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.

Tag Archives | Afghanistan

The Plot Thickens in Huffington Post Lawsuit

“Significant new evidence has come to light that demonstrates Arianna Huffington was passing along to third parties Boyce’s and Daou’s confidential ideas and plans about The Huffington Post without Boyce’s and Daou’s knowledge or consent, then using that information with those third parties to launch the website. The new evidence also shows defendants Huffington and Lerer actively schemed to conceal Boyce’s and Daou’s central role in The Huffington Post’s creation.” – Rodney S. Margol, attorney for plaintiffs

FORBES REPORTS new evidence, found through discovery, that sounds troublesome for Arianna Huffington, in the lawsuit brought by Peter Daou and James Boyce.

In discovery, however, the plaintiffs obtained the minutes of a meeting held March 29, 2005, at which Huffington, Lerer, Sekoff and Breitbart “discussed possible responses to press inquiries on the subject of when and how the idea for the website originated.” According to the minutes, Sekoff and Breitbart suggested that Huffington and Lerer deflect questions about how they came together by saying it “doesn’t matter.”

The plaintiffs say the exchanges detailed in the minutes “reflect the deliberate creation of a false and fraudulent ‘narrative’ to explain the origin of the idea for The Huffington Post.”

An earlier class action lawsuit spearheaded by Jonathan Tasini was dismissed. Tasini alleged “implied promise” of compensation by HuffPost. I’m sorry, but I just can’t imagine this at all.

Full disclosure, both Peter Daou and James Boyce are colleagues. I’ve seen them over multiple years in tremendously stressful and difficult political situations, so I have an idea of the mettle of both of these men.

I started writing on Huffington Post in 2006, but stopped around the time AOL purchased HuffPost, as did many of their original writers I knew. During the time I was fortunate to be a part of the crew regularly featured is when HuffPost was made and became what it once was, though today it’s not the same beast.

Arianna Huffington deserves credit for the coverage by HuffPost on Afghanistan, a subject on which they have been relentless. David Wood’s military coverage received a Pulitzer Prize in April, the first for the Huffington Post.

Arianna Huffington is covered in my book, because of her place in new media and specifically for the coverage HuffPost gave Obama versus Hillary in 2008.

The Forbes report and the facts at issue in it have got to be making some people just a little antsy. AOL, for one.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

German Voters Reject Conservative Austerity, But Will America?

WILL AMERICANS embrace austerity through Mitt Romney’s candidacy and his advocacy for Paul Ryan’s budget, just as Europe is turning away from austerity after having learned it doesn’t work?

It’s the 2012 $64,000 question.

Merkel’s loss comes in the wake of socialist and anti-austerity candidate François Hollande’s victory in France, with the American presidential election being played out across the pond on similar turf.

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives suffered a crushing defeat on Sunday in an election in Germany’s most populous state, a result which could embolden the left opposition to step up its criticism of her European austerity policies.Reuters

Part B of the question is whether voters will buy that Pres. Obama doesn’t have his own austerity lane.

It’s seen through his continued focus on debt instead of raising revenue, “Simpson-Bowles” and the ludicrous notion that entitlements are the problem, when it begins with revenue and the Pentagon, while Pres. Obama uses the fake bogie man of entitlement “reform” to suck up to conservative independents, while handing out goodies to his base as pacifiers. Considering progressives and other Democrats act like children when it comes to progressive economics, as well as individual rights, it’s what they deserve.

Obama’s triangulating populist hypocrisy that’s being trotted out for his reelection is obviously going to make partisans feel warm and cuddly in the “lesser of two evils” electoral sweepstakes, but it doesn’t stand up to the reality that Obama’s in the business of protecting the American Wall Street game, which is in direct conflict with strengthening the middle class.

It’s seen through Larry Summers and Tim Geithner, not to mention passing up Elizabeth Warren for the CFPB, but also through Jamie Dimon and the JPMorgan Chase loss of $6 billion, which proves nothing has really changed during Pres. Obama’s tenure.

Also gnawing should be Obama’s back room deals with private insurance and Big Pharma, as well as the Stupak Amendment that codified the Hyde Amendment into ACA, taking it out of the yearly HHS budgetary process, not to mention Obama choosing conservatism over science on Plan B. The first time a sitting Democratic president ignored the F.D.A. and facts, preferring emotional fiction.

Contraceptive coverage was a huge move, as was signing the Ledbetter Act, though that’s something any Democrat would have done, coupled with DADT, and all deserve to be lauded, which I have, without which there would be no liberal case to even consider Pres. Obama.

Turning to Andrew Sullivan’s most fawning rhetorical fellate of Pres. Obama since his “face” scribblings, as much as I applaud Pres. Obama evolving on marriage equality, policy hasn’t changed one whit. The credit deserves to be shared with the much more heart felt, honest and damned with faint praise candor of V.P. Joe Biden, who on “Meet the Press” had an epiphany in plain sight, which was the most refreshing instant of truth in American politics, which of course is considered a gaffe due to its obvious transparency, not the least of it because it was said by a devout, practicing Catholic in a statement that defied the Pope.

When we turn to foreign policy, between Obama’s convenient Libya involvement, juxtaposed against the inconvenience of Syrian war crimes, with our Afghanistan financial investment continuing until 2024, a positively ludicrous economic commitment that Americans should be protesting in the streets, it’s hard to see any difference between right and left, which is all about ease not purpose, and why the world game of risk never changes. We place our bets on outdated military outposts, drone strikes and assassinations instead of economic weaponry that’s clearly in the American arsenal to use. Our dirty little secret being our leaders, both political and financial, evidently don’t know how to employ the military if they bring them home, because they don’t have the brains to utilize investment and education instead of bombs, at home and around the world.

Of course, if you think Obama’s bad, Romney would embrace a similar austerity plan that’s brought the euro-zone to the brink, and make much of what is even worse, especially where women’s individual freedoms are concerned. This sets the picture on the paucity of choices facing American voters, with which they continue to be satisfied because Americans never threaten to take the Democratic and Republican purchase of the presidency on directly.

Amid this climate team Obama has released a campaign video (seen above, with the longer version below) to go at Mitt Romney on his tenure at Bain, which today seems like synchronicity. Job creation lays at the feet of both candidates, with American economic competitiveness in the world at issue. The Obama ad is yet another indictment of Romney’s choices that puts shareholders above the middle class; the very people who are the economic engine of this country. Pres. Obama’s efforts toward the American car industry versus the Romney bankruptcy model would be a worthy topic for any debate. It would pit the top 2012 issue, economics, and Obama’s restructuring against what Romney said occurred, which he believes was actually a restructured bankruptcy for the industry. I’m just wondering if there’s a moderator out there who could navigate it.

If the middle class can’t spend our economy won’t move. It all revolves around a living wage, not just shareholder value. Two jobs to cover the bills isn’t the answer and neither is bailing on universal health care, something both parties have done.

