Bush’s press conference

I watched the President’s press conference last night and here are a few thoughts.

The line of the night was the comment comparing governing by polls to a dog chasing his own tail. Forget for a moment that this administration clearly does govern by polls (hello Karl!), but could there be a better description for this train wreck of an administration?

Clearly, the current angle of attack on Social Security is to try to reduce benefits. I’ve read in various news articles and blogs that what the president meant by keeping benefits for future generations at least equal to those that seniors receive today was that they’d be adjusted for inflation, but I’m not so sure that he did mean that. I think he could actually mean keeping them equal in real terms – which would be even more disastrous for future beneficiaries. I think he’s that arrogant – he really believes that if he promises to keep benefits at least equal, that the public will swallow it whole and be happy about it.

Talking Points Memo picks up on this whopper of a contradiction during the Social Security discussion:

You don't have to worry about private accounts, he said, because if you want you can fill your account with US Treasury bonds which have no risk at all. They're backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. But he says that the very same Treasury notes, when they're in the Trust Fund, are just worthless IOUs.

And naturally, no reporters followed up on this OBVIOUS contradiction. I’ll do it for them – it’s really not that hard:

Mr. President, how can you justify encouraging Americans to invest in Treasury bonds when you’ve recently said that those same bonds in the Social Security Trust Fund are worthless IOU’s?

His comments about North Korea were so incoherent, it’s frightening. I really would prefer that a President of the United States at least sound like he knows what he’s talking about regarding a hard-line rogue nation that might possibly possess nukes.

I wanted to throw something at the TV when he said he didn’t think opposition to his judges was also being against "people of faith.” Why then is your personal hand-maiden in the Senate (Frist) running around the country saying that it is?

Many of the questions from the press were absolutely ridiculous. Even with Bush at his most unpopular, they are afraid to be aggressive. Who needs fake reporter/GOP life-line Jeff Gannon when the real press is so toothless?

Why Does Big Oil Hate America?

Set against the backdrop of high fuel costs, today the economic slowdown. Well, while most Americans have less money to spend on other things thanks to the 60% increase in the price of gas, these fortunate companies are literally rolling in moolah:

- USA Today reports "Exxon Mobil said Thursday that first-quarter earnings soared 44% from last year, due mainly to strong crude and natural gas prices...The company's net income surged to $7.86 billion."

- Reuters reports "Royal Dutch/Shell comfortably beat analysts' forecasts to report a 28 percent rise in first-quarter profits, helped by surging oil prices and strong refining margins...The company's earnings rose to $5.548 billion."

- The Houston Chronicle reports "ConocoPhillips, the nation's third-largest oil and gas company, said today that first-quarter earnings soared year-over-year on high oil prices, though they were partially offset by unplanned downtime in the company's exploration and production unit. The company's net income jumped to $2.91 billion."

Are patriotic American oil companies not willing to forgo some of their record profit by keeping prices from rising too high in order to allow other businesses dependent upon fuel to maintain production levels sufficient to keep the economy growing? Are patriotic American oil companies not willing to forgo some of their record profit by keeping prices from rising to high in order to allow the patriotic American consumer - the pillar of the American economy - to have sufficient disposable income so that consumer spending continues to improve?

The high fuel prices are directly responsible for the slowing economy - and it wasn't moving along all that briskly to begin with. So faced with the choice to help America get stronger through economic growth by making a small sacrifice in profit margin or to reap the profits from extremely high fuel prices while likely triggering, if we're lucky, and economic "soft patch" (a recession if we aren't so lucky), these companies have chosen to screw America.

Why does Big Oil hate America?

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

The three-ring circus held this past sunday in Louisville known as "Justice Sunday" was organized by one Tony Perkins. Mr. Perkins it appears, has a long history of pandering to white supremacists. More at the Nation:

Senate majority leader Bill Frist appeared through a telecast as a speaker at "Justice Sunday," at the invitation of the event's main sponsor, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins. "Justice Sunday" was promoted as a rally to portray Democrats as being "against people of faith." Many of the speakers compared the plight of conservative Christians to the civil rights movement. But in sharing the stage with Perkins, who introduced him to the rally, Frist was associating himself with someone who has longstanding ties to racist organizations.

