The blur of days

Holidays, a business trip, another cold turned to sinus infection, and the mad rush to finish my thesis are all contributing to this current blur of days and my inability or reluctance to form a reasonably thought-out blog post. Maybe by the long weekend I will have my head on straight again.

What I Missed

A few gracious days away from the television, away from internet media, and what have I missed?

Iraqi elections were overshadowed by the fact that Bush authorized possible illegal domestic spying. And we found out that Zarkawi was caught then released. Plus no cloture vote means 'no' vote on the Patriot Act.

So, the White House remains on the defensive, even giving an address to the nation that should applaud the elections in Iraq comes off merely as an attack on critics and an a list of excuses for keeping troops there after the elections. Meanwhile, Bush begins to recover in the polls. Interesting.

Who gets days off from blogging?

I will be on a trip to rural Missouri to show off my beautiful daughter to her grandmother and I don't anticipate much time to post until Monday.
Don't forget to comment on the post below and let me know which book you think I should read next.

The Rise of Illiterate Democracy

The Rise of Illiterate Democracy - New York Times: "The memory of a time when American party politics was worthy of a writer's respect, let alone professional involvement, has almost disappeared. American literature has distanced itself from an essential part of national life, and American politics has debased what was once an uplifting language of democracy."

So where's the politics in today's novels? I think we've grown so partisan over the last decade that no novelist dare declare an allegiance without fear of ticking off nearly half of the American public. Who would want to cut their potential audience in half?

Being a political junkie, I would love to see more politics in novels, but I don't know that I need my favorite writers to come out for one party or another.

What Should I Read Next?

With another book out of the way, I'm looking for what I should read next and I could use some help in this decision. These are the three sitting cockeyed on my shelf, demanding some attention: Vernon God Little by DBC Pierre, Everthing is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer, and of course Portnoy's Complaint by Philip Roth.

Of course this demonstrates both how far behind modern trends I am as well as un-well read I am.

Vote in the comments and I promise to read the one most recommended (at least I'll read it until something more spectacular appears under the Christmas tree).

The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 3

Anderson, Sherwood. Winesburg, Ohio.

I am attracted to small town stories because they provide a wealth of intercommunication and interpersonal relationships, and the secrets kept by a small town’s inhabitants tend to have larger implications than they might in the anonymous suburbs or urban centers. Anderson compiles these secrets and the characters that keep and reveal them in these compelling interrelated stories. Through the stories are set in early twentieth century rural America, it is easy to forget this setting, because the stories and characters are truly timeless.

Anderson does not romanticize this world but delivers the truth to the reader, dealing with themes and topics that wouldn’t become prevalent in American fiction until nearly a half-century later, including abortion, rebellion against American standards, and questions of faith. Anderson’s skill here, and what ultimately makes the book successful for me, is apparent in the balance he finds between what amounts to social commentary and the intensely personal and introspective.

See also:
The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 1
The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 2

The Death of Traditional Book Publishing

Working Smart: The Death of Traditional Book Publishing: "While most publishers will admit that reference content is better accessed on the computer, almost all believe that the traditional non-fiction book or novel will never be replaced with a digital equivalent. I say, “baloney.” It's coming. The sooner publishing executives get their collective heads out of the sand and face the future, the better prepared they will be to meet it."

I love books. I love their smell, the feel of the pages, and the way they look on the shelf. And I have a hard time believing that this will disappear anytime soon. I do see that some attempt at change is likely, but I see large differences between what has happened in the music industry and what is likely for the future of book publishing.

First, music is more conducive to digital medium. It has been abstract from the start, and through CD's we've been dealing in digital for twenty-plus years. The product is aural, not visual, and that makes a world of difference. Since we moved from storytelling to print, we haven't seen much overall change in the print medium. I have no doubt that something is coming, that someone will try and change the way we read books. But it will be much longer before someone gets it right, before someone puts together a device that feels right in the readers hands, that has a display that is as easy on the eyes as traditional print, that wins over new generations of readers. And, of course, they need to put it in a digital format that can't be easily traded over peer-to-peer networks. I think it's going to be a while.

MFA Workshop Hacks?

THE FICTION MACHINE The Workshop and the hacks. : "This is but fancy; however, I was reminded of Narayan's machine recently while reading the Best New American Voices 2006, an anthology edited by Jane Smiley. The book gives such a desultory vision of the future of American letters that one can only hope its title is wrong. Without ignoring the occasional flashes of verve, the stories included are so monotonous that they seem to have been written by a single person of middling talent. All but one of them are written in the first person; a similar percentage hinge upon the narrator's difficulties with dysfunctional or deceased members of his or her family, or with ex-lovers. The tone is always confessional and saturated with self-pity. The plot and action are always negligible"

There's much commentary aroundabout this article by Sam Sacks in the New York Press. And with good reason. Whenever someone sets himself up as an authority about something which many people have opinions, he/she is liable to say something to upset many. I will say this from the outset: Sacks is not all wrong.

I haven't had a chance to peak at the Best New American Voices yet, but I suspect what Sacks says is correct. So much of what I read of what is being published lately fits this mold. Autobiographical, first person, limted epiphany/resolution. This is the reason I tend not to read these collections. But it should be noted that this is an edited collection. These are stories chose by a particular editor, this time Jane Smiley, and I don't think that they in any way represent what is being produced out of today's MFA programs.

I am a product of one of these MFA programs, and it is natural to take offense when someone accuses the workshops of only being a mill to churn out teachers for other writing programs. Sacks's portrayal of the workshop seems misplaced and a tad resentful, but if he's looking for mentorship the workshop is the wrong place. As Rick Moody pointed out in his Atlantic article in this year's fiction edition, mentorship is entirely different than what we see in today's workshops. The workshops I experienced were filled with other writers whom I respected (those who couldn't be respected could be ingnored), and were led by professors (writers) who took their responsibility and their own writing seriously. These professors faced the same limits that anybody, any mentor, might in their ability to communicate their vision or understand the vision or intent of the workshop participants (of course certain professors held it against me when I wouldn't alter a story to suit their ideals and punished me with a lower grade than I believe I deserved, while at the same time rewarding other less involved in the class who also happened to be of the same gender as the professor--but that's a rant for another time).

Sure, anyone who teaches is liable to hand down doctrine, liable to attempt to bundle what they know into digestible chunks. It's for those on the receiving end to understand what to do with it. And maybe it is dumbed down to help everyone find a way to take something away. I simple believe that the system is inteded to nuture writers and help them develop their own style, while teaching the value of revision (which I'll be writing more about soon) and the community of other writers.

I went to graduate school to become a better writer, not to feel better about myself or to justify myself as a writer. Not to network and not to prepare myself to teach writing. And the program did not put too much emphasis in publication, even though Sacks seems to think that anyone can get published anymore because, of course, of the overabundence of writing workshops. Oh, and of course, what is greatness as Sacks sees it? Tolstoy is great, but can we truly judge what of the things be written today will be seen as great in the future? It just might be one of those stories that Sacks has just written off.

The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 2

Yates, Richard. Revolutionary Road.

Such comfort is to be found in a traditional third-person, omniscient, past-tense. Yates’s narration is so free of gimmicks and flows so easily from the mind of one character to another that the reader is hardly aware in any conscious way of a switch. What I also found heartening in this book, and what reaffirms my love of literature, is Yates’s way of getting at the subtleties of thought. When we see Frank Wheeler slip into a bit of negative thinking, fall for his own self-pity, or get caught up in bit of fantasy, we recognize that same trait in our method of thinking. This is what literature does best, or what makes great literature. What we read should remind us of who we are, awaken us to our own characteristics.
Revolutionary Road­ is particularly depressing because of its similarities to real life. We are given moments of fleeting hope, of grand aspirations that disappear in the drudgery of everyday life. As much as the novel is the story of how the suburbs consume those who thought they might be better it is also a story of how love fails the lovers. Not one thing amounts to as much as we initially make of it, and this is the truth that Yates gives us in this novel and the truth that I appreciate.

See also: The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 1

On Philip Roth

Hello, Columbus - New York Times

I finally got around to reading the NYT review of Roth's two Library of America editions (Philip Roth: Novels and Stories, 1959-1962 (Library of America), Philip Roth: Novels 1967-1972 (Library of America) ), and I have to say that I more interested than ever to read more work by Roth, particularly Portnoy's Complaint.

