kjo's catch-alls

Blame Bush for weak job growth?

There are good arguments on both sides as to whether Bush is responsible for the weak job growth the economy experienced in June (an addition of 112,000 payroll jobs -- only about half the 250,000 jobs expected).

I think Brad Delong's assessment is pretty much right on target:

"Is George W. Bush responsible for the fact that the employment situation is lousy? No. The economy is an ocean liner, but the president is not its captain. Presidents influence the economy. They don't control it.

"But are he and his administration responsible for the fact that the employment situation is as lousy as it is? Yes. He sold his tax cuts as employment-generating stimulus programs, while in fact they got only about half as much employment bang for the deficit buck as a reasonable program would have. Think of it this way: Suppose your insurance agent tells you you ought to get homeowner's insurance. You give your insurance agent $4,000 to buy homeowner's insurance. You then have a small fire. And your insurance agent then tells you that you're only getting half of the damage covered--that he only used half the money to buy insurance, and spent the rest buying his friends large flat-screen TVs. That's the situation were in: sold as jobs programs, the Bush tax cuts got us only about half as much insurance against a lousy labor market as a real job-promoting stimulus that cost the same in deficit terms would have generated.

"Thus when the Bush administration says that without the Bush tax cuts employment would be 1.4 million lower, they are probably right. But what they are not saying is that employment would be another 1.4 million higher had Bush administration fiscal policy been designed with its primary focus on boosting employment rather than providing tax cuts for the $200,000+ a year crowd.

"The lousy employment situation has consequences for working and middle-class incomes as well: wages and salaries have been nearly stagnant since 2000--a very disappointing thing to see, especially as rapid productivity growth means there is lots of headroom for broad-based real wage and income gains."

Bush quote of the day

Bush to reporters yesterday:

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda."

Yup. OK. Good enough for me, says the easily duped average American.

"Tear down this wall!" Eight cartoonists agree

Talk about synchronicity! Eight cartoonists come up with basically the same image and same caption within the same 48 hour period.

Now if only Bush would listen to Ronnie.

Nah, won't happen.

Kudos to Daryl Cagle for catching it, via monkeyfilter.

Ex-officials join the "Bush must go" crowd

The LA Times is reporting (reg. req.) that a gourp of 26 ex-diplomats and military leaders will issue a joint statement this week that Bush should not be re-elected. And many of the ex-officials were appointed to key positions by Republican presidents.

Their main argument is that Bush's policies are harming national security.

"It is unusual for so many former high-level military officials and career diplomats to issue such an overtly political message during a presidential campaign," the LA Times reports.

"The core of the message is that we are so deeply concerned about the current direction of American foreign policy … that we think it is essential for the future security of the United States that a new foreign policy team come in," said one of the ex-officials.

It's all Ronald at GeorgeWBush.com

What are those poor people gonna do who are looking for web site information on Bush's re-election campaign?

It seems his official re-election web site home page has given way to an over-the-top memorial for Ronnie.

And remember when the Republicans were squealing that the Sen. Paul Wellstone memorial ceremony had turned into an election rally?

Short memories for them. Or maybe they just play under different rules.

How CNN had Reagan dying twice

President Reagan's death reminds me that most media keep extensive files and "death stories" on famous people, so they can pull them out and publish them quickly as soon as they die.

But CNN once jumped the gun.

Back in 2001, it accidentally published its canned memorial pages for folks like Ronnie, Dick Cheney and Fidel Castro. And leave it to The Smoking Gun to archive them. Notice how the pages just follow a strict template and all look pretty much the same.

Credit also goes to Fark.com for noticing the CNN errant posting in the first place.

Bush presidency nets 81% failure rate from historians

History News Network reports that 81% of 415 historians surveyed called Bush's presidency a failure.

And gee, it's not even over yet!

And it also depends on your definition of success:

“His presidency has been remarkably successful,” one historian declared, “in its pursuit of disastrous policies.” “I think the Bush administration has been quite successful in achieving its political objectives,” another commented, “which makes it a disaster for us.”

Another 12% of all historians surveyed rate the Bush presidency as the worst ever -- not far behind the 19% who called it a success.

