Cheney lied

UPDATE: If anyone can tape Hardball tonight when IT'S ON AGAIN (it repeats in 3 hours), see if you can post onnline (or email me) a video clip of Chris Matthews re-playing Cheney's prior appearance in which he specifically links Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

I know that title is a bit like saying "the sun will rise tomorrow." But in this case, I think it's not just an obvious point to be raising. Cheney outright lied about having linked Saddam to 9/11. He specifically and repeatedly said that Mohammad Atta had met with Iraqi intelligence agents in the Iraqi embassy in the Czech Republic. It never happened, and Cheney has repeatedly tried to deny that he repeatedly said it was true. As someone just noted in the comments to another post, apparently Chris Matthews on Hardball just pulled up an old Cheney interview where he made the connection. (And the Washington Post a few months ago pulled up a similar interview transcript when Cheney lied back then about never having made the connection - hell, in that interview, he even adamantly denied saying the SPECIFIC PHRASE HE ACTUALLY USED!)

The thing that's really disturbing is Cheney's brazen ability to lie about something so obviously true on its face. The man lies about his own exact words. We're not talking nuance here. We're not talking "did you vote for a tax increase, or against a tax cut." We're talking you said the Iraq and the 9/11 terrorists were meeting and they WEREN'T, and then you go and lie about what you said, even though lots of reporters have your specific quote on the record.

To me, that was the most troubling part of this entire debate. I don't necessarily care that Cheney actually DID meet Edwards before, even though he said he didn't. But I do care when this administration lies about the reasons for going to war, then lies about the lies, as if we're all going to simply forget what they said just a year ago, on a recorded TV show no less!

A friend said to me earlier today that this administration truly is Orwellian. We are at war with you, we have always been at war with you, and we always will be at war with you. And tomorrow, we'll be at war with someone else, and we will have always been at war with them, etc. The truth is irrelevant. Facts are irrelevant. History is irrelevant. When you rule by the divine right of kings, right and wrong are inconvenient conventions best left to the little people.

Well it's time for the little people to stage a little revolution. Read the rest of this post...

The latest polls on how they did (the REAL polls)

CBS: A CBS News poll of 169 uncommitted voters found that 41 percent said Edwards won the debate, versus 29 percent who said Cheney won. Thirty percent said it was a tie. Read the rest of this post...

OPEN THREAD - So how did it go?

Open thread for the moment, so what did you think? Read the rest of this post...

AMERICAblog Debate Chat Closed

Well folks - another debate, another chat. We had two full rooms going all night. Everyone had a great time. Good opportunity after to share poll links and let people know what was going on on other channels. Thanks to everyone for their participation! -- Rob Read the rest of this post...

KICK ASS!

I don't want to upstage John - I'm sure we'll get his take soon -- but we have a lot to celebrate tonight.

Edwards won a slugfest. One of the reasons I can tell is the panic spin going on right now in the gop rooms. They really needed cheney to win big to try to regain momentum, but it's clear he couldn't do it. So now they're desperately trying to win the spin, 'cause they couldn't win the day. Mary Matlin has to yell, "we're happy!" as they're moving to the next interview. Sad.

Edwards landed the first haymaker -- "Mr. Vice President, you're still not being straight with the American people" -- and kept it up. After about 30-40 minutes the veep looked like he wanted to go home. Cheney cheaply tries to call Edwards an absentee Senator, so Edwards breaks out a couple of Cheney's voting gems. Against Meals on Wheels. Against MLK Holiday.

A bee-yootiful post script -- almost immediately after the debate, NBC news' "fact check" plays the clip of cheney in the debate denying he'd ever insinuated a connection between Iraq and 9-11, and then shows the clip of cheney on Meet the Press last year doing exactly that.

Priceless.
Read the rest of this post...

AMERICAblog VP Debate Chat

Once again folks, it's debate time. The media's calling it Shrek vs. Breck, Beauty vs. the Beast. It's getting good! To join the chat:

1. Log into AOL Instant Messenger (get it here).
2. Instant Message: robinbaltimoremd
3. I'll send you an invite to our chat room.
   

Should be another fun night. We'll be chatting until about 11PM. Join us!
Read the rest of this post...

