March 04, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY

ONLY URGENCY IS TAX CUTS

There has been a pattern to the way George W. Bush, the CEO president, has conducted the office. Bush never looks ahead. He and his cronies look for short-term gratification. They put some plan into action, even despite warnings of impending disaster, and then let the disaster occur. Bush ignored the danger of a terrorist attack and we got 9/11. He ignored the danger of whopping budget deficits when he pushed through his tax cuts for the rich, and now we're in a debt crisis. He ignored the warnings about Hurricane Katrina, and thousands are dead or displaced along the Gulf Coast. He ignored the warnings about the miserable prescription drug plan that is a boon to drug companies, but horrible for everyone else. This column by Paul Krugman is linked at www.buzzflash.com:

Iraqi insurgents, hurricanes and low-income Medicare recipients have three things in common. Each has been at the center of a policy disaster. In each case experts warned about the impending disaster. And in each case — well, let's look at what happened.

Knight Ridder's Washington bureau reports that from 2003 on, intelligence agencies "repeatedly warned the White House" that "the insurgency in Iraq had deep local roots, was likely to worsen and could lead to civil war." But senior administration officials insisted that the insurgents were a mix of dead-enders and foreign terrorists.

Intelligence analysts who refused to go along with that line were attacked for not being team players. According to U.S. News & World Report, President Bush's reaction to a pessimistic report from the C.I.A.'s Baghdad station chief was to remark, "What is he, some kind of defeatist?"

BUSH AND NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION

George W. Bush should be kept on his exercise bicycle and far away from making any agreements with other countries. Bush has apparently made a deal with India that may spark a nuclear arms race in that area of the world. It's a region that is already unstable. This article by Dan Froomkin is at www.washingtonpost.com:

In addition to all the predictable reactions (pro and con) to the landmark nuclear agreement reached in India yesterday, a powerful and unexpected new concern has emerged based on a last-minute concession by President Bush.

It appears that, to close the deal during his visit, Bush directed his negotiators to give in to India's demands that it be allowed to produce unlimited quantities of fissile material and amass as many nuclear weapons as it wants.

The agreement, which requires congressional approval, would be an important step toward Bush's long-held goal of closer relations with India. It would reflect India's status as a global power. And, not least of all, it would more firmly establish India as a military ally and bulwark against China.

March 03, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

DROWNING IN RED INK

We're hearing about a push to raise the federal government's debt limit again. It would be the fourth increase in five years. Failure to raise the debt limit would mean the federal government would be unable to meet its obligations for the first time in our history. We're seeing a lot of firsts, always the wrong kind, under the Bush administration. This item comes from www.americanprogressaction.org:

Yesterday, Treasury officials told Senate aides that without an increase in the nation's $8.18 trillion debt limit, the government "would default on obligations for the first time in history sometime during the week of March 20." The Senate will have to take up the issue soon since "federal default is considered unimaginable because it would rattle bond markets, force interest rates higher and shake the economy." The debt limit increase to around $9 trillion would be the fourth increase in five years. "I don't think the leadership wants to have any debate on this, and I think the reason is pretty clear," Finance Committee ranking member Max Baucus (D-MT) told CongressDaily. "It's embarrassing." To avoid an extended debate, the leadership is set to vote on the issue as close to the March 17 recess as possible. Finance Committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has admitted he wants the debt limit increased "with the least debate" possible. "I would like to see a bill on any Thursday night just prior to a recess," he said. The New York Times warned the Senate bill may "be put to a voice vote, so that no individual would have to go on record as approving the measure. The American people deserve better."

CORRUPT AND INCOMPETENT

Richard M. Nixon was corrupt, but he was a competent president who actually accomplished some good things. When you look at the record of George W. Bush you'd be hard pressed to find anything good about this administration. Not only is this the most corrupt administration in our history, it's also the most incompetent. The one thing this administration has been good at is spin, but spin only carries you so far. This article by James Klurfeld is at www.commondreams.org:

An old acquaintance in Washington - a former member of Republican administrations whose foreign policy views are decidedly hard-line - recently had this to say to a friend about the Bush administration: This might be the most inept administration in American history.

Considering some of the bozos who have served in the White House - James Buchanan and Warren Harding are two names that come to mind - that is a breathtaking statement. Considering the stakes involved with the United States, the most powerful nation in the world, it is also frightening.

But it should come as no surprise that President George W. Bush has fallen to an approval rating of 34 percent in a recent national poll. Just look at the events in this winter of his discontent:

Iraq appears to be on the cusp of a civil war even as U.S. soldiers continue to be killed each week.

CUTTING THROUGH THE STATISTICAL FOG

Anyone who lives in the San Joaquin Valley can tell you about fog. Every winter we get this ground-hugging, drifting, ethereal stuff that makes it very difficult to see. Fog is the way you would describe many of the statistics used to justify globalization. Propagandists like John Stossel would have us believe things have never been better even as we see our incomes sliding downhill and good jobs getting sent abroad. This article by Paul Craig Roberts is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

When the US Department of Labor, for example, releases the monthly payroll jobs data, the press release will put the best spin on the data. The focus is on the aggregate number of new jobs created the previous month, for example, 150,000 new jobs. That sounds good. News reporters report the press release. They do not look into the data to see what kinds of jobs have been created and what kinds are being lost. They do not look back in time and provide a net job creation number over a longer period of time.



This is why the American public is unaware that higher paid jobs in export and import-competitive industries are being phased out along with engineering and other professional "knowledge jobs" and replaced with lower paid jobs in domestic services. The replacement of higher paid jobs with lower paid jobs is one reason for the decline in median household income over the past five years. It is not a large decline, but it is a decline. How can it be possible for the economy to be doing well when median household income is not growing and when economic growth is based on increased consumer indebtedness?

March 02, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

CHENEY LECTURING US ABOUT SAVING

Gun totin' Dick Cheney gave a speech saying that Americans need to save more. That's a little easier if wages actually keep pace with inflation. It's a little easier if things like the minimum wage allow someone working full time to live above the poverty line. Cheney also made some comments about Social Security. Social Security is fine if right-wingers like him would quit raiding it to pay for their tax cuts to the rich and to fund their illegal wars. This story is from www.usatoday.com:

Vice President Dick Cheney urged Americans Thursday to do a better job of saving and challenged policymakers to strengthen pensions and fix Social Security to help people in their golden years. (Related story: How long can households sustain negative savings?)

"The American dream begins with saving money and that should begin on the very first day of work," Cheney told a conference here exploring how to encourage people to boost savings and be better prepared for retirement.

Too often, workers are living paycheck to paycheck and are not saving sufficiently, Cheney said.

Last year, Americans' personal savings rate dropped to its lowest point since the Great Depression. The dismal state of savings comes as a big wave of baby boomers will soon start retiring.

WHAT ABOUT AFGHANISTAN?

