"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Monday, November 05, 2007

Our Futile Attempts at Some Semblence of Justice...And Trying Not to Forget What We Were Trying to Remember a Second Ago....
Posted by Melina | 6:54 PM




In the better late than never file of don't hold your breath wishes we got a lil' surprise today that likely won't add up to a hill of beans. The house Judiciary Committee finally filed criminal contempt of congress charges against White House Attorney,Harriet Miers, and Chief of Staff, Joshua Bolton for disregarding subpoenas issued to them regarding the firings of US Attorneys last year.
According to Brad Blog, this story broke today, and is hanging only on one last chance being offered to the White House to produce Miers and Bolton for testimony, before the motion goes before the entire House. And then according to Raw Story, the White House doesn't give a shit, as usual, calling a congressional criminal contempt charge a "futile filing that won't go anywhere." The pathetic thing is that they are probably right. If these charges had legs, the White House, such as it is, would pardon them or retroactively pass a law or whatever else they have in their bag o' tricks.

And that's the rub; the real contempt that the White House has for our system should be looked at closely. It is, as Sam Seder said on Sunday on his unequaled show, Seder on Sundays, a form of mental illness that has become common in the right wing of this thing.
I hate to go into Janeane Garafolo's cognitive dissonance theory, which I seem to find reason to return to all too often these days, but it seems like I have to. In embracing the contempt that these people feel for the system and what they think is their God given right or due, they have confused the wrong and right of things, and in that confusion they end up embracing the dark side because thew reality of what they've done to our system and to the people who live by this system would be just too much for an ordinary mind to handle. When you embrace a failed idea that has hurt so many people, how can you live with yourself...and further, it takes a particularly strong person to face the truth and to accept their own flawed thinking in a circumstance. of the many words that I could think of to describe this bunch, strong is not one of them.

If a candidate purports to support the Constitution and laws of the United States while he is running for office, how can he turn 180 degrees over these long years and continue as if his administration is above the law...whatever laws are left...and change the entire tone of America's place in the international community. Isn't there some sorta recall for this? Don't we have some sorta recourse?

Oh yeah...impeachment....and I guess that's futile too, as is trying to prevent nominees for important posts with alot of power from taking offices where they might just continue the repugnant practices that the criminals who were previously in those offices practiced. Futile...


That's what Schumer tells us anyway. Its something about the devil you know. But before you know it, you've embraced that devil so hard that you lose any ability to tell right from wrong and you forget how things used to be.

We're fucked.



C/P on RIPCoco

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Monday, July 23, 2007

It always comes down to sex with this bunch
Posted by Jill | 10:23 PM
Now we know what the Bush Administration really wants to know about people entering the U.S. from Britain:

Highly sensitive information about the religious beliefs, political opinions and even the sex life of Britons travelling to the United States is to be made available to US authorities when the European Commission agrees to a new system
of checking passengers.

The EC is in the final stages of agreeing a new Passenger Name Record system with the US which will allow American officials to access detailed biographical information about passengers entering international airports.

The information sharing system with the US Department of Homeland Security, which updates the previous three-year-old system, is designed to tackle terrorism but civil liberty groups warn it will have serious consequences for European passengers. And it has emerged that both the European parliament and the European data protection supervisor are alarmed at the plan.

In a strongly worded document drawn up in response to the plan that will affect the 4 million-plus Britons who travel to the US every year, the EU parliament said it 'notes with concern that sensitive data (ie personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, and data concerning the health or sex life of individuals) will be made available to the DHS and that these data may be used by the DHS in exceptional cases'.


Why on earth would DHS need to know about the sex lives of the British?

(via Logan Murphy at C&L)

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Our plan for continuity of government in the event of disaster is so secret we can't let you see it
Posted by Jill | 6:42 AM
...not even the guy whose job it is to oversee it:

Oregonians called Peter DeFazio's office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

As a member of the U.S. House on the Homeland Security Committee, DeFazio, D-Ore., is permitted to enter a secure "bubbleroom" in the Capitol and examine classified material. So he asked the White House to see the secret documents.

On Wednesday, DeFazio got his answer: DENIED.

"I just can't believe they're going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack," DeFazio says.

[snip]

Norm Ornstein, a legal scholar who studies government continuity at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said he "cannot think of one good reason" to deny access to a member of Congress who serves on the Homeland Security Committee.

"I find it inexplicable and probably reflective of the usual, knee-jerk overextension of executive power that we see from this White House," Ornstein said.

This is the first time DeFazio has been denied access to documents. DeFazio has asked Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., to help him access the documents.

"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.


