The following excerpt caught my attention:
One ethical problem emerged when Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, asked Ms. Miller if she had pursued an article about Valerie Plame, the C.I.A. operative, or her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV. Ms. Miller said in an interview for the retrospective that she "made a strong recommendation to my editor" that a story be pursued. "I was told no."
But Jill Abramson, now a managing editor and the Washington bureau chief in 2003, would have known about such a request. Ms. Abramson, to whom Ms. Miller reported, strongly asserted to me that Ms. Miller never asked to pursue an article about the operative. Ms. Abramson said that she did not recall Ms. Miller ever mentioning the confidential conversations she had with I. Lewis Libby, the vice president's chief of staff, who appears to be in the middle of the leak investigation. When I asked her, Ms. Miller declined to identify the editor she dealt with.
Why is this a secret, Judy?
Saturday, October 22, 2005
THE CABAL AND THE WAR
Larry Wilkerson, chief of staff at the State Dept. from 2002-05, recently spoke at New America Foundation and had some interesting things to say about national security decision making in the Bush regime. You can get the transcript here, on the right side of the page.
What he thinks should be:
At the same time, especially in America – but I submit to you in Japan, in China, and in a number of other countries soon to be probably the European Union, it’s just as bad, if not in some ways worse -- the complexity of governing is unprecedented. You simply cannot deal with all the challenges that government has to deal with, meet all the demands that government has to meet in the modern age, in the 21st century, without admitting that it is hugely complex. That doesn’t mean you have to add a Department of Homeland Security with 70,000 disparate entities thrown under somebody in order to handle them, but it does mean that your bureaucracy has got to be staffed with good people, and they’ve got to work together, and they’ve got to work under leadership they trust and leadership that on basic issues they agree with, and that if they don’t agree, they can dissent and dissent and dissent. And if their dissent is such that they feel so passionate about it, they can resign and know why they’re resigning.
What he thinks is the current situation:
That is not the case today. And when I say that is not the case today, I stop on 26 January 2005. I don’t know what the case is today; I wish I did. But the case that I saw for four-plus years was a case that I have never seen in my studies of aberrations, bastardizations, perturbations, changes to the national security decision-making process. What I saw was a cabal between the vice president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made. And then when the bureaucracy was presented with the decision to carry them out, it was presented in a such a disjointed, incredible way that the bureaucracy often didn’t know what it was doing as it moved to carry them out.
One serious consequence of the cabal:
Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, whom most of you probably know Tommy Franks said was the stupidest blankety, blank man in the world. He was. (Laughter.) Let me testify to that. He was. Seldom in my life have I met a dumber man. (Laughter.) And yet – and yet –and yet, after the secretary of State agrees to a $400 billion department rather than a $30 billion department having control, at least in the immediate post-war period in Iraq, this man is put in charge. Not only is he put in charge, he is given carte blanche to tell the State Department to go screw itself in a closet somewhere. Now, that’s not making excuses for the State Department; that’s telling you how decisions were made and telling you how things got accomplished.
What he thinks should be:
At the same time, especially in America – but I submit to you in Japan, in China, and in a number of other countries soon to be probably the European Union, it’s just as bad, if not in some ways worse -- the complexity of governing is unprecedented. You simply cannot deal with all the challenges that government has to deal with, meet all the demands that government has to meet in the modern age, in the 21st century, without admitting that it is hugely complex. That doesn’t mean you have to add a Department of Homeland Security with 70,000 disparate entities thrown under somebody in order to handle them, but it does mean that your bureaucracy has got to be staffed with good people, and they’ve got to work together, and they’ve got to work under leadership they trust and leadership that on basic issues they agree with, and that if they don’t agree, they can dissent and dissent and dissent. And if their dissent is such that they feel so passionate about it, they can resign and know why they’re resigning.
