Even with daddy coming in to pull the President's chestnuts out of the fire I am not too hopeful. The President is arrogant enough to believe that he is "solving" things... It is a good thing that Cheney had the document shredding truck at his house a couple of weeks ago... Even though Rummy is out I still want to see him, under oath, before Congress.

I want Cheney there saying how his secret "energy policy" meetings included oil companies, AEI and PNAC and they determined that when sanctions would eventually be lifted (death of Saddam or compliance or whatever) it would be France or Germany that would hold influence in Iraq, not America. This was intolerable. After all they went through to see some other country reap the benefits.

Then after 9/11 the neocon boobs used it as justification to take out Iraq and retain control/influence in Iraq. All that was required was to lead the President by the nose, lie to the American people and deceive the rest of the world.

We need an accounting. We need the doors kicked open and the cockroaches brought out into the daylight. People like Wolfowitz should not be rewarded with prestige jobs... where ironically he is campaigning for "transparency" at the World Bank.

I am not saying impeachment (I want it but can live without it) but there needs to be documented evidence that cannot be squirmed out of or spun.

The arrogance, narrow-mindedness, and stupidity of Cheney and Rumsfeld led to the whole Iraq debacle. They decided that they knew what the truth was regardless of what the intelligence might say. So they got Feith and other assorted dunces in the DOD to cherry-pick intelligence that told Rummy and Cheney what they wanted to hear. They're both legally culpable for deceiving Congress and the American people.

Tom

Good one, Larry, but let's not forget that it was also the boy emperor who got slapped. W's problem is the same as every other so-called neo-con or shill thereof: they don't take a hint until they get hit over the head with a brick. Even then, little happens until the blood runs down their faces and into their mouths. At first, the taste of blood excites the predatory instinct, and they exclaim things like "Bring it on!" Unfortunately, it takes them awhile to realize that it is the taste of their own blood, rather than that of patriotic and dedicated pawns, that has excited them so. It sinks in that the dizziness is not the euphoria brought on by vicarious soldiering, but is induced, instead, by severe trauma to the body politic.

Does anyone else find it ironic (and oh, so satisfying) that within days of each other, Saddam and Bush are sentenced/slapped and both take on a conciliatory tone? Saddam, feeling the noose tighten around his neck, calms himself and advises his countrymen to get along. Bush, no longer able to deny the same uncomfortable sensation, declares his partisan days over. His pitiful performance the other day in the presence of the new Senate leadership was truly that of a man who had been slapped down and forced to eat a bucket of his own verbal excrement. Maybe now he won't so hastily define down what constitutes torture. Perhaps being force-fed crow will now appear in the field manual as a no-no. Now he runs to Daddy (yet again) to get bailed out of the mess he staggered into, drunk on the wine of neo-con sweet nothings tounged into his ear.

Let us hope that the slapping continue for a good, long while. May subpoenas rain down like the sweet, nourishing mana of heaven. May the decent people of this nation have the fortitude to relentlessly pursue George W. Bush and his vile, homicidal, corrupt, incompetent, fear-mongering cohorts into the long twilight of historical ignominy.

Hey, indulge me. I feel good. Jerry McNerney over here in CA-11 just slapped down Richard Pombo -- truly one of the most vile shills ever propped up by corporate interests. I am positively giddy with all this slapping down.
Pantheon

there needs to be documented evidence that cannot be squirmed out of or spun

Good luck. I don't think too many tape recorders went along on those hunting trips in Texas or the fish trips in Kennebunkport. Seems one reason they don't bother with the usual policy discussions is that they don't want to go on record and, well, the decisions have already been made so why bother.

It's going to take years for the little guys to roll over the big guys. I just don't see much evidence spilling out until after Jenna's term.

Remember the names of the three troop transports used in the Bay of Pigs? The Barbara, the Zappata, and the Houston. And yet, to this day, 41's official history is that his first day in the CIA was as director. Just try to prove otherwise. Considering they are in your face, they are very good at not getting caught.

