Cheney campaigns:
Signs held aloft by children and inscribed "Cheney Rocks" and "Too Cool" were featured in an MTV-style photo montage projected on screens beside the stage as a song by Garth Brooks blasted inside the Minneapolis Convention Center.
Garth Brooks? You mean this Garth Brooks?
Garth Brooks, Melissa Etheridge, Queen Latifah, George Michael, Pet Shop Boys and k.d. lang are scheduled to perform at a benefit concert dubbed Equality Rocks, set for April 29 at Washington, D.C.'s RFK Stadium. Net proceeds from the event will go to the Human Rights Campaign, a non-profit political organization that supports gay and lesbian rights...
And the song -- it wasn't this, was it?
When we're free to love anyone we choose
When this world's big enough for all different views
When we all can worship from our own kind of pew
Then we shall be free
Nope -- probably not.
******
I told you a few days ago that the Bush campaign thinks Cheney is an asset, "the unsavory but ultimately straight-up guy you need to fight the real bad guys." Here's Senator Norm Coleman making that case, as quoted in an AP story on the Cheney rally:
Coleman compared Bush's allegiance to Cheney, who some have called a drag on the ticket, with Abraham Lincoln's faith in Civil War General Ulysses S. Grant.
"He was rough at times. He didn't look so hot in his uniform. He sometimes used a cuss word," Coleman said of Grant. But he said Lincoln countered critics with, "He fights."
And here's a rally attendee responding like a good Pavlov dog:
Dustin Auman, a University of Minnesota student from Richfield, said he turned out for Cheney because he considers him a "pit bull" who has been key in the fight against terrorism.
Be afraid, people. The campaign is going to work this meme and work it some more, until even the Bush skeptics in the media feel compelled to write pieces about Cheney as the battle-weary, grizzled Mr. Gravitas, the tough man you need to do the tough job in tough times. I predict the long, thoughtful, flattering New York Times Magazine cover story will hit around the second Sunday in October.
Sunday, July 18, 2004
Saturday, July 17, 2004
SHORTER DAVID BROOKS
Two rich, preppy Ivy League elitists are running for President by claiming to have Middle American values. Let me explain at great length why that makes one of them a phony.
*******
Oh, and by the way, as the presidential campaign goes on and you hear conservatives deride Kerry and Edwards as hoity-toity and out of touch, please remember this photograph of one of the five new trustees of the pioneering conservative magazine, National Review. The man in the photo is 26-year-old Austin Bramwell, and he's wearing a Madras sport jacket. A Madras sport jacket! And he was born in 1978! But his name is Austin Bramwell, and he is an heir to William F. Buckley, so I guess a sort of double-recessive make-another-pitcher-of-bloodys-Muffy preppiness is appropriate.
When they say Kerry represents elitists, just remember: If Bush wins, Austin Bramwell and that jacket win.
Two rich, preppy Ivy League elitists are running for President by claiming to have Middle American values. Let me explain at great length why that makes one of them a phony.
*******
Oh, and by the way, as the presidential campaign goes on and you hear conservatives deride Kerry and Edwards as hoity-toity and out of touch, please remember this photograph of one of the five new trustees of the pioneering conservative magazine, National Review. The man in the photo is 26-year-old Austin Bramwell, and he's wearing a Madras sport jacket. A Madras sport jacket! And he was born in 1978! But his name is Austin Bramwell, and he is an heir to William F. Buckley, so I guess a sort of double-recessive make-another-pitcher-of-bloodys-Muffy preppiness is appropriate.
When they say Kerry represents elitists, just remember: If Bush wins, Austin Bramwell and that jacket win.
HILLARY
What the hell was that all about this week? Were they trying to keep her off the convention speakers' list because she’s a "polarizing figure" -- or the opposite, because she's such a star that she'd outshine the ticket?
It doesn't make sense either way.
If they think Hillary's offputting to some voters, why feature Bill so prominently? The Kerry people, who are trying to appeal to blue-collar males in the Midwest, ought to know that the Joe Lunchpails who think Hillary is a broom-riding hag find Bill slick and unsavory as well. (Maybe more so in his current somewhat self-satisfied I-sold-a-million-books mode.)
As for the other argument -- that Hillary would bring the house down and leave Edwards and Kerry struggling to steal back the spotlight -- remember that in 1988 dull Mike Dukakis emerged just fine from the shadow of Jesse Jackson, an extraordinary orator, the winner of several primaries, and, I seem to recall, a bit of a "polarizing figure" in his own right. Dukakis left the convention with a 17-point lead in the polls –- it was only after that that he started screwing up.
And besides, Hillary isn't all that good. No offense intended, but she doesn't have the gift –- her voice is adenoidal and her delivery's usually dull. (This actually helps her to debunk the demonization, or at least it did when she was running for Senate in 2000 –- she drones on about milk price supports and people think, This is the Hildebeast? If you want to appeal to people who hate her, it might actually be better to let them hear her speak -– otherwise, they conjure up an image out of her out of right-wing folklore.)
