Cautiously Optimistic

That is what I am, cautiously optimistic about last nights performance by the Yankees. Wang has had some trouble historically with the sox so he took some juice off his pitches to try and offset them. It worked, last night at least. Now I don't want to make a bold statement like "it looks like the offense is finally coming around" because the minute I say that they will cool right back down. Things could have gone to hell in a hand basket really quickly when the sox had the bases loaded in the 8th, but if the one thing the Yankees have that no one can deny it is veteran players who know how to make routine plays in clutch situations. So I think that I want to wait until the end of this series to dissect its every play for now, I don't want to jinx my boys after all.

To make a hard right turn if I may, one thing that I am not cautiously optimistic about is the fact that the democrats have removed their insistence on a time line in the battle over the budget for the troops. I have always been a fan of the speak quietly but carry a big stick mantra, unfortunately the democrats seem to be yelling loudly and breaking their stick over there knee causing them public embarrassment. (Sigh) if only Pelosi and the democrats could grow a pair....metaphorically of course.

Wolfowitz Under Investigation For Ethics Violations*

Paul Wolfowitz is under investigation regarding allegations that he unethically promoted and gave a raise to his girlfriend. When I read this in the Express this morning my first reaction was no doubt the same as yours......WOLFOWITZ HAS A GIRLFRIEND????!!!? I don't want to spend a whole lot of time in this blog discussing superficial BS, but come on, the guy sucks on his combs and uses saliva as hair gel for Godsake!

Personal hygiene aside, is anyone really surprised that someone from the Bush administration may be playing cronyism. The list of dangerously under qualified high ranking buddies of Bush is so absurd that if it wasn't actually true I don't think that I would believe it myself. It's too late to start the witch hunt for these guys now, and actually there is no point either. For every dunce that's removed another crony is waiting in the wings to take his or her place. So maybe I should just stick to the superficial on this one. With that I again say.....WOLFOWITZ HAS A GIRLFRIEND????? Hell, she deserves the promotion just for touching this guy.

*The Yankees were off last night

Enough Already, Just End This Damn War

Democrats are pushing forward with plans to include a withdrawal time line in the supplemental war funding bill despite a guaranteed veto threat from the president. Will the timetable stand, no, of course not. But the fact that the republicans have decided to not change the language of the bill speaks volumes to the confidence that bush's own party has in his leadership and his prosecution of the war. It also is a clear indication that they are ready to sacrifice the President to the inevitable public outcry.

Realistically though, the point of this whole exercise is purely political. Pelosi and Ried know that despite all the rhetoric they can't cut funds to the troops without major public backlash, so they at the very least must make it LOOK like they are doing something to end the war and hold the administration accountable. This bothers me. Anyone who knows me (or who as read this blog) is well aware of my political leanings and also knows that anything that makes bush look bad is like music to my ears. But ending the war is about ending needless death, reckless spending, and restoring credibility to our country's reputation. A political chess match is not what we need, we need real solutions to end this nightmare and not symbolic politics.

British Sailors To Be "Pardoned"

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he has pardoned the 15 British sailors and marines detained last month and will set them free. It was just a matter of time before this happened. The big question is was the capture just a few over zealous Iranian sailors, or was it a high level decision.

I tend to think that it was a little of both. I can't believe that the Iranian government would purposely provoke this type of diplomatic crisis. They know that they would have little to gain on the world stage. I think that the decision to hold the British sailors was more of a face saving / PR idea with the intent to come across as victims of western aggression. To that extent, at least in the eyes of many in the Arab world I think that it worked. There is no question that the "confessions" of the 15 detainees was coerced, but in the eyes of Joe Arab it probably seemed equal to what Joe America would think if we saw a Guantanamo detainee confessing. Unfortunately our President played along with this by opening his mouth when he shouldn't have.

Looking back this situation could have ended off a lot worse than it did, but even still it is yet another example of the dangerous cat and mouse game that the US and Britain are playing with Iran. In the war of Arabic public relations we always stand to lose.

An Accomplishment for Bush

Bush has so few accomplishments in his time in office I thought that it was time that I highlighted something he has done very well.....stink:

The latest USA Today/Gallup poll finds 34% of Americans approving of the job George W. Bush is doing as president. His approval rating has been highly stable in recent months, averaging 36% since last October, and 34% so far in 2007. Bush was last above 40% approval in September 2006, and his run of six consecutive months below 40% is one of the longest in Gallup's polling history.

