Wednesday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* With Larry Craig having blamed The Idaho Statesman for his troubles, the paper offered a response in the form on an editorial today: “During a brief — and largely defiant — public appearance Tuesday afternoon, Sen. Larry Craig apologized for bringing ‘a cloud over Idaho.’ We’re sorry, senator. This cloud does not belong to the people who have elected you for the past 27 years. It’s all yours. It stems from your mistakes.”

* Interesting developments in Pakistan: “Pakistani Gen. Pervez Musharraf and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto were on the verge Wednesday night of forming an improbable alliance that would involve him stepping down from the army but continuing as president and her returning to Pakistan after eight years of exile to try to win back her old job, officials on both sides said. ‘We’re very close to an agreement,’ Bhutto said.”

* Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki sat down with McClatchy Newspapers for an exclusive interview and said he has no intention of resigning and doesn’t expect to be forced out. He noted modest improvements in Iraqi security, and said it was his leadership, not Bush’s surge, that were responsible. Maliki also blamed the administration for the sectarianism that plagues the country, but stopped short of calling for a withdrawal of U.S. troops.

* Bush in New Orleans this morning: “It’s sometimes hard for people to see progress when you live in a community all the time. Laura and I get to come — we don’t live here, we come on occasion. And it’s easy to think about what it was like when we first came here after the hurricane, and what it’s like today. And this town is coming back.” Tim Grieve translates: “You don’t see the progress because you live here. I come here once in a while, so I know better.”

* Speaking of New Orleans, on the second anniversary of the storm hitting the Gulf Coast, Digby has a painful timeline of events from August 29, 2005.

* In light of NRO’s Michael Rubin getting stuck in Greenland due to an airline strike, Kevin Drum hatches a new plan to “finally solve the wingnut pundit problem.”

* I assume I’m the only person here who’s seen every episode of “Little Britain,” a sketch-comedy show on BBC, but last year, the show has this one skit in which a powerful male politician consistently gets caught having gay sex, and consistently has to read implausible public explanations. One, in particular, seems prophetic this week.

* I wish cable-news talking heads realized how foolish they appear when they tell viewers that Obama and Clinton have both claimed Bush’s surge policy is working. Why don’t these people know what they’re talking about? Shouldn’t they stay off the air until they read a newspaper or two?

* Interesting conflict-of-interest controversy in Maine: “[I[f Collins were to lose the election, the wife of the executive editor of a major newspaper in Collins’ home state would be out of a job — which would cause some serious inconvenience for that household.” Hmm.

* House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) said he’s not ruling out Bush impeachment. “Nancy Pelosi has impeachment ‘off the table,’ but that’s off her table, it is not off John Conyers’ table,” he said.

* I haven’t seen the Bourne Supremacy Ultimatum, but I am surprised at all the political discussions it’s prompted.

* A whopping 11% of Americans believe that the U.S. has “already achieved victory” in Iraq. I’m going to hope that these 11% are being clever, and are embracing the ol’ declare-victory-and-go-home tack.

* Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody did an item yesterday on blogger Lane Hudson filing an FEC complaint against Fred Thompson for misusing his exploratory committee. Brody wrote, “Well, now Fred Thompson has an angry girlfriend. His name (don’t go there) is Lane Hudson.” I have no idea what this means, or why Brody would write something like this, but it probably won’t hurt his chances of being on Meet the Press several more times.

* And finally, there’s this wild story from the New York Daily News: “Moon Karl Rove, and you’ll be arrested. When the politico spoke on American University’s campus in April, he was met by a throng of angry Democratic students’ behinds as they dropped trou and blocked Rove’s motorcade. Most of the kids were given 40 hours of community service by the university, but on Friday, the cheeky group was notified that the Secret Service has issued warrants for their arrest. Details are bare, but the students are reportedly being charged with crossing a police line and disorderly conduct.”

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

So I guess if we just visited Iraq every now and then we’d see the progress there, too? What an arrogant, little man Bush is.

  • “A whopping 11% of Americans believe that the U.S. has “already achieved victory” in Iraq.”

    Well, there aren’t any WMD over there now. are there? Saddam is gone and freedom is on the march. Ain’t that what we went over for?

  • …the cheeky group was notified that the Secret Service has issued warrants for their arrest. Details are bare…

    that is one punny writer…

  • Details are BARE??? That’s funny!

    I don’t know about crossing a “police line,” but I would think that mooning is protected “speech” under the First Amendment. But in Bush’s Amerika those students are probably enemy combatants.

  • * House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) said he’s not ruling out Bush impeachment. “Nancy Pelosi has impeachment ‘off the table,’ but that’s off her table, it is not off John Conyers’ table,” he said.

