Frist!

Aren't you glad you started an open thread?

I agree that Bolton is inmportant, but where have you been on everything else? No comments on France's rejection of the EU treaty? You're doing great work, but as a blog, this page has gone downhill quicly over the past few weeks.

Whew! What a relief. Came here from the TPM Cafe via your sponsoring ad ... how nice to get back to a single-author, un-busy'ed up, normal-HTML-comments blog.

Color me distinctly underwhelmed by that place, but I recognize it's early yet. Still, I'd say that putting eight centrists together is not necessarily eight times more powerful than one centrist writing in his/her own voice.

Thank You Steve for all of this! I feel like I'm witnessing a change in the course of human events, that this will make a difference and a big one. I hope I'm not nuts.

Look at the bullshit media reporting: Zarqawi and Bin Laden, two most wanted men in the USA and this unbelievable media outlet can record small talk between them.

Leave your comments here.

I'd also be interested in hearing some comments on the French rejection of the Constitution. I've been looking around for a good analysis of the whole situation, but it seems like everybody is holding their breath for the Netherlands vote in the coming days.

Has anybody read "Diplomacy" by Kissinger? I just picked it up the other day and have been going back to it in what little free time I have. The writing is excellent. So far I'm still in the discussions on European diplomacy of the 19th century, but it's been fascinating. Anyway, I'd like to hear if there are any major criticisms of it (I haven't found any in a quick search on Google).

Just wanted to express my gratitude as a reader and the gratitude of the many I have referred to TWN to get the ongoing "skinny" on the Bolton Nomination Situation.

You have deflected many of the accolades directed your way onto many of the unidentified you depend upon to do your work. You have also made a point of addressing the MSM and certain elected officials; throwing down the gauntlet at one point, defining a political geography they refuse to acknowledge, etc.

Let me continue in that vein and say to them that more and more of us are reading the work of people like you so that we may better see them and their positions defined.

We read your lines to better read between theirs.

Thanks again.

It's interesting listening to the news on Deep Throat (W. Mark Felt) today. It seems like the Watergate Tapes were the end of innocence about the honesty and integrity of politicians in Washington.

I appreciate Steve reminding us that those are still important chacteristics and his publicly applying those standards to someone that obviously falls short, John Bolton.

And no disassembling!

Or reassembling!

Thanks for leading the charge against Bolton, a man apparently not worthy of represnting the United States in any capacity. Without your efforts I believe that Bolton would be in New York today.

I'd like to say first of all that I appreciate your daily analysis and research into some trying times, and second of all that you're comments on Susan Collins go right to the heart of the matter. It's Olympia Snow we now have to concentrate on getting to tow the moderate line; she's vulnerable with an upcoming election, and I'd like to see more backbone in both of these Senators' views...I mean, chances are, Maine is going to lose its' bases and its' financial office in Limestone anyway, so why should they leave their integrity at the door of this administration for a hot-headed and tunnel visioned UN ambassador? Best regards...

Thank you for posting Sen. Feingold's position on the Bolton nomination. As one who has followed his career since he was first elected to office in the Wisconsin legislature, it is clear this was not an easy decision for him. It carries great weight in light of his commitment to allowing executives to have their own appointees. John Bolton certainly tests that resolve in every respect.

Special thanks for helping move the debate from the person to the principle of executive/ legislative standing. At least 41 senators understand the division of powers set forth in the Constitution.

Deep Throat W. Mark Felt headed the FBI investigation of the Watergate burglary and became a whistleblower when confronted with White House obstruction of his investigation of that administration's criminality.

Let's all hope the War Criminals in the present administration suffer the same fate, someone with conscience, this time disgusted with the blood on their hands.

Let's also hope we have another Daniel Ellsworth in our government to finally once and for all blow the lid off this administration's lying our country into an unnecessary, illegal, and immoral attack on Iraq.

Anything new on coingate today?

Your work has been very much appreciated by me and many others seeking updates on the Bolton nomination. Keep up the good work. You make a big difference.

I'm with George Flatley. I pray daily for a latter-day Daniel Ellsworth to appear and help us out of our national misery.

On a less serious note, am I the only one who is reduced to a giggling three-year-old every time George Bush says the word "duty"? How does he make it sound like that?

Steve, I am so grateful for all your work on Bolton.