AMERICAblog ONLINE CHAT TONIGHT - VP DEBATE - 9PM Eastern

Rob in Baltimore will be hosting our online chat tonight during the VP debate. Rob is just getting home now, so he should be online shortly to spell out the details. As usual, you'll need to send him an instant message at his AOL address, then he will invite you into the chat. Anyway, he'll explain all of that in short order. We had a great turnout at the presidential debate last week - I'd say a good 40-50 people at its peak. It was quite a fun way to pass the debate, hope you'll join in.

As for the debate, I'm not sure what to expect, or what to hope for. I suspect Cheney has been told to rip Edwards to shreds, the question is will he do it with a smile, or blatantly and violently? Cheney's theme will undoubtedly be "YOU'RE ALL FUCKING DEAD IF YOU VOTE FOR KERRY." But they're doing that table-in-the-round format they did in 2000 for the VP debate, and it tends to make everyone nicer. The only thing is, I don't think Cheney can afford to be nice. We'll have to see.

As for Edwards, I'm not sure what his goal should be. At this point, we tried nice and it got us a Bush lead for the past 2 months. I think he has no choice but to point out the disaster this administration has been, while hitting on the substantive plans he and Kerry have to solve things. But in the end, even though the public says they want substance, what works is flaying your opponent alive. I think Edwards needs to do that to Cheney.

Your thoughts? Read the rest of this post...

Gay Republicans ask RNC to stop gay-baiting this election

LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS
October 5, 2004

To: Chairman Edward Gillespie
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003

Dear Chairman Gillespie:

I am writing on behalf of Log Cabin Republicans, the nation's largest organization of Republicans who support fairness, freedom, and equality for gay and lesbian Americans; including the 1,000,000 gays and lesbians who voted for President George W. Bush in 2000. On a personal note, I write you as a fellow Republican, fellow Catholic and fellow graduate of Catholic University. I write specifically regarding recent anti-gay tactics being employed by the Republican National Committee (RNC) and a number of GOP campaigns. While Log Cabin is busy supporting dozens of fair-minded Republican candidates for House and Senate, as well as numerous inclusive local and state candidates, and working hard to build a sustainable majority party, some in our party and at the RNC are working to knock down the Republican Big Tent. Appealing to people's anti-gay animus as a campaign strategy betrays the legacy of President Ronald Reagan who always sought to appeal to the best hopes of the American people not their worst fears.

The RNC itself has admitted to sending mailers to voters in Arkansas and West Virginia (a copy of which is attached hereto) that seek to equate the recognition of gay and lesbian families with banning the Bible. This dishonest and disgraceful mailing represents a new low in this election cycle.

On Sunday night in South Carolina, we saw another betrayal of the legacy of President Reagan. Republican Senate hopeful Jim DeMint, during a debate with his Democratic opponent Inez Tenenbaum, said that he believes gays and lesbians should be barred from teaching in the public school system (a copy of a news article detailing this is attached hereto). In 1977, Log Cabin was founded after Ronald Reagan courageously opposed the Briggs Initiative, which sought to ban gays and lesbians from teaching in the California public schools.

In Ohio, Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, claims that the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign has asked him to coordinate the effort to write discrimination into the Ohio Constitution (a copy of a letter from Mr. Blackwell is attached hereto). This claim is especially troubling, considering that Mr. Blackwell is the official charged with verifying whether or not the Amendment supporters have gathered the requisite signatures to place it on the November ballot. Like so many state amendments, the proposed Ohio amendment goes much further than simply defining marriage; it specifically seeks to deny civil unions or, indeed, any domestic partner benefits. Such an Amendment runs contrary to what the overwhelming majority of Americans believes. Such an Amendment runs contrary to President Bush's position on this issue, and is opposed by Ohio's Republican Attorney General, Jim Petro.

In North Dakota, Mike Liffrig, our party's U. S. Senate nominee, has run a dishonest and vicious anti-gay television commercial that seeks to play on anti-gay sentiment by mischaracterizing his opponent's position on the Federal Marriage Amendment (the ad can be viewed at his website www.mike4senate.com). Opposing the anti-family FMA is the position embraced by Senator John McCain, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Governor George Pataki, and Vice President Dick Cheney; all of whom spoke in primetime at the Republican National Convention.