And if she was left off the speakers' list because the campaign doesn't want to give her a leg up on Edwards for '08 in the event of a Kerry loss this year, I say: Get a grip. People in the party are already thinking about '08, but here in America WE DON’T CARE. We're not going to remember a four-year-old speech come next primary season. (Did we remember Bill's '88 convention speech in '92?) All we care about this year is this election.
What the hell was that all about this week? Were they trying to keep her off the convention speakers' list because she’s a "polarizing figure" -- or the opposite, because she's such a star that she'd outshine the ticket?
It doesn't make sense either way.
If they think Hillary's offputting to some voters, why feature Bill so prominently? The Kerry people, who are trying to appeal to blue-collar males in the Midwest, ought to know that the Joe Lunchpails who think Hillary is a broom-riding hag find Bill slick and unsavory as well. (Maybe more so in his current somewhat self-satisfied I-sold-a-million-books mode.)
As for the other argument -- that Hillary would bring the house down and leave Edwards and Kerry struggling to steal back the spotlight -- remember that in 1988 dull Mike Dukakis emerged just fine from the shadow of Jesse Jackson, an extraordinary orator, the winner of several primaries, and, I seem to recall, a bit of a "polarizing figure" in his own right. Dukakis left the convention with a 17-point lead in the polls –- it was only after that that he started screwing up.
And besides, Hillary isn't all that good. No offense intended, but she doesn't have the gift –- her voice is adenoidal and her delivery's usually dull. (This actually helps her to debunk the demonization, or at least it did when she was running for Senate in 2000 –- she drones on about milk price supports and people think, This is the Hildebeast? If you want to appeal to people who hate her, it might actually be better to let them hear her speak -– otherwise, they conjure up an image out of her out of right-wing folklore.)
And if she was left off the speakers' list because the campaign doesn't want to give her a leg up on Edwards for '08 in the event of a Kerry loss this year, I say: Get a grip. People in the party are already thinking about '08, but here in America WE DON’T CARE. We're not going to remember a four-year-old speech come next primary season. (Did we remember Bill's '88 convention speech in '92?) All we care about this year is this election.
Friday, July 16, 2004
MARTHA
I never had particularly negative feelings about her, but I never quite understood those who worshiped her. The only theory I have is that maybe Spiro Agnew had half a point -- many of us were raised on Dr. Spock and negotiation, and maybe we crave a little cracking of the whip. (Though a prescriptive woman like Stewart clearly pisses off a lot of people, mostly men.)
I also think this is part of the reason we keep electing Republicans -- we want to be disciplined, we want to be told in no uncertain terms what's right and wrong. (Though we don't want too strict a disciplinarian, which is why we elected jokey afternoon napper Reagan and sort of elected fratboy Bush).
Well, she's guilty, and she got time. That seems right to me -- though I say that only because rich people have no damn excuse for screwing up the way she did. If you're rich, be smart yourself, or pay people to prevent you from doing something rash, potentially illegal, and stupid.
I'll admit, however, that I was impressed by this point in the Nation article Doug Henwood wrote about Stewart in January:
...why are insider trading and related transgressions often treated more severely than defrauding retirees, lying to stockholders or, more prosaically, running a dangerous workplace? The only obvious victim of Martha's alleged crime is the public's perception of the fairness of the stock market. The authorities would love to preserve the illusion that everyone is equal, and that the rich and well connected have no special advantage over the masses. But that's absolute nonsense. Though people on the left often cheer the prosecution of insider trading (which, remember, is something Stewart isn't even accused of), there's nothing particularly progressive about preserving the illusion of Wall Street's fairness.
I never had particularly negative feelings about her, but I never quite understood those who worshiped her. The only theory I have is that maybe Spiro Agnew had half a point -- many of us were raised on Dr. Spock and negotiation, and maybe we crave a little cracking of the whip. (Though a prescriptive woman like Stewart clearly pisses off a lot of people, mostly men.)
I also think this is part of the reason we keep electing Republicans -- we want to be disciplined, we want to be told in no uncertain terms what's right and wrong. (Though we don't want too strict a disciplinarian, which is why we elected jokey afternoon napper Reagan and sort of elected fratboy Bush).
Well, she's guilty, and she got time. That seems right to me -- though I say that only because rich people have no damn excuse for screwing up the way she did. If you're rich, be smart yourself, or pay people to prevent you from doing something rash, potentially illegal, and stupid.
I'll admit, however, that I was impressed by this point in the Nation article Doug Henwood wrote about Stewart in January:
...why are insider trading and related transgressions often treated more severely than defrauding retirees, lying to stockholders or, more prosaically, running a dangerous workplace? The only obvious victim of Martha's alleged crime is the public's perception of the fairness of the stock market. The authorities would love to preserve the illusion that everyone is equal, and that the rich and well connected have no special advantage over the masses. But that's absolute nonsense. Though people on the left often cheer the prosecution of insider trading (which, remember, is something Stewart isn't even accused of), there's nothing particularly progressive about preserving the illusion of Wall Street's fairness.
