Tangled Webs

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Madam Supertanker

Ya'all remember the big "oil for food" scandal? That huge scandal that was going to take down all the Democrats who were so willing to help Saddam thwart those sanctions? Remember?

“Chevron, the second-largest American oil company, is preparing to acknowledge that it should have known kickbacks were being paid to Saddam Hussein on oil it bought from Iraq as part of a defunct United Nations program, according to investigators. … At the time, Condoleezza Rice, now secretary of state, was a member of Chevron’s board and led its public policy committee, which oversaw areas of potential political concerns for the company. Ms. Rice resigned from Chevron’s board on Jan. 16, 2001, after being named national security advisor by President Bush.”

Well, I don't know of any Democrats who've gone down. But it sure looks like Madam Supertanker should ... ah ... go down. But of course, IOKIYAR.

Despite the CW that House Dems would sit on their hands and let the Senate figure out the war funding mess, House Dems are coming up with fresh ideas for short term funding that imminently make sense. Yet, Senator Reid has signaled that any such legislation is DOA. Why? I think it's quite simple. He just doesn't have the votes.

Senator Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, said he would be reluctant to support it unless it attracted enough bipartisan support to offset criticism that it was shortchanging American troops.

He and others said they would prefer that negotiations between the White House and Congress focus on reaching agreement on a measure that would pay for the war through Sept. 30, with the legislation including a set of benchmarks by which to measure the Iraqi government’s progress. Talks between lawmakers and senior White House officials were tentatively set to resume Wednesday.

Like it or not (and I don't), there is a significant contingent of conservative Senate Democrats that hold the balance, much like the few centrist Republicans in the previous Congress. It's gonna take more polls, more deaths, more voter feedback to get these guys off the dime.

Blockage

I wrote the other day about some nonsense comment made by a Democratic pundit about Congress. In essence the commentor said that Dems had better get some legislation through or else. I pointed out that this is idiotic as a narrowly split government with a nutbar President can block virtually any legislation is chooses. Well, here's exhibit "A":

Senate conservatives “effectively killed a measure that would have let Americans buy prescription medicines from foreign suppliers, which sponsors said could have saved consumers billions of dollars.” A ‘poison pill’ amendment from Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) passed 49-40 in a “major victory for the pharmaceutical industry.”

This will ultimately be a Congress without a lot of legislative successes. It's success will be in stemming the bleeding from a nutbar President and his minions. It will not be until there is Democratic leadership in the White House that anything can really be moved forward.

Heckuva Job Bushie

I saw this on last nights news. While not shocked, I certainly found it depressing:

“The chance that an Iraqi child will live beyond age 5 has plummeted faster than anywhere else in the world since 1990,” according to the group Save the Children, which “placed the country last in its child survival rankings. One in eight Iraqi children died of disease or violence before reaching their fifth birthday in 2005.”

China

I've had a couple of thoughts rattling around in my head lately about the current irrationality in the stock market.

The U.S. stock market seems to be on a rocket trajectory upward. No matter the news, stocks just continue to go up. Many are speculating that this rocket is propelled by Chinese fuel. As proof, it's offered that while the U.S. market does well, the international markets are leaving U.S. in the dust. The thinking goes that with the Chinese growing at well over 10% per year, they're a fueling and international stock market bubble.

I really believe there is much validity in this argument. And the downside is that the Chinese government is trying (without success thus far) to slow things down. A sky-rocketing Chinese economy is fueling excesses in their economy, most notably inflation and a stock market that makes ours look like it's flat. It appears that Chinese central bankers are continuing to try to slow things down with higher interest rates.

Suppose they're successful?

It would seem to me that the end of this particular stock market party will occur when the Chinese economy slows. And if it slows down significantly, look to the U.S. stock market to begin a bear phase .... perhaps a long one. Isn't it interesting that if all this is true, the U.S. has now gone from the preeminent world economy to a passenger in the backseat of a Geely?

Update: Evidence:

"China is on its way to becoming the superpower of the 21st century, and will play the same role that Britain and the US did in the 19th and 20th centuries," stock-market guru Jim Rogers is convinced. To profit from China's ascent, you should invest in commodities, he says, but he tends to advise against buying Chinese equities during the bubble periods.

