RockThrower

An Unmitigated Disaster

The Real State of the Union

President Bush is set to share his vision of the state of the union tonight.  My guess is that he hasn’t had a hallucination this wild since he ate that Peyote Jack Abramoff got for him from his Indian Tribe clients. 

I know, the Republicans get to make up their own version of reality these days, but even die-hards with a few brain cells left must be thinking that the Bush presidency is beginning to resemble a bad trip. It’s ugly out there.

Let’s face it, the Bush presidency is an unmitigated disaster.  From foreign policy failures to domestic doldrums, things aren’t going so well.  Not that that’s going to stop the Bush boy’s from saying it isn’t so.  Remember, were dealing with a group who calls legislation that increases air pollution the “Clear Skies Act.”  They’re not about to let a few facts get in the way now.

So to get a version of the state of the union that might be a little closer to reality, I thought we should take a look at how one of the President’s former favorite states is faring under the reign of Bush II, Ohio. 

You may remember that it was Ohio where Christian conservatives came out of the woodwork to vote to ban gay marriage and deliver the presidency to George Bush. (My bet says we don’t hear anything about the Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in tonight’s speech).  I think there is a picture of Ohio voters in the book of famous phrases next to the line “be careful what you wish for, for you will surely get it.”

Since the beginning of Bush’s Presidency in 2001, Ohio has lost 161,400 manufacturing jobs, 16.4 percent of all manufacturing employment. The state added just 3,600 jobs total during 2005, a gain of less than a tenth of one percent of the Ohio job market, according to Policy Matters, an Ohio research organization. Ohio's unemployment rate was 5.9 percent in December 2005, and just this month Ford Motor Corporation announced more job cuts impacting more than 1700 Ohio workers.

Policy Matters also reports that household income fell for the second straight year and median hourly wages for Ohio workers fell for the fourth straight year in 2004. Twelve percent of the state’s population, 1,362,000 adults, do not have health insurance, according to the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.  That’s an increase of almost 100,000 since Bush took office.  Today, 11.3 percent of Ohioan’s live in poverty according to U.S. Census Bureau data.

On a more positive note there were no gay marriages in Ohio in 2005. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said about dying in Iraq.  Since the start of the war, 105 Ohio residents have been killed in the war.

There is little doubt that Ohio has paid a tough price for their support of Bush, but the damage done by what is rapidly shaping up to be the worst presidency in United States history is shared by all of us.  So tonight, when the President is spinning out his vision of reality, Americans might want to keep a few facts in mind.

• As of January 30, 2006, 2,242 Americans have been killed in Iraq – 62 since January 1.  16,400 have been wounded.
• No weapons of mass destruction have ever been found, and there is no evidence of any link between Sadamm Hussein and Al Qaeda.
• International Public Opinion of the United States has plummeted.
• More than thirty-seven million Americans live in poverty today, an increase of 6 million people since George W. Bush took office in 2001.
• More than 45 million Americans have no health insurance, an increase of more than 5 million since George W. Bush took office in 2001.
• President Bush has the worst record on job production of any modern president. Nearly three million manufacturing jobs have been lost under the current Bush administration.
• Under Bush, the United States has gone from a budget surplus to a budget deficit of more than $300 billion and is expected to surge to more than $400 billion this year.  The U.S. Government today announced plans to borrow a record $188 billion this fiscal quarter.
• The trade deficit stands at a more than $700 billion, up 80 percent since Bush took office.
• Wages and income for most Americans are stagnant, and the savings rate is non-existent.  Meanwhile, Exxon-Mobil today announced record shattering profits of $36.1 million for the past year, while Americans paid record prices for gas at the pump.

By virtually every objective measure, Americans are worse off today than when President Bush took office.  And many would argue that the Presidents actions in Iraq and against terrorism have made Americans less safe.

The Bush presidency is an unmitigated disaster.  It is a stunning record of incompetence. And that’s before we even begin to discuss the response to Hurricane Katrina, let alone talk about charges of corruption, spying, illegal searches, torture, rendition, secret prisons and censorship.

The President has done, as he might say, “one heck of a job.”  And hold on to your hat.  He’s not done yet.

Thanks Ohio.

The Constitution as Talking Points

When it comes to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration claims they want judges on the court who will “strictly interpret and apply the constitution.”

