I feel like there's something missing from this Limbaugh story

I have a hard time believing that US Customs is going to detain you for a vial of Viagra. Whether or not the prescription is in your name (Limbaugh's lawyer is now claiming that Limbaugh got the prescription in his doctor's name to avoid embarrassment - which is a bit odd, since Bob Dole is on TV hawking the stuff). It just sounds odd. Odd, as in, something's missing from this story. How much Viagra did they find? Did they find anything else? I just have a very hard time believing that they found, say, 20 pills of Viagra and detain a guy. What are we missing here? Read the rest of this post...

Senator Specter pretends to be a real boy, again

Enough already. How many times do we have to watch the charade of Senator Specter getting weelly weelly mad at the Bush administration for breaking every law on the planet and ignoring Congress, only to find Specter refuse to hold hearings, refuse to swear in witnesses when he does hold hearings, then in the end work out a deal that totally exonerates every crime the Bush administration has ever committed?

Seriously, enough already. It's getting old. Time to throw the Republicans out and get a Democratic Congress that will actually hold George Bush in check, rather than enabling him. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Wasn't that a fun evening? Read the rest of this post...

BREAKING: Rush Limbaugh reportedly detained at airport for possession of illegal drugs

Getting the story now.

Sources have confirmed to CBS4 News that conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh has been detained at Palm Beach International Airport for the possible possession of illegal prescription drugs Monday evening.

Limbaugh was returning on a flight from the Dominican Republic when officials found the drugs, among them Viagra.

This is very bad. Limbaugh may have just violated the plea agreement that protected him from further prosecution:

Under the terms of the deal with prosecutors called a pretrial diversion, to be filed Monday, Limbaugh will be cleared of the charge if he stays clean for 18 months and doesn’t violate any laws, Black said.

Limbaugh has publicly acknowledged being addicted to pain medication.

But there's more. Limbaugh was apparently bringing in Viagra that wasn't his (no word on anything else). The previous arrest was for Limbaugh's supposed addiction to pain killers. Viagra has nothing to do with pain killers. So, was there more to the case before, or is there more to the case now? Either way, I can't imagine the judge is going to look kindly on this. Read the rest of this post...

Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki backtracks on amnesty, withdrawal timeline. Here's what it means...

As John would say, this is interesting. Apparently under pressure from other leaders of the UIA (a Shia coalition in which Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's Dawa party is a member), Maliki has dropped crucial language from his national reconciliation plan, softening it considerably.

Most reports are attributing the changes to internal UIA negotiations, so it's impossible to know the extent to which US Ambassador Khalilzad or other US figures affected the adjustments. My guess is that the US probably supported the changes, but there are plenty of domestic Iraqi political reasons for the UIA -- especially the powerful SCIRI party -- to argue against amnesty. Many Shia leaders simply don't believe there is such thing as a legitimate resistance, and they are itching to punish Sunnis both for past injustices and for the insurgency (regardless of definition as "nationalist" or "terrorist").

Removal of withdrawal language is, I think, less rooted in domestic politics and therefore more likely to have been influenced by Bush administration officials. Maliki (and/or the other leaders) also took out language regarding "death squads" and militias, which I'm sure SCIRI leaders demanded, as SCIRI's militia, the Badr Corps, has been most frequently accused of those kinds of actions.

I previously was harsh regarding the potential for amnesty, but I want to reiterate a point I made then: amnesty may very well be good policy as part of an endgame scenario, i.e., a cease-fire among Iraqis and a turnover of military power from U.S. to Iraq (a.k.a. withdrawal). But even thinking about that requires somebody to negotiate with, some person or group that actually has the power to bargain on behalf of The Insurgency. Right now that doesn't exist, and obviously there's really no such thing as a unilateral cease-fire. So the changes in this document may also tacitly admit the reality that even if the Iraqi government was prepared to offer certain incentives to fighters in exchange for peace, there's nothing like Sinn Fein or even an Arafat to haggle out the details and, more importantly, enforce it on that side.