The other issue is that concerning Wall Street, neither Pres. Obama or Mitt Romney are the men to alter the reality, because both bring their own brand of austerity economics to the presidency, coupled with a cozy relationship with the very people who have made our economic pain terminal.

With Congress a feckless hallow unable to challenge the Executive branch on anything, because instead of an equal branch they’ve become a propaganda organ, America is poised to continue moving slowly in place when urgency, action and foundational change are what’s required.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

White House: “We can’t do anything about Drudge”

**updated**

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S SECRET TRIP TO AFGHANISTAN was kept under wraps by responsible news media and members of the White House Press Corp.

The New York Post and Drudge could have cared less, with Drudge swapping links to keep the leak alive, while putting Pres. Obama’s life in danger.
Everyone has their priorities.

Zeke Miller of Buzzfeed has the incredible tick-tock and the story.

Per Jay Carney, via the pool report, after Obama’s speech to the troops, he visited a hospital on Bagram Airbase, gave out 10 purple hearts, as well as addressed the troops on the military radio system, thanking them for their service and what they continue to do.

As for Pres. Obama’s remarks and the strategic agreement, the U.S. will be in Afghanistan for many years to come, through 2024 in a “support role.”

There are so many questions left to answer it’s unfathomable where to start.

As Prepared for Delivery

Good evening from Bagram Air Base. This outpost is more than seven thousand miles from home, but for over a decade it has been close to our hearts. Because here, in Afghanistan, more than half a million of our sons and daughters have sacrificed to protect our country.

Today, I signed an historic agreement between the United States and Afghanistan that defines a new kind of relationship between our countries – a future in which Afghans are responsible for the security of their nation, and we build an equal partnership between two sovereign states; a future in which the war ends, and a new chapter begins.

Tonight, I’d like to speak to you about this transition. But first, let us remember why we came here. It was here, in Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden established a safe-haven for his terrorist organization. It was here, in Afghanistan, where al Qaeda brought new recruits, trained them, and plotted acts of terror. It was here, from within these borders, that al Qaeda launched the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 innocent men, women and children.

And so, ten years ago, the United States and our allies went to war to make sure that al Qaeda could never again use this country to launch attacks against us. Despite initial success, for a number of reasons, this war has taken longer than most anticipated. In 2002, bin Laden and his lieutenants escaped across the border and established safe-havens in Pakistan. America spent nearly eight years fighting a different war in Iraq. And al Qaeda’s extremist allies within the Taliban have waged a brutal insurgency.

But over the last three years, the tide has turned. We broke the Taliban’s momentum. We’ve built strong Afghan Security Forces. We devastated al Qaeda’s leadership, taking out over 20 of their top 30 leaders. And one year ago, from a base here in Afghanistan, our troops launched the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. The goal that I set – to defeat al Qaeda, and deny it a chance to rebuild – is within reach.

Still, there will be difficult days ahead. The enormous sacrifices of our men and women are not over. But tonight, I’d like to tell you how we will complete our mission and end the war in Afghanistan.

First, we have begun a transition to Afghan responsibility for security. Already, nearly half the Afghan people live in places where Afghan Security Forces are moving into the lead. This month, at a NATO Summit in Chicago, our coalition will set a goal for Afghan forces to be in the lead for combat operations across the country next year. International troops will continue to train, advise and assist the Afghans, and fight alongside them when needed. But we will shift into a support role as Afghans step forward.

As we do, our troops will be coming home. Last year, we removed 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more of our troops coming home. And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.

Second, we are training Afghan Security Forces to get the job done. Those forces have surged, and will peak at 352,000 this year. The Afghans will sustain that level for three years, and then reduce the size of their military. And in Chicago, we will endorse a proposal to support a strong and sustainable long-term Afghan force.

Third, we are building an enduring partnership. The agreement we signed today sends a clear message to the Afghan people: as you stand up, you will not stand alone. It establishes the basis of our cooperation over the next decade, including shared commitments to combat terrorism and strengthen democratic institutions. It supports Afghan efforts to advance development and dignity for their people. And it includes Afghan commitments to transparency and accountability, and to protect the human rights of all Afghans – men and women, boys and girls.

Within this framework, we will work with the Afghans to determine what support they need to accomplish two narrow security missions beyond 2014: counter-terrorism and continued training. But we will not build permanent bases in this country, nor will we be patrolling its cities and mountains. That will be the job of the Afghan people.

Fourth, we are pursuing a negotiated peace. In coordination with the Afghan government, my Administration has been in direct discussions with the Taliban. We have made it clear that they can be a part of this future if they break with al Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by Afghan laws. Many members of the Taliban – from foot soldiers to leaders – have indicated an interest in reconciliation. A path to peace is now set before them. Those who refuse to walk it will face strong Afghan Security Forces, backed by the United States and our allies.

Fifth, we are building a global consensus to support peace and stability in South Asia. In Chicago, the international community will express support for this plan, and for Afghanistan’s future. I have made it clear to Afghanistan’s neighbor – Pakistan – that it can and should be an equal partner in this process in a way that respects Pakistan’s sovereignty, interests, and democratic institutions. In pursuit of a durable peace, America has no designs beyond an end to al Qaeda safe-havens, and respect for Afghan sovereignty.

As we move forward, some people will ask why we need a firm timeline. The answer is clear: our goal is not to build a country in America’s image, or to eradicate every vestige of the Taliban. These objectives would require many more years, many more dollars, and many more American lives. Our goal is to destroy al Qaeda, and we are on a path to do exactly that. Afghans want to fully assert their sovereignty and build a lasting peace. That requires a clear timeline to wind down the war.

Others will ask why we don’t leave immediately. That answer is also clear: we must give Afghanistan the opportunity to stabilize. Otherwise, our gains could be lost, and al Qaeda could establish itself once more. And as Commander-in-Chief, I refuse to let that happen.

I recognize that many Americans are tired of war. As President, nothing is more wrenching than signing a letter to a family of the fallen, or looking in the eyes of a child who will grow up without a mother or father. I will not keep Americans in harm’s way a single day longer than is absolutely required for our national security. But we must finish the job we started in Afghanistan, and end this war responsibly.

My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under the dark cloud of war. Yet here, in the pre-dawn darkness of Afghanistan, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of our troops in harm’s way has been cut in half, and more will be coming home soon. We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al Qaeda.

This future is only within reach because of our men and women in uniform. Time and again, they have answered the call to serve in distant and dangerous places. In an age when so many institutions have come up short, these Americans stood tall. They met their responsibilities to one another, and the flag they serve under. I just met with some of them, and told them that as Commander-in-Chief, I could not be prouder. In their faces, we see what is best in ourselves and our country.

Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, coast guardsmen and civilians in Afghanistan have done their duty. Now, we must summon that same sense of common purpose. We must give our veterans and military families the support they deserve, and the opportunities they have earned. And we must redouble our efforts to build a nation worthy of their sacrifice.

