| [I]t is one of the two best books I've read in years about the Democratic Party, its myriad problems and challenges -- Charlie Cook, National Journal
[A]n insightful guide to how the Democratic Party can retake power -- Peter Beinart, NY Times Book tour :: Amazon :: B&N; :: Powell's :: Chelsea Green
|
Iraqi Government Embraces Democratic Proposals
Sun Jun 25, 2006 at 09:23:34 AM PDT
In a stinging rejection of Republican rhetoric, Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki has proposed a plan for partial US withdrawal which includes specific dates and/or benchmarks for reducing troop levels. The plan will reportedly incorporate a number of additional features, such as amnesty for insurgents and possibly even Iraqi control of US forces in some regions. While the withdrawal component of the proposal, if implemented, is certainly welcome news and supported by a majority of Americans, it throws ice-cold water on the Republican PR and smear campaign ramped up this month and carried out by GOP policy makers in the House, Senate, Department of Defense, and the White House.
Over the last several weeks, Republicans have painted themselves into a rhetorical corner using the same tired refrain they've spouted for years, especially regarding any timetable or benchmarks for a US pullout. Senate majority leader Bill Frist smugly dismissed the idea saying, "Withdrawal is not an option." John McCain chimed in that a timetable for withdrawal of American troops would be a "significant step on the road to disaster.'' Rumsfeld said, "Once you start doing that, then you are stuck with a number and a date, and it just doesn't do any good." Dick Cheney said, "The worst possible thing we could do ... What the Democrats are suggesting basically you can call it withdrawal, you can call it redeployment, whatever you want to call it, basically it's - in effect, validates the terrorist strategy."
Yet, in what can only be described as a bizarre, split-brain development, even as GOP leaders were bashing Democratic proposals for an exit plan, General Casey, top commander in Iraq, was reportedly working to implement them:
NYT--WASHINGTON, June 24 -- The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.
The WH sent America's sons and daughters into Iraq on false premises with no exit strategy and quickly lost control of the situation early on. Not only have events on the ground in Iraq consistently contradicted every new snow job the GOP tried to pawn off in the ever shifting rationale for war, the duly elected, purple finger-waving, government of Iraq is throwing in with the Democrats and the consensus of the American people at a time when Republican apologists, gamely sticking with the failed Bush policy in Iraq, were regaining at least a few conservatives who had strayed from the GOP fold. Now the Iraqis themselves--and apparently Gen. Casey himself--are embracing ideas proposed by leading Democrats, from John Murtha to John Kerry. What's a Republican ideologue to do?
The Next Hurrah--If you're Bush, you negotiate this deal, encourage the House and Senate to have one more peace-bashing dick-waving hurrah to brand the Republicans as the "patriotic" party, and you encourage the Iraqis ask you to do just what the Democrats have been clamoring for.
In the wake of the Iraqi plan, will the GOP make a hairpin turn and now try to claim the Democratic/Iraqi proposals as their own after weeks of harsh criticism? If so, will the traditional media facilitate the deception or call them on it? Or will some Republicans plow ahead with the tried and true tactic of lying while our troops keep dying, perhaps accusing the Iraqis themselves of cutting and running from their own country?
The distinct possibility that the nation will be treated to yet another conservative pundit clown show as they flail about wildly, whining that a timetable isn't really a timetable, or that amnesty doesn't really mean amnesty, is only an amusing side attraction. The possibility that the GOP will splinter, as their last Hail Mary to regain the upper hand is cut from beneath them, is merely a pleasant afterthought. No doubt the big losers are Republicans who shamelessly sought to exploit this cluster-fuck right up until last week, branding anyone who demanded accountability, competence, and an exit strategy from Bush and Cheney's Iraq disaster as a terrorist sympathizer or coward.
But make no mistake, regardless of any desperate right-wing spin, the likely winners of the Iraqi plan are clearly the US servicemen and women on the ground in Iraq or facing deployment, We the People, and the Democratic Party, in that order, with several tragic exceptions: the thousands of courageous men and women who have been killed or wounded in Bush's colossal mistake, the half a trillion dollars earmarked or spent already, and the as yet untold number of Americans yet to pay for this needless blunder.
Republicans Reject Minimum Wage Increase
Sun Jun 25, 2006 at 08:17:25 AM PDT
This week, the Republican Senate rejected Senator Kennedy's proposal to raise the federal minimum wage. By a vote of 52-46, Republicans case their cold-hearted votes to keep the minimum wage at the same rate it has been at for the last nine years.
This letter from a reader in the Sun-Sentinel pretty much sums up the issue:
Sen. Mel Martínez should try to live on $10,712 per year ($5.15 an hour). Clearly, based on his recent vote not to raise the minimum wage, he feels that Americans earning that amount can sustain themselves.
He can say it is to help business or to protect jobs, but he has once again stuck it to working Americans who will live below the poverty level working full time at that wage. Why ask business to pay a fair wage when he can burden the American working family already crushed under the national debt?
