TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Archive | March, 2009

Chavez is Nervous

By on 16 March 2009

Losing your grip, Mr. President?

President Hugo Chávez ordered the navy on Sunday to seize seaports in states with major petroleum-exporting installations, part of his effort to assert greater control over infrastructure that had come under the dominion of political opponents in regional elections last year.

The move points to a spreading radicalization by Mr. Chávez, as he responds to a slowing economy and the gains made by his opponents. Economic growth slowed in the last quarter to its most sluggish pace in five years, 3.2 percent, weighed down by low oil prices.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }

In the News

By on 16 March 2009

A.I.G. is big, but this is bigger:

Government spending on most domestic programs is growing at its fastest pace in nearly 30 years, and a lot of worried Democrats are seeking ways to rewrite and reduce the size of President Barack Obama’s budget proposals.

[...] The Senate is likely to consider the budget the same week, and Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., is also voicing reservations about the package’s size. “When I look at this budget, I see the debt doubling again, and that gives me great concern,” he said. Obama’s budget projects that by 2019, debt held by the public will reach $15.3 trillion, roughly double the current level.

What did anyone expect? The headline about moderate Democrats being Obama’s problem in passing legislation is absurd. Anyone not disgusted isn’t reading the fine print; either that or they can’t add.

At least the so called Blue Dogs aren’t demanding pay-go for health care. That’s because it’s not possible if you want reform.

More on AIG:

The Fed chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, appearing on “60 Minutes” on CBS on Sunday night, said: “Of all the events and all of the things we’ve done in the last 18 months, the single one that makes me the angriest, that gives me the most angst, is the intervention with A.I.G.”

He went on: “Here was a company that made all kinds of unconscionable bets. Then, when those bets went wrong, they had a — we had a situation where the failure of that company would have brought down the financial system.”

In deciding to rescue A.I.G., the government worried that if it did not bail out the company, its collapse could lead to a cascading chain reaction of losses, jeopardizing the stability of the worldwide financial system. …

We’ve got a lot of very smart lawyers who need to immediately start working on recovering the bonuses paid out by A.I.G. There’s got to be a way.

Netanyahu and Lieberman together at last:

The deal with Mr. Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu Party, which placed third in February’s parliamentary election, was concluded Monday morning, according to spokeswoman Irena Etinger, and is a critical first step in Mr. Netanyahu’s bid to form a governing coalition.

An aide to Mr. Netanyahu confirmed that a deal had been reached between the two men.

Pakistan takes a breath as judges are reinstated.

WJC parts with another source of big bucks, Yucaipa Partnerships.

Iran and Russian, together on energy.

Simply grotesque.

Khatami out? Reports saying he will not run against Ahmadinejad.

Roger Cohen on Israel and Iran.

God’s speed, Mr. Silver.

…and El Salvador elects a leftie.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

Dick Cheney Ignores that 9/11 Happened on Their Watch

By on 15 March 2009

Mr. Cheney’s “stuff happens” economic glibness is getting a lot of attention today, but it’s not what caught my ear.

The man who brought us Ahmed Chalabi and Paul Wolfowitz, as well as “Curveball,” with Judy Miller’s greatest hits on WMD pushing the way at the NY Times, thinks Scooter Libby was left “hanging in the wind” by Bush, and that Scooter deserved a pardon. Having the pleasure of interviewing Mrs. Plame and Mr. Wilson, the drivel from Mr. Cheney today is especially reprehensible. The lack of respect Dick Cheney has for independent intelligence professionals ends with Valeria Plame (and her colleagues) being dispensable. Never mind that later in the interview he lauds the intelligence community, but only when they validate the political agenda of Bush-Cheney. That tells you how we got into Iraq from the man who helped concoct the invasion. Accurate intelligence was never solicited or even required, but just got in their way. So when Joe Wilson outed the White House for manufacturing their primary avenue of proof against Saddam, it was nothing to Cheney that a career C.I.A. officer was burned in the process to send a message. Oh! But the hit man sent to do the dirty deed is worthy of a pass.

From there it was an easy jump to torture, illegal wiretapping, Justice department tampering, etc., etc., which resulted in America’s image and trust across the globe damaged in a way that will require Obama’s entire administration, especially Secretary Clinton, to begin from scratch to try and tape back together what Bush and Cheney destroyed.

However, the interview clincher came when John King asked Mr. Cheney if President Obama “has made Americans less safe.” The reply was blunt and short: “I do.” It’s Mr. Cheney’s evaluation of President Obama’s adherence to the U.S. Constitution that is so startling even today, as he applauds the illegalities that had George W. Bush circumventing the rule of law during his terms in office.

