UNSPUN

First we had, “if only we’d known we would have moved heaven and earth.” Only to find out, well yeah they did know and they did not even bother to leave Crawford, Texas

Then we had the WMD that were not there.

The relationship to Al Qaeda that did not exist.

The aluminum tubes that actually could be used for something other than refining uranium.

The mobile labs that did not exist.

The fleet of pilotless drones Saddam was going to attack us with.

The people in Iraq who did not greet us with flowers.

The quelling of the insurgency that might not be done in 6 weeks but would surely be over in 6 months that’s still raging after almost 3 years..

Mission Accomplished.

Failure to plan to stabilize Iraq after we conquerred it.

And I can’t believe we re-elected this putz after all of this. But look who he was running against!!!

Katrina, need I say more.

Rita, a chance to recover but did not.

Domestic spying.

But this is a bridge too far: George Bush drunk.

The New York Times has been batted about for not having reported the NSA’s domenstic spying program sooner. And there may be some room for legitimate criticism of the Times for not reporting this before the 2004 election when it might have made a difference in the outcome of events (though I doubt that). Yet you have to concede the Times did display more backbone than our elected representatives in holding this administration to account. Had it not been for the Times report, despite the fact that it was more than a year late in coming, we still would be unaware of the facts and people like Jay Rockefeller would still not have the balls to say anything about this program.

The time has come to radically change the balance of power on the full range of intelligence issues and the president’s war powers. Since 9-11 we now know we have gone to war under false pretenses and now we come to find out our constitutional rights are being ignored and the check to presidential power is ivirtually emasculated. Senator Rockefeller’s feeble letter to Vice President Cheney is indicative of the dimunition of congressional oversight. Based on the Bush administration’s reading of the law the executive is a power unto istelf. Completely forget that the constitution renders the power to declare war to Congress and not the President. For the sake of our security and liberty it is time Congress flex some muscle and rein in the rampant power grab of this administration. In light of being given less than the full truth on a number of occassions it is time for Congress to develop a joint intelligence oversight board (combining staff of both the House and Senate) with undbridled authority to review any and all intelligence to include even the most sensitive data. We need this to make sure the people who are to provide a check to presidential power have the means to actually do so. This board should be able to see any and all intelligence without limit to include the President’s Daily Briefing.

Furthermore, because armies fight battles and nations fight wars it is essential that when, if ever this nation goes to war again, the decision to do so is made by the nation through its representatives. Congress needs to one more time look at an effective mechanism to allow the president enough power to respond to immediate defense but retain the power to declare the nation at war with all that declaration implies. Vietnam and now Iraq prove how problematic virtual declarations of war are for our nation. Congress, not the President is mostly to blame for the position we find ourselves in today. The Congress allowed itself to be lied to, failed to investigate the cause of action when it had the opportunity and obligation to do so, and in general has failed to hold the Executive accountable for answering to the people on any number of counts. It is time to address the balance of power between the Executive and the Congress and reassert the power that rightfully belongs to the Congress.

Oh, and Harry Reid, the caucus needs to put a real leader into the position of ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, not some backbench eunuch.

I’ve meant to comment on Bush’s address this evening but I’ve been tied up getting the last minute letters and cards ready for mailing. But I did want to comment and I will flesh this out later.

To begin with, why should we believe that Bush’s answers on Iraq are any more correct this time than he has been in the past? I can’t think of a good reason to give him the benefit of any doubt. And after having read the transcript of his speech I am not convinced he has learned anything or changed a single concept from the beginning. The same disingenuousness found in all of his administration’s other dealings with the American people continues in this address. It seems to me Bush just put the whore into a new dress and added a little contrition and hopes to sell us that now he has a plan and he understands what it will take to get us out of this morass. It is just another ploy buying him a little more support and a little more time.

One of the first indications that Bush’s speech is just the same old whore in a new dress is the fact that he does not seem to acknowledge that the majority of the Iraqi people want us out of Iraq. He does not acknowledge that the primary forces attacking us are not Al Qaeda terrorists but Iraqis who feel we should not be in their country and need to get out. Our own generals have said Al Qaueda terrorists make up only a small portion of those who are attacking us in Iraq. But that bit of disingenuousness on Bush’s part is only the beginning.

Bush puts up the straw man: ” September 11th, 2001 required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously, and it shattered the illusion that terrorists attack us only after we provoke them. On that day, we were not in Iraq … we were not in Afghanistan….” Did anyone say that we thought Al Qaeda attacked us because we were in Iraq or Afghanistan? And is he so unaware that he does not know that Al Qaeda has claimed the attck of 9-11 because we did have a military presence on “holy ground” in Saudi Arabia?

More to come. (more…)

In thinking about the things Democrats should be thinking about and preparing for in the quest to regain one if not both houses of Congress in 2006 is the methodology on how to go about doing that. And while there are not many things I would want to take from the current administration you do have to acknowldge that for almost 5 years their discipline, message control, and ability to keep all their members tied to the cause were remarkable. I have not seen anything like it in my lifetime (57 years). That does not mean their efforts served us all that well but they made significant strides to carry out their agenda.

