I made a mistake today! By accident, I watched Bush talk after his being notified that the Immigration bill did not pass the Senate. I never watch him because he just makes me so angry.
What I noticed is that he blamed the Senate and not the Republicans for this defeat. Now, if it were the Democrats who handed him the defeat, he would have blamed them. In fact, he would have excoriated them. However, he could not do this to the member's of his own party.
Another thing, he went through a litany of programs that he wants to accomplish during the final years of his lame-duck, or fractured, administration. One of these is health care. He stated that we should have a new health care system without government involvement. Can you believe this? As much as private industry has screwed-up everything they have touched, the nerve of him to suggest this. I guess "Sicko" is on his mind. We only have to look as far as Walter Reed to see what private industry will not accomplish.
One other observation: This man looks totally depressed and defeated! He looked as if he saw the last door closing on his administration. If he can't accomplish this with the dems help, what can he accomplish? The only thing he has left is to stand pat against the subpoenas.
Now the fun starts!

This is Scott Ritter discussing his new book, Waging Peace. This is just as timely as his warning us of lies President Bush was telling to get us into this disasterous war

Evening News for Friday, June 8, 2007

U.S. NATIONAL NEWS

Iraq's al-Sadr Decries US Occupation

McClatchy Newspaper reported today that:

In a rare appearance on state-operated Iraqi television, radical anti-American Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Thursday called the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki "neglectful" and sectarian and blamed Iraq's problems on the U.S. presence in the country.

al-Sadr's his willingness to sit for an interview that lasted nearly an hour marked a new stage in his efforts to recast himself as a nationalist figure capable of uniting Sunni and Shiite partisans, two weeks after he resurfaced from a months-long absence.

In the interview, al-Sadr said that "the layers of government and parties are turning their backs on the people." He added that the government is only half-hearted in its efforts to serve the people.

He ticked off a laundry list of Iraq's problems - sectarianism, lack of services, lack of security, the Mahdi Army's reputation as a brutal killer of Sunnis. But the culprit was always the same - "the occupation."

He said he would never negotiate with American officials, despite assertions last week by Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the No. 2 U.S. military commander in Iraq, that the U.S. was interested in opening such talks.

"I refuse any sit-down with the occupation, whether in Iraq or outside," he said.

Many people in Iraq believe al-Sadr is Iraq's most popular political figure, thanks largely to the millions of impoverished Shiites who were devoted to his father, a popular cleric who was assassinated during Saddam Hussein's rule. Al-Sadr has cemented that loyalty with his Mahdi Army, which many Shiites credit with protecting them from Sunni insurgents.

Did Democrats Write a Republican-like Global Warming/Energy Bill

The problem with having only two parties is that it becomes too easy for moneyed interests to hijack both parties. House Democrats have tried to fashion a bill, but it looks more like a Republican bill than a Democratic bill. According to The Hill that has setoff a fight within the Democratic ranks:

Divisions among Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee may doom an early effort to combat global warming and develop homegrown alternative fuels.

A dozen committee Democrats have sent a letter to panel Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) and Energy and Air Quality subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher (D-Va.) saying a bill the two members drafted contained several “harmful policies.”

Specifically, the attacked the bill for pushing development of coal as a transportation fuel, despite concerns that doing so would raise greenhouse gas emissions, and for not increasing fuel mileage standards for cars and trucks aggressively enough.

Members also said they opposed language that would preempt states in forcing reductions in tailpipe emissions and overturn a Supreme Court ruling that found the Environmental Protection Agency had the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

“We have serious concerns about the direction in which the committee is currently heading and must strongly oppose the draft legislation that has been circulated,” the lawmakers wrote.

“We urge you to rethink your approach and produce a bill that will help address the serious threat of global warming and reduce the nation’s dependence on oil.”

Gay-Bashing Grey's Star Given the Boot

In a victory for common decency, MSNBC reported:

Isaiah Washington has lost his job on the hit ABC medical drama “Grey’s Anatomy,” five months after creating a furor with his use of an anti-gay slur.

Washington’s contract option was not renewed for next season, series producer ABC Television Studios said Thursday.

He drew fire after using the anti-gay epithet backstage at the Golden Globe Awards in January while denying he’d used it previously on the set against cast mate T.R. Knight.

Gay rights groups and cast member Katherine Heigl, who publicly denounced Washington, were among his most vocal critics.

WORLD REPORT

Fighting Explodes Again in Lebanese Refugee Camp

Lebanese troops pounded al Qaeda-inspired militants dug in at a Palestinian refugee camp in north Lebanon on Friday after the group rejected demands to surrender.

Artillery and tanks blasted several areas of the squalid Nahr al-Bared camp, where Fatah al-Islam fighters have shown stiff resistance in three weeks of often ferocious battles.

Camp resident Wissam Badran told Reuters he had helped pull a man, woman and two children from under the rubble after a shell hit a house sheltering 10 civilians. He initially thought they were dead.

"They lost consciousness. We thought they were dead, but thank God, they are alive," Badran said by telephone from inside Nahr al-Bared. Six others were lightly wounded, he said.

The heavy thud of machinegun fire echoed across the area as fires raged inside and clouds of smoke billowed over the camp, abandoned by most of its 40,000 residents. Witnesses said at least 30 civilians were evacuated by relief workers.

The fighting began on May 20 when the militants attacked army units deployed around Nahr al-Bared after one of their hideouts in a nearby city was stormed. At least 115 people, including 47 soldiers and 38 militants, have been killed.

EU Seeks to Standardize Rules for Asylum Seekers

Deutsche Welle is reporting that there is an effort underfoot in Europe to try and standardize asylum rules across the EU (European Union) and to provide more rights to long-term asylum guests:

Approximately 12 percent of asylum seekers apply to more than one country, looking for the one most likely to accept them or give them the best benefits, EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini said Wednesday. This practice of "asylum shopping" must stop, Frattini said.

The European Commission wants stronger cooperation between EU countries to standardize entry procedures and give legitimate asylum seekers more rights.

Frattini suggested looking for ways to better share the burden of refugees between countries. The approximately 182,000 people who seek asylum in the EU each year -- half as many as in 2002 -- are unevenly distributed between countries because entry points are often concentrated in southern Europe while northern European countries often have more liberal asylum policies.

Only a few countries, such as Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands will accept asylum-seekers from other EU countries. That must change so that there are uniform criteria, he said.

"We need a fair and effective system to deal with these people," Frattini said.

But the proposal goes beyond regularizing entry into the EU.

Frattini wants to give recognized asylum seekers who have lived in the EU for at least five years more rights. They should be able to travel within the EU and should be able to have a work permit as long as they fulfil certain conditions, such as having a regular income and health insurance.

It's unfair that in 2003 the EU granted such rights only to legal immigrants and not to integrated refugees, Frattini said.

Pirates Seize Danish Ship

The Copenhagen Post reported pirates, real ones - not those of Hollywood creation - have hijacked a ship near Somalia:

The ship and five-person crew of freighter Danica White are being held by pirates after being hijacked Saturday in the Arabian Sea off the coast of Somalia, reported the Operative Command of the Royal Danish Navy (SOK).

The ship is owned by H. Folmer & Co in Copenhagen and was carrying 10 tonnes of building materials.