As we emerge from a decade of conflict abroad and economic crisis at home, it is time to renew America. An America where our children live free from fear, and have the skills to claim their dreams. A united America of grit and resilience, where sunlight glistens off soaring new towers in downtown Manhattan, and we build our future as one people, as one nation.

Here, in Afghanistan, Americans answered the call to defend their fellow citizens and uphold human dignity. Today, we recall the fallen, and those who suffer wounds seen and unseen. But through dark days we have drawn strength from their example, and the ideals that have guided our nation and lit the world: a belief that all people are created equal, and deserve the freedom to determine their destiny.

That is the light that guides us still. This time of war began in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end. With faith in each other and our eyes fixed on the future, let us finish the work at hand, and forge a just and lasting peace. May God bless our troops. And may God bless the United States of America.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

The Sex Issue: FP’s Phenomenal Coverage of Women & the Uproar It’s Causing

Everybody should be talking about this. The future of the Middle East turns on it, as does the entire globe.

If you don’t know anything about foreign policy, this is your primer. It sets the 21st century stage & will give you an idea of the real challenges ahead and how the U.S. must continue to expand the opportunities of women if we’re ever going to reverse poverty, and begin to tackle the scurge of war.

Melanne Verveer, Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues under Secy. Clinton, the first role of its kind, has a classic piece. Seriously, Guys: Why Women Are a Foreign Policy Issue,” reads like Secy. Clinton’s platform for U.S. diplomacy, which is part of the Hillary Effect, in a lecture that the “guys” need.

The most pressing global problems simply won’t be solved without the participation of women. Seriously, guys.

[...] This is not just about the economy, though; it’s also about global security. In the 1990s, nearly half of all peace agreements failed within the first five years, according to the Human Security Report Project. These deals are generally struck by a small number of male military and political leaders shielded from war’s impact on daily life. Women, meanwhile, endure much of the residual violence and poverty caused by armed conflicts, and they bear much of the burden of rebuilding families and communities. They are often excluded, however, from both the negotiating table and the governments charged with sustaining peace. Less than 8 percent of the hundreds of peace treaties signed in the last 20 years were negotiated by delegations that included women, and according to the World Economic Forum, women hold less than 20 percent of all national decision-making positions.

One note about Verveer and trying to cover her work… A couple of years ago, in the middle of writing my book, I made a herculean effort to make a trip with Ambassador Verveer on one of her excursions abroad. Contacting the State Dept. innumerable times, never getting a definitive time for a trip, while running into a hamster wheel of assistants and non-ending non-answers, however politely they were pushing me off, I’d had enough. They won. I gave up. I’m fairly certain that if I wrote for the New York Times or even Foreign Policy this would not have happened. I was willing to travel on my own nickel, but still couldn’t get it booked. And it’s not like certain people don’t know who I am over at the State Dept.

Mona Eltahawy reminds America that the real war on women is in the Middle East.

Eltahawy’s writing for Foreign Policy’s “The Sex Issue” spectacular is causing a typing explosion on Twitter. From Shadi Hamid this morning, who is from Brookings:

How does @monaeltahawy explain the fact that the majority of Egyptian women voted for parties that don’t believe in gender equality?

I cover women around the world in my book in the chapter titled “Is Freedom Just for Women?” It’s a subject that more Americans need to engage. The freedom of women in countries around the world directly impacts U.S. aid and involvement. It’s important to note that one of the issues most important, access to reproductive services, is something the Republican party would strip from the budget, because of their phobia of contraception and simple family planning, which is so desperately needed around the world.

From Mona’s piece titled “Why Do They Hate Us?”

Foreign Policy's Sex Issue Centerfold

But let’s put aside what the United States does or doesn’t do to women. Name me an Arab country, and I’ll recite a litany of abuses fueled by a toxic mix of culture and religion that few seem willing or able to disentangle lest they blaspheme or offend. When more than 90 percent of ever-married women in Egypt — including my mother and all but one of her six sisters — have had their genitals cut in the name of modesty, then surely we must all blaspheme. When Egyptian women are subjected to humiliating “virginity tests” merely for speaking out, it’s no time for silence. When an article in the Egyptian criminal code says that if a woman has been beaten by her husband “with good intentions” no punitive damages can be obtained, then to hell with political correctness. And what, pray tell, are “good intentions”? They are legally deemed to include any beating that is “not severe” or “directed at the face.” What all this means is that when it comes to the status of women in the Middle East, it’s not better than you think. It’s much, much worse. Even after these “revolutions,” all is more or less considered well with the world as long as women are covered up, anchored to the home, denied the simple mobility of getting into their own cars, forced to get permission from men to travel, and unable to marry without a male guardian’s blessing — or divorce either.

Not a single Arab country ranks in the top 100 in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report, putting the region as a whole solidly at the planet’s rock bottom.

What a sumptuous dish Foreign Policy has laid out on this one.

The Aytollah Under the Bedsheets, By Karim Sadjadpour

The Startling Plight of China’s Leftover Ladies, By Christina Larson

The 25 Most Powerful Women You’ve Never Heard Of

The Bedroom State, By Joshua E. Keating (Coming if Republicans have their way.)

Fill in the Blanks, The Sex Edition

…and much more.

There's no shortage of data showing that men rule the political world: Women make up just 20 percent of the world's parliaments and constitute about 17 percent of cabinet positions. Why aren't there more women leaders, and is there any hope of change? We asked top female leaders around the world to tell us about the worst cases of sexism in politics, the biggest obstacles for aspiring female politicians, and the best ways to bring more women to the negotiating table. Presidents and vice presidents, cabinet secretaries and members of Congress answered our call -- and here's what they told us.



This column has been updated.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }

As the World Turns: Susan G. Komen Uzbekistan Edition

For whatever reason, Susan G. Komen for the Cure failed to fully vet its partner in Uzbekistan and assess the risks of working with them. – Due Diligence, Googoosha, and Komen for the Cure

Susan G. Komen is getting bad press and deserving it again. But this time they’re being mentioned with “the most hated woman in ‘rampantly corrupt’ Uzbekistan.”

One cable describes Miss Karimova and reads: ‘Most Uzbeks see Karimova as a greedy, power-hungry individual who uses her father to crush business people or anyone else who stands in her way … She remains the single most hated person in the country.’

Reports swirled this week that Susan G. Komen had gotten into the charity business with corrupt dictator-ette Gulnara Karimova, “the socialite, part-time pop star daughter” of Uzbek President Islam Karimov, as Foreign Policy described her this week.

In addition to her dad’s atrocious and well-publicized human rights record, Gulnara herself has been implicated in a range of illegal business practices, including essentially taking over rival companies at gunpoint. Then there are disturbing reports of widespread forced sterilizations of women in Uzbek hospitals and evidence that’s it’s being encouraged by the authorities.

Numerous reports reveal that organized crime and Karimov’s government are deeply linked, with the proximity to a raging war in Afghanistan having been a gold mine for him and his country, with his daughter in the middle of rumors flying about a possible squeeze play in Britain.