The only book by Roth that I've made it through yet has been American Pastoral, and I certainly enjoyed it. Never mind the semi-autobigraphical, first-person attributes that tend to bug me about quite a bit of modern fiction, it was a good book. An old dusty copy of Portnoy has sat on my shelf for some time because much of what I'd read about the book didn't help it appeal to me. This new review puts the book in a new light.

The reviewer, Gary Shteyngart, focuses greatly on cultural (Jewish) aspects, but he reveals Portnoy's longing in such a way that nearly made me get out of my chair and pull the book from my shelf.

Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim

Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim - New York Times: "The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials."

Frightfully bad news. We can't trust them at all, can we? The article goes on to say:

A classified Defense Intelligence Agency report issued in February 2002 that expressed skepticism about Mr. Libi's credibility on questions related to Iraq and Al Qaeda was based in part on the knowledge that he was no longer in American custody when he made the detailed statements, and that he might have been subjected to harsh treatment, the officials said.

Oh, my.

The Best Books I Read This Year, pt. 1

Bausch, Richard. Rare and Endangered Species: A Novella and Stories.

Sometimes I think Richard Bausch’s stories are like Raymond Carver’s if Carver only went deeper. Bausch’s stories are so truthful that they are by nature depressing. He manages to take situations that might otherwise be contrived or just trite and manages to draw what is richer from them. Like the back cover of the book suggests with mention of a “daughter’s announcement that she is marrying her sixty-three-year-old college professor,” or a “heartsick children’s clown,” these stories have the potential of being merely novel, but Bausch somehow knows the truth of the situations and goes beyond what a novice writer might make of them to find what the reader might understand about life.

"So what" books

Light Reading Gone Wild - New York Times: "Some books are meant to be read closely. Some are meant to be skimmed. And some are meant to be opened at random so that they can reveal weird, little-known factoids that are meant to astonish. In the last case, unfortunately, the more common response is, 'So what?'"

I usually find myself the recipient of at least one of these books each year, and I do find great amusement in them. At least on the two or three flip-throughs that I give them before they go on my "reference" shelf. Maybe it's because I'm a writer that people buy me these things, because I want every obscure dictionary or book of quotations, or because I like the idea of these things. But who is ever going to read them? I don't. What the article points out is true. They are great to flip through, the require no attention span, and that makes them especially good for Christmas Day. I'm sure there's one in my future for this year.

More best of lists

Over at The Millions are some best books of 2005 lists put together by litbloggers. Certainly some good recommendations there.

In response to all of these lists, I thought I might put one together of my own. But that would assume that I've actually read something published in 2005. I have not. What I will do is list the best books I read in 2005. Because, as excited as we get about that new book smell, there's plenty of dusty books that deserve a read.

Another Year End Book List: LA Times

calendarlive.com: Favorite Books of 2005: Fiction

'The Sea' John Banville
'A Long Long Way' Sebastian Barry
'The Testing of Luther Albright' MacKenzie Bezos
'Ice Haven: A Comic-Strip Novel' Daniel Clowes
'The March' E.L. Doctorow
'Johnny Mad Dog' Emmanuel Dongala
'The Painted Drum' Louise Erdrich
'Our Ecstatic Days' Steve Erickson
'Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close' Jonathan Safran Foer
'Never Let Me Go' Kazuo Ishiguro
'The History of Love' Nicole Krauss
'No Country for Old Men' Cormac McCarthy
'The Road to Esmeralda' Joy Nicholson
'The People of Paper' Salvador Plascencia
'Shalimar the Clown' Salman Rushdie
'On Beauty' Zadie Smith
'Trance' Christopher Sorrentino
'The Hummingbird's Daughter' Luis Alberto Urrea
'Europe Central' William T. Vollmann
'The Time of the Uprooted' Elie Wiesel

Okay, so again I haven't read any on the list and, truthfully, I'm only really interested in a few. Boy, do I need to read more.

Politics vs. Literature

I have two loves. Okay, we can call them obsessions. They compete for my attention and for my energies. On a daily basis, Politics wins out over Literature. I get the news thrown at me on the radio and on the internet, getting me riled up and angry before I ever get to work, but what do I hear about literature? Oh, so very little. So, I’ve used this blog to point to news articles that deserve our attention and the occasional rant. And where’s the literature?

This blog began as an extension of Satoriworks, a showcase of emerging artists that has not yet come to full fruition. It was to be a place for my Satoriworks co-founder, David, and I to rant and argue about current issues, political, artistic or otherwise. David, though, thinks he is too busy to comment or even stay informed. Never mind that I’m the one who has been going to school to get my MFA while working full-time. So, it’s just been me here, spending too much time on one topic, while my focus should be elsewhere.

So, we will begin a shift here to focus more on literature. That means books (it’s such a great time of year for them) as well as writing. Look for me to still point out current news items that deserve attention, but we will look more at literature as well as the development of the Satoriworks site.

Besides, politics is sooooo depressing.

Failing Grades for US Preparedness

Sept. 11 Panel: U.S. Remains Unprepared - Yahoo! News: "The five 'F's were for:
_Failing to provide a radio system to allow first responders from different agencies communicate with each other during emergencies.
_Distributing federal homeland security funding to states on a 'pork-barrel' basis instead of risk.
_Failing to consolidate names of suspicious airline travelers on a single terror watch screening list.
_Hindering congressional oversight by retaining intelligence budget information as classified materials.
_Failing to engage in an alliance to develop international standards for the treatment and prosecution of detained terror suspects."

Okay, so who feels safer? Do you believe we even have to go through this? We are talking about the safety of American people, the one thing that the government is truely charged with, and we'd rather spend billions fighting a war elsewhere. This makes me more than a little angry.

Cover-Up in an F.B.I. Terror Case, of course

Report Finds Cover-Up in an F.B.I. Terror Case - New York Times: "Officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation mishandled a Florida terror investigation, falsified documents in the case in an effort to cover repeated missteps and retaliated against an agent who first complained about the problems, Justice Department investigators have concluded."

Oh, for chrissakes!!! I have always had a problem trusting the government and now it seems like everyday we have another reasone not to trust them. How outraged can we be when this stuff happens all the damn time? Oh, and we're supposed to trust them with the new powers in the Patriot Act? It is exactly this sort of thing that we're afraid of.

Report Accuses EPA of Slanting Analysis

Report Accuses EPA of Slanting Analysis: "The Bush administration skewed its analysis of pending legislation on air pollution to favor its bill over two competing proposals, according to a new report by the Congressional Research Service."

These are the most dishonest folks. How are we to believe a thing they say?

Reading about reading

For those of you who, like me, enjoy reading and book so much that you enjoy reading about reading, USA Today offers these suggestions:

Every Book Its Reader: The Power of the Printed Word to Stir the World
By Nicholas Basbanes

13 Ways of Looking at the Novel
By Jane Smiley

Leave Me Alone, I'm Reading: Finding and Losing Myself in Books
By Maureen Corrigan


The Jane Smiley book is definitely on my Christmas wish list.

U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press

U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press - Los Angeles Times: "As part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq.

The articles, written by U.S. military 'information operations' troops, are translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times. "

Just our way of spreading democracy.

Bush Unveils New Iraq Strategy Document

Bush Unveils New Iraq Strategy Document: "'We expect, but cannot guarantee that our force posture will change over the next year, as the political process advances and Iraqi security forces grow and gain experience,' the report said. 'While our military presence may become less visible, it will remain lethal and decisive, able to confront the enemy wherever it may organize.'"

An exit strategy? Finally. If only they'd have done this months ago they would have saved themselves from the Murtha effect. But wait? Is he talking about drawing down the troops? Didn't they say that would only embolden the enemy? And then later in the AP article Laura Bush is quoted as wanting the troops home as soon as possible. So, according to the administration she's calling for immediate withdrawal. Should we now say that Laura is following the Michael Moore wing?

Suddenly their arguments seem a little weak, as they turn around and do exactly what we've been asking of them.

Ex-Bush Administration Official Gives It to Cheney

Wilkerson Airs Doubts About Prewar Intel - Yahoo! News: "Asked whether Cheney was guilty of a war crime, Wilkerson said: 'Well, that's an interesting question. It is certainly a domestic crime to advocate terror, and I would suspect that it is, for whatever it's worth, an international crime as well.'
He did not explain in the interview why he believed Cheney advocated terror, though he also said that Cheney was 'very publicly lobbying the Congress of the United States advocating the use of terror.'"