Who controlled whom is going to be a matter of searching, guessing and lies for more years than I care to listen to it. I am positive, however, that Bush led no one, ever. Did and does he think so? Oh yes. And the problem for us and for Iraq with his belief in his leadership is that he can at any moment turn into President and take off on a tangent of death and destruction once more. He is the elected Commander in Chief, and he is still inordinately proud of the power that title gives to him.

George W. Bush is still a very frightening man.

I keep hearing bits and pieces of a phone call from Kennebunkport to the West Wing Tuesday night. Can't quite make it all out but it seems to end with, "look, I don't give a damn if you like it, son. You don't want me to have to send your mother down there, do you?"

Rumsfeld was no more incompetent than your average bloke in the white house.

Look at the slimy rats like Ken Adelman spin the New Yorker to pin the blame on Rummy and come off as founts of wisdom.

Adelman can run, but he can't hide. He'll have "cakewalk" engraved on his tombstone. Do I remember that master wanker pontificate before the war. The rat's leaving the sinking ship. What a creep!

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/061120ta_talk_goldberg

Darth Vader?

Tom

Actually, the person most mentioned as a replacement is John McCain.

ONE BIG ELEPHANT you guys are overlooking is the one disguised as a Democrat..er.. excuse me, Independent.

Joe Lieberman

All Joe has to do is vote with the Republicans, the Senate lockups in a tie vote and TA DA ..Dick Cheney comes in and votes to break the tie.

If I remember correctly when Nixon's vice president, Spiro Agnew resigned due to earlier, probably criminal activity, Nixon appointed Ford who was a senator at the time.

The neocons are discredited, as is Cheney, and their pet projects -- from warrantless wiretapping to torture to trashing habeus corpus -- are dead as well.

Not until they are rolled back.
And who believes they will be fully rolled back?

Yesterday, Bush delivered his usual Saturday radio talk; it happened to be Veterans' Day. His short speech was full of tribute to the veterans and his repetitious nattering about freedom and the "War on Terror," which he has so endlessly talked about. Unfortunately, his war-hawk bluster about all of that wasn't frightening. However, one sentence he uttered chilled me to the marrow: "Whatever your opinion of the outcome, all Americans can take pride in the example our democracy sets for the world by holding elections even in a time of war. "

Mr Bush's seemingly innocent statement makes it clear that he and his advisors considered canceling the election; the 2000 stolen election, and 9/11, put the Bush machine into a position of unequaled power. The goal of the Bush/Cheney cabal has been to advance the "Unitary" Presidency - that is, the President of the United States has unlimited power. Mr. Bush has endlessly talked about "war" and being a "wartime president," but the United States is not at war. The US Congress constitutionally has the sole power to declare war. The Bush administration has made a 5-years-long effort to frighten the American public into spasms of fear; it is ALL for political gain. Recall that in 2004, the newly created Department of Homeland Security trumpeted the "Threat Level" with the Mainstream Media fully cooperating. Every little incident of someone seeing an unidentified box somewhere made national news. The level was raised and lowered almost daily, with appropriate news releases, all dutifully and breathlessly reported by the media. The constant fear-mongering continued right up to election day 2004. After the Republicans retained control of Congress, and Bush was "re-selected" for another four years, the threat-level reports all but disappeared from the public consciousness.

Mr. Bush's magnanimously allowing a more-or-less regular biennial election to occur is stunning. What a President! I am truly relieved to have such an ethical and morally-grounded man runnning our country.

Now, of course, I wonder about 2008. Will the Presidential election be allowed to happen? Will George W. Bush and his minions willingly give up power? I give the '08 election cycle slightly less than a 50-50% chance of happening.... All that needs to happen is another 9/11-type of event & bye-bye our Republic; hello GWB, President for Life!

My take on the so-called Neocons is that they are really dedicated rabid reactionaries.

Mr Bush's administration has, along with the roll-over Congress, have quietly started implementation of a whole series of programs with with the hidden agendas of:

1) make the rich corporate oligarchs richer by reducing their tax bites disproportionately.