Since this story started spreading from Registan, Foreign Polcy and Wonkette, Susan G. Komen has been manning the phones. Their clean up pitch is that they’re not partnering with the notorious dictator’s daughter, but the National Breast Cancer Association of Uzbekistan.

The intent of Susan G. Komen to help women and fight breast cancer is not in question. The disarray at the Komen Foundation is and this incident is just more proof of fundraising scrambling amid an organization that is looking like amateurs while asking people to give money when donors have every right to be skeptical of where that money is actually going and who is involved with the charity to which they’re donating.

As for Afghanistan, there are salacious rumors swirling about Gulnara Karimova being her dad’s ambassador to the Court of St. James, with push back on this tale coming from all quarters.

Rumors are circulating that London has rejected the daughter of Uzbekistan’s strongman Islam Karimov as his ambassador to the Court of St. James’s. Gulnara Karimova, the self-styled glamorous society queen, has already served as Uzbekistan’s ambassador to Spain and representative to the United Nations in Geneva. If true, the rebuff could spell trouble for Britain’s Afghanistan exit plans.

Though the idea Gulnara would seek such a sinecure is not far-fetched, for now the main source seems to be Craig Murray, a scandalous former British ambassador to Tashkent known for his debauched parties and long-standing hatred for the Karimov regime.

The BBC’s Uzbek arm reports that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) denies any such ambassadorship.

You can read Craig Murray’s March account and decide for yourself.

The reason these salacious tidbits matter is that if Britain wants an easy exit from Afghanistan they’re going to need Islam Karimov’s help out of Uzbekistan or things could get messy, long and drawn out, complicating P.M. David Cameron’s life exponentially.

The next hire for Susan G. Komen if they’re going to delve into international charity partnerships is a foreign policy expert. Getting mired with the “kelptocratic Karimov state” soap opera is the last thing they need after their Planned Parenthood disaster. But it does fit a pattern of incompetence.

Read full story · Comments { 1 }

LA Times Right to Publish Damning Afghan Photos

There is no question that publishing the photos of the Army 82nd Airborne posing with body parts of dead Afghanistan militants was the right thing to do.

It’s predictable that SecDef Leon Panetta would cite blowback as a reason to refrain, but there is too much secrecy in what the U.S. does through our military as it is. The contagion of events inside Afghanistan, from the Quran burning to the murderous rampage of a U.S. soldier recently, to the photos, proves we are not only in over our head, but we’ve lost control of the U.S. mission to the point of unraveling our own integrity and ethical purpose.

From the LA Times, who felt compelled to explain their job:

“We considered this very carefully,” Maharaj said. “At the end of the day, our job is to publish information that our readers need to make informed decisions. We have a particular duty to report vigorously and impartially on all aspects of the American mission in Afghanistan. On balance, in this case, we felt that the public interest here was served by publishing a limited, but representative sample of these photos, along with a story explaining the circumstances under which they were taken.”

… “The two photos published were chosen because they clearly and unambiguously depict conduct that the Army described as inappropriate. In examining the full set of images, we set aside others on grounds of taste, relevance or repetitiousness. Some were too gruesome. Others were very similar to the two images already chosen or were difficult to interpret,” he said.

It seems the American public has a huge appetite for the trivial, but when it comes to the serious, like the wars we are waging, we’d rather just close our eyes, because it’s all too horrible.

Our society hasn’t even begun to process the cost of rehabilitation and long-term care of the veterans coming back from Afghanistan. In America, war is something that happens in an alternate universe that is driven by partisanship.

It makes it easier for the fearmongers to squeal about the ludicrous charges that Pres. Obama is “weak” on North Korea, Iran or whatever national security fantasy they can concoct for the ideologically besotted and proudly ignorant.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Army 82nd Airborne Pose with Afghan Bomber Body Parts

U.S. troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers

An American soldier says he released the photos to the Los Angeles Times to draw attention to the safety risk of a breakdown in leadership and discipline. The Army has started a criminal investigation.

via the Los Angeles Times

We have a breakdown and it started some time ago.

George W. Bush was in charge when the worst military scandal since the Vietnam My Lai Massacre happened at Abu Ghraib. That his Administration was responsible for war crimes under the Geneva Conventions will never be proven, but that they occurred few of us doubt. It was under Bush that our military standards for recruitment had to be lowered, because the multiple tours were destroying our military.

Gen. Stanley McChyrstal and his elite staff were humiliated through hubris in a Rolling Stone interview that got one of the most talented military men in modern history deservedly sacked.

The Secret Service gets caught with prostitutes because they wanted a 2-for-1 deal and were too cheap to pay the girls their rate.

Something’s gone terribly wrong in our military industrial complex, which is not news, but it has become so wide, deep and secretive that control is no longer an option.

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

Hillary Having Fun: Embarrassment or Political Plot?

Is Hillary Clinton becoming an embarrassment as Secretary of State?

At least her arms were covered and she wasn’t showing cleavage!

The headline above is from the UK Telegraph, accompanied by this from Nile Gardiner after the Getty photo of Hillary having fun made a splash.

The overwhelmingly liberal US media is treating the story as a bit of fun, with the usually austere Mrs Clinton seen as letting her hair down. But I suspect that a lot of US taxpayers will see it differently – as a senior government official having a jolly time on an official overseas junket at taxpayers’ expense. And this was hardly a display of good judgment at a time when nearly 13 million Americans are unemployed, and US soldiers are laying their lives on the line every day in Afghanistan. In an effortless display of leading from behind, Hillary was partying in Colombia while the Taliban were about to launch a wave of terror attacks in Kabul.

If Gardiner had his way, Secy. Clinton would be in a constant state of mourning wearing widow black, because I seriously doubt there isn’t some catastrophe somewhere in the world weighing on her mind by the minute.

The bookend idiocy to Gardiner is Politico’s Burns and Haberman opining that the photo showing Hillary cutting loose would “play well” for 2016.

Clinton letting her hair down is the kind of thing that would play well in that presidential run in 2016 that some of her supporters have suddenly started talking about in the last few weeks.

At this stage Secy. doesn’t need to play anything well, because she actually does her job well.

No wonder Hillary keeps saying she won’t ever run again.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Taliban Loves the Smell of Fresh Gunpowder in Springtime

If it’s spring in Afghanistan, it’s time for a Taliban offensive.

Pres. Karzai couldn’t wait to blame NATO. From the UK Telegraph:

The Afghan president praised his own forces after they killed the final resisting members of insurgent suicide teams, but ordered an investigation into how the militants had been able to penetrate the city.

He spoke as Afghan intelligence officials said the string of coordinated assaults across eastern Afghanistan was carried out by the Taliban-linked Haqqani Network.

Mr Karzai said: “The terrorists’ infiltration in Kabul and other provinces is an intelligence failure for us and especially for Nato and should be seriously investigated.”

After seventeen hours of fighting, it ended.

Those in the tower were the last holdouts of a multifaceted attack which saw fighting in up to seven sites in Kabul and in three cities in eastern Afghanistan.