It's a bad thing when someone who used to work in your Adminstration lays into you like Wilkerson does here. It begins to look like anyone with a conscience feels compelled to tell it like it is. If only more of the American people would listen to what's going wrong in the Bush Adminstration.

A Growing Wariness About Money in Politics

A Growing Wariness About Money in Politics: "The latest court case came yesterday in San Diego when Rep. Randy 'Duke' Cunningham (R-Calif.) wept openly after pleading guilty to tax evasion and conspiracy. His plea bargain came less than a week after public relations executive Michael Scanlon coolly admitted his role in a conspiracy to try to bribe a congressman.
Members of Congress, lawyers and pollsters recognize that both events taken together could signal the start of a cyclical ritual in the nation's capital: the moment when lawmakers and outsiders are widely seen as getting too cozy with each other and face a public backlash -- and legal repercussions -- as a result."

Uh...no kidding. It becomes easier and easier with each guilty plea to identify the Republican Party with the party of Corruption. Democrats should be doing everything they can to raise awareness of these issues. Republicans already face that conception of being fat cats looking out for big business, but this proves that they are also looking out for themselves. Time to clear them out.

Calif. Congressman Admits Taking Bribes

Calif. Congressman Admits Taking Bribes: "Rep. Randy 'Duke' Cunningham, an eight-term congressman and hotshot Vietnam War fighter jock, pleaded guilty to graft and tearfully resigned Monday, admitting he took $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors to steer business their way.
'The truth is I broke the law, concealed my conduct, and disgraced my office,' the 63-year-old Republican said at a news conference. 'I know that I will forfeit my freedom, my reputation, my worldly possessions, most importantly, the trust of my friends and family.'"

I think we knew this was coming for a while now, but let's add another one to the list of Republicans indicted or under investigation. They are really giving the Democrats something to run on in 2006. It's time to clear out the party of corruption and lies.

Our Evangelical President's Radio Address

President's Radio Address: "And we acknowledge with humility that all these blessings and life itself come from Almighty God. "

Should the President really use language like this? Who is this "we" he talks about? That's "we" as in those that believe in God, "we" true Americans, and not "you" heathens who would believe otherwise. That's the way he sees it.

I do not think that these sort of statements are the realm of the President who represents this country. He does not speak for me.

All quiet

You know it's a holiday weekend when the most interesting political news is that NM Gov. Bill Richardson was never drafted by a baseball team. Of course, leave it to Drudge to try and make something out of it by turning the headline "N.M. Gov Admits He Wasn't Baseball Pick" to "N.M. GOVERNOR RICHARDSON ADMITS LYING ABOUT BASEBALL PAST... "

Sleazy.

FRONTLINE: the storm | PBS

FRONTLINE: the storm | PBS

Frontline had an excellent expose last night on everything that went wrong in New Orleans and spreads the blame pretty evenly. The show does reveal Michael Brown, no matter how hard he tries to defend himself, as the idiot he his. It also puts some fear into the viewer about the future of FEMA and their ability to offer any bit of service in the future. And of course no current Adminstration official was willing to be interviewed for the program--not Chertoff, no one from the White House.

For those of you who still think Bush didn't... "lie"

NATIONAL JOURNAL: Key Bush Intelligence Briefing Kept From Hill Panel (11/22/05)

The highly classified CIA assessment was distributed to President Bush, Vice
President Cheney, the president's national security adviser and deputy national
security adviser, the secretaries and undersecretaries of State and Defense, and
various other senior Bush administration policy makers, according to government
records.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has asked the White House for
the CIA assessment, the PDB of September 21, 2001, and dozens of other PDBs as
part of the committee's ongoing investigation into whether the Bush
administration misrepresented intelligence information in the run-up to war with
Iraq. The Bush administration has refused to turn over these documents.

All depends on your definition of "same." Or "lie."

100 Notable Books of the Year - New York Times

I always look forward to the publication of this list because it helps me to identify which of the year's books I'll add to my Christmas wish list. The fact is that I run that far behind on current books. There's not one book on the Fiction list that I've yet read, but these are the ones in which I'm interested:
KAFKA ON THE SHORE. By Haruki Murakami.
LUNAR PARK. By Bret Easton Ellis.
MEMORIES OF MY MELANCHOLY WHORES. By Gabriel García Márquez
ON BEAUTY. Zadie Smith.
PREP. By Curtis Sittenfeld.
SLOW MAN. By J. M. Coetzee.

Any other recommendations?

Cheney Again Assails Critics of War

Cheney Again Assails Critics of War: "Vice President Cheney yesterday accused critics of engaging in 'revisionism of the most corrupt and shameless variety' in the Iraq debate, in a major speech that reflected the uncompromising style that has made him a touchstone for many of the controversies shadowing President Bush."

I'm not sure this guy should really be talking about corruption. I still find it so vulgar the way the adminstration attacks critics. And I think to talk about pullout as defeat sets us up to never pull out. How should we attempt to finish out this thing if the leaders of our country go around saying the terrorists win when we leave. So, how do you propose we win this thing, Mr. Cheney?

Iraqi Leaders Call for Pullout Timetable

Iraqi Leaders Call for Pullout Timetable: "The leaders agreed on 'calling for the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces ... control the borders and the security situation' and end terror attacks."

So, after Friday's stunt in Congress backfiring on the Republicans, this too should push things in the right direction. It should be hard for Bush to ignore this. Time to put together a plan to get out, buddy.

Nervousness at The Corner

The Corner on National Review Online: "BACKFIRE IN THE AIR [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
I have a very bad feeling about this GOP vote-force tonight. Listening to the emotional debate on the floor now...well, there was just some screaming, to give you an idea. Prediction: Dems vote no on a Republican resolution for immediate withdrawal. Dems easily frame the whole exercise as Republicans caricaturing sensible concerns about Iraq--and more specifically a mocking of Vietnam vet Marine Jack Murtha (witness John Kerry below). "

Maybe it wasn't a good idea.

House GOP Seeks Quick Veto of Iraq Pullout

The Republicans have proposed a resolution calling for immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Now, either they want this or it is a stunt. It can only be one or the other. All of us know, especially John Murtha who the Republicans seek to damage with this resolution, that immediate withdrawal is not an option. Who would support this? We want them to just pack up and come home tommorrow? Not possible.
We need a way out, though. We need to know that there is a plan to finish the job in Iraq and come home. It is a war that should not have been fought, that did not need to be fought.
Every democrat should vote against this stunt and reveal the Republican posturing for what it is.

WH pushback Pt. 4

Setting the Record Straight: The Senate Amendment On The Strategy For Victory In Iraq

This one is worth reading as they struggle to assert that the Amendment put forth and passed by Republicans is wrong without ever pointing fingers at their own party. Pretty amusing.

And to pushback on the pushback, TPM points to this Knight Ridder article that does the same as the WaPo article we saw earlier this week by looking at Bush's recents statements and exposing the untruths.

ASSERTION: In a Veterans Day speech last Friday, Bush said that Iraq war
"critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no
evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments
related to Iraq's weapons programs."
CONTEXT: Bush is correct in saying that
a commission he appointed, chaired by Judge Laurence Silberman and former Sen.
Charles Robb, D-Va., found no evidence of "politicization" of the intelligence
community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported weapons of mass destruction
programs.
[...]
ASSERTION: In his speech, Bush noted that "more than a hundred Democrats in
the House and the Senate - who had access to the same intelligence - voted to
support removing Saddam Hussein from power."
CONTEXT: This isn't true.
[...]
ASSERTION: In his Veterans Day address, Bush said that "intelligence
agencies around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein."
CONTEXT: Bush is correct in saying that many intelligence agencies,
particularly in Europe, believed that Saddam was hiding some weapons of mass
destruction capabilities - not necessarily weapons. But they didn't agree with
other U.S. assessments about Saddam. Few, with the exception of Great Britain,
argued that Iraq was an imminent threat, or that it had any link to Islamic
terrorism, much less the Sept. 11 attacks.
[...]
ASSERTION: Stephen Hadley, the president's national security adviser, told
reporters last Thursday that the Clinton administration and Congress perceived
Saddam as a threat based on some of the same intelligence used by the Bush
administration. [...]
CONTEXT: Congress did pass the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which stated
U.S. support for regime change in Iraq and provided up to $97 million in overt
military and humanitarian aid to opposition groups in Iraq.
But it didn't
authorize the use of U.S. force against Iraq.

