Clarke '08

As much as I like Wesley Clark, I think Richard Clarke would make an awesome presidential canididate. When he came out with his book and testified before the 9/11 commission, he blew everyone away with his story and the honesty of it all.

The Republican Noise Machine tried to drown him out and question his knowledge and motives, but they came off looking despirate and disjointed. Rice and Hadley (her deputy) had their hats handed to them on 60 minutes and in other forums where they were seriously questioned. The lies and incompetency of Rice and Hadley showed through, despite their denials.

It is too bad that Clarke foreswore working in another White House or running himself. Maybe we could draft him. Even though he is more like a old-fashioned George H.W. Bush-style Republican, I think those are the type of people Democrats need to win these days to recapture the presidency.

Remember his claim that he sent Condi a memo in January 2001 saying the terrorist are a real threat and this is what we need to do about them? And Condi claimed she got no such memo? Well the Times has the scoop on the now-declassified memo:

The 13-page proposal presented to Dr. Rice by her top counterterrorism adviser, Richard A. Clarke, laid out ways to step up the fight against Al Qaeda, focusing on Osama bin Laden's headquarters in Afghanistan. The ideas included giving "massive support" to anti-Taliban groups "to keep Islamic extremist fighters tied down"; destroying terrorist training camps "while classes are in session" and then sending in teams to gather intelligence on terrorist cells; deploying armed drone aircraft against known terrorists; more aggressively tracking Qaeda money; and accelerating the F.B.I.'s translation and analysis of material from surveillance of terrorism suspects in American cities.

Exactly like told us in his book and testimony, and exactly opposite of Rice's claims, not even close:

"the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations." The article explained that the Federal Aviation Administration "received 52 intelligence reports" that mentioned Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda prior to September 11, 2001, and that the FAA warned airports that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."

Fifty-two? What was she doing when Clarke was banging down her door, Tenent's "hair was on fire" and the FAA had sent her 52 warnings, which included a method and other reports which said SOON in the summer of 2001...clearing brush with Dubya in Crawford? She did call him "my husband" once. Did she not want to hurt his feelings, interupt his runs, naps or solitare games? (he used to play the windows version as governor)

At least some of the blood from those 3,000 people who died on September 11 is on her hands (and Clarke's hands as he will admit). At the very least, GOPers have to admit that it is oftly coincidential that all these damaging things were blocked by the Bush administration until after the inauguration.

If only the American people had had all the facts in front of them, the entire senate intelligence committe report, the entire 9/11 report, all of Clarke's memos...I wonder if voters would have still felt that George W. Bush had/would keep them more safe than John Kerry.

glad to be in UT

Today I went to an ABA thing at the law school; they are having their convention here in SLC this weekend. Anyway, they were supposed to tell us tip on how to get our first job and we were supposed to schmooze with the panelists.

Instead, 90% were windbags reeling off their resume and how great thier firm is ("the first law office in France, the first law office in Russia...and that was in 1987, when we weren't even sure if it would [go capitalist]") Who cares? There is another reason not to go to NYC and deal with pompous blowhards who think they are God's gift to the law and to you.

There were some interesting people who told of their tale of cold calling and tiny salaries. The trouble is, I am not that extroverted and have trouble going donwtown to chat up a buttload of attorneys this weekend, or anyone for that matter. I prefer small groups, where I can find out what interests them and mention my one bit of knowledge on their area of expertise and ask smart sounding questions. But going up to people is the hardest thing to me. I am no Bill Clinton, I sweat just thinking about picking up a phone, let alone getting high on going into a room filled with people.

I got to talk to my hopefully supervising attorney this morning and am pumped to try to get a fellowship to reform our attrocious election laws. Wish me luck.

Photo of the day

What happened to Al Franken? this morning I was so happy that he was running for Minn.'s senate seat and then he chickened out! Here's to you Al:

While you were sleeping...

Surprise! North Korea has nuclear weapons! Not surprised? Nor am I. They have been about a hairs breath from getting such weapons since 1994 at least, when Carter staved off a Clintonian military strike (AKA no ground troops) with an agreement that seemed to slow things down.

On Secretary of State Albright's exit in 2001, she warned the incoming Bush Administration that North Korea was probabbly the biggest threat to world peace and wanted nukes. So what did they do? Plotted to attack Iraq and ignored Korea until they jumped up and down in a meeting saying they had cheated on the 1994 agrement.