Witnesses described Afghan commandos clearing the tower floor-by-floor overnight to dislodge the militants who had seized it as a base to launch rocket and machine gun attacks into nearby diplomatic missions, including the British embassy.

Despite Nato claims that Afghan forces had dealt with the attacks on their own, witnesses said British and Norwegian special forces troops had been with the commandos and had fired heavy weapons into the tower. The Ministry of Defence in London declined to comment.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

About the Costs of Wars and No Universal Health Care, and the System That Profits from Both

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

The Costs of War

From Bill Moyers,

Most discussion about the ‘costs of war’ focuses on two numbers: dollars spent and American troops who gave their lives. … But … those numbers … don’t tell the full story.

In one of the most comprehensive studies available, researchers in the Eisenhower Study Group at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies looked at the human, economic, social and political costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as our military actions in Pakistan. Their complete findings are available at costofwar.org. The numbers below are all from their report, which is dated June 2011. When the study sites both conservative and moderate estimates, we’ve chosen the conservative numbers.

Those “conservative” estimates include the following.

The Dead (Total: 224,475), including 6051 U.S. service members; 2,300 U.S. contractors; 9,922 Iraqi security forces; 8,756 Afghan security forces; 3,520 Pakistani security forces; 1,192 Other allied troops; 11,700 Afghan civilians; 125,000 Iraqi civilians; 35,600 Pakistanis (civilians and insurgents); 168 Journalists; 266 Humanitarian workers.

The Wounded (Total: 365,383), including 99,065 U.S. soldiers; 17,544 Afghan, 109,558 Iraqi, 19,819 Pakistani civilians.

The Displaced (Total: 7,815,000).

Costs to the American Taxpayer, $1.3 trillion in Congressional War Appropriations; $3.7-4.4 trillion estimated total costs to American taxpayers; $1 trillion in interest payments through 2020.

For more, see the section “Social, Political and Environmental Cost.”

The Costs of No Universal Health Care

Rather than reports by Corporate Media, focused on Electeds and the Judges they choose arguing about health insurance, what follows is what a reality-based conversation regarding health care in the United States sounds like. See Rose Aguilar’s TruthOut post, which includes multiple stories about the human and financial costs of a System more concerned about making bigger profits than actual health care needs.

In World’s Richest Country, the Uninsured Wait in Line Overnight for a Chance at Health Care

(Stan) Brock is the founder of Remote Area Medical (RAM), an all-volunteer mobile medical clinic that’s been traveling to cities across the United States offering free health care since 1992. Brock founded RAM in 1985 to provide care to people living in the most remote areas of the Amazon rainforest. Seven years later, he was asked to bring the clinic to Knoxville, Tennessee. The invitations have since increased.

‘You can close your eyes and stick a pin on the map of the United States and go there, and you’re gonna find people by the hundreds, and in many cases by the thousands, that need services,’ said Brock.

‘It’s simply unaffordable, particularly in dental and vision care. A very, very small percentage of people in this country have insurance that covers those two key items. We’re still seeing people dying of bad teeth in the United States,’ he said.

What follows is Aguilar’s account of meeting Brock at a

… recent four-day clinic at the Oakland Coliseum, where they serve up to 800 patients a day and provided over $1 million in free services. It was their 663rd clinic. It takes about six months to raise the $175,000 to run the clinic … .

According to the Census Bureau, 49.9 million Americans, including 7.3 million children, don’t have health insurance. Even if the Supreme Court upholds the Affordable Care Act, 26 million people will still be uninsured, and costs will continue to rise, according to the Physicians for a National Health Program, an organization advocating a single-payer national health program.

One RAM volunteer interviewed by Aguilar is Doris Lum, who worked in the “vision area.”

‘… We are seeing medical poverty in this country, and this is just the tip of the iceberg … . This should be front-page news. … We need you to tell people’s stories. We need better health care for everyone right now.’

As is typical for RAMs, many people camped out, to be sure to get a number. Even at 800 a day, the spots go fast. The people quoted in this piece tell what shouldn’t be, but are, familiar stories. I encourage you to read the whole piece.

How to understand the “costs of war” and the “costs of non-universal health care” includes, for me, a look at the economic / political / governance System (s) in which they exist. Larry Pinkney is one of the veteran activists I read regularly. One of his recent columns, at Intrepid Report is relevant here:

Free Your MINDS and Change the SYSTEM

The single most potent … weapon consistently used against everyday ordinary … people in the United States today, continues to be the perfidious propaganda and concomitant distractions emanating from the corporate government and its corporate-stream media. …

The political system in this nation constantly reinvents itself … for the purpose of perpetuating itself at the expense of everyday people. It is in fact, the system itself that is the root of the problem … .

The most effective way that the system’s gatekeepers have to perpetuate it (and themselves) is to fill the minds of everyday people with outright lies, distortions, and endless distractions. …

For example, the Democrat and Republican parties are the political symbiotic, self-perpetuating twins of this corporate/military system. Their very existence as supposedly being two parties is a well-maintained systemic delusion. The U.S. ruling class (i.e., the economic and political elite) recognize the importance of maintaining everyday … people in a perpetual state of delusion … .

I’ve seen Pinkney accused of hyperbole, exaggeration. In fact, when taking as clear a look as possible at things like the financial and human costs of war and the lack of health care, strong words are needed. And speaking of hyperbole, I’d say the System is the first place we should look: fear is a favorite tactic. You know, stuff like, “Fear socialized medicine!” and “Fear terrorism!”

(Fear Sells poster via Fay’s Photos at FB)

Read full story · Comments { 7 }

Condi’s Adviser: ‘War Crimes’ Were Committed

Documents now made public prove that Philip Zelikow told the Bush administration that their policy of “enhanced interrogations” amounted to felony war crimes. That means the policies Pres. Obama followed after Bush, also ignoring the warnings, are too.

The State Department adviser under Secy. Condoleezza Rice, Philip Zelikow, describes himself as “Rice’s policy representative to the NSC Deputies Committee” covering intelligence and terrorism issues.

Spencer Ackerman of Wired, who received documents from the State Dept., broke the story today.

A top adviser to former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned the Bush administration that its use of “cruel, inhuman or degrading” interrogation techniques like waterboarding were “a felony war crime.”

What’s more, newly obtained documents reveal that State Department counselor Philip Zelikow told the Bush team in 2006 that using the controversial interrogation techniques were “prohibited” under U.S. law — “even if there is a compelling state interest asserted to justify them.” [...]

This is what happens when a Democratic president and the majority party of Congress who matches him are more concerned with politics than doing what’s right.

Pres. Obama and the Democratic majority Congress, with Sen. Harry Reid and Speaker Pelosi as leaders, all chose not to follow the investigation and find the truth, wherever it might lead.

That was interpreted as tacit permission to mimic what had come before.

