I don't think all the focus on "voting problems" helps us. We don't need to know about every voting machine that won't start up and every guy who thinks there weren't enough pens at their voting place and every 5 minute delay. That just serves to undermine confidence in the system which works just fine in the overwhelming majority of incidents. From the reports you'd think that if you go out and vote today your polling place is going to be serving 600 people with one machine or that your going to be turned away because your license address doesn't match your voting address.
I have to say I'm getting rather sick of all the complaining about the electronic voting machines. "Oh, those Diebold machines are a joke, they're easily cracked and don't even have a paper trail!" I'll tell you what, if your Diebold machine doesn't have a paper trail it's because your state or county officials were stupid enough to order an electronic voting machine without a paper trail. If your machine doesn't have that paper trail don't go blaming Diebold or electronic voting in general, blame your local idiots.
George Voinovich: "Why I'll Vote for Bolton"
My original concerns about Bolton involved his interpersonal skills. Also of concern was his reputation for straying off message and a tendency to "go it alone" instead of working to build consensus with his colleagues. I have met and spoken regularly with him since his appointment, discussing my hope that the United States would indeed build such a consensus at the United Nations and work with our allies.My observations are that while Bolton is not perfect, he has demonstrated his ability, especially in recent months, to work with others and follow the president's lead by working multilaterally. In recent weeks I have watched him react to the challenges involving North Korea, Iran and now the Middle East, speaking on behalf of the United States.
I believe Bolton has been tempered and focused on speaking for the administration. He has referred regularly to "my instructions" from Washington, while also displaying his own clear and strong grasp of the issues and the way forward within the Security Council. He has stood many times side by side with his colleagues from Japan, Britain, Canada and other countries, showing a commitment to cooperation within the United Nations.
The deteriorating situation in the Middle East cannot be ignored. The terrorist organization Hezbollah has all but formally declared war on Israel, taking Israeli prisoners and launching more than 1,000 rockets into Israel over the past week.
The United States, along with the rest of the free world, must confront Iran and North Korea and defend Israel and its democracy while working to bring stability to the entire Middle East and Darfur.
Ambassador Bolton's appointment expires this fall when the Senate officially recesses. Should the president choose to renominate him, I cannot imagine a worse message to send to the terrorists -- and to other nations deciding whether to engage in this effort -- than to drag out a possible renomination process or even replace the person our president has entrusted to lead our nation at the United Nations at a time when we are working on these historic objectives.
For me or my colleagues in the Senate to now question a possible renomination would jeopardize our influence in the United Nations and encourage those who oppose the United States to make Bolton the issue, thereby undermining our policies and agenda.
Should the president send his renomination to the Senate, I will vote to confirm him, and I call on my Democratic colleagues to keep in mind the current situation in the Middle East and the rest of the world should the Senate have an opportunity to vote. I do not believe the United States, at this dangerous time, can afford to have a U.N. ambassador who does not have Congress's full support.
For the good of our country, the United Nations and the free world, we must end any ambiguity about whether John Bolton speaks for the United States so that he can work to support our interests at the United Nations during this critical time.
Yes, this is the same man who cried on the Senate floor in opposition to Bolton's original nomination.
1) The tightrope being walked between "the new press secretary was critical of Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and "Fox News is full of Bush lapdogs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" is really quite interesting to watch.
2) Keith Olbermann is an arrogant prick. He's like Bill O'Reilly only he likes to pretend its not political and he thinks he's funny. I figure at some point Olbermann got a dictionary where the definition for "condescension" was mislabeled as "humor".
My votin' finger's just itching to press the button next to the words "Newt Gingrich".
You should take a gander at the Ohio Democratic Party...
Paul Hackett, an Iraq war veteran and popular Democratic candidate in Ohio's closely watched Senate contest, said Monday that he was dropping out of the race and leaving politics altogether as a result of pressure from party leaders.
...
"This is an extremely disappointing decision that I feel has been forced on me," said Hackett, whose announcement comes two days before the state's filing deadline for candidates. He said he was outraged to learn that party leaders were calling his donors and asking them to stop giving and said he would not enter the 2nd District congressional race."For me, this is a second betrayal," Hackett, 43, said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates like me."
--DDN
Would it be too much to ask for sanity in the debate over these secret wiretaps? From the uproar you'd think it was Harry Reid, Michael Moore and Al Franken who were being surveilled and not people with suspected terrorist ties who are communicating internationally.
What would civil libertarians, or those finding it politically expedient to don the civil libertarian mantle, have done if Orwell had never written 1984?