But when it comes to their own actions, the President and his minions apparently believe that the Constitution is little more than political talking points from which they can pick and choose to press for political advantage.

The vaunted Republican spin machine was out in force again this week working to make the case that breaking the law and illegally spying on American citizens is a good thing.

Sensing a divide in American opinion over revelations of illegal domestic spying, the Bush team launched an effort to drive a wedge through the electorate and change the debate from a legal one to a political battle. They even gave their illegal spying program a snazzy new name “ The Terrorist Surveillance Program.” Treating the issue as just another political campaign, all the Presidents men were spun out to deliver the message that we need to be scared, and that to oppose the presidents spying program was to be weak on national security.

Karl Rove, delivering the Republican talking points and setting the stage for a weeklong series of political speeches, defined the issue in the starkest of terms. In a speech to the Republican National Committee he said, “We have two parties that have fundamentally different views on national security. Republicans have a post 9-11 world view – and many democrats have a pre 9-11 world view.”

The effort is pure Rove and it is intended to accomplish two things: One is to redefine the issue – to change it from a debate over substantive legal issues to a political controversy that frames the discussion as a false choice between security and liberty. The second is public relations 101 – the administration is admitting to what they have done in advance, disclosing wrongdoing while wrapping their actions in the cloak of 9-11prior to the pending Senate hearings and other investigations.

But Rove also said something in his speech that may come back to haunt him. Seeking to turn the debate over the appointment of Supreme Court judges into a political issue for the upcoming elections Rove said, “This important debate will decide whether we treat the Constitution as the governing charter of our nation - or whether we will treat it as if it is made of hot wax: pliable, inconstant, and easily changed.”

Well I guess we know where he comes down on this. Judging from their recent actions, Rove and others in the Bush administration apparently believe that the President is above the law and that the Constitution does not apply, except when they say so.

But despite the political claims of the Bush Administration, the United States, for the time being anyway, remains a nation of laws, and the 1978 FISA legislation specifically prohibits domestic spying on U.S. Citizens without a warrant based on reasonable cause.

And as for the Constitution, the Fourth Amendment reads:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Even Rove is going to have a tough time spinning his way past that one.

But he is right about Republicans having a post 9-11 worldview and Democrats having a pre 9-11 worldview.

Democrats believe in a pre 9-11 America where civil rights and civil liberties are protected, where political power is limited by the Constitution’s checks and balances, and no one, not even the President, is above the law.

Many Republicans however appear to believe in a post 9-11 vision of America where liberty is sacrificed in the name of security, where domestic spying, torture and secret prisons are standard policy, and the law is only what the President, or Karl Rove, says it is.

Independent Counsel Should Investigate Bush Domestic Spying

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service has issued a legal analysis concluding that the Bush Administration’s limited briefings of Congress regarding the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program are “inconsistent with the law.”

Former Vice President Al Gore has said that President Bush broken the law and has called for the appointment of a independent counsel to investigate.  I strongly encourage you to sign the petition  by   MoveOn.org to  demand the appointment of an independent counsel.

If Abramoff and Norquist were any Closer, They’d be having Sex.

"What the Republican Party Needs is 50 Jack Abramoffs" -- Grover Norquist

A friend of mine once wrote a piece that started off, “nothing like having one’s neck in a noose to focus your attention.”  I figure that must be what it feels like down at Republican headquarters these days where RNC President Ken Mehlman is spinning so fast against the Abramoff scandal avalanche he seems to be getting dizzy.

I don’t know how else to explain the Republican party’s apparent new effort to distance themselves from the corruption scandal washing over the Republican Congress and lapping at the White House doors by positioning the GOP as “the party of reform.”  Unless of course Mehlman too has been sipping at the White House vodka.

As reported in Sunday’s Los Angeles Times, Mehlman outlined the Republican strategy in comments last week to Grover Norquist’s ‘K’ street breakfast club.  The article quotes Mehlman as saying in an interview “Your going to hear from this president and see the Congress consider an agenda of real change and real reform in 2006.”

And if that’s not enough to make your head spin, the Republicans are apparently putting Norquist out front and center in the effort to redefine what the Abramoff corruption scandal is really about. The Times article quotes Norquist as saying “the GOP’s ideas could be both “ a shield and a sword.” for inoculating Republicans against corruption charges and pointing out Democrat’s excesses.  Norquist will apparently outline his thinking in an article to be published this week the conservative journal “The American Spectator.”

