This Guy's a General???

...if we pretend that it is not happening...maybe they'll cut it out..

PACE: Fair question. And I said it more than last week, I said it in my congressional testimony.

It is certainly a measure. But if you tell the enemy that what’s important to you is the number of bombs that go off, guess what the enemy is going to go do? He’s going to set off more bombs.

So it’s a self-defeating approach to tracking results of what you’re doing.

So, if you are being subjected to repeated acts of violence, don't mention that it is bothersome because....uhhhh, General..can you run that by again?

Is that the Bobby Knight defense?

The King....

in his more "corpulent" years..but he delivers.

The Lovell Sisters...

are worth a listen...youngsters but they can play...

This Article...

sums up a lot. Of what, I'm not completely sure..but the culture of Washington DC sure comes to mind.

Hat tip to PBS.org

Oh, Here She is...

The Dillards...

alter egos were the "Darlings" of the Andy Griffth show....they were good on that....but where's Charlene?

Question for the Press...

How about posing this one to the Prez, Vice P. or any of the flacks...

Is there ANY, I REPEAT, ANY law that does apply to Bush and Cheney?

Just asking...

Such a Fun Song...

The Clapper Caper...

...a Classic...

The Bush..

Admin has basically created a de facto line item veto with the signing statements Bush attaches to legislation that they also assume to be a "get out of jail free" card.

Of course if that kind of quasi-legal protective layer does not prove robust enough, they can always use the Karl Rove special defense being employed on the missing email scandal...I refer to the time honored..."dog ate my homework" strategy.

These guys are unbelievable...

I think Most...

people know that Rudy is a phoney who has little credentials to be the Prez....but on the flip side, he's got pretty good connections and could probably score some good blow....

Lehrer Report's..

Shields and Brooks both get it wrong on the Harry Reid/Peter Pace manufactured controversy...factually and pundaciously (made up word to describe pundit's inane attempts to turn spin into CW)

Too bad for Pace but you would be hard pressed to find a military person not constrained by current employment willing to describe him as a strong leader that ultimately had his troop's best interest at heart.

He executed policy dictated by the WH and Sec/Def without regard to the escalation's likely failure and detriment to the US military. I call that opportunism at it's very worst. I'm sure he believed that he could gain additional support to implement some of that strategy successfully....but why would he think that was attainable? He's short by a few hundred thou troops and everyone including himself knew it.

Getting back to the Mark Shields and David Brooks attempt to smack down Harry for making comments about Pace....

Harry Reid recalled his expressed disappointment with Pace on a conference call with some bloggers and described how he in fact had told Pace directly in a meeting that performance was incompetent. Is there an argument here? Is there some competence in Iraq that we are somehow unaware of?

Tony Snow is saying that it hurts morale to criticize Pace...huh? You would be hard pressed to find any war in history that the main line troops don't believe the leadership to be incompetent. When you have people running a war who have never served in the military, it is very hard to stomach them telling us what the "troops" think.

The Admin describes bloody violence as "progress" so I'm pretty damn sure that if there was any fucking "competence" to be seen, we'd have seen it..ad nausem.

God I hate these republican assholes...Can someone tell me again how pointing out a flat tire to the driver of a car is dangerous to the passengers?

Pretty Interesting...

glumbert.com - When graphic artists get bored

Executive Priviledge...

is likely to get a pretty good workout with the "come on down" Supoena's being issued to Miers and Taylor today. The implication is that more will likely follow as the noose tightens on the WH.

Here is a informative run down on various views of EP from the University of Chicago Law School Blog...

