Duty to Warn

AUSTIN, Texas -- O Karl Rove, Karl Rove, birder thou never wert. If George W. Bush loses the election narrowly in November, put it down to the birders. You read it here first. What was Rove thinking when he allowed William Haynes II to be nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit?

            There are all the usual reasons for rejecting a Bush judicial nominee -- he's only tried one case; no understanding of the Constitution; author of the "enemy combatant doctrine" that allows American citizens to be held in prison without trial, without counsel and without knowing the charges against them. But the fatal faux pas is the feather-blowing tale of Haynes' role as the top Defense Department lawyer in the case of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

For 30 months, 9/11 was a huge political blessing for George W. Bush. This week, the media halo fell off.

     Within the space of a few days, culminating with his testimony to the Sept. 11 commission Wednesday afternoon, former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke did serious damage to a public-relations scam that the White House has been running for two and a half years.

     We may forget just how badly President Bush was doing until Sept. 11, 2001. That morning, a front-page Philadelphia Inquirer story told of dire political straits; his negative rating among the nation’s crucial independent swing voters stood at 53 percent, according to the latest survey by nonpartisan pollster John Zogby.

     On Sept. 12, Bush’s media stature and poll numbers were soaring. Suddenly, news outlets all over the country boosted the president as a great leader, sometimes likening him to FDR. For many months, the overall media coverage of President Bush was reverential.

AUSTIN, Texas -- I'd like to thank Richard Clarke for doing the most obvious, decent and necessary thing this country needed from its government after 9-11, and that is to apologize to the families of those who died in those attacks and to admit: "We failed you. ... I failed you." Thanks to former Sen. Bob Kerrey for underlining it.

            Coulda, woulda, shoulda is not necessarily a useful exercise, but the 9-11 commission was given that responsibility -- after the Bush administration made every effort to stop it -- and appears to be doing its best. That some members seem more interested in protecting the Bush administration than in finding out what actually happened is perhaps just the nature of politics, but still disappointing.

America owes a debt to society, and what a debt.

December 31, 2003 the United States National Debt reached the $7 trillion mark.

President Bush didn’t mention it in his State of the Union speech and the Democrats didn’t bring it up in their response. But the U.S. Treasury’s Bureau of the Public Debt keeps a running tab and lately it’s running like hell.

$7 trillion was hit just 22 months after the debt passed $6 trillion February 26, 2002. It was the first time in U.S. history that trillion dollar milestones were crossed in back-to-back calendar years.

By comparison, the trail of arrears from $5 trillion on February 26, 1996 to $6 trillion took six years.

But what does it mean? To a public confounded by conflicting facts and competing philosophies, what’s a trillion or two either way?

The answer is interesting.

While the debt itself is a 13-digit string beyond the math of mere mortals, the interest on the debt is quite another story. Like the finance charge on your credit card, it’s the right-off-the-top part of the bill before the principal is touched.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Naturally, when I heard President Bush is now claiming to be in the forefront of the fight against corporate crime, I thought it was an April Fools' joke. But no, there it is in print -- he made a big speech about it in Houston, of all places, not far from he Enron building.

            "We had to confront corporate crimes that cost people their jobs and their savings," he said. "So we passed strong corporate reforms and made it very clear, we will not tolerate dishonesty in the boardrooms of America."

            We did; we won't? Oh, he was talking about the Sarbanes bill, that set of inadequate corporate reform measures that he (SET ITAL) opposed (END ITAL) until it passed the House of Representatives with just a handful of dissenting votes and he couldn't face the political heat any longer. That bill.

Are you a Sierra Club member?

The future of the Sierra Club is at stake.

Outsiders are trying to take over the Club by placing stealth candidates on the Club's board ballot this year.  This is driven by anti-immigration activists, and their tactics are underhanded -- they aren't declaring their real issue positions to members. They hope that low participation and confusion will allow them to stack the board of directors.

You can stop this, but you must vote now in the Sierra Club board election.  You probably have already received the ballot in the mail.

We've attached below an outreach from Groundswell Sierra -- a volunteer network of Sierra Club members working to defeat this threat.  This outreach includes a list of endorsed candidates. We recommending printing this email and having it on hand as you fill out your ballot.

If you'd like more information on this threat, go to:

http://www.groundswellsierra.org/takeover_index.php

Thank you,

-Carrie, Joan, Noah, Peter, and Wes
The MoveOn.org team

AUSTIN, Texas -- My, we are off to an elegant start here, aren't we?

            First, we have John Kerry in a classic open-mike gaffe referring to his Republican opponents as "crooked" and "lying." While this was not a high point in the history of political rhetoric, Kerry's refusal to apologize for the overhead remark promptly solidified his base.

            "Hey, he's got more guts than I thought," said many a pleased Democrat, convinced the Bushies (SET ITAL) are (END ITAL) all liars and crooks. So he is now free to go forth and talk of health care.  

AUSTIN, Texas -- How much fun can one administration have? More dead GIs. New record trade deficit. Stock market plunges. Ally in Spain goes down to defeat. The new Spanish prime minister says the occupation in Iraq is a "continuing disaster" and he's pulling his troops out. Still no jobs. And then they guy who was supposed to be the new jobs czar turns out to have laid off 75 of his own workers and then built a $3 million factory in China to employ 165 Chinese people. Whoever has the aspirin concession at the White House must be making a fortune.

            The unfortunate matter of the would-be jobs czar came at a particularly awkward moment. More than six months ago, President Bush promised to appoint a "manufacturing czar" at the Commerce Department. As the Center for American Progress points out, since then we've lost another 250,000 manufacturing jobs. Bush was on his way to Ohio last week, where the economy has just been hemorrhaging jobs, to "focus on jobs." He actually claimed, "We're creating jobs -- good, high-paying jobs for the American citizen."

To encourage restraint in war coverage, governments don’t need to shoot journalists -- though sometimes that’s helpful.

Thirteen journalists were killed while covering the war and occupation in Iraq last year, says a new report by the Committee to Protect Journalists. The deaths were a subset of 36 on-the-job fatalities related to journalistic work across the globe in 2003.

CPJ’s annual worldwide survey “Attacks on the Press,” released on March 11, indicates that some of those deaths in Iraq were not just random events in a hazardous war zone.

Journalists who were “embedded” with the American military tended to be safer. But as a practical matter, the tradeoffs shortchanged news readers, listeners and viewers. “The close quarters shared by journalists and troops inevitably blunted reporters’ critical edge,” CPJ reports. “There were also limits on what types of stories reporters could cover, since the ground rules barred journalists from leaving their unit.”

AUSTIN, Texas -- Gosh, we are having such a swell time here in Texas. For starters, once again the speaker of the Texas House is under investigation by a grand jury. We're so proud. We have nothing against this guy personally, we're just rooting for an indictment as a matter of Texas tradition. This would make five out of the last six House speakers indicted for one thing or another, and you must admit, that's some record.

            (As a matter of strict accuracy, I should note that there was one speaker in there who was not indicted, but rather was shot to death by his wife. However, she was indicted -- although not convicted, because in Texas we recognize public service when we see it.)