AP's John Solomon publishes ANOTHER misleading hit piece on Harry Reid

Okay, this one is truly outrageous coming from anyone working for an "independent" news organization like AP. The Associated Press is a c3 non-profit - in my view, they are entering very interesting legal territory in terms of their non-political non-profit status.

AP's Solomon just published a story stating in the first sentence:

Reversing course, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid's office acknowledged Wednesday night he misstated the ethics rules governing his acceptance of free boxing tickets and has decided to avoid taking such gifts in the future.

Any reader who speaks a lick of English is clearly going to understand Solomon's sentence as saying that Harry Reid claimed the Senate ethics rules said it was okay for him to accept the boxing tickets, and now Reid realizes the ethics rules say he cannot accept such tickets.

The problem? That's a flat out lie - Reid never said any such thing. Of course, in the way that only AP can do, they bury the "real" explanation of what they mean towards the end of the story so you'll walk away thinking something totally different than the truth.

Reid misstated the Senate ethics rules alright. He unintentionally painted the rules as MORE restrictive than they actually are. But you won't find that out until the end of the story.

In a nutshell, the ethics rules say a Senator can take something of value from a state agency (in this case, Reid accepted access to 3 boxing matches from a state of Nevada government agency - there weren't any "tickets"). Reid misspoke in saying that you had to be the Senator from the state in question to accept the "something of value." I.e., McCain of Arizona couldn't accept something from the state of Nevada, or so Reid thought. In fact, Reid today informs us that ANY Senator can accept something of value from ANY state's agency - i.e., it's okay for Arizona's John McCain to get boxing access from the state of the Nevada.

This isn't a small point. Harry Reid mistakenly claimed that the Senate ethics rules were MORE stringent in this area than they really are. And he wasn't refering to how the rules covered him - which is what AP claims - he was refering to how they covered John McCain. Harry Reid was absolutely correct in how he stated the Senate ethics rules' application to him, and he has not changed his position on that. The AP outright lied, or is one of the sloppiest publications on the planet, in their description of this issue in their lead (which is often the only thing people read).

To Reid's credit, he's said tonight that if it's going to create any appearance of impropriety, he'll pay for such boxing access in the future. And good for him. But for AP to paint this as though the Reid was wrong and the Senate ethics rules say he was wrong - and that's exactly what AP implies in its lead - is itself flat out wrong, and unethical, and frankly smacks of politics. And if the AP wants to have a partisan agenda, then they should change their tax status, or maybe someone should do it for them.

Here is the statement from Reid's office tonight about the issue:

"Senate ethics rules specifically permit any senator to accept something of valuefrom a state agency. Senator Reid misspoke when he said the rule applies only tosenators who represent the state agency. It was therefore entirely permissible forSenator Reid -- a Senator from Nevada -- to have attended a major Nevada sportingevent as a guest of Nevada officials. But in light of questions that have beenraised about the practice, Senator Reid will not accept these kinds of credentialsin the future in order to avoid even the faintest appearance of impropriety. Senator Reid will continue to fight for his federal boxing bill and otherlegislation that will benefit Nevada and the nation."

Read More......

Santorum is 23% behind Casey in PA Senate race

Holy cow. Read More......

Another reason we [heart] Atrios

"The willingness to send others off to die for a misguided war because you wet your pants after 9/11 is called 'cowardice' not courage." - Atrios

Read More......

Former chair of the Kansas Republican party switches, becomes a Democrat

Pretty "red" state to have this high level a defection. Anybody up on Kansas politics, like to tell us more about this?

The former chairman of the Kansas Republican Party jumped ship in a big way Tuesday, switching his affiliation to Democrat amid speculation that he would become Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' running mate.

Read More......

New Politics TV is Up. Today's topic: Haditha and more

Check out today's broadcast here. Read More......

Batwoman is a lesbian

Not kidding. The new Batwoman in DC Comics is going to be gay. Falwell is going to have a fit. Read More......

Republicans running for Alabama Supreme Court embrace Segregationist legal arguments, will ignore US Supreme Court if they don't like a decision

Sure, why not? Screw the Supreme Court. Screw the Constitution. Screw the rule of law. It's only the entire basis of our system of governance in America. So what if it's now in vogue in Republican and religious right circles to renounce America's entire system of checks and balances, our entire system of government.

Feel-good Republicans don't do things because they're legal, they do 'em because they feel good. In fact, what these Republicans and the religious are proposing sounds an awful lot like sedition and a call to civil war.

And thus democracies perish. Read More......

More errors found in Associated Press hatchet job story on Harry Reid

Sucks to be you.

(Additional background here.) Read More......

U.S. troops in Iraq kill pregnant woman racing to hospital to give birth

It's over. Read More......

Iran: How bad logic became bad policy

NOTE FROM JOHN: AJ is our newest addition to AMERICAblog. He's a former Department of Defense intelligence officer whose duties included covering Iraq.
--------------

Since we talked Iraq last week, and Iran is back in vogue this week – apparently we're in the "Iran phase" of the immigrants-gays-Iran SCARY rotation – let's look at why the administration seems to be seriously entertaining the notion of some kind of armed conflict with Iran.

Administration policies and tactics regarding Iran are increasingly focused on brinkmanship, which they're happy with because, to them, it's both good policy and good politics. I think the Bush administration honestly believes that Iran's leadership is both irrational and expansionist – the Hitler analogies fly fast and furious on the religious and neocon right – and the only thing one can do with such people, the conservative talking point goes, is confront them. Concurrently, all this talk of war with Iran takes the focus off of Iraq and makes people believe there's another imminent boogeyman out there (The Scary!). And scaring the public, the administration believes, is always a good strategy for helping Republican electoral prospects this fall.