The focus has been on Iraq and the unjustified attack on that country, especially as we have learned that all the justifications for attacking Iraq were lies. Iraq is disintegrating into civil war. But people forget Afghanistan. Many people who opposed the war in Iraq supported the attack on Afghanistan. I never did. The Taliban was terrible, no doubt, but our enemy was Osama bin Laden, not the people of Afghanistan, who have suffered through war after bloody war. Afghanistan has its own version of Guantanamo at Bagram. Warlords are coming back into power and opium is flooding the world from Afghanistan. It is no closer to democracy or peace than Iraq. In this article Ted Rall looks at the situation in Afghanistan. The article is linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:

Everyone loves Bush's war against Afghanistan, even though it was based on just as many lies as his assault on Iraq: Osama bin Laden probably wasn't in Afghanistan on 9/11 and was certainly not there by the time bombs began falling. People approve even though, as in Iraq, Bush didn't send enough troops--8,000 where 500,000 were required--to provide basic security. Even though Afghans didn't greet us as liberators. Even though, as in Iraq, he installed a government composed of corrupt, violent and vengeful minorities, guaranteeing sectarian bloodshed and civil war.

And even though the news from U.S.-occupied Afghanistan--if you can find any--is as relentlessly bleak as that from Iraq. Afghanistan suffers its own litany of roadside bombs, suicide bombs, massacres of foreign aid workers, citizens terrorized by kidnappers and rapists. It even has its own Abu Ghraib.

March 01, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

BUSH LIED ABOUT KATRINA TOO

After the Presidential Daily Briefing that stated, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the U.S." a major paper ran a headline that said BUSH KNEW. Bush was on vacation in the weeks preceding September 11 and he was on vacation again as Hurricane Katrina was bearing down on the Gulf Coast. After the levees were breached and New Orleans was flooded Bush said that no one could have anticipated the breach of the levees. It turns out Bush and senior officials of the administration knew very well the levees could breach. They are on tape getting briefed about the disaster unfolding with Hurricane Katrina. This story from the Associated Press is at www.nytimes.com:

In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: ''We are fully prepared.''

WELFARE FOR WAR PROFITEERS

Ronald Reagan made it to the White House by talking about mythical welfare queens. But Reagan and the Republican establishment have never been quite so outraged by the corporate welfare that runs like a cancer through the political system. There is something beyond obscene when foreign policy is based on who can make money from a war here, an invasion there, a prison over there, a weapons system everywhere. Halliburton, Dick Cheney's old company, has done quite well thanks to Bush's invasion of Iraq. This story by Derrick Z. Jackson is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

Even though an Army audit determined that $263 million of charges by Halliburton were exaggerated or unjustified on its $2.41 billion no-bid contract for fuel deliveries and oil equipment repair in Iraq, the Army said it will pay all but $10.1 million of it. The Times reported Monday that the decision to withhold only 3.8 percent of the charges in question is far below the average of questionable charges that are withheld. That average has ranged between 56.4 percent and 75.2 percent over the last three years.

Audits and averages rarely matter with Halliburton. While Reagan galvanized the middle class against laundry rooms for the poor, Halliburton is the company whose subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown & Root, charged you and me $100 for a bag of laundry and $45 for a case of soda in Iraq.

February 28, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

MONEY ONE, SECURITY ZERO

It's difficult to believe that after making 9/11 the crime of the millennium the Bush administration now has no problem with a cozy port deal with the United Arab Emirates, a country directly tied to terrorism. It's difficult to believe until you look at the money and who is getting the money. Bush's Secretary of the Treasury John Snow is one of the beneficiaries. David Sanborn, named by Bush to head the U.S. Maritime Agency, is another beneficiary. This story by MICHAEL McAULIFF is at The New York Daily News:

The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.

One is Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose agency heads the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan's cruise ship terminal and Newark's container port.

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet.

The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World's European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.

HOW DO YOU IMPEACH THEM ALL?

The Bush administration has made me wish we had a parliamentary form of government. A parliamentary system would allow us to declare no confidence in the Bush gang, hold an election, and kick them out. Our system provides only impeachment or resignation as a remedy to egregious and corrupt conduct. The problem we face is that it's not only Bush and Cheney who should impeached; it's the whole rotten administration. This article by James Charles is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

The dilemma for America is: When the whole executive branch is criminal, how do you impeach an entire administration?



* President Bush knowingly lied to Congress when he certified in writing an immediate threat to the security of the United States mandated the need to use armed force to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein. As has been well documented over the past three years, the administration knew before Bush's 2003 State of the Union message that there were serious doubts in the intelligence establishment -- the CIA, DIA, State Dept. and Dept. of Energy -- that Saddam had either chemical weapons or a program to build atomic weapons. Lying to Congress is a federal offence, a felony punishable with prison; on its face, it is also a "high crime and misdemeanor" -- an impeachable offence.

February 27, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

FREE TRADERS LIKE SWARMS OF LOCUSTS

One of the plagues Moses reportedly unleashed on Egypt was swarms of locusts. You wonder if there is a latter-day Moses releasing locusts on the U.S. economy. Since the free trade mindset took hold in the early 90s, thousands upon thousands of manufacturing jobs in the United States have been sent offshore. There are no comparable good-paying middle class jobs to replace them, and we find ourselves drowning now in debt. Thom Hartmann writes about the reality caused by the NAFTA and GATT treaties, and the consequences of free trade ideology. This article is linked at www.commondreams.org:

Through a combination of the "Fast Track" authority pushed for by Reagan and GHW Bush, sweetheart trade deals involving "most favored nation status" for dictatorships like China, and Clinton pushing us into NAFTA and the WTO (via GATT), we've abandoned the principles of tariff-based trade that built American industry and kept us strong for over 200 years.

The old concept was that if there was a dollar's worth of labor in a pair of shoes made in the USA, and somebody wanted to import shoes from China where there may only be ten cents worth of labor in those shoes, we'd level the playing field for labor by putting a 90-cent import tariff on each pair of shoes. Companies could choose to make their products here or overseas, but the ultimate cost of labor would be the same.

Then came the flat-worlders, led by misguided true believers and promoted by multinational corporations. Do away with those tariffs, they said, because they "restrain trade." Let everything in, and tax nothing. The result has been an explosion of cheap goods coming into our nation, and the loss of millions of good manufacturing jobs and thousands of manufacturing companies. Entire industry sectors have been wiped out.

COAST GUARD WARNED BUSH ABOUT PORTS DEAL

The Washington Post has a story about a Coast Guard memo to the Bush administration that warns the administration of a possible terrorist threat if a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates assumes port operations at major U.S. ports. It would seem you wouldn't even need a memo like this, but this is the Bush administration, after all, the administration that sees and smells money and disregards everything else. Bush is the man who didn't take seriously a Presidential Daily Briefing stating that, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within U.S." And we're supposed to believe Bush is looking out for our security interests? This article by Jonathan Weisman is at www.washingtonpost.com:

The U.S. Coast Guard, in charge of reviewing security at ports operated by a Dubai maritime company, warned the Bush administration it could not rule out that the company's assets could be used for terrorist operations, according to a document released yesterday by a Senate committee.

State-owned Dubai Ports World plans to complete its takeover of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. (P&O) on Thursday, assuming ownership of operations at six major U.S. ports even as it pledges to hold off on asserting control while the Bush administration reviews the national security implications of the deal. The White House has strongly argued that a preliminary review showed that the sale would pose no threat to national security.