I know that Republicans believe they can “make up their own reality,” but this is a little over the top, even for a group who apparently believed the Iraqi people would throw roses at the feet of U.S. forces instead of shrapnel. Norquist after all was one of the first players whose name rose out of the muck during the initial investigation into the lobbying activities of Jack Abramoff and his partner in crime Michael Scanlon.

As reported in May by New York Times (restricted access) Abramoff’s tribal clients gave $1.5 million to Norquist’s organization Americans for Tax Reform at the behest of Mr. Abramoff.  The tribes also gave an additional $250,000 to the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, an organization with questionable environmental credentials founded by Norquist and Gale Norton before she became Secretary of Interior.  According to the National Journal , Abramoff used Americans for Tax Reform as a conduit for funneling payments to Ralph Reed's political consulting firm Century Strategies to help defeat an Indian Gambling measure that threatened Abramoff's clients. 

And in November the Washington Post  reported  in that Norquist was part of a little ménage- a-trois with his old pals Abramoff and Ralph Reed in which funds from Abramoff’s gambling clients (in this case E-lottery) were first cleaned up by laundering the funds through Americans for Tax Reform before sending it on to Reed throught another group, but not apparently before Norquist took his cut.

The bottom line is that while the Republican spin machine may be trotting Norquist out to distance the party from Abramoff, the reality is that Abramoff and Norquist are connected at the hip.  If they were any closer they’d be having sex.  The connection between the two reaches back to their college days when Norquist ran Abramoff’s successful campaign to become chairman of College Republicans, and later to Citizens for America, a conservative group where they both worked.

It is that relationship that has metastasized into the cancer of corruption that is today threatening the Republican control of Congress and the Whitehouse.  As the Republicans gained power it was Norquist along with Tom Delay and Jack Abramoff who built the K street project, showering favors on lobbyists in exchange for their fealty and oath of loyalty to the Republican cause.

And so while the Republicans prepare to make their pitch as the “party of reform,” they might want to take a minute and remember that it was Norquist who once told the National Journal, "What the Republicans need is 50 Jack Abramoffs."  It looks to me like they have them.

.

Gore Speech

Better Late than Never

If you missed Al Gore's speech accusing the President of repeatedly breaking the law and calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor, don't.   Read or listen to the speech at the Commonwealth Club website

Gingrich for Hypocrite

David Sirota has a must read new article in The Nation    scoring former  Majority Leader and current Republican hypocrite Newt Gingrich for his comments urging the Republican party to distance itself from the corruption scandal linked to Jack Abramoff.  That's interesting because as Sirota points out it was Gingrich who started the "K Street" projects and helped to make Abramoff one of the most powerful lobbyists in town.

Bundt Cake II

For Jonathan Castro – killed in Iraq, December, 2004

A year ago today I wrote what has gone on to be RockThrower’s most popular posting, an article called “Bundt Cake,” which has been read by thousands of online readers.

The heart of the article was about a promising  American, an ambitious young man by the name of Jonathan Castro, who had dreams of being an engineer.  The article quoted his mother as saying “ He wanted to learn about a lot of different things in life. He liked to test his limits.” He sounded, I wrote, “like a fine fellow, with a world of potential.  But unfortunately, as I wrote then, Jonathan, just 21, was one of the brave soldiers fighting in Iraq who was killed in the December 2004 mess hall bombing that also killed 17 other Americans.

And so today, RockThrower is dedicated to Jonathan Castro. 

Since Jonathan’s death, America has lost more pieces of its future as hundreds more U.S. soldiers have died fighting in Iraq. According to a year-end announcement from military authorities, 841 soldiers died in Iraq in 2005. Already this January, another 28 soldiers have been killed. Clint Upchurch, 31, of Kansas was killed by small arms fire, Stuart Anderson, 45, of Iowa was killed in a crash with a civilian vehicle, Kyle Brown, 22 of Virginia was killed, Nathan R. Field, 23 of Iowa was killed, Robert T. Johnson, 23, of North Carolina was killed.  The names go on and on, piling up into a list, to be etched into some stone wall somewhere some day as if that will make it all right.

