
There is a sort of hoo haw going on about the NYTimes Travel Section, the not-even-remotely-secret adjacent compounds that the Rummys and the Cheneys purchased on the Maryland shore and the publication of names, addresses and phone numbers of the persons involved in the…TRAVEL SECTION…article.
Not even getting into the idiocy of the wingnutosphere bitching about a newspaper publishing information that is in the public record or anything (and frankly, Glenn’s already covered it in spades…) – Billmon is absolutely correct to mock them as the Ministry of Silly Walks and their pals in woof-woof land — I thought everyone would like a heads up that something wicked this way comes.
The Fall elections fast approacheth, and the full on assault of the wingnuts against all things accurate or truthful has begun. It’s election season, and anything they can do to stir up the righteous wrath of the ill-informed and frothing at the mouth will be ramped up over the next few months. Clearly, Wedge Issue June wasn’t the hotbed of base excitement that they had hoped (dang! "hate the gays" isn’t workin’ like it used to…), but that’s what they get for depending on a cat killer with the organizational and motivational skills of a George Bush toady.
Billmon is right on the money (and, may I take a moment to say, how fantastic it is to see regular blogging at the Whiskey Bar…I was having withdrawal symptoms.):
The problem is, I actually wish the Times hadn’t published the SWIFT story — although not for the same reasons as the adminstration and its right-wing squawk box. As Dan Froomkin, Glenn Greenwald and others have already pointed out, much if not most of what the Times reported is already in the public record. That being the case, the benefits of collating it and putting it on page one probably didn’t outweigh the costs. I mean, how many more stories do we need to know that the Cheney Administration regards the Constitution as an inconvenient piece of parchment?
And the costs, in my opinion, could be considerable. The right is getting a lot of mileage, at least with its own partisans, out of bashing the Times. Their reasons for hating the paper are certainly different from mine, but that doesn’t change the fact that the New York Times, like Dan Rather and Hillary Clinton, is a brand name you can always count on to get the juices of hysterical hatred flowing out in woof woof land.
And that sort of hysteria is exactly what the Rovians desperately need as we head around the turn and towards the final stretch of this year’s congressional elections. It’s not that domestic spying is a great issue for them with the electorate as a whole — although it could be if the Dems play it wrong, and since they’re the Dems they can generally be counted on to play things wrong. But it is a big winner with their base, which actually hates the idea that Big Brother isn’t listening in on every phone call in the country (or so we hope) because if he was he’d catch all those filthy liberals conspiring with bin Ladin.
OK, I exaggerate, slightly. But the point is that anything that helps Rove rally the GOP base between now and November helps preserve the Republican Reichstag, and anything that preserves the Republican Reichstag helps the administration go on turning the war against Al Qaeda into the war for unlimited presidential power. (It’s not that the Dems would be much of a brake on the machine, but any brake at all would be better than what we’ve got now.)
So you see, it’s not about accuracy of the articles therein, or whether or not there is any merit to any of the claims against the NYTimes or any other media establishment (although the Times has been the whipping boy for so long, it’s become a sort of brand name frothing tag line for the right-wing silly walkers). It’s about stirring up the wingnut base which has become so Pavlovian in its response to the Mighty Wurlitzer button pushing that you can see the jumping up and the asking of how high as the unthinking, well-trained wingnuts are already on their way.
Here’s the thing, though — occasionally, something breaks through: you know, pesky things like facts, reality, honest truth. A lot of it makes its way into the public consciousness via reporters who do actually their jobs and do them well and via bloggers who dig into facts and then dissect them on the web. This news propagates through the e-mails of various and sundry readers, and then…whammo!…Wedge Issue June fizzles out or the wingnut pushback isn’t so effective.
Which is why the press attacks on the blogs of late have been so monumentally idiotic. While the folks in the press think that left wing bloggers are all after their jobs (as if!), the right wingnut-o-sphere is sitting back and watching the press try to do their job for them– eviscerating one of the more productive means of countering the right-wing Orwellian "up is down" noise machine, and undercutting the entire media establishment’s ability to do its job in the first place by consistently undermining truthtelling in a very potent form. Listen to Digby:
Call me naive, but it sounds to me as if the Supreme Court, the Democrats and the American people are all in agreement. It’s the Republicans who want to continue this fiction that the government should be able to hold these presumed terrorists in limbo forever.
A senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the issue is still being debated internally, seemed to hint at the potential political implications in Congress. "Members of both parties will have to decide whether terrorists who cherish the killing of innocents deserve the same protections as our men and women who wear the uniform," this official said.
The assumption, again, being that these people are all guilty when everyone knows for a fact that many of them are not. That means that this administration just doesn’t give a shit if innocent people are held prisoner forever. I suppose that there are people who think that’s just the price that must be paid (by someone else) for our "freedom," but moral people cannot believe this.
On a practical political level, you can see by the way the WaPo article is written that the narrative frame for the debate is going to be the same as all the other war debates: will the weak, ineffectual Democrats be able to resist the strong, aggressive Republicans this time or will they give in once again to the presidents’ bold, controversial plans out of fear of being seen as soft on national security?
Can we all see the problems with that?
I said this on the media panel I did at YKos, but I’m going to say it again, because it bears repeating: the right wingnuts want the media to function as Pravda did for the old Soviet regime — echoing only what the State has sanctioned as "news for the masses." What does the left wing want? We want them to do their jobs, tell the truth, and report the facts. That’s it, plain and simple.
Jay Rosen, whose exceptional blog PressThink repeatedly asks the questions we wish we could believe the whole of the media was asking themselves, had a great piece this week on "The People Formerly Known as the Audience." Great stuff, including:
Fithian, Kirschner and company should know that such fantastic delusions (“we own the eyeballs…”) were the historical products of a media system that gave its operators an exaggerated sense of their own power and mastery over others. New media is undoing all that, which makes us smile.
You don’t own the eyeballs. You don’t own the press, which is now divided into pro and amateur zones. You don’t control production on the new platform, which isn’t one-way. There’s a new balance of power between you and us.
The people formerly known as the audience are simply the public made realer, less fictional, more able, less predictable. You should welcome that, media people. But whether you do or not we want you to know we’re here.
Amen, Jay. As Eric Boehlert said during our FDL Book Salon chat last weekend:
I don’t think blogs, for now, can supplant the msm’s ability to annoint cw. But blogs can sometimes help correct it or re-direct the cw.The bad news is in recent months I’ve become even more pessimisitic as we watch the msm again and again simply ignore obvious points raised online and just embrace RNC talking points. i.e. last week I wrote how odd it was the press was protraying dems as the losers in the ‘cut and run’ vs. timetable debate, considering the three previous national polls all showed a majority of americans supported the dems position; setting a timetable.
Yet this week’s newsweek reports the gop ‘won’ the debate on iraq last week, while, of course, conventiently ignoring the fact americans side w/ dems.
It’s like this bad movie that won’t stop replaying itself.
But what does this do for the current pushback — both from right-wing silly walkers and from a frightened media, who have ginned up a left wing bogeyman because they can’t bear to admit to themselves that they are suffering from long-term battered press syndrome from the right? No idea — but when one considers that the Rita Cosby’s of the world keep getting canned, while the Keith Olberman’s of the world have bigger and better ratings…well, that handwriting is on the wall, now isn’t it?
In the meantime, let’s all try to view the media bashing on the right for what it is: a Pavlovian tactic to stir up the masses of non-thinking wingnuts. Here’s hoping they have as much success with it as they did with Wedge Issue June.
(I found this bit of graffiti artwork on a blog from a Montreal-er, and thought it was perfect for this, considering Billmon’s reference to the wingnutosphere as the "Ministry of Silly Walks." Love Monty Python…)
UPDATE: And for extra credit, let’s contemplate the ethical lapses that Atrios finds here.
Related posts:
- Signs Of The End Times: David Brooks Making Sense
- I was the X-Files Editor for the New York Times
- Max Baucus Wastes Months, Fails; New York Times Misses It
- In April 2003, after Waterboarding Him 183 Times, the CIA Admitted KSM Was Lying to Them
- FDL Book Salon Discusses “The Test Of Our Times” With Gov. Tom Ridge





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

R O O T Z !!!
unbeat!
NYTimes Travel Section and films from yesterday about today…
“3 Days of the Condor” 1975 CIA conspiracy Mid-East oil and destabilization. Dead on Rummy and the bunch, Iraq and the Times.
And:
Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrado
Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador
correction, sorry.
Billmon!
Trouble is…”the masses of non-thinking wingnuts” can be quite weighty.
Oklahoma kiddo at 7 — I hear vast quantities of Cheetos will do that to you…
David Brock and Media Matters! (he’s cute too!)
Anything to get the headlines off of Iraq.
This is not silly. They really do want reporters to fear for their lives. They are fascists. They know that the country is not ready for a fascist takeover yet, but that’s their goal. They know that John Paul Stevens can’t live forever. If they can hold onto Congress for two more years, they can rev up another terrorist fright for 2008, get enough votes to steal the election convincingly, and Stevens will certainly die before 2012- and you can kiss our democracy good-bye. And kicking the press into submission is a key part of the plan.
moonbat malkin and her ilk are terroracists.
What Mary Alice said. Divert the sheep. That’s the junta’s supreme and only policy.
How about this little subtle Bush smear on the media.
Read this quote and you will instantly see Bush equating the media as being collaboraters and fifth columnists with Al Qaeda.
(Snip)
“If authentic, the tape demonstrates yet again that bin Laden and al-Qaida continue to use the media to justify their dark vision and war against humanity,” the Bush administration said in a statement.”
Hey Mr. Bush, you use the media too. It’s the message, not the medium.
-GSD
The nightmare that is behind all of this is, of course, when Negroponte is appointed McCain’s Secretary of State and things start to happen to those reporters. And somehow the SWIFT records of people who have contributed to certain websites gets into the hands of an obscure right-wing paramilitary group made up of former intelligence agents. I say that, not so much because I think we have no means to avert the plunge into corporate facism, but rather because a dim memory of a similar nightmare (or a version that some Palestinians are living through now) is what causes these insidious actions to be immediately effective in chilling speech and promoting self-censorship.
in order to have an ethical lapse, you have to have ethics to begin with. i think.
It’s facts v. fear, which is another way of saying rationl v. irrational, and the GOP believes that fear trumps facts and the irrational trumps the rational.
To some extent they are right. I mentioned this last night, but trying to counter fear with facts is about as easy as explaining to a toddler that there are no monsters under the bed or in the closet. As long as the child believes the monsters are there, no amount of rational explanation will do.
But how do we do the parental equivalent of turning an ordinary spray bottle into “Monster Repellent” so that fearful voters will have the courage to face the reality that the biggest monsters of all are not in the closet or under the bed, butm are sitting in the Oval Office and in the halls of Congress?
What do people need from us to vanquish the irrational fear that the right is cultivating?
I am amazed how the powergrab of this administration is similar to how the old Soviet Union used to operate. The way they handle the news, the way they keep prisoners in a gulag, the way they export their crooked type of governance, the way they fix elections. I wonder when their frontal assault on the blogosphere is getting into high gear.
It’s odd that Ann Coulter — and let’s just call a terrorist a terrorist — has made it this far in her voter fraud case, without her home address being splashed around.
I’m not advocating its spread. The last thing I want is a vigilante army harassing or threatening her. But if anybody deserved to fall prey to the baser instincts of the media, in all its forms, it’s Ann Coulter, Terrorist. That she hasn’t means something.
JR 11 – the government of our founders died on December 12 2000. What we’ve been witnessing since then is this psycho thug junta raping and maniacally dancing upon the corpse.
Hopefully after they have accomplished the utter physical destruction of our civilized nation, some of us will still be here to pick up the pieces. I will never stop having faith in the boundless promise and capacity of our smart children either.
Guest Post from TPM reader DK:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..008906.php
The Air Force is venturing forth into the virtual blue yonder with $450,000 in funding for a three-year project entitled “Automated Ontologically-Based Link Analysis of International Web Logs for the Timely Discovery of Relevant and Credible Information.”
That’s right. The Air Force is studying blogs. All part of Rumsfeld’s military transformation, I suppose. Here’s some of what the Air Force has deduced so far:
He must be talking about these guys.
I’ve always said that about Wolcott’s blog–too much actionable information. …
“Real Republicans are not haters. Not ever. It’s just not in them to hate, just as it’s not in any real American to hate any other American who lives within the law.”
-Ben Stein, defending Karl Rove, who gave Ben a ride home (Why I Am a Republican 6/26/2006).
Hey Ben, your friend “cloth coat” Karl started this hate fest against the NYT, which is culminating in Real Republicans publishing a photographer’s home address and urging people to find out where the kids of NYT staffers go to school.
This is no more an accident than the bigot-fest regarding the McCain’s adopted baby back in the 2000 South Carolina Republican presidential primary.
Sorry Ben, the Republican party is the party of hate. And you are just turning the truth on its head.
