Year: 2008

Bush Getting All Sneaky About FOIA Law

Buck Banks

foia.jpgRemember George Bush’s penchant for signing statements — you know, those little “I signed the bill but now I’m saying it don’t apply to me” post facto add-ons to pieces of legislation. Well, he’s up to his old tricks again, this time seeking to eliminate part of the Freedom of Information Act legislation through an act of legerdemain.

But Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-VT., caught him:

In a paragraph improbably located in a portion of President Bush’s fiscal 2009 budget dealing with the Commerce Department, the White House calls for shifting from the National Archives to the Justice Department funds for an FOIA oversight office created under the recently enacted law.

The Office of Government Information Services would house an ombudsman charged with reviewing agency policies, speeding up responses and mediating disputes involving FOIA.

Creation of the ombudsman is one of a series of steps required under the FOIA bill, signed Dec. 31 by President Bush.

But the plan to move the office has caused Leahy and groups advocating government transparency to charge the White House publicly agreed to the measure, but then privately moved to scuttle it in a step comparable to the president’s use of signing statements suggesting he may not be bound by portions of laws he approves.

The Justice Department has long been criticized for its handling of FOIA requests. Basically, the DoJ is quick to deny and slow to fulfill such requests. Add to that the atmosphere of secrecy the administration has created, going so far as to not share the list of visitors Bush has entertained in the Oval Office. And don’t get me started about the millions of “missing” e-mails.

You do have to give the Bushies credit for coming up with a pretty clever, if sinister, tactic to get the Congress to repeal its own law by inserting a little phrase into the omnibus spending bill. And we know how closely those elected officials read important documents, right?

The language in Bush’s budget says the Justice Department will carry out “the responsibilities of the office” created in the bill. The language also says a portion of the FOIA bill dealing with the new office “is hereby repealed.”

Leahy called issuance of the language itself an effort to repeal part of FOIA law. But a Judiciary Committee aide said the provision would only take effect if Congress passed the budget with the section included.

Thank goodness Pat Leahy actually reads that stuff. Even so, the government’s transparency under George Bush is still, as we say in the South, clear as mud.

For a funny suggestion to the commander in thief, check this out.

Great News! Evangelicals Promising Not to Vote

Trish
Stay home, Jim!

In what might be the best news I’ve heard since my first choice of presidential candidates dropped out, Jim Dobson is threatening to boycott the November election. And he wants to take his fanatic followers with him.

James Dobson, the influential founder of the conservative, evangelical advocacy group Focus on the Family, has delivered a blow to John McCain — by saying he won’t vote for him if he’s the Republican presidential nominee.

“I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are … I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience,” he said in a statement on Tuesday.

“I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life,” he said.

Dobson said he was just expressing his views as a private citizen — but many of his millions of followers in the evangelical community, who listen to his radio show and read his books, will take it as a signal to do the same.

What’s got Jimmy so fired up? Do you think it’s because McCain is pro-choice? Of course he’s not. Do you think it’s because McCain wants to get us out of Iraq too soon? Hell, he wants us there forever. Maybe Dobson is worried McCain’s fiscal policy or plan for health insurance will hurt families. Doubt it, since McCain hasn’t talked much about either.

No, Dobson’s issues are much more vital to America.

Dobson said McCain’s failure to support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and his support for embryonic stem-cell research among other things were beyond the Christian conservative pale.

Stay home, James. It will be the best thing you’ve ever done for your country.

Super Tuesday’s Biggest Loser: Rush Limbaugh

Jon Ponder

The truly most divisive figure in the 2008 race is not Hillary Clinton, it’s John McCain. His ascendancy has ripped the Republican Party asunder — and his most vicious and vocal conservative opponents include the loudest mouths in America: Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and, especially, Rush Limbaugh.

They don’t like McCain because he is a leftwing Republican who advocates policies on campaign reform, illegal immigration, taxes and other policies they find to be insufficiently doctrinaire. The fact that he has promised to continue George Bush’s occupation of Iraq for another century is not good enough for them.

On Monday, Limbaugh told his followers that McCain’s true mission was to destroy the Republican Party:

“He’s going to reach out to Democrats in Congress,” Limbaugh said, citing “McCain-Kennedy” and “McCain-Feingold” as examples of McCain-sponsored bipartisan legislation. “This is how he’s going to get even with Republicans for defeating him in South Carolina in 2000,” Limbaugh said. “The Republican Congress will effectively be neutered.”

And:

“It was just six months ago that if a candidate was endorsed by the liberal media we were instantly suspicious of them,” Limbaugh said. Now he said, “we’ve got drive-by media organizations having orgasms about McCain.”

And — despite the fact McCain has a solid record of voting to cede women’s control of their reproductive organs to government bureaucrats:

“It’s pro-choicers who are voting for McCain. That’s who liberals are!” Limbaugh said.

And then there was the amazing spectacle of Ann Coulter saying she would vote for Hillary Clinton if McCain were to become the GOP nominee. (Someone should get her a Clinton 2008 yard sign and bumpersticker, post haste.)