Did this sound the alarm bells? No, just a Condi Rice speech slamming the Clinton Administration for being soft on North Korea. Her solution? Just ignore them/refuse to talk with them until they give in to US demands and talk through China and with Japan and Russia (and the US and China). It also gave Bush the excuse to pump more money (at least 10 billion) down the toilet knows as Missle Defease.

The North Koreans starve their own people while building freeways for the Dear Leader's cars and nuclear weapons to threaten food support out of South Korea, Japan, and China. This guy is complete irrational, incompetant, and has built a cult around him filled with propaganda and lies...why does this sound familiar?

Real mature

This theory of mine that Republican elected officials and party operatives are fundamentally immature keeps getting backed up by events like this:

In Maryland, Governor Bob Ehrlich's longtime aide was caught spreading false rumors that (future Democratic gubinatorial candidate wannabe) Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley is having/had an extramarital affair. "I have always been faithful to my wife, from our first date to this date," O'Malley said.

Ehrlich, to his credit, fired that bum once it was obvious that his aide Joseph Steffen was the one doing the posting on conservative blogs and speading the rumors to TV stations, Annapolis lobbyists, etc. "Let me tell you, I don't put up with this, and I will not put up with this. Bottom line," Ehrlich said.

But was the whole thing sanctioned by Ehrlich anyway? "I began to suspect very strongly that it was something concerted and orchestrated and sustained," O'Malley said. "It became a drumbeat and then was relentless. And the common theme and language used to push it on Web sites and the like were some of the things about it that made me feel it was orchestrated." Steffen? "No Comment"

Steffen discussed the rumors on the conservative Web site FreeRepublic.com during the summer of 2004. He posted them under the name NCPAC, a reference to one of his early employers, the National Conservative Political Action Committee...."They call me the Prince of Darkness," Steffen said in the interview... Several of Steffen's co-workers said in interviews that he parachuted into agencies, set up an office with a statue of the grim reaper on his desk and began assembling lists of people who should be fired.

"I had been advised by my boss that he had a hit list," said Tom Burgess, a former state Department of Human Resources administrator who was fired after Ehrlich took office. "We were all very concerned about him."

Until yesterday, the Post Steffen was the spokesman for the Insurance Administration and made $72,453.

During the GOP convention in NYC, a delegate sold purple band-aids to make fun of John Kerry's three purple hearts. Every state of the union shows GOPers either booing loudly, pouting, or cheering wildly, depending on who is president. And then of course when Democrats try to boo this year, Republicans throw a hissy fit.

They called Al Gore "Sore Loserman" in November/December 2000, but they were the ones whining on every corner with their "Brooks Brothers Riot" about how the votes shouldn't be counted and complaining all the way to the US Supreme Court. I could go on, but I need to go to class.

that's why he said it

Remember back to the last SOTU? The one that nobody clapped at and even the GOP were wondering if they backed the wrong guy? George W. Bush talked about a fanatasy land he called "America" and some how manage to thrown in an attack on Major League Baseball and steriod use, which seemed like a cheap shot, equivant to saying "I am against these Catholic Priests who molest children."

Here's what Bush said last year: "The use of performance-enhancing drugs like steroids in baseball, football, and other sports ... sends the wrong message: that there are shortcuts to accomplishment, and that performance is more important than character." Takes one to know shortcuts to accomplishment, doesn't it?

But anyway back to the point. Today on Sportscenter, ESPN reported that ex-monster hitter Jose Canseco has a tell all book oh-so-subtley titled "Juiced" which recalls the days when he saw Mark McGuire shoot up, Jason Giambi shoot up, and the two shoot up each other (how cute), as well as Viarga spokesman and Texas Ranger Ralphio Palmero and MVP Ivan Rodregez. Then Canseco went on to say that Bush as the then-owner of the Texas Rangers knew or should have known this was happening.

Of course, they all deny it. But Steriod use was rampant in the MLB in the late 90s. Just like the stock market bubble and the resulting Enrons and WorldComs, everyone in the know could tell it was all too good to be true. But there was pressure to perform, and everyone with an interest looked the otherway.

There's no pretending anymore.