What he thinks is the current situation:
That is not the case today. And when I say that is not the case today, I stop on 26 January 2005. I don’t know what the case is today; I wish I did. But the case that I saw for four-plus years was a case that I have never seen in my studies of aberrations, bastardizations, perturbations, changes to the national security decision-making process. What I saw was a cabal between the vice president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made. And then when the bureaucracy was presented with the decision to carry them out, it was presented in a such a disjointed, incredible way that the bureaucracy often didn’t know what it was doing as it moved to carry them out.
One serious consequence of the cabal:
Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, whom most of you probably know Tommy Franks said was the stupidest blankety, blank man in the world. He was. (Laughter.) Let me testify to that. He was. Seldom in my life have I met a dumber man. (Laughter.) And yet – and yet –and yet, after the secretary of State agrees to a $400 billion department rather than a $30 billion department having control, at least in the immediate post-war period in Iraq, this man is put in charge. Not only is he put in charge, he is given carte blanche to tell the State Department to go screw itself in a closet somewhere. Now, that’s not making excuses for the State Department; that’s telling you how decisions were made and telling you how things got accomplished.
Friday, October 21, 2005
FITZMAS WEBSITE
This was just recently put up and has a few interesting documents and there might be more to come.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html
KAREN HUGHES, ANOTHER BUSHIE INCOMPETENT
Hughes, Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs , has been touring Muslim countries to help boost our image. A long-time crony of Bush, she has made two large errors that we know of already.
(1) KAREN HUGHES ON OUR CONSITUTION
UNDER SECRETARY HUGHES: I haven’t really heard a lot of that. I had one person at one lunch raise the issue of the President mentioning God in his speeches. And I asked whether he was aware that previous American presidents have also cited God, and that our Constitution cites "one nation under God."
(2) KAREN HUGHES ON SADDAM
Bush Public Relations Envoy Flubs Iraq Fact
Karen Hughes Insists Saddam Gassed 'Hundreds of Thousands'
By CHRIS BRUMMITT, AP
JAKARTA, Indonesia (Oct. 21) - Karen Hughes, who has faced a rocky road since being named Washington's public relations chief, answered tough questions Friday about the invasion of Iraq, and wrongly stated that Saddam Hussein gassed to death "hundreds of thousands" of his people.
Although the U.S. undersecretary for public diplomacy twice repeated the claim after being challenged by journalists, Gordon Johndroe, a State Department official traveling with Hughes, later called The Associated Press to say she misspoke.
(1) KAREN HUGHES ON OUR CONSITUTION
UNDER SECRETARY HUGHES: I haven’t really heard a lot of that. I had one person at one lunch raise the issue of the President mentioning God in his speeches. And I asked whether he was aware that previous American presidents have also cited God, and that our Constitution cites "one nation under God."
(2) KAREN HUGHES ON SADDAM
Bush Public Relations Envoy Flubs Iraq Fact
Karen Hughes Insists Saddam Gassed 'Hundreds of Thousands'
By CHRIS BRUMMITT, AP
JAKARTA, Indonesia (Oct. 21) - Karen Hughes, who has faced a rocky road since being named Washington's public relations chief, answered tough questions Friday about the invasion of Iraq, and wrongly stated that Saddam Hussein gassed to death "hundreds of thousands" of his people.
Although the U.S. undersecretary for public diplomacy twice repeated the claim after being challenged by journalists, Gordon Johndroe, a State Department official traveling with Hughes, later called The Associated Press to say she misspoke.
"JANE DOE" FUNDIE ON MIERS
This story about how ordinary folk fundies think about Miers on All Thing Considered from Tuesday got my attention, especially this statement:
"I think that she is a wonderful person and I just think that when opposition comes, a lot of the times it's the work of the Devil." - Audrey McKee
"I think that she is a wonderful person and I just think that when opposition comes, a lot of the times it's the work of the Devil." - Audrey McKee
CONS ON MIERS
I'm just browsing through some of the posts and comments about Miers from conservative blogs. They aren't too impressed with her writing:
In short, her muddled writing reflects muddled thinking.
P.S. In a recent comment, Beldar asked me if I had read this 1995 letter from Miers to Bush. Answer: yes, I have — and I think it sucks.
