PSoTD

The All Spin Zone has the details.

If it takes a blue ribbon panel to study if Republicans close elections better than Democrats, then it would be worth it just to shut him up - as long, of course, as he isn't part of that panel or selection of it.

Don't we need a clearer term - and don't Iraqis deserve a clearer term for purposes of history - for where that "country" is today?

Unfortunately, we may be at a point where we need to more specifically classify civil wars to cover those instigated by attacks from another country. The term "Civil War" implies that the society pushed apart at the seams, rather than pulled apart by other-sovereign forces. According to Merriam-Webster, civil war is defined as "a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country."

But Iraq isn't just that while we're there, and it didn't start because of those opposing groups. The U.S. and other foreign powers broke Iraq and allowed civil war to arise. It's unfair to Iraq to label this solely as a civil war at this point, a label that implies that this is solely their issue and fault that it's at this state at this point.

So we need a more specific term than just "civil war". Maybe it's Foreign-Induced Civil War. Maybe it's Exported Civil War. Suggestions?

Update: The Editors at BBC say that the fighting in Iraq defies simple categorisation.

Don't slow down the motorcade...

A HARARE motorist spent four nights in police custody last week for allegedly blocking President Robert Mugabe's motorcade.

Simba Mabasa, a driver employed by quasi-state organisation, the Tobacco Industry and Marketing Board (TIMB) was arrested and detained at Harare Central Police station last Thursday after he allegedly interfered with President Mugabe's motorcade along Julius Nyerere Way in the capital. He got into hot soup because he allegedely failed to give way to the motorcade. The convoy was on its way from the Harare International Airport after the presidential party arrived from a Common Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA) meeting in Djibouti.

TIMB is a statutory body, which issues licences to tobacco auction floors, buying companies and tobacco contractors.

In addition to arresting Mabasa, police impounded the TIMB shuttle bus that he was driving after ordering all passengers to disembark.

Workers at the TIMB said Mabasa was released on Monday after four nights of rigorous interrogation. The impounded bus was returned to the organisation on the same day. "They (police) said his docket is being worked on," said one worker at TIMB who requested not to be named.

An apprehensive Mabasa confirmed his release when contacted by The Financial Gazette on Tuesday, but refused to answer further questions. Under Zimbabwe's tough security laws, which include the amended Road Traffic Regulations (2002), it is an offence for the public to say or do anything "within the view or hearing of the State motorcade with the intention of insulting any person travelling with an escort or any member of the escort."

His odds are only slightly better than Joe Lieberman's at winning the Democratic 2008 nomination. I'd say he's neck and neck with Vilsack.

Newt Gingrich is helping the terrorists win. The terrorists hate freedom, the Preznit keeps telling us. And Newt Gingrich recommends we capitulate, giving away the freedom of speech.

Just imagine if we did curb freedom of speech in our war against terrorism... wouldn't Gingrich's speech be one of those to be curbed? After all, we wouldn't want to have Americans AND terrorists think the terrorists are making us change our philosophy because we're afraid... that would be a victory for the terrorists. So, apparently Newt Gingrich is recommending that Newt Gingrich's comments be curtailed. But because Newt Gingrich can't do that for himself, he needs the Federal Government to step in and stop it, because Newt Gingrich doesn't know what is wise and unwise to say.

I had a weird idea...

Take 50 political talk radio talk show hosts from around the country, including some of the national ones. Make it half and half, conservative and liberal. Ask each one of them for one legislative idea that they'd like to see passed by Congress.

And welcome to the newest reality program: "The Senate".

Each talk show host is a Senator, and must try to convince a majority of the remaining members of Congress to pass their idea. Each Senator puts their one idea in the hopper as a bill, and then they begin to try to work each other to pass their ideas. They're all locked in some huge estate until a bill is passed. The bill passed will win some ungodly amount of money for the author(s) of the idea. However, no bill can pass that encompasses more than 3 ideas.

And then videotape all the intrigue and dealmaking.

Had the brains and the guts to make such a political assessment.

When president Anwar El-Sadat removed Egypt out of the Soviet sphere of influence he was acting in the belief that the US held 99 per cent of the cards to solving the Arab- Israeli conflict. Some may have questioned that assessment, but the collapse of the Soviet Union and US deployment in the region following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait made it clear that a US-dominated era was beginning.