A note on spelling

Dear Brian Watkins (and other annoyed readers),

I am deeply sorry that I continuously have typos, misspellings, and improper diction in my posts. The causal style in which I write leaves much room for error. I would like to claim that is this is purposeful style and that, like e.e. cummings, I am rebelling in my own small way against grammar and spelling.

Unfortunately, I merely sloppy and unskilled. Please read in missing words, read out misplaced words, homonyms, and the like. I devout much thought to my posts as to their subject matter and general flow, but very little time actually typing them. True, this is deeply unprofessional but then again I have yet to see a penny from my Google Ads in the corner. Writing daily about my thoughts, "adventures" and frustrations is a joy that I am happy to share with all of you, but my spelling and grammar is not something I intend to inflict on anyone.

Please take this long rambling post as an apology for transgressions past and present. Hopefully, in the future I can devote more time to reading them over and correcting. But in the meantime, drop the red pencil and let me know more privately so I can fix the mistake(s) that bother you. Thanks again.

Postcards from different worlds

Last night, my fiancee and I went to Bountiful. This town is pretty homogeneous: over 95% white and probably at least as high percentage belong to the LDS faith.

We went up North to participate in student group that is designed primarily for spouses/partners who would like to get out and talk to adults everyonce in a while (read: stay-at-home moms). The ones there were 3Ls and gave us a snapshot of where we would be in two years. We talked, ate pizza and other snacks, played games and had a good time with nice people.

This are very conservative people. We played a comparison game called Apples-to-Apples. The word was "Trustworthy" and you were to choose among your cards of nouns which word you thought the judge would deem the most apt. Someone choose "Republicans," and my fiancee and I held back our shock and laughter given the record of lies by George W. Bush's administration and the homegrown version ex-SL Co. Mayor Nancy Workman, who is currently on trial for defrauding the county of money to pay her daughter for a do-nothing job.

The other one was a word somewhere between "evil" and "untrustworthy" (I can't remember the exact word) and someone chose "Hillary Rodham Clinton" as there card. Now some time HRC bothers me, but other than being ambitious and cut-throat, I can't think of many negative things about her...She had bad hair styles at times but she was hyperscrutinized. She is brilliant (probably smarter than Bill, and that is saying something), a good senator (in terms of getting stuff done and working with GOPers etc.), shying away from the spotlight that follows her around, and passionate about her causes.

This morning was completely the opposite politcally. Wellesley Professor (emeritus) Alan Schechter was speaking at an alumnae's house near us. Schechter was Hillary's mentor and got appointed to the Fulbright committee by Clinton. The man is from the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" but his wife was even more of an activist. Yet I had Wesley Clark in common with them. They had campaigned in Portsmouth while I was Derry last winter. We reminisced about how cold it was and talked about gearing up for Clark '08. In the crowd we had my contracts professor (class of '67), the dean of the law school/ Democratic gubenatorial candidate/husband of '76 alumna Robyn Matheson, lawyers, artists, PhD candidates and more prominant alumnae. A very powerful group of women assembled around Schechter and the muffins we bought from Costco.

Schechter talked about how we got to where we are today. His synopsis: we are in a backlash that started in the 1960s and 1970s where LBJ and the Warren/Marshall court changed the cultural landscape: allowing blacks to vote, women equal protection, abortion, banning the death penalty (and recently allowing gay marriage in places like SF and MA).

The Democratic majority from the '30s until '94 in Congress was a false, corrupt bargain between the "Solid South," filled with conservative (and racist) members/senators and the emerging coastal liberals. It was the Civil Rights act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 (combined with the court rulings) that sealed the eventual fate of that Democratic party. Almost all of these same conservatives slowly, but surely joined the GOP starting with Goldwater, then Reagan and eventually Bush 43.

While Reagan played lipservice to the evangelicals, Bush 43 actually is a born-again, as is many in his staff. Schechter sees no hope of the GOP's strange marriage between Wall-Street Republicans and evangelicals because they are mutually dependent on each other to achieve their goals.

The White House, he said, is up for grabs, but the Congress is out of reach for the foreseeable future. He believes Hillary is susceptible to a Draft movement like Clark was and both have the same view of running for the presidency: that they would run if their country called them.

