Woodward, Leaks and Dubai

Views of Dubai, UAE:








The United Arab Emirates is a constitutional federation of seven emirates; Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm al-Qaiwain, Ras al-Khaimah and Fujairah. The federation was formally established on 2 December 1971.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) occupies an area of 83,000 sq km along the south-eastern tip of the Arabian Peninsula. Qatar lies to the west, Saudi Arabia to the south and west, and Oman to the north and east. The capital and the largest city of the federation, Abu Dhabi, is located in the emirate of the same name.
Four-fifths of the UAE is desert, yet it is a country of contrasting landscapes, from awe-inspiring dunes to rich oases, precipitous rocky mountains to fertile plains.
The United Arab Emirates, one of the world's fastest growing tourist destinations, has all the right ingredients for an unforgettable holiday, sun, sand, sea, sports, unbeatable shopping, top-class hotels and restaurants, an intriguing traditional culture, and a safe and welcoming environment.
--From Emirates.org

Bob Woodward does have the inside slant on high-level politics, and let’s not forget we don’t get something for nothing.

As reported by Murray Waas, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, in a letter to Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, made Woodward's book, Bush at War, Exhibit A in making his case about the Bush administration's "blatant abuse of intelligence information for political purposes."

Waas points out how Bush pushed CIA agents to cooperate with Woodward and quotes a former administration official as saying, "This was something the White House wanted done because they considered it good public relations... This was done for presidential image-making." Huffington Post 2/24/06

And thanks to Arianna for making a whole lot of verbiage easy to digest:

The Pentagon just released its latest quarterly progress report (PDF) on Iraq. The report, entitled "Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq," is 56 pages long. And since I know how busy you all are, let me give you a shortcut:

turn on CNN.

It's. Not. Going. Well.

A very important column on the subject has been posted on National Review Online by conservative icon Bill Buckley. "The kernel here is the acknowledgement of defeat," he writes. "One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed... The administration has, now, to cope with failure."

I asked where Ramsey Clark was in my last post—“Impeach Bush.org?”
This email arrived same day:

There are now 27 members of the House of Representatives, including John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee who are supporting a bill, H. Res 635, calling for "a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before Congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment."

Well, 27 out of 450 is better than 0.

Hey Bush ain’t all bad. I’m not all good, for that matter. Just mostly—both of us. In the case of the sale of control over significant operations at six major American ports to the United Arab Emirates, Bush seems to have chosen the ethical, moral, right side of the issue. There are a myriad reasons for him to take this side: loyalty to old friends, backing a policy already in place, standing firm in the face of adversity…--but we’re not going to attach judgment to his decision. More importantly, let’s look at the reaction to this weird turn of events at this time.

Americans are apt to be skeptical of the matter of security being taken over by a company controlled by “Arabs” subsequent to the terrorist events of 9/11/01. I put “Arabs” in quotes to indicate that there is no more hegemony in that group than one would find in the designation of “North American” to indicate a tie between someone from Brooklyn and someone from Oaxaca. Still, we’re nervous about Arabs running a port where all sorts of contraband—bombs, weapons, ammunition—could slide by customs and promote harm for citizens.

If that’s the problem, then we should have been “up in arms” by now over the control of ports in the Los Angeles area alone. In a radio interview I happened to catch on my way to getting my daily dosage of bottled water from the market, the former Chief of Police for the Port of Los Angeles (I have no source on this since I just heard it on the radio) explained that, of the 27 ports in the L.A. area, 4 are controlled by American companies! The rest are owned by several foreign entities including Danish, Korean, Chinese, and more. And NOW we’re worried about Dubai?

Chris Dickey’s rundown of American misplaced prejudice highlights this tale of politics vs. rationale: What Price Xenophobia?

Dubai has a commercial vision—it is a commercial vision—that fits perfectly into the realities of the 21st century. It’s an open city for an open world. The United States, on the other hand, looks increasingly wary, withdrawn, insecure and ill informed. Jingoism, xenophobia and thinly disguised racism may help win votes, but they won’t make the United States any safer.

So Bush is right, and congress is wrong, and fearful Americans need to open their arms to the world, and Muslims are not terrorists, and terrorists have no cause, but love to cause murder and mayhem. And you thought it was easy to pick sides. It’s not that simple.

A visionary leader would see the implications, the nuances, the details, and try to make them clear for the rest of us. A dictator throws out platitudes and hopes whatever sticks on the wall keeps him in power.