[...] Zelikow’s memo was an internal bureaucratic push against an attempt by the Justice Department to flout long-standing legal restrictions against torture. In 2005, he wrote, both the Justice and State Departments had decided that international prohibitions against “acts of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture” do not “apply to CIA interrogations in foreign countries.” Those techniques included contorting a detainee’s body in painful positions, slamming a detainee’s head against a wall, restricting a detainee’s caloric intake, and waterboarding.

[...] Zelikow’s warnings about the legal dangers of torture went unheeded — not just by the Bush administration, which ignored them, but, ironically, by the Obama administration, which effectively refuted them. In June, the Justice Department concluded an extensive inquiry into CIA torture by dropping potential charges against agency interrogators in 99 out of 101 cases of detainee abuse. That inquiry did not examine criminal complicity for senior Bush administration officials who designed the torture regimen and ordered agency interrogators to implement it.

Nothing to see here, move along, now.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

Suspected Al Qaeda ‘Lone Wolf’ Stand-off Ends Violently in Toulouse

The video at the bottom is from yesterday and is worth a look. The reported suspect called in to say his killing rampage was to protest France’s burqa ban from last year, but also against the country’s involvement in Afghanistan.

From CNN not long ago, breaking news:

Toulouse, France (CNN) — French police burst into the apartment of a suspected al Qaeda-trained militant accused of killing seven people, prompting a shootout that ended with Mohammed Merah, gun in hand, jumping out a window to his death, authorities said Thursday.

Two police officers were injured in the raid, which came after a siege of the apartment lasting more than 31 hours, Interior Minister Claude Gueant said.

Merah, 23, was wanted in the killings of three French paratroopers and of three students and a rabbi at a Jewish school in Toulouse, in a string of shootings that began on March 11.

… He emerged from a bathroom and launched a barrage of gunfire at police as they burst in Thursday morning, Gueant said, before jumping from the window, still shooting.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Pamela Geller’s Dangerous Anti-Muslim Ad Rejected

The Freedom From Religion Foundation ran a full page ad in the New York Times last Friday, which was been mimicked by notorious anti-Muslim crusader Pamela Geller. Here’s part of what the anti-Catholic ad said:

It’s your moment of truth. Will it be reproductive freedom, or back to the Dark Ages? Do you choose women and their rights, or Bishops and their wrongs? Whose side are you on, anyway?

It is time to make known your dissent from the Catholic Church, in light of the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops’ ruthless campaign endangering the right to contraception. If you’re part of the Catholic Church, you’re part of the problem.

Why are you propping up the pillars of a tyrannical and autocratic, woman-hating, sex-perverting, antediluvian Old Boys Club? Why are you aiding and abetting a church that has repeatedly and publicly announced a crusade to ban contraception, abortion and sterilization, and to deny the right of all women everywhere, Catholic or not, to decide whether and when to become mothers? When it comes to reproductive freedom, the Roman Catholic Church is Public Enemy Number One. Think of the acute misery, poverty, needless suffering, unwanted pregnancies, social evils and deaths that can be laid directly at the door of the Church’s antiquated doctrine that birth control is a sin and must be outlawed. (full text here)

The text goes on and on and much of it is offensive, but free speech is also about the right people have to offend.

The difference is that unlike FFRF’s ad, Geller’s ad was rejected by the Times.

According to a Mar. 13 letter sent by the Times to the ad’s sponsor, anti-Islam activist Pamela Geller, the $39,000 anti-Islam ad was rejected because “the fallout from running this ad now could put U.S. troops and/or civilians in the [Afghan] region in danger.”The Daily Caller

Given the Quran burning, but especially the recent massacre by the U.S. soldier with PTSD, you have to challenge Ms. Geller’s priorities.

The Daily Caller contacted the Times and asked “if the Times’ decision is a surrender to violence and also an incentive for additional threats of violence.”

It’s hard to imagine anything less serious to ask in this situation.

In the letter the Times sent to Geller they stated they would “consider the ad … for publication in a few months,”

Does anyone think Geller’s ad wouldn’t set an already dangerous atmosphere aflame?

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

GOP War on Women Starts Hillary 2016 Talk


It’s the way I end my book. It was the only place the story of Hillary’s 20-year history could go. But it wasn’t actually an ending.

Thinking, wondering, and trying to game whether Secy. Clinton, after taking a long deserved break and maybe even starting work on her own international women’s foundation, will turn to shaking U.S. history one more time.

“Game Change” authors Halperin and Heilemann were asked about it today.

Maureen Dowd has pondered this out loud today.

Women who assumed that electing Obama would lift all minority boats are beginning to think: Maybe he’s not enough. If the desire of these conservative male leaders to yoke women is this close to the surface, if they are perversely driven to debase women even though it could lead to their own political demise, then women may require more than Obama.

If women are so vulnerable, they may need one of their own.

Is she inevitable?

We’ve been down the inevitable road before and there are still plenty of people who believe her foreign policy ideas have a military foundation to hawkish. But that’s who Hillary is. She’s not going to change, so she’ll never convince some. It depends on if they’re the minority and after the Republican war on women they just may be.

Yesterday Rush Limbaugh tried hard to weave the fantasy that Obama’s birth control mandate had hurt him with women. Of course, the only source he could cite was on the right.

Reuters brings reality today:

Americans overwhelmingly regard the debate over President Barack Obama’s policy on employer-provided contraceptive coverage as a matter of women’s health, not religious freedom, rejecting Republicans’ rationale for opposing the rule. More than three-quarters say the topic shouldn’t even be a part of the U.S. political debate.

More than six in 10 respondents to a Bloomberg National Poll — including almost 70 percent of women — say the issue involves health care and access to birth control, according to the survey taken March 8-11.

America will elect a female president the next time a candidate looks like she can handle it and it cannot be someone who doesn’t believe in women’s individual freedoms. It can’t be a Republican, because they’ve boxed themselves out and believe we don’t.

It’s quite possible that when the time comes to really think about 2016, it won’t be so much about whether Hillary will decide to make another run at the presidency, it will be how can she not?

Read full story · Comments { 30 }

If Afghanistan Massacre Isn’t the Tipping Point What Will Be?

“We have to either make the decision to make a full commitment, which this president hasn’t done, or we have to decide to get out and probably get out sooner.” – Rick Santorum

In recent polling cited across the morning shows today, 60% of the American people don’t think the Afghanistan war was worth it.

I’d really like to see Republicans try to make the Santorum case that Pres. Obama hasn’t made a “full commitment” and define what that means if he hasn’t.

Pres. Karzai is calling it an “assassination.”

P.J. Crowley thinks the massacre in Afghanistan is the tipping point. He tweeted this after the U.S. soldier, reportedly on his fourth tour, walked a mile to kill 16 Afghanis, including women and 9 children:

This is the Tet moment in #Afghanistan. The string of recent incidents will send public opinion in both countries into permanent decline. – PJ Crowley on Twitter

The reaction among some right-wingers was quite different, which one blogger posted.

If this doesn’t get Republican candidates talking about Afghanistan, separating themselves from the theory of “winning,” what will?

