Baby you can track my car

Guess I'm going to be a star. AP:

The Pentagon is developing an urban surveillance system that would use computers and thousands of cameras to track, record and analyze the movement of every vehicle in a foreign city.

Police, scientists and privacy experts say the unclassified technology could easily be adapted to spy on Americans.

"Government would have a reasonably good idea of where everyone is most of the time," said John Pike, a Global Security.org defense analyst.

Beep beep-n-beep beep yeah!

Hey, scooters and mass transit are looking better all the time, aren't they?

Fun with "W"!

We've been having some fun with "W" where "W" is a synonym for 43, the President the Republicans hope to get elected in 2004...

aWol, noun, synonym for W. Draws attention to W's missing year of Texas Air National Guard Duty.

qWagmire, noun. What aWol just got us into ...

... in Iwaq...

But alert reader Baba Wawa has elevated this practice to new heights:

Iwaq is only the beginning! Then we need to wibewate Iwan, Sywia, Saudi Awabia and any other countwy that thweatens Isweaw.

Of course, if we're sewious about Achieving Fweedom or Imposing Democracy or whatever the new catchphwase is now, there are so many other countwies we need to fix. How about Waos, which just impwisoned thwee foweign jouwnalists (incwuding one Amewican) on twumped-up murder charges? Or Myanmaw. Or Congo and its neighbors Buwundi and Wwanda. Zimbabwe. Wibewia. Siewwa Weone. Venezuewa. Pewu. The list goes on and on. People acwoss the wowld are cwamowing for Amewican intervention, saying "why should the Iwaqis get it all?"

"Kill the wabbit, kill the wabbit ...." (from alert reader Blu)

UPDATE: NoWth KoWea (from alert reader stencil)

Reuters Gets It: The President? Not.

At least if his speech today is anything to go by.

First, Reuters:

Here's the lede Yahoo goes with from a longer Reuters story.

Two months after President Bush declared major combat over in Iraq, the United States needs more troops on the ground and should accept any foreign help it can get to crush resistance and start real nation-building, military analysts said on Tuesday.

How devastating is that? l. Pentagon did underestimate troops needed on the ground. 2. Adminstration did make a mistake in cold-shouldering all who didn't fall in line behind our parade.3. We're way behind schedule on everything.

Okay, that's a harsh, one-sided oversimplification.

The longer Reuter's article, an excellent compilation of quotes and questions from ex-Military officers and defense experts, like retired Army Gen. Dan Christman, a former Pentagon planner, is quietly just as devastating.

"Our army is absolutely stretched thin and we ought to be reaching out to all of those countries who are offering to send troops -- the Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, the Indians, and NATO -- I'm not sure why we have been reluctant to pick up a NATO offer," said the retired general.

NATO's role in Iraq so far has been agreeing to provide logistics help for up to 7,500 Polish troops scheduled to deploy to Iraq this summer.

Christman said the presence of other flags would boost U.S. legitimacy during the crucial reconstruction phase, which should focus on the economy and getting oil pumping again.

How many Nato troops? According to Retired Air Force Gen. Chuck Boyd...several hundred thousand. That may be a high estimate, but it still says, 'what the hell was Rummy thinking?'

And there's this from Marcus Corbin, a senior defense analyst at the Center for Defense Information, on the need for more Iraqi involvement:

"The problem from the point of view of the Iraqis is that whatever limited authority they thought they were getting is being pulled back. Their sense is that things are going backward rather than forward," said Corbin.

Anthony Cordesman even makes an appearance.

Here's how Rove/Bush handled this increasing clamor today, when Bush spoke in the East Room of the White House on the 30th anniversary of the all-volunteer U.S. force, with a backdrop of 30 year men and women who'd chosen to re-enlist.

They ignored it. They focused instead on the President's stalwart determination to maintain our tropps there..."to keep the nation from falling back into the hands of Saddam Hussein loyalists."

"They have attacked coalition forces and they're trying to intimidate Iraqi citizens," Bush said. "These groups believe they have found an opportunity to harm America, to shake our resolve in the war on terror, and to cause us to leave Iraq before freedom is fully established."

