Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Harry Reid's Statement Not just another Chuck, Dick and Harry   One can only assume that since taking over leadership of the Senate Democrats, Harry Reid has been employing Muhammad Ali's "Rope-a-Dope" strategy, letting the Republicans rage about the ring like rabid wolverines until they tire themselves out, and then come in for the kill. If this wasn't the knockout punch, at the very least Frist and Co. are staggered.  Here is what Reid had to say today, as quoted on TPM Cafe: "This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush.  Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years.   "This indictment raises very serious charges.  It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant.   "The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm's way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress.   "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about:  how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions. "As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration.  This cloud is further darkened by the Administration's mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies. "And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these issues. "Let's take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr. President.  The record will show that within hours of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq.   "The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for attacking Iraq. "There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war.  Administration statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts. "The American people were warned time and again by the President, the Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities.  The Vice President said Iraq "has reconstituted its nuclear weapons." Playing upon the fears of Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons. "Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate.  But more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false.   "The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda.  The Vice President told the American people, "We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the Al Qaeda organization." "The Administration's assertions on this score have been totally discredited.  But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.   "What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration's manipulation of intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq?  Basically nothing.   Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight?  No.  Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions?  No.  Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior?  No. "Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just Iraq.  We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal.  We see it with respect to Katrina.  And we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration. "Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security.  They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why.   "There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions.  Time and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course. "For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end.  When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to an end.  When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged conclusions about Saddam's WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled out his inspectors.  When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration's claims of Saddam's nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post.  When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent. "Given this Administration's pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, what has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress?  Again, absolutely nothing.  And with their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq.   "This behavior is unacceptable.  The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn.  More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives.  Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone - the fourth deadliest month since the war began.  More than 15,000 have been wounded.  More than 150,000 remain in harm's way.  Enormous sacrifices have been and continue to be made.   "The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice.  For example, 40 Senate Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President asking four basic questions about the Administration's Iraq policy and received a four sentence answer in response.  These Senators and the American people deserve better.     "They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war.  Key questions that need to be answered include: How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq? Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore? How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people? What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics? How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions? Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements? "Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not.  Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment.  Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.   "At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security.  If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions.  Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.   "We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee's annual intelligence authorization report.  Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much.  It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests." 11:55:54 PM    comment []

Korea's Triumph, Our Disgrace Next time your "patriotic" friend, neighbor, relative, co-worker, etc. puffs out his or her chest and declares this the "greatest country in the world", remind him or her that, thanks to a small minority of religious fascists and their enablers in the Bush administration, the United States of America is becoming what no one ever thought it could be: scientifically second-rate.  And no amount of preening and boasting is going to change that. Of course the denizens of our vast suburban wasteland, living in smug complacency, apathy and ignorance, content to vote Republican as long as their taxes stay low and their neighborhoods stay white, never ponder the consequences of their actions until they creep through their perfectly-landscaped backyard, quietly slide open their patio door, steal into their master bedroom and rip out their heart and lungs. Of course, by then they're pretty much brainwashed into believing that it's "God's will". Or somebody else's fault.         S. Korean Stem Cell Center Draws Hundreds - - - - - - - - - - - - By KWANG-TAE KIM Associated Press Writer November 01,2005 | SEOUL, South Korea -- For the past few decades, Kim Young-ja lived with the thought she would never walk again. Seeking what she sees as a chance for a cure, the 55-year-old South Korean joined hundreds of patients who applied Tuesday to take part in research with a worldwide stem cell center that hopes to cure hard-to-treat diseases with its trailblazing cloning technology. "I spent the past 22 years in tears and I had no hope," said Kim, who was paralyzed from the chest down in a 1983 traffic accident with a drunken driver. She is among thousands of people volunteering skin cells to help launch a global center that will grow embryonic stem cells for research. The World Stem Cell Hub, led by cloning pioneer Hwang Woo-suk, aims to one day help those suffering from ailments such as Parkinson's disease or damaged spinal cords and who are willing to offer skin tissue for research. But the scientists caution that actual treatment for such ailments is years away. Despite the high hopes of those volunteering for research, scientists don't even know for sure if such future treatments will work. The Seoul-based research hub opened Oct. 19 with the aim of serving as the main center for providing scientists around the world with embryonic stem cells. They are master cells that can grow into all kinds of tissues in the body and are seen as a potential source of replacement tissue for people with a variety of ailments. On Tuesday, the first day it accepted applications from patients to participate in research, the center received 3,500 responses from patients via the Internet, telephone and fax or in person, said Lim Jong-pil, an official at the center at Seoul National University Hospital. During the day, the center's Web site was inaccessible for hours due to a rush of applications. No foreigners applied, although the center is open to them, Lim said. The center, which will have its first branches in Britain and the United States, is expected to provide other scientists room to get around government restrictions on research into embryonic stem cells. Hwang has garnered worldwide attention for cloning the world's first human embryos and extracting stem cells from them. In May, he announced he had created the world's first embryonic stem cells that genetically match injured or sick patients -- a major step in the quest to grow patients' own replacement tissue to treat diseases. Instead of using embryos left over from in vitro fertilization, the Koreans create them from cloned skin cells. That process is favored by some scientists because cloning can create a perfect tissue match for patients. Critics say such research condones creating human life for laboratory use. Removing stem cells often involves destroying days-old embryos, and the Bush administration has banned federal funding for research on all but a handful of old embryonic stem-cell lines. Officials at the center cautioned that their research is not the start of experimental treatment. Also, not everyone will be accepted; candidates will be screened. And it may take 10 years or more to develop a treatment. For those suffering from paralysis and left without any other apparent chance for a cure, the wait already has been too long. Kim, the woman paralyzed by an accident, lamented not being able to care for herself and her two sons. Her husband was also severely injured in the car crash. "I could not do anything by myself. The feeling of desperation I had was beyond description," she said. Lee Ae-ja, who registered Tuesday, can walk only a short way with a cane before her pain becomes too intense. The 64-year-old has used a wheelchair since a virus damaged her nervous system more than a decade ago. "My only wish is to walk with my legs even for some months before I die," she said as her husband filled out an application. --__ On the Net: World Stem Cell Hub: http://www.worldstemcellhub.org 7:05:53 PM    comment []

