Amusing Anomalies

Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit

A good article by the Washington Post detailing the mechanism used to obtain contributions from clients of Jack Abramoff and funneling the funds to Delay controlled non-profit entities. In this case the entity was the U.S. Family Network ("USFN"). "DeLay's former chief of staff, Edwin A. Buckham, and his wife Wendy, were the principal beneficiaries of the groups $3.02 million in revenue, collecting payments totaling $1,022,729 during a five-year period ending in 2001".

What is becoming clear that the motivation wasn't simply political aggrandizement but personal aggrandizement as well. According to the post the USFN only had a "tiny staff" that barely registered an impact on Capitol Hill. As the Post noted "[t]he Group appears to have served mostly as a vehicle for funneling corporate funds to DeLay's advisers and financing ads that attacked Democrats."

This looks like the unraveling still continues.

HoustonChronicle.com - Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program

It seems that rumors that former first lady Barbara Bush is self serving and tacky have the ring of authenticity. The article attacks the first lady for making a contribution to victims of Hurricane Katrina conditioned on the fact that the donation be used to buy software from her son's, Neil Bush, software company. Leave it to the Bush family to find personal gain even in charity.

On September 14, 1987, CBS introduced a new situation comedy that was distinguished by its sophistication and quality. Unfortunately, America wasn't quite ready for sophistication and quality back in 1987. So while TV programs like Alf garnered huge audiences, Frank's Place, toiled spectacularly in relative obscurity. In the end, Frank's Place lasted all of one year before it was cancelled yet I'll never forget the program. It was just that good.

What was Frank's Place? Well although the set up doesn't quite do the show justice, it was about a Harvard English Professor who was left a New Orleans restaurant, the Cheze Louisiane, by his estranged father in his will. The Professor, Frank Parrish, played by Tim Reid, was the classic fish out of water. He was a northerner, Ivy league type placed in a New Orleans restaurant with rather quirky but fully fleshed characters. The stories that were told in that restaurant would range from the absurd to the sublime. It played well. It was funny, sometimes so funny that you'd almost die laughing, but always true to the personalities that made up its universe. In fact, almost every part of Frank's Place was perfect, from the way it was filmed, its pace, all the way to its theme song, Louis Armstrong's "Do You Know what it Means to Miss New Orleans"

The tragedy of Frank's Place is that it was so good and that so few will ever see it. It doesn't play in reruns, there are no DVD's that have been issued, it barely remains in the minds of those who watched it so many years ago.

It's been nearly 20 years since CBS made the mistake of taking Frank's Place off the air, how many more years must pass before someone corrects that mistake and makes it available on DVD.

The New Yorker: Fact

A New Yorker article about Bill O'Reilly, Fox News' popular political commentator. The article focuses on O'Reilly's dark side which according to the article is considerable. O'Reilly, the loofa king (see here for details), who is in ongoing battle with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, penned a novel not to long ago about a former news caster who turns serial killer when he's pushed aside by the network. From the New Yorker:

In 1998, after the launch of "The O'Reilly Factor, but before
superstardom, he published a thriller called "Those Who Trespass," which is
his most ambitious and deeply felt piece of writing. "Those Who Trespass" is a revenge fantasy, and it displays extraordinarily violent impulses. A tall, b.s.-intolerant television journalist named Shannon Michaels, the "product of two Celtic parents," is pushed out by Global News Network after an incident
during the Falkland Islands War, and then by a local station, and he
systematically murders the people who ruined his career. He starts with Ron
Costello, the veteran correspondent who stole his Falkland story:

The assailant's right hand, now holding the oval base of the spoon,
rocketed upward, jamming the stainless stem through the roof of Ron
Costello's mouth. The soft tissue gave way quickly and the steel penetrated
the correspondent's brain stem.
Ron Costello was clinically dead in four seconds. Michaels stalks the woman who forced his resignation from the network and throws her off a balcony. He next murders a television research consultant who had advised the local station to dismiss him: he buries the guy in beach sand up to his neck and lets him slowly drown. Finally, during a break in the Radio and Television News Directors
Association convention, he slits the throat of the station manager.

It seems that the life of O'Reilly, goes beyond any caricature that Stephen Colbert could ever hope to create. Kind of an life imitating art imitating life type of thing. If I were Keith Olbermann, given the tone of O'Reilly's novel, I'd make sure to watch my back or at least keep an eye out for sharp utensils.

The Washington Monthly

A Kevin Drum blog on an article by LA Times columnist Max Boot, (free registration required). Boot's take? the war is going badly and Bush needs to clean house and step up the military campaign to regain control.

