- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
- Jan 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Feb 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–28
- Mar 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Apr 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30
- May 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–31
- Jun 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–30
- Jul 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Aug 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–31
- Sep 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
- Oct 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Nov 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–30
- Dec 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
Saturday, January 7, 2006
The Dark Horse Emerges
Posted by on 1.7.06 @ 3:09PM
Boehner, Blunt and Pence remain the names on everyone's list, but a DeLay staffer says that the former Majority Leader has his horse in the race and it is ...
Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan.
Rogers is a former FBI agent, a DeLay acolyte and a solid conservative. That DeLay is touting him is significant. As we have said all along, DeLay will play a role in the selection of a new leader.
According to several leadership staff sources, Rogers intends to make a play for a leadership position. "It's not clear that majority leader is what he's looking at. I know that people have talked to him about that, but he really seems interested in moving up the ladder taking a leading role in the caucus," says one source.
DeLay DeToast
Posted by on 1.7.06 @ 3:00PM
We'll have more on this on Monday morning, but obviously the former Majority Leader did the right thing on Saturday morning by stepping aside and allowing elections to move forward.
DeLay's career has been marked by an uncanny sense of political timing and how the political process works. This resignation is another sign of just that.
That said, Republicans are far from free and clear, and a new leaders will not resolve many of the problems the party faces in the House in the coming weeks.
Merkeling Guantanamo
Posted by on 1.7.06 @ 1:19PM
So much for improving relations between America and Germany. Just days before meeting with the president, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has delivered herself of the opinion that the detention center at Guantanamo should be closed. The money quote (from Sky News):
"An institution such as
Friday, January 6, 2006
Pence for Majority Leader
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 8:14PM
The AP doesn't mention Rep. Mike Pence, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, in its House elections tea-leaf-reading. But if House Republicans really want fresh, bold, principled leadership -- which Blunt and Boehner are not -- they should look no further than Pence. Though some members are sore that Pence was vocal about spending this year (the "grandstanding" charge just doesn't wash for this humble man from what his staff says privately), he stands for conservatism in all the important fights.
Alito's Way Cleared ... Slightly
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 7:57PM
So Stephen R. Dujack, the final witness that Sen. Patrick Leahy thought would create the kind of negative buzz against Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, has been pulled.
According to Republican and Democratic Judiciary Committee staffers, the Democrats were aware of Dujack's dubious background as a witness appropriate to a Supreme Court nomination, but felt that resurrecting the Concerned Alumni of Princeton story had enough upside to slide him in. According to one Democratic Committee source, some staffers advised against it, but were overruled by both Sens. Leahy and Kennedy.
"Dujack was Leahy's guy. He wanted him. We got him and vetted him and advised against it," says the Democratic staffer. "We were over-ruled." This source says that there is a consensus among the committee staff -- both parties -- that Alito should be confirmed.
So Dujack is dust, though now Sen. Leahy's staff is offering him to all of the news channels for interviews on Monday. That said, there are sure to be fireworks aplenty as the hearings open.
Drudge Headline
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 6:23PM
Drudge has a "Dems Plan to Destroy Alito" head up on his site right now.
We've been hearing that the organization Drudge refers to his in tease is Concerned Alumni of Princeton (see earlier posts). Before everyone gets hot and bothered by this, understand that the Senate staffs of Pat Leahy, Dick Durbin and Ted Kennedy have been pushing this CAP story for more than a month to little effect. In that time, we've heard that the Washington Post and the New York Times were working on stories. Now, they may be sitting on them, but it appeared -- as of earlier this week -- that there simply wasn't anything to the CAP rumors the Dems were peddling.
We won't put it past the MSM to concoct something in time for the Sunday morning talk shows or for the opening of hearings next week, but know this: everyone who has tracked the Alito nomination closely has been aware of CAP and Alito's membership. This all has the whiff of desperation about it.
First and Ten
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 5:58PM
It has been learned on good authority (remember that one?) that the Washington Redskins are not among the several Indian Tribes to receive refunds from the Abramoff kitty.
Alito's Way Updated
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 5:23PM
Word off the Hill on the Senate side is that Democrats are divided on how to approach a delay on the vote of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. According the Senate sources, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid was none too happy with the leak late yesterday by some of his aides about the planned one-week delay in a Judiciary Committee vote. But just what Democrats will do remains unclear. It appears now that the Democrats seem content to talk a tough good game, but wait to see how the hearings play out before they show their true hand.
While much of the media spotlight of late has focused on Sens. Patrick Leahy and Chuck Schumer, the man to watch next week -- as with the Robert Bork nomination -- is Sen. Ted Kennedy. He is the one spearheading much of the agitation on the Democratic side, and there is talk that if he had his way, the Alito vote would be put off into February.
Re: DeLay DeToast
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 5:09PM
I seem to recall some rather indignant reactions when I dared to suggest back in September that it was time to cut DeLay loose. National Review, calling for DeLay to step aside in light of developments in the Abramoff scandal, sticks by the line that to dump DeLay then "would have rewarded a Democratic political power play."
