"Revenue-Neutral" Could Mean "Revenue-Negative" for "Blue" States
From The Blue Lemur. The Bush plan for “revenue-neutral” tax reform needs losers to balance its winners, and people who take the federal deduction for state and local taxes may be in administration planners’ sights, the Washington Post reported last week, which could leave “blue” states, well, screwed.
In the past election, the states that collect the most income tax were solidly “blue” supporters of Democratic challenger John Kerry.
Eight of the 10 states with the most revenue in 2000 voted for Kerry: California, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Michigan, Illinois, New Jersey and Maryland. Only Ohio and North Carolina favored Bush.
The federal deduction for state and local income taxes “predominantly benefits the blue states,” said William Gale, a tax policy expert at the Brookings Institution, a liberal-leaning research group. “There is definitely a political calculation to this.”
But before conspiracy theorists get too carried away, political observers note that by eliminating deductions for state income taxes, Bush would be inflicting political pain on two of the nation’s most prominent Republican governors, George Pataki of New York and Arnold Schwarzenegger of California.
And they’ll be watching closely to see if Bush will also seek to end the federal deduction for property taxes.
Taking perspective of the Bush record and agenda, consider this excerpt from the Atlanta Journal Constitution:
In his first term, Bush pushed for --- and won --- a tax cut in each of the four years. His primary emphasis was on lowering rates for everyone who pays income taxes.
But during his presidential campaign, he promised to use his second term to put an even greater emphasis on promoting an "ownership" agenda.
"I believe strongly in ownership, because I know if you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of the United States of America," he said in a typical campaign comment in August.
To spur Americans to own shares of companies, Bush wants to further reduce taxes on dividends, interest and capital gains. He argues that by reducing taxes on investments, the government could help Americans become more financially secure while creating new pools of capital to fund economic expansion and job creation.
Mark Bloomfield, president of the American Council for Capital Formation, said reducing taxes on investments might help states by spurring job creation. "You would have higher levels of economic growth," which could lead to new tax revenues, he said.
Critics say that shifting taxes away from investments would increase the burden on wage earners. People rich enough to live off investments would gain, while workers would lose deductions for state and local taxes.
The president's tax advisory panel is expected to take roughly six months to make its recommendations. The Treasury secretary would then review the proposals and develop a plan for the administration to propose to Congress. The goal would be to have the changes enacted before the congressional election campaign in the fall of 2006.
By CHUCK LINDELL, The Cox News Service. WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans, boldly confident after their Nov. 2 electoral success, are preparing to end months of frustrating delays over President Bush's judicial picks by hitting Democrats with Republican's ultimate legislative weapon.
But the Republican threat to neuter long-cherished filibuster rules by steamrolling Democrats is risky — so potentially destructive that Capitol Hill calls it the "nuclear option." Democratic retaliation would be swift and long-lasting, raising the prospect of escalating clashes in a body that prides itself on gentility and cool judgment.
Even so, Republican leaders are signaling their intent to go nuclear in word and deed.
"We're going to use every tool we possibly can," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., who also unveiled a kinder, gentler phrase for the potential rules change: the "constitutional option."
"Republicans are loaded for bear, spoiling for a confrontation with Senate Democrats on judicial appointments," said Norm Ornstein, an expert on Congress for the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute. "For a lot of conservatives, this has really become an issue that leaves them passionate."
Democrats, with a new leader after the election defeat of Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., have yet to form a filibuster strategy for the 109th Congress, which convenes in January. But early indications show continued passion for blocking nominees considered too conservative, including Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen.
School Segregation Amendment Defeated; Nov. 2 Vote Reopens Racial Divide
In 1963, Gov. George C. Wallace (D) stood in a schoolhouse door and declared that his state’s constitution forbade black students to enroll at the University of Alabama, and he was correct. The state’s constitution did then, and it still does now; Alabama voters refused to approve a constitutional amendment to erase wording requiring separate schools for “white and colored children” and to eliminate references to the poll taxes once imposed to disenfranchise blacks on Nov. 2.
The amendment had two main parts: the removal of the separate-schools language and the removal of a passage – inserted in the 1950s in an attempt to counter the Brown v. Board of Education ruling against segregated public schools – that said Alabama’s constitution does not guarantee a right to a public education.
Leading opponents, such as Alabama Christian Coalition President John Giles, said they did not object to removing the passage about separate schools for “white and colored children.” But, employing an argument that was ridiculed by most of the state’s newspapers and by legions of legal experts, Giles and others said guaranteeing a right to a public education would have opened a door for “rogue” federal judges to order the state to raise taxes to pay for improvements in its public school system.
The argument plays to Alabama’s primal fear of federal control, a fear born of years of resentment over U.S. courts’ ordering the desegregation of schools and the creation of black-majority legislative districts.
“Activists on the bench know no bounds,” Giles said. “It’s a trial lawyer’s dream.”
Giles was aided by a virtually unparalleled Alabama celebrity in his battle against the amendment, distributing testimonials from former chief justice Roy Moore, whose fame was sealed in 2003 when he defied a federal court order to remove a two-ton granite Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court.
Here’s an excerpt from Sunday’s story in the Washinton Post.
The vote was so close – a margin of 1,850 votes out of 1.38 million – that an automatic recount will take place Monday. But, with few expecting the results to change, the amendment’s saga has dragged Alabama into a confrontation with its segregationist past that illuminates the sometimes uneasy race relations of its present.
The outcome resonates achingly here in this college town, where the silver-haired men and women who close their eyes and lift their arms when the organ wails at Bethel Baptist Church – a short drive from Wallace’s schoolhouse door – don’t have to strain to remember riding buses past the shiny all-white school on their way to the all-black school.
“There are people here who are still fighting the Civil War,” said Tommy Woods, 63, a deacon at Bethel and a retired school administrator. “They’re holding on to things that are long since past. It’s almost like a religion.”
There are competing theories about the defeat of Amendment 2, the measure that would have taken “colored children” and segregated schools out of Alabama’s constitution. One says latent, persistent racism was to blame; another says voters are suspicious of all constitutional amendments; and a third says it was not about race but about taxes.
Many blacks view the tax pitch coming from Amendment 2 opponents is just a smoke screen.
Nov. 26, 2004, ABC News — Six years ago, on a cold October night on the outskirts of Laramie, Wyo., 21-year-old gay college student Matthew Shepard was brutally beaten, tied to a fence and left for dead. He was found 18 hours later and rushed to the hospital, where he lingered on the edge of death for nearly five days before succumbing to his injuries.
