Life in OUR America, Volume 6, The Livyjr Files Options

[Livyjr]

A "political ploy" to embarass George W. Bush?

GET REAL, HERE, REPUBLICANS .....

GEORGE W. BUSH IS AN EMBARASSMENT .....

ALL BY HIMSELF ....

And it don't take a DEMOCRAT to point that out to no one here in OUR America .....

And so ...

"White House credibility on trial - Lawyers for former Cheney aide raise issue with prospective jurors"

By RICHARD B. SCHMITT, Los Angeles Times

First published: Wednesday, January 17, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The perjury and obstruction trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby turned into an examination of the credibility of the Bush administration Tuesday, with lawyers for the former White House aide asking potential jurors how they feel about the war in Iraq and whether present and former administration officials who may be called to testify could be believed.

Libby, who was Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, is charged with lying to investigators about conversations he had with journalists about a CIA operative who is married to a critic of the administration's war policies.

Libby's lawyers signaled Tuesday that even though the case is about perjury, they are concerned that strong feelings among the jurors about the war -- and whether President Bush misled the public about it -- could influence their verdict.

Two potential jurors were dismissed after expressing strongly negative feelings about administration officials.

The questioning about the Bush administration and the Iraq war drew repeated objections from prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who said that the defense lawyers were engaged in "an open-ended Rorschach test," alluding to the famous ink-blot test in which people are believed to project their feelings onto ambiguous stimuli.

But U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said the defense had a right to fully explore whether any of the jurors were biased.

Libby was indicted after a three-year investigation by Fitzgerald that began when the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame was mentioned in a July 14, 2003, column by syndicated columnist Robert Novak.

Plame is married to former envoy Joseph C. Wilson IV, who had accused the Bush administration of twisting pre-war intelligence in a New York Times op-ed piece eight days earlier.

While it is a felony to publicize the name of a covert agent, Fitzgerald did not charge anyone with that crime.

Libby, the only person charged in the investigation, was accused of misleading investigators by suggesting he had heard about Plame from reporters, when according to Fitzgerald, Libby was giving reporters that information.

Jury selection is expected to last several days.

The trial is expected to last six weeks; opening statements are set for early next week.

end quotes

ABOUT THE ONLY THING THAT YOU CAN TRUST ABOUT THIS PRESENT ADMINISTRATION .....

IS THAT THEY WILL LIE TO US .....

AND THE SECOND THING YOU CAN TRUST ABOUT THIS ADMINISTRATION ...

IS THAT THEY DON'T TELL THE TRUTH .....

And so .....

What were these lawyers for "SCOOTER" expecting ....

A DELUDED PUBLIC?

People in OUR America who don't believe that this administration LIES TO US?

I guess there still might be some of those around out there .....

BUT THEY ARE LIKELY TO BE ....

REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS .....

And I don't think that they can serve on a jury ....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

Study the past ......

If you would divine .....

The future .....

- Confucius

[Livyjr]

"Deadly clue to 1918 Spanish flu virus uncovered"

By Patricia Reaney

Wed Jan 17, 1:29 PM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - The virus that caused the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic which killed more people than World War One was so deadly because it triggered an uncontrolled immune system response in its victims, scientists said on Wednesday.

About 50 million people died in the 1918 pandemic, the worst in modern history, but why it was so lethal has been a mystery.

By infecting macaque monkeys with a reconstructed version of the 1918 virus, an international team of researchers uncovered a clue about the virus which could help to reduce the impact of future influenza pandemics.

They found the virus replicated quickly and unleashed an excessive immune system response in the macaques that destroyed the lungs in a matter of days.

"Instead of protecting the individuals that were infected with the high pathogenic virus, the immune response is actually contributing to the lethality of the virus," said Professor Michael Katze, of the University of Washington in Seattle, in a telephone briefing.

Katze and his colleagues believe the unusual immune system reaction increased the virulence of the virus in the macaques and in the victims of the Spanish flu pandemic.

"It is very important for us to understand why the virus was so lethal and that is why we did this research," said Professor Yoshihiro Kawaoka who headed the research team.

SIMILARITIES TO H5N1

The scientists said their findings, which are reported in the journal Nature, suggest early interventions targeting the immune system response against infection could help to limit the number of deaths that could be caused by future pandemics.

The response in the macaques was similar to what scientists had observed in an earlier study when they infected mice with a reconstructed 1918 virus.

It activated immune cells which attacked the respiratory system causing serious lung damage and death.

"Our analysis revealed potential mechanisms of virulence, which we hope will help us develop novel antiviral strategies to both outwit the virus and moderate the host immune response," Katze added.

Scientists fear the H5N1 bird flu virus that has killed 161 people and infected 268 since 2003 could spark a pandemic if it becomes highly infectious in humans.

Unlike other flu viruses that afflict mainly the elderly and children, the Spanish flu pandemic struck young adults and people without immune system problems.

"The H5N1 virus can also cause very serious disease and it appears to do this in a way that is quite similar to the 1918 virus," said Darwyn Kobasa of the Public Health Agency of Canada and lead author of the study.

"A greater understanding of the viruses that caused past pandemics will help us predict what we might expect and how to plan and use our knowledge and resources to reduce the impact of a new pandemic," he added.

[Livyjr]

"Election fundraiser irks GOP"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, January 15, 2007

Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who has focused on the need to end Albany's "pay-to-play" culture and proposed reducing the influence of special interests on state government, will host a $25,000-a-head fundraiser Thursday that has Republicans crying foul.

The event, which is being held at the Manhattan apartment of a Spitzer donor, is being organized by the state Democratic Party to raise money for the Feb. 6 special state Senate election.

The race is crucial for both Republicans, who want to hold on to the majority, and Democrats, who want to topple it.

Republicans are angry that people close to Spitzer are putting the squeeze on lobbyists and other special interests to pony up the $25,000 ticket cost for a chance to be in the same room with the new reform-minded governor.

"This is Mr. Good Government?" questioned one highly placed Republican official.

And as newly-elected New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer .....

Shows us all up here .....

How to put the capital "H" .....

In the word "HYPOCRISY" .....

Listen to what he says .....

BUT DON'T LOOK AT WHAT HE ACTUALLY DOES ....

We have ....

"Bruno faults Spitzer role in fundraiser, special election"

By MICHAEL VIRTANEN, Associated Press

Last updated: 5:13 p.m., Wednesday, January 17, 2007

ALBANY -- State Senate Republican leader Joseph Bruno criticized Gov. Eliot Spitzer on Wednesday for planning to attend a $25,000-per-person fundraiser for a Democratic state Senate candidate while at the same time advocating campaign finance reform.

Bruno, the Senate majority leader from Rensselaer County, said it was "very inappropriate" for Spitzer to attend.

He also said there are some people around the new governor aggressively calling for pressure on labor groups in the special election to fill a vacant Senate seat.

The fundraiser staged by the state Democratic Party is scheduled Thursday in Manhattan, party spokesman Blake Zeff said.

Both Spitzer and Nassau County Legislator Craig Johnson -- who is running for the open seat -- are expected to attend, he said.

Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson said Spitzer backs campaign finance and other reforms, that Johnson will help him enact them, and the fundraiser is being held under existing campaign finance rules.

She said the dollar limits for the campaign reform package haven't been set yet.

"He's been invited to attend this event."

"He will continue to attend some events," Anderson said.

"We will only enforce the restrictions on ourselves right now, and on Lt. Gov. David Paterson, which we did on the very first day."

The special election set for Feb. 6 was called by Democrat Spitzer after he lured state Sen. Michael Balboni, a Nassau County Republican, away for a job as the new administration's deputy secretary for public safety.

Balboni's departure has left the shrinking Senate GOP majority with just 33 seats in the 62-member Senate.

The Republicans have lost four other Senate seats in the last two elections, including one in November and three in 2004.

The election pits Democrat Johnson against Republican Nassau County Clerk Maureen O'Connell.

Bruno rejected the idea that the special election is a test of his clout against Spitzer's, saying it's about Long Island and that O'Connell is the better candidate.

David Pollak, state Democratic Party co-chair, said Johnson is meeting voters and raising his own funds, while O'Connell's entire campaign is being bankrolled by the Republican Party organization.

In his State of the State speech on Jan. 3, Spitzer said he would soon submit a legislative reform package to substitute the strongest campaign finance laws in the nation for what are now the weakest.

"Our package will lower contribution limits dramatically, close the loopholes that allow special interests to circumvent these limits, and sharply reduce contributions from lobbyists and companies that do business with the state," he said.

[Livyjr]

"Election fundraiser irks GOP"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, January 15, 2007

Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who has focused on the need to end Albany's "pay-to-play" culture and proposed reducing the influence of special interests on state government, will host a $25,000-a-head fundraiser Thursday that has Republicans crying foul.

The event, which is being held at the Manhattan apartment of a Spitzer donor, is being organized by the state Democratic Party to raise money for the Feb. 6 special state Senate election.

The race is crucial for both Republicans, who want to hold on to the majority, and Democrats, who want to topple it.

Republicans are angry that people close to Spitzer are putting the squeeze on lobbyists and other special interests to pony up the $25,000 ticket cost for a chance to be in the same room with the new reform-minded governor.

"This is Mr. Good Government?" questioned one highly placed Republican official.

Consider for a moment, if you will, in forming your own thoughts about the contents of this thread, these words of then-DEMOCRATIC Governor of the State of New York Mario Cuomo in 1986 concerning New York State's "HISTORY" of corruption as it stood right exactly then:

"TEN YEARS AGO, a study by the Joint House-Senate Subcommittee on Investigations estimated the costs of white-collar crime at MORE THAN forty-four BILLION dollars".

"The incidence of white-collar crime has not abated in the last decade; instead, it has spiraled ever-upward as economic crime has become increasingly profitable and sophisticated!"

"The effects of major economic crime can be devastating: THE WHOLE SOCIETY suffers as crimes against business become crimes against consumers."

"GREEDY, WHITE-COLLAR PROFITEERS WILL NOT BE STOPPED until we adopt strong measures to stop them!"

- Governor's Approval memorandum, New York State Legislative Annual -1986, p.236

SO!

Now, think on this for a moment, if you will .....

WHEN you have white-collar crime in a state, any state, to the extent of $44 BILLION, how exactly is that happening?

And by that, what I really mean is WHO IN THE HELL IS NOT LOOKING, or doing their job at preventing this kind of crime, TO THIS MAGNITUDE?

And more to the point, WHY ARE THEY NOT LOOKING, or doing their job of preventing crime of this magnitude from occurring in the first place?

Is a "BLIND EYE" being bought and paid for here, perhaps?

Bloomberg News

Friday, December 12, 2003:

"Fund-raiser nets Spitzer $2 million - luncheon for likely gubernatorial candidate attracts hedge fund managers, lawyers"

by Matthew Cox, Bloomberg News:

New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer collected more than $2 million at a political fund-raiser, with hedge fund managers and lawyers among the big donors, and said HE COULD ACCEPT CAMPAIGN FUNDS FROM THE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY WITHOUT COMPROMISING HIS ENFORCEMENT ROLE.

Spitzer, the leader of investigations into Wall Street conflicts of interest and mutual fund trading, has said he is interested in running for governor in 2006.

Though he hasn't officially declared his candidacy, Thursday's fund-raiser was Spitzer's biggest ever.

[His investigations of "certain aspects of the securities market doesn't mean there can't be or shouldn't be contributions from anybody within that sector, any more than it would mean because we bring consumer-type cases, no consumer manufacturer could contribute," Spitzer told reporters.

He said his campaign committee has "a very careful vetting process" to avoid accepting gifts from donors under scrutiny by his office.

A Spitzer campaign aide who declined to be identified said hedge funds, lawyers AND [u]THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY were among his LEADING SOURCES of campaign MONEY.

The luncheon at the Sheraton New York Hotel drew hedge fund manager Daniel Nir of Gracie Capital LP, who with his wife, Jill Braufman, donated $50,000 in June; Cablevision President James Dolan; Miramax Film Corp. co-chairman Harvey Weinstein, and Melvyn Weiss, one of several lawyer donors who has sued securities firms for investors based on Spitzer's investigations.

"There are a lot of hedge funds that have not been trading the way the naughty ones have," said Roy Smith, a professor of finance at New York University.

"THEY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MR. SPITZER INVESTIGATE ALL THEIR COMPETITION that's been too aggressive."

Spitzer's investigative work "gives investors a sense that someone's keeping an eye on what's in their best interest," said donor George Fox, founder of Titan Advisors, a hedge fund consultant.

Cynthia Darrison, managing director of the Spitzer campaign committee, said that the event attended by nearly 700 people generated more than $2 million.

