Assume a beach that is 100 yards long. (It wouldn’t be an economics story if you were not asked to assume something, right?) Now assume that there are two ice cream vendors working that beach, and that people are uniformly distributed on that beach. Where should the vendors set up? You might think vendor A should set up at the 25-yard mark and vendor B at the 75-yard mark – that way, no one has to walk more than 25 yards to get their ice cream. But look at it from the standpoint of the vendors. Vendor A could move to the 30-yard line and pick up a little business at the other vendor’s expense, and run no risk that the customers who now have to walk 30 yards would choose instead to walk 75 yards to vendor B’s stand. Vendor B then gets more business by moving to the 65, Vendor A to the 40, and pretty soon the two competitors are cheek by jowl, straddling the center. Voilà – a dysfunctional outcome, courtesy of the free market.

It turns out that this concept is pretty commonly taught (something I didn’t know in those pre-Internet days) – it is formally known as Hotelling’s model, after an economist named Harold Hotelling. And its application to politics is rather obvious.

Think of the spectrum of political views as the beach, and citizens as sunbathers. A politician on the left end of the beach knows that if he moves his offering a few steps to the right, he can pick up some middle-of-the-beach customers without losing the folks to his left.

You now know pretty much everything the Democratic Leadership Council knows about presidential politics. This is how they put Bill Clinton into the White House, it is how they tried to Bubbamatize John Kerry, and it is how they think they are going to win in 2008. But what Karl Rove knows (and the folks running the DLC clearly don’t) is that there is a fatal flaw in this model.

What this simplistic model does not take into account is that, like eating ice cream, voting is optional. And when politicians or ice cream vendors put too much distance between themselves and their customers, the customers stay home.

posted by John 11:49 PM |

Four More Years

From the Associated Press:

The Army is planning for the possibility of keeping the current number of soldiers in Iraq - well over 100,000 - for four more years, the Army's top general said Saturday.

Be careful what you want; you just may get it.

posted by Jerry Bowles 6:30 PM |

A heartbeat away

Senate minority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has a mild stroke and the MSM jumps all over the story. How often has the same thing happened to Dick Cheney and the MSM has said nothing? And don't forget Shrubby's "mystery box" that bulged from under his suitcoat that the pundits punked out on. We've got Dick "Mr. Holocaust" Durbin waiting in the wings. Not your basic "wartime" consigliare.

posted by Groom 5:33 PM |

Strange Bedfellows

The fountainhead, as it were, of the "intelligent design" movement is the Center for Science and Culture of the Discovery Center in Seattle, a slick radical Christian front group that promotes creationism under the guise of "teaching the scientific controversy about man's origins," as if there actually were such a controversy. Not surprising is the fact that its chief funders include Howard and Roberta Ahmanson, Philip F. Anschutz, Richard Mellon Scaife and other charter members of the vast right wing conspiracy.

What is shocking is that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provides $1 million a year in funding to these fruitcakes, including $50,000 a year of director Bruce K. Chapman's $141,000 salary. I assume Bill can still be reached at bill@microsoft.com

posted by Jerry Bowles 4:47 PM |

Casey Sheehan Died for This?

From Reuters:

"...a secular Kurdish politician said Kurds opposed making Islam not "a" but "the" main source of law -- a reversal of interim legal arrangements -- and subjecting all legislation to a religious test.

"We understand the Americans have sided with the Shi'ites," he said. "It's shocking. It doesn't fit American values. They have spent so much blood and money here, only to back the creation of an Islamist state ... I can't believe that's what the Americans really want or what the American people want."

Spin doctor this, war sluts.

posted by Jerry Bowles 9:49 AM |

The source of most (if not all) evil

Just this time last year the New York Times ran a strong editorial calling for abolition of the electoral college. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca) followed with plans to roll out legislation that would abolish the college and create a “21st century democracy.” In this era of unprecedented vote rigging and systematic disenfranchisement a few light bulbs suddenly went off. But since the Junta received its “new mandate” we’ve heard nothing. It’s as if Enron cut off their energy supply. Ditto the movement to clean up paperless electronic voting. Indeed, what is the frequency, Kenneth…

The “why” arguments for abolition are well known and were around long before “under God” was edited into the “Pledge of Allegiance” during the McCarthy era. I’ve blogged in the past about the need for a new political party. But new or so-called “third parties” are doomed by the electoral college, which is a, disproportionate, disenfranchising winner takes all system regardless of how much talking heads like Dallek and Beschloss fill dead air praising the “founding fathers” for creating it.

No “third party” presidential candidate has won an electoral vote since the middle of the 19th century. Something to think about as Democrats nationwide struggle for relevance. Let’s stop the denial. Presidential elections, like those held for state and local positions, have devolved into popularity contests, driven by tracking polls with issues and platforms at best tangential. More US citizens would vote if the US Constitution guaranteed that their vote really counted, and got counted... that means direct popular vote. For that to happen we need a constitutional amendment.

posted by Groom 8:07 AM |

How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm? All those Chinese, that is.

Over at Asia Times, Henry C.K. Liu has just concluded a six-part series titled The Coming Trade War. In the sixth and final segment he writes,

Within US policy circles, the rapid rise of China as a major force in the global economy is provoking a reconsideration of whether free trade is still in the US national interest.....

Part of the reason is, of course, plain old fear of "the Yellow Peril." But fueling that fear are some hard demographic and economic facts.

China has more than 1.3 billion people, a fifth of the world's population, and a workforce of 700 million as against a US workforce of 147 million. To avoid being overtaken by China in aggregate national income, US wages would have to maintain a gap of five times Chinese wages. Historically based technological and economic advantages currently give US workers a nominal wage gap of more than 35:1 over Chinese workers, or 9:1 on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis. This comfortable gap is not based on current productive differentials but rather on unbalanced terms of trade and geopolitical incongruity left by history. Yet until wage parity is attained, free trade will continue to be driven by cross-border wage arbitrage in favor of China. But with wage parity, the Chinese economy will be five times the size of the US economy, a prospect not welcomed by the US geopolitical calculations.

