Better days: Princess Diana with young William and Harry, circa 1993
Prince Harry's eulogy for his mom on the ten tear anniversary of her death of Princess Diana, who at the end of the day was first and foremost, William and Harry's mom, and only secondarily the world's royal icon. As someone who also lost their mother at a young age, I can only hope that the years have eased these two young men's pain, even just a little bit ... although time never really does. Here's the text:
William and I can separate life into two parts. There were those years when we were blessed with the physical presence beside us of both our mother and father.
And then there are the 10 years since our mother's death. When she was alive, we completely took for granted her unrivaled love of life, laughter, fun and folly. She was our guardian, friend and protector.
She never once allowed her unfaltering love for us to go unspoken or undemonstrated.
She will always be remembered for her amazing public work. But behind the media glare, to us, just two loving children, she was quite simply the best mother in the world.
We would say that, wouldn't we.
But we miss her. She kissed us last thing at night. Her beaming smile greeted us from school. She laughed hysterically and uncontrollably when sharing something silly she might have said or done that day. She encouraged us when we were nervous or unsure.
She—like our father—was determined to provide us with a stable and secure childhood.
To lose a parent so suddenly at such a young age, as others have experienced, is indescribably shocking and sad. It was an event which changed our lives forever, as it must have done for everyone who lost someone that night.
But what is far more important to us now, and into the future, is that we remember our mother as she would have wished to be remembered as she was: fun-loving, generous, down-to-earth, entirely genuine.
We both think of her every day.
We speak about her and laugh together at all the memories.
Put simply, she made us, and so many other people, happy. May this be the way that she is remembered.
Probably fittingly, the lads' wicked stepmother, Camilla, did not attend the memorial service for the late Princess.
Meanwhile, Dodi Fayed does his own tribute, and keeps the conspiracy theories coming.
The Justice Department's inspector general indicated yesterday that he is investigating whether departing Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales gave false or misleading testimony to Congress, including whether he lied under oath about warrantless surveillance and the firings of nine U.S. attorneys.
The disclosure by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine in a letter to Congress signals an expansion of the department's internal investigations into Gonzales's troubled tenure, probes that were not previously known to be focused so sharply on the attorney general and his testimony.
Fine's office has also separately expanded a probe into whether senior Gonzales aides improperly considered partisan affiliations when reviewing applicants for nonpolitical career positions. As part of that inquiry, Fine sent hundreds of questionnaires in the past week to former Justice Department job applicants.
In the questionnaires, Fine asks applicants whether they were quizzed by political appointees about their party affiliation, favorite politicians and judges, voting history, campaign contributions, and views on the death penalty and terrorism, according to a copy of the Aug. 24 questionnaire obtained by The Washington Post. Recipients are also asked to say whether White House aides participated in the interviews and to confirm if they were asked "what kind of conservative you were (law and order; social; fiscal)."
Gonzales announced his resignation Monday after seven months of sustained conflict with Congress over the prosecutor dismissals and other issues, telling aides that his credibility with lawmakers had been too damaged for him to continue. Democrats and some Republicans had urged him to resign amid allegations that he and his aides repeatedly let political considerations taint the law enforcement mission at Justice.
The scope and pace of the investigations suggest that public attention on Gonzales will probably continue long after he leaves his job on Sept. 17. But officials declined yesterday to say whether Fine's expanding investigations played a role in the attorney general's resignation. ...
KHOU-TV in Houston uncovered nearly 500 pages of documents on the FBI's surveillance of Coretta Scott King, the late wife of the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The documents include memos showing that the FBI shared intel on Ms. King with the U.S. military, mainly out of fear of her involvement with the anti-war movement. They also intercepted her mail, tapped her phonecalls to political leaders including New York Governor Nelson Rockefellar, and shared their findings with the White House, which apparently was concerned that Mrs. King just might be a communist.
This is fascinating stuff, particularly since the FBI claimed to the KHOU reporters that the agency has changed.
Really?
Well a funny thing happened on the way to the anti-war rally ... the FBI showed up! And according to information unearthed by the ACLU, they're keeping a mighty big database of not just anti-war protesters, but anyone seen as opposing any policy of President George W. Bush. And then there's the matter of Dubya's executive orders regarding the government's ability to seize the property of anyone Bush believes is interfering with his war.
A group of Black bloggers calls on the major media to give serious coverage to one of the most disturbing, race-related cases in my lifetime: the case of the Jena 6. According to the Afrosphere Jena 6 Coalition:
There is growing concern surrounding the Jena Six case in Jena Louisiana. Yet, inexplicably, the national media, most particularly on television, has been abysmally silent on an occurrence of grave social, political and legal importance.
The 'common folk' media of the blogosphere, has stepped up to the plate in the absence of adequate traditional media coverage. Bloggers have taken to hanging banners to blog side-bars and placing them in blog entries at an increasing rate; displaying the words 'Free the Jena 6' accompanied by the evocative symbolism of a noose hanging from a tree. On these blogs strategies that can assist in bringing awareness to these young targets of racist psychological abuse are finding willing participants in discussion, and action; but they need the media’s help.