In the 1990s, the world accepted that the Middle East was a zone of US influence. No other power dared to make any initiative in the region without Washington's approval. The US should have used that opportunity to establish its credibility as a patron of peace and stability. Instead, it was arrogant and greedy. It pushed its support of Israel to the limit while ignoring legitimate Arab concerns. It acted as if the Arabs were fit only to receive orders, not as partners in friendship and cooperation. With the US invasion of Iraq any hopes for a US change of heart were dashed. From then on the writing was on the wall. Faced with spiralling violence in Iraq, the US plodded on, unable to mend its ways, incapable of inspiring trust. If anything, the US fomented mistrust by supporting Israel's crimes against the Palestinians and Lebanon, acting belligerently towards Syria and engaging in suspicious schemes regarding Sudan.

Eventually Washington lost all credibility and now risks the prospect of a disgraceful retreat, even by the judgement of senior US experts. Richard Hass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, says we are seeing the end of the US era in the Middle East. Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security adviser, believes history is repeating itself, with the US likely to pull out from the Middle East following the Iraq war in the same way that Britain made its exit following the Suez campaign.

Other foreign powers are now competing for a foothold in the region. Europe is offering a Spanish-French-Italian peace initiative. Russia is trying to improve its ties with Egypt and other Arab countries. And China hopes for a major economic and political role in the region. Meanwhile, the US seems unable to think beyond exiting Iraq and protecting Israel.

One would think that this is the right moment for Arab nations and regimes to break free from foreign influence and find their own voice. It could well be their last chance.

We're still a work in progress.

Nuclear families, made up of married couples with children, fell to 23.5 percent of all households in 2000, down from 45 percent in 1960.

Maybe Laurence O'Donnell might want to consider this factor when pontificating that "Advocating war is easier when you and your family are not endangered by it." Because the same can be said for advocating the draft. This isn't the 1960s, and a lot smaller percentage of folks have kids available to be impacted by the draft.

This is a fool's exercise. Rangel's not helping the debate here, he's muddying it. We want out of Iraq? Bringing up the draft isn't going to get us out. We owe a focus on the real issues of getting out of Iraq. Stop this shit.

Lots and lots of excuses from Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings for losing to Lenny of Laverne and Shirley in Jeopardy!

(Good job, Michael McKean!)

Remember them? What the hell do they do the years between Presidential elections? Are they trying to figure out how to make the debates better and more useful for voters? Their website makes them look like they're in storage until 2008.

I'm somewhat appalled by the "discussion" of the draft over at DailyKos. I wish people would actually think about it before suggesting that a military draft would reduce the possibility for war. The two biggest wars we've had since World War II came with the draft. The draft legislates a responsibility for every citizen to potentially provide a period of time for the purposes of the government. That's servitude. If you're going to have arguments for servitude, you better bring a whole slew of them, you better have a real cost/benefit analysis, and you better not be hiding behind the dodge that it would somehow make America "better" and that being against the idea is somewhat less "American".

The whole "debate" is playing with fire, and I really think people should put considerably more thought into it before jumping in the flames.

This idea of volunteering other peoples' kids for military service is a loser. A LOSER. A LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't believe in the draft. I don't believe it's good for the country, and I don't believe it fits within our country's mythology of freedom or fairness. And I don't believe it's a good anvil to pound for responsibility in choosing our military efforts.

So I think Charlie Rangel is completely misguided in this effort to pound the anvil. Either he actually believes that the country needs a military draft, or he believes that the prospect of a draft will change the way people see our military choices because he doesn't believe the country wants a draft. I think this is a fire the Democrats should not even consider playing with, because I don't see this as a wedge issue. There are other forces at play, and it should be this simple: if you believe there should be a military draft, period, at all times, then support the idea. Otherwise, oppose it.

If the British thought the same thing about penny papers and other very low cost journals in the American colonies.

Blogging is evolving. One of the key things that this article fails to mention is that blogs - real blogs, at least, not just homages to speechifying - allow comments. Comments and commentary can either focus or dissolve the point of a post. Take a look at DailyKos, it happens all the time.

The problem that government is having is an attention span issue. If everyone says everything needs work - which is no doubt true - the job of government is to prioritize. And that's the problem. The political process is not setting clear set priorities. The governing process is confused because of this, and the governed are confused because of this. If it was clear, the debate would include prioritization. It does not.

So, first step: what are the priorities for a politician and for a member of governance? Try establishing that clearly, and keep working on making that clear. Muddling it allows politicians to claim they are all things to all people, yet it also increases the confusion and the spectrum of complaints.

It's a simple thing to recognize: Wars get names, and periods of peace don't. This just compounds our human failure to recognize the most important contributions made to avoid war and continue peace for a given time period.

Also, and sadly, the ratio of historians who write to explain the causes of a war, versus the ratio of historians who write to explain the causes of a peaceful time, does not exist. That's because you have to have at least one historian who chooses to write about the causes of peaceful times. I'm not talking about one political move, or one incident... I'm talking about how nations go through period of times of relative peace, and what the root causes of that peace are?