They might have had to actually think of a reasoned argument when the question of civil liberties was raised rather than just reflexively running through the town square screaming "BIG BROTHER, BIG BROTHER, BIG BROTHER!!!!!!!!!"
A similar post could be written about the Ben Franklin "those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither" quote.
Yes, let's all pretend that this is a good sign for the Democrats, that it shows they have a shot in Southwest Ohio and are strong nationally. Let's pretend this is a portent of the Republican party's downfall. Never mind that this was the perfect storm for them and they still failed. They had a Republican opponent with very little name recognition, an unenergized Republican base, strong support from the national party thanks to it being the only race in the country and a Democratic candidate doing his very best to hide his Democratic tendencies and present himself as a Republican... and they still failed.
(None of this is meant to take away from Hackett... he was the best candidate the Dems could put up there and he ran the best campaign he could. He just couldn't win.)
Yeah, yeah, the Democrats' defeat is all because of the racists and the bigots and the homophobes and the misogynists... blah, blah, blah... Is it any wonder the Dems keep losing when so many of them can't cotton to the idea that reasonable people can oppose them and not be stupid, racist, red-necked bigots?
A man has submitted a request to start the process to take Justice Souter's home by eminent domain and build a hotel on the site.
Doctors in Britain now want to ban pointed kitchen knives. Because apparently pointed knives are used in most stabbings.
You're never going to be able to eliminate murder. So long as somebody has the inclination to commit it they're going to be able to find a way. People were killing each other well before pointed kitchen knives came along and people'll keep on killing each other if they get rid of them.
What do you get when you try to blog while watching both 24 and political news updates?
UPDATE: Senator John McCain (R - Arizona) has terrorist mastermind Habib Marwan in a headlock. Wait, this is getting confusing.UPDATE: Foxy terrorist chick was bluffing. She intends to push through a vote on parliamentary procedure after all. Harry Reid (D - Nevada) just flipped open his cell phone.
...
UPDATE: Edgar and Chloe were able to triangulate the constitutional position of judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown, and she was shot down over Los Angeles at the last second.
"What [the Republicans are] trying to do is distract," [Minority Leader Pelosi's spokeswoman Jennifer Crider] said. "They're choosing to pass legislation that is bipartisan."
Today's tax day. (Personally I got my refunds back 2 months ago.)
Today seems a good day to remind people that if we had the FairTax in place there'd be no tax forms, no receipts to save, no money spent on tax preparation, no late night drives to the post office, no being forced by the IRS to steal the Trillion dollar bill back from Mr. Burns... whoops, slipped into the Simpsons there.
If we had the FairTax today would be just another day.
Federal prosecutors will recommend that former national security adviser Sandy Berger be fined $10,000 and lose his security clearance for three years, but receive no jail time, sources said.Looks like the long national nightmare that is Pantsgate has finally come to an end.The Justice Department announced Thursday that Berger would plead guilty to illegally removing classified documents from the National Archives.
Berger, adviser to former President Clinton, was expected to enter the plea in U.S. District Court in Washington Friday to a single count of "unauthorized removal and retention of classified material," officials said.
The misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison and a $100,000 fine.
...
An associate of Berger told CNN the former national security adviser admitted to the Justice Department he originally took five copies of an after-action report -- one during his September 2003 visit to the Archives and four during his October 2003 trip.When he returned to his office and compared the copies he had, he believed several were basically the same, the associate said.
He admitted to officials that he then used scissors to cut up three copies that night while at his office, they said. At first he had said he had either misplaced or unintentionally thrown them away.
When Archives officials contacted him after they realized documents were missing, he told them about the two copies he had and returned them, along with the handwritten notes he had taken, they said. He did not say anything about the three copies he had destroyed.
--CNN
The Christian Science Monitor has an article on Zero Tolerance policies and how the tide is turning against them.
Texas - one of the nation's toughest-minded states when it comes to crime and discipline - is now at the forefront of a small but growing movement to relax zero-tolerance policies enacted by states in the 1990s.Ahhh... can you imagine a world where common sense ruled? Unfortunately, (and I think I'm paraphrasing someone here but I have no clue who) those who understand the intent of the rules don't end up becoming bureaucrats.More than a dozen bills that try to bring a less rigid approach to school discipline have been introduced in the Texas legislature this session, including one that requires school officials to consider a student's intent. The bill is currently moving through the House of Representatives.
"We have seen a number of states toy with the idea of scaling back or trying to make the process of school discipline more rational," says Bob Schwartz, executive director of the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia. "But Texas is ahead of the curve at this point."
Indiana, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania are also weighing the issue at the legislative level this year, with the introduction of several bills aimed at softening strict school-discipline policies.