If they're willing to lie in defense of the war, it doesn't much help their case that they didn't lie to get us into it.

National Book Award Winners

Young People's Literature:
Jeanne Birdsall, The Penderwicks (Alfred A. Knopf Books for Young Readers)
Poetry:
W.S. Merwin, Migration: New and Selected Poems (Copper Canyon Press)
Non-Fiction:
Joan Didion, The Year of Magical Thinking (Knopf)
Fiction:
William T. Vollmann, Europe Central (Viking)

I usually feel compelled to read the fiction winners of these yearly contests, but I don't often get around to it. Truthfully, Vollmann's book does not sound very compelling. But I might have to read now the Didion book, because of this and the NYT review of the book.

Why this Woodward thing bothers me

So, once it was worthwhile to publish inside information when you're a young upstart, but when you have inside info now that may expose the guilty culprit in a crminal investigation of the White House, it's just better to keep your mouth shut--at least until going public may help the case of someone who has already been indicted.

Woodward kept quiet for fear of being having to testify. Now, why would you if you know there is an ongoing investigation. Of course, the other part of this is that he didn't tell his boss because he claims that he was gathering information for a book, and not for the Washington Post. I think again we must look into oversight of journalists by their editors.

But let's be clear that this in no way should exonerate Libby. Libby clearly lied and should pay the price for that. What it does show is that others were involved and other indictments are likely.

Again, it seems clear that journalists are more concerned with keeping sources confidential than doing what is right. It should make us wonder if people like Woodward or Judy Miller are more loyal to their role as journalist or to the Bush Administration.

WH pushback Pt.3

Setting the Record Straight: The New York Times Editorial on Pre-War Intelligence

I wonder if this begins to get a little harder for them as the Senate rebuke begins. So, we were wrong once, so we should just shut up? No. Chuck Hagel explained it yesterday:

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) strongly criticized yesterday the White House's new
line of attack against critics of its Iraq policy, saying that "the Bush
administration must understand that each American has a right to question our
policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them."
[...]
"To question your government is not unpatriotic -- to not question
your government is unpatriotic," Hagel said, arguing that 58,000 troops died in
Vietnam because of silence by political leaders. "America owes its men and women
in uniform a policy worthy of their sacrifices."

Funny that re-election concerns trumps blind allegience to a lame-duck President.

A Detour in The Corridor Of Power

A Detour in The Corridor Of Power

Just so you can get more of a story that isn't getting enough attention. Yes, more illegal activity in the Bush Administration, David H. Safavian.

Just 38, he was administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the
president's Office of Management and Budget, with the authority to make the
rules governing $300 billion in annual expenditures, including those in response
to Hurricane Katrina.

But that was before federal agents appeared at his
home on Sept. 19 and arrested Safavian in connection with the investigation of
Jack Abramoff, charging that Safavian lied about his dealings with the onetime
powerhouse lobbyist and misled investigators from the General Services
Administration and the Senate.

And this only part of what he's done wrong. In the wake of Katrina, Safavian raised the maximum amount for no-bid contracts with the government from $2500 to $250,000. He did this on his own, without any approval. This was corrected after his removal.

Report: Former CPB chair violated law

Kenneth Tomlinson was a Republican put in to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting by the Bush Adminstration in an effort to swing public broadcasting to the right. The Report found emails between Tomlinson and Rove and also found that the CPB head had his hand in creating and producing the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board show on PBS which, as you can imagine, bends hard to the right. He also put spies in to monitor programming on NPR and Bill Moyer's NOW, without board approval.

I want to point out that this demonstrates more unethical and illegal activity by those on the right trying to impose their ideology on the entire nation. So let's look again at the list of Republicans indicted or under investigation for illegal activity:

Libby
Rove
Delay
Tomlinson
Abramoff
Safavian

And I'm sure I'm forgetting others. Imagine what we would find if the Democrats were in control of Congress and able to have their own investigation.

Gangsta Lit

50 Cent to Launch Hip-Hop Book Line - Yahoo! News

"These tales will tell the truth about The Life; the sex, guns and cash; the brutal highs and short lives of the players on the streets," the publisher said in a release over the weekend.

I am all for expanding readership. I think the more people we have reading fiction, the better. But I think someone needs to do a little market analysis here and tell us if there are enough people out there interested in reading this books. Are there readers in the target audience? And will the books be any good?

Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force

Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force

And we wonder why the oil execs weren't sworn in last week. The most dastardly things go on right under our noses. Sure, I think it is often necessary to consult with industry when forming policy, but to shut us out, keep the list secret when we already have reason to distrust you on the issue is not wise.

Alito's True Colors Revealed

Alito's Smoking Gun: "Now, maybe I'm cockeyed here, but I don't read Alito's abortion assertion as either personal or political. A personal view would say, 'I'm opposed to abortion.' A political declaration would say, 'Abortion is a bad public policy.' But those aren't the sentiments that Alito voiced. What he said, if you'll pardon the strict construction here, is that there is no constitutional right to an abortion. Which is a viewpoint, if agreed to by five Supreme Court justices, that can change the law, and social fabric, of the land."

I have to agree completely. Alito is clearly giving his legal opinion here. He is not representing anyone but himself and how he is likely to rule. So, among his other lies about recusing himself, now he is lying to senators about his view on Roe. No wonder the far right is so pleased with this nomination.

Decades later, sleep doctor clarifies his theory

Decades later, sleep doctor clarifies his theory - Nightly News with Brian Williams - MSNBC.com: "But “Ferberizing” has lots of critics who maintain that leaving a child to cry can cause insecurity and other emotional problems. So it will come as a surprise to a lot of parents that Dr. Ferber himself has decided to clarify his theory.
“Different problems call for different solutions,” he says. “And the same problem can be solved in different ways.”
Ferber will explain in a revised edition of his book that if you rock your baby to sleep, you don't have to stop cold turkey, that it isn't even appropriate to do so if your child has night terrors.
In other words, Ferber will echo the many pediatricians who tell parents there is no magic solution to getting a child to sleep.
“You have to feel that what you're doing works best for you,” says Dr. Herb Lazarus."

Oh, gee, thanks. I always thought he was a mean bastard. I've cursed his name many times as we tried to get our dear daughter to sleep before finally giving up on the freakin' Ferber method. And now he says we're on our own? Thanks.

Senate Rebukes Bush on Iraq Policy

Senate Rebukes Bush on Iraq Policy: "Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) took to the Senate floor to insist that his colleagues were in no way trying to shift administration policy or rebuke the White House, calling such an assessment 'absurd' and 'ridiculous.' 'It's not a change in policy,' he said. 'It's a continuation of the oversight we've been conducting for years in United States Senate.'"

Oh, but wait. Isn't this just about the same thing the Democrats have been demanding? And what does the President think about this? Wasn't he just trying to tell us that critiquing him was "sending the wrong message to the troops?" Not that asking for more from the President is the wrong thing to do, but I like how setting a vague timeline is okay when it's the Republicans that demand it.

Another Set of Scare Tactics

"The bad faith of Bush's current argument is staggering. He wants to say that the 'more than a hundred Democrats in the House and Senate' who 'voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power' thereby gave up their right to question his use of intelligence forever after. But he does not want to acknowledge that he forced the war vote to take place under circumstances that guaranteed the minimum amount of reflection and debate, and that opened anyone who dared question his policies to charges, right before an election, that they were soft on Hussein.
By linking the war on terrorism to a partisan war against Democrats, Bush undercut his capacity to lead the nation in this fight. And by resorting to partisan attacks again last week, Bush only reminded us of the shameful circumstances in which the whole thing started."

In this great column, E.J. Dionne explains how what Bush did then was wrong, and his attacks now may be even worse.

WH pushback continues

The White House news page continues its rabid defense.