Come on: Democrats haven't stopped hating DeLay, and lots of them will be feeling "rewarded" by his downfall, and will cheer it. They'll be wrong to cheer, since they'll be weaker against a different Majority Leader. The Abramoff plea deal makes this only slightly more true now than it was in the fall. And don't kid yourself: Since the moment DeLay took his "temporary" leave, and certainly since Roy Blunt beat out David Dreier for acting leader, the leadership on the Hill has just been waiting for the right moment to push him out for good. I'm glad they've found it.
DeLay DeToast Pt III
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 4:55PM
Interesting watching the "dog chasing its own tail" on other blog sites as the MSM has created the buzz and excitement of an impending election that was a foregone conclusion a month ago to readers of sites like AmSpec and RedState.
For us, the only question was the timing and how late into January the Republican caucus and its leadership felt they could hold on.
It may be that Rep. Roy Blunt has built up enough goodwill in the past two months to have the "interim" removed from his leadership title. But as we have pointed out before, one reason Blunt's star was tarnished to begin with was damage inflicted by then-Leader Tom DeLay. There has been no reconciliation. DeLay is still influential in the caucus and will do everything he can to ensure Blunt is not given what DeLay feels his colleague should not have to begin with.
John Boehner -- his K Street credentials and friendships aside -- is right now in a slightly better position to take the leadership mantle. There is a clear sense that many in the caucus want change and Boehner is enough of a change to suit those seeking it, while presenting a more stable, presence than some of the young bucks who are agitating for radical reform.
Boehner goes back to the old House Banking Scandal days, when he, Rick Santorum and Jim Nussle were integral to keeping that story alive for months. Boehner is the last of the gang in the House with enough stature to grasp what many of them had their sites on back in 1991 and 1992.
If there is one winner to identify already, it's former Rep. Chris Cox, who surely would have been thrust forward as leadership fodder this time around. From his perch in his shiny new SEC Chairman's office, he must be breathing a deep sigh of relief.
Today on the Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 3:31PM
I'll be subbing for Hugh again today (6-9 pm EST on the Salem Radio Network). We'll be talking about the Dems' maneuvers to delay Alito, DeLay's altercations with the House leadership (viz. the Prowler) and just how far should the conservatives go in attacking the left on its feckless positions on the war. Pat Robertson goes too far. But most of us don't go far enough. See ya on the radio.
DeLay DeToast Pt II
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 3:20PM
Hotline is now reporting two dozen House Republicans have stepped up to sign on to an election petition, and fingers Rep. Jeff Flake as one of the ringleaders. There are at least two or three others lobbying conservatives and moderates to sign on.
The names in play for new leadership continue to be Blunt and Boehner. Fiscal conservatives are pushing Rep. Mike Pence, while others are pushing Rep. Zach Wamp.
We think, based on conversations we've had in the past few days that the names to watch - and what they say and do over the next few days - are Reps. Debra Pryce, Eric Cantor and Pence.
Pryce is being overlooked, and shouldn't be underestimated. Cantor is increasingly getting attention, and while he may not have built up the operation to pull off an election to Leader, he almost certainly will leap frog others to a senior leadership post.
The other wild card: Speaker Dennis Hastert. He has been strangely quiet about all of this, and while that has allowed others to fill the vacuum and move ahead with an election drive, there are some wondering just how long he intends to put up with a growing mess of a situation.
DeLay DeToast?
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 2:56PM
We're hearing that the House Republican Caucus may have at least partial closure to the Tom DeLay drama by Monday morning, perhaps sooner depending on how hot the phone lines get over the next 36 hours.
By then, Republicans will have have pulled together the requisite 50 members formally requesting an election for leadership posts.
The petition drive is not being driven by senior members of the caucus who might also be candidates for leadership positions, we are told. Rather, it is the tier of Republicans just below them that is driving this train. At least two regional whips are said to be involved in the lobbying to pull together the "Gang of 50."
As we reported before Christmas, GOP House leaders meeting on St. Michael's Island after Thanksgiving anticipated such a petition would be forwarded to the caucus after the holidays, particularly if the Texas courts didn't clarify Leader DeLay's legal predicament any further.
According to one Hill source we spoke to over lunch, if the group gets the necessary signatures for the election request, Rep. DeLay will be given the opportunity to make a face-saving gesture that at least superficially would allow the caucus to move ahead without much rancor internally.
"We all know there are going to be a lot of hurt feelings. There will be some additional backstabbing and Congressman DeLay will probably exact a certain amount of revenge on those he blames for this taking place, but we have to do this. The cost of not doing it will be a lot higher longterm to the party," the source says.
Re: Wouldn't It Be Great
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 2:19PM
That NYT write-up is a joke. Notice how they deep they buried the positive comments. And the lead is that Colin Powell "said nothing -- a silence that spoke volumes to many in the White House on Thursday morning." That was the most important thing about the meeting? Really?