Anne at 17 — I’ve been thinking a lot about that lately, but haven’t come up with any really good answers other than the usual mocking of the other side of things. I’d love everyone’s thoughts on this issue — and the spray bottle of monster repellent is a great image, I have to say. :)
Instead of comparing the Bush regime to the Third Reich, it might be more effective to compare them with the Soviet Union…..there are lots of similarities.
Good post Christy.
Anne 42, the only thing I can think of is to talk to people. In grocery lines, at parties (unless it’s the choir), with friends and acquaintances. I tend to get pedantic when riled so I try to keep it mellow. But two of our neighbors changed their voter reg to D this year for the primary -I don’t claim credit but did what I could to encourage the roll-over.
I keep hearing Al Gore’s voice in my head when I get discouraged. I know he’s right. The tipping point can come at any time.
Good morning from the upper midwest. If we can’t get the media back to neutral, all is lost. I don’t think they are scared. That is their bent. They color us the way they do because they WANT to.
Plagiarism from across the pond.
Is Karl Rove jotting down some memorable lines for Bush’s shaved poodle, Tony Blair? Or is Blair just lifting vapid and self aggrandizing memes all on his own?
You decide.
Tony Blair: “What sustains a government at this point is self-belief.”
Compared with: “We create our own reality.”
-GSD
#24.
Although there is a strong cult of personality theme among many Christians, it is indeed the “party” line that Republicans push. Just like the old commies. Party first.
-GSD
I must agree with the other posters above.
This is not just spin and electioneering. The far right is being serious. This is exactly what they want. They want journalists murdered. They want abortion doctors murdererd. They want anyone who disagrees with Dear Leader imprisoned at least, and dead would be best.
We MUST take these threats seriously.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 22:
‘Amazingly fit and trim…posterior‘ – ‘helps wash the dishes’ – ‘helps keep the house clean’ – ‘walks the dogs’, and during all this not ‘one mean word about anyone on the other side’…What’s not to love?
;>)
*wilson spotted MediaMatters as a frontline battlement against the assault on truth, justice and the American way being run out of Rove’s office. This essay by Paul Waldman appeared at MMFA on Friday:
“A declaration of war
This week, the conservatives declared war.
Not on The New York Times. Not even on the media in general. No, this week the entire conservative movement — from the White House to Republicans in Congress to Fox News to right-wing talk radio to conservative magazines — declared war on the very idea of an independent press.
They declared war on the idea that journalists have not just the right but the obligation to hold those in power accountable for their actions. They declared war on the idea that journalists, not the government and not a political party, get to decide what appears in the press. They declared war on the idea that the public has a right to know what the government is doing in our name.
This is a profound threat to our democracy, and we underestimate it at our peril.”
Sharkbabe,
Ever read the speechj by Etan Thomas.
It has the great line: “The bird of democracy flew the coop back in Florida.”
http://www.democracynow.org/ar…..26/1434223
-GSD
As to Ben Stein, he is just like the Republicans who claim Bush is “liberal” and not a “real” conservative. Yes Ben, there is no hate in a party littered with the fetid ramblings of Malkin, Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, Coulter, Savage and beloved Rev. Pat Robertson.
oops, link to Paul Waldman’s essay:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607010004
Lol darkblack. Beverage warning, please!
The New York Times is a brake on all progress and has been since 1995 or so. That they can’t see the problem now, after being accused of treason by the President of the United States, tells you everything you need to know.
Freedom of Press yes, NYT no; and the latter, by their dominant position, actively impedes the former.
The country would be a better place without the New York Times. Let other newspapers, other media replace this incubus.
.
darkblack!
Hmmm…love Billmon, may have to split a few hairs here. I agree the story wasn’t a big deal and much of the information had already been out there, but for that very reason — why should the NYT think that THIS would be the thing that sent the wingnuts over the edge? They’re always right there on the precipice anyway, and Rove will find one thing or another (even if he has to make it up) to rally the base. I’m not sure you can use that as a rational for NOT doing something. You wind up in Chuck Schumer land — second guessing yourself, not wanting to do anything “controversial” lest you give Rove the tools to do what he’s going to do anyway, no matter what you do.
Wingnuttia is now frothing about the frigging TRAVEL section in the NYT. Really, they’ll always find something. And I do think the steady drip-drip-drip of information about the Cheney Administration’s police state is starting to have an impact on the American consciousness, as I’ve always firmly believed it would. There’s a strain of deep “stay out of my business” libertarianism even amongst wingnuts, and it’s starting to split the rural red staters off from the True Kool-Aid Drinkers.
I’m glad the NYT published the SWIFT story. One can only hope they’ll wake up and stop accomodating those people who simply want to destroy them.
Well, time for some fun in the sun, Fourth of July, nephew’s birthday, celebratin’ (and undoing all the work at the gym this week), by feasting on hard-shell crabs washed down with ice-cold beer (the only time I ever drink beer), corn-on-the-cob, cucumber salad (thinly-sliced cucumber with paper thin onion slices, marinated in really good vinegar), fresh blueberries from our heavy-with-berries blueberry bush, and the carrot cake my nephew requests I make for him every year (he’s only 11, so it hasn’t been THAT many years, and he won’t be drinking beer of any kind).
MMMmmmmm…
The eventual outcome of bashing the Media and the constant spinning and attacks… There is no more truth or how do we know what the truth is anymore.
Goverment reports and analysis is “edited” to march to the party line.
Talking points are MORE important than the actual story or the truth.
Paid media to post stories pushing the party line.
The above is why I migrated to the blogs 5 years ago. Internet news such as Buzzflash, Alternet and CommonDreams.
Actually I believe the Media NEEDS to be liberal, because Liberals attempt to evaluate BOTH sides of the story and it takes the use of both the Right and the Left sides of your brain to be able to perform indepth analysis.
For the adult toddlers who are so afraid of the monsters under the bed, perhaps the answer is to point out — continuously — that the spray bottle currently being brandished by Bushco is empty. It doesn’t have anything in it. Why would anyone believe that the wonderful folks who let New Orleans drown, let OBL escape, and FUBARed Iraq could do a competent job of monster repellant?
It doesn’t work to tell them that there are no monsters, because there manifestly are monsters and they keep releasing video tapes. It also apparently doesn’t work to tell them that courage is about going to sleep in spite of the monsters. It might work to remind them of Katrina. A child can’t pick a more effective parent, but a voter can.
And one additional thought: just as we need to tie Bush around the necks of Republican candidates for Congress, so too we need to tie Cheney around the neck of Bush. Maybe someone needs to photoshop a photo of Lieberman sitting on Bush’s lap sitting on Cheney’s lap. Let’s get those PARs down to 20%.
Hey Ben Stein, they’re going to intern and eventually kill you too. Fucking FOOL.
MikeB 35
The problem is that righty newspapers(like ours here) just bought the Duluth Minnesota paper. That is the last thing Democrats in Minnesota need as they fight to keep their state blue.
From C & L:
“On Meet the Press this morning, Washington Post reporter Dana Priest snap back at Bill Bennett. She said it is not a crime to disclose classified information and then went on to say that people would like to make casino gambling against the law, but it is not illegal. Bill Bennett, who has previously admitted a gambling problem, sat in stunned silence like he had just been punched hard in the stomach. It was a classic moment.”
-GSD
There is a push-back being waged. Barney Frank shutdown a rightwing chimp-bot on the floor of the house this week. James Webb fired a few missiles right into Chicken George Allen’s slave ship hull too. Now Dana Priest slapping Dollar Bill Bennett’s playing cards all over the floor.
Our own friends in the blogsphere are manning the ramparts quite well too.
Anne, sheez would you quit torturing me with the carrot cake already :)
Really, though, in the same way that “illegal immigration” is the new “segregation forever” isn’t “The New York Times” rightwing code for “Jews and secular humanists?”
The rightwing can’t really hate The New York Times itself — after all, wasn’t the Grey Lady terribly helpful to Scooter, Addington, and Chalabi? And what paper has been more dismissive of the “stolen elections” research, investigative reporting, and dot-connecting?
No, no, no: it’s that The New York Times is run by people with names like Sulzberger and Keller. That’s the ticket for the base. Oh, and about The Base: does anyone else think it’s plain odd that Bush’s and Bin Ladin’s supporters have the same name?
… and George Bush’s supporters are very base !
I was away from the computer yesterday and am just catching up on the posts I missed.
I just read Pach’s post about how to connect with single women.
I addition to health care, and especailly child care (if you are a single mom, reliable, affordable child care is the difference between being able to make you life happen and not- after my divorce is final I am moving to the town my mother lives in so that she can watch my daughter after school–and I am not a minimum wage worker)
One thing I did not see mentioned on the thread is simply saying that you want to connect with them.
That you have identified them as a group who’s needs line up very closely with progressive values and you want to connect with them as voters because there vote matters to you and you want their vote to influence policy.
It is a very empowering thing to say to a class of people that don’t feel like they have much power or prestige or that their voice counts.
I was amazed at how much more seriously I was taken as a professional after I got married. Which is weird since my single(pre child) self had more time, energy and attention to devote to the job.
But put a ring on the left hand and all the sudden people start taking what you have to say much more seriously. (I’ll skip over how much that pisses me off)
One day some years ago, I was at a fundraiser held in NYC for the non-partisan Women’s Campaign School. It was mostly, but not exclusively women.
One man made an announcement, he said he was the chairman of the NYS republican Assembly campaign committee and that thay were actively looking for women candidates, would groom them, help fund their campaigns, and you did not have to be a republican and in some circumstance might not have to change your registration to run on the republican line.
You just had to be willing to run on “most” of their platform (meaning you did not have to go lockstep on choice)
To say that everyone in the room (and it was a large and crowed room) was stunned was a huge understatement. Betsy Gottbaum called him out on it thinking it was a bluff (which is how we found out about the wiggle room on the abortion plank). He said that they had identified women (yup soccer moms) as an underperforming segment of the voting public and wanted to mine those votes and he thought the best way to do that was by running alot of women so the Reps could claim to be the party of women. They also at about that time recruited women to run in the House and right after that Liddy Dole was running for president.
While that was all a stunt, many women, both parties took his business card that day. After he left, I was standing with a group of Dem women who were furious with the Dems, becuse no one ever asks us to run. Dem women have to thow huge fits with local party bosses and run as insurgents in uphill primaries to get started in their first elected office. You don’t see the dems grooming first time women candidates they way they groom bright, presentable young men. Why do you think Ellen Malcom had to start Emily’s List and Judy Hope start Eleanor Roosevelt’s Legacy?
The first person to ever ask me to run for anything was David Patterson back when he was chairng the NYS Dem Senate Campaign Committee. He made a noticible effort to recruit people who do not fit the back room deal profile so beloved by most old fashioned local party bosses.
Problem was, then the local bosses did not make much of an effort to really support David’s candidates (Which is one of the reasons why I declined to run–my local chairman would have added my name to the petitons, mentioned my name if I showed up at an event, but that would be it, not money, no phone calls calling in favors, not boots on the ground. NADA — he was quite clear, if your Patterson’s girl let him elect you–and it wasn’t just me. Our beloved chairman said the same thing to every woman in my district approached by the DSCC)
A huge problem in the Dem party, is the party leadership itself. How much time does Howard Dean waste having to fight with “bosses” inside his own party? how many shouting matches will Rahm Emanuel instigate with him over the 50 state program?
When women become county chairmen in the Dem party, things will change alot. In the meantime, simply telling single women voters that they are an important voting block, will be an empowring thing, cause them to take themselves and their vote more seriously. Just tell them you are courting their vote.
It certainly worked with the soccer moms.
Gotta stop the flag-burning gay Mexicans from getting married to their puppies!
oh Sharkbabe @ 41 – am with ya, always think of the elimination of the enablers in Animal Farm whenever I have the misfortune to see or hear any one of these suckpuppets
BarbaraB – but Bush and Rove and Cheney would all argue – and are arguing – that the bottle isn’t empty, that it is the media and the Democrats which are working to empty that bottle.
They did it with the NSA program, and they’re doing it now with the banking surveillance program. They’re also doing it with the SC ruling, suggesting that not giving the president the authority to do what he wants to do is being soft on terrorism.
The Monster Repellent isn’t effective on the real monsters – those who would happily see the US go up in flames – but it is highly effective against those who seek power through fear. L. Frank Baum was probably the creator of the first Monster Repellent – it was, as we all remember, nothing but water that melted the Wicked Witch of the West.
Jane 10:06 — something smells. REALLY reeks.
Why all the excess of panicky concern over the NYT, yet again??
Doesn’t that strike you as odd?
Did the NYT slip off its leash when it “lost” Miller? Has there been a story the NYT failed to carry, like one on alleged Iranian threats? Or is there another BIG story that NYT sits on that the White House knows about and is terrified will be printed?
Something’s going on here; the VRWC is going batsh*t over the very paper that sealed the deal on the Iraq war for them.
Anyhow, as for all the hullabaloo from the VRWC: we simply call it like it is. They are ape-sh*t fruit bat krazy, to the point where they want to kill the Constitution and the First Amendment. Start telling gun rights folks that the Second Amendment is next — heck, the DHS is already stopping ordinary Americans from having fireworks in their possession, how long before these same wackjobs start after their hunting rifles?