But the Bushies have a warped view of the international political implications of the Iran situation, which is leading to grievous political (and potentially military) missteps. One of the many mistakes they are making is one of the same critical errors they made with Iraq: forgetting that all politics is local. Iranian leaders will always be more focused on their own population than on their region or the U.S. - nationalistic rallying cries are beneficial to oppressive regimes. But, if they can get something that benefits them, some acceptable settlement, they will back off.

The Bush administration perspective, however, is that it's yucky to negotiate with Evildoers. Although I don't disagree with that general sentiment, sometimes talking to people you don't like is necessary to achieving greater interests. Shocking, I know.

The leaders of Iran are sending out all sorts of signals that they are interested in negotiating, but no nation, especially a prideful, honor-based one, can come forward hat in hand. International diplomacy is usually a subtle game, so it's hard for me to imagine how many discreet signals were sent before Iran resorted to rambling open letters and publicly revealing a slowdown in uranium enrichment to try to bring the U.S. to the negotiating table.

Iran is a genuine danger, both to regional stability and potentially to American interests. Even though Iran's religious leadership has said it doesn't want a nuclear arsenal, historically Iran isn't a particularly trustworthy nation. But the fact that this is a genuine international problem makes it even more important that skillful diplomacy – rather than ideological posturing and saber-rattling – be used, or at least attempted.

This kind of situation is where one hopes that smart, capable people can work something out - whether a secret deal, face-saving compromise, or whatever (good luck disaffected State Department careerists!). But for the True Believers, I imagine the idea of compromise with Iran is anathema, so it's up to the reality-based community to call bullshit when necessary... which is going to be often. Read More......

NYT: Ned Lamont's challenge to Lieberman "should be taken seriously"

I really think there's a danger of Lieberman bolting the Democratic party AFTER he's elected. It's just my gut, but I think Bush has already spoken to him about taking Rumsfeld's job at Defense. And Lieberman told him to wait until after the primary, or the election. Lieberman loses the primary or the general election, he takes the job. But what's even more troublesome is what happens if Lieberman wins the election, then takes the job anyway?

There has to be a reason Lieberman has been sucking up so badly to Bush over the war. To say, today, that the war is going well and still was a good idea, you'd have to be either insane or angling for something. And I don't think Lieberman is insane.

He should be forced to state categorically that he will never bolt the Democratic party and he will never accept a job offer from George Bush, or people shouldn't even give his candidacy the time of day.

Anyway, great NYT article on Lamont. Read More......

GOP doing MORE tax cuts next week, worth $1 trillion over ten years

Hey, what a better way to divert the nation's attention from war crimes than to cut taxes AGAIN and plunge us further into debt.

These "credit card Republicans" need to go. Read More......

Scathing editorial on Santorum in the Pittsburgh paper

Pittsburg Post-Gazette:

Before every election, the Post-Gazette routinely sends letters to the candidates seeking material for the Voters Guide. Back in March, as part of that process for the primary, the newspaper sent a letter to Rick Santorum at his home address, at least the one that he claims. Back from Penn Hills came the letter with a sticker from the U.S. Postal Service checked as "Not Deliverable As Addressed -- Unable To Forward."

That is all you need to know about the nasty dispute between the Republican Sen. Santorum and his Democratic opponent, Bob Casey Jr., in the November election. The whole thing is rooted in one inconvenient fact for Sen. Santorum: He doesn't live here anymore...

Read More......

South Dakota abortion ban repeal now on ballot

A funny thing is happening on the right wing's campaign to overturn Roe v. Wade using the South Dakota abortion ban. Led by the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, the people of South Dakota are intervening. They have collected enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot to repeal the ban:

An abortion rights group Tuesday submitted more than twice the number of the signatures needed to hold a statewide vote in November on whether to repeal South Dakota's ban on abortion.

The Legislature earlier this year passed the strictest abortion law in the nation, banning all abortions except those necessary to save a woman's life. The law, scheduled to take effect July 1, makes no exceptions for rape or incest.

The measure was aimed at sparking a court fight that supporters hope will lead to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established the right to an abortion.

Great work. Now the campaign begins.

A couple months ago, I saw the sponsor of the SD ban, Roger Hunt, on CNN. He maintained that his law would overturn Roe. He's calculating that by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, there would be another new Bush appointee on the Court:

CROWLEY: Roger Hunt has always believed abortion is wrong. And South Dakota has a long history of antiabortion legislation. What gives this particular bill its juice is a reconstituted, more conservative U.S. Supreme Court, and one liberal member Justice John Paul Stevens about to celebrate his 86th birthday.

HUNT: So that means President Bush is probably going to have the opportunity in the next two to three years to appoint a third nominee to the United States Supreme Court..

These guys think long term. They have an agenda. Their agenda affects the privacy of all Americans, not just on choice. That's the tip of the iceberg.

SD can stop them in their tracks. Read More......

Dissecting the Haditha cover-up

The New York Times has a front page article about the cover-up of the Haditha massacre:

A military investigator uncovered evidence in February and March that contradicted repeated claims by marines that Iraqi civilians killed in Haditha last November were victims of a roadside bomb, according to a senior military official in Iraq.

