Still Fighting has moved! Check us out at
www.stillfighting.com!
December 29, 2005
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Sunday's Links
Activism
The Bill O'Reilly Blacklist. Bill O'Reilly really is an idiot. The worst kind of idiot, actually: One with a microphone. But unfortunately, despite his idle threats to "retire", he's not going anywhere any time soon. Since he's a complete hypocrite and unable to respond to any of his critics with facts, he has to resort to ad hominem attacks. Recently, he labelled them "smear merchants", and blamed the whole hubbub about his threat to San Francisco as their fault. Furthermore, he "promised to publish a blacklist to publicly intimidate his 'enemies'." Arianna Huffington is collecting the names of those who will be proud to be on his absurd list. Count Still Fighting in, Arianna! You should take a stroll over to her post and add your name. Maybe if a large percentage of Americans WANT to be on his list, he'll get the message. Probably not, but it's worth a shot.
News
How U.S. Fell Under the Spell of 'Curveball'. You gotta give Bush credit for one thing: He's good at repeating the same lies over and over again. But unlike in the run-up to the war, and even the 2004 election, the media and the public are no longer willing to buy what he's selling. What that means is that the harder he pushes, the more of his dirty laundry comes out. From the L.A. Times, we're learning how the Bush Team based their intelligence on a single, unreliable informant (the infamous "Curveball"), and how the Germans who had him in custody (he was a defector) knew "his information was often vague, mostly secondhand and impossible to confirm." What was their reaction when Powell used Curveball's claims to justify the war? "Mein Gott!" We just have one question: Why didn't you speak up then?
Afghanistan Insurgents 'Extremely Resolute and Fought to the Last Man'. You may not have noticed, but there's still conflict in Afghanistan. So much conflict, in fact, that you might call it an insurgency. An insurgency that is just as dedicated to removing the invading forces as those in Iraq. The entire occupation/insurgency can be summed up by this quote: "The issue is not that they're [the insurgents] going to be successful today or tomorrow or even next year, but that in time, the United States and other major powers ... just do not have the political will to stay." And that's what it comes down to. The American public has made it very clear that they want us to leave Iraq and Afghanistan. Once we do, the insurgents win, because they persisted. But we certainly don't have a better idea...do you?
Texas GOP Agrees to Stop Some Campaign Practices. This story goes beyond the absurd. The Texas Republican Party has "agreed" to avoid continuing practicing illegal activity. How nice! Texas's Travis County Attorney David Escamilla has prepared an 18 month study documenting illegal activites by the Texas GOP in 2002. He was preparing to release his finding when the Texas GOP struck a deal to stop breaking the law, in return for delaying the release of the report until 2007, well after the 2006 mid-term elections. The study centers around corporate monies being used for campaign activities; a severe no-no. The article goes on to say that "[t]he GOP also agreed not to violate the state election code and to seek election-law training for its executive director and finance officials." Isn't that considerate? The Texas GOP is agreeing not to break the law! And if you're infuriated with that story, consider this one: last week, business lobbyists raised over $200,000 for Tom DeLay, in recognition of his hardworking efforts for their legislation. Included in those lobbyists were representatives from oil and electricity-utility industries, who must have been overjoyed to reward DeLay, for helping to get that horrendous energy bill passed. "DeLay has been the best thing for the lobbying industry in Washington in recent history," said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch, a Washington-based advocacy group that has called for a special counsel to investigate the lawmaker. "They work hand in glove with him to get his legislative agenda passed, and pay him and the Republican Party back with huge campaign contributions. At all costs, they want to get this guy back in power and re-elected." This is exactly why we need him out of office: we need a politicians who will work for the American people as a whole, and not for special interest groups.