February 26, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

BUSH'S KARMA

Since the terrorist attacks on 9/11, George W. Bush and his administration have ramped up the fear about terrorism and have demonized Arabs, although continuing a chummy relationship with Saudi Arabia, home of fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers. In the sloppy and slipshod approval of a ports deal with the United Arab Emirates, a country with al-Qaeda ties, Bush shows how hyperbole can rebound on you. Bush has created the terror monster and now he has to deal with it himself. This column by Paul Krugman is linked at guerillawomentn.blogspot.com:

Mr. Bush shouldn't really be losing his credibility as a terrorism fighter over the ports deal, which, after careful examination (which hasn't happened yet),, may turn out to be O.K. Instead, Mr. Bush should have lost his credibility long ago over his diversion of U.S. resources away from the pursuit of Al Qaeda and into an unnecessary war in Iraq, his bungling of that war, and his adoption of a wrongful imprisonment and torture policy that has blackened America's reputation.

But there is, nonetheless, a kind of rough justice in Mr. Bush's current predicament. After 9/11, the American people granted him a degree of trust rarely, if ever, bestowed on our leaders. He abused that trust, and now he is facing a storm of skepticism about his actions — a storm that sweeps up everything, things related and not.

TALKING TO THE "INVESTORS"

One very effective technique in advertising is called "snob appeal." It's a pitch that says that you are better, more discerning, and more virtuous than the guy next door, and that's why we're making this special offer to you. That guy next door just doesn't have what it takes, but you do. That's how Republican economic policy is sold. You know, we need to cut those programs that take taxes from you and redistribute them to those indolent people over there. But Republican tax cuts rain down mostly on the very wealthy, no matter how much we're told that owning a few shares of stock makes us "investors." This article by Froma Harrop is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

But the Bush administration would like to convince working folk that they are in the club.

Its motives are simple. Conservatives have been remodeling the tax code to move the burden off investment income and onto the earnings that people sweat for. The more Americans fancy themselves players in the stock market, the easier it will be to sell them on tax breaks for investors. Right now, the administration is pitching an extension of the 15-percent tax rate on capital gains and dividends.

Thus, we have Treasury Secretary John Snow asserting that the "typical" investor is "a middle-class person saving for retirement with a household income of about $65,000."

February 25, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

FREEDOM IS ON THE CRAWL

George W. Bush has often stated that "freedom is on the march" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The facts don't support that. Afghanistan has reverted mostly to the control of warlords, and Iraq has been a scene of daily carnage that seems to be getting worse. Iraq stands on the edge of all out civil war now. The country's infrastructure is worse than it was before the war. But the Bush administration keeps asking for more and more money to pour down a rathole. This article by Steven R. Weisman is at www.nytimes.com:

TWO days of mob violence last week after the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine did not simply aggravate Iraq's sectarian hatreds. Like a near-death experience, the carnage seems to have shocked Sunni and Shiite leaders into a new realization of what civil war would cost, and new efforts to avoid it.

But what happens if such efforts — and frantic ones by Americans — prove incapable of stopping an all-out war?

What if, as Abraham Lincoln famously said of America's greatest ordeal: "All dreaded it, all sought to avert it ... And the war came."

BUSH FAMILY'S TIES TO ARAB COUNTRIES

The Bush family has decades of ties to Saudi Arabia and other Arab oil interests. Those ties, interestingly enough, have included the bin Laden family. You have to wonder why the mainstream media hasn't taken a closer look. We have Craig Unger's book from a few years ago House of Bush, House of Saud, and we have the Kevin Phillips book about the Bush dynasty. What weird dynamic fueled the attacks on 9/11, dynamics that exist between the Bushes and the bin Ladens and other Arab oil interests? We see this come into play again with the controversy over allowing a company owned by the United Arab Emirates to take over operations at our major ports. Joe Conason writes about it in this article at www.salon.com:

But Bush's passionate defense of the United Arab Emirates and the ports deal inevitably raises questions -- not only about the due diligence of his administration in this instance but about his and his family's long-standing ties to the Persian Gulf sheikdoms, and specifically to the UAE's rulers. His insinuation that skepticism is equivalent to bigotry cannot deflect such concerns, which first arose in the months after the 9/11 attacks.

By now, everyone paying attention to the furor over the Dubai ports deal should be aware of the UAE's mixed record with regard to terror and global security. The Emirates' ruling families formerly maintained close relationships with the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, whose hunting camps in Afghanistan they frequented; two of the 20 hijackers in the 9/11 plot were UAE nationals who used safe houses and banks in Dubai; and the A.Q. Khan nuclear smuggling network also used facilities there to mask its operations. Since 9/11, however, the Emirates have cooperated with U.S. operations against al-Qaida, and their state-owned corporations have eagerly participated in American attempts to improve transportation security.

RIGHT WING INTELLECTUALS ABANDONING BUSH

Sometimes getting what you wanted isn't as good as you thought it would be. Take the case of right wing intellectuals and George W. Bush. Bush would seem to be their dream come true: a right wing ideologue devoted to the market above all else, steadfast in the belief that American hegemony is the way to remake the world. Now we see the fruits of the poisonous tree that is the Bush administration. Iraq, a country we never should have attacked, is in shambles and the stability of the entire Middle East is uncertain. We've gone from having budget surpluses to being in hock to Japan, China, and South Korea. Our credibility is shattered around the world. This article by Robert Parry is linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:

In just this past week, conservative legend William F. Buckley Jr. and neoconservative icon Francis Fukuyama have joined the swelling ranks of Americans judging George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq a disaster.

"One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed," Buckley wrote at National Review Online on Feb. 24, adding that the challenge now facing Bush and his top advisers is how to cope with the reality of that failure.

"Within their own counsels, different plans have to be made," Buckley wrote after a week of bloody sectarian violence in Iraq. "And the kernel here is the acknowledgement of defeat."

February 24, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

SHADES OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION

Those images of people standing in lines for soup kitchens from the Great Depression era don't seem like ancient history anymore. In his determination to make the plutocrats fatter George W. Bush's policies have increased poverty, resulted in declining family net worth, and stagnant or falling incomes for most Americans. We're quickly moving toward becoming a Third World country where there is a rich elite comprised of a few people and lots and lots of poor people. More evidence of this is the increase in the use of soup kitchens since Bush took office. This article by STEPHEN OHLEMACHER is at www.washingtonpost.com:

More than 25 million Americans turned to the nation's largest network of food banks, soup kitchens and shelters for meals last year, up 9 percent from 2001.

Those seeking food included 9 million children and nearly 3 million senior citizens, says a report from America's Second Harvest.

"The face of hunger doesn't have a particular color, and it doesn't come from a particular neighborhood," said Ertharin Cousin, executive vice president of the group. "They are your neighbors, they are working Americans, they are senior citizens who have worked their entire lives, and they are children."

WHY ILLEGAL SPYING IS AN ISSUE

I've seen or heard many right-wingers say they have no problem with George W. Bush's illegal spying because they "have nothing to hide." They're convinced Bush's spying will ferret out terrorists and make them safer. Never mind that the spying is in blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution that prohibits searches without warrants. Never mind that the FISA court already provides a mechanism for spying on real terrorists.

In this article John Dean, who was the counsel to Richard Nixon and saw presidential lawbreaking up close, talks about some other issues related to illegal spying. The most important issue to me is that people have fought and died to give us the freedoms we treasure in the Bill of Rights. There is also the issue that data mining makes mistakes and may tag totally innocent people as terrorists. Then there is the issue of computer hacking. Dossiers gathered on us might be hacked and the information used to blackmail us, steal our identities, or used maliciously. So, yes, it does matter that illegal spying is taking place. This article by John Dean is linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:

To those who don't worry about giving up their rights, programs like the NSA's may seem fine. But others of us appreciate the blood and treasury this nation expended, both indirectly and directly, in securing those rights. And I am convinced my generation will fight to the end to prevent the zeal of good intention in fighting terror, from letting the terrorists win by permitting the government to take those rights.

