Month: November 2005

FEMA Given Green Light to Work in the Dark

Trish

A federal judge in Fort Myers, Florida has ruled that it’s none of our business how FEMA spends our money.

The case involved the efforts of three newspapers — The Fort Myers News Press, Florida Today and the Pensacola News Journal — to obtain the names and addresses of people who received disaster aid after the 2004 hurricane.

Judge John Steele rejected the request, ruling that releasing that information would violate recipients’ right to privacy…the information could cause the residents embarrassment or make them subject to identify theft. Unscrupulous contractors could use the information to scam people looking to repair their homes.

Exactly what is embarrassing about finding a tree in your dining room and accepting some government cash to remove it, I’m not sure. It’s not like it’s a big secret anyway. The FEMA guy (or gal, in our neighborhood’s case) pulls up in the white FEMA truck and stands in the front yard, interviewing you about your damage. If you’re lucky, he or she will issue you a FEMA roof (blue tarp). Then they go next door, and to the house after that, and the one next to that, and so on. No one has electricity during this process, so they are either sitting outside trying to catch a breeze or clearing debris from the yard. There are no secrets – and no shame – after a hurricane.

Except for the secret of who’s getting your tax dollars.

…FEMA distributed close to $6 billion in Florida after last year’s hurricanes. Taxpayers deserve an accounting. Some questionable expenditures already have been uncovered…

Releasing the names of those who received FEMA dollars and how they were spent would guard against waste and abuse. If necessary, certain details could be excised from the public record.

…The likelihood of harm to recipients is small, whereas the likelihood of taxpayers being swindled if FEMA’s expenses are kept in the dark is great.

Tipping Point: Bush’s Polling Slides Toward Impeachment

Jon Ponder

Outside the Beltway The Dems in Congress may not be contemplating the impeachment of President George W. Bush, but according to a several recent polls, half of American voters are ready to rumble.

A majority of Americans support impeachment if Bush lied about the reasons for war – and 57 percent now believe that he lied.

A Zogby International poll released November 4th found that 53 percent of Americans want Congress to consider impeaching Bush if he did not tell the truth about the reasons for war. Similarly, an Ipsos Public Affairs poll from early October found that by a margin of 50 percent to 44 percent, Americans would favor impeaching President Bush if he lied about the reasons he took America to war.

These numbers represented a sharp uptick from a similar poll in June in which 42 percent told Zogby that they support impeachment if Mr. Bush lied in the run-up to war.

If you marry these numbers with a spate of recent polls that show that majorities among the public have come to see that Mr. Bush is not honest (finally!), you see that the White House has a potential crisis looming.

In particular, the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that a whopping 57 percent believe Mr. Bush lied about the reasons for the reasons for war.

[…]

GOP Lies: Claims That Dems Saw Contents of Iraq War NIE Are False

Jon Ponder

Blame game: Earlier this week, CNN reported that the Bush White House will go on the offensive to counter accusations that they lied about the reasons for war by implicating that the Democrats colluded with them in their deception of the American public.

As Buzzflash put it:

On Veterans Day, on the defensive (a good sign), Bush is going to claim Democrats saw the same intelligence on Iraq he did. Well, not really, because he saw the intelligence before it was “fixed.” The Democrats saw it after Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Bush manipulated the intelligence and forced the CIA to come up with speculation, no matter how doubtful, and turn it into propaganda factoids — along with assistance from Rumsfeld’s “little neo-con elves of deception” shop over at the Defense Department. So the Democrats voted to authorize Bush to go to war based on lies and only if all U.N. options were exhausted, which they weren’t.

There’s another lie that the GOP echo chamber is floating – and, as is typical, it floated out of Wolf Blitzer’s mouth on CNN last week – and that is that the Democrats in Congress saw the contents of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE).

In a news conference a few days ago, three Democratic senators – Dianne Feinstein, Dick Durbin and Jay Rockefeller, the vice-chairman of the Intelligence Committee – flatly refuted that assertion that they were routinely briefed on the contents of the NIE.

