Fitz

meltz!

Sorry ; ) LOL

pathetic bitch

This should really go a couple threads back, but the Jason Leopold piece appears to be bullshit:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/14/22295/5016

Denial from Rove spokeperson, with some quotes from it:
http://corner.nationalreview.c…..I0MDEyYzM=

Did Patrick Fitzgerald come to Patton Boggs for 15 hours Friday?
No.
Did he come to Patton Boggs for any period of time Friday?
No.
Did he meet anywhere else with Karl Rove’s representatives?
No.
Did he communicate in any way with Karl Rove’s representatives?
No.
Did he inform Rove or Rove’s representatives that Rove had been indicted?
No.

Village Voice piece about another Leopold stuff-up:

http://www.villagevoice.com/ne…..336,6.html

Post by Emptywheel about yet another Leopold leap of logic:

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c…..mpreh.html

All in all Leopold doesn’t look very credible. I guess we’ll see this week whether the stopped clock is right twice a day.

I would give Ned more but it would be against the law :)

(downbeat) anFitZipation, its making me wait…

What’s the current status re: Lamont on the primary ballot? I remember something like 15% of Conn Dems in favor at party convention or a petition with xx number of names.

The fix is in. Hillary is seen by the big money as the de facto nominee for the Democrats in 2008. See Rupert Murdoch cozying up to her. He hasn’t got his fortune from backing losers. But little money is going to have a say in this, I believe, and Al Gore as well, among others, so not so fast. Hillary could gain some cred if she donated some of her Senate “warchest” to non-DNC congressional or senatorial candidate in 2006. If she doesn’t, she’s out, or should be. Who needs that crap?

Hillary has worn out her pass. She’s running against the Democratic Party. The Clintons are standing in the way of a progressive future.

Just finished with the latest Libby filing (www.talkleft.com). It reads as a pretty desperate attempt to get their hands on something–anything–that they can try to use as greymail. The legal wrangling is pretty solid until they get to a specific example of how the requested documents could be crucial to their case: “Such testimony would support the defense’s contention that Ms. Martin did not tell Mr. Libby that Ms. Wilson’s employment at the CIA was classified, which would help the defense to contest the government’s argument that Mr. Libby should have known such information was classified.” Um, I didn’t tell Mr. Libby that Ms. Wilson’s employment at the CIA was classified, either. Do you need me to testify?

Thank you Jane! I think we CT progressives deserve a senator that represents us. Hilary, Obama et al have absolutely no right to interfere: It’s undemocratic. How’s Rupert, Hilary?

It’s just another example of DINOs hanging together. That damn comet 65 million years ago missed a few and for reasons known only to themselves they have congregated in the US Senate.

none, thanks for those links. IMO, Leopold gives the blogs a bad name. Also, he is taking oxygen away from the stories that need telling.
OT Coz, LOL. When will they learn?
OT I guess Hillary has been taking lessons from Schmuckie Schumur.

OT:

Tomorrow does not look like a good day on wall st.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/mon…..kets15.xml

Markets braced for the worst
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (Filed: 15/05/2006)

Global markets are bracing for turmoil today after an ominous slide in the US dollar and a slump in equity and bond prices late last week sent tremors through the global financial system, evoking memories of the 1987 crash.

Emerging economies have led the sell-off as investors recoil from risky assets, pummelling stocks and bonds in Turkey, Hungary, Iceland and much of Latin America.

The currencies of Brazil, Mexico and South Africa all suffered their sharpest falls in two years as foreign funds rushed for the exits.

Hillary really puzzles me. The potential for greatness in her is palpable, but she is blatantly tone deaf toward the democratic party. Is she merely assuming a coronation from the democrats, therefore feels the urge to fish in Bush’s 29% pond. Do most progressives feel like she is bandoning her base like I do?

Funny how Republicans never feel the need to abandon there base. They run toward them. Why does Hillary feel the need to run toward them too?

Hugh at 8:22, LMAO.

Hilary == AIPAC. She’s just as Neocon as the Neocons. It explains EVERYTHING.

wow. sound the death knell. her finger in the wind appears to be completely tinderbox dry.

Maybe in her recent close association with Republicans Hillary has picked up some tips in campaigning from them: tell an outright lie (Lieberman’s position on Soc Sec) and some of the people are going to believe it just because it was put out there.

Yes, John Caspar (13). The Iran thing really has me biting me nails.

I betcha old Ben Bernanke is tossing and turning in his nice comfortable bed in his nice house.

-GSD

It’s a great video and I suggest sending to all of the people on your distribution lists. I did earlier tonight.

I was happy to see an gay couple included. It’s about time the Democratic Party comes out from the closet.

I predict they’ll stop the ticker by 1:00 after a 300 point plunge.

-GSD

Ah, machine politics. Of course Hillary is backing Joe, they’re peas in a pod lined with corporate dollars. The old guard are sticking together, trying to keep us rabble from taking their power. This is not unlike the struggle in the 1960s within the party to go from smoke-filled back rooms for making decisions to opening the process to scrutiny. Since then we’ve fallen back into wheeling and dealing, exemplified by Schumer’s manipulation of who becomes a candidate.

While people may like Hillary, I don’t think she has the instincts to survive the changes coming in the next couple of years. And she’s full of figurative warts—for every step forward she makes she takes at least as many backwards.

ever since she was photographed kissing arafat’s wife, hillary has gone out of her way to side with any neocon who wants her help, whether it’s rupert or joe

oilfieldguy – 15. That’s a Dem thing. Running away from their base and embracing the “29″% pond”. I guess a legacy of the sista souljah moment. The problem I believe is with the Dem base for continuing to support the DINOs. The fundies desert the Repubs at a drop of a hat – recent example being Harriet Miers. That’s why the Repubs always play to their base. Note their mid-term strategy.

Miles to go before we can rest:

http://tinyurl.com/a6erq

^^^ HELP IMPEACH TODAY

Keep the pressure on Congress… Talking about impeachment wakes people up… They question, it’s a strong motivator to get people thinking. It also lets Congress know how intense the dissapproval is for this President… They seem to be a little slow on the uptake. So please:

1) Sign petitions if you have not done so
2) Send a letter to Congress (both Senators & House rep)
3) Send a copy to the media
4) Enlist friends and family to help, ask them to chip in time
5) Spread the link around, email it (with a request to forward) post it on a blog, or in the comments of a news story.

Help out!!!

Thanks :)

#14 tom – Chicago. That doesn’t look good, does it?

Notice this paragraph…US recession with a “hard landing” in China…

They might want to get the trampolines and parachutes ready for the folks on Wall St.

It is a much further fall from the penthouse to the sidewalk than from the sidewalk to the gutter.

“Analysts said there were now clear signs that monetary tightening by the world’s central banks was starting to crimp growth. Lombard Street Research warned the US was now heading into outright recession, with China also facing a hard landing.”

-GSD

VG, Don’t know if this answers your question:
via Lamont http://nedlamont.com/news/162/…..nwich-time

I would think the letter is good news for Lamont, sorta. It indicates Eeyore Joe whines worse than a loose fan belt for her ladyship to offer her fingers for a lick.

‘They call them cold-hearted glad-handers, They say they are shiftless and mean, But I’ll put this on the list, That I once knew Frist, When he was honest and upright and clean.’

;>)

It being late night and all. Forgive a longish OT.

A justification for the NSA data mining operation that, I think, has been largely unexamined is the notion that the NSA is looking for “patternsâ€. The image is one of blackboards covered in differential equations and statistical analysis, something for which few of us have sufficient information or competence to question. I wonder though if this isn’t a clever bit of misdirection.

Think about it for a moment. The NSA has two tasks. First it must recognize that some collection of calls constitutes a pattern and second it must prove that that pattern is meaningful. The first part is easy, in fact, too easy. If you have the phone numbers and internet records of 200 million customers (representing untold billions of communications), you will find patterns, millions of them. You call your mother, mistress, pizza place or son twice a week. Those are all patterns, same numbers and very likely similar call times and call durations. They are not, however, meaningful if you are trying to catch terrorists and what’s worse with just this information they can not be made meaningful.

