Get Your MoveOn Votes In

I think today is the last day for voting in MoveOn's competition for the Funniest Ad, Best Youth Ad, and Best Animation. There are some very entertaining nominations. In case you missed it MoveOn's contest has gotten a boatload of national attention due to the presence of a couple of submitted ads that compared Bush to Hitler. The Republican propaganda machine caught wind and started . cranking . out . more . attacks . than . you . can . shake . a stick . at. My favorite is this column which attempts to shame MoveOn for their support of Bill Clinton's obstruction of justice and perjury. It's written by Oliver North. That's rich. Certainly not all of . the press . has been bad. And arguably this is one of those cases where no press is bad press. In the past week MoveOn has established pretty significant national recognition, and when their national ad runs come State of the Union time, there will be a lot of people looking for it.

Stale and Intellectually Bankrupt

(part 3 of the 3-part epic poem entitled: These Candidates Suck)

The Dean campaign has caused quite a stir. The Dean Revolution they call it. It's caused all sorts excitement and consternation among Democrats, Republicans, the pundits, and just about anybody who's following the election at this point. Everybody is buzzing about Howard Dean. So what is it that makes him so different? Is it his background, his experience? Not really. He's got some nice credentials, but they're not measurably better than the impressive credentials of his competitors. Is it his policy? Doesn't look like it. His policies are nearly indistinguishable from any of the other Democrats. So what could be causing all the stir? He's angry. That's right, he's downright indignant about what the Bush administration is doing and he's shown it on the campaign trail. Even more disturbing, by all accounts this outburst of emotion seems to actually be genuine. Sometimes he even speaks without running his words past an army of consultants. It's revolutionary. Unheard of.

Does that say anything to anyone else? Should it tell us something that a simple display of emotion summons up recollections of candidates long past? McGovern. Goldwater. Does it mean something that simply seeing a candidate with fire in his belly sets the political world abuzz? It means something to me. It means our democratic process has gone past its freshness date. It's gone past rotten and is starting to ferment. I can smell the stink from here.

What happened to vision? What happened to inspiration? Creativity? More importantly, what happened to honesty? Sincerity? I'm not trying to knock Howard Dean. He stands a level above all his competitors on all of this. But it still leaves him standing 10 feet above rock bottom. How can we have 9 candidates and they all want to do the same damned thing? They want to internationalize the occupation of Iraq. They want to rescind Bush's tax cuts. They want to institute health coverage for the uninsured. They want protectionism and corporate welfare. They want to distort, invent, and massage economic numbers to show how a few minor economic initiatives will put us at record growth rates. They want to contort themselves into funny shapes to impress southerners and other key constituencies. They want to put on a happy face and lie to Americans about the severity of problems facing us.

Can we have someone who will speak to us honestly? Can we have someone with the guts to treat complex issues with complex analysis? Can we have someone with the courage to not remold their identity 50 times in the course of a campaign? Can we have someone who can say something obviously right, like that we need to take an even hand with the Israelis and Palestinians, and not be run off their position by the media heat? Can we have someone willing to acknowledge issues where we're in a bad spot and come up with bold policies to address the problem? Can we have a candidate who will admit to the limits of presidential power, and that there are some issues, the economy being a key example, where the president exerts a limited amount of influence? Can we have someone whose issue research and policy projection numbers come from non-partisan and academic sources?

The convential wisdom says no. The party establishments say no. The pundits say no. But they also get really excited about someone so revolutionary as to actually show a bit of emotion. Could it be that they're all wrong? Not just a little mistaken, but hugely, extraordinarily wrong. If Howard Dean's little sliver of radicalism can rally massive popular support and put his face on the front page of every newspaper and magazine, could a candidate who is honest, bold, and visionary light the political world on fire?

I'm not looking for extremists. Boldness doesn't have to mean socialism or libertarianism or any of the other movements that sit at the fringes of the political spectrum. A moderate who dealt with issues in a fully honest and intellectually robust manner would be a revolutionary.

This is a pipe dream in many ways. As much as some may deny its existence and as much as Howard Dean has tried with some degree of success to circumvent it, there is a political establishment, and it carries tremendous power. There is a group of people, from congressional leaders to pundits to national party committees to editorial boards to lobby groups and major political contributors where the ideas that are driving our election process are deeply entrenched. It's not a shadowy conspiracy, but then I don't believe the neo-con movement is either, and the effectiveness of their exercise of power is readily apparent. It, like the neocons, is simply a confluence of like-minded individuals in positions of power. They are gate-keepers. They hold the power to elevate a candidate into the national spotlight or to dash them into obscurity before a single vote is cast. They have certain ideas of what constitues electability, and the definition is awfully narrow. And those who don't meet the requirements are not worth their time. Howard Dean bucked their expectations, if ever so slightly, and only on the back of brilliant campaign driven mostly by the desperation of a small group of voters to find a decent candidate has he managed to fight his way through the gates.

Even if a candidate could survive that challenge there are still the American people to worry about. It seems clear they yearn for an honest, sincere, and frank politician. Popular culture is rife with depictions of such characters. But they also seem remarkably averse to accepting painful truths and equally averse to intellectual engagement. There was a time before movies and TV when towns would turn out to hear itinerant lecturers and hefty political treatises were published in newspapers across the nation. This tradition is no more. Could frank talk about reality compete with the myths and wishful thinking that our conventional politicians are pushing? Would the relief of having an honest to god effective solution to the social security crisis be able to overcome the necessarily painful costs of implementing it? I can't say, but I'm not optimistic.

I see this as our real challenge. How do we create an environment where candidacies like these can survive and flourish? This may also seem a pipe dream. But it is a problem that is growing ever more critical and the time for solutions is now. We can't allow ourselves to see it as wishful thinking. We need to see it as a solvable problem and start plugging away at solutions. The Dean candidacy is a baby-step in the right direction. We should support that, but there needs to be more. This problem is tougher to crack than any of the others we've encountered in our discussions and lays at the root of many of them. It's the problem that led Henry to conclude that the only solution is to remap the educational system to produce an electorate that not only accepts such candidates, but demands them. That's a legitimate response and may be the right one, but it's an experiment and one that will take a great deal of luck, perseverance, hard work, and time to make reality. Meanwhile we need to keep after it. I don't know the answer, but it's a priority and I'm going to work on it.

Iraq Invasion Planned Pre-9/11

Is this news? I don't know. On one hand it seems to fall into the "well, duh" category. On the other, having a Bush cabinet member admit that the administration was dying to find an excuse to invade seems like a significant event. Will it change anything? I guess it's more ammo for proving that intel data was manipulated to accomplish what the president wanted..

World Class Journalism

Transcript taken from Dean's blog:

PAULA ZAHN: Final question for you, sir. Your candidate, governor dean, has made several references to -- about president bush having alleged advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks from the saudis. Should someone who wants to be president be trading on rumors?

JOE TRIPPI: That's not what the governor said at all. In fact, you're trading on rumors when you keep saying that.

PAULA ZAHN: I haven't said it yet. I'm just repeating --

JOE TRIPPI: Yeah, you're repeating the rumor. Yeah, what happened was the governor said that when the president and the administration mislead people and the war, the American people start asking questions, there's these rumors out there, and we need to talk about them to shut them down because he didn't believe it. And he said that on the air in the interview.

PAULA ZAHN: But there was another interview on npr that has gotten a lot of attention. He basically said, you know, whether this can be proven or not, he suggested that the president had had advance knowledge of what might have fallen on 9/11.

JOE TRIPPI: No. The governor said he didn't believe that, and it was part of the problem. We have this right now with black box voting. You'll find across the country that there are people all over this nation who believe these paperless computer voting machines are a way that the bush administration will steal the election. Okay, what's not important here is whether that's a rumor or not. What's important here is that we shut that down, that we prove to people that there's no way that anybody -- that these paperless machines are going to rob people of their vote. Repeating that is not repeating that you believe it. I don't necessarily believe that those machines do that or not. But if we're going to have a democracy, we have to say so and air it out.

PAULA ZAHN: Let me just repeat exactly what came off the transcript of the npr radio show, and this is governor dean's remark, "the most interesting theory that i have heard so far, he responded, "is that he was warned ahead of time by the saudis."

JOE TRIPPI: And then can you keep reading, please?

PAULA ZAHN: Well, could go on for the next five minutes from the interview. And you're saying he didn't say that, I got it right here.

JOE TRIPPI: No, no, no, I said if you keep reading, he'll say he didn't believe that.

PAULA ZAHN: There is a point at which, but you were denying what he suggested.