Because Mr. Felt will have the opportunity to address the public during the next few days, wouldn't it be nice if he compared the corrupt and secretive Nixon, Cheney, Rumsfeld White House to the even more corrupt and secretive Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld White House?

He could use Watergate to illustrate the perils we currently face. I think it was Sid Blumenthal who wrote, "The dark side of this administration is that they can't stand the light of day."

This quote was in reference to the Bush administration. However, it also describes Nixon and his crew. All Americans could benefit from a refresher course on the dangers of imperial presidencies. I can think of no better instructor than Mark Felt.

Steve, your coverage of the Bolton nomination has been informative, exciting, and, probably, has helped shape events. Sites like this are why I don't bother with the MSM any more. Thank you.

How to Tell the Good Guys From the Bad Guys...

Here's an interesting article from Raw Story, offered as my contribution to the open thread:

http://tinyurl.com/7etv7

In it, the reporter discusses Representative Tom DeLay's reaction to a throwaway one-liner in the latest episode of the 'Law & Order' TV show; in which a cop says “Maybe we should put out an APB for somebody in a Tom DeLay T-shirt,” as he (the cop) is talking about how to track down the bad guy in the episode. Must be nice to get mentioned in a show like that. I think (I'm not sure - I don't actually watch TV anymore...) it means that one has attained the status of cultural icon. Historically, I'm told that a certain amount of good-natured but pointed ribbing has always gone with that state of affairs.

So anyway, how does one respond to something like that if one is a Good Guy; intent on leading our country to its best, and maintaining one's own image?

1.) "Law & huh? Whatever..."

2.) "Hey, good one, guys. Heh-heh."

3.) "Uh, say, I've got some T-shirts left over from my last campaign - can I send you guys some to use in your next episode?"

4.) Get the national leaders of the Republican Party to distribute vitriolic talking points to 'defend' against this incredibly unpatriotic slur - responses designed to slam the show, and place the blame for this insult to Representative DeLay's manhood (or whatever) squarely where it belongs: on Katie Couric, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton. Make sure that the Republican Party speaks with one voice on this matter of grave national import. Also, make it quite clear that humor is not to be tolerated, and do so in a series of carefully orchestrated press conferences across the country.

What would be your response? Representative DeLay chose #4.

So how does one tell the Good Guys from the Bad Guys? Hmmm...

Senator Clinton's response to this tirade? Essentially #3:

"We have said from the beginning that, when all the evidence is in, David would be vindicated. That has come to pass, and Senator Clinton is very happy for David and his family.” (Again, what with not watching TV and all, I'm not entirely sure - but I believe 'David' is a character in the show.)

It's not a party-line thing - being a Good Guy or a Bad Guy. No party has a monopoly on class, or on the lack of it.

There have been questions on this forum as to how I and others, in the absence of a viable third party, divvy up the Republican Party into the theocratic wingnuts who would be our tyrants, and those whose political stance we can generally support - if not whole-heartedly, at least in cautious spirit; and sometimes even with our vote.

I would like to personally thank Representative DeLay for doing his very best to answer these questions. It is a measure of his devotion to the professionalism of his office that he has done so more perfectly and succinctly than I could ever hope to.

Does the Stetson Company still manufacture their hats in this country? If they do, we should all - every one of us - buy a black one, and send it to Representative DeLay. At his home address, please. Thankfully, the address in D.C. is not likely to be good for too much longer... My only problem is that I can't decide whether to send him a size 4 hat, which would fit snugly around his brain - or a size 14, to both reflect his emotional age and contain his ego.

Herewith, my nomination for a white hat:

President Clinton, to his wife: "Women want to know why you stayed with me."

Senator Clinton: "Yes, I've been wondering that myself..."

JF

Charlie Moore

Mimikatz made the suggestion over at The Next Hurrah that the Dems ought to offer the Mainiacs funding for a significant stem cell research center in Maine (thereby offsetting the base) in exchange for a party switch. A rather neat suggestion...

As for the Felt discussion, I was thinking of Ellsburg when the recent Newsweek controversy hit. My take on it is that the source WAS correct, but because of the attention they either changed the report about the Koran or just buried it. A lot of people wanted Isikoff to name his source, arguing that he'd been burned and was therefore no longer bound to confidentality. Me, I think they guy got coerced to go back on his story.