"Just talking about it suggests that, if not a pendulum swing, a pendulum creep is in play," says Mr. Schwartz, though he cautions that many states have given their school districts discretion when it comes to discipline, making the issue hard to legislate.
It's particularly difficult to talk about relaxing discipline right now, a week after the school shooting on Minnesota's Red Lake reservation. But even the Red Lake school district Superintendent Stuart Desjarlait has admitted that zero- tolerance policies can't keep kids safe if a student is motivated to kill.
"It goes to show that if something is going to happen, it's going to happen - no matter what you do," he said at a news conference last week. Red Lake High School was equipped with a metal detector, security cameras, and guards.
--Christian Science Monitor (Hat tip Kirk)
KOFI ANNAN, the United Nations secretary-general, is said to be struggling with depression and considering his future. Colleagues have reported concerns about Annan ahead of an official report this week that will examine his son Kojo’s connection to the controversial Iraqi oil for food scheme.Depending on the findings of the report, by a team led by the former US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, Annan may have to choose between the secretary-generalship and loyalty to his son.
American congressional critics of the UN are already pressing him to resign over the mismanagement of the oil for food programme, and even his supporters have been dismayed by the scandals on his watch, including the sexual abuse of children by UN peacekeepers in Congo.
One close observer at the UN said Annan’s moods were like a "sine curve" and that he appeared near the bottom of the trough.
--Times Online (Hat tip Jake Allen)
Why would Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discuss North Korea's nuclear weapons program with China, when it has the third-greatest number of nuclear weapons behind the United States and Russia?Because the number of nuclear weapons which China owns has nothing to do with North Korea's nuclear weapons program. China holds influence over North Korea and has reason to not want a mad dictator with nuclear weapons next door.
Oh look, it's politicians grasping for the limelight.
Steroids are a problem for Baseball but there's really no reason Congress should be involved. This is between Baseball, the players and the fans.
*gasp!*
U.S. media coverage of last year's election was three times more likely to be negative toward President Bush than Democratic challenger John Kerry, according to a study released Monday.The annual report by a press watchdog that is affiliated with Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism said that 36 percent of stories about Bush were negative compared to 12 percent about Kerry, a Massachusetts senator.
Only 20 percent were positive toward Bush compared to 30 percent of stories about Kerry that were positive, according to the report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
The study looked at 16 newspapers of varying size across the country, four nightly newscasts, three network morning news shows, nine cable programs and nine Web sites through the course of 2004.
Examining the public perception that coverage of the war in Iraq was decidedly negative, it found evidence did not support that conclusion. The majority of stories had no decided tone, 25 percent were negative and 20 percent were positive, it said.
--Reuters
Senator John Cornyn takes apart the NY Times' hypocritical position on the filibuster.
To the Editor:"The Senate on the Brink" (editorial, March 6) supports the "historic role of the filibuster," which is a curious position for a newspaper that 10 years ago said filibusters were "the tool of the sore loser" and should be eliminated ("Time to Retire the Filibuster," editorial, Jan. 1, 1995).
...[Surely] all Americans can agree that the rules for confirming judges should be the same regardless of which party has a majority.
Now you praise the filibuster as a "time-honored Senate procedure." In 1995, when Bill Clinton was president, you called it "an archaic rule that frustrates democracy and serves no useful purpose."
You disparage the Republicans' view that 51 votes should be enough for judicial confirmation. Yet the 51-vote rule is a consistent Senate tradition. By calling for an end to filibusters, the Senate is simply contemplating restoring its traditions by traditional methods you disparage as "nuclear," even though they were once endorsed by such leading Democrats as Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Charles E. Schumer and Robert C. Byrd.
--NY Times
As you've probably noticed, there have been several Alan Greenspan-related posts on the main page in just the past day or so. In one of those threads, blogswarmer Bob Brigham suggested that we "unleash the blogosphere" on Greenspan. It's a brilliant idea - no one is more worthy of having a halo-ectomy than St. Alan - so let's have at it...Whah?! Ayn Rand? They think they're going to take down Alan Greenspan through Ayn Rand? Let me repeat that one more time just so we're clear... Ayn... RAND!And for those of you who want to really get down & dirty in the trenches, we can turn this into a one-degree-of-separation venture. That is, if you can find similar material for anyone who is closely linked to Greenspan, that's fair game, too. Good examples would be Greenie's idol, the nutbag "objectivist" Ayn Rand, and Andrea Mitchell, his NBC reporter wife. (An aside: We can debate the merits of this approach all you like, but suffice it to say, there is no question that Republicans do the same crap to us all the time. If you still want to play by the Marquess of Queensberry rules, fine - but I've moved on to brass knuckles.)
