It's Good To Be King

While most of us fixated on the midnight rules changes by former President Bush in the last days of his administration, or watched for the preemptive pardons of those members of his crew who signed off on torture or illegal wire tapping, he was busy appointing his BFFs to positions which will continue his legacy well into and even beyond President Obama's term.

Many of the appointments were of the vanity or resume padding variety (how much damage can someone do on the board of the US Holocaust Museum?); some came with the potential of nice paychecks and further influence. The recipients of the largess? Loyal aides and big campaign donors.

Bush made more than 100 such end-of-term appointments to a constellation of presidential boards and panels, such as the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports and the U.S.-Russia Polar Bear Commission. Like other presidents, he often turned to close aides and top political supporters to fill the last-minute postings, many of which will outlast President Obama's current term.

Nearly half of Bush's appointments after Election Day were filled by donors who gave a total of nearly $1.9 million to Republicans since 2003, according to an analysis of the postings. At least 20 of the positions were filled by former Bush aides, plus others filled by old hands from the administrations of Richard M. Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Most of the positions are unpaid and are valued more for their status than for monetary compensation. Yet the appointments show how political connections matter even for the most obscure Washington jobs, and they illustrate the extent to which presidents have an impact well after they leave the White House.

Harmless enough, eh?

Well, the polar bears may not think so, given the Bush's lack of concern for global climate change. Not all of the appointments are so benign, however.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said that while many of the appointments owe to vanity or good causes, some are also useful for maintaining political influence. "The real question is not only whether they are paid, but what benefits can they pay out from these boards," she said.

Consider the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations, the U.S. government's senior trade advisory panel, which favored several of the free-trade agreements that Bush was unable to push through Congress.

Bush named three members to the panel on Christmas Eve: Carol Ann Bartz, chief executive of Yahoo, who donated about $35,000 to Bush and other Republicans over the past six years; Maria Cino, who organized the 2008 Republican National Convention; and Israel Hernandez, who worked in the Commerce Department and the Bush White House. Their terms last through 2012, allowing them to play a role in influencing trade policy throughout Obama's term.. [Emphasis added]

Atrios refers to those who are perpetually tied to Washington DC as "the Villagers." It appears that one whole subdivision is set aside for those who have served a president well enough to get a lifetime gig.

Nice work if you can get it.

Year of the Rat

It's lovely watching the end coming in 20 days to the worst administration ever. This last year has been full of the rats leaving the sinking ship, and of rats of all sorts. Since everyone seems to be making lists, I started thinking of some monumental rats that this year has brought out. I will leave out the cretin in chief, as rats really are highly intelligent.

These are a top ten of the pack that's slithering away. Please feel free to suggest others that you feel should be mentioned.

1A*+ and in a league beyond comparison to everyday rodentia; Alan Greenspan. Without his decision that he was above the law, and his disregard of the regulations he was put in charge of the Fed to enforce, the whole financial crisis would have been averted. His advice has lost all credibility, as his lack of judgment has become painfully obvious.

The general run of rats, next league down.

2. Bernie Madoff, using his friends to make a gigantic fraud that has cost billions from all his investors. As one of the victims has been Project Innocence, his life in jail is going to be really nasty, we can be sure.

3. Sarah Palin, encouraging her political followers to threaten the safety of president-elect Obama, and claim that her family was being mauled by libruls. Back to watching Russia from her front stoop.

4. CEO's of Citibank, Ameritrust, WaMu, HSBC, Wachovia and the rest of the slew of subprime lenders who rewarded their mortgage officers for placing expensive mortgages, and disregarding ability to repay. Regulators now in charge.

5. Congressional pimps Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, leading their winger crew to exert every muscle they could engage to keep the public from being served by the 110th congress, then insisting that the 'Democrat' majority was a do-nothing Congress. They remain in office, but their veto powers have departed, making way for public servants.

6. Senator Liddy Dole, faking her opponent's voice denying the existence of God, to get votes from her winger constituents. A real improvement, she will be staying home for awhile.

7. Torture lobby; Darth Cheney, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzales, David Addington and fellow torture advocates, breaking all laws and dragging this country through the mud for eight years for their personal satisfaction and gain.

8. Erik Prince, who put together the Blackwater mercenaries to murder for profit, will be losing his promoters.

9. Joe Lieberman, winger BFF, dropping the pretense that he is a Democrat, going on the campaign trail with McAyn and Co., and making derogatory remarks about president-elect Obama. He will remain in office, but without the status of WH contact and buds in high office.

10. Karl Rove, a standard for evil deeds, making the lies of the right serve as 'news' as he acts like a reporter for the media. No longer has any claim to insider sources.