Like me, Schechter knew Kerry was a loser from the get-go because a) his lack of person magnetism needed to win over marginal voters b) his Vietnam history c) his ability to make every position seem two-faced and flip-floppy, even if he was consistent d) the fact that he was a senator for 20 years, and finally e) the fact that he represented Massachusetts. Thus, he liked Clark because he a) he charismatic (more than the the other candidates save Sharpton and Edwards) b) his clear pro-Vietnam history c) is lack of track record d) not a senator e) the fact that he was from flippable Arkansas. The idea was, with no voting history, Clark could be consistent and make up his positions as he went along. Of course, it didn't work out that way (see "Help, Mary!").

Clark learned from his mistakes, I believe, like Schetcher thinks that Dean learned from his. Schechter thinks that Dean will watch his mouth more and not try to change the party ideologically. But hopefully structurally Howard.

The church's fingers

Today there is a story in the Salt Tribune which I doubt has a corresponding article in the Deseret News, which is owned by the LDS church (along with a couple radio stations and a local NBC affilate, which has correspondingly opted out of showing Saturday Night Live).

The Mormon church is the most powerful and influencial lobbyist on Salt Lake's Capital Hill. While that is not a shocking statement, the level of their power is unlike any other church in any other state. Bills are routinely nixed or boosted by the church's support and they are in many areas a de facto branch of state government, who's veto power kills stuff before they even get a committee vote.

This case revolves around charter schools, which I am mixed about. As with anything in education, it seem ideology drive the research and it is difficult to tell if progress is actually being made or if there is regressions.

The Salt Lake Arts Academy right now resides in the old main branch of the SL Library, but their lease is up this summer to make way for a cool new perminant exhibit called Leonardo. Academy officials and city representatives (city councilmembers, the mayor, state representatives and senators) want them to stay downtown so students would "take TRAX, use the city library and mix with the business crowd." The problem? "[S]tate law prohibits alcohol establishments from opening within 600 feet of parks, libraries or schools for kindergartners through 12th-graders...If local zoning allows, there's no state law against a school opening near a bar. But if the city, which does not allow schools downtown, were to change its zoning to allow them, it would prevent new bars and restaurants from opening - running counter to redevelopment efforts."

State Senator and democratic LG candidate (in 2000 and 2004) Karen Hale (who's also LDS) proposed a bill to exempt charter schools to get around such laws and let more than one bar exist on a block. But then word got out that the church didn't like it (and MADD too). And then Hale dropped it, but she wouldn't say that it was the church that made her do it, or MADD, but the writing is on the wall.

Constroversal mayor Rocky Anderson was pissed: "The church, like anybody else, certainly has a right to make its views known," Anderson said Thursday, but added: "It's the only organization, I think, that seems to automatically get its way among most elected officials."

Just two days ago, the mayor "held his last public forum on bridging the divide among Mormons and others and one theme was the alienation some non-Mormons feel when they believe Mormon values run the state. To heal, Anderson said it is 'crucial' to move away public officials allowing the church to 'control' public policy."

Some times it seems that church has too much power. Any group, when it has total control in an area tends to get tryannical, just look at the Democratic party in Massachusetts.

Gonzales round-up

After an exciting and agressive debate on my comment board regarding the Torture Memo, we finially heard from people who had a say in the matter, our 100 US Senators. Armando and Kos have a nice handy sheet of Democrats who voted yea or nay or abstained.

I disagree with some of their conclusions and will make some of mine. First, lets go to the "yea" votes for Gonzales by Democrats (GOPers are irrelevant because they all voted with their president, even people like Linc Chafee who supposidly didn't even vote for Bush).

(1) Senator Ken Salazar (CO). His excuse? The "he's hispanic" argument/"American Dream" argument. Dick Durbin (IL) had a great rebuttal to the "American Dream" part:

I respect and admire Alberto Gonzales for his inspiring life story and the many obstacles he has overcome. Some of my colleagues suggested his life story embodies the American dream. But there is more to the American dream than overcoming difficult circumstances to obtain prominence and prosperity. We also must honor Fred Korematsu's dream that our country be true to the fundamental principle upon which it was founded: the rule of law...I cannot in good conscience vote to reward a man who ignored the rule of law and the demands of human decency and created the permissive environment that made Abu Ghraib possible....When the history of these times are recorded, I believe that Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo will join the names of infamous Japanese-American internment camps such as Manzanar, Heart Mountain, and Tule Lake where Fred Korematsu and over thousands of others were detained. I cannot in good conscience vote to make the author of such a terrible mistake the chief law enforcement officer of our great Nation and the guardian of our God-given and most cherished rights.