SOK was notified Saturday by the shipper that the vessel had been on its way from Dubai to Mombassa, Kenya and had been in contact with a French warship when captured. The French ship could not follow the freighter into Somali waters, and no further contact has been possible with the ship or its crew since Saturday.

The ship was reportedly localised Monday afternoon in Somalia by private investigation firm Protocol, according to Politiken newspaper, which reported that it is anchored in the port town of Hobyo, 700 kilometres up the coast from Mogadishu.

Lars Thuesen, the Foreign Ministry’s chief of consular affairs, told public broadcaster DR the ministry is doing everything in its power to secure the safety of the crew.

‘We’ve set up a task force with all the relevant Danish authorities, which have been summoned many times during the weekend. In addition we have close contact with the ship’s owners and the crewmen’s families.’

Authorities are now waiting to hear from the hijackers and what their demands are for release of the ship and crew.

Watching the Watchers: America and Human Rights

It Has Come to This

How many Americans, even, or, perhaps, especially the most ardent supporters of Mister Bush and Vice-President Cheney's comprehensive torture program could have ever dreamed that the Chinese and American governments would deservedly share the same lowly reputation on the issue of human rights? The answer, of course, is nobody would have ever dreamed such a circumstance could ever be possible. Yet, it is a reality.

One wonders though, can the Americans who support the administration's torture policy the most see that it is no better than torture being committed by the Chinese government? Somehow, it seems they can't make the connection.

Nicholas D. Kristof's latest column touches on America's recent freefall into the ranks of the world's worst human rights abusers and its ramifications:

I’d meant to focus this column on a Chinese woman whose battle for justice has led the police to arrest her more than 30 times, lock her in an insane asylum, humiliate her sexually, shock her with cattle prods, beat her until she is crippled and, worst of all, take away her young daughter.

The case of Li Guirong, a graying 50-year-old who now hobbles on crutches, reflects China at its worst — government by thuggery. But each time I start this column, I feel that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have pulled the rug out from under me. Do I really have the right to complain about torture or extra-legal detentions in China when we Americans do the same in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba?

More importantly, do Americans, especially those most supportive of the Bush administration's torture policies, understand that on the issue of human rights the United States no longer possesses the moral authority with which to address the abuses committed by others?

Kristof helps make the connection between America's newfound affair with torture and its moral impact:

Our extrajudicial detentions and mistreatment of prisoners are wrong in and of themselves. But they also undercut our own ability to speak against oppression and torture around the world.

The question now, of course, is whether or not anybody is paying attention and if so, do they care?

Here We Go Again

Paul Krugman takes on the media's absurd coverage of American politics. Regarding the latest Republican debate he writes:

Mitt Romney completely misrepresented how we ended up in Iraq. Later, Mike Huckabee mistakenly claimed that it was Ronald Reagan’s birthday.

Guess which remark The Washington Post identified as the “gaffe of the night”?

Folks, this is serious. If early campaign reporting is any guide, the bad media habits that helped install the worst president ever in the White House haven’t changed a bit.

Ouch! Some in the media might interpret that analysis as being harsh, but Krugman has a point. The media has turned everything, even our democracy, into a Paris Hilton tabloid moment. To prove his point Krugman highlights an earlier media malfunction:

You may not remember the presidential debate of Oct. 3, 2000, or how it was covered, but you should. It was one of the worst moments in an election marked by news media failure as serious, in its way, as the later failure to question Bush administration claims about Iraq.

Throughout that debate, George W. Bush made blatantly misleading statements, including some outright lies — for example, when he declared of his tax cut that “the vast majority of the help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.” That should have told us, right then and there, that he was not a man to be trusted.

But few news reports pointed out the lie. Instead, many news analysts chose to critique the candidates’ acting skills. Al Gore was declared the loser because he sighed and rolled his eyes — failing to conceal his justified disgust at Mr. Bush’s dishonesty. And that’s how Mr. Bush got within chad-and-butterfly range of the presidency.

Krugman then returns to the recent Republican debate and Mitt Romney's misleading Iraq comments:

Now fast forward to last Tuesday. Asked whether we should have invaded Iraq, Mr. Romney said that war could only have been avoided if Saddam “had opened up his country to I.A.E.A. inspectors, and they’d come in and they’d found that there were no weapons of mass destruction.” He dismissed this as an “unreasonable hypothetical.”

Except that Saddam did, in fact, allow inspectors in. Remember Hans Blix? When those inspectors failed to find nonexistent W.M.D., Mr. Bush ordered them out so that he could invade. Mr. Romney’s remark should have been the central story in news reports about Tuesday’s debate. But it wasn’t.

It is this all-too-frequent nonsensical media reporting that allowed the American people to be led into Iraq in the first place and Krugman is onto something. He has figured out that the public is slowly coming to grips with how the game is played - - the media, however, remains clueless.

Evening News for Thursday, June 7, 2007

US NATIONAL REPORT

Do Tell - Don't Ask, Don't Tell

During the Democratic debate in New Hampshire, the candidates all seemed willing to embrace the idea of allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve openly in the military. Republicans, however, during their New Hampshire debate and when not preoccupied advocating nuking Iran, all seemed unwilling to do away with the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Even Mitt Romney, becoming famous for his ability to stand on both sides of every issue, a onetime vocal critic of "don't ask, don't tell"; said he would now leave the policy unchanged.

The New York Times' Robin Toner noted:

Among the Democrats, the willingness to change course tracks a substantial change in public attitudes on several gay rights questions over the past decade. According to the Pew Research Center, 52 percent of Americans favored allowing gays to serve openly in the military in 1994, while 45 percent opposed it. By 2006, that majority had grown to 60 percent, while 32 percent opposed the idea.

In a trend that does not bode well for the often anti-gay-obsessed GOP's future prospects, 72 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 support allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. Mitt Romney's 2016 candidacy will return to his original position of being critical of "don't ask, don't tell."

Republican Corruption on a Road Leading to a Bridge to Nowhere

Another Republican finds himself having to answer uncomfortable ethical questions. A truly twisted affair about a road too often traveled and that leads to nowhere:

It is no secret that campaign contributions sometimes lead to lucrative official favors. Rarely, though, are the tradeoffs quite as obvious as in the twisted case of Coconut Road.

Why a "twisted case"? That is because the deal involved millions of dollars allocated to a stretch of road in Florida that would greatly benefit a land developing donor for a Congressman - - only the Congressman, Republican Don Young, represents a district in the State of Alaska.

Some might say that Young's $10 million earmark for his land developing contributor in Florida is nothing - - a drop in the bucket, really. He is after all, the same Alaskan Republican who had sought a $200 million bridge to nowhere. Well, it wasn't exactly to nowhere: Gravina Island, Alaska, population 80.

The turmoil occurs at an awkward time for Mr. Young. A corruption scandal involving an Alaskan oil company has rattled the Republican Party in Alaska, and Mr. Young is among the biggest recipients of the company’s campaign donations.

One of his former top aides, Mark Zachares, has pleaded guilty to separate bribery charges involving the lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

And, now, Alaska's U.S. Senator is being probed by the FBI for his role in the bribery scandal. All the corruption and ethical-challenged behavior has the residents of Alaska contemplating a move to a real Democracy - - in Canada.

I'll Take it Both Ways Please

In what appears to be something like an epidemic among Republicans, Mitt Romney the apparent carrier, Republican congressional candidate Jim Ogonowski said the United States was wrong to invade Iraq:
.