Interesting thought, isn't it, that in a world of free and fair trade where that "geopolitical incongruity" gets smoothed out, China winds up with an economy five times the size of the USA. Assuming, that is, that an imploding global ecosystem hasn't taken us all down.

And, then, of course, there's India....

posted by John 5:28 AM |

Damned good question

Finland is a leading example of the northern European view that a successful, competitive society should provide basic social services to all its citizens at affordable prices or at no cost at all. This isn't controversial in Finland; it is taken for granted. For a patriotic American like me, the Finns present a difficult challenge: If we Americans are so rich and so smart, why can't we treat our citizens as well as the Finns do?

Asked by Robert G. Kaiser in the Washington Post.

posted by John 1:26 AM |

Friday, August 19, 2005

Benediction from the ecumenical prayer group at Camp Casey.

From kos via Salon Table Talk,

"May God bless you with DISCOMFORT... At easy answers, half truths, and superficial relationships, So that you may live deep within your heart.

May God bless you with ANGER... At injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people, So that you may work for justice, freedom, and peace.

May God bless you with TEARS... To shed for those who suffer from pain, rejection, starvation and war. So that you may reach out your hand to comfort them And turn their pain into JOY.

An may God bless you with enough FOOLISHNESS... To believe that you can make a difference in this world, So that you can DO what others claim cannot be done.

Amen"

posted by John 11:35 PM |

New Chapter in the Have-They-No-Shame Book

Cindy Sheehan will not be breathing down Bush's neck for a few days. She is in LA at the bedside of her mother who has recently suffered a stroke. This brief reprieve is probably welcomed at Kiddy Kamp Krawford, where they'll be cooking up some new ways to smear her. Cuz if you can't beat her....

Ms. Sheehan's growing band of supporters are really riling up Bush supporters. You can tell by the dismissive way they talk about her cause. Her simple stand in Crawford, with growing media coverage, is coming to represent the increasingly vocal criticisms of the White House foreign policies. A candlelight vigil was held the other night at 1,627 sites with hundreds of thousands of citizens holding candles high, across the nation, so they could be counted as supporters of her efforts.

Ms. Sheehan's public call for a talk with our president over his repeated labeling of the invasion as a noble cause is also gaining the attention of the repug hit squad. Ann Coulter called the Casey Camp efforts "Stalinist" and admits to no grasp of what the words "moral" and "authority" could possibly mean in a sentence referring to the angry grief Cindy Sheehan feels. Others have thrown around the words "treason", "radical," and "terrorist supporter." She has been accused of a "psychological warfare campaign against her own country." A commentor on an anti-Cindy blog even had the audacity to construct a letter to her from her dead son (ostensibly in heaven) scolding her for her behavior and asking her to get over the loss of him!

Much speculation is being printed about her motivation, sanity, background and whether she knows she is being used. I suspect Ms. Sheehan knows very well the effects of her behavior. I believe that is the point. If anything personified the weakness of the anti-invasion crowd it is the lack of a single, strong face. Cindy is the face of this invasion's side effects. She and all the others like her on this entire planet are part of the reality of people killing each other.

Mr. Bush does not want to look at that reality. His continuing weaselness in avoiding a few minutes with her is getting difficult to justify. It's easier to attack her. Ms. Sheehan isn't helping matters by saying things like America "is not worth dying for." Her growing frustration is obviously showing through. But when I think of heros, I think of people who sacrifice the normalcy of a comfortable life, who put themselves out on a limb and who take a licking. They do this because they believe so strongly in the righteousness of their cause. America exists today because our Constitution inspired people to be heros. Whether Ms. Sheehan suceeds or fails in her quest, she is a hero for practicing democracy and standing up for her cause. The very least the President could do is be a man and speak to the woman who's son died because of his decision to invade Iraq.

Some of you might recognize my name from comments I've made here at BOB. I have been honored by an invitation to post my opinions. I have no sterling credentials for this other than my long-time love of history as a source of strength (how far we've come) and guidance (where will we go). A thousand experiences prevent me from ever being a Republican but terror over the current circumstances of America prevent me from feeling comfortable with the effectiveness of my Democratic party. I count on logic to see my way through an issue. Darwin is my god. I hope I can offer insight and inspire debate on current matters.

posted by Genevieve 7:52 PM |

Fox News: We Distort. You Deride.

Question: Why is Greta Van Susteren still in Aruba? Isn't the bigger story about the missing Coward in the Crawford Compound?

posted by Michael 5:32 PM |

Their Secret is Out

Here's a behind the scenes look at the Bush communications machine. Take a moment and be afraid, very afraid.

posted by Leftcoast 3:52 PM |

I Want to Believe

Headline this afternoon: "Frist backs 'intelligent design' teaching." On the scale of surprises, this ranks up there with sunrise and the Cubs tanking in August. What's interesting is this: Frist says, "I think today a pluralistic society should have access to a broad range of fact, of science, including faith." There's little doubt that faith is a part of science, if by that you mean a scientist having faith in an idea and working to determine whether it stands up to the scientific method. But what Frist means--that what you believe without evidence is just as valid scientifically as what the scientific method can prove with evidence--is nonsense. And if made a part of public school curricula, it will continue the institutionalization of stupidity as a valid lifestyle choice.

But if we're gonna go, let's go all the way. Adopting Frist's viewpoint on faith's role clears the way for many other alternate theories to be taught in public schools, each one just as intellectually plausible as intelligent design:

The Onion: "Evangelical scientists refute gravity with new 'Intelligent Falling' theory." (Blessings upon The Onion--it's a lot harder to do satire these days than it used to be.)