This is all I could stand, looks like we're just scratching the surface, doesn't it? If nothing else, this occupied White House has provided rational people with endless vistas of truly rotten people to watch. Every head of every agency qualifies to be on this list as well. I believe I set myself too large a project, even to start naming the departing rats.

These rats have totally overrun the government. It's really amazing that there are so many who were ready to throw aside all standards of decency and join in the scurvy crew.

Twenty more days.

Moles

It's election day. Fina-freakin'-ly. If you haven't already done so, do your country a favor and go vote.

Not that a change in administration is in and of itself going to end the problems our nation faces (a bankrupt economy, a bankrupt foreign policy, a bankrupt domestic policy). The new president, and I do believe that history will be made today and "That One" will will be "The One," has a miserably difficult four years (at least) ahead of him. He's going to need a strong administration and a competent executive branch just to start the brush clearing. And getting that strong administration and competent executive branch just might be the first problem he has to face. There's a lot "dead wood" which might not be so dead that will have to be cleared away.

Remember all of those presidential appointees chosen for their unswerving loyalty to George Bush and the Republican Party? Well, they might not have to go anywhere under the new administration. Joe Davidson's Washington Post column, Federal Diary, explains why this might be so.

As the political climate changes, officials appointed by the outgoing administration are looking for a safe place to nest. For some, that would be a career position in a new administration run by John McCain or Barack Obama.

Moving from an appointed position to a career job is known as burrowing in. It's not illegal and often not inappropriate, but it can look like the fix is in for the anointed to get the gig.

And this is burrowing season.

The burrowing has a more technical term in government circles: conversion. A political appointee applies to have his appointed position converted to a career position, thereby making him a civil servant with all the job protection that implies. This does more than "look like the fix is in," it stinks.

To the extent conversions happen at all, "it just undermines the sense of fair play and the rules of the game," said Donald F. Kettl, a University of Pennsylvania political scientist. "It's definitely a troublesome thing because it undermines the confidence people have in the system."

It will do more than undermine our confidence, however. The new president is going to be stuck with whole slew of Bushies, people who mismanaged FEMA and thereby lost an American city, who rewrote regulations and thereby poisoned the food supply, who granted no-bid federal contracts to their buddies and cost the government billions of dollars in wasteful and shoddy construction. Most importantly, many of them are rabid ideologues who would have no compunction in undercutting the new president's agenda any way they can.

Now, Mr. Davidson makes clear that there are safeguards in place to prevent any egregious abuses. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is supposed to keep a sharp eye on the process.

To guard against this, the Office of Personnel Management sent a letter months ago to heads of federal departments and agencies. It outlined the procedures for moving employees from appointed to career status. "During this presidential election year," wrote former OPM director Linda M. Springer, "I would like to remind agency heads of the need to ensure all personnel actions remain free of political influence or other improprieties and meet all relevant civil service laws, rules and regulations."

OPM prohibited agencies from appointing certain categories of officials to career or competitive positions before the personnel agency had a chance to review the appointment.

OPM also clamped the lid on the cookie jar, reminding officials of regulations that say those employees may not get an incentive award for the period from June 1 until Jan. 20, 2009.

I am somehow not soothed by such pro-active letters. I would much prefer the whole process be thrown out with the current occupiers of the White House. If an appointee is so knowledgeable, so competent, so experienced that he or she is ideal for the job, then let him or her apply for the job, either by the traditional civil service route or by applying with the new administration.

We don't need any moles, especially of the current stripe.

Kicking Another Can Down the Road

The Federal government, that failed to use regulations that were there to keep economic disaster from happening, announced today that it will take over Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The revision of their operations and structure is left for the next Congress. Actually, though it displays the existing officials' inability to deal with the crisis they produced, it is reassuring that better office holders will be handling the restructuring.

A failure would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance," Paulson said.

Both companies were placed into a government conservatorship that will be run by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the new agency created by Congress this summer to regulate Fannie and Freddie.

The Federal Reserve and other federal banking regulators said in a joint statement Sunday that "a limited number of smaller institutions" have significant holdings of common or preferred stock shares in Fannie and Freddie, and that regulators were "prepared to work with these institutions to develop capital-restoration plans."

The two companies had nearly $36 billion in preferred shares outstanding as of June 30, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Paulson said that it would be up to Congress and the next president to figure out the two companies' ultimate structure.

This is another instance of legislating appearance, which this occupied White House chooses because it expects the public to accept appearance rather than demand substance. Once again, no accountability occurs until after January 21, 2009.

The crises that have occurred over and over because regulations were not used, by Alan Greenspan more than by Paulson, are a proof of failed philosophy, one that the wingers will not own up to. Their aim is to keep up an appearance that will reassure investors and the financial community that the 'fundamentals are sound', a bit of voodoo economics if there ever was one. If they can scoot out before the total collapse of house prices descends on the economy, they are going to consider the two terms in high office as a success.

