Deja vu all over again

After a long absence, I am back by popular demand from my readership (Hi, John!).

The Washington Post previews the Bush Administration's fall campaign theme in a front page story. It's a familiar approach, attack war critics as "defeatist pansies." The story points out that this is the same approach that helped the Republicans win in both 2002 and 2004. What's a bit unfamiliar, is the skeptical tone of the reporting. Unsaid in the story is the role played by the media and helping the Republicans bamboozle the public into believing that failing to elect Republicans would put them at risk. In this story, however, there does seem to be a recognition that the reporter has a responsibility, not only to report the Administration's charges, but also to bring an element of truth into the discussion. To wit, this paragraph:

Pressed to support these allegations, the White House yesterday could cite no major Democrat who has proposed cutting off funds or suggested that withdrawing from Iraq would persuade terrorists to leave Americans alone. But White House and Republican officials said those are logical interpretations of the most common Democratic position favoring a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

Let's hope we'll be seeing more of this kind of journalism, rather than the "taking dictation" approach that has characterized past coverage.

See??

In a post below, I contrasted my view about the prospects for Democrats winning the House with the "smart guys" in Washington who do district by district analysis and can't come up with the sufficient number of seats to take the Dems to a majority. It annoys me how smug there are when they declare their obviously better informed opinion when talking to naive waifs like me who are motivated by wishful thinking, rather than hard core analysis.

Well, thank you NPR. While not precisely district by district, they have done a poll which only samples 50 competitive districts in the aggregate and find a substantial majority in favor Democrats even when the names of the local incumbent are specified. The poll found Democrats ahead by 10 points in competitive seats and 3 points in supposedly safer Republican seats. And the universe of districts was 40 Republican seats and 10 Democratic seats. So, this is Republican territory.

There is a wave building and I can't think of what it might take to reverse or even diminish it. No time for over-confidence. But it's also no time for defensiveness or "under-confidence."

Democrats Will Win the House

I am sick and tired of having the smart guys here in Washington chuckle indulgently when I say that Democrats have a very good shot at winning the House of Representatives in November. They smile and shake their heads at my naivete, explaining that they have examined all 435 House seats and there is no way you can add up the number flips from Rep. to Dem. to get to a majority. Well, I say Bullshit!

Yes, I understand the Republicans think they have a built a firewall through redisctricting that will protect them from a counter-tsunami and yes, I understand that the Democrats "have no message." What they miss is the broad-based anger at the mess we're in as a result of all Republican government. I do not examine things distrcit by district. I look at the big picture and the big picture sucks for Republicans. Not a week goes by that there is not a new blurb about some other Republican incumbents who is in surprising trouble. Here's todays from CQ:

Political Clippings CQ
Politics.com reports that Democrat Joe Sestak, a retired Navy vice admiral, is showing unusual strength for a first-time candidate in his challenge to 10-term Republican Rep. Curt Weldon in Pennsylvania’s 7th District. Sestak registered strong fundraising numbers in his latest report to the Federal Election Commission , and other factors also show an increasingly competitive race. CQPolitics.com has hanged its rating on the contest to Leans Republican from Republican Favored. Weldon still has an edge, but an upset by Sestak is a plausible possibility. CQPolitics.com presently ranks 37 districts — 26 held by Republicans and 11 by Democrats — as No Clear Favorite or Leans Democratic or Republican.

Do you get that? 26 Republican seats at risk and only 11 Democrats, which nets out to the exact number of seats needed to win the majority. And that number is inexorably trending to the Republicans disadvantage every week. Wait'll those moderate Republican votes learn about the consequences of Bush's veto of the stem cell bill. Also, the current statistics do not include voter reaction to the fact that, contrary to the view Bush proposed that the Iraq war was going to bring stability to the Middle East, the region is in flames and getting worse. In my campaign experience, if there is a trend, the results on election day always go beyond the trend.

Oh yes, and do they think that the various prosecutors investigating corruption in Washington are going to close up shop and exonerate all their Republican targets? I don't think so.

This past Sunday, long time non-partisan congress watcher Tom Mann, described my view. And I have it on good authority that at least one Republican instrumental in the 1994 tsunami agrees, as well. Check it out.