Gee, ya think? Libby Spencer, who wrote about this article, notes this conservative blogger, who thinks this is all paranoia:

Think about what would happen if the President tried to cancel elections and declare martial law: Do you really think that the military (the same generals who basically drove Rumsfeld out and who threatened to resign en masse if the President ordered a premature strike on Iran) would support and carry out such an extra-Constitutional move? Do you think the media would just stand by and that the Congress would shrug? Do you even think that Republicans in Congress would support the establishment of such a precedent that could just as easily be used against one of them down the road?


Uh....yes I do. And do I think the media would stand by and Congress would shrug? You bet I do. In the case of the media, we have plenty of history indicating the media's willingness, Keith Olbermann notwithstanding, to go along with just about anything this Administration wants to do. And as for Republicans in Congress establishing precedents that could be used against one of them, well, they're already doing it in allowing this president to take away their oversight role.

I don't think such a move would be done in a vacuum. But it's abundantly clear by now that at the very least, this administration had foreknowledge that the something akin to the 9/11 attacks were going to occur -- and they allowed them to play out in spectacular fashion, because this president wanted to go to war with Iraq, and such an attack would provide the "new Pearl Harbor" cited by PNAC as potential justification. If it looked like Dick Cheney didn't want to give up power, or if it started to look like Bush and Cheney were going to be tried as war criminals, I don't put anything past them.

Those who would say that these notions sound like the ravings of the black helicopter crowd during the Clinton years are comparing apples and oranges. My belief that such things are possible for this president and this vice president aren't based on my inherent loathing of them, they are based on their obvious and avowed enthusiasm for the "unitary executive" -- accountable to no one. If it seems that someone might actually hold them accountable for their deeds, well, a cornered animal is the most dangerous kind.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, July 07, 2007

And we'll keep killing him till he stays dead
Posted by Jill | 8:49 AM
Here's an example of the kind of suckers the Bush Administration thinks Americans are:

The U.S. command in Baghdad this week ballyhooed the killing of a key al Qaeda leader but later admitted that the military had declared him dead a year ago.

A military spokesman acknowledged the mistake after it was called to his attention by The Examiner. He said public affairs officers will be more careful in announcing significant kills.

[snip]

When The Examiner pointed out that Uthman's death had been announced twice, a command spokesman said in an e-mail, "You are correct that we did previously announce that we killed him. This was a roll up to show an overall effort against [al Qaeda in Iraq]. We can probably do a better job on saying 'previously announced' when we do long-term roll ups to show an overall effort."


Shorter "military spokesman": Oops. You weren't supposed to notice.

(via ThinkProgress)

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, July 01, 2007

And they're going to let it play out again....just like last time
Posted by Jill | 9:13 PM
Planning to fly anywhere this summer? I am...and now I wonder if I should make a will:

A secret U.S. law enforcement report, prepared for the Department of Homeland Security, warns that al Qaeda is planning a terror "spectacular" this summer, according to a senior official with access to the document.

"This is reminiscent of the warnings and intelligence we were getting in the summer of 2001," the official told ABCNews.com.

U.S. officials have kept the information secret, and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said today on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" that the United States did not have "have any specific credible evidence that there's an attack focused on the United States at this point."

As ABCNews.com reported, U.S. law enforcement officials received intelligence reports two weeks ago warning of terror attacks in Glasgow and Prague, the Czech Republic, against "airport infrastructure and aircraft."

The warnings apparently never reached officials in Scotland, who said this weekend they had received "no advance intelligence" that Glasgow might be a target.

Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff declined to comment specifically on on the report today, but said "everything that we get is shared virtually instantaneously with our counterparts in Britain and vice versa."

Unlike the United States, officials in Germany have publicly warned that the country could face a major attack this summer, also comparing the situation to the pre-9/11 summer of 2001.


A bunch of would-be ninja wannabees talk about blowing up the Sears Tower even though they've never been to Chicago. Another bunch of losers talks about attacking Fort Dix -- a military base full of armed soldiers -- and the Administration crows about thwarting a terrorist plot. An often homeless guy in New York talks about setting fire to the JFK pipeline, and it's Elect Rudy or Die.

But if there is a report warning of "spectacular" al-Qaeda attacks this summer, and it's being downplayed by the Administration, what else can we think from this beleaguered bunch but that they'll let it happen again, so that this time they can get the war with Iran that they want so badly?

We've been here, we've done this. Are we going to let them get away with it again?

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Monday, June 25, 2007

Here's why there will never be accountability
Posted by Jill | 4:30 PM
Bookmark and Share
Thursday, June 21, 2007

Compassionate Conservatism
Posted by Jill | 7:16 AM
There. Are. No. Words:

While the U.S. military searches for a soldier missing in Iraq, kidnapped by insurgents possibly allied with al Qaeda, his wife back home in Massachusetts may be deported by the U.S. government.

