Poll: Hillary’s War Stance Could Be a Problem

Running on Iraq: According to a new Zogby International telephone survey, if Sen. Hillary Clinton were to face a challenge from an anti-war candidate in the fall election, she could find herself in a real battle for re-election.

Right now she seems a lock to win the nomination for re-election to a second term in the Senate. The survey of 705 likely voters in New York, including 344 Democrats, showed she has the backing of 74 percent of Dems — not one of her three opponents garners over 3 percent support. But 21 percent said they are unsure, perhaps based on her support for the war in Iraq.

Asked if the race were between Hillary Clinton and a challenger who opposed the war in Iraq, 38 percent said they would support Clinton, while 32 percent said they would back the unnamed anti-war candidate. Another 31 percent said they would support someone else or were not sure. On that question, Clinton performed better among NYC voters (45 percent versus 28 percent for the anti-war opponent), and fared well among likely voters upstate (37 percent for Clinton, 29 percent for the anti-war candidate). However, she did worse in the voter-rich suburbs of NYC, trailing the unnamed anti-war candidate, 40 percent to 31 percent.

Among independent voters, 38 percent said they would favor the anti-war candidate and 28 percent would favor Clinton. Among women, Clinton would win, 42 percent to 32 percent. Men were split, with 33 percent supporting her, 33 percent supporting an anti-war candidate and 34 percent unsure or supporting someone else.

A likely anti-war opponent has emerged in New York politics, but he’s unlikely to beat Clinton. Jonathan Tasini, a labor activist and former head of the National Writers Guild, tried to place an anti-war resolution on the Democratic platform at the state convention over the weekend, but was rebuffed on a technicality.

Tasini did not receive sufficient votes at the convention to be placed on the ballot to challenge Clinton in a primary. He has pledged to mount a petition drive to collect 15,000 signatures to force a primary campaign between him and Clinton.

Good luck, Jonathan. Hillary Clinton has every appearance of being an unstoppable steamroller through the Senate campaign and onward two years down the road when it seems inevitable that the Democrats will forfeit another presidential campaign by placing her on the ballot.

Be the First Kid on the Block to Get the 2006 Terrorism Trends Poster

No black light needed: Take down your Hendrix poster, we’ve got something tons better — the official TKB Terrorism Trends 2005 map poster. “TKB” is short for “Terrorism Knowledge Base,” which is part of the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT), which is a nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing terrorism on U.S. soil or mitigating its effects that was established after the April 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City.

Oh, and it should be noted that the MIPT is funded through the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Grants and Training. Hmmmmm.

According to the TKB, “this large, colorful map is a must-have for analysts, law enforcement, researchers, or others interested in terrorism.” Who is “interested in terrorism” besides, say, al Qaeda and gothic death-worshippers?

Like manna for the terrorism groupie, the poster lists the 10 most active groups (top three: al Qaeda, Hamas, Taliban), top 10 most frequent targets (police, government, private citizens) and tactics (bombing, armed attack, kidnapping, assassination, arson), and the most lethal attacks for 2005 (al Qaeda has six of the top 10) — complete with lurid color photos of death and destruction. The map also offers comparison graphs for several terrorism hotspots — helpful in vacation planning.

You can download a PDF copy here. For a 24” x 34” hard-copy version, simply e-mail your name and mailing address to TKBsupport@tkb.org and TKB will ship you a copy at no cost.

Of course, then they’ll have your address, if they don’t already.

Get Ready for Post-Hurricane Military Dictatorship

When the power’s out, the power grab’s on: Tucked away in an obscure article on GovExec.com today was a disturbing little aside that bodes ill for state and local officials trying to deal with the aftermath of a hurricane. As if it weren’t bad enough that the National Secret Agency is spying on American citizens and the Federal Bureau of Invasion has commandeered the offices of the House of Representatives and the Whitewash House thinks the Constitution is something that applies to everybody but the president, we’re now looking at threats to “federalize” disaster response in the event that some local or state yahoo thinks the gubmint should butt out of hurricane recovery efforts until it’s actually needed.

Local opposition can lawfully be overcome by the White House’s “federalizing” National Guard units and, if necessary, by invoking the Insurrection Act to extend federal authority.

The article reports on a hearing held Thursday where federal officials were encouraged to issue emergency declarations faster this hurricane season to give military, homeland security and state and local response authorities more time to mobilize. The Defense and Homeland Security departments indicated they would like to have as much as a week to prepare for a hurricane. Of course, some bright light reminded the benighted bureacrats that at a week out, forecasts of possible landfall could cover hundreds or thousands of miles, leading to pointless and useless evacuations, and the staging of ice-filled semis in Quebec.

Then the discussion turned ominously creepy or creepily ominous:

One lawmaker expressed concern about federal authority to trump local and state mandates. In a discussion of how federal officials would deal with a local or state official who becomes unmanageable or recalcitrant, subcommittee member Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Mich., said federal officials may have to prove that they have the authority to override an individual.

[Paul McHale, the Defense Department’s assistant homeland defense secretary] told him “local opposition can lawfully [be] overcome” by the White House’s “federalizing” National Guard units and, if necessary, by invoking the Insurrection Act to extend federal authority.

Posse comitatus? We don’t need no stinkin’ posse comitatus! That, you will recall, is the provision that prevents the president from using the military for police activities. But, if you invoke the Insurrection Act, all bets are off and it’s up against the wall local redneck emergency managers and balky mayors and troublesome governors, and hello martial law.

At least this year the federal government has a plan — subjugate the populace using military force. Should be an interesting hurricane season ….