JOE TRIPPI: You're forgetting that part, paula.

PAULA ZAHN: I'm not forgetting it. I just wanted to clarify that he had, in fact, repeated something and he did say later on...

JOE TRIPPI: Keep reading the interview, and we'll get to the part where he says he did not believe it.

PAULA ZAHN: No, I am not denying that, but i wanted to challenge your point...

JOE TRIPPI: That's not how you started the interview.

PAULA ZAHN: I think our audience has a pretty good sense now of what was said and what wasn't said. Joe trippi, thank you for your time.


Classic.

Can We Have An Independent Thought Here?

(part 2 of 3 of my rant against the Democratic candidates. I'd rant against Bush too, but it feels too much like beating up on a retarded kid)

First off, that's a blockbuster of a report, Ryan, thanks for pointing it out. They suggest a permanent 60% tax hike or a 50% benefits reduction? Woof! Now that's moving past platitudes and having a serious conversation.

So the next issue to inspire my wrath has been globalization. Now I can certainly understand the candidates having some mixed feelings and confusion on this issue. I've suffered some of that myself. After all, my software development job got offshored to China. Yet, I still believe that globalization has tremendous potential to improve the state of many impoverished nations. Granted, I wasn't laid off, but I was shifted to a less desirable position, which is what prompted me think some deep thoughts about my career path and make a change of direction. The world will likely come to rue the day that motorola made that decision.

But really, this is probably the key driving force that will shape our economy over the coming decades, and what did the candidates come up with? John Kerry: provide tax breaks to domestic manufacturers and "strongly enforce trade laws". John Edwards: trade agreements with environmental and labor protections and tax incentives for domestic businesses. Dick Gephardt: trade agreements with "livable wage" guarantees. Joe Lieberman: tax incentives for domestic businesses and increased federal R&D spending. Howard Dean: trade agreements with environmental and labor protections.

So what have we got? Protectionism in the form of corporate welfare and revised trade agreements that do nothing to account for the fact that even with safe labor practices and a livable wage many countries have labor forces that can afford to work for a fraction of what US workers cost. Is this the best that our best and brightest can come up with? The only one with a hint of creativity is Lieberman's plan to increase research, and even that is a woefully inadequate proposal to double the National Science Foundation's budget, which he cites as being around 0.7% of federal spending. We are facing a structural problem that stands to gut the US economy, and all we get are some band-aids, if these even qualify as that. To top it, all of the candidates, I think, support sustaining or increasing US agricultural subsidies. The last major round of trade talks broke down due to that very factor. Good luck getting those concessions on your trade deals when you aren't willing to make concessions on the top priority issue of your trading partners.

We need new answers, new ideas. We've got more candidates than we know what to do with and they're giving us nothing. We've lost manufacturing and we're in the process of losing whole sectors of the white collar work force. We need to recognize that this is not happening due to unfair trade agreements or a lack of corporate welfare. It's happening for the incredibly simple fact that shit costs ten times more in the US than it does in any third world country. What are we going to do about that? What can we do about that?

I don't think I know. Increasing research and becoming an information economy is a good start. Let's manufacture patents, copyrights, intellectual property of all sorts and sell it to other countries where it can be used to create products. That's something we can do. We still have the best university system in the world and a powerful R&D infrastructure. These are areas where developing nations will be hard pressed to catch up for decades at the least. And by the time they do the wealth disparity should not be such a problem. So let's expand that further and make it a focal point of our economy. But can we expect everyone to get a PhD and work in a lab? Probably not. What do we make of our middle class? I'm really not sure.

These are very difficult questions and I'm not expecting a blockbuster solution. But I'd like to see them asked. Even if the candidate's answer is "well, I'm not sure, but it's a priority and we're going to work on it." This is just another critical area where we're getting all platitudes and no honest discussion. And it bugs me. A bit.

(to follow in part 3, "the vision thing")

Fiscal Blues: Bleeding Red

I agree with Joe (More Fiscal Responsibility Blues, 1/8/04) that the fiscal status of the United States is currently our biggest crisis and one that needs to be addressed quickly. The IMF released a report this week (the overview can be read here) outlining the current fiscal problems that the U.S faces and the implications of not addressing these problems. Some interesting excerpts from the overview of the paper:

"The major tax cuts (as well as some spending measures) enacted in 2001 and 2003 have been estimated to have cost roughly $1.7 trillion over FY2002-FY2011.

There is little doubt that significant macroeconomic gains could be reaped from reforms of the U.S. tax code, with the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA, 2003) citing estimates of potential gains in the range of 2-6 percent of GDP.

As noted in CEA (2003), taxpayers are required to spend roughly 3 billion hours a year dealing with federal tax matters, and overall compliance costs are estimated at around 10 percent of total federal tax revenues.

Simulations reported in Section II suggest that a 15 percentage point increase in the U.S. public debt ratio projected over the next decade would eventually raise real interest rates in industrial countries by an average of ??1 percentage point.

The United States is on course to increase its net external liabilities to around 40 percent of GDP within the next few years?an unprecedented level of external debt for a large industrial country (IMF, 2003b).

The results suggest that the fiscal imbalance [for SS, Medicare] is as high as $47 trillion, nearly 500 percent of current GDP, and that closing this fiscal gap would require an immediate and permanent 60 percent hike in the federal income tax yield, or a 50 percent cut in Social Security and Medicare benefits."

The IMF overview gives a fairly clear summary of the problems we face. Our government has drastically increased spending in recent years, partly in response to terrorism. At the same time, it has decreased its revenue in the form of tax cuts in an attempt to stimulate the economy. While this has likely provided a short-term stimulus, it has also increased our debt and the likelihood of major programs (SS, Medicare) becoming insolvent in the next decade or two. Furthermore, the report states (above) that U.S. debt is projected to raise interest rates globally, which is likely to hinder or depress the global economy. In short, the perfect storm for fiscal disaster is arising.

Our government should be ashamed. These are major issues that need to be brought to the attention of the public (and the public needs to be convinced to care). Conversely, the voters should be holding representatives accountable for such poor fiscal management. We need to immediately begin balancing our budget, likely through a combination of tax revenue increases and spending cuts (for starters, get rid of missle defense). From reading the IMF paper, this should be complemented by reform of the tax system to make it more efficient and consumption based. Furthermore, I see no reason for the estate tax to be phased out. Finally, the paper calls for reinstating and reinforcing the Budget Enforcement Act to ensure long-term fiscal stability and goals.

In the end, our politicians need to be forced to make the tough decisions that individual tax payers make every day. If we want to cut taxes to stimulate the economy, then services or programs will have to be cut to account for it. Or, if one actually thinks long term, one establishes a "rainy day fund" to tap into while enacting tax cuts. As Joe pointed out, none of the presidential candidates (including the current president) seems intent on tackling this problem. Take, for example, our current president: In creating our current record federal budget deficit, the Bush administration has undertaken an arguably unnecessary war and subsequent reconstruction; it (with Congress) has enacted enormous Medicare drug coverage. These are but the biggest items among numerous other spending increases. But wait, there's more! We will now establish a human settlement on the moon and send a manned mission to Mars. I leave you with a quote from the Wash. Post article:

"Officials were unwilling to provide cost figures or details and would say only that Bush will direct the government to immediately begin research and development to establish a human presence or base on the moon, with the goal of having that lead to a manned mission to Mars."

NASA Is Our Friend

Find a large, high-res monitor and Click Here. Now that's how I like to see my tax dollars spent! Sweetness. BTW, slashdot has been giving the Spirit mission copious attention, and a number of the Spirit team members have been checking in there and commenting in the discussions. It's a nice gesture to involve their biggest fans.

Re: A Last Gasp for WMD's?

I disagree that that the public has lost interest regarding whether the Bush administration misstated the intelligence on Iraq's threat to America--although they may have temporarily misplaced it. The topic is Bush's Achilles' heel and I would be altogether dumbstruck if his chief foe does not vigorously attack him on it.

As for the Carnegie Endowment's report (the full report may be downloaded here, or a summary here), I am very apprehensive about its conclusions, although I shall reserve judgment until I have had the opportunity to read the report carefully. I am curious how a non-governmental organization such as the CEIP can confidently assert that the "[i]ntelligence community overestimated the chemical and biological weapons in Iraq" without obtaining the confidential documents on which the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate was based. Even if the key findings are indeed supported by facts, the policy recommendations seem at first glance to reach far beyond weapons of mass destruction. For instance, the report lists as its first recommended change to U.S. Policy: "Revise the National Security Strategy to eliminate a U.S. policy of unilateral preventive war, i.e., preemptive war in absence of imminent threat."

