PSoTD

Didn't take long for a conservative blogger to step in it concerning the Zogby poll indicating that 72% of U.S. troops in Iraq say the war should end this year...

So, what’s the one real take-away fact from this poll?

Reservists and National Guard troops are wimps.

Marines rock.

End of story.

So who's gonna be the Jimmy Carter of 2008?

Bill Ingram is Executive Editor for Basketball News Services. That's right, he writes about basketball. But he also writes about politics from time to time, particularly when it invades basketball, such as the Sebastian Telfair incident. Some basketball fans don't appreciate it, but Ingram writes:

One reader wrote to ask me if I shouldn't differentiate between hoops and politics. This is a "hoops site," after all, and I should stick to that. I couldn't disagree more. Here's my response:

If only we could seperate our lives into such categories as "hoops" or "politics." One necessarily affects the other. Many of the people who should be paying attention to politics are often too busy paying attention to entertainment. That's how people who do not have the best interest of our country at heart get into office. Voters aren't paying attention.

So here it is. One writer doing what he can do to get the worst offenders to pay attention to more important issues. Take it as you will, but I'm not willing to criticize privately when I fail to do so publicly. That's called hypocrisy - and too many Americans are guilty of that.

Thank you, Mr. Ingram. You are correct. TOO many people refuse to spend much time considering the situation the country is in, preferring to bury themselves with entertainment. But politics invades everything, and reporters of entertainment need to keep their marketplace apprised of the impact of that invasion. There needs to be more people like Ingram in the entertainment reporting industry.

Where things stand tonight.

Glenn Reynolds can sees lessons in the Bush Administration UAE Port contract debacle. His vision is still hazy:

As I write this, it's not clear where the rest of the debate is headed, but there are already some useful lessons for the White House. First, blogs make an excellent early warning system. The White House, unaccountably, seems to have been blindsided by the furor over this deal, though most people's gut reaction was negative. As with the many bloggers like me who changed their minds, gut reactions can be overcome by evidence — but the White House should have taken advantage of this early warning to have its arguments in order. It didn't.

That's the second lesson: The White House should not only have read blogs, but responded to them with information and arguments, rather than waiting for blog readers to weigh in. As Rich Galen observed on Wednesday, "It is an issue of this administration having a continuing problem with understanding how these things will play in the public's mind and not taking steps to set the stage so these things don't come as a shock and are presented in their worst possible light." Paying more attention to the blogs won't solve that problem. But it will help.

I'm not going to argue that these aren't lessons to be learned, but it is not the primary lesson. The primary lesson: TRANSPARENCY. The point isn't that the Bush Administration should manipulate conservative bloggers for their own aim - regardless of how many conservative bloggers may beg to be used in such a function.

No, the point is - let the facts out in a timely fashion and Bush can avoid shocking even his own base to tears.

As for Reynolds' article and his ideas for the role of bloggers? Color me unimpressed.

Eschaton has an interesting post about how Republicans decry the civilian debate about the appropriate time to exit Iraq militarily. More civilians are saying that the time is now. Still, many Republicans, including the Bush Administration, want to rely on the military to make this decision.

And so we should ask these Republicans: what would have happened if Lincoln had decided that Civil War management decisions were a military and not a civilian decision? Would McClellan have remained in charge of the Union Army? Would Grant have remained in the West? Would the Union have lost the war?

When boy wrestles girl, neither feels like a winner

No matter what happens, Maurice Baker’s friends are going to enjoy this.

They stand alongside Baker on the edge of the mat, minutes before he risks a life’s worth of pride.

They tell him that the girl he is about to wrestle was the No. 3 girl wrestler in the nation last year. But they also make sure Baker hears their laughter when they watch her warm up.

On this recent Saturday morning, it’s hard to figure out who is delivering the bigger psych job: Baker’s friends or the girl, Shamaine Danner. There she is, on the other side of the mat, slapping her face with both hands. She’s pacing within a 10-foot area, and this being her hometown of Richmond, nobody is invading her space.