Setting the Record Straight: The Washington Post On Pre-War Intelligence
Setting the Record Straight: Sen. Levin On Iraq

I have to wonder if we've ever seen this sort of thing direct from the White House before. Have they overextended their role? I'm sorry, but I would like to see them doing other things--things more involved with running the country--than trying to defame those that speak against them. But that would be a different Administration than the one we have now.

Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument

Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument: "But Bush and his aides had access to much more voluminous intelligence information than did lawmakers, who were dependent on the administration to provide the material. And the commissions cited by officials, though concluding that the administration did not pressure intelligence analysts to change their conclusions, were not authorized to determine whether the administration exaggerated or distorted those conclusions."

In case, like me, you weren't reading much on this over the weekend, Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus explain that we're being misled again. The two arguements being put forth from the White House, that the investigation has cleared them and that the Senate saw the same intelligence, are not "wholly accurate." I suppose it depends on your definition of "same."

Sony goes too far in protecting against piracy

The Ghost in the CD - New York Times: "And in one company's haste to limit the ripping and burning of CD's, a hornet's nest has been stirred. By the end of last week, that company, Sony BMG, which had embedded aggressive copy-protection software on the Van Zant CD and at least 19 others, suspended the use of that software after security companies classified it as malicious.
At least two Internet-borne worms were discovered attempting to take advantage of the program, which the CD's transferred to computers that played them. And the company was facing lawsuits accusing it of fraud and computer tampering in its efforts at digital rights management, or D.R.M. "

There are so many things wrong with what Sony has done here. The Majors have created an adversarial marketplace, simply because they could not keep up with technological advances and the changing market. Some time soon, I'll have more to say on Intellectual Property, but for now I'll say that I'm not "buying" a Sony CD any time soon.

Josh Marshall takes on RNC lies

Josh Marshall at the ever-intelligent Talking Points Memo breaks down the lies we had to sit through yesterday while watching the RNC's Ken Mehlman on Meet The Press.

One was that the Senate intel report exonerated the administration of any effort
to mislead the American people over Iraq. Wrong. They specifically did not look
at that question.

He also said the Silbermann/Robb Commission concluded
the same thing. Wrong. They too were specifically not authorized to examine that
question.

He said the British Butler Report said the same thing. First
of all, who cares what a Report written to cover Tony Blair said? Second of all,
it said no such thing.

He said the Duelfer Report said Saddam "was
trying to reconstitute his weapons programs." That is at best a highly, highly
misleading description of the report.

He said that Saddam "had supported
terrrorists, had terrorists operating out of his country." There are so many
different lies and canards potentially underlying this claim it's hard to know
where to start. But again, wrong. None of the purported evidence for this claim
has ever stood up.

And think this only captures a few of them. TPM has links to the detail behind each of these at the above link.

Book Review: The World According to Garp

The World According to Garp by John Irving.

This book came to me on a very strong recommendation from someone whose opinion I trust. Needless to say, I expected quite a bit from this book. Irving’s talent cannot be debated. His skill is apparent on every page, if not in every paragraph and every sentence. The novel suffers, in my mind, from a couple of flaws that prevent it from being a great novel. The first offense is personal. Irving seems to have great fun within the book. It is not that I am opposed to fun, but some of the novelty of characters and events does not charm me as it might others. The second issue I take with the book may come from the fact that might focus lately has been on the short story. Garp seems to wander extremely. If we were to pull out the skeleton of the novel, lay the whole think out in outline form, I think we’d find that it is a very uneven novel. From the time we spend before Garp’s birth, then his youth, to then the jump to his family and subsequent tragedy, another jump and new characters, and then more tragedy and death. The structure here does not pull us along with anything more than one central, albeit vibrant, character. I do not wish to limit the range of the novel, but to simply rein things in some might have helped this reader draw more from it.

Poll: Most Americans Say Bush Not Honest

Poll: Most Americans Say Bush Not Honest - Yahoo! News: "Almost six in 10 now say Bush is not honest, and a similar number say his administration does not have high ethical standards."

Who do we think is rewriting history?

WH website blasts Kennedy

Setting the Record Straight: Sen. Kennedy On Iraq

So, this is where we are, huh? Attacking the opposition directly from the White House website. Maybe this would be better done through surrogates? A straight-line attack on the White House news page: tacky.

From the smart guys at The Plank

The Plank: "But the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has yet to investigate what, exactly, the Bush administration did with the intelligence it received; how administration policymakers (and the administration-loyal intelligence chief, then-CIA Director George Tenet) responded to analysts who presented competing or contradictory intelligence; and whether the administration manipulated that intelligence to make its case for war. Which is precisely why Democrats shut down the Senate last week--to get the SSCI's chairman, Kansas Republican Pat Roberts, to actually start 'Phase Two' of its investigation."

No one yet as proven that the White House has not misused intelligence, as much as the Republican Talking Points try to tell us that's the case.

Bush Attacks Iraq War Critics

Bush Attacks Iraq War Critics: "In a speech marking Veterans Day at the Tobyhanna Army Depot in Pennsylvania, Bush pointed to bipartisan support for an October 2002 congressional resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq and suggested that critics now were hypocritically refusing to 'stand behind' U.S. troops fighting there."

I don't know how many times I have to say this, but criticsm of the President, of the war, or the way in which we went to war, does not denigrate the troops. We cannot be held silent simply because we have entered into a never-ending war. Bush would have us blindly support him when he so soundly deserves criticism. In fact, he is being criticized because he may have abused his powers and put the troops in harm's way unneccessaily.

The resolution of which he speaks we were told was meant to be a bold threat, not a sign off on Bush's actions. This resolution essentially violates the constitution because it takes away the role of Congress to declare war and allows the President to enter into and conduct war any way he chooses. There's no doubt that those he criticize him now for going to war should seriously regret voting for the resolution, but it does not deny them the right to question the conduct of the war and the way intelligence was used to build the case for war.

As many times as we may hear that "everyone" though Hussein had WMD, there was one President who chose to put troops on the ground there to risk their lives for his cause. We must question and criticize because now over 2000 of those troops have now died. Who, really, is looking out for them?

NPR : A Survey Course on Alito Legal Views

For those of us without the time or patience to get into the details of Alito's rulings and what they might mean, NPR's Nina Totenberg has this good audio summary.

White House to 'hit back' at Democrats - Nov 8, 2005

CNN.com - White House to 'hit back' at Democrats - Nov 8, 2005: "The officials say they plan to repeatedly make the point -- as they did during the 2004 campaign -- that pre-war intelligence was faulty, it was not manipulated and everyone was working off the same intelligence.
They hope to arm GOP officials with more quotes by Democrats making the same pre-war claims as Republicans did about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."

So, here they go. But let us remember that the Senate Intelligence Committee does not see the same intelligence that the White House sees. In fact, the information given to the committee is filtered; they do not see information that may oppose the intelligence. Sure, all sorts of Democrats talked about Hussein's threat and wrongly supported the war. Even the previous administration talked of the threat, right? Yes. But did they launch a full-scale war and occupation of Iraq? No.
It was the White House that pushed for war from day one, and filtered the intelligence to gain support for it. It remains Bush's war.

GOP Leaders Urge Prison Leak Inquiry

GOP Leaders Urge Prison Leak Inquiry - Los Angeles Times: "Another Republican, Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, said that senators from his party might have given information to the Post. Lott told reporters that the existence of the prison system was discussed last week at the Republican policy luncheon on Capitol Hill, which was attended by Vice President Dick Cheney and held the day before the Post published its report. "

So, Republicans looking to somehow dull the effect of a leak investigation at the White House have succeeded in giving more importance to the criminality of leaking classified information and have now implicated themselves. Nice.

Stinging Defeats for G.O.P. Come at a Sensitive Time

"The elections capped a season of political turmoil for the Republican governing
majority, which has been buffeted by Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq, soaring
energy prices, scandal on Capitol Hill and, most recently, the indictment of I.
Lewis Libby Jr., who was chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney."

I think it's important to note, as well, which candidates shied away from attention from the President. Bloomberg was only reelected by such a strong margin because he tried not to show himself as a Republican. Very telling.

Democrats Win Elections in NJ, Va., Calif.

ABC News: Democrats Win Elections in NJ, Va., Calif.: "Democrats cleaned up big in off-year elections from New Jersey to California, sinking the candidate who embraced President Bush in the final days of the Virginia governor's campaign. They also turned back all four of GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's efforts to reshape state government. "

The winds of change, I'd say.