Selling America

One road/bridge/turnpike at a time:

In the past year, banks and private investment firms have fallen in love with public infrastructure. They're smitten by the rich cash flows that roads, bridges, airports, parking garages, and shipping ports generate - and the monopolistic advantages that keep those cash flows as steady as a beating heart. Firms are so enamored, in fact, that they're beginning to consider infrastructure a brand new asset class in itself.
source

The referenced article is down the page a little, under Roads to Riches. Democracy was a nice idea while it lasted.

What Government

I know these guys are always posturing, but somehow this has a more genuine feel to it:

In an interview with Nic Robertson of CNN, Iraq's Sunni Arab vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, has laid down an ultimatum. He said that he would pull the Iraqi Accord Front (Sunni fundamentalists) out of the al-Maliki "national unity" government if [Shiite] militias are not disarmed and revisions to the constitution aren't begun by May 15. He said he was ready to admit that he had "made the mistake of a lifetime" in agreeing to participate in the government if no progress were made by that date on these issues.

Sadr and his deputies have already abandoned al Maliki. The further loss of these MP's would seem to indicate that Maliki's government would then be toast. I suspect, at best, Maliki can make some window-dressing type concessions, but there's no way he'll abandon his support of the Shiite militia's. At best the infighting continues. At worst, the government collapses.

Alamo Update

Yep, the U.S. army is building them to carry out Gen. Paetraes' plan of getting out among the natives and mingling. The plan is that by having troops in the hoods', they can do neighborhood policing and improve security. Except for once itsy bitsy problem:

The WP's off-lead takes a look at how the small outposts in Iraq that were set up as part of the new security plan are becoming increasingly fortified. Although the plan was meant to get American and Iraqi troops out of large bases and closer to regular civilians, the U.S. military is finding that more barriers are needed for protection. The story is also a good look into the harsh living conditions that U.S. soldiers have to endure in these outposts.

I wonder how those walls, barriers, and barbed wire will go over as landscaping in the hoods'?

The time is long past for such a plan to work. Maybe ... MAYBE ... right after initial hostilities, such a plan might have had a chance. But at this late date, it's just a matter of time before the Americans leave. And the insurgents know that. Implementing such a plan at this late date is immoral in how it puts our soldiers at risk. But of course, when the Alamo's fail, Republicans will proclaim that no one could have predicted their failure. And the beat goes on.

Classic Alanon

I continue to marvel at the dysfunctional dynamics playing out on the national stage. It's taken Democrats six long years to move through their addictive/grief process to finally recognize that Bush is .... well ... Bush, and an addict that cannot be trusted .... period. Now the Republicans continue on their journey:

The Washington Post leads with a look at how September is shaping up to be a critical month for the Iraq war, as congressional leaders of both parties are pushing it as a deadline for evidence that the new efforts are showing results.

When September comes, progress will be proclaimed by the White House no matter what is reality. Republicans will, once again, be faced with the intransigence of Bush's addiction. They've been in a combination of depression and bargaining for the time being but are quickly speeding towards another letdown. And like the confrontation of any addict, Republicans will have to "hit bottom" before being able to repair their party. At this point and as a part of my ongoing "Republican watch", the only question is how badly will the party be damaged until it's members join Alanon?

Update: Great minds .... and all that ....

Update II: Kevin Drum:

But political progress? There are virtually no positive signs right now, and after 18 months of stalling it's unlikely that 18 more weeks are going to make a difference. What's more, I'm inclined to think that there are at least a handful of moderate Republicans who are genuinely serious about abandoning Bush this time around. This time, it looks like six months might really mean six months.

LMAO. Send that boy an Alanon card.

Chainsaw Management

Story tip stolen from MiaCulpa.

Spinning the revolving door between government and business as never before, the White House has handed more than 100 top environmental posts to representatives of polluting industries. The author provides a biographical sampler–and describes a devastating rollback of three decades of progress.
source

I can't imagine we have had a more destructive administration than this one. To those of you who voted for Bush, will you please listen to us progressives the next time around?

Monday, May 7, 2007

Fun With Tweety

My my. Tweety looks a little exasperated as a wingers tries to use a GOP talking point about Congress setting war policy:

Go get em'dude!

That Lamb Is Being Dressed

Now with Monica Goodling likely heading for testimony before Congress (with full immunity), the White House has a new plan. Looks to me like she's going to be set up to take the fall:

Newsweek reports that the Justice Department has “confirmed it’s investigating whether [Monica] Goodling improperly assessed the political loyalties of applicants for career assistant U.S. attorney posts.” The probe began “after Jeff Taylor, the interim U.S. attorney in D.C., complained that Goodling tried to block the hiring of a prosecutor in his office for being a ‘liberal Democratic type.’”

