Tuesday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* CNN: “Former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on Tuesday called on President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to immediately step down in the wake of a mass crackdown on the opposition this week. Protesters in Karachi meanwhile reportedly opened fire on two police stations in protest as Bhutto remained under house arrest in Lahore, according to The Associated Press. ‘It’s time for him to leave,’ said Bhutto in a phone interview with CNN Tuesday morning, as Pakistani riot police arrested her supporters.”

* After refusing to say whether he’d support the eventual Democratic nominee, John Edwards has clarified his position: “I fully expect to support the Democratic nominee, and I fully expect to be the Democratic nominee.” For those paying close attention, the other candidates have said they “will” support the nominee; Edwards has now said he “expects” to support the nominee. This one’s not quite over yet.

* I’d like to think this might move us a little further away from the brink: “Iran has met a key demand of the U.N. nuclear agency, handing over long-sought blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday. Iran’s decision to release the documents, which were seen by U.N. inspectors two years ago, was seen as a concession designed to head off the threat of new U.N. sanctions.”

* I’d also like to think this is a good start to Michael Mukasey’s AG tenure: “The Justice Department has reopened a long-dormant inquiry into the government’s warrantless wiretapping program, a major policy shift only days into the tenure of new Attorney General Michael Mukasey. The investigation by the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility was shut down after the previous attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, refused to grant security clearances to investigators.” (I’ll have more on this tomorrow.)

* All the key administration players, including Gen. Petraeus to Amb. Crocker, have described the “Joint Campaign Plan” as the key military and diplomatic strategy to stabilize Iraq. Members of Congress have been asking for a copy of the plan for several months. The Bush gang refuses to make a copy available, even after excerpts were leaked to the WaPo and the NYT.

* If you stop by Capitol Hill, and see congressional Republicans sweating, it’s because the Abramoff probe is still ongoing.

* This could be a major policy sea-change: “An independent panel is considering reducing the sentences of inmates incarcerated in federal prisons for crack cocaine offenses, which would make thousands of people immediately eligible to be freed. The U.S. Sentencing Commission, which sets guidelines for federal prison sentences, established more lenient guidelines this spring for future crack cocaine offenders. The panel is scheduled to consider today a proposal to make the new guidelines retroactive. Should the panel adopt the new policy, the sentences of 19,500 inmates would be reduced by an average of 27 months.”

* It’s probably best not to count on Bob Novak’s prognostication skills. He’s been off quite a bit lately.

* For quite a while now, the Wall Street Journal has been the only major newspaper with content hidden behind a pay-wall. Rupert Murdoch apparently plans to set the paper free: “Murdoch said that instead of boasting 1 million subscribers, a free version of the online newspaper could draw ’10 million to 15 million’ readers from ‘every corner of the earth…. We are studying it and we expect to make [the site] free.'”

* Remember the Iowa waitress who claims Clinton didn’t give her a tip? That story hasn’t quite gone away yet, either.

* When the GOP congressional majority disappears, so too does the protection for the tobacco industry: “On Tuesday, a Senate committee plans to release documents that reveal the tobacco industry knew as early as 1975 that ‘light’ cigarettes tend to pass as much if not more tar into smokers’ lungs as regular smokes, and government tests on these cigarettes were inaccurate. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who will chair a Senate Commerce panel hearing, plans to not only criticize the tobacco industry for its decades-long knowledge that light cigarette smokers inhale just as much tar and nicotine — he will show that the Federal Trade Commission used faulty methods in measuring delivery of toxins.”

* Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D) recent voting record is really not going over well among California Democrats.

* And finally, I’m pleased to report that Bush’s media operation is branching out. This week, the president is sitting down for two fairly lengthy television interviews — one with Fox News Channel, and the other with the Fox Business Channel.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

Former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on Tuesday called on President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to immediately step down in the wake of a mass crackdown on the opposition this week.

I guess we really can’t count on Pervy being happy the Minister is licking the crackdown. But at least Lahore is on fire. That should make him happy.

  • ‘It’s time for him to leave,’ said Bhutto

    That’s what an honest politicians says once he/she’s already licked a corrupt crackdown.