When I was in Iraq, one of the running (mordant) jokes we made after especially stupid meetings, foolish dictates, screwed up operations, etc. -- which happened with alarming regularity -- was to look at each other and say, simply, "Forever." As in, "We're going to be here... forever."

So my basic reaction to this posturing, politicking, and bickering, is: Forever. Read the rest of this post...

ABC News slams Bush hard over global warming

Read this. It's really quite an amazing slam on Bush. From ABC News:

In the White House, only hours after that old elm had fallen, Bush was addressed by a reporter, thus: "I know that you are not planning to see Al Gore's new movie, but do you agree with the premise that global warming is a real and significant threat to the planet?"

"I have said consistently," answered Bush, "that global warming is a serious problem. There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused. We ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary ... to be good stewards of the environment, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil..."

The President -- as far as the extensive and repeated researches of this and many other professional journalists, as well as all scientists credible on this subject, can find -- is wrong on one crucial and no doubt explosive issue. When he said -- as he also did a few weeks ago -- that "There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused" ... well, there really is no such debate.

At least none above what is proverbially called "the flat earth society level."

Not one scientist of any credibility on this subject has presented any evidence for some years now that counters the massive and repeated evidence -- gathered over decades and come at in dozens of ways by all kinds of professional scientists around the world -- that the burning of fossil fuels is raising the world's average temperature.

Or that counters the findings that the burning of these fuels is doing so in a way that is very dangerous for mankind, that will almost certainly bring increasingly devastating effects in the coming decades.

One small group of special interest businesses leaders -- those of some fossil fuel companies -- have been well documented by journalist Ross Gelbspan and others to have been fighting a PR campaign for 15 years to keep the American public confused about the wide and deep scientific consensus on this.

They've aimed, as Gelbspan explains, to keep us thinking that (to borrow the president's words this morning) "There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused" -- though no open and thorough journalism this reporter knows of can find any such thing.

Drenching waters, president's words, high judges' scrutiny, worried voters, journalists scrambling to get their arms around this enormous story, oil executives looking at spread sheets while they explore for more oil in Canada and the Arctic, and one elm down ... so far.

Meteorologists predict more heavy rain this week along the mid-Atlantic seaboard.

Climatologists predict much the same for the coming decades.

Read the rest of this post...

Alito upholds death penalty

If you're a person of faith who is troubled by the death penalty, and if you supported George Bush's recent Supreme Court appointment of Samuel Alito, then you need to know that you supported the continuation of the death penalty.

Not as warm and fuzzy as you thought, these conservative judges, eh?

Life is a lot more nuanced than always voting Republican. Read the rest of this post...

Today's Iraq casualties: 16 dead, including one US Marine; 56 wounded

Stay the course, and the band played on. Read the rest of this post...

Republican House Speaker Denny Hastert's $200 million personal pork

Yes, Hastert netted $2 million as a result of his own earmark. This is what happens when one part controls the ENTIRE federal government - the Republicans have the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court. And anyone is surprised that years of that control have made them corrupt? Read the rest of this post...

Polls continue to worsen on Iraq

See, this is the one (or three) inescapable fact about the war in Iraq. The situation will continue to get worse, US troops will continue to be attacked, and the American public will continue to lose confidence in the war effort. There is no way other than an outright victory to turn it around. And victory isn't going to happen because Bush has already lost the war. No matter what stunts Bush pulls, things will get worse, and the American public will know it. Read the rest of this post...

Please sir, may I have some oversight?

Pathetic. Check out the headline. Bush MAY ALLOW Senator Specter to do his friggin' job? Well bully for him, and for Senator Specter who seems to think congressional oversight involves crawling on your hands and knees and begging the president's permission.

It's time we elected a Congress that actually does its job. We need to restore the balance in Washington. The Republicans controlling Congress need to be thrown out. Read the rest of this post...

Put Afghanistan on the list of Bush foreign policy disasters

No surprise to anyone who follows the news -- although it's probably a surprise to the Bush White House -- Afghanistan is a mess. The country is spiraling out of control:

Many Afghans and some foreign supporters say they are losing faith in President Hamid Karzai's government, which is besieged by an escalating insurgency and endemic corruption and is unable to protect or administer large areas of the country.