"This is meant as a preemptive strike" with 35 months to go until the election, said Douglas Muzzio, professor of public affairs at Baruch College in New York.

"He's saying 'I can raise huge amounts of money.'"

end quotes

Yes, he certainly can.

But by "selling" what?

Or "who", perhaps?

"Spitzer returns extra cash - Donor's fund-raiser money exceeded limit on contributions by individuals under state law"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer's campaign returned $110,000 in excess donations from casino developer Richard Fields, almost all of it for jet flights and other costs tied to a lavish fund-raiser in Wyoming last summer, a new campaign filing shows.

Spitzer sent Fields' companies, Coastal Development LLC and SG Management, the money for catering, security, travel, jets and hotels paid for by Fields when he threw the bash for the former attorney general when he was seeking the Democratic nomination for governor.

Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Spitzer, said the money is being sent because calculations showed Fields' companies exceeded the $50,100 limit on individual donations allowed under state law.

Howard Wolfson, Fields' representative, said "the contributions were made inadvertently over the limit."

Fields' lawyer, Edward Wallace, said the money going to his client appears in the payment and expenditure section of Spitzer's filing because it is not a refund.

"It was a payment to avoid excess donations," Wallace said.

Fields is a leader in Excelsior Racing Associates, which was selected by a state panel last fall as the preferred bidder for the state racing franchise.

He also is working with the Wisconsin Oneida tribe on a proposal to build a casino in the Catskills.

On July 18, he threw a fund-raiser for Spitzer at his Jackson Hole, Wyo., home.

Fields' companies donated $200,000 to Spitzer just before the event.

But in-kind services and cash provided after the event apparently exceeded legal limits.

Anderson said the campaign reimbursed $52,579 to SG Management for catering, wine, a tent, a band and other costs for the Wyoming event.

It sent another $51,292 to Coastal Development for transportation costs -- a jet to New York City to pick up Silda Wall Spitzer, the governor's wife, and fly her to Jackson Hole, and a second jet to fly Spitzer from Seattle to Wyoming.

Fields also provided a jet to fly the couple back to LaGuardia together the day after the fund-raiser.

Anderson said the costs are for everything associated with the private jet use in July -- from pilots to peanuts -- taking into account a policy adopted by Spitzer's campaign after revelations that Fields provided a jet to Spitzer for a three-city fundraiser in May.

The campaign paid $4,300 for those May trips, the equivalent of first-class fares.

The campaign also recently reimbursed Fields' Coastal Protective Services $1,491 for security personnel for the party and $4,610 to Coastal Development for a car, a dinner reception and hotel, the new campaign filing shows.

During the campaign, Republican John Faso sharply criticized the donations Spitzer accepted from Fields, who is the developer of the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Florida.

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

Consider for a moment, if you will, in forming your own thoughts about the contents of this thread, these words of then-DEMOCRATIC Governor of the State of New York Mario Cuomo in 1986 concerning New York State's "HISTORY" of corruption as it stood right exactly then:

"TEN YEARS AGO, a study by the Joint House-Senate Subcommittee on Investigations estimated the costs of white-collar crime at MORE THAN forty-four BILLION dollars".

"The incidence of white-collar crime has not abated in the last decade; instead, it has spiraled ever-upward as economic crime has become increasingly profitable and sophisticated!"

"The effects of major economic crime can be devastating: THE WHOLE SOCIETY suffers as crimes against business become crimes against consumers."

"GREEDY, WHITE-COLLAR PROFITEERS WILL NOT BE STOPPED until we adopt strong measures to stop them!"

- Governor's Approval memorandum, New York State Legislative Annual -1986, p.236

SO!

Now, think on this for a moment, if you will .....

WHEN you have white-collar crime in a state, any state, to the extent of $44 BILLION, how exactly is that happening?

And by that, what I really mean is WHO IN THE HELL IS NOT LOOKING, or doing their job at preventing this kind of crime, TO THIS MAGNITUDE?

And more to the point, WHY ARE THEY NOT LOOKING, or doing their job of preventing crime of this magnitude from occurring in the first place?

Is a "BLIND EYE" being bought and paid for here, perhaps?

"Reform vote fails, but minority claims success - Democratic senators say effort shows their party is seeking change"

By ELIZABETH BENJAMIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, January 17, 2007

ALBANY -- Senate Democrats sought to capitalize on the shrinking margin between themselves and the Senate Republicans Tuesday with an effort to force the majority to vote on rules reforms designed to increase the power of minority lawmakers.

After a more-than-two-hour battle that saw senators fighting over fine points of parliamentary rules, the Democrats settled for a show of hands on their proposals that did not formally record the Republicans in the negative.

Sen. Thomas Duane, D-Manhattan, nonetheless declared that Democrats "got what we wanted."

"We had a recorded vote on the rules," he said.

"We showed that we're the party of real reform."

The record showed 23 senators raised their hands in favor of the rules -- far short of the 32 votes needed for approval.

None of the Republicans in the chamber raised their hands.

Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno wasn't in the chamber for the vote; nor was minority leader Malcolm Smith, D-Queens.

The Republicans later won a vote to keep the current rules.

The Democrats wanted a roll call to put every member's vote on the record.

But GOP senators fought hard for a voice vote, which would not show any specific member opposing "reform."

Among the changes Democrats pushed: reducing the gift limit from $75 to $25; equal allocation of funds and staff for senators, regardless of party affiliation; allowing minority members to move bills out of committee; and requiring that votes be recorded.

In 2001, Democrats complained that new rules dramatically curtailed their already limited power to force stalled bills out of committee and limited debate.

The most controversial change allowed bills to be pushed out of committee with unrecorded voice votes, providing cover to majority members on controversial issues.

On Tuesday, Democrats also sought to rein in the powerful Rules Committee, through which Bruno controls which bills get to the floor for a vote.

It has no scheduled meetings or agenda.

Sen. Eric Schneiderman, D-Manhattan, called it "a shadow committee ... with no identity other than to be the shadowy arm of authoritarianism."

The rules fight was a test for new Lt. Gov. David Paterson, the former Senate minority leader and now presiding officer of the chamber.

Paterson, a Democrat, ruled in favor of the Republicans on an initial voice vote, but sided with Democrats when they appealed his decision and sought a roll call.

Republicans, however, flatly warned they would overrule him.

Elizabeth Benjamin can be reached at 454-5081 or by e-mail at ebenjamin@timesunion.com.

end quotes

REAL REFORM, Senator Thomas Duane of Manhatten ......

DOES NOT COME ABOUT ....

Merely because you have flapped your gums and run your mouth in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION .....

REAL REFORM ....

Comes about ....

WHEN YOU HAVE FINALLY DONE SOMETHING ...

LIKE CLEANING UP ...

THE RAMPANT WHITE-COLLAR CRIME AND CORRUPTION IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

RAMPANT CORRUPTION THAT WAY BACK IN 1976 ....

The NEW YORK STATE SENATE ....

OF WHICH YOU ARE A MEMBER ....

HAD ESTIMATED THE COST OF TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE AS SOME $44 BILLION DOLLARS ....

AND THEN ....

IT SAT ON ITS HANDS ....

BECAUSE WITH THAT MUCH "ILLICIT" MONEY IN PLAY ....

IN A STATE WITH A SENATE KNOWN TO BE FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST OF THE HIGH BIDDERS ....

Well, Senator .....

You figure it out from there ....

BECAUSE WE, THE PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE ....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

And as newly-elected New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer .....

Shows us all up here .....

How to put the capital "H" .....

In the word "HYPOCRISY" .....

Listen to what he says .....

BUT DON'T LOOK AT WHAT HE ACTUALLY DOES ....

****NEWS UPDATE****

THE PROMISE OF ELIOT SPITZER ...

TO HIS CRONIES IN THE BUSINESS WORLD .....

THANKS TO HIS MAJOR FEDERAL COURT VICTORY ....

CRUSHING THE RIGHT TO DISSENT IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

A COWED AND COMPLIANT NEW YORK STATE WORK FORCE ....

TO SERVICE THEIR EVERY NEED ...

"Improving the Business Climate"

New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer

New York State Business Council, Bolton's Landing, NY

September 21, 2006

[As Prepared for Delivery]

Thank you, Peter, for that kind introduction, and thank you all for inviting me here today.

I want to recognize Dan Walsh and thank him for his leadership over the past 18 years as President and CEO of the Business Council.

Dan, you have been an outstanding advocate for New York's private-sector business community, and you will be missed.

I also want to welcome Ken Adams as the Business Council's new President.

Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.

And in too many other respects, our government bureaucracy hinders rather than assists businesses.

Well, I have a message for you: If I am elected Governor, on Day One of next year we are going to begin to implement an aggressive strategy to reduce the cost of doing business in New York and make New York the best place to do business in the world.

And we will streamline regulations to make them friendly to business.

As Governor, I will ensure that the Governor's Office of Regulatory Reform places renewed focus on breaking the regulatory logjam in the State's permitting process for new development.

It's time that our State government becomes part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Thank you.

http://www.spitzerpaterson.com/main.cfm?ac...&s=spitzer3

REAL REFORM, Senator Thomas Duane of Manhatten ......

DOES NOT COME ABOUT ....

Merely because you have flapped your gums and run your mouth in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION .....

REAL REFORM ....

Comes about ....

WHEN YOU HAVE FINALLY DONE SOMETHING ...

LIKE CLEANING UP ...

THE RAMPANT WHITE-COLLAR CRIME AND CORRUPTION IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

RAMPANT CORRUPTION THAT WAY BACK IN 1976 ....

The NEW YORK STATE SENATE ....

OF WHICH YOU ARE A MEMBER ....

HAD ESTIMATED THE COST OF TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE AS SOME $44 BILLION DOLLARS ....

AND THEN ....

IT SAT ON ITS HANDS ....

BECAUSE WITH THAT MUCH "ILLICIT" MONEY IN PLAY ....

IN A STATE WITH A SENATE KNOWN TO BE FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST OF THE HIGH BIDDERS ....

Well, Senator .....

You figure it out from there ....

BECAUSE WE, THE PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE ....

And so ...

"At $25,000, talk of reform isn't cheap - Spitzer is set for Democratic fundraiser where the price of admission draws Republican critics"

By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who ran on a platform that included getting big money out of political campaigns, came under attack by the state's top Republican Wednesday for his featured role in a $25,000-a-head Manhattan fundraiser tonight at the home of a prominent developer with ties to the state.

"I think that's very inappropriate, and some people say its hypocritical," Sen. Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno said.

While state Democratic party spokesman Blake Zeff said proceeds from the fundraiser will go to the party, not any individual campaign, the event comes less than three weeks before Democratic Nassau County Legislator Craig Johnson squares off against Republican County Clerk Maureen O'Connell in a special election for the seat in the 7th Senate District on Long Island.

There is nothing to prevent the party from giving the money to Johnson.

The seat opened up when Spitzer hired Sen. Michael Balboni as his homeland security chief.

Balboni's departure brought the Republican Senate majority to 33 seats in the 62-person chamber, a narrow two-seat advantage.

Bruno also suggested the Spitzer camp was making "threatening" phone calls to public employee and health care unions, such as the SEIU's 1199 and CSEA, which have endorsed O'Connell.

Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long also criticized the Democratic governor, saying in a prepared statement that he was "bemused" by the incongruity of the fundraiser.

"How can anyone believe that 'Day One' has changed anything with this type of fundraising taking place?" asked Long, referring to Spitzer's reform-promising campaign slogan that "On Day One, Everything Changes."

"The old adage is true -- the more things change, the more they stay the same," added Long.

Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson said Spitzer still plans to present a major campaign finance reform package, but he needs allies such as Johnson to help make that happen.

"When it comes time to pass campaign finance reform, he has to have partners like Craig," Anderson said.

"It's only proper that both candidates campaign within existing campaign laws."

The state Democratic party's co-chairman, David Pollak, said he believed Bruno was grasping at straws.

"Mr. Bruno is obviously upset because he knows his personal grip on Albany's old ways is on its last legs, and reform is on the way," Pollak said in a prepared statement.

"While Mr. Bruno's candidate's entire faltering campaign is bankrolled by the party organization, Craig Johnson is working hard, meeting voters and raising his own funds."

Bruno stressed one reason O'Connell may win is because voters want a balance of power.

While Republicans control the Senate, the Assembly and governor's office are Democratic.

The state comptroller's vacancy caused by the Alan Hevesi scandal is expected to be filled by a Democrat, and Democrats hold both U.S. Senate seats.

Tonight's fundraiser is at the home of Henry and Nancy Elghanayan.

Henry Elghanayan is the principal in Rockrose Development, which is active in building residential housing across New York City.

