Election 2004

Chastising rumsfeld II

This entry was posted in bush Election 2004 Federal Government Iraq Libertarianism US Foreign Policy US Politics on by

Jane Galt has stirred up a hornet’s nest of disagreement with this call for rummies resignation:

the only way to repair the damage is for responsibility to be taken at the highest levels. And not the fake “I’m accountable but I’m not going to, y’know, be called to account” responsibility of Janet Reno, but real, honest to God, “Somethine went wrong on my watch, and I will suffer the penalty” responsibility. For the good of his country, it is time for Don Rumsfeld to go.

Her commenters are near unanimous in their disagreement and there is a lot of other disagreement as well, e.g., James Joyner. I certainly agree with Jane that responsibility must be taken to the highest levels (see previous post) and I’m sure you can find others who agree with one aspect or another of her call.
One of the arguments that has been made against the call for resignation is that cabinet heads like rummie are too far away from the action to be held accountable though both Skippy (via the Progress Report) and the Washington Post call this into question with respect to rummie.
Brian Doss also works through this argument and ultimately comes to the conclusion that there just might be a positive light at the end of his executive hari kari discussion. Long quote follows:

(more…)

Will Oprah be Fined?

This entry was posted in bush Constitution Election 2004 FCC Federal Government Libertarianism Regulation on by

Kevin Aylward reports on an FCC investigation that may result in large fines for Oprah:

Using the recent FCC fines against Clear Channel Communications for airing indecent material on a Howard Stern radio broadcast, the 1900 complaints against a single episode of the Oprah Winfrey Show should lead to $5.9 million dollar fine.

If they actually do this I hope it happens well before the election. I have visions of huge anti-talibanbush rallies populated by hordes of Oprah and Howard fans.

The Lakers and the Candidates

This entry was posted in bush Democrats Election 2004 kerry Republicans on by

Professor Bainbridge doesn’t like the Lakers:

The Lakers personify our People/ET celebrity culture in which superficiality reigns supreme. They aren’t a team – they’re the sports world equivalent of VH1 Divas – four prima donnas plus entourages.

Which leads the Libertarian Jackass to wonder whether the Professor’s future action will be consistent with his words:

I hope the good professor votes against Bush and Kerry for similar reasons.

But I don’t think that the Professor puts bushco in this category:

As far as the elites are concerned, Middle America and the Republican Party are synonmous.
….
Here we see the modern Democratic party – secular elites at the top using the levers of government to effect wealth transfers from Middle America to reliable Democrat constituencies and special interests.

Now I do not disagree with his evaluation of what a Democratic government will do. The wealth transfer, using the power of government, is the whole game.
A simple variation of Bainbridge’s last sentence describes the current state of affairs: Here we see the modern Republican party – religious elites at the top using the levers of government to effect wealth transfers from Middle America to reliable Republican constituencies and special interests.

Update: Kevin Drum and Steve Verdon have related posts.

Nope, No Transparency Here

This entry was posted in bush Constitution Democracy Domestic Terrorism Election 2004 Federal Government Libertarianism War on Terrorism on by

The bushies will not release to the 9/11 Commission the complete text of rice’s preempted 9/11 speech. Josh Marshall tries to understand why not:

Unless the argument is that we can’t let our enemies know the depth of the poor judgment displayed by the president’s national security team it is searchingly hard to fathom what possible national security issue could be implicated by handing over the speech since it was — do we have to say it? — a speech! A speech for public consumption.

And just to be clear:

Trent Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, said only: �The White House is working with the commission to ensure that it has access to what it needs to do its job.�

These folks must have a different understanding of the commission’s job then the rest of us.

Clarke’s Book

This entry was posted in al Qaeda bush Domestic Terrorism Election 2004 War on Terrorism on by

Tim Dunlop has read the first bit of Clarke’s book Against All Enemies and has a lot to say about it:

The first thing to say is that, despite all the hostility arising from the 60 Minutes interview last night, Clarke is rather more respectful of the administration than I might have anticipated.

This is in respect to both bush and rice. Sure, this impression may change after more reading but given all the ranting going on today I certainly expected readers to have a different impression.
Based on Tim’s review of the first chapter that this will be a book that folks on all sides of the related issues will want to read:

I guess there are two stories being interwoven: the close-up detail of the day and of how the administration and the various intelligence and security agencies reacted to the attacks, and then Clarke’s reflections on the people involved, and the broader context within which the events unfolded.
There’s not much point trying to recount the close-up detail, the way planes were grounded, the air force was scrambled, the individuals from the President down were secured and the way all the actions to cope with the attack were launched, because no summary can do it justice. All I can say is, if you get a chance to read it, read it. It’s a gripping account.

I’m looking forward to the reading and the discussion.