Among the pieces of evidence that conflicted with the marines' story were death certificates that showed all the Iraqi victims had gunshot wounds, mostly to the head and chest, the official said.

The investigation, which was led by Col. Gregory Watt, an Army officer in Baghdad, also raised questions about whether the marines followed established rules for identifying hostile threats when they assaulted houses near the site of a bomb attack, which killed a fellow marine.

The three-week inquiry was the first official investigation into an episode that was first uncovered by Time magazine in January and that American military officials now say appears to have been an unprovoked attack by the marines that killed 24 Iraqi civilians. The results of Colonel Watt's investigation, which began on Feb. 14, have not previously been disclosed.

They don't beat up John Murtha in the Times article. They actually get to one of the key aspects of the scandal: the cover-up.

And for all those who think Murtha is somehow "politicizing" this issue because he's not covering it up, check out this quote:

"This was a small number of Marines who fired directly on civilians and killed them," said Representative John Kline, a Minnesota Republican and former Marine who was briefed two weeks ago by Marine Corps officials. "This is going to be an ugly story."

Read More......

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Yesterday, Congressman Murtha did several interviews on CNN about the Haditha massacre. Both John and I were struck by the combative tone from Paula Zahn and, we hear, Anderson Cooper (both of whom we actually like, and have been quite fair on a number of issues in the past).

For some reason, both anchors seemed to adopt the GOP talking points to make Murtha the story all about Murtha's credibility. Murtha handled it very well, of course. The guy is a pro -- and he knows of what he speaks (and clearly has amazing sources). But how did CNN decide that Murtha was the controversy -- and not either the actual massacre or the massive cover-up?
As Murtha himself noted, repeatedly, we wouldn't even be talking about this story, and there would be no investigation, if Murtha hadn't been so outspoken about it.

Classic example of the media missing the story. They wanted a controversy about the messenger instead of exploring further what he was bringing them. And what he was bringing them were war crimes.

With that, what else is going on? Besides Katie's last day? Read More......

Images of Mugabe's destruction now available

Amnesty International has published satellite photos of Porta Farm, a poor community of 30,000 outside of Harare, which was removed from the map last year as part of Mugabe's effort to squash dissent and disperse strong pockets of opposition. Like Pol Pot, Mugabe engaged in a broad program to break apart urban areas and relocated citizens to the country where resources were already limited. The photos of the devastated area are shocking.

Just a few days ago, a high ranking member of the Mbeki team governing South Africa launched into an offensive on the West/rich countries, blaming them for overlooking the positives that the continent had to offer and then whined about the brain drain. (Hint: if the environment is there, people will stay and work. I have heard the same story in France for years.) I agree that all too often stories in the Western media are exaggerated but this new story is precisely why foreign investors are nervous about Africa. When the economic powerhouse of South Africa sits on its hands and does nothing when its neighbor is wiping communities off of the map, what do you expect?

Take a stand for mankind and against insanity and perhaps foreign perceptions will be different. Otherwise, just accept the results of the environment that you created. Read More......

May has been bloodiest month for British troops in Iraq

Remember when the British-controlled areas were the calm regions? Considering the movement of additional US troops into the country, Iraq appears to be going backwards. How will Blair spin the increased UK death toll? Read More......

Did I mention September 11?

It's hard work using dead people for political gain. Read More......

Associated Press caught deleting line in news story, makes story more biased against Senator Reid

UPDATE: It gets worse.

This is rather serious. The Associated Press ran a story yesterday (byline John Solomon) attacking Senator Harry Reid for accepting tickets to a boxing match in Nevada as the guest of the Nevada state government (something that appears totally fine under Senate ethics rules).

AP then comes under some rather severe criticism from bloggers, this blog included, because the article notes in its second paragraph that rather than doing the bidding of the Nevada boxing folks, Reid was in fact pushing legislation they didn't like - i.e., Reid was not in the pocket of the Nevada boxing folks.

Today, Josh Marshall discovered that AP appears to have edited its story and deleted the sentence that makes clear that Harry Reid was pushing legislation the Nevada boxing folks didn't like. I.e., AP just happened to delete the key line of their story that proves that Harry Reid isn't dishonest. And AP happens to delete this line from their story right after we all criticize them, using the line as proof that AP's story doesn't hold water.

This is what AP was saying yesterday about Harry Reid in the second paragraph of their story. Note that this version mentions that the legislation Reid was pushing was not favored by the boxing commission:



And here is what the AP story NOW says after someone edited it. Note that there's no longer any mention that Reid was at odds with the boxing commission over the legislation - i.e., he was his own man:



What you will find in the "edited" story is a mention of this "usurping" of state authority in the 30th paragraph. It was initially in the 2nd paragraph of the story. It comes as no surprise that in some versions of the "new" story, the 30th paragraph was cut out entirely by local papers trying to conserve space.

It is very difficult to believe that this was anything other than intentional on the part of the Associated Press. They appear to have changed a story - taken the most significant piece of information out of a story - in order to better smear a sitting US Senator. And before the AP says it was a simple mistaken edit, a number of the top blogs wrote about that very sentence yesterday, showing how that sentence proved the AP story was a hatchet job. Would AP now have us believe that they never heard of the criticism, and the sentence simply disappeared by accident?

The Associated Press and its reporter John Solomon need to issue an immediate correction along with a statement explaining why this key line of the story was deleted, and apologizing to Senator Reid. And if you don't think this is important, CNN and MSNBC already got the story wrong, and it appears they may have relied on the "new" AP story.