Someone please tell me this is a scanner error (my source is a pdf file from the National Review) or an elaborate practical joke. I don't think we should have a Supreme Court Justice who would have trouble passing the typical 1L course in legal research and writing.
This is agonizing.
In short, her muddled writing reflects muddled thinking.
P.S. In a recent comment, Beldar asked me if I had read this 1995 letter from Miers to Bush. Answer: yes, I have — and I think it sucks.
Someone please tell me this is a scanner error (my source is a pdf file from the National Review) or an elaborate practical joke. I don't think we should have a Supreme Court Justice who would have trouble passing the typical 1L course in legal research and writing.
This is agonizing.
MISERABLE FAILURE
THE FUNDIES AREN'T GOING AWAY ANY TIME SOON
More students are drawn to conservative colleges
Enrollment is up at smaller colleges with Christian values. Some think students hope it will launch political careers.
By Adam Karlin Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
from the September 21, 2005 edition
In these politically polarized times, a rising number of top conservative students are politicizing their school choices. Instead of going to a Princeton or Stanford, they're opting for less costly home-state universities or smaller schools that see themselves as standard bearers of Christian values and laissez-faire governance. Such choices are perhaps a boon to those who intend to pursue careers in politics, since conservative think tanks increasingly are recruiting from these colleges.
"Schools like Grove City, Brigham Young, and Hillsdale are some of our more popular schools," says Elizabeth Williams, intern coordinator for the conservative Heritage Foundation, in an e-mail. "Their students are usually of very high caliber." Fifteen of this year's Heritage Foundation interns came from schools that provide a values-based, Christian education, triple the number in 2000.
Those students may find that their degrees carry all the weight of an Ivy League diploma if they choose to work with Republican politicians. "With a lot of the red-state government officials you have a near-total abolition of the preexisting strong bias toward Northeast schools," says David French, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
Enrollment is up at smaller colleges with Christian values. Some think students hope it will launch political careers.
By Adam Karlin Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
from the September 21, 2005 edition
In these politically polarized times, a rising number of top conservative students are politicizing their school choices. Instead of going to a Princeton or Stanford, they're opting for less costly home-state universities or smaller schools that see themselves as standard bearers of Christian values and laissez-faire governance. Such choices are perhaps a boon to those who intend to pursue careers in politics, since conservative think tanks increasingly are recruiting from these colleges.
"Schools like Grove City, Brigham Young, and Hillsdale are some of our more popular schools," says Elizabeth Williams, intern coordinator for the conservative Heritage Foundation, in an e-mail. "Their students are usually of very high caliber." Fifteen of this year's Heritage Foundation interns came from schools that provide a values-based, Christian education, triple the number in 2000.
Those students may find that their degrees carry all the weight of an Ivy League diploma if they choose to work with Republican politicians. "With a lot of the red-state government officials you have a near-total abolition of the preexisting strong bias toward Northeast schools," says David French, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
MORE CRUMBLING ON THE RIGHT!
VIA THINKPROGRESS:
Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist has upset cultural conservatives by agreeing to appear as a keynote speaker for the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay conservatives. Right-wingers are already lobbing rhetorical bombs:
Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist has upset cultural conservatives by agreeing to appear as a keynote speaker for the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay conservatives. Right-wingers are already lobbing rhetorical bombs:
One pro-family leader called Norquist’s appearance “an act of utter betrayal.”
…
Norquist’s presence at the fund-raiser was “traitorous,” [Cathie Adams, president of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum,] added. “If he was a serious economic conservative, Grover Norquist would not have accepted the invitation or the honorarium for speaking at a fund-raiser for a group bent on the destruction of traditional families,” Adams said.
But rhetoric is one thing. Questioning Norquist’s role in the conservative movement is another. And Tony Perkins, president of the influential Family Research Council, has done just that:
Grover has spent years working to assemble a coalition of fiscal and social conservatives and his decision to aid those who are trying to destroy the institution of marriage is truly a disappointment and will no doubt split this important coalition.