The story garnered national attention when the attack was characterized as a hate crime. But Shepard's killers, in their first interview since their convictions, tell "20/20's" Elizabeth Vargas that money and drugs motivated their actions that night, not hatred of gays.
While Shepard lay unconscious in a hospital, the national press quickly arrived in Laramie. Cal Rerucha, who prosecuted the case, told Vargas the media descended on Laramie "like locusts."
"We knew in the newsroom the day it happened, this is going to be a huge story, this is going to attract international interest," said Jason Marsden of "The Casper Star-Tribune."
"I remember one of my fellow reporters saying, 'this kid is going to be the new poster child for gay rights," he added. News of Shepard's death sparked reaction overseas and demonstrations across America.
"I think a lot of gay people, when they first heard of that horrifying event, felt sort of punched in the stomach. I mean it kind of encapsulated all our fears of being victimized," said writer Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay rights advocate.
But as the push for gay rights found new force, so did a corresponding backlash from anti-gay opponents who came from out of state to grab a piece of the media spotlight.
Tensions were so high that Shepard's father wore a bulletproof vest under his suit when he spoke at his son's funeral service.
"The saddest part of this whole case was at Matthew's funeral, when they, these people, refused to let Matthew be buried with dignity," said Rerucha. "I never saw people that could hate so much."
Killers Both Receive Two Consecutive Life Sentences
Local residents Russell Henderson, above left, and Aaron McKinney, above right, both 21 at the time, were charged with Shepard's murder. Henderson's case came before the court first. To avoid the possibility of receiving the death penalty, he pleaded guilty to murder and kidnapping and received two consecutive life terms in prison.
McKinney's case went to trial a year after Shepard's death. He was convicted of felony murder, aggravated robbery and kidnapping. Before the jury was about to decide his sentence, he, too, reached a deal that allowed him to avoid a possible death penalty. Both men are serving double life sentences in prison.
While McKinney and Henderson admit to killing Shepard, both men — and the man who prosecuted the case — now say the real story is not what it seemed.
From Pam's House Blend. It was about what I expected. We were treated by 20/20's Elizabeth Vargas spending the first half hour of the program describing the emotionally and physically abusive childhoods of McKinney and Henderson, even to the point of showing how McKinney was an Eagle Scout. It was just meth that made him go out of control, beating Matthew with a 357 Magnum until he was a bloody pulp for the $30 in Shepard's wallet. Henderson comes off as practically an altar boy, that "didn't even touch Matthew" aside from tying up the helpless young man to the fence. I guess that doesn't count. And he made no attempt to call for help because he was afraid of McKinney's meth-fueled fury.
Vargas interviews several people that say McKinney was bisexual, wasn't homophobic and knew Shepard long before that night. McKinney denies having sex with men, or ever having met Shepard prior to the night he killed him. A great deal of time is spent with a specialist describing violence and meth addiction, but not one minute is spent talking to anyone about McKinney's obvious internal conflicts about his sexuality. Also, many of these interviewees that support the theory that McKinney is bisexual have some serious credibility problems of their own -- like having lied or not come forward with information at the time of the murder. After the piece you are left with more questions than answers, but it is clear from the outset that the goal is to "prove" it was not a hate crime, no matter how much of the other information equally muddies the waters.
Editorial Note: The following is from Conservative Eyes: Daily Commentary from a Conservative Teen. It is perhaps a look into the eyes of our national future. The author is Art Green, from Michigan, USA.
When I say people with strong beliefs or convictions, that usually translates into people of faith. Usually, that is someone that is a Christian conservative. Well, why is it that way? What is it about Christians that make Democrats hate us?
Well it isn't us, the person. It is what we believe, which is why I named this entry what I did. As you have probably seen, this picture shows us the arrogance of liberals when looking at traditionally more Christian and more conservative areas:
How dare they believe in a Creator! How dare they believe that there is an after-life where we will meet God in Heaven! We should secede and disassociate ourselves from these 'bigots.'
Europe Must Give Immediate and Total Support to Ukraine's Velvet Revolutionaries
Timothy Garton Ash. The Guardian. Can Europe's velvet revolution claim another prize? When Ukrainian demonstrators on the frozen streets of Kiev place flowers in the perforated metal shields of their country's riot police, they are sending us two desperate yet dignified messages: "We want to join Europe" and "We want to do this in a European way". Peacefully, that is, supplanting the old Jacobin-Bolshevik model of violent regime change with Europe's new model of velvet revolution - as in Prague and Berlin in 1989, as in Serbia's toppling of Milosevic, as in Georgia, where exactly one year ago the people's president marched into parliament bearing a long-stemmed rose. If we, comfortably ensconced in the institutionalised Europe to which these peaceful demonstrators look with hope and yearning, do not immediately support them with every appropriate means at our disposal, we will betray the very ideals we claim to represent.
Matthew Shepard's Killers Deny Murder Was Hate Crime
CHEYENNE, Wyoming (AP) -- In their first public interview since attacking gay college student Matthew Shepard, his killers said they were motivated not by homophobia, but the prospect of robbery to fuel a methamphetamine binge.
"He was pretty well-dressed, had a wallet full of money," Aaron McKinney said of meeting Shepard at a Laramie bar in October 1998. "All I wanted to do was beat him up and rob him. ... Seemed like a good idea at the time."
The robbery got out of hand, said McKinney and his buddy, Russell Henderson, and Shepard was beaten into a coma while tied to a fence outside the small college town. The 21-year-old died five days later.
The crime drew condemnation from President Clinton, Congress and the international community, and spurred debate on the effectiveness of hate crime laws. McKinney and Henderson, both 27, are serving life sentences for murder.
In an interview that aired on ABC's "20/20," McKinney said he killed Shepard because he was strung out on drugs, not because Shepard was gay. Henderson agreed, saying "it's not because me and Aaron had anything against gays or any of that."
Henderson said that McKinney, who had been bingeing on meth for days, set out that night to rob a dealer of $10,000 worth of the drug. Henderson thought if he could keep McKinney drinking, his friend would forget the plan.
McKinney said Shepard was sitting at the bar when he and Henderson arrived, and at one point McKinney asked Shepard for a cigarette.
President Bush has dismissed speculation about filling a number of Supreme Court openings in his second term saying: "I'll deal with a vacancy when there is one." The following are names that he may be considering if there there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court:
Samuel A. Alito Jr., a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia who has been nicknamed "Scalito" because he has views similar to those of conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Janice Rogers Brown, the first black woman to serve on California's Supreme Court. Her nomination to a federal appeals court has been blocked by Senate Democrats.