David Galbraith: "I have a new theory - Unintelligent Design, which is the same as Intelligent Design, except that the creator is either a moron or Satan. . . . This theory is more compatible with religious teachings in that it proposes that suffering happens to creatures made by the devil."

The Flying Spaghetti Monster: "May you be forever touched by His Noodly Appendage."

I'm thinking of cooking noodly appendages for dinner tonight, myself. With onions. Mmmmmm.

posted by jabartlett 3:36 PM |

Margaret Carlson... brie and chablis loser culture

Examining Leftcoast's dissection of Time wonkette Margaret Carlson's LA Times op-ed, it becomes perfectly clear why the MSM is genetically disposed to set up the Democratic Potty for failure. I'm no big fan of Fenton Public Relations. I left Rolling Stone long before "hippie capitalist" Fenton started his antics there. But, ni modo. Margaret seems to think that media pimps like Fenton, and organizations like MoveOn! are feh! schmutz! But they are part of the M/O if you want to win. And as we all know, Vince Lambardo (yeah, I know his name is Lombardi but Ward Just likes to call him Lambardo)says winning isn't everything... it's the only thing. The Dems think it is everything and can't get there. The Repiggos think it is the only thing and they know when to throw dirt in your face or hold or cut block or trip when the ball is on the one yard line. Margaret, in her op-ed, seems to think it is bad to amplify Ms Sheehan's cause with public relations because Fenton and MoveOn! don't give the issue "a soul." Tell that to the friends of Clear Channel Communications who created the Swift Boat campaign. Do you want to win? Or do you want to sip chablis, eat brie and gossip with Priscilla Painton and your other Time Inc. friends, Margaret, and worry about winning with "soul." The French can win the Five Nations Rugby Tournament with elan... but they are French and they would still think you have shit for brains after reading your op-ed.

posted by Groom 2:38 PM |

Friday Liberal Snarkiness!

Enjoy. S'funny!

posted by Blackdogred 1:50 PM |

Friday's Open Thread

"Our current political leaders would suffer greatly if either house of Congress changed hands in 2006, or if the presidency changed hands in 2008. The lids would come off all the simmering scandals, from the selling of the Iraq war to profiteering by politically connected companies. The Republicans will be strongly tempted to make sure that they win those elections by any means necessary. And everything we've seen suggests that they will give in to that temptation." - Paul Krugman, in today's New York Times.

posted by Jerry Bowles 1:00 PM |

China enters battle to build world's fastest supercomputer.
US refuses visa to top Chinese cryptographer.

Today's International Herald Tribune features a story by New York Times writer John Markoff.

A global race is under way to reach the next milestone in the performance of supercomputers, many times faster than today's most powerful machines. And beyond the customary rivalry in the field between the United States and Japan, there is a new entrant - China - eager to showcase its arrival as an economic powerhouse.

Meanwhile, security consultant Bruce Schneier writes on his blog that,

Chinese cryptographer Xiaoyun Wang, the woman who broke SHA-1 last year, was unable to attend the Crypto conference to present her paper on Monday. The U.S. government didn't give her a visa in time: On Monday, she was scheduled to explain her discovery in a keynote address to an international group of researchers meeting in California. But a stand-in had to take her place, because she was not able to enter the country. Indeed, only one of nine Chinese researchers who sought to enter the country for the conference received a visa in time to attend. Sadly, this is now common: Although none of the scientists were officially denied visas by the United States Consulate, officials at the State Department and National Academy of Sciences said this week that the situation was not uncommon. Lengthy delays in issuing visas are now routine, they said, particularly for those involved in sensitive scientific and technical fields.

It has long been common knowledge that the United States is increasingly dependent on foreign students, in particular those from China and India, to fill graduate degree programs in science and engineering. And it used to be that foreign scholars would flock to the USA in search of the latest research in their fields. But when I read stories like these, I wonder what the future holds.

posted by John 3:24 AM |

Tarek Aziz, c'mon down

The only Goy in Saddam's Ba'ath government is getting his get out of jail free card. And, according to his laywer, Badiar Aref, he didn't have to rat out Saddam. If the Junta thinks that provisioning Tarek with a lifetime supply of Montecristo #2s will incent him to put Iraq back together they've got another thing coming. He can live longer and get a better deal in Geneva or Vienna.

posted by Groom 2:23 AM |

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Line of the Day

From Andrew Sullivan's blog:

"...Sheehan has every right to her emotion, as far as I'm concerned, since a war that can't survive a mourning mother shouldn't be going on at all."

posted by Leftcoast 11:40 PM |

Deadender Update

Looks like Cheney is in the last throes.

posted by Jerry Bowles 9:53 PM |

More Tone Deafness

Margaret Carlson makes an interesting point her editorial today in LA Times. The more groups like Moveon and Fenton pile on to events like the Cindy Sheehan protest and the Terry Schiavo obscenity, the worse things seem to appear for the Dems and progressives. To Carlson's point, Sheehan had so much more power when she said things straight from the heart, not through the looking glass of well-meaning but brain adddled handlers from Moveon and Fenton. To quote Carlson:

"She (Sheehan) has gone from a grieving mother with a claim on our hearts to a movement spokesperson clamoring for our attention. She's been joined by a variety of groups, among them Moveon.org and its public relations firm, Fenton Communications, and Democracy for America.

"Even if we assume those folks are there to help, that doesn't mean they don't bring their own agendas and a desire to bask in her reflected light. I see a woman whose life has fallen apart. They see a vehicle to latch on to and a rube to be media-coached. Every day, as her entourage has grown, the authenticity that won her prominence has diminished."

When is the Left going to learn that not everything is a candle-lit pr opportunity?