In Florida, Mel Martinez used anti-gay tactics against a fellow Republican in his campaign for the GOP U.S. Senate nomination. Late in his primary race against former Congressman Bill McCollum, Martinez criticized his opponent for supporting hate crimes legislation meant to protect gay and lesbian Americans. Martinez sent out direct mail referring to McCollum's support for hate crimes legislation as appeasing "the radical homosexual lobby." Former Republican Senator Connie Mack (FL) referred to Martinez's accusations as "hate speech."

In August, we wrote to you requesting that the RNC establish an outreach group for gays and lesbians. The RNC website lists 38 separate outreach groups including: Haitian Americans, Conservative Punk, Lebanese Americans, Home Schoolers, and Snowmobilers. No outreach group is provided for the 1,000,000 gays and lesbians who supported our President in 2000.

Finally, gay and lesbian Republicans watched as the Platform Committee drafted a platform that seeks to marginalize gay and lesbian families. The platform language is far out of step with mainstream America. It not only calls for a divisive Constitutional amendment, which bans same-sex civil marriage and civil unions, but also seeks to bar any legal recognition whatsoever for gay and lesbian families. This platform also states that "homosexuality is incompatible with military service." This claim is a slap in the face to the thousands of gays and lesbians who serve with distinction in our military today. This platform is an insult to the millions of fair minded Republicans who make the GOP our nation's majority party.

Chairman Gillespie, you have an obligation as the leader of our party to stand up for the millions of fair-minded Republicans across this country that you are supposed to represent. You have a moral and ethical duty to speak out against the politics of fear and division. Mr. Chairman, there are many important issues that are being debated this election cycle, and using anti-gay scare tactics only serves to distract American voters from the real issues. If you believe, as we do, that the Republican Party truly is the party best equipped to win the war on terror, reform government and strengthen our economy then you should make it clear that there is no room in a legitimate public discourse for this type of fear-mongering.

The American people deserve better, and our Party deserves better.

Sincerely,
Patrick Guerriero
Executive Director
Christopher R. Barron
Political Director
Log Cabin Republicans Read the rest of this post...

Make sure to visit George Soros' new Web site

He's not just a sponsor of an ad on this site, he also rocks. Visit his new site here. Read the rest of this post...

House GOP tries to squelch draft rumors

In a sign that the rumors are starting to scare them, the House GOP leadership today was reportedly going to bring up Congressman Rangel's legislation to reinstitute the military draft. The Republican plan was to bring the bill up, have everyone vote against it, then hopefully use this as proof that the draft is NOT coming anytime soon.

Of course, this cute little trick by the GOP is totally meaningless. The reason Americans are worried about the draft isn't because Charlie Rangel introduced a bill. They're worried about the draft because we read every day that our military is undermanned, that Iraq is going from bad to worse, and that the president and his neo-con coterie are planning military action against North Korea, Syria and Iraq next term. In order to meet Bush's need for world conquest we need troops. And we don't have those troops now, and recruitment is faltering. The only way to get those troops is the draft.

The only sure fire way to stop a draft isn't to vote against some meaningless piece of legislation, it's to vote against a meaningless piece of president this November 2. Read the rest of this post...

Top McCain aide defects to Kerry

"I am an independent McCainiac who hopes to revive the Bull Moose tradition of Theodore Roosevelt, and I support the Kerry-Edwards agenda...."

Wittmann said the point he is making is that the Bush administration has "betrayed" efforts to create a new politics of national greatness and unity in the aftermath of 9/11 through its divisive tax policies and the war in Iraq.

Bush did not invent our enemies, Wittmann writes. "But, despite all his bravado and swagger, he has made it more difficult to build a domestic and international political coalition to ultimately prevail against our terrorist adversaries. He has bred distrust by driving a cynical partisan agenda that seeks to reward the wealthy, while branding his political adversaries as vaguely unpatriotic."...

"But there is no remaining shred of doubt that another four years of a Bush presidency would have a toxic effect on American politics. If George W. Bush is re-elected, unlimited corporate power, cynicism and division will ride high in the saddle." - Marshall Wittmann, who just resigned as McCain's director of communicatoins in order to join the Democratic Leadership Council

Read the rest of this post...