I urge you to read “Tales From Torture’s Dark World,” by Mark Danner, which appears today in the Times. It will prove why President Obama’s commitment to distancing the U.S. from their national security policies is one of the most important things he can do if we are to bring terrorists who target Americans to justice. You simply cannot do it without adhering to the rules and tenets of American justice.

[...] From everything we know, many or all of these men deserve to be tried and punished — to be “brought to justice,” as President Bush vowed they would be. The fact that judges, military or civilian, throw out cases of prisoners who have been tortured — and have already done so at Guantánamo — means it is highly unlikely that they will be brought to justice anytime soon.

For the men who have committed great crimes, this seems to mark perhaps the most important and consequential sense in which “torture doesn’t work.” The use of torture deprives the society whose laws have been so egregiously violated of the possibility of rendering justice. Torture destroys justice. Torture in effect relinquishes this sacred right in exchange for speculative benefits whose value is, at the least, much disputed. [...]

Mr. Cheney scoffs at the notion that “the rule of law” is important in fighting radical Islamic jihad. It’s obvious that his idea of justice, and those of his former boss George W. Bush, is a 21st lynch mob mentality. I remain stunned that Congress never did anything about it and that President Obama seems sanguine to “look forward” without reconciling what happened in the past, at least so far. This sort of moral cowardice and squeamishness about the importance of law inforcement is how we got here in the first place.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

In Our World, and Cato Institute Event

By on 15 March 2009
Photobucket

Don’t look now, but Nawaz Sharif has been arrested in Pakistan.

It seems fitting that Pakistanis have begun to worry about extremism. While Osama’s popularity softens from around 50% to 34% thinking he will “do the right thing in world affairs:

Overwhelmingly, Pakistanis are worried about the impact of extremism on their country and people, says a new survey conducted by PEW (IRI) global research.

In 2008 72 per cent said they were concerned about Islamic extremism in their country, and over half — 54 per cent — said they were very concerned, the highest per centage among the eight countries on the survey where the question was asked (the others were Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Turkey). [...]

Meanwhile, “the long march” continues, as does the crackdown in Pakistan, with opposition party leaders and other activists going into hiding to keep from being arrested.

A story floated about Russia, Venezuela and Cuba have the wingnuts spinning Cuban missile crisis theories, because “if” and “could” equals action to jumpy Republicans. Memeorandum has the roundup.

Secretary Clinton to Mexico later this month.

Clinton’s talks in Mexico would cover the global financial crisis, trade and the war against drugs, as well as the explosion of narcotics-related violence, Duguid said.

[...] The State Department last month warned U.S. citizens of the recent surge in violence, particularly near the border, and advised traveling only on main roads during daylight, sticking to well-known tourist spots and avoiding areas frequented by prostitutes or drug dealers.

With due respect to the State Department, there should be an all out travel advisory regarding Mexico that should read like this: You’re thinking about traveling where? Are you nuts?

That brings me to the forum on Friday at the Cato Institute, Can the Pentagon be Fixed? One of the people on the panel was Col. Douglas Macgregor. One specific point Col. Macgregor (retired) made I’ve come to the conclusion is unassailable. The Caribbean basin will likely become an increasing challenge for the U.S., though Macgregor’s assessment is much more dire. He believes firmly that homeland security is more urgent than the troubles we are facing in the Af-Pak region, something that is sobering in the extreme. However, that’s looking forward, because for my money, right now nothing is more urgent than the situation in Pakistan.

Macgregor believes “high impact, low footprint” missions will be more important going forward, because the era of the U.S. being “indispensable is over.” Macgregor: We are not going to garrison the world. The world doesn’t want it and we can’t afford it. That’s as close to a quote as I can get, but you catch the drift.

But it was on the Mexico cartel question from the audience that Macgregor hit on something very rarely covered. It’s not the drug cartels, in his opinion, that are so dangerous. “The transportation structure is enormous,” but also deadly lethal to the United States. The people in charge of the transportation system only want to be paid and they don’t care what they’re transporting. The drug cartels have one product they’re interested in pushing and selling, so they’re focused on it. The transportation structure, vast and unlimited, is different. In Macgregor’s judgment, though he’s not alone, the Coast Guard is vastly underfunded and underequipped, but he also believes the U.S. Navy should have a larger presence in the Caribbean basin.