Every time I hear that Moveon is supporting an independent like Sheehan, I cringe. That's because no one on the Left seems to get it. The mere appearance of Moveon at an event immediately marginalizes it and gives blowhards like Rush and O'Reilly fuel for their whacko conspiratorial garbage.

The Dems have congenital foot-in-mouth disease, an uncanny knack of pulling defeat from victory, time and time again. Until the Left understands the difference between being right and being effective, it's going trip over its good intentions. Poll after poll shows the country supports Dem positions by good margins. But the electorate doesn't like them in the polls that count--the ones taken on election day. Until the Dems and the groups that support them understand what it means to communicate in this media crazed, corporate controlled marketing culture, they will win on the facts and continue to lose the seats of power.

posted by Leftcoast 4:00 PM |

Third Parties

Listen to this audio article from today's Morning Edition on NPR. Says the lead: "Progressives are taking a page from conservative politicians and are creating and supporting progressive think tanks, training young activists, and building a progressive network."

This dovetails nicely with some of the debates that've been going on over the months but specifically yesterday and today here on BoB re: the need for a third party, the legacy of the Clinton administration (from Left and Right views), and the leadership (or lack thereof) in the Democratic Party and its agenda (or lack thereof).

Some points/questions:

First, I welcome the effort by the progressives. A good idea, eh?

Second, as the audio article declares, one problem with the Democratic Party as it currently operates is that is seems to be focusing solely on the '06 midterms, and it is this very short term outlook which works against a long term winning strategy. The implication is that Conservatives were willing to lose elections to build a movement; I don't know if I buy that or not, but I do think it is now an established meme - that Republicans stand for something and Democrats stand for nothing. But the question is valid: what price focusing on just the next election? Is it worth embracing positions that pay off in the future at the risk of losing elections in the near term? I don't think it's one or the other, necessarily, but obviously there's that debate in real time in real circles of Democratic strategists.

Third, it seems that some of the folk intrigued by the third party option would probably disagree vociferously with each other at platform writing time. Perhaps there are more similarities than not between progressives and libertarians - and both agreements and disagreements should be explored if both agree that Bush Republicanism needs to be defeated - but I can imagine third, fourth, fifth parties once the schisms in the third party erupt. Thoughts? Thread away.

posted by Blackdogred 3:35 PM |

Tonkin, Mon Amour... lessons unlearned

This month marks the 41st anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Based on the cockamamie testimony of Defense Secretary Robert "Edsel" McNamara and Dean "the Secretary of State from Taiwan" Rusk, Tonkin was, ostensibly the justification for entering into an undeclared war with North Vietnam. Only Ernest Gruening of Alaska and former Repug Wayne Morse of Oregon voted against it. Liberal senators like George McGovern, Gene McCarthy, Paul Douglas, Abe Ribicoff, yes, and even Pierre Salinger (he was a senator too) bought in to the big lie. The resolution was subsequently "voted down" in 1971. In 1972, while Watergate was unfolding, Deputy NSA Director Louis Tordella revealed that Pentagon wise man McNamara did lie, misspeak, misrepresent information to Congress that triggered passage of the resolution. McNamara later admitted that the US may have "provoked" the second attack (the one Congress reacted to) but that when he testified before Congress he did what he thought was the right thing.

Don't think we will see Hilla the Hun or Crapout Kerry standing next to Cindy admitting Iraq was a big lie anytime soon. The schlep of 08 Dem presidential cannonfodder are too busy trying to figure out how to be the "Moral Minority." No diff between Tonkin and Saddam's WMD, Saddam's Al Qaedea connection, yellowcake from Niger... ni modo... fatcat Dems are making too much moolah from the "war of lies." See Sister Feinstein and Sister Harmon for details.

posted by Groom 3:29 PM |

Turki Bush... enter stage right

Our workout president is hooked on "god's morphine" (endorphins). How long will it take for him to invite new Saudi broom Prince Turki down to the ranch for a photo op and some woodchopping? God only knows. After all, as Saudi intel czar, Turki did fund Osama's "pro US" activities against the Roos in Afsmackistan. And the money just continued rollin' in. The toughest thing for Turki will be to hold back each time Shrubby proves himself as a total lightweight.

posted by Groom 3:10 PM |

Reality. What a Concept!

An uncommon amount of common sense floating around out there this morning. Gideon Rose, managing editor of Foreign Affairs magazine, weighs in with some reflections on the constant, and peculiarly American, clash between foreign policy visionaries and foreign policy realists. A sample:

The younger Mr. Bush talked a realist game on the campaign trail but morphed into the grandest of all visionaries after the attacks of Sept. 11. Following a quick success in Afghanistan, however, over the next few years all three pillars of the supposedly revolutionary Bush doctrine - pre-emption, regime change, and a clear division between those "with us" and "against us"- came crashing down.

Why did they collapse:

Administration supporters either deny it has occurred or argue that it constitutes only a slight change in tactics, appropriate to a world already improved by the administration's earlier pugnacity. Journalists and administration critics, meanwhile, generally attribute it to haphazard changes in politics or personnel, such as declining poll numbers or the brilliant performance of Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State.

The real story is simpler: the Bush doctrine has collapsed, and the administration has consequently embraced realism, American foreign policy's perennial hangover cure.

As Rose notes, only the President and the Vice President don't seem to have gotten the memo.

posted by Jerry Bowles 11:27 AM |

Report from Occupied-America

Howard Zinn, professor emeritus of political science at Boston University, in the Guardian:

I wake up in the morning, read the newspaper, and feel that we are an occupied country, that some alien group has taken over. I wake up thinking: the US is in the grip of a president surrounded by thugs in suits who care nothing about human life abroad or here, who care nothing about freedom abroad or here, who care nothing about what happens to the earth, the water or the air, or what kind of world will be inherited by our children and grandchildren.

posted by Jerry Bowles 8:08 AM |

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Beneath the Dirty Hood

With Bush’s approval ratings nearing freezing temperature and the war in Iraq all but over-- except for the dying and the coming rule of the mullahs--the war party is in messy retreat as more and more sensible Americans realize that one-party rule is less fun than they thought it was going to be. This unexpected turn-of-events has many concerned Democrats beginning to wonder whether they will once again be able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2006 and 2008. They needn’t worry. Unless some unknown savior rises from these streets, I’m betting they can pull it off.