VOLUNTEER to help elect Democrats

Americans Coming Together needs you. Our very own Llamajockey has been volunteering for ACT. This is his (her?) report:

Thanks John,

Folks this is where you can really make a difference.

I worked the phone bank again last night. There are still plenty of undecided voters out there. The biggest thing we are noticing is that Kerry voters can give you 2,3,4 reasons that they are going to vote.

Not to mention Bush Haters. Anyone who says Kerry supporters are motivated solely by Bush Hatred is full of shit. This is a very good sign in terms of potential turn out.

Even better Undecided voters are more concerned about Kerry issues like the Economy, Defict, Healthcare and of course the War in Iraq vs Bush Issues like the WoT.

I think what is really interesting is that the majority of Bush supporters can not or will not give you a reason why they are supporting Dubya Except for, that is the occasional pro-lifer or anti-gay marriage fundie. I don't know if it is because the right-wing media is telling them that this campaign is not about issues but about character. Who projects the best character to fight the WoT not who understands or has the best approach to fighting it.

What this tells me is that is Dubya's base of support rests almost entirely on image . If so the debates stand to really weaken his base's enthusiasm. We really need to work the post debate polls. Bush's numbers could take a real dive and we can soundly beat the Repug handily based on turnout.

Working the phones is all about turning out the vote.

So folks now is the time fight back and volunteer some time.

llamajockey

Read the rest of this post...

Ties between Al Qaeda and Saddam

In response to yesterday's faux pas from Rummy about there being no hard evidence of a link between Al Qaeda and Saddam, the White House is now trying to re-establish such a link. Here's what they had to say today (I am not making this up):

McClellan ticked off a litany of what he said were links between Iraq and al-Qaida. Both were "sworn enemies of the free world, including the United States"; both "celebrated the Sept. 11 attacks on America," he said.

"There are clearly ties between Saddam Hussein's regime and al-Qaida," McClellan said. "There (were) clearly some disturbing similarities that existed as well."

So this is now the Bush doctrine for starting wars. If Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln, and Lincoln's secretary Kennedy... Read the rest of this post...

Flip Flop Anyone? Rumsfeld Says...

John was right, Rumsfeld is just the gift that keeps on giving. From Reuters:

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Tuesday he was misunderstood when he stated hours earlier that he knew of no "strong, hard evidence" linking Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda.

"I have acknowledged since September 2002 that there were ties between al Qaeda and Iraq," Rumsfeld said in a Web site statement issued following remarks he made to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York on Monday.

This must be a flip / flop record - it seems the administration now thinks that it can get away with saying the exact opposite of what it said just HOURS earlier. Now that's strong leadership, I feel a LOT safer. Read the rest of this post...

DOD caught lying to discredit Bremer

Atrios has the story. In a nutshell, now that former US administrator in Iraq Paul Bremer has said that Bush screwed up by not having enough troops for the invasion or the aftermath, the DOD is trying to slam Bremer by saying he NEVER asked for more troops. But Atrios found that YES BREMER DID.

By the way, this lying freaking Pentagon is the same bunch who now say we don't need a draft. Just mentioning.... Read the rest of this post...

US mom dies hours after seeing dead soldier-son's body

"A co-worker of of the grief-stricken woman quotes her husband as saying she died of a broken heart." - Ohio News Newtork, 10/5/04

Read the rest of this post...

Ok, I sense a new video coming on

I read this morning that Bush said "it's hard," or a variation thereof, 22 times during the debate last week. I think someone needs to string those together into a video, something funny :-) Read the rest of this post...

Uncle Sam Will Soon Want Your Kids

Told you. I strongly suggest you email this article to all of your friends. And watch the (justified) panic began.

Uncle Sam Will Soon Want Your Kids
By David H. Hackworth

Recently, when John Kerry brought up the possibility of a return to the draft, SecDef Donald Rumsfeld was quick to respond that Kerry was full of it.

But my take is that Kerry is right on the mark. Not only because Rummy has been flat wrong on every major military call regarding Iraq, but because this is a war that won’t be won by smart weapons or the sledgehammer firepower we see every night on the tube.