Army Spec. Alex Jimenez, who has been missing since his unit was attacked by insurgents in Iraq on May 12, had petitioned for a green card for his wife, Yaderlin Hiraldo, whom he married in 2004.

Their attorney, Matthew Kolken, said 23-year-old Hiraldo illegally entered the United States in 2001 to reunite with her husband, whom she had met in her native Dominican Republic and later married at his New York State Army base in 2004.

Her husband's request for a green card and legal residence status for his wife alerted authorities to her status, Kolken said.

She now faces deportation, reports CBS station WBZ correspondent Beth Germano, and would be barred from applying for a green card for 10 years.

Her attorney is seeking a hardship waiver, which so far the government won't grant.


Of course writing about this is exactly the same as being obsessed with Bill and Hillary Clinton, right?

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Why it's hard to take these "terror plots" seriously
Posted by Jill | 7:20 AM
I'm very well aware of the dangers of shrugging off terrorist threats, even when one comes up like the JFK/oil pipeline plot that the FBI knew about for a year and a half and decided to break to the public on the day when the casualty numbers for American soldiers in Iraq was particularly appalling and right before the Democratic debate; one that experts even in the oil industry say wasn't feasible at the same time as a hack Bush-appointed U.S. attorney was still insisting that the consequences of such an attack would be "unthinkable."

If Keith Olbermann didn't exist, we would have to invent him. Last night he updated his roundup of "coincidental" confluences of bad news for the Bush administration with news of terror threats and plots thwarted:





Part 2 is at Crooks and Liars.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Iran Psyops
Posted by Jill | 7:19 AM
Very quietly, Newshoggers (formerly NewsHog) has become one of my must-read-daily stops in Blogtopia (® Skippy). Today Cernig points to this horrifying ABC News story that the Bush Administration has already authorized covert operations in Iran:

The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.

"I can't confirm or deny whether such a program exists or whether the president signed it, but it would be consistent with an overall American approach trying to find ways to put pressure on the regime," said Bruce Riedel, a recently retired CIA senior official who dealt with Iran and other countries in the region.

[snip]

Also briefed on the CIA proposal, according to intelligence sources, were National Security Advisor Steve Hadley and Deputy National Security Advisor Elliott Abrams.

"The entire plan has been blessed by Abrams, in particular," said one intelligence source familiar with the plan. "And Hadley had to put his chop on it."

Abrams' last involvement with attempting to destabilize a foreign government led to criminal charges.

He pleaded guilty in October 1991 to two misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress about the Reagan administration's ill-fated efforts to destabilize the Nicaraguan Sandinista government in Central America, known as the Iran-Contra affair. Abrams was later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush in December 1992.

In June 2001, Abrams was named by then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to head the National Security Council's office for democracy, human rights and international operations. On Feb. 2, 2005, National Security Advisor Hadley appointed Abrams deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security advisor for global democracy strategy, one of the nation's most senior national security positions.


Like father, like son indeed.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share

EVERYTHING with this president is political
Posted by Jill | 6:57 AM
President Psychopath has just declassified a U.S. intelligence report from 2005 indicating that Osama Bin Laden ordered one of his lieutenants to hit U.S. targets outside Iraq. What was hot, secret information -- so hot that he didn't even bother to raise the threat level -- is now public so that the public can be afraid of the Big Bad Bin Laden again and look to Big Daddy Bush to keep them safe:

Seeking to rally support for the war, President Bush is pointing to U.S. intelligence asserting that Osama bin Laden ordered a top lieutenant in early 2005 to form a terrorist unit to hit targets outside Iraq, and that the United States should be first in his sights.

The information, which Bush was to cite Wednesday in a commencement address at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, was declassified by the White House on Tuesday. It expands on a classified bulletin the Homeland Security Department issued in March 2005.

The bulletin, which warned that bin Laden had enlisted Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, his senior operative in Iraq, to plan potential strikes in the United States, was described at the time as credible but not specific. It did not prompt the administration to raise its national terror alert level.

Bush, who is battling Democrats in Congress over spending for the unpopular war in Iraq, will highlight U.S. successes in foiling terrorist plots and use the intelligence to argue that terrorists remain a threat to Americans, said Frances Fragos Townsend, the White House homeland security adviser.


Interesting how it never even enters his mind that Americans might instead look to this information and remember this president saying "I really am not all that concerned about him" in the context of Bin Laden just six months after the 9/11 attacks. It never enters his mind that Americans might wonder just why a guy on dialysis living in caves has been so elusive -- and whether it has anything to do with the fact that he is so handy for Bush to trot out every time it serves his political needs to have him on the loose.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Quote of the Day
Posted by Jill | 6:15 AM
Kevin Drum:

Is al-Qaeda recruiting these doofuses just to lull us into a false sense of security? Or maybe they're Jon Stewart fans and want to provide him with fresh material? WTF?


