Category: Politics

Topic Header

McCain Has Mini Meltdown at Dinner with Journalists

Jon Ponder

Does Sen. John McCain have the temperament and judgment to be president? His behavior at a dinner with journalists last week indicates he may be too emotionally volatile to make it through the campaign without embarassing himself.

Arianna Huffington was at the dinner, and wrote about it (“John McCain Bites My Head Off”) here:

McCain’s “volcanic” temper is legendary and there were concerns in GOP circles during the 2000 campaign that his tantrums could become an issue.

Toward the end of the conversation, I raised my hand and asked McCain:

“Given that you’ve said that you are ‘scared to death that it’s going to be a very hot spring in Afghanistan,’ and given that you have also said, repeatedly, that only a substantial increase in troops in Iraq would make a real difference, why not send the 21,000 troops headed to Iraq, in what is clearly an act of desperation, to Afghanistan instead?”

During his response, McCain equated those opposing his position with “the far left.”

“Do you consider Sam Brownback part of the far left?” I jumped in.

The Senator flared and told me that if I’d only let him finish his answer instead of interrupting, we could have “a civil discussion.”

He then continued on about why he supports the escalation … Along the way, he denied that he had used the phrase “the far left.”

Wow, I thought, the Straight Talk Express has run so far off the rails McCain is now denying things he’d said in front of close to two-dozen note-taking journalists not half-a-minute before.

I pressed on: “You keep presenting the Iraq debate in terms of left vs right and Democrat vs Republican, when there are clearly major rifts in your own party over the direction we should take. And you yourself have changed your mind about the number of troops we need.”

With a growing edge in his voice, McCain explained that he had sat down with General Patraeus. “He looked me in the eye,” said McCain, “and told me ‘I can do it with 21,000. And if I can’t, I’ll ask for more.'” McCain went on to say he believes that in a country of 300 million we should be able to have a large enough volunteer army to do whatever we need to do.

“That’s all very good in theory,” I replied, “but, in practice, where are these additional troops going to come from? And you keep saying that the American people are ‘frustrated’ about Iraq, which totally minimizes the outrage there is at continuing to be mislead by this administration.”

He had clearly had it with me and told me that since what I had just said was a statement and not a question, he didn’t have to respond.

McCain’s bad temper is legendary and there have been longstanding concerns about it in GOP circles. For example, in 1999, during McCain’s first presidential bid, the Washington Post reported that Arizona GOP officials who had felt the wrath of McCain’s “volcanic” temper were fearful his tantrums could become a factor in the 2000 race. After McCain won the New Hampshire primary, operatives for then.Gov. George W. Bush started a whispering campaign in South Carolina against McCain that characterized him as “unstable.”

Last Sunday, on “Meet the Press,” Sen. McCain seemed vey depressed. It appears something’s going on behind the scenes with the GOP’s putative frontrunner.

UPDATE: Republican tool Bob Novak has a column up criticizing McCain’s performance on MTP:

Democratic strategists … were surprised and delighted by his dour appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday. One Democratic leader referred to McCain’s performance … as “comatose.” A Republican adviser to McCain said it was one of the worst performances ever on “Meet the Press.”

Hagel: What’s the Bush Administration Afraid Of?

Trish

Don’t miss the amazing interview with Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) in GQ. You’ll see why the Bush White House is so upset with this guy, and why there is such a remote chance he will ever drink the Kool-Aid.

A sample:

GQ: What would it take to secure Baghdad?
Hagel: It’s not ours to secure. We have never understood that! We have framed this in a way that never made sense: “Win or lose in Iraq.” Wait a minute! There is no win or loss for us. The Iraqis will determine how this turns out. We can help them with our blood and our treasure and our standing, but in the end they have to deal with the sectarian problems. That is what’s consuming that country. It’s not Al Qaeda. It’s not the terrorists. That’s not the main problem over there. It’s a civil war!