Maybe it's the Bushies' fault for failing to emphasize that nearly everyone in that room more or less agrees with their Iraq policy -- none are calling for an instant pull-out, to my knowledge. Certainly Eagleburger, Baker, Schlesinger, Shultz, Laird, Carlucci, and McNamara back the war and (I think) have from the begining; probably Haig, Perry, and Cohen, too. Even Albright's criticism wasn't really of Iraq per se, more of a generic partisan foreign policy brickbat.
I notice that Caspar Weinberger was among those who couldn't make it. I was wondering if he'd be there, since word is he and and several of the people in that room haven't been on speaking terms since his 1996 book The Next War was published.
Leahy's Hit Squad
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 2:01PM
Talk about a motley crew that the Democrats have lined up to attack Judge Samuel Alito.
Powerline hits Leahy on the inclusion of Stephen Dujack on one of the panels (according to Leahy's list, the final panel). Dujack is considered even in some left-wing circles a bit a gadfly. He is expected to attack Alito for his purported activities as a member of Concerned Alumni of Princeton.
We've been hearing for weeks that Leahy staffers have been pressuring the Washington Post and New York to write about CAP and Alito, claiming they had "explosive" evidence. It isn't clear that anyone is biting. But clearly, Leahy thinks Dujack will impress.
The real fireworks should play out in panel three, which features attorney Fred Gray (famous for serving as a legal counsel to Rosa Parks), Kate Michelman (supporter of the slaughter of innocent lives), and Ronald Sullivan, a law professor at Yale.
According to a Democratic Judiciary Staff member, Leahy believes this is a panel that will garner the most press attention for Democrats. Gray will charge that Alito's writings and rulings will turn back the clock on the rights of American minorities. Michelman will charge ... well, we know where she's going to go. Sullivan has told Leahy's staff that he is willing to call out Alito for questionable ethics and recusal decisions during his time on the federal bench.
"Leahy and others on our side believe that after our side's opening statements, these panels are the best chance we have of raising the kinds of questions to delay Alito's confirmation vote, if we decide to go that route," says the Democratic staffer. "Gray and Sullivan are important in raising those kinds of questions."
Wouldn't It Be Great...
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 1:28PM
... If Bush, having gathered previous secretaries of state and defense, had Madeline Albright arrested?
Maybe he could have thrown in the journalist too. "Exceedingly upbeat"? You mean they didn't have a death count marquee along the bottom of the video feed that presented the Iraqi ambassador?
Sharon Update
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 12:19PM
Officially U.S. government officials over at the State Department or the White House aren't saying anything different from what Israeli officials are saying about the status of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. But unofficially, the White House is making plans for possible events in Jerusalem mid-week, next week. A source close to the situation confirmed chatter elsewhere this morning that the White House doesn't expect any official word on Sharon's status until after the Sabbath concludes. This, coincidentally... or not, is also around the time that Sharon's induced coma might be reversed.
Economic Reporting
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 11:44AM
Unemployment dips below expected levels, the economy adds jobs, and the AP reports a negative headline.
Re: Rain Dance
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 11:40AM
The ever-prolific super-lawyer Bob Bauer terms the returning of campaign contributions from tainted sources "the Ritual of the Refund... a strange act of public disassocation -- a shunning."
Rain Dance Produces Windfall
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 10:50AM
The New York Times hiring policy needs to be clarified. A reporter realizes that Abramoff-related campaign contributions are now being returned to Native tribes and charities as politicians are trying to distance themselves from the "Republican" lobbyist.
How does the reporter answer that pivotal question?
So, a Web site designer (and Democrat!) Dan Kriwitsky is outraged. WELL! It's a good thing he wrote a reporter. Phew, I thought we would never understand just how corrosive Jack Abramoff's influence was on our dignified political institutions.
Tapping Alito
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 10:23AM
That Ted Kennedy can be so cheeky. A Washington Times story indicates that Alito is going to have to face the wiretap issue in his confirmation hearings, and here's an excerpt.
There are times when individuals or executives, but I'm totally not naming names here, just, you know, people, believe they're above the law. Sometimes, they steal elections. Sometimes, they lie to the American people in order to wage a war for oil. And somtimes, just sometimes, they'll eavesdrop and spy on the American people.
This is completely unlike those other people who, in the most dignified of ways, drive cars off bridges.
Besides, remember the torture memos and Gonzales? Yawn. The
American people are perfectly okay with broad executive power in
wartime. So whenever you hear Ted say something like this, just be
sure to add those two words: "...In wartime."
Girly Governor
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 9:47AM
So much for challenging California's power bases as "girly men." New, in 2006, it's the sensitive, repentent Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The people, who always have the last word, sent a clear message: Cut the warfare, cool the rhetoric, find common ground and fix the problems together. To my fellow Californians I say -- message received.
Translation: Dear, I've changed. Really! Just come back home and it'll all be fine.
And kissing and making up costs more than $220 billion over the next ten years -- a 20% annual budget increase. There's nothing like a principled governing philosophy, eh?
Howling Harry
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 8:53AM
If it already isn't taking place, there is a conference call scheduled this morning among Senate Democrats to discuss their Alito hearings strategy. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid was said by aides to be livid that staff went public yesterday with his party's plans for a one-week delay. We should start hearing about the call's content by lunchtime.