Thank you, Sen. Martínez, for keeping an affordable home out of the grasp of working Americans. His anti-family vote not to raise the federal minimum wage while he accepts a raise is the height of hypocrisy.
Whatever he got for his soul, he should donate it to a family trying to survive at $5.15 an hour. For his sake, I hope that he has enough wealthy constituents to support his next campaign, but I doubt it. Shame on him.
Hard-working Americans who get paid the minimum wage don't get the luxury of automatic pay raises, like members of Congress do. For the record, just this month, Congress went ahead and agreed to keep that automatic salary increase.
Every single Democrat present voted for the minimum wage increase. The only Republicans to join Democrats and side with the American worker were Senators Chafee, Lugar, Snowe, Specter, and Warner (and Jeffords as well).
Open Thread
Sun Jun 25, 2006 at 06:08:32 AM PDT
Get it off your chest.
Sunday Talk - Grim Reaper
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 09:45:02 PM PDT
(From the diaries. mcjoan)
Inside the Fold:The Full Sunday Lineup
In the Comment Section:
(Vid) Howard Dean vs Noron O' Donnell
(Vid) Justice Anthony Kennedy's emotional Commencement Adresss
(Vid) Sunday Funnies - 2 Editions: Letterman & Olbermann
(Vid) Gore on Letterman
(Vid) Gerry Nadler's Stem Winder - "Bush is not above the LAW !"
(Vid) Newsreel - The Senate Debate and the Carnage in Iraq
(Vid) Newsreel - the Haditha Massacre
(Pics) Global Warming and Whacked Out Weather
(Vid) All this, George Clooney, and lot more
Open Thread and Diary Rescue
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 08:56:53 PM PDT
Up for diary rescue tonight (with a bonus of leftover good diaries from yesterday at the bottom):
(ksh checks in with three diaries from yesterday that didn't make the deadline):
- The Personal Is Political is starkravinglunaticradical's rivetingly written story of a coat and retelling of a tale many could tell. A long diary, easy to read, less easy to digest. (ksh01)
- Sfzendog's It's My Money is a civics lesson of sorts...an examination of those who want the "benefits of membership in the National country-club," but don't want to pay their dues. (ksh01)
- In All Quiet on the Eastern Front, Giustino posts a nice introduction to a topic given little play at Daily Kos: Russia's relationship with the major powers and its affect on the Baltics. This diary is written by a Kossack with experience in the region and is well worth a read. (ksh01)
Check out Carnacki's Top Comments of the Day, add your favorite diaries from the day below and use as an open thread.
Norquist, Abramoff, and the White House
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 08:21:47 PM PDT
The Associated Press has obtained some of the e-mails Senate and federal investigators have uncovered in the Abramoff investigations.
WASHINGTON - Wanted: Face time with President Bush or top adviser Karl Rove. Suggested donation: $100,000. The middleman: lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Blunt e-mails that connect money and access in Washington show that prominent Republican activist Grover Norquist facilitated some administration contacts for Abramoff's clients while the lobbyist simultaneously solicited those clients for large donations to Norquist's tax-exempt group.
Those who were solicited or landed administration introductions included foreign figures and American Indian tribes, according to e-mails gathered by Senate investigators and federal prosecutors or obtained independently by The Associated Press.
"Can the tribes contribute $100,000 for the effort to bring state legislatures and those tribal leaders who have passed Bush resolutions to Washington?" Norquist wrote Abramoff in one such e-mail in July 2002.
"When I have funding, I will ask Karl Rove for a date with the president. Karl has already said 'yes' in principle and knows you organized this last time and hope to this year," Norquist wrote in the e-mail.
Subtle, these guys, real subtle. The connection to Norquist is the new piece in this investigation. A spokesperson for Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) denies that Norquist ever offered to arrange White House meetings in exchange for money. Shocked, he is, shocked at the suggestion.
"No one from Americans for Tax Reform ever assisted Jack Abramoff in getting meetings or introductions with the White House or congressional leaders in exchange for contributions," Kartch said, suggesting some of the e-mails might be misleading.
"If you look at some of Abramoff's e-mails to third parties, they might be misread to suggest that he was misrepresenting or confusing support for a project with a specific meeting," Kartch said. "This could have been deliberate or just unclear."
The AP story details Abramoff/Norquist associations going back to 1995, and what appears to be a well-established mutual back-scratching arrangement between the two that included access to Karl Rove and the White House.
Norquist did make a special effort -- at Abramoff's request -- to introduce a British businessman and an African dignitary to Rove at another ATR event in summer 2002.
Abramoff bluntly told Norquist he was asking the African dignitary for a $100,000 donation to ATR and suggested the introduction to Rove might help secure the money.
"I have asked them for $100K for ATR," Abramoff wrote Norquist in July 2002. "If they come I'll think we'll get it. If he is there, please go up to him (he'll be African) and welcome him."