SCHADENFREUDE POST
Well, not really but that's what it will look like. I ran across this tidbit at Billmon's place and I couldn't resist but not because I have any ill-will toward the young woman. Instead, I think of how the Bennetts, the Boortzs and many others on the Right claim that giving people basic subsistence (welfare) robs them of their morality. The emphasis is on the morally debilitating effect of getting something you haven't earned.
Case in point:
Wal-Mart heiress in cheat probe returns diploma
Former roommate says she did homework for $20,000
Wednesday, October 19, 2005; Posted: 9:16 p.m. EDT (01:16 GMT)
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Elizabeth Paige Laurie's name was on a sports arena when a former University of Southern California roommate alleged the Wal-Mart heiress paid her $20,000 to do her homework. Now it isn't even on a USC diploma.
Laurie, the granddaughter of Wal-Mart co-founder Bud Walton, has returned her degree, nearly a year after Elena Martinez told ABC's "20/20" that she had written term papers and done assignments for Laurie for three-and-a-half years.
"Paige Laurie voluntarily has surrendered her degree and returned her diploma to the university. She is not a graduate of USC," the school said in a statement dated September 30 but not widely disseminated until the school newspaper wrote about it late last week. "This concludes the university's review of the allegations concerning Ms. Laurie."
After the homework allegations surfaced last November, the University of Missouri changed the name of what was then Paige Sports Arena. Laurie's billionaire parents, Bill and Nancy Laurie, had received naming rights in exchange for donating $25 million toward the building's construction. Nancy Laurie is Walton's daughter.
I recall a line from a Henry James' novel that talks about the debilitating effect of inherited money but you can be sure our moral pundits will never mention that possibility.
Case in point:
Wal-Mart heiress in cheat probe returns diploma
Former roommate says she did homework for $20,000
Wednesday, October 19, 2005; Posted: 9:16 p.m. EDT (01:16 GMT)
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Elizabeth Paige Laurie's name was on a sports arena when a former University of Southern California roommate alleged the Wal-Mart heiress paid her $20,000 to do her homework. Now it isn't even on a USC diploma.
Laurie, the granddaughter of Wal-Mart co-founder Bud Walton, has returned her degree, nearly a year after Elena Martinez told ABC's "20/20" that she had written term papers and done assignments for Laurie for three-and-a-half years.
"Paige Laurie voluntarily has surrendered her degree and returned her diploma to the university. She is not a graduate of USC," the school said in a statement dated September 30 but not widely disseminated until the school newspaper wrote about it late last week. "This concludes the university's review of the allegations concerning Ms. Laurie."
After the homework allegations surfaced last November, the University of Missouri changed the name of what was then Paige Sports Arena. Laurie's billionaire parents, Bill and Nancy Laurie, had received naming rights in exchange for donating $25 million toward the building's construction. Nancy Laurie is Walton's daughter.
I recall a line from a Henry James' novel that talks about the debilitating effect of inherited money but you can be sure our moral pundits will never mention that possibility.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
FAITH AND WAR
PAST:
“But in the midst of doubt, in the collapse of creeds, there is one thing I do not doubt, that no man who lives in the same world with most of us can doubt, and that is that the faith is true and adorable which leads a soldier to throw away his life in obedience to a blindly accepted duty, in a cause which he little understands, in a plan of campaign of which he has little notion, under tactics of which he does not see the use.”
- OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, “The Soldier’s Faith”, 1895
PRESENT:
[…] it's irrelevant to the liberal misconception that in order to have faith and to follow, you must have tangibility. Ladies and gentlemen, this is why atheism and liberalism, sadly, go hand in hand. This is why atheism and liberalism are mental disorders.
Liberals need tangibility in order to have security. Liberals need tangibility to feel complete. Liberals need tangibility to be able to follow someone.
Conservatives have faith. Conservatives know without seeing. Conservatives know without touching. Conservatives believe with their minds and their hearts, rather than with their heads and their hands.
