, who is truly a dangerous man - dangerous to our society, to our civil rights, to our place in the world - John Edwards is a warm, sincere, knowledgeable man. Unlike Dick "Go F*** Yourself" Cheney, Edwards is a real person with a sharp intellect and a quick wit who nevertheless is charming and disarming.

That's what makes him so dangerous.

Not to you and I. Not to our democratic processes. Not to our international standing. No, John Edwards is dangerous to the quickly declining chances of this administration to be re-elected to a second term.


Wednesday, July 21, 2004

Draft Proposal 

B.J., over at StoutDemBlog found a great proposal at The Nation for overcoming our military manpower shortfall.

The bill, explicitly requiring people who have never been in combat to serve in the wars they start, would affect thousands of neoconservatives in Washington and New York. It was strongly opposed by the Bush Administration on the grounds that it would leave most of the Administration's upper-level positions vacant, including the presidency and vice-presidency, but it was left unattended on President Bush's desk and he inadvertently signed it after deciding it looked too long and too hard to read first.
What a great idea; I only wish I'd thought of it.


Oh, Sandy 

Probably inadvertently, John Kerry has shown one of the key differences between himself and Bush; and likely a key difference between a Kerry administration and the current mal-administration. While the overblown Republican hysteria (not to mention the curious timing of this) over Sandy Berger's possible security lapse spills over onto the talking heads' teleprompters, Berger decided to step down as an informal advisor to John Kerry. Kerry praised Berger's service, but thought it best that he step down until all questions have been answered.

In a statement, Sen. Kerry described Mr. Berger as a friend who "has tirelessly served this nation with honor and distinction. I respect his decision to step aside as an adviser to the campaign until this matter is resolved objectively and fairly."
Contrast that with how Bush has reacted to any suggestions that any of his minions might have done wrong, that one or more of them ought to step down, or that perhaps some of them should be investigated. Bush refuses to admit that any mistakes have been made and then goes on to praise whoever is being questioned as "the best ____ ever and we are lucky to have him."

Humility vs. hubris. Deference vs. domination. "Go finish the investigation" vs. "Go f*** yourself."


Tuesday, July 20, 2004

"That's One Small Step for [a] Man..." 



"...One Giant Leap for Mankind." Neil Armstrong, July 20, 1969, The Moon.

It doesn't seem like 35 years have gone by since that summer evening when the world held its breath and waited to hear the fate of two men on humanity's greatest adventure.

And yet it seems forever.

We all dreamed, the children of the 60s, of the continued exploration of near-earth space and the planets. We were excited and motivated by the pictures and the grainy video of our heroes in space. There was talk of a manned mission to Mars even before Armstrong and Aldrin bounced around the dusty plains of Mare Tranquilitatus. Six further missions landed on the moon, a dramatic self-rescue was formulated during Apollo 13 and space stations were launched. The science fiction writers were correct, we were a space faring species!

And then reality intruded.

Turns out that once we beat the Soviets to the Moon, interest waned. Mostly interest waned in Congress and the White House. Other priorities called for our attention and our tax dollars. Viet Nam raged. Protests against the war flared all over the country. Budgets were slashed. The final two Apollo spacecraft were sent to museums instead of into space.

Thirty-five years later, we couldn't get to the Moon if we wanted to. At least not in less than 10 years. We can barely keep the International Space Station in orbit. And the supposed successor to Apollo, the Space Shuttle hasn't flown in years.

Where are the dreamers today? Bush makes grand promises in a bid to stir the electorate, but fails to fund NASA to even its reduced levels of previous years. The Hubble Telescope sends back pictures from nearly the birth of the Universe and Cassini-Huygens enthralls us with incredible pictures of the rings of Saturn. But where are the humans, where are we, in this exploration of our tiny corner of the universe?

I thought I would one day be able to bounce around on the Moon like Armstrong and Aldrin. I was sure that I'd watch astronauts descend from the mechanical descendent of the primitive LEM onto the surface of Mars. Pictures are interesting and scientifically valuable, but real people on real adventures are what stoke our imaginations and our dreams.

Have our dreams become so pedestrian that these things are no longer possible?


No Room at the Inn 

At least not if your politics don't line up with the owners. Just ask Linda Ronstadt.

Singer Linda Ronstadt was thrown out of the Aladdin casino in Las Vegas on the weekend after dedicating a song ("Desperado") to liberal film maker Michael Moore and his movie "Fahrenheit 9/11," a casino spokeswoman said on Monday.