Among its projects is a 3,300-unit waterfront development across the East River from the United Nations, part of the Queens West development being directed by Empire State Development Corp., the state's economic development arm.

Karlin can be reached at 454-5758 or by e-mail at rkarlin@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

What George W. Bush is going to do .....

In the next couple of weeks .....

Is to RENDER NULL ....

The militia of al-Sadr .....

As a fighting force ....

Over there in Iraq ....

He is going to have them eliminated .....

Exterminated, if necessary ....

And by doing so ....

George W. Bush is going to pull down al-Sadr's pants in public .....

George W. Bush is going to publicly diminish al-Sadr .....

By eliminating al-Sadr's militia .....

As a fighting force in Iraq ....

And so ....

"Mahdi Army expressing siege mentality"

By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press
Last updated: 4:43 p.m., Thursday, January 18, 2007

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Mahdi Army fighters said Thursday they were under siege in their Sadr City stronghold as U.S. and Iraqi troops killed or seized key commanders in pinpoint nighttime raids.

Two commanders of the Shiite militia said Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has stopped protecting the group under pressure from Washington and threats from Sunni Muslim Arab governments.

The two commanders' account of a growing siege mentality inside the organization could represent a tactical and propaganda feint, but there was mounting evidence the militia was increasingly off balance and had ordered its gunmen to melt back into the population.

To avoid capture, commanders report no longer using cell phones and fighters are removing their black uniforms and hiding their weapons during the day.

During much of his nearly eight months in office, al-Maliki has blocked or ordered an end to many U.S.-led operations against the Mahdi Army, which is run by radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the prime minister's key political backer.

As recently as Oct. 31, al-Maliki, trying to capitalize on American voter discontent with the war and White House reluctance to open a public fight with the Iraqi leader just before the election, won U.S. agreement to lift military blockades on Sadr City and another Shiite enclave where an American soldier was abducted.

But al-Maliki reportedly had a change of heart in late November while going into a meeting in Jordan with President Bush.

It has since been disclosed that the Iraqi leader's vision for a new security plan for Baghdad, to which Bush has committed 17,500 additional U.S. troops, was outlined in that meeting.

Al-Maliki is said by aides to have told Bush that he wanted the Iraqi army and police to be in the lead, but he would no longer interfere to prevent U.S. attempts to roll up the Mahdi Army.

In a meeting before his session with Bush, Jordan's King Abdullah II was said by al-Maliki confidants to have conveyed the increasing anger of fellow Sunni leaders in the Middle East over the continuing slaughter of Sunni Muslims at the hands of Shiite death squads.

Until February, much of the violence in Iraq was the work of al-Qaida in Iraq and allied Sunni organizations.

They had killed thousands of Shiites in random bomb attacks in what was seen as an al-Qaida bid to foment civil war.

When al-Qaida bombers blew up the Golden Dome mosque, an important Shiite shrine in the mainly Sunni city of Samarra on Feb. 22, Shiite militiamen, especially the Mahdi Army fighters based in Sadr City, stormed out of the poor enclave in a drive for revenge that has only grown in ferocity.

The U.N. reported this week that the sectarian fighting killed more than 34,000 Iraqis last year, a figure that was criticized but not disputed Thursday by the Iraqi government.

With the Sunni threat in mind, evidence since the meetings in Jordan indicates that al-Maliki has kept his pledge to Bush that there would be no further interference in favor of Shiite militias.

On Wednesday, the prime minister said 400 Mahdi Army fighters had been detained in recent months, although an exact timeframe was not given.

The midlevel Mahdi Army commanders, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the group operates in secret, said at least five top commanders of similar standing were captured or killed in recent months, including one snatched in a night raid from his Sadr City hide-out on Tuesday.

They refused to name him.

Two other key officials at the top of the organization were killed in raids last month:

-- Sahib al-Amiri, a senior al-Sadr military aide, was slain by American forces in the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Dec. 27.

The U.S. military reported his death, calling him a criminal involved roadside bombings.

Al-Sadr lives in Najaf.

-- The other top commander, identified by a third Mahdi Army commander as Abu al-Sudour, was shot to death in a joint U.S.-Iraqi raid last month as well.

He was hunted down in Sadr City.

The third commander, who also spoke anonymously to protect his identity, said U.S.-led raiding parties were now also engaged in massive sweeps, having rounded up what he said was every male old enough to carry a gun in south Baghdad's Um al-Maalef neighborhood Tuesday night.

The U.S. military spokesman, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, alluded to the tactics early this month when he was asked by the AP if the coming security operation would focus on pinpoint raids or broader military engagements.

"It'll be a combination of targeted killings and more traditional large-force operations," Caldwell said.

There has been so much advance publicity about the coming security plan, major speeches by both Bush and al-Maliki, that the militant targets of the operation -- both Sunni insurgents and Shiite militiamen -- have had ample warning the U.S. and Iraqi militaries are drawing a bead.

One of the Mahdi Army commanders who spoke with the AP said the early warning was not ignored.

"Our top leadership has told us to lay low and not confront the Americans."

"But if Sadr City is attacked, if civilians are hurt, we will ignore those orders and take matters in our own hands."

"We won't need orders from Sheik Muqtada (al-Sadr)," the midlevel commander said.

Others in the organization said street fighters have been told not to wear their black uniforms and to hide their weapons, to make their checkpoints less visible.

Reports from the growing number of neighborhoods controlled by the militias indicate fighters are obeying.

Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said the security strategy and the additional American forces would allow the crackdown to be sufficiently broad to sweep up those who try to escape Baghdad and operate elsewhere.

"On the militia, the Baghdad plan itself is integrated to a holistic, countrywide plan that the multinational corps is developing."

"And security for Baghdad won't just come from securing the inside of Baghdad," Casey said at a briefing on Monday.

"It comes from the support zones around the outside as far away, as you suggest, Baqouba and Ramadi and Fallujah."

"It goes all the way out to the borders to stop the flow of foreign fighters and support coming in there."

The Mahdi Army commanders said they were increasingly concerned about improved U.S. intelligence that has allowed the Americans to successfully target key figures in the militia.

"We're no longer using cell phones except in emergencies."

"Some of our top commanders have not been home (in Sadr City) for a year because they fear capture," one of the commanders said.

The militiamen said al-Sadr himself had apparently gotten wind of the coming assault and ordered a reshuffling of the Mahdi Army command structure, transferring many leaders to new districts and firing others who were of suspect loyalty.

While Shiite militiamen were less in evidence on Baghdad streets, Sunni insurgents continued their bomb and shooting attacks in Shiite regions and Shiite death squads remained active at night.

Police reported a total of 59 people killed or found dead Thursday, with the single largest toll from a triple car bombing that killed 10 in a wholesale vegetable market in a south Baghdad Shiite neighborhood.

Twenty-seven bodies were found dumped in Baghdad, 19 on the largely Sunni west side of the Tigris, eight on the mainly Shiite east bank.

An al-Qaida-linked coalition of Sunni insurgents claimed responsibility for a Wednesday attack in Baghdad on a convoy of a Western democracy institute.

The ambush killed an American woman and three security contractors.

The woman was identified as Andrea Parhamovich, 28, of Perry, Ohio.

[Livyjr]

"2 NY congressmen voice worries about Iraq"

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press
Last updated: 6:14 p.m., Wednesday, January 17, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Two New York Republicans, Reps. John McHugh and Randy Kuhl, offered their toughest words yet about the Iraq war Wednesday, a further sign that even stalwart GOPers have serious doubts about the new U.S. strategy to end the sectarian violence.

McHugh, R-Pierrepont Manor, stood before a phalanx of cameras with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to discuss their recent joint visit to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Separately, Kuhl, R-Hammondsport, issued a statement denouncing the Pentagon's ongoing use of the National Guard and reservists under the so-called "stop loss" program.

McHugh and Clinton held a packed press conference to discuss their weekend visits with 10th Mountain Division troops.

The 10th Mountain is based at Fort Drum in McHugh's North Country district.

It is the most deployed division in the Army, currently stationed in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

McHugh voiced an increasingly common refrain from lawmakers of both parties: dwindling patience with the Iraq government's promises to take on more of the security duties for their country.

He also made the argument -- little heard among Republicans -- that Congress should start imposing time limits on funding for the Iraq war.

"No more blank checks," declared McHugh.

"We are in a congressional Catch-22 ..."

"Congress right now has no effective role in this process."

McHugh argued that since the president has already started sending some 21,500 additional troops to Iraq, it is difficult and possibly dangerous for him or the Congress to vote to restrict funding for that move.

But he argued Congress could -- and should -- vote to fund such efforts for only a limited time: months, rather than a full year.

If the Iraqis still can't take the reins of the country and reduce the sectarian violence, Congress should then vote to reduce funding, McHugh said.

Some Republicans have characterized any effort to reduce funding for the military in Iraq as cutting support for the troops.

McHugh and Clinton both called for troop increases in Afghanistan to fend off an expected spring resurgence by the Taliban.

"This is a point of tipping for that government," said McHugh.

Kuhl, meanwhile, called the stop-loss program that pulls guardsmen and reservists to serve for longer than their original contract "a hidden draft."

"The nation should honor that contract by not calling up our troops for longer than the time they initially agree to serve," Kuhl said.

In a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Kuhl and Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., said the Pentagon's use of stop-loss "betrays their trust, separates families and threatens to devastate the likelihood that active duty soldiers will follow-up their service with time serving in the Reserves."

A number of lawsuits from reservists have argued the "stop loss" program illegally makes them stay in the military once their required term of service is complete.

The Bush Administration has argued with success that under federal law the Pentagon can involuntarily extend the deployment of any reserve officer who's on active duty, if the president believes it's essential to national security.

[Livyjr]

"Analysis: Shiite crackdown may be risky"

By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press

Last updated: 2:22 p.m., Wednesday, January 17, 2007

U.S. commanders have signaled they will shy away from a Fallujah-style assault on the Baghdad stronghold of Iraq's biggest Shiite militia -- even though President Bush insists that driving armed groups from the capital is key to his plan for success.

The talk from the Bush administration has been tough, with strong assurances that no part of Baghdad is off limits to the new push for control.

But in reality, the risk of killing civilians and outraging the Iraqi government may be too high to launch an all-out attack on the Mahdi Army of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in its base of the capital's sprawling Sadr City district -- at least for now.

Instead, U.S. commanders are likely first to try options that are politically less risky, such as raids targeting key Mahdi figures, or raids aimed at curbing the militia's spread across other parts of Baghdad.

"I think there's several ways -- several options," to try to rein in the al-Sadr group, the top U.S. ground commander, Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, told Fox News this week.

"One of them could be going into Sadr City."

"But that is not one that I would say we would probably do first."

Without cracking down on the Mahdi Army, however, U.S. and Iraqi officials will never persuade Sunnis to rein in their own armed groups.

The dilemma highlights the difficulty that al-Sadr, who commands a wide following among Iraqi Shiites and has political protection from the country's current leader, has long posed for the United States.

U.S. officials are convinced there can be no peace in Baghdad as long as Shiite and Sunni gunmen roam the streets, killing members of other sects.

And no militia is more feared than the Mahdi Army.

Its ranks swelled after the bombing of a Shiite shrine in the Sunni city of Samarra last February.

Black-clad Mahdi gunmen fanned out from Sadr City to strike at Sunnis throughout Baghdad.

Al-Sadr's strength is not just military.

Through a network of clinics and other charities, he also has won supporters among poor Shiites.

And he controls 30 parliament seats and five Cabinet ministers.

"He has become the authentic spokesman of a significant portion of traditionally disenfranchised Iraqis," the International Crisis Group said in a recent report.

He has "strong legitimacy" within Iraq.

Many Shiites also believe the Mahdi Army, which may have up to 60,000 fighters nationwide, is their best protection against Sunni religious fanatics who have slaughtered thousands of Shiites since 2003.

Many Iraqi police and soldiers -- most of whom are Shiites -- are believed loyal to al-Sadr and would be reluctant to confront his militia.

In past months, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has insisted that he sign off on any U.S. military operations within Sadr City.

That enraged the Americans, who felt their hands were tied.

In announcing his new security plan, Bush said U.S. and Iraqi forces would now have a "green light" to enter all parts of Baghdad, presumably to include Sadr City.

Bush also said al-Maliki had promised "political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated."

American forces seem certain to test those assurances at some point by sending more armed U.S. and Iraqi patrols into Sadr City to search for weapons, even at the risk of a fight.

But the U.S. forces are still likely to avoid an all-out assault there.

More than 2 million people live in Sadr City, and a large-scale attack would probably result in high civilian deaths that could trigger uprisings by Mahdi Army members throughout the southern Shiite heartland.