..[W]e lacked conclusive and irrefutable evidence that someone inside Iraq was actively supporting terror or planning to use weapons of mass destruction against the United States. ...I think it was wrong to invade Iraq."

The Massachusetts candidate then channeled his states former Governor, Mitt Romney, and quickly covered the other side of the Iraq War fence:

But in his first comments about Iraq, Ogonowski was adamant that American troops should not withdraw...

Ogonowski's vow to remain in Iraq until - - well, ... anyway, it is in stark contrast to Mister Bush's newly hired War Czar's position on the issue:

Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, a skeptic of the troop increase in Iraq and President George W. Bush's choice to oversee the war, said withdrawing troops may pressure the Iraqi government to make needed changes.

Under questioning from Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, Lute said the Michigan Democrat may be correct in his long-held assertion that the Iraqi government will only work to end sectarian strife if it has to.

A withdrawal "ought to be considered,'' Lute, 54, said.

No word yet, but it might be safe to bet Lute is going to get the George W. Bush boot.


WORLD REPORT

I Coulda Had a G8

The G-8's leaders supposedly settled on a plan to cut carbon emissions, but critics were quick to point out that there wasn't a lot of "there, there." Turns out the plan doesn't include any binding commitments:

The language of the declaration, however, falls short of an iron-clad agreement and contains no hard targets. It says the world's biggest emitters of greenhouse gases should "consider seriously" following the European Union, Canada and Japan in seeking to cut emissions.

The critics will probably be accused of being pessimists. After all, the plan does say the biggest polluters should "consider seriously" doing the right thing.

Frayed Nerves

Residents in the tsunami devastated Aceh community in Indonesia, cut the power to a tsunami early warning system after it malfunctioned and went off without cause:

Angry residents in Indonesia's Aceh have disabled a tsunami warning system after a false alarm spread panic in a province still traumatised by the deadly 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, an official said on Thursday.

Residents cut power to a siren on a tsunami warning tower in the Lhoknga area near the provincial capital Banda Aceh by smashing an electricity box, Syahnan Sobri, the head of the meteorology and geophysics agency in Aceh said.

A technical glitch prompted the siren to ring for about 30 minutes in Aceh Besar district on Monday, sending residents rushing out of their homes in panic.

Undoubtedly and rightfully a false alarm would be unnerving, but on the bright side the people know the siren works - - just a little too well.

Circle of Violence Continues

The war madness continues in the troubled Palestinian community. Fatah and Hamas renewed their fighting, which is certain to push the Palestinian people ever nearer an all out civil war:

Rival Hamas and Fatah forces clashed in the Gaza Strip on Thursday, killing at least one person and injuring 12 others, in the worst flare-up of factional fighting in almost three weeks.

The fighting spread across the southern Gaza town of Rafah as Hamas and Fatah gunmen set up checkpoints and took up positions on rooftops, two days after President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah said Palestinians were standing on the brink of civil war.

Let's hope the madness ends someday.

Watching the Watchers: Mess in Potamia

The Shifting Sands of America's Mess-in-Potamia

Jay Bookman of the "Atlanta Journal-Constitution" decided to revisit the Bush administration's ever-changing response to the question, "Is the US occupation of Iraq going to be permanent?":

Back in September 2002, with an invasion of Iraq looming, I asked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld whether the United States intended to build permanent bases in that country after the war. He brushed the question aside, saying the United States never coveted the territory of other nations.

Well, better revise that...

"We will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more," President Bush said in February 2003.

Just to make sure that nobody would confuse the administration's lack of a plan for leaving Iraq as a sign that the United States was never going to leave, Rumsfeld crossed the t's and dotted the i's:

"Foreign troops in a country are unnatural," Rumsfeld acknowledged that November, referring to U.S. troops in Iraq. "The goal is to keep them there only as long as they're needed and not one day longer."

Umm-ah-hmmm, well, here is the latest Bush administration plan for Iraq:

White House spokesman Tony Snow said last week that Bush seeks a long-term military presence in Iraq similar to what we have had in South Korea, where U.S. forces have been stationed for 60 years.

And, why does Jay Bookman believe Mister Bush and his people were so reluctant to be honest about their intentions for Iraq from the beginning? Pay attention, he is a bit vague (please, understand that is intended to be sarcastic):

Well, the Bush administration understands that Americans don't like to think of themselves as a militaristic people. The idea conflicts too directly with the American public's rather naive view of how their country operates in the world. If we are to support major expansions of our military footprint, we have to be frightened into believing that our security is at stake.

Thus, while denying any interest in permanent bases, the administration sold the invasion of Iraq as necessary to protect ourselves from weapons of mass destruction that did not exist, delivered to our shores by unmanned aerial vehicles that also did not exist, or by terrorists with whom Iraq had no relationship.

Read enough of Jay Bookman's work and a person might begin to entertain the idea that he is getting paid by someone to give his opinion. If so, his employer is getting their money worth and then some.

Did They Really Say That

The "Washington Post's" William M. Arkin, writing in his online column, "Early Warning," glommed onto a point from the Republican debate that most journalists and media outlets must have decided to ignore - - either that or insanity has become so common place in American politics that it no longer warrants special consideration. Arkin noted:

At the Republican debate [Tuesday night], almost all the candidates said that they would not rule out a nuclear attack on Iran as a means to prevent it from getting its own nuclear weapons

There was a time in this country that even the hint of a candidate seriously advocating the unprovoked unleashing of nuclear warheads, would have resulted in their immediate disqualification from holding office. After nearly seven years of Bush administration policies, however, instigating nuclear war seems a bit ho-hum and not worthy of media discussion.

Arkin's next passage is being included mostly due to the fact that he actually uses the term "knuckleheads" and let's be honest, that word isn't used nearly often enough when discussing the players involved in contemporary American politics:

Only one of these knuckleheads would say that attacking Iran -- indeed even threatening to nuke Iran -- is not the right strategy.

The lone dissenter was, of course, Ron Paul - - the only Republican on a crusade to save America that doesn't involve the constant invocation of Jesus.

Aside from Arkin's commendable use of the term "knuckleheads," he explained in a very succinct way why the Republican candidate's nuclear bellicosity is morally and practically unacceptable:

I am not arguing that Iran's effort to develop nuclear weapons is justified. It isn't. I am saying, however, that the U.S. should not use its nuclear weapons to threaten Iran. And not just from a moral standpoint, but from a practical one: When we brandish our own nuclear arsenal, we only play into the hands of supporters of Tehran's plans to develop its own.

That isn't nuclear rocket science, it's just plain old common sense - - a commodity as rare in Republican politics as the term "knuckleheads" is in today's political discussion.

Poor, Poor Scooter...

Assume for a moment that an American working within the Executive Branch of government willfully exposed the identity of an undercover intelligence agent who was working on a very important and dangerous issue - - say an issue, like, maybe, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in particular and the Iranian WMD program specifically. Further, for the sake of discussion, assume that very same government official lied to a federal prosecutor about their role in the crime of exposing the agent's identity. Assuming all that, how would the average American react to the knowledge that such an official were held to account in a court of law?