...
And, to make it amply clear, this is emphatically not a call for a "smear" campaign. This is a call to reveal the truth about Alan Greenspan (and his associates).
Gee, with sound tactics like these I can't imagine why the Left's highest profile takedown is a gay prostitute wannabe reporter.
They need to rethink going back to those Marquis of Queensberry rules. Taking mild doses of physic to work on their bowels and stripping naked and letting two men rub them gently with soft Turkish towels is actually probably higher up on the list of plausible ways to get to Alan Greenspan than going through Ayn Rand is.
You can count me as a supporter of the Fair Tax. It would eliminate the current income tax system and instead charge a national sales tax. Unlike most sales taxes however, this is a progressive tax system. Every month everyone would get a rebate (or prebate) from the government that would cover what they are expected to pay in taxes on the necessities. Thus someone who makes only enough to pay for the necessities will pay no taxes at all. Those who make less will have a negative effective tax rate. As a person makes more they'll have a higher effective tax rate until the wealthiest are essentially paying the full 23% rate. A family of four making $25,000 would pay 0%. It would be 12% at $50,000, 17% at $100,000 and -23% at $12,500.
This system is revenue neutral, will encourage saving, will tax the black market and virtually eliminate tax cheats, will help our businesses be more competitive on the world stage and vastly simplify a confusing tax system bloated with loopholes and exceptions.
[Spanish Prime Minister] Zapatero said he was anti-Bush, the complete opposite of former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar. But ever since his election, Zapatero has spent much of his time shadowing Bush and attempting to shake his hand. On Wednesday, he was waiting in the shadows, and made his move when Bush was talking to Tony Blair. Bush, who I suspect didn't really know who Zapatero was said “hola amigo” and continued talking to Blair. Meanwhile, Zapatero walked off smiling away like a child with a new pair of shoes. The exchange was so brief Spanish newspapers had a nightmare trying to find a photograph of the “great meeting.” To make matters worse a Spanish government spokesperson said that Bush and Zapatero had a “cordial exchange.” (They forget to mention it lasted about two seconds.) Even more laughable was the “meeting” Spanish Foreign Secretary Moratinos had with U.S. Secretary of State Rice. He literally rushed over to her in a passageway and then later claimed he had a summit meeting.
An exchange between Donald Rumsfeld and Rep. Loretta Sanchez:
Sanchez: Unfortunately, as I said, this committee has had a hard time assessing where we really stand with the Iraqi army as an effective fighting force. Over the past year, we've received incredibly widely fluctuating estimates of that. And I think you have a real credibility problem on this issue.Rumsfeld: Fluctuations of what?
Sanchez: The fluctuations of--the numbers that you bandy around about how many troops we really have out there that are Iraqi police, et cetera, et cetera. . . .
Rusmfeld: Now, you say we bandy around numbers. They're not my numbers. I don't invent them. They come from Gen. Petraeus. . . .
Sanchez: I have Petraeus's numbers. They're different than your numbers, by the way.
Rumsfeld: Well, what's the date? They aren't different because these came from Petraeus. He may have two sets of numbers, but they are not different if the date's the same. The date on my paper here is Feb. 14. What's yours?
Sanchez: Dec. 20.
Rumsfeld: Not surprising there's a difference.
--Transcript (via BOTW and Joe Fairbanks)
The comments on the Kerry-Edwards blog from election night are an interesting read, it's a roller coaster ride. (Continued here and here.)
"My analysis of the numbers indicates that Kerry will almost certainly win Ohio." - 11:15
"Ohio is still very realistic for Kerry to take...." - 11:26
"Ohio is in the bag IN SPITE OF the NEOCON dirty tricks." - 11:31
"Ohio is the grand finale ! Ohio repugs are evil!" - 11:43
"if Kerry leads the Ohio exit polls how can he be 150,000 votes behind???" - midnight
"OK we need all the lawyers in florida and Ohio." - 12:08
"If we win Ohio, I will go to church...once..." - 12:14
"Ohio will go Kerry. Unless Ohio is stupid" - 12:28
"The remainder of Ohio is not going to break for us at 60/40.
It's over.
May God have mercy on us all." - 12:37
"F&*%ING FOX IS CALLING OHIO FOR BUSH!!!
THEFT OF DEMOCRACY!!!
PITCH FORKS AND TORCHES!!!
PITCH FORKS AND TORCHES!!!
PITCH FORKS AND TORCHES!!!