It is unlikely that al-Maliki could withstand such a massive popular backlash.

One U.S. option short of assault on Sadr City is to target the militia's top people -- a tactic that requires good on-the-ground intelligence.

Another would be to bolster U.S. and Iraqi patrols inside Sadr City but on a limited basis.

It is unclear how the Mahdi Army would respond to a heavier U.S. and Iraqi military presence in Sadr City.

In recent months, Mahdi militiamen have been careful to conceal weapons during the day or when U.S. troops were nearby.

Another option would be to tolerate militia control of Sadr City but prevent the group from operating elsewhere in Baghdad -- a tricky task at a time when the Mahdi Army has made inroads in religiously mixed areas.

It also is far from certain whether local Mahdi commanders would agree to give up control of such neighborhoods -- even if al-Sadr ordered that.

Even more uncertain is how ordinary Shiites, an estimated 60 percent of Iraq's people, would respond to a heavy-handed crackdown against a popular leader.

The danger is that many Shiites would see such a crackdown as an American war against them.

------

Robert H. Reid is Associated Press correspondent-at-large based in Amman, Jordan, and has reported frequently from Iraq since 2003.

[Livyjr]

From the internet ....

Becoming Illegal (From a Maryland resident to his senator), not a half bad idea.

The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
Senate Office Building
309 Hart Building
Washington DC , 20510

Dear Senator Sarbanes,

As a native Marylander and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance.

I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted.

If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years.

I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine.

Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively?

This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider.

Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.

Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as "in-state" tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums.

This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative.

Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,

Pete M.

Get your Forms (NOW)!

Call your Internal Revenue Service 1-800-289-1040.

Please pass this onto your friends so they can save on this great offer!

[Livyjr]

This, of course ....

Takes us right back to the days of Lyndon Baines Johnson ....

Here in OUR America ....

And Viet Nam ....

Where this argument about "The resultant serious blow to the power and prestige of the United States" was once again all the rage .....

As an excuse for keeping us in Viet Nam .....

Where once again ......

There was big money to be made ....

If you were an American bid-ness man, or investor .....

And people just sucked that up back then ...

That excuse ....

And the one about "fledgling democracy", as well ....

And let that war go on and on and on .....

Got rid of some excess population in my generational group .....

Less competition in the workplace environment for those who did not have to go ....

And so .....

And none of that was ever a secret, of course .....

HOW WE WERE BEING MANIPULATED .....

As a nation ...

Because we are so easily manipulated ....

And MASTERS OF THE TRADE OF MANIPULATION ....

Such as Karl Rove down there in the federal city ....

The capital of MANIPULATION in the world .....

Know that we can be very easily manipulated ....

And they have the blueprint in hand .....

From the ANALECTS of Lyndon Baines Johnson ....

And so ......

A rule for holding power ....

Is knowing how to hold power ....

And that is where the requisite skill of the MASTER MANIPULATOR comes into the picture .....

The Bobby McNamara's .....

The McGeorge Bundy's .....

The Karl Rove's .....

The DICK CHENEY's .....

The Machiavelli's of our times .....

Got to have at least one on your team ....

If you are going to be a "HEAVY HITTER" in American politics .....

Or any politics, for that matter .....

And so .....

For a detailed history of that period of time in America from the early 1960's to 1965 .....

With respect to our involvement in Viet Nam .....

From the political perspective of over here .....

A book to read would be Dereliction of Duty - Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, AND THE LIES THAT LED TO VIET NAM by H.R. McMaster ......

Which used to be on the Joint Chiefs of Staff required reading list ......

Before George W. Bush ushered in this present age of gross ignorance that we are now in .....

Especially down there in Washington, D.C. ....

And so .....

And taking a trip ....

Back through time ....

As we can do so easily in here ....

Let us go back to 1965 .....

And LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON ....

AND THE FISCAL GIMMICKS ....

THAT HE USED TO "GAME THE SYSTEM", BACK THEN ....

Faced with growing congressional criticism AND THE PROSPECT OF VIETNAM PROTESTS AND DEBATES, the president sought to defuse opposition.

William Bundy - recalling that the Dominican (Dominican Republic in South America) intervention "and its rationale came under heavy fire in the very quarters, both at home and abroad, that were already skeptical or hostile to the Vietnam actions" - WROTE LATER THAT "THE PRESIDENT RESPONDED TO THE CONGRESSIONAL PRESSURE BY WHAT CAN ONLY BE DESCRIBED AS A GIMMICK."

THE DOMINICAN "CRISIS" GAVE THE PRESIDENT AN OPPORTUNITY TO OVERCOME OPPOSITION TO HIS VIETNAM POLICY.

On May 4 (1965), Johnson sent to Congress a request for seven hundred million dollars to support additional efforts both in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic.

THE PRESIDENT TOLD CONGRESS:

THIS IS NOT A ROUTINE APPROPRIATION.

FOR EACH MEMBER OF CONGRESS WHO SUPPORTS THIS REQUEST IS ALSO VOTING TO PERSIST IN OUR EFFORT TO HALT COMMUNIST AGGRESSION IN SOUTH VIETNAM.

EACH IS SAYING THAT THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT STAND UNITED BEFORE THE WORLD IN JOINT DETERMINATION THAT THE INDEPENDENCE OF SOUTH VIETNAM SHALL BE PRESERVED AND COMMUNIST ATTACK WILL NOT SUCCEED.

REMINDING THE LEGISLATORS THAT "MORE THAN 400 AMERICANS HAVE GIVEN THEIR LIVES IN VIETNAM," WILLIAM BUNDY RECALLED THAT THE PRESIDENT'S TACTIC WAS TO "MAKE THE APPROPRIATION OF A RELATIVELY SMALL SUM - NOT IN FACT RELATED TO ANY SPECIFIC PROGRAM OR ITS COSTS - INTO A SMALL-SCALE NEW TONKIN GULF RESOLUTION."

"AND ALL THIS IN A WEEK WHEN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WERE CONFRONTING THE IDEA OF A 'SECOND CUBA,' OF A COMMUNIST THREAT AT THEIR DOORSTEP."

Like the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, the president's bill passed overwhelmingly (408-7 in the House and 88-3 in the Senate).

As Rhode Island's Claiborne Pell, a Democrat, observed, VOTING AGAINST THE APPROPRIATION WOULD HAVE BEEN "LIKE VOTING AGAINST MOTHERHOOD."

THE PRESIDENT HAD PRESENTED THE LEGISLATORS WITH A FAIT ACCOMPLI.

AFTER U.S. GROUND COMBAT TROOPS ARRIVED IN VIETNAM, THE PRESIDENT COULD EQUATE A VOTE AGAINST HIS POLICY WITH THE ABANDONMENT OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND MARINES AT THE FRONT.

Representative Dante Fascell, a Democrat from Florida, recalled that THE PATRIOTIC IMPULSE TO SUPPORT THE TROOPS HAD BECOME THE "LINCHPIN FOR GREATER INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM."

- pp. 282,283 of Dereliction of Duty - Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, AND THE LIES THAT LED TO VIET NAM by H.R. McMaster, copyright 1997 ......

And as a determined Dick Cheney vows .....

To "STAND BY HIS MAN" ....

George W. Bush ...

The LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON of OUR TIMES ...

We have ....

"Critics won't halt Iraq surge, Bush says"

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney asserted that lawmakers' criticism will not influence Bush's plans and he dismissed any effort to "run a war by committee."

"The president is the commander in chief."

"He's the one who has to make these tough decisions," Cheney said.

Any attempts to block Bush's efforts would undermine the troops, Cheney said.

"This is an existential conflict," Cheney said.

"It is the kind of conflict that's going to drive our policy and our government for the next 20 or 30 or 40 years."

"We have to prevail and we have to have the stomach for the fight long term."

"Bush refuses to waver on Iraq troop plan"

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press
Last updated: 8:32 a.m., Monday, January 15, 2007

WASHINGTON -- President Bush concedes he isn't popular, and that the war in Iraq isn't either.

Yes, progress is overdue and patience is all but gone.

Yet none of that changes his view that more U.S. troops are needed to win in Iraq.

"I'm not going to try to be popular and change principles to do so," Bush said in a television interview that aired Sunday night.

A defiant Cheney, meanwhile, said Democrats offered criticism without credible alternatives.

He pointedly reminded lawmakers that Bush is commander in chief.

"You cannot run a war by committee," the vice president said of congressional input.

As the White House watched even some GOP support peel away from the war plan, it went all-out to regain some footing.

Still, Garner thought Frank's admonition about risk-taking on the way out was plain crazy.

Garner did not relish the prospect of watching U.S. forces leave just as he was setting up shop.

Frank's embrace of audacity was fine for the invasion, since a U.S. victory had been all but pre-ordained, but Garner thought it was reckless to take risks in postwar Iraq.

Holding the country together and installing a democratic government in the heart of the Arab world would be hard enough without removing forces from the field.

"There was no doubt we would win the war," Garner recalled telling McKiernan, " but there can be doubt we will win the peace."

AS UNSETTLING AS FRANK'S COMMENTS WERE, IT WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT GARNER'S TEAM HAD HEARD THAT THE U.S. MIGHT DIMINISH THE NUMBER OF ITS TROOPS IN IRAQ.

In mid-April (2003), Lawrence Di Rita, one of Rumsfeld's closest aides, had arrived in Kuwait to join Garner's team.

Speaking to a group of Garner's aides, Di Rita outlined Rumsfeld's vision.

THE PENTAGON WAS DETERMINED TO AVOID OPEN-ENDED MILITARY COMMITMENTS LIKE THOSE IN BOSNIA AND KOSOVO, AND TO WITHDRAW THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN FORCES IN THREE TO FOUR MONTHS.

THE STATE DEPARTMENT HAD MISMANAGED THE POSTWAR EFFORTS IN THE BALKANS, AND AFGHANISTAN WAS HEADED THE SAME WAY.

WITH THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT NOW IN CHARGE OF IRAQ AFTER THE FALL OF SADDAM THINGS WOULD RUN MORE SMOOTHLY.

"The main theme was that DOD would be in charge, and this would be totally different than in the past," said Tom gross, who was also at the session.

"WE WOULD BE OUT VERY QUICKLY."

"WE WERE VERY CONFUSED."

"WE DID NOT SEE IT AS A SHORT-TERM PROCESS."

IN ANOTHER MEETING WITH GARNER'S TEAM, DI RITA HAD ALSO REJECTED THE NOTION THAT THE UNITED STATES WOULD SUPERVISE A LENGTHY AND COSTLY RECONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTRY.

Paul Wolfowitz had initially suggested that much of the long-needed repair and upgrading of Iraq's infrastructure would be paid for by its oil proceeds.

DI RITA STRESSED THIS WITH MORE PASSION.

Garner's team had projected no more than $3 billion in reconstruction costs over three years at the February Rock Drill, but as the reconstruction plan was being laid out ....

DI RITA SLAMMED HIS HAND ON THE TABLE AND ERUPTED:

"WE DON'T OWE THESE PEOPLE A THING!"

"WE GAVE THEM THEIR FREEDOM!"

- page 464, Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq by Michael R. Gordon and General Bernard E. Trainor ......

"Bush refuses to waver on Iraq troop plan"

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press
Last updated: 8:32 a.m., Monday, January 15, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Yet when asked if he owes the Iraqi people an apology for botching the management of the war, he said, "Not at all."

"We liberated that country from a tyrant," Bush said.

"I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude."

And as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney turn to a COMMITTEE .....

To help them figure out ....

How to run the IRAQINAMI war ....

We have ...

"On Iraq, U.S. Turns to Onetime Dissenters"

By Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, January 14, 2007; Page A01

Timothy M. Carney went to Baghdad in April 2003 to run Iraq's Ministry of Industry and Minerals.

Unlike many of his compatriots in the Green Zone, the rangy, retired American ambassador wasn't fazed by chaos.

He'd been in Saigon during the Tet Offensive, Phnom Penh as it was falling to the Khmer Rouge and Mogadishu in the throes of Somalia's civil war.

Once he received his Halliburton-issued Chevrolet Suburban, he disregarded security edicts and drove around Baghdad without a military escort.

His mission, as he put it, "was to listen to the Iraqis and work with them."

He left after two months, disgusted and disillusioned.

The U.S. occupation administration in Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), placed ideology over pragmatism, he believed.

His boss, viceroy L. Paul Bremer, refused to pay for repairs needed to reopen many looted state-owned factories, even though they had employed tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Carney spent his days screening workers for ties to the Baath Party.

"Planning was bad," he wrote in his diary on May 8, "but implementation is worse."