And, the report notes: "Moreover, it seems likely that at least eight of those who said it is a success were being sarcastic, since seven said Bush’s presidency is only the best since Clinton’s and one named Millard Fillmore."

Gotta love those sarcastic historians!

Bush - "Flip-Flopper-in-Chief"

All my conservative blogging buddies love to point to Kerry's flip-flops on some of the issues. Now the Center for American Progress has compiled flip-flops by our wonderful president.

Read them and weep.

Bush's campaign of lies, negative ads

The Washington Post today chronicles how George Bush has been waging a campaign of misinformation and untruths against John Kerry in his zeal to get re-elected this fall.

The Post reports on a series of lies just last week propagated by the Bush campaign.

Mistruth: Last Monday in Little Rock, Vice President Cheney said Kerry "has questioned whether the war on terror is really a war at all" and said the senator from Massachusetts "promised to repeal most of the Bush tax cuts within his first 100 days in office."

Fact: Kerry never questioned the war on terrorism, and has proposed repealing tax cuts only for those earning more than $200,000.

Gen. Zinni's 10 mistakes about war in Iraq

Gen. Anthony Zinni, former CentCom commander, enumerated 10 big mistakes the U.S. / President Bush made on the war in Iraq. He made his remarks at a dinner May 12 for the Center for Defense Information's board of directors dinner. From 1997 to 2000 Zinni was chief of the Central Command, which controls U.S. military operations in the Middle East, southwest-central Asia and northeast Africa.

The 10 mistakes:

1. Abandoning the existing policy of containment

2. Promoting a flawed regional strategy

3. Creating a false rationale for war in order to get public support

4. Failing to internationalize the effort

5. Underestimating the task

6. Propping up and trusting the Iraqi exiles

7. Overall lack of planning

8. Allocating insufficient military forces

9. Installing an inadequate and ad hoc government

10. Enacting a series of bad decisions on the ground

Here's the full text of his remarkable remarks.

NY Times questions its own Iraq reporting

The New York Times today published its own apology/correction for its early reporting on the war in Iraq:

"We have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged -- or failed to emerge."

It's about time

Headline of the day in Salon.com:

"Bush to present 'clear strategy' on Iraq"

What took him so long?

Stolen Web gems

The following is stolen from Brad's Blog, who stole it from Harper's Index. When something is this precious, the stealing must continue:

Number of articles in major U.S. newspapers that have called any White House statement on Iraq a lie : 0

Number of the five tax-cut questions asked the president on Meet the Press last winter that concerned the cuts' inequity : 0

Average amount a Bush Cabinet member will save this year due to cuts in capital-gains and dividend taxes : $42,000

Median U.S. household income in 2002 : $42,409

"Middle class" earning $250,000 annually?

So when you think of "middle class," what's the salary figure that pops into your brain? $50,000 annually? Maybe $75,000 tops?

Well, for House Republicans, it could be more than $250,000, according to a New York Times report today.

House GOP members want to expand the child tax credit to include those families making more than $250,000 a year. Currently, it entitles families earning less than $110,000 a $1,000 per child tax credit. As the Times reports, "less than 2 percent of American households earn more than $250,000 a year.

"...And while the House bill would add benefits for some low-income families, those who earn less than $10,500 a year would still get nothing at all.

"...The House bill would also help lower-income families, allowing many who do not pay any federal taxes to get a tax rebate in 2004. But the child tax credit would remain entirely unavailable to families with incomes below $10,500.

"David Harris, president of the Children's Research and Education Institute, a nonprofit advocacy group in New York City, estimated that about 8 million children are in families with incomes below $10,500 and would not qualify for any tax credit at all.

"We agree that the child tax credit needs to reach more children, but they should start with those at the bottom instead of those at the top," Mr. Harris said."

The bill is expected to pass the House, but probably will run into trouble in the Senate.

Bush touts Ohio plant in 2003; Ohio plant closes in 2004

On April 24, 2003, George Bush traveled to election swing state Ohio to visit the Timken Co. steel plant in Canton. He spent some time talking about his plans for economic growth in Ohio, pointing to the 1,300 jobs at Timken as a sign of the strong and growing economy. "The future of this company is bright and therefore, the future of employment is bright for the families that work here," Bush said.