Miguel Estrada, a native of Honduras whose nomination to an appeals court was also blocked by Democrats. He's a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Emilio Miller Garza, judge on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. Bush's father, the first President Bush, considered the Hispanic judge a Supreme Court prospect.
Edith Jones, a judge on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans and former general counsel for the Texas Republican Party. Bush's father considered her for the high court.
J. Michael Luttig, put on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, by President Bush's father. Clerked for Scalia when Scalia was an appeals court judge.
Theodore B. Olson, who was Bush's solicitor general until this summer and represented him in the 2000 Bush v. Gore case. Olson's wife, Barbara, was killed in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
John Roberts, a former Rehnquist clerk named by President Bush to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Larry Thompson, who was deputy attorney general and the Bush administration's highest-ranking black law-enforcement official until he quit in 2003 to join a think tank, Brookings Institution. He is a longtime friend of Justice Clarence Thomas.
James Harvie Wilkinson III, judge on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and author of a decision that gave the government broad authority to hold U.S. citizens as enemy combatants without constitutional protections. The ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court.
Yushchenko Accused the Ukrainian Authorities of Poisoning
VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- As Ukraine's popular pro-Western opposition leader claimed victory Tuesday in hotly contested presidential elections, the mystery surrounding an appearance-altering illness that twice prompted him to check into a Vienna hospital persisted.
Yushchenko accused the Ukrainian authorities of poisoning him. His detractors suggested he'd eaten some bad sushi.
Adding to the intrigue, the Austrian doctors who treated him have asked foreign experts to help determine if his symptoms may have been caused by toxins found in biological weapons.
Medical experts said they may never know for sure what befell Yushchenko.
But the illness, whatever it was, has dramatically changed his appearance since he first sought treatment at Vienna's private Rudolfinerhaus clinic on September 10.
Known for his ruggedly handsome, almost movie star looks, Yushchenko's complexion is now pockmarked. His face is haggard, swollen and partially paralyzed. One eye often tears up.
By John Hawkins for Right Wing News. Recently, I actually had someone ask me "What do conservatives believe?" After answering his question, it occurred to me that there are probably a lot of people out there, who are new to politics, who are wondering,
"What do conservatives believe? Why do we take the positions we do? Are liberals right in the way that they describe our motivations or is something else at work?"
Therefore, I decided to answer "20 frequently asked questions about conservatism". But, before I get into this, I do have some caveats for you.
First of all, every conservative doesn't have exactly the same beliefs. Moreover, even when we do agree on certain positions, we may have different motives or reasoning behind our answers. So keep in mind that reasonable and intelligent conservatives may disagree with some of the things I've said below.
Furthermore, remember as you read these answers that entire columns, books, and in some cases, whole careers have been spent going into detail on some of the things I touched on. So obviously, what you're about to read is a very short, simplified, and basic explanation of these issues that can be expounded on at length. In other words, think of this as a cheatsheet for "Conservatism 101," not a comprehensive guide.
Ok, that's enough warnings. Shall we begin?
1. What do conservatives believe? As a general rule, conservatives favor a smaller, weaker, Federal government, less taxes, free trade, a strong defense, a color blind society, and traditional American values.
2. So who are these "scary" neoconservatives I hear people on the left ranting about?: "Neocons" are often portrayed as shadowy figures (usually Jewish) who're somehow manipulating America towards war in order to help Israel or just to stoke their bloodlust.
But in reality, the term neocon was coined simply to describe left-wingers who moved to the right. Because there are a number of hawkish Jews who fit that description, neoconservatism has been identified with Jewishness and hawkishness, although neither is a requirement to be a neocon. Neocons do not have a universal set of beliefs, nor do the prescriptions of prominent neocons for the war on terrorism seem to differ significantly from those of the "average conservative". More info here.
3. How 'bout Paleocons?: Paleocons for the most part hold the same beliefs as other conservatives except they tend to be isolationists, anti-free trade, and are debatably even more anti-illegal alien than the average conservative. The best known paleoconservative is Pat Buchanan whose magazine, The American Conservative, is so shrilly anti-Bush and anti-war that large portions of it could have been written by left-wingers like Michael Moore or Ted Rall.
4. Why do conservatives always seem to favor tax-cuts for the wealthy?: Most people on the right are against a graduated income tax. Put another way, conservatives favor things like flat taxes or national sales taxes over our current tax system because they believe a "rising tide lifts all boats". A flat tax or sales tax would encourage everyone to make as much money as possible, which would help grow the economy, whereas a graduated tax punishes high achievers for their success, and lessens economic growth overall.
Moreover, if everyone pays the same percentage of tax, that would provide a strong check on the growth of the Federal government. On the other hand, if the large majority of the taxes are foisted on the rich and ordinary people don't feel any pain if there's a tax increase, the government will grow larger than it should on the backs of the entrepreneurs who are helping to drive the economy. Eventually you get to a point, as we did in the seventies, where this strangles economic growth.
To sum it up, long term, the flatter the tax system is, the more the economy will grow, and the better off ALL AMERICANS, not just the rich, will be.
5. Why do Conservatives favor the rich so much? See the answer given above. Furthermore, instead of saying that, "Conservatives favor the rich," I think it would be more accurate to say that conservatives, unlike liberals, are not hostile to the rich. Conservatives don't begrudge the wealthy the money they make, think the affluent must have cheated somebody to get rich, or believe that society should "punish" people for success.
6. What's so great about Ronald Reagan? Why do conservatives admire him so much?: When the Gipper came into office, our economy was in the worst shape since the Great Depression, Vietnam and Watergate had shattered America's confidence, and the Soviet Union was considered by many to be the stronger of the two super powers. When Reagan left office he had rebuilt our military, taken the steps necessary to break the Soviet Union (which finally collapsed in 1991), and managed to create a tidal wave of economic prosperity with his tax cuts that America is still riding to this day. To conservatives, Reagan was a titan among men. More details here.
7. The conservatives I know are opposed to Affirmative Action and racial set-asides. Why so?: Conservatives believe it is wrong to discriminate against, or give benefits to, anyone based on the color of his skin. In other words, Conservatives believe in a color-blind society.
8. Is Republican a synonym for conservative?: No, no, a thousand times no! The Republican party is the home of the conservative movement, but that doesn't mean that all Republicans are conservative. Furthermore, even the Republicans who are conservative can't always do what they'd like because of political pressure.
