Still Fighting

Activism

Tell the Government to Stop Hiring the Bad Guys. Not all government contractors are evil. Many simply bid for contracts, get them awarded, and do their jobs. It's the Halliburtons of the world that give a bad name to government contractors. So, why does the government continue to give them contracts, especially no-bid contracts? We're over the fact that these evil contractors are using their positions of influence to do shoddy work and make money off of the taxpayers, and it's time to put this practice to an end. Go to the link above and sign the Project on Government Oversight's petition to stop giving contracts to the "bad guys." Your voice will make a difference!

News

'Holiday' Cards Ring Hollow for Some on Bushes' List. It's not often that we agree with the White House, but in this case, we must give credit where credit is due. The White House sent out this year's holiday cards (to 1.4 million or so "close friends"). Don't worry - it's paid for by the RNC. The cards wish people a happy "holiday season," and if you can't see where this is going, where have you been? Yes, you guessed it. Religious extremists are royally upset that "Christmas" has been taken out of the White House's holiday cards. Can you hear that, folks? It's the persecution train - all right-wing zealots, hop aboard! In a statement, the White House indicated that the Bushs' cards "in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths." Never mind the hypocrisy of these extremists; they claim to be persecuted, but by demanding that the White House send out Christmas cards, they are supporting the discarding of all other religions. Hey, extremists, we'll make a deal with you: You can have your Christmas cards between now and 2008, but then we elect a Jewish president. Hope you like Hanukkah: you can expect those first "Hava Nagila" cards to be delivered sometime around November, 2009.

Iraq VP Disputes Bush on Training of Forces. It comes down to who you believe. If you believe Bush, who has a tremendous track record for telling the truth, then the Iraqi forces are being trained quite well. However, if you believe Iraqi Vice President Ghazi al-Yawer, troops are not being trained, and "the army and other forces are being increasingly used to settle scores and make other political gains." Who's got more credibility? The man who won't come off of vacation for a national disaster, or the man who is actual IN Iraq, and can see what's happening?

Lieberman Calls For Formation Of 'War Cabinet'. We are officially prepared to throw the towel in on Joe Lieberman. It's hard for us to say, because he is a Democratic Senator, but it's time to face the fact that Lieberman no longer has the party's interests at heart. On Tuesday, Lieberman called for Bush to create a "War Cabinet," to provide advice and direction on the war effort. Perhaps the Senator is unfamiliar with the Secretaries of Defense and State, whose combined responsibilities include "advice and direction on the war effort." Not that we have a whole lot of faith in Rummy and Condi in the first place, but we certainly wouldn't have faith in a new, redundant "cabinet." It's sad to say, but Lieberman's time in the Senate seems to have passed. And with Lieberman possibly being challenged next year by Lowell Weicker, who would run as an Independent, that time could end rather quickly.

Editorials

The Next Iraq Offensive. General Wesley Clark has an op-ed piece in the New York Times, where he discusses what needs to happen next in Iraq. Clark is not a "Hill Man;" he is a retired, four-star general and former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. He also led forces into Kosovo, under Clinton, where not a single American soldier died. Clark knows a little something about the world stage, having been out and in it for 38 years plus. So when Clark says that we need to stay in Iraq, but that the course needs to change radically, we believe him. In addition to the things we need to do militarily, such as guard the borders and train the Iraqi troops, Clark notes that we also must extend the hand of diplomacy to the insurgents. Unfortunately, right now, this administration knows as much about Muslim culture as they do about telling the truth, and it shows. American muscle should only, and always, be used as a last resort, and not to settle petty grudges. Clark realizes this. We realize this. Why doesn't the administration realize this?

It's Not Whether You 'Win' or 'Lose'... Ever seen the movie "A Fish Called Wanda" ? Well, if you haven't, you should. In it, Kevin Kline plays borderline-psychotic thief "Otto", who fancies himself a warrior and a patriot. He can't stand the British, and when America's superiority is challenged by mentioning Vietnam, he replies "We did not lose in Vietnam! It was a tie!" Definitely a classic line, but it's amazing how that caricature has nicely captured the mentality of some of our war hawks. On the heels of Howard Dean's comment that "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong.", Applebaum's column is becoming increasingly relevant. Bush has never defined what victory means; he's just blithely asserted that it's inevitable. But Dean and Applebaum are right - a war is not a binary operation, where at the end, you either win or lose. Some of your goals are accomplished (getting rid of Saddam), and some aren't (bringing stability to Iraq). At this point, it is very unlikely we'll win. Maybe we should start thinking differently. It would, however, require elevating our political discourse just a little, so let's not hold our breath.

Blogger Commentary

The Economic Picture. We touched on the state of the economy yesterday, in quoting this Paul Krugman article. But Kevin Drum nicely sums up the "economic picture" in just a few short sentences. Productivity is up, but the real hourly compensation is down. What does this mean? Basically, we're working harder, and making more money...but for whom? If it's not going to the people doing the work (in the form of compensation), then where's it going? Hop on over to the link for the answer. Krugman was reluctant to blame Bush very much for the current state of the economy, but certainly the Republican Party isn't doing a whole lot to try and turn things around. Why should they? After all, it benefits them directly.

Opinion-making and Accountability. As long as we're quoting from Kevin Drum, why not quote from someone else who analyzes Kevin Drum? Greg Sargent takes a look at Drum's assertion that liberals should get over the fact that some liberals supported the war, and aren't going to apologize for that fact. He thinks it's unreasonable to expect us to "force tearful confessions of doctrinal error out of them", and we can see his point. But Sargent wants to take a look at the phrase "doctrinal error". He asserts that "The decision to support or oppose the Iraq war wasn't about doctrine. It was about judgment," and make a whole lot of sense in doing so. Sure, there were ideologues who led us to war, following their absurd doctrine of "spreading democracy" or "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" or even "lie us into war so all my defense contracting buddies get rich and Bush gets re-elected". However, the majority of the public isn't made of ideologues. Our elected officials, the pundits, and the people who voted for those officials exhibited poor judgment. Our leaders didn't do their jobs. The media didn't do their jobs. The pundits didn't do their jobs. "If we look at those who are now mea-culpa-ing about the war and see their decision retrospectively as having been driven by doctrine or ideology, not judgment, it absolves them of professional failure." He follows up with a fantastic point that not enough people are asking: "Because if they don't think they should be held accountable for past judgments, why should anyone turn to them for future ones?" Good question, Greg.

Activism

CA-48: Call to Action - Final Weekend Push. Tomorrow is the special election in California's 48th District. That gives you just one day to help Democrats take back a seat in the House of Representatives. Dems are down a whole bunch of seats, and there's no reason we can't start taking back the House right now. Go to the link above and see what you can do to help Steve Young strike a blow for democracy. And you don't have to live in the 48th District to participate: You can virtual phone bank, or at least email your CA friends and let them know how they should vote. Just do something!