2) Allow energy prices to soar without even jawboning the energy companies to hold down their prices (note that prices started dropping in the summer of '06 - started back up on 11/8/06). This is the payoff for $$millions in political contributions.

3) The Iraq war is about OIL, of course - Bush has no interest in "democracy" in spite of his utterances about it.

4) A major hidden agenda, and the ultimate goal of the neocons is to set the Federal Government onto the path of bankruptcy. It is their goal to pile on enough debt to eventually require ALL Federal revenue going to service the debt, leaving not even a penny for all of the human service programs now being slowly drained.

5) Eliminating Social Security: Bush wants to create "Private Accounts" which will result in ENORMOUS fees being charges these accounts, and whenever stocks crash again, hundreds of thousands of senior citizens would be wiped out. The government drones at the top of the bureaucracy would be insulated, as Federal Employees do not contribute to, nor participate in, Social Security.

Tuesday's election results were not a surprise to me; the only surprise was that the Democrats would be allowed to win at all. I guess I overmisestimatedly thought that Karl Rove would rise to the level of criminality to steal this elections, too.

As best I can tell the neo-Cons believe the Cold War was allowed to go on too long and was ended only when Reagan aggressively opposed the Soviet Union. They, as almost all former Leftists, believe cultures and societies can be changed. With the proper application of force and will countries that are not Democratic can be remade into Democracies. Once the world is made up of democracies there will far fewer wars as democracies do not go to war with each other.

Neo-Con philosophy is not so different than one part of standard American activism. Unfortunately they seem to have no understanding of the nature of foreign cultures. Thus they believe that the bad leader can be decapitated and the natural default society is a democracy. They also do not seem to fully grasp American society. We do not have large numbers of would be garrison troops or Redcoats.

Daniel A. Greenbaum

If the old hands are back in control then getting rid of Cheney might suit their purposes. If he were replaced with a personable moderate who is firmly in their camp, then when 2008 rolls around, they will already have someone the public knows to run as president. By picking the new VP now they avoid the messiness of any democracy breaking out in the RNC.

Anyone have ideas who the anointed one might be?

--- Policies not Politics
Daily Landscape

Lieberman.

Those who were so out of it that they didn't realize Rockefeller Republicans in the Senate contributed to the Republican majority in the Senate which rubber stamped Bush's destruction of the Constitution and Iraq are so out of it that I wouldn't count on them for anything.

Tom

It will most likely be John McCain, who has already demonstrated that he will go along with just about anything in order to be President.  He fits the Republican desire to have a very old man as president also, and he still has enough personal popularity that as a VP he would be very hard to defeat for the Presidency in 2008.  I suspect all that remains is for him to agree to the terms for signing away his soul.

Hoppy in Sacramento

J. McCutchen

Don't forget - Scooter's going to trial early next year; George Tenet's publishing his CYA memoirs, and hopefully the Democrats will make the first order of business, Iraq oversight.

Cheney hasn't seen anything yet

Suskind's One Percent Doctrine is widely thought to be Tenet's payback to Cheney.

It contains many disturbing glimpses of Cheney's arrogance through the eyes of a "source", who according to everybody in DC is Tenet.

"Can anyone tell me just exactly the nature of the crusade the neocons are on and what's behind it?"

Yep, I finally figured out the origin of the term and the context.

You need two books. First, Maurice Isserman's "The Other American: The Life of Michael Harrington" and the second, Taylor Branch's third volume in the Martin Luther King trilogy, "At Canaan's Edge"

The circumstance was the decision by Dr. King to come out against the Vietnam War in 1967, by delivering his Riverside Church Sermon. Up to this point the Democratic Socialists of America, of which Kristol was very much a central figure, had refrained from saying anything at all about Vietnam as an organization, though many within the organization were hot and bothered about that failure. Apparently the Kristol and Trot analysis of the Viet Cong was that they were died in the wool Stalinists, and any deviation from the all out US war effort was surrender to Stalinism. But many in the DSA strongly disagreed, including Harrington. It came to a head when they got a general outline of what King proposed to say at Riverside -- and of course King was inviting them to attend. This was when Kristol and the rest of his tribe quit the DSA, and went down and joined up with Scoop Jackson, and the rest is history.