Norquist obliged.
"I am assuming this is very important and therefore we are making it happen," the GOP activist wrote back, promising to introduce the two foreigners as well as a Saginaw tribal official to Rove that night.
A day later, an ecstatic Abramoff sent an e-mail thanking Norquist for "accommodating" the introductions. "I spoke with the ambassador today and he is moving my ATR request forward," the lobbyist wrote, referring to the donation.
This investigation couldn't happen to two more deserving guys. It's probably too much to hope that Rove gets pulled in deeper, but Abramoff has appeared to be in a dealing mood. It might not be Fitzmas, but it will be worth keeping an eye on.
Open Thread
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 06:53:28 PM PDT
Get it off your chest.
CT-Sen: The issues Lieberman finds important
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 05:56:18 PM PDT
As Connecticut Bob points out, if you sign up to volunteer for Joe Lieberman on his website, you are asked to check off your most important issues:
Nothing anything missing? (Hint: it's Iraq.)
And the list padding is hilarious. Especially the multiple references to social security. Here's Joe on social security:
Mr. Lieberman set off alarms within the party even before the State of the Union address. "This is an ongoing problem, and we'd be wise to deal with it," Mr. Lieberman told The Hartford Courant in January when asked about Social Security. "If we can figure out a way to help people through private accounts or something else, great."
Then the night of the speech, and the kiss, Mr. Lieberman said in a statement that preserving the program's benefits "may require we make some changes."
A week later, Mr. Lieberman praised [Republican Senator Lindsey] Graham for trying to fashion a plan that could win bipartisan support. Soon after, an unnamed aide to Mr. Lieberman told CongressDaily, a Washington newsletter, that "he's still in a listening and learning stage and keeping an open mind" but had not taken a position.
His opposition to Bush's and the Republican Congress' efforts to destroy social security seemed to only harden once it was clear that privatization was going nowhere. He otherwise continuously undermined Reid's efforts to keep the Democratic caucus united.
p.s. As you read through that New York Times story, dated March 7, 2005, note all the people laughing at the possibility that Lieberman might face a serious primary challenge.
Update: Interesting. Search on Google for the word "Iraq" on Lieberman's site, and you get one hit. Click on the Google result, and that page returns a "404 Not Found" error.
The word "Iraq" doesn't appear on Lieberman's site at all.
Really Quick
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 04:45:20 PM PDT
Just a quick reminder as the media nip at our heels --
We didn't get here because of them.
They can praise us, they can trash us, they can ignore us, and ultimately none of that will matter as long as we keep doing what we've been doing.
Whether we succeed or not will depend on our own efforts. Not those of anyone else.
Iraqis To Propose Timetable For US Withdrawal
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 04:09:51 PM PDT
This ought to make for some interesting backpedalling and parsing on the news shows tomorrow:
Newsweek--A timetable for withdrawal of occupation troops from Iraq. Amnesty for all insurgents who attacked U.S. and Iraqi military targets. Release of all security detainees from U.S. and Iraqi prisons. Compensation for victims of coalition military operations. Those sound like the demands of some of the insurgents themselves, and in fact they are. But they're also key clauses of a national reconciliation plan drafted by new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who will unveil it Sunday.
Kevin Drum adds:
Link--President Bush would be flatly insane to turn this opportunity down. [...] Conversely, if he resists it, it would be hard not to conclude that he was doing so solely because a "broad, conditions-based timetable" also happens to be exactly the position of the vast majority of the Democratic Party.
Yes, I posted on this yesterday evening, but it looks a bit more solid now, and it's significant. It also brings up an interesting question: Did the Iraqi government just punk Bush and the Rubber-stamp Republicans?
MO-Sen: McCaskill Increases Lead in New Poll
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 03:37:13 PM PDT
A St. Louis Post-Dispatch/KMOV poll has Claire McCaskill leading incumbent GOP Senator Talent by six points, up from three in polling done in January. Particularly encouraging is her opening up a significant lead of 14% among Independents. MoE for the poll is 3.5%.
(H/t to Rep. Chip Shields for this one.)
Update [2006-6-24 19:6:21 by mcjoan]: Here's more from the Post-Dispatch:
Among 800 likely voters polled last week, 49 percent supported state Auditor Claire McCaskill, a Democrat, in her quest to replace U.S. Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo. That compared to 43 percent who favored retaining Talent, who has been in office since 2003. The remaining 8 percent were undecided.
C&L Gets Mail
Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 03:17:27 PM PDT
Lovely.
In response to a post I did earlier about Jane Hamsher's mother passing away, here's an email I received: (I edited the curses)
Condolensces regarding Jane's mom
"Actually f--k that whore! And f--k you bitches!! LMAO!!! Especially your censore whore intern!!"
Certain Right wing blogs consistently try to characterize liberals as unhinged which the media picks up. What would you call this?