    Oh please please please…

    Reading the article, it looks like Conyers wants to talk tough and is trying to deny the obvious fact that Pelosi is still blocking any and all moves to impeach the criminals.

  • Hmmm…

    A majority of Americans – 54% – believe the United States has not lost the war in Iraq, but there is dramatic disagreement on the question between Democrats and Republicans, a new UPI/Zogby Interactive poll shows. While two in three Democrats (66%) said the war effort has already failed, just 9% of Republicans say the same.

    […]

    When asked which previous United States conflict was most similar to the war in Iraq, more than half (52%) in the online survey said it is most like the Vietnam War. Democrats (78%) were much more likely than Republicans (26%) to make the comparison between the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq.

    Look at that. No wonder the Republicans are having such a hard time getting on the sensible side of the Iraq war debate. Only a few of them can recognize the grim reality of the situation.

    But also look at this:

    Congress faces overwhelming dissatisfaction among Democrats – 95% give Congress negative ratings for handling the war

    You’d think that this might get their attention, but NOOOOO…

    WTF do they think, that we’ll vote for them no matter WHAT they do?

    JESUS CHRIST the Dems suck ass. The most pressing issue of our day is Iraq, and they seem to think they represent the fucking Republicans.

  • And finally, there’s this wild story from the New York Daily News: “Moon Karl Rove, and you’ll be arrested. When the politico spoke on American University’s campus in April, he was met by a throng of angry Democratic students’ behinds as they dropped trou and blocked Rove’s motorcade. Most of the kids were given 40 hours of community service by the university, but on Friday, the cheeky group was notified that the Secret Service has issued warrants for their arrest. Details are bare, but the students are reportedly being charged with crossing a police line and disorderly conduct.”

    There’s got to be a Larry Craig joke in there!

  • A whopping 11% of Americans believe that the U.S. has “already achieved victory” in Iraq. I’m going to hope that these 11% are being clever, and are embracing the ol’ declare-victory-and-go-home tack.

    It’s true. We did achieve victory. It’s the occupation that we lost… and the initial victory wasn’t justified or worth it.

  • Pelosi told Conyers to say that didn’t she? Conyers knows there’s enough evidence to impeach, especially against Cheney but he does not think enough House members want to hassel with it. Too much trouble and takes time away from their “policy making”. So Conyers is just blowing smoke up the collective ass of the participants of his town hall meeting. He’s doing exactly what Pelosi is doing only using different phrases to describe it. What problem does he have in co-sponsoring a resolution which is already in the House to impeach Cheney. He is one of those disinterested House members who really doesn’t want to bother with impeachment or he would sign on to the resolution to impeach Cheney. What these too busy, disinterested democrats want is a nice neat little package with the signatures of all senators agreeing to indict and all house members willing to support, tied up with bows of irrefutable evidence and admissions of guilt that they can then take credit for.

    Sorry Conyers, we don’t buy it. You are exactly like Pelosi on this issue and maybe a little worse for implying that you are willing to take action when in fact you know you won’t. You’ve gotten too old for your job(defending the constitution) and lack the energy to do it properly. You couldn’t even question well during the hearings, half the time I wondered if you knew where you were.
    Should have listened to your wife. She has more evidence than you are willing to hear because then you might have to actually DO something you don’t have the energy for.
    But you and Pelosi know better than your constituents or the voting public. You know what’s ‘best’ for us and that’s the reason you offer when we confront you, forgetting who works for who. It’s part of the Rove axiom…”I work for the people…just not those people.”

    Conyers and Pelosi sittin’ in a tree…spitting on signs that say “impeach”…waiting to give Bush exactly what he needs…until they are joined by Mr. Harry Reid.

    All I can say to Pelosi and Conyers is that after being screwed so many times on that table I wouldn’t put anything on it either. (and yes, it was consensual)

  • I wish cable-news talking heads realized how foolish they appear when they tell viewers that Obama and Clinton have both claimed Bush’s surge policy is working. Why don’t these people know what they’re talking about? Shouldn’t they stay off the air until they read a newspaper or two?

    Oh, I’m pretty convinced they don’t let people who read newspapers become cable news talking heads.

  • I wish cable-news talking heads realized how foolish they appear when they tell viewers that Obama and Clinton have both claimed Bush’s surge policy is working. Why don’t these people know what they’re talking about? Shouldn’t they stay off the air until they read a newspaper or two?

    TV news talking heads, with few exceptions, are almost the worst people in the world.

  • The worst thing about talking heads is how they think they are intelligent, discerning people just because they wear business attire and speak in serious tones of voice at their job.

    They’re like little dogs that think they are big and nasty because they bark loud. You want to say, “Listen, Scrappy Doo, before you I’ve seen many other Scrappy Doos, and they all did the same poses and made the same sounds you do, and here I am, still standing up.”