The Associated Press, under the byline of John Solomon, has an ever-growing history of smears against Democrats, including Ambassador Joe Wilson, Senator Dorgan, and Senator Reid. One of the adults at the AP needs to step in now and find out what the heck is going on. Read More......

Nice to meet you. You killed my cousin.

It was live on CNN, I saw it. Fresh from meeting President Bush at the White House, the new Iraqi ambassador went on CNN today and accused US troops of intentionally killing his cousin in Iraq without cause.

Let me try to explain how big a deal this is. This is the new Iraqi ambassador. Our stooge. He just met with Bush (our other stooge, but more in a Three Stooges kind of way). You just don't SAY things like this on CNN when you're the ambassador of a friendly country (especially a puppet country) and especially after you've just met the US president.

This is, as we say on AMERICAblog, rather huge. I think the Iraqi ambassador just Sister Souljah'd the US president to buttress the Iraqi government at home.

Here's the transcript from CNN.

BLITZER: But even months before the incident in November, you lost a cousin at Haditha in a separate battle involving United States Marines.

SUMAIDAIE: Well, that was not a battle at all. Marines were doing house-to-house searches, and they went into the house of my cousin. He opened the door for them.

His mother, his siblings were there. He led them into the bedroom of his father. And there he was shot.

BLITZER: Who shot him?

SUMAIDAIE: A member of the Marines.

BLITZER: Why did they shoot him?

SUMAIDAIE: Well, they said that they shot him in self-defense. I find that hard to believe because, A, he is not at all a violent -- I mean, I know the boy. He was [in] a second-year engineering course in the university. Nothing to do with violence. All his life has been studies and intellectual work.

Totally unbelievable. And, in fact, they had no weapon in the house. They had one weapon which belonged to the school where his father was a headmaster. And it had no ammunition in it. And he led them into the room to show it to them.

BLITZER: So what you're suggesting, your cousin was killed in cold blood, is that what you're saying, by United States Marines?

SUMAIDAIE: I believe he was killed intentionally. I believe that he was killed unnecessarily. And unfortunately, the investigations that took place after that sort of took a different course and concluded that there was no unlawful killing.

I would like further investigation. I have, in fact, asked for the report of the last investigation, which was a criminal investigation, by the way.

[Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq] is aware of all the details, because he's kept on top of it. And it was he who rejected the conclusions of the first investigation. I have since asked formally for the report, but it's been nearly two months, and I have not received it.

(Hat tip to The Dan Report.) Read More......

1,500 more US troops on their way to Iraq, Kabul is in anarchy, so what does Bush do? Calls a press conference about gay marriage.

At some point, will someone please tell the Republicans the rest of us are dying out here. Read More......

"Ashamed to be American"

This is a comment that one of our readers wrote and posted earlier today. For all of you folks who don't understand blogs (msm, ahem) I did not write this, one of our readers wrote this and posted it in the comments earlier today:

I had a friend die on 9/11 in Tower One, and the son of another friend in the Pentagon (I live in Maryland). I was heartbroken and angry as hell at Osama. I felt more patriotic than usual -- and I am usually very patriotic (even if what we did to Native Americans always pissed me off). But now, unfortunately, Bush has ruined my feelings for this country. I'm ashamed. 9/11 has become a sort of bastardized event where the sadness I feel now is directed at how 9/11 has been used and abused. Osama wanted to destroy our infrastructure and Bush played right into his hands. I'm so angry. And why this man is not impeached just kills me. I believe America has been lost. It started under Reagan, and now it is complete. I have no more hope. I think 9/11 actually destroyed us. The problem is it really wasn't Osama that did it -- it was Bush, the media, and the scores of ignorant Americans that have forgotten what we stand for. I actually hate the America that now exists. Thanks, George.

Read More......

Surprise! Officers reportedly not subjects of investigation of Iraqi civilian massacre, only enlisted men being investigated

Yes, the Bush administration is again making the enlisted men the fall guys.

Pentagon investigations into the shooting deaths of Iraqi civilians are focused on about a dozen enlisted Marines and do not target their commanding officers, the lawyer for one of the officers said Tuesday.

Forget about the fact that Rep. Murtha said this past weekend that there was definitely a cover up of this seeming war crime, a cover up that goes far beyond the men involved:

"This investigation should have been over two or three weeks after the incident."...

Murtha, a Marine veteran who six months ago called for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, added, "There's has to have been a cover-up. ... There's no question about it..."

"There's no question about what happened. ... The problem is: Who covered it up, why did they cover it up and why did it take so long?"

But funny, the DOD apparently isn't interested in investigating anybody above the grade of staff sargeant. After all, in the Bush administration, we don't hold bosses responsible for their mistakes, we simply blame their employees. And preferably the lowest employees on the totem pole.

Ah yes, one step closer to creating that banana republic military that Bush and Rummy and General Pace seem so fond of. Speaking of General Pace, how did he suddenly get out of this investigation? According to Murtha, the cover-up could go as high as Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. So why aren't any officers at all being investigated, let alone Pace himself? Again, per Murtha quoted by ABC, a network that didn't censor the Murtha quote to protect Pace:

"It goes right up the chain of command right up to General Pace. ... Did he know about it? Did he cover it up? I'm sure he didn't, but we need to find out."