As has been mentioned by many, the NSA can compare these telephone numbers with other databases and add names and addresses to them. In this way, a meaningful pattern might arise. Basically, you take the calls and associated data and score them both individually and over time. The higher the score, the higher the index of suspicion and the greater likelihood of more intrusive investigation and surveillance. Perhaps you might get Mohammed Atta’s brother calling flight schools in Florida (but probably not).

OTOH suppose a Mr. Khan makes calls to a religiously conservative mosque and subsequently to a fertilizer wholesaler. Cross referencing might show that his initial visa was granted so that he could study chemical engineering and that he currently works for Acme Pharmaceuticals. The NSA algorithm would kick in at some point. Perhaps as soon as he calls the mosque and it is found that he is a chemist or perhaps only after he calls the fertilizer wholesaler. It all depends on how high or low the set point is to initiate an investigation.

So the FBI is contacted and what they are likely to find is a guy who has agreed to buy fertilizer for a community gardens project. Nothing more. What has to be understood is that the NSA program is in essence a screen and like most screens it is going to have many false positives. The lower the set points for investigation the more false positives there will be.

Another example would be if Mr. Khan the chemist calls the mosque but a Mr. Smith calls the fertilizer wholesaler and then subsequently Mr. Khan. This too might trigger an investigation. Again it depends upon the way these data are scored.

The NSA has been in the business of monitoring and recording foreign communications for years. It also apparently has been doing this where one caller is domestic and the other is foreign. Of course, with wireless technology many calls where both sides originate in the US are routed through Canada and so it could be argued one or both are “foreignâ€. In addition, lists of “terrorist†numbers and web sites can be monitored and their traffic analyzed and recorded. If Mr. Khan or Mr. Smith call or visit one of these, the scoring on all their communications inside the US immediately increases and the bar for investigation is significantly lowered. Even if they don’t do this but call abroad and use words like ‘jihad’, ‘bomb’, ‘attack’ or names of known or suspected terrorists or even names that sound like them, their score increases and they, their friends, and associates, as well as all their communications everywhere are in for closer scrutiny. That Mr. Khan or Mr. Smith might be reporters, politicians, researchers, or just interested observers doesn’t really change anything. Even if they aren’t primary targets, their contacts are.

A criticism of this type of search is that it doesn’t need to keep track of billions of communications. If certain numbers or sites are key, then the monitoring of these would produce a few hundred names and the calling patterns associated with these names a few thousands at most. That is if the searches are kept within about two degrees of separation. The problem is that as degrees of separation increase, the number of persons under scrutiny increases geometrically while their potential relevance decreases similarly. OTOH I am sure the NSA would argue that mixing limited domestic and unlimited foreign surveillance has a synergistic effect. The proof, of course, is in the pudding and as of today we have no pudding.

More speculatively, we do not know how limited the NSA program is domestically. You see so much depends on how the word ‘wiretapping’ is interpreted. Is getting call records wiretapping? Apparently not. What if you record communications, pass them through electronic filters, but their content is not listened to by a human listener or watcher? You can say as the Administration does that “we aren’t listening in†but that is not the same as not monitoring or recording. The advantage to such a system is that you treat all communications (and all resultant data) more equally. If you want to listen to specific conversations which at the time were not considered significant but in the light of subsequent information become so, you can because they are recorded. And when you do this, you can say as the Administration does that it is only going after the terrorists.

The flaw (and it’s a big one) in the whole NSA data mining scheme is that it is so easily circumvented by going low tech. Terrorists could organize their cells so that they receive pertinent information by way of human messengers avoiding all but tangential contact with the NSA’s whole operation. We have already seen this in the “hunt†for Osama bin Laden and how he no longer uses cell phones. Coded speech can also be used with regular electronic communication. You don’t have to talk about ‘jihad’. You can be semi referential talking about your hobby and how it’s coming. Or you can be totally non referential. Your mom sends her love meaning, go blow something up.

And so the question comes down to this: Are you willing to trade off your right to privacy and your 4th Amendment protections to an Administration that has proven itself so untrustworthy in the past for an untested and poorly explained program that might or might not prevent a future terrorist attack?

Valley Girl –

I responded to your EPU’d Leopold post at 143 in the previous thread — that GNN piece is very good, and Jason and I were emailing at the time.

Pach @ 9 –

Steve Gilliard has a post on Hillary, where she called Gen Y lazy shiftless good for nothings, who want to start at $50 to $75k. This, despite her daughter using her name and connections to land a $100k+ first job. Not bad, if you can get it — if you can’t, and your name isn’t Clinton, you can always die in Iraq.

Hillary is dumber than a box of rocks — she has all of Bill’s flaws, with none of his charm or instincts . . .

http://stevegilliard.blogspot……-nuts.html

calvin continues to be amazed at the behavior of the so-called elites of both stripes. However, calvin learned many, many years ago, that there is only one party. And, that is the Money Party. Elites on both sides do their best suck on the teats. And, keep others from doing so. It’s called sucking up. Timmeh. Chris. Hilly. They all get co-opted.

The ones that aren’t copted are marginalized.

John Casper – Thanks for your reply near the end of the last thread. You make a compelling case.

Exclusive peek into Bush’s nect big photo-op:

Bush with Bullhorn standing on a pile of rubble at the Alamo:

“I hear you, and the Mexicans who destroyed the Alamo will hear from ALL of us soon.”

-GSD

Shit. I’m even starting to write like Jane.

GSD –

If the BushCo economic vultures come home to roost tomorrow, at least the Dear Leader has a speechifiyin’ moment scheduled — he can use it to reassure everyone that he and crackerjack team are on the job, and our financial security is in their hands . . .

Oh. My. God. — Sell, SELL EVERYTHING!!!

Speaking of civil war:

“Some of President Bush’s most influential conservative Christian allies during the last election are becoming openly critical of the White House and Republicans in Congress, warning that they will not help turn out the vote this fall unless Congress does more to oppose same-sex marriage, obscenity and abortion.”

I am sure that most folks will be champing at the bit to deal with these issues as the economy hits the skids and gas tools around $3.50 a gallon…..

Good luck Zippy the Chimp and Deadeye the Gimp.

-GSD

CK,

Bush and Cheney will be like the Randall and Mortimer Duke from the movie Trading Places….

“Mr. Duke, your brother is having a heart attack!”

“Fuck him! SELL!”

-GSD

wow – I thought some of Bill’s political acumen could be attributed to Hillary – how could being in the Senate make one more insulated than the WH ? I thought she was at least saavy – cripes

I remember somebody did a brilliant ed cartoon, in which, shrubbit, holding a newspaper with the headline that Chelsea had just landed her $100k job, says to a secret service agent, “Gee, imagine getting an important job, just cause your dad was president.”

Speaking of secret service agents, god help them if hilary gets the nomination, because that will bring out more Arthur Bremers and John Hinkleys than a Jodie Foster film festival hosted by Oliver Stone…

GSD

Never fear for Cheney as he has a staff of reanimatrons with him at all times, two of which are ex-NASCAR pit crew members.

TPM Lede –

Andrew Sullivan just published an email from a reader who says it’ll be Al Gore in 2008 for the Democrats, not Hillary. I could see it. I could totally see it.

I don’t think Hillary is anywhere near as strong as she looks or as people seem to think she is. And Gore would be formidable.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..008455.php

Re: NSA — here’s one simple, logical response I’ve yet to hear elsewhere, reported as said by Zbigniew Brzezinski:

“… when Qwest refused to cooperate, why was it permitted not to cooperate if this was such a real, serious national security need?”

That’s a question that makes sense to me. Seen at http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..222649/165

Hugh @33 – I’m glad you brought that up. Last night I had a question, and maybe you can answer it. Remember the stories about the peace groups etc, who were found to be under FBI surveillance, and the FBI was complaining they’d been sent on wild goose chases, going after hundreds of false leads? Could those be control groups?

Hugh at 33:

“And so the question comes down to this: Are you willing to trade off your right to privacy and your 4th Amendment protections to an Administration that has proven itself so untrustworthy in the past for an untested and poorly explained program that might or might not prevent a future terrorist attack? “

I don’t want to make you paranoid, but have you considered that the real reasons for compiling this massive database have little or nothing to do with the stated reasons for compiling it? The potential for misuse is stunning.