  • I’ll wager my sexual services that the Tucker Carlson incident didn’t actually happen, and he’s doing his duty to make the Republican party look less gay in the Craig aftermath. It’s the least he can do for them, since he’s probably, to the never-ending consternation of white, male middle-class Republicans, the butt of countless gay jokes cracked by macho black and Hispanic guys every day.

  • Here’s a little something from our “Friend in Christ,” Pat Robertson. If you can stomach it, towards the end, with a 1:07 left, he says “That guy was a homo –as sure as you’re alive.”

  • * Interesting developments in Pakistan: “Pakistani Gen. Pervez Musharraf and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto were on the verge Wednesday night of forming an improbable alliance […]

    I don’t know whyWaPo thinks it’s “improbable”. After the several political reversals Musharaff has suffered recently within Pakistan, it was almost inevitable that, if he wanted to hold on to *any measure* of power, he’d have to give up some of it. The question was which bit of it his ego would prompt him to give up: the uniformed or the civilian. Once he decided on being the civilian leader, co-operation with Bhutto was the best way to prove his bona fides. Still, I bet he’s resentful as all get-out, that Bush gets to be *both* a president and a commander-in-chief and he cannot 🙂
    * In light of NRO’s Michael Rubin getting stuck in Greenland due to an airline strike […]

    I notice that neither the airlines nor travel agents were the least bit helpful in getting him out of the jam; there he is, stuck at the airport, with a long line to the single internet connection… I wonder if he showed them his ID and tried to get preferencial treatment; Denmark may be a small country (Greenland’s size notwithstanding) but Danes are fiercely independent. And, at the moment, US is no more popular there than in the rest of Europe.

    * A whopping 11% of Americans believe that the U.S. has “already achieved victory” in Iraq.

    Well, haven’t we? Sometime in May or June of ’03? When was the Mission Accomplished photo-op?

    “Moon Karl Rove, and you’ll be arrested.

    If it hadn’t been Secret Service who issued the orders for arrest, I’d have said “moon anyone and you’ll be arrested” — for lewd and disorderly conduct in public.

  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    CB… your Brody quote was too flaccid.
    Here is the whole thing blown up to full size:

    So Fred, are you in or not? The answer is obvious but this political dating game has gone on long enough. Thompson is playing this thing like the cool, handsome jock in high school who teased all the girls who wanted to go out with him. You know the guy I’m talking about. The one with the smooth line where he says, “Hey baby, I’ll check you later. Maybe we’ll hang out”.
    Well, now Fred Thompson has an angry girlfriend. His name (don’t go there) is Lane Hudson…

    That reads like a bad case of latent jealousy.

  • Going to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast must be a particularly unpleasant thing for Bush to do. Every single time he’s there, he ends up saying something that is – even for him – colossally inane, tone deaf and insulting. I didn’t think it was possible, but even when I have no expectation that Bush can fake some minimal grasp of reality, he manages to take things to an even lower and more pathetic level.

    I think if I lived in New Orleans, I would have to have a sign that begged the president to stay away, to not come and remind us that on top of the worst disaster in the region, we had to deal with the incompetent and insensitive mismanagement by his administration that rubbed salt in our wounds.

    So, the people of New Orleans don’t see the improvements as well as he and Laura do…might be because they don’t have much occasion to visit the tourist areas that have received the most attention. Might be because they don’t regard living for two years in formaldehyde-soaked trailers as an improvement. Wonder if Bush inquired about all the people who still have not been able to return to the area – imagine they don’t feel quite as cheery as Bush.

    It must do terrible things to one’s psyche to know that everything one touches brings misery to someone.

  • Surprising support for Larry Craig:

    Barney Frank: Craig Shouldn’t Resign

    “What he did, it’s hypocritical, but it’s not an abuse of his office in the sense that he was taking money for corrupt votes,” Frank told the Associated Press.

    “I think people should resign when they have clearly done the job in a way that is dishonest.”

    Frank went on to tell the AP: “It’s one thing to say that someone can’t be trusted to vote without being corrupt, it’s another to say that he can’t be trusted to go to the bathroom by himself.”

    I love that last bit. 🙂 But I do think Frank is off the mark about Craig’s dishonesty. He was dishonest on every vote he made regarding gay rights, and I’d be interested in seeing how much money the xtian right poured into his coffers. More than enough to influence his vote on several issues, I would imagine.

  • “What he did, it’s hypocritical, but it’s not an abuse of his office in the sense that he was taking money for corrupt votes,”

    I would think that gay people have more sympathy for this guy than non-gay people. But it should be tempered by realizing that this guy was a traitor, that he sold out every other gay person’s opportunity to live a normal life every chance he got.