The Taliban has said they will retaliate.

News travels slowly in Afghanistan.

Read full story · Comments { 10 }

Democrats Ratchet Up Rhetoric on Iran, From Gillibrand to Wyden to McCaskill

While a missile retaliation against Israel would be virtually certain, according to these assessments, Iran would also be likely to try to calibrate its response against American targets so as not to give the United States a rationale for taking military action that could permanently cripple Tehran’s nuclear program. “The Iranians have been pretty good masters of escalation control,” said Gen. James E. Cartwright, now retired, who as the top officer at Strategic Command and as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff participated in war games involving both deterrence and retaliation on potential adversaries like Iran. – The New York Times

It must be a presidential election year.

But let’s not pretend this isn’t due to an adversity to enlightenment and our international interests.

Cards meet table, if Israel feels threatened she should strike.  Everyone else will have to deal.  The world has suffered worse and so have the Jews.

So let’s have it, minus the part that nobody wants to jump.

George W. Bush and the neoconservatives proved to the world not having WMDs was as bad as having them, so what’s to keep Iran from flexing?

Some remember public school drills and the underside of desks. Who went soft?

…and what are we going to really do about Iran, past pontificating?

Pres. Obama is to meet with P.M. Netanyahu next week in Washington, just in case you’re wondering why the Senate just got busy on a non-binding sense of the Senate Iran resolution.

I’ve been purposefully ignoring the web pages devoted lately to Israel striking Iran, because I’ve been to enough foreign policy think tank forums to know that little of what’s being written or discussed is grounded in sane analysis. Tune in to one minute of Sean Hannity and you’ll get the worst of it.

Much of the Iran talk where Israel is concerned revolves around a “zone of immunity,” which I’ve written about before. Blake Hounshell has an excellent rundown of what’s been happening leading up to Netanyahu’s visit next week.

The key issue under discussion is what the appropriate “red lines” are — Iranian actions that would trigger a military response by Israel or the United States. For Israel, the bar is lower, but nebulous: Defense Minister Ehud Barak talks about Iran soon entering a “zone of immunity” that will make an attack impossible. …

[...] But threats have consequences, too. U.S. officials haven’t clearly articulated why they believe all this war talk is unhelpful, but I suspect two reasons. One is the rising cost of gasoline, perhaps the issue that terrifies the political side of the White House most heading into November. Tensions over Iran are already adding about $10 per barrel to the price of oil, some analysts say, threatening to choke off America’s nascent economic recovery and make Obama a one-term president.

Sen. Gillibrand joining in on the sense of the Senate resolution on Iran is representative of why I called her out on Afghanistan in my new book, because she’s yet to prove boldness on foreign policy, let alone any leadership. One of the many issues I address in my book, as I have around here, is the rhetoric females use in foreign policy, which has yet to shift beyond militaristic terms.

The Iran Resolution proves why being a sitting senator from New York is complicated, as Hillary’s Iraq war vote the fall after 9/11 proved conclusively. With a heavy Jewish voter base, Gillibrand reveals yet again that Democratic females in the position to show leadership inevitably fall in line with conventional foreign policy thinkers, which keeps U.S. foreign policy from progressing and shifting.

It’s also why I wrote in my book about having great hopes for Elizabeth Warren, but whose progressive leadership remains to be proven. Once in the Senate, Democratic females trend toward mimicking their hawk brothers, which remains a problem for anyone wanting a wider lens on U.S. foreign policy. Since Sen. Scott Brown has joined the sense of the Senate resolution, maybe some enterprising journalist can put the question to Warren. Her answer matters.

If Democratic women politicians don’t stand apart from 20th century foreign policy thinking, which is traditionally militaristic, they threaten to carve a policy portfolio that is domestically driven, leaving the wider world to men, which would be a tragedy for progressivism itself.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

To express the sense of the Senate regarding the importance of preventing the Government of Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability.

Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. CASEY, Ms. AYOTTE, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. COATS, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. COONS, Mr. CORNYN, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. HATCH, Mr. HELLER, Mr. HOEVEN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. MCCAIN, Mrs. MCCASKILL, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. PRYOR, Mr. RISCH, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, and Mr. WYDEN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on….

RESOLUTION

Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments { 19 }

Michigan is All the Marbles for Mitt

Michigan Democratic strategist Joe DiSano has taken it upon himself to become a leading mischief maker. DiSano says he targeted nearly 50,000 Democratic voters in Michigan through email and a robo call to their homes, asking them to go to the polls Tuesday to vote for Rick Santorum in attempt to hurt Romney. – Democratic Mischief in Michigan

Poor Mitt, he’s getting hit from all sides.

Talking Points Memo has the robo call from a man with a gruff sounding voice meant to sound like a working man, talking about Democrats needing to get out to vote for Rick Santorum. The tag line is “this call was paid for by the Santorum for president committee.”

I’ve wanted a Romney – Obama match from the start, because of the big money political show it would be and the potential for unmasking the big two parties machines in the worst ways.

But Mitt Romney’s rolling gaffes and his own incompetence as a candidate has been stunning to watch and has put his path to the nomination in jeopardy. That doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be formidable, because of the Super PAC avalanche, but also because there are so many world event variables that could still make 2012 tough for Pres. Obama.

However, as things stand today Republicans are going to have a rough time making the 2012 election a referendum on Pres. Obama, which is their path to victory.

While Romney continues to be unable to close the sale, it’s not hard to see why religious conservatives are excited about the Santorum revival. He can even talk national security the way they like to hear it.

But could Democrats help Santorum and maybe make a difference in Michigan? Read Nate Silver and decide for yourself.

Republicans have bigger problems, because of how badly wounded Mitt Romney is today, much of it his own fault, including how far right he’s gone, especially on immigration. Romney continuing to lose prowess to Rick Santorum, whose extreme views and the power he’s building with religious conservatives threaten Republicans far beyond 2012, has been humiliating for Mitt Romney as a general election candidate.

It’s the set up for Jonathan Chait’s article in New York Magazine.

…Rick Santorum warns his audiences, “We are reaching a tipping point, folks, when those who pay are the minority and those who receive are the majority.” Even such a sober figure as Mitt Romney regularly says things like “We are only inches away from no longer being a free economy,” and that this election “could be our last chance.”

The GOP has reason to be scared. Obama’s election was the vindication of a prediction made several years before by journalist John Judis and political scientist Ruy Teixeira in their 2002 book, The Emerging Democratic Majority. Despite the fact that George W. Bush then occupied the White House, Judis and Teixeira argued that demographic and political trends were converging in such a way as to form a ­natural-majority coalition for Democrats.

The Republican Party had increasingly found itself confined to white voters, especially those lacking a college degree and rural whites who, as Obama awkwardly put it in 2008, tend to “cling to guns or religion.” Meanwhile, the Democrats had ­increased their standing among whites with graduate degrees, particularly the growing share of secular whites, and remained dominant among racial minorities. As a whole, Judis and Teixeira noted, the electorate was growing both somewhat better educated and dramatically less white, making every successive election less favorable for the GOP. And the trends were even more striking in some key swing states. Judis and Teixeira highlighted Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona, with skyrocketing Latino populations, and Virginia and North Carolina, with their influx of college-educated whites, as the most fertile grounds for the expanding Democratic base. [...]