This whole high school girl vs. boy thing can bring out myriad emotions for everyone involved. The boy doesn’t want to hurt her, but he also can’t lose. The girl feels constant pressure to validate her very presence on the mat. The boy’s parents and coach just hope he finishes the day without a loss and a long bus ride home. Even the girl’s coach feels awkward.

“I feel bad when she beats a boy,” Richmond coach John Daniels admits.

I guess this co-ed competition in a grappling sport is a good thing, and hopefully twenty years from now it won't be a big deal. But it does put high school student athletes in a strange position at a difficult age as far as dealing with gender norms and expectations.

I'll admit, if our daughter said she wanted to wrestle boys in high school, I'm not sure I'd be very excited about it. There is a social attention aspect to this type of co-ed participation in sports that does not come with sports that are less physically intimate. People have mixed feelings about it. Participation becomes muddled into social values. You can see it in this article.

On the other hand, if there are no female wrestling programs in high school, and a girl wants to compete, there's little option for her. If she wants to play, she has to participate in a co-ed program and automatically jump into the social aspect of it as well.

Iraq's on a new precipice. Only the spinmeisters can say that there are many more left...

Because I don't see why Americans should understand what he means:

The transaction should go forward, in my judgment. If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward.

How does Bush define "security" in this statement? How about the term "any chance"? Is this the same standard he used for the Iraq War decision? How about in the failure to implement many of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission? What the hell does he mean?

See for yourself.

From Reuters:

U.S. followers of a small Brazilian-based religion can import and use hallucinogenic tea in their ceremonies, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday in a case pitting religious rights against federal drug laws.

The court's opinion, the first ruling on religious freedom written by new Chief Justice John Roberts, rejected the U.S. government's effort to stop the import and use of sacramental hoasca tea by the New Mexican branch of the religion, called O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal.

The justices upheld an appeals court ruling that the government must allow the use of the herbal hoasca tea as part of a spiritual practice because of the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

I sense repercussions, but I have no idea what they may be...

Apparently, it isn't even called Presidents' Day as far as the Federal Government is concerned. It is the observance of Washington's Birthday. So what is everyone's obsession to call it Presidents' Day?

Do you prefer America officially celebrate all Presidents on Presidents' Day, or would you prefer America to officially celebrate Lincoln and Washington's birthdays separately?

From the Wichita Eagle:

Many Kansans, including members of The Eagle editorial board, have long admired Sen. Pat Roberts for his plainspokenness and reputation for fair brokering of issues.

So it's troubling that Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is fast gaining the reputation in Washington, D.C., as a reliable partisan apologist for the Bush administration on intelligence and security controversies.

We hope that's not true. But Roberts' credibility is on the line.

It is an election year. Right now Pat Roberts is trying to do what he can to protect Bush because there are legislative goals, as well as electoral politics, that Republicans want to reach. They want to get their work done, put some "accomplishments" on the mantle, and head to home to run their elections.

And so while they're in Washington, Bush can probably count on the Republicans to move very, very, very slowly, if at all, on anything controversial to Republicans.

But action in DC will be replaced by talk on the stump by late summer. Pat Roberts can continue to ignore reality, since he's not up for election until 2008. So can Brownback, who isn't up this year either. But all those Kansas House Representatives... what are they gonna do?

Apparently, Presidents' Day is not really much of a holiday. Not like Christmas, not like New Year's Day, not like Independence Day, not even like Labor Day. So for all of you who believe the Executive Branch is sacred, take heed - much of commercial America doesn't feel like celebrating the boss. Even "bankers hours" don't automatically include the day.

U.S. Bank announces branches open on Presidents Day

Those that will be open include Bank One, Dart, First National of America, Independent, Mason State, Republic and Summit Community.

I can't blame the banks, although this seems to be a big FU to the appreciation of the executive branch. I enjoyed the holiday when it was Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's Birthday, great men, integral to our history, worth celebrating. But lumping in some of the other dud Presidents into this holiday severely diminishes my appreciation of the day, and I'm not just talking about Bush II. Was Buchanan a good person to run our country? Just how important was Chester Arthur to you? And let's not even start on William Henry Harrison...

