National Guard units heading to Iraq for Bush's "surge" don't have enough rifles. I guess they can just use "spitballs"

This is the biggest keystone cops adventure in American history. From tomorrow's NYT:

The Pentagon is planning to send more than 14,000 National Guard troops back to Iraq next year, shortening their off-duty time to meet the demands of President Bush’s buildup, Defense Department officials said Wednesday....

“We’re behind the power curve, and we can’t piddle around,” Maj. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, commander of the Oklahoma National Guard, said in an interview. He added that one-third of his soldiers lacked the M-4 rifles preferred by active duty soldiers and that there were also shortfalls in night vision goggles and other equipment....

Capt. Christopher Heathscott, a spokesman for the Arkansas National Guard, said the state’s 39th Brigade Combat Team was 600 rifles short for its 3,500 soldiers and also lacked its full arsenal of mortars and howitzers.

Perhaps they can just bite the enemy in the shin. Read the rest of this post...

Woman says she's Iraq vet, leg cut off in accident, military won't give her a dime

UPDATE: The entire nearly-3-minute interview with the woman is here.



This is a video from an Obama rally in LA yesterday. The second person interviewed is a woman claiming to be an American vet who served in Iraq. She says she was sitting by a tent, a tank hit the back of the tent and the falling tent cut her legs off. She's now missing one leg (possibly two, it's hard to tell in the video). She says the military isn't "paying her" because they're calling her loss of a leg "an accident."

Judging by the other horror stories we've now heard, this one sounds exactly the same - no disability payment if your horrible injury wasn't caused by some guy with a funny name. Hopefully some intrepid journalist, or Hill staffer, or Illinois Senator perhaps... can look this woman up and see if her story is for real, and if it is, get it fixed. Read the rest of this post...

FOX News to air first Democratic presidential debate

What? Joseph Goebbels wasn't available?

A rather large brouhaha is brewing over the Nevada Democratic party's decision to have the conservative TV network, FOX News, host the first Democratic presidential primary debate this coming August. A lot of folks are a bit concerned as to why any Democratic would choose the official propaganda organ of the Republican party to host their debate.

I believe the Nevada party is arguing, interestingly, that this is a chance for FOX's audience to get to see the Democratic candidates unvarnished and unedited - i.e., FOX won't be able to negatively spin their appearances the way FOX usually does. But someone in the blogosphere today, I can't remember who, responded: And just who in FOX's audience will be voting for the Democratic candidate?

Now, I think that overestimates FOX's hold on its audience. Like the religious right, FOX has a lot of followers, but not all of FOX's followers are far-right GOP nutjobs. A lot of them are, but many, I suspect, are simply Republicans who like to watch Republican TV the same way we like to read liberal blogs. That doesn't mean that some of those Republicans aren't centrists who might be Perot voters, soccer moms (and grandmoms) and more.

Still, FOX? We couldn't come up with any better network - uh - like all of them? And in any case, I'm not sure we want to be sending any viewers to FOX. Their influence, like the influence of their GOP enablers, is, I think, waning. And, as Bowers notes:

Further, how much of the debate will Fox cut off entirely in order to have their in-house pundits offer negative commentary while the Democratic candidates are still speaking? Four years ago, in typically unfiltered fashion, Fox cut away from the Democratic debate they hosted a couple of minutes before it ended, in order to give arch-conservative William Bennett the first shot at post-debate spin.

That is not an insignificant point. The entire audience will be stuck, momentarily, watching FOX's hacks spin the debate against every candidate. I think we can do better.

Anyway, this is gearing up into quite a battle, with blogpac launching a petition drive, and MoveOn getting involved as well.

Markos has much more on this, including links to a number of other sites' analyzing the issue. Do read. Read the rest of this post...

Top Bush Admin. officials at Pentagon claim they didn't know about Walter Reed. Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) knew but didn't do anything.