(h/t: ShakesSis)

I will monitor Crooks and Liars on this. When Jon Stewart reports it, we'll have the story.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

President Bush Aspires to Kill 35,000 Troops in Iraq
Posted by Jill | 5:49 AM
Yes, it's a ludicrous headline. But is it any more ludicrous than the media's current hysteria over six terrorist wannabes in Jersey who only had access to purchase the weapons they wanted because an FBI sting operative said he'd sell them to them?

While the media dutifully does its job of attempting to whip the public into a frenzy about the latest misfits in search of self-styled jihadist glory and the loathsome Chris Christie tries to play on public fears to launch whatever seat in Washington for which he's planning to run next year, let's look again at what the troops' own Commander-in-Chief is doing to them:

The Pentagon announced yesterday that 35,000 soldiers in 10 Army combat brigades will begin deploying to Iraq in August as replacements, making it possible to sustain the increase of U.S. troops there until at least the end of this year.

U.S. commanders in Iraq are increasingly convinced that heightened troop levels, announced by President Bush in January, will need to last into the spring of 2008. The military has said it would assess in September how well its counterinsurgency strategy, intended to pacify Baghdad and other parts of Iraq, is working.

"The surge needs to go through the beginning of next year for sure," said Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the day-to-day commander for U.S. military operations in Iraq. The new requirement of up to 15-month tours for active-duty soldiers will allow the troop increase to last until spring, said Odierno, who favors keeping experienced forces in place for now.

"What I am trying to do is to get until April so we can decide whether to keep it going or not," he said in an interview in Baghdad last week. "Are we making progress? If we're not making any progress, we need to change our strategy. If we're making progress, then we need to make a decision on whether we continue to surge."


35,000 troops is not going to pacify Iraq. And as for progress, well, is Odierno saying it's going to take A FULL YEAR to determine if we're making progress? This country took less time to defeat Hitlerm Mussolini, and the Emperor of Japan. Of course during WWII, Americans were asked to sacrifice to finance the war effort, whereas this president is financing it with crushing debt that the children of the very people who voted for him will never be able to pay back, because HIS constituency -- the beneficiaries of much of his tax cuts -- refuses to sacrifice a nickel, and he knows that the rest of the American people are not inclined to give him another year of a blank check to feed tens of thousands more soldiers into a meatgrinder in an increasingly futile attempt to save his pathetic little ego.

This must stop. Rather than being willing to sacrifice even more of our civil liberties to this lunatic in the name of "safety", it's time for us to demand that he stop the gratuitous killing of a generation of young Americans in the name of his ego. And it's also time to not allow this Administration to play on the reptilian part of the human brain by flogging this arrest in south Jersey the way they have been. If we want to be outraged about plots to kill American soldiers, let's look at the man who is directly responsible for the deaths of over 3300 of them.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Miami Redux
Posted by Jill | 7:54 PM
Remember the infamous "Miami Seven"? The bunch of misfits who dressed up in ninja costumes and had aspirations of "a full ground war against the United States and we knew this because one of them had been to Chicago?

Well, here we are again, with a new bunch of clowns, who again had "aspirations", this time of inflicting massive casualties on American troops....stationed at Fort Dix. Yes, that's FORT Dix. Fort. As in "fortified"? Presumably with weapons? Weapons they hadn't been able to get UNTIL AN FBI GUY OFFERED TO PROVIDE THEM???

Let's look at this sinister bunch of people and the clues, shall we?

OMIGOD, they played PAINTBALL!

Levine recalls seeing some of the brothers shooting paintballs at trees in their front yard, an incident that seemed harmless at the time. Authorities say the group spoke of playing paintball as a training exercise for the attack.


And a video store clerk says that a videotape the men had wanted transferred to DVD showed 10 men shooting at a firing range, calling for jihad and shouting "Allah Akbar!" Do we know that the six arrested today are among the 10? Do we know how old the tape is?

Meanwhile, the loathsome and media whorish Chris Christie, often touted as a Republican challenger to whatever Democrat is up for re-election in any given year, was out in front of the cameras today saying that if six guys with guns had infiltrated a heavily-armed military base, "It could have been a disaster."

If six guys with guns can take over an armed military base, then we are in much bigger trouble than just six Albanians doing some kind of Islamofascist version of imitating what they saw on YouTube.

Shawn Mullen over at The Moderate Voice also notices the similarity of this case to the feckless Miami Seven:

Maybe it’s just me, but there seems to be considerably more caution in the blogosphere today over the announcement that the feds have arrested six men who were planning to attack soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, than breathless reports yesterday that an explosion in a Las Vegas parking garage was a terrorist attack.