Right now – with both our regular and Reserve soldiers stretched beyond the breaking point – our all-volunteer force is tapping out. If our overseas troop commitments continue at the present rate or climb higher, there won’t be enough Army and Marine grunts to do the job. And thin, overworked units, from Special Forces teams to infantry battalions, lose fights.

Clearly, this war against worldwide, hardcore Islamic believers will be a massive military marathon, the longest and most far-flung in our country’s history. By Christmas, more troops could be needed not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but wherever the radical Islamic movement is growing stronger, from the Horn of Africa to Morocco, Kenya, Somalia, Yemen and across Europe – remember Spain?! – to Asia.

Accordingly, we need to bring our ground-fighting and support units to about the strength they were before the Soviet Union imploded, especially since the proper ratio of counterinsurgent-to-insurgent in places like the Middle East should be around 15 to 1. You don’t have to be a Ph.D. in military personnel to conclude we need more boots on the ground.

Most of our warriors – who are mainly from blue-collar families from Small Town, USA – have few political connections and few conduits though which they can effectively sound off. So when they get screwed over by a desperate Pentagon’s makeshift policies – such as the “Stop Loss” program that’s holding over large numbers of our servicemen and -women well beyond their contractually agreed-upon terms of enlistment, or the widespread calling up of out-of-shape, ill-trained citizen soldiers from the Individual Ready Reserve – these “volunteers” salute, suck it up and lay their lives on the line.

But like elephants, they won’t forget that they are “backdoor draftees,” as Kerry and John McCain call them. Which means that when their hitches are up, they won’t be rushing to re-enlist. And they’re also warning their younger brothers, sisters and pals to stay away from recruiting stations.

Although Pentagon puff artists insist they’re making quota, recruiters are already saying it would be easier to find $100 bills on the sidewalk outside a homeless shelter than fill their enlistment quotas, even with the huge bonuses now being paid.

So the draft – which will include both boys and girls this time around – is a no-brainer in ‘05 and ‘06.

Oh sure, the Pentagon suits will fight it. Volunteers tend to go with the flow and seldom blow the whistle on military stupidity, flawed tactics and self-serving leadership. And draftees don’t hesitate to make waves and tell the truth. Not to mention influential citizens with draft-age kids who’ll soon be demanding an answer to the same type of hard question their moms and dads shouted during the Vietnam War: “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?”

Rumsfeld, in fact, has already kicked off the anti-draft campaign by denigrating the draftees who fought in Vietnam. The SecDef, who prefers sycophants who don’t ask questions, recently stated that Vietnam-era draftees added “No value, no advantage, really, to the United States armed services ... because ... it took an enormous amount of effort in terms of training, and then they were gone.”

Wrong once again. I led draftees for almost four years in Vietnam and for several years during the Korean War. If well-led, there are no finer soldiers. Ask the Nazis, the Japanese and the Reds in Korea and in Vietnam, where “no value” draftees cleaned their clocks in fight after fight.

Israel, a country that has lived under the barrel of the Islamic terrorist gun for decades, has the most combat-experienced counterinsurgent force in the world – and boy and girl draftees are its major resource.

Count on it. We will follow their lead.

Read the rest of this post...

Planned job cuts surge again

US corporations plan to lay off even more workers -- "planned job cuts" are at their highest point in eight months, according to Challenger Gray & Christmas.

This comes just hours after the White House says it plans to "re-adjust" their own job creation numbers over the past year. Not the actual, "independent" Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers, but, you know, their own estimates.

DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT.
Read the rest of this post...

Brace yourself for the panic spin...

Leave it to the foreign media to get an accurate picture of the presidential election. The GOP is in a state of panic. (I guess that's what happens when we put our candidates next to theirs.) There's no doubt the bushies will put their spin machines into blitzkrieg mode tonight, claiming a huge victory and storming back to regain the advantage.

DON'T LET THE MEDIA JUST WRITE WHAT THEY'RE TOLD. There will be incredible pressure from the repo's to push them into reporting "Cheney won." It's already started. This administration intimidates by design and has coopted too many reporters. The media actually had some cojones last debate:

And when Mr Rove tried to tell reporters that Mr Bush had turned in a solid performance and Senator Kerry had put in his "worst", he was met with incredulity. One reporter asked, "Can you say that with a straight face?"