* wink *
Teddy -
The rightwing can’t really hate The New York Times itself %u2014 after all, wasn’t the Grey Lady terribly helpful to Scooter, Addington, and Chalabi? And what paper has been more dismissive of the “stolen elections” research, investigative reporting, and dot-connecting?
You think the fascists care? What has NYT done for them lately?
Dana Priest smackdown of Bennett! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmYFc_ZCdH4
Christy,
Welcome to CT.!!!I’m up the road a piece in New London, working for Lamont. He’ll be here for Sailfest on Sat. July 8th. Would love to invite you to come and maybe live-blog from an internet cafe at a local marina that day. beach and spectacular fireworks for the little papoose.
Or, any other day or evening to help us jazz up the campaign here. I can plan something. Sorry to break the thread here with an off topic comment.
I agree with JH. For an example, remember how many Dems went along with the shrub on the Iraq war, imho because they didn’t want to be accused of being traitors and cowards.
Of course, that was what was going to happen anyways, along with a heaping helping of “you voted for the war, too!”
Now getting to CHS’s monster spray:
1) Keep reminding everyone that Cheney, Inc. did lie us into a debacle in Iraq.
2) These clowns claim to support the troops? We need a detailed account of all the bills and votes where the Republicans have done precisely the opposite. To the Republicans, a soldier is a tool for empire, until he or she returns home. Then they are Cadillac driving welfare queens, to the Grover Norquists of the world. This information is out there, but I can’t find it all in a well organized spot.
3) The domestic spying. The Republicans keep trying to position it as “are you with us, or do you love the terrorists?” question. It is a “Repubicans are spying on all of us, illegally!” answer.
That’s for starters…
Kathleen — actually, Jane is the one in CT this week. I’m still home in WV. :)
Hot of the Youtube.
“High Steaks” Bill Bennett smacked down by Dana Priest. He gets so jittery he moves his chair and is sounds like a fart.
Go Dana!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..chive.html
I’m with Rayne on this: there’s something on Keller’s desk they are negotiating about NOW. They’ve told him not to print the NEXT story and he’s trying to figure out how — or whether — to print it.
That’s the real story here. The bluster and blather and Jew-hating: that’s the intended and lovely consequence. But Keller’s got something else to print, you betcha, and it’s big.
Dana Priest notwithstanding, the media HAS ALREADY been acting like Pravda on this NYT issue. Andrea Greenspan was an absolute disgrace on MTP today, interrupting Harwood and making Bennett’s arguments for him and giving Bennett the first AND LAST word on the matter. It wasn’t much better on This Week. When Joe Klien (yeah, I’m amazed too) started to defend the Times, Cokie immediately interrupted him and smacked him down.
Tweety has gone from a defender of the article on Monday, when he had Ron Suskind on, to saying “I wouldn’t publish the article” on Thursday when he had his group of executioners on (and I thought that MSNBC had decided that Smirkonicz was a political operative and was NOT going to be on the network).
He also had the Malkin wannabe, Melanie Morgan on, TWICE.
All it took was a three point ‘bounce’ in the polls to have the MSM go back to cowering and spouting the Administration’s claptrap. What a bunch of heroes we got there.
However, to give credit where credit is due, just when you think you know what Safire’s gonna do, he turns around and reminds you that he’s old school and and ain’t gonna bash his profession.
From Billmon’s site:
Alternatively, perhaps the administration suspects, or at least has reason to worry, that the Times is getting close to an even bigger police state atrocity, and are pulling out the stops to try to intimidate Keller and his minions into laying off the story.
I think Billmon is on to something. Perhaps the administration is using the SWIFT information for something unrelated to terrorism.
For what purpose could that be? Could monitoring the activities of large hedge funds, which frequently engage in large international transactions, yield useful information to whomever had it? You bet.
*ilson,
You beat me by THAT much.
-GSD
@34, obviously there are lots of folks here who didn’t go to college with the same bunch of clowns I did … everyone saved their best material for the dining hall, where timing is everything: wait ’til your mate has a mouthful of spaghetti or cola, then drop your best one-liner. I tell y’all, I learned to swallow the food/drink, then laugh … a useful life skill!
“VRWC is going batsh*t over the very paper that sealed the deal on the Iraq war for them”
sure it would, if cornered, these creatures woudl bash their own mothers or children if it were in some way politically expedient
this is just one more opportuity to speak to the now wavering base (not the bottom feeder 20%) about ‘terra and the big swinging dick in the WH protecting us all – and frankly, I’d like to know why all those big brainy kewl kidz friggin’ fell for it – quite frankly, I think Rove got this idea from the NSA fallout
“yeah, that’s the ticket, we’ll sucker ‘em in to splashing our talking point spooge all over da place! “
and it never hurts that the so called ’source’ were those “secular-humanists” geesh
A few words in defense of Chuck Schumer, or at least in sympathy –
In early January 2001, I sent him a fax advocating two main points.
First, I asked him to NOT ratify the Florida Electors. (struck out on that one, sad to say)
Second, I made the case that since the DoJ is charged with defending the rights of ALL Americans, it was inappropriate to have an AG as overtly religious as John Ashcroft.
Much to my amazement, Chuck Schumer made that case very eloquently during Ashcroft’s confirmation hearings. For his efforts, Schumer got nuked by the right wing, and not a single Democrat came to his defense. He went underground for months.
Chuck Schumer learned a painful lesson — a Democrat sticks their neck out at their own peril, because your fellow Democrats will not have your back, unless they are trying to stick a shiv in it.
The same thing happened to Murtha, but at least the netroots had his back.
The conditioned response of Democrats to duck and cover whenever courage is called for has been a long time in the making, and it will not disappear overnight.
Unless Ned Lamont kicks Joe-nertia in the teeth, and blows up the Vichy Dem attitude in the process.
From his comments on the bobble-head atrocity show, it seems that Chuck Schumer is beginning to get it.
Blogs appear to be a good step back towards true democracy where we get to participate in the discussion.
True net neutrality and ownership diversity is important for this to continue.
A lot of our criticism of papers like the Times can show the same top-down thinking that got the media into this mess in the first place. As long as there are people working at these places that can see what’s happening, they will adapt and change-or the ”market” will ensure they die out. Their newspaper circulation will never reach the levels of the past, but they can thrive in a changed niche.
For an update on how well folks in hedge funds are doing, please don’t miss the current dead-tree Vanity Fair, which has an article about the $10,000,000 Greenwich, CT, houses being torn down by hedge fund “managers,” who replace them with $20,000,000 monstrosities.
Next time the GOP accuses John Edwards or another Democrat of class war, my answer: “Fuck, yeah!”
wow. thank you, Jane. I disagree with Billmon’s approach, and not just because I don’t share his hatred of the NYT. What Billmon advocates is that the press voluntarily censor itself by declining to publish stories of public interest, even of abuses of power by government, merely because they might allow Rove to throw red meat to the rightwingnutjobs. What???
Christy says,
I said this on the media panel I did at YKos, but I’m going to say it again, because it bears repeating: the right wingnuts want the media to function as Pravda did for the old Soviet regime %u2014 echoing only what the State has sanctioned as “news for the masses.” What does the left wing want? We want them to do their jobs, tell the truth, and report the facts. That’s it, plain and simple.
This are two very different views of the responsibility of a free and independent press, and they are not compatible.
There were several reason why the NYT, LATimes, WSJ and WaPo should have published the stories about the tracking of financial flows:
1. Although information that we were doing so was common knowleddged, readily available from multiiple public sources and repeatedly talked [bragged] about by the Administration itself, including testimony to Congress, it was not commonly known that those involved in the program had had serious concerns about its scope and implementation. sound familiar?
2. Although there was little disagreement about the need for swift action in the days/weeks immediately following 9/11, there was time afterward to come up with better procedures to ensure proper oversight and limitations to avoid abuse — and in fact, Congress had done that in the Patriot Act and elsewhere, but the Administration did not appear to be following those rules. sound familiar.
3. It was news itself that at least 20 different sources familiar with the program were concerned enought about the way it is being managed/overseen that they chose to talk about it. These are whistleblowers, folks.
Once again, the main story is the same story we’ve heard before; we have an Administration that isn’t willing to follow the law or deal honestly with Congress or the American people. And they’re screwing up yet another program while bragging that they’re doiing a heckava job. This is what the stories tell us.
the fact that we here aren’t surprised by this story is not the point. The main theme is important and needs to be told to the American people. And I’d remind the NYT bashers that they bashed the NYT for holding the NSA program for a year. What would the response be if, a year from now, they found out that the NYT had held this story for a year instead of publishing it?
Bashing the NYT at this point is irresponsible. People can like it or hate it, but on this issue, the NYT did the right thing and we should defending not only their right to do this but the fact that they did it.
The NYT is not the enemy, here, folks. Know your friends.
Of course Ann Coulter’s voter fraud got no traction with the “mainstream.” They love her.
It has fallen to us as responsible journalists to fight back.
Does the phrase “by any means necessary” make your little heart go pit-a-pat?
Blogistan must endeavor to pants these creeps 24/7. There’s tons of ammo out there, from the homophobes gay children (they all have at least one) to Bennett’s S&M obsession to all manner of other “peccadillos.”
To put it as delicately as I can we are obliged to rip off their heads and shit down their necks.
Hope you’re all having a lovely holiday weekend.
Re Jane’s ? @ #37:
“— why should the NYT think that THIS would be the thing that sent the wingnuts over the edge? They’re always right there on the precipice anyway……”
I imagine what is happening in the functional part of the GOP control machinery right now is a sense of desperation. Their precious wall protecting their serial criminal activities and criminally negligent conduct of foreign, military and civil affairs is being exposed more and more to the naked eye. A majority of recently retired military, intelligence and foreign service officers not only diss, but outrageously condemn Bushco policies and activities. We don’t know how much feedback the WH and the GOP congress are actually getting from their more powerful – yet rational – financial supporters. But I suppose it is growing rapidly, and is worrisome.
The combination of a looming Dem sweep, an economy poised for rampant inflation, and plainly obvious – as opposed to highly visible – failure of our GWOT/Iraq/Afghanistan policies has them scampering for all the levers on their control machinery. I’ve never seen anything like this happen in early summer, even in 2004.
These people are friggin’ scared to death. OF US. The only alliance they seem to be able to make right now with the MSM is to attack the left blogroots and netroots movement. Unfortunately, they have the support of the DINOs in this.
These creeps are better at changing the subject than they are at follow-through. That has been obvious for some time now – at least to the left. But as more and more rational conservatives peel themselves away from Bushco – sort of like the people who quietly found reasons to leave Jonestown in the weeks and days before the end there – the Rove machine is searching everywhere for any way under the sun (make that any way under a rock) to hold their fantasy together.
We’ve been creating a lot of metaphors to describe this unprecedented assault on democracy, but we need even better ones. I’m sorry, I haven’t thought of what they might be, but the new metaphors should reach out to conservatives concerned about America’s financial strength, morality and long-term military viability.
Sharkbabe is right: “the utter physical destruction of our civilized nation” is absolutely what’s coming down the pike. (This already isn’t “America” any more, and I’m not celebrating the 4th…)
As for our smart children, more power to ‘em, and I hope they’re around to help forage and gather firewood, as I may be a little slow crawling out from under the wreckage. If I emerge at all, that is. Most of us probably won’t, and I think it’s worthwhile to accept that and move past it in our hearts. No matter what I do, I won’t “survive” being alive, either. THAT FREES ONE UP TO FIGHT, you know, as well as enabling living life to its fullest.
We’re at an astonishingly new and critical juncture in human evolution that I wish more bloggers were tuned into — politics is a bunch of monkeys arguing in a barrel going over the falls — but all we really need are a handful of elders to tell the story later, if it comes to that. Given the number of tough old birds out there, this is guaranteed, so rest easy.
Onward.
ck — there’s a very important lesson in that.
Senators often don’t get the cover or the feedback they need from us. We make a lot of assumptions that they will simply do the right thing or the Democratic/democratic thing.
But they do have to take a line and defend it, often without our help. I’ve gotten feedback from Levin’s office that said they’d been deluged with mail from the right on the FMA, but nothing from the left. It’s hard for a Senator to support their position in the face of overwhelming feedback in one direction. We have to give both sticks and carrots.
In Schumer’s case, he should hear when he’s done the right thing by his constituents — a thank-you for his positive, constructive votes. And then the stick, applied when necessary.
Right now Schumer is getting all stick. Not that he might not deserve it, but if he’s only gotten sticks and nary a carrot, he’s going to begin to think “screw it”. Would make it too easy for him to simply hide out for the duration in DC (like Lieberman) rather than visit his constituents during his term.
self moderating -
omg, didn’t realize it was Rayne I was quoting at 62 above – in light of their sitting on the NSA story for a year, maybe you are right, maybe the chickenshits are sitting on something “bigger” – then print it, print it now !!!
but really, what is left to expose ? we are talking about Cheney/Addington for goodness sakes -
The Repubs have so many people whoring for them, even a lot of Dems, and people who ought to know better. At NASA for example they are scrapping a bunch of real science projects to go to the moon. So they are setting up grants for lunar science projects, to bribe people into saying that it’s interesting exploration. And they put their corporate buddies in charge of the science committees to make sure their BS sounds legitimate.