News

Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake. How long's it gonna be before the threat of terrorism isn't used to justify every secretive, illicit, or morally reprehensible act this administration undertakes? Maybe if more cases like Khaled Masri's are made public, the citizenry will demand more openness. Look, we understand that secrecy is critical in certain cases. And we certainly understand that it only takes a few terrorists slipping through the cracks to wreak violence upon innocent Americans. But when we engage in acts like "rendition", and then shield them in secrecy, we allow ourselves to make horrible errors. If the leadership is more concerned with prosecuting as many people as possible, and allowing no oversight, we're going to have more cases like Masri's, in which he was erroneously imprisoned for five months "because the head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center's al Qaeda unit 'believed he was someone else,' one former CIA official said. 'She didn't really know. She just had a hunch.' " How many innocents have to be abused before the war on terror becomes just as bad as the terror itself?

Private Security Guards in Iraq Operate With Little Supervision. Last Monday, we talked about a video of private security contractors in Iraq shooting Iraqi civilians ('Trophy' Video Exposes Private Security Contractors Shooting up Iraqi Drivers). As the LA Times details, this wasn't an isolated case. Yet none have been prosecuted, even in the most obvious of situations. Imagine how this must feel to the Iraqis: an occupying force comes in, causes mass chaos and removes most of the infrastructure. Now, private American citizens are killing private Iraqi citizens, and there's absolutely no culpability. While the law states that these contractors can't be held liable in Iraq, they are supposed to be tried in their home countries. We'll give you one guess as to the number of times that's happened.

U.S. Not 'Well-Prepared' for Terrorism. Remember the 9/11 commission? The former chairman and vice-chairman said on Sunday that the U.S. is not at all prepared to face another terrorist attack. We wonder what their first clue was. Was it the simple-minded color-coded alert system? Over-budgeting and under-delivering contractors? The lack of cargo inspection at ports? The failed FBI database? The massively poor response to Katrina? Much of the lack of preparedness stems from this administration's unwillingness to implement many of the changes recommended by the 9/11 commission, and as a result, we are not in much better shape than we were four years ago. If you talk with disaster preparedness experts, they will tell you that the two most important things to do are create a plan, and have a way to implement that plan. The plan can be ever changing (and it should be), but without one in place, you're just asking for trouble. And we apparently are.

Editorials

All the President's Flacks. When are insiders too inside? Look at Bob Woodward. He knew about Valerie Plame six months before any sort of investiation occurred. He doesn't understand what Plamegate has to do with the Iraq War. And he really doesn't understand why it was wrong of him to stay silent for over two years. Woodward, along with Carl Bernstein, were able to break open Watergate partly because, at the time, they were outsiders. They didn't have ties to that administration, and it allowed them to see things clearly. Now, Woodward is the Washington insider, looking at the nation through rose-tinted glasses. Insight into what has happened with pre-war intelligence is being made by the "next" Woodwards and Bernsteins. Frank Rich's column details Woodward's duplicitousness, and why we still have some friends in the MSM.

The Ginsburg Fallacy. Look, the President's in charge, ok? He gets to appoint whomever he wants to the Supreme Court, and the Senate should generally approve his nominee. Disagree? Well, that's what they did with Clinton when he nominated Ginsburg. You see, she was "an ACLU-loving, bra-burning feminazi", but the Republicans deferred to the power of Clinton's office, so now the Democrats should do the same thing with Alito. Just one thing...that's all false. Ruth Marcus goes into some details of Ginsburg's case history, but no matter the spin, Alito and Ginsburg are quite different cases. Whereas Bush was running back to his base by appointing Alito, "then-Judge Ginsburg was a consensus choice, pushed by Republicans and accepted by the president in large part because he didn't want to take on a big fight." Bush wants a fight. Let's give him one.

Blogger Commentary

You're Going to Make a Martyr of Me Whether You Like It Or Not. On Saturday we gave you a news story about four pharmacists who were suspended by Walgreens for failing to follow Illinois law and dispense emergency contraception (Walgreens Places 4 Pharmacists on Leave). Amanda Marcotte, at Pangagon, talks about this, and raises some good points. No one talks about how these pharmacists (who refuse to dispense emergency contraception on the basis of "moral philosophy") are discriminating against the women who come to get these prescriptions. There's also the religious discrimination, the "My religious philosophy is better than yours, and I don't approve of yours, so I'm not going to do my job" kind of discrimination. Marcotte laments that "When I worked in customer service type jobs, I don't think that I met a single Christian coworker who would have thought themselves in the right to refuse service to a customer for having different religious beliefs, even in the transaction involved those. For instance, I'd known lots of bank tellers who believed that Islam was a Satanic religion or that all Jews were going to hell, but they weren't going to throw a temper tantrum when given a deposit for an account in the name of a mosque or a temple. I don't think it ever occured to them they had a right to use their job to harass a customer for having different religious beliefs." So what gives pharmacists the right to do differently? It's not a question of "well, there's another pharmacist available, so let him/her fill the prescription." It's a question of "it's your job, do it." This attempted-martyr thing religious extremists have going for them is getting tired. Hopefully, what happened in Illinois will wake them up.

Ooops! He Did It Again..... Our President just seems to keep making the same mistake again and again. Somehow, we don't think it's an accident. See, he repeatedly conflates the war on terror with the war in Iraq. One problem: Every single day we get more information about how the two aren't the same, and how the administration knew that before we went to war. Well, slight correction: They're the same now that we've made Iraq a haven for terrorists, but it didn't used to be that way. The Cunning Realist argues that by saying "America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your Commander-in-Chief.", Bush has essentially "placed his own identity---his manliness, courage and cojones---above whatever might be right for our troops, the nation, Iraq or the world." Thanks, George, you macho idiot.

Activism

Volunteer with OneWorldHealth. What is OneWorld Health? Well, according to their website, they're a Nonprofit Pharmeceutical Company. What a novel idea! Providing helpful drugs to people not for profit, but simply because you want to help people. Imagine the possibilities. They were founded 5 years ago, and currently have $25 million dollars "at work", fighting infectious disease around the world. Their stated values are "Integrity, Courage, and Collaboration". Frankly, we can't imagine many organizations more worth your time. So hop on over and volunteer your time at the link above, or at least donate here.

News

Justice Staff Saw Texas Districting As Illegal. Remember when Tom DeLay spearheaded the redistricting of Texas, which caused several Democrats to lose their House seats? At the time, we were all very mad, and wondered how it could have been legal. Funny story: It isn't. Six lawyers and two analysts in the Justice Department unanimously agreed that the move was illegal, because it "diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts. It also said the plan eliminated several other districts in which minorities had a substantial, though not necessarily decisive, influence in elections." These eight individuals crafted a memo to this effect, but were overruled by "senior officials." The redistricting was a gross misuse of power, and the case is on the Supreme Court's docket. Let's hope that the Supreme Court sees it for what it really is: A illegal ploy to engineer the Republicans takeover of Congress.