Well, in the editor for the Weekly Standard, William Kristol's world, the average American would feel sorry for the government official who illegally exposed an intelligence agent's identity and then tried to cover it up by lying about their role in exposing the agent's identity:

I feel terrible. ... But we can't do anything about the injustice that has been done. Nor can we do anything to avert a further injustice looming on the horizon--Judge Reggie Walton seems inclined not to let Libby remain free pending appeal.

Poor, poor Scooter Libby! Such injustice and all the man did was to imperil the nation's national security - - surely, he is deserving of our collective sympathy.

Evening News for Wednesday, June 6, 2007

US NATIONAL REPORT

That Stinks for Bush - Pew Poll Finds President at Record Low

The latest Pew Poll finds substantially fewer Democrats (was 52 percent, now 44 percent) willing to say there is a good chance that they'll support Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy. Obama remains unchanged at 40 percent saying they'll likely support him and Al Gore's prospects have improved markedly. In Pew's April poll only 27 percent said there was a good chance that they would support Gore. He now sits at 34 percent.

It appears Mister Bush is on a course to find out whether or not it is possible for an entire nation to abandon him:

The survey finds that President Bush's job approval rating has declined significantly since April. Bush's approval rating stands at 29% - the lowest of his presidency - down from 35% two months ago. Bush has lost substantial support from his Republican base. Only about two-thirds of Republicans (65%) approve of Bush's job performance, which also is the lowest mark of his presidency.

At the rate Mister Bush's approval is falling, it won't be too long before Barney the dog goes Giuliani family on him and starts yapping to the press about what a rotten master the president has been.

Whew! That Was Close...Dangerous Drug Nearly Hurt Pharmaceutical Company's Finances

A medical expert testified before a congressional committee that the British drug company Glaxo, maker of "Avandia," threatened him with legal action when he first raised questions about the drugs safety.

The expert, Dr. Buse, was approached by the company after he highlighted a trend between the drugs usage among diabetes patients and heart problems:

Dr. John Buse was contacted by Glaxo in 1999 after drawing attention to a trend in heart problems among patients using Avandia.... Buse says Glaxo representatives mentioned that some in the company wanted to hold him accountable for hurting sales of the drug.

Buse, soon to become president of the American Diabetes Association, said he eventually signed a clarifying statement with the company that was used to ease concerns from investors.

No mention of any attempts to ease concerns among victims of the drugs side-effects.

Cheney's Legacy

Many Americans know Dick Cheney was head of Halliburton prior to appointing himself as Mister Bush's Vice-President (Cheney was charged with finding a suitable running mate for then 2000 presidential candidate, George W. Bush). Fewer Americans are aware of the millions upon millions of dollars that Mister Cheney has earned through profits garnered by Halliburton's Iraq War-related government contracts, and even less people realize the scope of the Bush administration's use of contractors in Iraq:

Historically, there is nothing new about the military's use of private contractors, but the Iraq war has seen outsourcing on an unprecedented scale. The policy change came after the Cold War when the Pentagon was downsizing under then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. Cheney first hired Halliburton as a consultant and later became the company's president. Halliburton subsidiary KBR is now one of the largest recipients of government contracts.

Actually, Mister Cheney's old subsidiary has collected $12 billion in government contracts. It seems Dick Cheney is very supportive of the concept of government of, for, and by Cheney-family profits.


WORLD REPORT

Iraq's Utility Futility Makes Seeing Democracy's Promise Impossible

Probably the biggest obstacle to Iraq's stabilization has been the inability of either the U.S. occupying force or Iraq's new government to improve the quality of the Iraqi peoples' day-to-day lives. If people can't count on the leaders to keep their lights working, they certainly can't trust the authorities to safeguard them from nefarious actors. That in turn causes fear to rule their existence, which makes survival more important than anything including the possible benefits of democracy.

For Baghdad's residents, their futility over unreliable utilities has reached the breaking point:

Corruption, neglect and insurgent attacks have left Iraq's public services in tatters, residents and officials say. Limited electricity and drinking water are the main problems, causing disease and frustration.

"We have one or two hours a day of electricity at best. Sometimes we have no electricity for two or three days. And it has become normal for us to wake up in the morning and find no water in the taps," Alwan, a father of three and government employee living in Baghdad, said.

Baghdad residents say they have never experienced such poor levels of municipal services.

Dick Cheney probably doesn't consider Baghdad's utilities to be in the last throes - - Baghdad's residents would probably disagree.

The World's Convenient Love Affair with Al

While Europeans remain decidedly cool and suspicious toward George W. Bush, their seeming love affair with former Vice-President Al Gore continues to grow:

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore was awarded Spain's prestigious Principe de Asturias prize on Wednesday for his role in raising awareness of climate change.

The award for International Cooperation comes alongside a nomination for a Nobel prize for his environmental work and the success of his global warming documentary "An Inconvenient Truth", which won two Oscars.

"With his leadership he has contributed to raising awareness in governments and societies across the world to defend this noble...cause," Leopoldo Calvo Sotelo, a former Spanish premier who led the jury, said.

Gore refused to either confirm or deny rumors that he might be seeking office in Spain.

Yer Makin' it Up

Every year Earth Day is celebrated in the United States. It has become part of the American experience. One day a year the globe's most gluttonous society pauses to consider the environment - - and, too, America's corporations spend the day defending their all-too-frequent disregard for the planet. Then, the day ends and most people return to their all-too-busy lives and grow too weary to worry about their personal carbon output.

And, for most Americans, that is the end of that particular year's enviro-worry. For the rest of the world, however; that isn't true. While America has long forgotten about the earth or Earth Day, the world is gearing up for "World Environment Day."

For 20-year-old Sweena Ganguly of India, and people from many other countries, "World Environment Day" is important - - and not merely as a one-day, one-off event:

"People keep talking about what one should do about the environment but what I ask them back is what are they doing about it?' said the 20-year-old. 'As for myself, I organize events at our local club where the kids from my locality either plant trees or put up plays on issues like saving water and trees.

"Besides these, I have my voluntary work at Green Peace, an international NGO which works on environment related issues,' Ganguly said, as she distributed pamphlets that urge people to use CFL bulbs instead of the normal bulbs to save energy."

Geez and the U.S. is still trying to get grownups to turn off the light before leaving a room!

Watching the Watchers: Kristol's Hysteria

Makin' it Up as He Goes

In his June 4, 2006 article William Kristol, Editor of the Weekly Standard, mentioned Iran and Syria 17 times and al Qaeda on four occasions - - he was writing about Iraq. Read a little of Kristol's work and two things immediately standout:

1. He really wants George W. Bush to bomb Iran and Syria
2. A person gets the feeling William Kristol helped Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby and Doug Feith write the Iraq-WMD pre-war intelligence

In his articles Kristol regularly makes baseless and factless assumptions and allegations as easily as Mister Cheney sneers. This piece was no different:

The Iranian regime has resolved to help Iraqi militants kill as many Americans as possible.

Upon what evidence does William Kristol base the above charges? None! No intelligence agency, foreign or domestic, has ever made such a claim. It is simply Kristol's hysteria overriding his intellect - - such as it is.

From the White House to the Big House, Scooter Scootin' Off to Prison

The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin covered the Scooter Libby sentencing in his "White House Watch" column. Froomkin noted, "Scooter Libby today expressed no remorse, and Judge Reggie B. Walton showed no mercy."