[snip]

"Ms. Ronstadt was hired to entertain the guests of the Aladdin, not to espouse political views," the casino said.
Now this is just stupid. Really. Had she dedicated a song to Chimpy McAWOL, say "Life in the Fast Lane" or "Cocaine," do you think they would have kicked her out?

Well, maybe for the latter, but that's a whole different story.

UPDATE: Seems all is not what the owner claims. Via Scooter, we see that TBogg has the real story... Thanks once again to our completely lazy SCLM for doing the oh-so-difficult work of finding out the truth.


Two Americas, Two Recoveries 

They say that genius is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in
mind at the same time; but sometimes I'm not sure if the Wall Street Journal is genius or just schizophrenic. An article in today's edition (subscription) basically lays out, in detail, talking points for John Edwards' "Two Americas" speech, especially in how it relates to the current so-called recovery.

A few examples:

Joshua Berry and Ricky Williams, both Houstonians, have seen two very different economic recoveries.

Mr. Berry, an entrepreneur, has profited handsomely from the stock market, in the real-estate boom and by selling a business. Mr. Williams, an airline baggage handler, has been waiting since 2001 for a pay raise.

[snip]

Hotel revenue was up 11% in the first five months of 2004 at luxury and upscale chains, but up just 3% at economy chains, according to Smith Travel Research, a market-research firm. At the five-star Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs, Colo., $600-a-night lakeside suites are sold out every day through mid-October.

At high-end Bulgari stores, meanwhile, consumers are gobbling up $5,000 Astrale gold and diamond "cocktail" rings made for the right hand, a spokeswoman says. The Italian company's U.S. revenue was up 22% in the first quarter. Neiman Marcus Group Inc., flourishing on sales of pricey items like $500 Manolo Blahnik shoes, had a 13.5% year-over-year sales rise at stores open at least a year.

By contrast, such "same store" sales at Wal-Mart Stores Inc., retailer for the masses, were up just 2.2% in June. Wal-Mart believes higher gasoline costs are pinching its customers. At Payless ShoeSource Inc., which sells items like $10.99 pumps, June same-store sales were 1% below a year earlier.

A similar pattern shows up in cars. Luxury brands like BMW, Cadillac and Lexus saw double-digit U.S. sales increases in June from a year earlier. Sales of lower-tier brands such as Dodge, Pontiac and Mercury either declined or grew in the low single digits.
The rich get richer and the middle class and poor are running just as fast as they can to stay in the same place. Most everyone who reads my blog will recognize something of their own lives in this account; I don't think there are too many millionaires that read The Fulcrum (although if there are would you forward a couple hundred grand to me? Thanks.).

The Journal, most notably on its staunchly pro-Republican, pro-Bush Editorial Pages, continues to tout the recovery, to promote the Bush tax cuts and the push to make them permanent. The reporters out on the street, who can see what's really happening in America are telling a different story.


Monday, July 19, 2004

I, Government 

I was thinking about a post decrying the blatant rip-off of Isaac Asimov's classic I, Robot now in theaters. But that's been done. However, thinking about why the movie is such a disservice to Asimov left me wondering...

One of the key concepts in Asimov's original anthology of short stories was the introduction of The Three Laws of Robotics. These laws were hard-coded into the positronic brains of robots and ensured that humans could remain safe from their own creations. It was an ingenious way to set aside the classic "Frankenstein" thesis of all previous robot stories and open the way for more interesting and illuminating storytelling.

The three laws are:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
What would happen if, with some slight rewriting, these laws were to be amended to our Constitution and applied to politicians of all parties at all levels of government? An interesting question, no? I thought so. Here is my attempt (and accompanying commentary in italics) at developing the Three Laws of Politics (with apologies to my hero, Isaac Asimov):

1. A politician may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm. I would interpret harm to mean physical or psychological or developmental harm. So that international aid, education and universal health care debates would have entirely different articles of debate.

2. A politician must obey desires expressed to them by citizens, regardless of political affiliation, except where such desires would conflict with the First Law. No longer would some political doors remain closed because of a citizens political party. No longer would the majority - or a vocal and well funded minority - be able to impose its bigoted or uneducated will on the rest of the citizenry.

3. A politician must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. I see this as addressing not only the political existence of the candidate, but of the politician's actions concerning the continued existence of the country. This would force consideration of the cost in lives of not only our own citizens but of the rest of the world.
You'll notice that the laws did not require a lot of changes to be applicable. The only corollary would be that under no circumstances will any group of people or any incorporation of people or businesses be considered a citizen nor accrue the rights and privileges of citizenship. Additionally, leaving "human being" in the first law while replacing it with "citizen" in the second was done intentionally to cover just such contingencies as international aid.