If we can manage to get responsible administration into office, the regulations that were there all along will be adequate to prevent further disasters. The protections we need are those against dysfunctional executive branch officials. More independence from the White House for the financial regulators, and the Department of Justice, is something that needs to be explored.

Pakistan Buddies

More comes out all the time about the forces we are supporting in the Pakistan border where the Afghanistan occupation is being lost. A book now out points out the pretense of pro-Western action is wearing tissue thin now.

Scott Horton of Harper's has interviewed Ahmed Rashid, whose book "Descent into Chaos" has just come out, on Pakistan and the Taliban:

The CIA, we learned in a report today, has compiled damning evidence of the Pakistani military’s complicity with the Taliban. But this is hardly news. Indeed, one analyst has repeatedly warned that Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf and his intelligence service have been taking America for a ride, pretending to support U.S. counter-terrorism operations while sheltering and supporting the Taliban and numerous other extremist organizations. That analyst is Ahmed Rashid, and he is the most articulate of the observers of the region between the Oxus and the shores of Karachi.
(snip)
The NWFP (Pakhtunkhwa) government is in a quandary. It has to call in the army whenever armed lashkars threaten to overrun a district as the police force simply does not have the capacity to fight an ever-expanding insurgency.

After Swat the army has also been deployed in Hangu. In view of the militant sanctuaries situated nearby, the army cannot be withdrawn in the near future. Imagine if the story is repeated in other vulnerable districts. Will the army also have to be deployed in all these other districts? Will such measures not bring the existence of the civilian provincial government into question?

Is it not amazing that in spite of such high stakes the presidency that has a monopoly over governance in Fata seems to show no anxiety over the prevailing situation? It is continuing with the policy of keeping Fata a black hole where terrorist groups from across the globe run their bases.

There seems to be no bottom to the ignorance the U.S. displays in support for military action against our own interests. The cost of using political hacks to run our government is on display in every sector.

Ignorance is not bliss, and it can prove fatal. Some reaction has been forced out of the worst administration ever.

Pakistan says its intelligence agents have been accused by the US of alerting al-Qaeda linked militants before the US launches missile attacks against them.

Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar said members of Inter-Services Intelligence were accused of "tipping off" militants before strikes in the tribal areas.
(snip)
The BBC's security correspondent Rob Watson says that relations between the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the ISI appear decidedly strained.

Our correspondent says that the stern message apparently being delivered to Islamabad was that Pakistan has to do more to tackle ties between the ISI and Islamic extremists based in the country's tribal areas.

It's awfully close to the End for the occupied White House. Looks like they may actually try to put a little into that pledge to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice. Hopefully, they're not going to use the dismantled Justice Department to accomplish that.

Empowering the Terraists II

The aggressive ignorance of the White House seems to be part of its general meltdown, as reported in today's NYT. Something of a deja vu quality is seen by Frank Rich, looking back on the breakdown in Nixon's regime.

But are we safe? As Al Qaeda and the Taliban surge this summer, that single question is even more urgent than the moral and legal issues attending torture. On those larger issues, the evidence is in, merely awaiting adjudication. Mr. Bush’s 2005 proclamation that “we do not torture” was long ago revealed as a lie. Antonio Taguba, the retired major general who investigated detainee abuse for the Army, concluded that “there is no longer any doubt” that “war crimes were committed.” Ms. Mayer uncovered another damning verdict: Red Cross investigators flatly told the C.I.A. last year that America was practicing torture and vulnerable to war-crimes charges.

Top Bush hands are starting to get sweaty about where they left their fingerprints. Scapegoating the rotten apples at the bottom of the military’s barrel may not be a slam-dunk escape route from accountability anymore. No wonder the former Rumsfeld capo, Douglas Feith, is trying to discredit a damaging interview he gave to the British lawyer Philippe Sands for another recent and essential book on what happened, “Torture Team.” After Mr. Sands previewed his findings in the May issue of Vanity Fair, Mr. Feith protested he had been misquoted — apparently forgetting that Mr. Sands had taped the interview. Mr. Feith and Mr. Sands are scheduled to square off in a House hearing this Tuesday.

So hot is the speculation that war-crimes trials will eventually follow in foreign or international courts that Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell’s former chief of staff, has publicly advised Mr. Feith, Mr. Addington and Alberto Gonzales, among others, to “never travel outside the U.S., except perhaps to Saudi Arabia and Israel.” But while we wait for the wheels of justice to grind slowly, there are immediate fears to tend. Ms. Mayer’s book helps cement the case that America’s use of torture has betrayed not just American values but our national security, right to the present day.