"They are wrong and they will not succeed."

(edit)

"But there will be no return to tyranny in Iraq," Bush said. "And those who threaten the order and stability of that country will face ruin as surely as the regime they once served."

Always the same. A single evil other, this time, "those who would...,"a single overstated, undercomprehended objective.

Rummy may be disparging the mere mention of quagmire, and insisting Vietnam was then, but the President's speech depended on exactly that kind of domestic "other," as if those asking questions about his policies on the ground were doing so to get us out of Iraq, and thereby, to harm America.

Watching the speech, it seemed remarkably lame. If that's the best Rove can come up with, Bush will lose.

Any thoughts on what else Rove might have up his sleeve?
Or at some point, after years of obsfucation, do you lose track of what's real?

Update: edited for content

Another Poll

From the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, this AP report emphasizes the issue of the Saddam-9/11 link.

Seven in 10 people in a poll say the Bush administration implied that Iraq and its leader Saddam Hussein were involved in the Sept. 11 attacks against the United States.

And a majority, 52 percent, say they believe the United States has found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam was working closely with the al-Qaida terrorist organization.

At least the number of Americans who believe we've found evidence of WMD in Iraq is down to 23% from its previous 34%.

Perhaps the most hopeful news:

The number who want the United Nations to take a leadership role in Iraq has grown from 50 percent in April to 64 percent now.

Maybe our fellow Americans are beginning to remember their pre-war skepticism about this administration's notion of aggressive, in your face, yet prickly, easily aggrieved unilateralism being synonymous with strong leadership.

"Where's Your Moral Clarity Now, Moses"

Then:

At a May 4 press briefing:

Secretary Rumsfeld: The Iraqi people will figure out what the government of Iraq will do.

The Iraqi people will ultimately decide on a constitution, the Iraqi people will be the ones to decide what the form of that government might be. There will be an interim, meaning temporary, short-lived authority of some kind, there will be people who will like it, and there will be people who don’t like it just as in the United States of America. That’s what democratic people do. They say they like this or I don’t like that and that’s fine, but the interim will be interim, it will be temporary, it will not be permanent and that process, people - Iraqis will figure out what the next step ought to be, and then Iraqis will approve or disapprove or modify what that final government will look like. Therefore, how can they reject it, if it will be theirs and it will be an Iraqi solution to a circumstance in Iraq? Now take the United States, are there people here who don’t like this form of government? Sure. Are there people who don’t like what our government does from time to time? Sure. And do they appear on television? Sure, because it’s news, someone’s against something let’s get right up there and they will talk about. And my guess is when that interim government, correction - interim authority begins to stand up, you will hear people say, Ahh it’s too big, it’s too small, it’s too slow, it’s too fast, it’s this, it’s that and the answer to that will be, fair enough. It’s not perfect, it’s temporary it’s interim, get into it, make it what you want because what’s important isn’t the interim authority, what’s important is what follows it and that’s going to be for the Iraqi people. Fair enough?

During an April 7th CNN interview with Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage:

.....the fact that our forces are being welcomed with open arms. This is something we cherish and we'll do our utmost to continue to deserve. You see jubilance in many of the streets and I think it will continue. This is not something, however, that will last forever. We have to make sure that our follow-on actions are absolutely consistent with those things, which will win the favor of the Iraqi people.

(edit)

.....so we have to have a government, which is of, for and by Iraqis. Now the question of how you form it, it seems to me that the administration is on the right track by trying to develop an interim Iraqi authority, which will be developed by Iraqis, themselves, in close consultation with coalition members who, after all, have shed their blood and expended their treasure to bring about the liberation of Iraq.

Remarks by the President on Operation Iraqi Freedom, April 28th, Ford Community and Performing Arts Center
Dearborn, Michigan

The Iraqi people are fully capable of self-government. Every day Iraqis are moving toward democracy and embracing the responsibilities of active citizenship. Every day life in Iraq improves as coalition troops work to secure unsafe areas and bring food and medical care to those in need.
America pledged to rid Iraq of an oppressive regime, and we kept our word. (Applause.) America now pledges to help Iraqis build a prosperous and peaceful nation, and we will keep our word again. (Applause.)

