« Asking The Question | Main | By Any Other Name »
Hiding The President
Not for nothing Dana Milbank, but we've been pointing this out for, what five-six years now? From WaPo:
The White House press corps spent its first day in exile yesterday, banished from the White House compound for the first time since the John Adams presidency while the West Wing briefing room undergoes a renovation.
Bush has traveled out of the Washington area at least seven times this year without a press plane, including four times in the past month to fundraisers closed to the press. This development, devised by a secretive White House and enabled by cash-strapped media outlets, has helped Bush to stage a series of father-protector photo ops with few of those pesky questions that reporters tend to ask. (emphasis added)
Sooooo, it's been months of this, and you folks are just picking your heads up off the bar and noticing it now? And only one of you is writing about it now?
As if to deepen the isolation, press secretary Tony Snow, stepping over some plywood and into the new digs on Jackson Place NW for his daily briefing, adopted the Borscht Belt comics' practice of answering questions with questions.
Does President Bush think the cease-fire in Israel and Lebanon will undermine support for Hezbollah?
"Well, we're going to find out, aren't we?" Snow replied.
"Did the president call for the respect of sovereignty by both sides?"
"Respect of sovereignty?" Snow parried.
Does Bush support the Republican candidate for Senate in Connecticut, Alan Schlesinger?
"Why do you ask?" Snow counterquestioned. "Is there something about the candidate that I should know about that would lead to judgments?"
So we should not assume the president will automatically support Republican nominees?
"Why don't you wait and see what happens?" proposed Snow, citing "peculiar characteristics" in Connecticut.
Snow's performance, in addition to making life even more miserable for candidate Schlesinger (6 percent support in a new poll that finds Sen. Joseph Lieberman and Democratic nominee Ned Lamont neck-and-neck), fits neatly in a renewed Bush administration effort to keep the media at a safe distance.(emphasis mine)
Well, here's a tip Dana, they've been doing this for years, son. And while you are trading pithy Borscht Belt insider humor that only about 5% of the people reading this will get, maybe you or one of your crackerjack wide awake buddies hanging around the snooze department should be reminding Tony Snow that just two short months ago this was the plan:
WASHINGTON -President Bush will hold a news conference Friday in Chicago as the White House explores new venues for putting the president before the public.
It will be his first full scale news conference since June 14 in the Rose Garden on his return from a surprise visit to Iraq.
[...]
Bartlett said the Chicago trip was the beginning of occasional presidential trips around the country to learn what's on Americans' minds.
Ah, memories...
It would be nice if the media would step up and remind Mr. Snow and Company of the earlier bamboozlements. What's that called?
Oh yeah, doing their job.
[graphics love to Chinimooman]
Damn, I miss having a real president...
Clinton Sounds Off on Terror, Republicans
Taking a break from his work at the XVI International AIDS Conference in Toronto on Monday, former President Clinton warned Republicans not to politicize the London terror arrests, slammed Sen. Joe Lieberman, whom he campaigned for just a couple weeks ago, and tackled some of the controversies surrounding his work to fight AIDS.
"I don't think the thought in that London bomb plot has any bearing on our Iraq policy," Clinton said.
"The Republicans should be very careful in trying to play politics with this London airport thing, because they're going to have a hard time with the facts."
Clinton said that the London terror plot had raised two questions about the Republicans' political strategy.
"They seem to be anxious to tie it to al Qaeda. ... If that's true, how come we got seven times as many troops in Iraq as in Afghanistan?" he said. "Why have we imperiled President Karzai's rule and allowed the Taliban to come back into the southern part of Afghanistan? Why was Iraq deemed to be seven times more important than finding the al Qaeda leaders for the last five years?"
http://www.kltv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5282264
U.S. plans for Mideast foiled, Syrian president says
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
-snip-
The Syrian leader said U.S. participation was needed for a peace settlement in the Middle East, but he said peace cannot be achieved under the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush.