The Republican bullshit machine encounters the unexpected: a man with a shovel. . . Harry Reid has apparently rediscovered his Manhood. Reid declares victory in Senate closure Bill Frist is grumbling about a "stunt," but Democrats are claiming that their move to put the Senate in closed session this afternoon has resulted in the outcome they wanted: a promise from Republicans to move forward on a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into the Bush administration's use of intelligence in the run-up to the war in Iraq. "After months and months and months of begging, cajoling and writing letters, we're finally going to have Phase II of the investigation into how the intelligence was used to lead us into this intractable war in Iraq," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said a few minutes ago. Reid said that the Republican leadership has agreed to provide Democrats a "phase by phase plan" for completing the long-delayed investigation by Nov. 14. Republicans say they were moving forward anyway. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, who said in March that continuing the investigation would be a "monumental waste of time," insisted today that his committee has been working on Phase II of the investigation all along. Reid scoffed at such claims and dismissed Frist's complaints about the Democrats' maneuvering today. "The only way we've been able to get their attention is to spend three and a half hours in closed session," Reid said. Asked about Frist's characterization of the unannounced Senate closure as a "slap in the face" to the Republican leadership, Reid said: "It's a slap in the face to the American people that this investigation has been stymied, stopped, obstructions thrown up every step of the way. That's the real slap in the face." -- Tim Grieve 6:43:35 PM    comment []

The Republican bullshit machine, as expected, has begun its smear of Joe Wilson, the facts be damned. . .  GOP senator: Wilson is to blame for Plame's outing While the rest of us continue to wait for the full story about who leaked Valerie Plame's identity, Republican Sen. Kit Bond says he knows who's to blame: It's Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson. Bond isn't claiming that Wilson leaked Plame's name to Robert Novak, but he's insisting that Wilson is every bit as responsible for Plame's outing as the leaker was. At a press availability in which he blasted Democrats for closing the Senate to push for the completion of an investigation into the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence, Bond said of Wilson: "When he says that the vice president sent him [to Niger], the obvious question is, 'If the vice president didn't send him, who did?'" Bond continued: "Joe Wilson has himself to blame for whatever revelation" would come about his wife. There's just one problem with Bond's theory: Wilson never said that the vice president sent him to Niger. To the contrary, in the New York Times Op-Ed piece that seems to have precipitated Plame's outing, Wilson said that "agency officials" asked him to go to Niger after receiving a request from Dick Cheney for more information about a report linking Niger and Iraq. So far as we can tell, that characterization is exactly correct. -- Tim Grieve 6:41:35 PM    comment []