As we reported yesterday, the one week delay is one of several strategies Reid is considering deploying in the Alito fight. In the past couple of days Reid has spoken with DNC chair Howard Dean, as well as other outside Democratic activists, and was told that they wanted a fight. That they had raised more than $15 million to fight Supreme Court nominations, and that they were ready to spend it over the next month.
Not surprisingly, Sen. Patrick Leahy has no recall of promising his colleague Sen. Arlen Specter that he will play nice during the confirmation process.
The Good News Patrol
Posted by on 1.6.06 @ 8:36AM
Bush, Cheney, and economic cabinet secretaries are beating the streets today to tout new economic numbers -- before they're even released. Wonderful.
Thursday, January 5, 2006
Harry Howler Pt. 2
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 6:34PM
Sources inside the Judiciary Committee and Democratic Senate leadership say that the one week carryover in the vote on Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito is something that was put forward by Sen. Harry Reid and his staff, in consultation with Democrats both inside and outside the Senate. Presumably this means Sen. Dick Durbin and Howie Dean over at the DNC.
Democrats and their operatives insist that "shoes are going to drop" about Alito and the nomination in the next couple of days. From our media contacts, we aren't hearing about anything earthshaking that anyone is working on. There just isn't anything out there. The man apparently is what he has appeared to be: authentic, bright, and more than competent.
And Yet Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres Live
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 6:15PM
Those who still take Pat Robertson seriously: You ought to stop.
Alito's Way Blocked ... Slightly
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 5:05PM
Interesting. According to Democratic leadership sources, this is but the first of what may be a series of shifting strategic moves by the leadership to wring every last drop of drama and angst out of the nomination:
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats will force an one-week delay in the Judiciary Committee's vote on Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, Senate aides say.
Big Allen Move
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 3:37PM
There will be all kinds of tea-leaf reading about the formal annoucement that former RNC Chairman and all arounnd GOP-go-to-guy Ed Gillespie has signed on as the treasurer of Sen. George Allen's leadership PAC.
One of the lingering questions around town is which camp of prospective '08 Presidential candidates Gillespie might join. This move doesn't necessarily answer the question, but it should give conservatives some indication about where the battle lines are going to be drawn in the coming couple of years. And it focuses a national spotlight on Allen in a way that it wasn't a few weeks ago. It means Allen will be a bigger player and supporter of Republican races around the country.
That Gillespie would commit to the Allen sidegig would seem to indicate that he isn't going back into the White House in an official capacity. There has been lingering talk over the past few months that he might fill Karl Rove's or Andy Card's job should either leave. Anything could happen, but it's doubtful Gillespie would commit to a big job as a national fundraiser unless he thought his calendar was clearer in the coming months.
Answering Lefty Questions
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 3:22PM
Duncan "Atrios" Black (echoed by Markos "Kos" Moulitsas):
No one has yet managed to explain how revealing that the administration illegally spies on American citizens without obtaining warrants, instead of legally spying on people after obtaining such warrants, damages national security.Sure thing! Here's Orin Kerr:Anyone?
Finally, and relatedly, the details of the program from Risen's book arguably explains the national security interest in keeping the domestic surveillance program a secret. It's not that terrorists may suddenly realize that they may be monitored; that argument never made much sense, as every member of Al-Qaeda must know that they may be monitored. Rather, I suspect the security issue is twofold. In the short term, terrorist groups now know that they can stand a significantly better chance of hiding their communications from the NSA by chosing communications systems that don't happen to route through the U.S. And in the long term, some countries may react to the disclosures of the program by redesigning their telecommunications networks so less traffic goes through the United States. The more people abroad know that the NSA can easily watch their communications routed through the U.S., the less people will be willing to route their communications through the U.S. Cf. Bruce Hayden's comment. No doubt it was a long-term priority of the NSA to ensure that lots of international communications traffic was routed through the U.S., where the NSA could have much better access to it. Indeed, Risen's book more or less says this. The disclosure of the program presumably helps frustrate that objective.Hope that clears things up. (Oh, and I'm not even close to convinced that the program was illegal.)
Re: Protection
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 3:19PM
I'd be wearing a bullet-proof vest if I were him. Wouldn't you?
Protection?
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 2:31PM
Jack Abramoff wearing a bullet-proof vest? Look closely at this picture from the Washington Post.
Harry Howler
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 1:20PM
Sen. Harry Reid is the most politically unethical leader in Washington. By this we mean he is willing to lie and manipulate facts and information he provides to his constituents and the American people to suit his purposes regardless of the cost.
For example: before the Christmas recess, he claimed he wasn't playing politics with the renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act. Yet sources tell us that Reid aides and other members of the Democratic leadership staff who were coordinating with sympathetic media and third party operatives, threatened the New York Times with going public about the NSA anti-terrorism prevention program themselves if the Times did not run the story they had been sitting on for almost a year before the Act's renewal debate was over. Reid said he had little to do with the threatened filibuster of the Act's renewal.