I respect the Carnegie Endowment as the most reliable source available to me regarding foreign policy, and I frequently draw on Foreign Policy, its flagship publication, for its well-balanced coverage. I sincerely hope that its factual and policy conclusions withstand scrutiny. Should it fail in its bold claims, I would not know where to turn to find its replacement.

A Last Gasp For WMD's?

Although the public appears to have largely lost interest, and, as far as I can tell, has bought the "we fought to save the Iraqis" story, it seems some effort is being made to revive the WMD controversy. Recently both the Washington Post and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have released large reports concluding that Iraq never presented any real security threat. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be much of an audience for this material outside of MoveOn.org and the Howard Dean constituency. Again I can't help but come back to the Democratic party's complicity in this mess and conclude that they are thus constrained from treating this as the major league scandal that it is.

More Fiscal Responsibility Blues

(part 1 of a 3 part tirade :P )

A Washington Post column on John Kerry, while intended to be sympathetic, brought to my attention for the first time his planned fiscal policies. While he refers to the current budget as "fiscal insanity", his grand master plan is to undo some of the Bush tax cuts and to reduce the deficit by half over four years. Half? And even this pathetic endeavour is fueled by what the column refers to as "overly optimistic" projections. That disgusts me.

The nation's fiscal future is currently our biggest crisis. Not terrorism, not health care, not education, not prescription drugs. We are sitting on an economic time bomb (as wonderfully described by a Robert Samuelson Post column) and in the confluence of a number of long term negative economic factors. This is facing up to be the greatest challenge to the union since at least World War II and possibly the Civil War. If nobody takes responsibility on this it is inevitable that the dollar will eventually collapse and hyperinflate, and we will be lucky to emerge from the ensuing slump after a decade or two. There will come a nexus point when our ongoing fiscal foolishness collides with our declining economic stature in the face of globalization and the crushing onrush of baby boomer dependency on government services. It won't be pretty. Who knows how global security would unfold in the wake of the collapse of the world's foremost power.

This is all right there staring us in the face. I don't think there are many people who would seriously dispute any one of the points that: a) Our current fiscal policies are totally unsustainable, b) Economic globalization will lessen the US's dominant economic position and will tend to disperse our concentrated wealth, c) The retirement of the baby boomers will cause a major economic crisis for the US. Is it so hard to put these ideas together and see where they lead? How can it be that this is not a part of our national dialogue? How can John Kerry believe that hopefully, if we're lucky, reducing the deficit by half over four years is a solution? I've been a bit discouraged by Howard Dean's positions on the deficit as well. Sure he says he's going to balance the budget, but he also says he's not going to touch military spending, social spending, education, etc, etc, and that he's going to increase homeland security spending. Doing all of that and balancing the budget would be a neat trick. I suspect that he, like Kerry, is figuring some absurd economic growth rate into his equations. However, Dean's gubernatorial record leaves me optimistic that when push comes to shove he'll do the right thing. He has a reputation of being fairly ruthless when it comes to balancing his budget, cutting services and social spending where necessary to get the job done. In any case the other candidates have not done much to make me believe in them on this issue.

I'm not sure if this is a problem that can be solved at this point. I'm not convinced that it isn't already too late to altogether avoid this crisis. But certainly if we start soon we can try mitigate it. And balancing the budget and paying down the national debt, getting our fiscal house in order, sounds like a good start to me.

(up next time: Democrats, have a clue on globalization)

The Long Sneaky Arm of the Law

In an update to a story reported previously on TBW Journal, Wired is running a feature on the new powers the feds acquired through the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004. It expands their ability to acquire, without a warrant, personal information from businesses including "insurance companies, travel agencies, real estate agents, stockbrokers, the U.S. Postal Service, jewelry stores, casinos and car dealerships". And not only are the feds not required to inform their suspects, the businesses themselves are forbidden by law from disclosing to their customers that their information was turned over. Yikes! Meanwhile we have at least one confirmed case where that Patriot Act was used to investigate a non-terrorism related case. Additionally, over the holidays the Feds took advantage of the new provisions by grabbing reams of data on all visitors to Vegas. Sounds ripe for abuse, but are the American people disturbed? The three everyman quotes in that last article speak volumes: "Anything they do is a good thing. I have no problems with it." "...it's justified because they have to take every precaution after 9-11." "In today's world, it makes sense for the FBI to look at these lists, and they'd be crazy if they didn't do it."

Say It Ain't So, Wes

Wes Clark has been, in my opinion, the most palatable alternative to Dean among the Democratic candidates. However, yesterday he announced $30b tax cut plan. Is this man not aware of the $500b budget deficit we're running? Has it become necessary for every person who runs for office to announce a tax cut plan? Sure, he has some plans to pay for this, but as far as I'm concerned there can be no tax cuts until the deficit is covered and principal is being paid off on the national debt. Until that time comes I don't even want to hear the words "tax cut" pass a candidate's lips. I'm not giving up on Clark, but this is definitely a strike against him.

Get Off It

My 3rd CSM story of the day, this one is a late-breaking entrant for the 2003 Most Nauseating Column Award that has jumped ahead of the pack and looks like a front-runner. How can a person be so completely wrong. I particularly like the part about the Osama bin Laden followers killing the 18 Americans in Mogadishu. Wrong. Try again. And Libya as a response to the Iraq war. That's a hell of stretch. Ugh....

Politics in the Era of the MTV Attention Span

I wanted to comment on this, because I've seen a number of similar stories to this one on CSM essentially predicting doom for the Democrats because the economy is doing so well and we got Saddam. These people clearly don't follow politics much. Or if they do, don't pay attention. If they had they would have realized that anything that happens right now is utterly irrelevant to the general election. This will be ancient, ancient history by November of next year. The political attention span of this country is about 3 months. And that is being really generous. What happens this December means nothing. What happens next September, on the other hand, is everything. If there is still fighting and bloodshed in Iraq by next fall, if we're still seeing domestic and international terrorist activity, it will be obvious that Saddam's capture didn't buy us much, and nobody will care. If there is peace and prosperity in Iraq and the new government is off to a roaring start, it wouldn't have mattered if we had never caught Saddam. Either way, whether things are good or bad, Saddam becomes irrelevant. The economy is no different. If the economy is headed south by the fall, this will look like a fool's rally in a long string of poor economic performances. If a strong recovery is taking hold by next fall, then Bush has a strong accomplishment to run on. In either case, voters will be thinking about the fall 2004 economy when they go to the polls, not the fall 2003 economy. It all comes down to what happens when the campaign for the general election is running.

The Triumph of Buddy Jesus

CSM has a story on the odd phenomenon of churches services transformed into large arena shows complete with rock music, flashy videos, and politically correct, easy to process McSermons. We've got a couple of these things around here. It's bizarre, on saturday nights you'll see this huge traffic jam, they'll have cops directing traffic, lanes blocked off by cones, the whole deal. I guess it's better than having people go to some Christian right, hellfire and brimstone church, but it's kind of sad to see one of the remaining strongholds of culture in this country wiped out by a repackaged version of itself stripped of all meaningful cultural elements.

A Beef with Ann Veneman

The Wall Street Journal is reporting today (online edition) that Federal investigators now estimate that 81 cattle across the US may have been exposed to bovine spongiform encephalopathy, otherwise known as BSE or Mad Cow Disease. Relatively little seems to be known about the first cow to test positive for BSE in the U.S. Discovered in Washington, the cow was 6.5 years old when slaughtered and may be from Canada. All beef slaughtered in the same plant as that cow on that day has been recalled.

The administration has been quick to downplay the health risks associated with this case. In an interview with CNN, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman goes so far as to say that "...I want to make sure that everyone understands that we have a safe beef supply and no one should hesitate. "

I realize that the federal government wants to avoid causing a panic in the American beef-eater and protect the American beef industry, but such statements are dangerous. The fact is, some 37 million cattle are slaughtered each year in the United States. Of these, an average of 20,000 are tested. How, then, can we possibly know the extent of BSE present in the population of American cattle? Until we do know, the government should not be so quick to dismiss the risk to our beef supply and therefore the beef consumer. Veneman also claims that because the brain and spinal cord were removed, there is little risk of contamination from this cow. Yet, studies (see Stanley Prusiner and others) are beginning to show that the muscle of infected animals contains prions (the infectious agent) as well, although it is still unclear whether muscle prions are as infectious as nervous system prions. Again, the government should not be so quick to dismiss potential health risks.

