Today on CNN:
WOLF BLITZER: Can you justify deploying more U.S. troops into what you believe is a civil war?
SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): On this day, for the record, Wolf, I would say no.
Today on CNN:
WOLF BLITZER: Can you justify deploying more U.S. troops into what you believe is a civil war?
SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): On this day, for the record, Wolf, I would say no.
“Under heavy American pressure, the Iraqi government ordered two Iranians who had been detained in an American military raid to leave the country, Iraqi officials said Friday, ending a bitter, nine-day political standoff,” reports The New York Times. Can you say untenable situation? The Bush administration (like Joe Lieberman) wants backing the Iraqi government to somehow be an anti-Iranian measure.
“Spc. Dustin R. Donica, 22, of Spring, Texas, was killed Thursday by small arms fire in Baghdad, the Defense Department said.”
UPDATE: Flashback to Tony Snow at the 2,500th U.S. fatality: “It’s a number, and every time there’s one of these 500 benchmarks people want something.”
Jon Chait takes on the topic of elections it’s better to lose, noting that liberalism would probably have been in much better shape had Gerald Ford been re-elected in 1976 leaving the GOP, rather than Jimmy Carter, saddled with the essentially unsolvable problems of America in the late 1970s:
And the elections that people think don’t matter often do. Moderates and liberals widely regarded the 2000 presidential campaign as a snoozer. Apathetic liberals held “shadow conventions” that year to highlight the stultifying timidity of the two major parties. The implicit premise of Ralph Nader’s 2000 candidacy was that it was as good a year as any for liberals to make a protest statement and throw the election to a Republican. We now can see that the radicalism of George W. Bush, then half-concealed, along with the rallying effect of Sept. 11 made the 2000 election incredibly consequential.
This consideration of the little-appreciated-at-the-time significance of the 2000 election, however, is the reason why I don’t think it ever makes sense to do anything other than try your best to win. The 2000 election turns out to have been incredibly important primarily because of 9/11. The giant external shock created a public expectation of dramatic policy shifts which, of course, made it much easier than it otherwise would have been to implement such shifts and far harder to obstruct or prevent them. Thus, a kind of latent radicalism inside the Bush administration was unleashed in a way it otherwise wouldn’t have been. Events, in short, are incredibly important and one of the main things presidents do is respond to them. Meanwhile, it’s just not possible to know in advance which four-year periods are the ones that are going to feature dramatic events.
I agree with Nick Kristof — George W. Bush would be a pretty good president if he reversed, um, all of his ideas about public policy and started governing like a liberal Democrat. I’m not sure that really would “rescue” his “legacy” since even the best possible policies simply can’t undue the damage caused by the invasion of Iraq (or, say, having invading Afghanistan and failed to achieve any of our major objectives there) in two years’ time.
Today on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), the outgoing chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said President Bush should have congressional support before he announces any plan for escalation in Iraq. “[I]n the past, the administration has been inclined not to disregard Congress but to not take Congress very seriously. I think this time Congress has to be taken seriously.”
If Bush ignores Congress, Lugar said he should expect “a lot of hearings, a lot of study, a lot of criticism,” and “demands for subpoenas.” Fox host Chris Wallace said, “You’re saying this could get ugly.” Lugar replied, “Yes, it could.” Watch it:
Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Larry Korb, former U.S. assistant secretary of defense under President Ronald Reagan, said last week that “Congress should intervene to block another troop surge unless the administration could adequately explain to it why such a policy was necessary.” Read American Progress’ full memo to Congress.
Full transcript: Read more
with so little guile or calculation.” — Vice President Dick Cheney, on former president Gerald Ford.
Today on Fox News Sunday, Bill Kristol said that Saddam Huissein’s execution “could be a milestone on the way towards a more decent and democratic regime in Iraq.”
On NBC, reporter Richard Engle, who is actually in Iraq, provided a reality check. Engle noted that supporters of Hussein “are not the overwhelming majority of people in this country carrying out attacks against american soldiers or against iraqis themselves.” Moreover, because the execution was “tinged by…sectarian overtones” it could “fuel” the “civil war.” Watch it:
Transcript: Read more
“The Justice Department is investigating whether the director of a multibillion-dollar oil-trading program at the Interior Department has been paid as a consultant for oil companies hoping for contracts.
The director of the program and three subordinates, all based in Denver, have been transferred to different jobs and have been ordered to cease all contacts with the oil industry until the investigation is completed some time next spring, according to officials involved.”