Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

More Staff Trouble in Thompson Campaign

Linda Rozett, the communications director for former Sen. Fred Thompson's (R-Tenn.) presidential bid, has left the campaign, according to an internal e-mail obtained by The Fix.

"It is my duty to let you know that Linda Rozett is no longer with our committee," wrote campaign manager Bill Lacy. "I will have to make a lot of tough decisions to make our venture successful, and this was one of them. Linda is a talented, professional and gracious lady who will be missed."

He added: "But in the limited amount of time we have I feel it critical to have a communications point person with significant campaign experience."

Rozett's departure follows that of press secretary Burson Snyder last week.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 27, 2007; 9:53 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Friday Presidential Line: No Rest for the Weary
Next: LA Senate: Kennedy Switches Parties

Comments

breaking news via shotgun mike at minnesota public radio. Nothing earthshattering, but very Fix-worthy...

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2007/08/theres_politick.shtml

MN GOP #2 man Marty Seifert pledges to put his machine behind the Thompson 'campaign', and is working on Pawlenty to support Thompson in the event that McCain drops out. Though the Romney campaign is also apparently working on the governor.

Posted by: bsimon | August 28, 2007 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Chris -

These people have way too much time on their hands - and on the subject of hands. Someone at the beginning of this thread hit the nail on the Fred, er, head when he nominated FT for the Mario Cuomo Handwringer of the Year award. I would also say, he is my "hands" (no pun intended - yeah, right) down nominee and winner for the Wes Clark "Imploding Before it Begins Award."

As to all the handwringing in Rome, er, Washington, D.C. - it stems from a universal does of guts and b.....lls. From the feckless politicians to the modern day courteseans of which you are one - do you still bow and scrape b/f that picture of HRC every a.m., or are you and the rest of the Roman media doing the Larry Craig - skulking off to random airport restrooms?

Posted by: Jonathan S. Tuttle | August 28, 2007 1:10 AM | Report abuse

"Did Attorney General Gonzales make the right decision by stepping down?
Yes 84% 64939
No 16% 12060
Total Votes: 76999 " www.cnn.com

Pretty steady all day. You gained one percent in 30,000 votes, gop. Good for you

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 7:00 PM | Report abuse

tSST tSST tSST. fRICKIN REPUBLCAINS. pLEASE PRATICE WHAT YOU PREACH. Or better yet. STOP PREACHING FAMILY VALUES.

Individual choice, remember.

"Larry Craig's pro-Romney video taken down


By: JONATHAN MARTIN | 08/27/2007 06:38 PM
Blog: Video on arrested senator's site touted his family values."

Posted by: RUFUS | August 27, 2007 6:53 PM | Report abuse

"So Ted Nugent roams a concert stage while toting automatic wea*ons, calls Barack Obama "a piece of ---" and says he told Obama to suck on one of his machine-guns. He also calls Hillary Clinton a "worthless bi**h" and Dianne Feinstein a "worthless wh**e."

That Nugent, he's a man's man. He talks the talk and walks the walk, right?

Except when it was time to register for the draft during the Vietnam era. By his own admission, Nugent stopped all forms of personal hygiene for a month and showed up for his draft board physical in pants caked with his own urine and feces, winning a deferment. Creative!...read on

When he had a chance to actually arm himself with a machine gu* he cowered in his own excrement. That's Hannity's man alright. And Roeper makes a great point about the Dixie Chicks. (h/t Peer)"


Yeah. Ban the dixie chicks for speaking out against fascsim. Yank them off every radio station. Now, how about your draft dodging coward freinds like bush, cheaney, oreilly, nugent.

Pratice what you preach. If you believe so much zouk, go fight for what you beleive as I did.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 6:15 PM | Report abuse

don't those wet airport restroom floors get your knees all soaked, anon coward?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

"It is not paranoia if they really are out to get you."

:)

Do your thing boy. It's not the ghost rider. It's the ghost writer. You like that?

do you thing boy. Ignore the coward fascsit hypocrite peanut gallery. If they could comabt truths with lies they would. It is impossible. What do they do instead? Try and silence us, or in news buy us out.

Good thing the internet is still free. They may aresst us for what WE type but at least we are FREE to type it right? So far

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

"Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men's public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.

Craig's arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.
"

Posted by: frickin republican's | August 27, 2007 6:06 PM | Report abuse

I sense the presence of a zouk. He runs the VRWC. It is not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 6:04 PM | Report abuse

:)

wHAT are you propogating fascsits scared of? CAn't you compete in the marketplace of ideas? Why are you always trying to silence those you disagree with. If you can't compete, your movement must not be worth a hill of beans.

Think about it. Why silence me? What good are you if you need to silence me? Read up. Learn things. Do the work. Then you will have the knowledge to TRY and take me on. Until that day all you can do is pray I decide to not blog one day. Pray for that day all you want. My being here is tied to lying fascsits in power. You want me gone help me get fox off the air. You want me gone help me make sure hillary does not win the d nom.

If you are unable or unwilling to do that. Sit there in front of your computers and type you garbage. But keep my name out of you mouth.

What are you people scared of? Truth?

Posted by: RUFUS | August 27, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

in the past 2-3 months, how many top level advisors have left fred thompson's non-campaign campaign already? 8? 10? or more?
if he can't put together a campaign team for more than a week or 2, how in the world would he ever be able to run the executive branch?

Posted by: ROZm | August 27, 2007 5:59 PM | Report abuse

word - bsimon

you would not get a single complaint, even from the ACLU

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

And, while you're at it, if you wanted to delete the posts by rufus and the anonymous person, few would complain.

TIA-
bsimon


No one stops anonymous coward and rufas. this is the idiots' blog now.

Posted by: we b dum | August 27, 2007 5:56 PM | Report abuse

WALLACE: Let's talk about Hillary Clinton, who, I think it would be fair to say, has run an almost error-free campaign up to this point but hit a bump, a speed bump, this week.

She told New Hampshire voters what will happen if there is another terrorist attack. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, D-N.Y.: That will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world, and so I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Because everyone knows the Libs won't do anything if we're attacked - that they are weak, that an attack will remind the country what is at stake. Even Hillary knows it.

Posted by: we are the weak | August 27, 2007 5:44 PM | Report abuse

yOU ARE THE COWARD ZOUK. aS THE GHOST WRITER SAYS.

"Why aren't you in iraq fighting the good fight aginst the REAL enemy."

Scared? Seems to be a common trait amoungst gop'ers. Must be because you people live in a cave and have never done anything of signifagince your selves. To scared to. Instead you measure you worth with dollar signs. And you wonder why the rest of humanity is not like you.

Why do you hate this country so much zouk? If if you love it why not join the military LIKE I DID. Former Army indantry soldier 11B

Posted by: RUFUS | August 27, 2007 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Earlier in the year, the nation's political commentators dubbed McCain the frontrunner despite the fact the Giuliani consistently led in the polls. Today, of course, Giuliani remains on top in the polls and McCain's campaign is struggling to stay afloat. Some reporters have suggested that Giuliani only leads because voters don't understand his position on the issues. But, Rasmussen Reports polling shows that two-thirds of Republicans already view the former New York City Mayor as politically moderate or liberal. Perhaps, the conventional wisdom held by reporters is more out-of-synch with Republican Primary Voters than Rudy Giuliani.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/media_analysis_is_off_on_gop_r.html

Posted by: rasmussen | August 27, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Welcome to the rufas and coward blog. where nonsense comes in two flavors - ignorant and imbecilic. Occasionally they allow some hate-spewing liberal interlopers. the rest of you stay away.

CC - can you post names at the top of the text so we can easily skip the waste of space morons you have somehow attracted to this home for the criminally stupid? You are lucky to get 10% content from the 'other than' coward, rufas and the spiteful haters. what happened to your blog? any democrat with half a brain or any conservatives seems to have headed for the hills.

Posted by: the lizard | August 27, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Fred Thompson? Mr. Excitement? The Candidate from Elmer Fudd? Someone's been throwing her gazongas around.

Posted by: Philip V. Riggio | August 27, 2007 5:17 PM | Report abuse

"from where will the future military leaders come?"

That or regent. http://www.regent.edu/

"christians" that think jesus was a wuss. That hate that want to kill anybody not like them. "Christains" that feel the best way to show the grace and goodwill of the lords is to force his teachings on the next man. Jesus doesn't need that. His word is the will of God. God doesn't need us to force feed his/her teachings down anybody's throught.

Those that God wants God will call. God is for freedom and peace. Not opression and war. Stop using my religon as a tool to work your fascsim. HAs worked for a century. The tide is turning. What changed? We now have the internet. This is way the internet is the gop public enemy #1 ie patriot act.

Sell-out fascsit traitors. I sincerly hope when the evidence comes out YOUR leaders get 30 years each. Taht will make sure this TREASOn never happens again.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"from where will the future military leaders come?"

Bob Jones University'

gag me wiwth a shovel

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

"from where will the future military leaders come?"

Bob Jones University

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Not that you care anyway. YOu gop'ers are just going to parrot more lies. The worst part is, you know they're lies. Now who's the crazy person?

You can't tell me O'Reilly believes half of the things he says. Does that make him a lying propogandists? Yes. Now what are these gop'ers pushing? Drugs, oil, war, willful ignorance. What is that? FAscism

That is why I call you people fox and oreilly lying propogating fascists. Not because I'm evil or have an agenda. IT'S BECAUSE IT'S THE TRUTH.

And why do you people do it. For you country? For your children?

No. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Sell-out fascist traitors. You have sold this country out. Your greed has caused almost 4000 of my brothers and sisters deaths, and hundreds of thousands of foreginers. All the while blanketing me religon for your protection.

A year and a half of political relevance gop. Use it wisely.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

We are destroying our military - 44% of the most recent West Point class able to decide to leave after its 5 year commitment to the Army did so - from where will the future military leaders come?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

"What would you have them do gop, fire everybody. How do you think fox handles this? Why is it the gop rallies against issues that they themselves have no intention of doing themselves."

Wasn't that fox news and shepard smith I saw nearly in tears during the landslide that was the 06 elections. Wasn't that fox trying to scare up gop votes. Non-bias news coverage?

The media on a whole may be liberal (based on fundraising numbers) but what are they reporting? The reporters may be liberal (like most americans, but like most americans they are slaves to their greedy sell-out fascsit bosses. Watch CNN, watch MSNBC (not counting olberman). Your going to tell me they slant left? Only gop'ers who haven't watched cnn in ten years (when fox came on the scene) could they that. SO you don't watch and parrot what your avatars tell you.

I am not here to convince you or anything. I'm here to show you gop'ers you are on the wrong side. You back with the red coats again. Selling out the country

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse

reason, thanks for responding. I am heartened that you are not vouching for that slime; whether it comes from Rs, or Ds, or just plain gaybashers. That one source is so vitriolic the writer cannot even keep straight [pun intended] who among his supposedly gay targets are conspiring together about what.

Instead of the "International Zionist Conspiracy" or the "Illuminati" or the "one-worlders" the writer is sure that we are all to be gender neutralized by the insidious "gay conspiracy". It would be amusing as parody if it were not so overwhelmed by raw hate.