How did all these unqualified high officials manage to ignore the wheels of justice? Perhaps the Nixonian insulation, fleeing from the public, had something to do with it, but I see the unleashed operation of ignorance. They never studied their subject.

Today I listened to Chris Matthews' panel describing McCain's 'stream of consciousness' methods, which necessitate a staff to keep him in hand and get him through simple tasks. I wonder if any of these people would ever be able to get through a day in my life, getting bills paid, taking care of a garden, watching out for an elderly mom (who also can't communicate very well what she does need), and the simple errands to get the things I need. I suspect not.

It's scary on many levels.

Public Servants

An unimpeachably correct sub-head at WaPo caught my eye, and I hope you readers will enjoy it as much as I do.

Bernanke Endorses Expanded Authority
New Tools Needed To Avert Crises, Fed Chairman Says

Those new Tools are welcome, they could hardly be worse than the old tools, such as Alan Greenspan. New public servants who are not tools would be much more welcome, and useful.

Predictably, the successor to Greenspan is trying to divert attention from the fact that regulations were in place to regulate mortgage lending, and grading of investment vehicles. Alan Greenspan decided that the crisis would not come about because the crash would be widespread, and dispersed enough that it would not affect those 'underlying fundamentals' that our worst administration ever were claiming to be sound.

Now Bernanke is joining the outcry, that new regulations are needed. Of course, this is a farce. New tools are needed, indeed, but this time how about a new administration, giving us real public servants, honestly using the regulations they have.

My comment at the WaPo editorial deploring the financial crisis, and calling for those new rules to replace the ones we already have:

jocabel wrote:
The regulations were in place and Alan Greenspan admitted he refrained from demanding stricter lending standards enforcement because he thought that a collapse would be distributed widely, and not happen all at once. What we need are honest public servants in high office.

*********************************************************

Yesterday, I called attention to a discussion being held today, at 1 ET, on columns written by Ruth Marcus, and particularly asked a question on it about her ignoring John McCain's taking out a campaign loan on false grounds that he would use public financing.

Today, Marcus writes a column on a Gitmo detainee and fairly cites a statement John McCain has made that is totally wrong. She also asks for justice, and I want to give her credit for that.

Sen. McCain, you called the Supreme Court's recent Guantanamo ruling, which gives Parhat and other detainees the chance to make their case directly to a federal judge, "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country." As someone who spent so long in captivity, could you tell Parhat why it would have been so terrible to let a court hear his case -- years ago?
(snip)
And Mr. President, Parhat once imagined that America would help the Uighurs, a group your own State Department says has been subjected to "official repression" by the Chinese government. Could you tell him that America has treated him fairly?

If not -- and it's hard to see how you could -- please find a way, before you leave office, to let him go.

The question about her ignoring facts about John McCain was submitted, by the way. I will look to see if it's included.

Hostages R Us

A very reasonable policy during the last energy crunch was lowering the national speed limit to 55. During the present crunch, there have been any number of articles mentioning that lower speed policy and the gas that can be saved. I usually drive around 55 mph myself, when it isn't absolutely hazardous.

Senator Warner of VA, an unusually conscientious member of the GOP, has proposed to the Energy Department that this reasonable measure be instituted, after a study to conclude what is its benefit. The Energy Department has shot back that it won't be dealing with reasonable stuff, it has to get its national treasures' protections removed or will hold its collective breath until it turns blue. Blue would be an improvement and is very much desired.

Sen. John Warner, R-Va., asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman to look into what speed limit would provide optimum gasoline efficiency given current technology. He said he wants to know if the administration might support efforts in Congress to require a lower speed limit.

Congress in 1974 set a national 55 mph speed limit because of energy shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo. The speed limit was repealed in 1995 when crude oil dipped to $17 a barrel and gasoline cost $1.10 a gallon.

As motorists headed on trips for this Fourth of July weekend, gasoline averaged $4.10 a gallon nationwide with oil hovering around $145 a barrel.

Warner cited studies that showed the 55 mph speed limit saved 167,000 barrels of oil a day, or 2 percent of the country's highway fuel consumption, while avoiding up to 4,000 traffic deaths a year.
(snip)
Energy Department spokeswoman Angela Hill said the department will review Warner's letter but added, "If Congress is serious about addressing gasoline prices, they must take action on expanding domestic oil and natural gas production."

Not to be confused with the kind of leadership that serves its' country, Energy Department actions have been as usual a means for beating up on the citizen.

We are not going to get public servants in high office until January 21, 2009, and needn't look to this cabal for anything but abuse. That is more clearly enunciated every day by the worst administration ever.

200 days.