Just to give you an example of what I'm talking about, keep in mind that President Bush has endured voluminous criticism from the right over his plan to deal with illegal aliens, excessive spending, Steel Tariffs, his support for the assault weapons ban, his large budget increase for the NEA, and a number of other issues.
by John Hawkins for Right Wing News. One of the stock questions I sometimes ask in interviews is, "Theoretically, let's say you could get any five pieces of legislation passed that you wanted. These could either bills that are already in the pipeline in Congress or that you could write yourself. What pieces of legislation would you pass?" Well, I decided to crank that number up to 9 and answer it myself. I kept things short for brevity's sake...
1. Abortion: I don't believe the rights of any mother should include the right to kill her child unless her own life is in danger. I'd like to see a Constitutional amendment banning abortion except when the mother's life is in danger.
2. Balanced Budget Amendment: The ONLY way we're going to be able to get the government to spend within its means over the long-term is to force it to do so with a balanced budget amendment. If the government wants to spend more than it takes in some years, then it better start saving some money for a rainy day instead of spending it all on pork.
3. Fifty-One Votes To Confirm A Judge Rule: Our judicial confirmation system hasn't functioned well in a long time and now it's totally broken. Quite frankly, I think you could make a case that the Senate can't Constitutionally filibuster judges as it is, but in any case, this is what we need to be doing.
KIEV, Ukraine (AP) -- Ukraine's two rivals for power failed in nearly three hours of talks Friday to resolve the political stalemate over who will lead the bitterly divided nation, and opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko told a huge rally that he was insisting on a new election.
Outgoing President Leonid Kuchma presided at the meeting with Yushchenko, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich and a delegation of key European envoys, and he said a working group had been established to find a solution to the crisis over who will succeed him.
The Krelim-backed Yanukovych was declared the winner of Sunday's election but cannot be inaugurated pending hearing of an appeal to the Supreme Court filed by the Yushchenko camp.
President Bush said from his vacation home in Crawford, Texas, that the world "is watching very closely" and he hoped the crisis would be "resolved in a way that brings credit and confidence to the Ukrainian government." The United States and European Union have said they cannot accept the results of the runoff election, warning of "consequences" of Ukraine's relations with the West if the current outcome stands.
Irony isn't a strong enough word by Rob in Baltimore - For Americablog.org
Hollywood couldn't come up with irony like this. It had to come from the U.S. Department of State and the mouth of Colin Powell (Photos from Yahoo):
Good morning, everyone. A dozen years ago, Ukrainians chose freedom and independence, setting their country on a path of democracy and prosperity. The United States has been a consistent partner with Ukraine in this journey. Similarly, today the United States stands with the people of Ukraine and their effort to ensure their democratic choice.
Indeed, this is a critical moment. It is time for Ukrainian leaders to decide whether they are on the side of democracy or not, whether they respect the will of the people or not. If the Ukrainian Government does not act immediately and responsibly, there will be consequences for our relationship for Ukraine's hopes for Euro-Atlantic integration and for individuals responsible for perpetrating fraud.
The Central Election Commission has just announced official results and declared the current prime minister the winner. We cannot accept this result as legitimate because it does not meet international standards and because there has not been an investigation of the numerous and credible reports of fraud and abuse. We have been following developments very closely and are deeply disturbed by the extensive and credible reports of fraud in the election. We call for a full review of the conduct of the election and the tallying of election results."
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels. More than a million people from all over Europe are to deliver a petition to Tony Blair and fellow EU leaders calling for changes to the constitution recognising Europe's Christian heritage.
Refusing to accept a secular "fait accompli" from Brussels, a Christian coalition is demanding that each EU state publish its version of the constitution's preamble, with references to God if desired.
Already armed with 1,149,000 signatures and with thousands more pouring in from Holland since the murder of the film-maker Theo van Gogh, the group claims that most states want some reference to Christianity but were blocked by France.
The move is keenly backed by Pope John Paul II, who has repeatedly condemned the "moral drift" of Brussels. "One does not cut the roots to one's birthright," he told pilgrims this summer.
President Orders CIA to let policymakers know about ‘diverse views’. The Associated Press.
CRAWFORD, Texas - President Bush has ordered new measures to bolster the CIA in combating weapons of mass destruction and other threats, directing an agency that lawmakers have accused of engaging in “group think” to present “diverse views” to policy makers.
The new steps came as part of a response to the Sept. 11 commission’s report, presented last summer. In measures he approved last Thursday and announced late Tuesday, Bush elaborated on how he will respond to two recommendations he had previously embraced.
He directed outgoing Attorney General John Ashcroft to press ahead with a “specialized and integrated national security work force” within the FBI. This group includes agents, analysts, linguists and surveillance experts who seek to cultivate “an institutional culture imbued with a deep expertise in intelligence and national security.”
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld denied reports Tuesday that he privately campaigned against a proposed intelligence overhaul.
"I'm a part of this administration. I support the president's position," he told reporters at the Pentagon.
Some Republicans and Democrats in Congress have suggested Rumsfeld had a role in stopping the legislation, which is intended to create a national intelligence director position, because the Defense Department would lose authority over several intelligence agencies that are currently part of the military.
Military officials also have said that losing those agencies to civilian control would threaten the flow of information to soldiers in the field.
White House Seeks Deal to Save Intelligence Bill By THOM SHANKER and RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: November 24, 2004
WASHINGTON, Nov. 23 - The White House held out hope on Tuesday that a compromise could be reached on legislation to overhaul American intelligence, as Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who has been accused of working secretly to scuttle the bill, vowed his support for President Bush's position.
In a Pentagon news conference, Mr. Rumsfeld denied that he had exerted his influence to protect the Defense Department's sweeping budgetary powers over intelligence. But he said that even the administration's views on the legislation could shift as Congressional negotiators sought compromise language to revive the bill.
"Needless to say, I'm a part of this administration," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "I support the president's position."
Badnarik, Cobb Ready to Sue Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party's David Cobb said they would sue in federal court to force a recount of Ohio ballots--before returns are certified next week. Last week, the two said they had raised more than $150,000 to cover the state's fee for a recount. Ohio law requires payment of $10 per precinct, or $113,600 statewide. One election official, however, has said he might mobilize fellow counties to resist a recount.
Cronkite Sounds Off on Iraq War at Fisher Island Forum
By Ginelle G. Torres,Miami Bureau, Sun Sentinel. Veteran journalist Walter Cronkite said Thursday that the war in Iraq has divided the United States.