When he returned to Washington, he made little secret of his views.

They were so scathing that his wife lost a government contract.

He figured his days of working on Iraq were over.

Until a phone call on Tuesday.

David Satterfield, the State Department's Iraq coordinator, was on the line with a question: Would Carney be willing to go back to Baghdad as the overall coordinator of the American reconstruction effort?

The decision to send Carney back to Iraq -- and to abandon the policies that so rankled him in 2003 -- represents a fundamental shift in the Bush administration's approach to stabilizing the country.

Desperate for new approaches to stifle the persistent Sunni insurgency and Shiite death squads that are jointly pushing the country toward an all-out civil war, the White House made a striking about-face last week, embracing strategies and people it once opposed or cast aside.

Indeed, Carney's rushed selection came just days after the administration announced two other key Baghdad appointments from among the ranks of dissenters in 2003:

Ambassador designate Ryan Crocker and Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, who will take over command of all coalition forces in Iraq.

Crocker, who spent the summer of 2003 helping to form Iraq's Governing Council, left the country frustrated with the CPA's reluctance to reach out to minority Sunnis.

Even before the invasion, he wrote a blunt memo for then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell warning of the uncontrolled sectarian and ethnic tensions that would be released by the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

Petraeus, who spent 2003 commanding the 101st Airborne Division in Mosul, grew dismayed by the heavy-handed tactics fellow military commanders were using to combat insurgents.

He also opposed the methods by which Bremer disbanded the Iraqi army and fired Baathists from government jobs.

And he chafed at the way reconstruction funds, personnel and decision-making were centralized in Baghdad.

The CPA's policies, he said in 2004, should have been "tempered by reality."

It's a view the White House now seems to accept.

The plan unveiled by Bush last week calls for many people who lost their jobs under Bremer's de-Baathification decree to be rehired.

It calls for more Sunnis, who were marginalized under the CPA, to be brought into the government.

It calls for state-owned factories to be reopened.

It calls for more reconstruction personnel to be stationed outside the Green Zone.

It calls for a counterinsurgency strategy that emphasizes providing security to the civilian population over transferring responsibility to local military forces.

Carney believes such measures could have been effective three years ago.

Today, he worries they will be too little, too late.

During the phone call, Satterfield told him that the new reconstruction effort might not succeed.

The two men agreed that if it was to have a chance, Americans would have to work more closely and collaboratively with Iraqis.

To Carney, it suggested "a sense of reality."

"It's certainly different than anything I saw out of the CPA or the aftermath of that," he said.

"It seemed a little refreshing, actually."

He paused.

"It's been a long time coming."

A Plan in Need of a Leader

Bush and his national security team began working on their new Iraq strategy in earnest shortly after the Nov. 7 midterm elections, which amounted to a rebuke of the president's war policy.

They met among themselves.

They talked to diplomats and military commanders in Iraq.

They conducted a videoconference with Iraq's prime minister.

They consulted with retired generals, experts at think tanks and academics.

By late December, the president and his closest security advisers -- Vice President Cheney, new Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley -- had coalesced around the need for more troops in Iraq.

They had settled on Crocker to handle political strategy on the ground, replacing Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad.

And they had picked Petraeus to take over from Gen. George W. Casey Jr., whom they deemed to be too focused on the handover of responsibility to the Iraqis instead of on restoring peace to Baghdad's strife-torn neighborhoods.

But it wasn't until Monday, when Bush was going over a draft of the address he planned to deliver on television Wednesday, that they confronted the issue of who would coordinate the administration's new economic initiatives for Iraq.

Bush was planning to propose increasing the number of province-level reconstruction teams operating outside the Green Zone from 10 to 18.

There would be new efforts to help the Iraqi government improve budgeting and management functions.

And, most important, there would be a significant new emphasis on putting unemployed Iraqis to work.

The strategy also included an implicit reversal of Bremer's policy on state-owned factories.

Scores of Americans ensconced in Baghdad's Green Zone would be involved: The U.S. Embassy has an economic section.

There's a U.S. Agency for International Development mission.

And there's the Project and Contracting Office, which manages reconstruction funded by an $18.4 billion U.S. aid package.

"Who's going to coordinate this?" Bush asked as he read through the economic initiatives, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting.

When Satterfield got back to his State Department office, he told his staff to "give me names."

The next day -- less than 36 hours before Bush addressed the nation -- Satterfield called Carney.

Idle Factories, Idle Workers

Before Carney left Iraq in June 2003, he tried one last time to persuade Bremer to rethink his refusal to repair more than a handful of state-owned factories.

Iraq's government-run businesses employed more than 100,000 people before the U.S. invasion.

To Carney, it was a no-brainer: Fixing the factories would allow thousands of Iraqis to get back to work, not only allowing them to provide for their families, but also keeping them occupied.

He knew from his time in other post-conflict societies that the idle and unemployed are the best recruits for insurgencies.

But Bremer and his chief economic adviser, Peter McPherson, didn't want to pour money into inefficient state-run firms.

They believed private investors would buy Iraq's government factories and set up new businesses to employ the populace.

So they refused to give Carney money to reopen the plants.

The day before he left, Carney sent a note to McPherson titled "Fatal Flaws in Budget Policy towards State-Owned Enterprises."

He argued that the CPA was violating the Geneva Conventions by undermining "assets of the Iraqi people."

He also accused McPherson of drawing up policy "without adequate Iraqi participation."

"Instead of transparency, with major concerned Iraqi Ministries and academics engaged," he wrote, "the policy seems to be the thinking of a small group in the Coalition Provisional Authority."

"We need to rethink this," he wrote in closing.

Petraeus also opposed the immediate privatization of state-run firms.

"What happens when you have privatization is . . . you end up with a hell of a lot less workers in the short term," he told an interviewer in 2004.

"If you want to increase unemployment en route to greater employment and greater productivity and greater a lot of other things, that's great, but you've got to survive in the short term."

For almost three years, the policy didn't change.

Although the Iraqi government reopened a small fraction of its 148 factories and began operating them at a diminished capacity, the efforts to sell them to private investors were unsuccessful.

When Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, at the time the top U.S. field commander in Iraq, sought to increase production at a state-owned tractor factory south of Baghdad early last year, a State Department official in Baghdad refused to pay for the necessary repairs, even though the rehabilitated facility would have been able to provide employment for many of the 10,000 people who worked there before the invasion.

Chiarelli used money from a different program -- for small-scale reconstruction projects -- to fund the construction.

It wasn't until June that the Bush administration began to reevaluate its approach.

Paul A. Brinkley, who had recently taken over as deputy undersecretary of defense for business transformation, returned from a trip to Iraq convinced that quelling violence depended on increasing employment.

To Brinkley, a former corporate executive, the most effective way to create jobs was to reopen state-run factories.

Brinkley persuaded Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England to authorize funding to repair as many as 200 factories.

England's predecessor, Paul D. Wolfowitz, was among the administration officials who opposed resuscitating state-owned firms in 2003.

It's not clear how effective Brinkley's initiative will be.

Many of the factories are in dangerous, Sunni-dominated areas of the country.

Electricity remains in short supply.

Raw materials can be hard to come by.

And given the intensity of the sectarian conflict, giving Iraqis jobs may not be enough to get them to put down their weapons.

Even if the odds are slim, the Bush administration wants to give it a try.

Brinkley's team is focusing on 10 factories that it thinks could be open and employing more than 11,000 Iraqis by the end of this month.

"Any counterinsurgency strategy has to have an economic component to it," said Celeste Ward, who spent last year in Iraq as Chiarelli's political adviser.

"It might give us a marginal increase in stability by getting some people off the street."

"You want people to start saying, 'Hey, we're a normal country where people go to work.' "

De-Baathification

"This is a big mistake," Carney thought in May 2003, when Bremer told senior CPA officials that he would soon issue an edict prohibiting many former members of Hussein's Baath Party from holding government jobs.

The one-and-a-half-page decree, which was drafted in the Pentagon office of then-Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith, banned anyone who had been in the party's top four ranks; it also banned hundreds of thousands of rank-and-file members from holding senior management positions in government ministries.

Bremer's stated goal was to cleanse Iraq's government of the former president's cronies.

Carney and the other Americans tapped to run Iraq's ministries knew that the senior managers in almost all government departments were Baathists.

Hussein's government had forced them to join the party, but that didn't mean they all had blood on their hands or that they were all close associates of the former leader.

And without them, it would be much more challenging to get the government running again.

With unemployment at more than 40 percent, Carney also knew that anyone kicked out of a government job wasn't going to find work elsewhere.

They would be unemployed and angry.

Carney was one of many CPA officials to object.

But Bremer refused to soften the policy.

The de-Baathification expert in the CPA's headquarters was Meghan O'Sullivan, then an aide to Bremer and now a deputy national security adviser working on Iraq.

Although she voiced initial misgivings, she quickly became a vigorous and uncompromising enforcer of the edict.

From the moment the order was issued, most of Carney's time was devoted to de-Baathification.

He held long meetings with the industry ministry's management, first to explain the policy and then to comb through records to identify people who were ineligible for future employment.

"It was a terrible waste of time," Carney said.

"There were so many more important things we should have been doing, like starting factories and paying salaries."

After a few months, the CPA began to receive reports that 10,000 to 15,000 teachers had been fired because of the de-Baathification order.

In some Sunni-dominated areas, entire schools were left with just one or two teachers.

Bremer eventually concluded that the policy had been applied "unevenly and unjustly."

But instead of rescinding his edict, he announced that appeals would be handled by a de-Baathification commission headed by Ahmed Chalabi, a controversial former exile whose informants had helped the Bush administration make the case for war.

Chalabi, a Shiite, saw little need to accommodate former Baathists, most of whom are Sunnis.

By the summer of 2004, as the United States was relinquishing sovereignty of Iraq, many officials handling Iraq policy in Washington had concluded that Bremer's initial edict was a mistake.

But it was too late for the Americans to do anything other than urge Iraq's Shiite-led interim government to rehire ex-Baathists.

The CPA no longer had the power to issue edicts.

U.S. officials in Baghdad and in Washington leaned on the governments of prime ministers Ayad Allawi and Ibrahim al-Jafari, but the country's powerful Shiite and Kurdish leaders were unwilling to embrace the changes sought by the Bush administration.

As far as they were concerned, Bremer enacted a sound policy in 2003, and there was little need to change it.

Finally, in 2005, the Shiites and Kurds agreed to reexamine the de-Baathification rules as part of a compromise to get Sunni political parties to support Iraq's new constitution.

The agreement called for a revised de-Baathification law to be enacted by parliament.

But that still hasn't happened.

In an attempt to get the process moving, Bush used his televised address last week to call on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to embrace the reintegration of former Baathists.

Maliki told Bush recently that he supports a revised de-Baathification law -- but the issue isn't in the prime minister's hands.

It's still with Chalabi.

Chalabi is the chairman of the Supreme National Commission for De-Baathification, which continues to have ultimate authority to decide which ex-Baathists can return to work and which cannot.

He has prepared draft legislation that calls for easing some elements of Bremer's policy, but he said parliament has been unable to act on it because a majority of the members of the legislature's de-Baathification committee belong to radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's political party, which walked out in November to protest a meeting between Maliki and Bush.

Speaking by telephone from Baghdad, Chalabi said he expects progress "pretty soon."

But he said the law will not contain a key demand of the U.S. government: a sunset clause that would abolish the commission, effectively depriving Chalabi of political influence.

He called it unconstitutional.

Chalabi said he heard Bush's call for swift action on the de-Baathification law, but he emphasized that he and his fellow Iraqis, not U.S. officials, are in charge of the legislative timetable.

"We don't feel any pressure," he said.

[Livyjr]

Ah, yes .....

BUSHIAN/RUMSFELDONIAN EXISTENTIALISM .........

It's a philosophy embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual, that being George W. Bush, of course, who must assume ultimate responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad .....

And so ....

"Iraq planning blocked, general says" - Rumsfeld refused to let military study how to deal with invasion aftermath"

By McClatchy-Tribune
First published: Saturday, September 9, 2006

FORT EUSTIS, Va. -- [u]Long before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forbade military strategists to develop plans for securing a post-war Iraq, the retiring commander of the Army Transportation Corps said Thursday.

In fact, said Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, Rumsfeld said "he would fire the next person" who talked about the need for a post-war plan.

Rumsfeld did replace Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff in 2003, after Shinseki told Congress that hundreds of thousands of troops would be needed to secure post-war Iraq.

Scheid, who is also the commander of Fort Eustis in Newport News, retires in about three weeks.

Scheid's comments are further confirmation of the version of events reported in "Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq," the book by New York Times reporter Michael R. Gordon and retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor.