February 23, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

FALLING NET WORTH

Since George W. Bush stole his way into the White House the net worth and income for the average family in the United States has dropped. The vast majority of us who are working class are simply fools to vote for Republicans. You see the same pattern repeated over and over again. Republicans will dangle tax cuts in front of us, fool enough of us to get into office, and the tax cuts and other goodies go to the very wealthy. This article by MARTIN CRUTSINGER is at news.yahoo.com:

The gap between the very wealthy and other income groups widened during the period.

The top 10 percent of households saw their net worth rise by 6.1 percent to an average of $3.11 million while the bottom 25 percent suffered a decline from a net worth in which their assets equaled their liabilities in 2001 to owing $1,400 more than their total assets in 2004.

"This is the continuing story of the rich getting richer," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "Clearly, the gains in wealth are going to the top end."

Democrats used the new report to blast
President Bush's economic policies, contending it would be wrong to make permanent his tax cuts which primarily benefited the wealthy.

BANKRUPTCY LAW A BUST SO FAR

The new bankruptcy law passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Bush a few months ago isn't working quite the way they anticipated. This bill was sold as making it tougher for "deadbeats" who carelessly ran up debt to get out of debt by filing for bankruptcy. The new law requires credit counseling, among other things. It turns out that most people considering bankruptcy have suffered a job loss or catastrophic health care costs, hardly the stuff of "deadbeats." This item comes from www.correntewire.com:

A report released by the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys was based on an analysis of 61,335 people who have gone to credit counseling agencies, the required first step before filing bankruptcy under the law that took effect on Oct. 17.

Of the 61,335, 97 percent were unable to repay any debts and 79 percent had gotten into financial trouble because of job loss, huge medical expenses or the death of a spouse, the report said.

“Contrary to the claims of proponents of bankruptcy-law changes that they would zero in on the alleged legions of ‘deadbeats,’” the new law is doing no measurable good, said Brad Botes, executive director of the bankruptcy lawyers’ group. “Instead, (it has) put new hurdles in the path of people who are already flat on their back due to financial crises over which they have no control.”

E-MAIL AND CELL PHONES EASY SPY TARGETS

Technology has evolved faster than privacy laws, and new technologies such as e-mail and cell phones can provide a treasure trove of data to government snoops. Requirements for spying on e-mail are fairly lenient. Cell phones can be tracked so that the government can pinpoint our locations. This article from Agence France Presse is linked at www.commondreams.org:

Fast-evolving Internet and communications technology is outpacing privacy laws and leaving a treasure trove of personal data prey to government surveillance, a new report warned.

The survey by the non-profit Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) appeared as debate rages over a domestic wiretap program in the United States and government lawyers demand search records held by firms like Google.

"The gap between law and technology is widening every day, and privacy is eroding," said Jim Dempsey, the CDT policy director who authored the report.

February 22, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

THE DENIZENS OF RIGHT WING RADIO

A writer in the letters to the editor section of The Fresno Bee today tried to trivialize criticism of George W. Bush as "hating." It doesn't seem to occur to these people there are plenty of reasons to dislike George W. Bush. You would think from the blather on the right that disliking Bush is akin to spitting on the flag or tossing apple pie into the dumpster.

Another of the many myths you get from right-wingers, but one of the most pernicious, is the idea of the "liberal media." Right-wing talk show gasbags dominate AM radio and similar gasbags dominate cable TV talk shows. I don't know how many of these people who reflexively spout "liberal media" even understand what liberals stand for. This article by Bill Berry is at www.commondreams.org:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who spoke at last year's Fighting Bob Fest in Baraboo, has been keeping a close watch on this. In a speech in San Francisco late last year, he noted that the notion of a liberal media is a right-wing ruse.

"There is a right-wing media, and if you look where most Americans are now getting their news, that's where they're getting it. According to Pew (Research Center), 30 percent of Americans now say that their primary news source is talk radio, which is 90 percent dominated by the right."

Unshackled by any meaningful oversight from the Federal Communications Commission or any sense of fairness, the right has elbowed its way into the mainstream, backed by big bucks. As Kennedy noted, "Twenty-two percent of Americans say their primary news source is Fox News, MSNBC or CNBC, all dominated by the right, and another 10 percent, Sinclair network, which is the most right wing of all." Sinclair also happens to be primarily Midwestern, a broadcast company whose owner makes news employees swear they won't criticize the war in Iraq or the Bush administration.

CORPORATE AGENDA MORE IMPORTANT THAN SECURITY

When you look at the policies of George W. Bush it's always a good idea to follow the money. There's money to be made for someone in almost anything this administration does. The latest example is the outrageous idea that a company based in the United Arab Emirates should handle cargo at our major ports. David Sirota has some thoughts in this post at www.huffingtonpost.com:

But as the coverage continues, the true motives of Bush's position are starting to slip out, almost inadvertently.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said about the UAE deal that "We have to balance the paramount urgency of security against the fact that we still want to have a robust global trading system." Similarly, the New York Times today quotes a corporate consultant saying that "The location of the headquarters of a company in the age of globalism is irrelevant."

So we are expected to believe that nothing should matter - not even security concerns - other than preserving the corporate America's trade agenda. When you realize that, President Bush's threat to use the first veto of his presidency on the UAE port security issue suddenly becomes not so surprising. He is proudly defending what Jeff Faux calls "The Party of Davos" or John Perkins calls the "corporatocracy" - that is, the multinational interests who really run the show.

February 21, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

THE OVERREACTION TO TERRORISM

Since the attacks on 9/11 many Americans have acted like Chicken Little. The sky is falling! They're so paranoid and so consumed by terror they're ready to sacrifice all our civil liberties. They're willing to give a liar like George W. Bush carte blanche to do anything he wants to do. As this article points out, terrorism really ranks pretty low on the threats to most of us. The article by Ben Friedman is at www.sfgate.com:

Conventional wisdom says that none of us is safe from terrorism. The truth is that almost all of us are.

The conventional belief is that in response to terrorism, the federal government has spent huge sums on homeland security. The fact is the increased federal spending on homeland security since Sept. 11 pales in comparison to increases in the U.S. defense budget. But homeland security has costs beyond spending, costs that conventional thinking rarely considers. U.S. homeland security policy conjures up a flawless enemy that could strike at any moment, in any place. That policy institutionalizes the fears terrorists created and harms liberal values.

Most homeland security experts say that Hurricane Katrina's flooding of New Orleans shows how vulnerable we are to terrorists. In fact, it shows that most Americans have better things to worry about. By any statistical measure, the terrorist threat to America has always been low. As political scientist John Mueller notes, in most years allergic reactions to peanuts, deer in the road and lightning have all killed about the same number of Americans as terrorism.

