Month: January 2007

Tancredo Exploring Run for Prez

Buck Banks

Jingo-In-Chief: Colorado Republican Rep. Tom “Miami Is a Third World Country” Tancredo thinks he has what it takes to be president of these United States. Of course, that might have something to do with the low bar the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. has set. Tancredo has announced the formation of an exploratory committee to assess the nation’s need for a jingoistic, mono-issue conservative from the suburbs of Denver.

‘They believe that there is a void in this race that none of the other candidates are willing or able to fill.’

Tancredo’s single issue is immigration reform, by which he means close the borders and kick out the illegals. Following a weekend meeting with Repugs in Iowa, Tancredo was convinced that the increasingly crowded GOP field of runners needs one more. Indeed, he explained to the Associated Press Tuesday what the Iowa GOP brain trust told him: “They believe that there is a void in this race that none of the other candidates are willing or able to fill.”

He’s probably right, you know. What sensible presidential candidate would hitch his wagon to the lone horse of immigration reform, an issue which reared its ugly head before the midterm elections but had absolutely no effect on any key races. Indeed, while the 109th Congress was well-known for its ability to get nothing accomplished, one got the sense that few on Capitol Hill had any real stomach for taking on the immigration issue, so no one did. Well, except for enacting a law that calls on the federal government to build a 700-mile-long Great Wall of America on the Mexico border — without appropriateing the $49 million to $70 million it will likely take to build it.

So Tancredo sees himself as the Void Filler of the GOP in the race for president in 2008. Good luck with that, Tom. He’ll likely garner some support from the true conservatives out there, but he’s such a polarizing and monomaniacal figure that I can’t imagine him becoming a viable candidate for president. But then, I thought the same thing about George W. Bush.

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

The increase in armaments that is intended in each nation to produce consciousness of strength, and a sense of security, does not produce these effects. On the contrary, it produces a consciousness of the strength of other nations and a sense of fear. Fear begets suspicion and distrust and evil imaginings of all sorts.

— Sir Edward Grey (1862-1933), British statesman

Obama Fever – Not Feeling It

Jon Ponder

In the unlikely event that Sen. Barack Obama becomes the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, I will vote for him in the general election that November. However, I will be very surprised if there is any chance he will win.

It is a harsh indictment, I know, but while Americans will vote a functionally retarded white guy into the Oval Office twice, there is no chance in hell the country is ready to vote for a black person or, for that matter, a white woman.

I agree that he has all the attributes ascribed to him by the Gang of 500 — he’s smart, well-spoken and telegenic, and all of those qualities would be a refreshing change after eight years of Bush. Unfortunately, none of those qualities will have an impact, finally, on his ability to win.

His lack of experience is a factor, but the main reason he’ll lose, I’m sorry to say, is his father’s race.

It appeals to our higher selves to believe that America is ready to elect an African-American president. Unfortunately, recent electoral history indicates otherwise:

  • Harold Ford Jr.’s loss of the Tennessee senate seat to the revolting Bob Corker last year.
  • Former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt’s two close losses to the even more revolting Sen. Jesse Helms in North Carolina a decade ago.
  • Former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley’s two losses to the odious Gov. George Deukmejian in California in the 1980s.

In each of these cases, white independent voters just couldn’t vote for a black candidate, even though in each instance the black candidate was equally or more intelligent, articulate and experienced than the white candidate.

There were other factors, of course. Both Gantt and Bradley were mayors of the biggest cities in their states, and thus stigmatized in the eyes of rural voters. Both Gantt and Ford were targeted with racist advertising. Sen. Helms ran an ad showing a white man receiving a rejection letter for a job purportedly because a black man had been given “his” job because of affirmative action. Ford was the target of the infamous “Harold, call me” ad that implied he dated white women, heaven forfend.

In the cases of both Bradley and Gantt, polling throughout the election showed close races, but on election day, the white candidates won decided victories. So white people were telling pollsters they would vote for a black candidate but couldn’t actually do it when the time came.

Of course, Deval Patrick was elected last year as Massachusetts’ first black governor, and as a presidential candidate, it wouldn’t surprise me if Obama were to win Massachusetts. He might even win all the states John Kerry won in 2004, but as we saw then, that was not enough.

Every election is momentous but the stakes are as high as they can be in 2008. The future of the United States depends on a Democratic victory. It is a harsh indictment, I know, but while Americans will vote a functionally retarded white guy into the Oval Office twice, there is no chance in hell the country is ready to elect a black person or, for that matter, a white woman.

