More Republicans bashing Karl

It's not good news for the White House when Republicans start bashing Karl, even anonymously.

One former Republican official who retains close ties to the White House said there could be a political cost for keeping Mr. Rove on board even if he is found to have done nothing illegal. "If Karl survives, he does so at the president's political expense," said the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to be seen as disloyal to Mr. Rove.

"George W. Bush came into office promising two tenets that are in competition now: straight talk, non-parsing - and loyalty," the former official said. "He's either got to choose loyalty or straight talk. He can't do both."....

"The Bush operating style is, you be loyal to me, I'll be loyal back to you - and I'm not going to let my critics think they can prompt a lot of resignations just by pointing out that we said we'd fire them," said Professor Stephen Walt, academic dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.

But, Mr. Walt said: "With Bush now being a lame duck, you start to wonder whether or not he'll have the same clout. At what point does the R.N.C. start weighing in and saying, 'Gee, we know he can't run again. But do we want to be saddled with a scandal that will make it harder for us to win in 2008?' "

Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Just got back from the movie "Wedding Crashers" with Joe and friends. It's okay, if you like dumb guy comedies, except that there's a gratuitously homophobic thread running through the movie that's kind of surprising for a movie made in 2005. One character is gay, and pretty much the freak of the movie. He's a sexual predator, a weirdo, looks weird, acts weird, doesn't socialize with other, sexually messed up, you name it. To Joe and me, at least, it felt real gay "Amos and Andy." I.e., Just gratuitously stereotypically "hey, look at the fag and laugh."

In any case, the movie seemed kind of dumb anyway - and not nearly as funny as the review in the Washington Post. But I hadn't heard about the blatant homophobia. And I hate to go all PC on a movie, but it was an unnecessarily side plot to start with, so making it poking fun at the freak homo only made it worse. Read the rest of this post...

Hillary Watch

I was not a fan of Hillary Clinton and would have voted for Rudy opposite her in the Senate race (though I think he'd make a better governor than Senator and this was before his hard-right turn). But I have to include myself among the vast majority of New Yorkers who have been won over by Clinton's hard work, focus on the essentials and canny political moves. She's done a bang-up job as Senator and honestly I was NOT expecting that. She's also making every right move in preparing for her (first?) run at the White House.

When NYC made a final push towards the Olympics, Clinton was an offhand last minute addition. She turned out to be the biggest draw -- by far -- for the international community. Clinton was far more popular than world leaders like Chirac and Blair and even the biggest sports stars in the world, including soccer's David Beckham. We've also seen numerous polls showing how Clinton has won over virtually ALL the undecideds in New York with her fine job. Yes, there's a minority that can't stand her, just as there's a minority that will always hate any politico, whether it's Reagan or Bush or Clinton, Bill or whomever.

Now the NYT has a strong, fascinating look at Clinton's evolution politically and professionally, worth checking out for anyone who wants a reality check about the fears Clinton is going too far to the right/mainstream with some of her positions. I think this shows her being true to her beliefs while being savvy in how she frames them. Well worth reading. I'm not sure I'd support her in the primaries or what kind of President she'd make. But I feel a lot better about her now than I did 4 years ago. And I KNOW Bill would make an awesome First Husband. Read the rest of this post...

In this White House, the buck stops at Karl Rove

Remember former head of the White House office of Faith Based Initiatives, John Dilulio and his Esquire interview about the Bush White House?

"There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus," says DiIulio. "What you’ve got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

Who heads up the political arm? Karl Rove. Yet we're to believe from Rove and his attorney that Rove not only didn't see the State Department memo about Ambassador Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, but that Rove had never even heard of it.

Rove said of the memo that he "had never seen it, had never heard about it and had never heard anybody else talk about it," according to a lawyer familiar with his testimony. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, said he can say "categorically" that Rove did not obtain any information about Plame from any confidential source, such as a classified document.

Really? In the Bush White House, the day after Joe Wilson writes a blistering attack on the president in the NYT, calling into question the entire WMD justification for going to war, Colin Powell is walking around Air Force One with a memo about - who else? - Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame - and NO ONE ever tells Karl about the memo, doesn't show it to him, nothing.

We are to believe that Karl Rove was totally out of the loop on the Joe Wilson WMD "sixteen words" gate. Uh huh. Sure. No one thought of letting Karl know that there was a State Dept memo about the very people the White House was furious at, the White House wanted to take down. The Secretary of State even has the memo with him on Air Force one, and nobody tells Karl. Because, apparently, Karl never told anyone to get him everything they had on Wilson after the article ran.

Right.

All roads lead to Rove. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Must buy Harry Potter book... Read the rest of this post...