Drum's response? Bush is a clown and no one seriously expects him to fire Rumsfeld, exile Cheney and substantially increase the number of troops in Iraq. Given that, the Drum asks, "why continue to support [the war]?

Salon.com News & Politics War Room

From the War Room at Salon.com, the top 10 reasons why Dick Cheney won't resign.

10. Trying to fix up Condi Rice with his daughter.
9. Turns out when you shoot somebody, if you're not vice president, you gotta do time.
8. Bush leaves at two every day, and then it's margaritas and Fritos.
7. Set the solitare high score on his office computer.
6. Wants to see if he can help Bush get his approval rating under 10.
5. Too hard to give up Vice Presidential Discount at D.C. area Sam Goody stores.
4. Wants to stay on the job until every country in the world hates us.
3. Extra-zappy White House defibrillators.
2. Undisclosed location has foosball and whores.
And the No. 1 reason Dick Cheney won't resign: Why quit when things are going so well?

Bush Proves His Harshest Critics Right - by Paul Craig Roberts

Yet another prominent conservative has turned his sights on Bush. Paul Craig Roberts, former editor of the Wall Street Journal (not known to be a bastion of liberal thought), harshly attacked President Bush after his speech on Iraq in Cleveland.

Roberts accused Bush of being "our delusional president" and added:

Bush told his audience that "the security of our country is directly linked to the liberty of the Iraqi people, and we will settle for nothing less than victory." What victory is he talking about? Despite the huge sums of dollars paid by the Bush regime to all the leaders of all the factions, Iraq cannot form a government.

Bush supporters are becoming scarcer and scarcer these days and increasingly harsh.

TheStar.com - How to spot a baby conservative

Okay, I'll admit that I'm a bit dubious about the analysis, and that I think this study might be a bit biased, coming from Berkeley and all...but I think this is just a bit too much potential for mischief not to comment on this.

The basic premise is that the "whinny, insecure kid[s] in nursery school, the one[s] who always thought everyone was out to get [them], and [were] always running to [their] teacher[s] with complaints?" tend to grow up to be conservatives.

There you have it. It explains volumes. For instance, it explains the huge conservative assault on day care. Conservatives, reminded of the difficult times they had when they were forced to leave mommy and deal with all the other kids who were "out to get them", just can't get past the trauma of that experience. They want to punish day care operators and gain symbolic retribution against their own mummies by essentially calling women who send their children to day care lazy parents.

It explains President Bush. WMD are everywhere, Saddam is out to kill us all. Unbridled paranoia channeled from his day care experiences.

It explains Dick "shoot 'em in the face" Cheney. If you don't fire first the quail will screw you all the time.

Oh and if Donald Rumsfeld doesn't have that picked on little kid overcompensation shtick going, who does?

These are all guys out to prove that they still aren't that whinny little kid anymore. Paranoid, whinny, ridged ideologues who first defense is to shoot first, analyze later.

Good News From Iraq Is Real but Elusive

Even the good news comes with a substantial degree of complexity. Bush in his speech today identified Tall Afar as an example of what can be done with a trained Iraqi force and a good method of dealing with insurgency. However, a closer examination of Tall Afar reveals a much more complicated "success" story. The key quote:

But lately, residents say, the city has taken another dark turn. "The armed men are fewer," Nassir Sebti, 42, an air-conditioning mechanic, told a Washington Post interviewer Monday, "but the assassinations between Sunni and Shiites have increased."

Even the good stories are filled with caveats.

American Prospect Online - The New New Gore

The resurrection of Al Gore? Possibly. Actually, I'm starting to come around to the idea that Gore wouldn't be such a bad choice. The American Prospect explains why.

FOXNews.com - U.S. & World News - Afghan Man Faces Death for Allegedly Converting to Christianity

Meanwhile in the other fledgling democracy that we helped jump start...

We were assured by the Bush administration that the provision in the Afghan constitution making Islam the state religion was no problem because there were strong constitutional protections for religious rights. Unfortunately for one poor man, the justice system in Afghanistan doesn't quite see it that way.

Abdul Rahman was arrested after his family went to police and accused him of converting to Christianity. Rahman was charged with rejecting Islam.

During his trial Rahman confessed that he converted from Islam to Christianity 16 years ago. The Afghan constitution, which is based on Sharia law, holds that any Muslim that rejects their religion should be sentenced to death.