FIVE GEARS IN REVERSE
Remember last summer, when the (post-)war was going badly and Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld were making (fact-challenged) comparisons of the Iraq situation to Germany just after World War II, when (according to easily debunked legend) a few Americans were killed by German guerrilla end-timers? Well, now, in National Review Online, right-wing historian Victor Davis Hanson is comparing Iraq to the period in 1944 just after the Normandy landing, when Allied soldiers were dying by the thousands. Whoopee! Guess we're making real progress!
Remember last summer, when the (post-)war was going badly and Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld were making (fact-challenged) comparisons of the Iraq situation to Germany just after World War II, when (according to easily debunked legend) a few Americans were killed by German guerrilla end-timers? Well, now, in National Review Online, right-wing historian Victor Davis Hanson is comparing Iraq to the period in 1944 just after the Normandy landing, when Allied soldiers were dying by the thousands. Whoopee! Guess we're making real progress!
Draft Ehrenreich? No -- draft Thomas Frank. This New York Times op-ed column by Frank is just terrific -- urgent, angry, funny, and with a genuinely original thesis: that fighting losing battles (such the as the attempt to put an anti-gay amendment in the Constitution) is a strategy for right-wing culture warriors, and a highly effective one. Go read this.
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Ditka Out; Nugent In?
Former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka will not run for the U.S. Senate....
Republican sources say that the Republican Party will now focus on two potential candidates: Jim Oberwies, who finished second in the primary for this nomination, and John Cox, who ran a couple of years ago. Both have the distinction of being multimillionaires.
But another name surfacing is that of rocker, outspoken conservative and gun rights activist Ted Nugent.
"He grew up in Arlington Heights. He went to St. Viator High School," said Cook County Republican Chair Gary Skoien. "He has more connection to Illinois than Hillary Clinton had to New York, and he's been a very articulate spokesperson on constitutional issues. He would be a very interesting candidate."...
Is that what you want, Illinois GOP? Here's what you get:
"Foreigners are assholes; foreigners are scum; I don't like 'em; I don't want 'em in this country; I don't want 'em selling me doughnuts; I don't want 'em pumping my gas; I don't want 'em downwind of my life—OK?"
"You probably can't use the term 'toxic cunt' in your magazine, but that's what [Hillary Clinton] is."
And so on.
Former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka will not run for the U.S. Senate....
Republican sources say that the Republican Party will now focus on two potential candidates: Jim Oberwies, who finished second in the primary for this nomination, and John Cox, who ran a couple of years ago. Both have the distinction of being multimillionaires.
But another name surfacing is that of rocker, outspoken conservative and gun rights activist Ted Nugent.
"He grew up in Arlington Heights. He went to St. Viator High School," said Cook County Republican Chair Gary Skoien. "He has more connection to Illinois than Hillary Clinton had to New York, and he's been a very articulate spokesperson on constitutional issues. He would be a very interesting candidate."...
Is that what you want, Illinois GOP? Here's what you get:
"Foreigners are assholes; foreigners are scum; I don't like 'em; I don't want 'em in this country; I don't want 'em selling me doughnuts; I don't want 'em pumping my gas; I don't want 'em downwind of my life—OK?"
"You probably can't use the term 'toxic cunt' in your magazine, but that's what [Hillary Clinton] is."
And so on.
Certainly lately, since the transfer of sovereignty, things seem to be looking up....
--Peggy Noonan on Iraq, column posted Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
10 dead as car bomb rocks Baghdad; And governor of Mosul assassinated
--AP story posted July 14, 2004, 04:09 PM
Bulgarian hostage in Iraq beheaded: Al-Jazeera
--AFP story posted July 13, 2004, 4:41 PM
Child killed as mortars hit Baghdad house
--AP story posted July 9, 2004, 04:25 PM
5 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraqi mortar attack
--AP story posted July 8, 2004, 06:02 PM
Iraq oil exports halved as looters strike; Workers struggle to repair downed line
--AP story posted July 5, 2004, 08:31 AM
In the thirteen days before the surprise early "transition" non-ceremonies, there were 19 American military deaths in Iraq. In the thirteen days since, there have been 31.
--blog post by Tom Englehardt, July 13, 2004, 10:40 am
--Peggy Noonan on Iraq, column posted Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
10 dead as car bomb rocks Baghdad; And governor of Mosul assassinated
--AP story posted July 14, 2004, 04:09 PM
Bulgarian hostage in Iraq beheaded: Al-Jazeera
--AFP story posted July 13, 2004, 4:41 PM
Child killed as mortars hit Baghdad house
--AP story posted July 9, 2004, 04:25 PM
5 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraqi mortar attack
--AP story posted July 8, 2004, 06:02 PM
Iraq oil exports halved as looters strike; Workers struggle to repair downed line
--AP story posted July 5, 2004, 08:31 AM
In the thirteen days before the surprise early "transition" non-ceremonies, there were 19 American military deaths in Iraq. In the thirteen days since, there have been 31.
--blog post by Tom Englehardt, July 13, 2004, 10:40 am
BOOGA BOOGA!