Fast forward just over a year to May 2004.

On Monday, Timken Co. announced plans to close that same plant, after failing to reach an agreement with the United Steelworkers of America on restructuring plans.

Ohio now has lost more than 200,000 jobs since Bush became president.

One person whose job is safe is W.R. "Tim" Timken - a top Bush fundraiser and the man who decided to close the factory. According to a misleader.org report, Timken "earned more than $2.6 million last year, [and] stands to receive $59,000 in new tax breaks from President Bush this year. ... By contrast, 89% of Ohio residents will receive less than $100 by 2006 from the latest Bush tax cuts."

Newsweek and MSNBC reporter Howard Fineman reports today how those 1,300 lost jobs may cost Bush the election.

"Here’s why," Fineman says. "As Timken goes, so goes Canton (and nearby Massillon). As they go, so goes surrounding Stark County, the bellwether county in the bellwether state. As Stark County goes (history tells us), so goes Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. Stark’s vote in presidential elections has always almost exactly mirrored the statewide totals. And no Republican has won the White House without Ohio."

Timken employees: Vote with your hearts and souls in November.

Taking credit for funding programs he tried to cut

That wily president! The New York Times today reports that he's taking credit for funding programs that he earlier wanted to cut. And he talks about Kerry having it both ways!

A good question

A Chicago Tribune letter to the editor this morning asks a good question.

Lois Erwin of New Jersey writes:

"I remember the howls from right-wingers asking how they could ever explain to their children the consensual, off-camera sexual behavior of President Bill Clinton.

"Pray tell, how are we supposed to explain to our children that American military personnel sexually humiliated and debased the very people we went to Iraq to liberate?

"How are we supposed to explain to our children the photographs of naked Iraqis forced into sexually explicit poses?

"And how are we supposed to explain to our children the assertions from right-wing media people that certain explicit and vividly described types of torture are OK?"

You got some 'splainin' to do Rickie!

Scary poll result of the day

A Newsweek poll in the current issue reports that 74% of Americans believe Satan exists.

So, for those of you out there among the 74%, please comment on what he/she looks like. Traditional horn and trident tale? Or more like Saddam or Clinton?

Sneak preview of Michael Moore movie

Movie reviewer Roger Ebert gives some information on what's in Michael Moore's new film, "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Such as:

"... (T)he most memorable footage for me involved President Bush on Sept. 11. The official story is that Bush was meeting with a group of pre-schoolers when he was informed of the attack on the World Trade Center and quickly left the room. Not quite right, says Moore. Bush learned of the first attack before entering the school, "decided to go ahead with his photo op," and began to read My Pet Goat to the students. Informed of the second attack, he incredibly remained with the students for another seven minutes, reading from the book, until a staff member suggested that he leave. The look on his face as he reads the book, knowing what he knows, is disquieting."

Also:

"On the night before his film premiered, Moore, in uncharacteristic formalwear, attended an official dinner given by Gilles Jacob, president of the festival. Conversation at his table centered on the just-published New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh alleging that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld personally authorized use of torture in Iraqi prisons.

"Moore had his own insight into the issue: "Rumsfeld was under oath when he testified about the torture scandal. If he lied, that's perjury. And therefore I find it incredibly significant that when Bush and Cheney testified before the 9/11 commission, they refused to swear an oath. They claimed they'd sworn an oath of office, but that has no legal standing. Do you suppose they remembered how Clinton was trapped by perjury and were protecting themselves?"

Ebert also writes about the long ovation the film got:

"The response at the early morning screening I attended was loudly enthusiastic. And at the official black-tie screening, it was greeted by a standing ovation; a friend who was there said it went on "for at least 25 minutes," which probably means closer to 15 (estimates of ovations at Cannes are like estimates of parade crowds in Chicago)."

"Daily Reason to Dispatch Bush"

Timothy McSweeney's Web site provides us with the above (along with the reminder that "guitars can change the world."