Chait’s piece, “2012 or Never,” makes the case that this is it for the GOP.

Remember where conservatives were in November 2008, after Pres. Obama won?

We wrote about the death of conservatism back then, too, but in Obama’s first two years the Tea Party rose up, with a lot of help from Sarah Palin, who has long since squandered her power. But not before she helped rev up the religious conservative engine to make historic gains in the 2010 election midterms.

The new group of right wing religious conservatives pointed their energy at women, setting off a war on female freedoms we haven’t seen in decades, which went from state to state.

But religious conservatives overstepped, as many of us have been writing, because extremists always do eventually.

It came to a head when Pres. Obama mandated free contraceptive coverage, then took a scalpel to carve out a First Amendment exclusion that was not planned, but brilliantly played when the uproar played out just how David Plouffe’s polling told him it would.

Women of all faiths and none rose up, leaving the political landscape littered with talking heads and cable yakkers, mostly of the white male variety, their mouths agape, as they had to dial back their pompous vitriol and ignorance over what the First Amendment meant to everyone, not just “the church,” but women in the workplace, too.

Then Gov. Bob McDonnell took a very public flogging for Virginia’s Republican extremism that manifested in transvaginal state rape legislation, with the entire comedic universe bearing down on McDonnell, as well as every political new media site, pundit and writer who had a place to opine.

But according to Chait’s argument in his article, using data that’s been around a while, in the end it will all one day come down to demography.

Not tomorrow it won’t. But what was triggered to manifest when Pres. Obama came in to office, another opportunity very similar looks like it’s returned. Now if the world community, Israel, and Greece will cooperate… then there’s Iran.

The short-term depends on whether Rick Santorum can take Mitt Romney down in Michigan. But also whether the stories of Democrats helping Santorum do it amount to anything significant.

Surely Mitt Romney won’t allow Rick Santorum to beat him in the state where his dad was governor and he grew up. There is no overstating how big it would be if that happens.

What a Romney loss would mean for Republicans in 2012, however, is wild to contemplate.

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

Clinton Blasts Russia and China on Syria; NATO Pulls Advisers Out of Kabul After 2 U.S. Officers Killed



Secy. Clinton’s statement on Syria from Friday is unequivocal. “The entire world, other than Russia and China, were willing to recognize we must take international action against the Syrian regime,” Clinton said. She went further, calling the action of China and Russia “despicable.” Then asked “Whose side are they on?” Clinton saying neither were on the side of the Syrian people.

Juan Cole writes about Hamas dispersing their interests away from Syria, their long-time patron.

Today, Mitt Romney on Fox News Sunday was asked about Pres. Obama’s apology for the inadvertent burning of Qurans at Bagram airbase, which reportedly had extremist messages inside. Romney asserted “this just sticks in their throat.” Wallace continued the mantra that “winning in Afghanistan” is even possible, whatever that definition means. Romney taking issue with Pres. Obama announce a date to draw down forces, inserting illogical neoconservatism in the place of assessing reality.

When it comes to foreign policy, minus Ron Paul, all of the Republican candidates are 20th century relics when it comes to envisioning America’s role in the world today.

In Afghanistan, the report from the New York Times:

Two American officers were shot dead inside the Interior Ministry building here on Saturday, and NATO responded by immediately pulling all its advisers out of Afghan ministries in Kabul, in a deepening of the crisis over the American military’s burning of Korans at a NATO military base.

The order by the NATO commander, Gen. John R. Allen, came on the fifth day of virulent anti-American demonstrations across the country, and it was a clear sign of concern that the fury had reached deeply into even the Afghan security forces and ministries working most closely with the coalition.

And a word about war with Iran from a friend of Tom Ricks:

The worst possible thing to do is go to war with Iran. The key is the people — and they are sick of the mullahs. Right now the pressure is working to separate the people from the regime. A limited strike would undercut all that.

[...] There is no doubt [that there is a huge divergence between U.S. interests and those of Israel]. We want to stop Israel from attacking so the issue is how to persuade Israel that we are serious about stopping Iran from having a weapon — like a congressional finding that we will take all steps necessary to stop Iran. It means we will define red lines that can’t be crossed.

But the bottom line is, I don’t know a single person in government, civilian or in uniform, who thinks it is in our national interest to go to war with Iran now.

Kiss of death? Rick Santorum gets a glowing tribute by Michael Ledeen in the Wall Street Journal over Santorum’s stance on Iran.

Turning to the GOP primary race, John Heilemann writes a long piece on Romney and the culmination of his candidacy that comes down to Michigan.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

Two U.S. Soldiers Killed in Quran Blowback

Today, the Taliban called on Afghans to attack “foreign troops.” It may be a coincidence, though it hardly matters, because an Afghan soldier turned his weapon on U.S. troops killing two.

Pres. Obama had already sent a letter of apology to Pres. Karzai, which is posted on the Afghanistan site.

From CBS:

Two U.S. troops have been shot to death and four more wounded by an Afghan solider who turned his gun on his allies in apparent anger over the burning of Korans at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan, an Afghan official tells CBS News.

A statement from the International Security Assistance Force – Afghanistan, the international coalition in the country, confirmed that two troops were killed in Eastern Afghanistan on Thursday by “an individual wearing an Afghan National Army uniform.”

ISAF does not typically give the nationality of casualties until family members have been notified, but the CBS News source in the Afghan government said those killed and injured in the attack in the eastern Ningarhar province, along the border with Pakistan, were Americans.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

U.S. Embassy on ‘Lockdown’ after Quran-burning at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan

U.S. Gen. John Allen, the top commander of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said after the books had been mistakenly given to troops to be burned at a garbage pit without realizing it. “It was not a decision that was made because they were religious materials,” Allen said Tuesday, one day after Afghan workers at the garbage pit found the books. “It was not a decision that was made with respect to the faith of Islam. It was a mistake. It was an error. The moment we found out about it we immediately stopped and we intervened.” – CBS News

The Qurans were removed from a library in the Parwan Detention Facility and unintentionally burned at Bagram Air Field. According to reports from a military official, they contained extremist messages, though what that means no one has specified yet, an investigation pending.

Jay Carney said it was a “deeply unfortunate incident,” with an official apology offered to the Afghan people from the U.S. military yesterday.

However, today, all hell broke loose.

From CNN:

Violent protests left at least five dead and others wounded Wednesday as demonstrations over Quran burning intensified in Afghanistan. Police killed four people and wounded 10 others during protests in Parwan province, said Abdul Wassi Sayedkhili, a provincial council official. Health officials said a fifth person died and 10 others wounded in eastern Nangarhar province.

Read full story · Comments { 24 }