Lord Help Us, Democrats Are Being Told To Find God

Trish

The tea leaves at the bottom of the pot of Democratic victories in this week’s elections are getting closer scrutiny than the models in the Victoria’s Secret fashion show. Everyone has a theory about why Democrats, considered by some dead and buried as a party, could still win. One explanation I am particularly loathe to embrace is that it’s about getting religion. Some pundits think that in the future, everyone should be Virginia Governor-Elect Timothy M. Kaine.

…Mr. Kaine’s advisers and some top Democratic strategists say their victory in Virginia shows that Democrats, including liberals, can win in culturally conservative states if they talk about deeply held religious beliefs.

That lesson is likely to be studied by many Democrats across the country as they head into next year’s midterm elections, political analysts and party officials say…

Representative Ted Strickland, who is running in next year’s Democratic primary for governor of Ohio, said the party had hurt itself by not trying to identify more closely with religious voters. He has already begun talking in his campaign about religion’s role in his life and politics.

“I do think the Democratic Party has for far too long been hesitant to talk about the things we deeply believe and value,” said Mr. Strickland, a former Methodist minister. “Many public policy positions have their foundation in religious beliefs that we hold dear.”

Sure they do. But freedom of religion and freedom from religion are bedrock values in America, or they were in the America where I grew up.

At least former Pres. Jimmy Carter, who has a new book out criticizing the Bush administration, isn’t letting the smell of victory go to his head. […]

We Can Do Better Than Trash TV, Obama Says

Trish

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) is trying to wake us up from our TV stupor, just as a new study shows that sex on TV is becoming ubiquitous. Ad Age:

One reason I think George Bush gets away with so much is that we are becoming a nation of George W. Bushes

In its fourth biennial study of TV, the [Kaiser Family Foundation] reported that both the number of shows with sexual content and the number of sexual scenes has risen sharply. Some 70% of shows now have some sexual content, compared to 56% in 1998, and there are 5 sexual scenes per hour compared to 3.2 in 1998. The study excludes news, sports and children’s shows.

Obama, although threatening broadcasters with legislative action, makes some great, long-overdue points not just about sex on TV but the vapid assumptions behind “entertainment.”

“We don’t teach our children that healthy relationships involve drunken, naked parties in a hot tub with strangers — but that’s what they see on ‘The Real World.’ We don’t teach them to express their anger by seeing how much blood they can draw with a round of ammo, but that’s what they learn in the most popular video games. And we don’t teach our kids that the height of success is inheriting a family fortune to buy Gucci bags without ever working a day in your life, but that’s how Paris Hilton gets by on ‘The Simple Life.’”

“You can say that kids know this isn’t real,” Mr. Obama, said, “but when they’re fed a steady diet of these depictions over and over again from the time they’re very young, this behavior becomes acceptable — even normal.”

I’ll go Obama one better, and say that not only do kids not question this bilge, but neither do adults. People get tired of hearing me say I don’t watch TV because they think my point is that I am superior because of it. The truth is I can’t afford cable, plus I’m only home in the evening one or two days a week (that second job). But what happens when you are not exposed to a steady diet of this stuff is that over time you notice differences in thought between yourself and people who are exposed to it, even cool people with their hearts in the right place. There are built-in assumptions that go along with TV-watching, and the more you watch, the more they become internalized. […]

More on Why Arnold Has Bombed as Governor

Jon Ponder

A hollow man’s undoing: For political junkies in California, the trouncing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger took in the polls on Tuesday made perfect sense. It was one of those rare moments when – as much as is ever possible – the electorate spoke in one voice, loud and clear. The message from the voters to Arnold was very simple: You suck!

Many voters chose Arnold in that election not because he stood for anything, but because they thought it would be funny to have The Terminator as governor.