BEWARE THOSE JOB STATISTICS

Any time you hear the Bush administration and its sycophants talking about job growth bear in mind that the vast majority of jobs being created now are deadend service sector jobs that pay far below the average wage. We're being given an economy that rewards a very few, such as CEOs, and expects the rest of us to subsist on peasant wages. This item comes from newstandardnews.net:

Buried in the rosy economic scenario portrayed by recentBLS reports is the fact that few jobs in the fastest-growing categories pay well. According to the BLS January jobs report, food-service and service-provider jobs grew a combined 69,000 in January.

The report was followed this month by the BLS annual Occupational Outlook Handbook, which projects continued rapid growth in demand for home-healthcare workers, medical assistants and personal-care aides, all service-related jobs that generally pay little more than the minimum wage.

BUSH'S DETENTION CAMPS

For anyone concerned about civil liberties, and anyone who has read the history of the Third Reich, this story raises major concerns. The Bush administration has talked of building detention camps, supposedly to deal with a major invasion of illegal immigrants. But the administration's talk of being "with them" or "against them," the warrantless spying on American citizens, the detention of people like Jose Padilla, and the general contempt for the Bill of Rights makes you concerned they want to lock up dissidents. This story by Nat Parry is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

But recent developments suggest that the Bush administration may already be contemplating what to do with Americans who are deemed insufficiently loyal or who disseminate information that may be considered helpful to the enemy.

Top U.S. officials have cited the need to challenge news that undercuts Bush's actions as a key front in defeating the terrorists, who are aided by "news informers" in the words of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com "Upside-Down Media" or below.]

February 19, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

THERE'S NO FOOD IN THIS HOUSE

Country music great Lefty Frizzell once recorded a song called "There's No Food in this House." All the mythology to the contrary, the United States has always had its share of poverty. Some people try to dismiss the poor as lazy and shiftless, but the reality is that many of the poor work at multiple jobs in an effort to survive. It is the system--and always has been the system--that is the primary culprit for producing poverty. Many of the poor are children, so I don't know how right-wingers can claim that children are responsible for their poverty. Poverty always increases under right-wing administrations. Since George W. Bush lied and stole his way into the White House, over five million more Americans have dropped below the poverty line. This article by Paul Harris is at observer.guardian.uk.co:

A shocking 37 million Americans live in poverty. That is 12.7 per cent of the population - the highest percentage in the developed world. They are found from the hills of Kentucky to Detroit's streets, from the Deep South of Louisiana to the heartland of Oklahoma. Each year since 2001 their number has grown.

Under President George W Bush an extra 5.4 million have slipped below the poverty line. Yet they are not a story of the unemployed or the destitute. Most have jobs. Many have two. Amos Lumpkins has work and his children go to school. But the economy, stripped of worker benefits like healthcare, is having trouble providing good wages.

Even families with two working parents are often one slice of bad luck - a medical bill or factory closure - away from disaster. The minimum wage of $5.15 (£2.95) an hour has not risen since 1997 and, adjusted for inflation, is at its lowest since 1956. The gap between the haves and the have-nots looms wider than ever. Faced with rising poverty rates, Bush's trillion-dollar federal budget recently raised massive amounts of defence spending for the war in Iraq and slashed billions from welfare programmes.

WHO IS THE "FRINGE ELEMENT"?

Mr. Anti-Choice makes his periodic visit to the pages of The Fresno Bee's letters section today talking not about abortion, but about how we on the left "hate" America's "values." Mr. AC takes issue with some interviews on Pacifica radio where the people interviewed suggested protecting coral reefs should be on the same level as dealing with terrorism. Just how that is "hating American values" isn't really made clear. He also has a problem with the idea that American consumerism has influenced China's major appetite for oil. The balance of trade deficit we have with China, which fuels China's industries, which fuels their appetite for oil, is all just coincidental, no doubt.

If there is a "fringe" element in this country, it's the people who would destroy the Bill of Rights. It's the people who would ignore the mounting danger of global climate change. It's the people who turn a blind eye, or actively support, lies that got us into a war and that allows the torture of people. The "fringe" element coldly and cruelly ignores the growth of poverty in this country. Then they have the unmitigated gall to say we "hate" America. It is they who hate America and everything it's supposed to stand for.

REAGAN WAS WRONG

Ronald Reagan famously proclaimed that government wasn't the solution; government was the problem. Reagan and right-wing ideologues are in love with the idea that business is better than government at fixing problems, and that business in inherently more efficient. Business has its place, but there are many areas where business isn't particularly effective or even interested. Business is about making money and not everything is about making money. This article by Chris Satullo is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

The nation is run by people who savor power but disdain governing. The Abramoff scandal shows the wages of that combination. It also underscores why turning public works over to corporations often produces poor results for taxpayers.

If you assume government is too inept to do anything useful itself, then you reduce its role to dispensing contracts to the companies that "get things done." This turns sleazy deal-brokers like Jack Abramoff into VIPs.

Once you're there, abandon hope that corporations will do public work well. Businesses work efficiently because smart customers and strong competitors spur them.

February 18, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

RIGHT-WING TALKING POINTS

The red herring is a favorite device of right-wingers who try to defend George W. Bush. In today's Fresno Bee we have a letter to the editor from a guy who says he "has problems" with Republicans (yeah, sure), but he's "terrified" of Democrats. He recites this litany: Japanese-Americans were confined after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Robert Kennedy authorized wiretaps on Martin Luther King, Bill Clinton authorized "illegal wiretaps" (with no evidence), and so on.

The confinement of Japanese-Americans was wrong and the country has since paid reparations, although that doesn't excuse the treatment of American citizens back then. I have a feeling Republicans back then were fully on board with confining Japanese-Americans. RFK authorized wiretaps on Martin Luther King reluctantly because of the pressure from J. Edgar Hoover. There were some Communists affiliated with the civil rights movement, and Communism was a very hot button issue back then. The FBI was already wiretapping King, and the Kennedy administration was trying to protect King and the civil rights movement as much as it could.

I don't know of any evidence that Bill Clinton authorized illegal wiretaps.

Look at the history of the Republican party in this century if you want to be "terrified." We had the Teapot Dome scandal under the corrupt and inept Warren G. Harding. We had the Great Depression occur because of the inept economic policies of Herbert Hoover. We had the Constitutional crisis caused by the crimes of Richard Nixon. We've had massive deficits and crimes aplenty under the Reagan-Bush administration. Under the current Bush administration we've been lied into a war, spied upon, had our national treasure transferred to the very wealthy, the environment neglected, and hatred fueled against us around the world. That's not even to mention Republican obstructionism against the United Nations, Social Security, civil rights, the environmental movement, the women's movement, labor laws, and civil liberties.

The Democrats have committed sins, but all of the progress we've seen for the middle class, poor people, and minorities has been thanks to Democrats.