This issue, like Katrina, highlights how some people receive deference in treatment over others. “The Jim Crow style racism and government negligence, reflected in the Jena 6 case, are both quite worrisome. Unfortunately, the case is another incident that points to the entrenched racial and socio-economic disparities in the South, which this country has yet to fully confront,” says political scientist Dr. Sekou Franklin of Middle Tennessee State University. As the Congressional Black Caucus has noted “…we must speak out against injustice and inequality. This tale of two standards depicts a pattern of gross violations.”
The Afrosphere Jena 6 Coalition “ask that the mainstream traditional media step forward and discharge their duty to provide coverage of this vitally important event to their viewers and readers and act as “the fourth institution" of governmental "checks and balance” that constitutional framers intended the press to be.”
I missed their blogaction yesterday, but want to express my full support for their efforts. This case sounds like it could have taken place in 1957, let alone 2007, and it speaks to the lingering stench of racism in American society.
When I ran across a tale on the Internet about six African-American teens from Jena, La., who are facing decades of prison time for allegedly beating up a white classmate, I couldn't believe their ordeal started with a tree. A tree holds powerful symbolism for black people. While traveling in the South, legendary singer Billie Holiday saw a tree that inspired her to write "Strange Fruit," a song which contains references to lynching.
Still, it is difficult to comprehend that in 2007, black students at any high school in America felt compelled to go to a school official and ask if it would be OK to sit in the shade of a tree usually enjoyed by white students.
There's no dispute that is what happened on Aug. 31, 2006 in Jena, a town with a population that is about 85 percent white and 12 percent black.
A vice principal apparently told the students they could sit "wherever they pleased." And the next day, Sept. 1, 2006, three nooses were found hanging from said tree.
Just three years ago the nation celebrated the 50th Anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruling that declared racial separation was inherently unequal. Yet, Jena High School seems stuck in the pre-civil rights era.
Read the entire column. Well worth it. The piece ends with this couplet:
I asked the Rev. Jesse Jackson why he thinks the "Jena 6" case had not received a drum-beat of exposure from national media.
"We've adjusted to this kind of tyranny," Jackson said. "This is small-town tyranny."
And the sad thing is, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the white students aren't still sitting under the tree.
P.S.: There's a petition up, asking for the charges against these young men to be dropped.
George W. Bush has been making increasingly threatening noises in the general direction of Tehran, leading many people to believe that he plans an attack on Iran before he finally, and mercifully, leaves office in January of 2009.
In fact, Bush's recent speech to war veterans in Nevada, in which he prognosticated a "nuclear holocaust" in the Middle East if Iran is allowed to develop a nuclear program (Iran denies it's for weapons), sent shockwaves through much of the world, as did his call for U.S. troops to seize any Iranian that Bush claims is causing havoc inside Iraq. This comes on the heels of the Bush administration's decision this month to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guards -- its highest level military establishment -- as a terrorist group. Put it all together, and up goes the temperature.
The subsequent arrest of a group of Iranians inside Iraq has only made things worse. Reports the Asia Times:
With Congress gearing up for a fight with the White House on the "surge" policy in Iraq, Bush has arguably many reasons to talk up tensions with Iran. Focusing on Iran may help deflect attention away from the "surge" strategy's failure to turn the tide in Iraq. It can also help convince Congress that Iran is responsible for US misfortunes in Iraq and that cutting the funds for the war would embolden the clergy in Tehran.
Iran's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad is certainly not making the work of the administration more difficult. Shortly before Bush's address to the Nevada war veterans, Ahmadinejad did his part in ratcheting up tensions.
"Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region," he predicted at a press conference. "Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation," he continued in a clear reference to the US's declining position in the Middle East and Iran's bid to reclaim a regional leadership role.
Still, the nature and implications of the Bush administration's recent moves do not have the characteristics of a customary rhetorical deflection exercise. Accusing Iran of seeking to put an already unstable Middle East under "the shadow of a nuclear holocaust" and promising to confront Tehran - whose actions "threaten the security of nations everywhere" - before it is too late echo statements made by the Bush White House about Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion of Iraq.
In fact, Bush's speech to the veterans in Nevada has several similarities to his address to the nation on January 10. That was also slated as a major speech on Iraq, though it spelled out little new about Washington's strategy except to call for staying the course. Instead, it revealed key elements of the US's new aggressive posture on Iran.
For the first time, the president accused Iran of "providing material support for attacks on American troops" while promising to "disrupt the attacks on our forces" and "seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq".
Moments after the president's speech in January, US Special Forces stormed an Iranian consulate in Irbil in northern Iraq, arresting five Iranians who Tehran said were diplomats. Washington described the detained Iranians as agents and members of the IRGC. Later that day, US forces almost clashed with Kurdish Peshmerga militia forces when seeking to arrest more Iranians at Irbil's airport.