End of coffe break. Bye.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 27, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

and everyone sees through your posting a cut and paste from some crackpot rightwing website every two minutes and signing it with a different name. we're not as simple as you.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"When Karl Rove's resignation was announced, many of its staffers erupted in cheers. They were rebuked by their executive editor, Dave Boardman.

Good for the rebuking. But I am all for transparency and candor in journalism, as in life"

What would you have them do gop, fire everybody. How do you think fox handles this? Why is it the gop rallies against issues that they themselves have no intention of doing themselves.

You gop'ers are a joke. At least you give me an opening to show independant thinkers what you people are about.

Ok. So if you are a gop'er you are free to do or say anything you want. Everybody else is a slave to the gop? And you people think the gop has a shot in the next election? The years of throwing non-conservaitives in the crazy house for not living in your crazy world are over. You did that for many years. No more. YOur party of fascsit lies and hypocricy has a year. Use it wisely.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

'why do I spend the entire day here, moron?'

that's what i asked you, zouk. why do you? you say you hate everyone... and no one likes you either.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I have lost all self-control and find myself helplessly posting all the junk from Kos I gathered today. someone help me.

why do I spend the entire day here, moron?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Given the often shocking record of what US intelligence officials have done over the years, why does it matter if such activities are carried out by contractors? The answer patently goes to the question of accountability. Public servants who are bound by oaths to the Constitution and the law understand what the measure of behavior must be, even if they fall short of it. Activities involving the surreptitious, especially, have properly been reserved to public institutions subject to political oversight. Private parties, bound by contract, operate at remove from such limit and accountability, which may be why borderline activities like interrogation or rendition are increasingly farmed out to them.

But there is a deeper problem. I know the dark history well, yet I also know that the American intelligence services were founded, then staffed across two generations, by patriots -- people who acted primarily out of loyalty to this country. If at times they acted wrongly, they mainly did so with a sense of higher purpose. Among the most gifted and well educated people in government, intelligence officials could always have done better in the private sector, but personal gain was never the point. The ethos of service informed their commitment. That was broadly true of the military, which is why "service" is its synonym. But that word, as in "secret service," defined the essence of the government's most dangerous work -- dangers both physical and moral.

But now intelligence activities, like security functions in Iraq, are increasingly carried out for the sake of large paychecks. True belief has its problems, but so does the no-belief of greed. The Post reported that "outsourced" intelligence operatives cost, on average, twice what comparable government employees are paid. This has resulted in something new -- the resignations of trained and trusted officials who take jobs with contractors to perform the same operations, but with far higher pay. Whether their activities are different or not, they themselves are. Such ex-officials are dismantling politically accountable structures, and undercutting an ideal of selflessness that formerly made the custodians of state power its most important check.

Readers of this column may know that the Defense Intelligence Agency was founded by my father in 1961.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/27/outsourcing_intelligence/

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

"What might that mean? That Democrats are ill-equipped to cope with terrorism? That only Republicans care about terrorism? Why is it always assumed that terrorist attacks against us will aid the Republicans, politically? Could it be that even Democrats believe that their leaders are too weak to face them?"

No. It means you gop'ers are in line with the terrorists and have the same goals as religous fundementalists. It means the gop has sold this country out. It means the gop has choosen party over country. Like when gas prices dropped before the 06 elections

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY What can we say? Patriot Act, Habeas, refusal of the administration to be accountable, assertions of the executive that it is not subject to Congressional oversight, assertion of the unconstitutional doctrine of the Unitary Executive, the invention of a new definition of the Office of Vice President - these are but a few of the examples of how this administration cares not for the liberty of the people.

Others can write more cogently on this than can I. This writer is but a government teacher, rushing to begin another school week, and thus typing in haste, not editing, hoping that this meagre assemblage of words may in some small way express the outrage and anger and sorrow at what has been happening to the country in which he has lived for more than 6 decades, which he served in the Marines, as a local government civil servant, and now as a public school teacher.

This administration has clearly proved one thing, but it is not that government is inherently untrustworthy. Rather that final adjective should be applied to this administration and those who enable it. At a minimum they are not worthy of public trust. They are at least negligent in fulfilling their oaths, for the president to take care that the law be faithfully executed (signing statements, anyone?) and for the Congressional enablers to support the Constitution. In many of their actions they are far worse, deliberately destructive of the vision expressed in the Preamble, put forth by our Founders, after a decade of government that was not fulfilling the dream expressed in the Declaration, a dream to which they pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor. The leadership of this nation shows no honor when it places the gaining of private wealth over the protection of the public good.

Remember, it is not just intelligence and support functions this administration has been privatizing, removing from accountability. It is private prison, and it is police and military functions, through companies like KBR, Blackwater, Custer Battles. Iraq has enabled them to put together the infrastructure and organizations which can also be used at home. Deliberate lack of oversight has facilitated the transfer of billions of dollars of public funds to such organizations. And our liberty and future as a nation are at stake.

Posted by: x | August 27, 2007 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Rufus is on point and knows what he talks about. You people should listen to him.

Zouk you are a joke. To bad only dittoheads are laughing. What will you do when your party is irrelevant? What will you do when hannity rush oreilly fox and the rest of your avatars are gone?

Posted by: Mr Mojo risin (rufus) :) | August 27, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Zouk is a fascsit

Posted by: Mojo risin | August 27, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse


PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE the Bush administration seems to interpret this clause as only applying to public assistance, to which it is philosophically (or should I say theologically) opposed. But it is here that preservation of our natural environment is addressed, it is here that education is covered. For the latter the administration has expanded mountaintop removal mining, has sought to open ANWR and other protected areas to petroleum extraction, has fought protection of endangered species. The administration argues that it is helping the economy by diverting water intended to preserve salmon runs for large-scale commercial irrigation. It may be assisting certain favored constituencies, but it misses the idea of "general" as applying to the public at large. That is why we have PUBLIC schools, because they are part of a "commons" that we all share, from which we all benefit. This administration does not believe in such an approach. After all, if you are sick you can always go to the emergency room, right?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Mrs. Clinton last week backpedaled on her tepid endorsement of the military surge in Baghdad after being challenged by the John Edwards campaign. She pointed out that any military successes had failed to spur the government of Prime Minister al-Maliki to reach a political compact with leaders of other factions.

don't try to go left on me - I can cover every side of an issue at once - said clinton

Posted by: clintoon | August 27, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse


PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE - clearly this administration has ignore the word "common" in that phrase. The privatization of intelligence functions is only the latest in a long span of outrages, whether it has been the privatization of support functions for the military, the weakening of the military by the disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq on false pretenses, or most especially the weakening of our defenses - and in this regard our ability to provide domestic tranquility - by the abusive use of Guard forces in an illegal (at least under international law) and abusive conflict in Iraq, this nation has seen is overall defensive strength weakened more in the 6+ years of this administration than during any other of my lifetime - and I was born in 1946. We are destroying our military - 44% of the most recent West Point class able to decide to leave after its 5 year commitment to the Army did so - from where will the future military leaders come? And remember that our Guard units have large numbers of first responders, and their repeated deployment overseas weakens our police and fire units, necessary not only for common defense but also domestic traqnuility.

Posted by: x | August 27, 2007 4:34 PM | Report abuse

We are the party of bumper sticker mentality, and we are looking for a new one this time around.
We can beat that bumper sticker war. all our thoughts can fit into a single, very short sentence - Carville says so.

Posted by: Dimdem | August 27, 2007 4:34 PM | Report abuse


INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY the people and the nation cannot be tranquil when the government cannot even respond to disasters like Katrina that it knows are coming. Its continued willingness to use fear to gain political advantage certainly undercuts tranquility. Opposing equitable governmental assistance in medical insurance and prescription drug coverage in favor of the profits of of PhARMA certainly does not make the nation tranquil. Constantly issuing terror alerts to distract the media and the nation from its transgressions is not conducive to domestic tranquility. And its willingness to remove restrictions on access to deadly weapons certainly leads to a situation of greater domestic violence.

Posted by: x | August 27, 2007 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"Whether you're more inclined to support Demcratic Liberalism or Republican Conservatism, both sides are best served when they have to work with the other party. "

mUCH RESpect and I agree with your point. But the whole post sounds like a cop out to me. The r's are not responsilbe for their downfall? The fact that the d's were not there to stop them is the problem? Resonsibility. Morales. Accountability. Not just bumber stickers. They are ideals

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 4:33 PM | Report abuse

The Preamble to the Constitution makes clear that our government exists for certain basic purposes. The first, "to form a more perfect union," was a recognition of the failure of government under the Articles of Confederation because of the inherent weakness of that national government. Under this administration, with the craven acquiescense of the Congress, we have seen moves to abandon EACH of the key phrases which follows, not exclusively via privatization, but always with a clear disdain for the role of government serving the larger public.

ESTABLISH JUSTICE - move after move has undercut this ideal, whether it was the sneak and peek of the original USA PATRIOT Act and/or the proposals first made for the vast expansion of government powers, the NSA spying and now the 6 month extension of spying powers just done, or the assertion of an Attorney General that habeas corpus is not constitutionally guaranteed, this administration has expressed its disdain for the idea of of establishing a justice that it cannot trample

Posted by: x | August 27, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

arroll describes as what has been happening in this administration as outsourcing run amok while rightly noting that the current extremes are but a logical outgrowth of a process driven by conservatives at least since Reagan, that even the country's basic needs can be "best met" by private enterprise, thus leading to what Carroll describes immediately before that final paragraph:

government has been in slow motion collapse, with the ineptitudes of Iraq as final proof of its untrustworthiness.

It is only with that last sentence that I might express disagreement, since we yet to see the full impact of No Child Left Behind in undercutting the idea of the value of public schools, although things like the outstanding Fairfax County Public Schools starting to see increasing numbers of school fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress is the first canary keeling over. Still, I believe Carroll is saying something important, of which I wish to explore some implications which occur to me.

Posted by: x | August 27, 2007 4:31 PM | Report abuse

President Assad understood something that too many Americans didn't. Then as now, the anti-war debate is conducted as if it's only about the place you're fighting in: Vietnam is a quagmire, Iraq is a quagmire, so get out of the quagmire. Wrong. The "Vietnam war" was about Vietnam, if you had the misfortune to live in Saigon.

But if you lived in Damascus and Moscow and Havana, the Vietnam war was about America: American credibility, American purpose, American will. For our enemies today, it still is. Osama bin Laden made a bet - that, notwithstanding the T-shirt slogan, "These Colors Do Run": They ran from Vietnam, and they ran from the helicopters in the desert, and from Lebanon and Somalia - and they will run from Iraq and Afghanistan, because that is the nature of a soft, plump ersatz-superpower that coils up in the fetal position if you prick its toe. Even Republicans like Sen. John Warner seem peculiarly anxious to confirm the bin Laden characterization.

Depending on which Americans you ask, "Vietnam" can mean entirely different things. To the New York Times and the people it goes to dinner parties with, it had "few negative repercussions."

