Link Roundup 2.9.05 - From Zack

EJ Dionne discusses the bizzaro world use of the race card, over and over again, by the Republican Party...particularly in the more recent case of Alberto Gonzales (and Rice too). Notice how more and more, nearly the majority in fact, of Republican talking heads are minorities or women? All to portray themselves as inclusive while their policies target those very groups. I can guarantee you this...go to one of their little fundraisers or church picnics, or whatever the hell these people do when they aren't destroying the world, and you won't see that "rainbow coalition". Here's EJ:

"This was too much for House Democratic Caucus Chairman Bob Menendez. "Republicans and Senator Hatch in particular can't have it both ways," Menendez said at the time. "They can't blatantly call for the end of affirmative action by characterizing it as a quota system while, at the same time, demanding that we support all Hispanic nominees simply because they are Hispanic."

 
More on the exit poll versus final tally discrepancy issue and the recent study done by US Count Votes. This is a critical read to start to understand how the vote could have been manipulated (aside from all the known GOP tactics like suppression, machine shortages, rule changes, precinct moves, etc.), the ludicrousness of the official explanations to date, and what next steps are needed to get to the whole truth. Don't let ANYONE tell you it somehow would take some massive conspiracy of 1000's of people working together, in unison, to successfully tamper with the vote count...it doesn't at all. In fact, the system in place makes it extremely easy to do with few people and little or no contact or knowledge of what the other is doing. Here's a clip:
 
"Since just three companies tally upwards of 80% of the US vote, the potential risk of systematic nationwide manipulation of vote counting equipment by a small group of rogue insiders cannot be dismissed out-of-hand.  Banks know that they face a far more serious threat from embezzlers than from gunmen in the lobby; that’s why banks have
extraordinarily comprehensive and elaborate audit mechanisms that are verified on a regular basis by insiders and independent outsiders...Today's standards for security and audit control of voting equipment that are considered acceptable to many county, state and federal election officials would be deemed unacceptably risky in other domains ­ especially in the banking and financial services industries. " Check it out

 
To get an idea of what some of the solutions to our electoral problems are and what's being done, I'll turn it over to our own Rep. John Conyers on his new legislation to do just that. I'll be working on this in one way or another.

 
This is the third op-ed i've read of Senator Feingold's in the past 5 weeks..this tells me he's thinking of running for President on 08'. That's very good news. He discusses real and thoughtful ways to "win the hearts and minds" of the muslim world...god, what a contrast to Bush:
 
Robert Scheer on some of the mind bogglingly ironic unintended consequences of our invasion and occupation of Iraq. I've said it before and I'll say it again, you can't write stuff like this, the incompetence of these guys reads more like an "Abbot and Costello become President and Vice President" farce, with them screwing up everything but somehow continually getting away with it...even getting praise. Here's Scheer,
"What we are witnessing here is a startling application of the law of unintended consequences: A U.S. president who is intent on breaching the wall between church and state in his own country on issues such as birth control and the "sanctity of marriage" has now used the world's most powerful military to pave the way for a new Muslim theocracy in the heart of the Arab world. Furthermore, Bush has unwittingly strengthened the hand of Iran, a nation allegedly developing weapons of mass destruction and supporting global terrorism."
 
 
Had to do it, Molly Ivins expands on her devastating critique of the Bush Social Security Plan..there's just so many giant holes in it I feel obligated to get out information on all of them, so we all can not only know the whole truth, but so we all can communicate to others more effectively. Because if Bush wins this one (which I don't think he will), it could be almost as destructive to our future as his wars. Two incredibly easier and fairer ways to fix the problem is simply 1. role back 1/3 of Bush's tax cuts to the super wealthy
or raise the social security tax cap from $90,000 to $200,000 (so they simply pay the same rate you do). Here's Molly: 
 
"If you use the same unlikely doom-and-gloom scenario Bush uses to predict the
"bankruptcy" of Social Security to predict the future of his formerly-private-accounts plan, the accounts will be an abysmal failure because the economy will be so bad, they won't make any money. But lo, as Bush presents it, the economic future is not going to be grim at all, but au contraire, so rosy everyone will have more money and there is such a thing as a free lunch. Of course, if the economy actually is that rosy, then Social Security would never run into trouble in the first place, all will be magically solved by glorious economic growth, and we don't have to do a thing."
 
And yes, another great analysis of SS by Paul Krugman...this on the real reason behind the neo-con plan: starve government so it can't pay for these programs anymore...then end them. This is what they've (meaning conservative Republicans)always secretly wanted to do anyway but just couldn't come out and say it because it wouldn't fly with the public: end the New Deal and the social safety net. One piece first:
 
"Why expose workers to that much risk? Ideology. "Social Security is the soft underbelly of the welfare state," declares Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth and the Cato Institute (right wing think tanks). "If you can jab your spear through that, you can undermine the whole welfare state." By the welfare state, Mr. Moore means Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - social insurance programs whose purpose, above all, is to protect Americans against the extreme economic insecurity that prevailed before the New Deal. The hard right has never forgiven F.D.R. (and later L.B.J.) for his efforts to reduce that insecurity, and now that the right is running Washington, it's trying to turn the clock back to 1932. Medicaid is also in the cross hairs. And if Mr. Bush can take down Social Security, Medicare will be next." and this sobering thought, "Any deficit reduction will come from spending cuts. Many of those cuts won't make it through Congress, but Mr. Bush may well succeed in imposing cuts in child care assistance and food stamps for low-income workers. He may also succeed in severely squeezing Medicaid - the only one of the three great social insurance programs specifically intended for the poor and near-poor, and therefore the most politically vulnerable."
 