In 2001, Scheid was a colonel with the Central Command, the unit that oversees U.S. military operations in the Mideast.

On Sept. 10, 2001, he was selected to be the chief of logistics war plans.

On Sept. 11, he said, "life just went to hell."

That day, Gen. Tommy Franks, the commander of Central Command, told his planners, including Scheid, to "get ready to go to war."

A day or two later, Rumsfeld was "telling us we were going to war in Afghanistan and to start building the war plan."

"We were going to go fast.

"Then, just as we were barely into Afghanistan Rumsfeld came and told us to get ready for Iraq."

Scheid said he remembers everyone thinking, "My gosh, we're in the middle of Afghanistan, how can we possibly be doing two at one time?"

"How can we pull this off?"

"It's just going to be too much."

Eventually other military agencies like the transportation and Army materiel commands had to get involved.

They couldn't just "keep planning this in the dark," Scheid said.

Scheid said the planners continued to try "to write what was called Phase 4."

"Critics won't halt Iraq surge, Bush says"

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush, facing opposition from both parties over his plan to send more troops to Iraq, said he has the authority to act no matter what Congress wants.

Like Bush, though, Cheney braced Americans to frame the war in Iraq as part of a much longer effort.

"This is an existential conflict," Cheney said.

"It is the kind of conflict that's going to drive our policy and our government for the next 20 or 30 or 40 years."

"We have to prevail and we have to have the stomach for the fight long term."

And to top off everything else that is plaguing the REPUBLICANS .....

Here is George W. Bush ......

And he looks like he is going LIBERAL on them .....

Becoming an existentialist .....

In his dotage .....

And so ....

"Bush's existential dilemma"

By TOM TEEPEN

First published: Friday, September 8, 2006

President Bush is taking a terrible ribbing -- perhaps good-natured here and there -- about claiming Albert Camus' "The Stranger" in his summer reading.

The 1942 novel is widely accounted as one of the seminal works of existentialism, although Camus himself disavowed the relationship.

Either way, neither Camus nor existentialism makes an easy fit with Bush's cultivated image, going back at least to his college days, as the proud C student, jock and former hard-drinking party guy.

In repeated photo ops at the Texas ranch, which he bought as scenery for his rough-and-ready look, the President has put across the idea that he clears far more brush than book shelves.

Maybe some current, serious but accessible novel, say E.L. Doctorow's "The March," about Sherman's, would tally, but "The Stranger"?

Bush, after all, scoffed at an American TV reporter for asking the French president a question in French -- in France.

And the President compounded the recent puzzlement when, queried about the Camus book by NBC's Brian Williams, he said that he had also read "three Shakespeares" and declared himself an "ecelectic" reader.

(Little has been made of the coinage, a mercy all around. Even the lazy can get tired of shooting fish in a barrel and go looking for better sport.)

Bush has my sympathy on this one, for whatever little that's worth.

I skipped the book and went straight to the movie, which I may have liked but who knows?

That was 60 years back.

And existentialism has defied my off-and-on stabs at getting some sense of it.

My Webster's Collegiate says it's a philosophy "embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad."

"On Iraq, U.S. Turns to Onetime Dissenters"

By Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, January 14, 2007; Page A01

De-Baathification

"This is a big mistake," Carney thought in May 2003, when Bremer told senior CPA officials that he would soon issue an edict prohibiting many former members of Hussein's Baath Party from holding government jobs.

The one-and-a-half-page decree, which was drafted in the Pentagon office of then-Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith, banned anyone who had been in the party's top four ranks; it also banned hundreds of thousands of rank-and-file members from holding senior management positions in government ministries.

Bremer's stated goal was to cleanse Iraq's government of the former president's cronies.

The de-Baathification expert in the CPA's headquarters was Meghan O'Sullivan, then an aide to Bremer and now a deputy national security adviser working on Iraq.

Although she voiced initial misgivings, she quickly became a vigorous and uncompromising enforcer of the edict.

AND WHILE WE ARE ON THE SUBJECT OF "EXISTENTIAL CONFLICTS" .....

Here in OUR America ....

From pp. 103,104 of FIASCO - The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks:

So while the task and stakes facing Garner (Jay Garner, American originally in charge of post-war Iraq in 2003) were huge - certainly the future of Iraq, possibly the future of the Mideast, perhaps that of U.S. foreign policy in the region, perhaps the future of the BUSH ADMINISTRATION - he found himself focusing instead on sniping inside the BUSH ADMINISTRATION, at Warrick and others he was recruiting.

APPARENTLY THERE WAS SOME SORT OF IDEOLOGICAL TEST THEY HAD FAILED BUT IT WAS ALL VERY MYSTERIOUS TO GARNER, EVEN TO THE EXTENT OF EXACTLY WHO WAS ADMINISTERING THE EXAM.

A few days later (2003) Garner briefed RUMSFELD on the state of his planning.

THE BRIEFING SLIDE ON THE IRAQI ARMY STATED THAT IT WOULD BE "NECESSARY TO KEEP IRAQI ARMY INTACT FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME."

"SERVES AS A READY RESOURCE POOL FOR LABOR-INTENSIVE CIVIL WORKS PROJECTS."

As the meeting was breaking up and aides were leaving, RUMSFELD took Garner aside and said he had an issue he needed to discuss privately.

HE WALKED OVER TO HIS DESK AND TOOK OUT SOME NOTES, WHICH HE REVIEWED FOR A MOMENT, GARNER RECALLED.

HE THEN LOOKED UP AND SAID, ACCORDING TO GARNER, "YOU'VE GOT TWO PEOPLE WORKING FOR YOU - WARRICK AND [MEGHAN] O'SULLIVAN - THAT YOU NEED TO GET RID OF."

"I CAN'T, THEY ARE SMART, REALLY GOOD, KNOWLEDGABLE," GARNER PROTESTED.

RUMSFELD SAID IT WAS OUT OF HIS HANDS.

"THIS COMES FROM SUCH A LEVEL THAT I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT," HE SAID, ACCORDING TO GARNER.

THAT COULD ONLY MEAN ONE THING:

THE PURGE HAD BEEN ORDERED BY SOMEONE AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND NOT JUST SOME UNDERLING ON THE STAFF OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL.

GARNER FELT THAT HIS GROUP, JUST GETTING OFF THE GROUND, WAS BEING HAMSTRUNG.

WORRIED AND UPSET, HE WENT TO SEE STEPHEN HADLEY, THE LOW-KEY DEPUTY TO CONDOLEEZA ("CON-JOB CONNIE") RICE AT THE NSC.

AGAIN HE WAS FACED WITH A SENIOR OFFICIAL TELLING HIM IT WAS OUT OF HIS HANDS.

"I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT," HADLEY TOLD GARNER.

GARNER THEN HAD ONE OF HIS STAFFERS CALL AROUND NATIONAL SECURITY CIRCLES IN THE GOVERNMENT TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON.

"HE WAS TOLD THE WORD HAD COME FROM CHENEY," HE RECALLED.

When POWELL got word of the ouster of Warrick and O'Sullivan, he called RUMSFELD and asked, "WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?"

RUMSFELD responded that the work of postwar planning had to be done by people DEVOTED TO THE TASK WHO SUPPORTED THE POLICY.

THE TUG-OF-WAR OVER GARNER'S PERSONNEL PICKS NEVER REALLY ENDED.

"Anybody that knows anything" was removed, ARMITAGE said later.

"THEY DIDN'T LIKE WARRICK AND MEGHAN [O'SULLIVAN], BECAUSE THEY WERE BOTH INCONVENIENT - YOU KNOW, WANTED THE FACTS TO GET IN THE EQUATION."

"THESE WERE NOT PEOPLE WHO STOOD UP FOR THE PARTY LINE, THAT WE'D BE WELCOMED WITH GARLANDS."

"We bitched about it, and all RUMSFELD said was 'I GOT THE HIGHER AUTHORITY'."

"And he didn't say whom."

"WELL, NOT MANY HIGHER."

[Livyjr]

And taking a trip ....

Back through time ....

As we can do so easily in here ....

Let us go back to 1965 .....

And LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON ....

AND THE FISCAL GIMMICKS ....

THAT HE USED TO "GAME THE SYSTEM", BACK THEN ....

THE PRESIDENT HAD PRESENTED THE LEGISLATORS WITH A FAIT ACCOMPLI.

AFTER U.S. GROUND COMBAT TROOPS ARRIVED IN VIETNAM, THE PRESIDENT COULD EQUATE A VOTE AGAINST HIS POLICY WITH THE ABANDONMENT OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND MARINES AT THE FRONT.

Representative Dante Fascell, a Democrat from Florida, recalled that THE PATRIOTIC IMPULSE TO SUPPORT THE TROOPS HAD BECOME THE "LINCHPIN FOR GREATER INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM."

- pp. 282,283 of Dereliction of Duty - Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, AND THE LIES THAT LED TO VIET NAM by H.R. McMaster, copyright 1997 ......

Poor old John Kerry .....

He led with not only his chin on that one .....

But his whole face as well .....

RIGHT INTO A STONE WALL ....

And that made KARL ROVE's VICTORY all that much sweeter ....

SINCE KARL HAD USURPED DEMOCRAT LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON'S FISCAL GIMMICKRY .....

FROM THE VIET NAM TIMES .....

HERE IN OUR AMERICA ....

AS HIS OWN .....

AND THEREBY .....

HAD CAUGHT JOHN KERRY IN A TRAP ....

OF THE DEMOCRATS' OWN MAKING .....

BACK IN THE VIET NAM WAR TIMES .....

And so .....

Of all people .....

John Kerry should have recognized this GIMMICK ....

When KARL ROVE had George W. Bush ROLL IT OUT, ONE MORE TIME, AGAIN .....

To "SLICK" America ....

To "SKIN" us .....

To "PULL THE WOOL OVER OUR EYES" ......

But John Kerry just didn't know OUR own history .....

And so ....

"THESE WERE NOT PEOPLE WHO STOOD UP FOR THE PARTY LINE, THAT WE'D BE WELCOMED WITH GARLANDS."

"Critics won't halt Iraq surge, Bush says"

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush, facing opposition from both parties over his plan to send more troops to Iraq, said he has the authority to act no matter what Congress wants.

Like Bush, though, Cheney braced Americans to frame the war in Iraq as part of a much longer effort.

"This is an existential conflict," Cheney said.

"It is the kind of conflict that's going to drive our policy and our government for the next 20 or 30 or 40 years."

"We have to prevail and we have to have the stomach for the fight long term."

Ahhhhhhhh ......

Yes ....

Yes .....

BUSHIAN/CHENEYESQUE EXISTENTIALISM .........

I have heard about that SCHOOL OF THOUGHT, MYSELF ....

It's taught at HARVARD, I hear ......

Very high level stuff, indeed .....

It's a philosophy .....

Embracing diverse doctrines ....

But centering on analysis ....

Of individual existence ....

In an unfathomable universe ....

And the plight of the individual ....

That being George W. Bush, of course .....

Himself a GRADUATE of HARVARD ....

Who must assume ....

Ultimate responsibility ....

For his acts of free will ....

Without any certain knowledge ....

Of what is right ...

Or wrong ...

Or good

Or bad .....

UH ....

Say, Dick ......

HOW DO YOU WIN AN "EXISTENTIAL CONFLICT"?

AND WHO GETS TO CALL IT A VICTORY?

"Pelosi comments draw White House ire"

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 53 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - In a critique the White House labeled as "poisonous," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi charged Friday that President Bush is wading too deeply into Iraq and said it should not be "an obligation of the American people in perpetuity."

Pelosi said Bush "has dug a hole so deep he can't even see the light on this."

"It's a tragedy."

"It's a stark blunder."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino retorted that Pelosi's comments were "poisonous," referring to the portion of Pelosi's statement that asserted Bush is rushing new troops there and betting that Congress won't cut off funds once they're in battle.

"It's certainly not in keeping with the bipartisan spirit and civility that the Democrats pledged and that we looked forward to," Perino said.

"Speaker Pelosi was arguing in essence that the president is putting young men and women in harm's way for tactical political reasons."

"She's questioning his motivations rather than questioning his policies."

Democratic support is building around a resolution that would rebuff Bush's plans for more troops to Iraq, and more Republicans are looking for ways to sign on to the measure.

As the White House scrambled to secure the dwindling backers of Bush's war policies on Capitol Hill, Republican Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon signaled that a simple wording change could persuade him to join the Democrats.

Pelosi said House Democrats would back a Senate Democratic resolution declaring that the troop increase is "not in the national interest of the United States."

Senate leaders expect to begin action on the nonbinding measure next Wednesday.