Watch This (cough, cough) Swing (cough)

There has been an ongoing air quality problem in the North Texas area, which the worst administration ever solved to its satisfaction by ending EPA responsibility. That is to say that EPA had its authority removed, and compliance with standards made a matter of self-reporting by industry. Since that time, EPA has been converted into a business-compliant agency like all the members of the executive branch. Now it has approved an environmental plan for Dallas/Ft. Worth that exactly replicates a plan previously rejected.

There is some comfort in the befouling of the air, if the same cretin in chief who engineered that irresponsibility really is planning, as he said, to retire here. Breathing in his own poisons sounds like a fitting end. I don't believe it, though - the Eagles' Nest in Paraguay sounds more likely to me, as long as it has no extradition agreement with the Hague.

Meanwhile, breathing in Dallas/Ft. Worth has been rendered more dangerous for its residents.

Environmental and public health groups contend that the EPA should have stuck with its initial conclusion that the plan does not go far enough in reducing air pollution from vehicles, industries and other sources.

The EPA could have rejected the plan outright, forcing the state to redraft it. If that happened, however, administrative moves by the state might have postponed some clean-air measures for up to three years. "Delay, delay and delay," Mr. Greene said. "The time to move forward is now."

He said the EPA's discussions with the state environmental commission produced better estimates of how much pollution the plan would cut. The plan would order some new cuts in industrial emissions, but not as deep as environmentalists demanded.
(snip)
But Dr. Al Armendariz, a Southern Methodist University environmental engineering professor who has done a technical analysis of the state's plan, said it is still fatally flawed. He predicted ozone levels would still exceed federal limits by the 2010 target date.

"They just recalculated the emissions and didn't put any new emissions reductions in the plan," Dr. Armendariz said. "That's what's so frustrating."

An outright rejection by the EPA would have sent a signal to Texas politicians and businesses that the agency is serious about requiring stronger clean-air measures, he said. "What is it that ... [the EPA] is really afraid of?"

The fear of business is epidemic in N. Texas, where the rights of individuals are put very far behind the interests of business in priorities. It's a fear that means raising children and growing old here is going to be increasingly hazardous to your health.

That isn't all bad. The same perpetrators of crimes against the people should suffer the effects of their crimes. Breathe deep, won't you, temporal White House occupant and minions?

******************************************************

Meanwhile a staffer to Sen. Cornyn has been outed for trolling in behalf of the campaign using a false name.

This story confirms a suspicion I've had, along with other commenters at websites like Eschaton, that some of the talking points our trolls spout are from paid dissident voices. Having the kind of time many trolls seem to have really indicates they have a position that includes gathering info from the opposition. The troll comments also often seem so devoid of normal mindsets that they have to come from extremists in the right wing. This news is hardly surprising.

"That's unethical at best," Glazer explained to KVUE-TV in Austin, "because he was trying to do it as a paid staffer for the campaign. ... Buck Smith time and again comes in, makes fun of people, challenges them to a duel."

A Cornyn spokesperson, asked by Burnt Orange Report for comment, responded sarcastically, "I am shocked...next thing I know you'll be saying the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus aren't real either."

Typical of high ethical standards of the GoPervs.

No Rights to Public Records

The TX White House preceeded the occupied White House in D.C., and seems to have set another rotten example. This time it's our 'Environmental' agency in TX that has declared its records are belong to us.

TCEQ has long operated as more of an obstacle to the public interest than a protector, another echo of the cretin in chief's business oriented services. It declares clean air standards while polluters report on their own emissions, voluntarily as they like to describe it. Now it is working to protect a serious polluter.

In El Paso, the city and Sierra Club among others are suing for records from a copper smelter that is befouling the air, but TCEQ has countersued the AG for ... violating separation of powers. As locals like to say, That Dog Won't Hunt.

We're dumbfounded that TCEQ believes it is not answerable to lawmakers or, apparently, to the public. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's open records division recently found TCEQ's argument to be absurd, ruling that the agency must turn over the documents.

But that hasn't stopped TCEQ, which, in an odd intramural contest, has persuaded another division of the attorney general's office to sue the open records unit. And when we asked about Abbott vs. Abbott, TCEQ officials and the AG's office declined to comment, saying the matter is in litigation.

TCEQ's lawsuit is a misguided assault on the authority of legislators to act in the public interest. The Public Information Act and other statutes authorize lawmakers to receive and protect sensitive information they need to perform their legislative duty. TCEQ's claim that a lawmaker can't seek answers about suspected conflicts at a state agency is preposterous.

The pursuit of private industries' interests that increasingly is substituted for its legitimate role of public protector has trickled down to state level, to the detriment of all of us. The public funds that are used to set up operations that then work against the interests of the public has grown into outright robbery.

The massive replacement of advocates of private industry in our agencies has assumed emergency status. We cannot any longer be deprived of our tax dollars and our rights. Using our votes to get rid of the thieves is overdue.