I was pointing out to a friend that, whatever else this database was, it was also the Taj Mahal of marketing databases. Let me see who everyone is calling and I’ll make us all millionaires in short order.

Now imagine if my intentions were somewhat less honorable than simple marketing. I truly believe we are being WAY too quick to accept the stated reasons for compiling this data. Once we have accepted the government “right” to collect it, preventing its expanded use would be impossible.

Remember, these people eat, sleep and live Leo Strass. Deception is not merely OK with these folks, it is a badge of honor.

CURRENCY DEVALUED = LOSING WAR

Because when you win a war, your currency gets stronger.

You don’t need to read all these… Just look at the titles.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/a…..99,00.html

http://www.freemarketnews.com/…..p;nid=4691

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060421/46778404.html

http://www.ameinfo.com/82263.html

Funny how the “liberal media” has not reported these in the mainstream U.S.

http://tinyurl.com/a6erq

please excuse an ot response to hugh’s ot at 33~
only talking about the seemingly reasonable idea of using patterns of calls to identify suspicious activity obscures the gompelling danger of collecting and warehousing all this data with no oversight. i posted the following earlier in the weekend in the “underwear drawer” thread. so, here hugh, until we come back around to this topic…

May 13th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
…â€The TIA program is a project that would create a working model for a computerized profile of the intimate details of a citizen’s private life. Neoconservative New York Times columnist William Safire notes the potential of the TIA program as follows:
“Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as “a virtual, centralized grand database.â€

Here is how John Markoff of the New York Times describes the capability of the TIA program:

“…it will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from Internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant. Historically, military and intelligence agencies have not been permitted to spy on Americans without extraordinary legal authorization. But Admiral Poindexter, the former national security adviser in the Reagan administration, has argued that the government needs broad new powers to process, store and mine billions of minute details of electronic life in the United States. Admiral Poindexter, who has described the plan in public documents and speeches but declined to be interviewed, has said that the government needs to ‘break down the stovepipes’ that separate commercial and government databases, allowing teams of intelligence agency analysts to hunt for hidden patterns of activity with powerful computers.â€

http://www.geocities.com/total…..awareness/

Frank Church on the dangers of NSA (via David Neiwert, via TLC)

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007650.php

“That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people,” he said in 1975, “and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.”

He added that if a dictator ever took over, the NSA “could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.”

“I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge,” Senator Church said. “I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

compelling danger

Remember one of the arguments for the original Patriot Act? How it was just “temporary” and all. The sunset provisions in act meant those of us who were concerned didn’t have a thing to worry about?

I said it then. I’ll say it again now. Sunsets never come.

a reader
I brought up a similar point here.

If this was legal then I’m sure that QWest would have been forced to comply as well. Unless they are operating under a different set of federal laws.
That is part of an email that I sent to my phone company (SBC now AT&T). I reposted it on my blog.

Re Hillary:

maybe in ordinary times, but what we will be facing as a country by the time 08 rolls around will be extreme and call for leadership of extraordinary abilities. she has shown absolutely no hint of leadership. she was nowhere during katrina . and what are her noteworthy proposals: an anti-flag burning amendment; censorship of video games; support to build a wall between mexico/u.s.. it’s endless pandering successful only in pissing off people who could have held their noses to vote for her — as she’ll never be acceptable to those she’s hoping to entice.

Send some dry dreams New Hampshire, Maine and Massachusetts way.

http://apnews.myway.com/articl…..RPPG0.html

-GSD

aReader #46

The short answer is that they probably didn’t need to. Qwest is small and covers parts of the West and Northwest. Many of it calls could be tracked because one of the sides was a non-Qwest customer. If Qwest covered New York, LA, or DC, a greater effort might have been made. And, of course, there was that whole legality thingy so the NSA would push hard but could only go so far.

brkily

I remember when you put that in the underwear thread. I put up a link to a deal I wrote on it too. Some excerpts:

Uncle Sam Is Not A Widower

She’s baaaaack!
Convicted felon John Poindexters’ discreet, yet chatty mistress, TIA (Total Information Awareness, or TIA, which is spanish for Aunt) a mega super snoopy data mining type continental gossip, is not so dead after all. Uncle Sam’s nosy wife was thought to have been euthanized by lawmakers over two years ago, for privacy infringement reasons, and that she was known to be consorting with convicted gunrunners.

[]

This little slut TIA is going to give Uncle Sam a virus. He probably needs a good old fashioned enema to get rid of all this shit. If this government were staffed by professionals with true credentials instead of keystone cop cronies this would be grave. As it is now, it seems like just another imperialistic run-of-the-mill lawbreaking. The one thing they can do though is win elections. I wonder who that nosy bitch is spying on?

JWR #47

I thought the peace demonstrator surveillance was tied in with some DOD activity. I have also read reports of irritation inside the FBI at being sent on thousands of wild goose chases by the NSA program. That’s a function of the program being an essentially big data trolling operation with poor parameters. They get lots of data but most of it is irelevant. If NSA people had to do the on the ground follow ups, I think you would see a real tightening up of criteria but since it’s the FBI, well…

Ned N Sted #48

I agree once you create a program this big and secret it is almost impossible to kill and worse with no real oversight people will keep finding new and creative uses for it.

Re: Hillary: she’s so not the nominee. I have been ranting about this for weeks–it’s Gore, and a smart-aleck bet would be Obama as veep. Kerry will get secretary of state. HRC will be lucky to get agriculture.

Jane–you don’t need an anvil. Lieberman will do fine for that as he is. :)

brkily #49

Such a data base is ripe for abuse We would have a monster too unwieldy to be used for intelligence functions but perfect for criminal and unethical ones.

How about cel phones, if not included, it is a joke at best or a bait at worst !!!! for things to come…

if anybody here tonight didn’t read billmon’s “Leviathan” over at the Whisky Bar (posted yesterday) you should. he nailed this topic in the most thorough and astute manner. it’s a brilliant piece.

NYT article traces history of Joementum’s flipflopping on Social Security

WASHINGTON – Just five years ago, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut was praised for his cross-party appeal as the vice presidential candidate on a Democratic ticket that won the popular vote.

In recent weeks, he has angered Democratic activists nationwide for expressing a willingness to work with President Bush to change Social Security. Critics say that is just his latest act of disloyalty to the party. He already had supported the war in Iraq and Mr. Bush’s cabinet choices – and received a televised presidential smooch at the State of the Union address.

(more)

http://www.commondreams.org/he…..307-01.htm

Looks like Rover will be up to old tricks in the morning… c-span monday schedule

11:00 AM EDT
1:00 (est.) LIVE
Speech
U.S. Economic Policy
American Enterprise Institute
Karl Rove , White House
The beginning and end of this live program may be earlier or later than the scheduled times.

Oilfieldguy said-
“Hillary really puzzles me. The potential for greatness in her is palpable, but she is blatantly tone deaf toward the democratic party.”

No, she is Tone Deaf towards the voters and people on the ground…not towards the Democratic PARTY.

One of the key findings of the Church committee was that too much information had been collected on too many and then kept for too long. Targets that were initially fairly narrowly chosen broadened inexorably over time. Information collected for one purpose would be used for another.

For example, domestic intelligence collected by the FBI was then used to disrupt groups seen as a threat. Some of the things the Bureau did were just silly, like sending anonymous copies of Reader’s Digest articles to college administrators to persuade them to get tough with anti-war protestors on campus. Some of what it did was outrageous, like trying to break up marriages or to get people ostracized from violent groups by falsely portraying them as police informants. (The FBI claimed no one was actually killed, but admitted that was the result of luck, not planning.) And then, of course, there was the project to discredit MLK, Jr.

The actual name of the committee, IIRC, was the Senate Select Committee on Government Activities With Respect to Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans. That was back when people actually thought Americans should be protected against the intelligence agencies. Seems rather quaint, now. The current chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence — the successor to the Church committee — has said that civil liberties are no good to you if you’re dead. He therefore thinks they should be abolished for the living. He makes me so angry that I want to scream and so nauseated that I want to puke. That whirring sound you hear is Frank Church spinning in his grave.

Re Lamont: I already gave twice. FDL has inspired me to break my primary primary rule several times – that is: keep your money in Alaska. Before I give him any more, does anybody know how the voting machine situation currently stands in Connecticut during this primary?