I know, who will buy such a book? No blood? No dramatic death totals? No obvious villains, no sinister fools? It would take a historian with quite the writer's flair to write an interesting piece about the periods of peace in our world's history. But if done... it would stand out.

Glad to see some of this Democratic Party response to James Carville and his comments about Howard Dean earlier this week:

Stephen Crockett: Carville Simply Wrong on Howard Dean and DNC

Harold Ford: I think Governor Dean has done a good job. I'm not interested in taking the job.

According to sources in the DNC and DCCC, Emuanel called Dean this morning to distance himself from the tone and general tenor of Carville's remarks.

Former DNC Chair Don Fowler: This is is nonsense... Democrats won a great victory on November 7; control of the United States House of Representatives, control of the United States Senate, majority of Governors, and majority of state legislative bodies. Governor Dean deserves to continue as DNC Chair.

But it should be more like a hot lava eruption on Carville for his remarks. That's how to prevent a repeat of such stupidity by Carville in the future.

It's really time for the shit to fall on Carville. This isn't about Dean, this is about pissing all over a great win and complaining about deficit spending. That's right, Carville is crying that the Democrats didn't borrow more money.

I don't care what Carville has done in the past. The Democrats should tell him to get off TV, now and for the longterm foreseeable future, and if they don't, he doesn't get any more jobs. I can not believe how moronic it is to try to damage Dean after the Democrats big win. We should now be moving forward on the next two years of goals. But no, we get this. Fuck Carville. He's a prima donna.

Hey James Carville: WHERE'S THE COMPLAINT OF HOW WASTEFUL HILLARY CLINTON'S SPENDING WAS? AND HOW MUCH MONEY DID YOU SPEND ON LOSING CAMPAIGNS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER SPENT WITH SUCCESSFUL CAMPAIGN MANAGERS? HOW MUCH MONEY ENDED UP IN CARVILLE'S COFFERS IN THE 2006 CAMPAIGN?

Americans need to work during "retirement": poll

The survey, which polled 2,500 baby boomers between September 26 and October 7, will be released in the next few days.

Faced with the cold, hard fact that they have not saved enough to live out their years comfortably, 43 percent of Americans say they will have to re-enter the work force almost as soon as they leave it, according to the survey.

There was a nice window in the 20th century in America to allow for retirement. It was a nice concept. But frankly, it seems to me to be damn near impossible to expect now, at least as how we've envisioned retirement so far, and the economy and human nature conspire against sufficient saving for most folks in the middle class.

If you're wealthy, then retirement is an option. If you're lucky enough to be in a for-the-time-being-stable retirement program through your employment, then it can be an option. Everyone else? Contingency plans make a lot of sense to me. Working when you're older doesn't seem such a horrible fate if you like what you're doing. It seems to me that there needs to be more effort in our society to get the baby boomers there - determining how employers can find 20-25 hour work weeks for still valuable 70-year-olds that these individuals will enjoy and appreciate.

Because we're going to need it.

He's heading for Dick Morris territory, on a bullet train.

And I think it's time the national media poll every Democratic Party member of the 2007 Congress and see if they agree or disagree with Carville's assessment - on the record. Starting with Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel.

I just discovered LegiStorm - which provides information on Congressional Staff Salaries. Ought to be worth looking at when looking at staffers going into lobbying. Somebody's gotta pay for Russell Caso's next $14,400 trip to Italy...

and the game.

This guy stands for nothing but power, just like the Republicans that elected him over Lamont.

Unfortunately, we're in for a bit of an internal fight once the Democratic Congress rolls in. Lobbyists - and lobbying firms - whose main strengths have been that they have access and ability to lobby Democrats have been waiting for this day for years. They feel they have been getting crumbs, at best, while their Republican lobbyist cousins feasted at the federal trough. There is now a growing sense of "our turn" in the Democratic lobbyist ranks.

The Democrats cannot afford their own version of "the bridge to nowhere." And knowing Bush, if something like that shows up in a budget or spending bill for the Democrats, he'll let it go to give Republicans something to campaign on in 2008. Democrats have to practice fiscal responsibility, and they have to keep the lobbyists disappointed but hopeful. Anything less will be disastrous, political and financially.

About the dustup between Carville and Howard Dean: I couldn't say it better myself. Except, Carville deserves blame as well. He chose to carry this water.

And news media: Ask Hillary Clinton if she agrees with Carville. ASK HER.

From Forbes

Regardless of their political leanings, the majority of American adults (80.4 percent) favors a balanced approach to sex education in schools, including teaching children about both abstinence and other ways of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, a University of Pennsylvania study finds.