By the way, Iraq, like Afghanistan, has made Islam the official state religion and considers Islam to be a source of legislation.

Bleakness In Baghdad

George F. Will joins those saying the civil war in Iraq has already begun. The quote:

[C]ivil wars do not usually begin with an identifiable event, such as the firing on Fort Sumter, or proceed to massed, uniformed forces clashing in battles like Shiloh. Iraq's civil war -- which looks more like Spain's in the 1930s -- began months ago.

TIME.com: Bush the "Incompetent" -- Page 1

A word association game. When 710 people are asked to describe President Bush in one word, the word that is used the most is "incompetent".

Rounding out the top five words are "good" "idiot" "liar and "honest". Until this month honest was the word that was used the most.

The former prime minister of Iraq, Ayad Allawi, now claims that Iraq is in the midst of a civil war. Allawi in describing the situation in Iraq said:

It is unfortunate that we are in civil war. We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more," Allawi told the BBC. "If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is.

Remember Allawi was the Bush administration's preferred candidate for prime minister after the administration soured on Ahmed Chalabi. Allawi represented the secular Shiite Bush administration was hoping would take over in Iraq. Unfortunately, Allawi could only generate 8-percent of the vote in the last election. Even more interesting is that Chalabi, who pressed his position initially as a secular Shiite, has forged close ties with the new non-secular Shiite party.

Iraq while a debacle is at least an interesting debacle.

Pundits, apparently tiring of the gay marriage debate, have now turned their eyes on polygamy. The catalyst is an HBO series entitled "Big Love" which follows the life and stress of the average, everyday Utah polygamist. Those on the the far right have raised their typically hysterical voices in opposition to this television program, claiming that it promotes the polygamist lifestyle. However, after watching this program, I would say that anyone who believes this program glamorizes polygamy needs to have their head examined. The beleagured husband, portrayed by actor Bill Paxton, seems harried, burdened and overwhelmed by the responsibility of meeting the needs, financial, emotional and sexual of three wives. He's popping viagra, he's begging for cash from the one wife that works, and he's doing drive by parenting for his children. It's not an enviable situation. I will admit that while I love women the idea of being married to more than one of them at the same time would in my opinion be a sure path toward suicide. Watch this show the moral character of our nation depends on it.

Having seen the rants of various hockey enthusiasts in here, I'd thought I'd delve into why I find the sport (and I'm being generous in calling it a sport) objectionable.

10 Reasons why I Dislike Hockey

1. Any sport that doesn't have the name "ball" is automatically suspect.
2. Whenever anything gets even close to being non snoreworthy someone is called offsides.
3. The blue line.
4. Ice. I don't particularly care for the cold.
5. Stupid team names. The Mighty Ducks? Puhleeze.
6. The puck. Unless you have HDTV it's hard to see, if you have HDTV you wonder why you wanted to see it in the first place.
7. Hockey fights. They look like a weird dance. If you want to see real good fights by athletes the NBA has some grand ones. No dancing.
8. Slapshots. The term is too close to slapstick.
9. The Penalty Box. These guys are adults right? But they're given time-outs? Sheesh!
10. Oh Canada...

WORLD Magazine Weekly News, Christian Views

In previous blogs I've been noting the litany of conservatives who have been jumping off the deck of the SS George W. Bush. So far, George F. Will, Bruce Bartlett, Andrew Sullivan, Francis Fukuyama, William Buckley and John Derbyshire have all jumped ship. Marin Olasky, in writing a review of Bruce Bartlett's new book, joins these conservatives on the lifeboat. Olasky, who is the father of the phrase "compassionate conservatism" notes:

"Players of the venerable board game Clue know the moment when the party's over. A contestant may say, "Colonel Mustard in the dining room with the revolver," and be shown surreptitiously a card that kills that theory. But when the next participant says, "Mr. Bush in the conservatory with the lead pipe," and other players say, "I can't refute that," it's time to give in.

That's how I felt when reading Bruce Bartlett's Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy (Doubleday, 2006). The desire for
alliteration sometimes leads to over-the-top titles, and words like bankrupt and betrayed are too strong. And yet, when Mr. Bartlett lambasts the Bush record on education, drug legislation, pork barrel spending, and other expand-the-government programs—well, I can't refute that. The metamorphosis of "compassionate conservatism" is particularly sad. I never thought that a switch from 70 years of increasing Washington-centrism would come easily, but I hoped some decentralization was possible. There's still hope—watch movement toward the use of social service vouchers—but I can't refute the charge that this concept has become a rationale for patronage."