This is an excerpt of a story from Murray Haas. Haas’ story is great in its own right but this one passage highlights the kind of attention to detail and preparation that went into message control and agenda control that led to getting so many things done. Democrats could learn from that:

“On July 9, 2003, senior presidential adviser Karl Rove was well prepared as he returned a telephone call from columnist Robert Novak. On his desk were talking points and other briefing materials that then-White House Political Director Matt Schlapp and other staffers had compiled for Rove in anticipation of the conversation. For a White House that took great pride in its disciplined approach to managing the flow of information to the public, such thorough staff preparation — even for a single conversation with a newspaper columnist — was not out of the ordinary, former and current administration officials said in interviews.”

Juxtapose that with the performance of the administration during Hurricane Katrina. What a difference! And it is that kind of difference which the Democrats need to reverse to once again convince the nation that they are the party to manage the nation’s problems and do a more equitable job than the Republicans have so far. The guiding principle should be one in concert with the finest traditions of the Democratic Party as ennunciated by Franklin D. Roosevelt, “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” -Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd US President (1882-1945)

I played Connect Four with a pretty young girl named Emily in a Philippine bar years ago. I don’t know what it was about that game, but there were many copies of it in the bar and the girls were all playing it obsessively. She came over with her game in front of her and said, “Want to play?” I did.

I asked her how old she was, and through cute, but imperfect teeth she said, “Eighteen.” I asked again, this time for the truth. “We’ll play a game for the truth.” How could I refuse? But she was really good and beat me handily and then told me she was thirteen even though she didn’t have to. After a couple of games she asked me, in a well-rehearsed line, if I wanted company for the night for only fifteen dollars. I told her no, but that I’d pay her twenty-five cents a game to play Connect Four. At that offer, she was visibly relieved and her brown eyes sparkled as she ran off to tell her ‘manager’ that she’d be busy at our table and yet still making money. (more…)

Twas the week before Christmas and all through the House

No bills were passed ‘bout which Fox News could grouse;

Tax cuts for the wealthy were passed with great cheer,

So vacations in St. Barts soon would be near;

Katrina kids were nestled all snug in motel beds,

While visions of school and home danced in their heads;

In Iraq our soldiers needed supplies and a plan,

Plus nuclear weapons were being built in Iran;

Gas prices shot up, consumer confidence fell;

Americans feared we were on a fast track to…well…

Wait— we need a distraction— something divisive and wily;

A fabrication straight from the mouth of O’Reilly

We can pretend that Christmas is under attack

Hold a vote to save it— then pat ourselves on the back;

Silent Night, First Noel, Away in the Manger

Wake up Congress, they’re in no danger!

This time of year we see Christmas every where we go,

From churches, to homes, to schools, and yes…even Costco;

What we have is an attempt to divide and destroy,

When this is the season to unite us with joy

At Christmas time we’re taught to unite,

We don’t need a made-up reason to fight

So on O’Reilly, on Hannity, on Coulter, and those right wing blogs;

You should just sit back, relax…have a few egg nogs!

‘Tis the holiday season: enjoy it a pinch

With all our real problems, do we honestly need another Grinch?

So to my friends and my colleagues I say with delight,

A merry Christmas to all,

and to Bill O’Reilly…Happy Holidays.

Congressman John D. Dingell

Lots of whoopla is being made of our almost passed legislation declaring that we do not torture our prisoners no matter who they are or where they are. In a last minute deal to get the White House to sign off on this legislation Sen. McCain agreed to incorporate a provision that “protects” civilians who might be accused of torturing a prisoner by allowing the defense that they were only following orders.

The deal keeps McCain’s original proposal, which was overwhelmingly approved by the Senate and endorsed by the House. One of the final stumbling blocks in negotiations was removed when language was added allowing civilian interrogators the same legal protections as those afforded to military interrogators.

Those rules say the accused can defend themselves by arguing it was reasonable for them to believe they were obeying a legal order. The government also would provide counsel for accused interrogators….

The provision that was added was modeled after the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which says military personnel accused of violating interrogation rules can defend themselves if a reasonable person could have concluded they were following a lawful order. Those rights — and the right to legal counsel — would be extended to CIA interrogators under the agreement.

And I thought we had all of this settled long ago at a place called Nurnberg? I find it difficult to believe that there is a so much controversy over saying clearly that it not only our policy but our law that we do not torture. That there is any question of our position on this rests entirely on the Bush administration. The laws and provisions which we now say we are going to comply with have been there all along. The only thing we’ve done in the meantime is to run the reputation of our country through the mud and who knows how many people we have tortured, some of whom have done nothing to even raise suspicion about themselves. We are a far cry from the ideals of this nation.

Here are Americans throughout our nation risking their lives showing us their purple fingers . . . praise the Lord, we’re so willing to paint our fingers purple and put yellow magnets on our SUVs . . . the world’s a safer place.

Purple-Fingered Warriors - I hope they don’t get caught, imprisoned, and tortured for their selfless act.

