Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

[Rian Jackson]

Well he's in a better place.

Palistine should do alright as long as Isreal does no bombing.

yeah, didn't you hear, everything is going GREAT!!

yippee! let's have a fucking picnic.

i need a drink.

[cowboyangel]

release Barghouti..please

[Rian Jackson]

release Barghouti..please

damn, i still need to get my 'barghouti for president' shirt made

[samtzu]

release Barghouti..please

damn, i still need to get my 'barghouti for president' shirt made

Isn't that a type of bread?

[Simply Joel]

The Road From Here
By ABDULLAH II

Amman, Jordan

From time to time, history holds moments of great potential, when we can look forward with hope even as we experience crisis and uncertainty. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, just such a moment may be here. With the sad passing of Yasir Arafat, Palestinians have lost a leader who kept their hope of independence alive for more than half a century. Now, an opportunity exists to honor the best of that legacy, in a new drive for progress and peace, in a part of the world that has seen too much bloodshed.

Today the Arab-Israeli conflict remains the world's central challenge. Israelis and Palestinians both need an end to its bitter violence. So do the global millions who suffer the collateral damage: ongoing extremist violence and deep cynicism about international justice.

In 2002, Arab countries took a bold step forward, committing themselves to a two-state solution that includes security guarantees for Israel to live in peace with its neighbors; a sovereign and democratic Palestine; and a process that leads to a comprehensive settlement, addressing the Syrian and Lebanese tracks.

The two-state solution recognizes what I and my late father, King Hussein, have long argued. For lasting peace, Israel must be fully integrated into the entire region, from Morocco to Yemen. But this depends on creating an independent Palestinian state, whose people are, at last, able to live in dignity and hope. Unless this happens, there will be no regionwide acceptance of Israel and no real peace.

In 2003, the parties agreed on the road map to peace. The United States and the eight leading industrialized nations are also on board. But the process has been trapped in an ongoing cycle of violence. Now, events provide fresh opportunities. New Palestinian leadership can carry forward the vision of a viable, independent Palestine by delivering on the reforms that statehood involves: competent governance, investments in public welfare, fighting corruption, tougher security against terrorism and a real partnership at the peace tables.

In Israel, the government can recommit to the road map and move swiftly to withdraw from Gaza and take other confidence-building measures that will refute the charge that its recent policies are intended to sideline the peace process and further divide people. Both sides can now make the compromises that a comprehensive, lasting and just peace requires.

Just as important, with its elections over, the United States can now refocus on this critical issue. The world's most powerful, most visible democracy has a chance to send a strong message to the region's people, especially its youth - a message of deeds, not words. That means fulfilling the promise of a rebuilt, violence-free, democratic and sovereign Iraq. And in the spiritual heart of the region it means leading the peace process and insisting that both sides engage in genuine dialogue and live up to their commitments spelled out in the road map - one that President Bush has said could lead to the creation of a Palestinian state next year.

Americans know how important it is to reach the world's Muslims. In the aftermath of 9/11, American leaders pledged that the war on terror was not a war on Islam. They acknowledged Islam's commitment to peace and recognized the great contributions of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims. They called on people of all faiths to stand together, and called on all nations to join the United States in its fight.

And for good reason. We can't win the war on terror if we don't act together. We Muslims were the first targets of the extremists, whose stated goal is to bring down moderate governments and stop the growth of democratic civil society. My country has played a significant role in the global alliance against terrorism, and more: we have led a regional effort for reform and development to counter the voices of hatred and cynicism. International reports have ranked our country first in the region in educational reform. In the economy, we have encouraged growth and opportunity; in public life, we have emphasized human rights and good governance.

My country's vision is of a modern civil society rooted in Arab-Islamic values. The Koran teaches: "Be just: that is next to piety." As a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be unto Him, I am committed to the struggle for tolerance and progress. I believe Jordan's path shows what a homegrown Arab-Islamic model can accomplish in fostering development, combating extremism and providing new hope.

At the end of the day, the success of regional reform depends on a renewed commitment to peace and progress, supported by a courageous America. That achievement will bring global healing. Perhaps now, in a moment shaped by both loss and hope, the time has come.