Oh, and by the way, Macgregor thinks we should be out of Iraq yesterday. Containment worked before and can again. I remember the first time I wrote something along those lines, pushing for this tried form of strategy to be utilized again. I was pilloried with mail. Let’s hope colonels have clout.

But one question from a reporter from Military.com was very interesting: If you had 2 minutes with Robert Gates what would you tell him?

Winslow Wheeler: Tear up the phony stuff like the Levin-McCain legislation. Do what you talked about in your Foreign Affairs article. (–Notes via tweets on Twitter.–)

Col. Macgregor: “Persistent warfare” needs to end; develop containment policies.

Danielle Brian: Stop saying top guy at Raytheon is the right guy. Learn to say no.

Tom Ricks: Ten percent (10%) of new brigadier generals should be people who have been blackballed.

Let me just say that Tom Ricks is priceless. (See my tweets during the forum for more.)

Oh, and as for the F-22, Winslow Wheeler was blunt: “It’s a dog.” Danielle Brian thinks it’s part of a larger test for President Obama. “This is going to be a real test of Obama’s administration” says Danielle Brian, which she’s said before, as a staunch critic of the F-22, but also someone pushing for real change at the Pentagon. If Obama yields to Congress it will be the same old stuff all over again. Taxpayers paying for a military force structure that used to protect us, but in its current form isn’t ready for the 21st century threats we face.

How about we at least test the weapons we purchase before we order dozens of them? …and while we’re at it, Congress needs to quit thinking and saying that defense budget cutting is not supporting the troops. The Pentagon’s bloated budget hides behind that lie.

Read full story · Comments { 36 }

President Obama’s Epiphany: ‘New Tone’ Airbrushes Bush Legacy Away

By on 14 March 2009

No connection all morning long… but at last, I’ve got connection. So, without further ado, what’s happening in your world this fine Saturday?

Reader and most astute contrarian, secularh, asks: Why is it that so many of the repug spokspeople are pudgy to fat, white, male etc….

Dave Letterman’s top 10 has an answer through a question posed. How can the GOP become hipper? Answer: #1 Fewer reactionary old white guys

Reader icemama’s dad has another reaction to those “reactionary old white guys” who run the GOP.

But the biggest news for me today is that President Obama has awakened from the naive position on which candidate Obama opined relentlessly. That is to say that on the question of “bipartisanship,” it’s now dawned on the new President that this “new tone” cuts off a critical avenue by which he can make his case. His campaign strategy has come back to bite him in the political posterior as president, because the mantra of “bipartisanship” and “new tone” comes at the expense of airbrushing of all things Bush-Cheney. Because if you don’t criticize the abject incompetence of the Bush administration people don’t understand what’s been handed off. If not done now, in the early days, pointing to Bush later will simply sound like an excuse.

But since Obama has touted Ronald Reagan at different points, mostly in a good way, once again his “bipartisan” “new tone” helped box him in.

The epiphany does seem to have come, however. Better late than never. But Obama’s airbrushing on the altar of “bipartisanship and a new tone in Washington” has cost him strong talking points early on, which was a terrible political calculation.

Always be attacking. Just do it with a smile. ..and to do this you must also make the case that Republicans don’t know how to utilize government to help citizens, because they don’t respect government’s role in people’s lives. The question is how strongly Obama believes in this Democratic tenet. The difference between Democrats and Republicans matters, especially when seen in the crisis of our economy, which was helped along by the Republican standard bearer Ronald Reagan’s deregulation mania back in the 1980′s. It’s long past time to drive this point home.

Read full story · Comments { 58 }

We’ve Had Worse Weeks

By on 13 March 2009

Photobucket

…and a message to China. Signed, Barack:

The U.S. Navy has dispatched a guided-missile destroyer to the South China Sea after Chinese ships allegedly harassed an American ship operating there last weekend, a Pentagon official said yesterday.

The USS Chung-Hoon, armed with torpedoes and missiles, is stationed in protection of the USNS Impeccable, an ocean surveillance ship. [...] The Hawaii-based destroyer, with a crew of about 275, was in the region for a regularly scheduled deployment and was diverted to the escort mission, the official said. “It’s not like we specially deployed another ship,” he said.

Consider this a Friday topic free for all. If you’ve got something on your mind, let it fly.

Cartoon by Paul Szep used by permission.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

Can the Pentagon be Fixed?

By on 13 March 2009
Photobucket

I’ll be working this afternoon outside my office, including attending a defense policy forum at the CATO Institute. The forum, “Can the Pentagon be fixed?”, begins at noon and will be streamed live.