FBI's Sham Candidate Crawled Under W.Va.'s Political Rock. We're astounded not only that this happened, but that it's considered legal. In 2004, as part of a plea agreement, Thomas E. Esposito ran for the West Virginia House of Delegates. He was one of 10 candidates on the ballot. He received 2,175 votes. And he never had any intention of taking office, because he ran at the behest of the FBI to help flush out corruption in the election process. He created a campaign, with bumper stickers, phone calls, gladhandling, and all the rest. So the government was sued over election fraud, where the lawyer argued that the citizens who voted for Esposito were robbed of a constitutional right. But, get this, the Judge sided with the government, and here's why. "Corruption in Logan County had been endemic 'for longer than living memory' and that the bogus election campaign might have been the only way to root it out." Although that's certainly true, and we applaud the FBI for trying to crack down on this, the FBI has clearly overstepped their bounds on this case. This isn't a vote for class president: This is a state's House of Delegates. So not only is the FBI sending a message that they don't care, but the court is sending a message that "the ends justify the means." The court ruled in favor of the government because of the situation in West Virginia. The judge, David A. Faber, asked the lawyer during the hearing, "What else could the Justice Department have done?" The lawyer replied, "Not violate the constitutional rights of the voters of Logan County." Well, we know how this administration feels about the sanctity of elections. This just adds to that sacrilege.

Most Americans Doubt Bush Has Victory Plan. On the heels of Bush's "Victory Plan" speech, a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll showed that 55% of Americans do not believe that Bush has a plan that will achieve victory for the United States in Iraq, although it is conincidental that what we know of Bush's plan is eerily similar to Senator Joe Biden's (D-DE). See Editorial #2 (Bullet Points Over Baghdad) for more. In further Iraq news, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), best known for his call for America to leave Iraq "now," recently told a civic group that our Army is "Broken, worn out." He, like so many others, admits that he was wrong to vote for the Iraq War. There's absolutely nothing wrong with admitting that. No decision should ever be made without re-examining it. If we knew then what we know now (or even what we think we know), far fewer people would have voted to authorize Bush to go to war. But we were a nation scared, and Bush preyed on that. Now Bush wants us to continue to "stay the course," which isn't really an option, when you get right down to it. Murtha also predicted that it will cost $50 billion to upgrade military equipment nationwide, but says the federal government is already reducing future purchases to save money. Of course they are. That's Bush's M.O., isn't it? Save today, screw tomorrow. Well, actually, screw up today, and screw tomorrow.

Editorials

If America Left Iraq. What would happen if America left Iraq right now? Of course, no one really knows, but maybe it's something we should start seriously thinking about. The President likely would argue that leaving Iraq would basically directly the denotation of nuclear weapons in every major U.S. city, but he has no clue what he's talking about. However, Nir Rosen does. He convincingly argues that our presence there does more harm than good, and there's basically no hope for a "western-style" democracy anyways, so we might as well give up the ghost. He believes that our presence is fueling the insurgency, and that if we left, it would likely stop. Additionally, Sunnis would realize that they can't defeat the Shiite majority, and would try to work with them. Furthermore, hopefully Iraqis would band together and ensure that Iran doesn't take over. Why should we believe Nir Rosen? Well, he did spend six months in Iraq post-invasion, and as far as we can tell, unlike Bush, he doesn't have a track record of utter failure.

Bullet Points over Baghdad. We know Bush's "Victory Plan" is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Paul Krugman breaks down exactly why that's so. The plan is full of talking points and tired cliches, but Krugman writes that it's actually a test for the media. Will the media hold Bush accountable for this "plan?" Conventional wisdom says no, but lately some members of the MSM have grown a backbone. No, as Krugman writes, "The point isn't just that the administration is trying, yet again, to deceive the public. It's the fact that this attempt at deception shows such contempt - contempt for the public." Should we expect anything more from this administration?

Blogger Commentary

O'Reilly Brought Christmas War to Cavuto. Look, usually, Bill O'Reilly's not worth our time. But Friday's usually our day to kick back and just make fun of crazy Republicans. Sure, it's not particularly productive, although we can't imagine any of our readers would actually waste their time with him, and it is important to know just exactly what kind of psychosis he's promoting. Lately, he's been engaging in his annual "Save Christmas" crusade, setting up "secular, liberal" strawmen who are out to eliminate Christmas. It's just plain old nuts. But unfortunately, some people take him seriously, which is how we get from harmless stupidity to people trying to fight against the "liberal courts" out to destroy Christianity. For adding fuel to the fire, or taking credit for lower gas prices, or just being an ass in general simply to further his ratings, Bill O'Reilly may just be the worst person in the world. Sound like hyperbole? Well, maybe, but at least Keith Olbermann agrees with us.

The President Makes a Speech for Peace. Ok, before reading the rest of this paragraph, go to the link and read it. It's quick, we promise. Don't worry, we'll wait. Go now! Ok, done? So, this might seem like a cute little joke, taking "Vietnam" out of an old speech and replacing it with "Iraq", but this is really no laughing matter. The rhetoric surrounding Iraq and the justification for continuing the war is eerily similar to that of Vietnam. Do we want to go through Vietnam again? Apparently, people like Cheney and Rumsfeld do, given that they served under Nixon, and didn't get the memo about what happened to him. On top of the similarities between the two war themselves, it now looks like rationale for Vietnam was faked too.

Activism

Stop Drive-Through Mastectomies. Sick of politics? So are we. Just kidding. But here's what must surely be an apolitical issue, right? Surely, the idea of a woman with breast cancer who has been forced to get a mastectomy to save her life, and then is booted out of the hospital to save insurance costs is abhorrent to people of any political persuasion, right? So then why does it still go on? The Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2005 would require that all women being undergoing be mastectomies be guaranteed reasonable coverage. Go to the link and sign the petition supporting this important legislation.

News

GOP Closer to Breaking Up Left-Leaning 9th Circuit Appeals Court. Here's the problem with electing conservatives: They do long-term damage to the country that can't simply be undone in a couple of election cycles. The recent incarnation of conservatives seek total dominance of the government. They're not satisfied with just two of the three branches, even though we've seen what atrocities they've already wrought. No, they want to rule them all. So, even though it's the only Appeals Courts left dominated by Democratic nominees, the Ninth Circuit has to go. Legislators claim that "it's too large to administer justice", whatever that means. Even conservative judges think it's a ridiculous idea. It's solely politics at work - break up any last vestiges of liberal courts (even though the Ninth Circuit works just fine) and engineer a lasting conservative rule of the judicial branch. This is why Republican domination of the government cannot be allowed to occur again.