THE PLACE WE ARE NOW

I forgot in my commentary above to mention people like Senator Joseph McCarthy, the forerunner to George W. Bush. McCarthy had no problem with dropping bombshells about Communists being everywhere, smearing people by innuendo, and destroying lives and careers. During the Reagan years we had a end run around Congress that created the Iran-Contra scandal. We had the savings and loan debacle that came about thanks to the Reagan administration. Now our country, under this administration, is like a barren landscape. Civil liberties lie in blazing hulks, the economy like a rotting and sagging building, and our credibility blown to smithereens. This commentary by Steve Osborn is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

Now I live in an America I don't dare leave for fear of being spat upon, shot, bombed or kidnaped. I am looked upon as a citizen of a rogue nation that has no concept or respect for any law except bullying and strength. I need a passport even to visit Canada, which was to be our sister nation with open borders forever. I must expect to be required to show my "papers" at any time, to any official. I must accept that the government can break into my house and rifle my belongings and papers any time it wishes on the thinnest of excuses and it is not even required to let me know it has violated my home and my privacy. I must accept the fact that the government can listen in to my private conversations, my phone, my e-mail, can probably read my snail mail if they wish and can put a gag order on anyone who has information on me so I may not even be made aware that I am being spied upon. George Orwell's absolute dictatorship has crept in to my home and my life and thrown out my beloved Constitution and Bill of Rights. The difference between the United States, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy is steadily and inexorably diminishing and the people are letting it happen while they remain paralyzed with fear. Fear incited by the gang that runs the White House and their cronies in the propaganda ministry that used to be our last bulwark against tyranny; our once free press.

February 17, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

CHENEY THE ALBATROSS

I don't know who I dislike more, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney, because both of them are so vile. I guess some people would cut Bush some slack because he's not real bright, but Cheney emanates pure evil. There is much evidence that Cheney has been the major influence behind attacking Iraq, torture, and our incredibly short-sighted energy policy. Cheney's hunting accident, and the loathsome way he handled it, just symbolize all that Cheney is. This article by Bob Herbert is at www.topplebush.com:

There's a reason Dick Cheney is obsessive about shunning the spotlight. His record is not the kind you want to hold up for intense scrutiny.

More than anyone else, he was fanatical about massaging and distorting the intelligence that plunged us into the flaming quagmire of Iraq. He insisted that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was hot on the trail of nukes. He pounded away at the false suggestion that Iraq was somehow linked to Al Qaeda. And he spread the word that the war he wanted so badly would be a cakewalk.

"I really do believe," he told Tim Russert, "that we will be greeted as liberators."

Well, he got his war. And while the nation's brave young soldiers and marines were bouncing around Iraq in shamefully vulnerable Humvees and other vehicles, dodging bullets, bombs and improvised explosive devices, Mr. Cheney (a gold-medal winner in the acquisition of wartime deferments) felt perfectly comfortable packing his fancy 28-gauge Perazzi shotgun and heading off to Texas with a covey of fat cats to shoot quail.

WILL THEY NEVER LEARN?

You think of the old song "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?" when you hear right-wing rhetoric these days. The Fresno Bee had yet another letter saying the writer had no problem with wiretapping, and saying that we're engaged in World War III. Talk about hyperbole. We've allowed the actions of nineteen nuts who were criminals to dictate international policy. Far from talking about world war, we should be talking about banding together to make the lives of everyone on earth better, including the eradication of criminal gangs like al-Qaeda. Instead, the Bush administration tries to apply an old geopolitical template in a new world. Right-wingers who would give George W. Bush unlimited power apparently haven't learned much from the history of the Third Reich. They had a "leader" who promised to protect them too. This article by Paul Craig Roberts is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

The siren call of "national security" is all the cover Bush needs to have the FISA law repealed, thus legally gaining the power to spy however he chooses, the protection of political opponents be damned. However, Bush and his Federalist Society Justice Department are not interested in having the law repealed. Their purpose has nothing to do with national security. The point on which the regime is insisting is that there are circumstances (undefined) in which the president does not have to obey laws. What those circumstances and laws are is for the regime to decide.

The Bush regime is asserting the Fuhrer Principle, and Americans are buying it, even as Bush declares that America is at war in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.

February 16, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

BUSH'S MEDICAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT SCAM

The Bush administration's philosophy is to take any situation and make it worse. You have Saddam Hussein contained and people aren't getting killed by the thousands, but hey start a war, destabilize the country, and get the military bogged down in an endless war. Take budget surpluses, pass massive tax cuts for the rich, and create red ink for decades to come. Ignore the evidence for global climate change and let global warming wreck our ecosystem. Do doing about 46 million Americans without health insurance and advocate a plan likely to create millions more without health insurance. That will the effect of Bush's Medical Savings Account sham. This article by Karen Dolan is at www.commondreams.org:

First, the proposal is to increase from $2,000 to $10,500 the amount that a couple or family can put away tax free to spend on high deductible insurance plans. Only the wealthy can afford to do this. Further, these tax benefits increase as tax brackets increase;

Second, high deductible plans simply discourage average and low-income people from getting the care they need, consequently escalating costs as health problems compound;

Third, the vast majority of our nation's health costs come from chronic illness and end-of-life care; high deductible health plans are for the more healthy;

Finally, as the wealthy and healthy choose the tax sheltering HSAs, the remaining risk pool becomes sicker and premiums for traditional plans skyrocket out of reach. As January's issue of the well-respected magazine, The Economist, puts it, "The Bush agenda may speed the reform of American health care, but only by hastening the day the current system falls apart."

RELIGION AS BIG BUSINESS

When I think of Jesus Christ I don't think of big cathedrals or hateful rhetoric against gays or other minorities, and I don't think of Christianity as the way to personal riches. But religion has been a good gimmick to make money for some people. Some of these "evangelists" are quite open in their lust for money. Give them "seed" money and you too can drive a Rolls Royce or wear a Rolex. It's the worst combination of superstition and greed. This article by Karen Horst Cobb is at www.commondreams.org:

According to a 2003 article in Forbes Magazine big churches are big business. Researchers found that in 2003 there were 740 mega churches each averaging 6,876 participants. The average net income of each was $4.8 million at the time of the study. The Forbes article states, “[the] entrepreneurial approach has contributed to the explosive growth of mega churches“.

Is it the entrepreneurial spirit or the Holy Spirit which is enticing the converts to this new religion? Some used to say that the love of money is the root of all evil and the rich man (like the camel) will forever be outside the kingdom. I guess that is just “too first century” for the modern believer. The millennium church makeover is all about Christian capitalism, he who the free market has set free shall be free indeed! Remember, this is the year God wants me to be a millionaire.

PRIVACY IS DISAPPEARING

Not that long ago people would have been offended if you wanted to intrude into their privacy. Now right-wingers act offended if you want to protect your privacy. After all, if you have "nothing to hide" you shouldn't mind the government tracking your every move, seeing your Internet searches, delving into your medical and financial records, tracing every purchase you make, and spying on your e-mail and other communications. The vast majority of us aren't terrorists and deplore terrorists. We shouldn't have to give up our civil liberties because of few loons running around in this country and the rest of the world. This article is about chips being implanted into the arms of some employees so that the company can follow their every movement. It seems there's just no end to authoritarianism these days. This article by Cheri Delbroccio is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

For all the FOX News-loving Freedom Fighters who continue to bang their war drums insisting that Iraq was invaded to spread freedom while defending the Bush regime's calls for Americans to be wiretapped, thumb-printed, filmed, wanded, searched, carded, frisked, and scanned in the name of "security" - how about this? Are you ready to be "chipped"? No, we're not talking computers, fingernails, or china. "Tagged" - it's not just for Spot and Fluff anymore. And it may be coming to a workplace near you.

A company in Ohio recently embedded silicon-tracking chips into a couple of its employees. The two workers complied with a request to have their right arms implanted with a glass-encased radio transmitter that can be read by a special monitor that tracks their every move at work. It's a human OnStar for employers. The private video surveillance company who was hired to test the technology claims the devices are necessary for controlling access to company security rooms. The employer defends it by saying it is not compulsory. Not yet, anyway. Of course, the device can also be used to track the "wearer" any time of day and night without their knowledge.