The speakers are Winslow T. Wheeler, Director, Straus Military Reform Project at CDI; Col. Douglas Macgregor, U.S. Army (ret.); Advisor, Straus Military Reform Project; Danielle Brian, Executive Director, Project on Government Oversight; Thomas Ricks, Senior Fellow, Center for a New American Security; Special Military Correspondent, The Washington Post; Benjamin Friedman, Research Fellow in Defense and Homeland Security Studies, Cato Institute.

The U.S. defense budget is higher than at any point since the end of World War II, but the size of the combat formations of the Army, Navy and Air Force are the smallest since 1946. …

Obviously, the reality of the sentence above is a tall order for Obama and his administration. It’s another part of the Bush-Cheney inheritance.

I’ll tweet the event if connection permits, as I will be doing with all of the national security forums I’m now attending since landing in D.C.

UPDATE: Post on this event is here.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

CNBC’s Jim Cramer Serves Himself Up

By on 13 March 2009

If you want to know why Jim Cramer has survived so long, last night’s “Daily Show” interview with Jon Stewart is the reason. He knew Stewart had the goods on him (and his entire cable crew babbling for bucks class), so when he showed up he was contrite, concerned, but most of all quiet. Cramer knows the mood people are in. He’s also not stupid. So he served himself up as the sacrificial lamb so Stewart could do what he does best. Take out after a public target in the media that represents the ills of our time. It was the most compelling interview I’ve seen in a very long time.

The unanimous verdict is that “Stewart won.” Of course he did. Not only because Stewart is incredibly adept at this sort of “smackdown,” but also because Cramer, representing not only himself but the entire financial networking system that has crashed around everyone’s 401K, but also because on the day Bernie Madoff finally goes to jail the jig was up for everyone in the Wall Street class.

Howard Kurtz gets it wrong in his review. Not because he doesn’t chronicle what happened, but because he doesn’t think Cramer planned this all along. He saw the YouTube clips of himself plastered across the web and Comedy Central, for which there is little excuse. People were expecting the bombastic “Mad Money” Cramer, which would have been his undoing, but also kept this story alive longer. Obviously, Jim Cramer has smart friends or advisers and he has the self preservation instincts to listen to them.

As for Jon Stewart, he continues to play the hero who always delivers on expectations. I’ll be watching to see if “Mad Money” changes a bit over the next few weeks. That will tell the rest of this tale.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

Meghan McCain Scares Laura Ingraham

By on 12 March 2009

Laura Ingraham is a wimp. If she can’t take the heat of right-wing radio, maybe she should leave it to the boys. Because whenever you punch down from your power category you’re either insecure or insufficiently aware of how embarrassing you appear or maybe it’s both. After her infamous tirade castigating journalists for not going into Iraq’s danger zones, while she was standing in the safety of the Green Zone, she’s decided to hit a new low.

Ms. Ingraham went after John McCain’s daughter, Meghan McCain, using weight to get the job done. She might as well challenged Meghan to a pillow fight. Seriously, Laura, if this is the best you can do please call Rush. I don’t care for the wingnut blowhard, but at least he knows how to wage these messy party wars and what target is below his pedestal.

Ooh! Ooh! Hey Meghan, you’re plus-sized! Ooh! Ooh! Done, of course, in Ms. Ingraham’s best valley girl voice.

Via Think Progress (audio at the link):

MCCAIN (on MSNBC): And I think there’s an extreme on both parties and I hate extreme. I don’t understand. I have friends that are the most radically conservative and radically liberal people possibly ever and we all get along. We can find a middle ground.

INGRAHAM (mocking): Ok, I was really hoping that I was going to get that role in the Real World, but then I realized that, well, they don’t like plus-sized models. They only like the women who look a certain way. And on this 50th anniversary of Barbie, I really have something to say.

When you can’t attack an argument someone is making, attack the person. If it’s a woman, go for the scales. Trouble is, Meghan has made peace with the weight issue — as most women have to at some point — leaving Ms. Ingraham talking to herself. From Glamour:

5. She has a great body image

“I got to a point where I was like, I just don’t care. You think I’m fat? Fine. I don’t care how much you weigh.”

This one cuts across party lines, so all I can say is good for you, Meghan. A remark like Ingraham’s has the spray pattern of buck shot.

But these wacky Republicans and their conservative cannibalism. By 2010 you’ve got to wonder if any of them will be left standing.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

Taliban Continues Push on Kabul

By on 12 March 2009

All the talks about reconciliation with the Taliban aren’t coming in a vacuum, obviously. Consider this yet another Afghan security forces nightmare, long slog edition.