President Bush's Walkabout - New York Times

Mr. Bush cannot fire Mr. Cheney, but he could do what other presidents have done
to vice presidents: keep him too busy attending funerals and acting as the
chairman of studies to do more harm. Mr. Bush would still have to turn his
administration around, but it would at least send a signal to the nation and the
world that he was in charge, and the next three years might not be as dreadful
as they threaten to be right now.

Three years to go and I think plenty of time to turn things around, but I don't think Bush is the guy to do it. He is too stubborn to change course. The only thing that would help is a victory in some other arena that would manage to distract us from all of his other failures.

Voter Anger Might Mean an Electoral Shift in '06

Voter Anger Might Mean an Electoral Shift in '06: "Interviews with voters, politicians and strategists in four battleground states, supplemented by a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, found significant discontent with the performance of both political parties. Frustration has not reached the level that existed before the 1994 earthquake, but many strategists say that if the public mood further darkens, Republican majorities in the House and Senate could be at risk."

Seems to me that maintaining this until next November could be very difficult. Though I don't expect we'll see much change in Iraq in the meantime. But a question for people who watch things much closer than I do: How many potentially vulnerable seats do the Republicans hold? I don't know if the numbers truly support the sort of revolution we would expect.

First death as French riots widen

First death as French riots widen - Europe - MSNBC.com: "The violence has prompted soul-searching about how to ease anger and frustration among troubled youths in France’s grim public housing estates, where many residents are minorities. Educators met the French prime minister to think of ways to help.
“These are young people who are generally resigned, they face discrimination everywhere, for housing and work, and their malaise gets expressed in violence,” said Ahmed Touabi, principal of an elementary school in the Paris suburb of Argenteuil. The troublemakers “feel rejected by France, and they want to spit on France.”"

This has become such a major crisis that I finally had to get around to commenting on it. There a couple of things that we need to understand. Civil unrest is the norm in France. Minor riots, strikes, pelting the police with rocks are regular activities. Disaffected youth, without a doubt--especially minority youth. These are the suburbs of Paris where people on government assistance are shoved in to high rises that are full of the same sorts of problems with see in the US.

What makes this worth noting is the escalating nature of the riots. Much as these youths are bored, they should also get bored with rioting. But what we're seeing is something more coordinated and organized. It should be particularly disturbing. Now you can put the problem off on standard French appeasement, or the socialist state, but I think this is too simple. The trouble there is a result of unemployment, lack of government assistance, and racism.

What also makes this thing troubling to me is the glee with which the Right Wing in this country talks about it. Rush Limbaugh had a particularly disturbing commentary on Friday, liking the riots to the Iraq insurgency. He was, of course, trying to show the left as sympathizers to the terrorists. The situation is no way comparable. What we have in France is civil unrest; what we have in Iraq is terrorism in the face of an occupying force. Neither should make anyone happy.

Bush Orders Ethics Course

In a memo sent to all White House aides, the counsel's office said it will hold briefings next week on ethics, with a particular focus on the rules governing the handling of classified information. Attendance is mandatory for anyone holding any level of security clearance. "There will be no exceptions," the memo said.

I'm sure this will get us far. And who will attend? No exceptions? Does that mean cabinet members, senior staff, senior officials? Rove? Cheney?

Cheney Fights for Detainee Policy

Cheney Fights for Detainee Policy: "Over the past year, Vice President Cheney has waged an intense and largely unpublicized campaign to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing more restrictive rules on the handling of terrorist suspects, according to defense, state, intelligence and congressional officials."

So, the original torture memo and the leak both came from the Vice President's office, and now there's this. Those caricatures of Cheney are starting to make sense now.

Bush: Rove Investigation Is Not Over and Remains Serious

Think Progress � Bush: Rove Investigation Is Not Over and Remains Serious

So, he admits that it's a serious investigation and that Rove is not in the clear yet, but can he make any move to show the American people that he believes in being forthright, that he believes in national security or the law for that matter? He could always relieve Rove of his duties and remove his security clearance until the investigation is complete. That might at least make it look like he cares about what the American people think. Someone want to remind him of the recent poll numbers?

Source of Forged Niger-Iraq Uranium Documents Identified - New York Times

Source of Forged Niger-Iraq Uranium Documents Identified - New York Times: "Italy's spymaster identified an Italian occasional spy named Rocco Martino on Thursday as the disseminator of forged documents that described efforts by Iraq to buy uranium ore from Niger for a nuclear weapons program, three lawmakers said Thursday."

Without taking a stand on what the truth might be, the article points out:

"La Repubblica said General Pollari had held a meeting on Sept. 9, 2002, with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser. Mr. Hadley, now the national security adviser, has said that he met General Pollari on that date, but that they did not discuss the Niger-Iraq issue."

Of course no documents, forged or otherwise, were traded, I'm sure.

Google Starts Putting Entire Books Online

FOXNews.com - Technology - Google Starts Putting Entire Books Online

Initially, I don't see a problem here. If this is material that is already in the public domain that they are certainly in their power to do it. Much of it is already on the internet anyway. I understand that publishers that republish these old titles are afraid that it will steal some revenue, but that's the way it works. I'll keep my Henry James titles on the shelf.

The link if you're interested: http://www.print.google.com.

Bush's Popularity Reaches New Low

Bush's Popularity Reaches New Low: "According to the survey, 52 percent say the charges against Libby signal the presence of deeper ethical wrongdoing in the administration. Half believe White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, the president's top political hand, also did something wrong in the case -- about 6 in 10 say Rove should resign."

39% approval. 58% question his integrity. More proof that the Republican loud mouths don't know what they're talking about.

WF Buckley Puts the Plame Outing in Prespective

Conservative Icon, NRO hero spanks those who think there is no underlying crime:

William F. Buckley on Patrick Fitzgerald's Investigation on National Review Online: "The importance of the law against revealing the true professional identity of an agent is advertised by the draconian punishment, under the federal code, for violating it. In the swirl of the Libby affair, one loses sight of the real offense, and it becomes almost inapprehensible what it is that Cheney/Libby/Rove got themselves into. But the sacredness of the law against betraying a clandestine soldier of the republic cannot be slighted."

Both Buckley and Fitzgerald, in his press conference last week, make it clear that the question of how covert Plame was is not an issue--identifying her in public as a CIA agent is a crime because that information is classified. And that this information would come from the White House should be particularly disturbing for all of us.

Bush's Job Approval Hits New Low - 35%

CBS News | Bush's Job Approval Hits New Low | November 3, 2005�09:00:06

"What's behind the slide? Two thousand war dead in Iraq, an indictment in the CIA leak, the aborted nomination of Harriet Miers, and the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina."

Scott McClellan must go

Press Secretary on Trial in the Briefing Room - New York Times: "'They're good individuals, they're important members of our White House team, and that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved,' Mr. McClellan said at his televised briefing on Oct. 7, 2003, one of several instances in which he denied that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were responsible for the leak."

This means one of two things: either McClellan is lying or he was lied to. If he was lied to, then it further goes to show that Libby was aware that the leak was wrong and that he was trying to hide his guilt. If McClellan was lying, then he needs to go immediately.

We cannot have a Press Secretary lying outright to the American public. I understand that he may not give full information, and will often seek to dodge the tough questions, but a lie is a lie. So either he was forced to lie by being given false information, or he lied on his own. Either way, he can't be trusted and he must go.

Former Cheney Aide Is to Make First Court Appearance Today - New York Times

Former Cheney Aide Is to Make First Court Appearance Today - New York Times: "Democrats are pressing for the intelligence committee to examine:
--The administration's strongly worded pre-war statements on the Iraqi threat and whether they match up with the actual intelligence.
--The role of the pro-war Iraq National Congress, an exile group run by Ahmad Chalabi, in feeding information from defectors to the Pentagon and to Cheney's office.
-- The intelligence activities of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, which fed policy-makers uncorroborated prewar intelligence on Saddam Hussein's Iraq, particularly involving purported ties with the al-Qaida terror network.
--The pre-war intelligence assessment and its failure to predict the post-war insurgency."

It may have been easy for Intelligence Committee members to agree with Bush's assessment of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein if that intelligence was made up of lies and fabrications. Sure other admistrations and other governments saw Iraq as a threat, but only one chose to go to war.