"This deal would not go forward, if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America,"—Bush on Port Sale

Woodward, Terrorists, and Cheney

In case you weren’t scared when you woke up this morning, here’s some frightening scenarios from none other than Bob “Keep my sources secret” Woodward (Thanks to Huffington Post):

Woodward said the possibility of "the Mideast imploding," cannot be dismissed, and that his darkest fear, shared by some in the intelligence community, is that terrorists are waiting until "multiple, high-stakes attacks" can be launched on U.S. cities and targets.

He said, "9-11 will be a footnote, but it could happen, and if it does, we will become a police state." – MySA.com

As Woodward himself wrote about his first meeting with Mark Felt:

In 1970, when I was serving as a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy and assigned to Adm. Thomas H. Moorer, the chief of naval operations, I sometimes acted as a courier, taking documents to the White House. --How Mark Felt Became 'Deep Throat’ Washington Post

Make no mistake about it, Bob’s an old hand at sharing info with the intel community, and according to the blog “Rigorous Intuition,” possibly even protecting it:

Former intelligence briefer Bob Woodward obligingly led the [Watergate] investigation away from the intelligence community…

No matter what we might think of Woodward’s latest principles in handling sources and secret information, with respect to his not being entirely forthcoming in the Plame outting fiasco—he’s still a voice worth listening to. With that in mind, here’s a really scary notion:

He noted that Republicans have a long track record of nominating "old war horses."

Given that, and depending on how things in Iraq proceed, "You're going to think I'm crazy, but you heard it here first. I think they could nominate Dick Cheney." --MySA.com

Speaking of “old war horses,” how’s Ramey Clark coming along with the “Impeach Bush” movement? Can’t happen too soon, and take Cheney with him…

Blame Bush, or Congress?

The issue is not whether George W. Bush has committed impeachable acts. The issue is why congress hasn’t initiated hearings by the House Judiciary Committee to determine the exact nature and extent of these offenses.

A new book describes a meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Bush 3 years ago prior to the invasion of Iraq. The gist of the meeting was that they

…were not sure there was enough evidence to convince the Security Council. Without the council's explicit authorization, their plans for an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein could be difficult to defend under international law.

Bush proposed an alternative: paint a U.S. spy plane in United Nations colors and see if that didn't tempt Hussein's forces to shoot at it. In any case, he said, the war was "penciled in" for March 10 and the United States would go ahead with or without a second U.N. resolution.Blair replied that he was "solidly with" the president.

This is the latest in the long list of scenarios of lying Bush has told to congress and the American public for his personal campaign to invade and occupy Iraq. The untold damage in blood, money, and worldwide morale this futile enterprise has cost is worth immediate action by congress.

Added to this debacle, Bush is also accused of illegally authorizing surveillance of American citizens without court-issued warrants in the name of national security in the war on terror. The existence of a legislated secret court to issue these warrants, known as FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)
which was mandated subsequent to the Nixon abuses under Watergate of similar illegally-authorized surveillance, vitiated the need for Bush to authorize any warrant-less bugging. Why did he not access these warrants which would have been secret anyway? Is it possible he was authorizing surveillance to gather more than just “foreign” intelligence? Was he on a fishing expedition in order to provide access to information he needed to gain additional power? Shouldn’t congress be chomping at the bit to find answers to these questions?

Does any of the following seem familiar?

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT EXHIBITED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

…Endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States.

…Making false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation has been conducted with respect to allegation of misconduct on the part of personnel of the Executive Branch of the United States

…He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office

…Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office.

The Republican-led congress is not anxious to start impeachment hearings against their leader. Despite rumblings that even Bush’s congressional base sees problems with the NSA surveillance program, and now new reports that Libby, Cheney’s right hand man, says he was ordered to leak classified information to the press by his superiors of which there are two—Cheney and Bush--action has yet to be taken.

The urgency of probing Bush’s abuses of power is immediate in that inaction is costing lives every day in Iraq, and the diffusion of military and intelligence focus from protecting Americans from the onset of another domestic terrorist event continues with undue monetary and personnel deployment in Iraq. It has been stated repeatedly by Bush supporters and opponents who are terrorist experts, and who are in agreement on this point—there are terrorist cells in dozens of countries around the world, including within the US.

The insurgency potshots in Iraq which are disconnected from the game of causing mayhem on US soil are not worth containing anymore. But while Bush and Cheney maintain power, and their lust for a base in the Middle East, little will change in US policy on the Iraq occupation in the near future, or fast enough to prevent disaster in the US.