The outrages surrounding the Walter Reed scandal continue. In the latest update from the Washington Post, we see that top Bush Administration officials are now playing the blame game. Yesterday, on behalf of his boss, Tony Snow blamed the Bush Administration officials at the Pentagon. Today, top Bush officials at the Pentagon claimed they didn't even know about the problems at what is referred to as the Army's "premiere medical facility" until they read the articles in the Washington Post. Then, they started to blame each other:

Top Pentagon officials today blamed a breakdown in leadership for problems with outpatient care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and vowed to take quick corrective action.

In a Pentagon briefing, however, the officials said they did not know about the most serious problems until The Washington Post reported on them in a two-part exposé on Sunday and Monday. An "independent review group" is being formed to look into the problems and report back as soon as possible, the officials said.

The breakdown in leadership started when the Bush Administration went to war without a plan. Let's keep in mind that Walter Reed is a facility for active duty personnel -- the same people who run Walter Reed are running the war in Iraq. Also, Walter Reed is the flagship of the Army's medical facilities. If this can happen right in the nation's Capitol, what's going on at other facilities?

Meanwhile, in a brazen act of hypocrisy, Virginia's Republican Congressman Tom Davis is making a lot of statements about the Walter Reed scandal:

A committee hearing attended by Army officials two years ago "recorded gut-wrenching testimony from wounded soldiers trapped in a frustrating thicket of Army commands and regulations," Davis said. "Painting and papering won't fix those problems. The issue is the standard of care, not the building code."

Tom Davis was the Republican Chair of the Government Affairs Committee in the Republican controlled House with a Republican President heading a Republican administration. But, apparently, there was nothing Republican Tom Davis could do with all that power. So, now, Tom Davis issues tough statements. Big deal. Talk is cheap. Davis is just like his Senate compatriot, Republican Susan Collins, who chaired the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs in the Republican-controlled Senate. They like to bitch these days as if they had no ability to change anything. But, Davis and Collins, like all their GOP colleagues, never challenged the Bush Administration. They're responsible for the Iraq War. They're responsible for Walter Reed.

And, one other thing: Top Pentagon officials said they didn't know about what was going on at Walter Reed til they read it in the paper. But, how could that be if "Army officials" were at hearings with "gut-wrenching testimony" two years ago? Seems some people aren't telling the truth here. This story is far from over. Read the rest of this post...

Pelosi tells Dick "20%" Cheney to go stuff it

You'll recall that earlier today Dick Cheney suggested that the 64% of the American people who oppose Bush's "surge" escalation in Iraq are basically terrorist sympathizers.

On her new blog, the Gavel, Speaker Pelosi has a few words for Vice President No-One-Likes-Me-Anymore No-One-Ever-Liked-Me:

Vice President Cheney continues to question the patriotism of those of us in Congress who challenge the Bush Administration’s misguided policies in Iraq, but his latest attack is beneath the office of the Vice President, especially at a time of war.

Mischaracterizations by the Vice President will not dissuade Congress from developing, on a bipartisan basis, a responsible new direction for U.S. policy in Iraq that brings our troops home safely and soon. I hope the President will repudiate and distance himself from the Vice President’s remarks.

I'd go one step farther (and further). Pelosi should demand an apology to the 192 million Americans Cheney just slandered. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

THIS is a lot of snow. I miss my childhood, when the snow was as high as me. Read the rest of this post...

Al Qaeda is resurgent, bin Laden is back in charge, yet Cheney says Pelosi and Murtha will validate the terrorists

Again, Cheney is talking like it's 2002. Unfortunately, the reality facing America now is that for al Qaeda, it's 2001 all over. The terror network is on the move and it's happened right under the noses of Bush and Cheney. Just this week, we learned that Bin Laden is back in charge. The terror networks are expanding. Al Qaeda has taken full advantage of Bush's war in Iraq to recruit new terrorists. Sure seems like al Qaeda's strategy is already validated. So, what's the response from Cheney? Blame the Democrats:

Cheney ridiculed Pelosi and war critic Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, for their opposition to sending more U.S. forces into Iraq.