"The public's reaction to Vietnam is going to be peanuts when compared to Iraq if it's not settled soon," he said during a media forum on Fisher Island held to benefit the Fisher Island Philanthropic Fund. "The war is tearing us apart."
During hour-long remarks, Cronkite also spoke out on the presidential election, the national debt and the state of television journalism.
Cronkite, 88, who spent years as a foreign correspondent and covered World War II and the Nuremberg trials for United Press, said the outcome of the presidential election only added to a tense atmosphere in the nation.
"We have one party controlling the White House, House of Representatives and its subsidiaries," Cronkite said. "The nation's severely unbalanced."
WASHINGTON - An overhaul of the nation's intelligence agencies may still pass this year despite the collapse of a compromise bill, congressional leaders said Sunday.
"I still think there's a pretty good chance we're going to get intelligence reform," Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said on ABC's "This Week."
He said Congress would likely return Dec. 6 in an effort to pass the bill, which would create a powerful position to oversee the CIA and several other nonmilitary spy agencies. The bill was a compromise that was endorsed by House and Senate negotiators, the White House and the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission. Congress was to have finished its session on Saturday.
by Jim Abrams, AP Writer. WASHINGTON (AP) -- Unwilling to concede defeat, congressional leaders expressed hope Sunday that lawmakers could return next month to resolve a turf battle that has blocked passage of an overhaul of the nation's intelligence agencies. Much depends on whether President Bush is more active in bringing his own troops in line, they said.
"For us to do the bill in early December it will take significant involvement by the president and the vice president," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "It will take real focus on their part."
During a chaotic Saturday that was intended as the final meeting of the 108th Congress, negotiators announced a compromise on the intelligence bill. Hours later, opposition from the Republican chairmen of two committees stymied the legislation, which would create a national intelligence director.
By Susan Q. Stranahan. Journalists are about to embark on an uncommon task in American politics: covering a president's second term. As Ronald Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times wrote recently, only eleven presidents have won a second term since the formation of the modern political party system in 1828.
Bill Clinton did it; so did Ronald Reagan. Now, as George W. Bush outlines his agenda and shuffles his cabinet in advance of Inauguration Day, it seems a good time to ask this question: Will the media, which belatedlyconceded that they failed to adequately scrutinize Bush's rationale for the Iraq war in his first term, take off the gloves in the next four years?
"History doesn't give us much evidence of that," says author Mark Hertsgaard. "Look at the Reagan era. The media certainly didn't get tougher in his second term."
In 1988, Hertsgaard wrote On Bended Knee, The Press and the Reagan Presidency. "Even with all that eventually went wrong -- the Iran-contra scandal, the stock market crash, the seemingly endless series of criminal investigations of former top White House officials -- the overall press coverage of the Reagan administration was extraordinarily positive," Hertsgaard concluded in his book.
By Susan Q. Stranahan. Journalists are about to embark on an uncommon task in American politics: covering a president's second term. As Ronald Brownstein of the Los Angeles Timeswrote recently, only eleven presidents have won a second term since the formation of the modern political party system in 1828.
Bill Clinton did it; so did Ronald Reagan. Now, as George W. Bush outlines his agenda and shuffles his cabinet in advance of Inauguration Day, it seems a good time to ask this question: Will the media, which belatedlyconceded that they failed to adequately scrutinize Bush's rationale for the Iraq war in his first term, take off the gloves in the next four years?
"History doesn't give us much evidence of that," says author Mark Hertsgaard. "Look at the Reagan era. The media certainly didn't get tougher in his second term."
In 1988, Hertsgaard wrote On Bended Knee, The Press and the Reagan Presidency. "Even with all that eventually went wrong -- the Iran-contra scandal, the stock market crash, the seemingly endless series of criminal investigations of former top White House officials -- the overall press coverage of the Reagan administration was extraordinarily positive," Hertsgaard concluded in his book.
ashington. Give the man his due: George W. Bush is emerging as one of the boldest, most audacious presidents in modern history.
Whether he is also wise is a question that will preoccupy us for another four years, but the reshuffling of his team in recent days makes clear that he intends to stretch the powers of his office to their limits. Woodrow Wilson once wrote that "the president is at liberty, both in law and conscience, to be as big a man as he can.'' President Bush comes Texas-sized.
By sending members of his White House staff to run three of the most important departments in the government - with perhaps more such appointments in the offing - Mr. Bush is centralizing power in the White House in ways not seen since Richard Nixon. Nixon had his troika of Bob Haldeman, John Ehrlichman and Henry Kissinger to run the government. Mr. Bush seems destined to run the government with his own troika: Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice.
by John in DC. Apparently burning the flag is wrong but burning a constitution is a-okay, per the radical right. Below, a man whose name suggests he should appreciate the gift of tolerance America offers people of all faiths, ethnicity, and other differences, seems to not get it so much. He's burning a copy of the Massachusetts constitution. Now, I understand the Mass. constitution is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, in the country. Pretty sacred document, you'd think. But I guess the radical right only cares about sacred documents when someone else is burning them.
But hey, no one ever accused them of practicing what they preach (or screech).
Thanks to Tom for sending this in from the the land of the free, Massachusetts.
(CBS/AP) The nine Judiciary Republicans agreed they would stand behind Sen. Arlen Specter in January's vote for chairman despite his statement after this month's elections that anti-abortion judges would have a difficult time gaining Senate confirmation, given Democratic opposition.
That comment infuriated abortion opponents, and Senate conservatives — during meetings arranged by GOP leadership — subjected Specter to an exceptional grilling on his views and intentions.
CBS Radio News correspondent Bob Fuss reports that Specter said Thursday, "I have no reason to believe that I'll be unable to support any individual President Bush finds worthy" of the federal bench.
Anti-abortion activists said they were disappointed that Senate Republicans had decided not to block Specter.
By JAY COHEN, Associated Press Writer. COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Election officials in one Ohio county found that about 2,600 ballots were double-counted, and two other counties have discovered possible cases of people voting twice in the presidential election.
Prosecutors were trying to determine Wednesday whether charges should be filed against a couple in Madison County accused of voting twice. In addition, Summit County election workers investigated possible double votes found under 18 names.
In the other case, Sandusky County election officials discovered that about 2,600 ballots from nine precincts were counted twice, likely because of worker error, elections director Barb Tuckerman said.