Would it be better with Dems in charge? Under Clinton we got the space station, another huge project that yielded nothing.
How can you expect hedge fund managers to live in slummy $10,000,000 houses? Oh, the indignity of it all!!!
undecided #60
I agree completely. There is more there. Was it not Abu Gonzalaz who said “Program(s)”
Smack them down now over a legal program that is taught in any new employee orientation in the banking industry. Several banking employees called our local Air America station this week stating that the aspects of the SWIFT program was part of their employee training.
There is more there…..
“The NYT is not the enemy, here, folks. Know your friends.”
I know my friends, and they’re right here. The NYT is, and always has been, the enemy.
Read “Straight News” by Edward Alwood for some of the reasons why.
The NYT has no interest in disseminating the Truth.
They have an enormous interest in controilling the Truth.
It is absolutely essential to punish organs like the New York Times that have gotten so far off track, drive down their circulation and ad revenue. That is how you get their attention.
Their business model is faltering and they know it; they know it because their numbers are down (actually the NYT is one of the few managing to hold on). Now is the time.
We saw an amazing transformation in our local paper a year or so ago, a (formerly) right-wing rag in a 75% Kerry town. Their circ was falling and I wrote the CEO, having subscribed for decades, telling her of my disgust in some detail and that I was cutting them out of my life, don’t need ‘em anymore, there are alternatives like the blogs. That drives them batshit because they know something’s up but understanding is just out of reach.
.
Jane, have you heard anything about a Marine recruiter attacking a demonstrator outside his office with a baseball bat last Wednesday in New Haven, CT? Here’s a link:
http://www.teambio.org/2006/07…..nstrators/
John @ 69
I pray you change your mind and see this is the very time to celebrate the Fourth ! We are presently living under socio-political conditions that so closely mirror those of the Founders – am in no way predicting outcome, but hope you’ll get your hands on a copy of The Declaration of Independence and celebrate their bravery and sacrifice
Dang – I left off the signing statement on my history part.
Add an H
H Signing Statement President signs the DTA, but with one of his little signing statements:
“The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks.”
Emph added.
onward
II Roadblocks to Judicial Review.
So with the history, what roadblocks did the Hamdan case face in even being heard by the Court?
A. Comity/Ripeness. Sometimes, the “right” to do things overlaps – whether between countries, states or even branches of government. Think of it like parents. When one parent has told the kids they can or cannot do something, lots of times good parents, who disagree, stil don’t pick a fight and have it out in front of the kids, or don’t overrule and override the other’s authority “just because they can” without a good reason.
Also, sometimes you are pretty sure something is a very bad idea and about to be a disaster, but you still fell obligated to wait it out and see if it will turn out just as badly as you expect, before you intervene. Like, say Dad brings home supersoakers with turbocharged sprays and backpacks for extra water source ammo. Mom thinks – oooooo, bad idea. Does mom confiscate the supersoakers right now – or does mom wait to see if it all turns out ok, with the kids only using them carefully and responsibly and outside, bc dad says, “don’t worry, I’ll be in charge and make sure that they don’t put the neighbor kid’s eye out or ruin the 25 mill Monet hanging in the hall. Relax.”
Gov tried that with the Court – com’on, “Dad said” and com’on, how do you know we’ll do the wrong thing with the turbocharged super soakers, wait and see, if we ruin the Monet, spank us THEN, don’t take away our toys NOW (aka the “we really will feed the puppy and walk it every day, just wait and see” argument).
Court didn’t buy it. Sometimes mom and dad have to fight, even in front of the kids, and sometimes, like when there is a supersoaker law that says turbo charged supersoakers are illegal, Dad’s just got no d*mn business bringing them home to start with.
So, the court “declines” Gov’s invitation to stay out of it, and says they don’t have to wait for the Great Turbo Charged Super Soaker Incident of 2006 to occur before ruling, esp when the law says you can’t have turbo charged super soakers at all.
B. Presidential Signing Statment. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. The President’s statement on how the court’s have constitutional limits to review a CICs actions and the Executive gets to “interpret” laws exclusively and look ma, I said “unitary Executive” and . . . Apparently that “statement” — more of a soliloquy. How much does the majority of the Court care about the Executive Signing Statemetn as either a limitation of Congress’ ability to make the laws or the Courts’ abilities to interpret the laws? How much ink will 0 cents buy Yoo? Some of the dissenters try mouth to mouth on this, but its a channel clicking moment.
C. DTA Affect on Pending Habeas Cases This was the one that Graham/Kly pushed, Gov pushed and Scalia wrote about at length, and Alito and Thomas joined. Arguments made back and forth, some pretty complex, but the jist from the majority is this: 1005(h) only made the DTA applicable to pending e-2 and e-3 cases, so it is pretty clear that by skipping over e-1 cases, they didn’t really try to strip our jurisdiction
We’ll leave for another day whether Congress actually CAN strip our jurisdiction once attached or whether, if we feel like a game of strip poker some evening, we can strip ourselves. For now, most of us don’t feel like it and Congress only called this is as regular Texas Hold em, not strip poker. Whether they can change it to strip poker over our objection part way through the game- that may come up another day. Today, we’re just splayig regular poker, boys.
D. Conventions and Eisentrager Issue – Can Court Fashion Relief? As to Geneva Conventions (only the GCs, not UCMJ issues that come up separately) issues, Gov also raised (and Roberts/DCCir court bought) that even if Geneva Conventions applied, the Court was still not an appropriate review mechanism. There had been an earlier case, the Eisentrager case,where a footnote had mentioned that the responsibility for the observance and enforcment of rights is “upon political and military authorities” and the rights of alien enemies are vindicated “only through protests and intervention of protecting powers as the rights of our citizens against foreign governments are vindicated only by Presidential inervention”
Eisentrager arose under the 1929 Conventions, not the current 1949 Conventions. In Eisentrager, German nationals challenged convictions for war crimes made by a military tribunal and argued it did not provide the procedural protections that would have existed for courts-martial for Amerian soldiers. The Court reviewed the procedures, held that they did not have prejudicial disparity from the procedures that an American soldier would have been subject to in a court-martial proceeding, an upheld the convictions.
The Eisentrager footnote is buried and has been deemed by some to mean that where the Geneva Conventions give a right, only the Congress and Executive can enforce those rights, not courts. That is by no means the uniform understanding, but the majority of the Court, (while IMO, but not as Imman would say overtly” *g* – making it pretty clear that such an interpretation of the Eisentrager footnote is questionable in light of its dicta function and the evolution of both the COnventions and other Congressional statutes since then) say – hey, whether or not we can enforce the Geneva Conventions or not is not the question before us today- that question is whether or not they are a part of the “law of war” which is incorporated by reference into the UCMJ – they are.
Since the UCMJ – a Congressional statute – talks about the President’s powers in terms of the laws of war, the Court says even if the Eisentrager footnote means what Gov says it means, it doesn’t matter bc the Court is not being asked to give a remedy to a Plaintiff based on a Conventions violation – they are being asked to interpret, under the UCMJ statute, whether the Conventions are part of the law of war that the UCMJ applies as a limit on the President’s powers – the majority of the Court says, Absolutely. Congress has made the President subject to the Geneva Conventions as a part of the laws of war references under the UCMJ. The court then pretty much says – we are now just being asked whether the Nov. 13 commissions created by the President are legal under, among other things, the UCMJ and we are not being asked to give a remedy for their illegality. So we don’t have to deal with the Eisentrager footnote — yet.
[A hard concept for non-lawyers is why, when the Sup Court has a case before it, it doesn’t just decide everything it can think of - but the rules work in the opposite direction. Generally, the Sup Ct tries hard not to legislate and give advisory opinions. It tries to limit its holdings to the narrowest grounds - the fewest things it HAS to decide to dispose of the case. This is where Kennedy’s abstention for a couple of sections of Stevens opinion comes in - there are things Stevens does that Kennedy feels he doesn’t have to join in on to dispose of the case in front of the court - not that they may not come up later and need to be decided, but just that they don’t have to be decided today to resolve the current question in the current case. Whether that means he agrees or disagrees with Stevens - if that case were in front of them - is up for grabs. You can interpret from language, but he doesn’t commit.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Those were the biggies, but you have to realize that there were roadblocks before you got to this point that some Justices were still tender about – like the fact that Scalia nd Thomas never really liked the Rasul case that granted habeas jurisdiction to start with.
None of the foregoing have much to do with the actual holdings and legal analysis – they have to do with whether the Court CAN step in and it does go beyond the simple grant of jurisdiction to Article III courts to hear lots of cases.
So a lot of the 5-3 has to do with when and how the Justices feel a court should act, not a determination of whether or not they think the Executive’s actions are good or proper. And yes, I have bite marks in my tongue as I type that. *g*
Ed*ard Teller 69 — I imagine what is happening in the functional part of the GOP control machinery right now is a sense of desperation. Their precious wall protecting their serial criminal activities and criminally negligent conduct of foreign, military and civil affairs is being exposed more and more to the naked eye. A majority of recently retired military, intelligence and foreign service officers not only diss, but outrageously condemn Bushco policies and activities. We don’t know how much feedback the WH and the GOP congress are actually getting from their more powerful — yet rational — financial supporters. But I suppose it is growing rapidly, and is worrisome.
Absolutely, All the more reason to print the story. Or as TRex famously said, ATTACK ATTACK ATTAAAAACKKKK!!!
I think it’s important to be vigilant about asking how a failed president and adminsitartion can protect America.
Bush ratings are down, people will be more receptive to listening, just attack with the litany of failures that define the adminstration and offer alternatives.
Don’t stop until the enemy within is defeated.
OT Has anyone else been thinking alot about the Supreme Court ruling this past week? I have, and basically it is my view that President Bush is now oficially guilty of war crimes. Any legal eagles out there want to review my thinking, please drop over to my site and give me your opinion. Thanks.
The fact that he’s guilty of war crimes, plus $1.25, will get you a crosstown bus ride in L.A.
More Monster Repellant™: Katrina
Sunday, August 28
MORNING — LOUISIANA NEWSPAPER SIGNALS LEVEES MAY GIVE: “Forecasters Fear Levees Won’t Hold Katrina”: [Lafayette Daily Advertiser]
AFTERNOON — BUSH, BROWN, CHERTOFF WARNED OF LEVEE FAILURE BY NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER DIRECTOR: Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center: ‘We were briefing them way before landfall. … It’s not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped.’ [Times-Picayune; St. Petersburg Times]
Monday, August 29
7:30 AM CDT – BUSH ADMINISTRATION NOTIFIED OF THE LEVEE BREACH: [AP]
MORNING – MAYFIELD WARNS BUSH ABOUT THE TOPPING OF THE LEVEES: [AP]
8PM CDT – GOV. BLANCO AGAIN REQUESTS ASSISTANCE FROM BUSH: “Mr. President, we need your help. We need everything you’ve got.” [Newsweek]
LATE PM – BUSH GOES TO BED WITHOUT ACTING ON BLANCO’S REQUESTS [Newsweek]
Tuesday, August 30
MIDDAY – CHERTOFF CLAIMS HE FINALLY BECOMES AWARE THAT LEVEE HAS FAILED: It was on Tuesday that the levee–may have been overnight Monday to Tuesday–that the levee started to break. And it was midday Tuesday that I became aware…” But later reports note that the Bush administration learned of the levee breach on Aug. 29. [Meet the Press, 9/4/05; AP]
PENTAGON CLAIMS THERE ARE ENOUGH NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS IN REGION: Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said the states have adequate National Guard units to handle the hurricane needs. [WWL-TV]
MASS LOOTING REPORTED, SECURITY SHORTAGE CITED: “The looting is out of control. The French Quarter has been attacked,” Councilwoman Jackie Clarkson said. [AP]
U.S.S. BATAAN SITS OFF SHORE, VIRTUALLY UNUSED: [Chicago Tribune]
2PM CDT – PRESIDENT BUSH PLAYS GUITAR WITH COUNTRY SINGER MARK WILLIS [AP]
BUSH RETURNS TO CRAWFORD FOR FINAL NIGHT OF VACATION [AP]
Wednesday, August 31
TENS OF THOUSANDS TRAPPED IN SUPERDOME; CONDITIONS DETERIORATE: [Los Angeles Times, 9/1/05]
PRESIDENT BUSH FINALLY ORGANIZES TASK FORCE TO COORDINATE FEDERAL RESPONSE: [New York Times, 8/31/05]
8PM CDT — FEMA DIRECTOR BROWN CLAIMS SURPRISE OVER SIZE OF STORM: “I must say, this storm is much much bigger than anyone expected.” [CNN]
Thursday, September 1
7AM CDT — BUSH CLAIMS NO ONE EXPECTED LEVEES TO BREAK: “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” [Washington Post]
I wonder if the manic nature of the VRWC against both the press and their political opponents is rooted in their fear of going to jail for abuses ranging from corruption to war crimes.