Here's the headline of a story by Bill Gertz in today's Washington Times:
British report links al Qaeda, Baghdad
Here's the sum total of links between al-Qaeda and Saddam's regime discussed in paragraphs 1 through 15 of the story:
Yup, nothing. The booga-booga headline apparently refers to this damp squib of a conclusion (paragraphs 16-19):
British intelligence assessments of connections between al Qaeda and Saddam's government were similar to U.S. intelligence assessments, the report said, adding that there were "contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi Directorate General of Intelligence since 1998."
"Those reports described al Qaeda seeking toxic chemicals as well as other conventional terrorist equipment," the report said. "Some accounts suggested that Iraqi chemical experts may have been in Afghanistan during 2000."
The British concluded that the contacts did not lead to "practical cooperation" because of mutual distrust.
"Intelligence nonetheless indicates that ... meetings have taken place between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al Qaeda operatives," the report said. "Some reports also suggest that Iraq may have trained some al Qaeda terrorists since 1998. Al Qaeda has shown interest in gaining chemical and biological expertise from Iraq, but we do not know whether any such training was provided."
The story does say this about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who may or may not be curreently affiliated with al-Qaeda:
A March 2003 British intelligence report stated that Zarqawi "has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city."
"These cells apparently intend to attack U.S. targets using car bombs and other weapons," the report said, noting that "it is also possible that they have received [chemical-biological] materials from terrorists in the [Kurdish Autonomous Zone]."
The report also said that "al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March."
I guess this demonstrates a connection between 9/11 and Saddam, according to right-wing logic: We can surmise that Zarqawi was working with Saddam's regime because he was making plans for what happened after Saddam's ouster. We can surmise that Zarqawi and Saddam were jointly planning intercontinental attacks on U.S. civilians because Zarqawi wanted to get really, really close to U.S. troops so he could attack them.
Here's the headline of a story by Bill Gertz in today's Washington Times:
British report links al Qaeda, Baghdad
Here's the sum total of links between al-Qaeda and Saddam's regime discussed in paragraphs 1 through 15 of the story:
Yup, nothing. The booga-booga headline apparently refers to this damp squib of a conclusion (paragraphs 16-19):
British intelligence assessments of connections between al Qaeda and Saddam's government were similar to U.S. intelligence assessments, the report said, adding that there were "contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi Directorate General of Intelligence since 1998."
"Those reports described al Qaeda seeking toxic chemicals as well as other conventional terrorist equipment," the report said. "Some accounts suggested that Iraqi chemical experts may have been in Afghanistan during 2000."
The British concluded that the contacts did not lead to "practical cooperation" because of mutual distrust.
"Intelligence nonetheless indicates that ... meetings have taken place between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al Qaeda operatives," the report said. "Some reports also suggest that Iraq may have trained some al Qaeda terrorists since 1998. Al Qaeda has shown interest in gaining chemical and biological expertise from Iraq, but we do not know whether any such training was provided."
The story does say this about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who may or may not be curreently affiliated with al-Qaeda:
A March 2003 British intelligence report stated that Zarqawi "has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city."
"These cells apparently intend to attack U.S. targets using car bombs and other weapons," the report said, noting that "it is also possible that they have received [chemical-biological] materials from terrorists in the [Kurdish Autonomous Zone]."
The report also said that "al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March."
I guess this demonstrates a connection between 9/11 and Saddam, according to right-wing logic: We can surmise that Zarqawi was working with Saddam's regime because he was making plans for what happened after Saddam's ouster. We can surmise that Zarqawi and Saddam were jointly planning intercontinental attacks on U.S. civilians because Zarqawi wanted to get really, really close to U.S. troops so he could attack them.
Shouldn't the Republican National Committee repudiate T-shirts, buttons, and bumper stickers -- produced by a company called AuthenticGOP.com -- that say 10 OUT OF 10 TERRORISTS AGREE: ANYBODY BUT BUSH?
Look, it's a free country -- but this company ties itself by name to the GOP; its logo is an elephant; and the front of the T-shirt says, "Grand Old Party, Established 1954," surrounding the word "BUSH." The company boasts that the shirts were first sold at Washington State's GOP convention.
It's time for the GOP, and the President himself, to say once and for all whether they believe everyone who disagrees with Bush is an ally of terrorists. If they do, then we can stop talking about Michael Moore and Whoopi Goldberg -- the leaders of one of our major parties will have told us that they believes anyone who doesn't support them is an accessory to mass murder and to the killing of U.S. troops. If the GOP and the President do not believe that opposition to Bush is loyalty to terrorists, they have no choice -- they need to tell AuthenticGOP.com to dissociate this product from the GOP. AuthenticGOP must either stop marketing these items or stop putting "Grand Old Party" and "Bush" on them, and if the products continue to be sold, the use of "GOP" in the company name is unacceptable.
I think it would be entirely appropriate for the Democratic Party and the Kerry campaign to raise this issue.
Look, it's a free country -- but this company ties itself by name to the GOP; its logo is an elephant; and the front of the T-shirt says, "Grand Old Party, Established 1954," surrounding the word "BUSH." The company boasts that the shirts were first sold at Washington State's GOP convention.