To their credit, the government has taken the good steps of banning ruminant-to-ruminant feed (1997) and the CDC has a national monitoring system for Creutzfeld Jakob Disease, the human equivalent of BSE (variant CJD is the result of "infection" from contaminated cattle). Unfortunatley for epidemiology, vCJD does not develop clinically until years, perhaps decades, after exposure to contaminated beef. This monitoring system will clearly be inadequate for preventing an outbreak of BSE/CJD.

I, for one, will be avoiding beef products until the status of American cattle becomes clear. Perhaps we should require testing of every slaughtered cow as in Japan. While I agree that the health risk posed by BSE in the U.S. is probably low, we simply do not know enough to be sure one way or the other. Until we do know more, I'll be sticking to non-beef and soy meat. But if any of you out there must have your beef, you may want to consider organic. Organically fed cows are fed with diets that avoid all animal products.

Osama Bin-Krar

Kudos to CSM for finally highlighting an intended case of domestic terrorism that was glossed over earlier by the national media. William Krar had a sodium-cyanide bomb (among other things) that could have killed thousands according to the article. What may shock most Americans is that this man is a home-grown white supremacist that hates the government. Perhaps not so surprising, he is from Texas...

Going Down?

The dollar continues to sink..

Tony Blair's Red Herring

Here's a bit of a bizarre story. Tony Blair claimed in an interview that the Iraq Survey Group had found "massive evidence of a huge system of clandestine laboratories, workings by scientists, plans to develop long range ballistic missiles". Paul Bremer, commenting on the quote, not knowing that it came from Blair, responded, "I don't know where those words come from but that is not what (ISG chief) David Kay has said. ... It sounds like a bit of a red herring to me. It sounds like someone who doesn't agree with the policy sets up a red herring then knocks it down." Doh! And can anyone explain why this WMD thing has apparently fizzled out? I always thought it put Blair at more risk than Bush, but it doesn't appear to have done any significant damage to either...

Sometimes Satire Isn't Even Necessary

Today's poll on Fox News: On Guard. Question: "Are you taking a 'business as usual approach' now that the nation is on high alert?" Answers: "Yes, otherwise the terrorists would win", "No, I'm altering my plans", "I'm not sure". Results: 96% yes, 3% no, 1% not sure. You may have to scroll down past the ad for the George W. Bush Top Gun action figure to see the poll. You can't make this shit up...

The Inside Story

I've recently become aware of George Washington University's National Security Archive. The archive actively pursues government information through the Freedom of Information Act, analyzes the data and makes archives of FOIA material available to the public. It's really great to be able to cut through the bullshit and see what the government actually knew and thought about some of these issues. Their Saddam Hussein report is particularly popular these days. There are some fascinating things in this report. You can see where the US government learns about Iraq's use of chemical weapons. You can see how the US largely ignores this issue in subsequent communications with the Iraqi government. You can see the administration skirting policy rules that barred the export of military equipment to Iraq. You can see the DIA favoring the sale of dual-use nuclear materials to Iraq. You can see the US's efforts to keep the UN's actions on the matter under control. It's an impressive bit of journalism. It certainly calls into question W's claim in the interview with Diane Sawyer that the invasion of Iraq was justified by Iraq's use of chemical weapons.

"But the fact that he is not there is, means America's a more secure country."

I sure feel more secure. Orange is safer than yellow, right?

What's the Difference?

Here's a bit of an inverview transcript between our Commander In Chief and Diane Sawyer:

DIANE SAWYER: But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still —

PRESIDENT BUSH: So what's the difference?


Wow! But wait, there's more...

DIANE SAWYER: What would it take to convince you he didn't have weapons of mass destruction?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Saddam Hussein was a threat and the fact that he is gone means America is a safer country.

DIANE SAWYER: And if he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction [inaudible] —

PRESIDENT BUSH: Diane, you can keep asking the question. I'm telling you — I made the right decision for America —

DIANE SAWYER: But-

PRESIDENT BUSH: — because Saddam Hussein used weapons of mass destruction, invaded Kuwait. ... But the fact that he is not there is, means America's a more secure country.

Wow. Somebody ought to get this interview to those folks making the moveon.org ads. There's some good material there.

The Numbers Hurt

Look at the pretty, pretty graphs.

A Dying Breed

Articles like this make me ever so happy to be getting out of the software industry. Forrester Research is predicting that the already hurting software development sector will lose another 25% of its jobs in the next 10 years. Ouch.

Watch Commercials, Defeat Bush

You guys may have already gotten an email from moveon regarding this, but moveon.org has a new initiative where they solicited fans and members to create their own 30 second anti-Bush TV add. They've now received over 1000 of them and so have requested moveon members view and rate the ads for them. What a great way to a) gather some data on the ads, b) give your members an easy way to participate and do something useful, c) expose them to your propaganda. Nicely done, moveon.

Civil Rights Make a Comeback

Thanks to our judiciary for slamming the brakes on the Guantanamo/Camp Xray/enemy combatant scheme to bypass Constitutional protections. The 2nd circuit decided that US citizen, Jose Padilla, cannot be held indefinitely without trial, which seems like a no-brainer, but I guess you never know these days... Meanwhile the 9th ruled that even the internationals held in Guantanamo must have access to lawyers and the courts. Hooray for the good guys!

Fun Things to Do At Return of the King

This is one of those things that just bounces around the internet. Best source I can attribute it to is here.

1 Stand up halfway through the movie and yell loudly, "Wait...where the hell is Harry Potter?"
2 Block the entrance to the theater while screaming, "YOU.....SHALL NOT..... PASS!" - After the movie, say "Lucas could have done it better."
3 Play a drinking game where you have to take a sip every time someone says, "the Ring."
4 Point and laugh whenever someone dies.
5 Ask everyone around you if they think Gandalf went to Hogwarts.
6 Finish off every one of Elrond's lines with "Mis..ter Ander-sonnn."
7 When Aragorn is crowned king, stand up and at the top of your lungs sing, "And I did it.... MY way...!"
8 Talk like Gollum all through the movie. At the end, bite off someone's finger and fall down the stairs.
9 Dress up as old ladies and reenact "The Battle of Helms Deep," Monty Python style.
10 When Denethor lights the fire, shout "Barbecue!"
11 In TTT when the Ents decide to march to war, stand up and shout, "RUN FOREST, RUN!"
12 Every time someone kills an Orc, yell: "That's what I'm Tolkien about!" See how long it takes before you get kicked out of the theatre.
13 During a wide shot of a battle, inquire, "Where's Waldo?"
14 Talk loudly about how you heard that there is a single frame of a nude Elf hidden somewhere in the movie.
15 Start an Orc sing-a-long.
16 Come to the premiere dressed as Frankenfurter and wander around looking terribly confused.
17 When they go in the paths of the dead, wait for a tense moment and shout, "I see dead people!"
18 Imitate what you think a conversation between Gollum, Dobby and Yoda would be like.
19 Release a jar of daddy-long-legs into the theater during the Shelob scene.
20 Wonder out loud if Aragorn is going to run for governor of California.
21 When Shelob comes on, exclaim, "Man! Charlotte's really let herself go!"

Spreading Christmas Spirit

I particularly like the picture of the mosque...

Spreading Christmas Spirit

I know I'm getting carried away with the satire lately, but this was too good not to post.

Who's The Man!

We like satire...

Fulfilling the Promise of America

Flipping through channels while eating dinner I came across Howard Dean delivering a speech on his foreign policy to The Pacific Council on C-SPAN. I thought it was a pretty good speech, you can find the text here, though a bit more verbose than necessary in some spots. After the speech he took some questions from the audience, and they asked some very good questions, and I found him to be more impressive there than in the prepared material. I don't see it in the C-SPAN archives right now, but I'll check again tomorrow to see if it's added. He handled the questions on Iraq and Saddam very deftly, did ok on Israel (he's still a bit more conservative on that than I'd prefer), and had some very thoughtful and intelligent things to say about US relations with China. There is a lot in common in his remarks with the Wesley Clark article I posted earlier today.

Lieberman's Logic

Joe Lieberman has outdone himself in his statement regarding the capture of Saddam Hussein. Let's focus on two quotes by this Joe (who does a great disservice to our Joe's name):

"This evil man has to face the death penalty. The international tribunal in The Hague cannot order the death penalty, so my first question about where he's going to be tried will be answered by whether that tribunal can execute him."