Here is McSweeney's latest reason for dispatch:

"In January, 2003, the Bush administration chose Jerry Thacker to serve on the Presidential Advisory Commission on HIV and AIDS.

"Thacker has described AIDS as the "gay plague," homosexuality as a "deathstyle" rather than lifestyle, and explained that, "Christ can rescue the homosexual."

"The Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS provides "recommendations on the US government's response to the AIDS epidemic." Thacker is also an alumni, and former member of the faculty at Bob Jones University, a school known for its ban on interracial dating. In September 2001, Thacker gave a speech at Bob Jones University, during which he spoke of the "sin of homosexuality."

"Due to the controversy over his appointment, Thacker withdrew from the Commission shortly after his nomination.

"(Source: Ceci Connolly, "AIDS Panel Choice Wrote of a 'Gay Plague,'" Washington Post, January 23, 2003.)"

Thanks to the folks at metafilter.com for the heads-up.

The troops grill Rumsfeld

U.S. soldiers in Iraq had an opportunity to question Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld yesterday, and they didn't waste the chance.

After fielding some of these questions, I wonder whether Rumsfeld thought he was facing the hostile press corps.

From the Washington Post report:

"One soldier asked when they would receive improved vests and better armor for the Humvees. It's those roadside bombs, he said. "We lost some soldiers due to them."

"Another asked whether it was true that the military would not pay their full air fare back home.

"Yet another wanted to know why his military medical coverage wouldn't handle physical therapy for his handicapped child.

"When, if ever, would the United Nations send some troops and where would they come from?"

"Would Defense Department employees who are civilians working with the military be permitted to carry guns, asked a civilian working with the military?"

Grim poll numbers for Bush

I have purposely stayed away from reporting results of various polls here for two reasons: the numbers are so fluid, and the election is almost six months away.

But a few recent polls are noteworthy.

1. The latest Pew poll shows Bush's overall job approval rating is now at 44%, while 48% disapprove of his job performance.

2. A new CBS poll shows just 39% approving Bush's handling of the Iraq situation, with 58% disapproving. His handling of the economy gets even less support, with 34% approving and 60% disapproving.

3. In Ohio, Kerry now is leading Bush 49% to 42%, according to an American Research Group poll. No Republican has won the presidential election without winning in Ohio.

4. Finally, buried deep on the Pew poll results page is the report that there are fewer "swing" or undecided voters. And that there's a total of 50% of voters either committed to Kerry or who are swing voters leaning to Kerry. 45% of voters are either committed to Bush or leaning to Bush. Only 5% are truly "undecided." And history shows the undecided usually support the challenger.

U.S. uses 114-year-old law against that pesky Greenpeace

"Sailor mongering" is a terrible thing. And those Greenpeace activists should know better than to do it.

What is sailor mongering, you might ask? Well, apparently it was popular in the late 1800s when brothels sent their whores to board ships in port, get the sailors drunk, and then capture them once they came to harbor. A law against sailor mongering was passed in 1872 and used twice, the last time in 1890.

Now, 114 years later, the Dept. of Justice is using the law to prosecute Greenpeace for boarding a freighter that was carrying illegal Amazon mahogany wood.

I always thought Attorney General John Ashcroft was living in the past, but I didn't think he dated back to the 19th century.

Bush had his shot at Zarqawi, didn't take it

It turns out that the U.S. had its chance to kill Abu Musab Zarqawi -- the Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, and the person who allegedly beheaded Nick Berg -- but never acted on it.

NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reported in early March that in June 2002 intelligence reports showed Zarqawi and his merry band of followers had set up a weapons lab in northern Iraq, producing ricin and cyanide.

The MSNBC reports notes:

"The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

"Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq."

Terrorism expert Roger Cressey also is quoted in the report as saying that "people were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of pre-emption against terrorists."

Who knows? Nick Berg might still be here today if Bush would have followed his own advisers in attacking and killing Zarqawi in Iraq back in 2002.

Newspaper solicits pro-Bush letters

A Wisconsin newspaper is so concerned about all the anti-Bush letters to the editor it receives that it is actively soliciting readers to send pro-Bush letters.

All in the interest of "balance."

And the right complains about the liberal press.