That is well and good, because the preliminary reports call to mind those feckless Miami-based terrorist wannabes who were going to take a bus to Chicago and blow up the Sears Tower. Or something.

These alleged terrorists had been under surveillance by the FBI for months, practiced by shooting paintball guns and real weapons in a rural area of the Pennsylvania Poconos and allegedly watched jihadist videos in which Osama bin Laden urged them toward martyrdom.

Captain Ed cut to the chase at Captain’s Quarters in noting that these guys do not appear to have the smarts of typical Al Qaeda operatives insofar as they made a videotape of their training sessions and then went to a retail store to get it made into a DVD.


All I know is that once again, we have George W. Bush in very real danger of losing support from his own party for his much-beloved war in Iraq, and we have an Attorney General who's got one foot out the door and the other on a banana peel -- and right on cue, we have a report of would be "terrorists" who had NO WEAPONS IN THEIR POSSESSION when raided, but had been "trying to acquire" them from an FBI agent who set it up to try to sell it to them.

Now, it's entirely possible that these guys had some notion of being Big Bad Jihadists About to Bring Down America, but let's not forget that this is, after all, six guys. And frankly, if six guys with weapons sold to them by an FBI agent can destroy an entire nation, then perhaps the Twenty-Eight Percent Squadron ought to re-evaluate their worship of the Big Daddy in the Codpiece who Said He'd Keep Them Safe.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share

Maybe it's only Democratic woman governors named Kathleen who get screwed over by the Bushistas
Posted by Jill | 7:51 PM
Haven't we seen this before?:

This is absolutely ridiculous. It's always the victim's fault. Why can't these people ever just admit they're incompetent and can't run a government? (Rhetorical question.)

AP via HuffPo:


The White House fought back Tuesday against criticism from Kansas' governor that National Guard deployments to Iraq are slowing the response to last week's devastating tornado.


White House press secretary Tony Snow said the fault was Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius'.


In a spat reminiscent of White House finger-pointing at Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco after the federal government's botched response to Hurricane Katrina, Snow rapped Sebelius for not following procedure to find gaps and then asking the federal government to fill them.


"If you don't request it, you're not going to get it," he said.



One slight problem: Governor Sebelius did request it. In fact, she took her concerns to Bush personally in 2006:


Sebelius, a Democrat, has written the Pentagon twice and spoke about the issue at great length with Bush in January 2006 when they rode together from Topeka to a lecture in Manhattan.


"He assured me that he had additional equipment in his budget a year ago. What the Defense Department said then and continues to say is that states will get about 90 percent of what they had," Sebelius said. "Meanwhile, it doesn't get any better. I'm at a loss."



So apparently it doesn't matter if you "request it"; you're still not getting it. What's more, ThinkProgress notes three other times Governor Sebelius lobbied the Pentagon to replace missing equipment.


The governor is not to blame here. She didn't start the war, and she didn't decide to send to send the National Guard equipment to Iraq. And despite her constant efforts to get that equipment back in order to deal with disasters like last weekend's tornado, it's still her fault. Have they no shame? (Another rhetorical question.)

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Monday, May 07, 2007

So where are the adults already
Posted by Jill | 6:16 AM
Remember when the Bush team came into office and with their stiff grey suits and power ties assured Americans that the pizza-and-khaki days were over and now the adults were in charge?

Obviously in Bushland, adulthood as meaning just wearing a big man suit is just another drag costume, and as far as it goes.

The architect of the so-called "surge" is getting outta Dodge while the getting's still good and people aren't yet asking questions:

Deputy national security adviser J.D. Crouch II, who helped spearhead the recent policy review that led President Bush to send more U.S. troops to Iraq, announced yesterday that he will step down early next month, becoming the latest key aide to depart the White House at a critical juncture.

Crouch, the No. 2 official at the National Security Council, has been a pivotal figure on a series of difficult issues, including Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran and the detention policy for terrorism suspects. And it was his interagency group meeting at the White House complex for many weeks last winter that resulted in the ongoing troop buildup in Iraq, which has become the defining decision of the year for Bush.

In an interview, Crouch said he is leaving to devote more time to his family after six years in the administration. He expressed confidence that Bush's policy of trying to build democracy in Iraq and spread it around the world will ultimately pay off. "I worry about it," he said. "I think it's important to question your assumptions, always ask yourself if you're on the right track. But as I look at the agenda that the president has set out, I think it's the right agenda, and history will vindicate that."

Crouch becomes the second top official involved in crafting the new Iraq strategy to leave before it is clear if the new approach will work.


The next time Americans are tempted to vote for the guy who has the most tough-talk, they might want to keep this in mind.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Since when does "the adults are now in charge" mean passing the buck?
Posted by Jill | 7:19 AM
One of the traits of effective managers is to hire good people, communicate their responsibilities, trust them to do their work, and leave them alone, then check in periodically on their progress. But when push comes to shove, and the department's performance is evaluated by the higher-ups, it's the manager who is accountable.