Editorials
A Private Obsession. Paul Krugman makes clear the only obvious thing about the new Medicare plan that just took hold: It's a terrible idea. Where did it come from? It came from those idealogues who are obsessed with privatization. To dogmatic conservatives (you know, the ones running everything nowadays), privatization isn't just a means, but rather a goal. So, even though certain things (like health care) shouldn't be privatized, because private companies would not benefit the actual system, our current government doesn't really care about making the system work. Instead, we're left with a confusing and ineffective prescription drug plans, with "doughnut holes" and higher, non-negotiable prices. This is what you get when you have people who care more about ideology than results. "And the result of that ideology is a piece of legislation so bad it's almost surreal."
An Open Letter to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald - From Former White House Counsel John W. Dean. We all know that Patrick Fitzgerald has been unswayed by political pressure in his quest to discover the truth about the Valerie Plame outing. And while his efforts so far have produced the resignation of Dick Cheney's chief of staff, how important is that, really? It's like getting Al Capone for tax evasion. In this letter, John Dean, former White House Counsel lays out exactly what Fitzgerald's powers are, and, using historical references, suggests a course of action that involves more than just zeroing in on the breaking of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. We urge you to read Dean's letter, because it'll help you undertand exactly what Fitzgerald is capable of doing.
Blogger Commentary
The Privilege to Destroy: The Priesthood of Journalism. One of our favorite verbose bloggers is back: Arthur Silber has an incisive, detailed writing style that allows him to examine important issues with a level of focus that most other bloggers (and certainly other newspapers) don't provide. In his latest missive, he likens the communications between anonymous sources and journalists to the communications betweens priests and confessors. In both cases, one party has been granted anonymity. In the priest-confessor case, it's pretty clear that there's an important service being performed that requires anonymity, but even then, in recent years, "even the clergy-communicant privilege has been revisited. Many have argued that such a privilege cannot be applied absolutely..." However, journalists, whose service is supposed to benefit the public, seem to now believe that they should be extended the same privileges, and not even have to make an exception to help punish crimes. There's a lot more in Silber's post, but here's one important point: "Any such legal privilege -- applied absolutely and with no exceptions, and regardless of the truth or falsity of the information provided -- serves only to protect the guilty and punish the innocent."
What Was That About Access to Intel? As we've talked about, one of the current Republican talking points is that, pre-war, Congress had access to all of the intelligence information that Bush did, so there shouldn't have been any reason for (Democratic) Senators of Representatives to lament the war now, or say that they weren't informed. But, as Matt over at 1115.org shows us, back in 2001, Ari Fleischer explained to reporters that Congress wouldn't have access to all of the intelligence information that Bush saw. In fact, Fleischer actually says that "the President has decided that he wants to make certain that the agencies that report to him provide information in a fashion that is a smaller circle to members of Congress." Republicans, once again, caught in a talking points lie. When will the American people learn? Even though the president's approval rating is down to 36%, we can't let up.
|
December 29, 2005
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Sunday's Links
Activism
The Bill O'Reilly Blacklist. Bill O'Reilly really is an idiot. The worst kind of idiot, actually: One with a microphone. But unfortunately, despite his idle threats to "retire", he's not going anywhere any time soon. Since he's a complete hypocrite and unable to respond to any of his critics with facts, he has to resort to ad hominem attacks. Recently, he labelled them "smear merchants", and blamed the whole hubbub about his threat to San Francisco as their fault. Furthermore, he "promised to publish a blacklist to publicly intimidate his 'enemies'." Arianna Huffington is collecting the names of those who will be proud to be on his absurd list. Count Still Fighting in, Arianna! You should take a stroll over to her post and add your name. Maybe if a large percentage of Americans WANT to be on his list, he'll get the message. Probably not, but it's worth a shot.
News
How U.S. Fell Under the Spell of 'Curveball'. You gotta give Bush credit for one thing: He's good at repeating the same lies over and over again. But unlike in the run-up to the war, and even the 2004 election, the media and the public are no longer willing to buy what he's selling. What that means is that the harder he pushes, the more of his dirty laundry comes out. From the L.A. Times, we're learning how the Bush Team based their intelligence on a single, unreliable informant (the infamous "Curveball"), and how the Germans who had him in custody (he was a defector) knew "his information was often vague, mostly secondhand and impossible to confirm." What was their reaction when Powell used Curveball's claims to justify the war? "Mein Gott!" We just have one question: Why didn't you speak up then?