The US move drew stark criticism from the Iraqi government. "What happened ... was very annoying because there has been an Iranian liaison office there for years and it provides services to the citizens," Iraq's Minister of Foreign Affairs Hoshiyar Zebari told Al-Arabiya television.
The administration has since declared the seizure of the Iranians to have been an unfortunate misunderstanding, as the BBC reported on Wednesday:
BBC World News reported Wednesday that "an embarrassed American military has said it regrets that eight Iranians ... were arrested, handcuffed, and blindfolded by US soldiers in Baghdad." The US now acknowledges that the Iranians are engineers who were in Iraq to help rebuild the local electrical system.
According to BBC, "the eight Iranians were taken away from the Sheraton Hotel in the dead of night to be interrogated. American troops also seized their bags, a laptop computer, and phones. All this just a couple of hours after President Bush began a speech to American veterans which included a bitter attack on Iran, accusing it of arming and training Shiite militants inside Iraq."
"I have authorized our military commanders inside Iraq to confront Tehran's murderous activities," promised Bush in that speech. ...
... but that hasn't stopped many nervous Bush watchers from predicting that the provocative actions are a prelude to yet another war, particularly as it might be the only thing a lame duck, woefully unpopular president could do to help his party, heading into the presidential election... And its not just Bush critics on the left. Smart journalists like Sy Hersh and analysts like The Washington Note's Steve Clemons are saying the same thing. In fact, Clemons sees some of these neocons fishing around to make a buck off the next war.
Besides that, Bush is still being advised by a coterie of neocon advisers who dearly want to attack, not just Iran, but also Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Check Joe Lieberman for that.
On the right, Pat Buchanan, a former Republican and unrestructed paleoconservative, has been sounding the alarm, too.
Let's hope that all of these voices are wrong. But don't count on it.
Two years to the day after the devastation of hurricane Katrina displaced some 600,000 people, more than 160,000 remain displaced, with some 60,000 still living in FEMA trailers, awaiting the chance to go home. Two years have brought little relief to the people of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, while Mississippi has received outsized benefits for its connected former GOP lobbyist governor, Haley Barbour, he of the floating casinos...
The storm that unmade George W. Bush's presidency (you know the saying: "9/11 changed everything... Katrina changed it back...") continues to haunt him, even as he returned to the scene of the crime today to try and sound compassionate. "New Orleans is comin' back!" Bushie declared, then he explained why he and Laura have a better perspective on the situation than the residents of that devastated city, because he and the missus don't get down there much. No, seriously, he said that... and then he went to another charter school.
Man, for a guy who can't read...
Anyway, the Institute for Southern Studies has the grim facts on the failures of reconstructin, despite a $116 billion outlay for rebuilding. Of that total, only 30% has been attached to real projects, and of that, only have has been spent, including $7 bilion on "administrative costs." Pathetic.
Keeping in mind that Senator Larry Craig of Ida-ho is so totally, seriously not gay ...
It's interesting the back story that's surfacing about him. Not just the stories of his bathroom stall mackadociousness, or his allegedly propositioning various men for sex over the years, but also his rather Mark Foley-esque implication in a 1982 congressional paige sexual solicitation scandal. Step into the wayback machine with me, will you? Let's go back to the Reagan era, and check out this ABC News report:
Well good thing Larry Craig isn't gay, because otherwise that denial might not sound so credible... And just to refresh your memory a bit more, here's TIME Magazine's reportage of that 80s sexual scandal:
These are serious charges," declared Ohio Congressman Louis Stokes, chairman of the House Ethics Committee. "I am deeply disturbed," said House Speaker Tip O'Neill. "This is the last thing Congress needs," agreed Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker, who added, "I'm flabbergasted."
The source of their consternation was an FBI investigation into charges that perhaps three Congressmen may have had homosexual relations with teen-age boys who serve as pages on Capitol Hill. An unspecified number of the pages, who run errands for members of Congress, supposedly felt they would lose their jobs if they did not agree to have sex with the Congressmen involved. Claims that female pages were solicited were also being probed. There were vague allegations in a separate investigation by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration that some Congressmen used cocaine supplied by pages.
So far, the sex scandal rests on shaky ground. One 16-year-old page told CBS News that he had once been propositioned by a Congressman and that pages had told him that they had been invited to parties at which Congressmen asked for sex in return for continued employment. CBS put the frightened page on its Evening News program, using silhouetted settings to obscure his features. An 18-year-old former page, who has been accused of car theft and writing bad checks, told CBS he had had sex with three Congressmen.
There are, of course, even more selacious allegations of past sexual scandal
Meanwhile, Republicans are just praying that Mr. Craig will just quietly go away... his seat, however, is up in 2008.
Update: Senators McCain and Coleman call for Craig to resign. I predict he will do so sooner rather than later, the better to spare the GOP further humiliation. Then, Idaho's Republican governor, C.L. "Butch" Otter could appoint a suitable, read "not gay" ... replacement.