Froomkin's column wasn't especially engrossing, really - - all the days reporting addressed the Libby team of attorney's attempts at convincing the judge to be lenient and allow their client to remain free upon appeal. Froomkin's take was somewhat unique in that he highlighted a quote from Federal Prosecutor Fitzgerald, that got to the heart of the entire Libby trial:

"'We need just to make the statement the truth matters ever so much,' Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald told Walton this morning. Fitzgerald also said, 'one's station in life does not matter,' as he argued that Libby does not deserve special consideration because of the public service he has rendered or the high government positions he attained."

It seems Mister Libby, if not the entire Bush administration, never figured that out. Libby and the White House too often conduct themselves as though the rules and laws don't apply to them - - because their station in life, by their reckoning, puts them above such trivialities.

Tell Me Sweet Little Lies

Writing in the National Review Online, Jonah Goldberg tried his level best to pen an "objective" piece on Fred Thompson. Not surprisingly, as Thompson is (probably has been from the start) Karl Rove and the Republican National Committee's "guy," Goldberg wasn't quite able to mask his near euphoric admiration for Tennessee Fred's candidacy.

Jonah's most telling line, however, was the last:

Thompson’s approval ratings may never be higher than on the day before he announces. We don’t know the man very well, but we know the character. And as long as he stays in character, it’s unlikely his ratings will drop anytime soon.

Telling how? In his last paragraph Goldberg inadvertently exposed the contemporary Republican Party's biggest problem - - they aren't interested in competence or ability or substance; only whether or not the Party's marketing gurus can make their "guy" appear presidential. Because if they can do that and Thompson is convincing in his role as president, Republican rank-and-file will vote for and support him regardless of how badly he mismanages the nation.

Indeed, Goldberg is almost praying that Thompson can trick him into believing the former Senator is actually presidential material.


Whistling Past the Graveyard

It seems more likely than not, that the New York Times' Thomas L. Friedman has the goods on some very important and influential people. There just isn't any other way to explain why the local community shopper, let alone the New York Times and book publishers would pay him real money for his perspective.

Mister Friedman has the 411 on someone and it probably includes the sort of pictures that Larry Flynt of Hustler fame would pay a million dollars to have in his possession.

Friedman's most glaring shortcoming is not that the local weatherman is right more often than he is. His biggest problem is that he couldn't identify reality if it were in a line up with nothing but UFOs and gremlins.

Mister Friedman's latest piece actually begins with the following:

The Middle East has gotten itself tied into such an impossible knot that Biblical references or Shakespearian quotations simply don’t suffice anymore to describe how impossibly tangled politics has become here.

"Gotten itself into such an impossible knot"? Look, the Middle East has never been utopia, but it arrived at its latest disastrous state with quite a little bit of help from George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and the Neoconservative philosophy. Friedman lists the issues quite succinctly, but somehow never manages to make a link between the disease, if you will, and the virus.

Just look around. Gaza is turning into Mogadishu. Hamas is shelling Israel. Israel is retaliating. Iraq is a boiling pot. Iran is about to go nuclear. Lebanon is being pulled apart.

Let's see - - Gaza came undone when the Bush administration refused to work with the Palestinian's legally elected government, and then probably goaded Fatah into picking a fight with their rival governing hopefuls; Iraq is a boiling pot due to the war Friedman once championed; Iran is going nuclear out of a fear being driven by the fact that someone drafted them into the "axis of evil," which marked the regime for certain extinction-by-invasion; and Lebanon is being pulled apart due to newly trained terrorists coming from or aspiring terrorists heading to Iraq and, too, the Bush administration's foolish refusal to reign in Israel after they invaded that country last year.

But for Thomas Friedman, the "Middle East has gotten itself tied into such an impossible knot..." And to think, someone is actually paying him to pontificate!

Evening News for Tuesday, June 5, 2007

US NATIONAL REPORT

Fred Thompson's Six One Way, Half Dozen the Other

According to Politico, George W. Bush's nephew is donating and helping raise money for Fred Thompson, former Bush-Cheney aides and many of the president's backers (financial and otherwise) are also joining the campaign. Fred Thompson had already completely co-opted Mister Bush's position on every issue. Now that Bush's family members, aides, and supporters have joined Fred Thompson's campaign, that only leaves Dick Cheney to appoint himself as the "Law & Order" star's Vice-President.

Er...Maybe Not

During the month of April, George W. Bush had often cited "a decline in violence," specifically "sectarian violence" as proof that the latest surge was "making progress." It stands to reason then, that Mister Bush's Iraq plan is now failing.

A recent UN report had found sectarian violence in May, across Iraq, had increased by much as 50 percent. And a Washington Post article noted that May was:

...the third-deadliest month for Iraqis since the AP began tracking civilian casualties in April 2005

Mister Bush's European Vacation

President Bush has begun his European tour in the lead up to the G-8 meeting. On the good side, there have been no reports yet of the president cussing into open microphones and he hasn't been caught attempting to "massage" Germany's Chancellor. On the bad side of George W. Bush's European visit, he appears to have managed to reignite the Cold War.

Putin said putting missile defenses on Russia's doorstep would ignite a new arms race. He threatened to retarget Russia's missiles toward Europe.

WORLD REPORT

Hello, It's Me Again

In case you or, perhaps, Mister Bush were wondering the brother of a Taliban commander killed in Afghanistan wanted the world to know that Osama bin Laden is doing just fine:

Haji Mansour Dadullah claimed he had also been in contact with Bin Laden. He told the Dubai-based broadcaster that he had urged Bin Laden not to meet anyone and "to stay in hiding and continue to give directives ... so that al-Qaida stays active in Afghanistan and the world"

Tutu's Two Cents

South Africa's human rights champion, Desmond Tutu, called on the world to do more to end the genocide taking place in Darfur. He specifically mention the use of sanctions:

The international community should press Sudan to end the conflict in Darfur with the same kinds of sanctions used to isolate apartheid South Africa, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Desmond Tutu said on Tuesday.

Hey Big Boy(s)

In an attempt to gain the attention of the G-8 leaders, Catholic aid workers and officials unfurled a massive banner in Rome. The banner is designed to try and convince the economic big boys to follow through on their promises on poverty aid with financial commitments.

Twenty-five bishops and archbishops, fifty priests and nuns, and three hundred other Caritas delegates raised a giant "Make Aid Work" banner in front of St Peter's Basilica at the Vatican today.

The problem, of course, is that the G-8 leaders are going to be meeting in Heiligendamm, Germany - - they probably won't be able to see the banner hanging in Italy.

Watching the Watchers for June 5, 2007

Democratic Dustup

Commenting on the New Hampshire Democratic debate, Eugene Robinson made a good point: After highlighting Obama's response to Edwards's criticism that the Illinois Senator hasn't exactly been bringing down the walls with his outrage over the Iraq War, i.e. Obama saying that John Edwards's indignation is "four and a half years late," Robinson wrote:

Edwards is asking the right questions. If the war in Iraq is the most urgent issue facing the country -- and both Clinton and Obama said bringing the troops home would be their first priority as president -- then why aren't theirs the loudest, clearest, most eloquent voices in opposition to Bush's tragic misadventure? Each is asking for the opportunity to lead the nation. Shouldn't each be showing some leadership on the war?