February 15, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

IMPEACHMENT BY THE NUMBERS

The fact that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are still in office is proof that the Republican party doesn't care about the Constitution, the country, or the vaunted "rule of law." Since Congress is controlled by Republicans, some people think talk of impeachment is just a pipe dream. We haven't got the numbers to get Articles of Impeachment introduced and passed in the House, and then to have Bush and Cheney tried and convicted in the Senate. But as this article points out, impeachment is a step by step process. The author talks about "moral impeachment." I believe we're already at that stage as even the mainstream media is acknowledging the horrific failure to aid the Hurricane Katrina victims, the increasing debacle in Iraq, and the crony capitalism such as giving away billions of dollars to the oil and gas industry. This article by Jamin B. Raskin is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

1. Moral Impeachment: One meaning of impeachment is to charge with malfeasance in office, but the other is "To challenge or discredit." We can debunk the administration's policies all over America, especially with the excellent work done by Rep. John Conyers and his staff on the fraudulent rush to war. Institutions with moral authority like universities, municipalities, unions and churches should conduct their own "Impeach-Ins" to impeach the various frauds and policy deceptions of the administration. The Federalist Society and others who support Bush should be invited to defend the constitutionality of Bush's actions.

AL-QAEDA WELL AWARE OF SPYING

In a recent appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee Attorney General Alberto Gonzales suggested that members of al-Qaeda might forget they're being spied on if not reminded by the American media. Who does this guy think he's kidding? Al-Qaeda is a thuggish organization with no respect for human life, even willing to commit suicide to achieve its objectives, but its members aren't stupid. A training manual for al-Qaeda even made a special point about avoiding wiretapping and other surveillance. This column by Gene Lyons is linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:

Alas, the CIA has long had in its possession an al-Qa'ida training manual from the 1990s warning would-be terrorists to be wary of U. S. wiretaps and to take evasive measures. The New York Times' revelation of NSA's warrantless spying on American citizens told the enemy nothing they didn't already know and weakened national security not at all. The only damage was to the Bush White House's political interests.

Gonzales' legal justifications of the spy program are similarly preposterous, proving only something else we already knew: that for a fancy title and an office filled with expensive leather furniture, you can find a shyster to argue damn near anything. They practically had to tear White House mouthpieces off Richard Nixon's leg before he embarked upon that helicopter ride into the sunset.

February 14, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

CORETTA SCOTT KING FUNERAL

I've picked up on another right wing meme in letters to the editor the past couple of days. I saw two letters in The Los Angeles Times and one today in The Fresno Bee that were talking about how awful--terrible!--it was that the "left" used the funeral as a political "rally." They're referring mostly to former President Carter's remarks. President Carter merely stated the obvious, that Martin Luther King and Coretta Scott King were wiretapped by the government. We know that the same activity has taken place under George W. Bush. If Mr. Bush is so convinced wiretapping is the right thing to do, why all the gnashing of teeth?

What really got me was someone talking about "hate speech" from President Carter. I didn't hear a single hateful word from Mr. Carter, but I've heard plenty from right-wingers. Ann Coulter has made numerous hateful statements, from suggesting that President Clinton be assassinated, that an attack on The New York Times building by terrorists would be a good thing, that killing leaders in the Middle East would be good, and so on. Pat Robertson has openly called for the assassination of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert said that we should just bulldoze New Orleans. It goes on and on. These people engage in real hate speech.

THE P.R. ADMINISTRATION

The General Accounting Office has released a report showing that the Bush administration has spent $1.6 billion in advertising and public relations efforts. We already know that some "journalists" such as Armstrong Williams were bought and paid for. This administration can't stand the truth, so they spin and lie and deceive, mostly at taxpayer expense. This article by Timothy Karr is at www.commondreams.org:

The tab for the fleecing and flogging of Americans comes to at least $1.6 billion. That's the amount seven Bush administration agencies spent from 2003 through mid-2005 on hundreds of contracts with advertising agencies, PR firms, and individuals, according to a Government Accountability Office report released yesterday.

The GAO report carefully itemizes this administration’s preference for pre-packaged reporting at the expense of real news and information – in a scheme to make U.S. taxpayers pay for their own deception.

The report found that White House public relations spending goes well beyond the practices of any prior administration. The contracts included $2.5 million to present the Army's strategy in the global war on terrorism; $86 million to explain the new Medicare prescription drug benefit in a bilingual ad campaign; and a $6.3 million agreement to help the Department of Homeland Security educate Americans about how to respond to terrorist attacks.

FREE MARKET ECONOMISTS WERE WRONG

It's almost like right-wingers go into a trance and start to chant: free market good, free market good. Despite all the rose-colored scenarios about global trade, what we're seeing down is a disaster. Millions of jobs have been exported from the United States to cheaper labor markets. The middle class in the United States is shrinking. Our balance of trade deficit is hitting new records. We're spending money on imports for stuff that should be made here at home and that should provide middle class jobs at home. Just like the wackos who advocate trickle down economics, the free trade ideologues are dead wrong. This article by Paul Craig Roberts is linked at www.makethemaccountable.com:

Last week the Bureau of Labor Statistics re-benchmarked the payroll jobs data back to 2000. Thanks to Charles McMillion of MBG Information Services, I have the adjusted data from January 2001 through January 2006. If you are worried about terrorists, you don’t know what worry is.

Job growth over the last five years is the weakest on record. The US economy came up more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth. That’s one good reason for controlling immigration. An economy that cannot keep up with population growth should not be boosting population with heavy rates of legal and illegal immigration.

Over the past five years the US economy experienced a net job loss in goods producing activities. The entire job growth was in service-providing activities--primarily credit intermediation, health care and social assistance, waiters, waitresses and bartenders, and state and local government.

US manufacturing lost 2.9 million jobs, almost 17% of the manufacturing work force. The wipeout is across the board. Not a single manufacturing payroll classification created a single new job.

February 13, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

PLAME LEAK DID MAJOR DAMAGE TO NATIONAL SECURITY

Lately we're hearing the saber rattlers in the Bush administration making menacing noises about the danger of a nuclear Iran. I don't relish nuclear proliferation by anyone, much less a fundamentalist theocratic state like Iran But you have to wonder how the administration can justify outing CIA operative Valerie Plame when Valerie Plame was an integral part of gathering intelligence about Iran. If Iran is the threat we're being lead to believe, the administration is guilty of gross negligence in revealing Valerie Plame's name. This article is at http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001246.php

An important and provocative report has just been published that suggests that Iran was the target of much of Valerie Plame's covert investigative work and that outing her identity had far worse consequences than has thus far been acknowledged.

This information also dovetails with information TWN has been digging up on Iran's interests in Niger uranium.

Raw Story has just published this piece by Larisa Alexandrovna.

The core of the article is:

The unmasking of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson by White House officials in 2003 caused significant damage to U.S. national security and its ability to counter nuclear proliferation abroad, RAW STORY has learned.

According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.

Speaking under strict confidentiality, intelligence officials revealed heretofore unreported elements of Plame's work. Their accounts suggest that Plame's outing was more serious than has previously been reported and carries grave implications for U.S. national security and its ability to monitor Iran's burgeoning nuclear program.

