Zactly

EJ Dionne:

American politics has been so corrupted by concepts such as "positioning" and "message discipline" that citizens don't get credit for their ability to decide issues on the merits. But when the public knows and cares a great deal about what's at stake, it is quite discerning about what's true and what's not.

That's why President Bush's troubles on Social Security cannot be explained by some alleged failure of the White House's usually impeccable communications operation. Conventional explanations fail because this is a battle over principle in which the facts matter.

So far the president has made at least four mistakes. He assumed he could convince the country that Social Security faces a crisis requiring urgent action. He thought he could accentuate the positive -- those "personal accounts" really do sound great -- without laying out what they would cost. He counted on getting good-government points by "facing up" to Social Security's long-term problems without proposing any hard steps to fix them. And he figured that some Democrats would fall his way simply because that's what has always happened before.

The "crisis" claim didn't fly because it wasn't true.

Ooh, Snap

The Christian Taliban:

The current debate, of course, has little to do with genuine religion. What it is really about is an effort to assert a cultural point of view. It is part of a reaction against social change, an American counter-reformation of sorts against the way our society has been evolving. Those pushing to blur the boundaries between church and state feel that they are losing out — much as, in the Middle East, Islamic fundamentalists fear they are losing out to "Western values."

The reactions are remarkably similar. In the Arab Middle East and Iran, the response is an insistence on the establishment of Islamic law as the basis for political life; in the United States, school districts assert religious over scientific theory in biology class, tax dollars are going to the faith-based, and the Ten Commandments are a putative founding document.

Will there come a point when rational Christians will lay claim to their religion, and the hijacking of it? Will our conservative leaders ever allow these people, the majority, a voice?

Comes out in the Wash

I guess:

Italy's Foreign Minister said yesterday that U.S. troops killed an Italian intelligence officer in Iraq by accident, but he disputed Washington's version of events, demanding a thorough U.S. investigation of the shooting and that "the culprits be punished."

Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini told parliament that the car carrying the intelligence officer and a former hostage to freedom was not speeding and was not ordered to stop by U.S. troops at a checkpoint, contrary to what U.S. officials say.

We know they didn't mean it, but we just don't know what happened.

Remember, troops follow orders, so it's not their fault. It always comes from above.

Ruh Roh

More lies to come, I'm sure:

Documents subpoenaed from an indicted fund-raiser for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas suggest that DeLay was more actively involved than previously known in gathering corporate donations for a political committee that is the focus of a grand jury investigation in Texas.

The documents, which were entered into evidence last week in a related civil trial in Austin, suggest that DeLay personally forwarded at least one large corporate check to the committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, and that he was in direct contact with lobbyists for some of the nation's largest companies on the committee's behalf.

In an August 2002 document subpoenaed from the files of the Washington-based fund-raiser, Warren M. RoBold, RoBold asked for a list of 10 major donors to the Texas committee, saying "I would then decide from response who Tom DeLay" and others should call to help the committee in seeking a "large contribution."

Another document is a printout of a July 2002 e-mail to RoBold from a political ally of Delay's, requesting a list of corporate lobbyists who would attend a fund-raising event for the Texas committee, adding that "DeLay will want to see a list of attendees" and that the list should be available "on the ground in Austin for TD upon his arrival."

Under Texas law, corporations are barred from donating money to state political candidates.

The political action committee acknowledged receiving large corporate donations during the 2002 campaign but always insisted that the money was used for administrative costs, which is legal.

If your haven't been following, Delay has funneled corporate money into Texas politics with the goal of redistricting/gerrymandering in order to send more Republicans to the US Congress. This is illegal.

Watching his spokesman on CBS talking about what one deems "administrative costs" to be was pretty comical.

This is a continuation of the story wherein Texas democrats fled to Oklahoma to avoid having to vote on the redistricting issue.

Now I'm Sick

"Bankruptcy Bill Set for Passage; Victory for Bush"

-defeat for most Americans.

How come Republicans never discuss why they vote down the amendments that make it harder for the rich to use loopholes? Hmmm, maybe because they're those people?

In a country that wasn't being paid for by corporate interests only you would have a bill that focused on those who are abusing the system via bankruptcy, and one making it more difficult for the credit card companies and banks to issue cards to every single person under the sun, regardless of their financial situations.

That's not this country.

I don't blame America first. I blame conservatives well before anyone or anything.

Freedumb Fighters

I think both sides should take a wait and see attitude before making any predictions:

Russia's army on Tuesday announced it had killed Aslan Maskhadov, the Chechen rebel leader, in a move that could give a political boost to President Vladimir Putin but also destabilise the political situation in the breakaway southern republic.