Quote du Jour

Democracy is the worst form of government. It is the most inefficient, the most clumsy, the most impractical. It reduces wisdom to impotence and secures the triumph of folly, ignorance, clap-trap and demagogy. Yet democracy is the only form of social order admissable because it is the only one consistent with justice.

— Robert Briffault (1876-1948), British surgeon, anthropologist, novelist

Fed Phone Tax Give-Back A Sure Sign It’s An Election Year

Much ado about not much: Republicons in Congress are crowing today about the “massive” give-back of $13 billion in federal taxes on mobile phone calls announced yesterday. But it adds up to less than it appears, and it appears to be just another election-year gimmick intended to make conservatives seem compassionate.

CongressDaily reported that Treasury Secretary Snow said yesterday the IRS will stop collecting the 3 percent federal excise tax on long-distance telephone calls on July 31, and will refund to businesses and individual taxpayers all such taxes collected during the past three years.

A sure sign that this was a cynical election-year ploy and not serious politics was Snow’s cute press conference quip: “It’s time to ‘disconnect’ this tax and put it on the permanent ‘do not call’ list.” Urp!

Treasury estimates that taxpayers will receive refunds totaling about $13 billion. They can apply for refunds on their 2006 tax returns. The decision to discontinue the tax was taken after long-distance phone customers successfully challenged the tax in several different federal appeals courts.

“It’s time to ‘disconnect’ this tax and put it on the permanent ‘do not call’ list.”

So what does this give-back mean to the estimated 214 million cell phone users in the United States? About $54 each, or less than 20 gallons of gasoline. Contrast that with the $477 billion in tax breaks the Bush administration has targeted to the richest Americans, which will average $342,000 each over the next 10 years. By 2010, when Bush’s tax cuts hit their stride, of the estimated $234 billion in tax cuts scheduled for that year, $121 billion will go to just 1.4 million taxpayers.

Makes that $54 look pretty puny, don’t it. But Bushco is counting on voters not doing the math, but instead responding like mindless zombies to headlines that tout a $13 billion tax refund on their cell phone calls. That’s a lot cheaper way to buy votes than to provide real tax relief for the middle class or decent health care for all Americans.

Quote du Jour

All great religions, in order to escape absurdity, have to admit a dilution of agnosticism. It is only the savage, whether of the African bush or the American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of God exactly and completely.

— H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), American editor, critic

Moussaoui: Thanks A Lot, Osama

Too little, too late: Man, Zacarias Moussaoui must be pissed. A tape purported to be a recording of Osama bin Laden has surfaced on which a disembodied voice identified as bin Laden says Moussaoui had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, that info comes just weeks after Zack dodged the death penalty and was sent up the river to the Big House for life.

Of course, having the most-wanted man in the world as a witness for the defense probably wouldn’t have swayed the jury, but it certainly would have added to the circus atmosphere that characterized Moussaoui’s year-and-a-half trial, which oscillated between the insane and the ridiculous. Suffice it to say, however, that bin Laden’s belated benignancy is no “Get Out of Jail Free” card for the hapless Moussaoui.

The old comic strip “Li’l Abner” has a memorable character named Joe Btfsplk, a harmless fellow who was jinxed, wandering the earth with a perpetual black cloud over his head. Seems to me that Zacharias Moussaoui is the Joe Btfsplk of al Qaeda — even after being sentenced to life in prison, his luck just keeps getting worse.

Bushco Tries to Neutralize Wingnut Viguerie

Cranky since the ’80s: Yesterday, Jon shared a the sad tale of an arch-conservative rending his robes over the betrayal of neo-conservative Bushco. “Reagan-era dinosaur” Richard Viguerie, as Jon accurately labeled him, spewed his vitriolic attack on the administration in the pages of the Washington Post and participated in an on-line forum held by that newspaper.

Today, Viguerie was even hotter under the collar after the administration followed “standard operating procedure for this White House,” as Viguerie wrote, and circulated an e-mail showing him to be a crank from the Reagan era:

‘[Bush] talked like a conservative to win our votes but never governed like a conservative.’
— Richard Viguerie

[Viguerie wrote in his e-mail] Peter Wehner, Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Strategic Initiatives, sent the following e-mail message to an unknown number of persons:

Original Message—–
From: Wehner, Peter H. [mailto:Peter_H._Wehner@who.eop.gov]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 11:54 AM
Subject: Richard Viguerie: Now & Then

Now

“Sixty-five months into Bush’s presidency, conservatives feel betrayed… The main cause of conservatives’ anger with Bush is this: He talked like a conservative to win our votes but never governed like a conservative.” — Richard Viguerie, “Bush’s Base Betrayal,” The Washington Post, Sunday, May 21, 2006

Then

“[Richard Viguerie], who also is a leading fund-raiser for conservative candidates, indicated he would not support Reagan in 1984, adding: ‘I’m very disillusioned with a president that walks away from the Soviet Union.’” — “Conservative Leader Blasts Reagan on Plane Reaction,” Associated Press, September 8, 1983

“‘Just like Jimmy Carter gave conservatives the back of the hand, we see the same thing happening in the Reagan administration,’” said Richard Viguerie, the direct-mail wizard who is the leading fund-raiser for conservative candidates and causes. ‘Almost every conservative I have talked to in the last two months has been disappointed in the initial appointments to the Reagan cabinet,’ Viguerie said.”– “Conservatives Angry with Reagan,” Associated Press, January 27, 1981

“‘The White House slapped us in the face,’ says Richard A. Viguerie, the conservative direct-mail expert. ‘The White House is saying you don’t have a constituency we’re concerned about. We don’t care about you.’” — “For Reagan and the New Right, the Honeymoon Is Over,” Washington Post, July 21, 1981

[…]