Dubai is now trying to censor CNN's Lou Dobbs

I'm not kidding.

The Dubai state-owned company that wants to get control of 6 key US ports is now trying to silence CNN's Lou Dobbs. Apparently Dobbs' coverage of the port deal struck too close to home, so now Dubai is trying to force CNN to shut him up.

Well, here's a little advice for Dubai: In developed democracies the government doesn't get to tell the media to shut up or else. Sure, your good buddy George Bush has tried to censor the US media for years, but he's a failed president and an idiot and as a result is now at 34% in the polls. You've picked the wrong role model.

Dubai just proved once and for all how undemocratic and not-ready-for-prime-time it is. Scratch just a little bit and you uncover just another two-bit despot. But in this case, the two-bit despot has a checkered past with terrorism and wants to control the port of New York City.

You're doing a heck of a job, Dubie. Read the rest of this post...

More and more and more on Dubai

It's still heating up, and the Republicans are fleeing like rats. This is what happens when a failed presidency is at 34% in the polls. Incumbents run away from the president, and fast. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

(Sigh.)

My new buddy BicycleMark helped me do my first podcast this weekend in Amsterdam. Mark is a Portuguese-American blogger, a very cool blogger, and very cute, and very single (and very straight - just adding that for any single liberal women out there, since he's available and quite eligible).

Anyway, Mark has been living in Amsterdam for a while now and was one of our two den mothers who adopted us this week in Amsterdam. Mark runs his own blog and podcast which you can find here, and you can find his podcast with me here. He was just great, showing me and the other bloggers around all week, took me to my first squat-bar, and more. Just a great new friend, the kind of new friends you meet when you travel (and then leave). Sigh.

Anyway, check out his podcast, he's really good.

And here's Mark in all his glory (see, told you he was cute).

Read the rest of this post...

Bush approval at all-time low 34%, Cheney at 18%

Will be interesting to see if the public starts demanding that Bush step down as president. I'm serious. Three more years of this? The potential devastation the Republicans may face in the November elections, this could be quite serious.

34%. Jesus. Read the rest of this post...

Under Bush Budget Veterans May Face Health Care Cuts in 2008

Tell me again how much Republicans love our troops? Hey, if you guys like being sent to war with no plan and no exit strategy, then have your veteran services cut, you go right ahead and vote Republican and knock your socks off.

At least tens of thousands of veterans with non-critical medical issues could suffer delayed or even denied care in coming years to enable President Bush to meet his promise of cutting the deficit in half — if the White House is serious about its proposed budget.

After an increase for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing by leaps and bounds, White House budget documents assume a cutback in 2008 and further cuts thereafter.

And one more thing. This is what happens when you have a president who launches wars of convenience on the wrong enemy without a plan for victory. You spend $300 billion the country doesn't have, then have to cut necessary services for patriotic Americans in order to pay for the failed war. Bush's mistakes come at a price. Read the rest of this post...

The media, politicians, and academics do NOT understand who bloggers, and what blogs, are

Markos goes off, rightly on, on an article that talks about bloggers being "extreme" and "activists." The idea that liberal bloggers are mostly far-left blood-throwing loons has been a common misconception that's been repeated by the media, politicians, and pundits.

First problem, you're mixing up the conservative blogs with the liberal blogs, and lumping them all together, when in fact both sides are quite different.

The top conservative blogs are very conservative, and do represent the far-right of the Republican party.

But on the liberal side of the blogosphere, things are completely different. On average, I'd say, the top liberal blogs are not far-left, nor are they conservative Democrats. The top bloggers tend to be middle of the road Democrats (or liberals) who occasionally veer left and right of Democratic center depending on the issue (I for example am very pro gay rights, but I also tend to be more hawkish on foreign and defense policy - though I don't appreciate being lied to and tricked into unnecessary wars costing $300 billion and thousands of American lives).

The problem the media, politicians and pundits make when calling the left side of the blogosphere "extreme" or "far left" is that they confuse anger and activism with a particular wing of politics. They're not the same thing. And in today's Democratic party, or rather, in today's America, to be angry at the way the country is heading, to think President Bush is a failure as a president, is not the same thing as having a particular political affiliation, let alone one to the "extreme."

Those who would call us "extreme" confuse our extreme anger with extreme politics. And they're two entirely different things.

Markos, for example, was a Ronald Reagan Republican as a kid. So was I. Markos is former military, and I even worked for a Republican Senator. Sure, we've both strayed from our political upbringing, but still, it's a bit difficult to pigeonhole us as per se "extreme" far lefties. I'm sure if you go through the bona fides of other "top" bloggers on the left, you'll run the gamut of those with far-left, center left, and perhaps even "right" left (i.e., conservative dems).