The apparent killing of Mr Maskhadov, elected Chechen president in 1997 but lately the leader of rebel forces, comes only a month after he called a ceasefire and urged Russia to start peace talks.

Taus Dzhabrailov, a member of Chechnya's Moscow-backed leadership, said the rebel leader's death would “speed up” attempts to find a peaceful solution.

But Thomas de Waal, Caucasus editor of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, said Mr Maskhadov's death could further radicalise the conflict.

When's the last time assassinating a leader lead to peace?

Digressing slightly, will Americans ever realize George Bush squandered an opportunity to support Muslims in a battle for independence and freedom, but instead chose to align himself with a man who is against democracy? This was the golden opportunity missed after 9/11. Al Gore would have made the right decision.

While the killing of children at a Russian school was horrific to most people, it's hard for us to understand the Chechen tipping point since their side of the story is never told because of curbs on Russian media.

The American media, knowing the story, often failed to flesh out all the details, and instead made the Chechens look like animals, and the Russians victims. It's more like the Russians treated the Chechens like animals, then they became animals, and acted like animals. OH MY GOD! THEY'RE ANIMALS!

Who's to blame, you be the judge.

We know which side President Bush chose.

Duuude

Too close for comfort:

Memphis' famed Easley McCain recording studio was devastated by an electrical fire last week. Among the casualties was believed to be the destruction of the studio's masters and the forthcoming Silver Jews record, which had arrived at the studio on the morning of the fire. A complete assessment of the fire's damage has not yet been made, but despite early reports claiming the record-- due to be mastered last weekend-- was irrevocably missing, the tapes now appear unharmed.

There were no injuries reported, despite the speed with which the fire spread through the studio. "The inspector said that two fires broke out at the same time at opposite ends of the building, due to some electrical reason," Easley engineer Kevin Cubbins told Rolling Stone. "Within 15, 20 seconds, the whole place was engulfed."

Easley McCain was the first structure built in the famed music town for the sole purpose of being a recording studio. It initially housed producer and songwriter Chips Moman before becoming the home of the Bar-Kays. In recent years, albums such as the White Stripes' White Blood Cells, Pavement's Wowee Zowee, and Loretta Lynn's Van Lear Rose were recorded or mixed here, as well as works from Sonic Youth, Wilco, Cat Power, Guided By Voices, and Alex Chilton, among others. Jeff Buckley was recording his sophomore album at the studio when he took his fatal swim in the Mississippi River.

This would be pretty coincidental being that Pavement's Live CD they once planned on releasing was lost in a car fire.

Thought

It's quite possible the first pick in the NFL and NBA drafts will be a player from Utah.

Alex Smith and Andrew Bogut.

I imagine it'd be the first time something like that happened, but I'm not positive.

Wow

That took what, a week? The writers are now talking about the "domino effect" and Bush's policies actually working.

Lets slow down here for a bit.

Without a major US Troop presence in Iraq the place is a disaster. Also, when we do leave, if we do, it will eventually fold back into that. If we stick around long enough Arab militants will rise up against a continued US military presence in the region. History repeats itself.

What happened in Lebanon may not have happened if we weren't in Iraq. I have no idea. I have no idea if the Syrians, assuming they did, would have assassinated the Prime Minister if there was no US presense. In fact, with one variable up in the air it's not possible to assess what would have happened.

If we had gone into Pakistan and actually captured bin Laden after we were attacked would there be a Zarqawi? I have no idea.

What I do know is there is no peace in the Middle East. Just because there's a rally by the Lebanese, seemingly modeled after liberal peace movement worldwide, does not mean there will be, especially if you consider there are now larger rallies by crazy fucks hell bent on keeping the Syrians in Lebanon.

Our press is so excited to make the news, rather than report it.

Talk to me about this peaceful Middle East in 3 years.

The Egyptians are not dumb, and all indications are they will not be opening up the nation to democracy. In fact, just a week after announcing they would hold these open elections they are already clamping down on the press for announcing a candidate!

Then there's Saudi Arabia, who held their own elections. Puhhhlease. The Saudis are giving a bit to the people because the place is so backwards the rulers fear they could be toppled. Can you guess what Presidential family is closer with the Saudi ruling family than any other Presidential family has ever been to ANY FAMILY? Yeah, tough one. I'll take "I'm not a Total Jackass for $200", Alex.