Anyway, I think we could use more Ellsbergs and now Felt encouraging people to stick to their guns on these things. In this case, it didn't much matter--there is so much evidence we've been flushing and dumping and dropping Korans that we don't really need that source. Still.

Iraq war illegal?

From Saturday's San Francisco Chronicle:
http://tinyurl.com/bwr5d

Paredes explained to the military judge, Lt. Cmdr. Bob Klant, that he thought the war was "random, unprovoked illegitimate violence," and that "any soldier who knowingly participates in a war can find no haven in the fact that they were following orders, in the eyes of international law."

While Klant didn't side with Paredes' legal reasoning, he didn't slap nearly as harsh a penalty on the sailor as the Navy had sought. Activists have been buzzing about a statement he made from the bench after allowing testimony from Marjorie Cohn, a law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, and an outspoken war critic.

Cohn testified that U.S. involvement in conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia had no justification under international law, a position Navy prosecutors did not challenge on cross-examination. Afterward, according to published accounts, Klant said, "I think that the government has successfully proved that any service member has reasonable cause to believe that the wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq were illegal." The Navy has not released a trial transcript.

What does it say when remembrance of the enormities of Watergate makes me wish things were still as relatively easy? Five years into the most dangerous, duplicitous administration this country has ever seen, and we have no Deep Throat and no Daniel Ellsberg in sight.

Worse, we have no 1970s-era NYTimes and Washington Post. Given the supine--if not completely bent over--posture of the corporate media today, I have to wonder if that kind of reporting would find space in newspapers that specialize in churning out the false equivalencies of "balance."

The story above (should have had quotation marks: those paragraphs were taken from the Chron story!)
is about a sailor who was given no jail time for refusing orders....and a sympathetic judge.

I ADORE that the Deep Throat story is coming out now. Shows how far we've slipped in journalistic standards, but also shows that one individual, properly placed and with the right "strategery", can undo a whole corrupt administration. Nostalgia, or cautionary tale? And what's with Woodward & Bernstein being strangely behind the curve on the release of the article? Did they really not know? Especially when one of them writes for the mag himself, as the article mentions? Curious, no?

Woodward and Bernstein certainly knew about the VF article, but if you read the article, it's still got wiggle room based on Felt's age and deteriorating condition. Woodward and Bernstein, in abiding by their pledge, couldn't acknowledge its accuracy until Felt himself issued the confirmation.

Steve,

Stay on the high road

Civil discourse, what a novel concept!

I doubt that I will impress you or any of the regular posters on this blog but I would like to extend my thanks for the ongoing education that I am receiving. The depth of knowledge and understanding that some of you display is a amazing. Keep it up for the benefit of this willing student.

In a recent interview of James Bamford author of "A Pretext for War" he says the following:

One CIA analyst from the Iraq Nonproliferation section told me that his boss once called his office together (about 50 people) and said, "You know what – if Bush wants to go to war, it's your job to give him a reason to do so." The former analyst added, "And I said, 'All right, it's time, it's time to go… And I just remember saying, 'This is something that the American public, if they ever knew, they would be outraged.'"

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/zeese1.html

James Bamford specializes in writing about intelligence matters and has a great many close contacts within the intelligence community, so the above account is a lock as to its veracity. Bamford's "A Pretext for War" lays out clearly that our county was Lied into an unnecessary, illegal, and immoral war in Iraq. The interview linked to above also has other statements that make the blood boil against our War Criminal Executive.

Interesting new tidbit from NYT:

[b]U.S. firms said to be named in withheld Bolton documents[/b]
06/01/05
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/01/news/bolton.php

Some of the information that the White House has refused to provide to Congress for its review of the nomination of John Bolton includes the names of American companies mentioned in intelligence reports on commerce with China and other countries covered by export restrictions, say government officials who have been briefed on the documents.

It had previously been reported only that the White House was refusing to hand over the names of 19 American persons mentioned in 10 intelligence reports by the National Security Agency.

The fact that the documents also included the names of American companies, and that the subject had to do with possible violations of American export restrictions, provides a new clue as to why the White House might be rebuffing the congressional requests.