Abdullah II is king of Jordan.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

good morning all...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 14, 2004
The Arafat Voids
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

The day after Yasir Arafat died, USA Today carried a big, bold headline that caught my eye. It said: "Arafat Dies, Leaves Void."

All I could think of when reading that headline was its double meaning. Yasir Arafat left a void of leadership, with no formal successor. But he also left a void of achievement. And it is that second void that really matters, considering that he led the Palestinian movement for some 40 years.

You will pardon me if I don't join in the insipid chorus about how Arafat's great achievement was the way he represented the "aspirations" for statehood of the Palestinian people and, through terrorism and resistance, put the Palestinian cause on the world map.

Excuse me, but Yasir Arafat put the Palestinian cause on the world map in 1974, when he was invited to address the U.N. General Assembly. What did he do with all that attention after that? Very little. There is a message in his life and his legacy for every world leader: If all you do is express the aspirations, but never produce the reality, then history will judge you very harshly. And any honest history of Yasir Arafat will judge him on his voids, not his visions.

Will we now see the emergence of a Palestinian leadership - a broad coalition from Hamas to Fatah - ready to take the collective decision to really reconcile with the Jews that Arafat was not ready to make on his own?

Will Arab leaders, like Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who put forth a peace plan, be ready to really help the Palestinians make the tough decisions by giving them Arab cover? Or will we simply have another generation of expressive politics by Arab leaders, who love the Palestinian cause but not the Palestinian people?

Ariel Sharon seems to have already started to learn some of the lessons of Arafat's life. Mr. Sharon was asked recently what made him change his mind, and risk his own life and political career, to undertake a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza after so many years opposing such a move. His answer: There were things he could see "from here" that he couldn't see "from there."

In other words, sitting in the chair of the prime minister, he could suddenly see the long-term interests of the Israeli people in a different way.

"Sharon has started to give up his popularity among his own constituency, because he realizes that the welfare of the Israeli people, as a whole, requires decisions that are unpopular but unavoidable," said the Israeli political theorist Yaron Ezrahi. But Sharon cannot stop just with Gaza. He's got a lot more popularity to give up with his old constituency if we're going to see a deal on the West Bank.

Finally, what about President Bush? When it comes to the Arab-Israel question, he's had a little bit of Arafat disease himself. He's given some of the best speeches of any president on the Arab-Israel issue and delivered the most pathetic diplomacy I have ever seen.

This divide reflects the paralyzing split in his administration between those who understand that America will never win the war of ideas in the Middle East without working seriously on the most emotional issue in Arab political life - the Palestine question - and those, like the vice president and secretary of defense, who think the whole issue is overrated. The first group are right, the second are wrong. The president needs to choose.

If only President Bush called in Colin Powell and said: "Colin, neither of us have much to show by way of diplomacy for the last four years. I want you to get on an airplane and go out to the Middle East. I want you to sit down with Israelis and Palestinians and forge a framework for a secure Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and progress toward a secure peace in the West Bank, and I don't want you to come back home until you've got that. Only this time I will stand with you.

"As long as you're out there, I will not let Rummy or Cheney fire any more arrows into your back. So get going. It's time for you to stop sulking over at Foggy Bottom and time for me to make a psychological breakthrough with the Arab world that can also help us succeed in Iraq - by making it easier for Arabs and Muslims to stand with us. I don't want to see you back here until you've put our words into deeds."

Yasir Arafat preferred to die, beloved by all his people, in a Paris military hospital - rather than sacrifice his popularity and maybe his life so that the majority of his people could live and die at home. Will Ariel Sharon, George Bush and the Arab and Palestinian leaders now follow his model and play to the crowds, or play to history?

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

morning all... developments on the United Nations corruption.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 15, 2004
U.N. Obstructs Justice
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

Washington — "I'm angry that we find the U.N. proactively interfering with our investigation," Senator Norm Coleman, chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, informed Lou Dobbs on CNN, "by telling certain folks not to cooperate with us." He repeated for emphasis his sharp response to Secretary General Kofi Annan's "interfering with our ability to get information we need" about the oil-for-food scandal.