Not in the Bush administration, however, where responsibility and accountability, not just tasks, are delegated downward. We know that George Bush wants to remove himself from accountability for the Iraq war by hiring a "war czar" -- a position no one, understandably, seems to want. But it seems that Alberto Gonzales has run the Justice Department in the same way.

Murray Waas:


Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed a highly confidential order in March 2006 delegating to two of his top aides -- who have since resigned because of their central roles in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys -- extraordinary authority over the hiring and firing of most non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department. A copy of the order and other Justice Department records related to the conception and implementation of the order were provided to National Journal.

In the order, Gonzales delegated to his then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, and his White House liaison "the authority, with the approval of the Attorney General, to take final action in matters pertaining to the appointment, employment, pay, separation, and general administration" of virtually all non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department, including all of the department's political appointees who do not require Senate confirmation. Monica Goodling became White House liaison in April 2006, the month after Gonzales signed the order.

The existence of the order suggests that a broad effort was under way by the White House to place politically and ideologically loyal appointees throughout the Justice Department, not just at the U.S.-attorney level. Department records show that the personnel authority was delegated to the two aides at about the same time they were working with the White House in planning the firings of a dozen U.S. attorneys, eight of whom were, in fact, later dismissed.

A senior executive branch official familiar with the delegation of authority said in an interview that -- as was the case with the firings of the U.S. attorneys and the selection of their replacements -- the two aides intended to work closely with White House political aides and the White House counsel's office in deciding which senior Justice Department officials to dismiss and whom to appoint to their posts. "It was an attempt to make the department more responsive to the political side of the White House and to do it in such a way that people would not know it was going on," the official said.


Instead of being an effective management technique, delegation in the Bush Administration and its associated agencies is all about covering the ass of upper management. One wonders, then, why Gonzales' underlings were so willing to be a part of this scheme designed so obviously to give cover to the Attorney General. And also why so many people in this Administration have been willing, time and time again, to play the fall guy for this bunch. (Arianna has more on why those who know they're just being set up to be fall guys don't just resign.)

(h/t: Cernig)

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, April 29, 2007

Once again, it comes down to this: Is it malice or incompetence?
Posted by Jill | 6:37 AM
I don't know why anyone thought a man who had botched everything he ever touched would make a good president. Perhaps the appeal of someone who promised to "run government like a business" seemed attractive after six years of prosperity. Too bad no one looked at the businesses he'd run.

Today's Washington Post features an appalling story of how millions of dollars in foreign aid for Hurricane Katrina victims was either never collected or "lost". At any rate, little was used to actually help those displaced by the storm and its aftermath:


As the winds and water of Hurricane Katrina were receding, presidential confidante Karen Hughes sent a cable from her State Department office to U.S. ambassadors worldwide.

Titled "Echo-Chamber Message" -- a public relations term for talking points designed to be repeated again and again -- the Sept. 7, 2005, directive was unmistakable: Assure the scores of countries that had pledged or donated aid at the height of the disaster that their largesse had provided Americans "practical help and moral support" and "highlight the concrete benefits hurricane victims are receiving."

Many of the U.S. diplomats who received the message, however, were beginning to witness a more embarrassing reality. They knew the U.S. government was turning down many allies' offers of manpower, supplies and expertise worth untold millions of dollars. Eventually the United States also would fail to collect most of the unprecedented outpouring of international cash assistance for Katrina's victims.

Allies offered $854 million in cash and in oil that was to be sold for cash. But only $40 million has been used so far for disaster victims or reconstruction, according to U.S. officials and contractors. Most of the aid went uncollected, including $400 million worth of oil. Some offers were withdrawn or redirected to private groups such as the Red Cross. The rest has been delayed by red tape and bureaucratic limits on how it can be spent.

In addition, valuable supplies and services -- such as cellphone systems, medicine and cruise ships -- were delayed or declined because the government could not handle them. In some cases, supplies were wasted.

The struggle to apply foreign aid in the aftermath of the hurricane, which has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $125 billion so far, is another reminder of the federal government's difficulty leading the recovery. Reports of government waste and delays or denials of assistance have surfaced repeatedly since hurricanes Katrina and Rita struck in 2005.

Administration officials acknowledged in February 2006 that they were ill prepared to coordinate and distribute foreign aid and that only about half the $126 million received had been put to use. Now, 20 months after Katrina, newly released documents and interviews make clear the magnitude of the troubles.