And it's hardly surprising its journalists should think like that when Times publisher Pinch Sulzberger, in a commencement address last year that's almost a parody of parochial boomer narcissism, was still bragging and preening about his generation's role in ending the war. Joseph Nye, dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard (which is apparently some sort of elite institution for which people pay big money to receive instruction from authoritative scholars such as professor Nye), told NPR last week: "After we got out of Vietnam, the people who took over were the North Vietnamese. And that was a government which preserved order" - if by "preserved order," you mean "drove a vast human tide to take to the oceans on small rickety rafts and flee for their lives."

But, if you're not a self-absorbed poseur like Sulzberger, "Vietnam" is not a "tragedy" but a betrayal. The final image of the drama - the U.S. helicopters lifting off from the Embassy roof with desperate locals clinging to the undercarriage - is an image not just of defeat but of the shabby sell-outs necessary to accomplish it.

At least in Indochina, those who got it so horribly wrong - the Kerrys and Fondas and all the rest - could claim they had no idea of what would follow.

To do it all over again in the full knowledge of what followed would turn an aberration into a pattern of behavior. And as the Sirik Mataks of Baghdad face the choice between staying and dying or exile and embittered evenings in the new Iraqi émigré restaurants of London and Los Angeles, who will be America's allies in the years ahead?

Professor Bernard Lewis' dictum would be self-evident: "America is harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend."

Posted by: mark | August 27, 2007 4:31 PM | Report abuse

bsimon: "Clinton v. Giuliani, 2008" will guarantee a third party endorsed by Dobson, at least. I don' think Hagel or Bloomberg would be a part of it, however.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 27, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Carroll has a particular concern about DIA - his father founded it in 1961, choosing not to leave the service and take a lucrative job at Ford because as a product of immigrant culture he had a love of this nation, a desire to give back to make it better. He could not have accepted the idea of a profit-driven motivation for the agency's core functions. And as Carroll rightly notes, there is a real issue of accountability when government officials leave service to do essentially the same job for perhaps double the pay:

Whether their activities are different or not, they themselves are. Such ex-officials are dismantling politically accountable structures, and undercutting an ideal of selflessness that formerly made the custodians of state power its most important check.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

But what the antigovernment movement missed is that attacks on the public sector equal assaults on the public. When the high calling of public service yields to the highest bid, the corruption is total: the heart of government -- the military -- becomes mercenary; the mind of the military -- intelligence -- becomes privatized. Citizenship itself is universally gutted, yet another source of our malaise.

That is the final quote from an op ed in today's Boston Globe by James Carroll entitled Outsourcing intelligence. Equally pertinent is what he says in his opening paragraph, where after noting that Bush is destroying something essential to our democracy because of the move by the Defense Intelligence Agency to privatize some of its functions, he writes

This raises the prospect that hired guns, instead of sworn officials, will be conducting covert operations, spying missions, interrogations, "renditions," surveillance -- the whole dangerous complex of shadow activity that began as the government's most sensitive responsibility.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

oh here we are, again, on climate change ranting... christ what an obssessive idiot you are zouk. does exxon pay you well?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:25 PM | Report abuse

New research from Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Lab concludes that the Earth's climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the IPCC assumes. Schwartz's study is "in press" at the Journal of Geophysical Research and you can download a preprint of the study here.

http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf

Posted by: settled only in the minds of fools | August 27, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Whatever dirty stuff is being spread around on Fred is prbably put out by Rudi's campaign -- he has the sleaziest operators, even worse than McCain's.

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2007 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Yvo de Boer, has admitted that the principle behind the Kyoto Protocol is "illogical." He noted that the idea that developed countries must tackle their own emissions expensively while developing nations continue to emit without restriction did not make sense and that it would be cheaper for the world if developed nations paid developing nations not to emit on their behalf. On the surface, Mr de Boer's rethink is welcome, but it is actually an example of green imperialism. Developing nations must be allowed to develop, and this laudable goal of the original Kyoto agreement must not be forgotten. Taken literally, Mr de Boer's suggestion forces the developing world into environmental welfare dependency, remaining poor to keep the world's emissions low. It seems that Mr de Boer has realized that Europeans have failed to reduce emissions and wants someone else to do it for them. Instead, he should realize that Europe's experience shows that the game of emissions reduction might not be worth the candle and that other approaches are needed

Posted by: al gore is a kook | August 27, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

The governments of Lithuania and Malta have announced they could join Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia and Latvia in challenging the EU's emissions-trading scheme, after the Commission ordered the two states to lower their proposed limits on national industrial carbon-dioxide emissions by 30% and 46% respectively.

The eight Eastern European countries argue that the strict limits imposed by the EU executive are too low and will hurt their economies at a time when they are still playing 'catch-up' with the rest of the Union. They hope that the European Court of Justice will overrule the decision

Posted by: we won't Al | August 27, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

We Have Never Been at War with Eastasia [Iain Murray]

In this commendably balanced story by New York Times journalist Andy Revkin about the recent NASA temperature data fiasco, a certain someone at NASA plays a Jedi mind trick:

Dr. Hansen and his team note that they rarely, if ever, discuss individual years, particularly regional findings like those for the United States (the lower 48 are only 2 percent of the planet's surface). "In general I think that we want to avoid going into more and more detail about ranking of individual years," he said in an e-mail message. "As far as I remember, we have always discouraged that as being somewhat nonsensical."

Huh? A few sample feature articles from the NASA website:

2005 Warmest Year in a Century (note the use of an "always discouraged" league table on the left)
2006 was Earth's Fifth Warmest Year (oops, another discouraged league table!)
Earth Gets a Warm Feeling All Over (about 2004 - ooh, and look what's on the left there!)
Global Temperature Trends 2003 (no league table, but begins "The year 2003 is the third warmest year in the period of accurate instrumental data" and prominentlty mentions the two warmer years)
Global Temperature Trends 2002 (well whaddaya know, begins "The 2002 meteorological year is the second warmest year in the period of accurate instrumental data")
In contrast to what he told Andy, Jim Hansen and his colleagues serially discuss individual years and rank them. Perhaps it takes a Court Jester to point that out

Posted by: iain | August 27, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Does Hillary really have an "electability" problem? The charge is thrown around with a startling degree of recklessness by our pundits, who more or less base this assessment on little more than the fact that someone else said it before they did.

But now Chris Bowers of OpenLeft.com has taken what may be the most comprehensive look yet at the polling data in an effort to answer this question. His methodology was basically to compare Hillary's performance against Rudy with that of Barack Obama and John Edwards. Bowers' conclusion: While Hillary was outperformed against Rudy by the other two Dems this spring, more recent polling demonstrates conclusively that she's erased this disadvantage and now beats Rudy by slightly larger margins than her Dem rivals.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

$500 million worth of eco-hypocrisy [Ken Green]

Like Hilary Clinton, Al Gore's paranoid tendencies are rarely far below the surface. Where Hilary likes to invoke the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy as her personal bogeyman, Al Gore likes to invoke the 'well-funded climate denial industry' as his arch-enemy.

"There has been an organized campaign," Gore told a forum in Singapore, "financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community."

Having worked for three different think-tanks over the years, I can personally attest that most are incapable of allying in any kind of ongoing organized campaign, so the predicate of Al Gore's comments are clearly wrong. But the more interesting question is who, exactly, is the real "well-funded climate industry?" An article today in Ad Age tells the tale:
"But now one of the most hotly contended pitches out there is for the Alliance for Climate Protection, the organization formed last year by Al Gore. Four elite agencies -- Crispin Porter & Bogusky, Bartle Bogle Hegarty, the Martin Agency and Y&R -- are squaring off for the business and are expected to present to the former vice president himself early next month, according to executives familiar with the review. The budget for the "historic, three-to-five-year, multimedia global campaign," as the request for proposals puts it, is contingent on how much money the alliance raises. Media spending will likely be more than $100 million a year."

That's right, $100 million per year. Al Gore, who seems to think it is sinister for other people to spend money in order to communicate their ideas about sound public policy is going to outspend the entire mass of climate policy critics tenfold in order to spread his message of environmental catastrophism to the public.

Will Newsweek damn Gore's eco-industry funded hysteria campaign to lead a charge back to the stone age? Don't hold your breath

Posted by: ken | August 27, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

'we hate, the refer we're Libs' wrote something. But it couldn't be right, as the Libs definitely DON'T hate the reefer.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Judge Crater writes
"HRC as POTUS might have the opposite effect depending on how she interacts with Congress... Can the thinking R's regain control? Nominating Guiliani seems like evidence to the contrary. I would like to see a Bloomberg-Hagel ticket as a means of setting up a third party that might best represent that group."

First, regarding HRC, yes I think if she's nominated the inevitable rebirth of the GOP will be postponed.

Regarding Bloomberg-Hagel, I see that Broder is again promoting the Unity 08 / potential Bloom-Hagel run. I think that's an extreme long-shot; but then again, if the race is Clinton v. Giuliani, 2008 could turn out to be an extremely interesting year... Interesting enough for a real shot at the Presidency by a 3rd party? I dunno. It seems implausible.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse


'With horrifying regularity, Iraqi politicians are kidnapped, maimed, murdered.'

that's right zouk - by other Iraqis. that's their problem isn't it? if they don't want to stop their civil war, how are we going to?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

When Karl Rove's resignation was announced, many of its staffers erupted in cheers. They were rebuked by their executive editor, Dave Boardman.

Good for the rebuking. But I am all for transparency and candor in journalism, as in life. We all know that Seattle Times people are partisan liberals -- so it is with most of the American press. Why shouldn't they let it all hang out? Why should they pretend to be neutral or objective? Many of these people are hardly less opinionated, less biased, than those of us who toil in opinion journalism. The difference between us is that we NR-niks -- and Nation-niks and so on -- are good and labeled.

You are perhaps familiar with my line: The anchorman of CBS News should attend Democratic fundraisers, as Dan Rather did. The Supreme Court reporter of the New York Times should march in pro-abortion rallies, and then report on them, as Linda Greenhouse did. I mean, this is the mind and spirit of CBS and the NYT. It's the pretending -- the faking -- that's maddening.

Posted by: jay | August 27, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

I heard the story about what hackers did to the U.N. website: They broke in and posted statements denouncing the United States and Israel. How could anyone tell the difference? How could anyone tell the difference between this vandalism and the U.N.'s regular fare?

Posted by: we hate, therefer we're Libs | August 27, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Did you see what Michael Dukakis said the other day? Speaking of the '08 election, he said, "We're probably not going to outstrategize them [the Republicans]. And some crazy guy will blow up a building with three weeks to go, you know, and then we'll be back in Bush-land again."

What might that mean? That Democrats are ill-equipped to cope with terrorism? That only Republicans care about terrorism? Why is it always assumed that terrorist attacks against us will aid the Republicans, politically? Could it be that even Democrats believe that their leaders are too weak to face them?

Posted by: the party of weakness | August 27, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

We're all supposed to be down on Iraqi politicians, I know: They miss their "benchmarks," they go on vacation, they're just not what we want them to be. But, you know? Every now and then, we should remind ourselves what Iraqi politicians risk.