There's nothing like the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

The Radical Right-wing has really done a great job duping the mainstream media into believing as if these people have some strong moral fiber - but the truth is a lot of the people in this movement were segregationists and racists a generation ago. Is it possible they have seen the light and abandoned their prejudice?

Um, no! Look at the language they spewed at this event, and the things they say in the media - they still push hate and intolerance, they've just changed the names that they are calling the groups they are inflicting their venom on.

The End of All Things

With Ann Coulter, the shrill right-wing pin-up pundit making the cover of Time magazine and receiving what can best be described as a wet, sloppy tongue bath in the form of a cover story by one John Cloud, it’s become quite clear to me that the world has indeed entered into The End of Days.

With Bush safely ensconced in the WH for another four years, the leaders of the Right-wing Machine that currently controls both the government and most major private institutions have begun to impose their full agenda on the Republic. From dismantling Social Security to eviscerating the judiciary to controlling all aspects of private behavior to wrecking international institutions, the right-wing is pursuing its agenda on many fronts.

Being that a well-informed, intelligent populace steeped in common sense would pose a serious challenge to the full implementation of the right-wing vision; the Machine’s masters have spent decades undermining the public’s primary tools for keeping this ever-present Machine in check – an independent press and a free and open discourse – with an endless barrage of defamation and sabotage. Liberal bias has long been the charge used to undermine the public’s confidence in its press. Recent barrages in this long siege, such as Memogate, Fox News and Jeff Gannon, only make a further mockery of public discourse, contributing to the further decline of that essential institution.

Now, here in the spring of 2005, we cross a new threshold of escalation in the War on Public Discourse. The attempt by Time Magazine (owned by Time Warner, one of the largest corporations on the planet) to “mainstream” a fringe character like Coulter signifies the final stage of this conflict. If successful, the acceptance of such a complete buffoon by the general public will signal to the right wing that absolutely nothing is off limits. No behavior by a public servant will seem too corrupt. No amount of presidential deception will be impeachable. No invasion of privacy will be deemed too unwarranted.

And the greatest joy to the right wing – the public will be completely unable to recognize what’s transpiring. The Daily Howler explains:

In just the past five years, the “press corps,” lacking all conviction, has made Gore seem crazy and Coulter seem sane. Their first performance put Bush in the White House; the latter act leads to a pitiless future. Quite plainly, Coulter’s the craziest one of them all—and your denatured “press corps” sends boys out to pimp her, boys who say they can’t find her mistakes! Don’t be fooled—Coulter is the stalking-horse, the test-case to see if there is anything so absurd, so insane, so bizarre, that your modern “press corps” won’t let it be peddled. This week, Time gave its answer: No. The mag said it couldn’t find Coulter’s mistakes—and that her comments are made in good fun.

Powdered, perfumed, disastrously overpaid, your celebrified press corps lacks all conviction. Our question: If your “press corps” won’t even object to this, is there anything they’ll ever confront or challenge? Is there any intellectual or moral tradition they’ll defend; is there any intellectual or moral tradition that will survive their abdication? Your “press corps” clowns at dinner parties, singing “happy birthday” to favorite pols and pretending that they don’t notice the Coulters. (Emphasis Added)

The only thing standing between freedom and a tyranny unlike anything the world has ever seen (thanks to technology) is a public (that is, a body of private citizens who actually believe in the principles of a free society) that is unwilling to accept the concentration of power in the hands of a small minority, and that overcomes even the most insidious attempts to hide or distort the truth. But if the public can believe that Coulter is actually normal or typical, then the war is already over.

And it is not enough for a handful of liberal or progressive intellectuals to point out the unacceptable abdication of responsibility demonstrated by Time and any other entity that bows to the right-wing power mongers. Those opposed to the right-wing machine, or at the least who care more about the principles of a free society, must do battle within their peer groups. Coulter is a lawyer, as are other right-wing radicals who are trying to dismantle the judiciary or bashing it in public (Texas Senator John Cornyn, Justice Scalia).