The 'Legacy' of the war criminals is already visible in these criminals acts against the public, at all levels.

***********************************************

That really amazingly blatant perpetrator of the worst of the Right Wing, Iowa's Rep. Steven King, has long inspired me with horror. I first took note of him in a floor debate on slaughtering horses, when he supported the slaughter on a ground that it would help our balance of payments with France.

Today he's cited by Crooks & Liars for a few other mouthdropping vulgarities.

Who can forget Rep Steve King’s horrible words about Obama back in Iowa?

King: “And I will tell you that, if he is elected president, then the, the radical Islamists, the, the al-Qaida, and the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on September 11….

Well, he’s baaaack. In one of the most reprehensible lines of questioning today - and Lord knows there were many as Republicans desperately try to outdo each other on who can cover Bush’s ass best - GOP stooge Steve King takes the cake with this gem:

“Couldn’t you have taken this to the grave with you and done this country a favor?”

Are there any Archie Bunker awards around, for the person with the most offensive talking points? I want to know where to send off to nominate this lump of waste matter.

A Little Hunger Among Friends

While parts of the world are seeing riots over food scarcity, and huge increases in price for the food available, Western nations with U.S. leadership plumped for biofuels over people at the Food Summit in Rome. Investments in ethanol appear to have been Agriculture Secretary Schafer's guiding principal, as our position eschews principle.

Having found that effects of diverting land usage to growing biofuel ingredients pays well, our U.S. representatives are supporting the rich devastation of the poor.

Global Food Crisis Summit: The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation's (FAO) Rome food security summit concluded on Thursday and not surprisingly differences on rich country subsidies/protections for agriculture, biofuels and the opposition of well-fed Europeans to GM foods, remained unresolved.

The FAO estimates that global food consumption will double over the next 30 years as the global population increases by 42 percent to over 9 billion.

At the opening ceremony on Tuesday, FAO Director-General Dr. Jacques Diouf appealed to world leaders for $30 billion a year to re-launch agriculture and avert future threats of conflicts over food. He said that OECD countries* spent $372 billion in 2006 alone, to support their agriculture - Global Food Crisis Summit: FAO says world only needs $30 billion a year to eradicate the scourge of hunger; OECD countries spent $372 billion in 2006 alone to support their agriculture

Also on Tuesday, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon said that that there were nearly one billion people short of food and called upon countries gathered here to act with"a sense of purpose and mission."

"Only by acting together, in partnership, can we overcome this crisis,"he said.

But it was noted that the powerful politicians in attendance spoke mostly about economics and politics.

It has been obvious for some time that the worst administration ever has business as its object, and we here in the U.S. have learned over 7+ years that the right wing is opposed to the public interest it has sworn to protect. We have agency heads who work to defeat the legislation that created their agencies, and Agriculture joins with FDA in diminishing protections of our food. Abroad, now, we see Agriculture working against food for the whole world. Promoting hunger was never the purpose of this department, but it has chosen to take that as its role.

We have to overturn the inhumane aspect of this government by thieves, and that should happen sooner, not later. The world is not going to ignore the axis of evil that our government has become.

Throwing Tea

When this country split off from England there was a great concept, No Taxation Without Representation. I think we've gotten back to that grounds again.

I was just listening to a little CSpan announcement, that the House will reconvene at 1 p.m. ET, to consider a bill that makes some technical adjustments to a highway bill. They will be discussing that a Florida highway project was inserted into the bill after it had been passed by the House and the Senate. Calling on the DOJ to investigate it. Oh, right that DOJ.

No Taxation Without Representation.

Our country has been taken over by criminals.

At least Lurita Doan just resigned.

Lurita Doan, head of the General Services Administration, was forced to offer her resignation tonight, according to an e-mail she sent out this evening.

Doan was appointed in late May, 2006, becoming the first woman to serve as GSA Administrator. With 12,000 empioyees and a $20 billion annual budget, GSA has responsibilty for overseeing the thousands of building and properties owned by the federal government.

Doan became the subject of congressional scrutiny last year for allegedly using GSA to help Republican lawmakers win re-election. Doan denied the allegation, but her appearance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was disastrous. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the panel, called on Doan to resign over the allegations, but Doan refused to step down.

One down, a whole executive branch of crooks to go. We have a lot of work ahead of us.

Administration Shills' Exemption Worn Out

Banner day for WaPo editorial board, as another commenter points out, with two actual critiques of the worst administration in U.S. history are up there today.

The advisors to the cretin in chief have been unique in offering obviously erroneous advice such as Abu Gonzales' and John Yoo's, that the president can choose not to prosecute laws he doesn't like and that the U.S. can torture its victims. That Mukasey is claiming that the executive can't be prosecuted for following that erroneous advice is simple justification for avoiding criminal prosecution, as Diane has pointed out.