Afghanistan Insurgents 'Extremely Resolute and Fought to the Last Man'. You may not have noticed, but there's still conflict in Afghanistan. So much conflict, in fact, that you might call it an insurgency. An insurgency that is just as dedicated to removing the invading forces as those in Iraq. The entire occupation/insurgency can be summed up by this quote: "The issue is not that they're [the insurgents] going to be successful today or tomorrow or even next year, but that in time, the United States and other major powers ... just do not have the political will to stay." And that's what it comes down to. The American public has made it very clear that they want us to leave Iraq and Afghanistan. Once we do, the insurgents win, because they persisted. But we certainly don't have a better idea...do you?
Texas GOP Agrees to Stop Some Campaign Practices. This story goes beyond the absurd. The Texas Republican Party has "agreed" to avoid continuing practicing illegal activity. How nice! Texas's Travis County Attorney David Escamilla has prepared an 18 month study documenting illegal activites by the Texas GOP in 2002. He was preparing to release his finding when the Texas GOP struck a deal to stop breaking the law, in return for delaying the release of the report until 2007, well after the 2006 mid-term elections. The study centers around corporate monies being used for campaign activities; a severe no-no. The article goes on to say that "[t]he GOP also agreed not to violate the state election code and to seek election-law training for its executive director and finance officials." Isn't that considerate? The Texas GOP is agreeing not to break the law! And if you're infuriated with that story, consider this one: last week, business lobbyists raised over $200,000 for Tom DeLay, in recognition of his hardworking efforts for their legislation. Included in those lobbyists were representatives from oil and electricity-utility industries, who must have been overjoyed to reward DeLay, for helping to get that horrendous energy bill passed. "DeLay has been the best thing for the lobbying industry in Washington in recent history," said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch, a Washington-based advocacy group that has called for a special counsel to investigate the lawmaker. "They work hand in glove with him to get his legislative agenda passed, and pay him and the Republican Party back with huge campaign contributions. At all costs, they want to get this guy back in power and re-elected." This is exactly why we need him out of office: we need a politicians who will work for the American people as a whole, and not for special interest groups.
Editorials
A Private Obsession. Paul Krugman makes clear the only obvious thing about the new Medicare plan that just took hold: It's a terrible idea. Where did it come from? It came from those idealogues who are obsessed with privatization. To dogmatic conservatives (you know, the ones running everything nowadays), privatization isn't just a means, but rather a goal. So, even though certain things (like health care) shouldn't be privatized, because private companies would not benefit the actual system, our current government doesn't really care about making the system work. Instead, we're left with a confusing and ineffective prescription drug plans, with "doughnut holes" and higher, non-negotiable prices. This is what you get when you have people who care more about ideology than results. "And the result of that ideology is a piece of legislation so bad it's almost surreal."
An Open Letter to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald - From Former White House Counsel John W. Dean. We all know that Patrick Fitzgerald has been unswayed by political pressure in his quest to discover the truth about the Valerie Plame outing. And while his efforts so far have produced the resignation of Dick Cheney's chief of staff, how important is that, really? It's like getting Al Capone for tax evasion. In this letter, John Dean, former White House Counsel lays out exactly what Fitzgerald's powers are, and, using historical references, suggests a course of action that involves more than just zeroing in on the breaking of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. We urge you to read Dean's letter, because it'll help you undertand exactly what Fitzgerald is capable of doing.