Should be “manic nature of the VRWC attacks against”
Ed*ard Teller,
Looks like that Marine recruiter was taking Ary-Ann Coulter to heart.
You know, “talking” to liberals with a baseball bat and all.
This is what Rove and Coulter want. They want to shut people up with words first and then with intimidation and finally with physical, brownshirted tactics when the other two tactics fail.
If this is indeed true, I am sure there will be a defense fund for the offender and calls for him to be bestowed with medals and some high speakers fees to boot.
We are very close to the threshold folks.
-GSD
We’ve crossed that threshold before. Remember Kent State. That was a very clear message to the anti-war movement. And did it stop us.
Hell no!
Has anyone else been thinking alot about the Supreme Court ruling this past week? I have, and basically it is my view that President Bush is now oficially guilty of war crimes.
Aren’t the screeching wing nuts telling us the SCOTUS is guilty Legal Opinion Thought Crimes against Dear Leader’s Glorious Reich?
I am not hearing any take on the Presidental election in Mexico today. It is all over the news here in AZ. Several of the hispanic groups tried t get voting stations for Mexicans to vote here but it was sqashed because it would be Sheriff Joe’s pickup spot for illegals.
Mexico is our #2 supplier of oil after Canada. Our local news is doing on the scene reporting on voter turnout and polling.
I may be wrong about this, but I believe O. North used the euphemism “sensitive intelligence” for financial transaction tracking during his congressional testimony. If so, such tracking has been around for a long time.
To me – and I’ve suggested it here before – this seems to be part of a rolling disclosure with more shoes to drop. Today we got a hint of more to come in the discussion of what has been done wrt TIA when Feinstein made a distinction between “data” and “meta-data”. No doubt an important part of the theoretical Admin’s legal theory behind the usurption of the Judiciary function.
cbl — you’re absolutely correct, with your observation, sure it would, if cornered, these creatures woudl bash their own mothers or children if it were in some way politically expedient.
They are trained to eat their young. Don’t know if you recall seeing any articles about the Young Repugs and how they “train” them. They are encouraged to win at all costs, taking out the weakest among their ranks in the process.
Hence the emergence of nasty pieces of work like Rove, Norquist, Abramoff — all of them “graduates” of the Young Repugs’ School for Thugs. I’ve not done my homework to look for Young Repugs in the ranks of the Heritage Foundation and TownHall, but I’ll put money on their saturation.
This ugly fraternity has now been turned loose not merely on the press at large, although they are carping here and there about the so-called liberal media when it suits them — like Bush’s comments in advance of more details coming out of Haditha. But note there was a specific link between the first reports of the Haditha massacre, Bush’s comments about the media, and then the subsequent release of photos/videos from Haditha.
In other words, there’s an M.O. established for the administration’s action/reaction to the media.
When the NSA story broke, the VRWC went ape-sh*t as well, even though many of folks within the ranks of the VRWC were actually distressed about the story. Note the parties that supported Al Gore’s speech this January at Constitution Hall — some of them clearly VRWC folks. This suggests that the VRWC are following orders, but will on occasion throw progressives out front to run cover for them since they understand the maxim, Win At All Costs – Eat the Young, Eat the Weak.
I have no clue what NYT might be sitting on, but there’s got to be a reason why the VRWC would go after Sulzberger in spite of his loyalty during the run-up to and through the launch of the Iraq occupation. Whatever it is is big, might even be the “rest of the story” on the NSA domestic spying story (maybe spying on domestic opposition?).
What are the likely stories that would rattle the White House / OVP this much that they would chum the waters so heavily around the NYT?
Was there more incriminating info about Cheney in L’Affaire de Plame?
Was there something as suggested about SWIFT transaction monitoring and hedge funds? Were the SWIFT transactions being traced before 9/ll? Did the SWIFT transactions show unusual trends related to hedging done just before 9/ll?
What other stories might be as big as these and cause the average American to go ape-sh*t against the White House?
This is the story the wingers are trying to distract us from, with their yammering about Rummy’s vacation home, and the usual death threats.
NSA sought to monitor domestic calls BEFORE 9/11/.
Party got pushed back a couple hours – sister-in-law thinks it’s too hot to sit outside, so we’re doing it later…
I suspect that this summer will see a steady trickle of NYT-style stories related to the administration’s activities, hence the pretty obvious attempt to inoculate against future reporting.
Let’s also not forget that there are probably more indictments coming related to Abramoff and others, which will not do much to dispel the “culture of corruption” as we head deeper into the election season.
Bush will beat a hasty retreat to Crawford for a break from all this hard work he’s been doing (gag), and you can only be fearful about the vacuum that is created when almost the entire administration takes off the month of August.
I think it’s going to be a long, hot and very uncomfortable summer for the administration and for the GOP in general.
ot
http://atrios.blogspot.com/200…..0465571485
dana priest does a so so job of schooling bennet, needs to be seen
but we need to get the following quotes to the talking heads, if they are armed with things like this they will embarrass anyone that boraches the subject;
quotes by thomas jefferson
“The most effectual engines for [pacifying a nation] are the public papers… [A despotic] government always [keeps] a kind of standing army of newswriters who, without any regard to truth or to what should be like truth, [invent] and put into the papers whatever might serve the ministers. This suffices with the mass of the people who have no means of distinguishing the false from the true paragraphs of a newspaper.” –Thomas Jefferson to G. K. van Hogendorp, Oct. 13, 1785. (*) ME 5:181, Papers 8:632
Quote:
Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.
Quote:
To preserve the freedom of the human mind then and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will, and speak as we think, the condition of man will proceed in improvement.
Quote:
Our citizens may be deceived for a while & have been deceived; but as long as the presses can be protected, we may trust to them for light
Quote:
“The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.” –Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491
Quote:
“I am… for freedom of the press, and against all violations of the Constitution to silence by force and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of their agents.” –Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10:78
we need to pay especial attention to this next quote from this incredible man, after reciting, we can REALLY school anyone arguing teh oppisite end of the discussion, we can tell them to be very weary of how the pupeteers would try to have you do thier will and silence “those who fear investigation for their action”;
Quote:
“… The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 1804. ME 11:33
and the president needs to read this;
Quote:
“I have been for some time used as the property of the newspapers, a fair mark for every man’s dirt.” –Thomas Jefferson to Peregrine Fitzhugh, 1798. ME 10:1
you’ll especially appreciate this quote from jefferson, as it seems he predicted what we are witenss too in these days of the class war we aer faced with
there has been a class war and the middle class lost…let’s get the government back on our side and out of the pockets of corporate america and rich people
Quote:
Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: (1) Those that fear and distrust people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. (2) Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depository of the public interests. In every country these two parties exist; and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. – Letter to Henry Lee (August 10, 1824)
Frank Rich in today’s NYT:
He tracks how WH Tony first called the NYT story “balanced” but then reversed course when the Admin found it needed a distraction from lots of bad Iraq news: e.g., was the General’s plan for withdraw just like the Demo plan? Was the publicity surround the arrest of the non-magnificent seven in Miami more hype? Did the Admin need someway to bury the Dem’s “hearing” on pre-war intelligence held last Monday? On and on — a distraction was needed.
From Rich’s column, “Can’t Win the War? Bomb the Press!”
The assault on a free press during our own wartime should be recognized for what it is: another desperate play by officials trying to hid their own lethal mistakes in the shadows. It’s the antithesis of everything we celebrate with the blazing lights of Independence Day.
This is more scapegoating and swiftboading, and it’s distressing to see some comments who see this as a time to complain that the NYT is not the paper they would like it to be. When Cheney et al attacked Joe Wilson for telling the truth, we saw that for what it was. Punishment, intimidation, spin, distaction. This is more of the same, and we should have the NYT’ back on this.
The typos in the Rich quote are mine, not Rich’s. My apologies.
[typos should be okay now - the spelling fairy used her magic wand!]
lambert strether — it occurred to me that bit could be “the rest of the story” that is making the VRWC go pre-emptively fruit batty, but then why aren’t they going after Bloomberg?
There’s something else going on here.
Am I the only one who thought this a bit odd?
looseheadprop at 41:
I just read Pach’s post about how to connect with single women.
(grin)
Prof — heh. Actually, if Pach were batting for the other team, he’d be incredibly effective.
Spying on Ammericans before 911?
http://americablog.blogspot.co…..-your.html
prof 100 — yeah Pach is our resident expert ;)
Rayne,
have been saying since 12/19/05 (NSA) – would not be surprised to see this was all somehow about “commerce” -
hedge funds, oil futures, pork bellies, you name it – Cheney is all about commerce -
have thought all along someone should be doing some kind of lexis/nexis on the Top 50 contributors and tracking their windfalls to date – AND I think NSA has been doing whatever in the hell they’re doing LONG BEFORE they claim t/b doing it
they are truly monstrous, but they are equally petty and short sighted (the quick $ is always better than long term $) Their incompetence is the result of this – It’s why Cheney’s Iraq Oil balls are so blue
In the GWFR (Global War For Resources) financial tracking can be key…
Good work, lambert. But I expect that’s only part of it.
Hell, if you haven’t had your phone tapped you just haven’t been doing your job!
Prof @100, it’s probably better to have Pach talking about connecting with single women, since too many of the rest of us guys — even when our motives are pure — can’t help thinking about connecting with them. Better to send someone whose motives are not in question, don’t you think?
And lhp, it may sound like an odd thing to say, but I honestly hope your divorce works out as well as mine did. The ex and I are friends again — although there was a period of great tension and animosity — but through it all we tried to keep the interests of our children foremost, largely succeeded, and our children (I think) are better off for it.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/…..mp;refer=#
Has anyone seen this?
“The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court.”
Seems like somedays everybody has to watch what they say, don’t they?
;>)
Pach’s post about how to connect with single women.
I haven’t read the whole thing, but what we need to understand:
Rove and Bush won by mobilizing the Peer to Peer network of Evangelical Churches.
The key is the Peer to Peer network.
The Democrats have depended on the Labor Unions for funding and GOTV field workers — which is why Rove/Bush has targeted Labor Unions for destruction.
The Democrats have depended on Trial Lawyers for funding — which is why Rove/Bush has targeted tort reform, to dry up the Democrats funding.
The key reaching Single Women is mobilizing their Peer to Peer networks.
We have the issues they care about — if we can distill them into simple, salient soundbites, we can make our case effectively.
But Peer to Peer contact is the key.
Rayne says: “I’ve gotten feedback from Levin’s office that said they’d been deluged with mail from the right on the FMA, but nothing from the left.”
July 2nd, 2006 at 10:36 am
FMA = ?
David E – I do enjoy your comments! just sayin’
my son, many years ago, stopped a dinner party cold when he expressed his shock that a relative-in-law was worried that a political activity might put one on a surveillance list – my then 8 yr old son went wide-eyed and said “you mean you *don’t* have an fbi file!”
one of my happier married life memories
I can tell you a top concern of single parents: what to do when your child gets sick on a work day. Can’t drop him/her at the daycare, can’t always take off from work, don’t always have the family support network living in the same town … can the babysitter take him/her on short notice? Who can you trust to watch your sick child while you have to go to work?
Jane: “All the more reason to print the story. Or as TRex famously said, ATTACK ATTACK ATTAAAAACKKKK!!!”
This was pretty much the attitude of the French general staff at the beginning of World War I. They even had a word for it: “cran,” which I guess translates roughly as “guts.” So they attacked head on into Alsace, which is pretty much what the German expected them to do, and they got their heads handed to them.
The point is, yelling ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK isn’t exactly a strategy. Attack where? When? With how many divisions?
At some point the left has to accept the fact that the public isn’t with us on this particular issue — they’re not entirely against us, either, but for the Republicans this is hardly the weakest point in the front. Far from it: National security, and the terrorist boogeyman, really is the only issue they have left, now that they’ve blown immigration.
The New York Times, for some reason, has decided that of all the crimes the Cheney administrationn has committed over the past six years, it wants to concentrate on domestic/international spying, including the monitoring of internationnal financial records. Frankly, my read on public opinion is that overwhelmingly approve of monitoring international financial records, whether it’s legal or not. And it’s not even clear (the Times itself has admitted as much) that what they did was illegal.
Anyway, that’s the NYT’s choice, and their right. But for anyone who wants to put an end to these abuses, instead of just complaining about them, having the Dems get control of at least one house of Congress in the November elections is absolutely critical. And this is not helping.
If the Times really wants to help the cause, let it do a front page expose on the minimum wage and the congressional pay raise.
Rayne – do you (or anyone out there?) have specifics on what Levin said or plans re Hamdan – I only saw the quick mention on Bloomberg and would love to get the details.
other topic – detailed info from Iraq thanks to mfi at the site linked in my name – the latest on yesterday’s bombings … inc. info on rumours that are heating up the tensions
ck @ 109
Speak to your hair dresser, drycleaner, sales clerk, the maid at the hotel, checkers at the stores. Ask what they care about…. it will always be progressive issue and link to a platform that Dems stand on.