Congress cannot take action too soon to start formally investigating the offenses of the Bush administration. We the people cannot afford to sit back and hope for a better solution to this quagmire—we must be on the backs of our representatives to do their sworn duty to represent us, and in so doing, protect us all better than they have been doing so far.

Hastert and Frist – Criminals Arm in Arm

Senator Bill Frist, darling of the pharmaceutical lobbyists and majority leader of the Senate, and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, “engineered a backroom legislative maneuver to protect pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits, say witnesses to the pre-Christmas power play.”

It’s not that secret—in this blog December 20, 2005, I reported,

Frist is sleazing into this appropriations bill an item that gives drug makers freedom from liability while they make billions of dollars on their products:

Companies making vaccines to protect against biological agents or pandemic viruses would be shielded from lawsuits, even if they are negligent or reckless, under a provision inserted into a military spending bill by Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader…

The potential fallout is as follows:

“The legislation, called the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, allows the secretary of Health and Human Services to declare a public health emergency, which then provides immunity for companies that develop vaccines and other "countermeasures."

Beyond the issue of vaccine liability protection, some say going around the longstanding practice of bipartisan House-Senate conference committees' working out compromises on legislation is a dangerous power grab by Republican congressional leaders that subverts democracy…

"It is a travesty of the legislative process," said Thomas Mann, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

"It vests enormous power in the hands of congressional leaders and private interests, minimizes transparency and denies legitimate opportunities for all interested parties, in Congress and outside, to weigh in on important policy questions."

…Frist has long advocated liability protection for vaccine makers, and it was widely reported that he would attempt to attach the legislation to the Defense Appropriations bill because it is considered must-pass legislation.” --Tennesean.com 2/09/06

I don’t like to sit in judgment of others who stand to gain from doing favors, since I’m not sure what my refusal threshold would be—everyone’s got a price. I like to think that as a defender of the public trust, who has taken an oath of office, that I would be above any kind of influence other than my conscience, no matter what. But I have been accused of being a dreamer.

Algebra is Ruining our Children

The Los Angeles Times series on dropouts at Birmingham High School in Van Nuys spurred at least 2 commentaries about school curriculums. My response to one of the editorials, "Karin (Johnny) {gt} 95%" included a quote from Roger Schank, an authority on learning. Here is the letter:

Ms. Klein comes so close to grabbing the brass ring of what's wrong with the cumpulsory school system in this country, that my criticism may seem like nit-picking. She says, "schools are structured to help administrators feel organized, not to help children learn."

Close, but in fact, these "administrators" don't want to make this mistake--it's more along the lines of the worst excuse for any policy in any field: we've always done it this way. I have long wondered what the reason is for every student in America to understand algebra. In the 1950's, as a student I was told we were losing pace to the Russians in math and science. So in order to keep up, since then, schools have been ramming advanced math concepts down the throats of> willing and unwilling young people because someone somewhere once said, "It helps you think more clearly,"--a totally unscientific and unproven theory at best.

My childrens' curriculum includes NO music. My daughter's kindergarten teacher told me she needed to be able to count to 100 by the end of the year. I told her I was convinced my daughter would be able to read, write, and add and subtract by the time she graduated high school. I said that what she left out of the teacher-parent "conference" was any notion of how my daughter was relating to the other children in her class, which to me was the priority issue.

Roger Schank, world-reknowned authority on cognitive learning and teaching, sounds revolutionary in his education ideas, but he simply takes Ms. Klein's program one logical step further: "What kid would choose learning mathematics over learning about animals, trucks, sports, or whatever? Is there one? Good. Then, teach him mathematics. Leave the other children alone."

In other word, Ms. Klein, you're right about the need to re-think how we educate our children, and first and foremost we must acknowledge that in our human infinite diversity, everyone can't learn everything equally, and some children should not be taught algebra.

In addition, Schank has said this about the school system in this country:

School is bad for children:

Schools are structured today in much the same way as they have been for hundreds of years. Schools should simply cease to exist as we know them.

The Government needs to get out of the education business and stop thinking it knows what children should know and then testing them constantly to see if they regurgitate whatever they have been spoon-fed.

We need to stop producing a nation of stressed-out students who learn how to please the teacher instead of pleasing themselves.

We need to produce adults who love learning, not adults who avoid all learning because it reminds them of the horrors of school.

We need to stop thinking that all children need to learn the same stuff. We need to create adults who can think for themselves.