The names of the Americans and the companies remain highly classified, but they were provided to Bolton by the National Security Agency in response to special requests he made as under secretary of state for arms control. The Democrats who forced the postponement last week of a vote on Bolton's nomination as ambassador to the United Nations argued that the Senate should insist on access to the same information that was provided to Bolton.
>>>>>>Snip

Okay Bolton is going to be appointed...sad but true...So Steve, my question is this--how long do you think it will be before Bolton does something utterly stupid or embarasing? I'm talking about one of those things the Limbaugh brigade can't blame the so-called "liberal media"

oops, I see there's another Charles here. I'm CharlesJ--been out the loop for a long while but i'm back for a minute.

Can anyone shed light on this little teaser from Voinovich:

"There are several interesting theories on how Mr. Bolton got the nomination. I am not going to go into them in the Senate. If anyone would like to talk to me about that, I am happy to discuss it with them; otherwise, I urge you to get in touch with senior members of the Foreign Relations Committee and ask them."

- Sen George Voinovich (R-OH), Congressional Record, May 25, 2005: S5895

Dying to know the answer to that one myself, Gordon

"Now in terms of the requests for the documents, I view that as just another stall tactic," Mr. Bush said, "another way to delay, another way not to allow Bolton to get an up or down vote."

Uh, wasn't that last week's talking point?

Re: James Bamford interview quote above, viz.

One CIA analyst from the Iraq Nonproliferation section told me that his boss once called his office together (about 50 people) and said, "You know what – if Bush wants to go to war, it's your job to give him a reason to do so." The former analyst added, "And I said, 'All right, it's time, it's time to go… And I just remember saying, 'This is something that the American public, if they ever knew, they would be outraged.'"

John Bolton's chief of staff, Frederick Fleitz, was on loan to Bolton from the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center, known as WINPAC.

Was the "Iraq Nonproliferation section" of the CIA, mentioned in the Bamford quote, part of WINPAC? Bamford's source surely describes to a tee Bolton's feelings about how intelligence needed to be aggressively cherrypicked to support aggressive policies, and puts added emphasis on the Downing Street Memo's "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

Maybe someone should contact James Bamford (Steve?) and see if he knows anything about Bolton's finagling with intelligence in the CIA through Fleitz as perhaps suggested in above quote.

I'd like to add my voice to the thanks for your work on the Bolton nomination. One-issue blogs are very useful, because they allow the reader to really get a picture from someone who is putting in the time to cover an issue thoroughly. Now, I know that you will carry on to other topics, but without your work, I doubt that the Bolton nomination would have become so high-profile. Too much of our government slips under the radar--you are doing your not insignificant bit to help that.

If he does get confirmed, at least we will have the interest of waiting for the explosions from NY! Too bad they may prove to be expensive entertainment.

In light of this Bush statement:

"Now in terms of the requests for the documents, I view that as just another stall tactic," another way to delay, another way not to allow Bolton to get an up or down vote."

A leading Democrat oughtta call Bush's ass out "with all due respect" and in his face through the media educate the boy what this is all about, and that it's not about his simpleton view of the matter. Make a statement the media can't ignore and put the boy King back on his heels with his stupid condescending grin. Make it clear that Bush thinks the people are stupid with the inane deceptive statements he routinely makes to 'em. Never saw a con artist huckster ever the likes of him. Smack him in the face!

"Smack him in the face!"

Thank goodness we are conforming to the "high road" standard set by Steve, otherwise I would suggest that when "smacking" Bush, one should aways aim a bit lower!

Gordon and Charles -- I'm with you. The explanations I've read are variations on the "Cheney wants him" theme. And previous to his remark on the Floor, Voinovich's objections had been based on Bolton's inappropriateness, not how he came to be named.

I think it's curious that here in Ohio we have this "coingate" story unfolding just now, with news that Tom Noe, a regional chair of the Bush/Cheney04 campaign seems to scammed $10 mil minimum from a Workers Comp investment fund. I can't help but wonder where all that money went; it must have been laundered someplace, somehow. And then, of course, having worked on the recount here, I start thinking about vote fraud and the need to launder the money to pay for it if it occured. Then I start thinking about vote fraud in Florida, with Bolton helping to stop the count there in 2000 -- and I wonder if there are any connections, what Voinovich might know about them if there is . . . And then there's Matthew Freedman, who one of Steve's commenters said helped Marcos' vote-rigging schemes in the Philippines. Does that part of his resume fit into any of this?

There may be no relationship between Bolton's nomination, his curious labors at State, and his work for the Bush/Cheney campaign. But one way or the other, I'd sure like to know . . .