Could such an amendment ever make it into consideration, much less committee? Never. Modern politicians - of all political stripes - are too much creatures of self-interest rather than public interest. Would the money wielders ever allow the demotion of the corporation to merely businesses? Never. They have ascended to the halls of power where they not only feed at the public trough, but have bought the power to ensure that the trough always remains full.

Can they stop us from dreaming? What do you think?


Minnesota GOP - The 'O' Stands for Orwellian 

If you haven't been reading AMERICABlog, you should be. John Aravosis is a writer and political consultant in Washington, D.C. and has - apparently - some great sources. In a recent post he discloses some rather disturbing tactics employed by the Minn. GOP to gather information on the political beliefs of citizens.

The [Minnesota] state Republican Party has developed a Web site that allows its activists to tap into a database of voters whose political allegiances and concerns it would like to know. But it is not just any group of voters -- they are the activists' neighbors.

The project, dubbed WebVoter, gives GOP activists the names and addresses of 25 people who live, in most cases, within a couple of blocks from them. The party has asked 60,000 supporters from across the state to figure out what issues animate their neighbors and where they stand in the political spectrum, and report that information back to the party -- with or, possibly, without their neighbors' permission.
Disturbing? Yes. Scary? Most definitely. Make sure to read the rest in the Washington Post.


Iraq Boondoggle, Part XXIV 

More bad news for BushCo. in the information that continues to come from the 9/11 Commission. I think the opening paragraph from the story in this morning's Wall Street Journal (subscription) says it all:  
The anticipated disclosure by the 9/11 Commission of contacts between Iran and al Qaeda before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks could ratchet up pressure on the White House to explain its subsequent emphasis on a threat from Iraq despite apparently far greater evidence of Iran's terrorist dealings.
The effects of the first wave of information from the Commission have been long-lasting, but not devastating. This revelation should have a larger impact; if people are still listening. This one bit of information shows that Iraq was not the right target and, in fact, despite the involvement of Iran shows that Afghanistan was - and remains - the "central front in the war on terror."
 
Here's more:  
People familiar with the report, expected to be released Thursday, say it will detail evidence that Iran instructed its border guards in late 2000 to allow al Qaeda operatives to pass freely from Afghanistan into Iran, and back, and that at least eight of the Sept. 11 hijackers passed through Iran from late 2000 through February 2001. At least some were allowed to pass without having their passports stamped, allowing them to conceal trips to training camps in Afghanistan.

The eight to 10 hijackers who crossed through are said to have been among the so-called muscle hijackers whose job was to overcome resistance by flight crews and passengers during the hijackings.

The panel's findings are also said to note that Iranian officials contacted al Qaeda leaders after the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole and proposed a collaboration on terrorist attacks. But Osama bin Laden spurned the offer because of fear of a backlash by supporters in Saudi Arabia. The commission information is based on reports of statements by al Qaeda detainees during interrogations, and numerous electronic intercepts by the National Security Agency.
The report will say, however, that there isn't any evidence that Iran knew in advance of the Sept. 11 plot. Details of the commission's findings on Iran and al Qaeda were reported earlier on Time magazine's Web site.

Although President Bush some time ago labeled Iran a member of the "axis of evil" along with pre-war Iraq, the administration's main focus consistently was on a military response to Iraq. Both Mr. Bush and Vice President Cheney cited alleged evidence of al Qaeda contacts with Iraq to justify the war.
To me the fact that this kind of information is making it into the final, bi-partisan report indicates that the culpability of BushCo. can only be greater than indicated, not less. How much of the supporting evidence is redacted remains to be seen, but to those paying attention the conclusion is obvious: Bush and his covey of neocon knuckleheads knowingly sacrificed our capability to deal with al Qaeda to pursue a preconceived war against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. This boondoggle left us all vulnerable to continued attacks from al Qaeda and provided added impetus for recruiting of terrorists and incited further hatred against us throughout the Muslim world.



Stuff

Politics
Move On


Previous Posts

Google

Web The Fulcrum
Free Google Page Rank Checker

TTLB Ecosystem

Bloggers Parliament
Bloggers Parliament

Issues and Google Bombs
visit LIBERAL FORUM

Shopping

Directories

Site Stuff

Creative Commons License

The Fulcrum Archives

Refering Sites

Who Links to Me