Republican Wreck

Politico is reporting a stampede of former Bush-Cheney aides hedging their bets and jumping on the movie-actor-turned-presidential-candidate Fred Thompson's campaign bandwagon - - and payroll. Not sure that is a good development? Fred Thompson already shares positions identical to Mister Bush's on all the major issues including the war, now he has the president's advisers, too?

It appears that the Republicans haven't figured out yet, that the issue isn't the messenger - - it's the message and having a mediocre actor delivering the lines isn't going to make it sound or appear any more appealing.

The Republican message, however, isn't Fred Thompson's only problem. Richard Cohen shined the spotlight on a growing concern (i.e. Thompson's tendency to shun hard work):

If Thompson's name came up in some sort of free-association game, he would be a genuine stumper: Thompson and what? There is no Thompson Act, Thompson Compromise, Thompson Hearing, Thompson Speech or Thompson Anything that comes to mind. No living man can call himself a Thompsonite. Instead, Thompson came and went from the Senate as if he were never there, leaving only the faint scent of ennui. "I don't want to spend the rest of my life up here," he once said. "I don't like spending 14- and 16-hour days voting on 'sense of the Senate' resolutions on irrelevant matters." As a call to action, this lacks a certain something.

Lamenting a Bad Bet

New York Times columnist and onetime big-time Iraq War supporter, David Brooks, has been spending a fair amount of time lately licking his, "how could it have all gone so wrong?" wounds. His latest lament, however, is noteworthy if for no other reason than that it goes beyond whiney and enters into the macabre:

Iraqi society has continued to fracture and is so incoherent that it can’t even have a proper civil war any more.

Brooks seems to be upset that things have gone so far off track in Iraq (his not-so-long-ago most prized cause) that the people there can't even manage to go about the business of slaughtering one another properly. By the end of his piece, however, Brooks is completely contradicting his previous lament:

In the Baghdad neighborhood of Kadhimiya, Shiite militias are gradually consolidating control. They are expelling the Sunnis. They have created a system of street justice, complete with underground Islamic courts. They’ve battled rival militias. They fund their activities through extortion and bribery. But amid the mafia behavior and ethnic cleansing, they’ve created relative calm. Two thousand Shiite families have moved in.

To the common sense observer, that sounds like a right proper civil war!

An Inconvenient Reality

Bob Herbert had a little sit down chat with Al Gore. The discussion was supposed to be about Mister Gore's new book, "The Assault on Reason," but Bob's mind keeps drifting around to all the "what ifs." As in, "What if Al Gore and not George W. Bush had been selected as President by the Supreme Court in 2000?"

By the end of the first paragraph a person finds him or herself knowing where Herbert is going with the piece and, too, going there for themselves:

You look at him and you can’t help thinking how bizarre it is that this particular political figure, perhaps the most qualified person in the country to be president, is sitting in a wing chair in a hotel room in Manhattan rather than in the White House.

Can't blame Bob for feeling that way. Laura Bush and the family dog, Barney, have probably wondered about that, too.

The Evening National and World News for Monday, June 4, 2007

U.S. NATIONAL REPORT

Bush's Iraq Plan Coming Undone

The recent surge in Iraq doesn't appear to be faring any better than all other previous attempts to bring the country under control. The goal had been for the U.S. to have control over all Baghdad's neighborhoods by July, but with time winding down the military controls less than one-third of the city.

The biggest hindrance, other than a determined enemy, appears to be a less than enthusiastic Iraqi military. Iraq's military was supposed to "hold" the neighborhoods after being cleared by the U.S., but they appear to be turning a blind eye to returning insurgents.

Vermont Wants Out of U.S.

A group in Vermont is working hard at creating a movement for the state to secede from the United States. T-Shirts declaring, "US Out of Vt.!" are selling almost fast as they can be produced.

Disillusioned by what they call an empire about to fall, [the movement's leaders] hope to put the question before citizens in March. Eventually, they want to persuade state lawmakers to declare independence, returning Vermont to the status it held from 1777 to 1791.

The drive for Vermont to secede appears to have plenty of supporters. Vermont has a history of being decidedly progressive, outlawed slavery before any other and is currently represented by the nation's only socialist federal Senator.

"The argument for secession is that the U.S. has become an empire that is essentially ungovernable — it's too big, it's too corrupt and it no longer serves the needs of its citizens," said Rob Williams, editor of Vermont Commons, a quarterly newspaper dedicated to secession.

"We have electoral fraud, rampant corporate corruption, a culture of militarism and war," Williams said. "If you care about democracy and self-governance and any kind of representative system, the only constitutional way to preserve what's left of the Republic is to peaceably take apart the empire."

Republicans Look to Thwart Democrats' Gonzales 'No Confidence' Vote

An online news outlet, Raw Story, is reporting that an effort is underway among Republicans to try and undermine a Democratic vote of 'No Confidence' against Attorney General Gonzales. Gonzales has been caught, while under oath, lying to Congress on at least two occasions and some believe he may have also tried to obstruct justice by possibly trying to manipulate his aide, Monica Goodling, into altering her testimony to match his.

According to the report:

Republicans are likely to tie up the Senate floor with all kinds of procedural mischief and introduce any number of amendments, including perhaps one on whether the Iraq War is actually 'lost' as Reid has suggested.

THE WORLD REPORT

Fighting in Lebanon Worsens

There is growing concern that the two-week-long battle taking place within a Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon, might be spreading to other camps. A second skirmish erupted at a second camp and claimed the lives of two soldiers and two militants.

Thousands of the camps inhabitants fled, but officials say as many as 6,000 people are caught in the crossfire.

Radical Fringe Moves into Gaza

As instability spreads from Iraq across the Middle East, al-Qaeda inspired groups are finding fertile ground for establishment and growth within the chaos. The latest enclave to play host to a newly emboldened "radical fringe" is the Palestinian enclave, Gaza.

Some Palestinian officials blame the radicalisation of some of Gaza's 1.4 million people on poverty and despair deepened by sanctions imposed by Israel and Western powers last year after the Hamas Islamist movement won a parliamentary election.

On Friday, a group that emerged this year, the Righteous Swords of Islam, threatened to "slit the throats" of women presenters on Palestine Television if they do not cover their hair: "The corruption that is coming from their mouths and their faces ... raises fears for the future of our children," it said.

Along with The al Qaeda Organisation in Palestine and other mysterious groups, the Swords have claimed several bomb attacks.

Canada Backs Germany in G-8 Climate Fight

Originally Canada's conservative government refused to take sides in the U.S.-G8 fight over how best to meet the challenge of climate change. Canada's government, however, softened its tone and aligned itself with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's position.

Despite the Canadian Prime Minister's more supportive G-8 stance, he didn't win too many friends after making clear his country would not be meeting its Kyoto obligations.

Merkel [told] the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. on Monday that "of course at this point we are not happy that Canada has abandoned Kyoto's goals".

Commentary: Iraq's Terrorism is Spreading

by: Georgie Anne Geyer

That there are stunning similarities between what happens medically in the body of man and what occurs sociologically and militarily in the societies of men is far less noticed – but just as frightening and dangerous.

Think of what has happened in only the last week in the Middle East. In northern Lebanon, in the long-established Nahr el-Bared Palestinian refugee camp, out of the blue arose a new al Qaeda-related insurgent group, Fatah al-Islam. Within days and even hours, the recurring hell of the Middle East was loosed, and refugees poured out of the camp in terror.