It's a nasty indictment. It seems that even the social conservatives are getting tired of Georege Bush's shtick. However, this is not the first time conservatives have criticized the presidents less than stellar implementation of compassionte conservatism, John Dilulio, former head of the White House Faith Based Action, long ago made the observation that the mayberry machiavellis of the White House have no serious interest in policy...just politics.

4Pundits � March Madness and faux student-athletes

The very essence of big time college athletics has long been a pet peeve of mine. The folks at 4Pundit address the issue in a generally fine article poking at the hypocrisy.

Let me start out by saying that unlike the author at 4Pundit, I'm a big big sports fan. Some of my fondest and earliest memories involve me going to Seattle Rainiers minor league baseball games at Sick's Stadium with my mom. I distinctly remember a sharp line drive that almost decapitated us when it curved and bounced off of the seat between us like yesterday. I remember my joy of watching the first exhibition game of the Seattle Supersonics back in 1967 and the first ever Football game of the Seattle Seahawks. I was also a big follower of the University of Washington Huskies during the Warren Moon era. So I love all the major sports in the United States (don't kid yourself hockey is not a major sport in this country -- witness when it departed because of labor strife no one really noticed.) Despite my love of sports, I have totally given up watching college sports entirely. Why? It's not because of drug scandals, it's not because of steroids or recruiting violations, or thuggery by "so called student athletes". For the most part those things have their corollaries in the major league sports as well. No, it's because the NCAA by its very nature is an exploitive, anticompetitive thieving cartel. The NCAA basically robs student athletes of the compensation they would get in a truly competitive market and redistributes it to coaches, athletic directors and their member institutions.

In a normal business, workers (substitute the phrase "student athlete" in this context) get to choose the firm they'll go to and negotiate over the type of compensation that they'll receive. It's how markets work in a capitalist society, the give and take of determining what the market price of a service or input into a final product. But in the NCAA cartel world, the members of the cartel get together and set the level of compensation that the student athlete will receive. Moreover, the cartel establishes a mechanism for punishing institutions, coaches and players who do not abide by this agreement. Now some might ask, how does this differ from how it works in the NFL where there is a draft and salary caps and such. Well here's the difference, in the NFL there is a player's union that negotiates with the owners to jointly establish the appropriate level of compensation. At least someone is representing the players.

What makes this even worse is that the NCAA makes these pious pronouncements about how this whole system is designed to help the student athlete. In essence, they're robbing these athletes and they loudly proclaiming what good folks they are for doing it. It's beyond disgusting.

So here's the situation, the NCAA is going to do its tournament. Coaches will get endorsement deals from the major sponsors, the teams will get the gate and money compensation as well. What do the players on the teams get. A chance to play basketball. That's just about it. Oh and the Glory.

Iraq through the Prism of Vietnam by General William Odom, retired

Foreign Affairs: Seeing Baghdad Thinking Saigon by Stephen Biddle

One of the areas of debate between those who believe that military action in Iraq may still be successful and those who believe that we're stalemated in a pervasive quagmire is how closely the situation in Iraq resembles the war in Vietnam.

Most of these debates devolve into useless exercises of looking at some meaningless issue and showing that objectively Vietnam is like Iraq or objective it's not like Iraq. For instance, it might be interesting that Vietnam has jungles and Iraq does not, but it might not be particularly relevant. However, in the course of such debates or even seperate from such debates sometimes there are reasoned opinions on how Iraq and Vietnam either do, or don't resemble each other. In that regard I found two articles discussing Iraq in the context of Vietnam that I like. They tend to shed some light on the analysis rather than troop levels, military tactics, and population. They discuss things at the strategic level, and quite frankly they both might be right. That is, Iraq and Vietnam share some important, relevant characteristics in many instances and in many instances they may not. More important, it might be extremely important to know what those similarities and differences may be.

Retired General William Odom, former head of the NSA under Ronald Reagan, argues that Iraq and Vietnam have many similarities. Odom breaks down the conflicts into three stages and discerns that our actions in Iraq are following the same pattern of evolution that occurred in Vietnam.

Stephen Biddle is a Senior Fellow in Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. Stephen Biddle argues that there are some important differences between Vietnam and Iraq and that policy makers need to be cognizant of them and take advantage of them. So far, the existing strategy, according to Biddle, is woefully misdirected.

They're both good reads.