First of all, shouldn't the Iraqi people be the primary decision makers in how and when Hussein goes to trial? Second, while Lieberman doesn't directly call for Hussein's execution, it comes close enough. Apparently Lieberman doesn't even want to go through the pretext of a trial before offing Hussein. Next:

"If Howard Dean had his way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today, not in prison, and the world would be a more dangerous place. "

Let's look at this from another perspective: If Howard Dean had his way, Hussein would likely still be contained by sanctions and weapons inspections, he would still not represent an imminent threat to the United States, over 500 coalition troops would still be alive today (and how many innocent Iraqi citizens?), our international alliances would be strong, and our federal deficit wouldn't be exploding due to the tremendous costs of war and reconstruction in Iraq. It is good news for the entire world that Hussein is now detained, but let us not forget the grave costs of this endeavor.

Wesley Clark: Foreign Policy Guru

Someone on a forum I read pointed out this column Wesley Clark wrote for Washington Monthly. I continue to be very impressed by his foreign policy knowledge and analysis. I also greatly appreciate seeing something written on this intellectual level by a candidate, where you can actually tell that he wrote it, and it wasn't slopped together by some PR hack. If someone beats Dean, I sure hope it's Clark. Whichever one wins, it would be very cool to see them both on the same ticket.

Is This Progress?

The release of this year's trade figures exposes the dark, seamy underbelly of the recovery. We've set a new record trade deficit to go along with our record federal budget deficit. Personal debt levels are also setting records. And based on our previous conversations I think we are generally in agreement that the dollar is substantially overvalued, generally speaking. To top it off, our good friends at the Heritage Foundation point out that the federal government has generated these record deficits despite a $247 billion/year windfall of reduced interest payments on the national debt due to low interest rates. Now, I'm still not sure how much of the mises.org fiat currency doom and gloom to buy, but it is absolutely clear to me that these trends are unsustainable. Given the general tendencies of economic systems (read massive feedback loops), I suspect when they reach the limits of their sustainability they will not sort themselves out gently. Particularly given the dire circumstances of the impending baby boomer retirements. Even if the political establishment starts to recognize this problem, public inertia and the rapid onset of fiscal catastrophe will likely prevent them from having the necessary impact. It is becoming difficult for me to see a scenario where we do not suffer a major economic meltdown sometime in the next 15-20 years. Maybe buying gold is not such a bad idea...

Howard Dean and the Power of Infomation

Phenomenal column by Everett Ehrlich on the Washington Post today on the subject of the importance of information in organizations. Ehrlich hits points I have mentioned as to why I don't see Dean's outsider status as having the sort of impact that it did for McGovern or Goldwater, and also speaks cogently about the difference in Dean's relationship to the party as compared to the other candidates. I think much of this is equally applicable to MoveOn.org. A very worthwhile read.

US Calls Afghan Convention - Democracy Breaks Out

In June, 2002, the US called for a loya jirga in Afghanistan to rubber-stamp their decision to put Hamid Karzai in charge of the new government. They thought they would do the same to have their newly written constitution approved. Not so. The warlords that the US chose to leave governing the provinces have figured out how to play this democracy game and have their own ideas for the constitution. It seems nobody actually knows what is going to happen when this loya jirga assembles, but it does appear the warlords have a clear upper hand. If the mujahideen wrest control of the government and Karzai resigns it would be a disaster for American policy in Afghanistan. Lesson: driving a bunch of thugs out of a country by helping a different bunch of thugs defeat them.. not such a good idea, particularly when half of the first group of thugs just switches uniforms and joins the second group.

Beyond the EU

An article on CSM details the EU's struggle to pass a new constitution, and the possibility of France and Germany peeling off to form their own union. It's a very interesting idea, and I think more than a small possibility. I would look for increasingly close ties between France and Germany in any case.

Going for the Gold

Henry's not the only one worrying about the state of the dollar. Even Clinton labor secretary Bob Reich is concerned about the possibility of a run on the dollar. I still suspect that the Euro may not be the best place to hide from dollar instability. If the dollar collapses, the Euro may well come with it..

Pretty Much Fucked

The Onion has once again come through as the most canny and accurate news outlet with their recent report on the state of America's poor. On the bright side there are some new employment opportunities for immigrants.

AP: Iraq to Stop Counting Civilian Dead

Yahoo News has this story.

Supreme Court Upholds Campaign Finance Law

The 298-page opinion is available here, if anyone is interested (the first 19 pages provide a summary).

Collateral Damage

Geez, we're getting good at this. But then we're learning from the best.

No Contracts For You!

The Pentagon announces that businesses in countries that didn't support the war will be shut out of contracts in Iraq. I love the quote from Paul Wolfowitz in the article: "Limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion of international co-operation in Iraq." Um, yeah, Paul, that's exactly what it will do. I'm sure the EU and NATO will be real excited to sign on with you now...

Snus to the Rescue

BBC has a story about health researchers and anti-tobacco activists lobbying the EU to lift their ban on snus. There's a step in the right direction.

Declining Global Influence

CSM has a story about how shrewd foreign policy moves by China and policy mistakes on our part have allowed China to become the dominant political force in the Far East.

GOP House Members Proposal to Replace FDR with Reagan on the dime

The AP issued this report on December 5 (as found in the San Francisco Gate). According to this story from the UPI (covered by the Washington Times on December 2), 80 Republican House members co-sponsored the bill. The text of the Ronald Reagan Dime Act (H.R. 3633) may be found here. Nancy Reagan is reportedly against the bill, according to this AP story (from San Francisco Gate). Rep. Souder (R, Ind.)--the chief sponsor of the legislation--has stated in this press release on his homepage that he maintains his support for the bill despite the former first lady's comments. According to this article on today's Chicago Tribune webpage, Rep. Souder is open to compromise, suggesting that they could put Reagan on one side and FDR on the other, or they could alternate the image each year.

Some excerpts from the bill:
President Ronald Wilson Reagan, through his efforts as the 40th President of the United States, created policies that renewed economic growth, strengthened the resolve of the free world together to oppose totalitarianism, and restored pride in the United States.

President Reagan, through his simple republican dignity and sense of personal responsibility to the United States of America, brought pride and honor to the Office of the President.

(Thanks to Joe Conason's Journal on Salon.com for raising this issue.)

A Banking Intro

Henry has been delving deeply into the world of global banking systems. He has many interesting theories on the subject, which I'm sure he'll enlighten us with once he's through with finals. He has concerns regarding fiat currencies, particularly with the overextension of the US's fiat currency, and seems to be mostly in agreement with the "Austrian school" of economics as established by Ludwig Von Mises. He assures me that although mises.org has been hijacked by intellectually inbred libertarian lunatics, there is much merit in Mises's economic theory. So in order to better equip myself for these discussions I've dug through the Asia Times archive to find a large, multi-part banking system primer written by Henry C K Liu (if he ever wrote any sections beyond 4c, I haven't been able to find them). If anyone else wants to get a head start on this topic, there ya go...

The Long, Slow Slide

News from Iraq gets uglier and uglier. I think we are at the brink of a point of no return, after which point it will be impossible to repair our relationship with the Iraqi people and we will be powerless to help their new government succeed. We'll be left with no option but to pack up and go home and hope for the best. Or we may have already stepped off that precipice and started the long slide down, it's hard to say... And if we have gone over the edge, if past history is a guide, it may take us years to realize it..

CSM has a great roundup of coverage on the newly infamous battle at Samarra. To cover some highlights:

A supposed US officer who fought in the battle wrote to an ex-military blogger:
"During the ambushes the tanks, brads and armored HUMVEES hosed down houses, buildings, and cars while using reflexive fire against the attackers. One of the precepts of "Iron Hammer" is to use an Iron Fist when dealing with the insurgents. As the division spokesman is telling the press, we are responding with overwhelming firepower and are taking the fight to the enemy. The response to these well coordinated ambushes was as a one would expect. The convoy continued to move, shooting at ANY target that appeared to be a threat. RPG fire from a house, the tank destroys the house with main gun fire and hoses the area down with 7.62 and 50cal MG fire. Rifle fire from an alley, the brads fire up the alley and fire up the surrounding buildings with 7.62mm and 25mm HE rounds. This was actually a rolling firefight through the entire town."

With typical understatement, the BBC wrote:
"The Americans were using enormously powerful weapons, including 50 mm cannons mounted on Bradley Fighting Vehicles, and 120 mm tank rounds from the Abrams. Used in a densely populated urban area, built with flimsy mud-bricks, it is almost inconceivable that people well out of sight of the gunners were not also injured in the battle. "

The US military take:
"We have been very aggressive in our convoy operations to ensure the maximum force protection is with each convoy, but it does send a clear message that if you attempt to attack one of our convoys, we're going to use our firepower to stop that attack."