Judith Miller of The Times had revealed that the Minnesota Republican, joined by ranking Democrat Carl Levin, sent a letter noting Annan's four-month foot-dragging and that "the U.N. is hindering our efforts to obtain relevant documents."

If legislative investigators were prosecutors, the name of the game Annan and his enablers are playing would be called "obstruction of justice."

The principal investigating body of the Senate is not helpless. Today witnesses from Treasury and C.I.A., as well as its own investigators, will present evidence that the huge rip-off engineered by Saddam Hussein - with the connivance of corrupt U.N. officials and companies protected by Security Council members like Russia and France - was even greater than the $10 billion figure estimated by our G.A.O. Going back to 1991 and including the predecessor to oil-for-food, an outside source tells me that the U.N.-maladministered profiteering reached $23 billion. Such heavy spending affects U.N. votes.

The Senate, as it returns to lame-duck work this week, will subpoena evidence through the U. S. connections of companies like Lloyd's Register Inspection Ltd., which Annan's consultant, Paul Volcker, has so far "proactively" kept from cooperating. And there is the budget option: if the U.N. persists in obstruction, the U.S. can re-examine its contribution to an unaccountable organization.

But the Congress is not dependent on one Senate committee alone. In the House, Henry Hyde's International Relations Committee is holding hearings Wednesday. Though there will be overlap - Charles Duelfer will be busy explicating the oil-for-food section of his C.I.A. report this week - its emphasis has been on following the illicit money through the banking system.

BNP Paribas, the European bank eager to expand in the U.S., has cooperated with "friendly subpoenas" that Annan's aides could not stop through their "gag letters"; its present and past officials will testify about its thousands of letters of credit. But what about "know your customer" rules? What did our Federal Reserve officials know about sloppy banking procedures, and how long did it take for those regulators to put suspect banks under supervising action? The Fed's Herbert Biern may have some explaining to do about the failure of financial and diplomatic oversight.

If the U.N. stonewalling continues this week, Chairman Hyde's patience could at last wear thin; as former chairman of Judiciary, he knows something about criminal referrals. Such an action directed at recalcitrant bankers, brokers or U.N. inspection contractors would at last get high-level attention at the Justice Department, where U.S. attorneys have been tediously poking around U.S. oil companies for leads on kickbacks.

Kofi Annan's longtime right-hand man, Benon Sevan, headed the U.N.'s Office of the Iraq Program; he has been retired but has been vociferously denying wrongdoing ever since his name appeared on a list of beneficiaries of Saddam's largesse in the form of vouchers for oil deals.

Annan's obstruction of outside investigations has strong support within the U.N. members whose citizens are most likely to be embarrassed by revelations of payoffs: Russia, France and China lead all the rest. He has dutifully continued to align himself with their interests by declaring the overthrow of Saddam "illegal" and recently denouncing our attack on the insurgents in Falluja. Perhaps he thinks that this confluence of national interest in cover-up - along with the unwillingness of most media to dig into a complicated story - will let his stonewalling succeed. He reckons not with an insulted Congress.

Sad to see is the secretary general's manipulative abuse of Paul Volcker. Here is a former central banker so confident of his hard-earned reputation for integrity that he cannot see how it is being shredded by a web of sticky-fingered officials and see-no-evil bureaucrats desperate to protect the man on top who hired him to substitute for - and thereby to abort - prompt and truly independent investigation.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

and what are the French doing to quell violence?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 15, 2004

Turmoil in Ivory Coast: Once Again, Things Fall Apart
By SOMINI SENGUPTA

Long after the precolonial gold city of Timbuktu faded from glory and Dakar's status as the capital of French West Africa expired, even after Monrovia's cosmopolitanism crumbled and the lights went out of Lomé's once thriving nightlife, there was Abidjan.