Air Force Erred With No-Bid Iraq Contract, GAO Says. Once again, the Pentagon is looking out for its friends, instead of the country. Last year, the Pentagon pressured the Air Force into awarding a no-bid contract to REEP, Inc. The contract required REEP to find bilingual speakers "committed to a democratic Iraq," for some propaganda and "government advisement." REEP went ahead and employed Iraqi political exiles for the job. The first problem is that the Air Force didn't bid the contract, which means that no one else had an opportunity to submit a proposal for the work. The Pentagon says that they felt like there wasn't enough time to seek proposals, and REEP was the only qualified company, so that's who they chose. Never mind that there are (at least) two other companies capable of doing this work. But those companies probably aren't under the thumb of the Pentagon, and wouldn't have used the political exiles, which is problem number 2. Problem number three reared its head when the Pentagon decided not to compete an extension of the same contract, and award it to REEP again. Thankfully, the GAO has called the Air Force on this egregious misuse of taxpayer monies. However, we don't expect the Pentagon to change their spots over this.

IRS Complaint Filed Against Focus on the Family. We love this story, if for no other reason then it shows liberals on the offensive, for once. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has asked the IRS to investigate whether or not James Dobson's Focus on the Family should lose its tax-exempt status, based on Dobson's endorsement of candidates in 2004. You may recall that a liberal pastor in California is under investigation for the same charges. But what's most amusing about this are the views of the right. This editorial, in Texas's The Monitor, tries to fight back against the charge, and fails. Instead of trying to defend Dobson, the editorial attacks CREW for being partisan, and claims that there's a double standard at work, and perhaps CREW should be investigated and have their tax-exempt status revoked. News flash: CREW doesn't participate in electioneering. The editorial cites CREW's website. "Moreover, a look at CREW’s Web site indicates that the vast majority of those it targets for alleged ethics violations are Republicans. . .But CREW has made only a token effort to go after Democrats — two of 13 members of Congress identified by the organization as "most corrupt" were Democrats — suggesting a one-sided agenda." Or, perhaps it suggests that there just aren't as many Democrats whose corruption approaches that of Republicans. The right's arguments here are hollow, and don't add up. How often are we going to see Democrats use facts and Republicans use innuendo and slander before we do something about it?

Editorials

The War on Our Children. When a Congressman from California speaks, we listen. First it was "Duke" Cunningham admitting that he is a liar and a fraud, by accepting $2.4 million in bribes. Now, Pete Stark (D-CA) has an editorial up that blasts Congress for its poor short-sightedness. Republicans in Congress are creating so many roadblocks for Americans who are under the age of 18 that their lives are going to be harder than ever. Cutting Head Start: check. Making job training for mothers of children six and under harder: check. Under funding a bad No Child Left Behind Act: check. Not raising the minimum wage: check. How else can Republicans screw up our children? Oh yes, by proposing to cut $14.3 billion from federal student aid programs. If we're facing such a money crisis, why are House Republicans continuing to cut taxes? Stark puts it far better than we could. "If the United States can find $250 billion for a failed war in Iraq and give American millionaires an average tax break of $41,574 apiece in 2006, then the most affluent country in the world can find the funds to improve its schools and workplaces. Our future depends on it."

Starving The Beast. Republicans love the idea of "starving the beast," the idea that less government is better, and that states and private enterprise are better equipped to deal with issues. But even before Hurricane Katrina, it's obvious that parts of the country were woefully unprepared. Take Louisiana, for instance. Poverty; teen pregnancy; low teacher pay; these were all occurring in Louisiana in disturbing proportions. Louisiana, unable to financially deal with the Katrina impact, has had to cut funding to Medicaid and hospitals (nearly $1 billion worth). So while Republicans "starve the beast," the people in Louisiana starve. Just dandy.

Blogger Commentary

Mark Warner, Batting a Thousand. Governor and Presidential hopeful Mark Warner (D-VA) didn't grant clemency to Robin Lovett because of a stunt, or because he didn't want the stigma of the "1,000th person executed since 1976" label. Warner had denied clemency to eleven previous executions. No, Warner granted clemency because the DNA evidence that might have cleared Lovett was destroyed, and Lovett's conviction wasn't strong enough, in Warner’s eyes, to merit the death penalty. Warner did the right thing, and in doing so, elevated his status in the eyes of liberals. Michael Oates Palmer looks at the case, and why Warner did the right thing.

Mexamerica. Digby chimes in with the next big topic. After failing with Social Security and, in a sense, the war, Bush is trying to find something to build a legacy on. The answer may be in a wall to separate the U.S. and Mexico. Not a fence, and not a "Great Wall," but an honest to goodness $8 billion dollar prison-type wall. "[A] barrier consisting of a 'pyramid' of rolls of barbed wire piled 6 to 8 feet high. Alongside it would run a deep ditch, followed by a fence, a security road, another fence, another ditch, and then another wire pyramid. Cameras and motion detectors would monitor the fence to create a formidable barrier 40 to 50 yards wide. The cost: $2 million to $4 million a mile, or $4 billion to $8 billion in total." Despite wingnuts like Pat Buchanan who have no sense of history, it's true that some 500,000 Mexicans make it into America every year. This is nothing new. But this $8 billion dollar idea isn't the solution. Do you have any suggestions?

Activism

CA-48th: 8.5 days left...Virtual Phone Bankers Needed. Remember how Paul Hackett nearly won a special election in a Ohio district that went overwhelmingly for Bush? Remember how the left "blogosphere" rallied around Hackett and helped to boost his campaign? Well, we need a repeat of that. You may not even be aware of the fact that there's a special election in California's 48th district in a little over a week, but there is. Steve Young (not the ex-QB) is running and needs your help. If you're not in CA, you can help by virtual phone banking - just go to the link above for instructions. If you are in CA, then volunteer, and vote if you're in the 48th! We'll take the Congress back, one seat at a time.

News

Cheney Sidesteps Travel Disclosure Rules. You know, in the grand scheme of things, this isn't a big deal. Really, this is the mastermind behind the Iraq war debacle, our torture policy, the CIA leak, and who knows what else? But that's exactly the point - it's critical to a functioning democracy to know what its leaders are up to. In fact, they refuse to even accept reimbursements from the organizers of the events to which he travels, precisely so they don't have to disclose those payments. We don't know how much we're paying to subsidize the trips of our Vice-President, and most of the time, we don't even know where he's going. It's pretty crappy that we're being stuck with the bills of his travel that seems to be almost exclusively for political purposes, but that's nothing new with this Administration. No, the point of this is that Cheney apparently doesn't feel he has any obligation to inform the electorate of what he's doing or where he's going, even those we're his boss. Of course, the Veep's office believes it's completely justified: "Their view is that the vice president is a constitutional office that is not subject to the laws that others in the executive branch are. They have been consistent in that." Well, at least they've been consistent...

The FBI's Secret Scrutiny. Do you trust the government? Because that's ultimately what the Patriot Act comes down to. If you trust the government not to abuse it's power, and to use their powers to go after those intent on causing Americans harm, then there's nothing wrong with the Patriot Act. On the other hand, if you pay just a bit of attention to what's going on, you realize how easy it is for a group of cynics and greedy powermongers can abuse that trust and game the system. That's what's happening now, and it's that atmosphere of abusiveness that makes the Patriot Act so dangerous. Read this story and learn about the FBI's monitoring of private citizens for whatever reason they deem appropriate. Since Bush has taken office, his Administration has steadily worked to lower to standards of what proof and justification is necessary to monitor and intrude upon private citizens. Do you really trust them to have our best interests at heart and exercise the appropriate restrait? Us neither.