    Also I think it comes down to how wrong you really think prostitution is. I’ll except pure religious opposition since this is a liberal site, and discuss the question as merely this: Do you think prostitution should w/o exception be illegal because of the social detriments / moral iniquity (an absolute stance against prostitution)? Do you think it’s only wrong because as it’s practiced, it really causes a lot of social problems and oppression, and if it was controlled better by the state, it would be ok? Or do you think prositution is pretty much ok no matter what, and it’s unfortunate that sometimes it may lead to social ills, but it’s not really the government’s place to butt in regarding sex? If you take the last position, than as a liberal (who presumably can’t think extra-marital sex is more than a personal/private sin, and presumably isn’t anti-gay) then pretty much all that was wrong with what he did is that he’s a hypocrite (unless you take some kind of pedantic, no-one-should-ever-break-laws-that-are-on-the-books approach to ethics); if you take the first position, what this guy did was bad from a liberal point of view regardless of whether he was a hypocrite, and he should practice his sexuality, whatever it is, in a more socially positive way; and if you take the second position, it can kind of go either way whether you think this guy is a skunk or not for more than just his hypocrisy.

    I think gay people are being short-sighted though if they think this guy is their champion. To make an analogy, this guy is the Jew who is helping the Nazis run the concentration camps; he’s not a fellow of the rest who are being victimized.

  • Barney Frank does have a point, though. And whatever wickedness you may ascribe to Craig, the social/personal, political, and professional consequences to him from having this thing come out in the open are probably punishment enough.

  • Swan, I normally just breeze by most of your posts, because you take waaaaay too long to get to your point. But I’ll bite on this one.

    I have the same position on prostitution as I do on drugs. Legalize it, regulate it, tax it, and use that tax revenue for programs to help those who want to get out of it. Prostitution is normally a victimless crime, by my understanding. Yes, some women AND men are exploited by it, but many others see it as a source of primary or secondary income. Same thing with porn actors/actresses.

    And the only reason there is so much violence surrounding drugs is our nation’s policies regarding them. I think most people who indulge (either occasionally or habitually) would prefer to get their supply from the local pharmacy than some street dealer.

  • Michael W, @ 22,

    I’m kinda “with” Barney Frank on this one. It has to be sheer hell to be a Repub (Senator representing blood-red state, no less!), stupid, 63, ugly *and* gay. I expect Craig would love to come out of the (Water) Closet, but he would have to give up so much to be able to do that, it must seem impossible. Frank is so much luckier and he knows it, that’s why he can afford to be generous. And he’s right too; the fRightwing is dumping on Craig for all the wrong reasons. Foley was *worse*, for goodness sake — he was on a committee which was supposed to protect children — but there was none of the hoopla attending Craig.

  • Libra, I wouldn’t disagree with you except for the example of Jim Kolbe. He was an openly gay Republican, and had no problem getting reelected. And if I remember correctly, he retired (as opposed to not being reellected) after a long career of public service. And he had a record of fighting hypocrisy and standing up for what was right.

    Would that more of our elected representatives (whether local, state or federal) could be the same way.

  • So, it shows Musharraf will do anything and everything for the sake of be in the president seat. He don’t have any agenda, or nothing do for people. His only desire to be in the resident seat.Until this trend continues, no can safe the Pakistan people.
    AA European Recovery

  • RacerX.@7
    The Dems DO think they represent the GOP and voters have asked them to. This is the short term genius of “triangulation”…
    Triangulation is finding the answer to a problem the majority already supports, then supporting it yourself.
    Leadership is finding the best answer among the options available and convincing the people to support it.
    Leaders lead us somewhere we haven’t been.
    The people stand still when a triangulation hack is standing in the center.

    The people intuitively understand (there’s no conscious awareness involved) that any fool can triangulate and they want to elect LEADERS.

    Clinton lost both houses of Congress for 12 years with this bunk. In 2004, progressive Howard Dean became DNC chair and in 2006, the Democrats won both houses back. Still, a few DLC holdouts in Congress, holding on to old, bad methods by its thumbs, are joining the GOP to make a ruling majority that is right-of-center.

    If Hilary gets elected. Expect 8 more years of thoroughly innocuous, ineffective, meaningless “rule”.

    The GOP won in 1994 because they stood for something. (Though we may not have agreed with it.) Tri-strangulation is deliberate avoidance of taking strong stands. It is a mindless adherence to middle ground.

  • ~

    Wow! Students hangin’ da’ moon? Kudos to them…

    A non-injurious and very mild form of American-style civil disobedience is better than the alternative … torches, clubs and ax handles.

    And it sure beats the hell out of dousing ones self with petrol … and instant bonfire! Silly as it Seem…

    The Olden Golden One

    ~

  • Comments are closed.