Response of a Samarran emergency room worker:
"All the people in town today are asking for revenge. They want to kill the Americans like they killed our civilians. Give me a gun, and I will also fight."

Conclusion of our anonymous US combatant:
"Since we did not stick around to find out, I am very concerned in the coming days we will find we killed many civilians as well as Iraqi irregular fighters. I would feel great if all the people we killed were all enemy guerrillas, but I can't say that. We are probably turning many Iraqi against us and I am afraid instead of climbing out of the hole, we are digging ourselves in deeper."

< nelson > Ha Ha! < /nelson >

For an amusing diversion, go to google and run a search on "miserable failure".... :)

Ask the White House a science question

Dr. John H. Marburger, President Bush's Science Advisor, will be answering questions on the White House's webpage today at 3:30pm ET. You can submit a question here.

Cyber-Security

The Washington Post has this article on the failure of the Bush administration to fund its own National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace , which the administration released over a year ago. I have not yet had an opportunity to read the document (indeed, the article was the first time I had heard about it) but I expect it will be an interesting read.

Worms For You

BBC has a curious science article suggesting we may all be better off with a few hookworms in our guts. These guys leave no stone unturned..

The Anti-Rove

Christopher Lydon, a Harvard Law fellow, has a great interview with Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi on mp3. It's a very fun listen. I think this guy has what it takes to go toe-to-toe with Karl Rove. The secret? His habit of "dipping Skoal snuff and drinking Diet Pepsi non-stop". As I've said before, I'm voting for this guy and the campaign he's put together as much as I am for Dean. If you do nothing else intellectual-like for the next month, listen to this interview. We ought to send him a Boys' Weekend invite, he would fit right in.

Experiment In Community Building

Also covered on CSM today a story about an experiment on how to rebuild decaying communities. There are some very simple ideas here that appear to effectively promote active civic participation. I think sometimes the answers can be simpler than we imagine. A little leadership to open the lines of communication can go a long ways.

An End to Progressive Taxes

CSM is running an insightful story on how Bush's tax cuts are moving US policy towards a flat tax. I knew that the cuts were top-heavy, but I hadn't realized how far they went. If the Democratic candidates can't figure out how to make this play with the electorate they deserve what comes to them. They normally get scrared off by accusations of "class warfare". At some point they have to realize that, yes, it is class warfare, and they, along with 90% of the US population, are getting their asses kicked.

At Least We Impress Ourselves

I love the headline on this one. I guess Europe is not as familiar with the Bush Legislative Strategy, as highlighted by Dave, of taking a useless symbolic action then launching an expensive media blitz to promote it. They'll get used to it.

Consumer Culture

I cannot find words adequate for this story. To add insult, Wal-Mart's concern for her was couched in their desire that she "come back as a shopper." Ugh....

A Karl Rove Production

Starring our President George W. Bush, the latest production features a clandestine fly-in by the president to the bowels of Baghdad. Braving the chaos and violence of Baghdad, from car bombs to rocket attackes, the valiant Bush defies the evil Iraqi terrorists and serves turkey to the American troops. Don't miss this sequel to the awe-inspiring aircraft carrier landing! Coming soon to a theater near you.

Thanksgiving's Shadow Side

I have to say, when I saw this headline, I immediately thought of the poor toilets on Turkey Day. Enjoy.

Clean Up Your Own Mess

The International Red Cross has announced that it will discontinue its food aid to the occupied Palestinian territories. The program was an emergency one begun in mid-2002 after violence escalated between the Palestinians and Israelis. I think this is a good decision on their part. I hope other agencies will follow, at the same time putting pressure on Israel to maintain stability and health in Palestine, as should be its obligation. My only concern is that Israel, content with its wall, will refuse to step in, and other agencies or countries (like the US) will fail to notice it or care. Should that be the case, the Palestinians will suffer unduly.

More on the Memo

Stephen Hayes, the author of the Weekly Standard article, has this commentary in the L.A. Times.

And in their effort to be fair and balanced, the L.A. Times posted this counterpoint commentary by Christopher Scheer, author of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq.

And William Safire published this article in The Day (A Connecticut Newspaper, I think).

Holy Spam, Batman!

Well this just takes all. Here and I thought the energy and medicare bills were both tilted a bit heavily in favor of commercial interest. But how about this, an anti-spam bill that leaves spammers celebrating! Not only is this bill completely broken and ineffective, but it will also preempt the non-broken anti-spam laws that have been passed in 35 states. Of course this thing passed the House in a landslide and its counterpart flew through the Senate on a 97-nil vote. And how could such a lousy piece of legislation be so popular with congress-people? It has a snappy name, the CAN-SPAM bill, and all congress-people know that a catchy name is the hallmark of quality legislation. Unfortunately they all seem to have misinterpreted the intended meaning of the word "CAN" in that name... Sometimes politics in this country are about enough to make me ill.

God Bless America... Or Else!

Apparently substantial portions of the bill previously known as Patriot II have been inserted into an intelligence funding bill which was passed by both houses of Congress last week. If their goal was to get under the public radar, this bill is apparently the stealth bomber of oppressive legislation. After all the uproar about the Patriot II back when it was first circulated, I can't find a single major media source that is covering this. Wired has it, slashdot grabbed it from there, Asia Times has it, even the AP has a story on it, but it doesn't look like anyone much picked it up, and those that did didn't pay any attention. By tying this crap onto an "intelligence" bill they apparently get a pass by the press to keep everything hush-hush. In any case the feds now have more freedom to collect records on us all while forbidding anyone from whom they acquire those records from letting us know about it. And also the requirements for numerous reports to Congress have been eliminated. More power, less oversight, yeehaw! That sounds like a recipe for a lot of wacky and wild fun times. It's a good thing we know that the FBI always shows such good judgment.

The Ghost of Philip K. Dick Conquers Hollywood

Wired is running a story, covered by slashdot, on the phenomenon of sci-fi author Philip K. Dick's novels and short stories being made into major Hollywood productions. I thought it was a good read, but of course Blade Runner is still my all-time favorite movie. It's really too sad that the David Cronenberg/William Hurt version of Total Recall never got made. That could have been very cool. The article includes the following snipped from a Dick essay:

"We live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups. I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudorealities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives. I distrust their power. It is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing."

The Dollar Drama

Also on CSM today, the latest installment of the ever-gripping dollar drama. In today's episode a number of experts propose that now may be an "optimal time to achieve the inevitable dollar correction". If so, hopefully he means sometime before next fall. :)

Watching Over Us

CSM's daily update today rounds up a lot of good coverage of all the creepy tricks the feds are up to. I don't understand how we can still give power to government agencies, without narrowly defining it, under the assumption that they will never use it in any way other than it was intended by Congress. Haven't we had ample proof by now that this doesn't work? Have we not figured out yet that if there is room for power to be abused it is simply a matter of when, not whether, that abuse will occur? Is that not the entire reason why our founders insisted that we have a government of laws not of men? I guess naming a bill some bit of jingoistic nationalist pap exempts it from any rational scrutiny.

re: Washington Post on Leaks

The column missed what I'd regard as the more obvious explanation:

4. Access. This administration has been famously aggressive and combative in limiting press access. Now they decide to leak, but only leak to a conservative news outlet who, as far as I can tell, has refused to share the actual memo with anyone. The major mainstream news sources have to be pissed. Particularly as the material seems to be of questionable value and appears to be a cynical political ploy rather than a disclosure of critical new material. I imagine they see the scenario as a) this administration has treated us like shit from day 1, b) they leaked this material to some pissant conservative advocacy magazine who won't share it, c) the memo appears to contain no new information and is only leaked to pump the old info back into the forefront of public attention (ie propaganda). Result: they bury the story and send a note to the White House saying next time you want us to propagandize for you, cut us in on the scoop, you wankers.

Washington Post on Leaks

The Post in this article (posted today) wonders why mainstream media has not carried the Memo story and concludes it must be one of three possibilities:
1) Mainstream reporters are sulking about having been beat.
2) The stories aren't all that great.
3) The establishment press reacts differently when conservatives break stories, assume it's part of the vast right-wing conspiracy and try to knock down the allegations.

"Low self-esteem 'shrinks brain'"

According to this BBC story.

Thanks, Dave Barry.

Our free trade hypocrisy

With all the promotion of free trade by the Bush administration, I am continually amazed by how protectionist it is. The EU, supported by the recent WTO ruling against American steel tariffs, is threatening sanctions of its own on politically sensitive American products unless those tariffs are repealed. The Bush administration is taking time to think things over, as if the WTO ruling were ambiguous. Ironically, the steel tariffs, while perhaps saving a few steel worker jobs, have hurt American consumers of steel with higher prices.