Schwarzenegger’s seemingly abrupt change in fortunes may be confusing to the rest of the world. Here’s a good explanation of it from David Wallechinsky at the Huffington Post:

In 2003, a majority of voters did not vote for Schwarzenegger, but he won anyway because the rules of the election did not allow a runoff. Many voters chose Arnold in that election not because he stood for anything, but because they thought it would be funny to have The Terminator as governor. Even I, who did not vote for him, purchased a Govenator coffee mug. Schwarzenegger sold himself as a Republican who was friendly to Democrats and independents. However, once in power, he ruled as a strict Republican Party partisan. He is not a conservative. Like George Bush, he is more of a “corporative,” someone who puts the needs of corporations and the rich above all else.

Bypassing the Democratic-controlled legislature, he put forth four propositions to be voted on by the citizens of California, the details of which are no longer relevant. Knowing that they were unlikely to pass in a general election, he called a special election—at a cost to California taxpayers of about $55 million. He also hoped that by winning this election he would be well-positioned to gain reelection next year. But, again like George Bush, he completely misread the extent of his “mandate.” According to Survey USA, Schwarzenegger’s net job approval rating, minus 32%, is worse than 48 of the other 49 governors. (Only Ohio’s Bob Taft is more unpopular.)

Besides Schwarzenegger’s four propositions, there were four other proposals on the ballot. None of them passed. In other words, Arnold Schwarzenegger, in a failed attempt to boost his political career, wasted $55 million of taxpayer money that could have been used to help the state. When he campaigned for governor two years ago, Schwarzenegger boasted that he was too rich to be bought by special interests. That being the case, I propose that he make it up to the citizens of California by using his own fortune to reimburse the state for the millions that he caused us to lose

We second Wallechinsky’s proposal and add this: He should resign – immediately. We’re serious about this because, again like Bush, his credibility among the electorate is gone. Leaders with no crediblity cannot govern.

Poll: 57% Believe Bush Lied about Iraq

Jon Ponder

America wakes up: Polls are starting to reflect the fact that George W. Bush is the Worst President Ever. But in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, one number could represent a legacy-killer, to say the least, for the president – nearly 60 percent believe he lied about reasons he took the country to war in Iraq:

Only 33 percent give Bush positive ratings for being honest and straightforward — a drop of 17 points since January

Fifty-seven percent believe [Pres. George W. Bush] deliberately misled people to make the case for war, compared with 35 percent who say he gave the most accurate information he had.

Contrary to Republicans’ hopes, the Bush CIA Leak scandal is not just an inside-the-Beltway tempest:

Seventy-nine percent think that Libby’s indictment is a serious matter … Moreover, only 33 percent give Bush positive ratings for being honest and straightforward — a drop of 17 points since January, when Bush held a 50-to-36 percent score on this question.

At Last, Something Worth Reading from Judy Miller: Her Resignation Letter

Trish

The attack poodles just lost their queen, according to Reuters:

New York Times reporter Judith Miller, a journalist at the center of the CIA leak controversy that led to the indictment of a White House aide, will leave the paper, the New York Times said on Wednesday.

Miller’s lawyers and the paper negotiated a severance package, the terms of which were not disclosed. As part of the agreement, the paper will publish a letter from Miller explaining her position, The Times said on its Web site.

That’s one article by Miller we’ll be looking forward to reading.

CA Special Election Cost $350 Million

Jon Ponder

A big waste: It’s okay. We’ll just borrow the money:

The total cost of Arnold’s California special election may top $300 million, according to this article. Gov. Schwarzenegger and his California Recovery Team have spent nearly $32.5 million, per the latest filings online, while the state teachers union has kicked in $55 million.

According to another article, total spending by “yes” and “no” campaigns is estimated at $220 million. Unions in California spent $100 million to defeat these initiatives.

I’m not sure if these numbers include the costs to each of the California counties for holding the special election.

Imagine something positive that could have been accomplished in California with $300 million . . .

The operational costs of the election are at least $50 million, upping the tally to $350 million.