Now, we have Reid calling for the resignation of Department of Homeland Security chief, Michael Chertoff. Why? Because Chertoff authorized the removal of Las Vegas from a priority list of cities at risk for terrorism. "Anyone who can't see that Las Vegas is a high-risk area doesn't deserve to serve in a position like that," Reid told his local papers. Reid didn't care enough about the lives of his constituents to reauthorize some of the most critical anti-terrorism tools our intelligence and law enforcement people use. Yet he'll call for Chertoff's head.
Chertoff and the Bush Administration may play politics with a lot of issues. But they don't play politics with core national security concerns. Harry Reid and his leadership cabal (Howie Dean included) do play politics with the terrorism issue. They have endangered lives of intelligence operatives through their leaking (Reid knows who in his leadership is leaking, and he's doing nothing about it), and they did it by delaying passage of the USA PATRIOT Act reauthorization.
Israeli Succession Struggle
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 10:43AM
The power plays among Ariel Sharon's possible successors have already begun. One Israeli correspondent e-mailed this morning that Sharon is close to death and isn't likely to make it. His temporary successor, Ehud Olmert, is already attracting intense fire. Stay tuned. This will be a prolonged and important change. The only short-term beneficiaries will be the Palestinians, who will now claim they have no "peace partner" in Israel, and will return to higher levels of violence almost immediately.
Re: No Recess
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 10:00AM
Prowler,
I wonder if Bush's neglect in taking advantage of recess appointments was part of a larger plan to make the Democrats look even worse. For example, by putting off a nomination for the FCC, the Republicans will have an opportunity to stomp the Dems for being obstructionist.
Of course, that's my interpretive optimism speaking. They
could just be lazy, as the record might
show.
Justice DeLayed
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 9:32AM
You read it here first before the Christmas Recess that the House GOP was looking to cut the cord on Suspended in Animation Leader Tom DeLay. It was the cocktail chatter at the St. Michael's Island retreat after Thanksgiving, and it continued throughout the December legislative session.
Rep. John Boehner has been putting himself in position to challenge for the leadership post for more than a year. Sources say that since January 2005, he has been holding weekly strategy sessions with a kitchen cabinet of advisers in Washington to discuss options, map out fundraising trips and commitments that best put him position for a run at leadership. "If we get a vote, we're ready to go," says one of the advisers. "We've been waiting for this for a while."
DeLay has a core group of supporters in the House who are pressing Speaker Dennis Hastert to keep DeLay's chances for a return open. But the Republicans have done such a poor job in combatting attacks by Democrats, that Hastert at this point isn't in position to do too much. That the White House on Wednesday announced that it was essentially giving away thousands of dollars donated to the Bush campaign by Jack Abramoff and his associates sent a clear message to Hastert and Senate Leader Bill Frist: do what you have to do to get your houses in order.
No Recess
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 9:24AM
Word was leaking out late Tuesday that Wednesday would be "Recess Appointment Day." The list of who received a "Get Out of Filibuster Hell Free" card isn't so interesting as who was left off the list. There are men and women far more qualified for their nominated positions than Julie Myers who were left off the recess appointment list. The White House has some explaining to do on that front, and we'll leave it at that.
More troubling is the White House's seeming inability to stock some of the critical commission seats. For example, in this round of recess appointments, the White House finally sat two Federal Election Commissioners. Yet 1600 Penn still has not put forward the name of a Republican nominee to the Federal Communications Commission, where chairman Kevin Martin has been balancing policy changes with a 2-2 (including himself) commission split for months.
This is perhaps the most troubling failing of the Bush Administration. For example, it sat back and allowed a liberal Securities and Exchange Commission chairman to run roughshod over the marketplace for the first five years of its administration, only now replacing the boob with a solid conservative, market-oriented chairman in Chris Cox. The Bush Team has taken a similarly passive approach to other commissions as mentioned before.
Why is this a big deal? Because without strong conservative majorities sitting on the commissions, liberal, Clinton-era-hired career staffs on those bodies are writing and implementing policy across a range of American life with impunity: how elections are held, how technology is deployed, what we eat, how business can operate, who can get a job. And a Republican Administration just doesn't seem to care. Fight for an unqualified junior Administration member to run a major Homeland Security agency, but don't bother appointing the critical swing vote to the FCC? That's just not right.
Another Myers, Same Story
Posted by on 1.5.06 @ 8:41AM
As Jed mentioned last night, President Bush recess nominated Julie Myers last night as head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In short, it stinks. As Michelle Malkin extensively reported last year, there's no indication that she's particularly well qualified to lead the 12,000-strong law enforcement organization besides her knowledge of export controls. This isn't the Bolton nomination -- in which petty partisanship held up an important post -- but a nomination that deserved to be held up.