I myself was reminded when I saw a headline not long ago: "Iraq Governor Killed by Bomb." Actually, two of them were killed, within about a week: Mohammed Ali al-Hassani and Khalil Jalil Hamza.

With horrifying regularity, Iraqi politicians are kidnapped, maimed, murdered. And the same things happen to their wives, children, friends. Yes, we have our frustrations with them -- with those who serve in Iraqi politics. But you know? If you're an American politician, what's your biggest concern? Your reelection? That the guy next to you has an office bigger by seven inches?

Posted by: impromtus | August 27, 2007 4:02 PM | Report abuse

again, zouk is go good at describing himself. 'the lizard' indeed.

why do you spend the entire day here, moron, whwen you say you hate it so much? why don't you leave then?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse

All good points bsimon but I think that the intellectual side of the R's is gone for good, buried alive under the onslaught of right wing noise and too-cozy corporate/billionaire connections. The R's are victims of their own tactics that have completely polarized the GOP into "wif-us-or-agin-us" knee-jerkism if any of the sacred cows are questioned. Much of Congress has been ensconced in this way.

I think this more or less agrees with what you wrote.

Things could change if the D's win in a landslide in 2008. However, as we have already seen the Congressional R's have begun to migrate away from the kooky, rigid extremes they adopted during the Tommy Delay years and that trend would accelerate with D's in control of both the legislative and executive branches. If Obama is POTUS that trend would be ensured as he would be more likely to power share and this might marginalize the noise machine. HRC as POTUS might have the opposite effect depending on how she interacts with Congress.

Can the thinking R's regain control? Nominating Guiliani seems like evidence to the contrary. I would like to see a Bloomberg-Hagel ticket as a means of setting up a third party that might best represent that group. The tactic of appealing to the lowest common denominator is way too successful for the GOP to pass up and they will not change their approach any time soon.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 27, 2007 3:47 PM | Report abuse

I agree with you bsimon. There are certainly decent, honest paleos-- I know some. But they too are deeply concerned with the direction their party has taken and by the increasingly loony and bloodthirsty tone of the base's discourse and the contempt for law that many of their currently elected officials seem to hold.

In fact, I know two conservatives who switched parties last year, in the hope that losing an election might change their party's direction. But that doesn't seem very likely. I don't know what it would take --unfortunately the propagandists and pundits have more influence than the thinkers.

Posted by: drindl | August 27, 2007 3:47 PM | Report abuse

that was zouk everyone!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 3:42 PM | Report abuse

It took 14 minutes for ignorant coward to post an insult in response to someone else, ostensibly zouk, his imagined enemy. He must be short of caffeine today. Keep a close eye coward, you don't want any zouks showing up to spoil your moonbat mutual admiration party. I am sure your real world life (te he) can be put on hold for a while. Kos and huff and nation will be there when you come back. you musn't allow any zouks to enter this site without announcing it, this is your solemn duty and charge. Can you handle it?

Posted by: the lizard king | August 27, 2007 3:39 PM | Report abuse

This looks more like a staff purge. Getting rid of everyone at once would hurt him, so he's spreading it out.


Reason,

I have no intention of voting for Thompson, but the only rumor I have heard is that when Thompson was single he got another mans wife pregnant back in Tennessee. Her husband in his anger and hurt was telling just about anyone who would listen and some who didn't want to listen. As the rumor goes; this resulted in the marriage breaking up and Thompson paying child support. I think the rest of the rumors are just political dirty tricks as right wingers are now canalizing their own party. Or Rove is running McCain campaign?

Posted by: DC in Tennessee | August 27, 2007 3:38 PM | Report abuse

drindl writes
"To be frank, quite a few 'conservatives' I've met seem to operate on that level most of the time--constantly on the attack. Look at Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, they can't go 2 minutes without attacking dems. Or look at old zouky here, that's all he does all day long."

It is important to note that there are conservatives who don't fit that stereotype. Granted, that's not the conservatism that makes headlines or even much attention - but there is a school of thought, political thought, that has reasoned, well thought out positions on the issues. The problem is that the larger 'conservative' movement has found traction with their cadre of talk show hosts and spinners that are constantly on the attack - and this branch of 'conservatism' seems to have lost touch with the intellectual base of the party/movement.

I suspect that some of the more serious conservatives are going to be able to wrest control of the Republican party from the win-at-all-costs set that seems to have lost sight of what they used to fight for. What will probably have to happen is the Dems win the presidency & maintain control of Congress, which will rapidly lead to overreaching on the part of the Democrats. Eventually the people will realize - whether consciously or not - that our system works best when the control is split between the parties. Whether you're more inclined to support Demcratic Liberalism or Republican Conservatism, both sides are best served when they have to work with the other party.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 3:32 PM | Report abuse

You forgot the one thing that lizards do that should be intimately familiar to the liberals on this website, because it is all they do here - excrement!

so far today we have nonsensical excremental postings from drindl, rufas, jane, anon coward, figures, greenwald (but I repeat myself), loudon voter, and truth hunter.


You all should move to the land of misfit liberals and enjoy your intense hate and total ignorance amongst yourselves.

and you can't even win a battle with an imagined enemy. how utterly weak and misguided you all are. Just like your candidates. If you ever come up with an original, inciteful or interesting idea, I may just fall out of my chair, or off my rock as we lizards tend to repose.

Posted by: the lizard king | August 27, 2007 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Michael Chertoff's name is being thrown around as a possible replacement for Alberto Gonzales. I'm re-posting this to highlight why he's not eligible for such a post. Tim Russert did a good job of grilling Chertoff over the absolute failure of his department in combating the Hurricane Katrina disaster. (Originally posted 9-4-05)

Download (0) | Play (0) Download (0) | Play (0)

Chertoff: Well, I think if you look at what actually happened, I remember on Tuesday morning picking up newspapers and I saw headlines, "New Orleans Dodged the Bullet." Because if you recall, the storm moved to the east and then continued on and appeared to pass with considerable damage but nothing worse."

Russert exposed the lies that have been coming from the administration for their lack of response to Katrina. Here's the full transcript from MTP. He admitted that he got his intel about NOLA from the media! The Democratic Party should oppose him if the nomination comes through.

RUSSERT: I want to stay on this because this is very important. You said you were surprised by the levee being broken. In 2002, The Times-Picayune did story after story-and this is eerie; this is what they wrote and how they predicted what was going to happen. (full transcript below the fold) "


No to more GOP cronies. Time for government officials who care more about country than party.
Right Judge?

Posted by: Info for the judge. | August 27, 2007 3:26 PM | Report abuse

'you have turned into some cackling village idiot that everyone remarks at on first encounter but eventually just ignores and steps over.'

nobody describes zouk better than he himself.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I don't beleive for one minute Bush read 94 books. Unless they were all 'My Pet Goat.'

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2007 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: reason | August 27, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

'And it may be as big a motivator of human response as duty, or grace, or love'

Even greater than those, Mark, having to do with natural selection, survival, etc. But it's closely tied with hatred. All the emotions centered in the Lizard Brain are the most primitive, and by the nature of our construction, the strongest.

'The Lizard Brain's reaction to everything, if it has one at all, is limited to the following...eat, attack, run away, or mate.'

'In the Lizard Brain's world, things are pretty black and white, and never our fault. This makes it a poor consul for the colorful stratosphere of human relationships.'

To be frank, quite a few 'conservatives' I've met seem to operate on that level most of the time--constantly on the attack. Look at Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, they can't go 2 minutes without attacking dems. Or look at old zouky here, that's all he does all day long.

Posted by: drindl | August 27, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Check this site out:
www.stewwebb.com/fred_thompson_gay_shampoo_night_club.htm

Posted by: reason | August 27, 2007 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Rufas - you are nuts and we are all ignoring you. that is why no one is calling you out. how about you post one off topic rant about face sits, traitors, propoganda and the rest and then if the situation changes you can return and post an update. I think we all got it the first time, many months ago.

you have turned into some cackling village idiot that everyone remarks at on first encounter but eventually just ignores and steps over.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin, it's my own speculation that F. Thompson may opt out of the race. But the rest of them are facts and rumors I have gathered from this blog, DC political Report and Fox news.

First off, it's fact that he didn't raise 3/4 the money he predicted. He predicted $5 million and raised what, a little less than $3 million. His marriage to Jerri is advertised by most news agencies as a hoax, and there are suggesstions that she wears the pants. If he can't run his household, how can he run the nation? People have been leaving his staff, not joining him. There is talk that that too, is because his wife is too hard to get along with. He has no CEO experience, as I know of. Thompson's past works for lobbyists, especially for Planned Parenthood, is being shunned by conservatives. His record as a senator contribute's to his laziness. He often skipped out early, even when votes were taking place and missed a good % of them. I'm uncertain as to his actualy % of votes missed, but compared to his peers, it's pretty low. I'm sure you can find that out by looking going to yahoo and looking up www.ussenate.com and find his record of missed votes. There was a story in some paper in Tenn. about him being lazy, even back in high school. In that story, it was told that he wrote in his high school yearbook "the lazier a man is, the more he intends to get done tommorrow." If that's true, that explains why he hasn't joined the race. Plus, I have yet to hear any type of policy specific's from Thompson. All of these things are at least partially factual.

Now, the story goes that when he skipped out on votes to leave the senate early, he was kind of a playboy. He went out looking for women and also went with men. As far as I know, that is unconfirmed and is a rumor. Although, it is a rumor alot of people are yacking about. I get the feeling if he get's into the race, we will learn more about it. Dave Vitter is having a hard time getting forgiveness from Conservative's b/c he had an affair with a woman, think of Thompson's chances of getting forgiveness for working for a pro-abortion group and for having homosexual relationships! This could also be a reason he hasn't entered the race.

Well, I'd just posted this on the other Presidential blog and came back up to see someone else has left Fred's campaign. So I posted it here as well.

Posted by: reason | August 27, 2007 3:04 PM | Report abuse

"Rufus, please stop posting your incessant off-topic rants & personal discussions with imaginary enemies. I wouldn't single you out, but, well, you asked to be singled out. "

I must be smarter than the average bear, then. Right? I'm operating on a higher plane than you gop'ers. All you can see is money. Stupid peices of paper. YOu live and die for this. You waste your entire live for that which means nothing.

You care about that which means nothing. And that which means everything means nothing to you. black is white up is down. Gop'ers!!! you are living in a false reality. Why?

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Did Attorney General Gonzales make the right decision by stepping down?
Yes 85% 38915
No 15% 6868
Total Votes: 45783


There's that pesky 15-20 dittohead vote. Sabotaging the poll again ( and the country).

"Living in denial." That is the state of the gop now. It's called "living in denial". Not as good a ring as my "willful ignorance" but it means the same thing

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 2:44 PM | Report abuse

rufus says
"You don't see people calling me out, do you."

Rufus, please stop posting your incessant off-topic rants & personal discussions with imaginary enemies. I wouldn't single you out, but, well, you asked to be singled out.

Thanks in advance-
bsimon

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 2:36 PM | Report abuse

nO ONE'S STOPPING YOU FROM PSOTING ZOUK. But what do you do? Attack others un-justly while spouting lies and propoganda. If you are lying all day expect people to call you on it.

