The Executive Brand We Have

This is one of the most important sentiments expressed about the true importance of electing responsible people to run our government.

That’s why I wish we could de-personalize elections. The American people need to understand more clearly just what a vote for Bush really represented.

A vote for Bush was also a vote for Rumsfeld running the Pentagon; it was a vote for Brownie running FEMA; it was a vote for the Federalist Society selecting our nation’s lower-court judges; it was a vote for an FDA that puts religion before science; it was a vote for David Safavian running procurement; it was a vote for Vladie Tomlinson running CPB (which runs PBS and NPR); it was a vote for oil executives writing energy policy; it was a vote for John Yoo writing torture memos; it was a vote for an EPA hostile to environmental law; it was a vote for a Department of Labor that warns Wal-Mart before an investigation; it was a vote for the Heritage Foundation staffing the CPA; and on and on.

Publius at Legal Fiction nailed it.

If more of the Democratic party and more of the anti-Bush groups focused on this rather than the variety of niche issues, there may be a chance to shift the wind.

- Murphy

No "Rumsfeld Wars"

Defense Tech is reporting that Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is distancing himself from responsibility for the war in Iraq.

Given the enormous role played by Rumsfeld, Cheney and the neocons in not only the war in Iraq but the entire forein policy structure of the United States, their sudden interest in reminding people that the ultimate responsibility lies with the President when previously they were happy to stand front and center on this issue, does not bode well for the administration. This makes reports of Bush's increasing isolation seem even more understandable.

The President's entire legacy rests on how he handles Iraq and terrorism. Now the partners that got him in up to his neck are distancing themselves. Or, perhaps, the President has pushed them away as the realization slowly dawns that his policies are not likely to earn him a great place in history.

The Washington Post Magazine story that Defense Tech refers to is an illuminating portrait of Rumsfeld. Far from distancing Rumsfled, it lays the consequences of the war square on his shoulders.

An important point near the end of the article comes from Army Lt. Gen. John P. Abizaid, senior office in Central Command, who summed up the state of the U.S. defenses in the face of actors such as Al Queda. Abizaid concluded that the nation is still unprepared to confront such an enemy.

There may be no "Rumsfeld war" but there is a "Rumsfeld military" and that military has been unsuccessful in prosecuting the war in Iraq. It has only been with the reassertion of the senior military commanders on the ground that there has been any progress in combatting the insurgency.

- Murphy

Happy B-Day, WWW

The world wide web will turn 15 years this month.

Over at the Financial Times, James Boyle explains how the web turned out so well, and why it won't happen like that again.

Someone previously said, if the attitude that corporations and media groups have towards the web were predominate earlier in our history, it's questionable that public libraries ever would have gotten off the ground. I think that is just about right.

- Murphy

Interesting Poll Numbers

There are some poll numbers out recently that will not sit well with the White House.

ABC News Poll

Bush Job Ratings
Overall job: Approve 39%, Disapprove 60%

Economy: Approve 36%, Disapprove 61%  

Iraq: Approve 36%, Disapprove 64%  

Health care: Approve 34%, Disapprove 61%

Gas prices: Approve 26%, Disapprove 68%
Bush Personal Ratings

Is a strong leader: Yes 47%, No 53%

Is honest and trustworthy: Yes 40%, No 58%

Shares your values: Yes 40%, No 58%

Understands problems of people like you: Yes 34%, No 66%.

Via Kevin Drum, CBS figures on the importance/unimportance of recent scandals.

Plamegate: 86% important 12% not important

Clinton-Lewinsky: 62% important, 37% not important

Whitewater: 49% important, 45% not important

Iran-Contra: 81% important, 19% not important

Watergate: 78% important, 22% not important

Via Crooks & Liars, the general public appears to view the advise part of the Senate's advise and consent job with more importance than the administration believes. The results of a Gallup poll evaluating Alityo in the shadow of Roe.

If it becomes clear Alito would vote to reverse Roe v. Wade, Americans would not want the Senate to confirm him, by 53% to 37%....

This is not the view of America that the conservative christian wing of the Republican party would like to see put forth.

Bush is not alone in his trip to the bottom of the polls. Vice President Cheney just hit 19% in his approval rating.

The public may not be as amenable to the administration's reasons for their actions.

- Murphy

You say potato I say actavisto...

Two Yale Lawyers, one a professor, one a recent grad, decided to take a swing determining just what makes an "activist judge". It's a widely used phrase among right-wing commentators and politicians who want to take a shot at judges who issue rulings they disagree with.

Many of those paying attention recognize the rather meaningless phrase for what it is, but Paul Gewirtz and Chad Golde decided to evaluate the sitting supreme court for levels of "activism" using a single, neutral and consistent standard, "How often has each justice voted to strike down a law passed by Congress? "

The results certainly won't please the right-wing punditocracy but should not surprise those who see through the term for whiffle ball bat it is.

We found that justices vary widely in their inclination to strike down Congressional laws. Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, was the most inclined, voting to invalidate 65.63 percent of those laws; Justice Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Bill Clinton, was the least, voting to invalidate 28.13 percent. The tally for all the justices appears below.