PITCH FORKS AND TORCHES!!!" - 12:48
One party has a clear programmatic agenda that has been relentlessly pursued in a well-organized fashion for five years; one party is still trying to build a credible war room (both materially and culturally).One party never apologizes and never shows weakness; one party is on its fourth day of cry-babyish "defense" of its Senate Leader, after a run-of-the-mill GOP "attack."
One party is already organizing for 2005/6/7/8; one party is still trying to figure out what changes a yet-to-be-elected chair will make on the Wisteria Lane of politics — Ivy Street, SE.
...
One party can whenever it wishes take off-the-shelf opposition research (video and text) and turn it into talking points that drive the friendly and (sometimes) mainstream media; one party considers 36 hours to be "rapid response."
...
One party is on offense; one party is on . . . something else.
...
One party knows the press is its "enemy"; one party mistakenly thinks the press is its "friend."One party is expending resources to expand the base and broaden the tent; one party says it is planning to do those things, but is distracted defending demographic and geographic turf.
One party owns national security; one party can't figure out how to own health care or the environment in a way that would help win elections.
One party figured out how to keep its "extreme" party platform on abortion and still make electoral gains; one party hasn't.
...
One party has been taking the long view for a long time; one party can't see past yesterday.One party has members who will take these words to be gospel; one party is dominated by people will quickly dismiss it as mean-spirited.
One party would agree with what we wrote above; so would the other one.
--The Note (By way of The Corner and Tapped)
Sick and tired of losing, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee seems to have adopted a new and very basic recruiting tactic for the 2006 elections: Simply call the Republican Member you are hoping to beat and ask him who the best candidate would be to run against him.I'm sure they got right back to Rushing with a list of people they'd hate to run against.Think we’re joking?
Just ask Glenn Rushing, the DCCC’s national field director, who last week left an ill-advised message for Mike Brady, the chief of staff to National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds (N.Y.).
“Congressman [Rahm] Emanuel asked me to give your boss a call to see if he knew of any potential candidates in New York 26,” says Rushing, according to a tape of the voicemail obtained by HOH.
No one knows why Rushing did what he did.... He’s been at the DCCC since the start of the 2004 cycle, around the same time that Reynolds became chairman of the House GOP campaign committee. Reynolds has held the Buffalo-area 26th district since 1998.
--Roll Call (Subscription required)
"I am strongly opposed to the E-Check system we have now. I think it's unfair," said state Sen. Steve Austria, R-Beavercreek. "We need to see evidence that this is actually working and having an impact on our environment."Other legislators are even more direct.
"This is the year to eliminate E-Check and find another way to deal with this issue. I understand we're going to have to do something to keep the Feds happy, but let's find the least invasive, least expensive, least impacting method," said state Sen. Tim Grendell, R-Chesterland, a lawyer who once sued the state over E-Check and lost.
There's absolutely no reason that I should be forced to pay $20 every 2 years just for somebody to make sure that the Check Engine light on my '98 Lumina isn't on.
It makes it so much easier to find morons.
President George W. Bush and his supporters are supposed to be Christian. Yet, the reason I most often hear for supporting Bush's plan to privatize Social Security is this: People want to keep "their own" money. C'mon, folks. Have you forgotten the parable of the loaves and the fishes? When we share, there's plenty for everyone. When we hoard, there is never enough.First off, the "parable" of the loaves and fishes wasn't a parable. It was a miracle. It's called a miracle because those things don't happen in the normal course of events; they require God's intervention.
Secondly I'd suggest that the caller/writer refer to the "parable" of the Soviet Communism. It goes something like this: "When people are forced to share it would take a miracle for anybody to have enough."
$2.57 trillion. It doesn't do a ton to actually reduce the deficit, but there are definitely cuts proposed. The budget in areas other than defense, homeland security and the mandatory programs like Social Security is set to actually fall .5%.
I think this could really pose a problem for Democrats. Of late they've been playing the role of deficit hawks. Every dollar spent is described as President Bush putting a "burden on our children". It's going to be awfully hard for them to continue to take that tack while at the same time fighting his efforts to scale back spending. They're going to need to make a decision on which of three options they're going to take. Will they fight to save these programs, continue to fight the deficit fight or will they make fools of themselves and try and do both, making them look like hypocrites.
Oh wait…
[The proposed budget's] cuts in veterans programs, health care and education reflect the wrong priorities, and its huge deficits are fiscally irresponsible.
Looks like they’re taking the hypocritical fools route.
To quote the Simpsons:
"I'm the last registered Democrat! TAX AND SPEND! TAX AND SPEND!!!"
One more recent than the other.
Harry Reid used to support Social Security reform: "Most of us have no problem with taking a small amount of the Social Security proceeds and putting it into the private sector."Interestingly, so did FDR: "In a written statement to Congress in 1935, Roosevelt said that any Social Security plans should include, 'Voluntary contributory annuities, by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old age,' adding that government funding, 'ought to ultimately be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans.'"