Wednesday, January 4, 2006
Liberty and War
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 11:02PM
Chris Roach slags civil libertarians:
There is literally no time [critics are] willing to let a close call go to the home team. Their constant criticism of the techniques employed in the war on terror suggest a complete lack of realism about national security and, consequently, a total negative beat on every tough decision this war requires.Roach paints with a broad brush, but I think he's on to something. Maybe our resident civ-lib can comment, but it seems that there's a real failure -- on both sides of the debate, but especially on the civil libertarian side -- to distinguish between expansion of domestic crime-enforcement powers on the one hand and war-fighting powers on the other. The former can be genuinely troubling, even shocking; the latter shouldn't be nearly as bothersome, particularly in the context of American history. Wartime civil liberty violations have tended to grow progressively less serious. William Rehnquist wrote a book about this -- three years before 9/11! -- that helps puts in perspective just how small-bore the current civil liberties debates are.
Recess Appointments
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 7:45PM
Roll Call is reporting that the president may announce a number of recess appointments tonight or tomorrow. Included among them are some, such as Julie Myers, nominated for chief of the Immgration and Customs Enforcement.branch of the Department of Homeland Security, who is criticized as unqualified by experience. Her case is unclear. But there are a whole bunch that aren't.
There are too many important positions left unfilled for the most petty of political reasons. Such as Deputy Defense Secretary-nominee Gordon England. The president should have made these appointments long before. Now's as good a time as any.
More Erroneous Front Pages
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 3:04PM
Dave,
There's nothing that says they couldn't have simply said,
"Hoping". This whole thing was indicative of the media's need to
come up with the story first, rather than deal with checking their
facts. You can blame them, as honest a
mistake as it may have been -- the mentality is completely
wrong.
Moran and Murtha, Best Friends Forever?
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 2:16PM
Well, at least they're political allies with MoveOn.org. This email just came in.
Tomorrow, Thursday January 5th, Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) will hold a town hall meeting in Arlington, VA. The meeting will feature Congressman John P. Murtha (D-PA) discussing the war in Iraq.
Congressman Murtha turned the debate over Iraq on its head last month when he issued a call for redeployment of troops from Iraq. Murtha is a decorated Vietnam veteran and one of the most respected members of Congress on military matters. He had been a supporter of the war in Iraq since before the invasion in 2003 but now is the most visible advocate for troop redeployment.
The town hall meeting is open to the public and Congressman Moran has extended a special invitation to MoveOn members in his district and nearby.
What: Iraq Town Hall Meeting With Congressman Jim Moran: "The Road Ahead in Iraq Featuring Congressman John P. Murtha"When: Thursday, January 5th, 2005 7:00 PM to 9:00 PM
Where: National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)
4301 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22203NRECA is across the street from the Ballston Metro Station and Ballston Mall; Glebe Rd. Exit off Rte. 66. Garage parking is available.
This is a good opportunity to show support for Congressman Moran and Murtha who are both leading the fight to bring our troops home from Iraq.
D.C.-area conservatives, have at it.
More Erroneous Front Pages
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 2:09PM
Newspapers went to bed across the country last night as the West Virginia mine worker story unfolded, and USA Today wasn't the only one to celebrate early. Mediabistro scans pages and finds even the L.A. Times mixed it up with their late deadline. But don't blame the papers in this case -- they went with whatever story they had at their deadline. And with later and online editions, they can quickly correct the misinformation.
Our Hearts Go Out
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 10:32AM
To the poor families who were yet so close to regaining their loved ones, only to find that the inverse casualty rate was true: one miner survived being trapped inside a coal mine, while the other twelve are confirmed dead.
USA Today made the unfortunate error of going to print too early -- an honest mistake, but one that'll be difficult to live down. Much is being made of those three hours in which the miners were thought to have survived, and the hope it gave families. Let us pray that for them, the hope hasn't died with the newspaper headlines.
Pelosi's Gambit
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 9:59AM
It now appears -- based on this morning's NYT report -- that House minority leader Nancy Pelosi and her staff have been part of the leaking crew on the NSA story. In having her letter to the then-head of the NSA declassified, Pelosi has been able to keep the NSA story alive, and even furthered it a bit. Parts of her letter were redacted due to national security concerns, yet the Times was able to find "sources" familiar with the full letter able to confirm what the redacted areas dealt with. Gee, a classified letter between Nancy Pelosi and the head of the NSA, who might know what the redacted sections involve, and who could the source be who talked to the NYT?
According to a Pelosi aide based in California, the House Democrat is cooperating with the NYT on several fronts on the NSA story: "She hopes there will be a series of two or three more articles she can help them generate," says the source. "She believes the American people have the right to know what their government is doing."
What Pelosi and many Democrats can't seem to get their head around is that most Americans get what the NSA was doing, and seem to understand that these efforts were a good thing. Late in this morning's NYT article, former NSA director Bobby Inman rhetorically wonders why the President didn't adjust the USA PATRIOT Act back in 2001 to allow for the kind of NSA terrorism protection that President Bush had authorized, never bothering to consider that such public action would have revealed what the NSA was doing.
The answer is simple: it can be helpful is the enemy doesn't know what you're doing to defeat them. Democrats and their allies in the CIA and NSA who are leaking to the press about these activities don't seem to understand that point, either.
