 |
Monday, January 26, 2004 |
The AP reported today that a federal judge ruled in favor of David Cole (who argued the case) and his client, the plaintiffs, the Humanitarian Law Project, stating that part of the US Patriot Act is unconstituational. In question was the part of the act that declares that individuals or groups cannot offer expert advice or assistance to designated terrorist organizations.
In the case of the Humanitarian Law Project, they (five groups and two US citizens) were "seeking to provide support for lawful, nonviolent activities on behalf of Kurdish refugees in Turkey" by advising them to seek peaceful resolution through a Kurdish campaign for self-determination in Turkey."
For this, the plaintiffs were being threatened with 15 years in prison, if convicted.
The judge's ruling said the law, as written, does not differentiate between permissible advice on violence and encouraging the use of peaceful, nonviolent means to achieve goals.
"The USA Patriot Act places no limitation on the type of expert advice and assistance which is prohibited and instead bans the provision of all expert advice and assistance regardless of its nature," the judge said.
10:05:24 PM  | |
|
|
I know that Eschaton and Absit Invidia have posted regarding this topic but what a surprise. Newsweek's Poll on the 24th reveals that if the vote were held today, Kerry would beat Bush 49% to 46% and Clark would lose to Bush by only 1% at 48% to 47%. Rove, Bush, and Company can't be happy about that poll, to say the least. Just 45 or so days after the US pulled Saddam from a spider hole. And not even a full week had gone by from the State of the Union Address.
I found a good article on the latest polls, written by Ruy Teixeira and published at TomPaine.com. It is called "State of Opinion." In the article, Teixeira talks about the latest polls by the Public Opinion Watch and discusses the latest poll results and the spin being placed on them, especially in regards to the CBS News/New York Times polls. Though the op-ed article in The New York Times yesterday "All the President's Numbers" states that Bush's numbers indicate that "Bush is in good shape politically relative to many of his predecessors, " Ruy explains, the actual results are to the contrary. Consider these paragraphs:
Bush's overall approval rating in the new CBS News poll is down to 50 percent, which is lower than he was before Saddam's capture (52 percent)--in fact, it matches the lowest figure recorded for Bush during his presidency.
His approval rating on the economy, which went up from a net -7 (44 percent
approval/51 percent disapproval) to a net +6 (49 percent approval/43 percent disapproval) practically overnight with Saddam's capture has now returned to exactly where it was before: 44/51. His approval rating on Iraq, which skied from 45 percent to 59 percent with Saddam's capture has now dropped back to 48 percent. Similarly, his approval rating on foreign policy, which had bounced from 45 percent to 52 percent, is now back down to 47 percent.
...Pretty much every public poll for the last month, including the Pew Research Center poll which Kohut runs and from which he got the 56 percent approval rating used in the graphic, shows Bush's approval rating falling steadily from the levels attained right after Saddam's capture.
It's bad enough that the press overplays it whenever Bush gets a bounce. But couldn't they please just report the facts--instead of asserting the exact opposite--when the data unequivocally show his approval ratings are falling? It doesn't seem like too much to ask.
Especially since the new Gallup poll has Bush's approval rating down to 53 percent, a six-point drop from their last poll and two points below where he was in this poll before Saddam was captured.
9:35:34 PM | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