"This is an administration that adopts the principle of pre-emptive war that is absolutely contradictory to the principle of peace," he said. "Consequently, we don't expect peace soon or in the foreseeable future."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/15/syria.assad.ap/index.html
Julia E. Sweig: Why They Hate Us
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081506Z.shtml
Julia E. Sweig writes that recovering our global standing will come not only from how we fight or prevent the next war, or manage an increasingly chaotic world. Domestic policy must change as well. Steering the body politic out of its insular mood, reducing social and economic inequalities, and decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels will help improve our moral standing and our security.
It just became official.
My Aunt Aline, God rest her soul, is now legally represented by a Civil Rights Attorney out of Chicago who has taken her case.
Blake Horwitz
National Police Watch
http://www.police-watchers.com
And I would just like to add...
HAHAHAHA!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHHHHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
HARHARHARHAR!!! HEHEHEHEHE!!!
Things just took a definate and interesting turn.
Posted by: Christy at August 15, 2006 12:25 PM
Congratulations, Christy! Hope your aunt's case gets the national attention it deserves. I'll keep my eyes peeled for news in Chicago press about it. Please keep us posted on the progress of the case.
TY MD...
It is 114 degrees outside but it feels like Christmas!
Paul Krugman | Hoping for Fear
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081506O.shtml
"All Mr. Bush and his party can do at this point is demonize their opposition," writes Paul Krugman. "My guess is that the public won't go for it, that Americans are fed up with leadership that has nothing to hope for but fear
itself.
DiAnne,
FEAR UP?
Oh yes, lots of that going around today...
Fear Up is a torture technique in which the suspect is made to be afraid that something terrible will happen to him or his loved ones if he does not cooperate...
SOUND FAMILIAR?
Karen
Back in NYC for Fear Up's second performance.
Karen and cast and crew,
Break a leg this afternoon! And for any of you who are contemplating going to see Fear Up either this afternoon, tomorrow night, or next week - GO!!!
And make sure to leave time in your plans for the talk back session which follows. Lively discussion about the true stories from the performance.
Ticket info here: http://www.democracycellproject.com/
Just FYI with regards to the previous thread header, a dkos diarist just reported on seeing Chuck Roberts with Ned Lamont and that Roberts apologized and explained that he had botched the intro and what he had intended to say.
No transcript yet ... just this diarist's best attempt to capture the moment.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/15/135452/532
Hey - what happened to my Olbermann post/link?
Oooops - posted it ont he LAST thread. Oh well. Here it is!
This is the excellent piece I mentioned yesterday that Olbermann did last night on "The Nexus of Politics and Terror". It is 12 minutes but worth every one!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/08/14/olbermann-the-nexus-of-politics-and-terror/
Keith runs down the timeline from 2002 until the latest UK plot regarding the politicization of terror. Remember when Tom Ridge explained how the administration signaled terror alerts that he didn’t think should have been used?
The piece speaks for itself.
Posted by: Christy at August 15, 2006 12:25 PM
Good development! I hope this takes a turn for the better.
My heart is with you always, Christy.
Mark Green is torching the Bush Administration on Hardball. Green is running to replace Elliot Spitzer as Attorney General here in NY.
Speaking of Spitzer, I did a blog post on his ads recently. Spitzer provides some good lessons to other Democrats in with regards to both his public statements and now his ads:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=32
Conservatives Put Faith in Church Voter Drives
Evangelicals seek to sign up a new flock of GOP supporters in states with crucial November races.
By Peter Wallsten, Times Staff Writer
August 15, 2006
WASHINGTON — As discontent with the Republican Party threatens to dampen the turnout of conservative voters in November, evangelical leaders are launching a massive registration drive that could help counter the malaise and mobilize new religious voters in battleground states.
The program, coordinated by the Colorado-based group Focus on the Family and its influential founder, James C. Dobson, would use a variety of methods — including information inserted in church publications and booths placed outside worship services — to recruit millions of new voters in 2006 and beyond.