Semi-relevant question: Why would gay rights groups get pissed that someone, even Tucker Carlson, would physically fight off the unwanted advances of another man in a restroom. Are straight people supposed to welcome such advances? Greet them politely? Or what? If a woman fought off the unwanted physical advances of a man, she would be applauded by my friends on the left. But a man? He's supposed to do what, thank the aggressor kindly or give him a high five? Give me a break.
Update: Check out the police report on The Smoking Gun. Keith Olbermann gave it an hilarious read on "Countdown" last night... Roger, Friday.
...life can be pure hell, and not just because deep down in your inner man you know that your party has f----d the country... Sayeth the Grey Lady:
WASHINGTON, Aug. 28 — Scott Reed, a Republican strategist, was at a dinner in Philadelphia on Monday night when his cellphone and Internet pager began beeping like crazy. Only later did he learn why. His party was buzzing with news of a sex scandal involving a Republican United States senator — again.
Just when Republicans thought things could not get any worse, Senator Larry E. Craig of Idaho confirmed that he had pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct after an undercover police officer accused him of soliciting sex in June in a Minneapolis airport restroom. On Tuesday, Mr. Craig, 62, held a news conference to defend himself, calling the guilty plea “a mistake” and declaring, “I am not gay” — even as the Senate Republican leadership asked for an Ethics Committee review.
It was a bizarre spectacle, and only the latest in a string of accusations of sexual foibles and financial misdeeds that have landed Republicans in the political equivalent of purgatory, the realm of late-night comic television.
Forget Mark Foley of Florida, who quit the House last year after exchanging sexually explicit e-mail messages with under-age male pages, or Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist whose dealings with the old Republican Congress landed him in prison. They are old news, replaced by a fresh crop of scandal-plagued Republicans, men like Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, whose phone number turned up on the list of the so-called D.C. Madam, or Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and Representative Rick Renzi of Arizona, both caught up in F.B.I. corruption investigations.
It is enough to make a self-respecting Republican want to tear his hair out in frustration, especially as the party is trying to defend an unpopular war, contain the power of the new Democratic majority on Capitol Hill and generate some enthusiasm among voters heading toward the presidential election in 2008.
“The real question for Republicans in Washington is how low can you go, because we are approaching a level of ridiculousness,” said Mr. Reed, sounding exasperated in an interview on Tuesday morning. “You can’t make this stuff up. And the impact this is having on the grass-roots around the country is devastating. Republicans think the governing class in Washington are a bunch of buffoons who have total disregard for the principles of the party, the law of the land and the future of the country.”
Then again, Washington does not have a monopoly on the latest trend among Republicans. Just ask Thomas Ravenel, the state treasurer of South Carolina, who had to step down as state chairman of Rudolph W. Giuliani’s presidential campaign after he was indicted on cocaine charges in June.
Or Bob Allen, a state representative in Florida who was jettisoned from the John McCain campaign last month after he was arrested on charges of soliciting sex in a public restroom.
Mr. Craig, for his part, has severed ties with the Mitt Romney campaign, despite his public declaration on Tuesday that “I did nothing wrong.”
In an interview Tuesday on “Kudlow and Company” on CNBC, Mr. Romney could not distance himself fast enough. “Once again, we’ve found people in Washington have not lived up to the level of respect and dignity that we would expect for somebody that gets elected to a position of high influence,” Mr. Romney said. “Very disappointing. He’s no longer associated with my campaign, as you can imagine.” ...
Yeesh. Good thing Craig isn't gay ... er ... that guilty plea to soliciting sex in the loo notwithstanding ... and those persistent rumors and claims by men that he had sexual encounters with them also notwithstanding ... Um, CUE THE ETHICS PROBE! And perhaps some nice, relaxing rehab!
Meanwhile, the Craig situation is playing havoc with the GOP's plans to dike it's Senate seat slippage. Okay, maybe "dike" was a poor choice of words...
Update: Mitt to Larry: "Under the bus you go!" ... Romney called his former campaign co-chair "disgusting," which should go over really well with the Log Cabin Republicans ... and he cancelled a trip to Idaho by one of his war campaign veteran sons ...
Looks like the Republican National Committee will follow the DNC's lead, by punishing states that choose to push up their primaries in defiance of the Iowa-New Hampshire hegemony, and that could put a crimp into the plans of one Rudolph "I married my cousin" Giuliani.
The Giuliani campaign has reportedly set up a "firewall" in the state of Florida, according to campaign materials obtained by Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post and discussed on his blog, The Fix. Says said Fix:
Florida is the "firewall" in former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's presidential bid, according to a Powerpoint presentation made to volunteers of his campaign in the Sunshine State and obtained by The Fix.
