1 Boring Old Man

Rice: ‘Iraqis Need To Know That We Are Not Looking To Leave Iraq’

… Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pointedly said, “[O]ur friends in the [Middle East] need to know and the Iraqis need to know that we are not looking to leave Iraq.” “Ever?” Rose asked. Rice responded, “We are not going to leave an Iraq that is not capable of defending itself and with a foundation for future reconciliation.”

Majority of Iraqi Lawmakers Now Reject Occupation

On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq’s parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.

It’s a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country’s civil conflict, and at times it’s been difficult to arrive at a quorum).

In an interview last night on the Charlie Rose Show, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pointedly said, “… the Iraqis need to know that we are not looking to leave Iraq.” “Ever?” Rose asked. Rice responded, “We are not going to leave an Iraq that is not capable of defending itself and with a foundation for future reconciliation.”

Bush Threatens Veto of New Iraq Bill

President Bush would veto the new Iraq spending bill being developed by House Democrats because it includes unacceptable language restricting funding, White House press secretary Tony Snow said Wednesday morning.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Snow said of the bill: "There are restrictions on funding and there are also some of the spending items that were mentioned in the first veto message that are still in the bill."

Bush Would Veto Democrats’ New Iraq Bill

The White House threatened on Wednesday to veto a proposed House bill that would pay for the war only through July — a limit Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned would be disastrous.

The warnings came as Democratic leaders wrestled with how to support the troops but still challenge President Bush on the war. Bush has requested more than $90 billion to sustain the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September.

Democrats were unbowed.

"With this latest veto threat, the president has once again chosen confrontation over cooperation," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

In a flash of defiance, House Democratic leaders this week promoted legislation that would provide the military $42.8 billion to keep operations going through July, buy new equipment and train Iraqi and Afghan security forces. Congress would decide shortly before its August recess whether to release an additional $52.8 billion to fund the war through September.

”In essence, the bill asks me to run the Department of Defense like a skiff, and I’m trying to drive the biggest supertanker in the world, "Gates told senators Wednesday. ”And we just don’t have the agility to be able to manage a two-month appropriation very well."

The Executive [as in Executive Branch] is supposed to be the "do things" part of our government. He’s doing nothing and shooting down anyone else’s attempts to act. He’s not capable of doing much more than sitting there like he did when he was told about 911 – frozen.

Impeachment of both George W. Bush and Richard Cheney is the only answer to the Iraq War.

Wolfowitz Criticizes Handling Of Probe

… "This is terribly unfair," the statement said, citing World Bank rules that give staff members at least five business days to respond to internal investigations. "We are extremely disheartened."

Consensus appeared to be growing yesterday that Wolfowitz can no longer effectively lead the institution and its global anti-poverty mission, as European finance ministers meeting in Brussels called for an end to the leadership crisis.

"We need a president with a good reputation and good integrity," Dutch finance minister Wouter Bos said, according to the Associated Press. He said he has "serious doubts" about Wolfowitz. "It is impossible to go around the world speaking about good governance without good governance at the World Bank," said Belgium’s finance minister, Didier Reynders.

In much of Europe, Wolfowitz is reviled as a primary architect of the Iraq war and as a symbol of a U.S. administration seen as arrogant and aloof — sentiments that have deepened as the ethics controversy has emerged. The European parliament has called for Wolfowitz to resign.

There has been a good deal of comment – some of it quite outlandish – about what our postwar requirements might be in Iraq. Some of the higher end predictions we have been hearing recently, such as the notion that it will take several hundred thousand U.S. troops to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq, are wildly off the mark. It is hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army – hard to imagine.

So long, Paul…

Rice: ‘Iraqis Need To Know That We Are Not Looking To Leave Iraq’

In an interview last night on the Charlie Rose Show, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pointedly said, “[O]ur friends in the [Middle East] need to know and the Iraqis need to know that we are not looking to leave Iraq.” “Ever?” Rose asked. Rice responded, “We are not going to leave an Iraq that is not capable of defending itself and with a foundation for future reconciliation.”

Rose then asked Rice if she believed she’ll have the support of the American people to continue the war. Rice claimed the American people are looking for “progress.” Rose replied, “But nobody can answer the question: If it doesn’t happen, what?” Avoiding discussion of a Plan B, Rice answered, “Charlie, because as the President said to you, we’re focused on having it happen.”