All we can say about Iraq is we've spent a boatload of cash to topple Saddam, and the nation is hardly stable; it's in flux.

Lebanon is not on its way to democracy. If history is a guide, it's only on its way back to a civil war.

Egypt is changing nothing, fast.

But our press, whoa, hey now, they've changed. They're becoming balanced, but not between Left and Right, but between Good and Terrible.

True Colors

Lets go back to the year 2000 when conservatives were not "nation builders." This was a simple policy, for the most part: The United States should not be sending troops overseas to fight battles where there was no strategic interest.

Regardless of the fact thousands upon thousands of people were being hacked to death with machettes in Africa, or that Serbians were slaughtering Muslims in Kosovo, we were not going to help, or shouldn't, because we're not "nation builders." This was the unmistakable policy of George W. Bush, and the hawks going forward.

Bush, having zero grasp on the realities of the world, was more than happy to puppet this Congressional line. At the time the worldview of Paul Wolfowitz was hardly relevant to a world leader who had hardly visited another nation in his whole life. He was as uninterested in the world the day he took office as he was as a college sophmore with a runny nose.

The reality is, even with Jesus as a guide, he didn't care if people were being killed worldwide because he was told it was the conservative platform. Now things are entirely different.

Bush is now focused on "spreading democracy" even though it's never going to happen (at least under his plans). The policies of Wolfowitz are the guideposts for our foreign policy. Bush has picked up the ball, and he has decided to run with it. Regardless of why he has done so, it's his new thing. As I mentioned a while back this is a man without a single original thought. However, "spreading freedom" has really picked up for conservatives because they've been able to sell it to their constituents as the "right thing to do." I mean, WHAT WOULD JESUS DO? Of course he'd spread freedom! So "nation building" is now a good thing as long as it enables us to cut taxes. Get credit for one thing, use the capital on another.

Everyone caring person knows intervening where this is a crisis is the right thing to do, but these people don't espouse intervention for those reasons. They do it because they were able to sell it as something highly moralistic, and they can use it to their political advantage. There's hardly a known conservative (minus Wolfowitz - Powell not a conservative) who cares about people outside of the United States. Their constituents are sheep, and they will buy anything.

When George Bush Sr. took us into Somalia, and troops were killed while Clinton was presiding, Congress went crazy. This is when "we're not nation builders" came of age. This is why Rwanda, and other atrocities, were allowed to happpen. A republican controlled Congress, where the authority to goto war begins, would not have it.

All things are different now for the party of complete hypocrisy.

When I see Bush standing on a podium talking about "freedom" and I hear goose-steppers commenting on his grand ideas for the future, I know it's a lie. The thing is, they don't know that. They convince themselves that what they're saying is really true. They really believe it. It's self perpetuating. They all talk to each other just to make sure they all agree, at least for that month. It's such a rare occassion to see one of them get off the boat (lets give Norman Ornstein some credit!).

This all gets back to the core thought of Republicans: Winning at all costs.

It doesn't matter who gets hurt along the way, or how they go about doing it. It doesn't matter if they have to lie, cheat, or steal to do it, the selfish core will always be there. This policy of "spreading democracy" is no different. Bush sees an opportunity to make himself look like a hero to the world, so he espouses these grand beliefs on things that will never happen. Sure, spreading democracy is a great idea, but the way these people go about it, it will never happen. Republicans will take credit for any idea regardless of the hypocrisy (just see Medicare).

Of course, if someone responsible comes into office and actually accomplishes the goal of spreading some democracy, Republicans will hee and haw about George W. Bush, the man who began the spread! They did it for Reagan.

It's all about winning, and getting credit for it. That's all it is. They want to say at the end of the day, "See, we told you so...now lets change the $20 bill!"

Long story short, even though I've passed that, Republicans care about getting more money during their selfish lives, and acting as if they care, which is why their greatest politician is an actor, and they want to change the constitution for another. Which is why they shine the light on this fool in 'made for tv' appearances, like landing on an aircraft carrier. It's all an act to push their policy if Selfish Winning.

Win at all costs, even if thousands die in the process, including poor Americans, they do not care. They never will.

The reason liberals are hated by Republicans is because they care for other people. Crushing, and berating that idea is a must because if it survives the core selishness of conservativism will be there for all to see.

It's never a battle over ideas for them, but only a made for tv/radio catch phrase.

Members Only

Because I'm tired of reading stupid comments on this site, if you'd like to comment in the future you'll need to be a member of the blog itself.

This is very simple, for even a President can do do it (probably).