  • After refusing to say whether he’d support the eventual Democratic nominee, John Edwards has clarified his position: “I fully expect to support the Democratic nominee, and I fully expect to be the Democratic nominee.” For those paying close attention, the other candidates have said they “will” support the nominee; Edwards has now said he “expects” to support the nominee. This one’s not quite over yet.

    This is all kind of prissy. Can’t we all just accept that Bush is terrible, and that after him, any one of the top Dem candidates is going to be able to do a lot to set things straight?

  • Glenn Greenwald is quite a reasonable fellow:

    Ron Paul distortions and smears

    […]

    This raises a broader point. It has become fashionable among certain commentators to hurl insults at Ron Paul such as “huge weirdo,” “fruitcake,” and the like. Interestingly, the same thing was done to another anti-war medical doctor/politician, Howard Dean, back in 2003, as Charles Krauthammer infamously pronounced with regard to Dean that “it’s time to check on thorazine supplies.” Krauthammer subsequently said that “[i]t looks as if Al Gore has gone off his lithium again.”

    For a long time now, I’ve heard a lot of people ask: “where are the principled conservatives?” — meaning those on the Right who are willing to oppose the constitutional transgressions and abuses of the Bush administration without regard to party loyalty. A “principled conservative” isn’t someone who agrees with liberals on most issues; that would make them a “principled liberal.” A “principled conservative” is someone who aggressively objects to the radicalism of the neocons and the Bush/Cheney assault on our constitution and embraces a conservative political ideology. That’s what Ron Paul is, and it’s hardly a surprise that he holds many views anathema to most liberals. That hardly makes him a “fruitcake.”

    […]

  • CB wrote:

    Remember the Iowa waitress who claims Clinton didn’t give her a tip? That story hasn’t quite gone away yet, either.

    Sometimes humble people get bribed by very bad people, and a lot of money matters to them. Check out the HuffPo interview and some points on it. The HuffPo claims that Hill’s campaign left an additional $20 at the restaurant after the story came out, but Esterday and the other waitresses are still claiming not to have got a tip. And Esterday ends the interview with a bunch of anti-Hill Clinton stuff. It’s odd. She could have been like that in her initial statement about all this, but she wasn’t.

  • Bush is branching out? Wow—a trip to the Foxchurian restauant, where he can get the combo meal—one menu item from column A, and one from column B.

    It’s being reported that Bhutto is now “unable to work with Musharraf under any circumstances.” I wonder—how long until she becomes a “terrorist vicitm?” And if Musharraf starts killing his enemies, then someone should ask Bush what the diference is between ol’ Perv—and Saddam.

    Abramoff—it’s the gift that just keeps on giving—and giving—and giving. It’s like a freaking plague—and only neocons can contract the disease.

    And—if Congress continues to fund Mr. Bush’s Folly when they can’t even get their mitts on a copy of the Joint Campaign Plan, then I must simply ask: Has Congress been smoking a few too many “joints?”

  • So sick of the supposedly liberal wing of the web running the “Edwards won’t support Hilary” and “Hilary didn’t leave a tip” stories for all their worth.

    The left knows these are non-issues. Why do we keep imitating the right??? It just keeps these inane stories going on and on… I’m sick of this whole campaign and the voting ain’t even started.

  • “Remember the Iowa waitress who claims Clinton didn’t give her a tip? That story hasn’t quite gone away yet, either.”

    So okay, I get it. Clinton gets 70 million or so in campaign contributions, but she’s so cheap she’ll try to save 15 bucks on a tip if she can get away with it. Sure, that makes a hell of a lot of sense. She’s too stupid to understand how that would piss off the help and might leak out. Sure.

    So now we have Clinton’s cleavage, Clinton’s cackle, Clinton’s hand clapping, Clinton’s planted questions and Clinton’s welching on a tip.

    Usually I switch channels or turn the tv off in disgust when this kind of crap comes on, but the planted question caper got me intrigued. “They gotta play back what her position on global warming is,” I said. “Finally, something of substance.” Nope, they didn’t. They only played back the part where she explained that young people often ask about global warming.

    I thought I had them checkmated into covering issues. Nope.