…

In the interview, Rose also noted that Rice once worked for President George H.W. Bush, who was “famous for insisting there be an exit strategy. [But] no one seems to know what’s the exit strategy [now],” he said. Rice responded that Iraq is “a long-term proposition.”

When Rose asked Rice if the administration was “looking for a strategy for the United States to exit from Iraq.” Rice answered, “No, we’re looking for a strategy that is going to do what we went there to do.”

Last month, Rose similarly asked President Bush, “Can you imagine a circumstance in which you would have to say, we did our best, good men and good women sacrificed their life, but we can’t in the end do what we want to do, and we have to leave?” “No,” Bush replied. “I can’t imagine that, because I believe that with time, this Iraqi government is going to be able to reconcile and move forward.”

Rice: We’re Not Leaving Iraq

Rice tells Charlie Rose that we’re not leaving Iraq – ever.

Even though the Iraqis want us to leave, even though al-Maliki says they want to take over by the end of 2007, and even though experts say that we need to assure the Iraqis that we have no permanent claim to bases and their oil, the Bush Administration thinks it will help to calm things down by doing what Al Qaeda wants us to do: stay forever, or at least until January 2009.

If you wanted proof that we have made Iraq a colony and are dictating their future, this is it. If the al-Maliki government asked us to leave tomorrow or even by the end of 2007, Bush would not heed that request. And that is all the proof you need that we are engaged in an occupation against the wishes of the occupied, which I believe is against the UN resolution.

Clearly, from the above, the Surge was simply a way of not withdrawing. Equally as bad, Bush resisted calling the continued violence in Iraq a Civil War. It was something else – perhaps Al Qaeda, perhaps Insurgents, perhaps Iranians, but it wasn’t an Iraq Civil War. Now both President Bush and mouthpiece Condoleeza Rice use some form of the word reconcile. I think the verb to reconcile would be an action waring factions [as in people fighting a Civil War] might take. So, now our goal is to resolve the Civil War. Not that we’re talking to either side fighting in this Civil War.

If that weren’t enough, Rice says, "[O]ur friends in the [Middle East] need to know and the Iraqis need to know that we are not looking to leave Iraq." What friends need to know that [as if we have any friends in the Middle East]? Why do the Iraqis need to know such a thing? What in heaven’s name are they talking about? Bush and Rice are saying that we are remaining loyal to the Iraqis, not deserting them in their time of need. As Steve points out, it’s hard to even know who he’s referring to. We don’t seem to have any allies in Iraq – people who are glad we’re there or want us to stay.

And why? Why are we staying? Well, says Bush, "I believe that with time, this Iraqi government is going to be able to reconcile and move forward." We’re staying because Bush has a belief – maybe something like a hunch. I used to try to decide if he is unable to see reality because he can’t admit he was wrong, or if he still holds out that the U.S. is going to control the Iraqi Oil Fields. I don’t much care what his motives are any more. I wonder if he even knows himself. Now it’s down to stopping him in whatever way possible. He’s no longer functioning with our country’s needs in mind [if he ever was]. He’s off on a personal path of some kind.

Senate Committee Schedules Hearing with Schlozman

The Senate Judiciary Committee has invited Bradley Schlozman to testify before the committee in a hearing next Tuesday, May 15.

As laid out in a letter by Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) and ranking member Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) yesterday, the committee wants to question Schlozman about his efforts to push allegations of voter fraud while a political appointee overseeing the Civil Rights Division and later as a U.S. attorney in Kansas City.

On the other hand, Bush does think that some people are "special." Apparently, Paul Wolfowitz is such a person. He’s gotten himself all tangled up in a tawdry bit of a scandal, and he’s hardly behaved like a Bank President. He may not have committed a crime, but he sure hasn’t risen to the office. Bush says that Wolfowitz should continue to lead the World Bank. I wonder why he thinks that? And then there’s Alberto Gonzales who has bombed as Attorney General – sins of Ommission and Commission. One wonders, in fact, why he isn’t in jail, much less still Attorney General. Bush still says that he has confidence in Gonzales. I wonder why he would say that?

I expect it comes down to the fact that our President believes he is "special" – the decider, the commander in chief guy, the guy who can wink at the Queen of England, the one who can interpret the laws of Congress however he choses. I wonder why he thinks that? I wonder how he is able to say that these other people are so special, and yet act like a monkey when he’s visited by one of the few people in the world who has been actually proclaimed "special."

