Today’s edition of quick hits.
* For the first time in four years, the U.S. economy lost jobs last month: “The job numbers for August were released this morning, and they show that the economy actually lost 4,000 jobs last month. It’s the first time in four years that the economy has actually lost jobs in a month, and that wasn’t the only bad news. The 92,000 jobs the economy supposedly gained in July? The Labor Department has just revised that number down to 68,000. And the 126,000 jobs the economy was thought to have added in June? Now the Labor Department says the real number was just 69,000. The biggest losers: August saw the loss of 46,000 manufacturing jobs and 22,000 construction jobs.”
* Wall Street was not pleased with the employment numbers, dropping nearly 250 points: “Wall Street had been awaiting the report all week as it sought to determine how well the economy was holding up under the weight of a faltering housing market, a rise in mortgage defaults and tightening availability of credit. While the report is backward looking, investors regard it as an important proxy of the economy’s overall health.”
* Fred Thompson believes “we better figure out a way” to combat al Qaeda. Not that he necessarily knows how, of course, only that “we better figure out a way.” If you like Bush, you’re gonna love Thompson.
* More on yesterday’s encouraging court ruling on National Security Letters: “The secrecy provisions are ‘the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values,’ Marrero wrote. His strongly worded 103-page opinion amounted to a rebuke of both the administration and Congress, which had revised the act in 2005 to take into account an earlier ruling by the judge on the same topic.”
* Over the weekend, a McClatchy piece on combat casualties in Iraq sparked quite a bit of criticism, leading McClatchy to delve into detail supporting its piece. It’s a refreshing approach for a media outlet to respond to criticism this way.
* Tom Edsall has a good piece on leading members of the Democratic foreign policy establishment (from Brookings, Council on Foreign Relations, Center for Strategic and International Studies, etc.). Those who opposed the war from the outset have signed up with Obama; the rest are aligned with Clinton.
* There’s hope for congressional Dems yet: “Senior House Democrats called on the Bush administration yesterday to delay a planned Oct. 1 expansion of the use of powerful satellite and aircraft spy technology by local and federal law enforcement agencies, challenging the plan’s legality and charging that the administration is failing to safeguard the privacy of Americans. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and two Democratic subcommittee chairmen jointly asked the Department of Homeland Security to provide the legal framework for the domestic use of classified and military spy satellites, and to allow Congress to review privacy and civil liberties protections.”
* AP: “Congressional auditors gave a stinging assessment of the Homeland Security Department’s progress and said the department could not take credit for the fact that there has not been another terrorist attack on American soil since Sept. 11, 2001. The Government Accountability Office identified 171 performance expectations and found the department achieved fewer than half since it formed four years ago in the government’s largest reorganization. Auditors said the country is safer than it was on 9/11, but the department has poorly managed its mission.”
* NOAA: “The Arctic ice cap is melting faster than scientists had expected and will shrink 40 percent by 2050 in most regions, with grim consequences for polar bears, walruses and other marine animals.”
* Conservatives don’t want Petraeus’ assessment being referred to as the “Bush report.” Odd bunch, those war supporters.
* Judith Miller and the Manhattan Institute deserve one another.
* If you support the war in Iraq, you’re “principled.” Good to know.
* And finally, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten was asked by PBS’s Jim Lehrer if Alberto Gonzales’ resignation was in anyway similar to Karl Rove’s departure. “No,” Bolten said. “This was completely an independent decision by Karl about the time that he wanted to leave…. And that’s a circumstance in which the timing was not dictated by any sort of outside forces. That was completely up to Karl.” It sounds like Gonzales’ resignation wasn’t exactly voluntary.
Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.