Democrats will lose, again, not because a majority of Americans don’t want change (they do) but because they have no change to offer. Like John Kerry, the entrenched Clinton-Biden-Lieberman branch of the Democratic party cannot now, credibly, admit that they think the war was a mistake because they voted for it in a craven attempt to not be labeled “soft” on terrorism and to burnish their bonafides as strong on defense. Since it’s never cool to admit that you made a mistake, they are left with the dubious argument that the war was a good idea but that the Bush administration botched it.

Trouble is, a majority of Americans now realize that Iraq was a major blunder from which no good is ever going to come. That chorus gets louder by the week. By this time next year, Bush may become the first president to break the 20% approval mark.

And yet, does anyone really believe that Hillary Clinton is going to say that she made a mistake in supporting a war that was clearly a sideshow from the war on terror from day one?

Do we believe that the “Democratic agenda” Hillary is putting together for the DLC will disavow the doctrine of preemption or say that torture is always wrong or that the President does not have an absolute right to hold suspects forever without charges or trial or any of the other abuses of power that the Bush administration has made standard operating procedure?

Do we believe it will say that the rich and the corporate should pay more taxes because they can and that every American should have health care and insurance and that creating decent jobs in America is a higher priority than tax breaks for corporations?

Will it call for an end to “soft” money and influence-peddling? Will it call for laws that prohibit redistricting by either party for political gain? Will it call for a standing, independent ethics body to monitor the actions of our Congresspeople? Will Hillary’s agenda call for a national effort to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by, say, 10 percent over 10 years?

Don’t hold your breath. The decisive battle in the next two elections will not be between Democrats and Republicans but between the Dean progressive, grassroots centrists and the permanent Beltway establishment for the soul of the Democrat Party. We have nothing to lose, except everything.

posted by Jerry Bowles 11:46 AM |

What makes Shrubby run?

When you exercise as much as he does, your body produces "God's morphine" otherwise known as endorphins. Everybody else can buy and use the drugs that are cultivated and produced by our allies, with our support.

posted by Groom 6:41 AM |

Approaching Flashpoint?

In today's Washington Post, a story entitled "U.S. Policy on 'Axis of Evil' Suffers Spate Of Setbacks" concludes,

As the conflict drags on, some analysts predict that resolution will elude the president who vowed not to wait nearly a full term ago.

"I think in five years we'll be in the same stalemate we are now at best," said Clifford Kupchan, who studies Iran at the Eurasia Group. "Neither Pyongyang nor Tehran wants to pick a fight with the 800-pound gorilla because they'll lose. On the other hand, the 800-pound gorilla doesn't have a lot of options right now, either."

On the other hand, if Doug Thompson at Capital Hill Blue is right and the President is a frustrated, dry-drunk, nutcase, we could be in for something really nasty, my friends. Let's all be praying now that he won't be saying "bring it on" to Armageddon.

posted by John 6:25 AM |

Si Senor!

Deming, New Mexico is the location of one of my favorite uh... New Mexican, er a, Mexican, Hispanic, or Mexican-American or Tex-Mex restaurants. Show up at Si Senor! at breakfast time and you'll see the New Mexico State police, the U.S. Border Patrol, local law enforcement and maybe a few "illegals" (unknown illegals as opposed known illegals, of course) wolfing down some killer huevos rancheros or maybe just some ham and eggs if their innards can't deal with salsas like pyromaniac, exterminator and hell on the red. These front line responders are more concerned with breakfast that who cuts the "war on terror" pork. And if you'd ask them you'd probably learn that save for the stretch of Arizona border that runs from Sierra Vista to Yuma, the real "action" is in Texas. You don't hear Governor Rod Perry ragging about not getting any federal money. He's a Republican. He's got his Texas Rangers and their militia pals and neo-nazis and nearly a thousand miles of border to deal with. GOP Gauleiter Schwarzenegger in California isn't complaining either.

Once again, the Dems show their penchant for bad timing. Shrub for now remains bulletproof on this issue. Chief Thunder Thud Richardson and Janet Napolitano should have complained at last year's Democratic National Convention, making Shrub being soft on border security into a campaign issue. But, ni modo. Simpled down, the intelligence tools required for tracking illegals, narcos and terrorist suspects are not the same. The irony here is that the world's largest narco intelligence (El Paso, New Mexico) and electronic eavesdropping centers (Ft Huachuca, AZ) are right in the middle of the "border zone" that Thud and Napolitano are ragging about. Of course the uniform wearing members of the US armed forces can't be seen doing squat. If they did, well... the Junta would be accused of posse comitatus. And if that happened you bet that Old Lady Benador would be calling Wes Clark's number with a nice big network TV consulting contract. More hay-ron (heroin) moves through the town of Espanola, just 20 miles north of the New Mexico governor's mansion, than what travels across the border between El Paso and Tucson. It was lidat when then 2nd Dist. Congressman Richardson was helping his old pal Charlie Wilson and do funny stuff in Afsmackistan. Cost of busride from Matamoros, MX to Houston TX $25. Cost of one toke of crack or smoking hay-ron... less than a #4 value meal. For everything else, there's Master Card.

posted by Groom 5:59 AM |

Troubled Borders

Today's New York Times carries the following story.

DEMING, N.M., Aug. 16 - Citing a surge of smuggling and violence along the border, the governors of Arizona and New Mexico have issued state of emergency declarations in recent days, faulting the American and Mexican authorities and freeing up federal and state money to strengthen local law enforcement efforts.