Now:

Frustrated Reservists See a Mission Impossible

U.S. officials need to get our [expletive] out of here," said the 43-year-old reservist from Pittsburgh, who arrived in Iraq with the 307th Military Police Company on May 24. "I say that seriously. We have no business being here. We will not change the culture they have in Iraq, in Baghdad. Baghdad is so corrupted. All we are here is potential people to be killed and sitting ducks."

To Sgt. Sami Jalil, a 14-year veteran of the local police force, the Americans are to blame. He and his colleagues have no badges, no uniforms. The soldiers don't trust them with weapons. In his eyes, his U.S. counterparts have already lost the people's trust.

"We're facing the danger. We're in the front lines. We're taking all the risks, only us," said the 33-year-old officer. "They're arrogant. They treat all the people as if they're criminals."

Many of the Iraqi officers despise the U.S. soldiers for what they see as unreasonable demands and a lack of respect. Many of the soldiers in Pollard's unit -- homesick, frustrated and miserable in heat that soars well into the 100s -- deem their mission to reconstitute the force impossible.

Of course that's just one police station in just one city.

Cleric Wants Iraqis to Write Constitution

Actually, it's more than just "wants."

Iraq's leading Shiite cleric has issued a ruling condemning the idea of a constitutional council put together by the American occupation authority, saying Iraqis should elect the drafters of their constitution.

The cleric's edict, or fatwa, may complicate considerably the plans of the American-led authority here to call a convention to select a commission to draft a new constitution for Iraq.

It's not like no one tried to warn them.

SENATOR BIDEN: "…but the real key here is we get one real shot at starting off a transition government here. And whatever that government is, that transition government, if it looks like it's imposed by us, if it looks like we sat down, hand-picked the leaders, put them in place, it will not have any legitimacy with the Iraqi people …"

They were warned to include not merely the window dressing of more "willing" coalition partners, but Nato, the UN, and countries like France and Germany who have ready expertise. They were warned that anything that quacked like an "American occupation" would be a constant object of attack. They were warned to include Iraqis at every level in decision making, they were warned that law and order and restoration of basic services was the most important initial goal.

The criticisms are reaching a critical mass. Watch for a new Rovian Presidential initiative that appears to shift our reconstruction efforts in the direction of the critics, without acknowledging those critics, of course, without actually changing anything very much on the ground.

What the Dems should say on National Security.

Daily Kos has great analysis here. The bullet points:

1. We need our allies


2. We need the world to trust us again


3. We have to fund first responders and train them


4. The missions of the US military must be clear and focused


5. The UN and NATO save American lives and promote the security of the United States


6. A Democratic secretary of Defense will work for the president, not the other way around


7. 9/11 needs to be fully investigated so we can prevent those errors from happening again.


8. We are honor bound to help reconstruct Iraq. But we can only do it with the cooperation of the Iraqi people.


9. We will work with Mexico and Canada to ensure, safe, secure borders without the risk of injury and death to those who seek to improve their lives by finding work in America.

qWagmire

From William Booth and Rajiv Chandrasekaran of the Sidney Morning Herald

United States military commanders have ordered a halt to local elections and self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, instead installing their own hand-picked mayors and administrators, many of them former Iraqi military leaders.

The decision to deny Iraqis a direct role in selecting municipal governments is creating anger and resentment among aspiring leaders and ordinary citizens, who say the US-led occupation forces are not keeping their promise to bring greater freedom and democracy to a country dominated for by Saddam Hussein for 30 years.

"They give us a general," said Bahith Sattar, a biology teacher and tribal leader in Samarra, north of Baghdad, who was a candidate for mayor until that election was cancelled last week. "What does that tell you, eh? First of all, an Iraqi general? They lost the last three wars. They're not even good generals. And they know nothing about running a city."

Mr Bremer has promised that as soon as an Iraqi constitution is written and a national census taken, local and national elections will follow. But that process could take months.

In Samarra the selection of a new mayor and city council by delegates was put off twice, then cancelled. "There will be no elections for the foreseeable future," said Jeff Butler of the US Army's 418th Civil Affairs Battalion, charged with running Samarra.