Harper's Index for October 2005. We've always been big fans of Harper's Index. Some highlights from last month's numbers: "Rank of 2004 among the most fiscally reckless years in U.S. history, according to the comptroller general: 1", "Minutes that NBC and CBS spent covering the Darfur genocide last year: 8", "Total U.S. spending on poppy eradication and other antidrug efforts in Afghanistan last year: $780,000,000", and "Amount it would have cost to purchase the country’s entire 2004 poppy crop: $600,000,000." Sometimes, numbers are also worth 1000 words.

Editorials

Guatemala, home of powerful drug runners. Often, we'll cover the same issues over and over again, but once in a while we like to mix things up. So, here's an issue that hasn't yet been mentioned on Still Fighting: The Guatemalan drug trade. Some in America believe that Guatemala is a "transfer point for 75 percent of the cocaine that gets into the U.S." Unfortunately, Guatemala doesn't seem to be doing anything to combat the problem. They don't seem to want to cooperates with our efforts to stem the drug trade, and so "[i]nstead of extradition, the DEA is now luring suspects into the U.S. and then arresting them." That seems to be a pretty ineffective method of fighting the problem. It'd be nice if we knew more about Guatemala's complicity in the global drug war, and what the U.S. is doing to pressure them to aid us in the fight. Hey media: Do your jobs!

So you want details about who lied. The ever-dwindling group of Bush defenders continue to insist that he never lied about WMDs in Iraq, and that it was just "bogus intelligence". Well, the fact that Cheney and his cohorts actively distorted that intelligence has been quite well established on this blog, but war supporters continue to insist that Cheney and Bush didn't lie in the run up to the war. They keep asking for details. One might be able to argue that "it isn't a lie if you truly believe it", but we now have information showing that for the most part, the White House shouldn't have believed the intelligence they push. This letter to the editor to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer outlines just some of the most egregious examples of the Administration willfully lying to the public. Yes, they knew that Saddam was unlikely to have nuclear weapons, and stated that he likely did. To quote the author, "If that isn't lying, I don't know what is."

Blogger Commentary

Rahm, Please Tell Us: How Many More Have to Die for It to Be "The Right Time?". David Sirota nails it with his righteous indignation, and for once, it's toward Democrats. After Jack Murtha called for an Iraq pullout, Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) said that the Democrats would have a position on Iraq "at the right time". Who's Rahm Emanuel? Well, only the leader of the House Democrats' election campaign. This might be prudent politics, although it's also typical of what many (including us) dislike about Democrats: Their unwillingness to take a stand, even if it's unpopular. But forget politics for a second - it's morally reprehensible to play politics with this war. It's wrong for the Republicans to continue to do it, and it's wrong for the Democrats to do it at all. If a Democratic opposition to the war could end it and save lives in the long run, then it's the right thing to do. Have some integrity, Rahm!

It's Our Fault. Arthur Silber's back, and this time he's dispelling another myth that seems to circulate in the right-wing propaganda factory. Namely, the idea that if, but some strange twist of fate, we "lose" in Iraq and are forced to pull out before "victory" is achieved (whatever that means), then it won't be the fault of our leadership. No, they believe the blame will rest on "Main Street, U.S.A.", for engaging in "defeatism". Silber points out the absurdity of this argument: "We are the strongest nation in the history of the world. We have the most powerful military forces ever known to man. But if we 'lose,' it's the fault of those of us sitting at home who read and think about these events, and who dare to reach certain inescapable conclusions. It's our fault. We control nothing, and cannot dictate even the most miniscule part of the outcome." The right-wing is in charge. When they fail, it's their fault. It's called "accountability". Look into it for once.

Activism

National Stop Alito Petition Drive. How long has it been since we linked to a petition or campaign to stop Alito? Well, however much time it's been, it's too much. They can pretend all they want, but the fact is that Alito will move the court to the right - much farther than they're willing to admit publicly. Most recently, a paper was unearthed that revealed his true opinions on abortion. Of course, that's not the only issue Alito could affect, but it's a big one. That's why NARAL is running this petition drive, and why you should sign on. Make no mistake: This is the far-right's opportunity to take firm control of the judicial branch.

News

Iraqi Leaders Urge a Timetable for Eventual Troop Withdrawal. Poor Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. One by one, their arguments for the war are crumbling, along with their public opinion. Of course, it's not like most of the arguments made any sense in the first place - witness Cenk Uygur's destruction of the "Insurgents will wait us out if we set a timetable" argument. But now even Iraqi "leaders" are asking for a timetable. (The Arab League, not the actual Iraqi government.) Bush used to maintain that we'd leave as soon as the Iraqi government asked us to. That hasn't happened yet, although we're not so sure Bush would let it happen, or become public if it did, but it's yet one more sign that we shouldn't be there anymore.

Lawyer Pleads Guilty in Abramoff Case. We try to stay away from articles that have too much of an "insider" feel to them, but the Abramoff scandal is important. It might sound intricate, but really the issue is the wholesale buying and selling of our government, piece by piece, to the highest bigger. Abramoff seems to be the guy largely responsible for facilitating the Republican culture of corruption that is turning Washington into a cesspool. We can't even hope to change Congress until we can be sure that the leaders we elect won't just whore themselves out as soon as they arrive in D.C. So it's very important that the Abramoff case is prosecuted, and that all of those on the take go down with him. Therefore, it's quite a good thing that Michael Scanlon, a lawyer with strong ties to Abramoff, pled guilty. "As part of the plea agreement with federal prosecutors, Scanlon admitted plotting to cheat clients and corruptly influence federal officials." The article details a lot more about how he bought off Congressmen. His plea bargain is a good start. Now let's get moving on booting those officials.

Bush Administration Grants Leeway on 'No Child' Rules. Bush has yet to admit that he's been wrong on anything, and this is the closest we'll see him coming to doing so. BushCo has eased some of the rules under No Child Left Behind, because someone in the White House realized that kids just are getting screwed by this bill. The biggest change is allowing 10 states to create "growth model" schools. What this means, essentially, is that states will qualify as "making progress" if they show improvement in test scores at these growth schools, even if those final results fall below the NCLB benchmarks. It is a much fairer way to assess schools, particularly those in lower-income areas. The big problem with NCLB, aside from being wholly unrealistic, was that it was trying to do too much at once; forcing states to have their students meet an arbitrary benchmark AND require teachers to get certified AND financially penalize those schools that didn't conform to either of those. NCLB is still a horrible plan, but at least this administration has seen that it doesn't work, and is trying to do something about it. That's something, for once. the larger problem is that requirements are different in each state, so trying to regulate something like this on a national level strips some of the power of the states.