- From RepublicanVet's blog, thanx to NonnyMouse at Crooks & Liars
“But in the midst of doubt, in the collapse of creeds, there is one thing I do not doubt, that no man who lives in the same world with most of us can doubt, and that is that the faith is true and adorable which leads a soldier to throw away his life in obedience to a blindly accepted duty, in a cause which he little understands, in a plan of campaign of which he has little notion, under tactics of which he does not see the use.”
- OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, “The Soldier’s Faith”, 1895
PRESENT:
[…] it's irrelevant to the liberal misconception that in order to have faith and to follow, you must have tangibility. Ladies and gentlemen, this is why atheism and liberalism, sadly, go hand in hand. This is why atheism and liberalism are mental disorders.
Liberals need tangibility in order to have security. Liberals need tangibility to feel complete. Liberals need tangibility to be able to follow someone.
Conservatives have faith. Conservatives know without seeing. Conservatives know without touching. Conservatives believe with their minds and their hearts, rather than with their heads and their hands.
- From RepublicanVet's blog, thanx to NonnyMouse at Crooks & Liars
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
INSTEAD OF "HAIL TO THE CHIEF"...
Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust, eh
- QUEEN
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust, eh
- QUEEN
REFINERY ECONOMICS
There isn't a market incentive to build more refineries because supply shortages increase profits. Although there may be some disincentive caused by environmental considerations, the primary reason we don't have more refineries is the profit-motive.
High prices bolster energy cos. profits
By STEVE QUINN Associated Press Writer
Oct 18, 2:27 PM EDT
Although hurricanes Katrina and Rita created compounding headaches for energy companies over the summer, the storms ultimately benefited them because, as supplies tightened, prices for gasoline, diesel and jet-fuel soared.
There is less room for error in the U.S. energy market these days thanks to the reduction of fuel inventories and slow addition of new refining capacity - trends that have helped make refining much more profitable in recent years.
Meanwhile, watch for refiners and independent producers to weigh in with their own stout performances, say analysts.
Refiners such as Valero Energy Corp., Tesoro Corp. and Frontier Oil Corp., are expected to show huge profit gains. Analysts forecast these three companies earned a combined $1.37 billion for the third quarter, a 162 percent jump from last year, according to Thomson Financial.
High prices bolster energy cos. profits
By STEVE QUINN Associated Press Writer
Oct 18, 2:27 PM EDT
Although hurricanes Katrina and Rita created compounding headaches for energy companies over the summer, the storms ultimately benefited them because, as supplies tightened, prices for gasoline, diesel and jet-fuel soared.
There is less room for error in the U.S. energy market these days thanks to the reduction of fuel inventories and slow addition of new refining capacity - trends that have helped make refining much more profitable in recent years.
Meanwhile, watch for refiners and independent producers to weigh in with their own stout performances, say analysts.
Refiners such as Valero Energy Corp., Tesoro Corp. and Frontier Oil Corp., are expected to show huge profit gains. Analysts forecast these three companies earned a combined $1.37 billion for the third quarter, a 162 percent jump from last year, according to Thomson Financial.
ANOTHER "WTF?" MOMENT
This comes from an Atrios commenter:
Posted on Mon, Oct. 17, 2005
Agency charged with spending oversight in Iraq left country in '04
By Seth Borenstein
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - The chief Pentagon agency in charge of investigating and reporting fraud and waste in Defense Department spending in Iraq quietly pulled out of the war zone a year ago - leaving what experts say are gaps in the oversight of how more than $140 billion is being spent.etc.
----I swear to God I'm not making this stuff up.
-QuentinCompson Homepage 10.18.05 - 1:05 am #
UPDATE:
Fixed article link here and some more excerpts:
The auditors were withdrawn in the fall of 2004 because other agencies were watching spending, too. But experts say those other agencies don't have the expertise, access and broad mandate that the inspector general has - and don't make their reports public.
Much of the criticism of Defense Department spending for military uses has focused on the billing practices of Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of the engineering giant Halliburton Inc. A Knight Ridder investigation in the spring of 2004 found that KBR charged the department to move convoys of empty trucks across central Iraq.