It was Michael Harrington who coined the term Neo-Con as description of the socialists who were running to the Right and joining forces with Scoop Jackson. Harrington was able to get a fairly significant part of the DSA to go to Riverside and attend Dr. King's speech.

You have to read Isserman's book to comprehend how profoundly this decision disorganized the Socialist Left of the Period, and you have to read Taylor Branch to get the picture of how a few self important old Trots felt about themselves and their decision to walk out on Dr. King and the movement for Civil Rights.

But Kristol did lots and heaps of damage, because he did everything he could to pull funds away from SCLC and Dr. King, and to make life quite difficult for him and his associates. Kristol then had much influence in the Foundation Circles that supported the Civil Rights Movement -- and he did lots of evil.

You know, we just elected a senator out of this crowd, Bernie Sanders has always been associated with DSA -- but I believe he was always more linked with the Harrington Faction than anything. I strongly doubt whether he would ever have had any truck with associating Dr. King with a Stalinist orientation and all that crap. But just the same, that is how the factions broke down in DSA, and it is how the Neo-Con term was first invented in 1967.

And while Democratic Socialists of America was a very very small leftist organization in the 1960's, they did control a good deal of money. For instance, many do not realize that from the late 1950's into 1966 the DSA controlled the financing for SDS through one of the foundations they controlled. You can read all about it in the Isserman book, but for additional material I recommend reading Tom Hayden's Memoirs. Democratic Socialists of America also had the franchise to participate in the Socialist International -- and Harrington was an active participant, along with the British Labor Party, the German and Scandinavian Social Democrats, the Indian Socialists, and the Israeli Labor Party as well as Arafat's PLO organization. My Economics Teacher from Denmark once told me that Socialist International meetings had to have their meetings in hotels where there were two totally seperate but equal doorways into the hall, one where the Israeli Labor delegate would enter, and at the same moment, another where Arafat would enter. Reminds me of the old India Office in London where they had two such doors for equally ranking Princes. Anyhoo -- he also said that upstairs in the hotel, they forgot such protocal matters and spent hours informally talking.

So such is my tale -- read Isserman, Taylor Branch, and if you have energy left, Hayden, and you will have the full picture.

Gates is career yes-man. He has the resume and pedigree to win conformation to his appointed job, but his appointment doesn't signal any repudiation of anyone currently in the administration. Gates will do what he's told and will provide what he's asked to provide. His career proves it and Bush knows it.

Indeed. I think Cheney is very happy with Gates, considering that the two are sais to have a very positive and strong working relationship established during Reagan's presidency. Cheney is not unhappy about Gates, at all.

Sara,

To clarify - you're talking about Irving Kristol, the dad - not William Kristol, the son. Dad was a Cold Warrior who couldn't accept the fact that Ho, the Marxist, was also Ho, the nationalist.

Tom

The Revolution is Here--I can rate now.

Jerry McNerney over here in CA-11 just slapped down Richard Pombo -- truly one of the most vile shills ever propped up by corporate interests.

Pombo didn't even bother to pretend to be anything else - he was a truly frightening example of what Congress was becoming. To watch him busily feeding the Endangered Species Act into the wood chipper, whistling while he worked, was like watching a horror film.

Regarding Point #3, it is about oil, but not because they want the oil, but because they don't want Iraqi oil on the market, thus driving down the supply and increasing the price.

Won't be a Senator which would make the GOP minority weaker. Lieberman would only open a seat for a more Democratic Democrat. Won't be Baker, who probably sneers at Cheney, and would not give up his current freedom of action. Look for a Rep, like Gerry Ford, (Hastert, Blunt?) or possibly Rice.

Don't forget that James Inhofe is still out there trying to do the same thing, along with his terrible staff. (See the link at TPM.)