And in fact, if you look at many of the top folks on the online left nowadays - Markos, me, David Brock, and Arianna, for example - the one thing many of us share in common isn't our far left politics, but rather our being former Republicans who grew fed up with far-right politics. And that fed-up-ness, I think, we share with a growing segment of America, left and center.

Once upon a time, to be a liberal activist was, perhaps, to be per se a VERY liberal activist. That just isn't the case any more. Certainly there are many VERY liberal activists, and more power to them, and many of them are bloggers. But today's Democratic/liberal/independent activist is, I believe, less motivated by a particular ideology as he/she is by a growing horror as to the direction our country is heading. If anything, rather than being "extreme" ourselves, we have become activists and bloggers as a RESULT of the extreme turn that Republican politics has taken over the past few decades, and the extreme direction it has taken our country.

I'm jet lagging massively, so I may not be enunciating this as clearly as I'd like, but journalists, politicians and pundits are naive and old-thinking if they believe that liberal bloggers are per se "liberal," meaning to the far-left extreme of the Democratic party. I do believe that only a few of us, if any, are to the far right of the Democratic party, and thank God for that - but only because conservative Democrats aren't Democrats at all. Conservative Democrats are pretty much akin to far-right Republicans. The mainstream of Democratic activists is (are?) politically mainstream and lefty Democrats (i.e, a mix). Whereas the mainstream of Republican party activists are far-right and Christian-right (no mix at all).

Thus, please don't confuse the current make-up of the Republican party and its activists, and its polarization of power to the far-right extreme, with the current make-up of the Democratic and Independent parties and its activists, with its polarization to the very very very angry of all political stripes.

And somewhere down the line, I'm going to write a second piece about how "angry" does not equal "crazy." Read the rest of this post...

Open thread - I'm back

Just got back from Amsterdam, got in from the airport a bit ago.

Really amazing trip. It truly is a gorgeous gorgeous gorgeous city, fun, and filled with surprisingly nice people (since they often get a bad rap - but do watch them on the streets, they have a nasty habit of bumping right into you when walking towards you on the sidewalk).

The food was good (again, it gets a bad rap), and they had really good ethnic food - we had Italian, Indonesian, and Moroccan, all really good. The town seemed incredibly safe - you can walk around at night, seemingly without much worry - we even walked through a park at 2am, without a problem (local friends said it was totally safe). Folks working in stores, the hotels, etc., all speak English and were terribly nice to us little ole tourists, which also made the trip really nice.

And finally, there's a ton to do. Yes, yes, you can get high etc., but that's only a small part of the town. It's a quite walkable, beautiful city, practically every street is on a canal, the buildings are each a bit different and equally beautiful and strange, and the nights are made for walking - everything has a soft glow, beautiful for a romantic stroll or some great night photography.

My hotel was amazing, the Amsterdam Centre Hotel, I highly recommend it - it's near the Leidespleine (or however you write it), which to me at least is much preferable to Dam square and all the tourists. My hotel in particular, the people working there could NOT have been nicer, and the beds were the most comfortable thing you'd ever slept on.

The Amsterdam taxis, however, are the biggest rip-off on the planet - seriously, I haven't seen a taxi system this corrupt since I lived in Buenos Aires, or perhaps NYC circa the 1980s. Several of us got seriously ripped off by cabs, and I won't even tell you how much a cab charged me to go from the main train station to my hotel - let just say, 5 times the normal price would be about right. And not having a clue as to cab fares, I paid it. I know several others that also got screwed. Had it happened to one or two of us, it could written off as bad luck - but when several people I meet get screwed within a period of days, that is one corrupt taxi system. It just bugs me because apparently it's the big joke in town, how corrupt the cabs are - we went to a comedy show and it was all funny funny funny how the cabs rip off tourists - well, it really wasn't funny after they took me for a ton of money. Amsterdam needs to take the problem seriously, and I get the sense it doesn't, and it really left a very bad taste in my mouth.

Then there's KLM. Incredibly nice folks working there, the food was fine, the service was great, but the coach seats rank up there with one of the most painful flying experiences of my life (and I'm told we had coach plus, or whatever it's called). The seat in front of you is RIGHT in your face, and that's before they recline. Then some brainiac got the bright idea of taking up half of the under-the-seat space of the seat in front of you to deal with the in-flight movie apparatus. I fly a lot, and this was one of the most uncomfortable pain flights of my life, it was literally painful how bad the seats were. I hate to say it, because they seem an awfully nice airline, but I honestly wouldn't fly KLM again, the seats were that bad - literally painfully cramped. Someone is trying to eek out a bit more cash out of that airline, and they're ruining it just like the US carriers have become second rate boxcars that I also won't touch (if you fly a lot, you know what I'm talking about, our flight was almost nine hours from Amsterdam to DC, that's a long time to be in pain). Let's hope the merger with Air France doesn't poison that airline as well, since so far the seats on Air France have been great, but I hear they're shrinking as well.