"Florida is the firewall" proclaims the second slide of the presentation which, by in large, is aimed at outlining the goals of Giuliani's effort in the state -- which is slated to hold a primary on Jan. 29. The slide goes on to highlight two press reports: the first, from the Associated Press, notes that Giuliani has "adopted an unorthodox campaign itinerary....lavishing attention on Florida."; the second, from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, points out that "Giuliani's strategy is to win delegate rich Florida to catapult him." The next slide notes that Giuliani's average lead in national polling is seven points but his average lead in Florida is 14 points.
Tony Carbonetti, a senior adviser to the campaign, dismissed the idea that Giuliani viewed Florida as a make or break moment for his bid. "Florida's the firewall, New Jersey's the firewall, Connecticut's the firewall, New York's the firewall," said Carbonetti. He added that the document was put together by state staff, not national staff, in order to "motivate our volunteers."
Although Giuliani's campaign has made clear that the states set to vote on Feb. 5, 2008, which include New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, California and Illinois, are likely to strongly favor their candidate, they insist that the former Mayor is also running hard in traditional early voting states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Nonetheless, the slide show does suggest that the Giuliani campaign believes Florida will play a central role in determining the identity of the Republican nominee.
And, while most of the rest of the document is rah-rah sort of stuff, there are some glimpses into Giuliani's broader Florida strategy in the document.
In a slide entitled "Opportunities to get involved", a list of "key coalitions" is provided that includes: "former Yankees" (we assume that means ex-northerners, not the actual Pinstripers), first responders, volunteer firefighters and, The Fix's personal favorite, Italian Americans.
On a slide titled "Our Plan for Victory" there are handwritten notes that read "go after congressional districts" and "Miami -- key city". As we noted in a story for washingtonpost.com's "Fast Track Campaign" series, Florida is one of several large states that splits its delegate apportionment between the winners of each congressional district and the winner of the statewide vote. Win the entire state of Florida and you get 39 total delegates. But, 75 delegates are up for grabs in the congressional districts -- three for each of the 25 seats. ...
The Republican National Committee plans to penalize at least four states holding early primaries, including New Hampshire and Florida, by refusing to seat at least half their delegates at the party’s national convention in 2008, a party official said Tuesday.
Much of the focus in the primary scheduling fight up to now has been on the Democratic National Committee’s moves to penalize Florida by not seating its convention delegates because of the state’s decision to move up its primary. But the Republican rules are even more stringent, and the national party said today that it would not hesitate enforcing them.
The actions by Republicans and Democrats to move against states holding early contests is a rare instance of the two parties moving in concert, in this case to regain control over a rapidly evolving primary calendar that has thrust the nominating system into deep uncertainty just months before it is to begin.
“The rules are clear,” said Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee. “Any state that holds their primary outside of the window shall be penalized delegates.”
In addition to Florida and New Hampshire, Michigan and South Carolina also face sanctions for moving their contests before Feb. 5. Two other early nominating states, Iowa and Nevada, will escape Republican sanctions because they hold nonbinding caucuses, not primaries.
Republican Party officials in both Florida and Michigan said yesterday they still believed it unlikely that they will face penalties — despite being told exactly the opposite by national party officials — and are crafting a plan to make their voice heard during the convention.
“I am confident that all 114 delegates from Florida will be seated,” said Jim Greer, the chairman of the Florida Republican Party.
Mr. Greer argued that Florida technically does not select its delegates on the date of the primary, but rather, the leaders in each of its 25 Congressional districts choose delegates starting Feb. 6, so it is not breaking the rules.
“I am confident that the Republican National Committee or any eventual nominee will not allow the voices of Florida voters not to be heard,” he said. “Florida is too important a state as it relates electing to the next president.”
Banning half a state’s delegation would be an extraordinary move. While state party officials have played down the impact, noting that presidential candidates are often selected before the convention, there is the chance that the parties could have brokered conventions in which each delegate’s vote would be prized. ...
That the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave this famed speech in the National Mall in Washington D.C. as 250,000 people marched for freedom and justice.
But what a lot of people omit, was another speech delivered that day -- a much more provocative one, by one John Lewis, then president of SNCC. The money quotes:
The revolution is at hand, and we must free ourselves of the chains of political and economic slavery. The nonviolent revolution is saying, "We will not wait for the courts to act, for we have been waiting hundreds of years. We will not wait for the President, nor the Justice Department, nor Congress, but we will take matters into our own hands, and create a great source of power, outside of any national structure that could and would assure us victory." For those who have said, "Be patient and wait!" we must say, "Patience is a dirty and nasty word." We cannot be patient, we do not want to be free gradually, we want our freedom, and we want it now. We cannot depend on any political party, for the Democrats and the Republicans have betrayed the basic principles of the Declaration of Independence.
Lewis was challenging the federal government, as was Dr. King, only in a much more confrontational way. I think it's important to remember that you needed both sides in order for the civil rights movement to work -- the spiritual and the provocative.
This guy wasn't attorney general of the United States. He was a toadie, whose only function was to serve George W. Bush's immediate interests. He is an embarassment. not only to the Justice Department, but to the entire legal profession.