Thomas 65.63 %
Kennedy 64.06 %
Scalia 56.25 %
Rehnquist 46.88 %
O’Connor 46.77 %
Souter 42.19 %
Stevens 39.34 %
Ginsburg 39.06 %
Breyer 28.13 %

One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more "liberal" - Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens - vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled "conservative" vote more frequently to do so. At least by this measure (others are possible, of course), the latter group is the most activist.

The troubling aspect of this study is not that the truth is not on the side of the critics, but that the right's use of the phrase has so permeated the public that many individuals toss of the phrase, "activist judge" without any real knowledge of what they are talking about.

There are certainly more measures than the one used above, but in the context of how it is used by conservative commentators (it is often used neighboring the implication that the judges are overturning the "will of the people" by overturning legislation) this is perhaps the most accurate measure of who are the "activist judges" among us.

- Murphy

Meet the new boss....

Vice President Dick Cheney's counsel, David Addington, may succeed the recently indicted "Scooter" Libby as Cheney's Chief of Staff. His potential elevation may only serve to increase the difficult questions the V.P. is likely being bombarded with. Murray Waas and Paul Singer lay out Addington's role in several controversial administration actions in today's National Journal.

…Addington worked with Libby and Cheney in a broader effort to blunt congressional criticism that the administration selectively used intelligence information, and misrepresented other information, to make the case to go to war. In that instance, Addington played a key role in withholding information from Congress.

… a CIA representative, as well as one from at least one other agency, believed that Addington selectively released classified information to damage Wilson…it was believed that Addington was holding back other documents that would portray the administration in an unfavorable light.

National Journal reported last week that Vice President Cheney, Libby, and Addington, overruled advice from some White House political staffers and lawyers and decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence.
…
Addington shares with Cheney and Libby the view of increasing presidential power and authority and setting strict limits on the release of executive branch information to both Congress and the public.

As early as May 2001, Addington was the point person for the White House in deflecting requests by congressional Democrats and later the General Accounting Office (now named the Government Accountability Office) for information about the energy policy task force convened by Cheney's office.

…Addington helped draft the White House memo that concluded that the Geneva Convention against torture did not apply to prisoners captured in the war on terror. The memo declared that terrorism "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

- Murphy

Question on charges

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's decision to indict Lewis "Scooter" Libby on charges of perjury, false statements and obstruction of justice rather than espionage or the identities act have left a the public with a few questions and provided administration supporters a chance to weave a defense, thin though it may be.

Kevin Drum provides a great explanation of the reasoning behind Fitzerald's decisions. Unfortunately for administration supporters, it has nothing to do with the state of the offense, but with technical limitations of the relevant laws.

The trial of "Scooter" Libby (if there is one, there is always the possibility of a plea bargain) is likely to expose a side of the Bush administration they would rather keep under wraps. It will be impossible for them to deny that Libby lied under oath, and the indictment itself undercuts arguments that Libby was some kind of "rogue" official. It's known that Libby consulted with Vice President Cheney and others early on about how to handle the press inquiries about Cheney's role in sending Wilson to Niger.

The prosecution will on fuel questions about intelligence in the lead-up to the war in Iraq. The Italian angle of the story is finally starting to break. Josh Marshall and Laura Rozen have been covering the role of Italian intelligence officials in creating and disseminating the forgeries as well as the false information that provided the administration with one of the most concrete points to hang their hat on.

Much of the story is bogged down in teasing out the countless twists and turns of how the operation worked, but as the story receives greater exposure, it will also begin clearing itself up. It is certain to be an interesting few months.

- Murphy

Locked and loaded

Michael Crowley of The New Republic lays out the ground rules for what is sure to be a lively sport this November:

Now, this is almost too easy. Nevertheless, in the event of PlameGate indictments, The Plank looks forward to reuniting apologist Republicans who persecuted Bill Clinton with their earlier views about perjury and obstruction of justice. Just because the fish are in a barrel doesn't mean you shouldn't shoot them![Italics mine]

- Murphy

Virtually Leakproof...

Frank Rich: Fitzgerald is, "The un-Ken Star."

- Murphy

The Scooter Story

James Wolcott adds to the story of "Libby the patsy" that is starting to shape up. It's not likely to be the chapter that Libby wanted to include in his memoir.

Imagine you're I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

I know, it's not easy.

It's not easy imagining yourself striding manfully down the corridors of power or plotting the overthrow of tyrants while answering to the name of "Scooter."
…
You're not even being treated as a honorable warrior whose crime (if it was a crime) and sin (if it was a sin) was standing up for your boss against that showboating prick Joe Wilson.

No, those you've been loyal to are now disloyally sliding the blade into your back and not even allowing you a dignified sacrifice. They've broken the code of silence are leaking like mad to the LA Times
…
See, I'm imaging that if I'm Scooter Libby, I might be thinking that Karl and his crew overplayed their hand making me the leper, and maybe I've got some things of my own to divulge, and if I go down, maybe I won't be going down alone.

They're not going to pin this all on me.

Fitzgerald has to wrap up by the end of this week unless he extends the grand jury which the folks with far better knowledge don't think he is going to do. I think the next few weeks are going to require a few batches of popcorn and perhaps a bottle of champagne for good measure (though I work in a brewery and a beer may be more appropriate. Perhaps a batch of indictment ale is in order).

- Murphy