Hold them accountable. Click on the internet polls. Call in to radio and tv shows. DON'T LET THOSE BASTARDS GET AWAY WITH ANOTHER LIE EVER AGAIN.

Too much is at stake. Read the rest of this post...

WSJ suspends journalist who told truth about Iraq

Remember that horrific email update from the Wall Street Journal reporter in Iraq? Well, seems the Journal got a bit too much heat from the rose-colored-glasses wing of the Republican party. They're now suspending the reporter who told the truth. Sure, they're calling it an "extended vacation." Uh huh. I understand those vacations were real popular during the heydays of the Soviet Union. Read the rest of this post...

Was Bush flipping a cheat sheet during the debate?

Several of us noticed yesterday, while watching one of the new fun videos about the debate, that Bush flipped some document while speaking during the debate. Now, it may have been his handwritten notes, but he didn't appear to be writing many notes during the debate, so when did he have the chance to write on TWO SIDES of the paper? (He needed to flip the document, thus it clearly had content on two sides.) Also, if you look closely at an enlarged video of the debate it looks to me like the document has a title on it - not something you'd really jot yourself in the middle of a debate. Bush's partisans started the discussion over whether Kerry cheated by bringing a cheat sheet, it's thus fair to ask the same of them.

Read the rest of this post...

Vote Bush or DIE

Taking a card from Cheney, Bush yesterday said that John Kerry's proposals were "dangerous." Ooooh. I have goose bumps (perhaps I'm feeling a draft).

"The policies of my opponent are dangerous for world peace,'' Mr. Bush said. "If they were implemented, they would make this world not more peaceful, but more dangerous."

But this next line is my favorite:

"In 1991, when my dad was president, he saw a threat, and that was that Saddam Hussein was going to overrun Kuwait," said Mr. Bush, who appeared relaxed and in good spirits at an Ask President Bush forum despite the generally negative reviews of his debate performance.

If Mr. Kerry's vote had carried the day, the president said, "Saddam would not only have been in his palaces, that means he would have been in Kuwait, as well.''

Actually, Mr. Bush, if your father were president, Saddam would still be in power today. Read the rest of this post...

So this is fiscally conservative?

The Bush Adminstration is asking Congress to once again raise the federal debt limit so he can issue another round of IOU's to pay for the occupation of Iraq and spare the richest people and largest corporations in the world the cost of it.

Your grandchildren will be reading about Medicare and Social Security in history books because the only thing their tax dollars will pay for is debt service.

This is the guy who keeps telling us he's a fiscal conservative. But only John Kerry supports "pay as you go," a.k.a actually having the money you need to spend. As if we needed another reason to vote for John Kerry.

Read the rest of this post...

Measuring trends in the election

This article by David Ignatius is a fascinating read which is about Denver Research Group and how they monitor news and information and make conclusions about trends. I've been wondering for a while now what the "tipping point" would be in this election and when it would happen. I was going mad with all of the hand wringers out there who were predicting doom and gloom for Kerry because my feeling was the the trends were working in favor of Kerry, regardless of what specific polls might have been saying. Let's keep the momentum going.

And what does McLean's giant Wurlitzer of information tell him about the debates? Like the conventional pollsters, he rated last Thursday night as a giant victory for John Kerry. The difference is that McLean's methodology allowed him to see this shift coming. His "tonality" measure for Kerry began to move up sharply just after Kerry gave a speech Sept. 20, outlining a four-point plan on Iraq. When Kerry performed well Thursday night, he was pushing on an open door.

Kerry couldn't reassure these uneasy voters until he had an alternative explanation of what the United States should do in Iraq. His "tonality," by McLean's measure, had collapsed in early August after the ad campaign by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth challenged his trump card of Vietnam service. It didn't recover until his Iraq speech, which reassured voters that Kerry had an alternative "plan" for the war, as he kept repeating Thursday night. The poll numbers didn't show the swing before the debate, but McLean's indicators did.

Read the rest of this post...