It's time for the GOP, and the President himself, to say once and for all whether they believe everyone who disagrees with Bush is an ally of terrorists. If they do, then we can stop talking about Michael Moore and Whoopi Goldberg -- the leaders of one of our major parties will have told us that they believes anyone who doesn't support them is an accessory to mass murder and to the killing of U.S. troops. If the GOP and the President do not believe that opposition to Bush is loyalty to terrorists, they have no choice -- they need to tell AuthenticGOP.com to dissociate this product from the GOP. AuthenticGOP must either stop marketing these items or stop putting "Grand Old Party" and "Bush" on them, and if the products continue to be sold, the use of "GOP" in the company name is unacceptable.
I think it would be entirely appropriate for the Democratic Party and the Kerry campaign to raise this issue.
Turkish Foreign Minister Gul Denies Claims CIA Has Torture Center In Turkey
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul denied on Wednesday claims that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States had a torture center in Turkey.
Responding to a question with notice of Republican People`s Party (CHP) deputy Kemal Anadol, Gul said that a Turkish press organ published a news referring to an article of the New York Times.
Gul noted that the press organ claimed that CIA had torture centers in some countries including Turkey, but the mentioned article did not make any reference to Turkey....
--TurkishPress.com/Andalou Agency
Meanwhile, a Swedish Muslim freed from Guantanamo is saying he was tortured ("They dragged me to the interrogation room and used it as a refrigerator. They put it on freezing and it became tremendously cold and you had to freeze there for hours. You had to sit there for 12-14 hours, in chains"). The Pentagon denies this.
Also, yesterday General Jay Hood, the commander of the Guantanamo facility, showed members of the Senate Judiciary Committee some Gitmo DVDs -- but only a few of the many available; "Based on the staff's review of a small number of the videos, it does not appear that prisoners at Guantanamo were subjected to the types of egregious abuses that occurred at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq or at Baghram detention facility in Afghanistan," Senator Pat Leahy said in a written statement.
And, as you may already know from Atrios guest blogger Athenae, Seymour Hersh has said in a speech that the Pentagon has video from Abu Ghraib in which boy prisoners are sodomized ("The worst is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking").
ALSO: Congress is still trying to get to the bottom of all this:
Before Congress goes into recess at the end of the month, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner wants the Pentagon to provide witnesses for another public hearing into the issue....
His committee is getting a closed-door, classified briefing Thursday on where several Defense Department investigations into abuse now stand....
The committee also will be briefed on previous International Committee of the Red Cross reports into mistreatment of Iraqis. The House Armed Services Committee had a similar briefing Wednesday and Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, D-Calif., blasted the Defense Department afterward, saying the documents were so long in coming they were relatively useless....
The recent charge she referred to was the Red Cross allegation Wednesday that while it has visited thousands of prisoner in Iraq and elsewhere, the United States might be hiding more detainees in other lockups across the globe.
Terror suspects the FBI reported as captured have never turned up in detention centers, and the United States has failed to reply to demands for a list of everyone it's holding, said Antonella Notari, spokeswoman for the Switzerland-based ICRC...
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul denied on Wednesday claims that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States had a torture center in Turkey.
Responding to a question with notice of Republican People`s Party (CHP) deputy Kemal Anadol, Gul said that a Turkish press organ published a news referring to an article of the New York Times.
Gul noted that the press organ claimed that CIA had torture centers in some countries including Turkey, but the mentioned article did not make any reference to Turkey....
--TurkishPress.com/Andalou Agency
Meanwhile, a Swedish Muslim freed from Guantanamo is saying he was tortured ("They dragged me to the interrogation room and used it as a refrigerator. They put it on freezing and it became tremendously cold and you had to freeze there for hours. You had to sit there for 12-14 hours, in chains"). The Pentagon denies this.
Also, yesterday General Jay Hood, the commander of the Guantanamo facility, showed members of the Senate Judiciary Committee some Gitmo DVDs -- but only a few of the many available; "Based on the staff's review of a small number of the videos, it does not appear that prisoners at Guantanamo were subjected to the types of egregious abuses that occurred at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq or at Baghram detention facility in Afghanistan," Senator Pat Leahy said in a written statement.
And, as you may already know from Atrios guest blogger Athenae, Seymour Hersh has said in a speech that the Pentagon has video from Abu Ghraib in which boy prisoners are sodomized ("The worst is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking").
ALSO: Congress is still trying to get to the bottom of all this:
Before Congress goes into recess at the end of the month, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner wants the Pentagon to provide witnesses for another public hearing into the issue....
His committee is getting a closed-door, classified briefing Thursday on where several Defense Department investigations into abuse now stand....
The committee also will be briefed on previous International Committee of the Red Cross reports into mistreatment of Iraqis. The House Armed Services Committee had a similar briefing Wednesday and Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, D-Calif., blasted the Defense Department afterward, saying the documents were so long in coming they were relatively useless....