Call school off. Turn them into apartments.

Schank's solutions are included in several dozen books he has written, and in his teachings to corporations worldwide on how to efficiently have employees learn their jobs. He is a major success, so his criticisms are worth paying attention to. Then it's time for the forward thinkers, and there are some, in our school's educational systems, to start making the changes in order to stop wasting our childrens' time, and minds.

SOTU -- Sense of Deja Vu

My first reaction to the President's speech is that we didn't hear anything new, and we didn't get any real answers.-- SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD Huffington Post 1/31/06

We meet at a time when we face great problems at home and abroad that will test the strength of our fiber as a nation…

It was 5 years ago on the steps of this Capitol that I took the oath of office as your President. In those 5 years, because of the initiatives undertaken by this Administration, the world has changed. America has changed. As a result of those changes, America is safer today, more prosperous today, with greater opportunity for more of its people than ever before in our history…

…we have organized a massive national effort to protect the environment.
Overall, Americans are living more abundantly than ever before, today. More than 2 1/2 million new jobs were created in the past year alone….

Despite this record of achievement, as we turn to the year ahead we hear once again the familiar voice of the perennial prophets of gloom telling us now that because of the need to fight inflation, because of the energy shortage, America may be headed for a recession…

We will break the back of the energy crisis; we will lay the foundation for our future capacity to meet America's energy needs from America's own resources.
We will establish a new system that makes high-quality health care available to every American in a dignified manner and at a price he can afford.

We will make an historic beginning on the task of defining and protecting the right of personal privacy for every American.

As you know, we have committed ourselves to an active role in helping to achieve a just and durable peace in the Middle East…

I urge again that the energy measures that I have proposed be made the first priority of this session of the Congress. These measures will require the oil companies and other energy producers to provide the public with the necessary information on their supplies. They will prevent the injustice of windfall profits for a few as a result of the sacrifices of the millions of Americans. And they will give us the organization, the incentives, the authorities needed to deal with the short-term emergency and to move toward meeting our long-term needs….

the time is at hand this year to bring comprehensive, high quality health care within the reach of every American. I shall propose a sweeping new program that will assure comprehensive health insurance protection to millions of Americans who cannot now obtain it or afford it, with vastly improved protection against catastrophic illnesses. This will be a plan that maintains the high standards of quality in America's health care. And it will not require additional taxes….

I look forward again to working with this Congress in establishing a new set of standards that respect the legitimate needs of society, but that also recognize personal privacy as a cardinal principle of American liberty….

...we will be working with the other nations of the world toward agreement on means by which oil supplies can be assured at reasonable prices on a stable basis in a fair way to the consuming and producing nations alike….

We cannot afford to neglect progress at home while pursuing peace abroad. But neither can we afford to neglect peace abroad while pursuing progress at home. With a stable peace, all is possible, but without peace, nothing is possible….

…As you know, I have provided to the Special Prosecutor voluntarily a great deal of material. I believe that I have provided all the material that he needs to conclude his investigations and to proceed to prosecute the guilty and to clear the innocent...

I believe the time has come to bring that investigation and the other investigations of this matter to an end…

…Now, needless to say, it would be understatement if I were not to admit that the [last year] was not a very easy year for me personally or for my family….

…we can and we will make [this] year…a year of unprecedented progress toward our goal of building a structure of lasting peace in the world and a new prosperity without war in the United States of America. --President Nixon 1974 State of the Union Address

Nixon resigned in August, 1974

Will Hamas Blow Up Mid East Peace?

Hamas won the Palestinian elections with an overwhelming majority of the vote. Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif, when interviewed by Newsweek reporter Christopher Dickey characterized this percentage more as frustration over Palestinian policy, and less as support of militant Hamas.

You’ll always have that dissent vote, that frustration vote in place. In Palestine it turned out the frustration vote was 70 percent.

Hamas is historically committed to terrorism in order to promote the end of the Jewish state of Israel, and in its place a Palestinian state. This platform negates coexistence of a Palestinian state and Israel.