Reckon he’s envious? Maybe he should get himself a hat…

Congress considers broadening Justice Department inquiry

… Clevenger and the other lawyer recounted Schlozman’s odd handling of their job applications in the spring of 2005. Clevenger said his resume stated that he was a member of the conservative Federalist Society and the Texas chapter of the Republican National Lawyers Association. The other applicant’s resume cited work on President Bush’s 2000 campaign, said the attorney, who insisted upon anonymity for fear of retaliation.

They said Schlozman directed them to drop the political references and resubmit the resumes in what they believed were an effort to hide those conservative affiliations.

Clevenger also recalled once passing on to Schlozman the name of a friend from Stanford as a possible hire.

"Schlozman called me up and asked me something to the effect of, `Is he one of us?’" Clevenger said. "He wanted to know what the guy’s partisan credentials were."

Schlozman, who recently completed more than a year’s service as interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City that was marked with controversy, has drawn harsh criticism over his conduct as the top deputy in the Civil Rights Division starting in 2003 and a term of roughly seven months as its acting chief beginning in the spring of 2005.

Several former department lawyers assailed his treatment of senior employees and his rollback of longstanding policies aimed at protecting African-American voting rights. They blame him for driving veteran attorneys, including section chief Joseph Rich, to resign from their posts.

Rich recently told Congress that 15 of the 35 attorneys in the voting rights section have resigned since 2005. Former employees of the Voting Rights Section told McClatchy of at least eight hires since then of employees with conservative political connections.

The Boston Globe, which obtained resumes of civil rights hires under the Freedom of Information Act, reported Sunday that seven of 14 career lawyers hired under Schlozman were members of either the Federalist Society or the Republican National Lawyers Association.

Kansas disaster renews National Guard debate

Critics of the Iraq war said on Tuesday the Bush administration’s failure to replenish vital National Guard equipment sent to Iraq caused Kansas to fall short in responding to last week’s tornado disaster, and other states were equally vulnerable.

The White House and the Pentagon rebuffed the criticism, saying Kansas and other states had adequate resources that they could share in event of disasters like the Kansas tornado that leveled one small town on Friday and killed 10 in the area.

The debate was ignited by Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, who said on Monday the federal government had failed to replace state National Guard equipment deployed to Iraq and the lack of equipment was hindering rescue and recovery efforts after a weekend of violent weather in the Midwestern state.

Tornadoes on Friday and Saturday were followed by widespread flooding, exacerbating the need for National Guard resources, according to the governor.

• Our National Defense and Emergency Response programs are in shambles. Bush has waged his war abroad using National Guardsmen and the National Guard equipment. We essentially have no National Defense, or Emergency preparedness. He has perverted the system in order to fight a sensless war in Iraq at the expense of necessary preparedness at home.
• Our Justice Department at the Federal Level has become an arm of the Republican Party. The U.S. Attorney firings are the tip of the iceberg. Essentially, the Justice Department is compromised, incapable of mounting an investigation [of itself].
• Even the Congress is not functional. No matter what they pass, Bush attaches a Signing Statement reinterpreting what parts of the law he will and will not uphold. 
• Our foreign policy is at a standstill. This Administration has withdrawn from diplomacy, and world mistrust of the U.S. is at a justifiable all time high. No one with any sense wants to have anything to do with us.

Missouri attorney a focus in firings
Senate bypassed in appointment of Schlozman

By Charlie Savage, Boston Globe Staff

Todd Graves brought just four misdemeanor voter fraud indictments during his five years as the US attorney for western Missouri — even though some of his fellow Republicans in the closely divided state wanted stricter oversight of Democratic efforts to sign up new voters.

Then, in March 2006, Graves was replaced by a new US attorney — one who had no prosecutorial experience and bypassed Senate confirmation. Bradley Schlozman moved aggressively where Graves had not, announcing felony indictments of four workers for a liberal activist group on voter registration fraud charges less than a week before the 2006 election.

Republicans, who had been pushing for restrictive new voting laws, applauded. But critics said Schlozman violated a department policy to wait until after an election to bring voter fraud indictments if the case could affect the outcome, either by becoming a campaign issue or by scaring legitimate voters into staying home.