Think of it this way: imagine all the Christian faiths decided to rename Christmas as Christian Leader Day. All of a sudden, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and the Pope and everyone else who is a leader of a Christian group is to be celebrated within the holiday. Would that make the holiday better, or worse, for you?

Yep, me too. Heck, bankers might even lose another holiday.

Good for you, Richard Dreyfuss.

It's quite likely that the controversies will occur regardless of how local government informs the community about the possibility of the construction and siting of a cell tower. The volume is quite high... below is just a sampling from this week around the U.S...

New Jersey
Cingular wins approval for tower
Residents see cell coverage gain as their loss

Massachusetts
Tower plan gets cool reception in Natick

California
Our Sprint-Nextel lease agreement

Cell towers approved
Residents plan challenge of New Monterey project

Arizona
Cherokee cell tower rejected: Parents happy but wonder why so little notice

Illinois
In back-to-back meetings, the Villa Grove Planning and Zoning Board and City Council faced a packed room of people who came with questions about a proposed tower to host cellular antenna equipment.

Maine
Patterson Hill hung up on cell tower issue

Ohio
Neighbors Oppose Cell Tower

One of the themes that come out of these controversies is the lack of transparency on the local government's part of considering and approving these towers. Citizens are not going to know what a notice for a use variance on plat XX-XXXX, code 374.12 and 398.3 means. Period. Yet, that's all some local governments have to do - and that's all some of them do. When the construction equipment shows up across the street, the residents realize what is going on, and usually that's a little too late to act.

This is a fine lesson for kids. Why not a pop-up book: "I Shot Him In The Head"...

If you're powerful enough, and around "friends", you can shoot a man in the head, keep it secret overnight, and face no legal repercussions. But you have to be more powerful than everyone else involved, so do not hang around people that are your equals. You have to be with "friends" who understand how your power can translate into benefit for them, so do not hang around people who are on the fence.

So... only make friends with the people you can bully or you can "persuade" with benefits. And those should be the only people you hang around with. Then you can shoot people in the head!

At least in terms of links. The number of links to each State Democratic Party blog, according to Technorati, 2/14/06

Alabama - 1.
Arizona - 4.
Arkansas - 4.
California - 1.
Colorado - 6.
Georgia - 10.
Idaho - 0.
Kansas - 28 (it is the Party Site's front page).
Maine - 10.
Massachusetts - 17.
Mississippi - 8.
Nebraska - 3.
New Hampshire - 1.
New Jersey - 19.
North Carolina - 4.
North Dakota - 7 .
Ohio - 7.
Oklahoma - 1.
South Carolina - 9.
Virginia - 34.
Wyoming - 1.

Unbossed has a good piece about the Bush Administration's obsession with the idea. Bushco: spreading the virus of incompetence to all corners of government.

It's really funny how the conservative states have all these political folks that decry Hollywood values, but they're willing to do just about whatever they can to get some of that Hollywood movie production business. You know, like Wyoming.

Kinda makes you wonder what values they are talking about when they talk about Hollywood values... is it really about how they make their money, or is it where they make their money?

Hopefully our kids' kids will find out what the scoop was on this. Leave it to this Congress to abdicate any investigative responsibility.

From yesterday:

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think that I've expressed my views, and we went through this yesterday.

Q But that's a non-answer.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, that's what I was trying to indicate to you --

I've tried to find all the State Democratic Party Blogs. I found them because they had a link from the front page of a State Democratic Party web site. Let me know if I've missed any. I've included the live link, and a brief assessment of the blog. I think this will provide a better visual when I say that official Democratic Party blogs need some sort of Guidelines when you see some of the inconsistent practices.