As for the "he's hispanic and I'm hispanic" argument, I would hope this country has come far enough that you don't have to vote for someone just because you share their race/ethnicity if you are a minority Member/Senator. I think that is insulting to all Hispanics out there that people can't tell the difference between a Cuban-American who will do whatever this President wants him to do and a guy like Caesar Chavez.

(2) Senator Joseph Lieberman (CT).OK well Joe is like George Kastanza and always manages to stick his finger in the air, and feel it blowing the wrong way. He is after all, the sole member of the "loyal JOE-position." Sorry, couldn't resist another Joe joke, he brought this on himself.

(3) Senator Ben Nelson (NE). He is running for reelection in a hyper-Red state. His biggest competition (the Governor) is now the new Secretary of Agriculture. But then again, Martinez was Bush's HUD secretary and that didn't stop him from running for FL's open senate seat. Just what we need another Bush puppet in the senate. I feel bad for Ben Nelson because some other dude with the same last name is now also a senator (see below) and it must be really annoying, but it is no excuse to vote for torture.

(4) Senator Mary Landrieu (LA) I hear her kids are real brats and she won't control them on airplanes. So I guess she is really into torturing mild-mannered law-abiding citizens on their way from Washington DC to New Orleans, so why not Iraqis Afghans and various other Arabs?

(5) Senator Pryor (AR) He will be up for a tough bout in 2008, the only reason he won last time was the guy he ran against was a holier-than-thou type who was porking his staffer and then dumped his wife for the staffer (who was like 20 years younger than him too). Nevertheless, Pryor also won because people liked his Daddy and might have thought they were voting for him.

(6) Senator Bill Nelson (FL) Bill, the other senator named Nelson. Wasn't there a band named Nelson, with long WWE hair? Oh right, they sucked. He too is up for reelection like his twin from Nebraska. Florida has seemingly gone Red on us since 2000, and Nelson is the only statewide Democratic elected offical (the legislature and the House delegation has been nicely gerrymandered to ensure a GOP majority for the next decade). Translation: he is taking a dump in his pants, and doesn't want to seem like a wuss against those terrorists to people in Pensacola.

Phew...now on to the Nay or Abstained, with particular focus on our Red state Democratic senators.

Evan Bayh (D-IN) Running for President in 2008...good luck.
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) one of those guys who nobody really knows what he does in the Senate, until now.
Robert Byrd (D-WV) the old man rules despite being ex-KKK.
Byron Dorgan (D-ND) He's got senority
Tom Harkin (D-IA) The last liberal of "the Heartland"
Tim Johnson (D-SD)it takes guts when you won by a few hundred votes...and your benefactor just lost by a few hundred.
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) you go girl!
Harry Reid (D-NV) Minority Leader with cajoines
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) Yes, that Rockefeller. The last of the Rockefeller Democrats.

Not present (fighting off Bush misinformation in their home states)
Max Baucus (D-MT) His wife hit someone over a bag of soil once, caused quite a stir in Washington society.
Kent Conrad (D-ND) I think I had an LSAT class with his daughter, she was nice to me.


And there you have it. Enjoy and have a great weekend.

A better way to spend SOTU night

Instead of watching a series of illogical reasoning for bad policies, deceptive use of numbers, and outright lies (along with mandatory juvenile boos and cheers), I went to CostCo last night. The workers there are always so happy, genuinely so, unlike the creeped out feeling you get at a Wal-Mart (where they speaking to you in code that they want out of this miserable existence).

After that, we went searching for dinner, as the hot dogs and pizza didn't seem like our cup of tea last night. In search of something "healthy" we went to Wild Oats, the blue state grocery store. And who did we see but local celebrity Bill Gephardt (not to be confused with Dick Gephardt, two time presidential loser and unemployed Cardinals fan.), the local TV channel's "consumer reports investigator." He looked pretty grumpy and tired gathering some food for the checkout counter, so I didn't bother him with some scam that had been pulled on me.

Ironically (not Atlantis Morrisette Ironic), we ended up eating at Taco Bell and Burger King. And although I regretted the feeling in my stomach while I tossed and turned, it was still better than watching the Bush's weltanshauung.