"Both federal governments let us down - there doesn't seem to be any sense of urgency," Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona, a Democrat seeking re-election next year, said in a telephone interview Tuesday, a day after declaring a state of emergency in four border counties. Ms. Napolitano said that "ranchers are at their wits' end" with smuggled immigrants who damage their property and livestock.

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, a Democrat who is also seeking re-election and who may make a bid for the White House in 2008, issued an emergency declaration on Friday, after touring this turbulent border region where a police chief reported being shot at last week.

"This is an act of desperation," Mr. Richardson said in a separate phone interview, adding that border problems had gone beyond illegal immigration to violent crime. He said the action would provide resources "until Congress and the feds deal with this issue," but added, "it is not a political move - I never mentioned the Bush administration."

Am I surprised? Not a bit. Stephen Flynn, the author of America the Vulnerable explains,

The rush to harden what historically has been essentially an open border has spawned an army of both legal and illegal intermediaries to work around the delays and hassles. Also, an environment that retards economic growth and integration will undermine the political foundation for closer collaboration among public authorities and the private sector, on both sides of the border. The result is a border region that has become more difficult to police and one which terrorists could readily exploit to get their operatives into the United States.

The war on immigrants is like the war on drugs. It creates the conditions that make smuggling a lucrative business. Underfunded first responders in the border patrol and immigration services are natural targets for bribery and stretched so thin that they are hardly more than a porous membrane easily pierced by anyone with the smarts, startup capital, and willingness to take illegal risks.

And, oh yes, while Bill Richardson may not want to score political points, I can't help noting that this marvelous strategy is brought to us by the same people who think that they are going to seal the borders of Iraq. Oh, yeah. Real soon now.

posted by John 2:48 AM |

Operation Enduring Chutzpah

Not only are they out to keep the rest of the Abu Ghraib torture photos secret, they're even trying to keep their legal arguments for doing so secret, as well. So far, New York District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein isn't buying into their "double-super-secret background argument" argument. But on the underlying issue of deep-sixing the torture photos forever, they think they've found (in the Freedom Of Information Act, yet!) a likely loophole:

The FOIA statute being used by the DOD to seal the abuse documents as well as the reasons for the sealing has never before been used by a government agency as a means by which to classify government misdoings. The statute of the FOIA, section 552(b) of Title 5 USC, subparagraph (f), has only ever been used by law enforcement and only in special circumstances and is defined as follows:

"records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes are exempt from production-but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information - could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individuals."

The DOD argues that the release of photographs and other evidence of torture and abuse falls under subparagraph (f).

The classic definition of chutzpah is the guy who murders both his parents, then throws himself on the mercy of the court, on the grounds that he's an orphan. Up until now, the federal government has argued: (a) that it is exempt from the Geneva Conventions; (b) that Gitmo is outside the jurisdiction of the federal courts; (c) that we were permitted to declare preemptive war on Iraq, without UN approval, in order to "enforce" UN resolutions; (d) that "enemy combatants" may be held forever without trial at the diktat of the President alone; and (e) that Americans (both military and civilian) are not subject to prosecution in the International Court of Justice for anything they may do during "wartime."

And now -- they say -- they get to keep all their lawless little atrocities at their lawless little compounds during their lawless little war secret, because they were doing it "for law enforcement purposes."

I just hope, when they make that argument before Judge Hellerstein, that he rips them a new asshole. And I hope the cameras are rolling when he does it.

posted by Michael 1:12 AM |

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

War Comes Home

Something clearly has changed in the current political matrix. Suddenly, that complete conservative revolution that would last decades doesn't look like quite the lock it did say, oh, nine months ago. To me, and to some of us on the Left, it never was a certainty, so the earthquakes rattling the political landscape, while by no means cause for celebration, are not surprising: we've been saying for years that this administration is going to go down as the most corrupt, incompetent, dishonest administration in American history. It was a matter of time before either Bushco jumped the shark and/or the majority of Americans not belonging to the Church of Holy Republicanism wised up to Bushco's immoral agenda and amoral tactics.

Which doesn't mean squat, yet, which is why, for better or worse, politically, most Democrats and establishment Liberals are making themselves as invisible as possible as Bushco gives all appearances of imploding. The CIA hates the White House hates the FBI hates the Pentagon; gas prices head for $3 a gallon, the housing bubble's about to burst, what new jobs are being created are mostly menial; death death death death in Iraq; Rove, Novak, Scooter, Cheney, Ashcroft, Fitzgerald. Is getting the hell out of the way of a car wreck good politics? I'm not sure it's good politics, but it's not bad politics.

What's changed? The wretched Right, always ready for a slur, a vicious shitslinging, character assassination, all based on a moral calculus that anything can be said and done if it serves the greater purpose of their power, is freaking out over the sudden realization that they do not control the universe. They've brought out the nuclear slime to take down a grieving mother outside of Crawford Texas, used weaponry on her that defeated a Democratic presidential nominee. She's still standing. And the Right is going batshit. Here's one thing that's changed: the Right is scared for the first time in a long time; for the first time in a long time it's occuring to them that they may not rule into eternity no matter how entitled to rule they think they are.

Do I think this will all pass? I freely admit to so loathing the Talibamericans and the corporate Republicans and anything and everything about Bushco and its lemminglike supporters as to render any prediction I make both optimistic by wishful thinking and pessimistic by recent experience, and beyond that I simply don't know.

I will predict this: crackers like this dope who fired a shotgun over the head of Cindy Sheehan and this dope who drove a pick-up through her campsite, while not dispatched from GOP Headquarters, are going to go positively Timothy McVeigh before, during, and after Democrats regain power. The Right has achieved its power by a deliberate, concerted, patient, inexorable program of demonization and hatred and fear of anyone or thing other than itself. Its architects and generals are not going to abandon their tactics, they're going to ratchet them up. The true believing footsoldiers? They're not going to surrender without, literally, a fight.