Hagel: “If Bill Clinton had invaded Iraq and after two years he was having the same problems, do you think the Republican Congress would have put up with that? I don’t think so”

GQ: The administration doesn’t call it that.
Hagel: They won’t call it civil war. Everybody calls it a civil war! Of course it’s a civil war. The generals call it a civil war. And it’s even worse than a civil war, because in addition to the sectarian violence, you’ve got Shia killing Shia. We have ethnic cleansing of major proportions going on in Baghdad. It’s reminiscent of Bosnia. A truck pulls up and Uncle Joe is put inside; his body is found in a dump two or three days later, arms bound, usually tortured—one of the favorite deals is to drill into their head a little bit while they’re still conscious and then shoot them. We can’t solve that!

GQ: If we can’t win and the public wants out, isn’t it the responsibility of Congress to check the power of the president?
Hagel: Sure.

GQ: But it seems Congress has been ineffective at that.
Hagel: Well, we have. We’ve abdicated our responsibilities. That has to do with the fact that the Republican Party controlled the White House, the House, and the Senate. When that happens, you get no probing, no questioning, no oversight. If Bill Clinton had invaded Iraq and after two years he was having the same problems, do you think the Republican Congress would have put up with that? I don’t think so.

…GQ: Does being a veteran also make you sensitive to the administration’s approach to interrogation and the use of secret military prisons?
Hagel: It does, because that’s not who America is. We have always, certainly since World War II, had the moral high ground in the world. But these secret prisons and the treatment at Guantánamo destroy all of that. We ought to shut down Guantánamo. There shouldn’t be any secret prisons. Why do we need those? What are we afraid of? Here we are, the greatest nation the world has ever seen. Why can’t we let the Red Cross into our prisons? Why do we deny they exist? Why do we keep them locked up? What are we afraid of? Why aren’t we dealing with Iran and Syria?

…GQ: You don’t hear very many politicians say that both sides of an issue are reasonable these days.
Hagel: We are living through one of the most transformative periods in history. If we are going to make it, we need a far greater appreciation and respect for others, or we’re going to blow up mankind. Look at what zealotry can do. Religious zealotry has been responsible for killing more people than any other thing. Look at the Middle East today. It’s all about religion. We need to move past those divisions and learn to be tolerant and respectful. If we go out there full of intolerance and hatred, we’ll never make it.

Read the whole interview. When the Rovian attacks start on Chuck Hagel — and they will — at least you’ll know what he really said.

Keep Molly in Your Thoughts

Jon Ponder

Houston Chronicle:

Nationally syndicated columnist Molly Ivins has been hospitalized in her recurring battle with breast cancer.

“I think she’s tough as a metal boot,” her brother, Andy Ivins, said Friday after a visit with her at Seton Medical Center in Austin.

Andy Ivins said his sister was admitted to Seton on Thursday. She spent Friday morning with longtime colleagues and friends, and was “sleeping peacefully” when he arrived later in the day.

A self-described leftist agitator, Ivins, 62, completed a round of radiation treatment in August, but the cancer “came back with a vengeance,” and has spread through her body, Andy Ivins sai

Fleischer Feared Death Penalty in CIA Leak Case – Immunity Now Questioned

Jon Ponder

Reporting from inside the courtroom in the CIA leak-related trial of Scooter Libby this week revealed that former White House spokesman Ari Fleisher sought immunity from prosecution because he was worried he might have committed treason — and even fearred he was in jeopardy of receiving the death penalty:

Fleischer saw a story in the Washington Post suggesting that anyone who revealed Valerie Plame’s identity might be subject to the death penalty. And he freaked. Of course,

It turns out Ari Fleischer will be the next witness, once court resumes Monday [Jan. 29, 2007]. The defense team wants to note — for the jury’s benefit — that Fleischer demanded immunity before he would agree to testify, because this might cast Fleischer’s testimony in a different light.

And here Fitzgerald makes a nice little chess move: Fine, he says, we can acknowledge that Fleischer sought immunity. As long as we explain why. Turns out Fleischer saw a story in the Washington Post suggesting that anyone who revealed Valerie Plame’s identity might be subject to the death penalty. And he freaked. Of course, if Fleischer was this worked up about it during the time period in question, that suggests Libby would have been, too. (Which again undermines the notion that Libby had much bigger fish to fry.)