Bush abandoned Afghanistan to launch the war against Saddam Hussein. Read the rest of this post...

In Iraq, amnesty if no terrorism -- still unclear if that includes killers of US soldiers

The Iraqi government yesterday announced a plan to offer amnesty to insurgents who were not involved in "terrorism":

Maliki said the "reconciliation will be neither with the terrorists nor the Saddamists," referring to supporters of former president Saddam Hussein. The plan called for pardoning detainees "who were not involved in crimes, war crimes and crimes against humanity" and for forming committees to secure the release of innocent prisoners as quickly as possible.

How this Iraqi government is exactly going to define "terrorism" is unclear. None of the articles I read could answer that very basic question.

The Iraqi government did define terrorism not too long ago -- in November of 2005. And, according to that definition, resistance against US forces was not considered terrorism. So, their definition of terrorism was specifically written to NOT include attacks on any soldier from the the United States:

"Though resistance is a legitimate right for all people, terrorism does not represent resistance. Therefore, we condemn terrorism and acts of violence, killing and kidnapping targeting Iraqi citizens and humanitarian, civil, government institutions, national resources and houses of worships," the document said.

The attempt to define terrorism omitted any reference to attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces. Delegates from across the political and religious spectrum said the omission was intentional. They spoke anonymously, saying they feared retribution.

If that definition of terrorism still holds, then George Bush's good friends -- the Iraqis to whom Bush paid that "surprise vist" just a couple weeks ago -- are giving amnesty to anyone who attacked and killed Americans. Attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces didn't count in November. The question for George Bush is whether they matter with the new Iraqi government now. Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

This week is off to a wild start....We're having a brief respite from the torrential rain right now. It's been pretty intense weather-wise here in DC.

But that pales in comparison to the storm brewing over the Iraqi amnesty controversy..

What else? Read the rest of this post...

US, UK, Australia, New Zealand to step up fight against whaling

Who would have thought that this issue could come back as an issue? What is disturbing is that the pro-commercial whaling efforts by Japan don't even seem to match up with the Japanese people because they simply are not interested in eating whale meat. It is more an issue of some people within power who want to cash in from killing whales, but disguise their ambitions by cloaking their argument to clinging to a piece of their history that is as outdated as slaughtering buffalo one hundred years ago in America.

I like Japan and the Japanese but if they really want to flash money around, they ought to continue spending it on many of the excellent development programs they have already started in some of the poorest countries of the world. I've stumbled upon many of these programs in remote corners of the world and they truly benefit some of those most in need. It's sad to see that some removed from the real world people have hijacked Japanese government money and influence for this incredibly bad cause. They are targeting some very poor and needy countries such as Mali, Nicaragua not to mention a few greedy and short sighted governments and giving those countries a bad reputation.

Let's hope that the US and other countries can work together and turn the tide on this unfortunate change. Read the rest of this post...

Mission Unaccomplished - failures of the G8 to follow through

A year ago, Blair patted himself on the back for the Gleneagles G8 summit and the promises made by the richest countries. Debt relief, HIV drug assistance, cuts to government farm subsidies for fair(er) trade was all in there. Like many of these summits, the talk was just talk and the action was considerably more limited. Blair continues to spin, as he does, the great success of Gleneagles but once again Blair and his talk has fallen short.

Writing in The Independent today, the Prime Minister insists there has been a "great deal of progress in many areas" over the past 12 months, but acknowledges there have been "disappointments", particularly the failure to reach a global trade deal. And in a speech tonight, he will hail the agreement reached at Gleneagles.

But detailed analysis by the charity Action Aid strikes a more pessimistic note, concluding that many of the much-lauded commitments from the world's most powerful leaders have not been met.

Its report, entitled Mission Unaccomplished and seen by The Independent, says millions of lives are still being lost in Africa and the rest of the developing world by the failure of Western countries to live up to the favourable headlines generated by the summit. The charity is calling for the millions of people who supported the Make Poverty History campaign to use the first anniversary to increase pressure on the Government over the failed pledges.

Read the rest of this post...