Yes we do need to find out, but we won't. Because General Pace and all of his officer flunkies won't be touched by this investigation - it's all the enlisted men's fault, per Bush and Pace, it always is. Bush and Pace would have us believe that if it weren't for those bad-apple enlisted men who supposedly also came up with Abu Ghraib all by themselves (even though the same practices were being done at other US military prisons around the world - coincidence, I'm sure) we wouldn't have all of these human rights abuses going on.

And in any case, we can't have an honest investigation of whether General Pace and any officers were involved. That simply is not the way the military works in a banana republic. If our military leaders were actually accountable to international law, we'd be a democracy and a shining beacon around the world. And we just couldn't have that.

What's a war crime between friends, eh General Pace? Read More......

House holds hearing on how to keep FBI out of their offices

The House Judiciary Committee had a hearing this morning about the raid on Jefferson's office:

Back on Capitol Hill, Sensenbrenner signaled that he would not be joining those who had softened their criticism of the raid and in fact planned two more hearings on the subject. He also suggested he might introduce legislation codifying any guidelines for such searches.

One hearing, Sensenbrenner said, would include Gonzales and Mueller.

"They didn't get it right this time," Sensenbrenner said during the first session, titled "Reckless Justice: Did the Saturday Night Raid of Congress Trample the Constitution?"

For the GOP, trampling the Constitution is only an issue when it directly affects them.

And, given all the corruption in the GOP, it's no wonder their leaders are worried about the FBI doing raids on Congressional offices. AMERICAblog put together this handy list for investigators of the sleaziest GOP members and their offices:

Roy Blunt: 217 Cannon or go right to the Majority Leader's Office right in the Capitol

Ken Calvert: 2201 Rayburn

Tom DeLay: 242 Cannon (Note to FBI:you only have until June 9th, he's resigning)

John Dolittle: 2410 Rayburn

Tom Feeney: 323 Cannon

Jerry Lewis: 2112 Rayburn and check out 2359 Rayburn which is the Appropriations Committee office, too. (He's the Chair.)

Gary Miller: 1037 Longworth

Bob Ney: 2438 Rayburn (get to him fast, everyone wants a piece of Ney these days)

Richard Pombo: 2411 Rayburn

Charles Taylor: 339 Cannon

Is it any wonder that the GOP leadership is apoplectic that the FBI may be cracking down on Congressional corruption.

UPDATE: Based on testimony in the Safavian corruption trial (by an aide of Bob Ney's who went to work for Abramoff), here are a couple more GOP members of Congress for the FBI to keep an eye on:

The aide, Neil Volz, who was a partner of Abramoff's at the time, also outlined how the Abramoff team received assistance from several Republican congressmen including, Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, and Rep. Steven LaTourette, R-Ohio.

Read More......

On the anniversary of "last throes," Bush sends more troops to quell Iraq. This is a VERY bad sign. Here's why...

NOTE FROM JOHN: AJ is an ex military intelligence officer now writing on AMERICAblog about security issues. He has extensive experience on Iraq policy both here and in country.
---------

CNN reports that 1,500 troops are being moved from Kuwait into Iraq's Anbar province, the Sunni stronghold in the west. WaPo and NYT put it at either 3,500, or a full brigade. (The discrepancy, I think, is that CNN is reporting the troops that have already moved; NYT and WaPo are reporting the total number in Kuwait that will eventually be deployed.)

This is a tremendously bad sign, and indicates that Anbar province, and likely the city of Ramadi in particular, are beyond out of control.

There is no indication that the move is in response to any particular increase in numbers of fighters from other parts of Iraq or neighboring countries, meaning that the surge in violence is home-grown. Although the insurgent learning curve has thus far been surprisingly gradual, they're getting better at their deadly craft and we don't appear to have an answer.

The articles also indicate a disturbing trend of Al Qa'ida recruitment successes among the indigenous Sunni population. As that occurs, huge swaths of western Iraq will become terrorist havens, camps, training areas, etc. If we can't control the cities, we're certainly not controlling the countryside.

In a particularly awful irony, exactly a year ago our Vice President declared that the insurgency was in its last throes. Unreal. Of course, when a government (or occupier) fails to provide any kind of security or basic services for the people, it shouldn't be surprising when they get pissed, lash out, and turn to anyone that can protect and serve them. Call it the Hamas model.

Most importantly, though, if the strategy being implemented with 130,000 troops isn't working, why would it work with 3,500 more? Deficient strategy. Deficient Secretary of Defense. Deficient presidency. Read More......

Open thread

Go for it Read More......

Republican tax bill raises taxes on Americans living abroad

Now they don't just hate France, they hate Americans living in France.

So much for no new taxes.

I think I smell a campaign issue - the GOP voted to raise taxes, and Bush agreed.

Ah, like father like son. Read More......

I'm all for the War on Terror. When does it start?

Seems the folks at Firedoglake have stirred up a hornet's nest of freepers by suggesting there is no war on terror, nor should there be. I think they're both right and wrong, kind of.

First, there is no war on terror - anymore. There was a war on terror, for a few months or so in late 2001, and it went quite well, for the short while it lasted. As you'll recall, America got hit and we retaliated, smartly, by going after the folks enabling Al Qaeda, the Taliban. Things went well in Afghanistan (for a while), then things went horribly wrong.

Since that time, whether by intent or neglect, the actual war on terror has been missing in action. We invaded Iraq for all the wrong reasons - Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror. Lots of us knew that before Bush invaded. All of us know it now.

And at home, Bush has been systematically dismantling the very freedoms he keeps telling us that Osama hates and our soldiers are defending. Watering down the Bill of Rights, tearing up the Constitution, and ignoring the rule of law have nothing to do with the war on terror, unless you count Osama's very goals in that war.