Ivory Coast's largest city and commercial center, Abidjan was a port and a destination for millions of West African strivers. For more than 30 years after independence, Ivory Coast's autocratic founding president, Félix Houphouët-Boigny, kept the doors wide open to French business interests and turned the country into the world's largest cocoa exporter. The towering Hôtel Ivoire, overlooking the steamy lagoons that course through the city, was a symbol of the aspirations of a modern West African republic.

Today, just over a week after clashes erupted between pro-government protesters and French troops, French citizens continue to leave Abidjan by the thousands, at a cost of more than $5.9 million to their government, according to Paris. Incinerated remains of shops and houses dot the city. A jailbreak in the city's main prison let loose as many as 4,000 hardened criminals. The failure of a peace accord reached last year has left the door open to a new round of war between the government of President Laurent Gbagbo and the rebels who control the country's northern half.

Perhaps most worrying of all, ethnic tensions between the peoples of north and south make the country's reunification a daunting challenge.

More and more, Abidjan looks as though it is going the way of Kinshasa, Congo's onetime boomtown, whose tree-lined boulevards and hulking skyscrapers have lately surrendered to the tropical mold.

Indeed, scenes from Abidjan over the past week looked uncomfortably familiar to Hervé Ludovic de Lys, a native of Mali who was working for an American-financed aid project in Kinshasa in 1991, when an army-led pillage of that city prompted evacuations of foreigners.

"In a matter of weeks, Kinshasa was emptied of all its expatriate community," said Mr. de Lys, now the Dakar-based West Africa regional chief of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. "It's never fully recovered."

The fires that engulf Abidjan today threaten not just Ivory Coast. In a region of porous borders, contested natural resources and a surplus of guns and gunmen, no conflicts are self-contained. Virtually all Ivory Coast's neighbors are vulnerable.

After more than a decade of bloodshed, Liberia and Sierra Leone have settled into a hard-won peace but still struggle with the problem that fueled conflict in the first place, namely a generation of frustrated young men to whom war signals economic opportunity. To the north, Guinea simmers with political and ethnic tensions. Former fighters in Liberia interviewed by Human Rights Watch said they had been solicited to fight in Guinea both for and against the repressive government of President Lansana Conté.

It would surprise no one in the region if Liberian and Sierra Leonean veterans were lured now into Ivory Coast's conflict. Despite millions invested to demobilize child soldiers in Sierra Leone and Liberia, economic prospects remain dim for young men across the region.

The fighting in Ivory Coast "could really pull in these roving combatants who, despite significant efforts to incorporate them back into society in Liberia and Sierra Leone, still feel there would be economic gain," said Corinne Dufka, the West Africa researcher for Human Rights Watch. "They are lured by the short-term promise of whatever benefits they can get from looting."

Last week, on the Liberia-Ivory Coast border, a new act opened in the long-running drama of West Africa's refugee crisis. The United Nations refugee agency reported that 6,000 to 10,000 Ivoirians, many of them women and children, had begun piling into flimsy fishing boats and crossing a narrow river into Liberia. Veterans of the region's unending conflict, they told United Nations workers that they did not want to wait until full-scale fighting broke out and the river became impassable.

The danger of Ivory Coast's conflict to the region was not lost on West Africa's leaders, as they gathered yesterday for an emergency meeting in the Nigerian capital, Abuja. The United Nations called for an arms embargo on the rebels and the government of Ivory Coast, Reuters reported from Abuja.

Analysts are skeptical of any swift resolution. President Gbagbo has promised political reforms but has failed to follow through. The rebels have said they are not interested in peace talks with Mr. Gbagbo. Ivory Coast "has reached the bottom," Mr. de Lys said. "It will depend on how fast Ivory Coast finds a political solution to this crisis. The odds are quite low, actually."

Hopes for an end to the civil war that erupted in September 2002 were crushed on Nov. 4, when Mr. Gbagbo's government, in clear violation of a cease-fire agreement reached the previous year, began bombing rebel-held towns. Two days later, a government airstrike against a French military base in the rebel-held north killed nine French soldiers and an American civilian. The French retaliated by destroying most of Ivory Coast's military aircraft, an act that unleashed days of anti-French violence in Abidjan. In a radio address on Sunday, President Gbagbo vowed to rebuild the air force.