Blogger Commentary
The Privilege to Destroy: The Priesthood of Journalism. One of our favorite verbose bloggers is back: Arthur Silber has an incisive, detailed writing style that allows him to examine important issues with a level of focus that most other bloggers (and certainly other newspapers) don't provide. In his latest missive, he likens the communications between anonymous sources and journalists to the communications betweens priests and confessors. In both cases, one party has been granted anonymity. In the priest-confessor case, it's pretty clear that there's an important service being performed that requires anonymity, but even then, in recent years, "even the clergy-communicant privilege has been revisited. Many have argued that such a privilege cannot be applied absolutely..." However, journalists, whose service is supposed to benefit the public, seem to now believe that they should be extended the same privileges, and not even have to make an exception to help punish crimes. There's a lot more in Silber's post, but here's one important point: "Any such legal privilege -- applied absolutely and with no exceptions, and regardless of the truth or falsity of the information provided -- serves only to protect the guilty and punish the innocent."
What Was That About Access to Intel? As we've talked about, one of the current Republican talking points is that, pre-war, Congress had access to all of the intelligence information that Bush did, so there shouldn't have been any reason for (Democratic) Senators of Representatives to lament the war now, or say that they weren't informed. But, as Matt over at 1115.org shows us, back in 2001, Ari Fleischer explained to reporters that Congress wouldn't have access to all of the intelligence information that Bush saw. In fact, Fleischer actually says that "the President has decided that he wants to make certain that the agencies that report to him provide information in a fashion that is a smaller circle to members of Congress." Republicans, once again, caught in a talking points lie. When will the American people learn? Even though the president's approval rating is down to 36%, we can't let up.
|
December 29, 2005
The Bill O'Reilly Blacklist. Bill O'Reilly really is an idiot. The worst kind of idiot, actually: One with a microphone. But unfortunately, despite his idle threats to "retire", he's not going anywhere any time soon. Since he's a complete hypocrite and unable to respond to any of his critics with facts, he has to resort to ad hominem attacks. Recently, he labelled them "smear merchants", and blamed the whole hubbub about his threat to San Francisco as their fault. Furthermore, he "promised to publish a blacklist to publicly intimidate his 'enemies'." Arianna Huffington is collecting the names of those who will be proud to be on his absurd list. Count Still Fighting in, Arianna! You should take a stroll over to her post and add your name. Maybe if a large percentage of Americans WANT to be on his list, he'll get the message. Probably not, but it's worth a shot.
News
How U.S. Fell Under the Spell of 'Curveball'. You gotta give Bush credit for one thing: He's good at repeating the same lies over and over again. But unlike in the run-up to the war, and even the 2004 election, the media and the public are no longer willing to buy what he's selling. What that means is that the harder he pushes, the more of his dirty laundry comes out. From the L.A. Times, we're learning how the Bush Team based their intelligence on a single, unreliable informant (the infamous "Curveball"), and how the Germans who had him in custody (he was a defector) knew "his information was often vague, mostly secondhand and impossible to confirm." What was their reaction when Powell used Curveball's claims to justify the war? "Mein Gott!" We just have one question: Why didn't you speak up then?
Afghanistan Insurgents 'Extremely Resolute and Fought to the Last Man'. You may not have noticed, but there's still conflict in Afghanistan. So much conflict, in fact, that you might call it an insurgency. An insurgency that is just as dedicated to removing the invading forces as those in Iraq. The entire occupation/insurgency can be summed up by this quote: "The issue is not that they're [the insurgents] going to be successful today or tomorrow or even next year, but that in time, the United States and other major powers ... just do not have the political will to stay." And that's what it comes down to. The American public has made it very clear that they want us to leave Iraq and Afghanistan. Once we do, the insurgents win, because they persisted. But we certainly don't have a better idea...do you?