SINCE ITS creation in the early 20th century, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel has been considered the legal conscience of the executive branch, rendering judgments to presidents and executive agencies about what the law allows. The OLC responds to executive branch requests for clarifications on everything from how to determine annual leave for federal employees to whether treaty provisions are constitutional and how torture should be defined. Its opinions are binding on the executive and essentially carry the weight of law. Past OLC opinions continue to have force when a new administration begins, just as Supreme Court decisions enjoy the force of law long after the justices who made them have left the bench.

Unfortunately, during the Bush administration, the OLC has become known as a partisan enabler of legally and ethically questionable presidential policies, including those involving the use of torture. The OLC's decisions have eroded the legitimacy of the office and given legal cover to behavior that most Americans -- and most lawyers -- regard as improper.
(snip)
Such checks and balances help the political branches stay honest and protect the rule of law from erosion.

Naturally, there is that last sentence implying that the rule of law has not yet been abdicated, unfortunately not true. There is an excellent comment following the editorial though, to wit:

njackson1950 wrote:
Get real. The Office of Legal Counsel has a delegated duty to offer legal advice to the President and the heads of Executive departments that was initially assigned by statute to the first Attorney General almost two hundred and twenty years ago. Lawyers who remember their ethics training from law school know that an attorney’s role as an adviser is not the same as the role of an advocate. An adviser is to tell the client what is legal and what is not regardless of whether the client likes the advice. It’s pretty clear that OLC lawyers such as John Yoo and Steven Bradbury breached their ethical duties to act as advisers.

But it’s worse than that. Lawyers cannot ethically counsel their client on the means, methods or advisability of committing a crime when they wear their advocacy hats. When lawyers go that far in their zeal they are participants in their client’s subsequent crimes.

With regard to the federal crime of torture, defined at 18 USC section 2340, a later statutory section provides severe penalties for torture conspiracy. This statute, found at 18 USC section 2340A, says such conspirators face life sentences.

The Justice Department spokespersons, the Bill O’Reillys, and the Rush Limbaughs can bob and weave all they want to say that 18 USC 2340A is not applicable to the likes of John Yoo and Steven Bradbury, but the stark language of the statute stares back.

After the current Attorney General, Michael Mukasey finishes his term of obstructing justice on January 20, 2009 the incoming Attorney General should prepare torture conspiracy indictments against Yoo, Bradbury, and about a dozen other Bush officials who were involved in the crime.

And, WaPo Editorial Board, none of these guys were “low-level lawyers.” (Emphasis added.)

And I have to repeat what I said, apologies for quoting myself, but the reason I said it is because it's what I think needs to be said.

jocabel wrote:
"Such checks and balances help the political branches stay honest and protect the rule of law from erosion."

A little late in the day of this worst administration in U.S. history, with its contention that the presidency is above the law. Reminiscent of Watergate, in which WaPo played a heroic role, this series of violations of law has not been prosecuted not because congress has failed, as its role is not to prosecute but legislate. Prosecution has not been done, by the executive branch that has the responsibility, and it has been whitewashed by a complaisant press. Shame on you.

The occupied White House has made a point from its beginnings to violate the laws and to insist that it has that prerogative. This is intolerable, and cannot continue if we are ever to return to the decent and lawful proceedings of ethical government.

**********************************************************

Texas has the most infamous politicians, I betcha - we can go toe to toe with any New Yorker in that capacity.

A veteran Capitol staffer resigned Monday over allegations he impersonated both a state representative and a newspaper reporter in the last month – first to sway a state primary race, then to glean information on an ethics complaint against his boss.

Todd Gallaher had been on leave from Republican state Sen. Bob Deuell's office since last month, when he used an e-mail address that looked like it belonged to a Democratic lawmaker to send out embarrassing photos of a South Texas sheriff up for re-election.
(snip)
The pictures from repjuangarcia@hotmail.com hit e-mail inboxes before the Aransas County primary election, showing Republican incumbent Sheriff Mark Gilliam revealing his buttocks, stripping off his shirt and pretending to kiss another man at a house party two decades ago.

Sheriff Gilliam lost the primary. Many questions have been raised, such as:
Now, which one would you rather be? Or which one's wife? Giuliani comes from New York? are you sure?

First Do Harm

Your government hard at work to keep you from being safe, I'm working on the poster. A picture of a vaccine needle will be the illustration.

We've seen a lot the safety inspections that didn't bark in the night leaving trails of bodies, now we have the FDA seeking to preempt suits that try to penalize irresponsible uses of drugs that do harm. The implications extend beyond threat from irresponsible pharmaceutical effects.

They took down that Hermes staff in your medical professions' symbol at FDA, leaving the snakes.