More than 10,000 pages of cables, telegraphs and e-mails from U.S. diplomats around the globe -- released piecemeal since last fall under the Freedom of Information Act -- provide a fuller account of problems that, at times, mystified generous allies and left U.S. representatives at a loss for an explanation. The documents were obtained by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a public interest group, which provided them to The Washington Post.

In one exchange, State Department officials anguished over whether to tell Italy that its shipments of medicine, gauze and other medical supplies spoiled in the elements for weeks after Katrina's landfall on Aug. 29, 2005, and were destroyed. "Tell them we blew it," one disgusted official wrote. But she hedged: "The flip side is just to dispose of it and not come clean. I could be persuaded."

In another instance, the Department of Homeland Security accepted an offer from Greece on Sept. 3, 2005, to dispatch two cruise ships that could be used free as hotels or hospitals for displaced residents. The deal was rescinded Sept. 15 after it became clear a ship would not arrive before Oct. 10. The U.S. eventually paid $249 million to use Carnival Cruise Lines vessels.

And while television sets worldwide showed images of New Orleans residents begging to be rescued from rooftops as floodwaters rose, U.S. officials turned down countless offers of allied troops and search-and-rescue teams. The most common responses: "sent letter of thanks" and "will keep offer on hand," the new documents show.

Overall, the United States declined 54 of 77 recorded aid offers from three of its staunchest allies: Canada, Britain and Israel, according to a 40-page State Department table of the offers that had been received as of January 2006.


I don't know what's more appalling here -- that while people were dying and scattered to the four winds, many of them never to return home again, Karen Hughes was still talking about the "echo chamber message", or that`while people were dying and scattered to the four winds, the Bush Administration was declining 2/3 of the offers of assistance.

I do not for one minute believe that if the primary beneficiaries of said aid were weathy Republican owners of beachfront property, such offers of aid (were they offered) would be refused. Every day, even nearly two years later, it appears more and more that the Administration deliberately and with malice aforethought allowed the part of an American city that doesn't attract tourists to just die. And the only possible rebuttal they have if they wish to deny that is that they are just plainly not up to the job of governing.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, April 26, 2007

In the Rovian model, governing is ALL about maintaining political power
Posted by Jill | 6:25 AM
As the pet food recall continues and expands (the latest recall is Drs. Foster and Smith Dry Lite dog and cat foods), melamine-tainted grains have found their way into the human food supply, and American chocolate manufacturers, obviously feeling strapped by the expense of increasing the cacao content of dark chocolate, want to pass off artificial sweeteners, milk substitutes and trans fats for actual sugar, milk, and cocoa butter; we now find out that federal agencies have been run as extensions of the RNC during the Bush years:


White House officials conducted 20 private briefings on Republican electoral prospects in the last midterm election for senior officials in at least 15 government agencies covered by federal restrictions on partisan political activity, a White House spokesman and other administration officials said yesterday.

The previously undisclosed briefings were part of what now appears to be a regular effort in which the White House sent senior political officials to brief top appointees in government agencies on which seats Republican candidates might win or lose, and how the election outcomes could affect the success of administration policies, the officials said.

The existence of one such briefing, at the headquarters of the General Services Administration in January, came to light last month, and the Office of Special Counsel began an investigation into whether the officials at the briefing felt coerced into steering federal activities to favor those Republican candidates cited as vulnerable.

Such coercion is prohibited under a federal law, known as the Hatch Act, meant to insulate virtually all federal workers from partisan politics. In addition to forbidding workplace pressures meant to influence an election outcome, the law bars the use of federal resources -- including office buildings, phones and computers -- for partisan purposes.

The administration maintains that the previously undisclosed meetings were appropriate. Those discussing the briefings on the record yesterday uniformly described them as merely "informational briefings about the political landscape." But House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), who has been investigating the GSA briefing, said, "Politicization of departments and agencies is a serious issue. We need to know more about these and other briefings."

In the GSA briefing -- conducted like all the others by a deputy to chief White House political adviser Karl Rove -- two slides were presented showing 20 House Democrats targeted for defeat and several dozen vulnerable Republicans.

At its completion, GSA Administrator Lurita Alexis Doan asked how GSA projects could be used to help "our candidates," according to half a dozen witnesses. The briefer, J. Scott Jennings, said that topic should be discussed "off-line," the witnesses said. Doan then replied, "Oh, good, at least as long as we are going to follow up," according to an account given by former GSA chief acquisition officer Emily Murphy to House investigators, according to a copy of the transcript.


Federal agencies used to help Republican candidates. A Justice Department built around disenfranchising potential Democratic voters. A Congress rubberstamping the Bush Administration's most flagrant attempts to circumvent the United States Constitution. This has been our government for the last six years until George W. Bush overplayed his Iraq hand, George Allen had his macaca moment and Congress was finally turned over to people who will hold this bunch of criminals to account.