With the arrival of reinforcements during the past week, France now has roughly 5,000 troops in Ivory Coast. President Jacques Chirac said yesterday that France had no intention of withdrawing its peacekeepers, news agencies reported.

Mr. Gbagbo, who had avoided foreign reporters for the past two years, has hosted a parade of Western journalists in recent days. He blamed French troops for attacks on Ivoirians and promised an investigation into the airstrikes that killed the French peacekeepers. In a radio address broadcast yesterday, he also said the exodus of French civilians was only temporary. "They will come back," Agence-France Presse quoted him as saying from Abidjan.

Regardless of the fate of the French in Ivory Coast, the latest crisis there does not bode well for West Africa. Mali and Burkina Faso have already felt the economic pinch. Trade has slowed, access to the port of Abidjan has become harder, migrants who once sent home money have returned home.

The political dangers are even more worrisome. For more than a decade, a cycle of violence and want has plagued the region. West Africa's government and rebel leaders have instigated fights in one another's backyards.

On Friday, Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the United Nations special representative for West Africa, blamed Ivory Coast's leaders for inflicting "incalculable damage" on the region as well as on their own country. "How can we hope to attract foreign investment, essential for creating the jobs that so many millions of West African youths desperately need,'' he asked, "if some of our leaders continue to pursue the logic of war and vendetta year after year?"

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[tonytohono]

Now Colin Powell quits...

Ole George W's wheel are coming off.

Must be tough.

[DVD Burner]

It took how many years for Powell to realize he got suckered?

[Simply Joel]

COSBY'S CRUSADE SHOULD ADD MARRIAGE TO ITS RANKS


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Cosby has his own values crusade going, and it's catching on in much of black America. When Cosby endorses academic achievement, discipline and parental involvement, he's supporting the traditional values to which many black Americans -- in red states or blue -- can relate.
You might be surprised to hear this, but there is little controversy over Cosby's rhetoric. A few fringe academics and left-wing scribes have attacked him, but he has drawn broad support, including from such civil rights activists as NAACP President Kweisi Mfume. Perhaps that's because Cosby's wisdom is self-evident.

Like so many others, I support Cosby's crusade. I'd just like to add one small item to his agenda: marriage. I'd like to hear him -- in the plain and unadorned language for which he has become known -- urging black men and women to get married.

Having been married to Camille for 40 years, he obviously believes in the institution. (The Cosbys are the parents of four daughters; their son, Ennis, was murdered in an apparent carjacking in 1997.) And Cosby has implicitly supported it in talks around the country -- pointing out the detriment of teen pregnancy and urging fathers to get involved in their children's lives.

But I'm not sure that young black men and women are quite getting the message. Over the last few years, many unmarried young black fathers have begun attending parenting seminars to learn the basics of fatherhood. As a result, some are going to PTA meetings, monitoring their kids' report cards, and even coaching their children's Little League teams. But too few are getting married to the mother of their children. What is better for kids than a law-abiding, hard-working dad who is present in the home?

The institution of marriage is in trouble throughout the Western world. High rates of divorce and pregnancy outside of marriage have destabilized traditional unions, not just here but in Western Europe, too. Even Japan, so long a traditional society, is experiencing divorce creep.

(Many critics of same-sex unions have promoted bans as a way to protect traditional marriage. I understand their worries over the state of heterosexual marriage, but its decline has nothing to do with gays and lesbians. The women's movement, Hollywood's idealized portrayals of marriage, and old-fashioned adultery and betrayal have undermined heterosexual marriage, but gay couples have not.)

