What did the President know, and when did he know it?

Sound familiar? Can't wait for a repeat of that question in a Senate hearing room!

From today's Face the Nation:

SCHIEFFER: How much did President Bush know specifically about the methods that were being used? We know that you– and you have said– that you approved this…

CHENEY: Right.

SCHIEFFER: … somewhere down the line. Did President Bush know everything you knew?

CHENEY: I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew — he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it.

Oh man, nothing has pulled back the curtain on the wizard better than this one. What does this mean: "He basically authorized it." ? If anyone doubted Dick was running the show for about seven of the eight years...

Sphere: Related Content

What A Difference A Day Makes!

whitehouse.gov 10:45am EST January 20, 2009

whitehouse.gov 4:45pm EST January 20, 2009

Sphere: Related Content

Tribute To An Iraqi Journalist

"Killer of Iraqis, killer of children."
- Muntathar al Zaidi



"This is a goodbye kiss, you dog!"
- Muntathar al Zaidi



Pointing the soles of one's shoes at someone, or striking them with shoes, is a serious insult in the Arab world.

Sphere: Related Content

Palin the Doctrinairhead

Bob Herbert nails it in his piece about Palin today. The issue is not her relatively thin resume, per se, it's that there is no evidence she is knowledgeable about most of the issues -- especially regarding foreign policy -- she would have to deal with if she became president. Her interview with Charlie Gibson only proved this.

Ms. Palin’s problem is not that she was mayor of a small town or has only been in the Alaska governor’s office a short while. Her problem (and now ours) is that she is not well versed on the critical matters confronting the country at one of the most crucial turning points in its history.

Some have said it was a "gotcha" when Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine, and that there are actually several Bush doctrines. Evidently there are several, but I knew what he was referring to, and in any case, she didn't reply "which one." It was evident she had never heard the term.

We need a lot more of the Powell Doctrine and a lot less of the Bush Doctrine.

Sphere: Related Content

Not to Worry

Gov. Sarah Palin has as much foreign policy experience as Gov. George W. Bush did in 2000.

Sphere: Related Content

No Alternative

Congress is fiddling while 202,000 Long Island taxpayers, right in the crosshairs of the alternative minimum tax, squirm. They're among the 21 million taxpayers across the nation who'll be socked with an average of $2,000 in additional federal income taxes this year, unless Congress does something to waylay the runaway AMT.

Lawmakers aren't likely to let that happen. They can't want to shock that many voters with higher taxes in an election year. The problem tying Congress in knots is who's going to cover the $50 billion it will cost to blunt the AMT for another year.

Republicans, incredibly, want to borrow the money and leave our children on the hook to pay it back. Democrats think a few thousand wealthy private equity and hedge fund managers should pick up the tab. They've voted to close tax loopholes that have unjustifiably lowered those high earners' taxes. Republicans should give our kids a break.

President George W. Bush said he will veto any AMT fix that raises anybody's taxes. This from a president who has presided over record deficits and already added $3 trillion to the national debt. Washington needs to get real, pass an AMT fix and pay for it. It's the responsible thing to do.

- Newsday editorial Dec. 17, 2007

Sphere: Related Content

No Immunity for Telecoms

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who sits on the Select Committee on Intelligence, said the administration's case for immunity is thin. Members of the intelligence and judiciary committees have been permitted to see a set of the classified documents that lay out the administration's legal opinions on immunity and its information requests to companies.

"I have read the documents and senators who haven't read them would be shocked to see how flimsy the case is on which the administration bases its case for immunity," said Wyden, who is prevented from discussing the details of the documents because they are classified. "As far as I can tell, these documents are being kept secret to protect the president's political security, not national security."

- FOX News

The telecoms argue that they didn't know they had the right to refuse to hand over personal data. That they didn't have leverage against a big ol' gummint coming to them demanding it. Yet one of the smallest of them, Qwest, refused. Told those gummint guys to get a court order. Never heard from 'em again.