But thier names are not just letters on a list, they represent the very future of our country.  What simple contribution might these brave young soldiers have made? What difference might they have made to your life or mine.  What difference might they have made to  America’s future?  As I wrote about Jonathan, maybe one of them would have invented the next “Bundt Pan -- or just have been a good man among his common men.”  But maybe they would have been the police officer that saves your life, the teacher who convinces your son to stay in school, the writer of a book that changes how we look at the world,or a politician who prevents the next war. We will never know the holes that their deaths are leaving in our future. 

And so today I am asking the few readers of RockThrower to take a minute and think about Jonathan Castro and the too many others who have died fighting in Iraq.  Take a minute and think not only about the sadness of thier deaths, but about the loss of their future and what it means to their friends and family, about what it means to our country.  That loss is the cost of this war.  And we should not forget it. And every American should be asking the president and our political leaders if it is worth it. 

FYI – You can view the original rockthrower article “BundtCake”  here   Photo’s of Jonathan Castro and other articles about his life and death are posted at the Gold Star Families Speak Out  website.  Updated information about U.S. casualties in Iraq can be found  here

Abramoff Pleads Guilty

Is Ney Small Fry?

The Halls of Congress are tension filled as house members and their staff consider their fate as former lobbyist Jack Abramoff gets set to spill his guts.

But for my money, the more interesting question is what are they talking about over vodka rocks at the White House?

It looks like Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio may be in for a beating.  Already, the Republican National Congressional Committee has thrown him overboard, with spokesman Carl Forti telling the New York Times “”seeing that only one person was named, there's got to be a little bit of relief out there."

But my guess is that Ney is just the small fry.  The bigger story may be what Abramoff has to say about his ties to the Bush White House.

The Bush team moved quickly to distance themselves from Abramoff with that fount of credibility Scott McClellan telling reporters "What he is reportedly acknowledging doing is unacceptable and outrageous. If laws were broken, he must be held to account and punished for what he did."

But the Bush White House ties to Abramoff have long roots and little Scotty saying it isn’t so doesn’t make it true.

Back in May of last year, the Associated Press, in an article published in USA Today 
and elsewhere, reported that Abramoff had “close contact” with the Bush team, meeting nearly 200 times with contacts within the new administration, including policy advisors to Vice President Dick Cheney’s office and Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles.  And an article in the Texas observer reports that Abramoff worked on the Bush-Cheney 2000 Transition effort as an advisor to the Department of the Interior.

Campaign finance records also show that Abramoff and his wife also each gave $5,000 to the Bush 2000 recount fund, and made the maximum contribution of $1,000 to the Bush 2000 campaign.  Abramoff was also a “Bush pioneer” raising more than $100,000 in contributions in both the 2000 and 2004 Bush-Cheney campaigns.

According to the  Texas Observer Article , Abramoff was able to capitalize on his connections, arranging a White House lunch meeting with President Bush in May 2001 for two of his Indian Tribe clients, the same clients he and his partner Michael Scanlon would go on rip off to the tune of $82 million.

While the Abramoff investigation may focus for now on corruption within Congress, given the connections between Abramoff and the Bush White House, one would think that journalists would begin to ask some hard questions about the relationship between Abramoff and members of the Bush administration.

One place to start would be the Department of Interior.  Records obtained by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee (pages 7&8) show that Funds from the Coushatta Indian Tribe given to the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy (CREA) at the suggestion of lobbyist Jack Abramoff paid for a public opinion survey provided to U.S. Secretary of Interior Gale Norton and others at the Department

Additional documents obtained from the Justice Department by the National Resources Defense Council as part of their effort to gain information about the energy policy taskforce conducted by Vice president Cheney show that CREA provided the Interior Department with the public opinion research (dated 5/16/01) suggesting how to talk about energy issues and emphasizing using rising gas prices to promote increased drilling and open the Alaskan National Wilderness Area (ANWR) to oil exploration.

Secretary Norton and others at the Department of Interior have denied any wrongdoing.  But journalists might want to take a close look at whether or not the Department of Interior made any favorable rulings on behalf of Jack Abramoff’s clients while accepting outside funding for a public opinion survey provided to the Department that somehow made its way into the office of the Vice President.