There had been none of this kind of terror networking in these northern camps. Indeed, since this camp was established in 1949 to accommodate refugees from northern Palestine after the creation of Israel, it has housed one of the more formal and conservative of peoples.

But it was soon established that these new "insurgents" or "terrorists" – or whatever they really are – had arrived at the camp only recently, that they marched in one day with brand-new weapons, ready to fight.

Two points grip you:

The first is found in the words of French scholar Bernard Rougier, author of Everyday Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam Among Palestinians in Lebanon. "The main point is that these camps are no longer part of Palestinian society," he told The Washington Post . "They are only spaces – now open to all of the influences running through the Muslim world."

The second is that Iraq, where we were supposed to be "containing terrorism," is now clearly exporting insurgents to other regions – to Lebanon, to Syria, to Gaza, to Bangladesh, to Kurdistan.

And so, on the one hand, you have weakened societies vulnerable to the "new answers" of "new insurgencies," and on the other hand, you have Iraq set up as a school for terrorists with American troops and policy providing the constant inspiration for their fight.

This, of course, is not the way the Bush administration sees it.

The White House sees terrorists as born, not created by history, bearing the mark of Cain, not the mark of circumstance. There is a scarlet "T" written on their foreheads at birth and the only answer is to destroy them. This kind of thinking, of course, relieves the thinker of any responsibility for the presence of the insurgent-terrorist-whatever in our innocent midst.

What's more, there is not much real give in the administration's policies. True, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other American diplomats met Memorial Day weekend with the Iranians in Baghdad (a good first move but limited, since the Iranians have most of the power because of our incredible stupidity in Iraq). But by all reports, President Bush is more convinced than ever of his righteousness.

Friends of his from Texas were shocked recently to find him nearly wild-eyed, thumping himself on the chest three times while he repeated "I am the president!" He also made it clear he was setting Iraq up so his successor could not get out of "our country's destiny."

The truth of the steadily deteriorating situation in the Middle East is, of course, quite different. The Palestinian people of 40 and even 30 years ago were formal, conservative people who remained closely tied to their families, clans and religious groups. Theirs was a highly stratified society, which has now been shattered.

In the institutional vacuum that is a camp like Nahr el-Bared, a few hundred men trained and tempered in Iraq can make a huge difference. At the same time, the Turkish military is ready to go into northern Kurdistan, al-Qaeda operatives from Iraq are popping up in hitherto untouched places, and the American military's advice to its troops is, "Get down with the people – listen to them!" Only four years and thousands of bombs and night missions too late.

Anyone who knows anything about cancer knows that the danger point comes when the cancer suddenly and unexpectedly appears in another supposedly "clean" part of the body. As when, say, breast cancer, an implacable traveler, reappears in the bloodstream or the bones.

U.S. National News for Sunday, June 3, 2007

Iraq 'Surge' Stumbling in Bloody Fashion

The AP reported 14 U.S. service personnel killed in action over the weekend in Iraq. Seven of the 14 were killed on Sunday. May had been the deadliest month for the U.S. military with 127 troops killed. It was the third deadliest month since the invasion began in March, 2003.

The report of U.S. deaths came only days after the Bush administration floated the possibility of American forces occupying Iraq for at least 50 years. The president's spokesmen likened the idea to the U.S. presence in South Korea, but some warn the occupation would more resemble Israel's post-six-day war occupation of the West Bank - - that is to say, an endless war.

Still, the bad news doesn't end with the increased U.S. casualties. Mister Bush had been touting a decline in the number of sectarian killings as proof of progress in Iraq, but a new report indicated such killings were up between 30 and 50 percent in Baghdad and across Iraq. In the last 24 hours alone, the bodies of more than 30 sectarian-related murder victims were found in Baghdad.

Mississippi's Infant Death Rate Little Better Than Some Third World Countries

To CBS News's credit, they reported on a very real social issue - - one that didn't include drugs, children, and a celebrity.

After a brief lull, Mississippi's infant death rates have skyrocketed. In 2005, Mississippi's infant death rate increased by nearly 20 percent over 2004.

For whites in Mississippi, the 2005 infant death rate was 6.6 per thousand, around the national average.

Among blacks, the rate soared to 17 per thousand, similar to rates in Sri Lanka and Russia.

Europe Seeing Red Over Bush's Green Pitch

Few in European leadership were as impressed by Mister Bush's call for a summit of the world's 15 biggest polluters as was the American media. Most Europeans, long distrustful of President Bush's motives, viewed the timing of the plan as being designed to simultaneously provide cover for his refusal to participate in G-8 efforts to curb global warming and, too, an effort to derail the U.N.'s ongoing work on reducing the impact of climate change.

Immigration by the Numbers

There are currently as many as twelve million undocumented workers in the United States today. The current immigration reform bill pending in congress is more than 3,000 pages long. Sixty-two percent of the American people believe undocumented workers should be allowed citizenship:

A CBS News/New York Times poll found that 62 percent believe illegal immigrants who have lived and worked in the U.S. for at least two years should have a chance to apply for legal status.

World News for Sunday, June 3, 2007

Lebanese Government Struggles in Fight Against Militants

The Lebanese government appears to be struggling in its effort to subjugate militants within the Palestinian refugee camps. It would seem that the Lebanese military has embraced the dangerous fallacy -- doctrine? -- advocating the notion that terrorism can somehow be exterminated through brute force.

The army on Friday attacked Fatah al-Islam positions at the entrances of the [refugee] camp with the declared aim of wiping out the militants.

Perhaps, it might be possible to "wipe out" the militants, but bullets and bombs cannot kill ideas or ideology. Only better ideas can do that.

Nigerians Battle Big Oil Companies, Kidnap Russians

As world demand for oil and other natural resources increases, Africa has become the latest exploitation hotspot. Energy and mining corporations have rushed into African countries, often bribing government officials as they go, in search of oil and minerals and increased profit margins.

More often than not, African governments and associated cronies -- outside the corporations, of course -- are the only people to benefit from the sometimes generous income being generated by the invading multinationals. Unfortunately, Africa's poorest citizens appear to have been excluded from the process.

Excluding Africa's impoverished people from the benefits of their countries' resource exploitation, has led to increasingly desperate attempts at seizing a share in the wealth.

Nigerian gunmen kidnapped six Russians and shot dead a local driver in a dawn attack on a residential compound of the world's top aluminium producer, authorities said on Sunday.

The kidnapping of the Russian workers is only the latest in a long line of similar incidents in 2007. Scores of foreign workers, most associated with oil corporations, have been abducted in Nigeria.

Frank Rich - Failed Presidents Ain’t What They Used to Be

A few weeks ago I did something I never expected to do in my life. I shed a tear for Richard Milhous Nixon.

That’s in no small measure a tribute to Frank Langella, who should win a Tony Award for his star Broadway turn in “Frost/Nixon” next Sunday while everyone else is paying final respects to Tony Soprano. “Frost/Nixon,” a fictionalized treatment of the disgraced former president’s 1977 television interviews with David Frost, does not whitewash Nixon’s record. But Mr. Langella unearths humanity and pathos in the old scoundrel eking out his exile in San Clemente. For anyone who ever hated Nixon, this achievement is so shocking that it’s hard to resist a thought experiment the moment you’ve left the theater: will it someday be possible to feel a pang of sympathy for George W. Bush?