McCainiacs
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 9:39AM
We've reported on several occasions about Sen. John McCain's early forays into the 2008 Presidential race, and make no mistake, he is putting the pieces in place for a run. He's been holding fundraisers across the country, with some success, but certainly not at a level you expect from a politician with a national following.
McCain has also been creating media events for himself, whether it be with congressional hearings on steroids in sports or the embarrassing lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his associates with the 5th Amendment assertions the media loves to play over and over on TV.
McCain has been particularly bloodthirsty when it comes to the Abramoff scandal, and one has to wonder why, particularly since he has not been hesitant to reach out to some of Abramoff's former clients to sign them up as prospective charter members of his 2008 campaign's version of the Bush campaign's "Ranger" fundraising program.
Scared?
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 8:38AM
The NYT is, at least of the prospect that the crimes committed in leaking to their reporters -- and those of the WaPo -- will be investigated and the leakers punished. In one of their editorials today, the Times tries to pull the same stunt that Chuckie Schumer tried yesterday.
First, they say that it's different when someone rats out the White House than when someone in the White House, for political reasons, strikes at someone illegally. Which, of course, is not at all what happened in the revelation of Valerie Plame's employment. But the Times wants us to believe that pure-hearted whistleblowers should be protected even from investigation so long as they are leaking information that is damaging to the president. Balderdash.
Whistleblowers are protected when they stay within the law. There are several avenues for making complaints about secret activities, and none of them require leaking top-secret information to the press. The people in the CIA and -- probably -- NSA who have been leaking information about the CIA detention facilities and the NSA intelligence gathering on telephone and e-mail traffic have committed crimes. The best way to investigate and punish these crimes is to put the reporters who published the leaks under oath and before a grand jury. If they refuse to testify, they should be jailed as was Judith Miller in the much less serious Plame investigation.
There should be, as I have written and argued repeatedly, a limited privilege for reporters to protect sources. But not in the case of criminal acts such as these leaks. If the Times is sweating, it should be. Its irresponsible conduct in printing these stories -- and the parallel conduct of the Post - are damaging to freedom of the press, as well as to our nation's security.
Torture or Not?
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 8:04AM
Is the White House having the McCain torture bill both ways? After strongly opposing McCain's amendment to the defense appropriations bill, which President Bush signed last month, the White House appeared to cave to popular and political sentiment. However, the Boston Globe reports that President Bush, citing his Constitutional authority as commander-in-chief, is interpreting the law to have exceptions when national security is at risk.
I appreciate that White House lawyers have found a way around McCain's potentially disastrous law. But if they're correct, and the loopholes are Constitutional, wouldn't that suggest that the McCain bill is unconstitutional? And that, knowing this, the President signed it anyway? As with campaign finance, another sad, unconstitutional deal with the gentleman from Arizona, it appears that the President did the popular thing while crossing his fingers behind his back.
Looking Good for Alito
Posted by on 1.4.06 @ 7:53AM
Judge Samuel A. Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court enjoys strong popular support despite the coordinated opposition campaign from the left, the Washington Times reports today. If he performs nearly as well in his hearings, scheduled to begin next Monday, January 9, then we'll see him on the Court in no time.
Tuesday, January 3, 2006
Batting Zero in Baton Rouge
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 9:58PM
Can't let the night go by without noting the latest from the offices of Kathleen Caligula Blanco, governor of the People's Republic of Louisiana. Whilst people remain homeless (and voteless due to Blanco's postponing the New Orleans mayoral election lest Ray Nagin have to get a real job), Mizz Blanco has decided to continue with plans to renovate her staff offices to the tune of about $500 large.
According to this report, "At the time of her decision, Blanco also was hinting at deep budget cuts to state programs and the possibility of laying off 20 percent of the state workforce." We have no report that the layoffs could include Mayor Nagin, or that the Gov plans to replace him with her horse. We expect that report any moment.
Comforting
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 8:05PM
To know that Iranian Prez Ahmadinejad thinks the world's reaction to his denial of the Holocost was positive, according to an Iranian MP quoted in their official news service. In characterizing the reactions as positive, he probably wasn't thinking of the Israeli Defense Forces chief of staff remark that the Iranian nuke program positively can be destroyed. Though the Israeli probably lack the capacity to do that, I'm told it would be one long afternoon for four or five B-2s.
Patrick Henry, Jefferson, and the Beach Boys
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 3:08PM
I don't have anything against the Beach Boys, but I had to chuckle at the diverging tones in Gov.-Elect Tim Kaine's emails over the last few days.
Friday's email about inauguration press credentials made me envious that a Democrat would enjoy a Williamsburg inauguration:
Thank you for your interest in covering this unique and historic Inauguration. When Governor-elect Tim Kaine takes the oath of office on Saturday, January 14, 2006, he will become only the third
Fine, Kaine's no Henry or Jefferson, but to join that distinguished list is quite an honor for any governor.
Today's email brought that sentiment back to reality. Headlining the "Promise of Virginia" inaugural concert will be the Beach Boys. How underwhelming.
We Hardly Knew Ye
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 2:26PM
One great airline, Independence Air, is now shutting down for good on Thursday. For those of who you didn't fly it, you would miss it too. All the seats were a bright blue leather, comfortable, and fares were quite cheap (sometimes as low as 39 dollars one way).