Now that's a real blast from the past. Is it "ultimately" yet?
A good speech, much better towards then end than towards the beginning. Half way through I was left thinking "I'll take ideas over delivery any day of the week but just imagine if he were a better orator". The oratory certainly picked up in the latter portions as he moved from the programmatic to the more thematic portion. Still not great oratory, but definitely better.
The Social Security portion was certainly the most important part but the hug between Safia Taleb al-Suhail and Mrs. Norwood will get a good deal of play.
Some highlights:
America's prosperity requires restraining the spending appetite of the federal government. I welcome the bipartisan enthusiasm for spending discipline. I will send you a budget that holds the growth of discretionary spending below inflation, makes tax relief permanent, and stays on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. (Applause.) My budget substantially reduces or eliminates more than 150 government programs that are not getting results, or duplicate current efforts, or do not fulfill essential priorities. The principle here is clear: Taxpayer dollars must be spent wisely, or not at all.
...
America's immigration system is also outdated -- unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country. We should not be content with laws that punish hardworking people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border. It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists. (Applause.)
...
One of America's most important institutions -- a symbol of the trust between generations -- is also in need of wise and effective reform. Social Security was a great moral success of the 20th century, and we must honor its great purposes in this new century. (Applause.) The system, however, on its current path, is headed toward bankruptcy. And so we must join together to strengthen and save Social Security. (Applause.)Today, more than 45 million Americans receive Social Security benefits, and millions more are nearing retirement -- and for them the system is sound and fiscally strong. I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you; for you, the Social Security system will not change in any way. (Applause.) For younger workers, the Social Security system has serious problems that will grow worse with time.
...
In the long-term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America and other free nations for decades. The only force powerful enough to stop the rise of tyranny and terror, and replace hatred with hope, is the force of human freedom. (Applause.) Our enemies know this, and that is why the terrorist Zarqawi recently declared war on what he called the "evil principle" of democracy. And we've declared our own intention: America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world. (Applause.)
...
Across Iraq, often at great risk, millions of citizens went to the polls and elected 275 men and women to represent them in a new Transitional National Assembly. A young woman in Baghdad told of waking to the sound of mortar fire on election day, and wondering if it might be too dangerous to vote. She said, "Hearing those explosions, it occurred to me -- the insurgents are weak, they are afraid of democracy, they are losing. So I got my husband, and I got my parents, and we all came out and voted together."Americans recognize that spirit of liberty, because we share it. In any nation, casting your vote is an act of civic responsibility; for millions of Iraqis, it was also an act of personal courage, and they have earned the respect of us all. (Applause.)
One of Iraq's leading democracy and human rights advocates is Safia Taleb al-Suhail. She says of her country, "We were occupied for 35 years by Saddam Hussein. That was the real occupation. Thank you to the American people who paid the cost, but most of all, to the soldiers." Eleven years ago, Safia's father was assassinated by Saddam's intelligence service. Three days ago in Baghdad, Safia was finally able to vote for the leaders of her country -- and we are honored that she is with us tonight. (Applause.)
...
We will not set an artificial timetable for leaving Iraq, because that would embolden the terrorists and make them believe they can wait us out. We are in Iraq to achieve a result: A country that is democratic, representative of all its people, at peace with its neighbors, and able to defend itself. And when that result is achieved, our men and women serving in Iraq will return home with the honor they have earned. (Applause.)
...
[W]e have said farewell to some very good men and women, who died for our freedom, and whose memory this nation will honor forever.One name we honor is Marine Corps Sergeant Byron Norwood of Pflugerville, Texas, who was killed during the assault on Fallujah. His mom, Janet, sent me a letter and told me how much Byron loved being a Marine, and how proud he was to be on the front line against terror. She wrote, "When Byron was home the last time, I said that I wanted to protect him like I had since he was born. He just hugged me and said, 'You've done your job, Mom. Now it is my turn to protect you.'" Ladies and gentlemen, with grateful hearts, we honor freedom's defenders, and our military families, represented here this evening by Sergeant Norwood's mom and dad, Janet and Bill Norwood. (Applause.)
In these four years, Americans have seen the unfolding of large events. We have known times of sorrow, and hours of uncertainty, and days of victory. In all this history, even when we have disagreed, we have seen threads of purpose that unite us. The attack on freedom in our world has reaffirmed our confidence in freedom's power to change the world. We are all part of a great venture: To extend the promise of freedom in our country, to renew the values that sustain our liberty, and to spread the peace that freedom brings.