Bush has been trying to sell our ports to countries that enabled the attacks on September 11. Containers coming in to our country still go unchecked (oops, there goes a nuke). And how about mail packages that travels on domestic airlines - last time I checked, lots of mail on planes wasn't being checked for bombs either, has that changed? FEMA still remains totally unpreprepared for another national disaster. We're not prepared for smallpox. Airline passengers still aren't screened against all the name on the terrorist watch list. Homeland Security money is doled out as pork. And on and on.

And after all that, Bush still hasn't learned his lesson. He talks tough against Iran, preparing the nation for another war, while Iran has nothing to do with the attacks on September 11 or Osama. Where is Osama bin Laden? Have we taken care of Al Qaeda? Have we taken care of ourselves?

Not a word from Bush.

There was a war on terror. But now, there is no war on terror. Bush's foreign and domestic policy, when he has a coherent one, is geared towards helping his corporate allies profit at the expense of regular Americans - not geared towards protecting the nation against terrorism or fighting any supposed war on terror. Iraq was about oil and avenging Bush's father. Iran is about oil and the neo-conservative fixation with rewriting the world. North Korea (a massive threat to the US, though not in the "terror" sense, rather in the "they can nuke us and they're crazy" sense) is... forgotten. And the depressing rollback of civil liberties and the rule of law at home are about establishing an imperial presidency in order to entrench conservativism in American government for decades.

What happened to the war on terror?

Here is where I differ with Firedoglake. The semantics of the phrase "war on terror" don't bother me as much as it does them, though clearly the phrase is used by Bush in a manner that would make the best propagandists from Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, or Orwell's Oceania proud. (We are at war with Iraq, we have always been at war with Iraq (other than that time Rumsfeld, at the behest of Ronald Reagan, shook Saddam's hand), we will (sadly) always be at war with Iraq.) The problem isn't the war on terror, it's what Bush and his coterie of conservatives ideologues have done with the war on terror. They've taken a valid campaign, a valid battle, and twisted it beyond recognition in order to help push every agenda other than the actual war on terror itself.

Just as bad, to the degree you believe Bush has actually been trying to fight the real war on terror, it's still a wash because he's been so incompetent at it. Whether it's the invasion of Iraq (oops, wrong country, and worse, Bush turned Iraq into the very Al Qaeda playground he claimed he was trying to destroy), or the dismantling of civil liberties at home, which flies in the face of everything our country stands for (not to mention, it doesn't appear to have helped the "war" much either), George Bush is simply too incompetent of a man to effectively fight a war on terror.

Imagine during World War II, had America invaded Mexico instead of attacking Germany and Japan. Could we really claim the war on Mexico was a part of the war against the Axis when Mexico wasn't a member of the Axis, nor did it have anything to do with them? Sure, we'd THINK we were fighting alongside the Allies in World War II, but we wouldn't be really.

Just because Bush says we're fighting the war on terror doesn't make it so.

Whether by misdirection or incompetence, the president who ran and hid for 12 hours on September 11, has been running and hiding ever since. A real, competent president would take the war on terror to the actual enemy. Rather than just say it (repeatedly), he'd actually do it. A real president would recognize our freedoms as our strength, as the very thing we're fighting to protect, rather than marking our liberty as a part of the problem.

So, I'm all for the war on terror.

When does it start? Read More......

Bush named new patsy for Treasury

What kind of self-loathing fool is this guy who wants to take this job under Bush? Things must be going poorly for him at Goldman Sachs if he's ready to make a move like this. Read More......

US sending more troops to Iraq

Despite all the talk of "progress" in Iraq, the United States has actually increased the number of soldiers in that country:

The top American commander in Iraq has decided to move reserve troops now deployed in Kuwait into the volatile Anbar Province in western Iraq to help quell a rise in insurgent attacks there, two American officials said Monday.

Although some soldiers from the 3,500-member brigade in Kuwait have moved into Iraq in recent months, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. has decided to send in the remainder of the unit after consultations with Iraqi officials in recent days, the officials said.

The confirmation that the number of American forces in Iraq would grow came on a day of soaring violence in Baghdad.

Read More......

John Snow is quitting...or getting canned...or something in between

Does it really matter? CNN just reported that Henry Paulson who heads Goldman, Sachs is taking the job as Secretary of the Treasury. Bush will make the big announcement at 9:15 a.m.

UPDATE: Think Progress reports that Paulson not only acknowledges global warming exists, he endorsed the Kyoto protocol and believes that failing to address this problem actually undermines American competitiveness. Not quite the Bush Administration policy. Read More......

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Let's get it started... Read More......

Trouble continues in Paris suburbs

When the riots stopped last year, I was quite sure that it was only a matter of time before problems re-started because no real actions were taken to address the serious problems of racism and lack of opportunity within the poor suburbs. It's hard to say if last nights clashes will expand but until the government gets serious about this problem it will not just go away. Read More......

EU court knocks down airline passenger data law

The US had been forcing airlines flying into the US from overseas to turn over passenger data which would then be screened. An EU court today has struck down that law because it claims that once in the hands of the US the data can not be protected. Too bad we don't have anyone in DC that is as interested in protecting individuals personal data. With the steady stream of data that is being lost or stolen, you might think that someone might take action, but obviously that's asking for too much. Read More......

Open thread

Hitting the sack early for once. At least gonna try. Nite nite. Read More......