You don't see people calling me out, do you. It's not because I'm a "lib" it's because I'M NOT LYING. What a novil concept. If you are going to come here to lie spin and discredit you should expect people to call you on it. Nobody's stopping you coward gop'ers from posting, are they? What are you afraid of? That you can't compete in the marketplace of ideas anymore? Your right. So what do you do instead. Lie spin and discredit. That is your right zouk. Jsut don't expect the rest of the planet to live in the same dream world as you. Reality calling zouk. Wecolme in. Join us. You need to change first though. Not be more liberal. But less fascsit traitor.

Posted by: RUFUS | August 27, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse

blarg - It was the Republican controlled Florida legislature that moved the presidential primary into January not the Florida Democratic party. They included a provision to require a paper audit trail for all ballots so the Democrats in the legislature would support it.

The RNC is also threatening sanctions against the Florida Republicans. The Florida Democrats are contemplating legal action.

The Thompson campaign is doing a good imitation of the gang that couldn't shoot straight. But I do not believe that this development will leave the field to Giuliani and Romney - I think it is a great opportunity for Huckabee.

Posted by: JimD in FL | August 27, 2007 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Very tactless - to publicly criticize a staffer you just fired. I hope that top level staffers will remember that behavior if they are approached by the Thompson campaign.

Posted by: Christopher | August 27, 2007 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Deb writes (quotes?)
"Rove recently told Rush Limbaugh that he beat Bush last year. The Score: Rove, 110 books; Bush, 94.

If Schroeder really wanted to show how big-picture her thinking is, she might have pointed out the Rove-Bush book competition as an example of what conservatives can do."


It is an example, but I'm not so sure its one they should trumpet from the rooftops. I'm an avid reader - have been my whole life. There have probably been years in which I've read 94 or 110 books. Those would have been grade school or high school years though. Now, as an adult, I find that with a 40+ hr work week, not to mention a spouse and a child, reading a book every three or four days is an impossibility.

So, I have to ask, if the President is already spending a well-publicized amount of time exercising on his mountain bike, and is reading 94 books a year, how much time is left for, you know, Presidenting?


Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 2:18 PM | Report abuse

This is the second time Bush's attorney general has resigned. Maybe sooner or later people will catch on that he has no respect for the law and separation of powers

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 2:13 PM | Report abuse

while they are at it, can they delete any poster who doesn't rabidly attack conservatives?

We free thinking Libs don't need any additional information to make up our "minds".

Posted by: mindless Lib | August 27, 2007 2:06 PM | Report abuse

From bush's statement. So it LOOKS like he is not going to try his usual shading dealings for trying to put someone int heir during out of session.

"I've asked Solicitor General Paul Clement to serve as acting attorney general upon Alberto Gonzales' departure and until a nominee has been confirmed by the Senate."

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 2:05 PM | Report abuse

"Fear is very real. And it may be as big a motivator of human response as duty, or grace, or love. Would that it were not so."

The only thing keeping it around it people telling you it exists. It is merely brain sensors in your mind, trying to keep you on point. Fear is not something to live your life by or have it mold your actions.

A TRUE chrsitian knows this. A TRUE chrsitian does not pray to GOd to save his grandma. A true chrsitian does not ask God for money. A true Christian does not ask for God to remove fear from you so you can live a "perfect" harmonious life.

A TRUE chrsitian trusts in God and allows God's will do be done. He/She does not pertend to know God's will. A true chrsitian is a slave to God's will, or better put a part of it.

We cannot live in a safe box, why would we want to? How would we grow. Death comes for us all. It is not to fear. We will all go when we are ready.

But what we don't do is mold our life because of fear. What we don't do is change the coutnry that used to be about freedom, BECAUSE of fear.

I don't think the GOP is really scared, other than fear of the "liberals" taking "their" money. That's waht it all boils down to. Money $$$$$$$$$$$$. Those that need it, and those that have in and want to protect it.Moeny is nothing but paper. It's the things that money buys that's important.

If coca puffs (for exapmle) decides to produce foor to combat hunger world wide, how much would it cost them? Would it hurt their business to drop hundreds of punds of food on africa? What about pepsi cola? How much does this really cost. Cost and reward. The industrial revolution. All our ill's can be cured, as a world. Who is stopping this. The gop? The greedy? The fearful?

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Well they're at it, bsimon ask them to delete the poster deb/bert zouk. all the same person -- a troll.

'not letting facts get in the way, ' gives you away, Deb. zouk has characteristic phrases he uses all day long, every day.

zouk, sorry -- we are not as stupid as you.

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2007 1:55 PM | Report abuse

FRED IS JUST ANOTHER SO CALLED "GOOD OL BOY"
BUT WHAT IS HE GOOD AT???? BEING A CHARACTER ACTOR AND MARRIED TO A WOMAN ALMOST TOO YOUNG TO VOTE DOESNT QUALIFY HIM AS A LEADER IN ANY CAPACITY. WEVE HAD B GRADE ACTORS [REAGAN AND GOV. ARNOLD S.] IN OFFICE AND RECEIVED NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE FROM THEIR SLANTED AND INCOMPETENT PROGRAMS.

Posted by: TOM MCCLAIN | August 27, 2007 1:54 PM | Report abuse

"Rove recently told Rush Limbaugh that he beat Bush last year. The Score: Rove, 110 books; Bush, 94. "

Wow. Since they SAID it it must be true. Not like the gop has ever lied before of anything. Why do you continue to beleive what the gop tells you and not what they are actually doing.

You have two options deb. Neither are good for the gop. If they gop is smart and enlightened, as you claim, then how have they been wrong on every issue.

1. Either they are incompetant morons, That don't know what they're doing.

2. Or they do know. And are in line with our enemies. Look at the dividends. I don't think you gop'ers are morons. There's to much money flying around for that to be the case.

I do think you people are sell-out fascsit traitors who choose money party and outside influences over country.

So which is it deb. Are you people morons or sabotage traitors. Either way you lose

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:51 PM | Report abuse

JD and bsimon, the four region rotating plan, even with IA and NH up front, is better than what we have in 2008. "Perfect", by definition, is a political impossibility, I think. Better than what we have is a step in the right direction.

Fear is real.

Rufus, I have known fear that immobilized me, stark terror at age 6 while dangling through a broken ceiling of a storage shed on our farm above the sharp blades of a field disk, fear that surged my adrenaline and allowed me to survive injury, fear for my little child's life, fear of losing a case that I thought should be won, fear of the coiled large snake I stepped on barefoot when I was 11; I could go on.
Fear is very real. And it may be as big a motivator of human response as duty, or grace, or love. Would that it were not so.

See y'all later.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 27, 2007 1:51 PM | Report abuse

"Outgoing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' last day, Sept. 16, is also Mexican Independence Day."

It comes full circle. Frickin republcians. Choosing outside influences over coutnry,a s always. This was always about race and using it to hide. For all the "hating of the race card" the gop sure loves to use it don't they.

I knew this was about race when he said no ag had ever stepped down due to blah blah blah. Race card. Condi as the secratary of state must mean the gop is not racist also.

those games only work with you gop'ers. Everybody else in the world is in the real world. You gop'ers are living in la-la land.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I looked into the poll -- which liberals have hailed as proof of their intellectual superiority -- and there's not a lot there in "the whole picture." The poll found that among people polled who read at least one book in the last year, liberals read nine books and conservatives read eight.

When I called Michael Gross, associate vice president of Ipsos public affairs, to find out more about the Ipsos poll, he told me the one-book difference "is within the margin of error, it's not a statistically significant difference."

Rove recently told Rush Limbaugh that he beat Bush last year. The Score: Rove, 110 books; Bush, 94.

If Schroeder really wanted to show how big-picture her thinking is, she might have pointed out the Rove-Bush book competition as an example of what conservatives can do. That is, she might have tried to promote book sales.


Instead, she fed into all the happy snipes some nine-book Democrats throw at GOP -- most notably the president's -- intelligence, or lack thereof.

Yes, Bush is so dumb he graduated from Yale, earned an MBA from Harvard, was an F-102 fighter pilot -- and was elected Texas governor and U.S. president twice. All his critics should be so stupid.

You see, the Bush-is-dumb crowd is busy looking at the whole picture. Forget the accomplishments; what's important is how Bush mispronounces "nucular."

There is no happier liberal conceit than the notion that lefties are sophisticated thinkers, while conservatives are pea-brains. So eager are Dems to believe those self-laudatory stereotypes that Schroeder glommed onto the poll results without understanding what they were. And were not.

Let me note that both parties have their share of pinheads -- partisans who not only do not think, but also do not want to.

But in her zeal to brand conservatives as bookless simpletons, Schroeder reveals herself to be rather uncurious about the details of the AP-Ipsos poll.

While she berated conservatives for buying into slogans, she flaunted her prejudices. Her idea of thinking in paragraphs: not letting facts get in the way.

Posted by: Deb | August 27, 2007 1:42 PM | Report abuse

"I have to confess that I was overjoyed to hear that crackpot Cindy Sheehan has carried through on her threat to run against nutty Nancy Pelosi."

Right bert. The left is nutty? Right. The real world beconds. I say people living in a alternate reality created by fascsits and austrailias are the nutty ones.

Go Cindy. Show the democrats that talking a good talk is not enough. WE want action. We want traitors and sell-outs to the nation to get time, real time in jail.

Go Cindy go. Ignore the peanut(brain) gallery like bert. They hate and fear all. Forget the divide and conquer of the gop. They have no hope but sabotage of this nation. If we sit down and talk about issues the gop is removed from politics. They have a year left of relevance. Then all this power they think they have will be striped. Then what power do you have GOP? None, right. So the only power you people have is in your mind.

Does that make YOU crazy? I think so. The gop has lost it's mind/compass. You have a year and a half left. Use it wisely.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Two men are walking through a feild and view a flower.

The first man views the flower in all it's glory and thinks it is beautiful. He see's the flower it was made to be seen. He sees the bee's pollenating it. He see's it as a small peice in the bigger picture of life. To love God is to love oneself. To love God, for this man, is to love the flower.

The other man see's the same flower. In order for him to enjoy the flower, he must pick it. He must have it. He must add the "it" (flower) to the him (by owning it). In picking it what happens? If he kills the flower does he hate God (the universe)? Or is he just ignorant to the larger scheme of things?

Think of these things GOP. Think about Alvin and the chimpmunks. Which one are you?

Christians! Think about the religous right and how it corelates tot he teachings of YOUR MASTER/God. Think about what you people have done to this great nation. Now, where do we go from here? Continue down the same path, or change. What is stopping us? FEAR? Fear doesn't exist. Anybody that would tell you diferant has a brdige to sell you.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:34 PM | Report abuse

I used that little 'email us' link above to send the following to wash post admins. They may be too busy to do much, but its worth a shot...


There's a bogus post for an adult site at 12:21 PM on the following page:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/08/more_staff_trouble_in_thompson.html#comments

And, while you're at it, if you wanted to delete the posts by rufus and the anonymous person, few would complain.