At Conservative Forum on Bush, Everybody's a Critic:

"'Unconscionable,' 'irresponsible,' 'vindictive' and 'inept.'" with those words Bruce Bartlett torched the Bush administration for undermining, subverting and perverting almost every principle of limited government conservativism. What's extraordinary is Bartlett is a conservative and the forum was being held by the conservative Cato Institute. The program included Andrew Sullivan, also a conservative, who has lately not minced very many words in criticizing the administration's lack of principle, foresight and competence. Sullivan in dissin' Bush referred to him not only as a "socialist" but as a "reckless socialists". I'm sure reckless socialists everywhere are lining up to initiate lawsuits for this libel.

The Cato Institute began sounding warning bells about the Bush administration a long time ago by posting various economic charts and analysis about the Bush budgets and GOP spending. (pdf)

With conservatives getting fed up with Bush, it's not hard to see why his poll numbers have plummeted toward the below 40% approval mark. Hopefully this trend will continue.

In the end, the Bush administration end up being one of the few things that conservatives and liberals can finally agree on. Now wouldn't that just be great?

Seahawks sign Shaun Alexander for $62 million

I didn't expect this to happen. I was psychologically prepared for Shaun Alexander to go elsewhere. I was already thinking about working out a deal to get Warrick Dunn. Much to my surprise the Seahawks wind up signing Alexander.

Perhaps the free agent market for NFL running backs did not look as good as Alexander and his agent thought, but saying that, Alexander's $62 million deal over 8 years is not a shabby deal. Depending on how it's structured it may make him the highest paid running back in the NFL.

I know I know, I haven't addressed the Superbowl, perhaps when I get far enough away from it I'll be prepared to discuss what happened rationally. Until such time I'll defer.

IRAQ THE MODEL

From a blogger in Baghdad. This is not a particularly positive outlook, but a well reasoned one. It basically outlines a hypothetical discussion between father and son. The killer quote:

Dad: What politics are you talking about?! We are dealing with deeply-rooted beliefs…Yes, in politics everything is possible but with religion you find yourself before very few options to choose from and our people have mostly voted for the religious.

NATIONAL JOURNAL: What Bush Was Told About Iraq (03/02/2006)

We recently delved into what Bush was told about Katrina, before it hit New Orleans, now Murray Wass, of the National Journal has penned an article that discusses what Bush was told before we invaded Iraq. In both the case of Katrina and Iraq, the Bush administration's response was stunningly similar.

Prior to our invasion of Iraq, there were two highly classified intelligence reports that questioned many of the statements that the administration was making publically.

The first report was a one-page summary of the National Intelligence Estimate ("NIE"). That summary discussed the aluminum tubes that the adminstration identified as compelling evidence of Saddam's Hussein's nuclear weapons program. The administration claimed that the aluminum tubes were purchased to advance Saddam's nuclear weapons program and had no other use:

RICE: You will get different estimates about precisely how close he is. We do
know that he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. We do know that there have
been shipments going into Iran, for instance—into Iraq, for instance, of
aluminum tubes that really are only suited to—high-quality aluminum tools that
are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs.

We later found out that there was a sharp debate between the Department of Energy and State Department over this issue. What is significant about this story is this, until now there was no evidence that the President was aware of this internal policy debate. It now seems clear that he was.

The second report was also a summary of the NIE. In this report the intelligence agencies unanimously agreed that it was unlikely that Saddam would try to attack the United States, except if Saddam's regime was at risk from ongoing US operations. The only level of dissent came from the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, which believed that it was unliekly that Saddam would conduct clandestine attacks against the United States even if his regime's demise was imminent. The significance of this report? We now know that Bush was informed of this as well before he ordered us to invade.

For those who believe that Katrina spelled out something new, these reports suggest that Katrina was yet another example of business as ususal.

TIME.com: What I Got Wrong About the War -- Mar. 13, 2006 -- Page 1

As I've said before Andrew Sullivan is tottering. He's on the edge of joining conservatives like William F. Buckley, George F. Will, Francis Fukuyama and Bruce Bartlett in denouncing George Bush's Iraqi invasion. Sullivan won't quite fall---yet. Although Sullivan's comments about what he's gotten wrong sound very similar to the criticisms of the others who have since jumped ship, they are still refeshing because they offer little in the way of excuse.

In a nutshell, Sullivan believed that we overestimated the ability of government to pull off this act of turning a state into a democracy. We were supremely overconfident and not cautious enough, we were arrogant in expecting everyone else to see the justness of our cause and follow, and we undermined our own moral authority by engaging in torture and other abuses.

In the end, Sullivan is hanging over the edge of the rail looking into the water. I don't think it will take a big wave to sweep him off the deck. It's worth a read.