So, I've said it and date stampted it. I want to be able to say "I told you so" in November.

Abuse of Power

According to today's Washington Post, President Bush personally denied the security clearance requested by lawyers in the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility for purposes of investigation the Administrations warrantless search program by the National Security Agency. Many respected legal scholars have concluded that the President violated the law and the U.S. Constitution in creating this program. Now he is using his presidential power to block an investigation.

Eight years ago, the House of Representatives impeached a president for lying about a private sexual affairs. Thirty years ago, an attorney general resigned rather than facilitate a president's order to block a Justice Department investigation. Today, a much more egregious presidential act merits only page four coverage.

Where is the outrage?

An American in Haifa

I have a very good friend who works for an Israeli public affairs firm. He's an American Jew from Chicago and was President Clinton's liaison to the Jewish community. I called him yesterday with a new business prospect and found him sitting in a restaurant by the beach in Tel Aviv. He had just relocated to Tel Aviv after an aborted vacation with his in-laws in Haifa. They scrambled out of there after the first missiles fell last Thursday. He spent the weekend cleaning out the in-laws' bomb shelter, which has been used for storage since the Gulf War. It was odd to be chatting with him on the phone with my TV broadcasting scenes of destruction from the region.

He confirms by word and attitude the conclusions drawn by my colleague Jeff Weintraub that this crisis has unified not only Israelis, but all Jews, as no other. For me, I am deeply troubled by their moral clarity. I am not a Jew, but feel a connection to the region through a peace program in which I participated and where I met my friend. I am currently reading a book entitled War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning by Chris Hedges. He's a former war correspondent for the New York Times. He makes the point that it is this moral clarity that draws human beings to war, with the attendant mayhem and destruction. My view of this situation in Israel right now was captured by Fareed Zacharia on Sunday when he said that it is entirely justified for Israel to hit back hard, but is it smart? There is no way I am competent to second-guess the military decisions that the Israelis are making. But bombing civilian targets does seem to me to make things worse. Maybe it is impossible to distinquish between military and civilian targets and they can't just sit back and take it.

So, I really do not know what to think. I was frankly saddened to stumble across an interview with Chris Hedges on a left-wing radio show yesterday. He was pretty harsh on Israel, blaming them for a disproportionate response and for its oppression of the Palestinians over the years. And he was the moderate on the show. Knowing people like Jeff Weintraub and my friend, who are deeply moral people who have come to the conclusion that Israel must fight makes me very sympathetic to this view. But Hedges has written the most powerful critique of war I have ever read and I wish he had expressed a little more ambiguity about the situation going on right now.

Another Conservative Sees the Light

Andrew Sullivan long ago ceased supporting Bush's catastrophic war in Iraq. As a conservative, he was supportive at the beginning, but concluded that Bush and his crew were incompetent in conducting the war. He has now come to a more sinister conclusion and joins the rest of us who have only disgust for the man and his destructive and corrupt administration. Here's what he says:

"In the last few years, I have gone from lionizing this president's courage and fortitude to being dismayed at his incompetence and now to being resigned to mistrusting every word he speaks. I have never hated him. But now I can see, at least, that he is a liar on some of the gravest issues before the country. He doesn't trust us with the truth. Some lies, to be sure, are inevitable - even necessary - in wartime. But when you're lying not to keep the enemy off-balance, but to maximize your own political fortunes at home, you forfeit the respect of people who would otherwise support you - and the important battle you have been tasked to wage."

Be sure to read the full post. It's devastating.

O Cananda

I spent Canada Day at the Annual Smithsonian Folklife Festival, at which one of the cultures highlighted is Alberta, Canada. Please excuse the silly outfit. I biked down to the Mall. Many great exhibits, arts and crafts and, most particularly, music.

The Folklife Festival is my favorite annual event in Washington. I've been to every one for the last 15 or so years. Some are better than others, but each has given me at least one moment of grace. I particularly like the music. Watching Washington tourists stumble upon some musical culture and just start dancing literally brings a tear to my eye.

It is the most genuine thing that happens in Washington, year after year.

The Bash Brothers

Here are two pictures of my son, Danny, and his best friend, Walter. They've been playing baseball together since they were about 2 years old, thanks mostly to Walter's father, Luke. I'm a marginal fan/player, at best.