What the 'Shield' Covered Up By E. J. Dionne Jr. Tuesday, November 1, 2005; A25 Has anyone noticed that the coverup worked? In his impressive presentation of the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby last week, Patrick Fitzgerald expressed the wish that witnesses had testified when subpoenas were issued in August 2004, and "we would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005." Note the significance of the two dates: October 2004, before President Bush was reelected, and October 2005, after the president was reelected. Those dates make clear why Libby threw sand in the eyes of prosecutors, in the special counsel's apt metaphor, and helped drag out the investigation. As long as Bush still faced the voters, the White House wanted Americans to think that officials such as Libby, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney had nothing to do with the leak campaign to discredit its arch-critic on Iraq, former ambassador Joseph Wilson. And Libby, the good soldier, pursued a brilliant strategy to slow the inquiry down. As long as he was claiming that journalists were responsible for spreading around the name and past CIA employment of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, Libby knew that at least some news organizations would resist having reporters testify. The journalistic "shield" was converted into a shield for the Bush administration's coverup. Bush and his disciples would like everyone to assume that Libby was some kind of lone operator who, for this one time in his life, abandoned his usual caution. They pray that Libby will be the only official facing legal charges and that political interest in the case will dissipate. You can tell the president worries that this won't work, because yesterday he did what he usually does when he's in trouble: He sought to divide the country and set up a bruising ideological fight. He did so by nominating a staunchly conservative judge to the Supreme Court. Judge Samuel Alito is a red flag for liberals and red meat for Bush's socially conservative base. Alito has a long paper trail as a 15-year veteran of a court of appeals and a strong right-wing reputation. This guarantees a huge battle that will serve the president even if Alito's nomination fails: Anything that "unites the base" and distracts attention from the Fitzgerald investigation is good news for Bush. That is why Senate Democrats -- and one hopes they might be joined by some brave Republicans -- should insist that before Alito's nomination is voted on, Bush and Cheney have some work to do. The Fitzgerald indictment makes perfectly clear that the White House misled the public as to its involvement in sliming Wilson and talking about Plame. Bush needs to tell the public -- yes, the old phrase still applies -- what he knew about the operation to discredit Wilson and when he knew it. And he shouldn't hide behind those "legalisms" that Republicans were so eager to condemn in the Clinton years. The obligation to come clean applies, big-time, to Cheney, who appears at several critical points in the saga detailed in the Fitzgerald indictment. What exactly transpired in the meetings between Libby and Cheney on the Wilson case? It is inconceivable that an aide as careful and loyal as Libby was a rogue official. Did Cheney set these events in motion? This is a question about good government at least as much as it is a legal matter. Fitzgerald has made clear that he wants to keep this case going if doing so will bring us closer to the truth. Lawyers not involved in the case suggest that the indictment was written in a way that could encourage Libby, facing up to 30 years in prison, to cooperate in that effort. But there is a catch. If Libby, through nods and winks, knows that at the end of Bush's term, the president will issue an unconditional pardon, he will have no interest in helping Fitzgerald, and every interest in shutting up. If Bush truly wants the public to know all the facts in the leak case, as he has claimed in the past, he will announce now that he will not pardon Libby. That would let Fitzgerald finish his work unimpeded, and we would all have a chance, at last, to learn how and why this sad affair came to pass. © 2005 The Washington Post Company 2:27:18 PM    comment []

Quote of the Day "It was like opening the door to your house and having someone come in and take your big-screen TV off the wall during the big game, and there's nothing you can do about it." --Faux-country singer Kenny Chesney on his divorce from Renee Zellweger 2:18:28 PM    comment []