As if that weren't enough, the administration has announced that it will impose quotas on the imports of certain Chinese textiles and clothing. This is technically legal under the WTO agreement with China (I can't find the specific text, but I believe that the US can impose product specific quotas on hyper-increasing imports for 12 years - aren't we sneaky?) . Strangely, these quotas are likely to do little for the virtually nonexistent textile manufacturing industry in the US. Will someone tell me what this administration means by free trade?

Re: Did you get that memo?

With all my efforts to chronicle the news (or paucity thereof in the mainstream press) regarding the memo, I have yet to offer much in the way of my take on the whole matter. It appears to me that this was deliberately released by the administration--or at least some segment of it--that was concerned a number of Bush supporters were losing faith in the Iraq effort. I am deeply concerned that this has estabished a trend of releasing highly sensitive information that benefits the administration and harms its opponents. And I am surprised that the immediate rebuke by the Department of Defense has not received attention from the mainstream media, and I am surprised that only a few journalists have risen to the task of addressing the substantive points raised in the Weekly Standard piece.

I would wager that few other media sources have actually obtained a copy of the memo (this seems to be the case with the Newsweek journalists who tried to address the points that were raised in the "Case Closed" story but had no knowledge of the remaining points of the memo). This story is essential to understand what the state of the evidence was at the time Bush asserted to the American public and the rest of the world that Saddam must be overthrown. And the public (particularly those whose eyes and ears are affixed to the Murdoch sources) must be accurately informed. The coverage by the websites that openly speak with the conservative voice have provided only half-truths (at best) regarding this memo and the surrounding circumstances and someone must deliver the rest. I doubt our pint-sized blog can serve this role--if only there were others with a louder voice who could take up this issue.

Did you get that memo?

Upon finally checking in to BWJ (yes, I've been delinquent lately), I was surprised to notice all this talk/news about Feith's memo. Interestingly, the Wall Street Journal (which I read almost daily) hasn't even mentioned this story to my knowledge. Indeed, a search of the site brought up nothing regarding this story. Apparently this story, as many of the commentators note, wasn't relevant or important enough to merit time or space in some of the major press. I noticed that Fox News failed to mention that the Wall Street Journal didn't carry this story as well. Looks like a Murdoch special to me.

Addendum: Should anyone wish to revisit the Bush administration's case for war more thoroughly, I recommend FP's informative and interactive Between the Lines analysis of Bush's 10-7-02 speech making the case for war. They are apparently updating it as more information/evidence becomes available.

Fox News: War Support Slightly Up

You're all going to love this. In this article, Fox News claims:

Short-Term Memo-ry?

Over the weekend, the Weekly Standard published a "top secret U.S. government" memo detailing more than a decade of intelligence indicating an operating relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq. The Pentagon has since confirmed the memo's authenticity, but it has been almost entirely overlooked by major media.

USA Today has completely ignored it. The New York Times has yet to mention it on its news pages, though a column today mentions it. And The Washington Post got around to mentioning it on Sunday, dismissingly in the sixth paragraph of a much broader story.

Now let's look at a few of those statements a little closer:
The Pentagon has since confirmed the memo's authenticity, but it has been almost entirely overlooked by major media.

Here's what the DOD statement on Nov 15 said, in part:
News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate.
* * *
The items listed in the classified annex were either raw reports or products of the CIA, the National Security Agency or, in one case, the Defense Intelligence Agency. The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the intelligence community. The selection of the documents was made by DoD to respond to the committee’s question. The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, and it drew no conclusions.

Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal.

And what about the Washington Post? I found articles mentioning the memo here, here, here and here--and this op-ed here.

Weekly Standard's Latest

Here is the Weekly Standard reply to Newsweek's article responding to the Weekly Standard article on the Feith Memo.

Apparently, the Weekly Standard had not included a complete description of all the "data points" in the memo, for when the Newsweek reporters observed that "The Pentagon memo pointedly omits any reference to the interrogations of a host of other high-level al Qaeda and Iraqi detainees--including such notables as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Abu Zubaida, and Hijazi himself," Stephen Hayes replied with "bullet-point 39," summarizing an interview with none other than Hijazi himself. Hayes continued, "either Isikoff and Hosenball have not seen the memo or they misreport its contents."

Hayes concludes:

It is, of course, possible that the information in the Feith memo is "cherry-picked" intelligence. It's also possible that some of the bullet points listed won't check out on further analysis. But Feith isn't alone in his conclusion that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden had a relationship. CIA Director George Tenet said more than a year ago that his agency had "solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade," that the CIA had "credible information" about discussions between Iraq and al Qaeda on "safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression" and "solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad," and "credible reporting" that "Iraq has provided training to al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs."

How Not To Stage an Occupation

CSM has an interesting article where they discuss Iraq with former Soviet personnel involved with their invasion of Afghanistan. Some of it is obvious, other parts very insightful.

NYTimes weighs in on Memo

See here. The article doesn't really add much but an anonymous Pentagon official who was quoted as follows:

"If you don't understand how intelligence works, you could look at this memo and say, `Aha, there was an operational connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda,' " a Pentagon official said Wednesday. "But intelligence is about sorting what is credible from what isn't, and I think the best judgment about Iraq and Al Qaeda is that the jury is still out."

The article also observes that the memo and the Weekly Standard have revitalized the claim about Atta in the Czech Republic that has already been widely discredited. But see this Slate article from yesterday the 19th that attempts to bolster the Atta in Czech claim.

Very Critical Coverage of Memo

Asia Times has this story (entitled, "The Truth Leaks Out") with intriguing analysis. Two paragraphs stand out:

This week's blockbuster leak of a secret memorandum from a senior Pentagon official to the US Senate Intelligence Committee has spurred speculation that neo- conservative hawks in the Bush administration are on the defensive and growing more desperate.
* * *

''This is made to dazzle the eyes of the not terribly educated,'' Greg Thielmann, a veteran of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) who retired in 2002, told Inter Press Service. ''It begs the question, 'Is this the best they can do?' If you're going to expose this stuff, you'd better have something more than this,'' he said, adding, ''My inclination is to interpret this as probably a very good example of cherry-picking and the selective use of intelligence that was so obvious in the lead-up to the war.''

Dean's Doubters

The problem here with the electability issue is that I am hard-pressed to see how anyone taking an outsider's view of things can think that any of the other candidates can beat Dean on this. In these claims from Democratic party insiders, who as the CSM story says "kept him at arm's length, hoping that one of their own, such as Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, would catch fire", it seems they refuse to recognize that their approval is not the key determination of electability. In the polls you refer to generally they poll only Democrats on the primary, but the full public on the general election. Gephardt, Kerry, and Lieberman serve in the federal government and Clark is a TV personality. Outside of the party, Dean is not well known. But governors tend to have an advantage in presidential politics, and who the hell had ever heard of Bill Clinton before 1992? I don't put too much stock in those poll numbers. As the Democrats are the ones actually following the primary race and learning about the candidates at this point, it's the question of who is exciting them that seems more relevant. The argument that Democrats like Dean because he's a liberal extremist has to deal with the fact that his record is actually pretty moderate, a fact that has been completely ignored by proponents of this view.

With regards to their typical views of what constitutes electability, who could be more electable that Al Gore? An upbeat and friendly moderate southerner with loads of experience and inside party connections who presided over one of the most prosperous and peaceful periods in the nation's history. And he lost to a coke-head alcoholic draft-dodging born-again business failure whose sole distinction is that he's the deadbeat son of a mediocre one-term president. If their measures of electability were accurate Gore should have slaughtered Bush with hardly an effort. Moreover the press loves Dean, just as they loved McCain. The doom and gloom is emenating from party insiders, not the press. The criticism of the press, as noted in the Howard Kurtz column I linked to earlier, is that they're already heralding him as the winner.

I even see Dean in good shape where the regional politics are concerned. The South is a puzzle the Democrats haven't worked out yet. If Gore couldn't deliver any of the south, I don't see Clark or Edwards doing much better. And Lieberman and Kerry are no better off than Dean. Dean's proven record of fiscal conservatism and his straight shooter attitude match up better with midwestern values than any of the competition. Gephardt may also have done well in the midwest, but with the defection of unions to Dean, I think he's nearly a non-factor at this point. None of the candidates have any great claim on the West.