Like all good liberals, I yearn for the day when race, gender and, what the heck, sexual orientation, are not a factor in who we elect to be president. And while I wish Sen. Obama well in the coming campaign, unfortunately, America is not there yet.

Pentagon Surplus Sales of Fighter Jet Parts Going to Iran

Jon Ponder

Before the Iranian revolution in 1979, when the Shah was a U.S. ally against the Soviets, we sold the Iranians the latest, greatest state-of-the-art military equipment our contractors could produce. Now, three decades, Iran is our enemy, so when they need to repair their aging helicopters and fighter jets, who do they buy from? The Pentagon’s sidewalk sale:

“Right Item, Right Time, Right Place, Right Price, Every Time. Best Value Solutions for America’s Warfighters.”
— Pentagon advertisement

Fighter jet parts and other sensitive U.S. military gear seized from front companies for Iran and brokers for China have been traced in criminal cases to a surprising source: the U.S. Defense Department.

In one case, federal investigators said, contraband bought at auction from Defense surplus stocks was delivered to Iran, which President George W. Bush had in his “axis of evil” grouping. Just Tuesday, the State Department branded Iran as the world’s worst exporter of terror

In the Iran case, a Pakistani arms broker convicted of exporting U.S. missile parts to Iran resumed business after his release from prison. He purchased Chinook helicopter engine parts for Iran from a U.S. company that had bought them in a Pentagon surplus sale. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents say those parts made it to Iran…

“Right Item, Right Time, Right Place, Right Price, Every Time. Best Value Solutions for America’s Warfighters,” the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service says on its Web site, calling itself “the place to obtain original U.S. Government surplus property.”

Federal investigators are increasingly anxious that Iran is within easy reach of a top priority on its shopping list: parts for its precious fleet of F-14 “Tomcat” fighter jets the United States let Iran buy in the 1970s when it was an ally.

In one case, convicted middlemen for Iran bought Tomcat parts from the Defense Department’s surplus division. Customs agents confiscated them and returned them to the Pentagon, which sold them again, customs evidence tags still attached, to another buyer, a suspected broker for Iran.

“That would be evidence of a significant breakdown, in my view, in controls and processes,” said Greg Kutz, the Government Accountability Office’s head of special investigations. “It shouldn’t happen the first time, let alone the second time.”

Too bad the Pentagon didn’t offload some of their famous $500 hammers or $2,000 toilet seats on them.

Bush: Iraq “Has Still Got Some Maturation to Do”

Trish

First, Saddam Hussein is executed in such a way that even Bush feels sorry for him. Next, Hussein’s half-brother dies from having his head ripped from his body instead of from hanging. And finally, the United Nations releases an estimate that 34,452 innocent Iraqis died brutally during 2006.

So what does Bush have to say on PBS’s Newshour about how it’s going for Iraq? Oh no, he did-ent.

“…it just goes to show that this is a government that has still got some maturation to do.”

Yeah, he did. And it gets worse.

“No question, 2006 was a lousy year for Iraq.”

Let’s review.

“Lousy” is how Ohio State played against the Florida Gators.

“Lousy” is how Britney’s career has been going lately.

“Lousy” is how I feel the next morning after one too many vodka and néctar de granadillas.

“Lousy” does not even come close to describing the average of 94 random and horrific deaths every day in a country plunged into fear and darkness and violence.

And “lousy” is also how I feel knowing that this idiot isn’t done yet.

Can We Call It a Civil War Yet?

Trish

I think we’re there.

A suicide bomber and a car bomb killed at least 70 people and wounded 169 more at entrances to a once-prestigious university in Baghdad.

The strike at Mustansiriya University was a dual bomb attack. The suicide bomber detonated a vest at the back entrance of the school, and a parked car exploded at the main gate under a pedestrian bridge where students and employees get public transit.

A CNN producer near the scene said police sealed off the area and there were armed members of the Mehdi Army — the militia under the control of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr — on the street.

The university, in northeastern Baghdad, is at the tip of Sadr City, a Shiite neighborhood where there is much support for al-Sadr. It is considered to be a Mehdi militia stronghold.

Meanwhile, gunmen on motorcycles opened fire on a marketplace in the Mehdi Army-controlled Bunouk area of eastern Baghdad and killed 12 civilians. Seven others were wounded.

In the Sadr City neighborhood, a bomb left inside a minivan detonated, killing four people and wounding 10 others, the official said. The blast occurred 100 to 200 meters away from al-Sadr’s main office.

…A bomb exploded near a police convoy along a main road in central Baghdad, the official said. When police and others responded to that blast, a second bomb exploded nearby. At least 15 people were killed and 70 wounded by the two bombs, the official said.