Sergeant Butler said he sympathised with Iraqis upset about elections being cancelled. "We would like to see some kind of democratic system, too," he said. But for now, the Iraqis needed to be satisfied with "baby steps".

Remember when Rummy compared the "chaos and confusion" in Iraq to the United States after the Revolutionary War? This policy is like making General Cornwallis Mayor of New York because we couldn't find anyone better. Frightening thought: there is no one better. qWagmire...

Festung America

From the Guardian:

The Pentagon is planning a new generation of weapons, including huge hypersonic drones and bombs dropped from space, that will allow the US to strike its enemies at lightning speed from its own territory.

Over the next 25 years, the new technology would free the US from dependence on forward bases and the cooperation of regional allies, part of the drive towards self-sufficiency spurred by the difficulties of gaining international cooperation for the invasion of Iraq.

The SLV-Cav [Small Launch Vehicle/Common Aero Vehicle] ]combination, according to [DARPA], "will provide a near-term (approximately 2010) operational capability for prompt global strike from Consus (the continental US) while also enabling future development of a reusable HCV [hypersonic cruise vehicle] for the far-term (approximately 2025)". The range of this weapon is unclear.

Too bad our main threat is asymmetrical warfare.

And now to write the real Prescription Drug Bill

WaPo:

Private health insurance plans began lobbying Congress today for major changes in the Medicare drug legislation passed just three days ago.

Without increased subsidies and more stability, they said, few private plans will enter the Medicare market, and the legislation will not work as intended.

The first step toward privatization is more subsidies ... Makes sense if the goal of privatization is to loot the Treasury, but not in many other ways. Well, looting is what the Rethuglicans are best at, after lying!

Texas redistricting once more

This is important. Lee Hockstader of WaPo writes:

"If Tom DéLay gets his way, he'll pick up five or six to seven or eight seats, which will significantly solidify the Republican hold on the House of Representatives, perhaps for decades."

So important that, as usual, the Rethuglicans trample the rules to get the job done:

Redistricting ... normally occurs only once a decade, after the census. Texas redrew its congressional districts in 2001, but in the 2002 elections the GOP won major gains in the legislature, giving Republicans the sway to go back to the redistricting map and try for more.

Why? Because they can. The last time the Texas Thugs tried this maneuver, the Killer D's (Texas Democrats) thwarted DéLay by leaving the state to prevent a quorum. That's when the Texas Thugs, aided by national Thugs, politicized the Department of Homeland Security by using it to try to find out where the Democrats were.

That tactic won't work this time, since Thug Governor Perry called a special session. Bottom line is that the Democrats need to hold three State Senators to win: Eddie Lucio Jr., Kenneth L. Armbrister, and Frank L. Madla.

The Big Dog was right. All politics is turning national. Perspective from The Times here.

No numbers, no problem

Whenever aWol's maladministration sees a problem they don't like, they find a way to cook the books, as we've just seen in the refusal to even track repetitive strain injuries.

Guy Gugliotta and Eric Pianin of WaPo write:

The Environmental Protection Agency for months has withheld key findings of its analysis showing that a Senate plan to combat air pollution would be more effective in reducing harmful pollutants -- and only marginally more expensive -- than would President Bush's Clear Skies initiative for power plant emissions.

Don't like the numbers? Suppress them. Cook the books. Standard operating procedure for aWol.

aWol's Freudian slip

Bush on the campaign trail in Florida (AP):

I want to thank you all so very much for your help today. We're laying the groundwork for a national campaign -- a national campaign that I believe will result in a great victory in November 2002. (Applause.)

Does anyone know what time it is?

Support For Iraq War Slipping

No, not in my dreams. In a CNN poll. Billmon links to it and unspins the CNN spin for you.

Hack Like Howie

From medianews letters:

Finally for you Howard Kurtz bashers, here's a brief exchange from the NAHJ's Jayson Blair panel discussion on Friday (I'm paraphrasing):

Arlene Morgan, director of the Workshop on Journalism, Race and Ethnicity, Columbia University.: "We don't have the culture competency to handle diverse newsrooms. The people take their lead from the top. If the top is clueless, if people like Howie Kurtz can go on 'Reliable Sources' and bring in people who are totally clueless on affirmative action programs or how to hire diversity, somebody has to say, 'Hey Howie, you're sending out the wrong signal. You're bringing in the wrong people to interview.' I'm appalled at the interviews. None of the people know what the hell they are talking about."