And, let's all give a round of thanks to the Republican party for creating and now sending out an in depth, deceitful, and vicious hit piece on Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid the other day at the same time Bush was talking about reaching out across the aisle. Why thank them? Because Harry Reid is pissed, and when he's pissed, is when he's good (granted, he's totally lacking in charisma). He came out blistering yesterday, not only calling Bush's budget the worst and most dishonest budget in history but also taking the "hit piece" they did on him to the Senate floor and going ballistic. Something tells me this is part of a larger pattern, begun by Boxer, continued by Kennedy, seen in the rise of Dean to the DNC Chair, the emergence of the Progressive Democrats of America, and more, all point to a party that is getting its legs, finding its voice,
and becoming...drum roll please...a real opposition party (lots of work to go of course)!
 
From AP:
The Republican committee plans to send a 13-page document to more than a million people — including in Reid's home state of Nevada — analyzing and criticizing his votes and stances before he officially took over as Senate Democratic leader in January (also questions his ethics and past settled problems). Bush repeatedly has said he wants work with Democrats, most recently during his State of the Union speech last week, Reid noted in a speech on the Senate floor. "Why didn't he stand and tell the American people last Wednesday that one of the first items of business we were going to do in Washington is send out a hit piece on the Democratic leader?" Reid said.
 
More disturbing info coming out on global warming's accelerating pace...and the forces that continue to try and cast doubt over it, "Between industry-funded groups like the Greening Earth Society and the Science and Environmental Policy Project, and conservative mouthpieces like Limbaugh, there is no shortage of press releases and sound bites decrying each new observance of global warming's effects. And the emphasis on balance in the mainstream media requires that all stories must have two sides, even if one side is made of 928 peer-reviewed science articles and the other is made up of a few industry front groups. Combine that with support from the Bush administration and it's easy to see how we've gotten where we are today, with cries for "more research" and "wait ten more years!" overwhelming the quiet extinction of countless species and the destruction of ecosystems."
 
Finally, more on the Bush Budget and the "tax cut" myth for the middle class. Or more apt...the tax hike...and more cuts... 

Bush's Middle Class Tax Hike

A closer look at the administration's 2006 budget shows an economic agenda promoting the wrong choices and wrong priorities. Rolling back massive tax cuts for millionaires is off the table, but the Bush administration has no qualms about raising taxes on average Americans. The budget President Bush submitted to Congress yesterday imposes $5.3 billion in new, regressive taxes. (They are conveniently listed in table 18-3 on page 305 of the Analytic Perspectives supplement to the budget.) The administration's budget contains new taxes that will increase the price of a six pack of beer, an airline ticket and prescription drugs for veterans. Meanwhile, the budget cuts funding for education, public health and environmental protection and includes $1.4 trillion in new tax cuts for the wealthy. Welcome to Bushonomics.

THE SHELL GAME: No matter which way you slice it, the administration's budget is egregiously fiscally irresponsible ­ by its own estimates, it will result in a $390 billion deficit in 2006. Worse, that figure is only arrived at through trickery. The budget includes over a billion dollars in revenue from drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), even though Congress hasn't authorized such drilling and has rejected President Bush's proposal to open ANWR to oil exploration for the last four years. Budget Director Josh Bolten defended the move, claiming, "the budget is the right place to present the entirety of the president's policies, so all of his proposals are reflected in there." Really? The Bush budget excludes all funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and the administration's $2 trillion Social Security package.

KICKING THE NEEDIEST WHILE THEY'RE DOWN: During the Bush administration, more and more Americans are struggling. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities sums it up: "The number of poor went up for the third straight year in 2003, the share of total income that goes to the bottom two-fifths of households has fallen to one of its lowest levels since the end of World War II, and the number of people lacking health insurance rose to 45 million in 2003, the highest level on record." Yet the Bush administration is cutting programs that help people get back on their feet. For example, the administration's budget proposes "a five-year freeze on child care funding that...will result in cutting the number of low-income children receiving child care assistance by 300,000 in 2009." The Bush budget also cuts $45 billion from Medicaid, the program that provides basic health coverage to the poor.

THE MEDICARE MESS: The industry-backed prescription drug bill President Bush jammed through Congress is a bad law that keeps getting worse. While the bill was pending before Congress, the administration promised the bill would cost $400 billion over 10 years and threatened to fire the Medicare actuary who knew that figure was too low. Later, the administration revised its estimated price tag to $534 billion over 10 years, largely due to excessive payments to private insurers and HMOs. Now, in the most recent budget, the Bush administration estimates the bill will cost $395 billion over five years. In the meantime, drug companies have already jacked up their prices enough to offset any discount to seniors.

FUNDING FOR ABSTINENCE-ONLY PROGRAMS INCREASED: Apparently, President Bush isn't concerned that abstinence-only programs are misleading the nation's children about sex. A study last year found that some of the most popular programs pushed lies, such as claiming that mutual masturbation can cause pregnancy and condoms fail to prevent the transmission of HIV 31 percent of the time. President Bush's budget increases funding for abstinence-only education by $39 million, to a total of $209 million.

FUNDING FOR CLEAN WATER SLASHED: Good news for Evian, bad news for everyone else. President Bush proposes reducing federal funds states use to improve water quality by $369 million. The federal contribution to the program is now just $730 million, down from $1.98 billion four years ago.