Rove's Future Role Is Debated

Rove's Future Role Is Debated: "Fitzgerald is considering charging Rove with making false statements in the course of the 22-month probe, and sources close to Rove -- who holds the titles of senior adviser and White House deputy chief of staff -- said they expect to know within weeks whether the most powerful aide in the White House will be accused of a crime.
But some top Republicans said yesterday that Rove's problems may not end there. Bush's top advisers are considering whether it is tenable for Rove to remain on the staff, given that Fitzgerald has already documented something that Rove and White House official spokesmen once emphatically denied -- that he played a central role in discussions with journalists about Plame's role at the CIA and her marriage to former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, a critic of the Iraq war."

Sure we would love to see him go, love to see some accountability, but do we really think this is going to happen? They didn't even fire Libby as they should have, only letting him resign. Even we can't prove the underlying crime, heads should still roll for lying to the American public.

56% of the Country is Pro-Choice

Just to prove that people like Dobson are out of the mainstream, Survey USA has a poll out that I picked up on at MyDD. Does the Right Wing really want a fight on Roe? Doesn't sound like a good idea.

Frist throws a Hissy

Dana Milbank has the account:

Mad About You: "Without counting to 10, as anger-management experts recommend when you are very, very mad, Frist exploded.
'About 10 minutes ago or so, the United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership!' he announced. Never, he said, have 'I been slapped in the face with such an affront to the leadership of this grand institution.' Epithets flew from his mouth: 'They have no conviction. They have no principles. They have no ideas. This is a pure stunt.'
Frist was now sputtering. 'This is an affront to me personally. It's an affront to our leadership. It's an affront to the United States of America!' Turning sorrowful, he vowed that 'for the next year and a half, I can't trust Senator Reid.'
'Mr. Leader,' one stunned journalist observed, 'I don't remember you being so exercised over something before.'
'You've never seen me in heart surgery,' the senator, a transplant specialist, replied."

When you get used to having your way, you get a little testy when the opposition weilds some power. Sounds like Senate Democrats are going to take it to the leader and all of the majority looking for some accountability. 'Bout time.

Democrats Force Senate Into Closed Session Over Iraq Data

Democrats Force Senate Into Closed Session Over Iraq Data - New York Times: "Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Reid was making 'some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak.' "

That Lott--always tactful.

Bold move by Senate Dems. Maybe it will get some attention. Maybe not.

Don't forget Libby

Just so we don't let the Fitzgerald Investigation and subsequent indictments get buried, here is a round up of articles and opinions:

ABC News: Reid Says Rove Should Resign
CBS News: Arraignment This Week For Libby
CNN: Vice president's top aide indicted
Fox News: Cheney Fills Libby Posts at White House
MSNBC: Cheney’s ex-aide to make first court appearance
NPR: White House Tries to Leave Scandal Behind
WaPo: Known for Discretion, Libby Is A Surprising Figure in CIA Leak
NYT: Intrigue Has Familiar Ring for Libby and Associates
LATimes: Leak Case Prosecutor Raises Questions That Demand Answers
Chicago Tribune: Indictment likely to hurt Bush agenda
USA Today: Bush sets out to salvage 2nd term
Time: What Scooter Libby And I Talked About
Newsweek: Karl Rove: Last-Minute Evidence

"Scalito" as racially insensitive?

Okay, Drudge, where do you get your talking points? Judge Alito picked up the nickname for two obvious reasons. One--the name. Two--Alito clerked for Scalia and is said to follow him closely ideologically. No one is saying that because they share a similar heritage, they must be the same.

The right looks pretty dumb when they try to use far-left talking points.

Second Try: Alito (Scalito)

From what I can gather from the snippets I've heard on the radio and read on the web, it sounds like Bush (along with attempting to distract us from high-level idictments) has delivered a nominee in the mold of Scalia as promised. I doesn't sound like we'll hear much of the intra-party dissent that filled talk radio since the Miers nomination. If the right can all agree, and agree quickly, about the nominee I don't think we will see much of a fight by the Democrats. I have to agree with The Note:

Our guess: the country ain't in the mood for a big fight, and the left is too disorganized and divided to mount one effectively.

If Alito is as staunchly conservative and his personal views will get in the way of his interpretation of the Constitution, then he must be opposed immediately. If we need to know more, we can wait and see. But I think it will be too late to oppose him by the time of the hearings

Volcker Report

The Many Streams That Fed the River of Graft to Hussein

In case you've missed any of this in all the hub-bub:

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 27 - Paul A. Volcker's report on the oil-for-food program in Iraq includes industrial giants like DaimlerChrysler AG, Siemens AG, the Weir Group P.L.C. and Volvo, as well as little known traders.
The individuals named as having profited from contracts with Iraq ranged from recognizable politicians like Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democratic Party in Russia, and Charles Pasqua, a former French interior minister, to unfamiliar names like the Rev. Jean-Marie Benjamin, a Swiss priest who put his profits in his Vatican bank account.
What brought them together in Thursday's report was their participation, witting or unwitting, in the exploitation of the program, which funneled $1.8 billion in illicit profits to Saddam Hussein.

Eschaton: Market Soars on Indictment News

Eschaton

I guess the question is whether the market was reacting to there being no Karl Rove indictment, or were they feeling better because someone (anyone) is going down.

The Italian Press explains the docs

Jefferson Morely at WaPo scoops:

According to La Repubblica, Pollari was providing the false information, specifically a batch of forged documents concerning alleged Iraqi efforts to purchase nuclear material in the African country of Niger. The documents, rejected as genuine by the CIA and State Department earlier in 2002, were fed to a "parallel intelligence conduit" created by Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Reporters Carlo Bonini and Giuseppe d'Avanzo say officials working for Cheney and Wolfowitz were "determined to produce the evidence for 'regime change’ in Baghdad." President Bush then used the information to make the case for invading Iraq.
. . .
La Repubblica's account suggests the forged documents were the product of an Italian government eager to curry favor with President Bush after the Sept. 11 attacks. They were originally produced by a rogue cop on the payroll of both French and Italian intelligence services, the newspaper reported. The French wanted to follow up on reports from the late 1980s that Iraq had bought nuclear material in Niger, so the cop, in need of money, sold them the phony documents.

Let us not forget that our government was fully aware that the docs were questionable before we used them as part of the rationale for war.

Poo-pooing this at The Corner.

The Corner on National Review Online: "I think the indictment stinks. You have to parse it very carefully to figure out whether Libby is accused of lying to the grand jury or the FBI, or to journalists. Go look. I finally concluded that it says that Libby lied to the grand jury (and elsewhere the FBI) when he testified that he told (Cooper, Miller or Russert) things that in fact he did not tell (Cooper, Miller or Russert)."

Surprised? The right already thinks this is unreasonable. I'm sorry Michael Ledeen, a crime is a crime. I have to have faith that Fitzgerald as enough evidence to prosecute Libby for his lies.

"Serious Breach of the Public Trust"

After the Fitzgerald Press Conference, here's what we know:

- The leak of Valerie Plame's name to the press was a crime.
In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified.

- Libby lied to both the FBI and the Grand Jury.
It would be a compelling story that will lead the FBI to go away if only it were true.
At the end of the day what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true.

- The scope of the investigation is large and this is far from over.
And as you sit back, you want to learn: Why was this information going out? Why were people taking this information about Valerie Wilson and giving it to reporters? Why did Mr. Libby say what he did? Why did he tell Judith Miller three times? Why did he tell the press secretary on Monday? Why did he tell Mr. Cooper? And was this something where he intended to cause whatever damage was caused?

Why the Right Was Wrong - Hugh Hewitt

Why the Right Was Wrong - New York Times: "The right's embrace in the Miers nomination of tactics previously exclusive to the left - exaggeration, invective, anonymous sources, an unbroken stream of new charges, television advertisements paid for by secret sources - will make it immeasurably harder to denounce and deflect such assaults when the Democrats make them the next time around."

Oh, Hughie. I guess this means your support for Miers was only "strategery?" Sorry, we all expect better things out of someone as smart as you.

Libby Resigns

None too soon. I thought Bush talked to Libby and was reassured that he wasn't involved. Who else is lying?

Update: And now Cheney "regrets" his resignation. These guys are full of regret lately, aren't they?

Libby Indicted

5 counts.