Re Hillary Clinton: When I first started reading FDL last summer, she was fairly popular here. That has slowly changed as this site and her stances have evolved. I find the dialogue here on that subject to have been one of the more mature aspects of this incredibly reasonable site. Let’s hope that as she quite probably becomes THE candidate over the next 22 months (I’m beginning to think the fix is in), we can handle the utter disappointment of all that.

If Hilary and Joe are the Dino’s – would that make Klein and Begala the SoreUs? SoreUs-es?

What with American Idol and Laura Bush interviews, MSM doesn’t have time or space for any wmd inspectors who come out under their own name and confirm the biolabs cover up.*s*
http://tinyurl.com/paanm
Ex wmd inspector – politics quashed facts re: mobile biolabs.
At one point, former U.N. arms inspector Rod Barton says, a CIA officer told him it was “politically not possible” to report that the White House claims were untrue

When politics don’t quash all you want, it’s time to subvert the judicial system and Constitution.
Under cover of night is how EFF describes the Government’s filings on the 13th (yes, that would be Saturday ) to crater the AT&T suit under the cloak of State Secrets. Accompanying affidavits from Alexander and Negroponte (anyone who didn’t see Feingold Press club question/answer missed a long question about how Negroponte has explained that everything is fine – and finshed with, *Doesn’t Negroponte’s input reassure you* and Feingold’s “Noâ€)
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004659.php

For such a historically little used approach, the State Secret’s argument to crater lawsuits has been awfully popular. Popular is maybe not the word I am looking for? All while saying – but hey, we don’t do those kinds of things – it’s just that if we did, it needs to be *S*E*C*R*E*T*
Whether it’s corporate billons on the line for domestic crimes and corporate collaboration, or the Worst of All Fates someone actually demanding that the government apologize!!! for international crimes, kidnapping and torture, our DOJ is there. Coverups aren’t just for the beach anymore.
Where was I going with this – oh yeah, DOJ also intervenes to dismiss the Khaled el-Masri suit. State Secrets will be implicated if he is allowed to put on his case that we – kidnapped and tortured him. And apparently there is some hidden law, maybe something from the Deep Magic of Narnia?, where mountains will crumble and rivers run backwards if GWB ever has to apologize for anything. When you think of it, it IS a matter of national security since God will smite the nation if someone makes George say “sorry.†Luckily, God will provide and here the deity has provided a whole phalanx of lawyers to stand between George and an expression of regret. Brave souls.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05…..ref=slogin
US, Citing State Secrets, Challenges Detainee Suit
Khaled el-Masri, a Kuwaiti-born German, had gone to Macedonia on vacation when he was arrested there on Dec. 31, 2003, and flown to a prison in Afghanistan, where he was held for five months before being released.
I can understand. I mean, look what happened when the pictures got out from Auschwitz. If only Hitler had a better, more creative lawyers. You know, ones who could say: Shhhhhhhhh, it’s a SECRET! These cases are proof of the axiom that: “all the law you ever need to know, you can learn in a junior high mean girls clique.â€

Further to the deodorant theory of governance, it appears that fired CIA employee McCarthy was upset because CIA employees were fibbing to protecting State Secrets from Congress in closed door sessions. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/us…..NlYwN0bWE-
Wonder who that senior CIA official, meeting with Senate staff in a secure room of the Capitol last June would be? And while Secret is stopping both perspiration and facts dead in their tracks, the story also mentions a nifty DOJ opinion “authorizing†Ghost Detainees.
McCarthy also told others she was offended that the CIA’s general counsel had worked to secure a secret Justice Department opinion in 2004 authorizing the agency’s creation of “ghost detainees” — prisoners removed from Iraq for secret interrogations without notice to the International Red Cross — because the Geneva Conventions prohibit such practices, the paper said.
Anyone out there thinking that the Bybee torture memo that was ohsoquietly withdrawn might have been ohsoquietly re-instated at some point?
Shhhhh, it’s a secret.

Feingold voted for Roberts. A man with known anti-woman and anti-minority positions.

Love Feingold despite voting for Roberts personally. Hate Hillary for supporting someone who voted for cloture–and against Alito. Interesting. Very interesting.

I have a comment awaiting moderation. My turn I guess even though I didn’t say L*op*ld or pen*s. It’s just a perhaps overlong meditation on the difference between the Church committee and the current SSIC. Anyway, on the main topic, I don’t think we can really expect any of the incumbents to come out for Ned, but they don’t have to lie about Joementum. Surely they can find something nice to say that’s truthful. Um…er…well, now that I think about it, maybe not.

let’s pillory Hillary

Thanks Mary doesn’t begin to begin to say it.
Tom Edsall has the WaPo online discussion tomorrow. Lately he has been downright liberal in terms of the questions he has posted. I’ll see if I can distill some of what you have here and maybe he’ll post it. Either way, I figure they might put a reporter on it, seems newsworthy to me (snark alert).

GQ 74 — don’t “hate Hillary,” and if you don’t understand the implications of the cloture vs. floor votes for Alito I suggest familiarizing yourself.

http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.c…..solid.html

Larisa puts her credibility on the line for Leopold.

#11:

Does Jane live in CT? What about Atrios? What about C&L? Is it undemocratic for Hillary to butt in in CT but OK for non-CT bloggers to?

Hugh33 – interesting observations and follow up – BarbB – history seems to repeat itself faster these days.

GQ 80

“Does Jane live in CT? What about Atrios? What about C&L? Is it undemocratic for Hillary to butt in in CT but OK for non-CT bloggers to?”

What’s undemocratic is for Clinton to butt in in CT and misrepresent the facts in order to prop up a senator whose voting patterns are undemocratic on key issues and whose highest priority seems to be earning the preznit’s favor.

fahrender #64

Thanks for the Billmon article. It is an interesting meditation. I ascribe less to Hobbes and more to yahoos than he does.

People forget that Hillary began life as a Republican. It could explain part of her tone deafness, in that she really hasn’t given up her roots. And the other part that I think is important is that this is a woman who could stick with a guy she had to have known at least as far back as in the ’80s that he couldn’t stay faithful. She could stay married to him by making deals with herself as to other things being more important. And when you start to do that, you start down this lonely road of self-deception and it eventually creates an inability to discern what is truly real. She has made so many deals, it’s like breathing to her, and she just does not understand why other folks cannot get that it’s ok. That’s how she made it.

Stephen Parrish, wesgpc,and EPU, to the white calamity phone please”

any of these folks check in – someone ask them what they see for the street tomorrow. I think we have a day trader or two as well – gonna go see what the overnights say -

GQ 80 — you are a positive intellectual marvel. Yes that is in fact what the entire post is about. Hillary has no right to butt in to Connecticut politics because she is not from Connecticut.

You have us cornered with your masterful command of logic. We bow before your genius.

Mary, you are (as usual) absolutely right. It’s deja vu all over again and again and again. It is heartbreaking.

The Republican strategy for the fall can be summed up by the lyrics from a Randy Newman song:

Send lawyers, guns and money.

-GSD

GSD

That was the late Warren Zevon, I believe.

I wonder if this marshall was about to blow the whistle on something.

http://kevxml2adsl.verizon.net…..;ran=24275

Things are quickening and getting hinky all around.

Gang warfare in Brazil. Massacres in Algeria.

Floods in NH and wildfires in Florida.

Quick, send John McCain to Liberty U.

-GSD

Oops — I should have “moderated” my own comment #68. Make that “Committee on Government Operations With Respect, etc.” You’d think I’d remember the formal name of the darn committee when I spent a year of my life on its staff! I had a security clearance so high its name was classified, but no worries about unauthorized disclosure from me — I can’t remember the name of the clearance, either. *g*

Jeesh, I stand corrected. I almost attributed it to Gary Numan.

Thanks for the corrcectomundo.