The most depressing thing I've read...today

That great title is owned by a Newsweek article entitled Dream On America.

The basic gist of the article is that America is in decline. We have lost our moral compass, and the world no longer looks to us as a beacon of freedom. Our economy is not doing as well as the EU, our health care system ranks 37th best in the world (according to WHO), "behind Colombia (22nd) and Saudi Arabia (26th), and on a par with Cuba." The gulf between the rich and the poor in the US has widened faster than in EU countries. "In Sweden, you are three times more likely to rise out of the economic class into which you were born than you are in the U.S."

When the soviets withdrew from Central Europe, U.S. constitutional experts rushed in. They got a polite hearing, and were sent home. Jiri Pehe, adviser to former president Vaclav Havel, recalls the Czechs' firm decision to adopt a European-style parliamentary system with strict limits on campaigning. "For Europeans, money talks too much in American democracy. It's very prone to certain kinds of corruption, or at least influence from powerful lobbies," he says. "Europeans would not want to follow that route." They also sought to limit the dominance of television, unlike in American campaigns where, Pehe says, "TV debates and photogenic looks govern election victories."

The same thing happened in South Africa, Kosovo, other African countries, and South America. They all prefer a European-style constitution over a American-style one.

Much in American law and society troubles the world these days. Nearly all countries reject the United States' right to bear arms as a quirky and dangerous anachronism. They abhor the death penalty and demand broader privacy protections. Above all, once most foreign systems reach a reasonable level of affluence, they follow the Europeans in treating the provision of adequate social welfare is a basic right. All this, says Bruce Ackerman at Yale University Law School, contributes to the growing sense that American law, once the world standard, has become "provincial." The United States' refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions to certain terrorist suspects, to ratify global human-rights treaties such as the innocuous Convention on the Rights of the Child or to endorse the International Criminal Court (coupled with the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo) only reinforces the conviction that America's Constitution and legal system are out of step with the rest of the world.

The rest of the world is hating us more and more, and not just President Bush. "A plurality of voters (the average is 70 percent) in each of the 21 countries surveyed by the BBC oppose sending any troops to Iraq, including those in most of the countries that have done so. Only one third, disproportionately in the poorest and most dictatorial countries, would like to see American values spread in their country."

One of the main reasons I supported Wesley Clark and opposed George Bush this last election was that Clark understood the worldview, and Bush couldn't care less. Now I am not saying the UN or the EU or whatever gets to have "veto power" over US policy, but I am saying there are lots of good things that come out of listening to ones Allies seriously beyond good will: increased trading, more foreigners studying in our colleges and universities (they are now going to Europe more instead), increased military support for missions around the world, increased influence on the world stage, moral authority to push American Ideals and our version of Democracy. I am afraid that if we continue down this road of Bush-ism, in my lifetime we will see the US surpassed by China or the EU.

Iraqification

I am so happy that the voting went off with nary a hitch this weekend. Too bad it will be a while before we know who won and at some will doubt the authenticity of the outcome given the low participation by Sunnis. The real winner will be Sistani in my boat, he will be the power broker not too far from the glare of the flashbulbs.

It is also unfortunate that we had to spend over $150 billion so that 26 million people would have the chance to vote. Is that really why we invaded the country, spent blood and treasure? I wonder if people really are aware of how much history repeats itself with the second Nixon Administration...I mean the second Bush Administration.

"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam[Iraq]'s presidential election despite a Vietcong [insurgent] terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting."
-- New York Times, September 4, 1967. Here's the PDF of the original article. Courtesy of Political Wire and DailyKos

site of the day

Hot or Not for US Senators!
via Political Wire

I don't know where these photos were dug up but they are hilarious and extremely unflatering for just about everyone of them.

Go ahead see how your senator ranks.

much to do about nothing

Senator Hillary Clinton's speech over abortion have been labeled "triangulation" and an attempt to position herself for 2008.

In reality, this is the same position on reproductive choice that she's held since those halycon days of "It Takes a Village." Abortion, Clinton said, is "a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women," said Clinton. Then she went further: "There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances."

The new twist, according to Slate's William Saletan is the idea of never.