Years ago, progressives liked to say that This Land is Your Land should be our National Anthem. That seems like a quaint notion today. If I were to nominate a song to be our new Anthem, it would be this one:     We Can't Make It Here by James McMurtry Vietnam Vet with a cardboard sign Sitting there by the left turn line Flag on the wheelchair flapping in the breeze One leg missing, both hands free No one's paying much mind to him The V.A. budget's stretched so thin And there's more comin' home from the Mideast war We can't make it here anymore That big ol' building was the textile mill It fed our kids and it paid our bills But they turned us out and they closed the doors We can't make it here anymore See all those pallets piled up on the loading dock They're just gonna set there till they rot 'Cause there's nothing to ship, nothing to pack Just busted concrete and rusted tracks Empty storefronts around the square There's a needle in the gutter and glass everywhere You don't come down here 'less you're looking to score We can't make it here anymore The bar's still open but man it's slow The tip jar's light and the register's low The bartender don't have much to say The regular crowd gets thinner each day Some have maxed out all their credit cards Some are workin’ two jobs and livin’ in cars Minimum wage won't pay for a roof, won't pay for a drink If you gotta have proof just try it yourself Mr. CEO See how far 5.15 an hour will go Take a part time job at one of your stores Bet you can't make it here anymore High school girl with a bourgeois dream Just like the pictures in the magazine She found on the floor of the laundromat A woman with kids can forget all that If she comes up pregnant what'll she do Forget the career, forget about school Can she live on faith? live on hope? High on Jesus or hooked on dope When it's way too late to just say no You can't make it here anymore Wow I'm stocking shirts in the Wal-Mart store Just like the ones we made before 'Cept this one came from Singapore I guess we can't make it here anymore Should I hate a people for the shade of their skin Or the shape of their eyes or the shape I'm in Should I hate 'em for having our jobs today No I hate the men sent the jobs away I can see them all now, they haunt my dreams All lily white and squeaky clean They've never known want, they'll never know need Their shit don't stink and their kids won't bleed Their kids won't bleed in the damn little war And we can't make it here anymore Will work for food Will die for oil Will kill for power and to us the spoils The billionaires get to pay less tax The working poor get to fall through the cracks Let 'em eat jellybeans let 'em eat cake Let 'em eat shit, whatever it takes They can join the Air Force, or join the Corps If they can't make it here anymore And that's how it is That's what we got If the president wants to admit it or not You can read it in the paper Read it on the wall Hear it on the wind If you're listening at all Get out of that limo Look us in the eye Call us on the cell phone Tell us all why In Dayton, Ohio Or Portland, Maine Or a cotton gin out on the great high plains That's done closed down along with the school And the hospital and the swimming pool Dust devils dance in the noonday heat There's rats in the alley And trash in the street Gang graffiti on a boxcar door We can't make it here anymore Music and lyrics © 2004 by James McMurtry. 12:01:15 PM    comment []

An Open Letter to Orrin Hatch   Dear Senator Hatch: As an American, I find the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court repugnant. As an Italian-American I find the attempts of people like you to use Alito's ethnicity as a weapon in the confirmation process offensive in the extreme. Samuel Alito does not reflect the views of the majority of Americans, or, I believe, Italian-Americans, who have a proud progressive tradition dating back to Arturo Giovannitti, Vito Marcantonio and Fiorello La Guardia. Alito's political radicalism and judicial activism are an affront to everything that most Americans consider good and decent, which of course makes him the perfect nominee for this administration and this Republican congress. I have no doubt that Alito will be confirmed, and that the Republican Party's orgy of unfettered power will continue, and that this country will continue to deteriorate under the arrogance and immorality of its current one-party rule.  But just remember that there is something called retribution, and it's going to happen soon. Maybe in 2006, maybe in 2008. And when you're back in the minority, whining and crying about your treatment and wondering where it all went wrong, just think back on these days and you'll have your answer.   Michael D. Zungolo   8:23:18 AM    comment []

Remember the Old "Miserable Failure" Google Bomb? Right, the one where you Google "miserable failure" and you're taken to the White House website's biography of George W. Bush. . .Well, it doesn't go directly there anymore, but according to most of the country it should. The quotes below are from a USA Today article published yesterday, titled Bush Sets Out to Salvage Second Term. I won't bore you with the entire article, but the poll results quoted below are pretty juicy:     "Financial pressures and economic unease are one reason Bush's ratings have fallen by 10 percentage points since he was inaugurated in January. "An analysis of 10 USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Polls — six surveys taken between the election and inauguration and four taken in recent weeks — shows the drop has been particularly precipitous among the sort of working-class voters Reagan helped draw to the GOP. Bush's standing has fallen by 15 points among those who have only a high school education and by 14 points among those who earn between $20,000 and $30,000 a year. "In the USA TODAY poll taken this weekend, Bush's approval rating is 41%. That is lower than Reagan's standing at any time during the Iran-contra controversy or Clinton's rating during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. "When Gallup asked in 1993 whether the first President Bush's tenure was a success or failure, 53% called it a success even though he had been defeated for re-election a year before. During Clinton's presidency, a majority never called his tenure a failure. Only once, after the health care debacle in 1994, did a plurality say it was a failure, by 50%-44%. "In January 1999, after he had been impeached by the House and was awaiting a Senate trial, 71% called Clinton's tenure a success. "But in August, by 51%-47%, those surveyed by USA TODAY called the current Bush presidency a failure. That proportion grew to 55%-42% in the poll over the weekend. "The finding is consistent with a survey taken this month by the Pew Research Center. In that poll, for the first time since Bush took office in 2001, a plurality of Americans said that in the long run he will be viewed as an unsuccessful president. Just one in four said Bush would be seen as successful. "The USA TODAY poll found little optimism that Bush's turnaround strategy would succeed. By 55%-41%, those surveyed said the remaining three years of Bush's presidency would be a failure." 8:21:57 AM    comment []

© Copyright 2005 Michael D. Zungolo. Last update: 12/1/2005; 11:07:38 AM.