Among black Americans (whom some civil rights leaders have long described as "canaries in the coal mine" -- an early warning system of ills that will soon afflict everyone), the problem has assumed alarming proportions. Marriage is fast becoming all but obsolete. Using figures from the U.S. census, this chart shows the percentage of men who are married, by age group:

.....25-29..........30-34..........35-39


White 41 percent 59 percent 66 percent

Hispanic 36 percent 53 percent 64 percent

Black 25 percent 41 percent 43 percent

(If my subscribers don't want to deal with the chart, here's the written version of the same information: Among white men from 25 to 29 years old, 41 percent are married; in the age group from 30 to 34 years old, 59 percent are married; and from 35 to 39 years old, 66 percent are married, according to the U.S. census. Among Hispanic men 25 to 29, 36 percent are married; from 30 to 24, 53 percent are married; and from 35 to 39, 64 percent are married. But the marriage rates among black men drop precipitously: Among ages 25 to 29, 25 percent are married; from 30 to 34, 41 percent are married; from 35 to 39, 43 percent are married -- still less than half.)
The high rates of incarceration among black men are certainly a hindrance to marriage. Joblessness is also a factor. But there is something else going on -- a certain cultural shift that is harder to articulate: Marriage has simply become devalued.

That's bad news. Marriage is not only a solid institution for rearing children. It also encourages responsible behavior and civic participation (good reasons for allowing gays and lesbians to marry, too). Furthermore, as the nation becomes increasingly mobile and young adults move away from their relatives, their spouses become their support system. That value increases as couples age.

The next time Bill Cosby begins reminding black listeners about the need to return to self-respect and self-reliance, he ought to encourage marriage, too. It may be too late to save the institution from the relentless forces of modernism that threaten to crush it, but it's worth a try.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She can be reached by e-mail: [email protected].
COPYRIGHT 2004 THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION

[cowboyangel]

I can make a special room just for you Joel, for the politically addicted....come back and visit us in 12 step...you are always welcome

[DVD Burner]

What does Bill Cosby have to do with anything.


Bill Cosby?



Jeezzz.

Joel, I belive you have really lost it.


Should'nt that have been under the "Idle Chat Thread"?

[DVD Burner]

[cowboyangel]

DVD............................take some drugs man

[DVD Burner]

hey man,

ahnold for prez and ban gays period. also lets not forget, reverse roe vs. wade.


yepper......this is gonna be real good. now excuse me while i take some more much needed drugs to deal with all this.

[DVD Burner]

and put god back in schools and impose christianity on everyone.

[DVD Burner]

Wonder what Joel and Calicow have to say about this?



GOP may change House rules to allow DeLay to stay if indicted


Posted on Tue, Nov. 16, 2004

BY MARIA RECIO

Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON - (KRT) - House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas, unanimously re-elected leader by House Republican members Tuesday, is expected to get another present from the GOP on Wednesday: a rules change that will enable him to serve as leader even if he is indicted in Texas.

DeLay supporters said they do not expect him to be indicted by a Travis County grand jury investigating political fund raising but want to show their loyalty to DeLay and send a message to Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle. They accuse Earle, a Democrat, of partisan politics.

The Travis County district attorney secured indictments against three DeLay associates in September charging them with soliciting and funneling illegal corporate contributions to influence Texas House races in 2002. DeLay was not charged.

Current GOP rules in the U.S. House require anyone in a leadership position to step aside if they are indicted.

Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-Texas, will offer a change in the GOP rules that would enable a leader indicted at the state level to continue in his or her job, said Jessica Boulanger, press secretary to House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo. The revision - which would require a leader to step aside if indicted at the federal level - should pass easily, said two GOP aides who spoke on condition of anonymity.

DeLay spokesman Jonathan Grella said that the initiative did not start with his office and that the majority leader is "studiously neutral" on it. The Republican Conference of 231 House members meets Wednesday.

"This is more about Ronnie Earle than it is about Tom DeLay," said one of the GOP aides. "Our conference has been very vocal in support of our leader. We're not acting out of any fear that an indictment will come about. This is a politically motivated prosecution. Therefore, we are protecting our popular leader."

Earle did not return a call seeking comment but he has declined in the past to say if he would try to indict DeLay or Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick, a Republican.

Craddick attorney Roy Minton of Austin said he was aware of the persistent rumors about indictments of his client or DeLay. "I have never seen as many rumors," said the veteran lawyer. "Bottom line is I don't know of any imminent indictments."

DeLay said when asked about the rumors, "Austin's all about rumors."