The question is this: Will voters in 2008 remember the last eight years when they vote? Or will they succumb to the "vote Republican or die" rhetoric of Rudy Giuliani?

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, April 20, 2007

The new definition of executive privilege
Posted by Jill | 6:37 AM
Executive privilege now is defined as "Anything that would get us into trouble if released." It's not surprising that the Bush Administration is now claiming executive privilege on the e-mails that Karl Rove sent through the Republican National Committee e-mail system to evade archiving requirements, but it's breathtakingly galling nonetheless:

A White House official today again raised the possibility of an executive-privilege claim on e-mails and other documents from private e-mail accounts used by senior White House officials but controlled by the Republican National Committee.

In a letter to Robert Kelner, the RNC's counsel, Emmet Flood, a special counsel to President Bush, reiterated the desire of the White House to review any materials it is considering turning over the House Judiciary Committee before doing so.

Flood said the Judiciary Committee is seeking "relating to communications authored by Executive Branch officials in which there exists a clear and indisputable Executive Branch interest," including e-mails from Karl Rove and other White House officials related to the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys last year.

Flood said the White House wants to review the documents to determine if "any materials implicating the Presidential Records Act are, in fact, involved," as well as whether "the Executive Branch may need t take measures necessary to protect its other legal interests in communications responsive" to the Judiciary Committee's request to the RNC.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, immediately criticized the Flood letter to the RNC as an attempt by the White House to delay his panel's investigation.

"The White House's position to clear all RNC emails before they can respond to our request is extreme and unnecessary," Conyers said. "This is a clear attempt, on the Administration's part, to delay this process and keep the wheels of Justice turning slowly."

22 current White House officials, including Karl Rove, deputy chief of staff and President Bush's top political advisor, have private e-mail accounts on RNC servers that are supposed to be used for political work. Democrats, in investigating the U.S. Attorney purge, as well as contacts between Bush administration officials and imprisoned former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and other incidents, found that some White House officials may be using the RNC accounts to avoid the Presidential Records Act, which requires the president and his top aides to retain records of all official actions.

The probe of the RNC accounts led to the further revelation that the White House may have lost as many as 5 million official e-mails thanks to a software malfunction, although the White House says is may be able to recover these messages and has told Democrats that it will consult them in appointing a forensic expert to handle the effort.


The fact that we've been waiting for them to try to pull a stunt like this is bad enough, but that they actually believe that executive privilege extends to attempts like this to avoid accountability ought to finally show Congressional Democrats that this is an administration that cares not one whit for the rule of law, for the U.S. Constitution, nor for any construct of good government as we know it. People like me have known since 2002 that this was the nature of the bunch of criminals who occupy the executive branch. It's taken far too long for Democrats (*cough* John Kerry *cough*) to understand that they are dealing not with an opposition party, but with a syndicate of criminals. If they don't get it now, they never will.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, April 10, 2007

And this is the administration that told Americans we have to watch what we say
Posted by Jill | 6:52 AM
You almost have to admire their chutzpah.

After years of being told by the Bush Administration that we have to watch what we say, that for a candidate to oppose Bush's policy in Iraq emboldens the enemy, that opposing Bush is unpatriotic; after surveillance of peace groups and protesting nuns being put on no-fly lists, after being told we have to put up with illegal wiretapping in the name of national security, now we're being told that the huge anti-American demonstrations taking place in Iraq are a benchmark of progress:

A huge anti-American protest swept two cities in Iraq today, but White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe told reporters this only underscores how much "progress" the U.S. is making in that country.

Four years since the fall of Baghad, Iraq "is now a place where people can freely gather and express their opinions, and that was something they could not do under Saddam." Johndrove said, traveling with President Bush to Arizona.

He also noted that Moktada al-Sahr had called for "massive protests-- I'm not sure that we 've seen that, those numbers materialize."

But the Associated Press reported this afternoon: "Tens of thousands of Shiites -- a sea of women in black abayas and men waving Iraqi flags -- marched from Kufa to Najaf on Monday, demanding U.S. forces leave their country on the fourth anniversary of fall of Baghdad. Streets in the capital were silent and empty under a hastily imposed 24-hour driving ban.

"Demonstrators ripped apart American flags and tromped across a Stars and Stripes rug flung on the road between the two holy cities for the huge march."

Johndroe also said: "While we have much more progress ahead of us -- the United States, the coalition and Iraqis have much more to do -- this is a country that has come a long way from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein."


....and handed that tyranny back to us in the emboldened dictatorship of George W. Bush.

Somehow I'm not sure that the families of the over 3200 young Americans killed in this war and the over 30,000 wounded would agree that fighting for the right of Iraqis to march in the streets in favor of killing Americans is a noble cause.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share