"I think in fact if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we'll do is validate the al Qaeda strategy, the al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people," Cheney told ABC News.

Seriously, Cheney has lost his mind. He's the one who deserves ridicule. Al Qaeda is doing just fine under the Bush/Cheney Administration. Yes, our "war on terror" leaders validated and enabled the al Qaeda strategy. They sent troops to Iraq instead of fighting the terrorists who attacked America. Read the rest of this post...

Murtha speaks out about Walter Reed fiasco

MURTHA STATEMENT ON BUILDING 18 AT WALTER REED

WASHINGTON, DC - Feb. 20, 2007 - U.S. Rep. John Murtha released the following statement today regarding Building 18 at Walter Reed Army Medical Center:

"The recent stories detailing the dilapidated conditions at Building 18 at Walter Reed are disturbing. It is a disservice to those who have bravely sacrificed and it is a dishonor to their brave service to expose them to these conditions. Those who are responsible must be held accountable and immediate rectification must be aggressively pursued."

"I routinely visit our military hospitals, as does Congressman Bill Young and his wife, Beverly, and I am always inspired by those who have sacrificed so much. Over the past few months, I have personally visited with our wounded at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Bethesda Naval Medical Center, Brooke Army Medical Center and Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio,
Balboa Naval Medical Center in San Diego and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany. From my many visits to Walter Reed in particular, I can tell you that the medical staff there is second to none. During these visits I always make sure that I ask the question, "Is there anything you need?" I ask this question because I know the additional stress extended combat tours places on our military families, on medical personnel and on medical facilities. I want to make certain that the best care available is being offered."

"The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in over 28,000 casualties and have placed severe demands on our military hospitals in terms of personnel and facilities. More severely wounded continue to arrive daily. Exacerbating the problems at these facilities was last year's announcement of the BRAC closing of Walter Reed. I was then and remain concerned that
with the knowledge of the closing, especially during a time of war, facility maintenance and/or upgrades might be ignored or placed on the back burner. Thus over the past few years, the Defense Subcommittee has appropriated additional funding for operation, facility maintenance and equipment at specified medical facilities."

"We owe our men and women in uniform a debt gratitude and the best care possible. They have more than held up their end and have sacrificed so much. Our government must hold up its end. The troops deserve to know that if they come home wounded that they will get the care and the best possibl facilities that they deserve." Read the rest of this post...

How to deal with terrorists: Mauritania edition

To some extent this is a Stupid Terrorist story, but also a pretty smart -- and gutsy -- move by a pilot who thwarted a hijacking. Somehow a passenger on an Air Mauritania flight managed to board the 737 with two loaded handguns, seized the jet soon after takeoff, and demanded to be flown to France to seek asylum. Leaving aside the dubious efficacy of acquiring asylum through hijacking a plane, this particular Francophile apparently didn't speak French.

The pilot apparently realized this at some point during the event and had the presence of mind to craft a plan and then announce it over the loudspeaker in French so everyone on the plane (except our intrepid asylum-seeker) knew what would happen:

"The pilot and his colleagues decided to abruptly apply brakes on landing to throw off-balance the hijacker, who was hurled to the floor by the jerk and was quickly overpowered before being handed over to the Spanish police force," a Mauritanian official told AFP news agency . . . [The pilot] used the plane's intercom system to tell passengers in French of his plan.

The pilot even urged crew members and men to sit in the front rows, ready to act, while asking women and children to move to the rear of the plane.

I'm a little surprised this wasn't a bigger story -- I understand the news tends to focus on results, rather than the events that precede them, but to be fair, this could have ended much, much worse. But it didn't, and the actual result was good (heroic and mildly funny, even!), so just another footnote of global vulnerability buried under the weight of Iraq. Read the rest of this post...

Hillary is Sistah Souljah'ing the entire Democratic Party

I don't relish writing these repeated columns deploring Senator Clinton - you'll recall that we were one of the blogs that, up until recently, didn't have a problemwith her (check our archives, you won't find a lot of Hillary (or Bill) bashing). But Senator Clinton's increasingly nasty campaign tactics and anti-Democratic messaging is getting out of control.