I like it that Steve concentrates on one issue. It helps me learn a lot about one subject, and it has become the main place to go for information on Bolton. I suspect the strong focus is also strategically important in changing the content and style of political discourse in this country.

Speaking of the NSA. Coincidentally, the May 12 issue of The New York Review of Books has an article called "Black Arts" by Thomas Powers, which reviews three books generally relevant to the subject of this blog. They are Chatter: Dispatches from the Secret World of Global Eavesdropping, Blind Spot: The Secret History of American Counterterrorism, and The Reader of Gentlemen's Mail: Herbert O. Yardley and the Birth of American Codebreaking.

Wolcott is a riot!

"Michael Ledeen, who was the only kid in elementary school with a Machiavelli lunchbox, is peeved. President Bush isn't prosecuting the war on terror and implementing the neoconservative shake-and-bake agenda in the Mideast as hard and fast as he would like.

He hates when that happens

Malaise, schmalaise--Ledeen wants the president to get a move on and make that beautiful dream that Norman Podhoretz has christened World War IV become bracing reality..."

http://jameswolcott.com/

sue,

you mean you wanna smack that thang? what good would that do? whap upside his l'il head. that head'll jus start rearin' if ya do that too much, then it'll starta spittin' an' I hope ya ain't got yer blue dress on, ya l'il devil yoo.

Why couldn't any on the reporters followed up on the SS questions today during the press conference... 'So, Mr. President, if you are interested in solutions to the social security problem from both sides of the aisle and believe it's a subject of debate whose time has come for the American people, why do you screen the people who discuss it with you in your 'town hall' events? Shouldn't a leader engage the conversation honestly and openly on its merits, rather than limit access to only those citizens who already support his position?'

Check out

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/01/news/bolton.php

Which contains new reasons why the white House is stonewalling.
I don't feel like reading it right now, but it should be worthwhile.

Steve, great work over at TPMCafe (and, as always, here at TWN).

Charles of the NYT cite:

Interesting. All this time I thought it was Powell bitching about Reich. But it turns out it's some corrupt US firm thrilled with the way Reich has "facilitated" things with China? Hmm. Interesting.

Let me echo the disappointment expressed WAY above this re: TPM cafe. Wow. Lots of cacophony, very hard to track comments, etc. Perhaps folks who live at Kos understand that craziness, but I'm afraid I'm not likely to take the time to wade through it all on a regular basis. When I come here I know I can find out quickly if there's something new worth perusing, I think it would take me several days at TPMcafe.

Saw this post on another blog, thought the crowd here might enjoy.

The sheer gaul of them
Posted by Maria

Why I’m a little irritated with France:

For falling asleep at the wheel in 2002 and letting back in to the Elysee a fraud who has no vision for France, no values apart from expediency, and whose number one professional objective was using the office to stay out of jail.

For thinking Supermenteur is kind of funny and harmless with his man of the people, socks in his sandals routine, when he’s spent the last 8 years lying to the people and assuring them it’s ok to put off, say, retirement reform till it’s too late to save the pensions of anyone under 40.

For letting Chirac keep as prime minister a one man crumple zone who took all the knocks for the right’s policies but had no mandate to do anything except fold when the public sector unions got stroppy.

For being hoodwinked by the government into blaming everything else on the EU.

For running a corporatist closed shop of unions and business leaders who don’t give a damn about the excluded unemployed and the perpetually damned ‘sans-papiers’.

For endless criticism of the US 2004 presidential outcome combined with chippy defensiveness when the French vote mostly on domestic issues to tell the rest of Europe to kiss off.

For endless rhetoric about the European ideal (especially in the pre-amble of said constitution) and the coming together of nations in harmony, etc. etc., based on the assumption that France is the true driving force

For insisting in the first place that the constitution be written by a self-important old windbag / ex-President of France.

For constant efforts to impose its own social model on the rest of Europe – not so we can enjoy the benefits, but to weigh us down with the costs so we provide less competition for France.

For self-congratulation at vanquishing ‘anglo-saxon capitalism’ while handing incoming EU President Tony Blair carte blanche to shape the outcome of the French non.

For assuming that if the French don’t like this painstakingly negotiated agreement, everyone else will quickly iron out the wrinkles and present one that’s more to France’s taste.