F.B.I. Is Still Seeking Source of Forged Uranium Reports - New York Times

F.B.I. Is Still Seeking Source of Forged Uranium Reports - New York Times: "But a little-noticed passage in another government report said the C.I.A. had determined that foreign intelligence passed to the agency in the months before Mr. Wilson's trip also contained information that was 'based on the forged documents and was thus itself unreliable.'"

Let us not forget that our government was fully aware that the documents were likely forgeries, so much so in fact that the CIA would not back up the use of the information in the State of the Union and so the President cited British Intelligence instead.

Harriet Miers Withdraws Nomination

Harriet Miers Withdraws Nomination: "Bush responded that he was 'reluctantly' accepting the decision."

Not really the response he should be giving, I would say. And citing executive privilege doesn't sound like the right way to go either. There were so many other things wrong with this nominee. I hope some are now doubting whether she has the abilities to be White House Counsel

George Will - Defending The Indefensible

Defending The Indefensible: "As for Republicans, any who vote for Miers will thereafter be ineligible to argue that it is important to elect Republicans because they are conscientious conservers of the judicial branch's invaluable dignity. Finally, any Republican senator who supinely acquiesces in President Bush's reckless abuse of presidential discretion -- or who does not recognize the Miers nomination as such -- can never be considered presidential material."

Monday Headlines

Some articles you can be sure they're not reading at the White House:

Frist's Prior Comments Disputed
Fitzgerald's CIA Leak Probe Praised as Nonpartisan
Resignations May Follow Charges in CIA Case
Miers Gets Criticisms Rare for Nominees to Court
All Is Just Fine in the White House These Days, or Is It?
Washington Memo: Leak Case Renews Questions on War's Rationale
Cast of Characters Grows in CIA Leak Drama
Senator: Miers Lacks Votes To Win
Leak Indictments This Week?
GOP Senator: Libby, Rove Should Go If Indicted
Challenges Ahead for Bush Administration This Week
Doubts Arise Over Miers' Readiness for Hearings
Stock probe will affect Frist's 2008 plans

Why is this man smiling?

Because he has no shame.

Delay is a smart man--dirty, but smart. How much more fun would it have been if he had that typical mugshot frown?

Quill Awards

I have to admit that I'm a literary snob. I have no real affection for genre fiction and I tend to think that the best literature is underappreciated by the masses. That said, when I heard a segment on NPR about the Quill Awards I actually thought it was good. The Quills Literacy Foundation is sponsoring award that is for the most part judged by the public at large. We can guarantee that the winners here will be different from the National Book Award winners, but I don't think it's a bad thing.
It is good for all writers when interest in reading is high. If a more populist award can draw more readers to the bookstores, I think we all benefit. Sure, Harry Potter won book of the year, but we also had winners we're liable to see on more prestigious lists (Sue Monk Kidd, Langston Hughes, and of course the crew at The Daily Show).
I'm still looking forward to the other awards being announced so that I can add to my reading list.

Tancredo and "The Threat of Multiculturalism"

Tom Tancredo (R, CO-6) doesn't get it. In a Q&A with coloradopols.com yesterday he was asked about how immigration became his primary issue. It's really his sole issue, but anyway... he answers:

In the early '90s, I read Arthur Schlesinger's "The Disuniting of America,"
which had a profound effect on the way I looked at the threat of
multiculturalism.

Now I'm not a big fan of what's being done in the name of multicultralism. I think many of the efforts do more to split us apart than help us understand what we have in common. But to use the term "threat" demonstrates the adversarial nature of his viewpoint. What is multiculturalism threatening but his white-American way of life.

For more proof that he doesn't get it, he doesn't even bother to retract or clarify his statement about bombing Muslim holy sites. Instead he says:

Many critics of my statements have characterized them as "offensive," and indeed
they may have offended some. But I can't preoccupy myself with political
correctness, or who may or may not be offended by what I say. Al Qaeda certainly doesn't care if the western world is "offended" by televised images of hostages
beheaded in Iraq, subway bombings in London, train attacks in Madrid, or planes
crashing into buildings. Should we take any option or target off the table,
regardless of the circumstances? Absolutely not - particularly if the mere
discussion of an option or target may dissuade a fundamentalist Muslim extremist
from strapping on a bomb filled backpack, or if it might encourage moderate
Muslims to start policing their own communities for extremists and jihadists.

There are many things wrong in this statement. It seems clear to me that Tancredo things that we are at war with all of the Muslim world. His words are "offensive" because they were spoken by an elected official, someone representing the people of the United States. I could care less if his words were offensive to Al Qaeda, but the were offensive to me and and a good segment of society. It'embarrassingng that Tancredo is my Congressional representative.

Faith and the Court - New York Times

Faith and the Court - New York Times: "The White House is invoking Ms. Miers's religious activities as a substitute for talking about her professional qualifications and her views about the law, which remain a mystery. But her qualifications and beliefs about the law are what matter. As this nomination proceeds, both the nation and Ms. Miers will benefit if we hear less about what kind of a Christian she is, and more about what kind of a justice she would be."

Just one of the many things that bothers me about this nominee. Sure, there are good things coming from the Republican infighting. Nice to see that some can see that Bush makes some bad decisions. Democratic silence on the whole thing doesn't have me feeling confident. Let the intraparty battles go on as long as possible, because when the left begins to attack the right will circle the wagons. We can only hope that Ms. Miers takes the National Review's advice and withdraw.

And while people begin counting the votes on the Senate floor (at most 52 right now) someone should be looking at the votes in committee. She's liable to never see a floor vote.

Hillary vs. Condi? I don't think so.

Okay, let's go over a few reasons why this will never happen so that we can get off the topic.

Hillary as the Democratic nominee would be disastrous for the party. She gets people's hackles up, including mine. While I know the party would love a strong woman to run, I think enough people know that she can't be trusted and she's just liable to set the opposition on fire and rally them enough to defeat her. Can you really see her bringing people over from the other side? It's a bad, bad idea.

And let's imagine the Republican base voting for a black, pro-choice woman... it'd never happen.

Next topic, please. (And let's don't go into all the things that are wrong with Dick Morris.)

Facing revolt, White House touts Miers "experience"

Top News Article | Reuters.com: "The conservative uprising among Bush's Republicans has fractured the party a year ahead of mid-term congressional elections that minority Democrats hope to use to increase their numbers in the U.S. Congress and perhaps regain control."

Uprising? Revolt? Interesting choice of words.

Scandals Take Toll On Bush's 2nd Term

To make you feel warm and fuzzy.

"In my administration," Bush told voters in Pittsburgh in October 2000, "we will ask not only what is legal but what is right, not what the lawyers allow but what the public deserves."

Okay, okay....Let's get back to it

Two months off? Yes. I was a little depressed. My sense of urgency disappeared. With a busy life and a pregnant wife, my mind has been elsewhere. Things, though, are changing. My blood is starting to boil again. The outrage is gaining steam. We can't let them slip things by us while we're mired in months of post-election depression.

Dean to Seek Democratic Party Chair

Dean to Seek Democratic Party Chair (washingtonpost.com)

I can't help but think this is the best decision. I wanted him to run the country; the least we can have him do is run the party. Conservatives think that it would be seen as a move to the left and they will equate that with the death of the party. Some of us don't believe that the country is as wholly to the right as they would like to think. Giving the party some focus can only help.

Dean also has some experience with this sort of thing. Here's what he says in the email I got today:

Together, we helped elect a Democratic governor in Montana, a Democratic mayor of Salt Lake County, Utah and an African American woman to the bench in Alabama. Fifteen of the candidates we endorsed had never run for office before -- and won.

I also have experience building and managing a local party organization. My career started as Democratic Party chair in Chittenden County, Vermont. I then ran successful campaigns: for state legislature, lieutenant governor and then governor. In my 11-year tenure as governor, I balanced the state's budget every year.

I served as chair of both the National Governors' Association and the Democratic Governors' Association (DGA). And as chair of the DGA, I helped recruit nearly 20 governors that won -- even in states like Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Mississippi.

All of these experiences have only reaffirmed what I know to be true. There is only one party that speaks to the hopes and dreams of all Americans. It is the party you have already given so much to. It is the Democratic Party.

We can win elections only by standing up for what we believe.

I like the guy and I like what he stands for.