Condi Rice Stumbling In Asia

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice can't seem to get her footing in Asia. She's the first Sec of State to snub the annual Association of Southeast Asian Nations convention in more than 20 years. It may be for a positive reason -- our wanting to distance ourselves from the oppressive regime of Myanmar. But all it's done is offend our vital allies in the region. And of course Rice can't get on her high horse about refusing to deal with the cruel and corrupt gov't of Myanmar aka Burma because Bush cozies up to cruel and corrupt govts all over the world.

Then, when South Korea achieved a minor breakthrough by offering to provide massive amounts of electricity to North Korea in a bold gesture, Rice undercuts their achievement by taking credit for it.

While some Asian officials, and even some administration officials, say they believe that South Korea's surprise offer last month to wipe away the North's energy problems broke the stalemate, Ms. Rice played down its significance. She portrayed it as an elaboration of the offer that the United States made during the last negotiating session, in June 2004.

Thanks, Condi! Read the rest of this post...

Republican Culture of Corruption Infects Science

The Bush administration's scientists are rife with corruption. Apparently, when they're not doctoring reports to put politics ahead of science, they're ignoring flagrant violations of the law. The New York Times says the National Institutes of Health is investigating more than 100 scientists, with 44 of them likely showing serious conflicts of interest and at least 9 of them likely to face criminal charges. Naturally, Bush's lackey wanted all of this kept secret -- no need to burden the American people with the truth.

In other words, it's a debasement of science that threatens the health of every American who depends on neutral and fair assessments of the medicine and products we use ourselves and give to our children. Why does Bush hate children? Read the rest of this post...

Justice Sunday II: Tearing Down The Wall Between Church And State

The far right created such controversy with its melding of politics and religion with (In)Justice Sunday that they're doing it again. Justice Sunday II is set for August 14 -- break out your Bibles and your ballots, people! This time, however, they may play it a little smarter and not invite the politicians. As for their agenda? To put all hot-button social issues off the table when it comes to Supreme Court nominees.

"...the new telecast would again say that questions posed by Democrats about a nominee's personal beliefs on abortion and other issues would amount to an unconstitutional "religious test," wrote the New York Times.

Uh, people, those are called "legal" issues, not religious ones. I suppose they'd object to finding out if a Supreme Court nominee opposed desegregation too, since that's a "religious" belief as well.

Their lineup sure is impressive:

Scheduled speakers in the telecast include James C. Dobson, the influential founder of Focus on the Family; former Senator Zell Miller, Democrat of Georgia; Charles W. Colson, the former Watergate figure and the founder of an evangelical group, Prison Fellowship; the veteran Christian conservative organizer Phyllis Schlafly; and William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. Mr. Perkins said the organizers planned to include a Jewish speaker as well.

By my count, that makes it one leader of a nasty fringe group, one nutty politico, a criminal who betrayed his country's trust in one of our greatest scandals and went to jail for it, a woman who opposes women's rights and a fringe Catholic who makes Mel Gibson seem reasonable. And a Jew. I am so there. Read the rest of this post...

Bush's Budget Deficit "Only" $333 Billion. Woo-Hoo!

What a stunning accomplishment for President Bush. He avoided posting the biggest budget deficit of all time and -- thanks to some one-time savings, according to economists -- Bush has racked up "only" a $333 billion deficit for fiscal 2005.

Break out the champagne! While predictions are always difficult, it's nice to keep in mind that four years ago Bush told the American people he would show fiscal discipline and achieve a $269 billion SURPLUS. So he was only off by $600 billion.... Read the rest of this post...

Bush: Supreme Court Appointment to be "Mainstream"

It seems to me that the White House is just plain ignoring the political realities right now. Take the President's radio address on his Supreme Court appointment today:

I will be guided by clear principles as I make my decision. My nominee will be a fair-minded individual who represents the mainstream of American law and American values. The nominee will meet the highest standards of intellect, character, and ability, and will pledge to faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our country. Our nation deserves, and I will select, a Supreme Court justice that Americans can be proud of.

The keys here, of course, are what the definition of mainstream is and how one defines values. Now I don't trust the President's definitions of either mainstream or values. But he's never going to win me over.

What I find strange about his stance, and where I think that they are simply ignoring reality, is that use of the word "mainstream". It's a code-word to Conservatives for squish -- someone who's not REALLY that conservative.

Conservatives have spent over 30 years waiting for this very moment. Ostensibly, they have the White House and the Congress. There are no excuses left for the Republicans not to appoint a Focus on the Family Conservative to the Court.