The recent charge she referred to was the Red Cross allegation Wednesday that while it has visited thousands of prisoner in Iraq and elsewhere, the United States might be hiding more detainees in other lockups across the globe.
Terror suspects the FBI reported as captured have never turned up in detention centers, and the United States has failed to reply to demands for a list of everyone it's holding, said Antonella Notari, spokeswoman for the Switzerland-based ICRC...
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
OK -- Ditka's not running for Senate, possibly because he was pissed off that the press showed up at a meeting he was going to attend with leaders of the Illinois GOP. Ooooh -- scared of a few reporters. What a delicate flower this alleged tough guy is.
The problem with calling Bush a liar isn't, as Nicholas Kristof would argue, that it coarsens the debate. The problem with calling Bush a liar is that it makes it awfully easy for him to beat the rap. A U.S. congressional committee focuses the blame for intel failures on intelligence gatherers, or a British inquiry criticizes the work of both U.K. intelligence agencies and the British government but finds that no one acted in bad faith, and self-righteous Bush defenders can wave a triumphant finger in the air and say: See -- he did not lie. "Liar" was your name for him; he uttered nothing that wasn't believed to be true by Good Men, so he's no liar, and you're a scoundrel to say he is one.
If Bush is seen as blameless because it looks as if he didn't lie, then we're in trouble. We're like DAs who charged someone with Murder One in a jurisdiction where the jury can't choose to convict on a lesser charge.
I don't think it matters whether Bush lied; what matters is that the decision to go to war with Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision, the worst foreign policy judgment, by a U.S. president in living memory.
My opinion is that Bush didn't lie. Infinitely slicker than Clinton, Bush conveys erroneous impressions about Iraq every time he talks about Iraq, while tiptoeing carefully around actual lies like a man trying to escape alive from a minefield. His typical speech on the subject is: al-Qaeda Taliban al-Qaeda Taliban terrorism Iraq Saddam Hussein safe haven for terrorists weapons of mass destructions we must not forget the lessons of September 11. There are no lies; there's just proximity. It's Saturday Night Live's Mr. Subliminal.
Bush made a horrible judgment based on excessive receptiveness to bad, ideologically poisoned intelligence ultimately traceable to liars, frauds, and bunko artists. I'm sorry that doesn't have the same ring as "Bush lied."
If Bush is seen as blameless because it looks as if he didn't lie, then we're in trouble. We're like DAs who charged someone with Murder One in a jurisdiction where the jury can't choose to convict on a lesser charge.
I don't think it matters whether Bush lied; what matters is that the decision to go to war with Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision, the worst foreign policy judgment, by a U.S. president in living memory.
My opinion is that Bush didn't lie. Infinitely slicker than Clinton, Bush conveys erroneous impressions about Iraq every time he talks about Iraq, while tiptoeing carefully around actual lies like a man trying to escape alive from a minefield. His typical speech on the subject is: al-Qaeda Taliban al-Qaeda Taliban terrorism Iraq Saddam Hussein safe haven for terrorists weapons of mass destructions we must not forget the lessons of September 11. There are no lies; there's just proximity. It's Saturday Night Live's Mr. Subliminal.
Bush made a horrible judgment based on excessive receptiveness to bad, ideologically poisoned intelligence ultimately traceable to liars, frauds, and bunko artists. I'm sorry that doesn't have the same ring as "Bush lied."
From "Noted Now" at ABC News:
House Speaker Dennis Hastert and several top Republicans, including state house GOP leader Tom Cross, expected to endorse the idea of a Ditka candidacy Wednesday night at the Navy Pier...
Hmmm ... if Ditka throws his hat in the ring, I wonder how much these are going to go for (especially autographed).
House Speaker Dennis Hastert and several top Republicans, including state house GOP leader Tom Cross, expected to endorse the idea of a Ditka candidacy Wednesday night at the Navy Pier...
Hmmm ... if Ditka throws his hat in the ring, I wonder how much these are going to go for (especially autographed).
So I see from yesterday's paper that everything we know about Zarqawi is wrong:
...Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has described him as a Qaeda operative, but a senior American military official said recently that sources now indicated that Mr. Zarqawi was "a separate jihadist."...
Mr. Powell stands by his statement, a spokesman said this month, even though other parts of that speech have been discredited and Mr. Powell mistakenly identified Mr. Zarqawi as Palestinian. He actually is of the Beni Hassan tribe, with roots deep in the Jordanian desert.
Other American information about Mr. Zarqawi has also been incorrect. At first it was said that he had a leg amputated during a Baghdad hospital visit, but now, a senior United States military official said in an e-mail message, "we believe Zarqawi has both legs, and reporting of the missing limb was disinformation." ...
In February, American officials in Baghdad released a 6,700-word letter - outlining a terror strategy to drag Iraq into civil war - that they said had been found on a CD from Mr. Zarqawi to Al Qaeda's leadership. But people who know Mr. Zarqawi wonder if he was the author. They said the lengthy political analysis, the references to seventh-century kings and embroidered phrases like "crafty and malicious scorpion" do not sound like him.
"The man was basically illiterate," Mr. Abu Doma said, though he acknowledged that a learned acolyte could be helping him.