The effort builds on the aggressive courtship of evangelical voters in 2004 by President Bush's reelection campaign, even as the Internal Revenue Service has announced renewed scrutiny of nonprofit organizations, including churches, that engage in political activities
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gopchurch15aug15,0,5887088.story
Been wondering about the connection between the neocon think tanks, the senseless war in Iraq and the sudden war between Israel & Lebanon?
Everything Old Is New
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Tuesday 15 August 2006
Everything old becomes new again, or so the saying goes. Nowhere is this more evident than in the highest reaches of neo-conservative power in Washington, DC. The term itself - "neo-conservative" - is little more than a shortened version of the old maxim.
Over the last several weeks, an old White Paper found new life in the shattered ruins of Lebanon's infrastructure. Titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," the paper was masterminded by three neo-con hawks who, in the fullness of time, became powerful members of the Bush administration: Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser. The three were working for a pro-Israel think tank called the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies when the paper was first drafted.
"A Clean Break" was originally written for the benefit of Benjamin Netanyahu after he rose to the position of Prime Minister of Israel in 1996. This, in and of itself, was unique; it is rare indeed to have a trio of American foreign policy specialists crafting national security policy for a foreign power. Those who have seen the hand of the Israeli Likud Party guiding American foreign policy over the last several years base their premise, to no small degree, upon the involvement of these three men in Israeli affairs before their ascendancy in American government. The arguments contained in this document eventually became the basis for the now-infamous White Paper by the Project for the New American Century titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses," which was authored in 2000.
Perle, Feith and Wurmser's vision for a new Israel centered around the re-invigoration of the discredited policy of pre-emption, i.e., attacking a perceived foe based on whatever premise can be found in order to show strength in the region and intimidate local governments into compliance. "Israel's new agenda," read the paper, "can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which assumed exhaustion and allowed strategic retreat by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone, and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response."
Beyond reviving pre-emption, the paper argued that Israel's wisest course of action involved a military invasion of Lebanon, followed by attacks upon Syria and Iran. "Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil," read the paper. "An effective approach, and one with which American[s] can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon."
In order for pre-emption to be successful, according to the paper, a premise for attack must be established. It did not matter if the premise was based upon actual facts or genuine threat. It only needed to be plausible enough to rally the support of the American people
Read the rest at
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081506A.shtml
Not surprised to see the name of Richard Perle
Not surprised to see the name of Richard Perle
Posted by: DiAnne at August 15, 2006 06:12 PM
I'd only be surprised if Perle was volunteering to do some actual fighting. He talks loud and proud, but has never put his butt on the line for either Israel or the US.
Cyrano
Perle has a big house in the south of France.
He practically had a stroke when Spain went to the Socialists, despite his meddling in Europe.
He keeps a pretty low profile - alot of people don't know who he is. I think he's probably one of the most dangerous neocons of all. I saw him going into a hotel with Spanish royalty at Versailles in 2003 (via French paparazzi on IndyMedia) - at the Bilderberg meeting prior to G8. Also read before how Tom Delay, of all people, spoke to the Israeli Knesset. It's a completely creepy alliance & despite modern militaries, neither nation seems to be able to prevail before third world style guerilla fighting on the ground, despite softening up with weeks-long aerial assault. (Think Vietnam, lessons not learned, then Iraq 1991 and 2001, & USSR & US's misadventures in Afghanistan, & Israel's month-long adventure trying to neutralize Hezbollah) What a catastropic waste of time & money - one step forward, two steps back for everyone.
More on Perle:
(They keep files on us, we keep files on them)
-Reaganite
-Nicknamed "the Prince of Darkness"
-PNAC member & signatory of '88 letter to Clinton calling for overthrow of Saddam
-supporter of rightwing Likud party, Israel
-London School Economics, Princeton PoliSci
-worked for "Scoop" Jackson, arms control
-worked against nuclear arms reduction
When working with "Scoop" Jackson when younger, he was known as "Prince of Darkness" and the name has followed him.
"Perle was so strongly opposed to nuclear arms control agreements with the former Soviet Union during his days in the Reagan administration that he became known as 'the Prince of Darkness.'"