THE ARROGANT SCOTT MCCLELLAN

If the Bush administration wanted to find a press secretary who exemplifies the character of the administration, they couldn't do better than Scott McClellan. McClellan is a liar and consistently condescends to the White House press corps (and by proxy the rest of us). McClellan has certain standard responses when he doesn't want to answer a question. There's the old reliable, "We don't comment on a matter under investigation" (everything in this administration is under investigation). Lately McClellan dodges by saying he already answered the question. He must think reporters have awfully short memories. This item by Mark Silva is at newsblogs.chicagotribune.com:

The atmosphere can get pretty testy in the White House press briefing room from time to time.

But there were no cameras rolling in the Monday morning "gaggle'' today, the morning after news belatedly broke about Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shooting a hunting companion on Saturday. The broadcast sessions of press encounters with White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan are saved for formal afternoon briefings, with the morning gaggles serving as more informal warm-ups. And David Gregory, the chief White House correspondent for NBC News, was warmed up.



Why was the White House relying on a Texas rancher to get the word of Cheney's hunting accident out over the weekend, asked Gregory, accusing McClellan of "ducking and weaving.''

"“David, hold on… the cameras aren't on right now,'' McClellan replied. "You can do this later.''

"Don't accuse me of trying to pose to the cameras,'' the newsman said, his voice rising somewhat. "Don’t be a jerk to me personally when I’m asking you a serious question.''

"You don't have to yell,'' McClellan said.

MACHO DICK CHENEY

Dick Cheney got five deferments from the Vietnam war draft, but the guy is a man, don't you know. He can send young men off to die in unnecessary wars and he can shoot fellow hunters in the face. What makes this incident even more despicable is that it was a so-called "canned" hunt. Birds that don't know how to survive in the wild are released for the sadistic pleasure of people like Dick Cheney. This item is at scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/02/these_guys_at_the_top_are_desp.php

Monday's hunting trip to Pennsylvania by Vice President Dick Cheney in which he reportedly shot more than 70 stocked pheasants and an unknown number of mallard ducks at an exclusive private club places a spotlight on an increasingly popular and deplorable form of hunting, in which birds are pen-reared and released to be shot in large numbers by patrons. The ethics of these hunts are called into question by rank-and-file sportsmen, who hunt animals in their native habitat and do not shoot confined or pen-raised animals that cannot escape.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported today that 500 farm-raised pheasants were released yesterday morning at the Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier Township for the benefit of Cheney's 10-person hunting party. The group killed at least 417 of the birds, illustrating the unsporting nature of canned hunts. The party also shot an unknown number of captive mallards in the afternoon.

February 12, 2006

IMPEACH BUSH

BUSH HATES THE TRUTH

Facts are often inconvenient for George W. Bush. A system of checks and balances as mandated by the Constitution is also inconvenient. Bush, according to a CIA analyst, "cherry picked" intelligence to justify attacking Iraq. Bush has made end runs around Congress and the Constitution to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants. If Republicans in Congress were true to their oaths to preserve and protect the Constitution, we would already have impeachment hearings for Bush and Cheney. This editorial comes from The New York Times at www.nytimes.com:

We can't think of a president who has gone to the American people more often than George W. Bush has to ask them to forget about things like democracy, judicial process and the balance of powers — and just trust him. We also can't think of a president who has deserved that trust less.

This has been a central flaw of Mr. Bush's presidency for a long time. But last week produced a flood of evidence that vividly drove home the point.

DOMESTIC SPYING After 9/11, Mr. Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the conversations and e-mail of Americans and others in the United States without obtaining a warrant or allowing Congress or the courts to review the operation. Lawmakers from both parties have raised considerable doubt about the legality of this program, but Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made it clear last Monday at a Senate hearing that Mr. Bush hasn't the slightest intention of changing it.

NOW THEY'RE QUOTING CICERO

Today's right-wing defense of Bush's domestic spying (in The Fresno Bee) offers up a quote from the Roman Cicero. Cicero said that in a time of war the rules are at rest. We should probably remember that ancient Rome went from being a Republic to being a dictatorship. Our writer suggests that Bush "can't win" with us on the left. We criticize Bush for not "connecting the dots" before 9/11 and then we criticize him for his actions post 9/11.

We should remember that Bush had ample warning of an impending terrorist attack before 9/11, including a Presidential Daily Briefing that flatly stated, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." On the day the attacks occurred, Bush was in the classroom of a Florida elementary school even after being informed of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center. Even as four airliners were hijacked and flight controllers were aware that something was dreadfully wrong, nothing was done to intercept the airliners.

As is typical of right-wingers, this guy says that other administrations have wiretapped too. He mentioned something called Project Echelon during the Clinton years that I'll have to research. He also mentioned that the Kennedy administration wiretapped Martin Luther King. We should probably put that into context, however. Both JFK and Robert Kennedy were supporters of Martin Luther King. They were trying to protect King from the psychopathic J. Edgar Hoover. They weren't trying to to derail the civil rights movement. I don't have confidence that the Bush administration wouldn't use information it gathered to hamper or destroy political opposition.

It was recently revealed that Bush's domestic spying has largely resulted in sending the FBI on wild goose chases. They get directed to people who aren't doing anything terrorist related. So we're devoting resources that should be used to finding real terrorists to spying on totally innocent Americans.

If Bush has such a compelling need for domestic surveillance, he also has the FISA courts, which almost always approve warrants. Warrants can even be obtained retroactively. So I don't buy the argument that Bush has to supersede the Constitution, Congress, and the courts to spy on Americans without warrants.

BUSH HATES AMERICA

If you believe in a United States that promotes peace around the world, or you believe in a United States that offers equal opportunities to all its citizens, or you believe in a United States that stands for human rights, or you believe in a United States that remains true to its greatest ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, you have to believe that George W. Bush and his supporters hate the United States. They believe in a country that is an international bully, a country that promotes torture, a country that shoves most of its citizens to the bottom of the economic heap and puts a foot on their necks, and a country that hypocritically espouses freedom while doing everything it can to destroy freedom. This article by Jaime O'Neill is at www.smirkingchimp.com:

Beyond that, we have the shameful spectacle of Americans who call themselves patriots urging a forfeiture of our rights and liberties as U.S. citizens the rights to due process and the protections devised by the founding fathers to guard against abuses of power.



And beyond that, we have breaches of national security in the outing of a CIA agent for no better reason than spite. We have the staffing of all kinds of highly paid and important government jobs with incompetent administration cronies and partners in crime. We have repeated and massive failures of imagination. No one could have imagined a) people flying planes into U.S. skyscrapers, b) a storm of the magnitude of Katrina, or c) a Palestinian militant group like Hamas winning elections in Palestine these being just a few of the things Condoleezza Rice has said the administration couldn't imagine.

Beyond all of that, we have the growing gap between rich and poor, the exportation of American jobs by the hundreds of thousands, the wasteful and exploitive health care system that continues to bankrupt American industries, the packing of the Supreme Court with judges confirmed despite their stonewalling before the congressional oversight committees charged with vetting them before they assumed lifetime appointments. We have been unable or unwilling to secure our borders. We have seen corruption on an unprecedented scale and massive neglect of dozens of urgent national needs. Science has been disregarded whenever it runs afoul of the profit motive, and we have a foreign policy no one, least of all the people in charge of it, seems to understand.