Just send an email to me and I'll sign you up!

If not, have fun reading.

Now I Get It

So Hezbollah wants Israelis out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but they themselves don't want to leave a country that is completely not theirs. That seems about right.

The article mentions how if Syria were to leave ethnic strife may set in because of the many different groups in Lebanon. That's true, and it was a major part of the War in Lebanon. It's also no different than what will inevitably result in Iraq.

May as well get the ball rolling now. I mean, occupiers out, free will takes over. Lets roll them dice!

Cool

Krugman:

Today the Senate is expected to vote to limit debate on a bill that toughens the existing bankruptcy law, probably ensuring the bill's passage. A solid bloc of Republican senators, assisted by some Democrats, has already voted down a series of amendments that would either have closed loopholes for the rich or provided protection for some poor and middle-class families.

The bankruptcy bill was written by and for credit card companies, and the industry's political muscle is the reason it seems unstoppable. But the bill also fits into the broader context of what Jacob Hacker, a political scientist at Yale, calls "risk privatization": a steady erosion of the protection the government provides against personal misfortune, even as ordinary families face ever-growing economic insecurity.

The bill would make it much harder for families in distress to write off their debts and make a fresh start. Instead, many debtors would find themselves on an endless treadmill of payments.

The credit card companies say this is needed because people have been abusing the bankruptcy law, borrowing irresponsibly and walking away from debts. The facts say otherwise.

A vast majority of personal bankruptcies in the United States are the result of severe misfortune. One recent study found that more than half of bankruptcies are the result of medical emergencies. The rest are overwhelmingly the result either of job loss or of divorce.

To the extent that there is significant abuse of the system, it's concentrated among the wealthy - including corporate executives found guilty of misleading investors - who can exploit loopholes in the law to protect their wealth, no matter how ill-gotten.

One increasingly popular loophole is the creation of an "asset protection trust," which is worth doing only for the wealthy. Senator Charles Schumer introduced an amendment that would have limited the exemption on such trusts, but apparently it's O.K. to game the system if you're rich: 54 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted against the Schumer amendment.

Other amendments were aimed at protecting families and individuals who have clearly been forced into bankruptcy by events, or who would face extreme hardship in repaying debts. Ted Kennedy introduced an exemption for cases of medical bankruptcy. Russ Feingold introduced an amendment protecting the homes of the elderly. Dick Durbin asked for protection for armed services members and veterans. All were rejected.

None of this should come as a surprise: it's all part of the pattern.

As Mr. Hacker and others have documented, over the past three decades the lives of ordinary Americans have become steadily less secure, and their chances of plunging from the middle class into acute poverty ever larger. Job stability has declined; spells of unemployment, when they happen, last longer; fewer workers receive health insurance from their employers; fewer workers have guaranteed pensions.

Some of these changes are the result of a changing economy. But the underlying economic trends have been reinforced by an ideologically driven effort to strip away the protections the government used to provide. For example, long-term unemployment has become much more common, but unemployment benefits expire sooner. Health insurance coverage is declining, but new initiatives like health savings accounts (introduced in the 2003 Medicare bill), rather than discouraging that trend, further undermine the incentives of employers to provide coverage.

Above all, of course, at a time when ever-fewer workers can count on pensions from their employers, the current administration wants to phase out Social Security.

The bankruptcy bill fits right into this picture. When everything else goes wrong, Americans can still get a measure of relief by filing for bankruptcy - and rising insecurity means that they are forced to do this more often than in the past. But Congress is now poised to make bankruptcy law harsher, too.

Warren Buffett recently made headlines by saying America is more likely to turn into a "sharecroppers' society" than an "ownership society." But I think the right term is a "debt peonage" society - after the system, prevalent in the post-Civil War South, in which debtors were forced to work for their creditors. The bankruptcy bill won't get us back to those bad old days all by itself, but it's a significant step in that direction.

And any senator who votes for the bill should be ashamed.


E-mail: krugman@nytimes.com

This bill has actually gotten progressively worse since the previous one, when a lot more democrats had signed on. Corzine not included. Neither did Feingold, Kennedy, Wellstone, Leahy, and I believe maybe one more.

Whoa

And here I thought irony died months back.

Bush Picks Critic of U.N. to Serve as Ambassador to It

I envision Dick Cheney toasting to the 'Hopeful end of the United Nations'.

Do You Care?

Hmmm, let me think about that one. I am a Republican, and a patriot, but...

We passed another marker in this war on terror last week. The U.S. military death toll in Iraq hit 1,500.