Schlozman is emerging as a focal point of the investigation into the firing of eight US attorneys last year — and as a symbol of broader complaints that the Bush administration has misused its stewardship of law enforcement to give Republicans an electoral edge.

…

No stranger to election law controversy, Schlozman previously spent three years as a political appointee in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, where he supervised the voting rights section.

…

There, he came into conflict with veteran staff over his decisions to approve a Texas redistricting plan and a Georgia photo-ID voting law, both of which benefited Republicans. He also hired many new career lawyers with strong conservative credentials, in what critics say was an attempt to reduce enforcement of laws designed to eliminate obstacles to voting by minorities.

"Schlozman was reshaping the Civil Rights Division," said Joe Rich , who was chief of the voting rights section until taking a buyout in 2005, in an interview. "Schlozman didn’t know anything about voting law…. All he knew is he wanted to be sure that the Republicans were going to win."

…

As the controversy over the US attorney firings started building, the Bush administration picked someone else to be western Missouri’s US attorney. Unlike with Schlozman, the administration first sent the nominee to the Senate for confirmation.

In April, when his replacement was confirmed, Schlozman got a new job. He now works in the Justice Department office that supervises all 93 US attorneys, where he is handling sentencing matters and cybercrime.

It’s been an odd Spring in North Georgia. For one thing, we’re in a drought. People plant this time of year, and so "we need some rain" pops up in every conversation. Then there was a "blackberry winter." Spring came and was beautiful [and the pollen counts soared], but then there was a bad cold spell that lasted for days. It killed off the color and the trees went brown and stayed that way.

In the South, there’s a term, "called." It originated in the church – "he was ‘called’ to be a preacher." But it’s used other places too. It means a person is doing what he or she seems "meant to do." So you might say, "He was called to be a prosecutor" about somebody like Patrick Fitzgerald. Or "Jon Stewart was called to be on the Daily Show." There’s a subset of southern guys that are "called" to do bar-b-que – big bar-b-que for lots of people. Everybody knows who they are. When there’s a gathering, they’re always the one’s doing the cooking. It’s hard to tell who they are at other times. They might be doctors or lawyers or truck drivers. They might be black or white or even transplanted northern persons [formerly called Yankees]. There are contests and some even open bar-b-que restaurants, but most just cook for local gatherings once or twice a year.

I’m such a person. I got called under unusual circumstances – living in europe with a bunch of Americans planning a 4th of July Party. There was a bar-b-que guru from South Carolina who passed on the secrets. Cook the meat very, very slowly, never use direct heat, bathe the meat in smoke.  That’s it. We’ve cooked over an open pit, in and old refrigerator [the "refrigismoker"], but currently use a raised ‘pit’ built from concrete blocks covered with roofing tin. Here’s a picture [from last year in the sunshine]:

One can cook anything [but pork is the right thing]. When we were younger and the liquor flowed, we cooked whole pigs all night, a real art. But old men do pork shoulders. Yesterday was one of those days, a biannual gathering at our little lake. It was gray and rainy. We got the meat on about 8 AM. People stopped by to talk – and it only rained a little, but there was a low turnout. It was cool, drizzly. The greatest blue-grass band ever [the "Dappled Greys"] showed up early. The scene was right, except for the weather. Small crowd, not much talking. If you’re "called" to bar-b-que, how it goes matters, and this one wasn’t going so well. Pretending that how it comes out doesn’t matter is hard work if you’re a "called" person [and a basic lie].

Around serving time, the sun peeked through and the band began to play their good stuff. The food was great, people got happy [a few even teared up when they sang "summertime"]. Out of the grayness of the day, we had us one damned fine [sunny] bar-b-que [with mist rising off the lake]. You could just feel the thing turning around. People said it was the best bar-b-que they ever tasted [that’s what they always say if you’ve done it half-way right].

Later last night, it rained. A real rain. This morning, the sun was shining like it can here in the Spring. I was sitting on the front porch and I looked at the trees. Almost overnight, they’re finally coming back!

[If you think I’m trying to make an analogy about things finally growing back after a long drought and a Spring freeze, and a gray day at a neighborhood bar-b-que turning sunny, an analogy that has something to do with the current American political scene, an analogy about the feel of things finally changing for the better, I guess you caught me dead to rights].