With a 42% approval rating, it's clear that the President has his base Conservatives and about 15% of Americans - the only slightly whack-job. Mainstream to them, an appointment leaning towards Gonzales, would be a complete sell-out and would have Conservatives outraged.

So if he's never going to win me over, and he's unlikely to win over any Democrat, after Schaivo and stem cells, what does the President think de-motivating his base like this is going to do? How is this going to help him?

The reality is that with scandal brewing, he's going to need his base. A move like this will outrage them, and may de-motivate the Conservatives out of the political process. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy... Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

We'll see if we can have a slower day here today, what with all the Rove madness during the week. Read the rest of this post...

Think Rove ever saw the State Dept. Memo?

So much of the Rove story doesn't add up yet, but the NY Times piece about the State Department memo on Wilson and Plame does add a whole new dimension. Think about it. The memo was written on June 10, 2003:

The memorandum was dated June 10, 2003, nearly four weeks before Mr. Wilson wrote an Op-Ed article for The New York Times in which he recounted his mission and accused the administration of twisting intelligence to exaggerate the threat from Iraq. The memorandum was written for Marc Grossman, then the under secretary of state for political affairs, and it referred explicitly to Valerie Wilson as Mr. Wilson's wife, according to a government official who reread the document on Friday.

It was apparently being circulated by Colin Powell on July 7, 2003 -- which is "coincidentally" one day after Joseph Wilson's op-ed about Niger ran in the New York Times:

The memorandum was sent to Colin L. Powell, then the secretary of state, just before or as he traveled with President Bush and other senior officials to Africa starting on July 7, 2003, when the White House was scrambling to defend itself from a blast of criticism a few days earlier from the former diplomat, Joseph C. Wilson IV, current and former government officials said.

Mr. Powell was seen walking around Air Force One during the trip with the memorandum in hand, said a person involved in the case who also requested anonymity because of the prosecutor's admonitions about talking about the investigation.

What are the chances that Karl Rove didn't know about it? What are the chances it wasn't discussed by the White House political operation and the National Security Team?

The level of intensity at the White House surrounding the Wilson op-ed was exposed yesterday by AP which reported:

Prosecutors investigating a CIA officer's blown cover gathered e-mail evidence that a top White House intelligence official knew Bush confidant Karl Rove had spoken to a reporter just days before the journalist identified the covert operative.

Rove told then-deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley in the July 11, 2003, e-mail that he had spoken with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper and tried to caution him away from some allegations that CIA operative Valerie Plame's husband was making about faulty Iraq intelligence.

"I didn't take the bait," Rove wrote in the message, disclosed to The Associated Press. In the memo, Rove recounted how Cooper tried to question him about whether President Bush had been hurt by the new allegations Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had been making.

So, again, what are the chances the Rove did not know about the State Department memo which explicitly named Valerie Wilson? That just is not remotely credible.

Clearly, that week, the White House staff was obsessed with the Wilson op-ed. And when Rove is in full defense mode, it's full smear mode. The White House wanted this e-mail leaked because they think it makes Karl look good. It doesn't....what is does show is that the whole White House team, including the supposedly non-political National Security Adviser's office, were in full spin mode. To think that they would be spinning without the benefit of the State Department memo is just not credible...and in that WH, not feasible.

The White House is leaking and leaking these days...trying to save Rove's butt. When you start piecing together the leaks, they make the case against Rove even stronger. Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

What new revelations can we expect today in the Rove Scandal? What else is going on? Read the rest of this post...

Massachusetts demands apology from Santorum

The Massachusetts congressional delegation sends a letter to Santorum, demanding an apology. Santorum has to go next year along with any other extremist Republicans who are running in the Blue States.

"We are deeply disturbed that you would offend Massachusetts by using an abuse scandal, one that has been mirrored in your state and in others, to score cheap political points with far right political groups," said the 10 lawmakers in a letter to Sen. Rick Santorum, R-PA.

Read the rest of this post...

More bombings in Iraq, 30 dead

The latest episode of "last throes" has translated into 20 dead and over 100 wounded. This comes just after the Wednesday attacks that killed 27 including many children. Since the latest polling data shows that a majority of the US public believes that Iraq is part of the war on terror, maybe someone could explain that to me because besides complicating the efforts to combat terror, I just don't see it as part of the plan.

I just wonder how any of us in the west, especially those of us from countries who are involved in this mess, would react to this regular stream of bombings as we see in Iraq. The pre-war US chicken hawk propganda loved telling everyone that if people want to be free they will rise up like the American founding fathers but that simplified message, which was accepted by too many people, just has no grounds in reality. But tell me something new about these people.

What a complete mess. Read the rest of this post...