Three more AP John Solomon articles faulted for taking pot-shots at Dems, leaving out key facts

It seems AP's John Solomon has a history of writing anti-Democrat hit pieces that don't really hold water:

1. John Solomon's AP story about Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan leaves out key information. From Media Matters:

A November 29 Associated Press article by John Solomon and Sharon Theimer omitted a key claim by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) that could undermine allegations that he received a political contribution arranged by lobbyist Jack Abramoff "shortly after" writing a letter in support of a tribal school program that would benefit the American Indian tribes that Abramoff represented.

2. John Solomon's February AP story attacking Harry Reid was exposed as having unfairly slanted the story by not noting the not-insignificant fact that Harry Reid never took any action on behalf of the folks who AP claims bought him. This time from Josh Marshall:

In this case, despite the AP story's narrative of lobbyist contacts, there doesn't seem to be any evidence whatsoever that Reid ever took any action on behalf of Abramoff's Marianas clients. Wasn't that worth a mention?

3. After being shown to have written a sloppy story attacking Harry Reid (point 2 above), AP's John Solomon writes a third story again refusing to include key information favorable to Reid. More from Josh Marshall:

Nowhere in the new article can the AP writers bring themselves to note that Reid never adopted Abramoff's clients' position on the issue. So whatever quids Abramoff's folks were offering up, Reid never gave them a quo. From start to finish he was the co-sponsor of the bill Abramoff's clients wanted to defeat.

That's key information -- arguably, the central piece of information in the whole case. But the AP keeps pressing their misleading narrative while omitting this key point.

This is a good example of what happens when getting (or in this case, not losing the story) becomes more important than getting the story right.

And more from Media Matters about Solomon's second poorly-written hit piece on Harry Reid.

AP, is there something you'd like to tell us? Read More......

More on John Solomon, the Associated Press writer who wrote the bogus hit piece on Harry Reid today

You might recall that this isn't Mr. Solomon's first brush with truthiness. From AMERICAblog last July, 2005 we learn of John Solomon's untrue reporting about Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson:

The Associated Press totally botched a rather significant part of the Rove-Plame story today.

Basically, AP is now supposedly quoting Wilson as saying his wife was NOT an undercover agent when Rove outed her. Here's what AP wrote today:

But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," he said.

NO, AP, that's not what Wilson said - I watched the interview live. What he said was that the day Bob Novak outed his wife she ceased to be an undercover operative. Not that she wasn't an undercover operative on that day, but rather that she sure wasn't undercover anymore once Rove and Novak outed here. Big difference there.

At the very most, one can argue that Wilson's comments were confusing - that it wasn't clear which interpretation he meant. But AP simply quoting this as fact, that's simply factually wrong on its face. (It sounds to me like the GOP fed that quote to AP and no one thought twice about what it really meant - haven't you guys learned yet about trusting this administration on this stuff?) And you know that AP line is going to be used by the wingnuts to "prove" that Plame wasn't an undercover agent.

And as Atrios notes, Wilson can't come right out and say his wife was an undercover operative, because legally he probably can't. That's why he wasn't clear. But for AP to just presume that Wilson meant his wife wasn't undercover at the time, there is simply no basis in fact - that's a rather big screw-up.

Read More......

Lay and Skilling testimony helped tip the balance

The arrogance of power in action. I'm glad to hear that Lay and Skilling helped the jury decide that they were guilty.

Speaking shortly after a federal judge read their verdict, jurors said Lay's indignant outbursts while testifying in his own behalf made him seem "that he very much wanted to be in control -- he commanded the courtroom," said Wendy Vaughan, a Houston business owner.

As for Skilling, who spent days explaining the tedious financial inner workings of the once high-flying energy company, the jurors couldn't understand how he could know so much about that and not be aware of illegal business maneuvering, whether or not he was responsible for it personally.

And if you really want to be disgusted with Kenny-boy...

During the trial prosecutors had played tapes of conference calls to investors, which Lay and Skilling held several hours after they released quarterly earnings reports, as well as the tape of an employee meeting during which Lay encouraged his employees to buy more Enron stock, calling it "an incredible bargain." Government prosecutors revealed that Lay sold millions of dollars worth of Enron stock the same day.

Read More......

Democratic Senator from Nevada attended Nevada event as guest of the state of Nevada along with Nevada constituents. Oh the humanity!

What kind of world do we live in when the Senator from Nevada is the guest of the state of Nevada at a Nevada event with his Nevada constituents.

I mean, really now - what does ANY of that have to do with Nevada?

Yes, this is the big scoop of a story just breaking from the Associated Press. Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) attended three boxing matches in Nevada as the guest of the Nevada Athletic Commission, the state agency that regulates boxing. Even though this appears on its face to be permitted under Senate ethics rules (it's okay to accept gifts from the federal, state, or local governments), the AP apparently thinks they pulled a "gotcha" on Harry Reid.

Perhaps my favorite part of the article:

Reid, D-Nev., took the free seats for Las Vegas fights between 2003 and 2005 as he was pressing legislation to increase government oversight of the sport, including the creation of a federal boxing commission that Nevada's agency feared might usurp its authority.

Wow, so you mean Harry Reid accepted tickets from a state agency that he had no intent on helping - an agency, in fact, that Reid was actually working to undercut (in the agency's view). Wow, hell of a conflict of, uh, conflict of, uh, well, it's not really a conflict of anything when you accept tickets from somebody for which you're doing the exact opposite of what they want. That's like "unbribery" - give me the money and I'll screw you over. If anything, this proves Reid's independence - it ain't a bribe when you take the tickets with no intent whatosever to help.