Alabama - No comments.
Arizona - Ugh. Last post February 1. Second to last post: August 23. Comments are indicated by not readable. What is the point.
Arkansas - Accepts comments.
California - Takes comments. Appears to have about a post every weekday.
Colorado - Accepts comments.
Georgia - Accepts comments.
Idaho - Registered comments. No posts since January 27th.
Kansas - Must register to post comments. Blog contents on Party's front page.
Maine - Accepts comments. No posts in 2006. I guess nothing has happened this year (rolling eyes).
Massachusetts - Takes comments. One post since January 25th.
Mississippi - Accepts comments.
Nebraska - Accepts comments.
New Hampshire - Accepts comments. No posts since January 24.
New Jersey - Last post: May 6, 2005. Good God.
North Carolina - Must register for comments.
North Dakota - Accepts comments.
Ohio - Accepts comments.
Oklahoma - Accepts comments.
South Carolina - No comments. Two posts so far in February.
Virginia - Accepts comments.
Wyoming - Accepts comments.

Gotta like Indiana, they actually link to other liberal bloggers in state rather than posting their own blog. As does Maryland.

This is bullshit. The Democratic Party has to find a way to encourage - not stifle - primary races. It shouldn't be the party of hording campaign money, it should be the party of discussing policy ideas. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

by intentionally offending Muslims. So says Glenn Reynolds. He deserves credit for a simple and accurate declaration.

What would the conbloggers be saying if Wittington accidentally shot Cheney?

DHinMI has a great piece at The Next Hurrah. Give it a read.

I don't see why most Americans can't agree that most earmarking sucks as a legislative practice and should be severely limited. And I think that it's become such a porkbarrel problem that it shouldn't really be that controversial to cut the practice.

Which is another reason I really don't appreciate the efforts of U.S. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska. And why it's depressing that he's actually running again this year.

And although the liberal blogosphere focuses on Lieberman, it is Nelson who departs from his own party's position - the Democratic Party - more often than any other member of Congress.

The Advisory System of greatest importance to the Bush Administration...

I wonder if liberal/progressive bloggers ought to consider development of some guidelines for official Democratic Party blogs. These guidelines do not have to deal specifically with content, but they should deal with the expectations between Party officials and the voting members of the Party which may want to use the blog for information. Such guidelines could be:

Development of a blog committee to occasionally consider functionality of the blog

Standards for currency of blogs

Standards for allowance of comments on blogs

It does seem to me, however, that some content expectations should be realized. For example, when the filibuster and eventual confirmation of Alito's nomination occured, at least one state Democratic Party blog had nothing about either event on their site. That just seems to be missing the message.

As guidelines, these recommendations obviously don't HAVE to be adhered to by State or County Party blogs; however, they can provide a reference point if audience believes that the State or County Party is doing a poor - or even damaging - job on their blog.

Who in their right mind thinks it's okay for Michael Brown to take this position, period? Is this guy an American, or just an unemployed minister to Bush?

Anyone who pays Brown a dime for anything until Brown testifies to what happened and America can use that experience to prevent it from happening again, is hurting the country.

Serve the country by testifying fully and truthfully, or starve - that should be Brown's choice at this point.

Tom DeLay still haunts the House Majority Leader website...

House Republicans have still not popped Boehner into the website. (sorry)

I've looked at a lot of the conblogger comments about yesterday's Coretta Scott King funeral, and their whining about how George W. Bush had to sit and listen to a few negative comments about his Presidency.

I have to say, if this is the best and the brightest the Republican Party has to present for the future, their party is in a lot bigger trouble than Bush's current problems. So many of them are so weak. They're so easy to cry when their leader is reproached in public. They can't even consider the cause of such reproachment, their immediate response is cry foul, generalize their besmirching of the reproachers, and claim protocol like they were suck-up 17th century royal advisers. Sycophantism ain't much of a platform on which to maintain a political party. And the robes are no cooler than the pajamas.

Secondly - I hope they keep crying about this. I suspect this isn't what Bush wants, this story to continue to burble in the news. Today's news: Republicans go waaaah. Tomorrow's news: Republicans go waaaah. Yes, just the image such a brave terrorist-fightin' President should want. Waaaah.

Senator Arlen Specter will be on Pennsylvania Cable Network's Journalist Roundtable program this Friday, live, at 4 PM. Not sure who the journalists will be at this point, but it sure seems like a good opportunity to ask whether the remaining witnesses in front of his committee regarding the wiretapping "investigation" will be under oath or not.