But aside from the thieving taxis and the unfortunate KLM, I really loved Amsterdam. Had a ton of really interesting political conversations as well with folks, I'll get to those later. But suffice it to say that the Netherlands have a conservative government that is doing some things even further to the right of George Bush, in terms of "homeland security." I'll get to that later.

Anyway, good to be back. Kind of :-)

JOHN Read the rest of this post...

Coast Guard had serious concerns about Bush's UAE port deal

This scandal just keeps growing. A report released today showed that the Coast Guard had serious concerns about the UAE deal. This issue gets worse for Bush every day. The entity charged with port security was ignored when they raised questions about the deal:

Citing broad gaps in U.S. intelligence, the Coast Guard cautioned the Bush administration that it was unable to determine whether a United Arab Emirates-owned company might support terrorist operations, a Senate panel said Monday.

The surprise disclosure came during a hearing on Dubai-owned DP World's plans to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports. The port operations are now handled by London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Company.

"There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O; assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment of the potential" merger," an undated Coast Guard intelligence assessment says.

The Coast Guard actually raised terror concerns -- and it got them no where. Read the rest of this post...

Hillary: Karl is obsessing about me

Hillary hit the nail on the head. The GOPers are obsessing about her. And, Karl Rove does have a creepy feel to him. Seems like the kind of guy you'd see lurking:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that President Bush's chief political strategist Karl Rove "spends a lot of time obsessing about me."

The former first lady and potential presidential contender was reacting during a radio interview to a new book quoting Karl Rove as saying she will be the 2008 Democratic nominee for president,

"He spends more time thinking about my political future than I do," Clinton said, noting that Rove and other White House aides have met regularly with her possible opponents in November's 2006 Senate race.

The junior Senator from New York said she believed Rove, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman and other Republicans are focusing on her to divert attention from Republican problems as the 2006 congressional elections approach.

Somehow, it's just seems creepier to know that Ken Mehlman is obsessing about you. Read the rest of this post...

Bush still has a pre-9/11 mindset on port security

For all the talk Bush has done about national security, he's really failed when it comes to port security. For the Bush Administration, the issue with the ports is first and foremost economics, not security. Isn't that what Bush and Cheney would call a "pre-9/11 mindset"?: Bush thinks it makes economic sense and that's all that matters:

Bush has pledged to veto any measure blocking the deal. "The president's position remains the same," McClellan said. After the review, it will be up to Bush to decide whether the deal takes effect.

Schumer said Monday he is skeptical of the review panel's ability to evaluate the deal, saying the panel has been more focused on economic development rather than national security.

Let's be real. Bush has already made up his mind about the deal with the UAE company. The delay "requested" by the company -- which is ostensibly to review security matters -- is really a farce. Read the rest of this post...

No traction for Bush -- and the bad news keeps coming

AP has an article out today that states Bush:

just can't seem to find traction for his second-term agenda.

There should be no traction for his agenda. Given the Bush record, there's nothing in it that could be good for America anyway. In lieu of an agenda, AP points out the hallmarks of Bush's second-term:

The bad news has been coming in waves, from furors over Hurricane Katrina and warrantless wiretapping to the error-plagued rollout of the new Medicare prescription drug program, Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident, growing civil strife in Iraq, and now the Republican revolt over the administration's Dubai port decision.

The controversies have rocked the White House and caused alarm among Republican strategists. Their party's electoral hopes in November may depend on whether Bush is able to right his troubled presidency.

The Democrats have to do everything they can to make sure Bush's presidency stays troubled...although, he seems to be doing a good job of that himself. Read the rest of this post...

DeLay used IRS against political opponent

How Nixonian:

The Internal Revenue Service recently audited the books of a Texas nonprofit group that was critical of campaign spending by former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) after receiving a request for the audit from one of DeLay's political allies in the House.

The lawmaker, House Ways and Means Committee member Sam Johnson (R-Tex.), was in turn responding to a complaint about the group, Texans for Public Justice, from Barnaby W. Zall, a Washington lawyer close to DeLay and his fundraising apparatus, according to IRS documents.

Read the rest of this post...

William F. Buckey: Our mission in Iraq has failed

"[the] mission has failed....different plans have to be made. And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat." - William F. Buckley, Jr., The National Review

It's over, folks. Cong. Murtha's "extreme" position of only some three months ago is now mainstream conservative conventional wisdown. Only time will tell if the rest of the Dems join in, or whether the conservatives will get credit for "saving us" from Iraq. And only time will tell if the Dems are smart enough and crafty enough to label the Republicans as abject failures.