I'm not saying there's never a reason for the feds to get this kind of info, only that there need to be controls. If the White House can run roughshod over private businesses, who are lilylivered and choose to be run over, and then are protected from the results of those actions, might as well chuck the 1st amendment and any right to privacy.

Of course, them Republickans don't believe in a right to privacy (the legal basis for Roe v. Wade).

Sphere: Related Content

George loves them parks!

2004: U.S. National Parks Told to Quietly Cut Services

by Stefan Lovgren for National Geographic News

Millions of Americans will flock to the country's national parks this summer. Dazzled by nature and history, will they notice the missing signs, crumbling roads, or disappearance of park rangers?

Facing what some people warn is a "crippling" budget shortfall, many national park superintendents are being asked to consider cutting their ranger staffs, services, and visitor center hours—and possibly even closing down completely on certain days.

Several advocacy groups now charge that the entire National Park System is menaced by a hidden crisis, and that Park Service officials are trying to cover it up. "Make no mistake about it. There is a chill over the National Park Service today," said Denny Huffman of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees in Washington, D.C.

2007: President pushes boost in funding for national parks

by Richard Wolf, USA TODAY

National parks would be a big winner under President Bush's 2008 budget, and a plan to match up to $100 million annually in private donations could guarantee increases for a decade.

Bush's budget, being unveiled today, would give the National Park Service $2.4 billion next year, administration officials told USA TODAY. That includes a $258 million increase for daily operations, up 14.5%. Since 2002, those funds have risen 1.5% above inflation.

The president proposes adding at least $100 million a year for the next 10 years. The funds would be used to hire 3,000 seasonal park rangers, guides and maintenance workers each summer, an increase of more than 50%. In addition, more than 1 million children could be enrolled in youth programs.

Sierra Club:

National Park funding under the Bush administration has fallen by a third -- $600 million -- resulting in the loss of one-third of the visitor education activities at Death Valley and in Yellowstone turning away 60 percent of the school groups that sought to use the park's educational facilities.

In other words, the 2008 proposal restores a fraction of the funding Bush has previously cut.

and now...

This Christmas season we give thanks for our nation’s abundant blessings.

In the spirit of gratitude for our natural and historic treasures found from sea to shining sea, this year’s theme highlights America’s national parks. From breathtaking landscapes to important historical sites, generations have marveled at God’s magnificent creation and cherished memories of visits to these special places.

George W. Bush | Laura Bush

Sphere: Related Content

Pervez & George Go to White Castle House

This President is a strong defender of freedom and the people of Pakistan, and I appreciate your leadership ... We talked about democracy. The last time I was with the President, he assured me, and assured the people that were listening to the news conference, that there would be free and fair elections in Pakistan in 2007. He renewed that commitment, because he understands that the best way to defeat radicalism and extremism is to give people a chance to participate in the political process of a nation.

-President Bush , with Musharraf, September 22, 2007

Oops. Again.


Full transcript here.

Sphere: Related Content

Believe it or not: Bush Compares Iraq to Vietnam!

President Bush, speaking to the VFW this week:

"...one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms, like "boat people," "reeducation camps," and "killing fields."

There's another price to our withdrawal from Vietnam.

And we can hear it in the words of the enemy we face in today's struggle, those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens on September the 11th, 2001.

In an interview with a Pakistani newspaper after the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden declared that the American people had risen against their government's war in Vietnam and they must do the same today.

The number two man, Zawahiri, has also invoked Vietnam. In a letter to Al Qaida's chief of operations in Iraq, Zawahari pointed, quote, "to the aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam and how they ran and left their agents," end quote.

Zawahiri later returned to this theme, declaring that Americans, quote, "know better than others that there is no hope in victory. The Vietnam specter is closing every outlet."

Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price for American credibility. But the terrorists see it differently. We must listen to the words of the enemy. We must listen to what they say.