For the assumption that if France votes no, then the constitution is automatically dead. Just how democratic is that, protest voters? (Don’t Austria, Germany, Belgium, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain count? They’ve all voted yes – in parliament or referendum – and by overwhelming majorities.)

For its refusal to have any debate about admitting Turkey to the EU that doesn’t start with straw men (‘then why not Syria too?) and finish with inchoate mutterings that are nonetheless held to be self-explanatory (But …they’re Muslims.).

For bringing the country to a standstill every five minutes to protest Canute-like about global economic forces.

For its dubious insistence on making the European Parliament pack its boxes every single month and shuttle to Strasbourg, a lose-lose symbolic practice that showcases French blocking power while keeping MEPs frazzled and weak. (So that’s probably a win-win if you’re the French government, then.)

For the CAP. How can it still be alive…? (Answer: because CAP also stands for collective action problem.)

And so on.

I may have over-stated my case just a tiny little bit. And I have experienced and enjoyed too many aspects of the French exception to not be a little complicit too. But, gentle French readers, if you find yourself jibing at the irritation of your fellow Europeans over the next week or two, keep in mind that these are the angry little thoughts zinging around in our heads. They will pass. And no one will be pouring French wine into the gutters. But you should know not all fellow Europeans regard this as France’s finest hour.

http://www.crookedtimber.org/

I'm considered a bit pro French, but I am perturbed, not enough to pour out the French wine I am drinking...heck, then I'd just have to go out and buy more, but while I feel the French had legitimate objections they did little to compromise and much to create that which they objected to.

P.S. Hey Top, hope all is well.

I hear the Dutch will vote NEE too.

What happens to the Euro if widespread adoption of the constitution fails?

What happens to the Euro and the dollar-vs-the Euro, if widespread adoption of the constitution fails?

What happens to my trip to Prague next fall because of the darn dollar devaluation? (A blight on Bush and his damn deficit.)

The NYTimes story is now up on its own site, and I suspect that Steve will be leading with this tomorrow, though its impact may be lessened by the Deep Throat stories. That said, people may be looking for parallels between the Nixon White House and the current administration...

But who leaked this to Douglas Jehl? That's the task of our host, I suspect.

Would anybody in the Senate like to see a candidate for UN Ambassador that has the recommendation of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee?

Would the President prefer that Bolton had the SFRC's endorsement?

Susan,

The EU-treay (or so-called constistution) will have no direct effect on the Euro or the dollar vs. euro . The constitution is a ratification of the treaty of Nice and includes a new way of governing the EU. It also constitutionalizes the cultural differences between the countries in the EU. In theory this has nothing to do with the euro.

Today I will vote a big YES to the EU-constitution. Unfortunately most of my fellow dutchmen will not...

I guess your trip to Prague will be a bit more expensive than planned. I still hope you will have fun this fall!

ahem

Yes, the NYT has surely gotten ballsy, in the past week or two.

That is, since - of all papers - the Minneapolis Star Tribune has taken a principled and noisy stand against the wingnut theocrats. And the Washington Post, if more moderately. And let's remember that a couple of rags down in Texass - including King George's hometown paper - were the first that I recall, from before the 'election.'

But ahem, I don't think anybody 'leaked' anything to Douglas Jehl - the story was the result of editorial calculation, nothing more.

Do you believe there has been one single item -about Bolton, or any other matter that concerns us - revealed on this blog, or anywhere else on the planet, that the NYT didn't know about long before it was even rumor to us? They have an intelligence-gathering operation that is second only to that of the major world powers.

Nowadays, when they decide to print a story like Mr. Jehl's, it is a decision taken by the careful balance of fear of revenue-loss, legal ramifications, and anticipated retaliation by the religious right (and their lackeys, the government).

Here is how we vote, in this country: I'm so damn sick of the religious nuts, that I might actually consider switching all my operating systems to Microsoft again, if they hold the line against Ralph Reed and in favor of their support of gay rights.

I already own a Ford, dammit - but I may get a new one earlier than I would normally, just to thumb my nose at the American Family Association.

Isn't that a pathetic way to calculate one's vote?

Belatedly, I extend my hand to those frustrated European powers who kicked our sorry asses off their continent. They were right. Our forebears, the Puritans, were totally obnoxious - and they haven't gotten much better to live with. I suppose it wouldn't do much good to use up the last of our credit, and buy Zanzibar as a new home for them. As it turns out, there is apparently a genetic maker for religious fervency (wow - you talk about irony!), so it would find its way back into the population eventually. Julian Jaynes is probably sitting in his tower, laughing his face off.