Perhaps not. It’s hard to pity someone who, to me anyway, is too slight to hate. Unlike Nixon, President Bush is less an overreaching Machiavelli than an epic blunderer surrounded by Machiavellis. He lacks the crucial element of acute self-awareness that gave Nixon his tragic depth. Nixon came from nothing, loathed himself and was all too keenly aware when he was up to dirty tricks. Mr. Bush has a charmed biography, is full of himself and is far too blinded by self-righteousness to even fleetingly recognize the havoc he’s inflicted at home and abroad. Though historians may judge him a worse president than Nixon — some already have — at the personal level his is not a grand Shakespearean failure. It would be a waste of Frank Langella’s talent to play George W. Bush (though not, necessarily, of Matthew McConaughey’s).

This is in part why persistent cries for impeachment have gone nowhere in the Democratic Party hierarchy. Arguably the most accurate gut check on what the country feels about Mr. Bush was a January Newsweek poll finding that a sizable American majority just wished that his “presidency was over.” This flat-lining administration inspires contempt and dismay more than the deep-seated, long-term revulsion whipped up by Nixon; voters just can’t wait for Mr. Bush to leave Washington so that someone, anyone, can turn the page and start rectifying the damage. Yet if he lacks Nixon’s larger-than-life villainy, he will nonetheless leave Americans feeling much the way they did after Nixon fled: in a state of anger about the state of the nation.

The rage is already omnipresent, and it’s bipartisan. The last New York Times/CBS News poll found that a whopping 72 percent of Americans felt their country was “seriously off on the wrong track,” the highest figure since that question was first asked, in 1983. Equally revealing (and bipartisan) is the hypertension of the parties’ two angry bases. Democrats and Republicans alike are engaged in internecine battles that seem to be escalating in vitriol by the hour.

On the Democratic side, the left is furious at the new Congress’s failure to instantly fulfill its November mandate to end the war in Iraq. After it sent Mr. Bush a war-spending bill stripped of troop-withdrawal deadlines 10 days ago, the cries of betrayal were shrill, and not just from bloggers. John Edwards, once one of the more bellicose Democratic cheerleaders for the war (“I believe that the risk of inaction is far greater than the risk of action,” he thundered on the Senate floor in September 2002), is now equally bellicose toward his former colleagues. He chastises them for not sending the president the same withdrawal bill he vetoed “again and again” so that Mr. Bush would be forced to realize “he has no choice” but to end the war. It’s not exactly clear how a legislative Groundhog Day could accomplish this feat when the president’s obstinacy knows no bounds and the Democrats’ lack of a veto-proof Congressional majority poses no threat to his truculence.

Among Republicans the right’s revolt against the Bush-endorsed immigration bill is also in temper-tantrum territory, moving from rational debate about complex policy questions to plain old nativism, reminiscent of the 19th-century Know-Nothings. Even the G.O.P. base’s traditional gripes — knee-jerk wailing about the “tragedy” of Mary Cheney’s baby — can’t be heard above the din.

“White America is in flight” is how Pat Buchanan sounds the immigration alarm. “All they have to do is go to Bank of Amigo and pay the fine with a credit card” is how Rush Limbaugh mocks the bill’s punitive measures for illegal immigrants. Bill O’Reilly, while “reluctantly” supporting Mr. Bush’s plan, illustrates how immigration is “drastically” altering the country by pointing out that America is “now one-third minority.” (Do Jews make the cut?) The rupture is so deep that National Review, a fierce opponent of the bill, is challenging its usual conservative ally, the Wall Street Journal editorial board, to a debate that sounds more like “Fight Club.”

What the angriest proselytizers on the left and right have in common is a conviction that their political parties will commit hara-kiri if they don’t adhere to their bases’ strict ideological orders. “If Democrats do not stick to their guns on Iraq,” a blogger at TalkLeft.com warns, there will be “serious political consequences in 2008.” In an echo of his ideological opposite, Mr. Limbaugh labels the immigration bill the “Comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act.”

But there’s a strange paradox here. The decibel level of the fin-de-Bush rage is a bit of a red herring. In truth, there is some consensus among Americans about the issues that are dividing both parties. The same May poll that found the country so wildly off-track showed agreement on much else. Sixty-one percent believe that we should have stayed out of Iraq, and 63 percent believe we should withdraw by 2008. Majorities above 60 percent also buy broad provisions of the immigration bill — including the 66 percent of Republicans (versus 72 percent of Democrats) who support its creation of a guest-worker program.

What these figures suggest is that change is on its way, no matter how gridlocked Washington may look now. However much the G.O.P. base hollers, America is not going to round up and deport 12 million illegal immigrants, or build a multibillion-dollar fence on the Mexican border — despite Lou Dobbs’s hoax blaming immigrants for a nonexistent rise in leprosy. A new president unburdened by a disastrous war may well fashion the immigration compromise that is likely to elude Mr. Bush.

Withdrawal from Iraq is also on its way. Contrary to Mr. Edwards, only Republicans in Congress can overcome presidential vetoes and in so doing force Mr. Bush’s hand on the war. As the bottom drops out of Iraq and the polls, those G.O.P. votes are starting to line up. The latest example came last Sunday, when the most hawkish of former Rumsfeld worshipers, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, joined his party’s Congressional leaders, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, in talking about drawing down troops if something “extraordinary” doesn’t happen in Iraq by the time Gen. David Petraeus gives his September report on the “surge.” No doubt Mr. Sessions, who is up for re-election in 2008, saw a May 12 survey in The Birmingham News showing that even in his reddest of states, nearly half the voters want America out of Iraq within a year and favor candidates who agree.

This relatively unified America can’t be compared with that of the second Nixon term, when the violent cultural and political upheavals of the late 1960s were still fresh. But in at least one way there may be a precise political parallel in the aftermaths of two failed presidencies rent by catastrophic wars: Americans are exhausted by anger itself and are praying for the mood pendulum to swing.

Gerald Ford implicitly captured that sentiment when he described himself as a healer; his elected successor, Jimmy Carter, was (to a fault, as it turned out) a seeming paragon of serenity. We can see this equation at work now in Mitt Romney’s unflappable game-show-host persona, in John McCain’s unconvincing efforts to emulate a Reagan grin and in the unlikely spectacle of Rudy Giuliani trading in his congenital scowl for a sunny disposition. Hillary Clinton’s camp is doing everything it can to deflect new books reminding voters of the vicious Washington warfare during her husband’s presidency. Then again, even Michael Moore is rolling out a kinder, gentler persona in his media blitz for his first film since “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

Edgy is out; easy listening is in; style, not content, can be king. In this climate, it’s hardly happenstance that many Republicans are looking in desperation to Fred Thompson. Robert Novak pointedly welcomed his candidacy last week because, in his view, Mr. Thompson is “less harsh” in tone than his often ideologically indistinguishable rivals and “a real-life version of the avuncular fictional D.A. he plays on TV.” The Democratic boomlet for Barack Obama is the flip side of the same coin: his views don’t differ radically from those of most of his rivals, but his conciliatory personality is the essence of calm, the antithesis of anger.

If it was a relief to the nation to see a president as grandly villainous as Richard Nixon supplanted by a Ford, not a Lincoln, maybe even a used Hoover would do this time.