Now, one could argue, as AP does, that this case is different - you see, the state had an interest in legislation Reid was working on. Well newsflash, the state has an interest in EVERY piece of legislation a Senator works on. If that's the criteria for a Senator never being the guest of the state government, then he could accept NO gifts from the state government ever - and under the Senate ethics rules, Senators are specifically permitted to take gifts from state and local governments. So AP's argument just doesn't hold water.

And in any case, Reid went to a boxing match. He didn't accept a Caribbean vacation or gold ingots or millions in retirement benefits or direct millions to his buddies' businesses, he went to a bloody boxing match in his own state when boxing is one of the major industries of that state - hello, Vegas anybody?

Now, let's compare this story to the tale of Republican Randy "Duke" Cunningham - since the AP is in the market to paint Reid as just as corrupt as all the Republicans.

Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) resigned from Congress... after tearfully confessing to evading taxes and conspiring to pocket $2.4 million in bribes, including a Rolls-Royce, a yacht and a 19th-century Louis-Philippe commode....

Prosecutors said Cunningham, an eight-term House member, "demanded, sought and received" illicit payments in the form of cash, home payments, furnishings, cars and vacations from four co-conspirators, including two defense contractors, over the past five years.

Yes, one man accepted tickets to a boxing match from his own state government when boxing is one of the top state industries. The other man "demanded" $2.4 million in bribes. Oh yeah, awfully similar stories.

And finally, there's this little fact that I didn't even realize until someone pointed it out in the comments:

Take Harry Reid, for example. The leader of the Senate Democrats is so tough he took on the Mob -- drove the Mafia out of the Las Vegas casinos. They planted a bomb in his car, and he never flinched, never backed down.

Oh yeah, definitely sounds like the kind of guy you buy with a couple of boxing tickets.

Sounds to me like the Associated Press is trying to protect the Republicans by "proving" that the cultural of corruption in Washington isn't predominantly a Republican problem - even though it is. Read More......

Afghanistan is erupting

Afghanistan has "an insurgency" and we should expect more combat there according to Barbara Starr who is reporting from Kabul on CNN. Today's events don't instill much confidence:

Thousands of angry demonstrators rioted across the Afghan capital today after an American military truck crashed into a dozen cars on the north side of town, killing and wounding several people.

Gunfire rang out across the city as the police and army soldiers tried to control the violence while rioters rampaged through the streets burning and looting a dozen offices, cars and police posts. At least 14 people were dead and scores injured by the end of the day, hospital officials said.

Wasn't this supposed to be Bush's foreign policy success? He didn't finish the job in Afghanistan. No, he had to invade Iraq. Everything the guy has done is a disaster. Everything. Read More......

Flip flopping Frist

Frist was against the FBI's raid of Jefferson's hill office before he was for it. Frist is quite possibly the most craven pol around -- at least as craven as McCain. Read More......

It's hard to cover the "good news" when you're dead

2 CBS Crew Members Killed in Iraq Bombing



Then again, a truly unbiased media would have reported the story thusly:

"FOX News crew uninjured in Iraq attack." Read More......

Major media still afraid to call it quits in Iraq

From E&P;. Read More......

Blair is not just Bush's poodle

He's also toeing the line for Rupert Murdoch as well. It's no wonder Murdoch has been so supportive of Blair. When Murdoch wanted to move into the Italian media market, he relied on Blair to fish around for information about the political ramifications of such a move. More than that, Blair also helped squash competition in the market in the finest tradition of the new right. It makes you wonder why Hillary and Murdoch are getting along so well.

Mr Blair has also recently been accused of blocking competition which would have affected Mr Murdoch's policy of cutting the cover price of his newspapers.

Read More......

Ralph Reed work for Abramoff exposes his hypocrisy

Ralph worked with Abramoff to prevent US worker safetly laws from being implemented in the Northern Marianas Islands. I never really understood the back story on this particular aspect of the Abramoff scandal. The Washington Post gives some insight today. It wasn't just corruption.

The Reed/Abramoff team claimed in 1999, importing Chinese workers was a way for them to become "exposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ." I don't claim to know the bible the way Ralph does, but I don't remember anything about Jesus promoting the sex-tourism industry:

A year earlier, the Department of the Interior -- which oversees federal policy toward the U.S. territory -- presented a very different picture of life for Chinese workers on the islands. An Interior report found that Chinese women were subject to forced abortions and that women and children were subject to forced prostitution in the local sex-tourism industry.

It also alleged that the garment industry and other businesses set up facilities on the Northern Marianas to produce products labeled "Made in the USA," while importing workers from China and other Asian countries and paying them less than U.S. minimum wage under conditions not subject to federal safety standards.

Yes, that's what the boy wonder of the Christian Coalition was defending. Read More......

Monday Morning Open Thread

Memorial Day. Read More......

Indonesia earthquake death toll almost 5000

I can't even imagine how much worse it might have been if aid organizations were not already in the area, preparing for an eruption at Mt Merapi. Food and temporary housing are arriving though they are still in need of medical assistance. Read More......

Just when you thought it was safe

...more talk of Bush III. How much can America take of this family? I'm not interested in voting for any of the American royal families. Read More......

Open thread

This one is for the cumbaya chorus.

(If a joke is told to someone who won't get it because that's the joke, is it really not a joke at all, or is it an especially good one?) Read More......