Once you embrace that truth—that the ideal number of abortions is zero—voters open their ears. They listen when you point out, as Clinton did, that the abortion rate fell drastically during her husband's presidency but has risen in more states than it has fallen under George W. Bush. I'm sure these trends have more to do with economics than morals, but that's the point. Once we agree that the goal is zero, we can stop asking which party yaps more about fighting abortion and start asking which party gets results.

My favorite quote of his? "Many profound things are at stake in the abortion debate. Afternoon delight isn't high on the list."

Anyway, this is the same old same old. Hand it to Hillary to have her "Sistah Soldier" moment in 2005 in front of the pro-choice crowd instead of in 2007 or 2008, if she really is running for president, which I doubt.

don't fear the national ID

I don't get the liberatian fear of a national ID card. The ACLU has another one of their scare campaigns on the subject. Ellen from BOPNews and the Draft Clark movement is concerned about the issue.

Even if we were to make smart cards like PPI folks like Shane Ham want, I doubt we would ever get close to the ACLU 1984-esque ad. It makes sense to have one uniform ID across the US, instead of 50 different systems with varying degrees of security. It was find in the old days when people were just making fake IDs to buy beer before they turned 21 or work if they were illegal immigrants. But now terrorists could pick on a state were the standards are lax and make lots of IDs that won't be immediately recognizable. Futher, more security would help prevent identity theft, a rapidly growing crime in the information age.

Sure, at first the costs would be high to retool ever state, but the savings would be great. One swipe, and the bar tendor could know you are old enough to drink and who you say your are. We don't want criminals evading the law via changing IDs either. The government is too incompetant to compile that much data on the man in the ALCU pizza ad, nor would any Congress ever let them.

Companies already sell each other what magazines you read, what catalogues you order from what stuff you buy online to each other. So far, none of their targeted messaging has been effective on me. Maybe they base too much on the fact that I bought one philosophy book for college freshman year.

Just think, in nearly every other big, industrialized country, they have a national ID system and has anyone heard of the government listening in on people in those countries that don't have such a strong liberitarian past? Such fears are misplaced and while pure in motive, wasted in effort.

The Clinton's throw in the towel

For a while there, it seemed Bill and Hill were deserately groaping around looking for someone, ANYONE other than Howard Dean. But now that we heard Ex-Clinton Aide Hardold Ickes, Jr backs Dean for DNC we know they have given up on finding their own Tim Roemer.

``I think all the candidates who are running have strong attributes, but Dean has more of the attributes than the others,'' said Ickes, who considered running for chairman himself before dropping out in early January. ``Many people say Howard Dean is a northeastern liberal, he is progressive, but his tenure as governor of Vermont was that of a real moderate.''

Ickes, who heads the political action committee of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton....While Ickes would not comment on the Clintons' preferences, he is a close ally and would not be endorsing Dean against their strong objections."

To be sure, their fear of Dean was different than say, Al From's. The Clintons liked the old chair, not because of his ideology, but because he was their guy. Having a wide-open race for DNC chair meant that they had lost their control over the party to a degree.

It reality though, it could have been a smart vote. Howard was on the cusp of winning for sure, but he was also "a lock" about this time of year for the Nomination too and look out that worked out. Now, in theory, the good doctor "owes" the Clintons for his victory.

The timing of Ickes was impecible, just before the ASDC was about to endorse on Monday, which might or might not of sealed the deal for Howard anyway. This way, the Clintons can at least claim they influenced that outcome.

This is all very bad news for people like Frost or Roemer, who had hoped the Clintons would endorse them in the last minute and save their candiacy from an uncertain (Frost) or certain (Roemer) fate.

All the wannabes like Rosenberg and Fowler must be quite dissipointed too. They will never know if their complex strategies for taking down Dean without attacking Deanism would have worked.

Now the real question is, who will this help in the 2008 primaries? Certainly not Kerry or Bayh or Biden, maybe Boxer, maybe Clark, Clinton if she gets in, I doubt it would help Edwards, and rest of the cast of characters have yet to emmerge.

9 years and counting

The quote of the day:

"Well, I quit drinking in '86"

-- Bush, asked by C-SPAN's Brian Lamb if he sees "ghosts of past Presidents"

George doesn't have a reflective bone in his body, and I think that is what some people like about him. But there is a big drawback to moving ever forward without looking back or admitting mistakes: repeating past mistakes over and over again.