Fundamentalist Christians overwhelmingly vote Republican and a lot of the reason why is that they don’t believe in any sort of future. Even though Christians have been foretelling the second coming of Christ as an imminent event for over a thousand years, these people believe it’s going to be tomorrow.

I have a friend who works in a Barnes and Noble and he says that he can spot a Fundamentalist as they walk in the door - they head in as straight a bee-line as possible to the Left Behind Series shelf, grab the one that interests them and try not to see anything else as they check out and leave, assuredly hoping to not be tempted by secular literature.

These are people who don’t care about the environment because they think it’s all going to be burned to crisp and repurified by their redeemer.
These are people who don’t care about the poor, needy, afflicted, and destitute because they are all just contributing to the signs of the world’s decadence and the impending doom that we’re all going to be subjected to, any minute.
These are people who love the idea of turmoil in the Middle-East because it was foretold and will envelope the world in a massive world-war which will bring about the end that much quicker and they’ll be rapturized anyway so $%@! the rest of us.
These are really scary people.

Well, I have to live here to and you people and your mythology don’t have a right to mess it all up just so you can have a grand self-fulfilling prophecy that leaves us all suffering the disasterous results of your Armageddon. Stop it now.

Frist promises to trigger “nuclear option” if senators filibuster Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. 3:35 pm | Comment (29)

From our friends at Think Progress.

What do you do when you have a guy who wants to convince you he is a mad man and has his finger on the nuclear trigger? You act like more of a mad man, only it’s not acting! I’m just more than tired of Frist holding the threat of the nuclear option open everytime there is talk of a filibuster for a jusdicial nomination. If he wants to invoke the nuclear option then let him. 2006 looks like the perfect year for a change in the Senate and the new rules would work out just fine. And for the rest of the senators, do what you have to do to salve you conscience about Alito or any other judicial nominee who you think should not be a judge on the various courts. And once the rules are changed I am sure Sen. Reid can provide some lessons in constructive parliamentary procedure for our friends on the right.

I would like to begin by showing that the U.S. Invasion of Iraq and the Regime overthrow was illegal under international law. For this I first refer to the Charter of the United Nations

Article 33 of the Charter states that “The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall first of all seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their own choice.”

Articles 41 and 42 make clear that war is a matter of last resort and all other measures would be “inadequate or have proved to be inadequate” before using armed force against a nation. It also stipulates that only the Security Council can authorize international use of force. (more…)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter on Thursday said he was launching a formal inquiry into Justice Department treatment of an American charged by the government after being held by the military for more than three years as an “enemy combatant.”

“I’m making a formal inquiry of the Department of Justice as to why they’re handling (Jose) Padilla as they have,” Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, told reporters. He said he may hold a committee hearing on the matter.

“I think there’s a real question raised when you hold a citizen for three and a half years on a charge that he’s going to explode a dirty bomb, and then, when the Supreme Court is considering taking jurisdiction of the case, to withdraw. That troubles me,” Specter said.

Why not just have a king and put Padilla in an iron mask and lock him away forever, no trial. And if Bush wants to do it to you what can you do about it? Nothing. We once had a constitution that protected our rights. Now you have to ask yourself, what Constitution? King George is as much a tyrant as his namesake.

Earlier I posted comments from Rahm Emmanuel about some courses of action Democrats might include in their election platform for 2006. In the ongoing turmoil about how to extricate ourselves from Iraq the conventional wisdom is not to lay out our position too early in light of the fact that the President has made no effort to engage Congress in formulating our policies and doing so would expose whatever ideas we might have to a death by a thousand cuts. Despite all of that, I am relaying here some more of an epiphany I have had about the wisdom of Ike Skelton. I think this proposal is worth considering.

Posted on Tue, Oct. 25, 2005
Skelton has plan to bring troops home from Iraq
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Missouri’s Ike Skelton is calling for the removal of one American brigade from Iraq for every three Iraqi brigades deemed capable of defending the country.

Skelton, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said Monday that the redeployment formula would provide “a measurable sense of progress” that Americans needed to see if the White House expected to have support for the mission in Iraq.

“I believe that we should set a benchmark that is easy to understand and that sets reasonable, achievable standards for both our forces and the Iraqis,” Skelton said in a letter last week to President Bush. Skelton made the letter available Monday.

Earlier this month, Democrats criticized a Pentagon report that did not place a timeline directly tied to the drawdown of coalition forces and the increased numbers of capable Iraqi battalions.

The Bush administration has said training Iraqi security forces to defend their own country is the key to bringing home U.S. troops. Democrats have demanded more details on when American troops can begin leaving Iraq.

A White House spokesman said Skelton’s letter was under review and had no immediate comment.

And it seems they also have no not so immediate comments.

No, he is just a smart fellow with years and years of experience on the House Armed Services Committee. Like Jack Murtha, when Skelton talks those who are smart enough to know listen. Look at these prophetic words he offered to the President back in 2002.
It doesn’t look like Ike was buying into the line that we were going to be greeted as liberators and be met with flowers!

Hat tip to Fired Up America and Roy Temple, http://www.firedupamerica.com/skelton_on_iraq