DeLay was admonished twice in late September and early October by the House ethics committee for his aggressive fund raising and heavy-handedness in getting federal officials to pursue Texas Democratic lawmakers who had fled the state to avoid a vote on redistricting.

The 2002 GOP victories at the heart of the Earle investigation gave Republicans control of the Texas House for the first time since Reconstruction and laid the groundwork for the congressional redistricting that added six GOP U.S. House members to the Texas delegation.

Asked Tuesday if his redistricting effort was worthwhile, DeLay said: "It was certainly worth it. So that the people of Texas have fair representation and representation that reflects their voting patterns and their values; it was all worth it."

---

© 2004, Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Visit the Star-Telegram on the World Wide Web at http://www.star-telegram.com.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

[DVD Burner]

GOP COVETS COLIN TO CHALLENGE HILL

By FREDRIC U. DICKER

November 17, 2004 -- ALBANY — Republicans yesterday touted outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell as a possible challenger against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2006.
"I think he would be an exciting choice . . . and I think he would have star quality," said Stephen Minarik, who was tapped Monday to head the troubled state Republican Party.
Minarik said he would seek to talk to Powell, a native New Yorker, about making the race once he leaves the State Department.
Powell was first suggested as a potential Clinton challenger by Rep. Vito Fossella of Staten Island, who, like many in the New York GOP, is known to fear his party won't have a strong candidate to field against her in 2006.
"His roots and heart have always been in New York," Fossella said of Powell, who was born in New York City and attended City College.
"I think he'd make a great representative and I urge him strongly to consider running," Fossella continued.
A State Department spokeswoman refused to comment, except to say, "It's a question after he leaves maybe he can answer."
A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton also declined to comment.
Minarik said he would also be talking to former Mayor Rudy Giuliani about challenging Clinton.
Meanwhile, a new Gallup Poll showed Clinton as the Democrats' early first choice to run for president in 2008, while Giuliani and Sen. John McCain were tied as first choice among Republicans.
The former first lady was backed by 25 percent of Democrats surveyed, followed by John Kerry at 15 percent.
Giuliani and McCain both drew 10 percent among Republicans, followed by 7 percent for Powell and 3 percent for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

[Simply Joel]

Wonder what Joel and Calicow have to say about this?

#1. please don't assume that calico cowboy and i agree on anything to include this subject.

#2. please don't assume i have an opinion to share on this matter or any other matter.

#3. if confused refer back to #1 & #2 above.

[DVD Burner]

Wonder what Joel and Calicow have to say about this?

#1. please don't assume that calico cowboy and i agree on anything to include this subject.

#2. please don't assume i have an opinion to share on this matter or any other matter.

#3. if confused refer back to #1 & #2 above.

I never said anything about you 2 having the same view. (refer to the OP.) nor would I think your minds would think the same or similar. I just wondered you both had to say about the post. ( was that too complicated? refer to the original post in case you were further confused.)

[DVD Burner]