Nice streak Dubya, but this is common right?

Given the rarity of approval ratings below 40%, extended runs of sub-40% approval ratings are also uncommon. A review of Gallup historical data finds only nine instances in which a president consistently had approval ratings below 40% for three months or longer. Only six presidents endured such a run, with Truman, Jimmy Carter, and Bush suffering through such a fate on multiple occasions.

Well, at least he didn't get another comparison to Herbert Hoover. Keep up the awful work George!

P.S. Once your term is over you and Rove can join forces as rap battlers.

Do You Have The Time (Line)?

Surprisingly it looks like the spending bill on the war in Iraq will make it through with the time line in place. True to form Dubya has promised to veto anything that forces him to admit that Iraq is a never ending quagmire.

"President Bush accused congressional Democrats Wednesday of meddling in Iraq war policy and setting a deadline for a U.S. pullout that would have disastrous repercussions for both countries."

Please. Bush has no credibility to accuse anyone of creating a disastrous situation in Iraq. That responsibility lies solely with him. Congress has a responsibility to monitor and distribute tax payer money, they are not meddling, they are doing what they should have done years ago. No one in their right mind would keep paying for a plumber if he couldn't fix a leak, so why should tax payers keep paying for a foreign civil war that has destroyed America's military, popularity in the world, and made us less safe at home? Democrats (and a few republicans) have insisted that if Bush wants the money he is going to have to accept compromise and a time line. This of course prompted Bush's usual "they don't support the troops" rally cry which seems to finally be falling on deaf ears.

"Why doesn't he get real with what's going on with the world?" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said after Bush's speech. "We're not holding up funding in Iraq and he knows that. Why doesn't he deal with the real issues facing the American people?"

Clearly he doesn't deal with the real issues facing the American people because that is not whose best interests he is concerned with, he is more concerned with his own. The election of 2006 was a mandate for Democrats. They won by listening to Americans and promised more oversight with regard to the war. Now they are actually living up to that promise, but Bush simply does not want to believe that he is wrong. He is.

There is no question that this war is a disaster and was a huge waste of life and treasure, it's nice to see that Congress finally has the juevos to says enough is enough. There is no way the bill can survive a veto, but at least it is a step in the right direction.

What Would War With Iran Look Like

In short, it would be a disaster. Unfortunately unless the current political climate cools we are quickly heading in that direction. This wouldn’t be the type of conflict we have grown accustomed to over the past two decades. Casualties would be severe, acts of terror would sky rocket, and a draft would be all but certain. A war with Iran wouldn’t just be us against them either, it would quickly escalate into a regional conflict that would no doubt involve Israel, Syria, and possibly Saudi Arabia. It would be a no win situation for the United States. The aftermath of such a conflict would destroy what's left of our credibility in the Middle East for generations, and Osama Bin Laden would be completely justified in the eyes of the Arab world.

Analysts agree that if a conflict with Iran becomes a reality the US and Israel would launch a massive air campaign dwarfing any bombardment in the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars. The first targets would no doubt be nuclear facilities, although US intelligence is terrible on where and or how deep these installations are. No doubt this would lead to huge civilian casualties which would embolden the Iranian population to fight. Iranian defense planners have stated publicly that they have learned from the cases of neighbouring Afghanistan and Iraq. They are acutely aware of the U.S. military’s heavy reliance on aerial strikes and have planned accordingly for just such an attack. And unlike Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran does have a competent Air Force.

Israels conflict with Lebanon last summer was a preview of the type of rocket melees we could expect. This time we wouldn't be talking about Hamas and their home made rockets though, we would be talking about return fire from highly sophisticated Iranian rockets that would not only be raining on Tel Aviv, but also on the Green Zone in Baghdad. It is not out of the question that some of the Israeli return fire rockets could be tipped with tactical nuclear missiles, especially if Israel is on the brink of collapse.

While US forces would most likely not initially invade Iranian territory, Iran would no doubt invade Iraq. The 150,000 US troops scattered across the country would be up against a wall, and an escalation to approximately 500,000 combat troops would be necessary. The problem is that the US does not have that many fit for duty units...so...hello selective service.

If this scenario were to happen it is certain that suicide bombers would find their way to the streets of major American cities. It would be a severe psychological blow to a population that is used to seeing war only through a TV screen, and not as a daily reality.