If Iraq was key to the war on terror, as Bush has said so many times, then his failure there has put our country at even more risk. Just like the Dubai ports deal, George Bush is making life in America and this world more dangerous by the day. It's not clear America can afford three more years of a failed presidency.

Finally, as E&P; notes, now that Buckley recognizes we've failed, when will the New York Times (and the Washington Post) admit the same? Read the rest of this post...

Bush and GOPers on the Hill aren't feeling the love right now

If Bush and the GOPers in Congress are having issues, now is the time to exploit them. Keep up the pressure. They might fight among themselves, but it won't last long. They deserve each other -- and those weak-kneed Republicans on the Hill will never stray too far from Bush. Bottom line is their failures are mutual failures:

Though the tensions were somewhat defused Sunday when the company agreed to a 45-day national security review, the problem continues to exact a steep political price from Mr. Bush, exposing divisions between the White House and Congressional Republicans in a critical election year and further weakening a president already reeling from a series of setbacks, from Hurricane Katrina to the war in Iraq.

"We've defended them on wiretaps, we've defended them on Iraq, we've defended them on so many things he's tried to accomplish, that to be left out here supporting this thing in a vacuum is kind of offensive," Representative Mark Foley, Republican of Florida, said Sunday in an interview after the company's agreement to the review was announced. He added, "If it's just about saving face and letting us humor ourselves, we won't be satisfied."

Sunday's agreement is likely to forestall, at least for the time being, a confrontation between Congress and the president over legislation, which Mr. Bush threatened to veto, blocking the Dubai contract. But with Republicans worried about their own re-election prospects, relations are clearly strained.

Thanks to Bush's failures in Iraq, with Katrina and now on port security, the GOP has lost their edge on national security. The Republicans on the Hill know they've got nothing else for the election year. Nothing. But, they'll stick with Bush in the long run. They always do. Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

It's 18 degrees in DC right now. Yikes.

Anything happening yet? Read the rest of this post...

Halliburton gets slap on wrist for $250M in questionable charges

One might think that when the Pentagon puts its top auditors on a case involving $250M in excessive or unjustified costs, someone is going to be in trouble and have some answering to do. If the target is Halliburton, all bets are off and this is just a little speed bump on the road to riches. It sure does pay to have friends in the right places.

The Army has decided to reimburse a Halliburton subsidiary for nearly all of its disputed costs on a $2.41 billion no-bid contract to deliver fuel and repair oil equipment in Iraq, even though the Pentagon's own auditors had identified more than $250 million in charges as potentially excessive or unjustified.

Later that year auditors began focusing on the fuel deliveries under the contract, finding that the fuel transportation costs that the company was charging the Army were in some cases nearly triple what others were charging to do the same job.

That means the Army is withholding payment on just 3.8 percent of the charges questioned by the Pentagon audit agency, which is far below the rate at which the agency's recommendation is usually followed or sustained by the military Â? the so-called "sustention rate."

Figures provided by the Pentagon audit agency on thousands of military contracts over the past three years show how far the Halliburton decision lies outside the norm.

In 2003, the agency's figures show, the military withheld an average of 66.4 percent of what the auditors had recommended, while in 2004 the figure was 75.2 percent and in 2005 it was 56.4 percent.

Read the rest of this post...

New plan to revive democracy in the UK

You may recall the outrage in the last UK election when Blair's Labour Party won a significant number of seats despite only winning 37% of the vote. Britain's "first past the post" election system, not to mention the public concern with the concentrated power of the PM as opposed to Parliament has chiseled away at democracy in recent years. Now, a new report is coming out that will review new programs to re-introduce democracy in the UK. Maybe it's about time the Democrats think of something like this for the US.

The independent Power commission calls for sweeping changes to prevent a dangerous gulf between politicians and the people becoming even wider. Its ideas include allowing the public to initiate legislation and a shift of power back from the Government to Parliament, following criticism that Tony Blair has neutered it.

Power to the People, the commission's 311-page report, demands a new electoral system "to ensure that all votes count by having some influence on the final outcome of an election."

However, the inquiry concludes that electoral reform is only "one part of a wider 'jigsaw' of change required to re-engage the British people with their political system".

Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws said: "Politics and government are increasingly in the hands of privileged elites as if democracy has run out of steam. Too often citizens are being evicted from decision-making - rarely asked to get involved and rarely listened to. As a result, they see no point in voting, joining a party or engaging with formal politics.

Read the rest of this post...

Flying back to DC in a few hours...

A final Amsterdam photo for the evening. I took this one yesterday (Sunday). I like the sense of unity and power and confidence, and style. Very "new Europe." Encapsulates a lot of how I feel about this place.

Oh yeah, and their coffee rocks too. Read the rest of this post...