Quote:
"I really resent being depicted as some sort of dark mystic or some demonic power....All I can do is sit down and talk to someone."
-Perle's objected to arms talks between Carter and the Soviet Union as he did not want to limit cruise missile development
-Perle is credited for spearheading opposition to the treaty, which was never ratified by the Senate
-Under Reagan, Perle was Assistant Secretary of Defense for international security policy
-he recommended the Army purchase an armaments system from an Israeli company that a year earlier had paid him $50,000 in consulting fees
-Perle is fellow American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (defense, security, middle east)
-Perle is director of Hollinger,partner of Trireme, a director of Autonomy and a director of the Jerusalem Post (owned by Hollinger).
-Perle is chairman of Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, advises Department of Defense. Seymour Hersh published an article in The New Yorker accusing Perle of conflict of interest, that Perle had business dealings with Saudi investors and intelligence-related computer firm Trireme Partners LLP, which stood to profit from the war in Iraq.
Perle responded that "Hersh is the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist, frankly." Perle threatened to bring a libel suit against Hersh, and finally resigned from Trireme.
-Investigation into conflicts of interest into Perle's business interests took place at the behest of several members of Congress
The inspector general ruled federal conflict of interest rules didn't apply to Perle because the provisions don't apply unless an employee works 60 days in a year, and Perle only worked eight days total in a three year time span
-Perle authorized several controversial transactions which diverted the company's net profit from the shareholders to the accounts of various executives
-Perle is said to be the person behind the US policy on Iraq - believed that Saddam Hussein's control of the government was weak, and that an invasion of Iraq would remove Saddam from power within weeks.
"Saddam is much weaker than we think he is. He's weaker militarily. We know he's got about a third of what he had in 1991. But it's a house of cards. He rules by fear because he knows there is no underlying support."
- Yet there was a protracted postwar insurrection waged by former Ba'athists, Sunni insurgents, and foreign jihadists affiliated with the Wahhabi al Qaida movement.
-In the leadup to the war, Perle complained that C.I.A. officials hostile to defectors brought out of Iraq by the Iraqi National
"But ultimately, the flow of information was so vital and so overwhelming that they could no longer ignore it", he is quoted as saying. One such defector was Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, who claimed that chemical and biological weapons laboratories were hidden beneath hospitals and inside presidential palaces. (New York Times, January 24, 2003. Judith Miller) If such weapons or evidence ever existed they were never found. Judith Miller has since retired from the New York Times in disgrace.
-Perle advocated invading Iraq with only 40,000 troops, and complained about the calls by then Gen. Eric Shinseki to use 250,000 troops.
-Perle continued to hold an optimistic assessment for the future of Iraq, even after major terrorist attacks which destroyed the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad
"And a year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush. There is no doubt that, with the exception of a very small number of people close to a vicious regime, the people of Iraq have been liberated and they understand that they've been liberated. And it is getting easier every day for Iraqis to express that sense of liberation."
When discussing his new book "Battle Ready" co-authored with retired general Zinni, author Tom Clancy stated that he almost came to blows with Perle.
"He was saying how Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me."
On November 19, 2003, he stated "international law stood in the way of doing the right thing"
-Perle advocates first-strike bombing of North Korean nuclear facilities.
- advocated preemptive attacks on Syria, Iran, Libya, and a number of other countries.
- He is known to have a negative opinion of the United Nations and of multilateralism, and supports maintaining the military superpower status of the United States.
- Perle chaired a study group that included Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and others, that produced a strategy paper for the incoming Likud Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" [9], declared that "removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq" was an "important Israeli strategic objective in its own right as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions."
-He owns a vacation home in Provence in France where he spends much of his time.
-Perle is co-founder of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a spin-off from the American Enterprise Institute.
Perle is author of
An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror Hard Line
Reshaping Western Security
In 1992 he produced the PBS feature The Gulf Crisis: The Road to War.
(I have sources for all of the above)