Wonder if this little ~~intimidation~~ investigation will piss her off enough to actually tell the truth?

The Next War

This is no surprise. It's been reported for some time:

The governments of Saudi Arabia and the United States are working with other states in the Middle East region to sponsor covert action against Iran, according to a report in this month's edition of The Atlantic. The report also suggests that covert attacks may occur against Iran's oil sector.

Make no mistake. We are at war with Iran already. And Iran will not sit idly by while these incursions occur. Plus we get the added benefit of using U.S. resources to train, equip and arm a whole new generation of terrorists. After all, what is the name we now give to the Mujahideen who fought the Soviets with the aid of U.S. training, equipment and arms? That's right. Al Qaeda.

Before things settle down again, there will be a regional war in the Middle East pitting Sunni's against Shiites. Iraq is just the current battle ground.

Remember. Up Is Down

How's this for setting the table in a favorable way to the administration:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military announced the deaths of 11 U.S. soldiers killed in combat along with an embedded journalist Sunday, and Iraqi officials said 163 civilians were killed or injured across the country.

But still more carnage is likely over the next three months as additional U.S. forces arrive in Baghdad under President Bush's troop "surge" because "we're taking the fight to the enemy," a top U.S. military commander warned.

So let's review the bidding. We have more troops in Iraq. If we're "successful" our military leaders are predicting that it will be evidenced by more dead soldiers. Yes, indeed. Taking the "fight to the enemy" will result in more death. But isn't this the essence of the entire error of the plan? And just how are we going to be measuring success if not via the key measure, less violence? Is success going to be the ability of Paetraus to walk down a street with a full military escort without being attacked?

The conservative approach is simple minded, clumsy and stupid .... to take a problem and to beat it to death. The miscalculation is that there is an unending supply of "enemy" in Iraq. Until there is a solution that stops the flow of new enemy, the status quo can only be maintained by a similar unending flow of new soldiers. And trust me on this, we are no where even close to stopping the flow of new insurgents.

Escalated

It appears that the, for now, final troop deployment of the escalation is on it's way:

BAGHDAD — The final troop contingent in President Bush's controversial plan to improve security, a brigade that includes 152 attack and transport helicopters, will arrive soon in the Iraqi capital, a U.S. commander said.

With the arrival of the 3rd Infantry Division's Combat Aviation Brigade, based at Ft. Stewart, Ga., the addition of 28,500 troops begun in mid-February will be complete.

The brigade will be based at Camp Victory near the Baghdad international airport, Maj. Gen. James Simmons, deputy commander of multinational forces, said in an interview Friday.

My first thought is, yeah right. I'm guessing there will be many more troops sent in before any come out. More importantly, with this deployment the nutbars can no longer claim that the escalation isn't in place yet. It's there. They're getting killed in larger numbers and the Iraqi government is no closer to a political solution.

Conventional wisdom is a very powerful thing. And the current CW is that the Preznit has until September to "show results" (whatever the hell that means). I'm afraid that I have to agree with what Atrios has said (among many others), never doubt the power and strength of the Friedman Unit Generator.

Relative Gains

Barry Ritholtz puts up an interesting set of charts today (click to enlarge):

These charts show the the value of the S&P 500 stock index vs. various commodities. Put another way, these charts show the amount of various assets it would take in today's dollars to buy the stock market.

First it's interesting to note that in dollars, the stock market is just getting back to 2000 levels. But more interesting is how poorly stocks have done against other assets. This gives you some idea of just how pernicious inflation can be. For example, it takes a whole lot more corn equivalent dollars to buy a stock than just a few short years ago.

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Meanwhile, Over There ....

BAGHDAD - Roadside bombs killed eight American soldiers in separate attacks Sunday in Diyala province and Baghdad, and a car bomb claimed 30 more lives in a wholesale food market in a part of the Iraqi capital where sectarian tensions are on the rise.

In all, at least 95 Iraqis were killed or found dead nationwide Sunday, police reported. They included 12 policemen in Samarra, among them the city's police chief, who died when Sunni insurgents launched a suicide car bombing and other attacks on police headquarters.

The deadliest attack against U.S. forces occurred in Diyala, where six U.S. soldiers and a European journalist were killed when a massive bomb destroyed their vehicle, the U.S. military said. Two U.S. soldiers were wounded, the military said.