Just four months later than my prediction, ding-dong, Alberto is finally getting gone.
WACO, Tex., Aug. 27 — Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, whose tenure has been marred by controversy and accusations of perjury before Congress, has resigned. A senior administration official said he would announce the decision later this morning in Washington.
Mr. Gonzales, who had rebuffed calls for his resignation, submitted his to President Bush by telephone on Friday, the official said. His decision was not immediately announced, the official added, until after the president invited him and his wife to lunch at his ranch near here.
Mr. Bush has not yet chosen a replacement but will not leave the position open long, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the Attorney General's resignation had not yet been made public. ...
... The official said that the decision was Mr. Gonzales's and that the president accepted it grudgingly. At the same time, the official acknowledged that the turmoil over his tenure as Attorney General had made continuing difficult.
"The unfair treatment that he's been on the receiving end of has been a distraction for the department," the official said.
I'm thinking Gonzo's next move will be to lawyer up, and lawyer up good. There's perjury charges afoot... or at least there should be.
Alberto's resignation comes just a few days after the head of the Justice Department's civil rights division called it quits too, in the wake of the attorneygate scandals that had their roots in attempts at the federal level to punish people who were registering people to vote.
While you were fulminating about Michael Vick abusing those pit bull pups ... this guy was stomping the living shit out of his evangelist wife, and then returning to the pulpit to thunderous applause. Man, the devil is busy...
The DNC has dropped the hammer on Florida, threatening to deny the state its 210 delegates to the party's convention if the Sunshine State goes ahead with its plans to hold a primary election on January 29. Here's how Nedra Pickler at the AP reports it:
Florida Democrats would forfeit their votes in selecting a presidential nominee unless they delay their state election by at least a week, the national party said in a stern action Saturday meant to discourage others from leapfrogging ahead to earlier dates.
The Florida party has 30 days to submit an alternative to its planned Jan. 29 primary or lose its 210 delegates to the nominating convention in Denver next summer.
The state party chairwoman, Karen Thurman, said she would confer with state officials about the ultimatum. "It's going to be a difficult discussion," she said, because Floridians are wary of having their votes taken away.
Elected officials in Florida have said they would consider legal action and a protest at the convention if the national party barred the state's delegates.
Florida's vote change was pushed by the GOP in order to enhance the state's stature by making it one of the early primary states, along with South Carolina, Nevada, and the whitest states in the union, Iowa and New Hampshire. The logic is that with Florida's diversity, it is more representative of the country writ large, and should have a louder voice (I suspect that the GOP also sees Florida as a state more amenable to a more moderate, non-evangelical candidate like Rudy Giuliani, who leads the state in the polls and in terms of elected leadership support, as opopsed to a North Carolina, or a Nevada, where anti-immigration forces could hurt Rudy pretty badly...)
Either way, the Democrats are now committed to the primary date, and the Republican-led legislature has no real incentive to help the Dems out, unless of course the RNC decides to go the same route. More from the AP:
There is general agreement that the eventual nominee will seat Florida's delegates rather than allow a fight at a convention intended to show party unity. But the decision by the Democratic National Committee's rules panel could reduce Florida's influence because candidates may want to campaign in states where the votes are counted.
In other words, the DNC's action could cost this state -- and particularly our media outlets, like the one I work for, a shitload of cash. More on what we know, and check out hard-ass Donna Brazille!
The calendar was designed to preserve the traditional role that Iowa and New Hampshire have played in selecting the nominee, while adding two states with more racial and geographic diversity to influential early slots.
Several DNC officials said before the vote that they wanted to take the strong action against Florida to discourage Michigan, New Hampshire and other states that were considering advancing their contests in violation of party rules.
Garry Shay, a rules committee member from California, said allowing Florida to move forward "would open the door to chaos."
DNC committee member Donna Brazile also argued for a strong penalty, saying, "I hesitate to see what happens if we show somehow some wiggle room in our process."
The party argues that Florida's early primary could cause a headlong rush by other states, including Michigan, to move their primaries up, too. Now, to Ms. Brazille, as reported by The Politico:
During the debate, Donna Brazile, a DNC member from D.C. who was campaign manager for Gore-Lieberman in 2000, said: “I understand how states crave to be first. I understand that they’re envious of the role that Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally played. And I understand that they would like to see if they can get the candidates to come down and … spend all of their time and the resources and fill their bars — oh, sorry, not the bars! — fill their farms and their barns up with people. But the truth is is that we had a process. … That vote will stand … and send a signal to the people of Florida – which includes my sister, who had to show not one, not two, but three forms of ID in 2000.”
And as regards "funny hats", the Politico's Ben Smith continues;
As the meeting broke up and all the cameras and reporters (and there are a bunch of both) lunged for the Florida folks, I walked up to the dais and asked Mr. Roosevelt and his co-chair, Alexis M. Herman, the practical consequences for Florida if the sanctions remain in place.