JF

do you think this bolton nomination might be a ruse and the white house doesn't want a ambasador to the un?

JF --

Friends don't let friends buy Fords.

I am kind of tired of hearing French-bashing columns about that country rejecting the constitution. They have every right to, just like the US had every right to elect George Bush, if they so chose.

Nobody is talking about pouring Coca Cola down the sewers because of that, so why the French wine analogy? I think that many people tolerate anti-French racism, where any other racism wouldn't be tolerated.

sm:

Dude, Ford makes a great piece of cheap iron. Best car I ever had was an old four-banger Mustang. I'd drive down the street, and pieces of the engine would fall off and clatter down the street - but the thing just kept working. Right now I've got an F-150 with 140 rounds on it - bought it new and it's going strong.

But maybe your posting handle reveals your preference for sado-masochism? Perhaps you've owned Jaguars, or Maseratis? Oh yeah, me too - 0 to 143 mph for the two blocks to your local $196.00/hour mechanic.

American Iron, dude - on time and under budget.

JF

susan:

"Nobody is talking about pouring Coca Cola down the sewers..."

Oh man susan, I hope not. Our infrastructure in this country is so weak after Lord knows how many decades of neglect by both Parties, that I don't think our sewer systems could take any more phosphoric acid than they already get from the detrius of the Bush-daughters' hangovers...

But seriously... you know we have a 'special relationship' with the French. Every now and then they get their asses kicked, we save them, and they send us a statue or an arch or something. I kind of like them. The world would be a much less interesting place without the French, and that great triumvirate of civilization - wine, art, and language - would suffer so.

Evoe!

JF

Isn't the real difference between Watergate and Iraq/Gitmo/Diebold/Bagram/Nukula/Plame/Halliburton/Coin-gate not that we have no Felts -- there are plenty -- but that we have no congressional oversight?

There are many differences between now and 1972-4. Loyalty, especially blind loyalty, is so prized by the Bush White House that we have no Howard Bakers in the Senate. We also have much less spine at the WaPo. We do have leakers aplenty, but their motives are much smaller than Felt's--not much of a sense of right and wrong, or of country over party and king.

Abd Bush is better liked than Nixon, for what it's worth, especially among the press.

And my new vote on the Bolton tapes? Halliburton is active in Iran again. Bolton had it on Cheney, of all people.

Some of us are going to get more out of a blog like this one:
http://www.opinionmeter.blogspot.com/
because at the end of the day if we are not completed, we are entertained.

MimiK

"...Bush is better liked than Nixon, for what it's worth, especially among the press."

If the press liking our politicians is what gives them more favorable coverage, a leg up, we ought to forget trying analize or to spread any messages and give into this dream of nonreality I am perceiving especially as the homes slide down the hill here in California when it is not even raining.

That's right, Jamie, we saved the French ass in the Franco-Prussian War and they sent us the Lady Liberty as a gift of gratitude.

And before that, the French were getting the hell beat out of them at Yorktown, Va. in 1782 and we had to bail their asses out there by sending Washington's Continental Army down from Westchester County, NY, and send John Paul Jones' fleet to blockade the British on Yorktown Peninsula.

For that last one the French gave us as a gift of gratitude the arch that stands in Washington Square Park, NYC, located I believe on the Lower East Side where you hail from.

If I'm wrong in any of this, please correct me, 'cause I'm not as smart as you, Jamie.

I do worry that Bolton - and socail security - are distractions from the fundamental shift of wealth, and the use of the federal budget for paying off supporters of the administration.

There is also the issue of style. Taking a bully stand and not caring if you win or lose on the issue, solidifies your position (unless it comes undone through a real mistake). Even iraq can be seen more as style than substance. The goal of such an administation might be to solidify a new economy managing elite as the country recalibrates itself against the world economy, where money can be made by aligned groups even as the country is losing wealth.

Actually, Rochambeau, I was being facetious. And I believe your history of those two monuments may be just a touch off - try Googling them.

Oh, and Washington Square is in the heart of Greenwich Village, not the Lower East Side...

JF

Je communique facetieusement aussi, Jamie.