Tuckerman believes the votes were counted twice when they were mistakenly placed alongside a pile of uncounted ballots. The room where the ballots were being fed into optical-scan machines on election night was so crowded that ballots had to be placed on the floor, Tuckerman said.
"It was totally hectic," she said.
The problem was discovered when Tuckerman found that one precinct showed 131 percent of registered voters had cast ballots.
House Republicans Lower Ethical Standard for Tom Delay
House Republicans decided that since their ethics-challenged leader Tom Delay stands a real chance of being caught by their own ethics rules, it would probably be best to change them before they actually had to abide by them. So they did. Republican members of the House changed a rule put in place to show their "ethical superiority" in the early 1990's that forbade Republicans from serving in leadership positions if indicted for a crime that could put them in jail for more than two years.
Delay is at the center of a campaign finance scandal that has already led to the indictment of three people, so Republicans certainly had reason to worry. But instead of standing up and truly showing some type of ethical conscience, Republicans changed the definition of what they felt a leader should embody. No longer is a Republican leader held to a standard that says: "if you're indicted, you're not qualified to lead us." They're now held to a standard that says: "if you're indicted, we'll take thirty days to decide if the indictment was warranted, and even then we'll probably let you stay around."
It's amazing what happens when the ethically bankrupt are in control of their own ethical standards.
Posted by Josh McConaha at DNC: Kicking Ass
DeLayed Ethics
The Republican Caucus of the U.S House of Representative voted to change its rules and allow to members to remain in leadership position even if indicted on criminal charges. The changes were made to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) who is the subject of a grand jury investigation into his fund raising activities in Texas.
Back in 1993, here’s what Newt Gingrich said about the rule:
"And I think, frankly, we should adopt the rule the Democrats have prospectively, which I think is a sound rule that once indicted you step down."
And now, of course, when the rule could actually come into effect, the GOP axed it to protect their ethically challenged leader.
From Opinion Journal, by Arlen Specter. To resolve any concern that I would block pro-life judicial nominees, take a look at my record. I have consistently opposed any litmus test. I have backed that up by voting to confirm pro-life nominees including Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justice Anthony Kennedy. I led the fight to confirm Justice Clarence Thomas, which almost cost me my Senate seat in 1992.
I have voted for all of President Bush's judicial nominees in committee and on the floor.
The current controversy was artificially created by incorrect reporting. I never "warned" the president on anything--and especially not that I'd block pro-life nominees.
The New York Post says outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell is being urged by Republicans to run against Clinton for Senate.
"I think he would be an exciting choice . . . and I think he would have star quality," said Stephen Minarik, who was tapped Monday to head the troubled New York State Republican Party.
Minarik said he would seek to talk to Powell, a native New Yorker, about making the race once he leaves the State Department.
Powell was first suggested as a potential Clinton challenger by Rep. Vito Fossella of Staten Island, who, like many in the New York GOP, is known to fear his party won't have a strong candidate to field against her in 2006.
Sen. Hillary Clinton "has decided to run for a second term in the Senate in 2006, despite arguments by some Democrats that such a move could complicate her potential bid for the presidency in 2008," the New York Times reports. Ture, perhaps, but hardly a major complication.
"Clinton's advisers said the most obvious complication would be questions about whether she would promise to serve out another term; such demands would be particularly insistent in the intense news media environment of New York."
Why care? A new Gallup Poll showed Clinton as the Democrats' early first choice to run for president in 2008, while Giuliani and Sen. John McCain were tied as first choice among Republicans. If the 2008 Presidential Election were today, whom do you think would win--Clinton or Giuliani? Now imaging Clinton vs. Colin.
Who knew? President Bush met Thursday at the White House with former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky to discuss Sharansky's new book The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny & Terror. Sharansky, is a former Soviet dissident and political prisoner who has spent his life defending democracy and freedom. For his courage, he was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal of Freedom.
In previous years, Sharansky has held various positions in the Israeli government, including deputy prime minister. Also the author of a memoir called Fear No Evil, he is currently minister for Jerusalem and Diaspora Affairs. He lives in Jerusalem with his wife Avital and daughters Rachel and Chana. Does W's recent chats with Sharansky and Blair portend a Case for Peace in the Middle East?
The Book Natan Sharansky has lived an unusual life, spending nine years as a Soviet political prisoner and nine years as an Israeli politician. He brings the unique perspective of his experiences in order to make the case for democracy
Coauthored with his longtime friend and adviser Ron Dermer, this is an analytical yet personal book. In it nondemocratic societies are scrutinized to plumb the tyranny sustaining a "fear society." The authors explain why democracy is not beyond any nation's reach, why it is essential for our security, and why there is much that can be done to promote it around the world. Freedom, the authors claim, is rooted in the right to dissent, to publicly declare one's views, and to do so without fear of punishment, reprisal, or social persecution. The authors argue that societies that fail to protect that right can never be reliable partners for peace. Hmmm? One begins to wonder why W would read this one.
Publisher's Comment "When there is every reason to doubt that freedom will prevail in the Middle East, this book declares unequivocally that the skeptics are wrong. The argument advanced here makes clear why lasting tyranny can be consigned to history's dustbin if the free world stays true to its ideals. The question is not whether we have the power to change the world but whether we have the will. Summoning that will demands that we move beyond Right and Left and start thinking about right and wrong."
Fine and noble, surely. But does W have the will to face what's right and wrong with his own youthful democracy? The current rip in fabric American perhaps tares deeper that the common morality. Some would say it remains much easier to champion the freedoms of the oppressed and downtrodden miles abroad than to celebrate the most innate promises of freedom--intelligent choice. If we fail to champion freedom at home, how can we crusade for it abroad, some of us would ask.
Terrorist Now Has Religious Approval to Use Nuclear Device Against America
NEW YORK(CBS)Osama bin Laden now has religious approval to use a nuclear device against Americans, says the former head of the CIA unit charged with tracking down the Saudi terrorist.
The former agent, Michael Scheuer, speaks to Steve Kroft in his first television interview without disguise to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Nov. 14, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
Scheuer was until recently known as the "anonymous" author of two books critical of the west's response to bin Laden and al Qaeda, the most recent of which is titled Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror.
A CIA analyst who wrote a book that criticized the U.S. war on terror has resigned from the spy agency after it effectively banned him from publicly discussing his views," Reuters reports.
Michael Scheuer, who has criticized the United States' handling of the war on terrorism in a book published under the pseudonym "Anonymous" resigned from the intelligence agency Friday, Nov. 12th.