The younger picture was taken in 1998, the picture below was taken last weekend. A latter day Maris and Mantle.

Barney On the House Raid

I had been supportive of the House leadership on the FBI raid of Congressman Jefferson's office. I saw it as another example of the Imperial presidency under George Bush. Given my fourteen years working in the House of Representatives, I am also very sensitive to the Constitutional perogatives of the Congress generally and the House specifically.

My old boss, Barney Frank has forced me to change my position. As usual, he gets to the core of the issue and his logic is unassailable.

TalkingPointsMemo reprints his remarks on the floor of the House. This now represents my position.

Here's Barney's money quote:

"What we now have is a Congressional leadership, the Republican part of which has said it is okay for law enforcement to engage in warrantless searches of the average citizen, now objecting when a search, pursuant to a validly issued warrant, is conducted of a Member of Congress."

And why or why did Nancy Pelosi not consult Barney before she signed on to the Hastert letter?

White Man's Burden

There's a story in today's London Times about the U.S. Embassy in Iraq. It is stunning. Supposedly, we couldn't send a lot of troops into Iraq for post-war stablization because it would send a message of imperialism to the Iraqis. Yet, while the rest of Iraq suffers and $22 billion has been wasted on a reconstruction program that has not even brought electricity and water to pre-war conditions, we are building the biggest embassy in the world in Baghdad.

Read this and be shocked with the monumental hubris and folly.

In the chaos of Iraq, one project is on target: a giant US embassy - World - Times Online: "

Building work at the 104-acre complex, known locally as 'George W's palace', is supposed to be secret, but it is impossible to disguise the cranes dominating the Baghdad skyline





In the chaos of Iraq, one project is on target: a giant US embassy
From Daniel McGrory in Baghdad





THE question puzzles and enrages a city: how is it that the Americans cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a couple of hours a day, yet still manage to build themselves the biggest embassy on Earth? "

Chutzpah

Talk about making lemonade. Now the Republicans are claiming that the mid term elections will be the key to Bush's comeback. We certainly can't underestimate these people. After all, I was convinced that the Swift Boat thing would go away once the New York Times proved unequivocably that their whole case was a lie.

But isn't this like the Captain of the Titanic saying that the ice bergs are the key to his journey across the Atlantic?

Elections Are Crux Of GOP's Strategy: "Elections Are Crux Of GOP's Strategy
Bush Aides Look to Midterm Vote as Way to Reverse Slide
By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, May 22, 2006; Page A01
Confronting the worst poll numbers seen in the West Wing since his father went down to defeat, President Bush and his team are focusing on the fall midterm elections as the best chance to salvage his presidency and are building a campaign strategy around tax cuts, immigration and national security."

Trust

I'm watching the hearings on Michael Hayden to be CIA chief. He seems like a pretty decent guy and is probably well qualified for the job. And I'm sure he is a patriotic American who will do the right thing in the job.

Here's the problem. Our intelligence services rely on the trust of the American people that things done in their name that they can't know about are being done within the spirit and values of our country. This administration has betrayed that trust. This is a president who claims he does not have to follow the law when he believes he is protecting the national interest as he sees it. Why should we trust that he will feel any constraint whatsoever in how he conducts secret intelligence policies. And, even if we trusted Bush, there is no way in the world we can trust Cheney, who we know is the real president when it comes to intelligence matters.

These hearings are a charade that have no meaning because we cannot trust our own government. It's sickening...literally.

Rove Indictment Less Certain

In the clip below, the Wall Street Journal reports that Karl Rove is going to speak to the American Enterprise Institute today. Not the kind of thing you would expect of someone who was informed of his own indictment on Friday.

Here's another post, offering a blow by blow on the situation. I'm leaning toward the view that the previous speculation is untrue.

WSJ.com - Republicans Seek to Revive Their Activists: "The low poll numbers are also among reasons why votes in Congress are likely in coming months on social issues crucial to conservatives and why White House political adviser Karl Rove, in an address to the American Enterprise Institute Monday, is expected to lay the foundation for an attack on Democrats, perhaps by reminding his audience that liberal leaders and ideas would return if Republicans lose control of either house of Congress. "

Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators

This is a fascinating blog. They guy writes like news stories, which makes them sound really credible. But it is a blog.