An open thread is a good place to speculate on the reasons Bushco might risk a bipartisan confrontation over Senate authority to review documents rather than release the NSA intercepts to expedite a Bolton vote.

Just a quick post to give my encouragement and thanks to this blog and the people who read/support it. Whether you are left, right, green party.....whatever, I think we can all agree that we need Blogs where we can get accurate and factual reporting, instead of MSM bullshit. With the spotlight being focused on the Mark Felt story, it reminded me of the real meaning and purpose of the reporting of Woodward/Bernstein, and that was to cut through all the non-stop bullshit coming out of the Nixon admin. Thankfully, at that time in our history, the reporting of Woodward/Bernstein actually mattered, and people paid attention to it. I wonder if, in today's climate/culture, with the total bullshit-ization of our country (government, MSM, popular culture, etc) that has taken place, would anyone even care about a Woodward/Bernstein series of stories/reporting??? Would someone even publish it??? I hope that a blog like this proves that people can breakthrough the complete bullshit-ization of our media and political culture. While thewashingtonnote has been concentrating mostly on the Bolton story, I wish that another similar blog had been focusing on the leaking of the Downing street memo, which was published almost a month ago in the Time of London. This memo proves (beyond a shadow of a doubt) that EVERYTHING that came out of the Bush Admin, pre-war, to include State, Defense, NSA (name any department of the executive branch) was complete and total Bullshit. A premeditated, coordianted, carefully planned series of lies. Complete and total bullshit. The bullshit-ization of America is now (almost) complete, and the Bush Admin. is running laps around the Nixon admin.
We need more blogs like this one, to try to cut through it all.

The latest from Raw Story (the story isn't posted yet - just the headline):

"Congressman to introduce resolution commending Deep Throat."

I'll assume it's Rep. Conyers. Good for him. A vote on something like this would be a true revelation, whether passed or not: practically a hit-list for the Democratic Party.

JF

Laugh over Bolton:

The NPR quiz show, "Wait Wait," got a laugh over the Bolton vote.

You can re-listen by going to
http://www.npr.org/programs/waitwait/thisweek.html

The first segment, "Who's Carl This Time?," with the subtitle,
"All three of our quotes are about what will soon be known in Washington as 'The Great Compromise of '05,'" is about 8 min 33. Abouth 6 min. into the segment, they are looking for the answer Extraordinary Circumstances to fill in under what conditions the "You'll know it when you see it" fillibuster is invoked, and someone, I didn't catch who, says as an automatic appropriate answer, "Bolton." Others have hinted "It begins with C, part of it begins with C." Someone says he, Bolton, "begins with C and ends with CRAZY." Then there is chatter about how Bolton is a dead ringer for the cartoon character Yosemite Sam.

IMHO, the White House saying they will be keeping Bolton on a leash--virtually admitting he needs supervising-- and Voinovich's arguments, that Republicans know he will make a horrible UN Ambassador are better arugments than "release the documents." The documents will either get leaked, officially released (still leaving Bushies to make the argument that it was all a tempest in a teapot), or they will get away with the line they are taking, you have enough, stacks of documents.

Tell wobbling Republican Senators we don't want an an out of control cartoonish outlaw in the UN.

"I wish that another similar blog had been focusing on the leaking of the Downing street memo..."

Mark, Here is some info for you:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/1/74549/88811

Awaken the MSM: Downing Street Memo Alert (6/1)
by smintheus

Wed Jun 1st, 2005 at 04:45:49 PDT

Today begins a series of diaries aimed at helping to lift the virtual news blackout on that political bombshell, the Downing Street Minutes. Though it was published one month ago, the US news media has produced just a small trickle of reports to date. Many of us have appealed for more coverage by the news media, but with only limited success. It is high time to wake the MSM up. We will need to focus, coordinate, and sustain our efforts if we wish to get their attention. Clearly a scatter-shot approach will not get this information before the wider public, which deserves to know about it.

Therefore every weekday this month I will post a diary listing three news outlets. Please email, fax, or call all three on that day requesting politely that they report on DSM. The contacts for today are:

(A) CBS Evening News. email: evening@cbsnews.com phone: 212-975-3247

(B) Associated Press. email: info@ap.org phone: 202-776-9400 (DC) or 212-621-1500 (National News)

(C) C-Span Washington Journal. email: journal@c-span.org

Other websites are participating in this campaign as well.