CNET is trying to figure out which companies opened up their networks to the NSA. They asked 27 companies, 15 that are willing to say that they have not participated in the NSA program, and 12 that... well, wouldn't say. The Twelve:

Adelphia Communications
AT&T
Cable & Wireless
Citizens Communications
Global Crossing
Google
Level 3
NTT Communications
SAVVIS Communications
United Online
Verizon Communications
Yahoo

I don't see any appropriate way that Arlen Specter cannot complete the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings concerning the NSA wiretapping without bringing back Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to testify again, this time under oath. I wonder if that's why Specter let him testify the first time without being under oath... He left way too many questions unanswered, and there are too many new questions left to be asked. But he needs to come back after the committee hears from others.

John Ashcroft and James Comey, formerly of the Justice Department, need to testify in front of the committee. Also, bring in the executives from some of the telecoms and internet companies that were party of these searches. What assurances did the Department of Justice give them to the legality of this? What questions did they ask internally and of the Department of Justice? And it looks like Specter plans to have Gonzales back...

Specter said that Gonzales had agreed to return for another day of still-unscheduled testimony. Specter also plans testimony from legal scholars on both sides of the issue.

I'm not going to try to deconstruct this email - I want to wait and see how Specter's committee investigates the matter. It does disturb me that Specter considers the President as "wise" and "candid" about the NSA program, since it was anything but that until his secret was exposed. But in general, I get the sense that Senator Specter's main goal is to stop the activity from continuing, which would be a step in the right direction.

Thank you for contacting my office regarding President Bush's secret domestic surveillance program. I appreciate your concern regarding this important matter.

Law enforcement officials must be provided with as much information and as many tools as possible to ensure the protection of our country, but those resources cannot come at the expense of citizens' civil liberties. I believe that it was wise for the President to be candid with the American people concerning his surveillance program. It is important at this point that the matter does not become politicized, because this is a time for analysis and oversight, not attacks.

The U.S. Constitution limits the President's ability to conduct surveillance or searches of United States persons while residing within the United States . In 1978, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ("FISA") which permits federal agents to conduct electronic surveillance on United States persons in order to acquire foreign intelligence without obtaining a traditional Title III search warrant. FISA does, however, require a FISA court order approving the surveillance. In so doing, the Congress sought to strike a delicate balance between national security interests and personal privacy rights within the United States . I have scheduled Congressional oversight hearings in order to make sure that we are able to maintain this delicate balance.

Thank you again for taking the time to bring your views on this important matter to my attention. As your United States Senator, it is essential that I be kept fully informed on issues of concern to my constituents. Be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind on this issue and related issues in the 109 th Congress. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at www.specter.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

Geeky Mom has a good piece about the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings starting today about the NSA wiretaps. She points out that it would be quite valuable to subpoena telecom and Internet company executives to find out about their level of participation in the wiretaps - but that it's unlikely that such subpoenas will be issued. Request that the Committee members to dig as deep as they can on this. They need to subpoena the telecom executives.

Republican U.S. Senators are suggesting that an Australian government inquiry into its own actions lacks independence.

Republican U.S. Senators. Mull that over.

You can't say the Australian government hasn't been paying attention to the Bush Administration. Their response?

Australian Prime Minister John Howard has also labelled the suggestion "offensive".

Oh, delicious irony.

When allies of Bush attack allies of Bush, what side does Bush go on?

I've been thinking about politics and parties and bloggers. I don't believe that bloggers are ready to have their own party. But I believe liberal bloggers ought to be ready to go recruit candidates for Democratic Party primary elections that bring with them campaign planks and programs that bloggers want tried out in campaigns.

Notice I said recruit - not just fund. They would have to fund them as well. But the time is coming, and if not in 2006, then by 2008, to find new policy programs that are largely untested in the election marketplace, to find the candidates to run on those policies, and to fund those campaigns.

There's no reason to fixate on winning as a start. Instead, it might make sense to pick races in which there isn't a likely Democratic candidate nor a likely expectation that such a candidate can win. What bloggers would be doing is testing the marketplace of ideas - displaying their excitement and desires into expanding it - and hopefully feeding it.