Moderator Maria Hinojosa: Are you going to call Howie?

Morgan: "Having been misquoted by Howie Kurtz enough times, I don't want to speak to him ever again."

Crowd: "OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH!"

Recipe For Success

Social Science research should be useful. Studies of which social programs work and which don't are needed.

As we were saying yesterday, when a study's results are too useful and fit one side's needs too snugly, be suspicious, be very suspicious.

Mark Kleiman was suspicious about the glad tidings revealed in a University of Pennsylvania study of Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship, Texas, faith based program, which enjoyed the patronage of the then Governor Bush, and after the Penn study, was hailed at a Washington news conference by the now President Bush. There's just this one little problem:

LATEST RESEARCH FROM PROFESSOR HAROLD HILL

Here's a sure-fire method for producing a "successful" program: measure your successes, and ignore your failures. Works every time. What's astonishing is how easy it is to get some academic to write it up, how willing the newspapers are to report the resulting "study" as if it contained actual information, and the many politicians will then cite your "success" as scientifically documented fact.

It's rare for a study to get as nakedly thorough a debunking as this one gets from Kleiman. Read, enjoy, learn, and remember; I'm guessing there's going to be a lot more of this kind of propoganda.

Money Money Money

As Kos points out, Bush can serve hot dogs for $2000 per any day of the week and rake in loads of cash. The fact is that the Democrats need money, and they need it badly. The candidates need it for the primary, not just to fight each other but to lay the groundwork for the general election. The DNC needs it to coordinate an overall national effort. The state parties need it. Your local candidates need it. Interest groups need it.

Some of you don´t have much money - fine, then call and volunteer. If no one calls you back, call again. Put a bumper sticker on your car. Print out fliers and hand them out on street corners.

Some of you do have some money - if so, give small amounts often.

Some of you may have some extra liquor and gambling money - if so, give it away.

You can give to any of the candidates on the left. But, this money isn´t enough. Once the primary season is effectively over, these candidates will be broke and will need the DNC to step in and start running the ball towards the endzone during the summer months while the candidates replenish their funds.

So, you can donate to the DNC through this site here. As Kos says:

And for all of those who say "I'll support the nominee, no matter who he is", what better way to show you mean it than by donating to the ePatriots fund? After the primaries are done, our nominee will emerge broke and bloodied, only to face $200 million in GOP attack ads. The money you donate will be used by the DNC to counter those ads. This effort will be crucial to the ultimate success of our candidate.

Or, pick your favorite candidate/cause/organization/whatever. I´m not going to tell you how to spend your money. The point is, there are a small number of rich people/corporations and a large number of not-so-rich people. A large number of small donations adds up - but only if you make them.

Damn You Bill Gates!

Blair published the dodgy dossier as a Word document...which included the revisions log.

2020 Democrats

Building the party of the future. Check it out, go join them for a conference in DC.

Hello, Horse?

It´s July...

Matching Funds

One of the largely overlooked aspects of Dean´s recent fundraising success is the fact that the average donation size appears to be quite small - about $66 at one tally, though that isn´t the final number. He´ll get matching funds for up to $250 per person who donated, so lots of small donations are better from a candidate´s perspective than larger ones.

Just to be clear, I´m definitely not coming out and endorsing any candidate for the primary (not that I think my endorsement matters) right now and I doubt I ever will. What I´ll try to be doing is focusing on candidates who in any given week seem to be doing the right thing - not just to win the primary but to bring the party to victory in ´04. I´ll also try and criticize candidates when they are taking cheap unfair shots at each other. I like Dean because I think he´s injected a necessary jolt of adrenaline into the primary campaign which perhaps only a Beltway outsider can do.

Anyway, I may change my ´no endorsement´policy at some point, but right now it´s way too early and I´m not going to jump on anyone´s bandwagon.