A few post-speech thoughts:
Thank God Nancy Pelosi was there to deliver the Democrats' response. Between her constantly gritted teeth, eerily still head and "eyebrows" that somehow manage to be one to two inches above her eye sockets it's hard to really consider what she's saying.
As usual I was amazed by Charles Krauthammer's complete lack of shoulders.
Scarborough having it out with Ron Reagen over whether the hug was staged or not was fun to watch.
From an anti-war Democrat in the Sun-Times:
Maybe you're like me and have opposed the Iraq war since before the shooting started -- not to the point of joining any peace protests, but at least letting people know where you stood.You didn't change your mind when our troops swept quickly into Baghdad or when you saw the rabble that celebrated the toppling of the Saddam Hussein statue, figuring that little had been accomplished and that the tough job still lay ahead.
Despite your misgivings, you didn't demand the troops be brought home immediately afterward, believing the United States must at least try to finish what it started to avoid even greater bloodshed. And while you cheered Saddam's capture, you couldn't help but thinking I-told-you-so in the months that followed as the violence continued to spread and the death toll mounted.
By now, you might have even voted against George Bush -- a second time -- to register your disapproval.
But after watching Sunday's election in Iraq and seeing the first clear sign that freedom really may mean something to the Iraqi people, you have to be asking yourself: What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?
Meanwhile Alberto Gonzales passes the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Hundreds of people gathered at both ends of Meridian Hill Park in Northwest Washington for a peace rally sponsored by the D.C Antiwar Network.I think it speaks for itself.But there were interlopers: Thirteen members of ProtestWarror, supporting the Bush administration and its policies in Iraq. When the Bush supporters arrived, about 20 black-clad, self-described anarchists emerged from the crowd, shouting profanity and epithets and demanding that they leave the peace rally.
When the Bush supporters refused to leave, the anarchists tore the sign out of the Bush supporters' hands and stomped on them. When ProtestWarrior leader Gil Kobrin objected, several male anarchists knocked him to the ground, kicking him in the back and punching him. Other anarchists punched and shoved Kobrin's 12 colleagues.
After D.C. Antiwar Network members broke up the fight, the Bush supporters heeded their order to leave the park. Kobrin then called D.C. police, who are now guarding them at the entrance of the park as they hold up their pro-war signs. "We're going to hang tight," Kobrin said. "We're expressing our freedom of speech just as they are expressing theirs."
At this second gathering, our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together. For a half-century, America defended our own freedom by standing watch on distant borders. After the shipwreck of communism came years of relative quiet, years of repose, years of sabbatical -- and then there came a day of fire.We have seen our vulnerability, and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny -- prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder -- violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the most defended borders and raise a mortal threat.
There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment and expose the pretensions of tyrants and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant. And that is the force of human freedom.
We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.
The full text of his 2nd inaugural address.
Senator Joe Biden, D-Del., speaking to Europe:
"I spent a little bit of time in Europe recently and I have one simple message: Get over it. Get over it. President Bush is our president for the next four years. So get over it and start to act in your interest, Europe," Biden said.--ABC News
Not in heavily Democratic Cuyahoga County according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
[A] Plain Dealer analysis shows that, in Cuyahoga County at least, the elections board distributed machines equally to city and suburban polling locations.The long lines at some locations appear to be more the result of timing, new voters and overwhelmed poll workers, not necessarily a shortage of machines.
Before the Nov. 2 election, the elections board allotted each Cleveland precinct one machine for every 117 registered voters within its boundaries - the same ratio of machines that suburban precincts received.
In other words, the more registered voters a particular precinct had, the more machines it received, regardless of where that precinct was.
And in the end, the busiest precincts - when measured by the number of ballots cast per machine - were actually in the suburbs, not Cleveland, according to a Plain Dealer analysis of records from the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections.
Countywide, voters cast an average of nearly 71 ballots on each of the county's 8,000 machines. In Cleveland alone, voters cast an average of 62 ballots per machine. In the suburbs, the average was 74.
And likewise, the Columbus Dispatch reported that in Franklin County the busiest precincts were the suburban ones.
In fact, many polling places in inner-city neighborhoods had fewer voting machines than during the last presidential election.Even so, the busiest places to vote — as measured by the number of ballots cast per machine — were overwhelmingly in suburban areas, according to an analysis by The Dispatch.
...
Nearly half of Franklin County’s 146 wards had fewer machines than four years ago. Generally, the machines were shifted from city wards to suburban ones, following population swings."We have the same number of machines, but they had to be spread over more precincts," Elections Director Matthew Damschroder said.