I guess Coleman's story is that he was duped.

Australia's ambassador to the US Dennis Richardson will meet American Senator Norm Coleman for talks on the growing wheat scandal after Canberra responded in writing to the senator's concerns.

Senator Coleman, the head of a US Senate inquiry into illegal payments made to Saddam Hussein's former regime in Iraq, has requested Australia's ambassador in Washington DC, meet him to explain the government's role in the Australian wheat exporter affair.

Senator Coleman has fired off letters to Richardson and former Australian ambassador in Washington DC, Michael Thawley, asking for explanations over AWB's dealing with Iraq.

A date and time for the Senator Coleman-Richardson meeting has not been set.

"We will be responding to the Senator in writing and subsequently meeting at a mutually convenient time," an Australian embassy spokesman in Washington DC said today.

Senator Coleman said in his letters he was "deeply troubled" by the representations by Thawley at an October 2004 meeting where he "unequivocally dismissed" claims AWB was making illicit payments to the Hussein regime.

At the meeting, Thawley urged Senator Coleman to leave the AWB out of an investigation into kickbacks under the UN's oil-for-food program, insisting the company would never be involved.

Apparently there are some other U.S. Senators that have expressed unhappiness with Coleman about Australia's role in protecting AWB (Australian Wheat Board) - particularly Senators from wheat growing states. However, not much of a peep in the news from these other Senators at this point.

The American wheat industry is definitely unhappy, though.

Texas is one of America's biggest wheat producing states and it's there that the board of directors for US Wheat Associates, the peak industry lobby group, is meeting this weekend.

One of the agenda items for the 36 members is what's being referred to in Australia as the "wheat for weapons" scandal.

US Wheat Associates President Alan Tracy will make it one of the key topics of his report to his colleagues.

and there is this...

Wheat Industry asks USDA to Reinstate Suspension of AWB

Okay Republicans and conservative bloggers, let's hear it: whatcha gonna say about your buddy John Howard of Australia? And Norm Coleman... don't be surprised to be sucked into an Australian investigation of Howard's government.

Found via Vanessa at feministing...

The Third Annual "Day of Purity" will be observed on February 14, 2006

Vanessa is right. Major League Creepy.

How much did Roy Blunt's "ticking off" of conservative bloggers play into the choice of John Boehner as House Majority Leader?

Think Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack should have a realistic shot at the Democratic Party nomination for President in 2008? This blogger doesn't. Neither do I. A waste of money and effort.

Whee, lawsuits!

Supporting Australian wheat interests over American wheat interests since 2004!

Nice Iraq connection to the story, too!

Upside: nobody remembers these speeches unless it is fiery anyway. Maybe we would be better off just running three minutes of images and video of the past year as a reminder of what it has been like.

Results matter more. Bush has gotten the result of another round of puppy love from the shill media, and he may get a small, temporary, but ballyhooed bounce in the polls. But this is in no way guaranteed. But any expectation of more than that is just more fantasy as government. These words were to shore up the base and stimulate the press, the likelihood of much of any reality actually following the outline of Bush's speech is much more dependent on outside factors than the efforts of Bush.

I just saw Timmeh Russert on NBC say that the NSA wiretap issue is going to the courts. Of course. This country needs the news media to quit focusing on what Bush says, or even what Congress says, about the end around FISA, and get them to focus on the legal issue. Period. Bush can hang as many scare tactic names on the program as he wants, but the courts will determine whether he and his administration broke the law. Let's get to it.

Will Republicans run with Bush, or try to focus on their differences, in 2006? The next couple of months are critical for Bush, because if he doesn't show considerable polling progress, Republican candidates for office are going to have to make a very tough decision on that. Nothing will bring Bush down further and faster politically faster than to have members of his own party taking apart his administration.

Bush hit a home run with his base with the Alito confirmation. He's now had his biggest scheduled prime time bully pulpit opportunity of the year. He was in bad enough shape that he needed to have them on the same day to buck up his party. But now what? How's he going to cheer his party up when the next secret door of major fuckups is opened?