No, I don't think there is a legitimate point to be made that Dean trails in any serious measure of electability. Arguments to that effect strike me as being in a state of denial. The game has changed, they just refuse to admit it. The comparisons to Goldwater and McGovern miss out on the critical role that the internet has played in this campaign and the manner in which it is redefining the way politics operates in this country. Prior to this election party insiders truly did have immense power, the power that comes from controlling the party purse strings and the party machinery. Dean has gone over their heads directly to the party activists. Even as the party apparatchiks worked to push Kerry and Edwards, Dean has raised more money, mostly in small contributions, and has created his own grass roots machinery, in many way superior to theirs. He has successfully made the jump from yuppy activists to picking up Jesse Jackson and major labor unions. The game has changed. Dean's campaign and the likes of moveon.org are doing what many internet entrepreneurs have done before them: cut out the middle men. And like all the other middle men, the party establishment reaction fluxuates between rage and denial. That Dean has accomplished all that he has in spite of them speaks volumes. What could he do with them? Hopefully we'll find out.

The Almighty Memo

First off, Barry, I agree the Reason Mag article is quite good. Aside from that I have a couple of reactions to the story. First, is that these guys are awfully clever, and damned good at what they do. I think it would be safe to say that this leak is a direct response to the pressure that forced Bush and company to state publicly that there was no known connection between Iraq and 9/11. These admissions had caused the widespread public belief to the contrary to waiver, but now Feith has muddied the water again. This crap doesn't have to hold up to intense scrutiny, nor do I think it was ever intended to. It's just there to confuse an issue which, if clarified, could do them a lot of damage. They knew that the conservative press and grassroots offshoots would take it as gospel and would give it enough exposure to serve their purposes. Whether or not anyone else bought it was of no great importance. It was very slick, and I think it worked.

My other interest in the story is the coverage itself. It's interesting to see some stories like this that spread like wildfire across blogs and partisan news sources and then are slowly, almost reluctantly, handled by the mainstream press. You can almost see the paradigm shift before your eyes. I think it's a good one. It's the democratizing effect that we always hoped the internet could have on the media. If they don't cover it, we'll damned well cover it ourselves. And Barry will call them up and let 'em know about it. :)

Michael Jackson

Somebody shoot me, please. I'm already sick of this goddamn story...

Reason Magazine on the Memo

Sorry if y'all are bored with this issue, but I am intrigued as to how this is all playing out in the media (particularly after our conference. Here is Reason Magazine's take. It is probably the most unbiased reporting I have seen thus far.

Progressive Analysis of Al Qaeda-Iraq links

The Center for American Progress (an admittedly left-leaning group) ran this story on November 13.

Newsweek examines some of Memo's claims

Check out this article on MSNBC (and presumably, soon to be found in Newsweek) entitled, "Case Decidedly Not Closed."

Rumsfeld on Memo

This is from Sunday:

Q: Quoting a DoD memo which says that they are detailing contacts between al-Qaeda and the regime of Saddam Hussein?

Rumsfeld: Haven’t seen the article.

Q: Can you comment on your view of Iraq Saddam contacts with al-Qaeda?

Rumsfeld: Nothing to add. My understanding from Larry (Larry Di Rita, acting assistant Secretary of Defense for public affairs) is that the article is just the article that it may have a reference – be a reference to some testimony that DoD representatives had before Congressional Committees many, many weeks and months ago. And that some questions were asked and they require that their responses be submitted for the record and that those responses may have just gone in recently but there is nothing new there.

Q: Secretary on the council, while you say there’s no direct link?

Rumsfeld: I haven’t seen the article so I shouldn’t say there’s nothing new. I don’t know of anything.

White House Statement on the Weekly Standard Memo

Scott McClellan had this to say on Monday:

Q There's an article in the Weekly Standard outlining something like a 13-year relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, based on intelligence reports, and how they were trying to coordinate or work together on terrorist activities. Your reaction to the article, and also, do you think that the administration sees this as more justification --

MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't had an opportunity to read the actual article. I've seen the reports. But the ties between, or the relationship between Saddam Hussein's regime and al Qaeda were well-documented. They were documented by Secretary Powell before the United Nations, back in February, I believe. And we have previously talked about those ties that are there.

Q More justification for the war, then?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?

Q Do you see that as more justification for the war?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we outlined -- the justification for the war was clear in all the Security Council resolutions that were passed. Resolution 1411 called for serious consequences if Saddam Hussein continued to defy the international community. He did, and the President acted to make the world a safer and better place by removing his regime.

Weekly Standard Responds to DOD Statement

Read it for yourself. Ok, one teaser (the article purportedly quoting James Woosley):

"Anybody who says there is no working relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence going back to the early '90s--they can only say that if they're illiterate. This is a slam dunk."

Slate Article on Feith Memo

This article calls for more media attention to the Weekly Standard's "Scoop," and calls the DOD's statement "a bit of a red herring," as it sees it because the Case Closed article "works assiduously (until its final paragraph, at least) not to oversell the memo."

Update: News Coverage on the Memo

The New York Post ran this article on the 15th, which starts:
Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein gave terror lord Osama bin Laden's thugs financial and logistical support, offering al Qaeda money, training and haven for more than a decade, it was reported yesterday.
Yesterday, the New York Post ran this op-ed, "Bush Was Right."

The Fox News Network has this story, entitled "Intelligence Report Links Saddam, Osama." Yesterday, the Network ran this article recognizing that the Senate Intelligence Committee is seeking investigation over the leak, and reported of the Pentagon statement:

A Pentagon statement Saturday has said the memo did not include any new information about Al Qaeda's contacts with Iran. It said the memo provided details of intelligence reports Feith referred when testifying before the committee on July 10. It said the leak of classified material "is deplorable and may be illegal.

Notice they did not report that the memo stated the findings of the memo were "inaccurate." Today, there is no related news on the website (that I could find, anyway).

The GOP's website ("GOPUSA") has this story, which starts:
It's been terribly discouraging to hear the liberal pundits and Democratic politicos continue to spout the lie that there has never been a substantive link between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terror organization. What gobbledygook!

TownHall.com ran this article, which observed:
The unavoidable conclusion: Saddam Hussein’s regime had been guilty as charged – tied for over a decade to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network (among other terrorist groups) for the purpose of waging attacks on their mutual foe, the United States.

Antiwar.com has this story, entitled "Big Story: Neocons Leak Neocon Memo, Then Report On It."

The Hill has this story, entitled "The dubious link between Iraq and al Qaeda."
CNN has this story which proclaims, "Officials confirm probe of Pentagon memo leak"

The Washington Post on Sunday ran this article, entitled "CIA Finds No Evidence Hussein Sought to Arm Terrorists." Today, the Post ran this article headed, "CIA Seeks Probe of Iraq-al Qaeda Memo Leak." Senator Rockefeller, to whom the memo was purportedly addressed, had this op-ed calling for an objective evaluation of the evidence and Bush's claims for war.

And lastly, I again encourage anyone who is truly evaluating these claims about Iraq and the "War on Terror" to visit this website by the Carnegie Center Endowment for International Peace, where they have compiled the Administration's statements and the reports and analysis behind those statements.

Update: Report Debunked by Department of Defense

The Department of Defense released this statement calling the newly released information "inaccurate," based on raw reports that "drew no conclusions" and issued this sharp condemnation:

Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal.

New leaked report on link between Al Qaeda and Iraq

My father today informed me that the Weekly Standard has recently posted an article to be featured in this week's issue entitled, "Case Closed," detailing a memo sent by Douglas J. Feith to the Senate Intelligence Committee regarding the connection between Al Qaeda/Osama Bin Laden and Iraq. Interesting.

The article proclaims, that the memo is "detailed, conclusive and corroborated by multiple sources."

Dean Creates Panic Among Democratic Insiders

CSM has a sweet article about the panic and fear of Democratic insiders at the prospect of a Dean nomination. Each one has a different doom and gloom projection to make. But the way I see it they all read the same way: "We might lose our grip on the party." Dean has put the fear of god into these ass-clowns and I couldn't be happier for it.

Spitzer Op-Ed

Check out this New York Times editorial in today's paper

Dissent

I'm not sure which is more impressive, four former heads of Israeli security blasting Sharon's security policies, or Senator Fritz Hollings' verbal assault on the Iraq war. While I'm not fan of Hollings, whose record on copyright issues is awful (on /. they refer to him as the Senator from Disney), that's a hell of a speech. Wouldn't it be remarkable for something like that to be carried on broadcast news? From a quick google, I can find no website larger or more mainstream than tompaine.com (which is neither large nor mainstream) which carries this speech. So Americans may never hear or read a powerful and critically important message from one of their highest elected officials. While we may not get this information, I promise that our friends in Iraq will.