Can we extrapolate from this that the normally uber-unctious Fleischer was feeling a wee bit — what’s the word — guilty?

With the prospect of a lethal injecution put to rest, Fleischer spilled the beans. In particular, he told prosecutors that he learned Plame’s identity from Libby in the summer of 2003. Now Libby’s lawyers are now firing back, questioning the conditions of Fleischer’s immunity deal:

Defense attorneys are skeptical [and] are preparing court documents demanding to know exactly what Fleischer promised in exchange for immunity.

“I’m not sure we’re getting the full story here,” defense attorney William Jeffress said in court.

It is doubtful anyone will be charged with treason in this matter, even though it is clear that exposing the identity of a secret agent was the aim of this enterprise, and that it was done on direct orders from the vice president.

In any case, Ari can rest easy. He’s not going to fry. He’ll just have to live with being persona non grata among his former colleagues. (And he should probably buy a polonium detector.)

Bush Just Keeps Saying the Same Thing: “Trust Me”

Trish

“Some are condemning the plan before it even has a chance to work.”

I don’t know about you but comments like that by Bush and his henchmen Cheney, Limbaugh, and Lieberman are really getting on my nerves. Not to mention this chestnut:

President Bush…said Friday “I’m the decision-maker” about sending more troops to the war.

He still expects us to give his latest idiocy the benefit of the doubt, a chance to work. Try it out, see how it goes. What the hey?

Bush still doesn’t get it. Even after his “thumpin’,” even after congressional Republicans hulked up and started acting like people again by voting their conscience instead of their party, and even after 70 percent of the American people said they disagree with him, he still takes umbrage when his ridiculous conclusions are questioned.

Well wake up, decider, we aren’t taking your word anymore.

White House veterans and analysts say the signs suggest a bunker mentality for a White House frustrated over its efforts to govern and pursue a broader agenda when the administration seems to face criticism of the Iraq War at every turn…

White House insiders, speaking on condition of anonymity, say an intense sense of war fatigue has set in.

Some cite a sense of regret and self-recrimination among White House officials who have evolved from a sense of being unjustly persecuted to a sense that the administration itself made critical mistakes in the conduct of the war that have contributed to the media and public lament.

I would say that from Day One this president has asked us to trust him while presenting nothing but evidence that we should do the exact opposite. I would say that, except he hasn’t asked us to trust him, he’s simply ridiculed and bullied and threatened those who don’t. He’s demanded blind faith while demonstrating incompetence and duplicity and the poorest judgement of the 21st century.

And he still expects us to give his latest idiocy the benefit of the doubt, a chance to work. Try it out, see how it goes. What the hey? After all, what’s really at stake? Only 21,500 men and women with families and loved ones and jobs and futures. Come on, America, just roll those dice. W is. And the only thing bothering him about it all is having to answer to you for it.

Poll: Prez Hopefuls’ War Stance Evaluated

Buck Banks

McCain’s brain: The Pensito Review brain trust was standing around our virtual water cooler yesterday, scratching our heads over Sen. John McCain’s siding with George Bush on the surge deal in Iraq. Not to mention some of McCain’s recent appointments to his exploratory committee and his tactics on dealing with Mitt Romney’s campaign. Thank goodness every Friday the National Journal polls D.C. insiders on the hot topics of the day and then shares what movers and shakers in both parties have to say about a topics — or we’d still be scratching our heads.

On John McCain: ‘It’s hard to run as a maverick when you are supporting the status quo.’

This week’s National Journal poll of political insiders asked participants whether they thought McCain’s support of the surge would be advantageous to his presidential bid. Of the 77 Democrats tested, 82 percent said no — that it would hinder his chances.

“Once the Republican candidate that Democrats were fearful of, [he] has changed dramatically,” one Democratic insider said. Another pontificated, “It will help him in the primary, but just kill him in the general.”

GOP insiders were fairly split, 48 percent to 43 percent, in favor of McCain’s stance helping his chances. The respondents who said McCain’s support would hurt him offered sentiments similar to the Democrats’, including one who said: “It’s hard to run as a maverick when you are supporting the status quo.”