    Hillary is not my number one choice, but I just can’t sit still while the media is throwing her to the wolves because they’re bored with the Democratic campaign and need to drum up some excitement to make it more competitive.

    How about the issues, for chris sakes. You’d think this campaign was about selecting People Magazine’s person of the year or something.

  • “I thought I had them checkmated into covering issues. Nope.”

    ROTFLOL!… I guess if it were that easy, everybody would be doing it.

  • JKap, what’s the matter? Are you going to argue that people never get bribed or that Republicans are too nice to do it or that people of humble means are not more susceptible to bribes than are rich people, or what? A lot of people are susceptible to threats, too. Funny, that story someone told her about, about how it was reported she committed suicide.

    Pervy is probably euphoric over the fireworks he has cause for Lahore- the screwy knave.

    I am really sympathetic to Bhutto’s plight. CB, if you ever see her about Washington, you’ll give Bhutto a sympathetic caress across the cheek for me, won’t you?

  • Steve wrote:

    It’s being reported that Bhutto is now “unable to work with Musharraf under any circumstances.” I wonder—how long until she becomes a “terrorist vicitm?” And if Musharraf starts killing his enemies, then someone should ask Bush what the diference is between ol’ Perv—and Saddam.

    Steve, hilarious!!!

    I love the double-entendre. Keep it up. *Heh!*

  • A lot of people are rushing to get out of Lahore right now, but some people like to be where it’s hot, and they’ll be heading straight for where the action is. Wherever there’s going to be a licking, they’ll keep on ticking.

  • Feinstein deserves censure. As does Schumer. I can understand political expediency in some circumstances, but bucking your party and voting for a man who cannot condemn waterboarding as torture, that goes beyond expediency into Alsheimers. Has she forgotten what this country is supposed to stand for?

  • After refusing to say whether he’d support the eventual Democratic nominee, John Edwards has clarified his position: “I fully expect to support the Democratic nominee, and I fully expect to be the Democratic nominee.”

    I am pretty firmly convinced at this point that Edwards is angling to poach votes from Obama by casting himself as the replacement anti-Hillary. Clinton haters of course don’t want to hear anything about group hugs if she wins the nomination. They want to know where is the outrage that Hillary Clinton is breathing their air.

  • They’re not showing a lot of pictures of Lahore’s action on TV. It must be pretty graphic, and not suitable for a younger audience.

    I’m sure there are a lot of relief workers and freedom fighters who would only want to get in and out of Lahore as quickly as possible. But not me. If I was involved with Lahore, I’d be getting in there for the long-haul.

    Good luck, Lahore!

  • Between Feinstein’s vote for Leslie Southwick – a judge Reagan could be proud of – her vote for Mukasey and her announced intention to vote for the revised FISA bill that contains immunity for the telecoms, I’m hard-pressed to tell the difference between her and, say, Joe Lieberman. She should be censured – times 3. At least.
    *****
    As near as I can tell, the only difference between Musharraf and Saddam is that Pervy is shorter, browner and has the keys to actual nuclear weapons. Hmmm. Never fear, though – democracy’s just “on hold” in Pakistan. Sure, okay. Whatever.
    ****
    I’m amazed that the media that has passed on parsing anything Bush has said in 8 years has developed a new fondness for it, but only where Democrats are concerned. Yes, John Edwards fully expects to support the Democratic nominee – maybe that means just what it says.
    ****
    I’m officially over the Waitress Who Didn’t Get Tipped. One day, she’s thrilled to have gotten Hillary’s autograph and gushing about how she’ll never forget meeting and talking with her – now she’s “never going to vote for her.” Maybe she’s just disappointed that she’s still just a waitress making less than $20,000 a year and isn’t being offered book and movie deals for her “story.” Whatever.
    ****
    How exciting! The WSJ wall will come down right around the same time it looks – and reads – like every other tabloid piece of trash. Woo-freakin’-hoo…
    ****
    Maybe Ron Paul doesn’t deserve to be called a fruitcake or a nutjob or a whacko. I suppose, if we have to, we can just say that he is “a person of principle whose ideas and plans for the country are terrible.” He may not be crazy, but he is attracting an awful lot of supporters who seem way out of the mainstream – way out.