Scheuer had led a CIA unit that tracked Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from 1996-1999. He announced his intention to resign at a "cordial" meeting with the CIA's new executive director about a series of unauthorized press interviews Scheuer gave last weekend.
The now former CIA analyst is the author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror, a controversial book that he signed as 'anonymous' and published last summer. Scheuer's resi gnation comes after 22 years of service at the Central Intelligence Agency.
"There was no pressure applied in that meeting and it was at that meeting when Mike announced his intention to resign," said a spokesman, who asked not to be identified.
Ashcroft Saying Federal Judges Jeopardize National Security
By John in D.C. - David has already mentioned this story in a post below, but again I had to weigh in because this is just so outrageous. John Ashcroft is now saying that federal judges jeopardize national security by questioning Dear Leader's policies. It's hard to overstate how dangerous and un-American Ashcroft's comments really are.
Judges don't threaten national security by keeping the executive branch honest. People like John Ashcroft jeopardize our entire democracy with their dangerous authoritarian, anti-democratic, and downright un-American utterings. This man should be railroaded out of the country and sent to a fundamentalist Islamic state where he can hang out with people of his same narrow-minded imperious ilk.
Federal judges are jeopardizing national security by issuing rulings contradictory to President Bush's decisions on America's obligations under international treaties and agreements, Attorney General John Ashcroft said Friday.
In his first remarks since his resignation was announced Tuesday, Ashcroft forcefully denounced what he called "a profoundly disturbing trend" among some judges to interfere in the president's constitutional authority to make decisions during war.
"The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war," Ashcroft said in a speech to the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers group.
By David. Seems like the CIA folks aren't exactly thriled with their new bosses. Washington Post reports that the Deputy Director has resigned after warning that "widespread resignations" are on the way under Porter Goss' current (lack of) leadership. Normally, I'd say this is just a house cleaning under a transition, and some feathers are being ruffled, and it's no big deal. But the Deputy Director leaving is a very big deal. And we can't forget the CIA has been getting it RIGHT about bin Laden, and got it RIGHT that Iraq wasn't the problem. It's just that this isn't the information the white house wanted.
David Brooks at NYT says the CIA is now the "enemy." Why? Because people at the CIA dared to speak up when their bosses at the White House ignored them. "Enemy" is a strong accusation, and Brooks knows it.
Earth to Brooks: This white house OUTED a covert CIA operative for political reasons. A lot of people know who did it, but they will let journalists go to jail for refusing to reveal the traitor's name. THERE'S your enemy. Novak is the one who published the operative's name. THERE'S your enemy.
Sadly, Brooks goes on to admit he "mischaracterized" comments John Kerry made about the screw-up in Tora Bora. Mischaracterized, my ass. He's not an idiot. Brooks lied. He knew he lied. And he waited until after the election to say so.
By Joe in D.C. Today, Charles Krauthammer had a really counterintuitive column about what he called the "Moral Values Myth." John and I were mulling this over today. Seems like there might be trouble brewing in conservative paradise. Krauthammer is one of the right wing loudest (and crankiest) voices. He has a huge megaphone with his Washington Post column.
Basically, he seems to be trying to distance the Republican Party from the right-wing religious zealots. He is certainly not giving the kudos to the Falwell, Robertson, Dobson wing of the party. Krauthammer somehow tries to blame Democrats and the media for giving the zealots all the credit for the elections, but it rings hollow. True, Democratic pundits and consultants are giving the religious fanatics too much credit for what happened on November 2nd. But, the Right wing fanatics are taking credit for themselves...and asserting their role as leaders of the GOP. They don't need anyone else's help.
Krauthammer deconstructs the exit polls and proves the gay marriage amendments weren't the deciding factors in the 11 states where they passed. He does more to aid the gay cause than anyone else has yet.
George Bush increased his vote in 2004 over 2000 by an average of 3.1 percent nationwide. In Ohio the increase was 1 percent -- less than a third of the national average. In the 11 states in which the gay marriage referendums were held, Bush increased his vote by less than he did in the 39 states that did not have the referendum. The great anti-gay surge was pure fiction.
So the question we have is what is Krauthammer so worried about? Clearly, warning bells are going off in GOP circles about the new perceived power of the right wing religious zealots. This could be fun to watch.
Krauthammer's conclusion has it backwards:
This does not deter the myth of the Bigoted Christian Redneck from dominating the thinking of liberals and infecting the blue-state media. They need heir moral superiority like oxygen, and they cannot have it cut off by mere facts. Once again they angrily claim the moral high ground, while standing in the ruins of yet another humiliating electoral defeat.
After reading his column, seems to us it's not the liberals and the blue-state media who fear the "Bigoted Christian Redneck". It's the Krauthammers, the conservatives and the White House.
Former Fertilizer Salesman Faces Death by Lethal Injection or Life Without Parole
From Ron Gunzburger. New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey -- who is resigning from office next week -- was once viewed as a potential rising national star on the Democratic scene. The Newark Star-Ledger did some extensive investigative reporting to learn more about what happened to McGreevey's career and why. In a detailed report published Monday, they wrote of a highly flawed politician who was constantly being protected by his staffers from his own self-inflicted problems. "Despite his clean-living image -- and confounding those who believed he was a closeted homosexual -- McGreevey visited traditional, female-staffed go-go bars so frequently before he became governor that his advisers admonished him to stop, warning that he risked political immolation," reported the Star-Ledger. Even back to when McGreevey was running for Woodbridge Mayor, the guy was constantly visiting female strip clubs during the weekdays, at night, and on the weekends. His visits to one particular strip club in Sayreville became so common that his staffers had a nickname for it: they'd joke that "McGreevey is out knocking on doors in Sayreville." The report also details McGreevey's problems with a female prostitute, his visits to gay nightclubs during his campaign for Governor, his hidden relationship with then-boyfriend Golan Cipel, his potentially illegal attempt to funnel hush money to Cipel as the scandal was breaking, and the ongoing corruption investigation of his adminstration. It makes for a fascinating (and prurient) read.