TIA-
bsimon

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I have to confess that I was overjoyed to hear that crackpot Cindy Sheehan has carried through on her threat to run against nutty Nancy Pelosi. I may even send her a couple of bucks for her campaign. The way I see it, whoever represents the radical 8th congressional district in San Francisco can't help being a national embarrassment. But at least if it's Ms. Sheehan, she won't be Speaker of the House, a position that places Mrs. Pelosi a scant two heart beats away from moving her spooky left-wing agenda and her humungous ego into the Oval Office.

Posted by: bert | August 27, 2007 1:33 PM | Report abuse

CAse in point, on the above post.

Olberman's continuous use of CC and other Washington post people including Dana milbank. While CC and milbank talk the good tlak on the show, what are they doing here? Gop propogandists? Milbank is from yale and was in the famous skull and bones.

Beware of the yale plan.

ANd now that allegory

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for that JD. i blog here for a reason. This blog has a link to Mr. Olberman, the only tv "journalist" reporting real news right now. Fox and the gop has destroyed the media. Radio, internet, tv. There are still people out there fighting the good fight, in the name of che.

Olberman is the lone show reporting from the "leftist" perspective. Not that I beleive olberman is a liberal. He is a capitialist filling a niche. Althgouh I am angered by some of his positions and guests, he is all the left has in terms of news. Beggers can't be choosers. I'll just happy SOMEBODY, anybody is reporting real news. 5 years ago that wasn't teh case.

So I'm trying to spread news. Not only hoping Olberman jumps on it, but those pointed here by olberman. This site will be a left rallying point. I know CC is a gop propogandists. I know he wouold pull this site from the web the instant it got to big for him to control. But hey. That is the gop. To show all independant thinkers waht the gop is about.

They claim to love free speech while silenceing all non-gop voices.

MAybe to much information. MAybe on a level you people can't understand. If you remember nothing else I say, remember this.

New York can't be trusted. Nothing, espiecally news and news people, from new york should be takin at face value. O'Reilly, Olberman, Rosie, Fox, nancy grace, bill maher,I could go on forever with media people from new york molding public policy on both ends from new york. Trying to sabotage both sides.

NEW YORK IS THE NEW BABYLON.

Greed, hate, intolerance, fear, lies.

And olberman is from ny also. What scared me was when I heard Rosie O'Donell and NAcy Grace were close freinds. That scares me. As does the yale plan.

GOP sabotage. YOu think you know someone by what they say. What if they are biding time until they can pull the rug out from under us. They play all sides. They control all. Fox news has partnered with Olberman's station (msnbc) to make a youtube liek webstie and compete. It's all about $$$$$. The propoganda comes from NY. American control then comes from NY. NY then controls the world. "He who controls the past, controls the future."

Big Brother is watching you. I got an allegory for you.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

JD writes
"I cannot understand why the Dems and Repubs don't just get together and implement the 4-part rotation system for the country, so each region gets a turn at being relevant.

I'm sure this will p!ss off Iowa and NH as they would lose their special place."


There's a proposal in the Senate along those lines. Or, if not in the Senate, its a proposal being made by Senators - our freshman, Sen Klobuchar is involved. In that version though, IA & NH are still given their 'traditional' spots at the front of the queue. Which, in my opinion, defeats the purpose.

I'm also not convinced that merely moving the circus to a new region every four years will work any better, though it is my contention that the process is faulty & by design can't help but produce faulty candidates. In the computer biz, we call this GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out. This is not meant as an assessment of the candidates specifically, but of the process.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Chertoff's record:

'FEMA was unable to fully support the accuracy and completeness of certain unpaid obligations, and accounts payable, and the related effects on net position, if any, prior to the completion of DHS's 2006 PAR. These unpaid obligations, as reported in the accompanying DHS balance sheet as of September 30, 2006, were $22.3 Billion or 46% of DHS consolidated unexpended appropriations at September 30, 2006. [emphasis mine]

To give some idea of proportionality, in fiscal year 2005 the entire Grants and Training (formerly know as State and Local Government Preparedness, a/k/a grants to get working radios for NYC firemen and protection for bridges, tunnels, chemical plants and nuclear facilities) was only $171 million.

So, follow me here, FEMA has lost and/or failed to account for a sum of money that is almost half of DHS's entire budget and 130 times greater than the amount of money that the Department of Homeland Security is willing to spend to secure the homeland.

Close to half the budget for DHS, missing and unaccounted for -- in any corporation, that would be a fraud investigation of massive proportions. In government, that's sheer incompetence with your tax dollars. Certainly worth a lot of questions, isn't it?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin writes
"I did not see that "reason" ever revealed the gossip source; if anyone else has heard the same rumors, reprinted by "Truth" at 11:09A, from where do they spring?"

Ah, I see them now. Who knows about the more salacious details, they should be ignored. Regarding the overriding allegation that not only is Thompson not now, but has never been a serious candidate, that rumor has dogged him from the start. I recall seeing speculation that his 'candidacy' was designed to boost McCain's appeal. The idea behind that theory was to get someone with 'gravitas' and 'charisma' to step in and distract from the Romney & Giuliani 'media darling' campaigns. Once the focus returns to traditional conservatism and/or Republicanism, Thompson steps down in lieu of McCain.

That seems like a desperate plan, at this point.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Blarg, I cannot understand why the Dems and Repubs don't just get together and implement the 4-part rotation system for the country, so each region gets a turn at being relevant.

I'm sure this will p!ss off Iowa and NH as they would lose their special place; I'm sure the buggy whip manufacturers were angry when they invented the car, too.

Posted by: JD | August 27, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Monday said he reluctantly accepted the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, whose "good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons."

the lying scumbag defends the lying scumbag...

Posted by: figures | August 27, 2007 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone have any thoughts on the scuffle between the DNC and Florida? The DNC stated that no state can have its Democratic primary before February 5th. Now the Florida Democratic Party is trying to move their primary up to January 29th. The DNC has responded by threatening to revoke Florida's delegates to the convention unless they move the primary back.

Personally, I side with the DNC. There has to be some order to the primary process. Every state wants to be important in the primaries, but not every primary can be in January. The Florida Democrats are right that this system is unfair, but their change doesn't fix anything. They should move the primary back past the February 5 date that was previously agreed to. And after this primary season is over, the DNC should develop some new way of determining when the 2012 primaries will be, and get the states to buy in to the plan beforehand.

Posted by: Blarg | August 27, 2007 1:12 PM | Report abuse

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Homeowners trying to sell last month faced the biggest glut of homes on the market in about 16 years, as declining sales and growing problems in the mortgage market helped push home prices down for the 12th straight month.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 1:12 PM | Report abuse

bsimon, thanks for the definition; I knew it was something like that.

I did not see that "reason" ever revealed the gossip source; if anyone else has heard the same rumors, reprinted by "Truth" at 11:09A, from where do they spring?

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 27, 2007 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"You'll be happy to know the author agrees with your politics on this issue."

I checked it out. Good. Looks like his head is on right. Wait a second. There's more blogs on Wa PO? What!!!!. Why wasn't I informed about this :).

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Rufii, if you want to talk about the AG, there's another blog on WaPo about that subject:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/benchconference/2007/08/post_48.html?hpid=topnews

You'll be happy to know the author agrees with your politics on this issue.

Hey Loudoun Voter (and I apologize for the coming threadjack), where do you live in Loudoun? You seem quite liberal, which is fine, but I'm interested in your position on the anti-illegal immigration legislation passed by your county (and mine, I'm in PW county).

Posted by: JD | August 27, 2007 12:57 PM | Report abuse

We did it :)

"You did it! U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has resigned.

As a Democracy for America member, you played a major role in the battle to return integrity to Washington. Here's what you did:

Signed over 100,000 petitions calling for Gonzales to go.¹
Ran three hard hitting media generating ads.²
Ran newspaper ads in five major media markets.³
Delivered your powerful message to Members of Congress by phone, through email and in-person
Our strategy works. When we all work together and channel the power of the progressive grassroots - we win! But we aren't done yet. We have more work ahead to remove all Republican corruption from Washington.

Support DFA in the next challenge - kicking the Republicans out of the White House - with a contribution of $25 or more today."

Posted by: another bites the dust | August 27, 2007 12:56 PM | Report abuse

guess that leaves Makeup Mitty and Ghouli Guiliani...

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 12:51 PM | Report abuse

My issue with this site personified. Let's talk about a candidate that isn't a candidate. Let's spend all day talking about someone who hasn't even declared. Let's talk about how his campaign is done. Guess what? There is not campaign.

Rather than talking about the relevant topics of the day (today would be the AG), CC would blog about that which has no bearing.

Frickin republcians. If you can't win cheat. Doesnt' work on independant thinkers. I'll blog about whatever I want. I choose to come here for a reason. And it's not to blog about CC's topics.

What a waste of time. It's funny if you take a step back and look at it. I know it's not a game. I know thousnads of people are getting murdered. But it's a game to the gop. It's a funny game to these people.

Rather than wasting time talking about thompson or huckabee, why not talk about that which has actual bearing on our political process. Thompson has no chance, he never did. The only gop'ers that have a shot are mitt and rudy. Not because of the support of the base, but because or a small amount of support on the other side. Can't you see that gop. YOu party is about to be gutted. The far right is done for a generation, and rightfully so.

What have you people done right? And you think all your wrongs and errors qualify you for MORE public service. Only in america would doing your job badly qualify you for more work. Frickin republicans

Posted by: RUFUS | August 27, 2007 12:45 PM | Report abuse

bsimon, I saw Huckabee on FNS yesterday, I thought he was OK but still way too far back. It's almost September, it's later than people think.

Of course, that's what people said about another Arkansas governor who was in a similar position about 16 years ago.... but it's a different world now. The primaries are moved up, *early* money is more important, and I don't see a 3rd party Perot-type to play spoiler this time around.

Posted by: JD | August 27, 2007 12:42 PM | Report abuse

The worst is Romney. Pro-abortion flip-flopper. A complete phony.

Posted by: Iowa caucusgoer | August 27, 2007 12:34 PM | Report abuse

the biggest piece of trouble in the Thompson "Campaign" is that Thompson is not a candidate now and never will be. He's fraud - - an actor playing a candidate. How surprising.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 27, 2007 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Is Abraham still with the campaign? Or did he go back to lobbying for Qaddafi?

Posted by: Jan | August 27, 2007 12:24 PM | Report abuse

'porn' -- they used to be a little more subtle. geez.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 12:23 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: porn | August 27, 2007 12:21 PM | Report abuse

More amusing news from the non-campaign campaign.

Posted by: Alan in Missoula | August 27, 2007 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Are we seeing the Thompson "campaign" crumble before it even gets started? And does this hand the GOP nomination to Giuliani?

http://political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | August 27, 2007 12:10 PM | Report abuse

If Romney is the GOP's only realistic "conservative" alternative to Rudy they are in deep trouble. Mitty's "conservatism is a mile wide and an inch deep. He's the opportunist's opportunist.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 27, 2007 12:03 PM | Report abuse

"They want to show the current d feild? ""

Shoot

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"Who are you doing player? "

How. How are you doing

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Thompson's done. Romneys the nominee. Its a done deal.

