Friday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* In the face of a presidential veto threat over defense appropriations, House Dems are taking Bush on over raises for the troops:”Mr. President, you have consistently called on Congress and the American people to support our troops. Considering the sacrifices that our military families make, the Democratic proposal to provide the troops with the pay raise they deserve and an increase in benefits for the spouses they may leave behind is one small way that we can support our troops. When it comes to supporting our troops, our actions must match our words.”

* In a surprise turnaround, former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman “abruptly reversed herself Friday and agreed to testify before Congress on her agency’s response to the environmental fallout of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Two days ago, Whitman’s lawyer Joel Kobert had denied a request from a House panel chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., for his client to testify, noting she was named in two lawsuits related to the issue. But today, Whitman herself told Nadler in a hand-delivered letter that she was willing to participate in a hearing ‘if you insist.'”

* No matter what you think of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Chris Bowers has an interesting analysis of the senator and recent national polls.

* Frank Bowman, a law professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia, makes a persuasive case that Congress “could and should impeach Alberto Gonzales.” There are a variety of reasons, of course, but Bowman argues the David Iglesias firing alone is enough to tip the scales.

* For all the complaining that I do about how conservatives enjoy consequence-free standards on broadcast media, apparently I’m mistaken — right-wing activist Melanie Morgan has been banned by PBS. Said Linda Winslow, executive producer of NewsHouse, “Since the program is produced live, we can’t do much to eliminate rude guests from your television screen once the segment has begun; what we can do is guarantee you will never see that person on our program again.” To see what prompted the decision, here’s Part 1 of the clip, and here’s Part 2.

* Donald Rumsfeld is thinking about establishing “a new foundation” to “remain engaged in public policy issues” and offer “teaching and research fellowships for graduate and post-graduate students.” The goal, apparently, is to “promote continued U.S. engagement in world affairs in furtherance of U.S. security interests.” This has “bad idea” written all over it.

* Sorry for the lack of analysis on the new immigration measure; it’s just not really my issue. I’ve decided to outsource my commentary to Kevin Drum, whose post on the subject I strongly endorse.

* The Congressional Food Stamp Challenge seems like a worthwhile project.

* ABC News: “The White House appointee in charge of the Education Department’s troubled financial aid office took home $250,000 in bonuses, leading Democratic lawmakers to question what she did to deserve such lavish rewards. ‘Given that the student loan programs became increasingly rife with conflicts of interest and unethical practices’ during the four years Theresa Shaw served as chief operating officer of the Federal Student Aid office, ‘it is questionable whether these bonuses were justified,’ House Education Committee Chairman George Miller, D.-Calif., told ABC News.”

* The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is spending up to $4 million to publicize a 200th anniversary celebration while the agency has cut $700,000 from hurricane research. This, too, has “bad idea” written all over it.

* Krugman: “What we need to realize is that the infamous ‘Bush bubble,’ the administration’s no-reality zone, extends a long way beyond the White House. Millions of Americans believe that patriotic torturers are keeping us safe, that there’s a vast Islamic axis of evil, that victory in Iraq is just around the corner, that Bush appointees are doing a heckuva job — and that news reports contradicting these beliefs reflect liberal media bias. And the Republican nomination will go either to someone who shares these beliefs, and would therefore run the country the same way Mr. Bush has, or to a very, very good liar.”

* AP: “A bipartisan group of senators is pushing legislation that would force the CIA to release an inspector general’s report on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The CIA has spent more than 20 months weighing requests under the Freedom of Information Act for its internal investigation of the attacks but has yet to release any portion of it. The agency is the only federal office involved in counterterrorism operations that has not made at least a version of its internal 9/11 investigation public.”

* And finally, in an apparent attempt to drive me insane, CNBC chief Washington correspondent and Wall Street Journal national political editor John Harwood, comparing John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, claimed, “Rudy Giuliani also has a bit of a claim to combat in a different way, because he was on the ground in 9/11.”

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

I thought Rumsfeld was going to replace Wolfowitz at the World Bank.

/humor

  • Gosh. The plane that went nose-first into that Pennsylvania field flew over our house in the process of turning around. My son was outside; he was three-and-a-half years old at the time. Does Harwood suggest that my son has a combat claim? He wants his Presidential Medal of Freedom.

    *turns off the snark to prevent Dr. Benen’s head from exploding….

  • Does Harwood’s comment mean that I, as a New Yorker, can claim to have seen combat because I, too, was on the ground on 9/11?

  • “…the infamous ‘Bush bubble,’ the administration’s no-reality zone, extends a long way beyond the White House. ” — Krugman

    Amazing how effective a well-orchestrated propaganda campaign can be when you have the commander guy loading the catapult and his minions leading the charge, crying “danger, danger!”

  • Thanks for the link to the MyDD story. It reminded me why I no longer waste my time there and at Kos. It’s like reading the ramblings of a bunch of children. Like her or not, Hillary is, next to Bill, the single most recognizable Democrat in politics. And it seems that the front pagers of two “A-list” left wing sites spend virtually all their time attacking her. It would be a breath of fresh air if they wouldn’t spend their time attacking Hillary, and instead focused on why their candidate is the better choice. Of course, they might be doing just that and I wouldn’t know since I haven’t been to either of those sites in quite some time.