From Politics1.com. Regular viewers of Comedy Central's The Daily Show may remember a profile this past summer of Florida State House candidate Ed Heeney (R). In his interview, Heeney explained how lesbians were ruining his love life and his ability to shoot games of pool. Heeney complained that lesbians had taken over all the good bars in the Fort Lauderdale area with pool tables and that he no longer had any good places to play. He even cited one incident when "a gang of lesbians" confronted him. One lesbian bar owner joked that Heeney was only upset because some lesbians "kicked his ass" in pool. The candidate also explained how "homosexual culture" ruined South Florida and that he could no longer find any single women to date who were not lesbians (Editor's Note: or who were simply telling Heeney they were lesbians in order to not go out with him). Heeney's signature line was that he was not homophobic but "'homo-nausic' ... I'm not afraid of them, I'm sick of the bastards." Heeney lost his run for State House last week by a 40-point margin. Yesterday, Heeney and his former campaign manager were arrested in a bizarre incident. The campaign manager was apparently being evicted from his apartment for non-payment of rent. When a Sheriff's deputy went to enforce the eviction, he found the lock changed. He sawed off the lock, only to find the door was reinforced from the inside by wood and steel. The campaign manager had a past criminal history involving gun violence, so the deputy called for backup. That led to a ten hour stand-off that ended peacefully when the man and Heeney -- who was inside the apartment helping the guy keep the door locked -- were both arrested for trespass and resisting arrest without violence. Heeney didn't post the $100 bond but instead spent the night in jail....and ladies, yes, amazingly he's still single and available!
By Keith Olbermann (Bloggerman), Nov. 11, 2004. NEW YORK. John Kerry or no John Kerry, there could still be recounts in Ohio and New Hampshire courtesy of the two candidates who got far more grief than votes during the presidential campaign. David Cobb of the Green Party told a California radio station late yesterday afternoon that he is quite likely to be demanding a recount in Ohio, with a final decision to be reached and announced during the day.
From Arianna Online, Nov. 11, 2004. Twelve days before the election, James Carville stood in a Beverly Hills living room surrounded by two generations of Hollywood stars. After being introduced by Sen. John Kerry’s daughter, Alexandra, he told the room — confidently, almost cockily — that the election was in the bag.
“If we can’t win this damn election,” the advisor to the Kerry campaign said, “with a Democratic Party more unified than ever before, with us having raised as much money as the Republicans, with 55% of the country believing we’re heading in the wrong direction, with our candidate having won all three debates, and with our side being more passionate about the outcome than theirs — if we can’t win this one, then we can’t win shit! And we need to completely rethink the Democratic Party.”
Well, as it turns out, that’s exactly what should be done. But instead, Carville and his fellow architects of the Democratic defeat have spent the last week defending their campaign strategy, culminating on Monday morning with a break
Nov. 26, 2004, ABC News — Six years ago, on a cold October night on the outskirts of Laramie, Wyo., 21-year-old gay college student Matthew Shepard was brutally beaten, tied to a fence and left for dead. He was found 18 hours later and rushed to the hospital, where he lingered on the edge of death for nearly five days before succumbing to his injuries. 
From Pam's House Blend. It was about what I expected. We were treated by 20/20's Elizabeth Vargas spending the first half hour of the program describing the emotionally and physically abusive childhoods of McKinney and Henderson, even to the point of showing how McKinney was an Eagle Scout. It was just meth that made him go out of control, beating Matthew with a 357 Magnum until he was a bloody pulp for the $30 in Shepard's wallet. Henderson comes off as practically an altar boy, that "didn't even touch Matthew" aside from tying up the helpless young man to the fence. I guess that doesn't count. And he made no attempt to call for help because he was afraid of McKinney's meth-fueled fury. 
President Bush has dismissed speculation about filling a number of Supreme Court openings in his second term saying: "I'll deal with a vacancy when there is one." The following are names that he may be considering if there there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court: 
VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- As Ukraine's popular pro-Western opposition leader claimed victory Tuesday in hotly contested presidential elections, the mystery surrounding an appearance-altering illness that twice prompted him to check into a Vienna hospital persisted. 
WASHINGTON - An overhaul of the nation's intelligence agencies may still pass this year despite the collapse of a compromise bill, congressional leaders said Sunday. 
ashington. Give the man his due: 
House Republicans decided that since their ethics-challenged leader Tom Delay stands a real chance of being caught by their own ethics rules, it would probably be best to change them before they actually had to abide by them. So they did. Republican members of the House changed a rule put in place to show their "ethical superiority" in the early 1990's that forbade Republicans from serving in leadership positions if indicted for a crime that could put them in jail for more than two years.
By John in D.C. - David has already mentioned this story in a post below, but again I had to weigh in because this is just so outrageous. John Ashcroft is now saying that federal judges jeopardize national security by questioning Dear Leader's policies. It's hard to overstate how dangerous and un-American Ashcroft's comments really are.
By David. Seems like the CIA folks aren't exactly thriled with their new bosses. Washington Post reports that the Deputy Director has resigned after warning that "widespread resignations" are on the way under Porter Goss' current (lack of) leadership. Normally, I'd say this is just a house cleaning under a transition, and some feathers are being ruffled, and it's no big deal. But the Deputy Director leaving is a very big deal. And we can't forget the CIA has been getting it RIGHT about bin Laden, and got it RIGHT that Iraq wasn't the problem. It's just that this isn't the information the white house wanted.
Jim McGreevey -- who is resigning from office next week -- was once viewed as a potential rising national star on the Democratic scene. The Newark Star-Ledger did some extensive investigative reporting to learn more about what happened to McGreevey's career and why. In a 
Heeney explained how lesbians were ruining his love life and his ability to shoot games of pool. Heeney complained that lesbians had taken over all the good bars in the Fort Lauderdale area with pool tables and that he no longer had any good places to play. He even cited one incident when "a gang of lesbians" confronted him. One lesbian bar owner joked that Heeney was only upset because some lesbians "kicked his ass" in pool. The candidate also explained how "homosexual culture" ruined South Florida and that he could no longer find any single women to date who were not lesbians (Editor's Note: or who were simply telling Heeney they were lesbians in order to not go out with him). Heeney's signature line was that he was not homophobic but "'homo-nausic' ... I'm not afraid of them, I'm sick of the bastards." Heeney lost his run for State House last week by a 40-point margin. Yesterday, Heeney and his former campaign manager were arrested in a bizarre incident. The campaign manager was apparently being evicted from his apartment for non-payment of rent. When a Sheriff's deputy went to enforce the eviction, he found the lock changed. He sawed off the lock, only to find the door was reinforced from the inside by wood and steel. The campaign manager had a past criminal history involving gun violence, so the deputy called for backup. That led to a ten hour stand-off that ended peacefully when the man and Heeney -- who was inside the apartment helping the guy keep the door locked -- were both arrested for trespass and resisting arrest without violence. Heeney didn't post the $100 bond but instead spent the night in jail....and ladies, yes, amazingly he's still single and available!