Insiders were also posed a question on a top-tier Democrat who hopes to return to the White House in 2008. Asked whether it would be a good move for New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to denounce her 2002 vote authorizing the use of force in Iraq, seven in 10 Republicans said no. Like the Republicans were on McCain, Democrats were split, 56 percent to 44 percent, with the majority saying that Clinton should come forth and say her vote was a mistake.

A Democrat who might like her to do so explained, “One moment of candor, authenticity, real emotion would be a plus.” Another called the vote “the dividing line between her and the Democratic nomination.” On the other end of the calculation, one said, “She’s in a box on this one, but changing now might do more damage as it would appear just too politically expedient.”

Republicans on the “no” side agreed, saying that she’d be viewed as a flip-flopper if she changed her position, and that former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama have already earned their chits in the field as anti-war Democrats. But as one Republican voting “yes” put it, “She looks incapable of admitting mistakes if this continues.”

What do you think? Leave a comment.

With Jeb Out of the Building, Secrets Out of the Closet

Trish

Jeb Bush kept a tight lid on the problems his policies created in Florida while he was in office. But Jeb’s gone now and that famous Florida sunshine is shining in the cracks once so snuggly covered.

Take privatization for example. Even a Republican state senator is appalled at the sweet deal Jeb’s prison contractors enjoyed.

After eight years of Jeb, more people are leaving Florida than moving in

Alarmed by millions of dollars in overpayments the state made to a private prison contractor, a state senator called for a criminal investigation Thursday.

[Sen. Victor] Crist asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to look at the contract between GEO Group of Boca Raton and the state Correctional Privatization Commission, which was disbanded in 2004 amid allegations of mismanagement and cronyism.

A 2005 state audit revealed that over an eight-year period GEO Group and Corrections Corporation of America, another private contractor, were overpaid $4.5-million.

The Correctional Privatization Commission also gave GEO $5-million in cost-of-living salary adjustments that, auditors said, were not fully passed on to employees.

At the Quincy facility, Corrections Corp., of Nashville, got $2.9-million more for facility maintenance than it spent.

The news is even worse about Jeb’s other flagships: the “A-Plus” and later, “A-Plus-Plus” education schemes. Starving public schools by diverting taxpayer funding into vouchers for private schools and penalizing budgets based on standardized tests, as well as doing away with affirmative action in public universities were all part of Jeb’s libertarian plan to undermine state-sponsored education.

And it’s all working, though not as Jeb planned. More people are leaving Florida than moving in.

In 2006, what the industry calls “outbound” moves actually surpassed “inbounds,” according to data from United, Atlas and Allied van lines. The industry had seen a steady increase in the number of customers heading out of the state in the past five years.

…The moving company statistics seem to indicate that those who are leaving are likely to be middle- and upper-middle class individuals who can afford moving vans, [University of Florida researcher Jim] Dewey said. They also could be families with children who are unhappy with the state’s funding for K-12 education, he said.

Department of Education statistics appear to support Dewey’s hunch. While state enrollment has grown an average of 51,000 students annually since 1989, regular enrollment in 2005 grew by only about 30,000 children.

The numbers were down again at the start of the 2006 school year, even in districts with normally climbing enrollment such as Orange, Manatee and Palm Beach.

In Pinellas, the decline in student enrollment was nearly twice what the district expected.

The former real estate developer governor’s policies toward growth, or should I say, “Let the party begin!” have also taken a toll.

…the spike in house prices in the last five years in Florida has made coming here less of a bargain.

“It wouldn’t be a surprise to me that there is a temporary slow down,” Dewey said. “Real estate here has gone way up.”

…Scott Brown, chief economist at Raymond James Financial in St. Petersburg, said it’s no exaggeration to say Florida is at a crisis point. “You’re always going to have the weather attracting people, and it’s still a very business friendly environment,” Brown said. “But it’s a difficult issue. It’s a very serious concern for Florida.”