On Friday, the deputy chief of the Hamas political bureau, Moussa Abu Marzouk, set a high standard for discussions regarding disarmament. "Europe and the United States must ask Israel to withdraw from Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem, according to international legitimacy, before they ask Hamas to disarm," he said.--CNN, 1/28/06

The United States, along with other countries, is committed to its policy of not negotiating with terrorists. Bush made these remarks at a news conference:

Asked in a follow-up question if he was ruling out dealing with a Palestinian government that was made up partly of Hamas, he replied: “They don’t have a government yet, so you’re asking me to speculate on what the government will look like. I have made it very clear however that a political party that articulates the destruction of Israel as part of a platform is a party with which we will not deal.”--MSNBC 1/26/06

The evolving situation since the Hamas elections may hinge more on the reaction of the world to Hamas, than on how Hamas approaches the world. If all sides refuse to bend in order to meet in compromise, the so-called roadmap to peace is nothing more than a hallucinatory dream.

There is a glimmer of hope in the midst of all the political statements—at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, reporter Dickey managed to get an on-the-fly video clip of a thoughtful overview from Tel Aviv University president Itamar Rabinovich. He concedes that the election of Hamas is a “negative event,” describes the reaction of diplomats looking for a “silver lining,” and despite the track record of Hamas as terrorists opposed to the existence of Israel, sees a possibility to “find a way to overcome these technicalities…”

There is no other choice than to find a middle ground on which to start communicating. The modern state of Israel itself was born on the back of terrorism. That doesn’t make killing innocent people right, but it proves that there is always room for movement within a mood of intransigence. However, without a lot more intelligent diplomats like Rabinovich, an ultimate solution for peace and cooperation in the Middle East will remain dishearteningly far off.

Nazi Wannabees In Orange County

Gilchrist Founder of Minutemen
In Chicano folklore, Aztlan is often appropriated as the name for that portion of Mexico that was taken over by the United States after the Mexican-American War of 1846, on the belief that this greater area represents the point of parting of the Aztec migrations.—Azteca.net
“Aztlan” is a term sometimes used by anti-immigrationists to bolster their viewpoint that unlike their own forefathers and mothers, this new generation does not want to assimilate but would rather initiate a separate entity within the United States.

Well folks, it looks like that schmuck Gilchrist is out to get press attention again. Some crypto fascists just don’t know when it’s time to move on. Here’s the scenario:

LAGUNA BEACH – The founder of the Minuteman Project said his group is being discriminated against by the organizers of the Patriots Day Parade after its application to join the March event was denied.

Charles Quilter, spokesman for the parade association, said the nonprofit's bylaws state that no group with a political or religious agenda is allowed. Since they refused the Minutemen, Quilter said he has been subject to racist e-mails and phone calls from supporters of the anti-illegal immigration group.

Quilter said the decision was partly based on Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist's run for Congress. Also, the group is "a well-known political organization with political goals," Quilter said.—Orange County Register, 1/24/06

Gilchrist is the organizer of the "Minutemen,” not to be confused with the patriots who fought at Concord and Lexington. His band of KKKr's-without-the-hoods simply wants to take the law into it's own hands, scour the US-Mexican border for hopeful immigrants, legal or otherwise, who might come here to pull weeds out of their garden and possibly pollute their inbred genes.

I’m not overreacting—check out this anti-American web site devoted to anarchy which appeared when I googled Minutemen and Gilchrist:

According to reliable sources, the U.S. Senate is about to block border security measures in H.R. 4437, especially the border fence. Instead this millionaires club will tack on a guest worker (amnesty) provision. Indications are that the House will reject this measure, sending the entire issue into limbo. If this happens, Mexico wins because time is on their side. Wait another few years and they will simply outnumbers us.—AmericanPatrol.com

They’re already about to “outnumbers” us in California. Why is such racism surprising? Only 65 years ago German Nazis took fellow citizens from their midst, who were accomplished people—doctors, lawyers, business-owners—removed them from society and killed them in sequestered areas called concentration camps, because they were Jewish. Gilchrist hates Mexicans, whether they're American citizens, or immigrants with or without documentation—because he is full of fear, just like the Nazis.

If Gilchrist took a minute to read (well, one can always dream) any of the statistics involving immigration into this country in the last 20 years, he would kiss the border clay they tread on as they add to our economy, tax base, and overall lifestyle.

Gilchrist has plenty of support, in case you thought he might be an aberrant outcast. When he ran for congress in the special election in Orange County’s 48th district last fall, to replace SEC appointee Christopher Cox, he got a nice showing of voters:

JOHN CAMPBELL (REP) 46,184 44.4%
STEVE YOUNG (DEM) 28,853 27.8%
JIM GILCHRIST (AI) 26,507 25.5%

It’s the most right-wing district in the nation anyway, but still, for a racist to do so well is scary.