Posted on Mon, Oct. 17, 2005
Agency charged with spending oversight in Iraq left country in '04
By Seth Borenstein
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - The chief Pentagon agency in charge of investigating and reporting fraud and waste in Defense Department spending in Iraq quietly pulled out of the war zone a year ago - leaving what experts say are gaps in the oversight of how more than $140 billion is being spent.etc.
----I swear to God I'm not making this stuff up.
-QuentinCompson Homepage 10.18.05 - 1:05 am #
UPDATE:
Fixed article link here and some more excerpts:
The auditors were withdrawn in the fall of 2004 because other agencies were watching spending, too. But experts say those other agencies don't have the expertise, access and broad mandate that the inspector general has - and don't make their reports public.
Much of the criticism of Defense Department spending for military uses has focused on the billing practices of Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of the engineering giant Halliburton Inc. A Knight Ridder investigation in the spring of 2004 found that KBR charged the department to move convoys of empty trucks across central Iraq.
Monday, October 17, 2005
ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST
(Hat-tip to TalkingPointsMemo)
In Sign of Conservative Split, a Commentator Is Dismissed
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: October 18, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/18/politics/18bartlett.html
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 - In the latest sign of the deepening split among conservatives over how far to go in challenging President Bush, Bruce Bartlett, a Republican commentator who has been increasingly critical of the White House, was dismissed on Monday as a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative research group based in Dallas.
In a statement, the organization said the decision was made after Mr. Bartlett supplied its president, John C. Goodman, with the manuscript of his forthcoming book, "The Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy."
The statement from the organization said Mr. Bartlett had negotiated a deal last year to reduce his workload to give him time to write a book about economic policy and taxation for which he had received a six-figure advance. The statement said that the manuscript he showed Mr. Goodman was "an evaluation of the motivations and competencies of politicians rather than an analysis of public policy." The statement said the organization did not want to be associated with that kind of work.
Like many economic conservatives, he has grown increasingly disenchanted with the current administration's fiscal policy, arguing that Mr. Bush has tolerated if not encouraged a federal spending spree, dashing conservative hopes for progress toward a smaller, leaner government. He has also joined social conservatives in attacking Mr. Bush's nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court.
In his next column, to be published on Wednesday, Mr. Bartlett wrote that it is dawning on many conservatives "that George W. Bush is not one of them and never has been," citing the administration's positions on education, campaign finance, immigration, government spending and regulation. The choice "of a patently unqualified crony for a critical position on the Supreme Court was the final straw," he wrote.
In Sign of Conservative Split, a Commentator Is Dismissed
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: October 18, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/18/politics/18bartlett.html
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 - In the latest sign of the deepening split among conservatives over how far to go in challenging President Bush, Bruce Bartlett, a Republican commentator who has been increasingly critical of the White House, was dismissed on Monday as a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative research group based in Dallas.
In a statement, the organization said the decision was made after Mr. Bartlett supplied its president, John C. Goodman, with the manuscript of his forthcoming book, "The Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy."
The statement from the organization said Mr. Bartlett had negotiated a deal last year to reduce his workload to give him time to write a book about economic policy and taxation for which he had received a six-figure advance. The statement said that the manuscript he showed Mr. Goodman was "an evaluation of the motivations and competencies of politicians rather than an analysis of public policy." The statement said the organization did not want to be associated with that kind of work.
Like many economic conservatives, he has grown increasingly disenchanted with the current administration's fiscal policy, arguing that Mr. Bush has tolerated if not encouraged a federal spending spree, dashing conservative hopes for progress toward a smaller, leaner government. He has also joined social conservatives in attacking Mr. Bush's nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court.
In his next column, to be published on Wednesday, Mr. Bartlett wrote that it is dawning on many conservatives "that George W. Bush is not one of them and never has been," citing the administration's positions on education, campaign finance, immigration, government spending and regulation. The choice "of a patently unqualified crony for a critical position on the Supreme Court was the final straw," he wrote.