Editorials

Time to Leave. Krugman's back, and taking up the argument that it's time for us to exit Iraq. Honestly, it seems pretty obvious to us, but Krugman has a knack for making his points so clearly that it's a wonder anyone bothers to think otherwise. The fact is, we're not winning in Iraq. Our presence there makes things worth. What's keeping us there? Stubborn, arrogant leaders who refuse to "admit defeat", but can't even define victory. Maybe you're conflicted about withdrawal, but read Krugman's article and then see how you feel. As a Marine officer quoted in an article Krugman references says, "We can lose in Iraq and destroy our Army, or we can just lose." Given that choice, we think we'll opt for the latter.

Bush's War on the Press. John Nichols and Robert McChesney detail the steps that the Bush administration has taken to remove "the power of the press." Everything that is documented here, from fake news ads to PBS to the Freedom of Information Ace are all individual acts that lead to a greater goal: the gutting of the independent media. Although Bush doesn't want to hear any "bad" news, or news that disagrees with him, that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. This isn't the case of a hear-no-evil monkey. So the administration has taken extreme steps to remove that news from the public eye. Whether it's hiding the names of the dead soldiers in Iraq or secretly paying Armstrong Williams to pimp the NCLB Act, this administration is trying everything in it's power to covertly withhold information from the public. Fortunately, there's no such thing as "covertly" anymore.

Blogger Commentary

'Reform Republicans' - The McCain Scam. Over at MyDD, Matt Stoller points out that liberals who love John McCain are being scammed. Heck, he's even pulled the wool over Still Fighting's eyes from time to time! Stoller claims there's no particular reason we should like John McCain: "Liberals shouldn't fall for it. John McCain is a corrupt Republican, just like Bush. He doesn't play to the base, preferring instead a 'good government' bipartisan strategy, but he's corrupt, mean-spirited, and puts his ambition above everything else." He claims to be against torture, but votes against habeus corpus rights. He wants to reform campaign finance publicly, but privately is just as much in the pocket of big business as the rest of the party. McCain's nothing special, and we should stop lionizing him just because he criticizes Bush once in a while.

Genie In A Bottle. One of the most disturbing aspects of our recent debates about the merits of torture is what it reveals about our own culture. Years ago, torture was commonly considered morally reprehensible and beneath us. Now, we're practically having open debates about it, and discussing its effectiveness, as if it would somehow be justifiable if it worked. It's not. But where is this debate taking us? It's debasing us, as Americans. Digby references an article that discussions how torture can affect the mind of those administering torture, and we fear that's exactly what's happening to our collective conscience. "Now that we've let the torture genie out of the bottle, I wonder if we can put that beast back in. He looks and sounds an awful lot like an American." Scary.

Activism

Help Stop the Reverse Robin Hood Budget: Take a Photo. It's a wonder that Congress can look us in the eye and with a stright face actually claim that the budget they propose is what's best for the American people. The fact is, it's not. The most recent budget atrocity may have been defeated last week, but you can be sure there will be something almost as abhorrent coming along soon. Unfortunately, the fact is that most Congresspeople never really do have to look their constituents in the face and justify their votes. But maybe, just maybe, if we look them in the eye and tell them what our priorities are, they'll get the message. Hop on over to the link above and help out with MoveOn's campaign to send Congress a host of pictures that depict concerned citizens looking right at the camera and explaining their priorities. It may seem crazy, but months ago, we never would have thought enough Republicans would turn and vote down the most recent budget proposal. So, be a little creative and add your picture!

News

Corruption Inquiry Threatens to Ensnare Lawmakers. No word defines Jack Abramoff more than "chutzpah". He's been indicted, and while we've only gleaned bits and pieces of the extent of his lobbying activities, what we've seen so far is enough to turn out stomachs. Look, politicians beholden to interest groups and rich lobbyists are really nothing new. But Abramoff took lobbying to a whole new level, essentially outrightly buying politicians. He's essentially being charged with "being part of a broad conspiracy to provide 'things of value, including money, meals, trips and entertainment to federal public officials in return for agreements to perform official acts' - an attempt at bribery, in other words, or something close to it." But it takes two to tango, and what that means is all of the politicians who provided their "services" to Abramoff should be quaking in their boots. We've already seen White House budget official David Safavian arrested "on charges of lying to investigators about his business ties to Mr. Abramoff, a former lobbying partner." We've heard about Tom DeLay's close ties to Abramoff, and rumors of the president of Gabon paying for a meeting with Bush. Who knows how far the corruption goes? One Congressional specialist quoted in the article says "I think this has the potential to be the biggest scandal in Congress in over a century."

A Rebuilding Plan Full of Cracks. Is there anything that this administration has touched that hasn't had the anti-Midas effect? In 2002, Bush launched a $73 million dollar development program for Afghanistan. The goal was to create or restore 1,000 schools and clinics by the end of 2004. How many have been completed? By the end of 2004, 100 (mostly all refurbishments), and an additional 40 since then. Let's see...1,000 buildings, 140 completed...that's 14%. 14%! The conditions in Afghanistan are so horrendous, what with the infrastructure being destroyed, that life expectancy is now only 43 years. So, does the fault lie with the administration, for creating a faulty "plan," or with USAID and the Louis Berger Group, who failed to get the job done? Well, to hear USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios tell it, the goal was really to build 533 buildings by the end of 2004, and that they had really completed far more than the 140 listed above. But even if this is true, the conditions in Afghanistan are still atrocious. USAID can't be proud of the job they've done while locked buildings still sit empty in the cities, and babies are dying at a rate of 1 out of every 4.

Powell Aide: Torture 'Guidance' From VP. Even more proof that Dick Cheney is pure evil. Retired U.S. Army Col. Larry Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, recently told CNN that he has no doubt that the torture that has happened, and the torture that is continuing to happen, is the result of Dick Cheney's "philosophical guidance." Wilkerson went on to discuss a "cabal" formed by Cheney and Rumsfeld that "made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made." Although Cheney and Rumsfeld have seperately dismissed the idea of a cabal as absurd, it's important to note that Wilkerson is a Republican who voted for the Bush/Cheney ticket twice. Why would he make something like that up? Maybe he's growing a conscience...

Editorials

One War Lost, Another to Go. Frank Rich is back with his latest installment. This time, he focuses on the Iraq War. Rich notes that the American public knows that the war is "over." Even Republican lapdogs like Rick Santorum, faced with re-election next year and down by 16 points, are distancing themselves from Bush and pointing the finger of blame, ever so slightly, at the White House. While Bush refuses to set a timetable, it should be fairly obvious that there already is one: November 7, 2006. That's the date of the mid-term elections in this country, and if Bush and company don't do something about getting us out of Iraq before then, we're going to see a large number of Republican incumbents dropped on the front stoop, in favor of Democrats who have long held the belief that we must leave Iraq.