Gilchrist and his band of cronies is just a copy of the age-old need to build fences in order to keep out what they consider riff-raff. As history has proven over and over, all these fences do is corral the idiots. Fear will out, as always.

Maybe not this time—the real heroes deserve recognition as much as the demons: The organizers of the Laguna Beach Parade for Patriots Day are to be honored for their quick and courageous decisive action to ban Gilchrist and his group from marching in their midst. After all, we true patriots look back at the legacy of our nation of immigrants, and the prosperity and freedom that came from them.

Big Pharma & Insurance Co’s: 1, Seniors: 0

The lobbying clout of big pharmaceutical companies and the corresponding medical insurance companies is only too obvious with the enactment of the Bush drug plan. This blog has well noted the failings of the plan, both on a monetary and humane basis, due to Bush’s catering to the bottom line of the drug companies at seniors’ expense--42 million senior Americans, to be exact.

In case all of the carping on both sides of this issue sounds like partisan politics, here is a clear-cut opinion written by a member of the medical profession. He’s really displeased with the way congress let the constituents down—or sold them out:

From Los Angeles Times Op-Ed January 21, 2006:

It's a benefit, but for whom?

By Daniel J. Stone

DANIEL J. STONE is a internist and associate medical director at Cedars-Sinai Medical Group.

January 21, 2006

AS A GERIATRIC medicine specialist, I am confronted daily by the chaos and confusion of Medicare's Part D drug benefit. The program should reflect President Bush's ideals of "compassionate conservatism." Compassion would mean user-friendliness and easy access to affordable drugs. And a conservative plan would maximize "bang for the buck." Instead, the priorities of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies have trumped these objectives.
Economics 101 tells us that the largest purchasers have bargaining power to get the best prices. Medicare could have used this power to gain large discounts on behalf of seniors. Similar national bargaining entities in Canada and Europe allow foreign consumers to pay a third to one-half of U.S. drug prices. A single Medicare bargaining entity, however, threatened to place unprecedented price pressures on drug companies and might have reduced or eliminated the role of private insurers.

So Congress sacrificed Medicare's bargaining power in favor of a system in which multiple private insurers offer competing plans. This decision will ultimately transfer billions of dollars from seniors and the government to insurers and drug companies. Some claim the industry needs these resources to finance tomorrow's drug breakthroughs. Although the need for research dollars is real, it seems unfair for Medicare seniors to shoulder costs that also subsidize Canadian and European consumers...

Jack Bauer and the Pres: Life Immitates TV

George W. Bush-POTUS; Gregory Itzen-Actor POTUS

Buzzflash noted the following news story in today’s email:

George W. Bush assured the nation that his wife was not planning to run for the Senate. (Who asked?) "She's not interested in running for office. She's interested in literacy," Bush said during an appearance at JK Moving & Storage. Hey Laura, literacy begins at home.

Does literacy include reading the newspapers? Last week Bush admitted he was not aware that German intel usefully filled in gaps for unmanned target strikes in Iraq shortly after the initial invasion.

Question: “From your knowledge, did the German intelligence help the U.S. before and during the Iraq war in Baghdad?”

President Bush: “I have no idea about the latter. [Laughter.] You did say, secret intelligence, right? [Laughter.] I understand. I really—the truth of the matter is, the chancellor brought this up this morning. I had no idea what she was talking about. The first I heard of it was this morning, truthfully.” –MSNBC Shadowland, Target Practice, Christopher Dickey, 1/19/06

Newsweek reporter and terrorism expert Chris Dickey’s reaction in his latest Shadowland column:

Apparently the president’s public position on such sensitive matters is don’t ask, don’t tell. But given the American track record, maybe it’s time the rest of us took a closer look.

I watched Bush, live, make his remarks at the podium with the German Chancellor. I thought I was watching one of those made for TV movies where the president drank some bad stuff planted by terrorists and he lost his mind. This is because of the huge amount of media coverage one day prior, devoted to the German intel Bush now claimed he never heard of.

The image immediately came to mind of the actor, Gregory Itzin, who plays the character of President Charles Logan on the Fox TV series, “24.” While the “24” show episodes center around good guys--Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU) and main man Jack Bauer--fighting the bad guys—sub-human lethal terrorists—the character of the president, Logan, is key to plot movements based on his temper tantrums and cumbersome inability to take on the leadership role in tight spots. This fictional president’s foibles and failings keep the fictional story more interesting and suspenseful.