Senate Democrats, backed by two Republicans, unveiled legislation Wednesday that criticized Bush's decision.

"It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq," the nonbinding Senate measure states.

Smith said his reluctance to back the resolution hinged on the word "escalating," which he said is a partisan term that unnecessarily inflames the issue.

He said he is working with Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Ben Nelson, D-Neb. on a "constructive, nonpartisan resolution that expresses the opposition of the Senate to the surge."

Pelosi's attack came as Lee Hamilton, the Democratic co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, told a House panel that Bush's plan to deploy 21,500 additional troops to secure Baghdad and Anbar province would delay progress in training Iraqi security forces.

The bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended removing U.S. combat troops by early next year, and changing the U.S. mission from security to training and logistical support of Iraqi troops.

"You delay the date of completion of the training mission."

"You delay the date of handing responsibility to the Iraqis."

"You delay the date of departure of U.S. troops" from the region, Hamilton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the buildup.

Bush and senior administration officials have been laboring to limit Republican defections.

"He said, 'If you can help us out, I really appreciate your help,'" Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., said after a White House meeting with the commander in chief.

Republican lawmakers in both houses are expected to draft alternative legislation, in part to give party members a measure to support rather than merely oppose what Democrats draft.

Officials said one possibility under discussion is an alternative that supports the troop increase as long as the Iraqi government meets certain conditions.

Administration supporters have expressed concerns the president faces a bipartisan repudiation of significant proportions.

So far, Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe of Maine have said they back the resolution.

Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., echoed Smith's opposition to the troop increase but also said "there are some things in the resolution I don't agree with, and so we're kind of looking at language."

Bush's meeting with lawmakers was his third session in as many days as he struggles to build support for an increase in troops for a war that is opposed by the public and played a role in Republican setbacks in last fall's elections.

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley traveled to the Capitol to meet with House Republicans.
___

Associated Press writers David Espo, Matthew Daly, Barry Schweid, Jennifer Talhelm and Fred Frommer contributed to this report.

end quotes

WE'RE ALL QUESTIONING HIS MOTIVATIONS AT THIS POINT, DANA .....

BECAUSE HE HAS BEEN PLAYING GAMES WITH THE LIVES OF OUR AMERICAN MILITARY PERSONNEL ....

FOR TACTICAL POLITICAL REASONS .....

LIKE HOLDING UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER OVER US ....

HERE IN OUR OWN AMERICA ....

This Dana Perino doesn't seem to have fathomed the fact .....

That back in November of 2006 .....

There was a NATIONAL ELECTION .....

That spoke VOLUMES .....

About the TONE OF VOICE .....

That the AMERICAN PEOPLE ....

Would have HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI .....

USE ON GEORGE W. BUSH ....

And it sure was not one of obsequiousness ....

And so .....

It is PAST TIME ....

That somebody like Nancy Pelosi .....

Stood up, here in OUR America ....

To call a SPADE ....

A SPADE ....

And so .....

"EXISTENTIAL CONFLICT ..."

"TO LAST THIRTY OR FORTY YEARS ....."

What a bunch of BULL CRAP ....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

"Bush team weakening security"

By H.D.S. GREENWAY

First published: Monday, January 1, 2007

Vice President Dick Cheney, whom Scowcroft says he can hardly recognize anymore, has turned out not only to be the most powerful vice president in history, but also one of the most destructive.

His near Vladimir Putin-like obsession with beefing up the power of the executive branch at the expense of Congress and the judiciary has undermined the checks and balances upon which the republic was founded.

His "1 percent doctrine," as author Ron Suskind called it, the principle that if a country presents even the slightest suspicion of a threat it has to be whacked, has put this country in great peril.

Cheney's manipulation of intelligence before the Iraq war is now legend.

His secretive style, his seeming advocacy of torture, his baleful influence in the affairs of state, his interference to make sure that men and women with expert knowledge of the Middle East and Iraq be removed from the decision-making process, the fear mongering, the constant refrain that all criticism, or even questioning, is unpatriotic have all weakened this country both morally and physically.

Cheney's wings may have been clipped a bit as allies and soulmates leave government, but he remains the keystone in the crumbling edifice of pre-emptive war and don't-talk-to-evil.

"Former VP Mondale criticizes Cheney"

By DANIEL YEE, Associated Press Writer

Fri Jan 19, 11:08 AM ET

ATHENS, Ga. - Former vice president Walter Mondale on Friday criticized Vice President Dick Cheney's role in the White House, and said former president Jimmy Carter never would have tolerated Cheney's actions.

"I think that Cheney has stepped way over the line," Mondale said.

Mondale, who was vice president under Carter, made the comments at a three-day conference about Carter's presidency that opened Friday at the University of Georgia.

Mondale said Cheney and his assistants pressured federal agencies as they prepared information for President Bush.

"I think Cheney's been at the center of cooking up farcical estimates of national risks, weapons of mass destruction and the 9/11 connection to Iraq," he said.

Mondale said that does not serve the president, because he needs facts.

"If I had done as vice president what this vice president has done, Carter would have thrown me out of there," Mondale said.

"I don't think he could have tolerated a vice president over there pressuring and pushing other agencies, ordering up different reports than they wanted to send us."

"I don't think he would have stood for it."

Academics credit Carter with expanding the role of the vice presidency during his administration.

As vice president, Mondale served as the president's senior adviser.

He held an office in the West Wing of the White House, had private meetings with the president and spoke on behalf of the president before influential groups.

end quotes

"I think Cheney's been at the center of cooking up farcical estimates of national risks, weapons of mass destruction and the 9/11 connection to Iraq," he said .......

Well, Mr. Mondale ....

I believe that you will find a lot of LOYAL AMERICANS .....

Quite in agreement with you on that statement .....

And that sentiment ....

And so ...

In fact ....

If I am not mistaken ......

That is what this last NATIONAL ELECTION was all about ....

In part, anyway ....

A REFERENDUM ....

On all the lies .....

That Dick Cheney and his crowd have been cramming down OUR throats .....

To keep this "EXISTENTIAL CONFLICT" of theirs going .....

FOR ANOTHER THIRTY OR FORTY YEARS ....

While they BLEED us and OUR TREASURY DRY ....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

"Palm Beach trip probed - Vacation, including a visit to a strip club, part of the Bruno-Abbruzzese inquiry"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, January 14, 2007

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- New York's legislative leaders had been in session only a few days last year when Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno quietly left town for a vacation in Florida.

It was Jan. 11, a Wednesday, and a bitter political debate over sexual offender laws was unfolding as Bruno boarded the private jet of his friend, Jared E. Abbruzzese, a Loudonville multimillionaire.

The two-day excursion included an expensive round of golf at an exclusive course, The Medalist, designed by Australian golf legend Greg Norman.

The day would end with Abbruzzese bankrolling the senator's visit to a strip club.

The trip, the Times Union has learned, has become one of many events being scrutinized by federal authorities in an ongoing criminal investigation of the unusual relationship between the senator and the businessman.

With Bruno on the Palm Beach trip were Abbruzzese, a physician who has treated Bruno, and an unidentified fourth man.

On the drive back from the golf course, the men pulled into Rachel's, a high-class strip club and steakhouse in the heart of West Palm Beach.

There, patrons are greeted by overly polite valets who spend much of their time parking Range Rovers and customized BMWs driven by an almost exclusively male clientele.

Inside, $40 steaks and $90 bottles of wine are delivered by bow-tied waiters in a darkened four-star atmosphere.

On two stages in the center of the club, female performers, some fully nude, move fluidly under pulsing strobe lights while tunes from rockers such as Tom Petty and Jimi Hendrix pierce the air.

For those seeking a closer encounter, the women, many resembling Playboy centerfolds, offer private lap dances -- at a $20 minimum -- on a leather-covered bench near a secluded spot in the back.

Bruno's two-day vacation, including the night at Rachel's, was bankrolled by Abbruzzese, sources told the Times Union.

"Bruno trip included key appointee - Member of panel responsible for oversight of NYRA was member of senator's Florida travel party"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS and JAMES M. ODATO, Staff writers, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 19, 2007

ALBANY -- A member of the state's racing oversight board was among a small group that accompanied Sen. Joseph L. Bruno last year on a Palm Beach excursion that included two days of golf and a helicopter flight to a South Florida horse track.

The trip was largely bankrolled by Jared E. Abbruzzese, a friend of Bruno's who has been involved with efforts to win the state's horse racing franchise.

Abbruzzese's and Bruno's financial records have been subpoenaed by a federal grand jury, according to knowledgeable sources.

Federal authorities and the state Lobbying Commission have used subpoenas and letters to obtain information on the Palm Beach trip and other flights from Richmor Aviation, which manages Abbruzzese's private aircraft.

The Palm Beach trip, one of several Bruno, R-Brunswick, took with Abbruzzese or aboard his aircraft, took place in January 2006.

Months later, Abbruzzese became a director and investor with Empire Racing Associates, one of three consortiums vying for the franchise to run New York's horse tracks.

An official briefed on the federal investigation said Thursday that Bruno and Abbruzzese were accompanied on the Palm Beach trip by Joseph Torani, who is the Senate Republicans' appointee to the New York Racing Association's Oversight Committee.

The five-member board, which is unpaid, was created in August 2005 to keep watch over the troubled management and finances of NYRA.

NYRA's lucrative and long-standing contract to manage the state's horse tracks expires at the end of this year.

In addition to Empire Racing Associates, the bidders for the franchise include NYRA and Excelsior Racing Associates, which was selected by a state panel last fall as the preferred bidder for the franchise.

Empire Racing officials announced several weeks ago that Abbruzzese's involvement with them had ended.

The announcement came days after the federal investigation was publicly disclosed.

Federal officials are said to be exploring whether anyone tried to buy Bruno's influence.

The state Lobbying Commission, which has no authority over Bruno's activities, also is investigating whether Abbruzzese is an unregistered lobbyist, which he denies.

Torani, managing partner at a financial and consulting firm in Colonie, did not return telephone calls seeking comment.

He was with the oversight committee for five months when he went to Palm Beach with Bruno, Abbruzzese and a physician who has treated Bruno.

The four men are friends, and Bruno and Abbruzzese have mutual business interests, according to a knowledgeable source.

The group flew to West Palm Beach that week aboard a private jet owned by Abbruzzese.

They played golf at an exclusive course, flew to the Gulfstream Park horse track aboard a private helicopter -- a flight also arranged by Richmor Aviation -- and visited an upscale club that offers adult entertainment, according to three sources familiar with the trip.

While in Palm Beach, they stayed at The Breakers, regarded as one of Florida's most lavish oceanfront resorts, according to an official familiar with the trip.

John McArdle, Bruno's spokesman, said that since the trip was private, "we are not commenting on details of the trip beyond matters that Sen. Bruno has publicly discussed."

He did, however, acknowledge that some political business occurred on the trip.

"Sen. Bruno's trip to Florida did not involve government-related business or his role as a public official," said

"Given that a fundraiser was scheduled in Florida the following month, a portion of the trip did involve meetings and talks with potential campaign contributors about supporting the Senate majority."

Charles Hayward, president of NYRA, said the Palm Beach trip is troublesome because of the coziness between the senator and supporters of Empire Racing Associates, which hopes to replace NYRA.

Hayward said Torani told him he went to Florida with Bruno last January, detailing the helicopter ride over Gulfstream Park.

However, Hayward said Torani proved to be an advocate for NYRA on the oversight board.

"Joe's a stand-up guy."

"He told us he went on that helicopter ride around Gulfstream, to look at the track from the air," Hayward said.

Hayward said he has concerns about what was going on behind the scenes as Friends of New York Racing, a nonprofit group that included Abbruzzese, morphed into Empire Racing Associates.

Empire Racing officials said Hayward is off base in describing Friends of New York Racing as its forerunner.

Timothy Smith, the former head of Friends of New York Racing, testified before the Lobbying Commission last year that he once was able to have a one-on-one meeting with Bruno at Abbruzzese's Loudonville home.

Smith said Abbruzzese helped arrange the meeting.

Lyons can be reached at 454-5547 or by e-mail at blyons@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

This Eliot Spitzer is one smart POLITICIAN, alright ....

He knows to call himself a DEMOCRAT up here .....

Because it is a word that really doesn't mean anything at all ....

It is an empty word .....

Devoid of any substantive meaning .....

And yet ...

Despite that ....

The "label" appeals to people ....

Who will vote for the "label" .....

Regardless of what really is in the "package" the "label" is on .....

AND IN THE MEANTIME .....

Spitzer will continue on with REPUBLICAN George Pataki's POLICIES .....

As he continues the State's POLICY OF PANDERING TO THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL .....

And so ....