Today we learn via Editor & Publisher that Senator Clinton is trying to demonize Hollywood money by attacking gay billionaire David Geffen.

Good luck with that.

Geffen was quoted in a Maureen Dowd column today saying:

"Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it’s troubling,” Geffen said.

The response from Hillary's team was fast and vicious:

Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson just released the following statement: "While Senator Obama was denouncing slash and burn politics yesterday, his campaign's finance chair was viciously and personally attacking Senator Clinton and her husband.

"If Senator Obama is indeed sincere about his repeated claims to change the tone of our politics, he should immediately denounce these remarks, remove Mr. Geffen from his campaign and return his money.

"While Democrats should engage in a vigorous debate on the issues, there is no place in our party or our politics for the kind of personal insults made by Senator Obama's principal fundraiser."

Ah yes, personal attacks. You mean like using Bush talking points to accuse the other Democratic candidates of not thinking we "face a real threat from terrorism" - in other words, calling them traitors? Is that the kind of personal insult and nasty tone you're talking about? Or how about leaking a false racist story about a presidential candidate being raised in a madrassah? Oh, that's right, Hillary's campaign says they had nothing to do with that one.

While it's laudable that Mrs. Clinton is intent on proving that she's no push-over and won't take attacks sitting down, it's increasingly disturbing that the targets of Mrs. Clinton's rebuttals are fellow Democrats, and the barbs Mrs. Clinton is throwing at them are Republican talking points used to demonize Democrats as basically un-American traitors.

It started with Hillary's unique experience on 9/11 - the day she witnessed the world falling apart while the rest of us went to Disneyland. Then yesterday we heard about how Hillary thinks terrorism is a bad thing, while her fellow Democrats think it's no big deal. And today we get an earful about those nasty rich Hollywood Jews - oh, sorry, I mean fags.

Could Karl Rove have written a better script?

It's becoming increasingly clear that Hillary isn't running as a new Democrat, she's running as as a non-Democrat. Her strategy seems to be attacking everything and everyone associated with the Democratic party, and especially its base - and using Republican talking points, at that - in order to somehow position Hillary as a modern-day Diogenes, independent, above-the-fray, alone in the wilderness, forever on the look-out for honest politics.

In other words, Hillary is Joe Lieberman.

Funny I should mention that. Who are two of Hillary's top advisers? Pollster Mark Penn and media consultant Mandy Grunwald, both of whom worked on Joe Lieberman's 2004 presidential run. And we all know Joe "Surge" Lieberman, the man who just can't get enough of George Bush and the ever-successful war in Iraq. The guy who simply can't say a kind word about Democrats.

Yesterday, Mrs. Clinton was quoted as telling an outright lie. She said that some of the other Democratic candidates don't think America faces a threat from terrorism:

In response to an audience member’s question about the war — one of eight she fielded — Clinton said America faces a dire threat from terrorism.

“To underscore a point, some people may be running who tell you we don’t face a real threat from terrorism,” she said. “I’m not one of them. We have serious enemies who want to do us serious harm.”

Today, Mrs. Clinton is called a liar and her campaign goes ballistic, trying to destroy one of the biggest Democratic donors in Hollywood (anybody else get a whiff of Bill Donohue from this one?). Two days ago, she told the entire left-wing of the party to go take a hike. And just yesterday, she told all of America that George Bush was right, some of our Democratic leaders actually don't think terrorism is a problem. Who will be Hillary's next Democratic target? The blogs?

To paraphrase Martin Niemoller: Some day, Mrs. Clinton, you may find that there will be no one left to vote for you. Read the rest of this post...