Executive Privilege: A Primer
In view of the current conflict between Congress and the President, it might be useful to outline existing law on executive privilege, and thus to provide a kind of primer (a tentative, preliminary, and incomplete one to be sure). The following does not focus on or attempt to resolve the current controversy.
Nor does it trace the practices of Congress and the executive branch over time. One of the largest lessons is that much of the law remains unsettled. The Supreme Court has not said a great deal; the court of appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has said more; but it is not at all clear that a majority of the Supreme Court would agree with what the lower court has said. Here is (the bulk of) the law as it now stands.
1. The President has a generalized privilege against disclosure of his own discussions with his close advisers. US v. Nixon (1974).
2. This privilege is not absolute. The “generalized interest in confidentiality” can be overcome by the need for evidence that “is demonstrably relevant” to a criminal trial, if that evidence is “specific and central to the fair adjudication in a particular criminal case.” Id.
3. The privilege might be absolute if the case involved “a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets.” Id. (Note: points 2 and 3 apply in either a grand jury proceeding or a criminal trial.)
4. The privilege apparently applies to the Vice President no less than to the President, at least where the communications of the Vice President are intended to culminate in advice to the President. See Cheney v. USDC (2004).
5. In a civil case, it will be harder to overcome the privilege, because civil cases do “not share the urgency or significance of the criminal subpoena.” Id. A generalized request for information, in a civil case, will not overcome the privilege. Id.
6. How does executive privilege apply to conflicts between Congress and the President? The Supreme Court has not said. The key rulings come from the DC Circuit, and the Supreme Court might not agree with that court. See points 12 and 13 below.
7. To whom does executive privilege apply? The Supreme Court has not clearly said. On one view, the privilege applies only to communications involving the President. On another view, the privilege applies to everyone within the executive branch. The DC Circuit has ruled that the privilege applies to presidential advisers in the course of preparing advice for the President. In Re Sealed Case (1997). This includes a) communications authored by such advisers and b) communications which these advisers solicited and received from others.
8. But the presidential communications privilege “should be construed as narrowly as is consistent with ensuring that the confidentiality of the President’s decisionmaking process is adequately protected.” This means that the privilege does NOT extend “to staff outside the White House in executive branch agencies.” Id. The privilege is limited to “communications authored or solicited and received by members of an immediate White House adviser’s staff who have broad and significant responsibility for investigating and formulating the advice to be given to the President on the particular matter to which the communications relate.” Id. See also Judicial Watch (2004), underlining the lesson and saying that the privilege does not extend to “internal Justice Department documents that never make their way to the Office of the President,” even if those “documents were created for the sole purpose of advising the President.” (It is not at all clear the Supreme Court would agree with this view.)
9. Direct decisionmaking by the President is required. If the President himself is not directly involved, there is no privilege. See In Re Sealed Case. (Cf. Cheney v. USDC, extending the privilege to the Vice President, at least in the context of communications designed to culminate in advice to the President.) Thus the court of appeals has said that the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General cannot “be equated with the close presidential advisers” protected by the privilege. See Judicial Watch.
10. The appointment and removal power are quintessential and nondelegable, and hence communications related to the exercise of that power are privileged. In Re Sealed Case.
11. The court of appeals said that propositions 7-10 might NOT bear on the scope of the privilege in the congressional-executive context, because the “President’s ability to withhold information from Congress implicates different constitutional considerations.” Id.
12. According to the court of appeals in 1974, Congress’ ability to obtain information from the President should be analyzed under the US v. Nixon framework. See Senate Select Committee v. Nixon (1974). This means that a generalized request from Congress, unaccompanied by “particularized showings” of need, will run into trouble. Id.
13. It is not enough for a Senate committee to overcome the privilege by saying that it needs materials “in order to resolve particular conflicts in the voluminous testimony it has heard, conflicts relating to ‘the extent of malfeasance in the executive branch,’ and, most importantly, the possible involvement of the President himself.” Id. At least this is so when another committee had the relevant materials, id., and when thse materials could not be shown to be “critical to the performance of . . . legislative functions.” Id. But this is a very narrow ruling in light of presidential release of many materials and the “subsequent and on-going investigation of the House Judiciary Committee” with respect to impeachment.
14. The executive branch has a generalized “deliberative process privilege,” rooted in the common law. See In Re Sealed Case (1997). This privilege applies throughout the executive branch. Compare 7-10, above.
15. The deliberative process privilege is highly qualified and it depends on a balancing test; it is far weaker than the presidential communications privilege. When “there is reason to believe that the documents may shed light on government misconduct, ‘the privilege is routinely denied.’” Id.
16. It is possible that conflicts between Congress and the President in this domain would be taken to present a political question – but unlikely, because this view has attracted close to no support on any federal court.
17. What, in particular, does US v. Nixon mean by a demonstrated, specific need, sufficient to overcome the privilege? The court of appeals has said that a party seeking to overcome the privilege must demonstrate 1) “that each discrete group of the subpoenaed material likely contains important evidence” and 2) “that this evidence is not available with due diligence elsewhere.” In Re Sealed Case.
18. Questions without clear answers therefore include a) how far down the line the privilege extends, b) the relationship of US v. Nixon to conflicts between Congress and the President, c) whether the latter conflicts might present a political question, d) the nature, basis, and scope of the deliberative process privilege, and e) the precise showing that must be made to overcome the privilege. With respect to e), a generalized interest in possible wrongdoing is far less likely to overcome the privilege than a specific need to answer the question whether specifically described wrongdoing has occurred.