-GSD

http://www.lyricsdownload.com/…..yrics.html

re:

this should really go a couple threads back, but the jason leopold piece appears to be bullshit

brad blog also lends credence to leopold:

as well, since friday, we’ve received various communications from both respected insiders and respected reporters who have told us in no uncertain terms that it’s a done deal. the indictment was handed down by the grand jury on friday, they say, and now it’s only a matter of when the information will be made public.

though we were not told by these sources who the sources were from which they received their information. so we cannot stand behind those reports ourselves, but we do believe that their certainty is worth notice.

meanwhile, out there in internetland, former cia man and spookmate of plame, larry johnson sent an email (some of which he also posted on du) claiming that: “joe wilson heard the same from other sources. and, more importantly, jason [leopold] is reporting based on multiple, more than two, sources. his editors realized what a big story this is and did the appropriate checking before posting.”

having partied with him, i trust brad. if that’s not a reason to trust a blogger, what is?

I’ve made this comment before, but its a bit of history repeating itself and its also Cheney’s redo of history:

http://www.landmarkcases.org/nixon/nixonview.html

More on topic, at this point in time Hillary has a 44% chance of being the Dem. nominee (Ideosphere and Intrade). That is ugly. She probably has one narrow path to the nomination. Can she thread it? I don’t think so.

Mary

I agree secret government is undemocratic and shows a complete disdain for the governed. “We can’t trust you with the truth because you can’t handle it and our enemies (real and imagined) will use it against us.” The reply to this is that it is more important for us to know and judge than it is to be completely safe. The simple truth is that we as a nation could bear a string of 9/11s. What we can’t survive is the loss of the guiding principles of our democracy.

Skippy, that’s a great reason to put your credibility on the line. You got drunk and shared a few tall tales.

Jane,
I realize I pale in comparison to your abilities. That’s fine. I’m not trying to match wits. But I was addressing a specific comment (#11).

GQ 98 — you’re right, I didn’t see the 11. My apologies.

(hits self in head)

Really now, there is plenty to criticize HRC about, but the fact that she was a Goldwarter Republican at twelve is hardly one of them. That was 40 years ago.

Can I hit you on the head, Jane. (Just so you know, that’s a flirtatious joke to lighten the tension. Also because I’m playing the pro-Hillary antagonist.)

GQ 101 — you’ll probably have to take a number ;)

BarbB – I tend to quote from other, smarter people which helps my percentages. But don’t tell – it’s one of my secrets. *g*

cbl- whether it is a big tank on Monday or something less dramatic over time – we have trouble in river city re: the dollar. It has been telegraphed lots of places. We have too much debt, no matter how the Bush economists spin it – and it is debt that was not invested in return items. We have alienated or created instabilty for governments holdeing big sections of natural resources we need. We are underproducing engineers and other labor categories and have a tax cuts policy that is (again, despite govt spin that mixes in their one time bump from the 5% offshore to ourshore tax amnesty)

We are also running the business of govt in such a way that we have literally lost (not as in “bad investments” but as in “hey Frank you seen that 9 billion we were looking for last month anywhere?”) billions and we have off the books commitments and robbed from long term obligation set asides.

We just don’t look that great. There is a solution, though.

Next week, the size of the National Debt becomes a State Secret.

Shhhhhhhh.

moe99 #84

That’s an interesting point. Hillary just going back to her roots explains a lot. I keep looking for countervailing tendencies but all I see is conservative.

Run for something Hugh. I just want to vote for someone, anyone, Dino, Rhino or Wino, who believes those things.

I do understand that there are some particular areas of investigations where things need to be secret.

How government is breaking the law is not really where I think secrecy is called for though. After all, you let the WH keep all its lawbreaking secret and pretty soon all the criminals will want the same.

Gotta fold – night all.

Mary, is that when they bury the ME3 numbers?

-GSD

Mary @ 103 -

What was it Lloyd Bentsen said?

Oh yeah: “If you let me write $200 billion a year in hot checks, I’ll give you an illusion of prosperity too.” Though in my memory it was “…I’ll show you a hot time.”

Of course, now the deficit is twice that. Reagan showed deficits didn’t matter, right Dick?

GQ, fyi, the numbers can change in a thread for example if a comment is in moderation. Time is more reliable.

tryggth,

The right conveniently forgets that Reagan did, in fact, raise taxes after he initially cut them.

One thing that would be super cool: If posting didn’t send you to the top of the thread.

Thanks for the tip, 108. I mean JC (10:55)

The problem with Hillary is she is still stuck in a 1995 triangulation mindset — between flag burning and Lieberman and the Iraq war and a host of other issues, Hillary seems to be pursuing a nonexistent middle, by proving her bona fides as a NOT LIBERAL Senator.

The problem is, she needs Liberals more than she needs the dittoheads — the wing nuts are never going to vote for her, and alienating us is a lose-lose proposition. On issue after issue, all she has to do is say nothing, and everything is a-okay.

The Lieberman letter is small potatoes in my book — calling Gen Yer’s lazy slackers is so stupid, it is beyond words.

I generally like Hillary, and was prepared to support her last year — and if she is the nominee, I will support her.

But here’s the kicker — will the average GOP voter trust Hillary with the police state apparatus Bush has created? Will Democratic voters trust her?

Dismantling the damage done by BushCo will be the number one challenge to the next President, and the country will not be in the mood for anyone who they think might be faking it, just to get elected.

No problem GQ, the PayPal button is up at the top. You can contribute towards making that happen.

Two former CIA analysts have this take on Hillary from January of this year:

http://www.counterpunch.org/ch…..52006.html

I don’t think she will be able to thread it.

ck #111

The problem is that Hillary is triangulating between the right and the far right. No wonder we’re feeling left out.

I think the real danger with supporting Hillary is that she represents old politics and won’t be able to confront effectively the problems that a post Bush President will be faced with. Her failure will then be whether we like it or not ours (even though she doesn’t represent our ideas or values).

Hillary has several problems, any one of which is fatal. First, she is firmly entrenched in the conservative mindset as being a super liberal. The name “Clinton” has been trashed repeatedly on conservative talk radio for over a decade now. No self-respecting Freeper would ever even consider voting for her. The next problem is that she is not a liberal Democrat in even the slightest sense. She has much more in common with Lieberman than Feingold. Finally, she is a woman, and Americans, including many American women I’m sorry to say, will never elect a woman president because they are too culturally conservative and backward. If she is our party’s nominee, we will lose big and it pretty much won’t matter which cretinous chump opposes her.

Americans for Democratic Action says that Hillary has a “liberal” voting record.

BTW, Alexander Cockburn and CounterPunch are not known to be the best sources of information.

Any triangulation with regard to social security is wrong, when one corner of triangle is BushCo fraud and attempt to steal poor peoples’ money and life savings. And a social compact of young generation to support older generation does count as a person’s savings in my book. So what Liebarman did was worse than triangulation, and now that Hillary Clinton is trying to fudge it, that is worse than triangulation in my book too.

Fraud is wrong. Lying and trying to damage the public credit is wrong. BushCo did both wrt social security. Anyone who went a long with that even a little bit has some big ’slainin’ to do. There is a respectable case made for taking Social security toward some kind of prepaid for partially privatized system. Several normal sane countries (not named Chile) have gone in that direction, responsibly. Sweden has, and what evidence came from there showed that BushCo plan would have been a disaster, unless you were rich. But where BushCo wanted to go was totally off the map in terms of respectable or responsible anything. It was 1+1=3 type of stuff. Can’t support any Dem who went along to the extent Lieberman did. Does he have one argument in his defense? Why is Clinton trying to cover for him?

Re dollar: we have been in dollar trouble ever since the moment BushCo got re-elected. Krugman uses an example -the Wiley Coyote effect of financial markets. The market is Wiley Coyote and wants to assume things will keep going on as they have been, US will be responsible, US will come to senses before big painful adjustment for everyone has to occur. So market acts like Wiley Coyote running ten feet off the cliff before looking down and going all “ooops!” and falling down.
Very few countries or private currency holders will enjoy rapid fall in dollar. We will not notice their pain, but they have been reluctant to write off overvalued dollar as a bad debt as it were. So now private and public international dollar holders may have thrown in towel. Everyone hope it is a controlled fall. ME3 won’t tell you much about it, though, IMHO.

Hugh 114 –

I think that in 2008 the electorate will be disgusted with the status quo — which is exactly what allowed Jimmy Carter to win the nomination and the White House in the post-Watergate era.

Competence and Change will be the two factors that will motivate voters — someone who has what it takes to undo the Bush damage.