Where are the many other lawyers out there, especially the conservative ones who actually still believe in the rule of law, fighting back against this attack on their livelihood? How can they not disown a disgrace like Coulter, who hacked her way to prominence by plagiarizing, lying, and breaking every basic rule of editing known to man? Where’s the outrage when a lawyer like Cornyn says that judges bring the violence on themselves for following the rule of law? Where’s the condemnations when Supreme Court Justice Scalia further stains the profession by saying that judges “only have themselves to blame.”

The Daily Howler rightly calls out liberals who fail to publicize and criticize so-called liberals who attacked their own using bogus right-wing spin – he asks why they don’t name names.

Well, I think the same is true in other peer groups. The Bar should be all over hacks like Cornyn, Scalia and Coulter for their nonsense. Bill Frist should have his medical license revoked. But no, everyone’s too nice for that. Why is everyone so gosh darn nice? Well, as afar as it concerns the press, Slate’s Jack Shafer puts it this way:

SHAFER (4/8/05): I started writing press criticism at Washington City Paper back in 1986, because as editor I couldn't get anybody else to do it. Writers were frightened that if they penned something scathing about the Washington Post or the New York Times they'd screw themselves out of a future job.

The Good Ol’ Boy network! I have to be nice or I might not get that job that will allow be to buy that over-priced house or that gas guzzling super-SUV or that vacation at Martha’s Vineyard. Scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours? So this is how it works? With the right-wing Machine, it’s more like: Scratch my back while I rob you blind and burn your house down.

Hypocrisy Award - cue "Rocky Top"

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) is the latest Hypocrisy Award recipient for his blatant lies about filibuster history now that the record has become quite inconvenient for his presidential ambitions.

The Lies:

In a speech to the Federalist Society arguing against the filibuster, Senator Frist said:

Tonight I want to share with you my thoughts about the filibuster of judicial nominees: it is radical; it is dangerous; and it must be overcome.

The Senate must be allowed to confirm judges who fairly, justly and independently interpret the law. The current Minority has filibustered 10 -- and threatened to filibuster another 6 -- nominees to federal appeals courts. This is unprecedented in over 200 years of Senate history. Never before has a Minority blocked a judicial nominee that has majority support for an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

Never.

….Bob Dole’s Republican Minority didn’t filibuster Democrat Bill Clinton’s nominees.

The Hypocrisy:

Two specific attempts to filibuster Clinton judicial nominees in 2000 failed – that is not enough Republican Senators were willing to join the filibustering minority in order for it to succeed. Furthermore, the filibuster was used to defeat LBJ’s Chief Justice Nominee in 1968 – so it has been done.

Only ten of Bush’s 229 judicial nominees have been successfully filibustered. Because the Dems are the minority, the filibuster is the only check against the ample poor judgment in competence this President has so repeatedly demonstrated (see John Bolton) in his appointments.

And let’s make an important distinction; the Republicans didn’t need to filibuster against Clinton because they were in the majority (beginning in 1995), which means as chairs of the committees overseeing the initial hearings they didn’t even need to bring his nominees up on committee agendas.

Of course, for the first two years of the Bush administration, when the Dems had a one vote majority thanks to Jim Jeffords defection, they returned the favor for the GOP’s not holding hearings on dozens of Clinton nominees by doing the same thing to Bush’s nominees. However, after the GOP returned to majority status in 2003, they have had no excuse for not at least moving these votes to the floor.

The problem for the GOP, though, is the threat of Democratic filibusters means potential embarrassment to the party as well as greater exposure and public scrutiny of some of Bush’s nominees as extremists. This is what they are afraid of, and so we see this urgent need to get rid of the filibuster so they can quickly and quietly continue pandering to the fringe fundamentalist wing of their party.

Frist knows this, and his statements to the Federalist Society, meant for broader public consumption, are patently false. His latest gambit to equate filibustering to being “against people of faith” -Justice Sunday- is yet one more reckless example of political pandering to a small group of fundamentalists bent on remaking the US as a theocratic, authoritarian state.