What's a Senior Administration Official? This editorial by Daniel Engber is pretty neat. Engber, prompted by Bob Woodward's claim that he was told of Valerie Plame weeks before by a "senior administration official," sets out to explain exactly what that means. We see it all the time in news articles. But what does it mean? The answer is...well, nebulous. There's no hard and fast rules about it. Pretty much anyone in the White House (except for interns) can be a "senior administration official." It also depends on the context of the story and the informer's title/position. For example, writes Engber, Dick Cheney wasn't the "senior administration official" who told Woodward about Plame. So, that narrows it down to the, oh, several hundred non-interns that work in the White House.

Blogger Commentary

Kent State Redux? In case you missed it, over the last few weeks Kent State University has been the target of a massive campaign. Supported by liberal bloggers all over the country, Americans were encouraged to send letters to KSU denouncing their attempts to silence the first amendment. In short, as Caroline Arnold writes, David Airhart is an ex-marine and current student at KSU. On October 19 of this year, Airhard climber a 30 foot climbing wall and displayed a banner that said, "KENT OHIO 4 PEACE," an anti-war sentiment, protesting against the military recruiters on campus. Once he arrived at the top, one of the recruiters started to climb up after him, so Airhart started climbing down. As he did so, he was met by another recruiter who tried to pull him down. Airhard received a fine and was ordered to appear at a disciplinary hearing, which was cancelled hours before it was scheduled to start. Airhart is admirable in that he took a stand, made his convictions known, and was prepared to accept whatever consequences came of this. KSU was inundated with letters, phone calls and emails. Only, there didn't seem to be any reason for them. The military recruiters didn't speak for the University, and KSU President Cartwright has long been an outspoken proponent of the first amendment. No, what KSU shows us is that Bush is very good at spreading dissent, and we need to be united against our real enemies, not divided against ourselves.

Ten Commandments for Wal-Mart. What's really amazing about this piece by Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) is not so much what he's written, which is quite good, but the scathing comments from readers. The Huffington Post is an unapologetic liberal blog, yet there are more comments from uneducated conservatives to his post that from liberals. Maybe it's because liberals know that he's right. After all, what kind of a corporation pays their CEO hundreds of million of dollars a year, yet leaves 48% of its work force without health insurance? Kennedy makes a very interesting note regarding returns, as well. Costco pays its employees, on average, 76% more than Wal-Mart. Employees at Costco have health and dental insurance, as well as retirement benefits. Oh, and in the last decade, Costco has delivered higher returns to its shareholders. So don't tell us that it can't be done. If Wal-Mart truly cared about their employees, they'd find a way. Clearly, Costco has.

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.

Activism

We've discussed the "pharmacists declining to dispense Plan B" fiasco for weeks. But, as John over at AmericaBlog shows us, now Target is trying to justify their pharmacists' reticence to dispense Plan B by saying that they are covered by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Huh? It's very simple, really. Pharmacists are paid to do a job. Not part of a job. Not a job when it's convenient. A job. John recommends contacting Target to ask them about this absurd policy, and in the link above, he provides the link. Not filling a prescription for "religious reasons," and then trying to hide behind the Civil Rights Act, is just about the most asinine thing we've ever heard. Oh, and don't forget that most of these religious fanatics don't mind using the Civil Rights Act when it benefits them, but then they turn around and say that homosexuals aren't entitled to those same rights. The hypocrisy is just astounding.

News

Massive bid-rigging scam alleged in Iraq. There's that word again: Alleged. But let's just assume, for sake of argument, that this allegation is true. Think about what this means for you, the American taxpayer. You pay your money to the government. The government then uses that money to finance an illegal war. But that's not all. The money for the war goes to corporations so they do work in Iraq. Then, those corporations take that money and use it to bribe more officials to get more contracts, and more of your tax money. Not only that, but the Administration then argues that programs like Social Security and Medicare are too expensive, and so need to be cut, all while cutting taxes for corporations and wealthy people, who funnel that money right back into the system in the form of bribes. Millions of YOUR dollars are missing in Iraq. This is the first U.S. criminal case brought against coalition officials. We bet it won't be the last.

A 'fiscal hurricane' on the horizon. We don't mean to be so gloomy all of the time, but would you prefer false optimism? We thought not. Fortunately, more and more politicians are realizing that we could be in deep financial trouble in the near future. Pointing that out is not being pessimistic; rather, it's the realistic and responsible thing to do. "To hear Walker, the nation's top auditor, tell it, the United States can be likened to Rome before the fall of the empire. Its financial condition is 'worse than advertised,' he says. It has a 'broken business model.' It faces deficits in its budget, its balance of payments, its savings — and its leadership." The deficit is a serious problem. We've made promises to future generations in the form of Medicare, Medicard, and Social Security, that are going to be very difficult to fully keep, especially if we continue on the track we've been on. At some point, this won't be a theoretical notion any more, but will start affecting "real people" - "Higher interest rates. Lower wages. Shrinking pensions. Slower economic growth. A lesser standard of living. Higher taxes in the future for today's younger generation. Less savings. More consumption. Plunging stock and bond prices. Recession." It's time we had some responsible leadership in Washington, even if that means electing people who don't only tell us good news, and require some sacrifice.

U.S. Goals Are Thwarted At Pro-Democracy Forum. Last weekend, there was an international conference in the Middle East. The stated goal was to advance democracy, but it ended without a formal declaration, leaving the United States a tad disappointed, needless to say. The idea was that such a declaration would bind countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa to "expand democratic practices, to enlarge participation in political and public life, to foster the roles of civil society, including NGOs, and to widen women's participation in the political, economic, social, cultural and education fields and to reinforce their rights and status in society while understanding that each country is unique." Sounds good to us. Unfortunately, our leaders have failed dramatically at "selling" democracy, and have no moral authority anymore, so it's kinda tough to get any other country to respect our desires.

Editorials

Bush Rewrites History to Criticize His Anti-War Critics. David Corn, of the Nation, writes an extremely important piece. This administration loves to call out anyone who criticizes the war, by saying that they are un-American. And if they actually voted "for the war?" Then they are a flip-flopping, unpatriotic bastard. It's easy to forget, but important to not, that Congress didn't vote "for the War." Congress voted to give Bush the power to go to war if he deemed it necessary, after taking specific measures. The difference is staggering. Congresspeople from both parties had put faith in Bush to find a negotiated settlement. Obviously, that faith was misplaced. And now, even people like Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) are lashing out at the White House for their attacks on critics of the war. "To question your government is not unpatriotic -- to not question your government is unpatriotic," said Hagel. And if people like former Senator John Edwards (D-NC) can pony up and admit that they made a mistake in voting for this war in 2002, why can't "average" citizens do the same? What kind of administration has the audacity to tell us that we can't criticize them, particularly when that administration went out of its way to cook the books and manipulate the intelligence to get us to war, as Larry Johnson writes. As the lies become unraveled (and make no mistake, they are), it's becoming more and more apparent just which party actually gives a damn about this country and its citizens. Back in 1998, Ann Coulter wrote a trashy book called High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton. If Republicans actually believe that Clinton's "crimes" were so heinous, what do they think of a president who lied to the country and killed 2,079 American soldiers (and counting)?