Oil prices would sky rocket if such a regional conflict were to take place, most likely leading to a global economic crisis. Particularly if oil wells are targeted (which they most certainly will be) the price of a barrel of oil could triple (not to mention the environmental tragedy).

So how realistic is this scenario? Put it this way, we have already dispatched an additional carrier group to the region, the Iranian's have been preparing with war games, and uranium enrichment talks are falling apart. With this latest news regarding the capture of 15 British sailors, I would put the chances of conflict at about 40 / 60......and that is downright terrifying.

HOLY CRAP

Britain's Ministry of Defense confirms to CNN that Iranian naval vessels have seized 15 British Navy personnel on patrol in the Persian Gulf.

--More on this as it develops

Attorney-Gate

The scandal surrounding eight terminated US Attorneys is on its way to becoming one of the biggest political and constitutional showdowns since Watergate. In fact this similarities between this scandal and Watergate are becoming too obvious to ignore (just like the comparison of Iraq to Vietnam).

I hypothesized yesterday that the Bush administration clearly has a lot to hide by refusing to let Rove and Meyers testify under oath. Bush’s statements on the subject not only support that idea, but also raise deeply alarming concerns about what else may be lying under the surface. In reaction to this whole disaster Bush said:

"We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants," Bush said Tuesday. "The initial response by Democrats, unfortunately, shows that some are more interested in scoring political points than in understanding the facts. ...

That’s just it Mr. Bush, Senator Leahy IS trying to understand the facts. Clearly Bush would prefer a secret meeting (since that is how he and Cheney spoke to the 9-11 Commission) but truth is evasive when the only explanation offered is done in a dark room with no windows, no promise to tell the truth, and no record of what was said. But wait, for this administration truth and facts are two completely different things. Here is a little passage from Nixon regarding the refusal of a White House Counsel to testify....tell me if it doesn't sound familiar.

The White House managed to prevent Watergate’s political fallout from affecting the 1972 election. But Nixon had hardly begun his second term when the dam broke. In February 1973, L. Patrick Gray, Nixon’s nominee to succeed the late J. Edgar Hoover as head of the FBI, revealed during his confirmation hearings that he had allowed John W. Dean, a White House legal counsel, to sit in on FBI interviews of Watergate suspects. Nixon refused to allow Dean to testify before the Senate Watergate committee chaired by Sam Ervin (D-N.C.), citing the doctrine of executive privilege. Gray’s nomination was all but dead. “Let him hang there,” John D. Ehrlichman said memorably. “Let him twist slowly, slowly, in the wind.”

The Justice Department released 3,000 documents to Congress in an attempt to show transparency. However, according to Leahy redactions in the documents make them unworkable. "Instead of freely and fully providing relevant documents to the investigating committees, they have only selectively sent documents, after erasing large portions that they do not want to see the light of day," he said. Can anyone say 18 1/2 minutes of missing tape?

Bush claims that it is extraordinary to think that one of his aids could testify under oath and in public. This is simply not true. Click here. This is also not an instance where executive privilege is relevant. National security is not at stake here, although national integrity (or what's left of it) is.

Senator Leahy will get his subpoenas which will no doubt lead to a long and bitter court battle over what executive privilege means, and ultimately it will be a thorough examination on our system of checks and balances. If Rove and Meyers are not forced to testify it will be nothing less than the beginning on an executive monarchy in our country in which the executive branch has the final say on the powers of the legislative. Bush has already been America's scariest nightmare, and our worst President. If he gets his way on this he will have finished off our way of governing completely. If only the founding fathers could see us now, they would probably just head back to England.

In conclusion, there is no doubt in my mind that the administration and some republicans conspired through the justice department to strong arm US Attorneys into prosecuting democrats to shape the outcome of the 2006 Congressional elections. There is also no doubt in my mind that Bush knew about this, and in fact was an active player. So I suppose that Bush has every reason to fight Leahy and the Democrats tooth and nail, because once the public really understands what this whole scandal is about Bush will finally be seen for what he is, a crook. (And I didn't even write anything about the abuses of the patriot act)

(03-22-07 Post Script Courtesy of CNN)

• No e-mails released on firing of U.S. attorneys during a 16-day period

•Investigators interested in period between November 15 and December 2, 2006

• Last e-mail before gap asks whether issue should be raised with the president

Rove and Meyers to Testify

But not under oath, so it really makes no difference. Bush and his gang clearly have a lot to hide......go get em Pat!