Very Cool Webcam..

on Catalina Island....On Sat., I expect to enjoying a cold beverage or 2 on the Green Pier.

http://www.visitcatalinaisland.com/avalon/webcam2.php

Lurita Doan...

she of faulty memory clearly violated the Hatch Act and the Bush admin has been duly informed by their own (republican mind you) Special Counsel that she should be disciplined for her actions....

Any bets on outcome here?

Surely....

He means "his administration"...doesn't he?“

They can have their votes of no confidence, but it’s not going to make the
determination about who serves in my government,” Mr. Bush said.

And don't call me Shirley...

Iraq is Not Korea...

But ....if Korea is going to be the new bush model for establishing a long term troop commitment....then, let's ask the Koreans how it has worked out for them..right?

and Baghdad is hardly a DMZ easily drawn straight line....It's gets awfully squirrelly there...and everyone hates everyone elses guts.....

My Dismay..

at most things political these days has kept me from posting anything of substance...heading into summer should be filling our heads with baseball and beaches....

Foul balls and bikinis..and music.

DVD Must See..

Grateful Dead Live from Orchard Park (Buffalo, NY)

Wow...wanna see a band enjoying life from the first note..this is it.

Starts with Bertha and just keeps going...effing fantastic.

Iris is Great..

the video, not so much..

but check the laid back musicians doing the living room thing...nice.

Susan Does Angel

Now, let's Just Hold on there Fella...

Rocket Prediction...

5 innings....4 runs...

not televised outside of NY...great.

Gutsy Guy here...

Pool Prank - The funniest videos are a click away

Scooter Libby Prison Checklist

1. 2 toothbrushes (extra one for filing into a shiv)
2. striped pajamas
3. cigarettes (for bribing the screws)
4. roll of dimes (for pay phone calls)
5. bible (all repugs find religion in the joint)
6. new nickname
7. astroglide (may not need if # 6 is good enough)

Repugnant Republicans..

are pretty funny too...I tuned in briefly on Sat radio in time to hear Huckster disavow evolution which is nothing new. He threw some red meat making fun of people that believe man evolved from primates...hilarious! I just wonder why Wolfy can't ask if there are other established scientific theory and practice that he chooses to ignore....gravity?...what else Mike?

If you are prezdent and shit hits the fan...will you be on your knees praying or taking care of biz for the country? Fucking asshole.

One of the Primary...

qualities required for service in the Bush administration is an incredibly faulty memory. Some of the folks that have testified in front of Congress appear to have no memory whatsoever. The latest is this shlub....Bradley Schlozman...jeez!

Think Progress has the video...very funny stuff.

Funeral for a Soldier in Torrance, CA...

on Fri. included a procession of Vets on their bikes flying flags and trailing the horse drawn hearse with the body of Joseph Anzak Jr. killed in Iraq. There must have been several hundred of them but I only got a picture of a small group shown here.

I heard that there is going to be video posted on the web showing the torture and or killing of him. It won't be shown here.


(disregard date, I forgot to set properly on the camera after putting new batteries)

Those Boston Fans...

should send all those blong wigs to Papelbon cause A-Rod has himself a new bitch...

MTP Blogging....

Guests include Bob Shrum the self described Democratic Strategist who has lost every major contest he has been involved in prefaces every statement with..."In the book I write...."

What a blowhard. Who gives a shit what this guy thinks? He couldn't get a dogcatcher elected and we're supposed to hang on his words of wisdom? I cleaned up as much political insight from my dog in the backyard.

I Like to Sing a Few...

songs...then have a few pops and nail a few chickies..dig?

A Re-Post..

cause it's sooooo good...

Tom Russell is always a good listen.

Yanks vs. Boston...

Hmmm....a little order restored perhaps? Better late than never anyway...

Lots of interesting subplots here too...1st of all I didn't get a chance to post earlier my predictions...would it be too hard to believe I had the Yanks at whatever the final was? Probably....but here is my take on the weekend series..

A few hit batsman always helps get the rivalry blood flowing..tomorrow should be greatly entertaining.

Note to Yuke.....you've never been dusted before? Your're not that great that the Yankees are plotting against you.

Can this be the game that wakes up the Yankee bats? Abreu, Cano, Melkey, Damon...Noonan?

If the Yanks win all they make a statement..
Win 2 they save a little self respect.
Lose 2...they suck beyond belief.


Can't wait for tomorrow afternoon....oh yeah.