About two hours before that incident, two police officers who helped defuse a car bomb in central Baghdad’s Karrada section were killed when another bomb hidden nearby exploded, the official said. Two civilians were also killed in the blast, and 10 people, including three policemen, were wounded, the official said.

In Baghdad’s western Bayaa neighborhood, two policemen were gunned down as they drove home after work in civilian clothing and car.

Mortar rounds hit a residential area in the Amil neighborhood in western Baghdad, wounding 10 civilians.

Poll: 100 Percent of Buck Thinks Zogby’s a Repug Tool

Buck Banks

Poll this, buddy: I have often cited John Zogby’s polls in Pensito Review knowing that he’s a Republican tool and conservative. I have done this because usually Zogby’s polls seem balanced, as in the late midterm elections when it was clear to anybody with sense what public opinion was, and Zogby had to call it as he saw it or look foolish.

Respondents nationwide said Reagan’s qualities are most sought after, with FDR a very close second.

Well, he’s over that, and he’s come out of the conservative closet, as it were, with his latest poll, which, he alleges, found that a majority of Americans would rather have a president with Ronald Reagan’s qualities than the empty 10-gallon hat we now have in the White House. Mr. Zogby, methinks thou hast hoisted truth on the petard of the poisoned poll. Consider his methods:

Offered thumbnail descriptions of the presidential qualities, including the names of five of the greatest American Presidents — George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan — respondents nationwide said Reagan’s qualities are most sought after, with FDR a very close second. Twenty–eight percent said they would prefer someone like Reagan, whose “far-sighted vision” and who “persevered despite harsh criticism from enemies and was firm in pursuing his agenda.” Nearly as many (26 percent) said they preferred the “pragmatism and hopefulness of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who inspired a nation in trouble and championed the needs of the downtrodden.”

Another 21 percent said they think this is a time for Democrat John F. Kennedy, while 16 percent reached back to Abraham Lincoln in search of a leader to solve today’s modern problems. Just 6 percent said they think the nation — now at war around the world for five years — would be best served by George Washington, the man who led the war for independence.

It comes as no surprise Republican respondents overwhelmingly believe America is most in need of the guidance Reagan would provide — 57 percent of Republicans say the nation needs a president like Reagan, while 18 percent said it is time for a president with Lincoln’s attributes. But only 9 percent of Democrats believe the nation is in need of a president like Reagan. They would instead turn to Democratic presidents of the past to help solve the nation’s problems — 35 percent want to have a president like FDR, while 32 percent believe a president like Kennedy would be best able to lead America today.

Don’t you like how Zogby only shares selected “thumbnails” of the presidents’ traits? Since when did Reagan get “far-sighted?” Oh yeah, since his death and subsequent canonization. And “persevered despite harsh criticism from enemies and was firm in pursuing his agenda” sounds a lot like the numbskull who’s currently president. But some of us remember Reagan’s terrible record of fighting the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s, his harsh policies toward women and families, poor people, race relations, foreign policy (Iran/Contra), energy policy and general plain meanness. Reagan gave us Tom DeLay and Newt Gingrich, “Star Wars” weapons systems and Reaganomics.

I suppose we should be thankful that Zogby didn’t include genocidal maniac Andrew Jackson in his list, and it’s pretty clear why he didn’t include Richard Nixon (a crook and a Republican). I especially appreciate his characterization of Abraham Lincoln as a Republican even though the Republicans of Lincoln’s day in fact held liberal values one associates with the modern Democrat Party.

Zogby rounds out his poll with questions about the state and direction of the country (crisis; going to hell in a handbasket) about which almost everyone agrees. But as far as I am concerned, he already blew it by skewing the poll to further the sanctification of Ronald Reagan in the false memories of Americans, to whom Reagan seems like long-lost Grandpa, not the mean-ass vetoer of social legislation while quoting Clint Eastwood’s famous “make my day” line.

As the writer O. Henry once said, “Statistics are the lowest grade of information known to exist.” Zogby’s latest poll certainly fits that description.

Military Takeover of Intel — It’s Even Worse Than Jon Thinks

Buck Banks

Old spooks club: In his recent column on George Bush’s military takeover of U.S. intelligence services Jon noted that “Using the military to fight a civilian force like al Qaeda is like using a chainsaw to perform an appendectomy.” His expressed concern was that the military and its contractors are already too close, and handing the intelligence agencies to the military creates a serious problem. True, but maybe the real bad news is not that these guys are former military, but that they are former intel operatives.

This is the intelligence professionals retaking the ground.