My bet is on Al Gore — but it’s definitely not on Hillary. She just has too much baggage, and she’s piling it higher every day.

I believe HRC’s voting record isn’t that far from Feingold. Feingold voted for Roberts and Ashcroft and didn’t sign to extend the assault weapons ban. I could construe Feingold’s record to make him look like a devil in my eyes (voting for anti-minority Roberts is a big step).

For the record, the name Clinton is actually pretty darn popular according to that last CNN poll. Something in the 60s. There is no way any Democratid nominee is going to get the freeper vote so it’s moot to knock Hillary for that.

wesgpc — I like the Wyley Coyote analogy. That I get.

Can anyone explain to me why Lieberman or H. Clinton would want to triangualte with a corner that is -immoral, -incoherent, -bad faith, and even if done in good faith, will blow up in their faces? The BushCo social security plan=bad news in every respect. It is not like fiddling around with balancing more or less conservative or liberal details on regulating gun ownership, or welfare reform, or even abortion. It was a very dangerous, very immoral, very incoherent, very innumerate, very senseless, very very bad faith lie from start to finish. Look, BushCo stacked his social security commission with people who had to swear to support his idiotic version of privatization, and then he threw in some dishonest hacks, just to be sure. The BushCo approach was so totally bad that even that fixed commission had to fudge on recommending the BushCo proposal. BushCo didn’t appoint enough total mindless hacks, commission wasn’t properly hackified and stacked. That is why BushCo is willing to propose commission this time -it will be 100% mindless hacks.

BTW, just in case anyone was wondering, we had crazy traffic for a Sunday and most of it for — a liberal book club. And yesterday we put up the post on labor, I thought it was going to be a bitter pill (subject-wise, the post was amazing) that people would not want to swallow. Both were things we did because we thought it was the right thing to do even if they were traffic killers, which I firmly expected them to be. People have been mentioning both to me all day as two of their recent faves. I am absolutely thrilled about this for all the obvious reasons.

Hillary never supported Bush’s S.S. plan. Lieberman eventually signed up against Bush’s plan as well.

Bill and Hillary have raw experience with flag radicals. A local african american activist Say Macintosh in Little Rock announced to the press his intention to burn a flag on the capitol steps early in the first presidential campaign. Gov. Bill stood up and said he would call in the national guard to defend the fellow. Death threats flew like blackbirds in a rice field. Clocks stopped for a couple of days. Say backed down in enough time to save his hide and Clintons future Presidency.
Wingers are ready and willing to get bloody over such matters.

GQ

I looked at the data from Americans for Democratic Action. Only 4 Democratic Senators scored under 90%. Something tells me this may not be the best way to judge what is and is not liberal.

ck

We can hope but as the last election cycles have shown the American electorate can think the country is going in the wrong direction and then vote to continue down the same road.

Shubs epistle to the Corinthians is coming up on my TV screen. Four major possibilities here…
1) Maintains uncomfortable straddle on barbed wire issue while passing notes to Condi, ‘ I wanna pee!’
2) Krystalnacht in Amerikkka – release the bats.
This could also have an added ‘ night-of-the-long-knives’ option as the Dictatoror never takes a backward step.
All the log cabin Rethuglicans oughta be aware.
Look what happened to Erich Rohm was not pretty.
3) Kristolnacht in which case the ‘ compassionate conserverizor’ takes a dramatic LEFT turn. ( Actually he will still be a minuteman in drag but he will adopt some protectionist nativist populist bs rhetoric as cover for a complete implosion of ideas of what to do in der fuhrerbunker )
4) He will literally screw the pooch, Miss Beazley, in the oval oriface. Large men in white coats will rush in and Josh Bolten will blame an ‘ evil twin’ or comedian.
5) Unknown unknowns – I forgot. My bad. A stopped Rummy grandfather clock is right-wing twice a day. ( Never expected a Spanish Inquisition )
I’m still hopefull for a thursday Fitztacular firedogworks display and , oh hey…Mom sends her love.

uh, just some economic basics, but a falling dollar is good for the U.S., right? More jobs at home, overseas markets buy more of our goods. The only ones to get screwed are the countries that have been hedging with the dollar and the countries purchasing our debt.

I think Bernake will do fine. All ready marching to the beat of his own drum.

Hilary Clinton can never be discounted in U.S. politics, she’s that good. And if you are that worried about the markets, just think how the markets would react if Hilary got elected. Business, other than the fossil fuel industry and arms dealers, would be back to making serious money. I think I’d even have to look in a Biofuel stock at that time.

Hat tip for posting on labor. The 60 minutes segment on Andy Stern today was great. Stern addressed the real problem with many of todays unions. I may be a “DINO” to many, but I do think strong organized labor is essential in a democratic capitalist society.

I respect Eisenhower 10000 times more than any Republican politician in power today, but I would never vote for him if he were running now. But at least he respected the social compact of social security. So how can I not oppose Clinton when she covers for a Democrat who apparently made a right turn past Eisenhower, and not even an honest right turn towards an honest destination? I dunno if FDL was trying to drum up opposition to Hillary, but this might have made up my mind.

Eisenhower quote of soc sec.
***
Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.
Letter to Edgar Newton Eisenhower

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Eisenhower

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp

Go @ 116 -

I don’t read Counterpunch much anymore (more a taste thing than anything else). But that article is just a couple of CIA analysts making observations about Israel/Palestine and suggesting what Hillary’s stance appears to be.

I doubt that Wurmser and Feith’s masters have n designs on Hillary now that the A team is out.

Jane — thanks again for everything you do; especially putting up lame posters and OT posts.

That said, the following is about Before the Storm — written this morning before the book club, which ended before I got home.

=====

From an Amazon review:

Before the Storm is a book that both conservatives and liberals can and should enjoy. Anyone seeking to understand why politics and society are what they are today should start here.

While the Goldwater Campaign is the starting point of the modern Conservative Movement, you have to go back New Deal Era, the first Progressive Movement, and even the Gilded Age, to understand the forces that have shaped the modern political landscape.

People like to say that we are an evenly divided country right now — truth be told, we’ve been evenly divided for more than a hundred years. FDR’s victory was dependent on the Solid South — and holding the South meant going slow (or doing nothing) on Civil Rights.

The Dixiecrat exodus to the GOP was an inevitable cultural and political realignment, not some plot hatched in the Nixon White House.

In the Spring of 1945, LIFE Magazine ran an editorial that began I’m a Liberal too, but . . . — the point being, conservative had become such a dirty word, that even conservatives were calling themselves liberals. Likewise, FDR called himself a Liberal because the word progressive had been disgraced by Wilson’s betrayals.

The Gilded Age is the closest thing to a parallel for today’s situation — McKinley and his guru Mark Hanna manipulated corporate cash to divide and defeat the progressives and populists. Mark Hanna is Karl Rove’s hero — but Hanna had a preznit with a brain.

One last thought — long before Goldwater, the Claire Boothe Luce and Henry Luce Foundations were laying the groundwork for what would become the modern Conservative Movement.

I will be interesting to see Arnold the Gub/Grop/Governator’s response to Bush’s immigration speech tomorrow. I think Arnold sees his comeback in danger if BushCo pursues this loser. Does the GOP have nothing better. I live in CA, so if the national GOP immigration ply buries the CA GOP even deeper, that will be some consolation, no matter what else happens.
(PS: Arnold running and hiding in a hole in the High Sierra for a week counts as response)

GQ

Most Republicans didn’t support Bush’s Social Security plan which is the reason it met such a quick and ignominious end.

I have no respect for politicians of either party when it comes to Social Security. The 1983 reform act is the biggest con and swindle ever perpetrated in history in straight dollar terms.

Hugh,
Or maybe the conventional wisdom Re: DINOs is a bit overstated. When you look at what has happened in the last several years, nearly all major votes come down on a party line. If you think you’re frustrated, imagine what it’s like to be a Democratic congressperson. Votes held open half the night, not allowed to conduct any hearings, getting press conferences preempted by a Bush speech.

Also, remember that many things get changed in committee. People don’t seem to understand the level of mischief that the GOP has been operating under. They have coopted the rules of the Congress so it’s no longer just the votes that matter.