Bin Laden has declared that the war in Iraq is for you or us to win; if we win it, it means your disgrace and defeat forever. "

I won't argue the contention that the vaccuum left when we withdrew from Vietnam (and by the way, it was not a precipitous withdrawal by any means!) may have contributed to the sad events that followed in that region and that our retreat does offer a hell of a talking point for Al Quaeda.

But the only conclusion I can draw from Bush's statement is that he believes we should have not left Vietnam, at least not when and how we did.

So I would like to hear the Commander in Chief's further thoughts on what he believes we should have done with regard to the Viet Nam war from 1972 on. How long should we have stayed and how would we have won the war and avoided the tragedies that followed?

Also, one way we reacted to the chaos we contributed to in southeast Asia was by welcoming thousands, perhaps millions, of Vietnamese and other refugees to our country.

We broke Iraq, yet we will not admit her refugees. The pileup of refugees inside Iraq and in surrounding countries will cause untold misery and further destabilization of the region. I know what George is thinking: We'll fix Iraq and then all those folks will want to return.

It will be for the next president to welcome them.

Sphere: Related Content

Bird Had it Right

Watch the left arm. Bird should have aimed a little to his right.

Sphere: Related Content

You Just Gotta Believe!

"I wouldn't ask a mother or a dad -- I wouldn't put their son in harm's way if I didn't believe this was necessary for the security of the United States and peace of the world. And I strongly believe it. And I strongly believe we will prevail. And I strongly believe that democracy will trump totalitarianism every time. That's what I believe. And those are the belief systems on which I'm making decisions that I believe will yield the peace....I obviously have a unique view of things at times."

- George W. Bush, July 10, 2007

full transcript of speech

HuffingtonPost commentary on same quote by Marty Kaplan

Sphere: Related Content

Subpoena Cheney

The White House said today it would not comply with congressional subpoenas for documents and testimony relating to the firings of federal prosecutors last year, setting up a potential constitutional confrontation over its claim of executive privilege.

- Washington Post

Since Cheney has stated his office isn't part of the Executive Branch, subpoena his office. Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll have been copied on some of this stuff.

Sphere: Related Content

The Endgame

I've always been reluctant to buy into conspiracy theories.

Some bloggers have theorized that come January 20, 2009 the Bushies will not be leaving. I've scoffed at that. Hey, they're bad, but not that bad.

Then something put me over the top. It was Cheney's claim that his office is exempt from Presidential orders because it is not part of the Executive Branch.

I can't say why this is the act that has brought me to the conclusion that there is nothing Cheney and Bush won't do if given the opportunity, but it has.

So here's my theory on the endgame: As taxed as our military is fighting the war in Iraq, at any given time there are still many thousands of soldiers, airmen, sailors, marines and national guard on American soil. However, if we start another major war (i.e. Iran) while continuing to fight this one, we'll really have to empty the bases and send everyone to the theater of war.

What a perfect time for a coup.

I firmly believe that the military would rise up against that. If they were here.

It's January 20, 2009. G.W. Bush has announced that, due to unprecendented voter fraud, he cannot accept the result of last November's election and will not relinquish power. The Supreme Court, not wanting to repeat the 2000 fracas, is silent.

Yes, it's a ridiculous idea. But let's review the realities of the past 6 years and ask:

Is there anything they wouldn't do?

Sphere: Related Content

They say...

...the way to a man's heart is through his stomach. In Bush's case, perhaps they're one and the same.

Sphere: Related Content

Drinking Game

My wife suggested we come up with some drinking game to play during the State of the Union address. I agreed it would be better watched while drunk, but stuck with my seltzer.

Speaking of drinking, remember the classic ventriloquist's trick of taking a drink of water while the dummy continues to talk? Clearly, Cheney isn't good enough to pull that off, because when he took a drink, so did Bush.

Sphere: Related Content

How is Vietnam different from Iraq?

Bush had a plan for getting out of Vietnam.

Sphere: Related Content