So keep this in mind when you're told that people were disenfranchised because their precinct had fewer machines than in 2000 - They had fewer machines because other precincts gained more voters.
Only Senators Kerry and Boxer, out of 18 Senators on the committee, voted no. All that's left is for the full Senate to vote.
And of course the likes of Phil Burress aren't happy.
Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, has asked an Ohio Republican who supports some abortion rights to be his co-chairman, stirring the ire of social conservatives.Mr. Mehlman's choice is Joann Davidson, who was chairwoman of the Bush campaign in the pivotal Ohio Valley region and a former speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives. In an interview on Thursday, Ms. Davidson declined to discuss her views on abortion. "My focus is on building a stronger party," she said.
...
Phil Burress, president of Citizens for Community Values, an Ohio-based conservative Christian group, said, "How in the world can you have a vice chair of the Republican Party on such an important issue as this one be on the wrong side of the party platform?"Mr. Burress, who led the drive for a constitutional ballot measure banning same-sex marriage in Ohio, also faulted Ms. Davidson for failing to take a position on the measure.
The co-chairwoman of the party during the 2000 election, Patricia Harrison, also supported some abortion rights, but Mr. Burress argued that the 2004 election had changed the party.
"They have got to go," he said. "The pendulum is swinging the other way now. We have a seat at the table now."
--NY Times
You're always going to have people like Burress talking the talk, but I believe the real story here is that it's just that, talk. Sure "they" have a seat at the table but it's not at the head of it as Burress seems to think and he's not going to win this argument.
The Republicans aren't purging the party of people who don't agree with the platform 100%, they're making them co-chair of the party. It really is a bigger tent than the detractors would have you believe.
Not what you'd call a big name. Chertoff is currently on the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals and was "assistant attorney general for the criminal division" at the DOJ from '01-'03.
The best take I've seen on the Williams kerfuffle comes from Michael King:
Black conservatives like myself work day-in and day-out to promote solid and beneficial causes, which have included NCLB, but with one-fell-swoop, Williams has effectively torpedoed much of that work.We constantly come under scrutiny by others from both sides of the aisle, from some conservatives who are wary of our presence, and by many liberals who insist that we are "on the take" or "reaching for scraps from 'Massa's' table." We constantly have to prove that we are not some sort of 'spook sitting by the door' when Armstrong comes along and not only accepts taxpayer money, but doesn't see anything truly wrong with it!
...
Just damn.
Martin Gottlieb's justifiably curious about just what Jesse Jackson thinks he's doing here in Ohio. His conclusion is that it's pretty much about staying in the spotlight at any cost and hoping to lay the smack down on Ken Blackwell.
So, the question arises, what is the Rev. Jesse Jackson up to?This thing in Ohio — going to court over the re-election of George W. Bush, holding rallies, generally keeping the election alive — seems awfully pathetic, doesn't it?
...
Like others, [Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune] sees Jackson as keeping himself in the spotlight by rallying a part of his old base, which Jackson is wont to do as various issues come along. Page says that Jackson has been diminished by the revelation that he fathered a child out of wedlock, and that staying in the spotlight — which is necessary to maximize his impact — is not as easy as it once was.Page also mentions the name of Blackwell as a motivator of Jackson.
"Everything is there," says Page, to get Jackson going. Blackwell is a black conservative Republican — of all things — who is moving toward the governorship and is "cocky" about it. Jackson, says Page, "feels dissed" by this development. He "takes himself very seriously" and doesn't want to be eclipsed as a leader by somebody like Blackwell.
That has the feel of a pretty good summary.
Gotta agree with Gottleib, it is awfully pathetic.
The Democrats will challenge Ohio's electoral votes when the votes are counted today.
Just imagine how up-in-arms they'd be if they'd lost and there actually WAS vote fraud. The best they seem to be able to come up with is that people had to wait in line to vote.
Looks like Tucker Carlson and Crossfire are out at CNN. It's about time. It used to be a fairly reasonable debate show, back when it was 4 people around a table against a black backdrop. Then they brought in the studio audience and it all went to hell. You had Conservatives in Novak and Carlson going up against Democrat shills in Begala and Carville. In the end it resembled the Jerry Springer Show more than it did a dignified political program.
Stop with the politicizing of this tragedy, people. Even Mark Cuban, my favorite billionaire blogger, has called for the cancellation of the presidential inauguration festivities so that funds can be diverted to tsunami relief. Huh? Why not call for the cancellation of the NBA season and take all the dollars advertisers have committed for broadcasting it and send those funds to tsunami relief? What, the advertisers won't do that? Have you asked?--Rex Hammock (via Jeff Jarvis)