Wyo Nate 127 –

A gradually declining dollar is probably a good thing, but a collapsing dollar is a bad thing — and a collapsing dollar is what we might be facing, given the way Bush has screwed up everything he touches.

Confidence is key — and right now, the financial markets and the World are voting no confidence in Bush.

Richard Moron Morin will be so disappointed.
USA Today: Poll: 51% oppose NSA database
Great news about the traffic, I’m turning in…

I guess I’ll have to wait another day to hit Jane in the head. Sigh.

professor rat #126

LOL

ck — that’s very thoughtful. You should go post that on the Before the Storm thread as well – people will be looking at it, I think C&L is throwing up a link to support Rick on it, and I know Rick will be reading them all. He was very very happy today with everyone’s participation and said he read through the thread with absolute delight so I would want him to see that if possible.

me at 131 — oh geez; that shuld have read “putting up with lame posters”

As someone who lives in a reliably blue state, I think Hillary’s upcoming problem is getting hit from both sides. The true blues (like myself) no longer can stand her, and regardless of her recent lurches to the right, there is no red state that she would win. And a Dem cannot win without taking at least one red state. I marvel at the stupidity of the DLC and its minions, thinking that repubs have no memory of the failed health care plan, the “rightwing conspiracy” interview on the Today show, the Mrs. Arafat kiss, etc. None of those things are the ones that bother me – rather it’s sometime prudishness and sometime nationalism (flag burning ammendment) – but as stated here many times, the repubs are licking their chops that she will be the nominee. I believe that’s Rupert Murdoch’s strategy. Make sure she gets in, and then let the henchmen slam her silly. She will be skewered in a way that that makes the swiftboating of John Kerry look like a schoolyard brawl.

My question: if she becomes the nominee, what will you do? Is it too early to commmit, yay or nay? Will you play the loyal patron because even a compromised shill like Hillary is still better than any repub? or will you stand your ground and withhold your vote from her? Because I always end up voting Dem, even when I loathe the nominee (and it happens too often!)

If Lamont wins, maybe that not only shuts Hillary up, but shuts her down before New Hampshire and Iowa.

Thanks Jane — I’ll do that right now, before I fall asleep on the keyboard.

Hillary has certain advantages: she can raise money like no one else, everyone knows who she is (a la Cher, Madonna, etc) and all the scandals and the dirt have already been exposed.

She has some major disadvantages: you either love her or hate her with little in-between so she may have a ceiling(can she hit over the 50% mark?), she’s an old-style politician at a time when a “New Age” is dawning in politics, she always tries to play it safe by triangulating and she’s not a proven leader.

Hi ck 135 and wyo nate 127-

Your ideas remind me of a basic question….

I’m an economic ignoramus and this question no doubt supports that assertion.

About (non-catatstrophic) dollar depreciation:

If the US has a net trade imbalance due to energy imports, other raw materials, and manufactured goods no longer produced in the US, how does paying more for those goods benefit residents?

I get it that oil bourses – for now – are dollar demoninated* (and thus depreciation may not be relevant).

The idea that lower dollar excahnge rates lead to better US exports makes sense to me.

Yet – I think – our ag exports benefit a tiny slice of the population, and far more US residents benefit from cheap imported goods than would benefit from higher wages in the relatively few remaining US manufacturing jobs.

If it is true that most people would pay more with a falling dollar, how can that net cost be compared with the net benefit of increased exports?

BTW, I’m not advocating for changes up or down in dollar exchange rates – I’m too ignorant to know what to hope for. The purpose of raising these question is to learn more about these issues’ impact on the lives of working people in all job sectors, not only manufacturing/export.

I’m sure not advocating for GATT/WTO style policies that favor cheap exports over good domestic jobs, either.

PS: I’ve read that at least one measure of money suppply (M3? M5? where’s my a-to-zed?) is no longer published, and thus direct measurement of expansions in the US currency supply is more difficult.

If expansison in money supplies can bring about inflation, and dumping the M3(M5?) reporting would mask such inflationary trends, would the decision to withold the money supply starting in March have any relationship with the Fed’s apparent decision to halt raises in shot-term interest rates?

In other words, would increasing money supply via the no-longer reported “M” index be somehow “contraindicated” with increased short-term interest rates?

Apologies to all suffering abdominal injuries arising from busting a gut while resding my ignorant blather here… :)

[* “demoniated” is a typo for denominated….but Freud’s 150th B-Day year makes me want to keep the “mistake”. Not a bad term for US energy foreign and fiscal policy.]

Isn’t lying about one’s record the last refuge of a politican afraid to let the voters know where he really stands on the issues in the fear that they will send him packing? ;-)

I smell fear.

kirk murphy #144: I’d take a stab at answering but I am not an inernational trade or financial economist. But google following to keep informed, all are reliable economics blogs:
Angry Bear
Econobrowser
Brad DeLong
Economists View
and, if you are a glutton for punishment and want to read an unending stream ofinternational finance and trade expertise, then google
rge monitor

Great post Jane, love the anvil.

It is so curious disturbing the Hillary/Joe drift from 2000. Genuinely embodies the rudderlessless, cowering crouch and go-along psychology that grips the Dems today. The middle way without a spine and a moral compass is no way forward at all.
Heartily agree we would be better off without them. Still waiting for Gore to reach the tipping point, he looks better and better every day–forget Clinton nostalgia, I’m heartsick he went down.

Good earlymorning! I quit smoking today and now I’m up in the middle of the night trying not to commit mass homicide or refrigerator raiding. I’m glad the blogs and y’all are here.

This is probably a dumb question that’s been asked a hundred times, but can Fitz really indict a sitting vice president? I know Spiro Agnew resigned under the threat of one, but didn’t the actual charges have to wait until he left office?

vachon

only a sitting President can escape indictment while in office

cbl #85: day trading on currency movements!? No way! I’d rather go to Vegas. And I am way too cheap to gamble there. All I have to say is “Don’t do it for God’s Sake, Man!” and “Good Luck, you’ll need it!”

I have said it before and will say it again. The Republicans would love nothing better than for Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic nominee in 2008. They know that she is the only candidate that they could beat.

Senator Clinton is a Democrat not in the sense of a more modern-day FDR Democrat. Instead she is the distillation of the Goldwater Girl she was in the ’sixties with the label Democrat stamped on her forehead, the label which reflects her smile. Perhaps she fell under the spell of Bill, perhaps Bill fell under the spell of Hillary. So what else is knew: there is so much pillow talk in U.S. politics and media nowadays anything can happen. She is just as much a CEO as Bush but probably better at the job, as if anyone could be worse.

Thank you, a lurker.

Thanks neurophius (82)! The differences between what bloggers do on one hand, and Hilary and Obama do on the other, GQ are legion. We are the little guys and women. We are very ordinary citizens of CT with a lot of justifiable grievances. If you don’t believe me, check out the pictures in Ned’s meetings. We are not party bosses. We don’t hang with Imus and Rupert Murdoch. We don’t hold the money bags. Jane and FDL get our backs. It’s that simple.

Hillary is a despicable adventuress and opportunist. This from someone who was prepared to support her. She has decided to go to bed with someone far worse than Monica Lewinsky.

Slick Hillary is a ghastly prospect.

In fact GQ, I would go even further and say that it’s thanks to bloggers like Jane and Christy, that some of us CT progressives have any thing approaching national representation at all. We’ve been thoroughly stonewalled by Holy Joe.

Now I am feeling sentimental. Thanks guys!

Someone say Hilly’s goin’ to be skewered?

OooH! Can I watch!?

( Hughie – backatcha…you slay me.- Love Jane.)

Prof. rat, should it be the proverbial BBQ or simple roast? Heh.

We’ve had a couple of Ned-like primary challengers to Clinton this season, most notably labor lawyer Jonathan Tasini. He got some visibility on HuffPo, but virtually none in the New York MSM, as far as I’ve seen. Not much elsewhere on the progressive blogosphere, either.

Clinton is to the right of Schumer on many issues, which is saying a lot, and is more arrogant and inaccessible (as a recent Roots Project video documented; at least the Schumer office brought out a polite staffer to meet the volunteers).