My last flight included a flight attendant who opened with the following introduction speech:
"Hi, my name is Fritz and I along with Jen and Alex will be your flight attendants for this flight. But I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that you'll have to put up with us for about an hour. The good news is that I just saved a bundle on my car insurance by switching to Geico.
"... There is no smoking on this plane. Disabling the smoke detector in the bathroom is a federal offense. However, if you exit the plane anywhere between here and our destination, please feel free to smoke as much as you like.
"...If you're travelling with a child, be sure to adjust your oxygen mask first, in the event of an emergency. If you're travelling with two children, pick a favorite."
To Fritz and the rest of the I-Air crew, you'll be
missed!
Speaking of Predictions
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 9:32AM
TAS contributor James G. Poulos has a few, some serious, some fantastic.
Some Predictions
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 8:59AM
It's not too late for a few '06 predictions, so here goes.
First, three reporters -- WaPo's Dana Priest and NYT's James Risen and Eric Lichtblau -- who reported the leaks of the CIA secret detention facilities and the NSA program authorized by President Bush, will each be either in jail or facing jail time for refusing to reveal their sources by year's end. These leaks have damaged national security in a major way and must be punished. The only way the leakers will be discovered is by compelling the reporters' testimony.
Second, David Cameron will last only until the next general election as Tory leader. He is a man eager to distance himself from Thatcher, to redistribute wealth, and to befog what little his party stands for. If he lasts longer than that, the Tories will render themselves irrelevant. Brit Conservatives need to go back to their dictionaries and study the meaning of "conservative."
Third, the Israeli political crisis following the impending retirement (or death) of Ariel Sharon will be prolonged. It will not be settled with one or even two successors to Sharon in the prime minister's post. This will be a generational change, and the next long-term leader is someone we can't possibly identify now.
Journal Blogging
Posted by on 1.3.06 @ 8:11AM
With the new year, the Wall Street Journal is stepping into the blog world with a Law Blog, hosted by reporter Peter Lattman. Lattman writes yesterday that the blog will cover stories on business and law and the business of law. And more great news: the Journal's address for the blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/, suggests they have more blogs in mind.
Monday, January 2, 2006
Churchill Must be Spinning
Posted by on 1.2.06 @ 10:14PM
Over this BBC report that Britons chose EU commission prez Jose Manuel Barroso the most powerful man in the UK. Sadly, the poll may be right.
Keystone Spies
Posted by on 1.2.06 @ 5:42PM
Since it came out on Christmas Day, you probably missed this must-read report on the CIA's embarrassingly poor tradecraft that has them in trouble with the law in Italy over a 2003 rendition. No matter how low our expectations of The Agency's competence get, it seems they can always be a tad lower.
Porter Goss is trying to fix things, though. Best of luck to him on that.
(Hat-tip: INDC Journal.)
Sunday, January 1, 2006
A Good Start
Posted by on 1.1.06 @ 6:27PM
2006 is off to a good start in France. According to this IHT report, French youts (as My Cousin Vinny would say) burned 425 cars last night. What Monsewer Chirac will say about that in his big address is, at this point, unreported. Thank Heaven.
Fifteen Years Ago Today...
Posted by on 1.1.06 @ 3:45PM
...The USSR ceased to exist. Dave Kopel looks back.
In other receeding-tyranny news, The arrival of the New Year means bars in South Carolina will finally be able to pour from full-size bottles. Thus ends perhaps the dumbest "temperence" law ever -- because bartenders treated the minibottles like shots even though they contain about a shot and a half each, the law's main effect was to make drinks much stronger.
Happy UN-New Year
Posted by on 1.1.06 @ 9:50AM
Rise and shine, sleepyheads. You thought this year might be different? C'mon, guys. It's barely nine hours old here in Virginia, and we already have adequate proofs that 2006 is just 2005's ugly sister.
The J-Post reports, based on a story in a German newspaper, that we are planning a military strike on Iran. This is a combination of German disdain for any war Germany doesn't start and Israelis thinking wishfully that we will do it before they have to. And the London Times reports that the ever-charming Kim Jong-il's regime is restarting a nuclear reactor that will enable it to make about ten nuclear weapons a year. This despite the six-party talks that were supposed to get the North Korean genie back in the bottle.
Cheer up. The UN, as always, is ready to provide comic relief. The UN's leaders have finally realized that the UN Human Rights Commission, memorably chaired by Libya in 2003, is shredding - daily - the little credibility the UN has. So they're seeking a replacement for it. According to a report in today's New York Times, UN bureaucrats and ambassadors, seeking to restore some of that credibility, are rushing to come up with an alternative to the HRC. Their time -- and ours -- would be better spent devising an alternative to the UN, comprised only of democracies.
There is no reason to expect the next version of the HRC to be nearly as good a result as if the people whose names appear as the first fifty on the list of the next graduating class at Parris Island were assigned the task. They are unsuited to the UN job, having the capacity to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong.