The Bush administration has embraced preemption largely because it allows the White House to use its regulatory power to achieve what big businesses haven't been able to do through legislation, which is immunize themselves from lawsuits over defective products. In recent years, federal agencies, dominated by industry insiders, have written preemption language into safety regulations, from rules issued by the Consumer Products Safety Commission governing mattress flammability to those introduced by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on seat-belt placement and automobile-roof strength. In fact, while the NHTSA was run by a former lawyer for DaimlerChrysler, it issued a roof-strength regulation that was so weak the only possible explanation for its issuance was that it was designed to help auto manufacturers head off lawsuits. Even the EPA has gotten into the act, once filing a brief on behalf of Dow chemical supporting its preemption defense in a case before the Supreme Court in 2005.

But no federal agency has pursued a preemption agenda as aggressively as the FDA did when Troy worked there. In 2003, he appeared at a conference of defense lawyers and in-house legal counsels from drug companies and publicly invited them to contact his office if they had a case the FDA could help them out with. "We can't afford to get involved in every case," he said, according to an affidavit written by someone who was there. "We have to pick our shots…so make it sound like a Hollywood pitch."
(snip)
The "preemption preamble," as it's known, states that this rule preempts all state tort lawsuits against manufacturers who make drugs approved by the FDA. The regulation allows drug companies to invoke the FDA's approval to beat back lawsuits without actually having to get the agency to enter the case. This is a hedge against future Democratic presidents who might want to institute a change of course. The preamble was inserted into the regulation without any public input. Since then, lawyers have repeatedly invoked it when defending companies against personal-injury lawsuits.
(snip)
If the Supreme Court follows Troy's lead, it won't just be pharmaceutical and medical-device lawsuits that are affected. A ruling for the drug company in Levine could also limit lawsuits over everything from toxic chemical exposure to tainted beef—a pretty grim scenario for the average consumer. And there’s reason to believe the court will do just that.

The ongoing damage the worst administration in history has accomplished is deep and far-reaching, enabling the forces against the American people as no war ever has.

The remark that was made just in passing in a White House de-briefing yesterday by Ms. Perino, that the economic damage done to this country was the result of the Dems having "been asleep for seven years" just blows me away. It's the second evocation of that theme that the Dems are responsible for the war because they failed to realize all the information they were fed was lies, and didn't stop the war criminals before they could kill again.

It will take penalties to make these depredations stop paying off. The Hague is ever more called for by the war against America waged by this cabal.

FEC Shuts Down As Dems Refuse Criminal Appointments

Giving credit where credit is due, I want to thank the Dems for refusing to accept horrible appointees on the Federal Election Commission even though it means the FEC will have to shut down. No recess atrocities, either, will be possible because the Congress is refusing to recess. Three cheers to this exercise of the powers they can muster, and those are slim until we get more Dems in Congress.

The potential for an FEC shutdown has been looming for weeks, as a handful of Democratic senators voiced opposition to one of Bush's nominees to the commission, Hans A. von Spakovsky. Their concern stemmed not from von Spakovsky's work on the FEC but from his tenure in the Justice Department's civil rights division.

His critics contend that von Spakovsky advocated a controversial Texas redistricting plan and fought to institute a requirement in Georgia that voters show photo identification before being permitted to cast ballots.

"I am particularly concerned with his efforts to undermine voting rights," Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) said in a statement released in September after he placed a hold on von Spakovsky's nomination. Obama and others gathered more opposition to von Spakovsky's nomination by drawing civil rights advocates into a lobbying effort for its rejection. They attracted the involvement of a number of groups, including the NAACP and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, that typically would not be engaged in a battle over an FEC nomination.

The blockade worked, but Republican leaders in the Senate countered with one of their own. If von Spakovsky were rejected, they would not allow the two Democratic nominees to be appointed, either.
(snip)
As senators left town this week, the small community of lawyers and advocates who monitor campaign finance law tried to take stock of the new reality. There will not be total lawlessness, they said. The statute of limitations on most campaign finance violations does not run out for five years, so when the commission is at full strength, it will be able to pursue complaints.

While it would be far preferable to have an operational FEC during coming campaigning, the proliferation of regulators who oppose the public interest is far, far out of hand. The representatives of our country's interests have got to take hold, and that's what they're doing.

Further violations of laws by those who are supposed to enforce them has to be stopped, and our Dem leadership is having to go to extraordinary lengths to stop them. It's another line drawn in the sand, and we are learning that the cretin in chief sees that line as his to draw. I can't see him making any rational response to the Dems' crossing his imaginary Rubicons yet. The GoPerv party is going to have to act to solve his irrational behavior, or face the consequences that follow. Failing to have an acting FEC may be something they're pleased about, but it's not sitting well with voters.