Texas GOP Agrees to Stop Some Campaign Practices. This story goes beyond the absurd. The Texas Republican Party has "agreed" to avoid continuing practicing illegal activity. How nice! Texas's Travis County Attorney David Escamilla has prepared an 18 month study documenting illegal activites by the Texas GOP in 2002. He was preparing to release his finding when the Texas GOP struck a deal to stop breaking the law, in return for delaying the release of the report until 2007, well after the 2006 mid-term elections. The study centers around corporate monies being used for campaign activities; a severe no-no. The article goes on to say that "[t]he GOP also agreed not to violate the state election code and to seek election-law training for its executive director and finance officials." Isn't that considerate? The Texas GOP is agreeing not to break the law! And if you're infuriated with that story, consider this one: last week, business lobbyists raised over $200,000 for Tom DeLay, in recognition of his hardworking efforts for their legislation. Included in those lobbyists were representatives from oil and electricity-utility industries, who must have been overjoyed to reward DeLay, for helping to get that horrendous energy bill passed. "DeLay has been the best thing for the lobbying industry in Washington in recent history," said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch, a Washington-based advocacy group that has called for a special counsel to investigate the lawmaker. "They work hand in glove with him to get his legislative agenda passed, and pay him and the Republican Party back with huge campaign contributions. At all costs, they want to get this guy back in power and re-elected." This is exactly why we need him out of office: we need a politicians who will work for the American people as a whole, and not for special interest groups.
Editorials
A Private Obsession. Paul Krugman makes clear the only obvious thing about the new Medicare plan that just took hold: It's a terrible idea. Where did it come from? It came from those idealogues who are obsessed with privatization. To dogmatic conservatives (you know, the ones running everything nowadays), privatization isn't just a means, but rather a goal. So, even though certain things (like health care) shouldn't be privatized, because private companies would not benefit the actual system, our current government doesn't really care about making the system work. Instead, we're left with a confusing and ineffective prescription drug plans, with "doughnut holes" and higher, non-negotiable prices. This is what you get when you have people who care more about ideology than results. "And the result of that ideology is a piece of legislation so bad it's almost surreal."
An Open Letter to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald - From Former White House Counsel John W. Dean. We all know that Patrick Fitzgerald has been unswayed by political pressure in his quest to discover the truth about the Valerie Plame outing. And while his efforts so far have produced the resignation of Dick Cheney's chief of staff, how important is that, really? It's like getting Al Capone for tax evasion. In this letter, John Dean, former White House Counsel lays out exactly what Fitzgerald's powers are, and, using historical references, suggests a course of action that involves more than just zeroing in on the breaking of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. We urge you to read Dean's letter, because it'll help you undertand exactly what Fitzgerald is capable of doing.
Blogger Commentary
The Privilege to Destroy: The Priesthood of Journalism. One of our favorite verbose bloggers is back: Arthur Silber has an incisive, detailed writing style that allows him to examine important issues with a level of focus that most other bloggers (and certainly other newspapers) don't provide. In his latest missive, he likens the communications between anonymous sources and journalists to the communications betweens priests and confessors. In both cases, one party has been granted anonymity. In the priest-confessor case, it's pretty clear that there's an important service being performed that requires anonymity, but even then, in recent years, "even the clergy-communicant privilege has been revisited. Many have argued that such a privilege cannot be applied absolutely..." However, journalists, whose service is supposed to benefit the public, seem to now believe that they should be extended the same privileges, and not even have to make an exception to help punish crimes. There's a lot more in Silber's post, but here's one important point: "Any such legal privilege -- applied absolutely and with no exceptions, and regardless of the truth or falsity of the information provided -- serves only to protect the guilty and punish the innocent."
What Was That About Access to Intel? As we've talked about, one of the current Republican talking points is that, pre-war, Congress had access to all of the intelligence information that Bush did, so there shouldn't have been any reason for (Democratic) Senators of Representatives to lament the war now, or say that they weren't informed. But, as Matt over at 1115.org shows us, back in 2001, Ari Fleischer explained to reporters that Congress wouldn't have access to all of the intelligence information that Bush saw. In fact, Fleischer actually says that "the President has decided that he wants to make certain that the agencies that report to him provide information in a fashion that is a smaller circle to members of Congress." Republicans, once again, caught in a talking points lie. When will the American people learn? Even though the president's approval rating is down to 36%, we can't let up.