It's entirely probable that the Right's propaganda will succeed in beating down the whole Sheehan controversy by making her, not Bushco's failure, the issue. But it's possible that the ultimate lesson to most Americans from the Cindy Sheehan saga is the realization of just who and what the Right is and what it is capable of to keep power. It may be different tomorrow, but that's what's changed, at least for today, in the political matrix.

UPDATE: Rush fantasizes about Republicans being able to deport any American that disagrees with Rush. What if they won't leave peacefully, Rush?

posted by Blackdogred 4:14 PM |

One More From The "Soft Bigotry Of Low Expectations" Administration

WASHINGTON - Infants have been stopped from boarding planes at airports throughout the U.S. because their names are the same as or similar to those of possible terrorists on the government's "no-fly list."

It sounds like a joke, but it's not funny to parents who miss flights while scrambling to have babies' passports and other documents faxed.

Ingrid Sanden's 1-year-old daughter was stopped in Phoenix before boarding a flight home to Washington at Thanksgiving.

The government's lists of people who are either barred from flying or require extra scrutiny before being allowed to board airplanes grew markedly since the Sept. 11 attacks. Critics including the American Civil Liberties Union say the government doesn't provide enough information about the people on the lists, so innocent passengers can be caught up in the security sweep if they happen to have the same name as someone on the lists.

Because, of course, the one fixed, immutable characteristic a terrorist could never change about himself is his name . . .

posted by Michael 3:21 PM |

Mostly French fries

Hassan Tannir, a Colombian of Lebanese extraction founded West Caribbean Airways in 1988 as a cargo airline operating off of a small island. He sold the mostly cargo carrier to a syndicate of businessmen from Medellin. If anybody knows what kind of cargo Hassan's airline carried it would be our man in Bogota, Alvaro Uribe, and his daddy, who is wanted in the US on drug trafficking charges. But, ni modo... Cargo operators transitioning to niche market passenger carriers face business and technical challenges. Ruling out any conspiracy theory, perhaps that's what happened in this case. I can think of US carriers who have operated out of places like, uh, Sparta, TN that have had planes go down just like this one. Most of the 155 who died in the crash of the West Caribbean McDonnell-Douglas MD-182 were French citizens. Go figure.

posted by Groom 12:47 PM |

Washington Post Pulls Its Head From Its Ass, Discovers Huge Country Lying Due West Of Beltway Not So Keen On Iraq War

The Washington Post announced tonight that it will cease its co-sponsorship of the Pentagon-organized Freedom Walk next month. The paper's involvement had drawn heat from within and outside the paper, with a guild committee today calling for the link to end.

The newspaper told the Department of Defense that it was pulling back on its offer of free ads for the event--a march up the mall ending with a concert by pro-war country singer Clint Black.

"As it appears that this event could become politicized, The Post has decided to honor the Washington area victims of 9/11 by making a contribution directly to the Pentagon Memorial Fund," said Eric Grant, a Post spokesman. "It is The Post's practice to avoid activities that might lead readers to question the objectivity of The Post's news coverage."

"Could become" politicized? Gee, d'ya think?

No, if I may borrow a phrase from the anti-choice crowd, this event was politicized "from the moment of conception."

posted by Michael 10:26 AM |

Over the Cuckoo's Nest?

Incredible (but oddly credible) stuff from Capitol Hill Blue:

Buy beleaguered, overworked White House aides enough drinks and they tell a sordid tale of an administration under siege, beset by bitter staff infighting and led by a man whose mood swings suggest paranoia bordering on schizophrenia...The President of the United States is out of control. How long can the ship of state continue to sail with a madman at the helm?

posted by Jerry Bowles 8:56 AM |

What did John Roberts really do as White House counsel?

Just look at the job description. A not so subtle reminder to Reid, Pelosi and the MSM that the documents released by the Junta so fair ain't squat. John Roberts did everything for Ronald Reagan that John Dean and Fred Fielding (Johnny's boss on Ronnie's watch)did for Richard Nixon. Add in Iran-Contra and helping convicted thugs Abrams and North... he probably did more. From a legal standpoint, since most of us didn't take high school civics and 40 percent of us are functionally illiterate, the office of the White House counsel is the president's "bodyguard"... it does the dirty work, keeping the boss out of legal trouble with all US government agencies and more. How political is it...look at the churn of White House counsels on Bill and Hill's watch. LBJ didn't even have one. Ironically former White House counsel Fred Fielding is still doing it. As a Repig member of the partisan Kissinger... oops Kean Commission, Fred it appears, fed questions designed to discreditformer terrorism tsar Richard Clark (and protect the Junta) to fellow commissioners during the "hearings." Did "Wonder Boy" Roberts provide his mentor any pro bono "backroom" advice on that?

posted by Groom 7:11 AM |

Monday, August 15, 2005

The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has a Launch Date

And it's August 23, 1971. Then corporate attorney and future Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, drafted this strategic gem in reaction to the cataclysmic '60s. It is a roadmap and it's chilling. The only good things about it are a) we're not crazy, there really is a conspiracy, and b) here's a blueprint for the Dems if they ever decide to pull their heads out of their collective asses and get serious about restoring what's great about America.

I'm sure this document has been "improved" upon, most likely made more virulent and extreme than even Powell ever imagined. A must-read.

posted by Leftcoast 8:44 PM |

Yes, Matt. Isn't It Pretty to Think So.