The findings suggest that the U.S. government's support for abstinence-only programs doesn't reflect broad public support for comprehensive sex education, say researchers from the school's Annenberg Public Policy Center.

They noted that 25 percent of American youth have sex by age 15, 37.5 percent by age 16 and 46.9 percent by age 17.

Sex is like any other topic that kids have to learn about. Parents can provide education, detail, philosophy - but there's clear benefit to providing health, scientific and statistical information through the schools, as well. Most Americans understand that. If the Bush Administration can't understand that, then the Congress needs to take the lead to show support for comprehensive sex education.

If you're a liberal or progressive blogger, you very well could have received this in email recently. I think it's a pretty nice - and smart - touch by the DSCC. Thanks!

We wanted to take a moment and thank political blog writers for all that you have done to change the direction of the country. Because of your efforts, and the efforts of many of your readers, our party has been reinvigorated with an enormous amount of energy and activism.

Americans sent a clear message that we need to change the course - both in Iraq and at home. Democrats will hold President Bush accountable for his failed strategy and propose a new direction for America.

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that we appreciate everything you did to help take back the Senate. The power of the Internet to revolutionize politics and our party is only starting to show. This is just the beginning.

Thanks,

Michael Link

Online Communications
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
http://www.dscc.org
http://www.fromtheroots.org

After all, he is so successful at being elected!

It cracks me up that all these Republicans that are explaining why they lost Tuesday seem to be, oh, election losers. I guess that explains their expertise as to why Republicans lost. I doubt listening to them is going to help Republicans figure out how to win...

that reading corn husks is as effective as reading tea leaves.

I predict this is the pinnacle of his campaign.

It would be funny, if it weren't so likely to be repeated. All these conservative writers and bloggers come out today, and basically say that Bush and the Republicans deserved the election results, and for different reasons than I believe they deserved it, but still, loudly pronouncing they deserve it. It was all Bush and the Republican Congress' fault. They blew it.

And yet they take no responsibility for having been cheerleaders for Bush and the Republican Congress for all these years. Fred Barnes' life credo: "It's mea culpa for thee, but not for me." Apparently, Beetle's rah-rahs supporting Bush and the Congressional Republicans for anything and everything bear no responsibility. And a lot of the conservative bloggers sound just the same.

Perhaps Bush and surviving Congressional Republicans learned something in this election. I don't think Barnes and his ilk did.

But how long until Rumsfeld gets the pardon?

As for purposes of election politics, this makes absolutely no sense. A week ago, if Bush did this, perhaps the Republican candidates would have gotten a bounce. But Bush did the exact opposite - declare that Rumsfeld would last throughout his term.

Obviously, it wasn't about winning the 2006 election. But it sure looks like it is about damage control for the 2008 campaign. Scapegoat Rumsfeld for the policy, reduce his damage to the administration in potential upcoming investigations as yesterday's news, and try to move on.

I'm sure the conbloggers are scratching their heads about this one and what could have been.

Wouldn't you like to hear the essence of this call?

Bush made just one phone call on Tuesday night — to Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., chairman of the House GOP's election effort, who was re-elected.

Your move, Maloof Brothers.

Go read Savor the Victory. Don't downplay it. Meteor Blades is absolutely right. The Republican drumbeat to downplay this election result is already in strong force. Don't listen to it. Let the Republicans believe this - yesterday it became obvious that Republican denial is a positive for Democratic Party electoral chances.

I'm a Sacramento Kings fan. But I've had it with these sports owners that insist that local or state government finance their arena or stadium or ballpark. If the Maloofs move the Kings away because the voters of Sacramento won't buy them an arena with taxpayer or borrowed money, then I say screw the Maloofs. And, unfortunately, the Kings. We shouldn't be treating professional sports as anything different than any other business - or at least, any other entertainment business. Does a county buy the roller rink for the company that provides indoor skating? Does a city buy the movie theatre so that AMC can show movies? At some point, the issue of fairness - and the issue of developing a smart, long-term unique identity for a region not held hostage by the short-term fancies of the rich - needs to overcome the weak-kneed wannabe sportster business community, and if government can't say no directly, it's best to let the voters say no instead. So if Sacramento County tells the Maloofs no, I say congratulations to them for behaving as sensible adults.

All this talk about the Senate going 51-49 for the Democrats isn't going to mean much if Lieberman wins, decides to caucus with the Republicans and gives Cheney the tiebreaker vote again.

Sure seems like less media reporting of news from Iraq today than there has been in months.

So - best guess - How many different events of election goon squad activity intent on suppressing voter turnout will be documented on Tuesday?