After McCain won the Florida GOP primary last week, Limbaugh and the others went into overdrive to get word down to their followers to vote for Mitt Romney, who, they say, is the “true” conservative. (Who cares if he held positions far to the left of Mccain just three years ago.) Secondly, the Limbaugh cabal also warned their listeners that a “vote for Mike Huckabee was a vote for McCain” — their logic being that since Huckabee doesn’t have a chance, votes for him will eventually accrue to McCain.

Well, the votes are in, and, there’s no way other way to say: Limbaugh lost big time:

Sen. John McCain cemented his Republican front-runner status Tuesday, piling up big wins coast-to- coast, according to CNN projections…

McCain capped the night by taking California and all its 170 delegates …

McCain also won Connecticut, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Delaware and Arizona, his home state, according to CNN projections.

McCain has gathered 514 delegates so far in his presidential campaign, including Tuesday night’s projections. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has 177 delegates, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has 122.

Early in the evening, the pundits were laying odds that if Romney lost California, he would quit the race. After word came around 9:15 p.m. that McCain had trounced him here (McCain 42.2 percent, Romney 33.3 percent, Huckabee 11.5 percent), Chris Matthews and Tom Brokaw were on the set talking about Mitt in somber tones like the guy had just died. No word yet today when Mitt will pull the plug, but it appears to be a matter of time.

As has been stated here before, it is too early to write the obituaries for the conservative movement, but the results from the Feb. 5, 2008, primary do provide evidence that these Reagan era dinosaurs are losing their sway among their own kind.

Super Tuesday Primary Results

Jon Ponder
Clinton Obama
• AR
• AZ
• CA
• MA
• NJ
• NY
• OK
• TN 		• AK
• AL
• CO
• CT
• DE
• GA
• ID
• IL
• KS
• MN
• MO
• ND
• UT
Delegates: 845 Delegates: 765

3:35 p.m.: Exit polling looking bad for Hillary Clinton. Sizable majorities said “change” was more important than “experience.”

4:02 p.m.: One of the few sure bets that was not a home state:
• Georgia: Obama projected winner (MSNBC).

5:38 p.m.: Had to take a break, but here’s an update.
• Alabama – Obama up by 71 percent but only 6 percent of precincts are in.
• Arkansas – Clinton projected winner (MSNBC).
• Connecticut – Too close to call.
• Illinois – Obama projected winner (MSNBC).
• Massachusetts – Too close to call.
• New Jersey – Clinton leading but only 1 percent of precincts are in.
• Tennessee – Clinton projected winner (CNN)

6:04 p.m.:
• Delaware – Called for Obama..
• Massachusetts – Called for Clinton. No Kennedy-Kerry effect at all.
• Oklahoma – Called for Clinton.

6:21 p.m.:
• New Jersey – Called for Clinton (MSNBC).

6:27 p.m.:
• Alabama – Called for Obama (MSNBC).

6:47 p.m.: McCain is winning Northeastern liberal states. Not good for him. He’ll probably also do well in the West but doing poorly in the South.

7:18 p.m.:
• Kansas – Called for Obama (MSNBC).

7:46 p.m.:
• New York – Clinton (MSNBC).

7:58 p.m.:
• Minnesota – Obama (MSNBC).
• Idaho – Obama (MSNBC).

9:13 p.m.:
• California – Clinton

Voting Today: Polling Place Busy But Not Crowded

Jon Ponder

I ambled down the street to my polling place, the rec room of a condo building, at about 11 a.m.
There are no Republicans for miles and miles around, so half the booths reserved for Republican voters stood empty in both polling places.
Our polling place changes from election to election — this precinct in West Hollywood is the only one among the dozen or so I’ve lived in where this happens. The venue seems to depend on the type of election (municipal, county, state, federal) but this is the first time there have been two polling places open simultaneously — the one where I voted and another one in a community building in a pocket park next door. Not sure what, if anything, this means.

My fear was that the writer’s strike would make the polling places as crowded as the coffee shops and lunch spots have been. I inadvertently went to the park first, so I can report that both places were busy but there were no lines, which is normal.

There are no Republicans for miles and miles around, so the GOP booth stood empty in both polling places. I did overhear the poll worker give her spiel to the guy ahead of me: “You’re listed as an unaffiliated voter. I can give you a Democratic ballot or a nonpartisan ballot.” (Independents can’t vote in the Republican primary. The nonpartisan ballots don’t include the presidential candidates, just the votes for the six or eight propositions in this round.) He spoke up: “I want the Democratic ballot.

Separately, I heard Sen. Barbara Boxer tell David Gregory on MSNBC that over 1 million of California’s 6.75 million Democrats had voted by mail, most of them before the Obama surge hit the state over the past three or four days. We can expect that number of absentee ballots to double, and then some, before the counting is over.

Stay tuned.

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

My granddad, viewing earth’s worn cogs,
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in his house of logs
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in the Flemish bogs
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in his old skin togs
Said things were going to the dogs;
There’s one thing that I have to state:
The dogs have had a good long wait.