Posted by: George | August 27, 2007 11:53 AM | Report abuse

"I'm sure most of you have heard the latest words of wisdom from Ted Nugent by now. You know, where he calls Barack Obama a piece of sh*t and says Obama and Hillary Clinton should suck on his machine gun? Where he calls Diane Feinstein a worthless wh*re? Right. He actually threatens Hillary's life."

What's up ghost poster (that's my label for you :))

Who are you doing player? I saw that. I tried to post it last week but it got blocked due to his language. I had to appologize to CC for that one. If someone said this about Bush the secret service would be knocking.

Do these gop'ers think this is ok? "Edwards is a fag**t. Obama is a terrorist. They want to show the current d feild? "

And this is ok normal politics? Switch sides. Look at this from the other angle. I think Bush is in with the terrorist and making money off the death of americans. That's pretty bad right. And even I don't say about bush what nugent and other right wingers said about the left.

The double standand and the hypocricy is out there for all independant thinkers now. The gop has a year and a half before they are removed from the public shpere for good. I can't wait.

Without the sabotage we can get back to building a better nation and world. Without the gop game of sabotage and divide and conquer. For what? $$$$$$$$$$$$$

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:51 AM | Report abuse

'I think if we talk around the region of two to two-and-a-half years, if we work in a full partnership with the United States, to have a draw-down. I think we are in the right direction.'

So Awad Allawi, the next 'leader' of Iraq, thinks we should stay in Iraq at the current troop strength for two and a half more years. Except that our own military says we can't do that, we simply don't have the troops, it will break the force.

Allawi is backed by the Saudis. They didn't bring us down with 9/11, maybe they are doing it this way.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:49 AM | Report abuse

I've got to think that after Bob Beckel and Alan Colmes got through with Sean Hannity tonight (8/24/07), even blind Republican viewers saw through his hypocrisy as he tried to defend rocker Ted Nugent's vile comments about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama by likening them to Democratic criticisms of Bush administration war policy. With video.

Beckel was outstanding as he demanded that Hannity answer "yes or no" whether he would denounce Nugent for calling Obama "a piece of sh*t" who should "suck on my machine gun" and Clinton, a "worthless b*tch" who should "ride into the sunset" on his machine gun. But, hilariously, Hannity insisted that his comparison to Obama's comments about the war in Afghanistan was apt.

Colmes wasn't shabby either. He pointed out Hannity's outrage over the Dixie Chicks' mild comments about Bush, then played a clip of Nugent calling for the arrest of a left-wing blogger who had joked about shooting him. Even the Republican guest, Karen Hanretty, called Nugent "a lunatic."

Hannity, on the other hand, stuck to his guns (pun intended) and provided many moments of unintentional humor. My personal favorite: his over-done, ostentatious laughter from the other side of the desk as Colmes played Nugent's Obama "joke."

http://www.newshounds.us/2007/08/24/hannity_pummeled_on_his_hypocrisy_over_ted_nugent.php

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse


I'm sure most of you have heard the latest words of wisdom from Ted Nugent by now. You know, where he calls Barack Obama a piece of sh*t and says Obama and Hillary Clinton should suck on his machine gun? Where he calls Diane Feinstein a worthless wh*re? Right. He actually threatens Hillary's life.

Anyway, on the heels of last week's opus by a writer for a prestigious neocon [Phillip Atkinson] and conservative think tank calling for Bush to declare himself emperor and then the mass enslavement, or execution, of the invaders [Mexicans], which must be followed by an American invasion of Mexico to enforce American language and values upon the Mexicans, and Rush Limbaugh saying that the Democrats are going to buy the black vote by invading Darfur, it's been quite a week for racist and eliminationist talk from mainstream right wing sources.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:44 AM | Report abuse

www.salon.com


How do you people think a recess appointment of an AG will go right now? Do you think the GOP has the balls to try it. And if so what are the repercussions for this great nation? Why not just divide the nation down the middle and have two americas. Gop and not. You people have done so much damage to this country. Let's jsut split it up. You people obviously can't live in a civialized society with civilized people. Fascists sell-out traitors.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:43 AM | Report abuse

"The Democrats' responsibility in the wake of Gonzales' resignation
(Updated below - Update II)

One of the most blatantly dishonest political hacks ever to occupy the position of U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, has now resigned. This is a real moment of truth for the Democratic Congress. Democrats, who have offered up little other than one failure after the next since taking power in January, can take a big step toward redeeming themselves here. No matter what, they must ensure that Gonzales' replacement is a genuinely trustworthy and independent figure.

That means that Democrats must not confirm anyone, such as Michael Chertoff, who has been ensconced in the Bush circle. Instead, the DOJ and the country desperately need a completely outside figure who will ensure that the prosecutorial machinery operates independently, even if -- especially if -- that means finally investigating the litany of Executive branch abuses and lawbreaking which have gone almost entirely uninvestigated, as well uncovering those which remain concealed.

The standard excuse invoked by Democrats to justify their capitulations -- namely, that they cannot attract a filibuster-proof or veto-proof majority to defy the President -- will be unavailing here. They themselves can filibuster the confirmation of any proposed nominee to replace Gonzales. They do not need Blue Dogs or Bush Dogs or any of the other hideous cowards in their caucus who remain loyal to the most unpopular President in modern American history. The allegedly "Good Democrats" can accomplish this vital step all on their own. They only need 40 Senate votes to achieve it.

It is difficult to overstate how vital this is. The unexpected resignation of Gonzales provides a truly critical opportunity to restore real oversight to our government, to provide advocates of the rule of law with a quite potent weapon to compel adherence to the law and, more importantly, to expose and bring accountability for prior lawbreaking. All of the investigations and scandals, currently stalled hopelessly, can be dramatically and rapidly advanced with an independent Attorney General at the helm of the DOJ.

That is not going to happen if the Democrats allow the confirmation of one of the ostensibly less corrupt and "establishment-respected" members of the Bush circle -- Michael Chertoff or Fred Fielding or Paul Clement or some Bush appointee along those lines. The new Attorney General must be someone who is not part of that rotted circle at all -- even if they are supposedly part of the less rotted branches -- since it is that circle which ought to be the subject of multiple DOJ investigations.

As Democrats supposedly just learned (yet again), even the Bush appointees whom they claim (foolishly) to believe they can trust to act independently, such as DNI Mike McConnell, have their ultimate allegiance to George Bush and Dick Cheney. The President is certainly entitled to choose someone who is generally compatible with him ideologically, but the only acceptable replacement for Alberto Gonzales is someone who is truly independent of the Bush machine and whom Democrats are supremely confident will act independently, which means pursuing criminal investigations where warranted of the highest levels of this administration, including the departing Attorney General himself.

Congressional Democrats, insulting the intelligence of their own supporters, have repeatedly claimed to have trusted the Bush administration and its appointees only to be "betrayed" time and again -- they were "betrayed" by allowing the confirmation of Alito and Roberts to the Supreme Court based on false assurances that they would respect precedent; they were "betrayed" again by the agreement on the Military Commissions Act between the White House and Graham/Warner/McCain only to then have the agreement modified severely by last-minute changes; they were "betrayed" again by trusting Mike McConnell on the FISA deal; and they even claim to have been "betrayed" by supporting the confirmation of Gonzales himself based upon assurances at his confirmation hearing that he understood and would honor his independent role as Attorney General.

That excuse is not going to work again. Relying on assurances from some current Bush appointee that they will act independently is woefully and self-evidently insufficient. Only a truly outside figure, one who is entirely independent of the Bush circle, should be acceptable.

Pressuring Senate Democrats right away on this is vital. There is no more important domestic political goal then ensuring that the DOJ investigative and prosecutorial machinery operates independently. Senate Democrats will have none of their usual excuses if they fail to compel the nomination of someone truly independent and/or if they sit by meekly and allow the appointment of someone whose independence is even questionable.

Whatever it takes -- repeated blocking of nominees, filibustering, protracted hearings -- it is critical that it be done in order to restore integrity to the DOJ. A less-than-independent replacement as Attorney General will be entirely the fault of Democrats if they allow it to happen. Conversely, by ensuring the confirmation of someone independent, Senate Democrats can take a major step in revitalizing the rule of law, revitalizing their political base, showing the country they stand for something, and making the case that the 2006 midterm election change of control actually meant something.

UPDATE: Commenters have suggested that Bush could bypass the confirmation process with a recess appointment, but Bush and Harry Reid have an agreement in place that there will be no recess appointments during Congress' adjournment:

There'll be no recess appointments this time around, Roll Call reports (sub. req.), meaning the White House won't be taking advantage of Congress' vacation to install any contested nominees. That's due to a deal between Bush and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). . . .

Last recess, the White House made a number of controversial recess appointments, including Swift Boat backer Sam Fox as ambassador to Belgium. In order to prevent that sort of thing from happening again, Reid had plotted to keep the Senate in "pro forma" session during the recess -- whereby the Senate floor personnel show up every three days to make it an official session. But now Reid and Bush have made a deal, according to Roll Call. Bush won't make any recess appointments and Reid has promised to move some of his nominees when Senate gets back in session.

Obviously, there is nothing truly binding about the agreement, and Bush could violate it. But in the Beltway world, that is a Draconian step that seems unlikely (though not impossible) for many reasons. Far more likely, it seems, is Bush's (reasonable) belief that Senate Democrats will be as accommodating as usual and confirm a replacement who is acceptable to the administration.

UPDATE II: Oddly, the Drudge Report, for a period of no more than several minutes, apparently "reported" that the Bush administration would replace Gonzales via recess appointment, but has now taken that down. Identically, the publication most closely associated with Drudge, The Politico, briefly had a caption on its front page indicating the same thing, though nothing in its Gonzales article mentioned that. When I just went to the Politico site to screen capture the recess appointment reference, it, too, had been removed.

The Politico does have an article by the always-plugged-into-the-Bush-administration Mike Allen which signals the potential administration strategy here:

The acting attorney general with be Solicitor General Paul Clement. He "can stay in that position for quite a while," a senior administration official said.

That would avoid a bruising confirmation fight. Some Democratic senators have vowed not to confirm a Gonzales successor. . . .

An administration official explained: An individual may serve in an acting capacity for 210 days. However, if there is a pending nominee, the 210 day "clock" starts again when a nominee is announced. The 210 day "clock" would restart again if the nominee is voted down. The clock stops when there's a nominee, and restarts with a new 210 days if the nomination is withdrawn or fails.

Engaging in that tactic would be tantamount to a recess appointment -- allowing Bush to have an Attorney General in place more or less indefinitely without Senate confirmation. One would hope, though not necessarily expect, that Harry Reid and company would treat that as the serious violation of their agreement that it would be and respond with full retaliation.

[Immediately after posting this update, the reference to a "recess appointment" has returned to the Politico front page:"

Posted by: greenwald | August 27, 2007 11:35 AM | Report abuse

"WHY AREN'T YOU IN IRAQ, ZOUK? WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A LIFE?"