Bush likes loyalty, but what he has gotten in return has been good (Rove) in parts, but mostly horribly incompetant (Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Gonzales, etc.). To have yet another trite but true saying, "be careful for what you wish for, just might get it."

Remember the days?

The GOP increased the majority they gained in '94 this cycle, but with the retirements in '04, there are even fewer GOPers who remember life in the minority. Only 79 GOPers have served as the minority party. On the Dem side, 88 members served in the majority. Less than 40% of House members have memory of what it's like on the other side -- one wonders if any institutional memory will be utilized in the GOP's aggressive agenda for the 109th Congress.

--From National Journal's House Race Hotline.

This is the major problem with the Democrats in the House, they keep acting like they are in a decade-long nightmere and that sooner or later, they will awake to see they still have an overwhelming majority in the House. Meanwhile, their GOP counterparts have lost their way and forgotten what got them to power: the Contract with America. "To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace." Look down the list of their pledges and you will see that the majority of them never came to be and GOPers have actually gone backwards towards accomplishing these goals, which are basically copied from H. Ross Perot.

All of a sudden, the majority isn't interested in term limits or having the rules apply to them, they aren't interested in anything but Tax Cuts for corporations and other forms of Corporate Welfare (see Social Security Privatization).

On one side there is a stench of arrogance, on the other, handwriting and speechifying with no results. Chris Bowers at myDD says that the DCCC targeted 13 races last year, and they were down 13 races PLUS they were bound to lose some in Texas. In other words, they had consigned themselves to defeat. I feel sad for many House Democrats I really do, but many of them have been there for decades and really done all they could to stall progress in order to enhance their careers (see Dingell, John). I have trouble feeling pity for those who win with over 80% of the vote and sit on their hands when others who barely win or lose come begging for help.

We need to clean house on both aisles. If we truely want reform, we will have to through the bums out, all of them (those who are bums that is). I would do this through redistricting reform.

Another interesting development in redistricting is the "compromise" legislation that would give Utah another seat in exchange for letting DC's delegate be a real House member and vote on bills. In theory, it would be a wash for both parties and thus amenable to all. I bet Jim Matheson would run in the new 4th district. The state legislature already has made a map of a 4-district state in case they won that Supreme Court challenge involving the uncounted missioniares and North Carolina. The 4th district would basically be Taylorsville and surrounding areas of Salt Lake County exurbs(like Draper) and involve much of Jim's 2000-2002 district which he did well. This would be a compact district again like his old district and urban versus the incredibly rural-urban mix of the current 2nd district.

I wish I could find a map of the old plan, but I can't here is the bill, but not the map. Oh and the governor signed that too, so this should be a speedy process.

So if Jim does run in the 4th or against Cannon (another favorite option of mine, since the man is an idiot and has never had a real race), who runs in the new 2nd? I doubt Scott Matheson would run again and I can't think of anyone who they could get to run, maybe St. Sen. Minority Leader Mike Dmitrich (sp?) who basically owns the Price-area. Further South than that, and the pickings get really slim for Utah Democrats.

The first firing?

Good news. The biggest incompetent of the War in Iraq, the War on Terror and just about everything else, is "resigning" to be "closer to his family." Maybe this is the way Bush likes to fire idiots who are loyal to him.

Douglas J. Feith, the Pentagon's top policy official who became a lightning rod for issues including intelligence on Iraq and information warfare, said Wednesday that he would resign this summer.

Feith had the Midas touch, turning everything he got himself involved in, whether it was warplanning, post-war planning, troop training, intelligence gathering to find proof for the war, finding the non-existent Saddam-9/11 connection, into a complete disaster for the President.

Douggie even got entwined in an FBI investigation over DOD being too cozy with Israeli intelligence via IPAC.

The man was a wrecking ball at the DOD policy shop. This is what happens when you put ideologies in positions of power where they should be off writing nasty letters instead. Like Bush, it seems Doug didn't bother himself with "facts" he just went about his business to prove the unprovable to make plan with so many built-in erroneous assumptions that they were bound to fail. He was too busy worrying how many roses the Iraqis would use up to greet American soldiers as liberators to worry about guarding arms depos or the Iraqi Museum or provide enough armor for the troops.

Now I have another reason to look forward to the summer. Good riddance.