Low wages == Dems want to increase mininum wage
Healthcare == Dems want Medicare for All
Daycare/sick time == Dems will protect Family Leave act
Jeffery Feldman at http://www.frameshopisopen.com/ had a tuitorial on development of your own personal “elevator speech” which uses framing and language to provide a short, sharp, memorable and repeatable sound bite that addresses a specific issue. If you have a list of elevator speeches already to use when talking to others. This group of voters do not have much connections and it will take person to person contact to reach them.
Register 5 new voters
Ask them to register 5 more women
Take 5 voters to the polls, As your friends to take 5 voters to the polls.
rather than critique the NYT for carrying the story, I say we ask the Dems to learn how to use a story (any story) to their advantage
Here’s my therapist take on the Billmon blog with which I really enjoyed and totally agree. It reminds me of the alcoholics in my life. When I confront them and openly go after exposing them…it often backfires on me and leaves me looking the hysterical over-reactive idiot. One of the symptoms of the disease of alcoholism is denial and projection.
For just a minute, let’s theorize that the administrations inability to self reflect is really about a disease process. A symptom, if you will. A symptom that means that this administration will ALWAYS (and so far this use of the invariant term ‘always’ could be valid) respond by minimizing, denying and blaming to keep the focus off their sickness. The sickness being an addiction to oil(greed).
For instance, it’s interesting that Bushie had no problem accusing americans of being addicted to oil. (a projection????). I think that this is what keeps happening to dems. They expose and bush co twists and they twist at a level that tells you that the threat of truth is HUGE. They go to degrees they most of us folks would not. Which has an intimidating affect.
They come back at you with a force bigger than is one would expect. It works.
If this dynamic is about a disease process then the only solutions I know come from my experience in alanon. Let go and let god (I am a humanist and tend to believe in that my higher power is the structure of the universe).
The problem with active addiction is that there is very little people on the outside can do to control it. What we can control is what we do. We (the dems) need to be making a big list of the things we can control and controlling only that…and letting go of the whole bush administration addictive behavior stuff. The consequences for their behaviors were written into the universe billions of years ago. There are consequences for everything in this universe.
Love to all and happy fourth.
I also posted about this, and actually got email back from Horowitz:
Update: I left a comment at Horowitz’s place stating the basic thesis of this post. I wasn’t sure why, as comments don’t appear anywhere. Apparently only Dave gets to read them, because here’s his personal email response to me:
These houses are vacation “White Houses”; and we are in a war with terrorists which as the President said “changes everything.” Thnk about it.
Does it serve any nation to elect, support, and not challenge the prespectives of paranoid schizophrenics, desiring conspicuous privacy in public locations, preaching democracy while practicing tyranny, and ignoring the constitution they have taken oaths to uphold? History says ‘NO’ or ‘Know’. The only thing the administration and its supporters fear is learning the truth about their own righteous hypocrisies. That is why they see it as threatening to have anything embarassing exposed as a violation of their version of ‘national security’, to have their willful ignorance of the rule of law exposed. It may seem ‘right’ to them, but it isn’t not how a democracy best functions and thrives. History has taught us this as well. It is time to set aside the ‘right’ and make progress with what is left.
Power without accountability. Story of Fredo’s life. He wants to do whatever he wants and when it turns to shit Bar and Poppy come in and clean it up.
looseheadprop 47, I hear you. Great comment.
Billmon 114 — Anyway, that’s the NYT’s choice, and their right. But for anyone who wants to put an end to these abuses, instead of just complaining about them, having the Dems get control of at least one house of Congress in the November elections is absolutely critical. And this is not helping.
But the NYT is not SUPPOSED to be partisan. They’re supposed to be journalists, and I don’t like the idea of them choosing their stories based on partisan goals (putting the Democrats in power) any more than I like it if they conspired with the right to do so.
The ATTACK ATTACK ATTAACKK!!! invocation was not meant for them. It was meant for us. And I do think it is a strategy, one that the GOP has been following for years with some success. You’re right in that it needs a focus, but it’s been a quite successful way for the Republicans rally their base. It’s also something that OUR base seems to respond well to, as when Dana Priest did it today with Dollar Bill or when Russ Feingold said to hell with the party dons and introduced censure. And I really wish we’d spend a bit more time rallying our side rather than worrying about whether we’re giving them ammunition to rally theirs.
The next time Bush goes blathering on about his duty to “protect the American people”, will somebody please ASK HIM does he recall the oath of office he swore (twice now)?
It says “protect … the Constitution” asshole, not “the lives and property of the American people, and especially my wealthy friends”. I am so tired of this fucktard talking about “defending” me when he is trashing that which I hold dear (the Constitution, and especially the Bill of Rights).
So, what we’re really fighting against is the perception that no attacks since 9/11 means that the administration is doing a great job, and anything that changes what they have been doing places that track record in dire jeopardy.
And the administration is fighting tooth and nail to keep the Iraq war prominent as the major straw man in the “fighting them over there, so we don’t have to fight them here” argument.
Jesus God, I feel like the passenger in a car being driven by a maniac. We’re making our way through traffic, but leaving in our wake accident after accident, and whenever I plead for the driver to pull over and let me take the wheel, I’m told that we’re almost to our destination. He won’t tell me where that is, and he won’t tell me the route we’re going to take. When I scream that he’s going to kill us, he reminds me that he hasn’t had an accident yet, so what am I so worried about?
I want peace, and I want freedom from terror. I also want to keep the freedoms I have, and I will not settle for being told that “if I haven’t done anything wrong, I have nothing to fear.”
Jane 2, Billmon 0.
.
In other news – and perhaps a topic for our union series here?
IRAQI GOVERNMENT FREEZES UNION BANK ACCOUNTS
Just confirmed reports that the Iraqi regime has frozen all the bank accounts of the Iraqi Oil Workers’ Union, both abroad and within Iraq.
The Iraqi regime’s decision comes in the wake of a series of anti-union measures, including the disbanding of the council of the lawyers’ union, freezing the writers’ union accounts and the September 2005 decree making all trade union activity illegal. For that anti-union act the regime used the pretext of promising the promulgation of a future law to ‘regulate’ trade union organisations and their activities.
This action follows in the footsteps of US administrator Paul Bremer. In 2004 Paul Bremer, the occupation’s then pro-consul in Iraq, declared trade union activity in the state sector illegal. That decision re-enacted Saddam Hussein’s 1987 decree banning workers’ unions in the state sector by declaring them to be ‘civil servants’ rather than ‘workers’.
Iraq’s enormous oil wealth is being groomed for Production Sharing Agreements, which would transfer effective control over all aspects of oil policy, production and marketing to multination oil companies. The oil workers’ union is one of the most effective opponents of this policy, organising an anti-privatisation conference last year and another one to come this year.
http://www.dailywarnews.blogspot.com/
more from the site of the Iraqi Oil Workers union
IRAQI GOVERNMENT ATTACKS OPPONENTS OF OIL PRIVATISATION
We have just confirmed reports that the Iraqi regime has frozen all the bank accounts of the Iraqi oil workers’ union, both abroad andwithin Iraq.Wave of anti-union activity by government The Iraqi regime’s decision comes in the wake of a series of anti-union measures, including the disbanding of the council of the lawyers’ union, freezing the writers’ union accounts and the September 2005 decree making all trade union activity illegal.
http://www.basraoilunion.org/
Ann #126
BusCo is driving the whole bus and we are all passengers. They are heading off the cliff and no matter how hard I yell, run up and down the isle or wave my arms, that bus is running for distruction.
Wake me from the nightmare!
“Jane 2, Billmon 0.”
Yeah; see I don’t think you should be doin’ that. That’s where the thread “jumps the shark” and we shoot ourselves in our collective foot.
Okay, SteveAudio, I’ll take Horowitz’s bait:
1. Only two guys per Administration get a “White House,” POTUS and DeadEye.
2. Only one guy per Administration gets a “vacation White House,” POTUS (the pig farm in Crawford).
3. We really can’t afford the concept of multiple “vacation White Houses” because, frankly, the Chinese, our future financial overlords, are unlikely to go along.
Where is the outrage at the Washington post for covering this same story last year?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..tml?sub=AR
I also remember CNN doing a story on this.
I don’t see how criticisms of Fox News, that they are essentially shills/mouthpieces for the Bush Administration on most issues, and that they function in not only a fact-free environment, but also an ethics-free environment by refusing to publish fact-based news that possibly undermines their policy biases — can withstand scrutiny if we ask the NYT to be just like them, only for our side. I dont want the NYT pulling its punches in a Demo administration, wrt to Dem abuses, just because that might incease the chances of affecting the next election. I want them doing their jobs, just as Christy argues.
Naive? Maybe. Will there be stories that “hurt us” more than “help us?” Probably. But too bad. This is how it’s supposed to work, and if we can’t hold to this set of rules, we’re in ethical free fall, with no holds, not ledges, and no boundaries.
TeddySanFran 128:
His response was really idiotic. I mean, we know the actual location of the White House, Blair House, 10 Downing St.,geez, imagine what terrorists could do wiht that information!
I’m with Tim at 129. Discussion good — scorekeeping among members of the same team, never good.
Uh, I meant 130
Apologies — looking back on that comment (81) it did look like I was exhorting the NYT and that’s not how I meant it at all. To clarify I meant that Ed*ard’s comment was why WE should be happy the story was printed.
king george: fighting for democracy in Iraq, while we fight against democracy at home…
I’m not how big a deal the NYT story was–certainly not anything approaching the faux outrage on the right–but Feinstein wasn’t briefed on the program until after the story ran.
Tim says
“Jane 2, Billmon 0.”
Yeah; see I don’t think you should be doin’ that. That’s where the thread “jumps the shark” and we shoot ourselves in our collective foot.
What Tim said.
During the 70’s and up till the mid-80s there was some thought given in some academic circles to the needed roll of council’s of “philospher-kings” (with strong scientific backgrounds) to inform governmental policy making. The impetus for such institutions was the growing awareness of the increasingly rapid pace of technological advance and an awareness that the utilization of such technology didn’t always mean social progress. The exemplar for such a clash was the Manhatten Project. The short form of the argument was “primates can now make things not good for primates – but they have a strong desire to monkey around with such shit”.
Today it seems we have a similar problem. A confluence of economic tools and marketing/persuasion technologies is outstripping and undermining the older social technology of our form of government. But the Catch-22 is that the underminded goverment has little interest in rectifying the situation – probably because of the effectiveness of the newer technologies.
I asked my wife this morning why she thought single women don’t vote in the numbers they probably should. She said for some it is probably the case they don’t feel well enough informed to feel confident to make decisions about the issues. I think that is a wingnut strategy being used perhaps more generally. Keep people believing they don’t have enough information to intelligently comment.
With no slight intended to Jane–who’s a blog goddess–any score awarded Billmon would approach the infinite. He’s one of the all-time greatest.
ironic, as a long time billmon reader, today i read his post on the NYT keeping quiet for our own good, and for the first time was disgusted with something he said. i looked for a way to send him an email and couldn’t find it. next stop, firedoglake, and the discussion was already going on. thank god for the blogs.
the press needs to do its job. give us the information, all of it, as accurately as possible. informed voters are what we need desperately. the rovians will always find ways to smear and intimidate anyone who causes them discomfort. being fearful of the consequences of poking your head up is exactly the result they want.
Jane,
Bilmon is basically correct in #114. “Elan” and “ATTACK” don’t always work. Uncoordinated attacks against something with as many resources as Bushworld without more coordination than is currently happening between the netroots progressives and the established Dem orgs is a recipe for almost but not quite taking over the House.
I know people like you, Redd, Kos, MyDD, etc. have been beating your heads against the wall of the Dem establishment for months and months, but as much as we need a formula to beat the Republithugs, we need a better strategy to convince the MSDems we are their most important asset, even though victory of this new paradigm will doom to oblivion the MSDem working model developed by the Clinton machine in the late 80s.
Still, absent a better plan, “ATTACK’ works a lot better than “sit on our thumbs.”
AirportCat, you and me both. I don’t think he even knows he took an oath to defend the Constitution. That would be a great question for a little kid to ask him.
I bet he’d dither around and say he couldn’t remember or some shit.
Back on the single women subject….
My impression from talking to some women is that politics is scary, men own it, women who get into politics aren’t feminine, politics is hard, doesn’t matter to them (that phrase I heard over and over)…
They’ve been let down by men before. Why get involved only to be told you’re stupid and the party only wants your money, not your ideas? Why tell people what you really, really need only to be told, ‘our focus this year is more on…’ something that doesn’t matter worth shit to you. Grrrr.
tryggth 140:
During the 70’s and up till the mid-80s there was some thought given in some academic circles to the needed roll of council’s of “philospher-kings” (with strong scientific backgrounds) to inform governmental policy making. The impetus for such institutions was the growing awareness of the increasingly rapid pace of technological advance and an awareness that the utilization of such technology didn’t always mean social progress. The exemplar for such a clash was the Manhatten Project. The short form of the argument was “primates can now make things not good for primates – but they have a strong desire to monkey around with such shit”.