...On May 11, a video appeared, titled "Sheik Abu Musab Zarqawi Slaughters an American Infidel." It showed the beheading of Nicholas Berg, the young Pennsylvania businessman. American officials believe that Mr. Zarqawi may have been the killer.
Back in Amman, there are questions. The killer on the video cuts with his right hand. While Mr. Hami said he thought Mr. Zarqawi was right-handed, Mr. Rababa and Mr. Abu Doma, who shared the same room with him for several years, insisted that he used his right hand only for eating and shaking hands.
I don't know if we're dealing with incompetence, bad faith, disinformation from insurgents and terrorists, or a combination of one or more of these things. Surely it's politically important for the Bush administration to say that Zarqawi in Iraq = al-Qaeda (therefore Iraq war = war against the 9/11 terrorists). I'm not sure who benefits if it's believed erroneously that Zarqawi killed Nick Berg -- Zarqawi earns respect and fear in his world, I guess, and the Bushies get to draw a line from Berg's beheading to the Twin Towers. As for the letter, it's always seemed peculiar to me -- why did some passages seem to echo contemporaneous U.S. propaganda?
"There is no doubt that our field of movement is shrinking and the grip around the throat of the mujahidin has begun to tighten", the letter, which was found on a compact disc, states. "With the spread of the army and police, our future is becoming frightening".
Professor Juan Cole said he thought the letter was genuine (though written with a collaborator); Cole later posted the comments of Bernard Haykel, a Middle East scholar, who believes the letter is a forgery.
I assume Zarqawi's a really bad guy; I assume that much of the terrorism he's blamed for really is his doing. But have we ascribed more than we should to him because doing so implies that we're just one evildoer away from restoring stability to Iraq?
(Juan Cole links via Billmon.)
...Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has described him as a Qaeda operative, but a senior American military official said recently that sources now indicated that Mr. Zarqawi was "a separate jihadist."...
Mr. Powell stands by his statement, a spokesman said this month, even though other parts of that speech have been discredited and Mr. Powell mistakenly identified Mr. Zarqawi as Palestinian. He actually is of the Beni Hassan tribe, with roots deep in the Jordanian desert.
Other American information about Mr. Zarqawi has also been incorrect. At first it was said that he had a leg amputated during a Baghdad hospital visit, but now, a senior United States military official said in an e-mail message, "we believe Zarqawi has both legs, and reporting of the missing limb was disinformation." ...
In February, American officials in Baghdad released a 6,700-word letter - outlining a terror strategy to drag Iraq into civil war - that they said had been found on a CD from Mr. Zarqawi to Al Qaeda's leadership. But people who know Mr. Zarqawi wonder if he was the author. They said the lengthy political analysis, the references to seventh-century kings and embroidered phrases like "crafty and malicious scorpion" do not sound like him.
"The man was basically illiterate," Mr. Abu Doma said, though he acknowledged that a learned acolyte could be helping him.
...On May 11, a video appeared, titled "Sheik Abu Musab Zarqawi Slaughters an American Infidel." It showed the beheading of Nicholas Berg, the young Pennsylvania businessman. American officials believe that Mr. Zarqawi may have been the killer.
Back in Amman, there are questions. The killer on the video cuts with his right hand. While Mr. Hami said he thought Mr. Zarqawi was right-handed, Mr. Rababa and Mr. Abu Doma, who shared the same room with him for several years, insisted that he used his right hand only for eating and shaking hands.
I don't know if we're dealing with incompetence, bad faith, disinformation from insurgents and terrorists, or a combination of one or more of these things. Surely it's politically important for the Bush administration to say that Zarqawi in Iraq = al-Qaeda (therefore Iraq war = war against the 9/11 terrorists). I'm not sure who benefits if it's believed erroneously that Zarqawi killed Nick Berg -- Zarqawi earns respect and fear in his world, I guess, and the Bushies get to draw a line from Berg's beheading to the Twin Towers. As for the letter, it's always seemed peculiar to me -- why did some passages seem to echo contemporaneous U.S. propaganda?
"There is no doubt that our field of movement is shrinking and the grip around the throat of the mujahidin has begun to tighten", the letter, which was found on a compact disc, states. "With the spread of the army and police, our future is becoming frightening".
Professor Juan Cole said he thought the letter was genuine (though written with a collaborator); Cole later posted the comments of Bernard Haykel, a Middle East scholar, who believes the letter is a forgery.
I assume Zarqawi's a really bad guy; I assume that much of the terrorism he's blamed for really is his doing. But have we ascribed more than we should to him because doing so implies that we're just one evildoer away from restoring stability to Iraq?
(Juan Cole links via Billmon.)
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Via Taegan Goddard's Political Wire, we learn about this study from the Project for Excellence in Journalism. The study finds that media coverage of both Bush and Kerry's characters is negative this year -- but that coverage of Kerry's character has been negative by a factor of five to one, whereas coverage of Bush's has been negative by a factor of three to one. Bush is regularly depicted as arrogant and lacking in credibility, the survey says, but also as a strong and decisive leader, whereas Kerry is depicted as a flip-flopper, a very liberal person, an elitist, and, sometimes, as a tough guy. Oh, and there's been far more coverage of Bush than of Kerry -- the margin is 72% to 28% -- so Kerry loses on quantity as well as quality.