He'll probably be hiding on Tuesday. At least, he should be.

He spent all this effort to line up Saddam's death sentence verdict two days before the election, and Ted Haggard craps all over his news cycle.

The Republican Congress eliminated auditing of Iraqi reconstruction spending for 2007.

And they call themselves fiscally responsible. That's just pathetic.

In the next two years, I'd like to see some discussion about how the whitehouse.gov web site is used. Currently it is abused with campaigning and propaganda, and seldom is useful information provided that has to do with governance, rather than politics. Considering that this is a tax-paid web site, I think rules and regulations that control the usage are in order.

If only to avoid this kind of crap being posted. If Bush wants a campaign site during an off-year election, fine, have the RNC build one. Otherwise, keep this manure off the public's web site. It's unfortunate, really, that anyone should feel that rules are needed for the President's official web site, but that's what happens when something is so crassly abused.

We really don't want Joe Lieberman to be the "pivotal figure in Washington"...

Sincerely,

Dick Cheney

I'll give Cheney this - he doesn't seem to care if Republicans are elected in three days or not, since this interview is unlikely to make them happy.

Since the slime is being discovered about many of the current crop of elected federal Republicans, you have to think they open the newspaper each day wondering, "what new scandal is going to taint my campaign by association today?"

About the Senate election results prediction from Stu Rothenberg:

The Senate: "While Senate control is in doubt, with Democrats most likely to win from 5 to 7 seats, we do not think the two sides have an equal chance of winning a majority in the Senate. Instead, we believe that state and national dynamics favor Democrats netting six seats and winning control of the United States Senate."

I really have to wonder, if Lieberman is re-elected in Connecticut, how the Senate might play out. Does anyone really trust him to do anything other than play to power? He'll hold the Dems hostage for two years in the Senate if it's 51-49.

Until the Republicans release the latest "Terrorism Alert"...

Don't you expect one by the end of the day tomorrow?

Slate mailers are not the most ennobling feature of California politics.

Or anywhere else.

Should scientists be protected from the "S" word?

I am amazed how many people in the United States are so intimidated by the word “sex” and are unwilling to discuss its consequences. My latest book, Sex in Space, tackles both the fun and serious sides of this currently neglected topic. It’s not just my opinion that the possibilities of sex in space need more attention. This is the recommendation of a 2005 report from the US National Academies of Science. Yet I have encountered all sorts of bizarre problems when bringing up the topic of sex in space. Apparently, some people just don’t understand that the book is intended to spark the public’s interest in space exploration, settlement, and tourism. To illustrate my case, here are some examples.

Sex in Space was sold at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) store for the first month after Apogee Books released the book. It was doing very well, so the store manager invited me to do a book signing. The trouble began as soon as a cheery book-signing announcement was emailed to all personnel at JPL. Unbeknownst to me, the store simply isn’t allowed to do book signings because JPL can’t be seen as endorsing a commercial product. The JPL store personnel simply made a mistake by booking my signing. However, what happened next is ridiculous. First, a liaison to the store e-mailed an announcement to all personnel—thousands of people at JPL—citing “ethical reasons” for the cancellation of the signing. This, of course, prompted many people to contact me to ask exactly what it was that I did wrong. The implication is that I did something unethical. I’ve done nothing wrong, which the JPLers involved have assured me of via several telephone conversations. A simple clarification sent to the same distribution list (all personnel) as the previous announcement would have fixed things. To date, no such email has been sent. Second, those involved ordered my Sex in Space books pulled from the store. Apparently the title “Sex in Space” is just too racy. Perhaps I should have titled my book, “The Possibilities of Human Reproduction Beyond Earth.” Oh, yes, the general public would have been so interested.

I tend to agree with this assessment from one of Josh Marshall's commenters:

OK, so JK has once again demonstrated how his lack of verbal discipline can cause serious problems in a campaign. It may be best for Democrats to just toss him overboard and weather this storm...(sorry)...but two very positive things can come from what was very probably (based on his history) a botched joke:

1) Senator Kerry has likely diminished his own chances for retaking the Democratic Presidential Nomination in '08, with this indelible reminder of how not-ready-for-prime-time he is.

Yep, the one thing I think he's really accomplished with this flap is to close the door on his 2008 chances, not that it was open very wide as it was.

There's the piece of direct mail that was designed to look like a sex-offender notification. There's the mailer accusing a candidate of accepting a bribe several years ago when he sat on the Harlandale school board. Then there's the Cook County Sheriff where one candidate is accusing his opponent's campaign of holding one of his volunteers at gun point. And, of course, there's Drew Brees telling his mother to quit using him in her campaign ads.

And there's still six days to go.