— Perennial Journeys

The New Bush Legacy — Sticking Us in Iraq

Buck Banks

iraq_multiple_bases.jpgA trillion-dollar federal deficit isn’t enough. A slime trail of obfuscation and secrecy is not enough. A record of trampling on our constitutional rights with secret wiretaps and illegal Internet monitoring is not enough. Now George Bush wants to cement his legacy by tying us to Iraq indefinitely by means of a “status of issue agreement.”

The agreement that Bush wants states that the United States will defend Iraq whenever and wherever — forever. There’s no end date, no out point. There has never been a clearer expression of Bush’s long-term goal in Iraq than the status of issue agreement, which ties us to the occupation indefinitely.

As far back as 2004 the army was building 14 “permanent” bases in Iraq. But somehow, Bush’s overall plan to maintain bases in Iraq long-term to use as launching pads for aggression against Iran or Syria, to protect oil supplies and quell insurgents continues to fly just under the media’s radar.

And the worst part of this status of issue agreement is that there are members of the Senate who say that Bush is within his rights as president to strike such an agreement without consulting Congress.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said she believes Bush probably does have the power to strike such a deal if he wants.

“He would have authority, I think,” said Feinstein. “Based on what I know, he would.”

Fortunately, there are some senators who are of the opinion that Bush would need the ratification of Congress for what is, in effect, a treaty:

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, had a one-word answer as to whether Bush had the legal authority he is claiming: “No.”

And Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the administration in a letter that the proposed status of forces agreement obligates the United States to use force to protect Iraq’s security — the kind of commitment he says the Constitution requires Congress to bless.

“A commitment that the United States will act to assist Iraq, potentially through the use of our armed forces in the event of an attack on Iraq, could effectively commit the nation to engage in hostilities,” Biden wrote. “Such a commitment cannot be made by the executive branch alone under our Constitution.”

Tough talk, no doubt about it. But Congress has shown a marked inability or lack of will or just plain lack of intestinal fortitude when it comes to bucking this imperial presidency. Bush has ruled by proclamation, repetition and obfuscation for so long that he knows that all he has to do is repeat the same lies enough times and the citizens of the Benighted States of America will nod like the pod people we have become and let him get away with whatever atrocity du jour he proposes.

But we can’t allow him to tie us to Iraq indefinitely. That’s a legacy none of us can afford and one we shouldn’t have to even countenance.

In Desperation, Real Conservatives Seek to Open Up the GOP Campaign

Buck Banks

Please join me in an all-out effort to keep Rush Limbaugh from voting in the 2008 election. But more on that later.

Our favorite right-wing nut job, Richard Viguerie, is up on his soapbox again. This time he’s calling on his fellow conservative Goldwater worshipers to call on the Republican Party to open up its convention next September in hopes that some party savior will materialize. Here’s Viguerie dreaming out loud:

The discombobulated state of the Republican presidential campaign means that it is still possible for someone to jump into the race. Such a candidate could serve as a kingmaker at the Republican convention in September, or even – yes, it’s possible – could become the party’s nominee.

Viguerie then goes on to critique the current batch of GOP candidates. Guess what? He finds that none of them is Ronald Reagan:

  • McCain has Reagan’s toughness, is a Vietnam War hero, supports a strong military, and opposes pork-barrel spending, but sides with liberals on immigration, freedom of speech, taxes, environmental extremism, and other important issues.
  • Huckabee is a Reagan-style populist and a conservative on social issues, but is sympathetic to Goreism, and he fought conservatives on taxes, spending, immigration, and other issues when he was governor.
  • Romney has adopted a mostly-Reaganite platform, but he is suspect because he converted to conservatism only after serving as governor, and, besides, many conservatives see him as a probable loser in November.
  • Ron Paul is the real straight-talker in the race, the one who stays truest to the libertarian beliefs that are, as Reagan said, “the heart of conservatism.” He is the one candidate who doesn’t confuse a strong defense with the failed policy of nation-building. But most conservatives want a powerful U.S. presence in world affairs and will never support Paul’s defense and foreign policy. In any event, Paul’s chance of getting elected, or even nominated, is infinitesimal.

But do you want to know how really bad it is? Viguerie lays it out like the voice of doom:

Even Rush Limbaugh has raised the possibility that he may not support the Republican nominee this year. The nomination of McCain or Huckabee, he said, would destroy the party as we know it.

Gasp! The Bloviator not support the GOP nominee? Man, things really do look bleak. Of course, they don’t look much brighter when Viguerie goes down his short list of possible party saviors: Former Virginia Gov. and Sen. George Allen, Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Sen. Jim DeMint or Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. That’s it? That’s the best you can do Richard?

Well, I think readers of Pensito Review could help out in Viguerie’s time of need by making some recommendations. Viguerie asks for them. He even provides an e-mail address to send them to: RAV@ConservativesBetrayed.com.

What about a Tom DeLay or Larry Craig? Not conservative enough? I hear David Duke’s out on the lecture circuit. But don’t let me tell you who to suggest. Let’s all e-mail Viguerie and do our part to keep Rush Limbaugh away from the polls.