A top Taliban commander has told CNN his insurgents are poised and ready to attack Kabul and could strike virtually anywhere in the city. It would be tempting to put this down to Taliban propaganda except one of Kabul’s top cops is saying the same thing.

“We are working on a security strategy for the city and if we don’t get it right, they [the Taliban] can attack at any minute, at any hour, any time,” says Commander Mohammed Daud Amin, in charge of securing the Kabul district that includes the Presidential Palace and many government ministries.

Proof of the menacing threat came just last month when eight Taliban fighters, bristling with weapons and suicide vests, burst into three government buildings in the center of Kabul. [...]

There’s no way forward without dealing with the Taliban. Zalmay Rassoul, Hamid Karzai’s national security adviser, explains the Afghan side of reconciliation, via Spencer Ackerman:

Pressed by another reporter, Rassoul divided the insurgency ino three groups. “The hardcore leadership [with] very close links to al-Qaeda and other state actors” are “irreconcilable,” he said, and the Karzai government wouldn’t negotiate with them. That would mean the Quetta Shura of Mullah Omar, and presumably the leaders of affiliated insurgent groups like Jalaleddin Haqqani or Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Similarly, “the foot soldiers” were not people with whom to negotiate. “An economic alternative is the way forward for them,” Rassoul said. “These are people lured into terror… it’s our responsibility to lure them out.”

Negotiated reconciliation is the way forward for “the midlevel commanders,” he said. “Our purpose is to reconcile with them… Whether they give up violence up front now or late, it doesn’t matter… What matters is they renounce [violence] at some point.” Rassoul didn’t offer any particular guess on the size of this “midlevel” pool. But the day before, the Afghan foreign minister, Rangin Dadfar Spanta, said that reconciliation was a realistic prospect for a “remarkable” proportion of the insurgency.

Vice President Biden’s comments in Belgium give the foundation of whatever negotiations will happen with the Taliban, some of which was posited through a The New York Times piece recently.

The idea of what concessions would be made is well beyond the scope of my being able to answer, except to say that whatever is initiated will have to be ultimately initiated by the Afghan government, and will have to be such that it would not undermine a legitimate Afghan government. But I do think it is worth engaging and determining whether or not there are those who are willing to participate in a secure and stable Afghan state. – Vice President Biden

Understanding that the Taliban is not a monolithic group and there are also drug thugs and war lords beyond that are in the mix as well, not to mention Pakistani Taliban. As an aside, let’s not forget where the Taliban come from in the first place: Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy misadventure (and a lot of Saudi cash).

Then there is the reality of the Afghan women, whose plight must be considered during the time the “reconciliation” is being worked out. Making the women a part of any negotiation, not an afterthought that splashes across CNN, followed by horror stories of torture via some special report hosted by Christiane Amanpour.

Just keep repeating to yourself, our presence in Afghanistan isn’t about democracy, ala Bush-Cheney. It’s about keeping Afghanistan from becoming a failed state. Because regardless of the fact that Pakistan is the real challenge, no one has figured out or been able to explain how we keep Pakistan from going off a cliff (it’s presently teterring) if Afghanistan fails.

Read full story · Comments { 10 }

Madoff: ‘I am deeply sorry and ashamed’

By on 12 March 2009

He didn’t buy any stocks.

He didn’t buy any securities.

It was nothing but a ponzi scheme. The largest fraud in U.S. history. He’s now plead guilty to 11 felony counts, including money laundering. When he gets sentenced, he could end up in a maximum security prison. He’s now “deeply sorry and ashamed”.

“I am actually grateful for this opportunity to publicly comment about my crimes, for which I am deeply sorry and ashamed,” he said.

“As the years went by, I realized my risk, and this day would inevitably come. I cannot adequately express how sorry I am for my crimes.”

What about the rest of the Madoffs, specifically, his sons? Mrs. Madoff is a subject of further investigation. To be continued.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Engaging the Muslim World

By on 12 March 2009
Photobucket

Nice title for Juan Cole’s new book. It’s something we’ve done a horrible job doing since 9/11. But the timeliness takes on new importance when looking through the prism of the Freeman withdrawal for NIC. Cole’s assessment on President Obama is stark, the review devastating:

Israeli Apartheid will continue unabated under Obama. – Juan Cole

Meanwhile, the Washington Post editorial today embarrasses the paper and everyone who trusts it, labeling Chas Freeman’s rhetoric as “crackpot tirades.” But the worst aspect of the editorial is that they naively believe that the campaign against Freeman manifested out of thin air. Labeling what happened to Mr. Freeman as a “reasonable” approach to asking if Freeman was right for the job is down right ludicrous.