    I don’t agree with Hillary on everything. Then again I’m not sure there is a politician out there that I do. While I haven’t made up my mind yet, I’m leaning towards voting for her in the primary. And then regardless of who it is, I will be voting for whoever the Democratic candidate is in the Presidential election. And I’m not sure I’d read that last sentence from some of those writers.

  • Was Rudi Giuliani “on the ground” or on a mistress on 9/11?

    What pathetic heroes we Americans construct.

  • Chris Bowers has an interesting analysis of the senator and recent national polls.

    He sounds like a leftwing nut. We have them too I guess.

  • Melanie Morgan is a typical wing-nut jerk, and she’s unpleasant, to be sure. But if you’ve spent any time at all watching the circus that is Fox News, her comments on those two video clips seem like an Actor’s Studio love fest by comparison. By those standards I have to assume that Ann Coulter would be cut down by a sniper with a PhD should she dare approach within ten miles of the PBS studios.

  • If PBS shows ann coulter, I will declare that hell has frozen over.

  • Considering the sacrifices that our military families make, the Democratic proposal to provide the troops with the pay raise they deserve and an increase in benefits for the spouses they may leave behind is one small way that we can support our troops.

    It will probably help prevent some of the infidelity the troops keeps worrying about each time their tours get unexpectedly extended, as reported on in the mainstream media a couple times I’ve seen.

    People aren’t perfect and it sounds like the troops consist of a lot of people who are adult enough to know this when they get married- but, doing this will make waiting a little easier for the spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends, so at least some of them can know that their service isn’t costing them a marriage, even if they can’t be sure that nothing would ever make their spouse cheat. And I’m sure will be appreciated a lot by the troops.

    Good move, Dems.

  • Maybe that wasn’t totally clear- I’m just saying the benefits will make it easier for troops loved ones to wait, so that will make the troops feel more secure and less worried about what goes on at home while they’re serving.

  • thanks for mentioning the challenge.

    while i like gravel or paul for president, i think i’m going to vote for clinton just because it will make my father and uncles grind their teeth for four years.

  • As regards Hillry Clinton, among my many political friends, there are two choices with her: active dislike (the overwhelming majority) or grudging acceptance with no enthusiasm (a small minority). I would not say that this is in any way a “representative sample” of anything more than politically-active folks who keep up with the news, but I think she does not generate “excitement” or “enthusiasm,” and this is going to be damn important next year, when we have to get people out to vote in the face of the Right wing/GOP/MSM “Mighty Wurlitzer” disinformation campaign that will be run against her.

    Not to mention that we need to get away from people with the same names as other people who have recently been President of the United States, because Constitutional Republics cannot survive aristocratic dynasties.

  • “In his monologue [Wednesday night] Letterman quipped, “Here’s a story we’re working on now. Apparently, there are rumors coming out of Washington that Vice President Dick Cheney, when he was the CEO of Halliburton, used to go visit prostitutes. This could explain why one girl was paid two billion dollars. I mean, I was thinking about this and Cheney … I mean, going to a prostitute, that’s … I mean, I can’t believe a good-looking guy like that would ever have to pay for sex, you know what I’m saying?” Source: Wayne Madsen Report

    Can’t wait for the Top Ten List!

  • Ummmmmm… reading the comment about PBS, I am not entirely sure that Winslow said that it was Morgan that was targetted by Winslow (and, having watched the clips, Soltz did also interrupt Morgan, so Winslow’s comments could apply to either or both). Can we get a confirmation that it was Morgan that she was referring to?

  • You mean I was wrong?

    Rummy’s not writing a book titled something like:

    Tiger at the Center of the Storm.

    Shucks.
    28% of America would pony up their pocket change for it.
    I guarantee it….

    It is amazing how quickly one can fall.
    One week you are one of the sexiest men in the country…
    The next week you are just another rumster in a dumpster.

    Fame is such a fickle master…

  • Can we get a confirmation that it was Morgan that she was referring to?

    Good point, CT, it did seem a little ambiguous. I can report that I spoke via email to a couple of insiders today who mentioned that it is Morgan who will not be welcome back.

  • I got the feeling the neither Ms. Morgan nor Mr. Soltz will be invited back. This episode appeared to be an attempt by PBS to present the respective “wings”, and the result, as they put it “…produced more heat than light”. I thought Mr. Soltz was substantially more accurate and less rude, than Ms. Morgan, but I didn’t see PBS make that distinction.

  • “No matter what you think of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Chris Bowers has an interesting analysis of the senator and recent national polls.”

    Awe christ’o’mighty, Chris! Again with the cell phones? Tell it to
    President Kerry, why don’t you.

  • “Rudy Giuliani also has a bit of a claim to combat in a different way, because he was on the ground in 9/11.”

    Someone tell that fuckwit Hitting the deck /= Being on the ground. What an incredibly assanine thing to even think, much less say where other’s might hear. Better human beings, PLEASE.

    It is also an enormous fucking insult to:
    Every emergency response worker who responded to the attacks.
    Every person who survived the attacks.
    Every person who has actually, you know been in combat.
    Our intelligence.

  • Comments are closed.