Did you know? Yes, there were stories about it in the national news, small and elusive at times, nothing compared to the stories about Martha and her sleek SUV ride out of the clink. In the local accounts, any mention of the 1,500 was often even less prominent.

Some war supporters got all bent out of shape last April when "Nightline" decided to devote an entire show to reading the names and showing the photographs of the more than 700 U.S. service men and women who had been killed in action since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Ted Koppel's reading of the names took "Nightline" way beyond its 30-minute time slot.

Around the time the death toll reached 1,000, the first anti-war rally in northwest suburban Barrington was staged. The yard surrounding resident Paul Vogel's business held more than 1,000 small U.S. flags, one for each of the soldiers killed in the conflict.

The flags crowded the landscaping and stood amid two signs, one updating the death toll and another asking: "Do you care?"

So, let's do the numbers: From March 2003 to April 2004, roughly 700 service men and women died. From April 2004 to March 2005, the number increased by about 800. That's not counting the number of soldiers who have been wounded.

Idea

I have heard conservatives say, "If you want to pay higher taxes what's stopping you? Why don't you just give more money to the federal government?" It's almost clever, until you respond with, "Why don't you go adopt all the unwanted children who sit in foster homes? I mean, afterall, you want to force women to have unwanted children..." Usually they don't say much.

But here's a new one for you: If you're a conservative and you believe in private accounts, why not just take an amount equal to the tax dollars you're spending on Social Security, create your own private accounts, and then when you're 68 you'll get your initial investment back? It's a free investment! Unless you're black because chances are you won't even live until 68.

Chuck Hagel proposes raising the age, and creating accounts. Hacksaw John Snow thinks private accounts are integral. Alan Greenspan likes his job. George W. Bush is canvassing the nation talking about an issue the majority of Americans disagree with him on. Of course, if another memo warning of terrorists attacking the United States crosses his desk he'll get to it when he returns.

This country would be such a better place if someone like Chuck Hagel were president. At least we'd have respect, and at least he'd respect you.

Check Out This Guy

What an idiot.

Uhhh

A "thank you" would have been enough:

U.S. and Austrian lawyers have filed a lawsuit demanding Thailand, U.S. forecasters and the French Accor group answer accusations they failed in a duty to warn populations hit by December's Tsunami disaster, a lawyer said Monday.

The lawsuit was filed Friday at a New York district court on behalf of tsunami victims by lawyers including U.S. attorney Edward Fagan, internationally renowned for 1990s lawsuits against Swiss banks over Holocaust-era accounts. It demanded an account of their actions on Dec. 26.

Guided by Values

Previously on Reality Bush:

"Let me make very clear the position of my government and our country. We do not condone torture," Mr. Bush said yesterday before the memos were released. "I have never ordered torture. I will never order torture. The values of this country are such that torture is not a part of our soul and our being."

Now we return to our latest episode:

The Bush administration gave the CIA extensive authority to send terrorism suspects to foreign countries for interrogation just days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

The newspaper said President Bush signed a still-classified directive that gave the CIA broad power to operate without case-by-case approval from the White House in the transfer of suspects -- a process known as rendition.

He wasn't lying then either.

Prioritizing

When it's not so important to buy votes for the President anymore this is what happens.

Questionable

And it seems the Italians may be right.

The United States doesn't approve of this (ransom) policy and so they try to stop it in any way possible," the veteran war reporter, 57, told Sky Italia TV.

In later comments to Reuters, Sgrena was less strident:

"You could characterise as an ambush what happens when you are showered with gunfire. If this happened because of a lack of information or deliberately, I don't know, but even if it was due to a lack of information it is unacceptable."

Bush promised a full probe into why troops shot at the Italian car nearing Baghdad airport Friday evening. Calipari died instantly of a single bullet to the head, doctors said.

The U.S. military says the car was speeding toward a checkpoint and ignored warning shots, an explanation rejected by Italian government ministers and the driver of the car.

A senior U.S. official, White House counselor Dan Bartlett, said the shooting was a "horrific accident."

"As you know, in a situation where there is a live combat zone, particularly this road to the airport ... people are making split-second decisions, and it's critically important that we get the facts before we make judgments," he told CNN.

Rome prosecutors have opened a second degree murder investigation into Calipari's death and Italy's justice minister has signed documents requesting information from witnesses.

According to Italy's leading daily Corriere della Sera, the driver, an unidentified Italian agent, said: "We were driving slowly, about 40-50 km/h (25-30 mph)."

Perfect No More

Go Bucks!