Have you noticed that Drudge's news is becoming increasingly...ur...local? He's been reporting for a couple of hours now that the Iraqis have agreed on a draft consitution but the New York Times, the Washington Post and everyone else says the deadline has been extended for a week.

posted by Jerry Bowles 5:55 PM |

The Hotline

Check out The Hotline, a splendid roundup of blogules from the left and right, published by the National Journal.

posted by Jerry Bowles 4:48 PM |

The Cheerios Theory of Government

Americans want their president in shape and "in a position to make good, crisp decisions." Our Leader, as he prepared for a bike ride yesterday.

posted by Jerry Bowles 4:24 PM |

Single souvlaki theory or grassy Parthenon

No love lost between Orthodox Greeks and Muslim Turks, particularly when it comes to the real estate known as Cyprus. Terrorism has already been ruled out on this cryogenics in the sky caper. The flight recorder is in very bad shape according to Greek "experts" (don't think the boys over at Schlumberger believe that, do you?) so bad that it is not lilkely to reveal anything about what really happened. Maybe its time to bring in the real cover up pros like Jim Kallstrom and Bush family retainer "Dial M" for Mueller. Keep in mind that the pilot cabin receives about 80 times the amount of oxygen than passengers get and initial reports out of Athens indicated that jets that scrambled saw people, ostensibly from the cabin trying to gain control of the plane. And just think, Condi met with Greek Cypriot leaders in July and the situation was supposed to be under control.

posted by Groom 2:23 PM |

And now, some insight from our trolls:

"Hazings at colleges and universities are far worse than anything that went on at Abu Ghraib."

"Congress has toured these sights, people have been prosecuted."

"Here we go again, the Liberals would rather support the Terrorists than condemn them."

"This is old news; you're beating a dead horse into the ground."

posted by Blackdogred 11:08 AM |

Today's Open Thread

The war in Iraq is over. How badly did we lose?

posted by Jerry Bowles 8:47 AM |

Another space cadet

Look who else dressed up for the "end of hostilities" mediafest. Jeez, Condi, if you weren't a Cleveland Browns fan I'd say a lot worse things about you.

posted by Groom 12:21 AM |

Sunday, August 14, 2005

End of hostilities toward Social Security?

This is the photo the Washington Post ran alongside their coverage of our leader "lauding the 70th birthday" of Social Security. The flightsuit swagger... the Hitleresque wave...the caption... "public opinion of President Bush is standing lower than that of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton at this point in their second term in the White House." My value bet is that impeachment hearings will begin during the Spring of 2007. If you want a second opinion surf over to Frank Rosenthal.(AP photo credit: Denis Poroy)

posted by Groom 9:10 PM |

News Bulletin: Bush Won't Waste His Beautiful Mind On Cindy Sheehan

CRAWFORD, Texas - President Bush, noting that lots of people want to talk to the president and "it's also important for me to go on with my life," on Saturday defended his decision not to meet with the grieving mom of a soldier killed in Iraq.

Bush said he is aware of the anti-war sentiments of Cindy Sheehan and others who have joined her protest near the Bush ranch.

"But," he added, "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life."

* * * * *

I feel how weak and fruitless must be any words of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from the tendering to you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the Loved and Lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.

-- Abraham Lincoln, Letter to a Gold Star Mother

posted by Michael 7:58 PM |

Why We Have To End This War -- "The Left" Won't Do It For Us

from digby, at Hullabaloo:

. . . I'm pretty sure that Cindy Sheehan hasn't been guided or exploited by anyone in her quest. "The left," if you're talking about organizations, can't get it up to do anything that effective. Believe me, the Democrats would have peed their pants at the idea of sending a woman to Crawford to demand to see the president. It's so awfully unseemly you know. Someone might get upset. Besides it isn't manly and we want ever so much to be super-duper manly.

In fact, last year at this time, if you'll recall, Max Cleland went down to Crawford and wheeled his chair right up to the gate. The Democrats got all nervous that it was too ... undignified. Max was getting a little bit shrill, you see, and looked like he might be getting ready to force the secret service to push him off the property in his wheelchair. How indelicate.

No, this was a grassroots move started by one individual who felt strongly enough to put herself on the line. No leftwing group could have ever orchestrated anything this successful.

posted by Michael 11:41 AM |

When Shrub dumps, Tony Bliar flushes

Rebounding off of Jerry's post, the Scotsman reveals that the Cousins are "on message" lowering expectations about Iraq. Why does Shrub remain "bulletproof" when he can't get the right kind of body armor to his ("support the") troops in the theatre of operations? If Slick Clinton had fucked up that bad Al Gore would be preznit and Willie'd be Commissioner of Baseball by now.

posted by Groom 11:33 AM |

Frank Rich says it like it is

LIKE the Japanese soldier marooned on an island for years after V-J Day, President Bush may be the last person in the country to learn that for Americans, if not Iraqis, the war in Iraq is over. "We will stay the course," he insistently tells us from his Texas ranch. What do you mean we, white man?

A president can't stay the course when his own citizens (let alone his own allies) won't stay with him. The approval rate for Mr. Bush's handling of Iraq plunged to 34 percent in last weekend's Newsweek poll - a match for the 32 percent that approved L.B.J.'s handling of Vietnam in early March 1968. (The two presidents' overall approval ratings have also converged: 41 percent for Johnson then, 42 percent for Bush now.) On March 31, 1968, as L.B.J.'s ratings plummeted further, he announced he wouldn't seek re-election, commencing our long extrication from that quagmire.

The trouble is, of course, that Bush will stay utterly, blindly pigheaded to the end.

posted by John 5:36 AM |

Where Have You Gone, My Little Neocons?

From today's Washington Post:

The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

No WMDs, no al Quaeda link, no Iraq oil boom, and now, insult to injury, no democracy. A secular country with relative freedom for women is about to become an Islamic Republic and breeding ground for future terrorists. How can any rational person continue to justify this diaster? Where are the principled Republicans and Conservatives?

Face it, suckers. You've been had.

posted by Jerry Bowles 12:02 AM |