Itzin’s character Logan is so inept, so scattered and erratic, that occasionally my wife complains about Itzin’s acting. I have reassured her that the acting is right on the money. Itzen is depicting a person who has no spine, who is totally self-centered and opportunistic, and who would have outlasted Hamlet in a contest for “person least likely to make a decision.”

When we, the audience, are treated to an insider viewpoint of President Logan and his cronies on “24,” as they discuss events behind closed doors, one can imagine how that same activity plays out with Bush and his crew in the real world.

After Bush admitted he hadn’t heard about the German intel in Iraq until the morning of last week’s press conference, even though the media were splattered with references the day before, what might have happened back in chambers? What did Bush and his aides discuss? Did it go like this, as if from an episode of “24?”

Bush [to Andrew Card, Chief of Staff]:

Do you think they bought that about me not knowing about the German intel? I looked like a jerk out there.

Card [nodding the knowing look while reaching out to
reassure]:

It was in your briefing papers yesterday that the press got hold of it. Only yesterday, so you could conceivably not have known about it until today. I don’t think you looked that jerky.

Bush:

Hell I can’t get through the briefing papers anyway—I’m the President of the Free World! Do you people think I have time to read, get dressed, do my exercise routine, listen to Laura’s lectures, AND run the country in one day? Plus dad’s on my ass about the polls. Half the time I can’t even remember what I said to who…

Card:

…”Whom” sir…

Bush:

..”whom” what?

Card:

You said “what I said to who,”—it’s “whom.”

Bush:

What you said to what? Andy, what are you talking about? You
are really confused. Never mind anyway--Someone’s gotta brief me on the briefing papers, ‘cuz I don’t have time to read both pages. And don’t leave out stuff like this German intel shit again or we’re all gonna start looking stupid!

Card:

Yes sir Mr. President. I’ll let the Vice president know you want him to
read to you some more.

The producers and writers of “24” are well aware of politics and current events in order to keep their plot lines a step ahead, or at least in tune with, the times. That’s why the President Logan character is coming off so much like a mockery of Bush, who plays the US President in real life. Even in the background profile on the “24” web site, Logan’s resume is short on political experience, and long on executive level activity in the energy field--too similar to the real guy to be a coincidence.

I usually attribute the nervous feeling I get watching “24” episodes from the suspense created by true TV professionals. The added reason for the queasy upsetting sensation I get lately, comes from the idea that what’s happening for entertainment in my living room, could be a horrible foreshadowing of reality to come—especially when Itzen’s President Logan character screws up big-time, which he does all the time. It’s too real.

Dec 22, 2005 Encinitas

Surfing in the fog in 20 foot swells 

Malibu, January

Surfers with Santa Monica in distance 

Iran: What Do These People Want with Nukes?

Veteran Middle East reporter and my good friend, Chris Dickey, has written a story with other top Newsweek correspondents, that explains the highly confusing signals coming from Iran lately regarding developing nuclear capability. The clear-cut summation is this:

Iran's ultimate goal in this complicated game of chess is to win security guarantees from the United States at a time when American troops are in several countries on Iran's borders.-- Iran’s Rogue Rage, Newsweek 1/23/06 issue

As the article points out, even the Iranian people who are not aligned with the erratic new President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the Islamic Mullah leadership, have a nationalistic desire to be masters of their own destiny, which includes having nuclear power. As one young Iranian says,

We are a nation with an ancient civilization and rich culture. I think it's really hypocritical of Mr. Bush to criticize Iran for having nuclear technology while Pakistan, India and Israel have nuclear bombs.-- Iran’s Rogue Rage, Newsweek 1/23/06 issue

Well, yeah, except what do you need an A-bomb for unless you plan to use it? All this saber rattling doesn’t help to urge the Bush squad to want to abandon Iraq very soon, either. Although the Bush doctrine, unstated though evident, has always been to gain and keep a physical foothold in the oil-rich Middle East.

It would be better for the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad to make nice with the anti-war crowd in the US, while as time goes by, the movement to bring troops out of Iraq grows, and the apparent danger to Iran softens. And the Bush crowd and their followers slither out of office through impeachment, the ballot box, and the end of their terms.

Breaking News: Seniors Can’t Afford Drugs Under Bush Plan

Top news stories today:

Miners Funeral

Comet Dust Probe Returns

Iran plans Holocaust Conference while threatening nuclear capability

Feinstein Warns Against Alito Filibuster

None of these stories immediately affects as many people as the Bush drug prescription plan, yet that headline is not even on the grid.