The blundering silence of the Obama administration during the Steve Rosen and friends assault (Rosen is now suing AIPAC for defamation – oh, the irony), has hurt President Obama, of that there can be no doubt. How much is not yet known, though anyone can sympathize with Juan’s pessimism.

Scott Horton interviews Juan about his new book, asking him six questions. Here’s one small portion regarding Pakistan, which is always on my radar, especially these days when the major parties look like they’re about to wage political civil war:

As for Pakistan, the demand that the government exert control over the Federally Administered Tribal Areas is frankly daft. I’ve been through that territory. You might as well demand that we exert control over all the rattlesnakes in New Mexico. And the conviction that the security of the U.S. mainland depends on the urban Pakistani government regimenting those rural clansmen makes no sense to me. Rugged areas where the government is weak are obviously possible havens for terrorists, but they also typically lack the infrastructure to enable major operations to be conducted directly from such territories. We’d be better off working with Pakistan to put in better airport security and computer tracking of people flying in and out. The Pakistani military has been fighting hard in Bajaur, one of the tribal agencies, against the Pakistani Taliban since August. They have had some success, but displaced 300,000 Pashtuns from their homes. That is going to settle the Pashtuns down?

Then there is Iran, which includes Israel and the entire Middle East mess, the biggest area of possible breakthrough for which President Obama could be known. That is if the Obama administration doesn’t kowtow to the Israel Lobby. Right now there is no indication they have the courage to stand up to them, but since this is urgent and Obama understands this, as does Clinton, I remain in the camp that believes the Administration will find a way through, though I fully admit this is out of necessity of the situation, not any evidence coming from the Administration.

The U.S. relationship with Iran is the most perilous area of U.S. foreign policy going forward. But there are actually only two bilateral issues between Washington and Tehran that put that relationship on the front burner. They comprise, first, Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program, which the U.S. fears could veer toward dual use and result in a nuclear weapon. Second, Iran’s rejectionist stance toward U.S. ally Israel, and its support for the Lebanese Hezbollah and, allegedly, for Hamas in Gaza, are highly objectionable to the United States.

[...] As for the Iranian involvement in the Levant, it is the Israelis who give the ayatollahs that opening and they could easily close it off. If they just gave back the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for a Camp David-style peace treaty with Damascus, and gave back the Shebaa Farms occupied territory and made peace with Lebanon, they would deny Hezbollah its pretext for remaining armed and remove a key Hezbollah patron, Syria, from the equation. If they stopped blockading and half-starving the Gazans, ceased colonizing the West Bank and granted the Palestinians a state, Sunni, Christian, and secular Palestinians would not want or need Iranian money and arms. …

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Michael Steele, Keep Talking

By on 11 March 2009

The gift that keeps on giving… and giving. From the interview in GQ:

LISA DEPAULO: Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?

MICHAEL STEELE: Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.

Somehow, I just don’t think this is going to go over very well.

Read full story · Comments { 19 }

DNI Blair: Iran Undecided on Nuclear Weapons

By on 11 March 2009

The disagreements inside the Obama administration on Iran’s building nuclear capabilities were on display recently when Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mullen said yes, but Secretary Gates said no. Dennis Blair joins in on the side of Gates, with Israel coming to a different assessment, foreshadowing a possible foreign policy fork in the road:

Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair said that Iran has not decided to pursue the production of weapons-grade uranium and the parallel ability to load it onto a ballistic missile.

“The overall situation — and the intelligence community agrees on this — [is] that Iran has not decided to press forward . . . to have a nuclear weapon on top of a ballistic missile,” Blair told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Our current estimate is that the minimum time at which Iran could technically produce the amount of highly enriched uranium for a single weapon is 2010 to 2015.”

[...] Blair said Israel was working from the same facts but had drawn a different interpretation of their meaning.

“The Israelis are far more concerned about it, and they take more of a worst-case approach to these things from their point of view,” he said.

Chas Freeman’s appointment is wound around this issue, someone who would have likely taken the side of Gates and Blair, meaning that Obama’s PDB would have leaned in on the assessment that Iran is years off from serious nuclear capabilities (meaning weaponization as well), which is one of the reasons the Israel Lobby crew targeted Freeman so relentlessly.

M.J. Rosenberg, who was at the Middle East forum I covered last week, weighs in today on the whole sorry mess. We should only hope his conclusion manifests.