Here's a blockbuster bit of news. Hasn't been picked up by any of the other blogs, never mind the news media. It'll be interesting to watch this unfold. Won't it be something if this thing breaks here.

Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators: "Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t Report
Saturday 13 May 2006
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.
During the course of that meeting, Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment charging the embattled White House official with perjury and lying to investigators related to his role in the CIA leak case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning."

Name One Thing

As we survey the wreckage wrought by the Bush Administration, I would love to see some pollster ask the following open-ended question in a poll:

Name one thing the Bush Administration has done right in six years in office?

I am certain that the vast majority of respondents would be stumped.

We know Bush's view. He caught a 7.5 lb. perch in his private lake. Of course, as Daily Kos points out, the largest perch ever caught was 4.3 lbs. He must have had it weighed by the CIA.

Moussaoui Gets Life

I was strangely relieved that Moussaoui got life in prison instead of death. I oppose the death penalty in all instances. I don't believe the government should have the power to take a life.

But it was more than that. I admired the jurors for not stampeding him to the gallows to vindicate the victims of 9/11. They clearly couldn't bring themselves to execute a man for a lie. They must have known that they will take a lot of heat for their decision. It was a courageous act.

They are doomed

I'd been hearing about this $100 gas rebate plan, vaguely out of the corner of my ear. I can't remember where. But I had assumed that this was some lame-brained scheme by one of the crazy lefties (who I love) in the Democratic Party. I only just found out that this was proposed by the Republican Senate leadership. Predictably, their right wing has erupted in opposition. As though more proof were needed, this demonstrates that they have no principles whatsoever....none.

Sharp Reaction to G.O.P. Plan on Gas Rebate - New York Times: "WASHINGTON, April 30 � The Senate Republican plan to mail $100 checks to voters to ease the burden of high gasoline prices is eliciting more scorn than gratitude from the very people it was intended to help. "

A Must Read - United 93 Review

I do not expect to read a more powerful review of the movie, United 93, than the one by the President of the National Air Traffic Controllers Union, John Carr. A particularly powerful quote is posted below, but I urge you to click through and read it in its entirety. And then take a quiet minute to think.

The Main Bang: United 93---A Review: "When the movie ended, just like we all knew that it would, with sudden swift blackness and no audio, the only sound which filled the theatre was the mournful, heaving sobs of the family members themselves. The credits rolled but the audience sat transfixed, afraid to move, afraid to intrude on the pain and the sorrow and the suffering unfolding just a few short rows back. Those in attendance eventually filed out of the auditorium, speaking in the hushed tones of a funeral. "

Fitzmas 2006

OK, here we go again. Check out this post of a blog that I'd never heard of before. Interesting that something can seem so credible. According to the bio blurb at the bottom, the guy is a legitimate journalist and his blog reads that way. In any event, if the quotes from Rove's attorney are accurate, it seems we may yet see a Rove indictment.

We've been here before. And the Libby indictment was a pretty big disappointment, given the build up. Once burned, twice shy. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

But, then again.....

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042006Z.shtml

David Brooks

David Brooks is the conservative columnist for the New York Times. He spoke to a group today of which I am president. We are the House Administrative Assistants Alumni Association, an organization of ex-chiefs of staff to members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Brooks is a very appealing and engaging man. His conservative credentials are unchallenged. But he comes off as almost shy. He is self-effacing and very funny. And extremely thoughtful. He spoke to us about a philosophy of government that he supports called "energetic limited government." He claims this approach to government goes back to Alexander Hamilton and was sustained by Abraham Lincoln. It's last advocate in the White House was Teddy Roosevelt. It's guiding principle is that government should give people the tools to accomplish social advancement, but should not guarantee social advancement. I could live with that. Unfortunately, the policies of modern day conservatives actually retard social advancement and institutionalize the concentration of wealth.

Contrarily, Brooks discussed the growing social divide in America based on educational achievement. His compassion is clearly genuine and he obviously believes that conservatism is the correct path to a just society. It is hard, however, to reconcile his view of conservativism with actual consequences of the long term dominance of conservatism over national public policy. The results are the opposite of the values to which his aspires.