He fights his war here. That's why. Against his real enemy. America. The same thing the terrorists are trying to do inthe middle east, the gop is trying to do here. Create a fundamentalist christian theology. Individual CHOICE does not matter to these people. Only "their" money. Not knwoing money has no real value. It's only value is the value we give it. Which is worth more? A house or a stack or pieces of paper. Frickin republcians. You sabvotage of this great country deson't have much longer. You party has a year and a hlaf. Use it wisely. You are wasting every day with lie spin and discredit. I know it is all you can do but it is also the political way of the past. Use your tiem trying to fix the damage you people have done to this great country the last 30 years, rather than digging yourselves deeper in your hole of perpetual irrelevance.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Why do you always rant about exactly the same stuff as Bill O'Reilly, zouk? Can't think up anything on your own?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:29 AM | Report abuse

JD writes
"Clearly, the one person who gains most from Fred's chaos/missteps is Mitt. Now he can position himself as the GOP's lone conservative alternative to Rudy."


Are you ruling out Huckabee as a too-long shot? My reading is that he's gaining grounds as a 'real' conservative, rather than as a 'conservative of convenience' as Romney is being cast.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 11:28 AM | Report abuse

JCHILD314--oh look, zouk's here already. now expect the rest of the day to be ruined on this blog, as he posts rants every 2 minutes about Pelosi, Reid, 'dems' 'Libs' daily kos, climate change denials, DDT -- did I forget anything?


WHY AREN'T YOU IN IRAQ, ZOUK? WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A LIFE?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:26 AM | Report abuse

"Rufus, if you follow your Chipmunks analogy, what we're looking for is a real life "Dave" to keep chipmunks of all colors in line and pulling in the same direction.

btw is "Alvin" the "red" chipmunk?"

Word is born. I forgot about Dave. Dave!. It's been a long time since I've seen the show :). We do need a dave. Someone above the partisanship and doing what is right for the country. I elect Obama :)

Alvin was the red one.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:25 AM | Report abuse

The ship is sinking before it even leaves the dock.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:24 AM | Report abuse

"Or is that saved for the onesided circle jerk at the KOS...."

Why does it always have to come back to the kos. What are you gop'ers scared of. That liberals have a voice, or that your attack dogs can't silence them?

You show your face gop. Why weren't you people talking about the kos three months ago.

Why do you people let O'REilly hannity and rush run your lives. They will not be on the air much longer. What you will do without your avatars gop? How will you live your lives with the above and FOx? Be an individual not a dittohead. They are lying to you. Why? For a better country? No. For $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:23 AM | Report abuse

NEWSWEEK: He's Still Out There. The Hunt for Bin Laden

In the winter of 2004-05, U.S. soldiers on patrol in the mountains along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border came so close to the most wanted man in the world, Osama bin Laden, that his entourage considered using the code word to kill the Al Qaeda leader and commit suicide, according to a report in the current issue of Newsweek.

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/newsweek-hes-still-out-there-hunt-for.html

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Rufus, if you follow your Chipmunks analogy, what we're looking for is a real life "Dave" to keep chipmunks of all colors in line and pulling in the same direction.

btw is "Alvin" the "red" chipmunk?

Posted by: Bokonon | August 27, 2007 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Clearly, the one person who gains most from Fred's chaos/missteps is Mitt. Now he can position himself as the GOP's lone conservative alternative to Rudy.

I've heard that Fred's stump speeches have left audiences really 'wanting'; strange that, as such a successful actor, he doesn't have more charisma out on the hustings.

Posted by: JD | August 27, 2007 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Wow Truth, you really have those points down to where you can rattle them off. Perhaps at some point you and you Lib friends might show you have SOME intelligence and talk about the ISSUES!!!!!!! Or is that saved for the onesided circle jerk at the KOS.....

Posted by: JCHILD314 | August 27, 2007 11:19 AM | Report abuse

So are the Saudis behind the new push to install Awad Allawi in Iraq?

'IraqSlogger's Eason Jordan says that in his CNN interview yesterday, Ayad Allawi dissembled about whether he knew the exact amount and details of the lobbying contract. One sign: his signature on the contract:

When asked by Blitzer to confirm whether he was paying Washington lobbyists $300,000 to work on his behalf -- a story first reported by IraqSlogger -- Allawi said "I think those numbers are accurate" but said he was unsure of the exact amount being paid to the Republican lobbying firm because "I am not party to the exact amount."

The latter part of that statement is false because Allawi himself signed the August 20 contract with the Washington lobbying firm of Barbour Griffith & Rogers (BGR) -- a contract that spells out that Allawi is to pay BGR $300,000 over the next six months.

The BGR point man on the Allawi contract is Robert Blackwill, who served in 2004 as President Bush's presidential envoy to Iraq.

While the BGR-Allawi contract calls for Allawi to make $50,000-a-month payments over six months, Allawi said the money wasn't his own but instead was coming from an Iraqi supporter of Allawi's Iraqi National Accord political party.

On the question of who's paying, a top contender is Hazem Shaalan, a vehicle for Saudi/UAE money.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"Rufus, we'll very likely get Chertoff. Which means that your wish will NOT be granted. He's historically been a lapdog for the Bush administration."

Bush will put him out there. The dem's will not go for it. Here, the dem's have the power. They just havn't used it the last 7 years, ie scalito. The only power these gop'ers have is the power we give them. I think the d's are going to finally stand up, this is a big chance. They screw this one up I'm not sure how many more chances the d's get.

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:12 AM | Report abuse

For inquiring minds... I believe this is the "reason" post about Fred you have been asking about:

"Does anyone else wonder if Fred Thompson was just a tease? It looks like he couldn't raise half the money he projected, his past ties to lobby groups is coming back to haunt him, his marriage is becoming more and more of an issue, there are rumors that he's a closeted homosexual and his past laziness is already coming into play. Combine all of that with the fact that he's got no organization in key states, no money to gain that organization and no following at all outside of the south, it's not looking good for Freddie. Besides that, he's had no real policy specifics.

"It looks like it really could be Huckabee's time to capitalize on this. He has social conservative bona-fides and a CEO's record of running Arkansas. I'm wondering if after Labor Day, Thompson will say he's decided against running.

Posted by: reason | August 27, 2007 12:02 AM"

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 27, 2007 11:09 AM | Report abuse

bsimon.... Not a boater, but know a poor push off when I see one :) Your description was very apt.

Linda Rozett was the spokesperson for Friends of Fred... is that the same as a "communications director?"

According to Bob Novak, Newt G suggested to Fred that he announce via video like Hillary did... followed by a fly-around to several cities.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/528160,CST-EDT-NOVAK26.article

Wonder if Newt is trying to undercut Fred... comparisons to Hillary, no "personal touch" live announcement... all sounds very, well, unexciting.

Also according to Novak, Thompson has decided to attend the Sept 27 debate at Baltimore's Morgan State University.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 27, 2007 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Isn't the new campaign manager from the Dole Campaign? Not sure I would listen to what he has to say. This Thompson campaign has turned into a joke and anyone splitting hairs calling it an exploratory committee is deluding themselves.

Thompson is skirting CFR if not downright breaking it. I am conservative Republican that refuses to give him a pass on CFR that he was co-sponsor (one of few bills BTW).

Agree with the person who said cat fight!

Posted by: Samantha | August 27, 2007 11:01 AM | Report abuse

"The Ag is gone. Now we can finally get someone in there that will go after bush and his corrupt administration."

Rufus, we'll very likely get Chertoff. Which means that your wish will NOT be granted. He's historically been a lapdog for the Bush administration.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 27, 2007 11:01 AM | Report abuse

I had an apifany this weekend trying to explain Alvin and the chimpmunks to my son.

Check it out check it out check it out.

You got Red, BLue and green, right. You got the "leader" always getting them in trouble. Always doing what he wants and caring about himself, not his brothers. His mischeif gets them into deep water and hilarity ensues.

So you got the red reckless leader. Blue. You got blue as the conscience. The smart guy. The guy who tells the brothers what is safe and what they should be doing. If the brothers followed blue would they not be in a better situation. He is the wise one.

Then you got the green. Green with greed. All he cares about is food. In the social world the is money. He only cares about himself and money.

Political allegory?

Follow the blue guy. The world will be a better place :)

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 11:00 AM | Report abuse

The Ag is gone. Now we can finally get someone in there that will go after bush and his corrupt administration.

Can I get a "another one bites the dust, cc"?

Posted by: rufus | August 27, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Early in the 1994 race, after struggling to connect with voters, Thompson decided to lease a used truck and drive around the state in what turned out to be a wildly successful effort to recast himself as a folksy man of the people.

Posted by: he's a complete phony | August 27, 2007 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Chris, Wanted to ask if there were any further updates on any further retirements in the House or Senate. Is Senator Warner just a question of when? Also, you reported yesterday about Bob Kerrey truin to get back into the Senate if Sen. Hagel retires. How would rate the likelihood of this happening?

Sorry to post this note on a entry about Thompson. I see you are not doing any discussions this week and hoped to hear any latest news you might have. Thx

Posted by: Bob | August 27, 2007 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Is Spencer Abraham still with the campaign? The wingers hate him.

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/07/jihad_fred_fred.html

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2007 10:46 AM | Report abuse

I didn't see reason's post either, Mark. What was it about?

Posted by: drindl | August 27, 2007 10:43 AM | Report abuse

"He missed his campaign announcement ship, and now we're watching the pier collapse."

Interesting metaphor. Are you a boater? I've occasionally been that guy who was pushing off from the dock, intending to stay with the boat, but having too much weight on the dock and being unable to apply enough force to fully commit to one or the other. Without external help, you do the splits until one foot or the other loses purchase, resulting in a swim.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 10:39 AM | Report abuse

meow -- sounds like Jeri and Linda had a catfight. this boy can't do anything right... why should anyone take him seriously? it sounds like his wife is torpedoing his campaign in every possible way.

Posted by: cassandra | August 27, 2007 10:38 AM | Report abuse

"bsimon, what's an "exporatory" committee? Sounds obscene. Did you see "reason"'s post last night on the previous thread about FT's rumored problems?"

Exporatory is clearly based on the root word 'oratory'. While the prefix 'ex' would usually mean 'not' or 'former', when used in conjunction with the trailing 'p' modifier, it means 'sometimes' or 'partial'. Therefore an exporatory committee one for a politician who can't make up his mind whether or not he's going to run, and in the meantime blows a lot of hot air.

I didn't see reason's post & am somewhat reluctant to wade through 400 comments to find it...

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 10:35 AM | Report abuse

I nominate Fred for the "Mario Cuomo Handwringing Decision" award.

He missed his campaign announcement ship, and now we're watching the pier collapse.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 27, 2007 10:17 AM | Report abuse

bsimon, what's an "exporatory" committee? Sounds obscene. Did you see "reason"'s post last night on the previous thread about FT's rumored problems?

reason, where did you get that gossip? Why should we think it credible? Or is the point that it does not matter any more if it is credible?


i'll be back at 1P EDT for your reply [ies]!

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 27, 2007 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Chris, with all due respect, I believe the headline should read

"More Staff Trouble in Thompson Exporatory Committee"

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2007 10:00 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company