Flashback:
Ditka fined $20,000 for unsaintly gestures to fans
Tuesday, October 19, 1999
New Orleans Saints coach Mike Ditka was fined $20,000 by the club yesterday for the obscene gestures he directed toward heckling fans during and after Sunday's loss to Tennessee at the Louisiana Superdome.
As a group of fans screamed obscenities and derided Ditka, the coach flashed an obscene hand gesture while walking off the field at halftime. When the game ended with Tennessee winning 24-21, Ditka grabbed his crotch while he walked off the field...
Ditka, of course, was the longtime coach of the Chicago Bears before his stint with New Orleans, and now may become the GOP's candidate for Senate in Illinois -- even though
Ditka's wife has said she will divorce him if he throws his hat in the ring, and he is not apparently even registered to vote in this state.
Ditka fined $20,000 for unsaintly gestures to fans
Tuesday, October 19, 1999
New Orleans Saints coach Mike Ditka was fined $20,000 by the club yesterday for the obscene gestures he directed toward heckling fans during and after Sunday's loss to Tennessee at the Louisiana Superdome.
As a group of fans screamed obscenities and derided Ditka, the coach flashed an obscene hand gesture while walking off the field at halftime. When the game ended with Tennessee winning 24-21, Ditka grabbed his crotch while he walked off the field...
Ditka, of course, was the longtime coach of the Chicago Bears before his stint with New Orleans, and now may become the GOP's candidate for Senate in Illinois -- even though
Ditka's wife has said she will divorce him if he throws his hat in the ring, and he is not apparently even registered to vote in this state.
Yesterday's line of the day from the Bush administration was "LOOK OVER HERE! BIG SCARY LIBYAN NUKES WE SAVED YOU FROM!" Rather an odd retroactive justification for a war, really -- "We abandoned the fight against the Afghanistan-based terrorists who attacked you to go fight in Iraq to save you from nukes that were in the early stage of development in Libya" -- but hey, the Bushies got The New York Times to carry their water by splashing this phony-looking photo-op photo across the front page, so I guess it worked, hunh?
Monday, July 12, 2004
Did you blink? Well, you might have missed the Bush boom:
Retail sales slowed in June. Auto purchases declined. Several technology companies warned about weak software and hardware spending at the end of the second quarter.
Less than three years since the United States emerged from a recession, a patchwork of unexpectedly soft economic reports is raising doubts about the vigor of the recovery.
... stock prices have faltered since the end of June, as corporate earnings have disappointed investors....
Signs of the end of consumers' exuberance have popped up in several areas. Year-over-year growth in spending slowed to 4.1 percent in May, in real terms, the slowest pace since January....
June was also sour for automakers. The General Motors Corporation reported sales that fell 15 percent and the Ford Motor Company reported an 8 percent drop from the same month a year earlier. Citing the "difficult new vehicle retail environment that we are operating in," AutoNation Inc., America's largest automotive retailer, trimmed its earnings forecasts for the second quarter.
...New orders of nondefense capital goods, excluding aircraft, fell 2.1 percent in April and 3.5 percent in May. And business spending on technology has seemingly remained weak. Since the beginning of July, 32 technology companies have issued warnings of lower second-quarter profits, according to Thomson First Call, while only one has increased its earnings projections.
..."Now the only real positive for the consumer is income and job growth," Mr. Harris at Lehman said. "If the labor market really slows down it would be a blow to the consumer and we could talk of growth slipping to below trend."...
--New York Times
Retail sales slowed in June. Auto purchases declined. Several technology companies warned about weak software and hardware spending at the end of the second quarter.
Less than three years since the United States emerged from a recession, a patchwork of unexpectedly soft economic reports is raising doubts about the vigor of the recovery.
... stock prices have faltered since the end of June, as corporate earnings have disappointed investors....
Signs of the end of consumers' exuberance have popped up in several areas. Year-over-year growth in spending slowed to 4.1 percent in May, in real terms, the slowest pace since January....
June was also sour for automakers. The General Motors Corporation reported sales that fell 15 percent and the Ford Motor Company reported an 8 percent drop from the same month a year earlier. Citing the "difficult new vehicle retail environment that we are operating in," AutoNation Inc., America's largest automotive retailer, trimmed its earnings forecasts for the second quarter.
...New orders of nondefense capital goods, excluding aircraft, fell 2.1 percent in April and 3.5 percent in May. And business spending on technology has seemingly remained weak. Since the beginning of July, 32 technology companies have issued warnings of lower second-quarter profits, according to Thomson First Call, while only one has increased its earnings projections.
..."Now the only real positive for the consumer is income and job growth," Mr. Harris at Lehman said. "If the labor market really slows down it would be a blow to the consumer and we could talk of growth slipping to below trend."...
--New York Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)