Shane Harris of National Journal has an alternate take on the military-intel triumverate. He seems to think it’s a positive thing that the new intel heads have all been intel heads before, as well as military officers, but leavens his analysis with just enough negative stuff to come off not sounding quite like a cheerleader for the spy team. He offers this sketch of the players:

In this new intelligence constellation, there are four key players, each of whom has led a major agency at least once. On January 5, President Bush nominated retired Navy Vice Adm. Mike McConnell, a former director of the National Security Agency, to be the second director of national intelligence. It falls to him as DNI to continue post-9/11 intelligence reforms and to act as a chief operating officer for the government’s 16 intelligence agencies.

Next is new Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has his hands on 80 percent of the intelligence budget and so has the most muscle to flex. A former CIA director, Gates will bring a keen understanding of civilian intelligence operations to his job.

Days before McConnell’s nomination was announced, Gates asked retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper, a deeply experienced uniformed intelligence officer, to take over the top spy job in the Pentagon, the undersecretary for intelligence. Clapper will replace a controversial civilian political appointee, Stephen Cambone, who was a close ally of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and had little career intelligence experience.

Clapper has held two top jobs, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and head of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which analyzes satellite and aerial imagery and data.

Harris makes it sound like these guys get together for golf outings, barbecues and wife-swapping:

McConnell, Gates, and Clapper also have a friend in recently installed CIA Director Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force general who rounds out the new team. Hayden, who has been busy beefing up the CIA’s human spying efforts, appointed a career clandestine officer as his No. 2. Hayden is professionally close to McConnell and Gates, and several former officials said that he and Clapper are “old friends.”

“Here you have very trusted players who have been around each other for a long period of time,” said Fred Burton, a former special agent for counter-terrorism in the State Department who’s now the vice president of counter-terrorism and corporate security for Stratfor, a private intelligence firm. Those relationships, perhaps more than anything else, bode well for their chances of success, Burton said.

While McConnell was leading the NSA in the early 1990s, Clapper was director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and Gates was head of the CIA. Hayden held key positions on the National Security Council and in military intelligence, and he took over the NSA in 1999. Also, when McConnell was the military official in charge of intelligence for Operation Desert Storm, Clapper was the assistant chief of staff for Air Force intelligence and played a leading role in coordinating the air war.

[…]

Richardson: Congress Should Cut Iraq Funding

Jon Ponder

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico has a prodigious foreign policy portfolio — he was ambassador to the U.N. under Pres. Clinton and continues to negotiate in hotspots like Darfur today. His bona fides in foreign affairs make this exchange on CNN very interesting:

I just believe [cutting funding for war expansion] is an ultimate decision by the Congress. But since the president doesn’t listen, he’s off in, I think, his own bubble. Unfortunately, that’s the course I believe the Congress needs to take.”

WOLF BLITZER: Are you in favor of using the power of the purse that Congress has to try to stop this war?

GOV. BILL RICHARDSON (D), NEW MEXICO: Yes. I believe because the president has not listened to the Congress, he hasn’t listened to the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and to the American people, that overwhelmingly want a change of course, I believe that’s the function of the Congress, to deal with the appropriations process, find ways to at least this surge, to deny the funds to make it happen, because this is going to add to sectarian violence.

I would support a phased withdrawal, tie it to a political solution. There is no military solution. I would also organize a regional conference to get other states to help with the security and civil administration. I would talk to Iran and Syria to try to get the situation to at least a stable level.

I just believe that this is an ultimate decision by the Congress. But since the president doesn’t listen, he’s off in, I think, his own bubble. Unfortunately, that’s the course I believe the Congress needs to take.

BLITZER: What do you say to those who would then come back and say you know what, you’re going to undermine the U.S. fighting men and women in Iraq by denying them the bullets, the military equipment they need, by cutting off funds?

RICHARDSON: Well, I would say that you don’t cut off the military equipment. You don’t cut off the armor or their weapons. But you basically say to the 20,000 surge of troops that it can’t happen without an adequate explanation and that it shouldn’t happen because the American people don’t believe this is the right course of action.

Again, Wolf, I do believe that what is important is to redeploy those troops that are in Iraq. Use them in Afghanistan, where al Qaeda and the Taliban are getting stronger. Use them against the fight on international terrorism. Use them to deal with nuclear proliferation and a loose nuclear weapon on the black market.

Use it for our ports. Use it for our subways. Use it in homeland security protection in this country.

Whether or not cutting the funding turns out to be the right strategy, it’s refreshing to hear a knowledgeable politician make a declarative statement about the Democrats’ available options.

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.

— Guido Bruno (1548-burned at the stake 1600), Italian philosopher