You mean Leo Strauss at U of Chicago, patron saint of the Neocons.
If I remember correctly there were 8 years between the first World Trade Center attack the the second. Any crowing that we are fighting them there so we don’t fight them here is so much garbage. Their reasoning reminds me of S. Hiakawa in “Language in Thought and Action” from long ago college days. “Cow A is not cow B” One problem is that we are not dealing with rational people on the right.
I’m just happy Billmon showed up to chat, as someone I respect absolutely.
The Rover is setting the stage. I can see it now. Who is responsible if/when another terrorist event occurs? Take your pick: the left, the press, the dems, the whistleblowers, the Supremes.
It’s heads I win; tails you loose. And the buck doesn’t stop here.
How pathetic.
Elaborating on mine @125, when we succumb to fear, and allow our liberties to be severely curtailed, the terrorists win: they have destroyed America. Bush either is too stupid to recognize this, or it is his (and Cheney’s and Addington’s) real objective? This is a strong point that should be hammered repeatedly. Better to lose a few — even 3,000 — Americans to the terrorists than our Constitution and our way of life. Chimpy, if they hate us because we are free, why take away our freedoms to combat them? Because “we had to destroy those freedoms in order to save them”?
To focus for a moment on the Rita Cosby portion of Christy’s post: I bet Dan Abrams’ ears are still bleeding from his nine-hour meeting with her, as he tried to fire her and ended up giving her some every-two-week gig without her name on it, just so she’d GO AWAY.
But here’s my concern: The primetime MSNBC/RNC lineup is now Olbermann/Scarborough/Carlson, and three white guys ain’t gonna cut it for very long. There’s gonna have to be a change, and I bet they’ll want a female person of color with prosecutorial experience and a solid TV background.
I give you: Star Jones Reynolds, phoenix.
Re the ‘White Houses’ on the Chesepeake Bay, i wish the Travel Section told us how much taxpayers money went to outfit those houses with security and communications systems.
Kathryn in MA – good question – along with how much it costs to for every visit.
It might be useful to remember that the right wing noise machine isn’t aiming its noxious blather at us, or even at independent voters. Swing voters only matter to the Roves of this world in a presidential election. No, this is aimed at shoring up the base. Maybe we can do something about that, but it would require aiming the attack at the wobbly Republicans. What was peeling them off? Dubai, immigration, Harriet Meiers? Anyone know? Is there a way to re-wobble them without supporting issues we do not, in fact, support?
Beyond that, we have the chance to shore up our base and even to enlarge it. The factors that made Republicans go wobbly aren’t necessarily the factors that lost the independents — and it is quite clear that the Republicans have lost the independents. Figure out why so many people beyond the progressive blogosphere are so pissed off and go after them. If they vote at all this November, it’s going to be for a Democrat, so keep reminding them why they’ve had enough.
Here’s a clue: a large proportion of the public has decided that you know when a Republican is lying by the fact that his or her lips are moving. It would be nice if Democratic congress critters could remember that instead of crawling into foxholes. This isn’t 2002 or even 2004. You don’t have piss off your own base by being so obviously terrified that you’re going to be Max Cleland. Maybe Billmon is right and voters don’t care about civil liberties. I hope he’s wrong, but then I’m an in utero ACLU member. But they do care about being lied to. So repeat after me: The only thing Republicans are good at is lying. Lying about the reasons for the war in Iraq, lying about their own incompetence, lying about the economy, lying about their support for the troops, and yes, lying about what the Constitution says and what it means. You, too, can preach to the choir — and that choir has about 2/3 of the American people already singing in it.
RE: St. Michael’s being two hours from DC. As was mentioned in the article, it’s 20 minutes by Chinook helicopter. Since Chinooks don’t have taxi-meters, I’m guessing that part (and all parts) of every trip are on us.
charlesf — welcome. I was getting lonely here (although that Jane someone seems to be helping!)!.
Ed*ward Teller – I don’t see Jane arguing for uncoordinated attacks for their own sake. It’s the mindset of moving forward versus always playing defense that was encouraged in the TRex post.
But the issue here is not whether progressies should attack or how to attack. Here the question is whether the NYT is supposed to be part of whatever political strategy the progressives choose. I think the answer should be no; I understand Billmon to be saying yes., because he believes that would help Dems a lot in 2006. It might, but at what cost? I have confidence that if they (press) just do their jobs, what they report in good faith will, over time, support our view of the world. (or that we will be honest enough to adjust our view.) And it’s up to us, not the NYT, to figure out how to project that view successfully into the political realm.
Jane @ #148. Amen! I think Bilmon sees the need for more direction as these primary almost victories go flitting by. Thanks, Bilmon.
Hey Billmon –
Good little debate here; I generally agree with Jane on the salient points, but you are absolutely correct that Izvestia on the Hudson self censors all the time — and is more than willing to go on the attack with demonstrably false stories, and never apologize for the fallout. (Wen Ho Lee, Jeff Gerth, Judy Kneepads, etc)
But I like the ATTACK ATTACK ATTAAAAACKKKK!!! meme — it is exactly what Jane did against lil’ Debbie and the WaPoo several months ago; it had some impact, but it also took a lot of effort with little long term effect. (French Generals, Alsace? hmmm . . .)
But back to the importance of the ATTACK ATTACK ATTAAAAACKKKK!!! meme — it’s more of No-More-Mister-Nice-Blog Declaration of War, on the Vichy Democrats who sell us out and the co-opted journalists who carry water for Karl Rove.
“Oh Thank You Senator Lieberman, for kicking us in the teeth — no, of course we won’t mind if you stab us in the back. Go right ahead.”
I’ve become extremely frustrated over the past few days; the blogs are a fever swamp, with a low signal to noise ratio. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t the best idea testing ground the Democrats have. What is most depressing is the DC Establishment’s hostility towards blogtopia and the netroots. Our team is so far behind the curve on everything, and they reject the best source of new ideas.
One last thought on the fever swamp metaphor — the Seminole Indians are the only tribe that never surrendered and was never conquered by American Forces; and it was the fever swamps of Florida that allowed them to survive.
Viva Le Fever Swamps!!! ATTACK ATTACK ATTAAAAACKKKK!!!
AudioSteve @ 145 -
Heh. Haven’t read Strauss, but from the little I know that would probably fit in. The preamble wasn’t intended to be a recommended remedy. Just an illustration of an acknowlegement that sometimes there are recognized mismatches between social institutions. Some institutions are poorly adapted to handle rapid changes in other social institutions. Really isn’t anything aonyone wouldn’t be able to guess on a yes/no quiz.
Finance reform seems to be an attempt by our government to come to grips with one aspect of enormous amounts of disposal wealth. What has me curious is the application of advanced marketing techniques to political discourse.
margot,
I just asked my 20yo daughter (who hasn’t missed voting in any election yet) your questions, and she 1) disagreed with all but the glass ceiling one, and, 2) thinks you could do well to rephrase the whole lot of them.
new thread — watertiger
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..e-snark-3/
Getting the vichy dems to pay attention is dependent on a single strategy, currently. There’s lots of skirmishes — some of which the netroots have won: Tester, Webb. But there’s one main chance: Lamont. We simply have to win on August 8. Winning will change the landscape completely and unite Democrats behind the Democratic vision.
I don’t like to think about what losing looks like, and I won’t.
Support Ned here: http://actblue.com/page/downwithtyranny#9354
“It’s the Republicans who want to continue this fiction”
It’s not even the republicans anymore. It’s what’s left of the republican party the so called crazification factor. The bill bennett’s, ann coulter’s, bill o’reilly’s, sean hannity’s, etc., etc., with their backs against the wall not even thinking anymore, just reacting and spewing forth absolute nonsense.
“I asked my wife this morning why she thought single women don’t vote in the numbers they probably should. She said for some it is probably the case they don’t feel well enough informed to feel confident to make decisions about the issues. I think that is a wingnut strategy being used perhaps more generally. Keep people believing they don’t have enough information to intelligently comment.”
I disagree with the underlying assumption in this argument. This issue is not one of being well-informed enough to make a decision on the issues. I don’t think people really vote in order to express positions on issues.
People vote because they think voting will either (a) get them what they want or (b) stop what they don’t want from happening.
On the (a) front: What is there about voting that will get single women what we want? I’m not talking abstracts here. On last night’s thread, I suggested making child support payments automatic and direct deposited into the custodial parent’s account on the first of the month — collection to be taken care of by some state or federal agency. This one policy change would take so much stress off of single mothers, you wouldn’t believe it. It would probably also take a lot of stress off society in ways tangible and intangible.
On the (b) front: I think this is a harder hurdle to get over. Single women know for a fact we are the most powerless, unrespected people in this culture. If we are mothers, we are bombarded by messages that we are raising the next generation of criminals. If we are childless, we are bombarded with messages that we are sluts, whores, looking for it, immoral, doomed in almost every way. If we are older, unless we have money we are invisible. We are reminded of our lack of power daily. Why should we think our vote means anything?
In my 53 years, I was married for only a little more than 2. And when I was married, I felt more secure with that second income and another human being supposedly on my side than I have ever in my adult life. I think above all things, single women want a society that is more, not less, supportive — not in words, but in programs, laws, concrete daily life support.
The last thing Rove wants everyday Americans to remember is Katrina and lack of clean up effort.
I think in late July or early August you will see and all out attack on blogs.
They will plant rigged comments and then accuse the blogs of Un-American conduct.
Anyone with a non-GOP blog will be swift boated.
The Kos story was just the warning shot.
There has been so much going on with comments on GOTV and other topics, I have to go back now and read.
I do just about have things (Hamdan)out of my system now. *g*
I can’t help thinking that Mora must be a little extra proud that Swift was Navy though. Here’s to the bad guys biting the dust – and the good guys making it happen by following the rules. ;) Final section
III. Holdings & Effect on Detainees v. Effect on Other Programs.
While the Hamdan case itself has a narrow focus – the Nov. Order “commissions” – the case brings into play all the rationale for so many of Bush’s actions to date: inherent Presidential powers, CIC powers, expansions of CIC and inherent powers by the AUMF, signing statement effect on Congressional statutes, etc.
Also, for the military, it brings into play whether or not the President, by Exec order, can exempt the application of the Geneva Conventions, especially common Article 3 (and maybe 5 as well if there are questions on status), and whether or not orders that provide for ignoring or disregarding the COnventions are legal orders.
Whether or not the person wronged under the Conventions has a remedy (the Eisentrager issue – can they get release, compensation, etc.) there is no question but that the persons who carry out illegal orders are subject to punishment (and yes, those are two different questions). So under both the UCMJ AND the US War Crimes Act, the military has just been served notice that the Geneva Conventions apply. Whether you put it in the field manual or not.
Also, whether or not Congress crafts new commissions rules, unless it re-writes all of the UCJM, War Crime Act, and withdraws from some or all of the Conventions, the military can no longer back away from the issue that it should have dealt with head on immediately- the issue that made Mora stand up and literally read to the assembled officers and lawyers. The issue which Haynes and Cambone and RumsFeld said “don’t worry” and Pace et al let pass.
The issue of whether soldiers and officers who don’t follow the Geneva Conventions re: suspected terrorist detainees are liable for punishment under the War Crimes Act – that has been answered now. Officers who continue to place their troops in peril by telling them COnventions do not apply — have no grounds on which to stand now unless Congress actually withdraws from portions of the Conventions.
DOJ lawyers who, after this ruling, advise that anyone is exempted from complying “bc the President said so” are, IMO, open for charges themselves. A nation of men or of laws? The Court has spoken, but men must still act. That will be the final chapter.
In addition to those broad categories not involving Hamdan that are affected, IMO the ruling also pre-Determines what the DCCir – under an e-2 CSRT appeal, would have to find. I don’t see how those tribunals (the ruling says all tribunals and commissions must comply with UCMJ rules for courts-martial to all extents practicable) can be argued to have been legally constituted and they need to be redone – following rules of procedure that comport with the UCMJ. Again, IMO.
Anyway – the holdings.
A. Authority to Initiate Commissions. President needs to get that from somewhere. The common law of war or statute. “Bc I’m the Decider” is not a grounds for authority. When Congress speaks (as it has the right to do under its powers to make the laws for the military) then the President is bound by the statutory requirments (in this case, the UCMJ) and where the statute if vague or skips areas, then the law of war applies. THe “law is what the President decides” argument – shot down.
Also major league shot down – the AUMF as a grounds for overriding Congressional statutes, even in a CIC and military setting. The UCMJ and Conventions are NOT affected by the AUMF. Keep in mind, with respect to US Citizens on US Soil, Scalia also in Hamdi didn’t think the AUMF could operate to affect statutes or Constitutional rights. So the 5 count goes to 6 on this for arguably domestic programs. Technically, we don’t know for Roberts and Alito since they weren’t around for Hamdi. Breyer and Kennedy were, though, and they have pretty much made it clear – Hamdi was an anomaly – Congressional statutes are by and large NOT going to be affected by the AUMF.