What does it all mean? That is hard to say although an insider I spoke to last night said: “This was a real pyrrhhic victory. One, the administration is pissed off. And, two, Obama is going to be more determined than ever to take a strong stand on settlements, Gaza relief, and negotiations. They shot their wad on Freeman. They will not think that was so smart a few months from now.”

As we go forward the drama to watch is whether Dennis Blair will be the next target, because eventually it will be about Obama’s diplomatic moves toward Iran, with Israel ready to take out anyone who disagrees or marginalizes the Iran threat. Having people to stand up to the tendency for blind bubble mentality means Blair will need some help. Without contrary viewpoints inside the Obama administration there are all sorts of predictable pitfalls to imagine.

With Freeman out Secretary Clinton’s role is likely to enlarge, but we’ll have to see.

Walter Pincus paraphrases a leading senator on the subject: Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) later praised the way Blair defended Freeman, saying the danger of centralized intelligence was the lack of divergent opinion, as was seen in the run-up to the Iraq war.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

Senator Vitter Freaks Out at Dulles

By on 11 March 2009
Photobucket

We already know the former “D.C. Madam” Senator has sloppy control issues, otherwise why would he have a diaper fetish? Never mind, don’t answer that, just couldn’t resist. But at a time when laughs are scarce, we do appreciate the diaper fetish, right-wing Senator Vitter for providing the freak out show today. Via Roll Call:

Vitter, our spy said, gave the airline worker an earful, employing the timeworn “do-you-know-who-I-am” tirade that apparently grew quite heated.

That led to some back and forth, and the worker announced to the irritable Vitter that he was going to summon security.

Vitter, according to the witness, remained defiant, yelling that the employee could call the police if he wanted to and their supervisors, who, presumably, might be more impressed with his Senator’s pin.

But after talking a huffy big game, Vitter apparently thought better of pushing the confrontation any further. When the gate attendant left to find a security guard, Vitter turned tail and simply fled the scene. [...]

I guess one of the “very serious sins” Mr. Vitter admitted to when he got caught using hookers does not include arrogant tirades delivered at Dulles. Maybe the Senator should visit church on Sunday to remind himself that we are all equal according to God. I guess he missed that lesson, as well as the one on fidelity.

Just another do as I say, not as I do politician.

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Closing Gitmo, New Envoy Appointed

By on 11 March 2009

Obama has a Gitmo envoy. A former Bush 43 diplomat, Daniel Fried has a thankless job with overarching challenges.

Milt Bearden was on C-SPAN this morning and was asked a question about Gitmo and released prisoners, the latest detainee making news this week for his new roll in raising hell in southern Afghanistan

Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, formerly Guantanamo prisoner No. 008, was among 13 Afghan prisoners released to the Afghan government in December 2007.

He is now known as Mullah Abdullah Zakir, a nom de guerre that Pentagon and intelligence officials say is used by a Taliban leader who is in charge of operations against U.S. and Afghan forces in southern Afghanistan.

Bearden’s response was predictable. What do you expect considering the conditions and the treatment of detainess at Guantanamo.

Yet another inheritance issue from Bush-Cheney.

Read full story · Comments { 1 }

Tim Geithner on Charlie Rose

By on 11 March 2009

Transcript is available from Greg Mitchell over at Editor & Publisher. One short excerpt:

[CR} Will capitalism be different?

[TG] I think capitalism will be different, and the financial system will be dramatically different. It’s already dramatically different. Again, if you look at the scale of adjustment and restructuring in the financial system, it’s already happened. It’s profound in scope already. So if you just look at the system today relative to what it was through three years ago in terms of the institutions that existed then, and their basic shape has changed dramatically. And there’s going to be more changes ahead. But I think it will emerge stronger. This will clean out a lot of the excesses and bad practices, and those that don’t get cleaned out just by experience and knowledge now, better regulation oversight, better rules to the game, enforced more cleanly, we’ll fix.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Chas Freeman Strikes Back on the Way Out

By on 11 March 2009

…and hits the Israel Lobby squarely between the eyes. Via Laura Rozen:

[...] The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors. …

I am thoroughly disgusted with Sen. Charles Schumer, whose candor in taking credit for helping drive Freeman out is nothing to brag about. That he doesn’t know it isn’t surprising, though Freeman is denying Schumer played a role.

The cowardice of the Obama administration to allow this appointment to fall in on itself bodes ill for our work in the Middle East. The unmitigated collapse and absence of any push back against the people more worried about other interests than equilibrium is why U.S. Middle East policy is in such a muddle and is likely to stay that way.