Roosevelt: “The event on Jan. 29 would be purely a beauty contest — equivalent, as somebody said, to the Iowa straw poll.”
Herman: “But voters WOULD get to register their preference. I think that’s important to point out.”
Roosevelt: “There would be a state-run poll or beauty contest, as has happened before. But there would NOT be a selection of delegates for the national convention in that process.”
What will happen at the national convention, in Denver a year from now (Aug. 25 to 28, 2008)? Will Florida have a section with a "Sunshine State" sign and the funny hats?
Herman: “This would then come under the purview of the credentials committee of the convention. And the convention credentials committee would then have to make a determination as to how they would interpret whatever activities would have occurred in Florida — be it the 29th process, or any subsequent activities, if it were not party approved.”
So is it disenfranchisement, as the state party is claiming, or just strict adherance to the rules? Hm...
As for the Republicans, they stand to lose up to half of their delegates when the powers that be over there decide September 5th. But the state GOP chair is vowing to fight the power. We shall see...
Why is the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in such a hell-fire hurrry to take over the Miami-Dade Housing Agency? The County's court fight to stop the pending federal takeover of the embattled agency sheds light on some possible reasons why. A district court judge has ordered mediation between HUD and the county over the takeover, delaying the receivership until at least September 20. (Read the judge's order here.) But the really interesting document is the detailed memo filed by the county (with the mayor and commissioners in rare agreement, along with local housing activists, who didn't file a friend of the court brief, but who probably for the first time are in line with the county...) to support their case for relief. In that memo (read it here), the county argues that HUD broke its own rules by now giving the county sufficient time to correct any violations, rather than seizing the housing agency and all of its properties. Speaking of properties, the county argues that the takeover would do irreparable harm to the county. How? Let me count the ways:
The loss of control over a significant County department, by itself, constitutes irreparable harm that cannot possibly be repaired by money damages. This is particularly true where the County has recently spent tremendous time, money, and other resources in creating an expert management team to run and revitalize its Housing Department.
Moreover, approximately 545 employees work in the Housing Department. If HUD is allowed to implement its final decisions, HUD will be able to abrogate the collective bargaining agreement that these employees have with the County. 19 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(j)(3)(D)(i)(V). HUD has given the County no assurances as to how these employees would be treated. In fact, Assistant Secretary Cabrera stated publicly that if HUD did fire these employees, this would be the County’s problem, not HUD’s.20 See Orlando Cabrera Interview, The Jim DeFede Show, AM 940, Aug. 9, 2006. Putting 545 County employees at risk of being fired or losing their health and retirement benefits and disregarding their collective bargaining agreements constitutes irreparable harm to the County and its employees.
And now for the big finish:
Furthermore, if HUD does take possession of any of the County’s assets, HUD could sell these assets, including valuable riverfront property where public housing projects sit. 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(j)(3)(D)(i)(II). HUD could build market-rate housing, and could privatize the public housing stock and/or programs. Thus, HUD would seize County assets, control them, privatize them, and the County would never regain possession or control. Clearly, this represents irreparable harm to the County and the public.
Again, when HUD Secretary Orlando Cabrera -- formerly the chief counsel to the powerful Latin Builders Association -- appeared on our morning show (with Andre -- I was out on vacation -- ) He refused to rule out privatizing the Liberty City properties that would come under HUD's control under a receivership. He refused to do that, because he very likely plans to flip some of those valuable public properties to private control. This is a guy who in March, gave a speech about what a burden Section 8 is on the federal government. He he doesn't believe in public housing, that I can tell. But he does have his relationships, and the LBA is likely to be the chief beneficiary of this quickie takeover, if it is allowed to happen.
How do you get up on Sunday and preach the word of God, and then turn around and stomp your wife out in a hotel parking lot? Bishop Thomas Weeks has some reconstructing to do...
Juanita Bynum, the fiery national evangelist whose sermons empower women to walk away from dead-end relationships, is suffering some man trouble of her own.
Her estranged husband, Thomas W. Weeks has been charged with felony aggravated assault and making terrorist threats after he allegedly struck her in a hotel parking lot.
wife, is expected to turn himself in to Atlanta police Friday, his lawyer said.
Police said Bynum, 48, has been whisked away by family as they decide what to do next.
Bynum and Weeks are co-founders of Global Destiny Church in Duluth. They were married in 2002 in a lavish televised wedding that featured a 7.76-carat diamond ring. They separated three months ago, said Bynum's sister, Tina Culpepper.
According to an Atlanta police incident report, Bynum said her husband "choked her, pushed her down, kicked and stomped her."
She told police Weeks "continued stomping" her into the ground until a hotel bell man pulled him away. Police also said Weeks threatened Bynum's life.
Culpepper said the couple was meeting for dinner at Concorde Grill in the Renaissance Concourse Hotel near Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport Tuesday night.