POPPY BUSH ON TRAITORS
Via Atrios:
We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. (Applause)
Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.
Remarks By George Bush
41st President of the United States,
At the Dedication Ceremony for the George Bush Center for Intelligence
26 April 1999
We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. (Applause)
Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.
Remarks By George Bush
41st President of the United States,
At the Dedication Ceremony for the George Bush Center for Intelligence
26 April 1999
MERRIE SPAETH BACKS AWAY FROM MIERS
As I wrote below, Spaeth is an old friend of Miers and had been supportive of her nomination, until now. I just heard on All Things Considered that she has reconsidered her position because of the furor Miers has aroused in the far-right. She noted that some e-mails have urged her to start a "Swiftboat campaign" against the nomination.
As I have written before, the Rove coalition is falling apart.
As I have written before, the Rove coalition is falling apart.
MIERS WILL VOTE TO OVERTURN ROE v. WADE
(Via Crooks & Liars & Daily Kos) John Fund discloses a conference call we hadn't heard about. This will also be trouble for Dobson because this means he lied about the discussions he had about Miers.
Judgment Call
Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?
Monday, October 17, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
(Excerpts)
On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.
The call was moderated by the Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association. Participating were 13 members of the executive committee of the Arlington Group, an umbrella alliance of 60 religious conservative groups, including Gary Bauer of American Values, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and the Rev. Bill Owens, a black minister. Also on the call were Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court and Judge Ed Kinkeade, a Dallas-based federal trial judge.
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"
"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.
"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."
Judge Kinkeade, through his secretary, declined to discuss the matter. Justice Hecht told me he remembers participating in the call but can't recollect who invited him or many specifics about it. He said he did tell the group that Ms. Miers was "pro-life," a characterization he has repeated in public. But he says that when someone asked him about her stand on overturning Roe v. Wade he answered, "I don't know." He doesn't recall what Judge Kinkeade said. But several people who participated in the call confirm that both jurists stated Ms. Miers would vote to overturn Roe.
Judgment Call
Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?
Monday, October 17, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
(Excerpts)
On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.
The call was moderated by the Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association. Participating were 13 members of the executive committee of the Arlington Group, an umbrella alliance of 60 religious conservative groups, including Gary Bauer of American Values, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and the Rev. Bill Owens, a black minister. Also on the call were Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court and Judge Ed Kinkeade, a Dallas-based federal trial judge.
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"
"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.
"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."
Judge Kinkeade, through his secretary, declined to discuss the matter. Justice Hecht told me he remembers participating in the call but can't recollect who invited him or many specifics about it. He said he did tell the group that Ms. Miers was "pro-life," a characterization he has repeated in public. But he says that when someone asked him about her stand on overturning Roe v. Wade he answered, "I don't know." He doesn't recall what Judge Kinkeade said. But several people who participated in the call confirm that both jurists stated Ms. Miers would vote to overturn Roe.
Sunday, October 16, 2005
SHORTER JUDY MILLER: "I CAN'T RECALL, I DON'T KNOW"
Not what one would expect from an ace reporter of a prestigious paper.
On one page of my interview notes, for example, I wrote the name "Valerie Flame." Yet, as I told Mr. Fitzgerald, I simply could not recall where that came from, when I wrote it or why the name was misspelled.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/national/16miller.html?pagewanted=1
Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.
Mr. Fitzgerald asked me if I knew whether I was cleared to discuss classified information at the time of my meetings with Mr. Libby. I said I did not know.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/national/16miller.html?pagewanted=4
On one page of my interview notes, for example, I wrote the name "Valerie Flame." Yet, as I told Mr. Fitzgerald, I simply could not recall where that came from, when I wrote it or why the name was misspelled.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/national/16miller.html?pagewanted=1
Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.
Mr. Fitzgerald asked me if I knew whether I was cleared to discuss classified information at the time of my meetings with Mr. Libby. I said I did not know.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/national/16miller.html?pagewanted=4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