Once again dad has brought a perspective to the issues of the world that seems to be missing from the media reports of late: seniors can’t afford the drugs they need under the new Bush drug prescription program. Maybe his interest is due to his holding a license as a pharmacist for 60 years. Or maybe he doesn’t like seeing the underdog, in this case the American senior citizen, treated unfairly. Or maybe he doesn’t trust Bush, or most politicians for that matter, when statements are made saying,

"Some older Americans spend much of their Social Security checks just on their medications. This new law will ease the burden on seniors and will give them the extra help they need." (George W. Bush at bill signing ceremony, December 8, 2003 2)

The facts: Most Medicare beneficiaries will end up paying MORE for
their prescriptions. (http://www.ourfuture.org/)

Here’s the enactment of the Bush drug plan:

Since Jan. 1, countless low-income Medicare patients have been turned away from druggists' counters or forced to come up with large sums of cash for crucial drugs. Despite emergency measures announced Thursday by California officials to cover the costs of drugs for this group in the short term, relatively few patients were able to take advantage of the move Friday. Many didn't know about it.

Indeed, hundreds of pharmacies — including stores operated by at least two major chains, Long's and Rite Aid — apparently hadn't received word of the last-minute guarantees by the state and were charging regular prices for the drugs. Some people went away empty-handed; others dependent on vital drugs such as insulin dipped deep into limited savings or borrowed from others. Still others made tough choices, forgoing asthma medication, for example, for blood pressure pills.

Even when glitches in the new drug plan were resolved thanks to the emergency measures, many seniors were overwhelmed by new co-payments they didn't realize they would have to pay.Medicare Situation Still Chaotic, Los AngelesTimes, 1/14/06

Dad’s reaction:

Isn't it awful to read this and realize nobody (not even Diane Feinstein [Democratic Senator-CA]) cares? I was waiting until this plan come into effect to see how the poor are affected and now see it clearly---where they got medi-cal free and other states have medicaid--they are now pushed into this plan where they have to pay a co-pay (I worked in a welfare drug store in Hartford and know these people don't have any money for Rx)--so what happens today on the talk shows Feinstein appears on CBS and says our big problem is the gov't invasion of privacy.

Feinstein did have something to say about the Bush drug plan for which she voted:

On Friday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, one of the few Democrats to vote for the prescription drug plan pushed by President Bush in 2003, described the program's faulty debut in dire terms."The result is a major health emergency in California, particularly for people with chronic and debilitating diseases who rely on multiple medications daily to keep them alive," she wrote. L. A. Times

Multiply the following story by millions:

Henry Cook, 52, of Los Angeles, who has had diabetes since age 6 and was disabled by complications of an aneurysm, chokes up as he talks about what happened to him.

The Rite Aid drugstore he has patronized for years told him he owed $250 because his deductible hadn't been covered to pay for insulin and related supplies. He opted to forgo his blood pressure medicine, but still had to borrow money. By the time he got home to measure his blood sugar, it had soared.

He has since resolved some of the problems after spending hours on the phone. "What's worrisome is that any time I'm going to have to get the prescriptions refilled, I'm going to be sweating bullets because I'll never know what to expect," Cook said. L. A. Times

As George W would say, the Bush senior prescription initiative is a heck of a plan.

Nixon: King = Bush: Dictator

Nixon, Kissinger, Cheney, Rummy, W.

My 8 year-old going-on-30 bought herself an Atari video plug-in for the TV at Toys R Us tonight. Now Mom and little girl are playing Pac Man and the hourglass of time is turned upside down 26 years. It’s that easy to bring on the past.

I know it’s that easy because the rumblings of bugging by the NSA with the blessings of the Bush people rings up the same old transgressions of the plumbers trying to plug the leaks in the Nixon years. And that was reminiscent of the surveillance that took place illegally during the case against Alger Hiss brought by the republican communist witch-hunters led by McCarthy and Nixon’s HUAC in the late 1940’s.

Nothing much has changed—even the players come from the same old schools. What’s new is the extent to which Bush thinks he can get away with it. And the lack of opposition to his maneuvers. Much has been written in the blogs and the press about the lack of scrutiny and public decrying by the democrats about the Bush steamrollering of civil rights. Therein lies the problem—and as much as the lobbyist pocket-greasing is getting the once-over right now, so should the spotlight shine on congress and the democratic opposition who are too afraid to lose their perks and stand up for American values, which includes most importantly keeping presidential power in check.