YOU GO PAT!!!

"I want testimony under oath. I am sick and tired of getting half-truths on this"

Patrick Leahy from the great state of Vermont did what I have been hoping a Democrat would do since 2001.....he grew a spine. Pat appeared on the Sunday talk show circuit this weekend and went on record to say that he will subpoena Bush’s aids to testify about their role in the growing scandal surrounding the firing of eight US attorneys. It is widely believed that should that happen Bush will evoke executive privilege to keep them from testifying. But when asked about the possibility of a compromise for private one on one meetings with former Bush attorney and Supreme Court nominee Harriet Meyers and presidential adviser Karl Rove, Leahy responded "I want testimony under oath. I am sick and tired of getting half-truths on this."

Pat, I couldn't agree with you more.

We need to know what is going on here. Gonzales claimed that the terminated attorneys were all fired for performance reasons, but members of Congress soon learned that all eight had received good performance reviews. Gonzales also said that the White House wasn’t involved. Then we found out they were, but that it was Harriet Meyers idea and hers alone. That is until we heard about a few emails that Karl Rove had written himself about the subject. As if it couldn’t get any worse, yesterday we learned from Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein that one of those attorneys who was fired just happened to be involved in the investigation of a close friend of republican Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who as you may recall pleaded guilty to accepting over two million dollars in bribes and is now serving an eight year sentence.

COME ON!!!! How many more trips around the damage control circle are we going to be subjected to before the administration and the Justice Department admit to this for what it is....a politically motivated attack on critics of the administration!!!! Did we not learn anything from the Scooter Libby trial? Speaking of which, could it be that Cheney had a role in this? If so certainly there would be some serious calls for his resignation as well.

Last week I called on Gonzales to testify under oath. There is no question that he must do that now, but that is no longer enough. Gonzales must resign or be fired. As for Rove and Meyers, I will reserve judgment until such time as they testify, I doubt they will, but let's just say I'm less than confident that they would be absolved from any wrong doing if they do.

To put it very bluntly, Gonzales may serve at the pleasure of the President, but the President serves at the pleasure of the people. I hope that Bush has finally learned the lesson of Rumsfeld and Brown, that loyalty to the President does not equal satisfaction with the American public.

Has Bush’s Day of Reckoning Finally Arrived?

It has been yet another bad week for the Bush administration. Libby’s conviction, public hearings on the disgraceful treatment of wounded soldiers at Walter Reed, and revelations of strong arming and terminating US attorneys for political purposes. Is anyone really surprised by all of this? I have been saying for years that Bush’s day of reckoning would come, and when it did it would be bad....really bad.

So now what?

Scooter Libby’s trial painted an alarming picture of a White House who will stop at nothing to discredit and destroy anyone who acts in opposition to the (Vice) President’s policies. In the wake of these disclosures the public must demand full disclosure on exactly what happened behind the scene at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in the lead up to the war. I am not calling for yet another presidentially appointed “independent” counsel, I am talking about subpoena’s from Congress, and public hearings under oath. The Democrats promised to do this during the election, now it is time for them to keep their promise.

Walter Reed is a tragic, and utterly disgraceful example of how much Bush, who despite his rhetoric, really couldn't care less about the troops. In public Bush accuses Democrats of not supporting them, yet privately he cuts the budget for veterans benefits. Regardless, everyone shares some of the blame here, not just Republicans. For all of their hawkish talk about their admiration of our service men, where were John McCain and John Murtha (just to name a few) through all of this? If they were truly as involved as they claim to be in the welfare of our soldiers shouldn't they have been concerned about conditions at our country's “premier” veterans hospital long ago? This problem needs to be remedied immediately in a bipartisan manner, and with the appropriate funding.

Gonzales’ justice department has been an institution of deplorable jurisprudence which rarely if ever challenges Bush’s policies. Waterboarding, Guantanamo Bay, and now the ousting of 8 US Attorneys are just the tip of the iceberg for how far Gonzales is willing to go to help Bush, and presumably secure himself a seat on the Supreme Court. Gonzales must testify at the very least about any political pressure that was applied to those attorneys who were released during the election, and he must do so under oath.

So will any of these things ever actually happen? It’s in Pelosi’s court right now. But I suggest that she and the Democrats act now, and work on growing one of these.