  • My pile of rose colored glasses gets a little higher every day. The latest pair tossed on the heap have Feinstein’s name on them and I find myself wondering once again what took so long. I read a nice evaluation by commenter Che Pasa at Glen Greenwald’s site the other day.

    I think it went something like this: Feinstein has somehow locked herself into much of the public mind as the strong, healing mother figure picking up the pieces and providing a center as a city mourned a murdered mayor and city supervisor. And that’s where many folk’s analysis of Feinstein started and stopped. I know that I’ve sort of laid that veneer over her and I just haven’t questioned or examined that perception on my part. There’s been so many assholes coming out of the woodwork. Did I have to start deconstructing someone I thought I could trust, (for not particularly clear reasons). And the answer, of course, is yes. And right now.

    The Mukasey thing pulled me up short. Maybe I didn’t know this mother figure so well. And the telecom thing suddenly created some clarity. I don’t know this person at all and I’ve never questioned her votes, loyalties or motivations. And it’s not only late in the game to do so, it’s really past time as I voted for her. I’m not alone. She breezed back in. But I also don’t think I’m alone in having to shade my eyes from the bright light of newly acquired wisdom.

    For all the good it will do, I’ve written Feinstein twice in the last week. Just to let her know that she wasn’t flying under my radar any more. For me, it all reinforces the notion that there’s Democrats and there’s DINO’s and taking anything at face value is a mistake. Discovering misplaced trust is a sad revelation but continuing to accept the lie is worse. Really makes me respect Boxer all the more.

  • This may not be “on topic” here, but if you’d like to hear in their own words why we in the WGA don’t trust the studio heads to deal with us honestly on the issues of the s trike, you can see everything you need to know about why there’s a strike here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a37uqd5vTw

  • You forget that Feinstein doesn’t give a shit. She’s comfortable, an insider in the beltway able to get those lucrative defense contracts for her husband by doing what Bush wants her to do. There’s no reason to believe she didn’t lie to her constituents to get elected and now says screw ‘em because after this term I’ll be eighty so I’m gonna’ get all I can before I retire. She doesn’t give a damn about the democratic party only about herself. Censure won’t phase her one bit and she will still vote for amnesty for telecoms just like Jay Rockefeller whose been accepting big bribes..er..I mean campaign donations for over a year now to get these telecoms amnesty and make Bush’s activities legal.

    Censure doesn’t even embarrass her at this point…she needs to be recalled by California voters. Make no mistake…she is carrying out the republican agenda. She needs to be investigated by the senate ethics committee but we all know they don’t ever do anything. She knows there’s nothing anyone can do about her at this point. She lied to get elected and continues to lie by pretending to be a democrat.

  • “I’d like to think this might move us a little further away from the brink: ‘Iran has met a key demand of the U.N. nuclear agency, handing over long-sought blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday. Iran’s decision to release the documents, which were seen by U.N. inspectors two years ago, was seen as a concession designed to head off the threat of new U.N. sanctions.'”

    Not to sound pessimistic, but caving in to the UN didn’t help Saddam in 2003.

    I’m sure Bush will be issuing a demand that Ahmadinejad and his cabinet leave Iran within 48 hours any day now.

  • Is there any chance the unhealthy obsession with Hilary’s tipping, cleavage, snorting gufaw, and other trivia stem from her petulant habit of needing to control the message to the point where nothing newsworthy is said or done?

    Some readers of this column have suggested the press shouldn’t bother showing up for white house press conferences because no hard questions get asked. The same principle would apply here except Hilary is forced by the campaign to mingle with lowly humans rather than fester in the bubble of the oval office.

    What happens when this little inconvenience is no longer required of her?
    Will she then befriend the press that she has considered her opposition; the enemy?
    Or….

  • I actually think I would like to see, and could vote for, Arnold if he ran against Feinstein in 2012 (assuming she runs again).

  • Time for California to take out the trash in the next primary. Feinstein is an embarrassment to us all.

  • bubba,

    I actually think I would like to see, and could vote for, Arnold if he ran against Feinstein in 2012 (assuming she runs again).

    Arnold would never win the GOP primary in California. The California GOP is chock full of frothing idiots.

  • Comments are closed.