The Spectacle Blog
Wish I could attribute this better, but I heard it in the middle of the night on BBC. They interviewed a fellow from something like Council for Free Islam, who said Hamas was seething over UBL's latest "interference." "Hamas doesn't want anything to do with Osama bin Laden," he said. "They want their relationship with the west." Because they need their money.
UBL's latest videotaped hate mail may be bad news for Hamas, the terrorists elected to government in the Palestinian territories. In it, bin Laden spews the usual threats and feeds the ideology that America's war on terrorists and the states that support them is a "Zionist-crusader war against Islam." But there's more.
Part of bin Laden's statement says, "the blockade which the West is imposing on the government of Hamas proves that there is a Zionist-crusader war on Islam." Two points fairly leap out from that one sentance:
ONE: bin Laden is equating Hamas -- a terrorist organization with the blood of thousands on its hands -- with Islam. Where are the moderate Islamic voices to condemn this? Or are they content to let his statement stand?
TWO: There have been many reliable reports that al-Qaeda is building operating bases in the Gaza Strip and possibly the West Bank as well. What will the Israelis do to root them out?
Last, and not least, how long will it be before the governments of Europe cave in and resume aid to the Palestinian government: the terrorists of Hamas?
Congress returns to town this week, so you can count on an assault on taxpayers' money and common sense.
And nothing captures Congressional nonsense better than Republican attempts to out-Democrat Democrats on gas prices. There's a populist demand to "do something," in spite of a spate of articles calmly explaining why the gas prices reflect lower supply and higher demand -- basic economics. Instead of explaining the facts and sticking to market principles, Bill Frist and Denny Hastert will reportedly request an investigation into higher gas prices.
Ned: Useless senators? Careful lest thou commit a grammatical redundancy. Ken: I think that's unfair to Franks. As I understand it, his plan was vetted, modified and approved by all - including Rumsfeld, Pace, Myers and the president - and worked damned well. The issue of what came after wasn't Franks's to plan or command.
Nice, Dave, to connect the dots between Congressional shenanigans and the China's glowering global interests. It's very much in the public's interest to understand what a vast obstacle Beijing has become to our preferences and necessities, to grasp how much China is working right now to undermine them, and to know why. Batchelor has done some heavy dot-connecting of his own on that tip, of course, as have the guys at ThreatsWatch. I want to highlight the antagonistic geopolitical link between China and Iran in terms of culture -- both states have venerable cultures that adopted autocratic governments. No surprise that their objectives and interests overlap -- in direct opposition to our own. Plenty to say on this point. More to come.
Rep. Alan Mollohan has temporarily left the House Ethics Panel, hoping to help Democratic leaders stem damage to their "Republicans are corrupt" message.
-I doubt Mollohan's departure is "temporary." If anything about his earmarks scandal sticks, he won't be back.
-Democrats are foolhardy to think that this move cleans up their act sufficiently to go after Republicans. Pelosi is painting Mollohan's scandal as a partisan attack to provide cover for GOP scandals. But the record so far is clear: Republicans aren't protecting their politicians from corruption charges (readers of this blog differ on whether that's a proper response -- I think they should presume innocence until guilt is proven, but not undertake a Clintonian scorched Earth policy to protect guys who could very well be guilty as sin). Duke Cunningham's out of the House and convicted. Tom DeLay is out of leadership and on his way out of the House. Frankly, the dirty Republicans are behaving like Democrats did when they ran the show. As such...
Having apparently recovered from the national backlash he suffered after comparing Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to a Nazi death camp (and the intellectual thrashings he suffered at the hands of John Roberts and Samuel Alito) Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois wants to return to center stage. The strong rumor is that he will introduce a "no confidence" resolution aimed at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as soon as the Senate returns next week. (It has apparently escaped Durbin that we don't have a parliamentary system of government in which such resolutions have the effect - if passed - of removing the target from government.)
This comes as a bit of a shock to other Dems eager for the publicity it can generate for Durbin. Schumer -- Little Miss Gun Control -- will be simply seething. And it's going to be very interesting to see how many Dems jump to support it other than Russ "Censure" Feingold. Will Rumsfeld's cloaked Republican adversary - the one whose staffer attacks via anonymous quotes in the NYT - be revealed?
Too bad these guys spend all their time attacking Rumsfeld with nary a harsh word directed at people like Zarqawi.
Prowler -- I still don't quite get why everybody seems so down on John Snow. Frankly, on substance he seems to have done a very solid job. And he's never off message, and he works his tail off. He's done everything they've asked of him. His only drawback (and this may be a big enough drawback to be important) is that he's not an exciting communicator. But the man deserves better than a death by a thousand leaks.
All that said, my idea for the best replacement for him, if he is to be replaced, is the same guy I've touted for about five other important jobs in DC: Chris Cox. Yeah, he's only been at the SEC for eight months, but then again Rob Portman hadn't been Trade Rep very long either. Cox has done a great job at SEC and he has all the right skill sets to make him a first class SecTreas. And while Phil Gramm is smart as hell, Gramm has the ability to scare people or turn them off; Cox will never do that. If PR is the problem, Cox is a better answer than Gramm. For one thing, I guarantee you COx will NEVER wax eloquent about "Dicky Flatt"!!!!
There are rumors floating about DC today that former Sen. Phil Gramm is about to be named Treasury Secretary to replace Secretary John Snow.
There were rumors earlier this week that Gramm was being offered a job as "senior counselor" to the President to oversee Congressional relations, among other things.
Gramm's name have been floated a number of times over the past 18 months and nothing much has come of it. There are several other people who would love to put their hats in the ring for the Treasury job: Robert Kimmett and Tim Adams, both Snow deputy secretaries, have made it clear they would like the job. And White House chief of staff, Joshua Bolten spent five years with Goldman Sachs before moving to Austin in 1999, so he knows the senior Wall Street types that might be enamoured of the job.