One bright spot were the strong words coming from DNI Dennis Blair on behalf of Chas Freeman. I see that Ackerman feels the same way. Just maybe he will be the new line in the sand, but considering he’s the only speaking out I’m wondering what will unfold.

What was revealed is that the Lobby to which Freeman refers didn’t want to speak on the record, letting the likes of Steve Rosen and the Weekly Standard’s Michael Golbfarb do their dirty work for them. Ben Smith reports:

But Jewish and pro-Israel organizations largely decided not to make the fight against Freeman a public crusade, though they were the first, and fiercest, Freeman opponents and made their views known privately.

“The vast majority of the Jewish community [were] very careful not to make this a Jewish community issue,” said a top official at one major pro-Israel organization.

David Rothkopf provides the capper:

So Chas Freeman withdrew his nomination to be Chairman of the National Intelligence Council. The people who fed the debate that led to his withdrawal have cost the United States intelligence and policy communities the benefit of a truly unique mind and set of perspectives. They have also contributed to what can only be characterized as a leadership crisis in the U.S. government. [...]

This whole spectacle unfolded into a revolting display of weakness from the White House.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Swiftboating Works

By on 10 March 2009

–updated–

Dennis Blair has accepted “with regret” the request from Chas Freeman that his name be withdrawn from consideration as Obama’s top intel post:

Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair announced today that Ambassador Charles W. Freeman Jr. has requested that his selection to be Chairman of the National Intelligence Council not proceed. Director Blair accepted Ambassador Freeman’s decision with regret.

Swiftboating works. Point to the AIPAC crowd. Obama loses.

“If they withdraw his appointment prior to the conclusion of [Freeman’s formal vetting] that would be seen as abject caving in on people who are extreme partisans of Israel,” Nicholas Veliotes, a former Ambassador to Egypt, and one of 17 former diplomats who signed a letters supporting Freeman, said Tuesday before the withdrawal was announced. – Politico

Read full story · Comments { 16 }

Anti Middle Class Market Games By Citigroup

By on 10 March 2009

–updated–

The Employee Free Choice Act war began today. Citigroup didn’t waste one moment getting involved, in the hopes that the Employee Free Choice Act will be the victim, right after the American middle class, as they downgraded Wal-Mart from buy to hold today. All of this based on “unionization” fears. Shorter Citigroup: manipulate the market using unions as the scapegoat. Even shorter Citigroup: screw the middle class.

Citigroup Inc. lowered its rating on Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to hold from buy on Tuesday, citing concern that legislation intended to make it easier for employees to unionize would raise the retail giant’s labor costs and hurt its competitiveness. [...]

The proposed Employee Free Choice Act, a top priority for unions this year, could be introduced to the House as early as Tuesday by Rep. George Miller, D.- Calif., the analyst said. Wal-Mart would be the “primary target” if any such bill were to be passed, especially because the U.S. food retail industry has historically been unionized with the exception of Wal-Mart, the largest food retailer, she said. …

First, EFCA makes it easier for employees to form unions.

Republicans don’t want unions and neither do corporations.

“Secret ballots” make it easier for employers to manipulate the process by revealing these “secret ballots” as they decide, without sunrise and transparency.

Finally and most importantly, EFCA DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE “SECRET BALLOT,” but it would be up to the workers to decide. EFCA offers more choices while “secret ballots” (without EFCA) offer only one. (Sorry to scream, but too many Republicans are lying about this issue.)

So why are some Democrats caving? Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s reasoning:

At least six Senators who have voted to move forward with the so-called card-check proposal, including one Republican, now say they are opposed or not sure — an indication that Senate Democratic leaders are short of the 60 votes they need for approval.

The legislation is divisive and distracting, said Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln in an interview Monday. The Democratic lawmaker, who was previously seen as a supporter, said the Senate should focus on creating jobs and improving the U.S. economy. “I have 90,000 Arkansans who need a job, that’s my No. 1 priority,” she said. The legislation, she said, would be “divisive and we don’t need that right now. We need to focus on the things that are more important.” [...]

Aw, heck, Blanche, we wouldn’t want to be “divisive.” It’s just middle class wages and benefits we’re fighting to bolster. After all, not everyone can afford to work and feed their family on minimum wage. I wonder if she’s tried that one lately. Let’s take away Sen. Lincoln’s health care, plus lower her wages to see how she likes it.

UPDATE: George Stephanopoulos is reporting that a “leadership source” has said that Sen. Reid has decided not to schedule a floor vote on EFCA until summer.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }