Month: May 2007

Writing the Book on Iraq Reconstruction

Buck Banks

Wasteful reading: The plot is thick, the characters familiar. The inspector general tasked with overseeing the Iraq reconstruction has been criticized by disgruntled former employees for using agency resources and personnel to produce a book along the lines of the 9/11 Commission Report about the reconstruction. Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen is currently the subject of an ongoing investigation that some believe might have been instigated from the White House due to the agency’s occasional (gasp!) criticisms of the Bush adminsitration’s handling of the decon … er … I mean reconstruction of Iraq.

Waste represents a transgression that is less than fraud and abuse, and most waste does not involve a violation of law.

SIGIR spokeswoman Denise Burgess said the project, called the “Story of Iraq Reconstruction,” or SIR, is a “capping report” that will present SIGIR’s unique perspective on the reconstruction, including the period before oversight was established.

“What it’s not going to be is a publication with a whole bunch of reports in it,” Burgess said, explaining that it would use a narrative style to appeal to a wide audience. Citing the Iraq Study Group report and the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission as models, she said the SIR project would “drill up” to capture the full picture of reconstruction.

Burgess said plans for publishing the report still are being fleshed out, but it is expected to be complete by the end of 2007. She said she did not know the size of the team working on it, but said it consisted of in-house employees, though she said contractors have done much of the writing for the IG’s quarterly reports to Congress and three lessons learned reports.

But, in a plot twist eerily similar to the firing of federal prosecutors, some have seen the heavy hand of the White House behind the yearlong investigation:

Some news reports have suggested that the investigation could be a form of retaliation by administration officials against Bowen, whose office often has been critical of the reconstruction effort.

White House spokesman Tony Snow also has said there is no link between the White House and the investigation, noting that “when people raise allegations, somebody is going to look into it.”

So who can blame Bowen for wanting to protect his reputation in these days of legacy-building? Meanwhile, he continues the difficult task of overseeing the rebuilding of a ruined country:

In February, Bowen worked with the head of the Government Accountability Office and IGs at the State and Defense departments to come up with a common definition for “waste.” The overseers agreed that “waste represents a transgression that is less than fraud and abuse, and most waste does not involve a violation of law. Rather, waste relates primarily to mismanagement, inappropriate actions or inadequate oversight.”

Whew! I’m glad we finally got that “waste” definition out of the way four years into the thing. Now we can carry on with the real job of rebuilding. Once we definitively define it, that is.

Gingrich Advises Republican Candidates Not to Mention Bush

Jon Ponder

Think Progress:

[On Sunday’s] CBS’s Face the Nation, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich advised fellow conservatives not to talk about President Bush’s record. “President Bush is not the future. He’s not a solution. He doesn’t solve Social Security. He doesn’t solve Medicare. He doesn’t solve the economy. He doesn’t solve the environment. He doesn’t solve education. He’s a current fact,” Gingrich said.

It’s also a “current fact” that the conservative agenda has failed to “solve” these important issues over the past six years.

Gingrich went on to say that conservatives “have to say, this is not what we want to debate. It’s not in Baghdad, it’s not in Katrina, it’s not at Walter Reed, it’s not with the U.S. attorneys, but I have a better plan for a better solution that fits your values.” When Host Bob Schieffer suggested that Gingrich seemed to advocating steering clear of President Bush, Gingrich responded, “Well, I think that’s clear.”

Novak Pans Fred Thompson’s First Campaign Speech

Jon Ponder

Republicans who are unhappy with the current crop of 10 GOP candidates for president have pinned their hopes of “Law & Order” actor Fred Thompson. A former senator from Tennessee and (formerly?) a good friend of second-place candidate Sen. John McCain, Thompson has been sending signals that he plans to enter the race.

Republicans stumbled the last time they nominated someone whom they believed to be Reaganesque. After being fooled into believing that George W. Bush was Reagan’s political heir, he turned out to be the heir of his actual ancestor, Pres. Franklin Pierce, a one-termer who left office in disgrace in the 1857.

Thompson made his first campaign-style appearance Friday night in Orange County, the fountainhead for GOP fundraising in California. I happened to catch part of the speech on C-SPAN over the weekend and was surprised at how bad he was. His delivery was flat and unenergetic, and the message was less than inspiring — talking points strung together in no particular order.

Of course, Fred Thompson doesn’t stand a chance with me. I’ve never voted for a Republican, for one thing. For another, I am immune to the charms of millionaire Republicans like George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan who project folksiness.

However, no less than the prince of conservative darkness himself, Robert Novak, who was in the room, had a similar take:

“It was not Reaganesque.” “No red meat.” “Too low key.” That was the preponderant reaction I heard to Thompson’s half-hour presentation (leavened by a few favorable comments, mostly by women, that he was more “statesmanlike” and “presidential” than the announced candidates). Lincoln Club members, like many conservative Republicans, have been unimpressed by the existing field of Republican hopefuls and envisioned Thompson as the second coming of Ronald Reagan. They did not get it Friday night…

Surprisingly for such an experienced performer, however, Thompson had trouble with the podium microphone as his low, conversational tones faded in and out. He ended his speech on a down note by reporting a recent visit to 6-year-old schoolchildren and what they had told him. Thompson worried that the long Lincoln Club program preceding his speech may have turned off the audience, but he may have been the one who lost his enthusiasm.

Novak also gave notes on the debate among the 10 announced candidates last week in Simi Valley, Calif.:

Dissatisfaction with the current presidential field was intensified by the chaotic debate of 10 Republican candidates broadcast nationally the previous night. Rudy Giuliani seemed uncomfortable dealing with standard conservative issues. John McCain sounded harsh and hawkish. Mitt Romney’s newfound conservatism still seems contrived to many in the Republican base.

Republicans stumbled the last time they nominated someone whom they believed to be Reaganesque. After being fooled into believing that George W. Bush was Reagan’s political heir, he turned out to be the heir of his actual ancestor, Pres. Franklin Pierce, a one-termer who left office in disgrace in the 1857. (Pierce was the only sitting president rejected by his own party for a second term.)

Despite Thompson’s stumble in front of the big-money crowd Friday night and his lackluster record in the Senate, he may still be the best candidate the Republicans have to offer next year.

Bush at 28% Again – Is It a Sign of a ‘Dead Duck’ Presidency?

Jon Ponder

In the new Newsweek poll, approval of Bush’s job performance has dropped to 28 percent. That’s the second time this year — the first was in a CBS Poll taken in January, during the week before his State of the Union address. Twice in a little over three months is not a good sign for him but not yet a clear signal of a major shift.

George W. Bush has been rewarded for his phone-it-in attitude and his incompetence with money and power, time and time again. No one has failed as far upwards as he has.

Pres. Bush lost the support of independents long ago (and what little support he had from Democrats evaporated when he invaded Iraq), so it has been support from mainstream Republicans that has buoyed his approval ratings in the mid-30s. But if he skids along in the 20s for the next few months, it is a sign that the mainstream has given up on him.

Left with only the wingnut base of Christian nationalists and whackjob extremists behind him, Pres. Bush could become, not a lame duck, but a dead one.

George W. Bush was born lucky, but throughout his life he has taken for granted the extraordinary advantages handed to him — in military service, business and government. He wasted or mismanaged nearly every cushy assignment given him, usually with impunity. In fact — and here’s the luck again — despite his lifelong incompetence, phone-it-in attitude and cronies-only hiring practices, he has been lauded with power and money at every turn. No one has failed as far upwards as he has.

But if he loses the support of his party’s rank and file now — the way he lost it from the rest of us ages ago — his luck could finally run out. To save their own skins, Republicans in Congress, especially the 21 out of 48 GOP senators who are up for reelection in 2008, might feel compelled to abandon him on the war, and perhaps even to agree to corrective action against him, such as a censure or worse.

D.C. Call Girls Found ‘Shock and Awe’ Author, Mr. U., to Be ‘Unpleasant’

Jon Ponder

Jeane Palfrey, the D.C. Madam, recently turned over thousands of phone numbers belonging to clients of her high-class escort service to Brian Ross at ABC News. Ross announced his findings last night on “20/20.” I’m glad I didn’t stay up:

The phone records trace back to thousands of men, including a career Justice Department prosecutor. There are NASA officials; at least five military officers, including the commander of an Air Force intelligence squadron … The phone numbers also track back to Georgetown mansions and prominent CEOs, officials at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and lobbyists both Republican and Democratic.

But as usually is the case in Washington, much of it is dull. There were no members of Congress that we could find in these phone records, no White House officials.

Quite frankly, but for the few exceptions, most of the men on this list just aren’t newsworthy, not even as customers of the D.C. Madam’s escort service.

Hiring a prostitute is as illegal as being one, or so I thought. So the fact that a Justice Dept. official and military officers are breaking the law would be newsworthy to a lot of people.

We knew that Deputy Sec. of State Randall Tobias, the head of the Bush administration’s global anti-prostitution crackdown, resigned after being outed as a Palfrey client.

(Tobias’ role as the anti-prostitution czar adds irony to this cavalier remark: “Tobias said [calling for a prostitute] was no different than ordering a pizza and denied there was any sex.”)

But the name Harlan Ullman was new to me:

Also named by Palfrey is Harlan Ullman, a leading military analyst who wrote the book “Shock and Awe,” a concept cited by the Pentagon in planning the war in Iraq.

Palfrey says she remembers Ullman as “Mr. U,” — remembers him well.

Jeane Palfrey: I think he was a disagreeable character. And there were some complaints about him, yes.

Brian Ross: From your women.

Jeane Palfrey: Yes.

Brian Ross: They didn’t want to go?

Jean Palfrey: Because he was an unpleasant person.

I assume Palfrey gave the phone numbers to Ross with the intent that he would expose her clients’ names so that they would suffer some of the same consequences she will, if she is found guilty. She should have known better.

As Melissa Farley, an academic who studies prostitution, said to “20/20” last night:

The women are arrested; the women are incarcerated; the women are taken out in handcuffs, and the men who buy and use women in prostitution slowly and quietly slink off, and they’re pretty much socially and legally invisible.

Same as it ever was.

Book Review: With God on Our Side

Buck Banks

What would you do if you found that people espousing a brand of intolerant evangelical religion were turning an organization that was responsible to a large degree for shaping your life and career into a tool for coercive recruitment? No, I’m not talking about the White House; I’m referring to the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.

Mikey Weinstein, a self-described “militant Jew” took on the academy, the Air Force and the Department of Defense a couple of years back because of flagrant violations of the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution by the officers and cadets of the Air Force Academy. Their officers, chaplains and classmates were subjecting cadets to a robust and pervasive proselytizing of fundamentalist Christian doctrine. And if you happened to be Jewish, it was likely that you would be treated like an outsider, subjected to humiliation and possibly called a “Christ killer” by classmates.

“With God on Our Side: One Man’s War against an Evangelical Coup in America’s Military” chronicles Weinstein’s crusade against the school from he himself graduated with honors in 1974 and followed it with a distinguished record of service in the judge advocate general corps and three years on staff in the Reagan White House. So he’s no slouch. Instead Weinstein is the third generation of a four-generation military family, and both his sons graduated from the Air Force Academy.

While the narrative occasionally gets rather breathless — especially the first couple of chapters where the author is desperately trying to hook the reader with the power of Weinstein’s personality and the gravity of his crusade, the book is well-written.

For a look into the underpinnings of the race to theocracy and the rise of radical evangelicalism that we are witnessing in America today, read this book.

LAPD Caught on Tape Attacking Reporters – Again

Jon Ponder

The sound was off on my television when I first saw video of police in riot gear attacking reporters covering a demonstration. I assumed I was seeing footage from a police riot in Bogata or Buenos Aires.

In fact, the scene had taken place at MacArthur Park near Downtown Los Angeles, just five miles from my home.

The demonstrators were protesting treatment of Mexican illegal aliens by the government, marking the first anniversary of immigrants rights protets that brought tens of thousands of people to the streets downtown. This year’s event was much smaller, and would have been relegated to footnotes in the news, if the cops hadn’t over-reacted.

It’s hard to imagine a worse PR move than clubbing reporters who are simply doing their jobs. It’s equally hard to think of an organization that needs to avoid bad PR, especially among minority communities, more than the Los Angeles Police Dept.

Worse, this is not the first time the LAPD has been caught on tape roughing up reporters at a big event. The department and the city were sued after the Democratic Convention here in 2000 for precisely that. The matter was settled in 2002, with an agreement that officers would not use force against reporters even when they were covering an unlawful assembly during an order to disperse.

Oops.

Spoiling Everything Else Just to Use More Energy

Trish

The Sierra Club is reporting even more depressing news on a day that included the devastation of honeybees and no end to problems with the nation’s food supply.

Get a load of this:

Have any doubts about the motivation for this treachery? It doesn’t apply to Texas. Nuff said.

Jaws dropped last week when the DOE proposed its first two so-called “National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors.” They covered the entirety of [Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey] and vast swaths of southern California, Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, and New York. Under everyone’s favorite bill, the Energy Policy Act of the 2005, the DOE can designate such corridors for new pipelines and powerlines. And if local or state officials want to protect their wilderness area, wetland, tribal burial ground, or Civil War battlefield — TOO BAD! The federal government can approve transmission lines over local objection and even if they conflict with other federal laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act.

Best of all, once they’re approved, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has been granted sweeping powers of eminent domain. So FERC can then swoop in, take your property from you, and turn it over Energy Company X so they can pad their bottom line.

Have any doubts about the motivation for this treachery? Wait, there’s more.

This provision of EPACT 2005 — never debated on the floor of the House — does include one Texas-sized loophole. As in, the whole state of Texas is excluded from this vast and likely unconstitutional power grab by the federal government.

Nuff said.