And yet there are those who actually miss Jeb’s trademark sneer. Check back in another year or two and I bet even they will be glad he’s gone.

2008 Is Still Al Gore’s to Lose

Jon Ponder

I am not a fan of Al Gore’s. Never have been. Could not wait to vote against him in the 1988 New York primary. But, as I said last March, he has the best chance to win the presidency in 2008 of any candidate in either party.

All things being equal, it’s hard to see how Gore couldn’t carry every state Kerry took plus Ohio (and maybe even Tennessee).

I mention this again now because my sense is, despite the recent announcements from senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Gov. Bill Richardson and others, this dynamic has not changed. In fact, an announcement yesterday may have improved Gore’s chances:

Former Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry took himself out of the running for president in 2008, choosing instead to devote his energies to ending the Iraq war. Call me crazy, but Al Gore’s prospects just got even better than before. If he doesn’t announce soon I’ll eat my hat

What has Gore got that the others don’t? A record. He was right about the war in Iraq, right about global warming, right that Bush would raid the Social Security “lock box” and on and on. Unlike John Kerry in 2004, Gore won the popular vote in 2000. All things being equal, it’s hard to see how Gore couldn’t carry every state Kerry took plus Ohio (and maybe even Tennessee).

His biggest challenge is that — like me — the “liberal media” hordes don’t like him. Yet, it’s also possible to imagine that some of them may feel chastened enough by the undue respect they gave the aristocratic boor they helped elect in 2000 and 2004 to give Al Gore a second look.

Plus, Gore has beome a lot feistier in his time out of office. He’s given himself the freedom to speak more candidly — to avoid the courtly hemming and hawing he learned in the Senate and that made him appear so wooden in his appearances as vice president and as a candidate in 2000.

All that seems to be missing right now is the proverbial fire in his belly.

More Rumors That Cheney Is Out, Condi Is in as VP

Jon Ponder

We have been suggesting for a while that Vice Pres. Cheney would step down early this year — due to “health problems” or boredom with government. Now there’s a new swirl of rumors going around.

Rice is unelectable as president. For one thing, the GOP can’t win without taking every Red state Bush won in 2004. Where there are Red states, there are racists who would never vote for a black candidate, especially a female — especially an unmarried female about whom there are gay rumors. Secondly, she’d never get votes from independents because of her deep involvement in the failure of the Iraq war.

Our prediction has been than GOP graybeards and powers-that-be would force Pres. Bush to appoint a Republican politician as vice president who would be an electable presidential candidate in 2008. The obvious choice would be St. John McCain, in spite of the fact that Bush and McCain famously loathe each other.

But the new vice president mentioned consistently in the rumor mill is Sec. of State Condoleeza Rice.

It makes sense that Bush would choose the worst possible person for the second-highest job in the land (after all, he’s done it before). Rice has proven to be a disaster in both roles she has played in the Bush Administration. She was the national security adviser who ignored an intelligence report from August 2001, titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” As secretary of state, her diplomatic efforts have had lackluster results.

With that record of incompetence, a Medal of Freedom is not sufficient. This woman deserves a promotion!

Rice would be a “Harriet Miers” sort of choice for vice president — someone Bush is “comfortable with” but who is wholly unqualified for the job.

But Condoleeza Rice is unelectable as president. For one thing, the GOP can’t win without taking every Red state Bush won in 2004. Where there are Red states, there are racists who would never vote for a black candidate, especially a female — especially an unmarried female about whom there are gay rumors. Secondly, she’d never get votes from independents because of her deep involvement in the failure of the Iraq war.

If Cheney resigns, Bush is going to face intense pressure from GOP senior election officials, strategists and big donors to replace him with the person whom they believe to be the most electable candidate out there. Despite Rudolph Giuliani’s high polling right now, in the Beltway Republican mindset, the frontrunner is John McCain, so I still believe that’s who they will push.

Of course, there’s a compromise candidate out there, waiting in the wings. Someone who’s got the experience, who left office with a high approval rating, despite his last name — someone who might appeal both to the boy king and his mininons and courtiers:

Jeb.

H/t Alice