Poodle-boy Bremer now says Bush sent insufficient troops to Iraq

He claims to still be supporting Bush and that the war was the right thing to do, but the issue of troop levels is raised in a speech yesterday. Frankly I'm sick and tired of people who ought to know and who do have power that fail to use it when it's needed. If he was so much against US policy in Iraq, why the hell did he fail to make it an issue while he was there? Towing the line regardless of the facts and then dipping into the middle afterwards doesn't cut it with me. Bremer sounds like he's trying to position himself closer to the middle on Iraq so he can be a hired gun after the election no matter who wins. What an asshole.

The former U.S. official who governed Iraq after the invasion said yesterday that the United States made two major mistakes: not deploying enough troops in Iraq and then not containing the violence and looting immediately after the ouster of Saddam Hussein.

"We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an atmosphere of lawlessness," he said yesterday in a speech at an insurance conference in White Sulphur Springs, W.Va. "We never had enough troops on the ground."

Read the rest of this post...

A Global Test

What's so galling about the Bush attempt to turn Kerry's phrase "global test" into "we have to get permission from France before putting on our shoes in the morning" is that it's a complete lie, the media knows it's a lie but doesn't emphasize in every discussion of the Bush ads, Bush comments, Bush surrogate attacks that they're not simply twisting the words out of context but trying to pretend that Kerry was saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he said.

Here's the statement in full by Kerry:

"The president always has the right, and always has had the right, for preemptive strike. That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War. And it was always one of the things we argued about with respect to arms control.

"No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.

"But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

"Here we have our own secretary of state who has had to apologize to the world for the presentation he made to the United Nations."

In other words, Kerry explicitly says he WOULD act alone to defend America's interests. But he said when you do that, you better be damn sure you've got your facts straight and can justify your unilateral actions to your friends and allies and the world at large.

And of course that global test is exactly what Bush failed. Not because he did something other countries disapproved of. But because his central evidence was a lie and he knew it was a lie and every assumption he made was wrong and has been proven wrong. If the US had found weapons of mass destruction or a nuclear facility building bombs only a few months away from being ready-to-go, the French and the Germans would have had to eat crow.

Kerry says directly and without equivocation he would act unilaterally. He simply states -- quite reasonably -- you better be damn certain when you do so. Any newspaper or magazine or TV broadcast that doesn't make absolutely clear that any Bush claim "global test" means foreign approval is an out and out lie should be ashamed of itself.
Read the rest of this post...

Another Asinine Column In NYT

If John can shred the Washington Post for not doing its job, I can laugh at the NYT running column after conservative column. Yesterday it was William Safire claiming John Kerry is a closet right-winger.

Today, it's David Brooks doing a lame job of defending the White House.

"Administration officials smile when they talk about [Ayad] Allawi," writes Brooks, "then marvel at how aggressive he is. Allawi believes that his government has to establish its authority if it, or any future government, is to do its job."

Wow, that is surprising. Allawi, a leader of the Shiite majority (roughly 60% of the population) that suffered under the Sunni-dominated Hussein reign wants to aggressively crush the Sunnis (roughly 40% of the population cause no one counts the Kurds) and their rebellion? What a shock. And what determination.

"It was clear from our conversation [Brooks and Rumsfeld] (and from the way other administration officials talk about decision-making in Iraq) that the charge that Allawi is a puppet is just absurd."

Oh, well, if Donald Rumsfeld -- who just yesterday said there was no "strong, hard evidence" linking Saddam and Al Quaeda and then later released a statement saying he has acknowledged since Sept of 2002 that there were ties between Al Quaeda and Iraq -- why if he says Allawi is not a puppet then it must be true.

Mind you, a Sunni cleric with power who is not involved in the government saying it might be more convincing. Or say a Kurd leader who also has been sceptical. But if Rumsfeld says it it would be absurd for anyone to question it.

"Yesterday, Rumsfeld said Iraq had "a crack" at being a success," writes Brooks. "At least he's not overhyping."

Gosh, that is comforting and quite modest given violence and deaths have increased repeatedly since Bush announced "Mission Accomplished" and car bombs went off in three locations."Three powerful car bombs exploded across Iraq on Monday morning," says the NYT today, "killing at least 26 people and wounding more than 100 others in a day of carnage that demonstrated the relative ease with which insurgents are striking in the hearts of major cities."So, really, you have to admire Rumsfeld's candor. At least he didn't say "Mission Accomplished." Read the rest of this post...