Digusting

I've referenced this before, but it bears repeating, expanding and exploring. The situation is summed up very well by a reader at Josh Marshall's place regarding one of the prosecutors fired by Abu Gonzales:

I've read TPM for years, and appreciate your work. I email you because I read something today about the firing of John McKay that finally put me over the edge.

Apparently during Comey's testimony today he said that one of the reasons McKay got himself in hot water with the DOJ heavyweights was because he was pushing for additional resources to investigate the murder of Tom Wales, who was an Assistant US Attorney in Seattle. Tom Wales was shot and killed in 2001. What nobody has talked about, and what you may not be aware of, is the fact that Tom Wales was extremely active in attempting to get tighter gun control laws passed here in Washington.

Think about that for a second. A pro-gun control federal prosecutor was shot and killed. John McKay was agitating for more resources to bring his killer to justice. That pissed off DOJ, who apparently thought that McKay should spend his time going after bogus voter fraud prosecutions rather than solve the murder of a guy who was in favor of gun control. If you don't think the fact that Tom Wales' political views weren't taken into consideration by the higher ups at DOJ when they decided to punish McKay for fighting to find his killer, you haven't been paying attention to the way these guys have operated for the last 6 years. Every single thing they do is about politics, and the political views of those they help or hurt.

The bottom line of this whole McKay firing could be summed up in this way: try to catch killers, you get fired. File BS charges of voter fraud, you keep your job.

It's a slap in the face to every prosecutor in the country. It's our job to seek justice for those that aren't able to seek it for themselves. None of us should give a damn what the political views are of the victims we try to protect. It's beyond reprehensible for them to punish McKay for doing this. But for this administration, it's par for the course.

You know what? A more cynical greyhair might suggest that this could indicate a conspiracy. One plus one still equals two. Has Tom Wales' killer been found? Did DOJ try to shut it down for a reason other than their own stupid political self-interest?

There is no evidence of a conspiracy to do anything other than push the U.S. attorney's to pursue the White House political agenda. And that's bad enough. But still, isn't it a sign of the times that a tinfoil hat conspiracy is the first thing that pops into my head?

Reverse Fly Paper

There were a bunch of headlines the other day about al Qaeda's number two guy announcing, or denoucing, the Democrats plans for a timeline to leave Iraq. His reasoning was that he wanted the U.S. to stay bogged down in Iraq so it could be drained of it's resources and destroyed.

Juan Cole makes the point that this is essentially the "fly-paper" strategy ..... in reverse! Kind of an interesting thought, but it's true that if you put fly paper in place by actually, like, grabbing the fly paper yourself, don't you get stuck too? Except in this case, al Qaeda has a lot less to lose being stuck in a death struggle with the U.S. in Iraq.

Pierced

Charlie Pierce writes a letter to Eric Alterman about the Republican debates. It's a great read and a quality take on the entire affair. Here's an excerpt:

This is a field with the gallows in its eyes. They all know full well that, for six full years, they had the chance that Reagan never really had. They controlled all three branches of the government, and they cowed the elite press far more thoroughly than did Mike Deaver and that bunch. And now they realize to whom they handed the keys of the kingdom, and they're all standing there surrounded by bills that are coming due almost by the day. "Movement conservatism" -- which takes Reagan as a secular icon even though he largely saved it from many of its own excesses -- is an empty shell. It always was a bunch of resentments pretending to be an ideology, and it always contained within itself the poisons that would leach out and kill it.

I never really thought about it much, but the pics I've seen are just that ... like a bunch of white boys going to the gallows. The only candidate I've seen that even seems to really have a chance is Fred Thompson. Unfortunately I suspect that if he gets serious about running, his health problems will sink his chances. Everyone is playing all nicey nicey about his cancer for now, but if he gets serious expect there to be a lot of raised eyebrows about having a Preznit with the big C in the White House.

Tangled Webs

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Madam Supertanker

A Few Short

Blockage

Heckuva Job Bushie

China

Selling America

What Government

Alamo Update

Classic Alanon

Chainsaw Management

Monday, May 7, 2007

Fun With Tweety

That Lamb Is Being Dressed

The Next War

Remember. Up Is Down

Escalated

Relative Gains

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Meanwhile, Over There ....

Digusting

Reverse Fly Paper

Pierced

About Me

Froomkin

Blog Archive