Goss tells CIA workers to get behind president

Last update: November 17, 2004
at 12:02 AM

Douglas Jehl and Philip Shenon, New York Times
November 17, 2004

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- New CIA chief Porter Goss has told employees that they are expected to "support the administration and its policies in our work," a copy of the internal memorandum shows.
"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," Goss said in the memo circulated Monday at the Central Intelligence Agency. He added that he was seeking "to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road."
While his words could be construed as urging analysts to conform with administration policies, Goss also wrote, "We provide the intelligence as we see it -- and let the facts alone speak to the policy-maker."
Goss has embarked on a major overhaul at the agency and changes so far, including the ouster of the clandestine service chief, have left current and former intelligence officials angry, unnerved and in some cases outspoken.
Some of them said Tuesday that they regarded Goss' memo as part of an effort to reimpose discipline. In recent weeks, White House officials have complained that some CIA officials have sought to undermine President Bush and his policies.
At a minimum, Goss' memo appears to be a swipe at an agency decision under George Tenet, his predecessor, to permit a senior analyst, Michael Scheuer, to write a book and grant interviews that were critical of the administration's antiterrorism policies.
One former intelligence official said he saw nothing inappropriate in Goss' warning, noting that the CIA long has tried to distance itself and its employees from policy matters.
"Mike exploited a seam in the rules and inappropriately used it to express his own policy views," the official said of Scheuer. "That did serious damage to the agency, because many people, including some in the White House, thought that he was being urged by the agency to take on the president. I know that was not the case."
But a second former intelligence official said he was concerned that Goss' memo is part of an effort to stifle independence. "If Goss is asking people to color their views and be a team player, that's not what people at CIA signed up for," said the official. This person and others interviewed in recent days spoke on condition that they not be named.
Some of the contents of Goss' memorandum were reported first by the Washington Post.
On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, House and Senate negotiators renewed talks Tuesday on a stalled bill to enact the major recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission and create a Cabinet-level job of national intelligence director.
Aides said fresh White House lobbying had created some optimism that a bill could be worked out this year. They said the efforts, which included a telephone call last weekend from Bush to the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, had put pressure on negotiators to agree on measures that could be passed before Congress ends its lame-duck session, probably next week.
"I feel hopeful, I feel positive," said Timothy Roemer, a Democratic member of the Sept. 11 commission who has been involved in the negotiations. "We're making good progress." He said high-level resignations at the CIA and other reports of trouble under Goss had put pressure on them.
The House and Senate have each passed a bill that would create the post of national intelligence director to oversee the nation's spy agencies.

[DVD Burner]

and just a great read.

http://www.politrix.org/foia/FEBMAR04/c ... t2003.html

[Simply Joel]

and just a great read.

http://www.politrix.org/foia/FEBMAR04/c ... t2003.html

the boogeyman once again.

[DVD Burner]

and just a great read.

http://www.politrix.org/foia/FEBMAR04/c ... t2003.html

the boogeyman once again.

Geekster is really got you beat. It's too bad. He tries much harder with investigating and comming back with logic.

You are challenging a PHD.

Please ...please do better other wise you are just not only wasting your time but Safire and everyone elses on eplaya.

[Simply Joel]

an example of using fear to make an argument.

It needs to be emphasized that the 'unofficial' black budget and Manhattan Project have legally evolved in ways to respond to a national security contingency that is yet to be revealed to the American public. The classified adversary that this elaborate secret system has been developed to respond to is arguably a potential threat that warrants an extraordinary network of covert programs that dwarf the original Manhattan Project and annually consume as much as 1.1 trillion dollars in a non-transparent manner. More disturbingly, the importance of Manhattan II is such that the CIA has evidently used organized criminal networks and the drug trade as sources to partially fund Manhattan II.

It is unclear when the full scope and impact of Manhattan II will be disclosed to the American public. However, the consequences in terms of increased loss of trust in federal government agencies, loss of morale among senior agency officials instructed to cover up black budget transactions, non-transparency in the flow of government appropriations, targeting of policy makers and business leaders who discover the fraudulent accounting and money laundering that occurs with the black budget, all warrant a serious examination of the need for maintaining the secrecy of Manhattan II and the black budget that funds it. Finally, the classified adversary against whom Manhattan II is directed requires immediate declassification due to the inherent dangers of dealing with what appears to be an undisclosed security threat in a non-transparent and unaccountable manner, and totally outside of the moral/legal restrictions that emerge from vigorous public debate in democratic societies.

it is the boogeyman...

[Simply Joel]

and just a great read.

http://www.politrix.org/foia/FEBMAR04/c ... t2003.html

the boogeyman once again.

Geekster is really got you beat. It's too bad. He tries much harder with investigating and comming back with logic.

You are challenging a PHD.

Please ...please do better other wise you are just not only wasting your time but Safire and everyone elses on eplaya.

hmmm, an appropriate response... oh yeah.

piss off, you wanker.

[DVD Burner]

You are a truely a lost cause.


We shall call you the write off.

[DVD Burner]

Has anyone seen the documentary "Warship" on PBS? On last night in S.F.

[Simply Joel]

You are a truely a lost cause.


We shall call you the write off.

we?

you mean i have attained "persona no grata" status...