What a top journalism prize says about America's shocking treatment of its own troops

From Attytood:

On Monday night, they announced the winners of the George Polk Awards for Journalism, honoring the best news reports and articles that appeared over the course of 2006. For those of you unfamiliar with the Polk Awards, run by Long Island University, they are arguably the second-most prestigious journalism prizes, sort of like the Golden Globes to the Oscars of the Pulitizer Prizes awarded in April.

And three out of the 12 winners. amazingly, were for stories that chronicled mistreatment or abuse or unnecessary risk to Americans fighting in Iraq -- along the lines of the Walter Reed story, yet arguably worse in some cases, because in these instances young men and women actually died. Read through these award-winning stories, and you'll be as baffled as I am over how a great nation can neglect or mistreat its own soldiers in this fashion.

Read the rest of this post...

Problems at Walter Reed exposed by Salon.com two years ago

The first our wonderful commander in chief and his buddies in the military and the Republican congress heard of all the problems at Walter Reed was in this weekend's Washington Post. Funny that, since Salon.com reported on many of the very same problems two years ago. That means that not only are these problems not new. But the Pentagon and White House knew about them at least two years ago (and who doesn't think they knew long before that?). Read the rest of this post...

Cheney's in Japan giving his 2002 "we're gonna win" speech

Cheney is in Japan giving basically the same speech he gave back in 2002. The Bush Administration can't let Cheney give a speech like this in the U.S. -- he'd be mocked. Seriously, in just this following short excerpt, there are so many distortions and lies. Vintage Cheney:

"We know that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength, they are invited by the perception of weakness," Cheney said in a speech aboard the USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier at Yokosuka Navy Base near Tokyo.

"We know that if we leave Iraq before the mission is completed, the enemy is going to come after us," Cheney said.

"And I want you to know that the American people will not support a policy of retreat," he added. "We want to complete the mission, we want to get it done right, and we want to return with honor," said Cheney, who heads on Thursday for Australia to meet Prime Minister John Howard, another backer of Bush's Iraq policy.

Too late, Dick. You didn't do it right. It's over. You and Bush have made America weaker. You've emboldened our enemies. You've strengthened the terrorists. And, we still don't know what "the mission" is. Nice job. Read the rest of this post...

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Started watching Imus in the morning -- he's live on MSNBC. He is in a rage over the situation at Walter Reed. And, his news is unfiltered -- the Today Show has been spending way too much time on Anna Nicole, Brittany and lost hikers. Not sure how long I'll last with Imus, but this week, he's worth watching.

Start the thread. Read the rest of this post...

Denmark announcing Iraq withdrawal

Just on the heels of Blair's acceptance of an exit time line and partial withdrawal from Iraq, Denmark will also be announcing the exit of the 460 Danish troops from Iraq. Read the rest of this post...

More e.coli trouble?

It sounds like consumers may have been lucky that BJs caught this and pulled the mushrooms from the stores. I guess we will see the FDA spring into action any moment now, if they could only find people and money to take action since the GOP stripped them of any real function other than reporting what is already known. The GOP has no issue with splashing billions in Iraq without caring where it goes but heaven forbid money is spent in the US to address the problems with food. After all, it's not like food is really that important to people and they can probably get by without it. Read the rest of this post...

Romney - for gun control, before he was against it

What's next for this guy?

Mitt Romney, who has touted his support of gun owners since launching his presidential campaign, yesterday acknowledged he did not become a member of the National Rifle Association until last August, campaign officials said.

A former advocate of gun control, Romney during his 1994 run for the US Senate backed measures the gun-rights group opposed, such as a five-day waiting period on gun sales and a ban on certain assault weapons.

The former Massachusetts governor has been criticized for changing his positions to appeal to social conservatives voting in Republican primaries. In a nationally broadcast interview yesterday, he also had to explain his switch to a conservative stance on abortion and why he once voted for Democrats in Massachusetts primaries.

What a bold leader. Read the rest of this post...

The miraculous recovery of ABC's Bob Woodruff

I saw that title and went, come on. Then I clicked. Visit this site and click through the images on the bottom of the page, one by one, and read the text. It's amazing. Read the rest of this post...