Police said the couple had met to work out their differences. Things soured, and Weeks walked out to the parking lot about 10:30 p.m., police said. He then turned back around and attacked her, said Officer Ron Campbell.
Weeks also threatened Bynum's life during the attack, police said. "Anytime you tell a person, 'I'm going to kill you,' that moves it up to a felony," Campbell said.
The bruises found on Bynum also were serious enough to bring felony aggravated assault charges against Weeks.
In a comment posted on her MySpace page, the Pentecostal evangelist said, "I am currently recovering from all of my injuries and resting well ... this too shall pass."
Her publicist, Amy Malone, said Bynum wants to keep the matter private.
"People are interpreting it to mean the two of them were fighting," Malone said. "They were not fighting. She was assaulted."
And now for the really good part:
Bynum's husband has retained two lawyers: famed defense attorney Ed Garland to represent him in the criminal case; and Louis Tesser, to take care of the domestic matter.
Garland has in the past represented NFL star Ray Lewis in his murder trial and millionaire James Sullivan, who ordered the murder of his socialite wife.
"He very much regrets what happened and said he's sorry for what it's worth," Tesser said Thursday night.
Weeks loves his wife, Tesser said, and "he hopes he doesn't wind up getting a divorce."
What??? Wow. Dude, divorce is the least of your worries...
California Republicans have hatched a devious plan worthy of Jeb Bush, and if they make it happen, it could change the landscape for 2008:
California voters are inclined to support a proposed ballot initiative that would change how the Golden State allocates its electoral votes in presidential campaigns, but they're not yet sold on the idea, a Field Poll released today showed.
Currently, California employs a winner-take-all system that awards the state's entire 55 electoral votes to the winner of the state's popular vote.
Under the proposed measure, which could be on the June 2008 ballot, the presidential election would become, in essence, a congressional district-by-congressional district contest. The winner of the statewide popular vote would receive two electoral votes, but the remaining votes would go to the winner in each of the 53 congressional districts.
The proponents of the California ballot measure, largely Republicans, say such a change would make presidential elections more fair by more accurately reflecting the results of the popular vote. However, Democrats have railed against the proposal by charging that the measure is a Republican-driven effort to keep Democrats from capturing the White House.
If the proposal is adopted, analysts suggest that a Republican presidential candidate would get a boost because Democrats can no longer count on all 55 electoral votes from California, which has voted for Democratic candidates since 1988.
All but two states, Nebraska and Maine, give their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis to the presidential candidate who wins the statewide popular vote.
Iraq remains "unable to govern" itself effectively and hobbled by the absence of strong leadership, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's inability to broker political accord continues to make him vulnerable, according to a new U.S. intelligence report released today.
Seven months after President Bush ordered more U.S. troops to the country, "there have been measurable but uneven improvements in Iraq's security situation," the report concludes. . If U.S. forces continue their current strategy, security "will continue to improve modestly" over the next six to 12 months but violence will remain high and political reconciliation will remain elusive.
The report , determined that while some Iraqi security forces "have performed adequately," overall they "have not improved enough to conduct major operations independent" of U.S. forces in multiple locations on a sustained basis.
If U.S. troops were to downscale their mission to supporting Iraqi security forces and hunting terrorists affiliated with al-Qaeda, the report contends that move "would erode security gains achieved thus far."
The British have a new "super weapon" to use to fight the "war on terror" in Afghanistan: an "enhance blast weapon" that kills the enemy by sucking the air out of his lungs and rupturing internal organs.
On the domestic "war on terror" front -- National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell admits what we already knew: that AT&T and other phone companies helped the government to spy on us. Why the admission? Because McConnell would like Congress to exempt the telcos from their customers' lawsuits. Nice.
It looks all bad. Bud don't worry, Dubya! Maybe some silly neocon can get Bushie to launch us another war?
Ari Fleischer has a new job! He's the spokesman for a group launching a $15 million ad campaign in support of Bush's Iraq surge. Ari appeared on "Hardball" yesterday with Mike Barnacle sitting in for Chris Matthews, and Barnacle scored two major slapshots: first, asking Ari to name the soldier featuerd in the ad (Ari couldn't recall) ... and second, after what sounded like a slathering set-up, asking "so Ari, how many Iraqis were on those planes that flew into the World Trade Center?" Watch:
As for who's funding the campaign, NBC's First Read has the rundown:
The donors who are financing the new multi-million-dollar TV ad campaign arguing against a withdrawal from Iraq include a Who's Who of former Bush Administration ambassadors (to plum assignments like France, Italy, and Malta); a least one of Bush's original Pioneers; the man ranked by Forbes (in 2006) as the third-richest American; and, of course, former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer.
Brad Blakeman, the president of Freedom's Watch, which is running these ads, released the following names as donors to his group. Blakeman told NBC that the rest of the donors are choosing to be anonymous. Freedom's Watch is a 501(c)4 organization, which can collect unlimited contributions and doesn't have to disclose its donors.