Why progressives haven’t banded together to fight her in a manner analogous to the Lamont wildfire is an important study in political paralysis. I may offer further thoughts on this, but miniralphbon is waking up and needs a bottle…

ralphbon, I feel bad for NY progressives. And you have such fine people.

Oops. I mean ralphbon, you NY progressives have so many fine people amongst yourselves, and deserve better than Chuck and Hillary.

I’m not surprised that Clinton is supporting Lieberman. She’s very predictable in her behaviour.

Friday is the Dem State Convention here in CT. I’ve been in touch with several Ned Lamont supporting delegates, and it looks like it’s going to be interesting. I’ll be there with my video camera doing interviews, eavesdropping on privilaged conversations, and generally being a pest; this is a great opportunity for some gonzo video coverage.

Bob Adams, give us some priveleged email coverage as well. No, of course you don’t have too.

I hope that Hillary will have the presence of mind not to be a “spoiler” in the Nadar tradition.

I think the Republican Machine will secretly devote a lot of resources to promote her as the Democrat choice because she would not bring out a massive Democrat vote and they could always use their game plan to pull the rug out from under her and totally trash her- old Karl has had that prepared for a long time.

Why not Gore and Feingold? I mean why not?

is anyone awake?

I am very interested in following the CT dem convention. Will someone (Bob?) be blogging about it?

It is now morning but wanted to add my voice to how great the book club thread was yesterday. I participated for a while, but my kids started calling to give me Mother’s Day wishes. Had a long call with my eldest son who recently lost his wife. He spent the day with his kids. He says there were many tears shed yesterday but are all doing O.K.

Good morning all.

Over at the Corner JPod is calling “birthright citizenship” “science-fictional”. Is this new? Doesn’t he realize jet airplanes solves that problem as Newt “explained”.

Maybe he is just trying to pre-empt the “life begins at conception” implications.

On the Hillary conundrum, I suspect that she is constrained by her major donors, who back Lieberman because of his unconditional support of Isreael’s West Bank policies. And let’s not forget that she is running this year in a state where a quarter of her vote is Jewish. She doesn’t need that 25 percent to win, but she needs it to win big, and she needs to win big to be a viable presidential candidate.

“On the Hillary conundrum, I suspect that she is constrained by her major donors, who back Lieberman because of his unconditional support of Isreael’s West Bank policies. And let’s not forget that she is running this year in a state where a quarter of her vote is Jewish. She doesn’t need that 25 percent to win, but she needs it to win big, and she needs to win big to be a viable presidential candidate.”

Right on Knut…that’s what it’s all about. Pandering for the jewish vote!!!

Just a little OT — Let me recommend this NY Times article to everyone about the religious right’s threat to stay home in November.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05…..r=homepage

I have been watching for this to happen — not because the rightocracy really is planning such an effort, but rather as a sign that they know that the Republicans will lose big this fall. Here is how I see it — the whole basis of the religious right’s powwer is not in numbers, but in very visible activists who usually have a great deal to do with primary wins, but not so much in general elections. Compared to the general republican demographic, they are certainly a minority group, but their tactics and volume have really created an important space for them.

So, in ordser to maintain that space, the religious right needs to either 1) Deliver elections or 2) Be perceived as beinging the determining vote group in an election. It is the latter that is now at play. The RR needs to be able to say, we didn’t go to the polls because you didn’t deliver on our agenda and see? You lost.

It is the only way in an election that is already lost for the religious right to claim it still has power.

I consider these noises incredibly good news for the Dems in November.

On “birth right citizenship”… I just hadn’t been paying attention:

http://skeeter-bites.blogspot……-over.html

immanentize #172:

Sorry, but the Rethuglicans will win big, again, in November because they control the MACHINES THAT COUNT THE VOTES.

We need to lean on our county election officials to get rid of Diebold and ESS machines — only then will Dems win elections again.
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001300.htm

SCIENTIFIC REPORT: Evidence Strongly Suggests 2004 Presidential Election Results — Not the Exit Polls! — Were Biased and/or Flawed!
Study of Exit Poll/Final Result disparity based on Exit Pollsters Own Data, Explanations, Allow One-in-959,000 Chance of Being Correct!

Study of Exit Poll/Final Result disparity based on Exit Pollsters Own Data, Explanations, Allow One-in-959,000 Chance of Being Correct!

On Thursday, USCountVotes.org , a Utah non-profit organization of statisticians and researchers, released a new scientific statistical analysis of the “2004 Presidential Exit Poll Discrepancies” [PDF] . Here is the…

On Thursday, USCountVotes.org, a Utah non-profit organization of statisticians and researchers, released a new scientific statistical analysis of the “2004 Presidential Exit Poll Discrepancies” [PDF]. Here is the executive summary of the report [PDF].

This study is a real one. A scientific one. Produced by a real group of non-partisan investigators, statisticians, university professors and mathmeticians — unlike at least one phony GOP disinformation front group comprised of paid Bush/Cheney/RNC staff that we know of.

The USCountVotes.org report is in response to the one released by the Exit Pollsters, Edison/Mitofsky themselves who had tried, in their report, to explain away their own data as somehow being flawed. As explained in the USCountVote report’s executive summary:

Our conclusion is that the data appear to be more consistent with the hypothesis of bias in the official count, rather than bias in the exit poll sampling. No data in the report supports the [Edison/Mitofsky] hypothesis that Kerry voters were more likely than Bush voters to cooperate with pollsters and, in fact, there is some indication that the opposite may have been the case.

In describing the report, USCountVotes.org says that:

It has only recently been officially confirmed (by the exit pollsters themselves) that on election night the final set of exit polls showed John Kerry defeating George Bush by 3% of the popular vote and a clear majority of 316 electoral votes. Our statisticians analyzed Edison/Mitofsky’s own explanation of their exit poll discrepancies, and found serious flaws in their argument. Exit polls have been used for years to detect corruption of official vote tallies – most recently in Ukraine.

TO READ MORE, FOLLOW LINK

immanentize says:
May 15th, 2006 at 5:50 am

I consider these noises incredibly good news for the Dems in November.

Oh, lord no. It means we will be forced to endure an endless loop of gay marriage bashing and every other rr pet peeve. Because, you know, the Repubs actually listen to their base. Not to mention the ballot initiatives that will turn out the folks who can’t be counted on to tend to their own moral standards, but must constantly be plucking out the imaginary beams in other people eyes.

cbl says:
May 14th, 2006 at 10:15 pm

I just saw your post. To answer your question – if you’re wondering what the stock market will do today, I don’t know. If the newswires send some big surprises our way, it will be interesting to see how the markets react to the news.

Fun (if you have a warped sense of humor like I do) Leopold related story about the spreading of his report:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs…..50380/1007

“Bernstein told me he was meeting with Hillary Clinton and several members of her staff in a Hyatt Regency reception room early Saturday evening when “everybody began reaching for their BlackBerrys at roughly the same time.”

Stephen Parrish, CPA

My shorthand may have been too short – was just looking for our much appreciated ‘numbers guys and gals’ to take a peek at Tom’s link @ 14 above re: Asian Markets – just to catch y’all’s impressions before everyone started jumping out of windows and selling the farm

Are we switching servers now?

Home is down for 10 minutes the message says.
I can’t go home.

Knut & Frank on 170 & 171:
your assumption troubles me:

Don’t assume that the majority of the Jewish vote want Lieberman because he is Jewish (and your logic is that is why Hillary is supporting him to pander to the Jewish vote).

The majority of the Jewish vote wants a viable and secure Israel, and the Lieberman/Bush policy is not about that. The policy currently being pushed is not supported by the majority of democrats who happen to be Jewish.

O, my. Hillary signing on to a lie to build her conservative bona fides. Who could have guessed? I guess we can soon expect to read items by Joe Klein, David Broder, Richard Cohen et al about what a sensible centrist she’s become. Wonder if she’s realoly nimble enough to weave left, then right, then left again before the 2008 primaries, and then right again before the general election.

scutty (181) Agreed. The “Jewish vote” spans the political spectrum with varying attitudes–often extremely negative– toward Joe. In fact, I know a number of *conservative* or orthodox types who can’t stand Lieberman. I feel Hilary is protecting her own conservative position. Hawks stick together.

That is a *great* video. It works for me. Thanks guys.