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Bill Frist threatens to re-structure the Intelligence Committee in order to block NSA hearings

Glenn Greenwald captures and explains an extraordinary effort by the Senate Majority Leader to block Senate Intelligence Committee hearings on the Presidents warrantless eavesdroping program. This is sincerelya must read.

The bottom line, Bill Frist is threatening to restructure the Senate Intelligence Committee if the Committee votes to hold hearings on the Administration's electronic wiretapping program. Greenwald explains the history, an explanation and the importance of this issue.

Law.com - Solo's Errant Spell-Check Causes 'Sea Sponge' Invasion

The dangers of an unchecked spell-checker. The moral? Take a close look before you file the brief.

The Corner on National Review Online

What has been interesting the last few weeks is the addition of conservative pundits to the ranks of those who believe that President Bush's Iraq policy has failed. So far I have mentioned William F. Buckley, George F. Will and Francis Fukuyama as conservatives who now view Bush's Iraq invasion as a policy failure. Today John Derbyshire, has joined their ranks:

Well, I'm with Bill Buckley and George Will. This pig's ear is never going to be made into a silk purse, not by any methods or expenditures the American people are willing to countenance. The only questions worth asking about Iraq at this point are: How does GWB get out of this with the least damage to US interests, and to his party's future prospects? I wish I had some answers.

We Can't Force Democracy

This is an excellent article by Robert D. Kaplan, discussing Iraq and the Hobbesian challenge of trying to create a democracy in a world that has no democratic tradition. The Hobbesian challenge is simply this, in a world full of violence, the first order is security. Democracy in such a world is a second order desire. This type of analysis was touched on by George Will, a while ago, but the analysis here is quite good and quite focused.

As Max Weber noted, a state that can not reasonably claim to have a monopoly on the use of force, is a state in name only. In Iraq, where Shiite militias, Sunni insurgents, former Ba'athists, and foreign Jihadists all exercise violence openly and wantonly, there can be no security and thus no real state.

Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina

The headline above about says it all. Despite White House statements that no one could have anticipated levy breaches in New Orleans, there is compelling, okay more than compelling evidence that Bush and Chertoff both were well aware of the possibility prior to the time Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast. The more than compelling evidence? uh, it's kind of like...uh, video tape of them being told that this just might happen...

But let's rewind a little bit. First we turn to Michael Chertoff, Director of the Department of Homeland Security. Here is what Chertoff told reporters on September 5, 2005:

"That 'perfect storm' of a combination of catastrophes exceeded the foresight of
the planners, and maybe anybody's foresight," Chertoff. He called the disaster
"breathtaking in its surprise."

Just 4 days prior to Chertoff's statement of surprise, on September 1st, the President discussed how completely surprised he was about levee's breaching in New Orleans. Here's what President Bush had to say when interviewed by Dianne Sawyer:

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm. But these levees got breached. And as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded. And now we are having to deal with it and will."

So what do we find in today's Washington Post? A story describing how Bush and Chertoff were both warned by Brownie et al., about levee's breaching and catastrophes at the Superdome. Who wudda thunk it? More astounding? It's all on tape.

So the following questions naturally arise: Were Bush and Chertoff lying? Was their attention focused on a hand held version of Grand Theft Auto during their briefing and they missed what was said? Or did they suffer a Scooter Libby memory lapse in the extreme? My gut tells me they are lying...but one could never overlook the possibility of gross incompetence when speaking of these two.

Iraq's worst week -- and Bush's Salon.com

Juan Cole writes a rather perceptive piece about the difficult tactical, strategic and political position the President is in. Bush's declining popularity along with rising disappointment in how Bush is handling Iraq limits his ability to convince the American people to stick it out in Iraq in the long run. In fact, 72-percent of American troops polled believe that we should get out of Iraq in a year or less. 29 percent believe that we should leave immediately.

The recent rise in sectarian violence, makes it unlikely that Iraq would be sufficiently peaceful for us to leave quickly. Also the broader strategic implications of an Iraq meltdown are only now beginning to be understood.
Thus, we don't have the support to stay for long. The rising violence makes it impossible for us to leave quickly. Leaving quickly may lead to a civil war. A civil war may cause destabilize the whole region.

What is increasingly being understood even among supporters of the President that the decision to invade Iraq has become an unmitigated disaster. It would be wonderful if Bush could reprise Harry Houdini and get himself (and us) out of the mess, unfortunately for us all, it doesn't seem likely.