The UCMJ (which survives the AUMF and signing statement and “decider” challenges) sets forth details on lots of things, including rules for courts-martial, and states an intent to comport with the Federal rules for District courts pretty closely. The UCMJ says that the President CAN set up tribunals or commissions, if necessary, but they must meet certain standards. The UCMJ also says the President is required to follow the laws of war.
So the majority holds: The Nov 13 Commissions on their face do not include the protections of courts-martial and there has not been any showing of why those are not “practicable” (where that is even an option for allowing change) or why the rules that are not in the “practicable” category are not followed. So the commissions are illegal.
A second holding that can be seen as either indpendent or subsumed, is that the Geneva Conventions are a part of the laws of war. So the President’s authority under the UCMJ and the proceedings under the UCMJ also are subject to the Geneva Conventions and those must be incorporated for people covered by the Conventions for the commissions to be legal.
B. Rules for the Commissions Just like the PResident needs a legal grounds – independent of his “I am Decider” status – to hold commissions, the rules for the commissions that he establishes must be within the bounds of law – law of war or UCMJ. So if the UCMJ says certain things have to be done – they do. If UCMJ says they have to be done if practicable, they do. If UCMJ is silent, or vague the law of war applies.
While the Geneva Conventions do not impact the President’s authority to impanel a commission (that is either UCMJ or common law of war per above), the Geneva Conventions as a part of the law of war and as Congressionally mandated law must be given the force of law in military proceedings where for those detainees covered by the Conventions.
So the President must follow UCMJ rules for any commissions he establishes, and if the people subject to the commissions are covered by the Conventions, then he must follow those rules too.
[Note - this also means that unless Congress is going to revise the UCMJ or withdraw from Conventions - any new commission “rules” they draft pretty much need to comply as well- otherwise big showdowns on conflicting legislation - that may, however, have to wait for e-2 final order reviews for detainees]
D. Who has to have a commission hearing and when? Not addressed or resolved. Hamdan was not challenging detention. Court refers in passing to the fact that the conflict “in Afghanistan” is continuing and usually combatants can be held while conflicts are continuing.
[IMO, that makes revisiting the CSRTs that much more important for anyone who is there mistakenly. REAL CSRTs would indicate whether someone is really a combatant or not. If not — then the ongoing conflict issue is not an issue and I have to question whether jurisdiction stripping works for someone found under a CSRT to not be a combatant. ]
The e-1 portion of DTA may prevent anyone from bringing the issue of “how long can we be held with no charges” under a GWOT concept before the COurt except for cases that were already pending when the DTA was enacted. The issue of whether Congress specifically deep sixed the ability to bring that issue before the Court, and the issue of whether Congress CAN deep six it for someone wrongfully held as a combatant, or after we withdraw troops from Afghanistan or the conflict there is deemed to be over – who knows?
There are allegations that, at a minimum, some US officers and employees have knowingly taken to GITMO and held there British residents who refused to act as spys for Britain and who are not combatants taken on the battlefield under the laws of war. Do those kidnapped persons have habeas rights? We don’t know. If they did – Congress may have taken them away in the DTA.
E. Who is Covered By Common Article 3 for Their Commissions Pretty much everyone. All the Gov’s wriggles to contort the common article into something less common- fail. Without reaching the application of whether other portions of the Conventions may apply to certain persons (for example, Taliban or Afghani citizens who may have taken up arms against an invading force,etc.) as POWs, the COurt says Article 3 does apply to someone like Hamdan who is presumbaly al-Qaeda.
[NOw, if it applies for the courts being consituted to hear the proceedings (the Commissions) - well, there is no good argument for saying the “courts part” of Article 3 applies, but not the rest of common Article 3. So the “humiliating and degrading” treatement, etc. that the Army field manual wants to dispense with - and the President and Addington deem to be piffle (we can’t win hearts and minds without making detainees masturbate for the camera) - any military officer who tells their command that they can ignore those parts of the COnventions, or who fails to require his/her command to follow the conventions - seem to me to be Wiley Coyote running off the end of the cliff. FWIW]
F. What kinds of Charges Can be Tried by the Commissions Per the Exec Order and UCMJ, those “triable by a commission” under the “law of wars.” Not every offense is one triable by a commission under the law of wars. So there will have to be a determination on that. COngress can try to open the commissions up to more types of offenses, but it has to revise the UCMJ to do that as well. Then it will become an issue under the Exec Order – those triable when it was written, or now?
Just by the by – IMO if that Exec Order isn’t withdrawn PDQ, it is a standing illegal order from the CIC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Things that Plurality says and Kennedy does not join one way or the other.
G. What Does Article 3 Require
Ability to be present at hearing and see evidence against you, per plurality.
If COngress wants to not withdraw from the Conventions, but also drafts rules that don’t allow for these two items (subject to well thought through exceptions at least) – then it just picks a fight. It may be a fight that the Court waits until later to address (final order review) or it may become a double fight on the jurisdiction stripping issue and the Conventions issues now.
[If we don’t want to have the Terrorists force the US to stand alone as “needing” to address terrorism by withdrawing from the Conventions, then there needs to be a lot of care taken - not yet another, quickie, “I don’t need to know the facts, I just need to protect the PResident with amnesty legislation” weekend at Arlen’s effort.]
H. Can you Charge in Commissions When your only charge is Conspiracy>
Plurality – no. If the only charge is conspiracy to commit offenses of the laws of war – that kind of charge has to go before a courts-martial or regular court. It is not the kind of crime that, under the laws of war, is “triable” by a commission.
Ed*ward Teller — I’m thoroughly confused. So now you think the Times SHOULD NOT have published the story?
I’m missing something here.
scarecrow 156 — But the issue here is not whether progressies should attack or how to attack. Here the question is whether the NYT is supposed to be part of whatever political strategy the progressives choose. I think the answer should be no; I understand Billmon to be saying yes., because he believes that would help Dems a lot in 2006. It might, but at what cost? I have confidence that if they (press) just do their jobs, what they report in good faith will, over time, support our view of the world. (or that we will be honest enough to adjust our view.) And it’s up to us, not the NYT, to figure out how to project that view successfully into the political realm.
Thanks, I think the essential argument got tranmuted/siderailed, thanks for putting it back on track. That IS the point I was trying to make, just better than I said it.
LindaR @ 163 -
Thanks for your insight. Makes sense to me. Not being a single woman I really don’t have a clue to the underlying psychology. Thats why I asked someone who was a single woman for several years.
What do you suppose it would take to do a meaningful poll on this phenomenon?
The Facts and the Truth have a Liberal Bias — that’s why the Right Wing HATES the Free Press.
Anytime the NY Times or WaPo or any media outlet sits on a factually accurate story, or treats right wing lies as ‘balance’, they are objectively endorsing the Right Wing Narrative.
And THAT — is what we find so objectionable.
tryqqth 169 — I haven’t the foggiest, really. I’m just not a poll person.
Chris Bowers has a What-Should-We-Call-The-Media post at MyDD. The Winner, by acclimation of Chris Bowers, is:
Establishment Media
http://mydd.com/story/2006/7/2/122645/5623#25
I wanted to respond to the idea about the “right wing blather”. They are not whipping up the base. They don’t care. They are pacifying. Period. They just need plausible reasons for what they do. Plausible enough to keep the masses from getting upset. They have the power. They have the elections. They have the senate, they have the house. They have the oil or at least access to it. Saudi is that connection. Bush and the Saudi’s have a very clear cut relationship. Saudi owns much of our country. This has been coming for a long time and in my humble opinion there is only one peaceful solution and that is to remove their power by refusing to use their oil.
We must develop a cheap alternative and commit to using it. Bush co wants to keep us pacified in our big cars. They will use whatever method works. These are their golden years. As the oil runs thinner, they make their biggest profits. They don’t want us to get upset enough that we do something drastic like stop using their oil. They will (like a good drug dealer) slowly raise the price. Not too fast. Just fast enough. They will block any legislation that threatens these last golden years.
The solution is a solution to the oil crises…it is the only way to get our democracy back…we must stop needing them. This is without a doubt the solution to the alcoholic relationship…we are the codependents folks!!
Right back atcha, siun!
I came face-to-face with The Truth in 1961 on my very first day at Communist Martyrs High (aka. The High School of Music and Art in New York City.) As the overwhelming majority of my classmates were “Red Diaper Babies” the school was under police surveillance at all times. Our favorte sport was freakign out the cops from the “Red Squad” in the cars they had parked in front of the school to watch our every move. The noodnicks thought they were being discreet but we could spot them in a nanosecond. We’d walk up to the car and they’d floor it and drive away.
Later when I joined the anti-war movement, at the same time I was a member of media committee of the Gay Activists Alliance, my phone was tapped I used to say all sorts of things to freak them out.
Wow. Had to drop off for a bit and look what happens…Billmon drops in and I missed him. Nuts, that’ll teach me to leave FDL for even a minute!!
Billmon’s correct about the need for a strategy; it’s hard to argue with success and that’s exactly what it was that brought progressives to this place in history, successful media strategy on the part of the right. They had a strategy as well as an infrastructure and it’s been working for them for decades now.
We’re finally building an infrastructure, but we have no strategy; a few people are trying to do what is the equivalent of herding cats to move the oceanliner that is Progressive Blogdom, but without the effect we need as a whole. We need something more in the way of strategy.
We must also acknowledge we do both beta and full product release in tandem; we have no room for a pilot project, must release as we develop on the fly. But the stakes are too damned high not to do so.
I agree whole-heartedly with Jane about the NYT; they’ve proven themselves unreliable and easily manipulated. Could we manipulate them to our needs is the question, keeping in mind that they are very much in the right’s tool box? Doubtful — but perhaps we get ourselves organized and assign a crack squad to keep them occupied while trying to manipulate them.
The biggest challenge I think we have is organizing an open source media in concert with an open source think tank and open source tactical team — while remaining below radar. We would be running thin to count on speed alone; flying undetected must be considered a part of the arsenal.
Relatedly, I found a post at WorldChanging today about bloggers and media, about the release of an online book: Reporters without Borders: Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-dissidents. Maybe Jay Rosen would be willing to come and participate in a book chat about this?
Stephen Parrish — FMA = Federal Marriage Amendment. Probably used the wrong acronym, sorry.
cbl 11:21 am — “about commerce”
Yeah. Commerce is like their manhood, at least in the neo-con world. It’s the real source of their power, the corporatist chakra. If we hit them in the commerce, it’ll crush them.
Remember the Dubai Ports deal? (yeah, Dubai now owns the ports gang…hold that thought.) That REALLY rocked their world because it was the commerce and the corporatist folks who were pissed off about it. Non-stop wall-to-wall coverage on CNBC. If it got the same coverage AGAIN on CNBC, it would do some serious damage.
See my comment above about NYT and strategy. I think this is has possibilities. NYT being a port-town paper and the one that many commerce/corporatists read, I think we could press them for follow-up coverage.
I think we could also tell Schumer he can redeem himself if he follows up and puts the screws on this story again.
And I think we slip them the shiv by asking CNBC and [can’t think of his name] WSJ reporter to follow up on this as well.
billmon to the rescue!
though i wouldn’t presume to take billmon’s considerations lightly, i believe that what the NYT did in publishing the swift article was correct from the perspective of journalistic ethics—something the (grim and) grey lady desperately needs—i will consider billmon’s after-the-fact idea of withholding the piece, fwiw.
but, imo, if billmon wants to help turn the tide in this monstrous game of political brinkmanship, i for one think that he should post more regularly AND take comments (more) occasionally.
the respect that i have seen attested towards billmon and his ususally very well-considered views leads me to think that the whiskey bar could once AGAIN become a vortex of despair for the rovians and his rabidly vile excrement-flinging zombies—-formerly known as republicans.
billmon to the rescue!
after mulling it over, i disagree with billmon’s belief that the Times shouldn’t and shall not report on the resident-in-chief’s surveillance programs.
i applaud the Times’ courage and would argue against capitualting in the face of tyranny.
nevertheless, i think billmon should still post more often and also take comments.
x174, billmon has mulled it over also, and has updated his post on the nyt:
http://billmon.org/archives/002498.html
if i am reading him correctly, he thinks that they have picked the wrong place to make a stand, since financial tracking may not be a crime, and americans are willing to give up rights for security. but i still don’t understand why billmon thinks the nyt is ‘pursu(ing) a crusade’ against the administration, or why they should even be considered part of our plans. i’d say at this point, i would be happy if the nyt just did their job again, and this story is part of that job. i am flabbergasted that billmon, someone whose writing i’ve respected and enjoyed for some time, is suggesting our papers sit on stories for the purpose of some grand strategy of ours for winning back the country. the press is already emasculated, ham-strung, compromised, dibilitated, and any other watb word you can think of. please, let the press give us more facts, not less. reality is rove’s worst nightmare.