"Hospital CEO up for state health job - Spitzer nominee Richard Daines would have task of carrying out Berger plan"

By CATHLEEN F. CROWLEY, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 19, 2007

Gov. Eliot Spitzer Thursday nominated a New York City hospital CEO with a reputation for improving patient care as the state's next health commissioner.

Dr. Richard Daines, 55, the CEO and chief medical officer of St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, received strong support from the medical community and his colleagues, who called him a thoughtful team builder.

"Governor Spitzer has chosen a commissioner with an extensive background in hospital management, and we welcome him," said John Klein, president of Nurses United, CWA Local 1168.

"At a time when New York's hospitals are being faced with a scalpel, it's good to know we'll have a doctor in Albany."

If the Senate approves his nomination, Daines will be charged with executing the highly controversial closing and downsizing of the state's hospital system as proposed by the Berger Commission, a initiative of former Gov. George Pataki.

The commission recommended closing nine hospitals, including Bellevue Woman's Hospital in Niskayuna, and merging dozens of other to save $800 million in Medicaid and other health care expenses.

Daines, a Republican, will serve in the Democratic administration under Dennis Whalen, Spitzer's choice for the new position of deputy secretary for health.

Daines replaces Antonia Novello, who resigned before Spitzer took office.

The post pays $136,000.

Daines has served as CEO of St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center for six years and was medical director for two years.

Previously, he held administrative positions at a hospital in the Bronx.

His medical background is internal medicine and critical care.

Before earning his medical degree at Cornell, Daines served as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Bolivia.

"He's an incredible man of integrity and honesty," said Gail Donovan, the chief operating officer of Continuum Health Partners, the parent company of St. Luke's-Roosevelt.

Donovan credited Daines with creating a quality improvement program and helping St. Luke's-Roosevelt stabilize its finances, she said.

Spitzer's choice also drew praise from the Greater New York Hospital Association, the Healthcare Association of New York State, and Assemblyman Richard Gottfried, chairman of the Assembly Health Committee.

Also Thursday, Spitzer named Diana Jones Ritter to serve as commissioner of the Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities.

Ritter has served as the executive deputy state comptroller since 2003.

In addition to various financial posts, she was associate commissioner of administration and quality executive for OMRDD from 1990 to 1993.

The job also pays $136,000.

Cathleen F. Crowley can be reached at 518-454-5348 or by e-mail at ccrowley@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

And then there is the subject of CORPORATE WELFARE ...

Or put another way ...

Having the taxpayers of the state ...

PUT SOME STATE TAX MONEY RIGHT INTO THE POCKETS OF THE CORPORATE SHAREHOLDERS .....

As if they were owed that .....

These CORPORATE SHAREHOLDERS ...

By the citizens of the state .....

"GIFTING" ....

Or "TITHING" ....

OR A STATE GUARANTEE OF CORPORATE PROFITS ....

Whatever name you want to put to it .....

IT IS STEALING FROM THE TAXPAYERS, ON THE ONE HAND .....

And it is playing favorites, on the other .....

As to which business is to get the GIFT to its CORPORATE PROFITS from the "state" this time around ...

And so .....

"All sides air views about $650M for AMD - At open forum, residents debate state's plan to chip in for construction of $3.2 billion chip fab"

By ERIC ANDERSON, Deputy business editor, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, November 7, 2006

MALTA -- One o'clock on a Monday afternoon before Election Day wasn't the most convenient time to hold a public hearing, several Saratoga County residents suggested Monday.

They had gathered at the Luther Forest Technology Campus in Malta to voice their views on the state's plan to provide $650 million to Advanced Micro Devices Inc.'s planned $3.2 billion semiconductor plant there.

In all, state assistance is expected to total about $1.2 billion, and AMD is committed to creating 1,205 jobs at the plant by 2014.

Still, the ultimate size of the incentive -- about $1 million per job troubled some people.

"I'm actually in total disbelief this project has gotten so far," said Louise McNeilly, who identified herself as a "refugee" from Silicon Valley.

"Not only are we turning public dollars over to a private company, we have no control over it."

"AMD stock dives amid price war - 9.5 percent drop comes after clash with Intel cuts computer chip prices"

By JORDAN ROBERTSON, Associated Press
First published: Saturday, January 13, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- Shares of Advanced Micro Devices Inc. fell more than 9.5 percent Friday, a day after the world's No. 2 microprocessor maker said plunging computer-chip prices hacked into the company's fourth-quarter results.

AMD, which plans a $3.2 billion computer chip factory in Saratoga County, warned late Thursday that operating income for the quarter -- excluding business units and charges related to newly acquired graphics chipmaker ATI Technologies Inc. -- is expected to be "positive but substantially lower" than in the third quarter.

Sunnyvale, Calif.-based AMD blamed the decline on "significantly" lower average selling prices in the quarter for microprocessors, which act as the core calculating engines in computers.

Unit sales were up, but were offset by the falling prices, AMD said.

The company did not provide details.

Shares of AMD dropped $1.92 to close at $18.26 in Friday trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Its much larger rival, Intel Corp., gained 21 cents to close at $22.13 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

AMD also said that revenue for the quarter ended Dec. 31 -- excluding ATI-related segments -- is expected to increase about 3 percent from the $1.33 billion reported in the previous quarter.

AMD is scheduled to report its fourth-quarter earnings on Jan. 23.

On average, analysts have been expecting the company to earn 22 cents per share on $1.85 billion in total sales.

Some of AMD's woes in the quarter can be traced to a price war with Intel as AMD battles inch-by-inch to capture new customers and market share.

AMD has steadily stolen market share away from Intel with processors that some customers and analysts have viewed as faster and more energy-efficient than Intel's offerings.

AMD has also inked deals with once-exclusive Intel customers like computer-maker Dell Inc.

But Intel has taken dramatic steps to halt AMD's encroachment and reverse falling profits.

Intel has slashed the price on older chips and introduced powerful new chips with a new design that vastly reduces energy consumption while boosting power.

In September, Intel announced a massive restructuring calling for the elimination of 10,500 positions to streamline its operations.

The cuts are expected to save Intel $3 billion per year by 2008.

[Livyjr]

"Reform, for $4 million - A state Senate race looks like a free-spending affair rather than a referendum on changing Albany"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 19, 2007

The voters in Nassau County trying to decide whom to send to Albany to fill a vacancy in the state Senate could do a lot worse than base their choice on which candidate will be the more forceful advocate of campaign finance reform.

An election in which the candidates, Republican Maureen O'Connell and Democrat Craig Johnson, could well spend more than $4 million between them would have an especially beneficial legacy if it marked an occasion when the public said enough.

State government is supposed to be changing.

The people have supposedly registered their disgust with a system where big money and special interests prevail over all else.

Yet here's a state Senate election that may well be the most expensive in New York history.

One issue that has emerged in the Feb. 6 election is, ironically enough, reform.

Governor Spitzer says it's critical to elect Mr. Johnson to advance his agenda for transforming the political culture of Albany.

Other Democrats, though, say one reason they settled on Mr. Johnson as their candidate is because of all the money he has, and all the money he can raise.

Usually, the Republicans, as the majority party, would have the fundraising advantage in an election like this, where they're fighting to maintain their five-seat margin.

Some of the special interests lining up behind Ms. O'Connell -- the major state workers unions, for example -- are among the forces that have been resistant to the reforms Mr. Spitzer is pushing.

One of the most crucial of those reforms, campaign finance laws that lower the cost of running for office and provide public financing for legislative candidates, also has been quite unpopular among Senate Republicans.

Still, Mr. Spitzer is going to some very odd lengths to make the Johnson-O'Connell election a referendum on reform.

He was the host of a $25,000-per-person fundraiser for Mr. Johnson on Thursday night in Manhattan.

Aren't there other, and, frankly, cheaper ways for the governor to get behind a reform candidate so soon after all that supposedly changed on Day One?

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and the other Republicans are having all sorts of fun chortling over that, and rather indignantly so.

Their objections would have so much more credibility, though, if they truly believed in the very Spitzer agenda that they're now ridiculing.

They might gain some clout with the disaffected public, too.

This won't be the only state Senate election of the Spitzer administration.

All 62 Senate seats are up for re-election come 2008, and all 150 Assembly seats as well.

There even could be other special elections before then.

The price tags on each and every one of them will an especially telling indicator of how different state government has become, or else how unscathed the status quo has remained.

[Livyjr]

"Whither all the war protesters?"

By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Fri Jan 19, 4:00 AM ET

On a beach in US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district the other day, about 1,000 war protesters formed up to spell out the word "IMPEACH."

The aerial photo quickly spread to China and Europe.

Still, there were no political harangues, no civil disobedience.

The quiet turnout was mostly "old hippies, and even older hippies," jokes event organizer Brad Newsham.

In Boston, a peaceful rally to protest the planned "surge" in US troops drew no more than a few hundred people.

Nearly four years into US combat in Iraq, the antiwar movement has yet to generate the kind of mass protest seen during the Vietnam War.

There's no shutting down universities or blocking traffic at military bases - no tense face-offs with police.

But with the new Congress, the Bush administration's surge strategy (which critics deem an "escalation" of the conflict), and increasingly negative public opinion polls on the war, this may be a critical moment for the antiwar movement.

Now, it is organizing and most active in cyberspace.

And while that "public space" is not as visible as the town square and university grounds nearly four decades ago, it no doubt feeds the growing public opposition to the Iraq war.

(Seventy percent of Americans oppose sending more troops to Iraq, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll last week.)

One key reason that opposition to the war has been less overt, organizers recognize, is the lack of a military draft.

Also, the scale of the war is different.

There were four times as many troops involved and 10 times as many American casualties over a comparable period in Vietnam.

Third, only a handful of Americans are directly affected by the war or asked to sacrifice for it.

For many, "it feels removed," says Tressa Jones of Needham, Mass., who joined the recent rally in Boston.

"It's easy to forget because there hasn't been a draft."

"It's not wartime in the way we are living ...."

"People aren't collecting scrap metal or growing victory gardens."

Yet scholars of recent controversial wars say that though the Iraq War is far different from Vietnam in many ways, opposition, in fact, developed much sooner.

"Protests against the Iraq war, throughout, have been at a far higher level than they were with regard to Vietnam at comparable stages of the invasions," says Noam Chomsky, the MIT linguist who was an early critic of US involvement in Southeast Asia and often opposes US foreign policy in general.

"It wasn't until late 1967, five years after [President John F. Kennedy's] outright invasion, that a substantial movement became visible - and even then, and in fact until the end, it was mostly focused on the bombing of the North," Dr. Chomsky said in an e-mail.

"It's hard to know how to measure effects - we don't have internal records, as in the case of Vietnam - but they have at least kept it visible enough so that most of the population has been in favor of withdrawal."

The Web played an important part in defeating war supporters in Congress last November, which in turn led to the current Democratic majority there.

One significant development: Thanks to e-mail and the Internet being available to most troops in Iraq and their families back home, the war can be very immediate to many Americans.

That keeps many fighting men and women more politically aware and engaged than in past wars.

As a result, more American troops now disapprove of President Bush's handling of the war than approve of it, according to a recent Military Times poll.

"When the military was feeling most optimistic about the war - in 2004 - 83 percent of poll respondents thought success in Iraq was likely," Military Times reports.

Now, "that number has shrunk to 50 percent."

"Only 35 percent of the military members polled this year said they approve of the way Bush is handling the war, and 42 percent said they disapprove."

At the same time, according to the poll, the number of military respondents who identify with the Republican Party has dropped from 60 percent in 2004 to 46 percent today.

On Tuesday, two active duty servicemen - Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto and Marine Corps Sergeant Liam Madden, who served in two tours in Iraq - presented to Congress more than 1,000 signatures from active duty and Reserve troops in support of "the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq."

The day before, about a dozen of those troops held a press conference at a Unitarian Church in Norfolk, Va., to voice their opposition to the war.

Those are relatively small numbers compared with the 140,000 US troops currently in Iraq.

But it's the kind of act that gets public and political notice.

And it echoes 1969, when 1,366 active duty troops signed a full-page ad in The New York Times opposing the war in Vietnam.

Around the country next week, Veterans for Peace will launch an antiwar effort based on a constitutional argument.

Organizers will target Democratic lawmakers - especially those in leadership positions like House Speaker Pelosi.

"The Constitution is being violated," says Vietnam veteran Lee Thorn of San Francisco, referring to allegations that the US has tortured prisoners as well as what he calls infringements of civil liberties.

"It's our duty as those who've taken an oath to defend the Constitution to continue."

Later in the week, a large "mobilization" of antiwar groups is planned in Washington.

Staff writer Ben Arnoldy contributed to this report.