Imperial presidency, invisible Congress. If the above block of editorials wasn't enough, here's another one: All of the previous treachery oulined would be irrelevant if Congress had simply done its job and stopped this imperial Presidency, but instead, it decided to be invisible. Andrew Rudalevige at Nieman Watchdog has some important questions he thinks the press needs to ask our Congress. Why did they give Bush so much power? When are they going to stop letting him trample over their role in government? Do they have any interest in checking the power of this Presidency that has run so far off the rails? American citizens would like to know.

Blogger Commentary

Chalabi, Syria, and Iran: Cambodia Redux? Ah, Representative John Conyers; how we love your candor. If the government was a family, Conyers would be the old mother-in-law, who has been around for ages, always says the truth, gets a rise out of the rest of the family for it (particularly when he talks about the "other half"), and is routinely dead-on correct. In this column on the Huffington Post, Conyers calls out Bush, drawing strangely accurate parallels between Iraq and Viet Nam. Conyers has a good finger on the pulse of government, and it wouldn't surprise us at all to find out that Conyers' predictions turn out to be true. It would certainly disturb us, but it wouldn't surprise us.

No Longer Ready For His Closeup. Here's the thing about Bob Woodward: he was a brilliant reporter/writer. He could capture a story so perfectly and write it in such a way as to really make you care. His investigative skills were never in doubt. But, as the Cunning Realist writes, his holier-than-thou silence on what he knew about Plamegate is simply nauseating. He's become a shell of what he once was, and it's that very reason why newspaper readership is down: when you treat your readers as the lowest ones on the totem pole, pretty soon they are going to give you the finger. (Note that Woodward has since apologized for keeping his silence, saying that "I didn't want anything out there that was going to get me subpoenaed" by Patrick Fitzgerald.) Is it possible to apologize and make yourself look even worse?

Activism

1000 Organizing Events and Counting. We've mentioned this before, but it's worth reminding everyone: Tomorrow is the Democratic Party's National Organizing Kickoff. And in keeping with what fueled Howard Dean's campaign, the DNC is relying on the grassroots to fuel the party. It's a wise idea, but it depends on you to make it work. "Tomorrow night - in all fifty states (and in 20 other countries) - Democrats will come together and begin the work that's needed to win in 2006 and 2008." If you want to host an event, you can go here to do so. If you just want to attend an event, search for one here. It's your country - be a part of taking it back!

News

Senators Agree on Detainee Rights. We've been talking about this for a few days now, and it looks like we're coming to some sort of consensus. Of course, the final "agreement" doesn't give detainees full rights, but given the fact that we're dealing with Republicans in power, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) was lucky to get the concessions that he did. If today's vote passes (Note: The Republican version passed), detainees will have the right to appeal any military tribunal ruling. Although this is a big step for Democrats, it's still disgusting that we're having this discussion in the first place. Couple that with Cheney's desire to eliminate the McCain torture amendment, and we're embarrased to have people like that running the country.

Review of 'Plan B' Pill Is Faulted. We've speculated that the FDA delay in selling Plan B over the counter was politically motivated. Now we know that it was, as is evidenced by a GAO report that shows that approval was never going to be given, regardless of the outcome of the scientific review. The Government Accountability Office, the White House watchdog group, if you will, finally concluded that then-FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan and others were involved in the unsubstantiated disapproval. The GAO can't say for sure, because McClellan wouldn't speak to them. Still, we see once again that politics trumps science, and that's a sorry state of affairs for a government agency that depends on science to make educated decisions.

Parents Carry Burden of Proof in School Cases, Court Rules. This is just depressing. In a 6-2 ruling (with John Roberts recusing himself), the Supreme Court decided that parents who are unhappy with their school, district's special education programs must carry the burden of proof. What this means, generally, is that "parents who disagree with a school system's special-education plan for their child have the legal burden of proving that the plan will not provide the "appropriate" education to which federal law entitles all children with disabilities." (Sandra Day O'Connor's full 26 page majority opinion can be found here). In a way, this isn't fully the SCOTUS's fault. But what does that mean? The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) was designed in such a way that schools must (with parents' consent) test students with special needs, and then create an IEP, or Individualized Education Program, for that student. The way IDEA was originally written in 1970 didn't make it clear who's responsibility it was to address issues with the IEP (it's been subsequently updated several times, but this has never been discussed). What this ruling says is that if parents feel that the IEP isn't working, it is the parents' responsibility to prove that it isn't. Surprisingly, the Bush administration initially favored the parents in this ruling, before, ahem, flip-flopping to the state's side when the decision came before the court. With the burden of proof on the parents, administrations won't be so quick to look so hard to make sure they are doing the right thing, particularly in more rural areas where money and expertise is limited. If the burden of proof were on the schools (that is to say, the experts), maybe schools wouldn't be so quick to jump and create an IEP that won't work.

Editorials

Health Economics 101. Paul Krugman's one of our favorite political writers, because he's not afraid to point out the moral shortcomings of the Bush administration, and to pull no punches. But he's at his best when talking about his area of expertise, economics, and explaining how it affects every day people. A side specialty of his is moral outrage, and discussing the health care system allows him to engage both his strengths. In his latest missive, he explains why the GOP solution to everything, namely, throw a little capitalism at the problem, won't work with health care. Preach on, Professor Krugman.

Facing the Reality of Choice. Progressives are pro-choice - that much is obvious. But as much as the right-wing would like to paint pro-choice people as pro-abortion, that's simply not the case. In fact, all reasonable pro-choice people want to reduce the number of abortions in America, which is an admirable goal. It's important to keep that perspective and understand how a women choosing to have an abortion is a tragic, difficult choice. We want less women to be forced into that decision, although we firmly believe it's an option they should have. This editorial outlines one woman's experience during a Planned Parenthood visit, and makes some good points that people on both sides of the abortion fence would do well to keep in mind.

Blogger Commentary

They Won't Stop Lying Until You Start Impeaching. Yesterday we linked to a Washington Post article entitled "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument." In it, the White House is called out for their pre-war intelligence. Also yesterday, the White House was quick to respond by saying that the problem was with the actual intelligence, and reminded us that the The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction concluded back in March that "in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments." Stirling Newberry points out that the lying continues, and that it's got to stop. And the only way it's going to stop is with Democrats standing up and continuing to pour the pressure on the White House. Come on, it's been more than half a decade since our last impeachment - what are we waiting for?

Our Care vs. Their Care. Ezra Klein discusses a study that was released last week. It compares the patient care experiences in the following countries: Australia, America, Canada, Germany, England, and New Zealand. Not surprisingly, the U.S. ranks near the bottom in pretty much everything. Also not surprisingly, "the United States is an outlier for financial burdens on patients and patients forgoing care because of costs." Wait times are too long. Patients are dissatisfied. After-hours access is poor. How long before we can no longer claim to be the world's superpower with a straight face?