With a vote scheduled Thursday on his contested nomination as ambassador to the United Nations, John R. Bolton has told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that a policy maker should maintain the right to "state his own reading of the intelligence" even when it differs from that of intelligence agencies.
Mr. Bolton's statement came in a written response to a written question from Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a leading Democratic critic of the nomination, and was disclosed by Democrats legislators opposed to the nomination. They said they would cite it as evidence that Mr. Bolton would adopt a loose standard for accuracy in making statements based on intelligence.

That's from Douglas Jehl's "U.N. Nominee Asserts His Independence on Intelligence" in this morning's New York Times.

The Times notes this issue with intelligence:


Among newly declassified documents being reviewed by the committee are some from the Central Intelligence Agency expressing vehement opposition to testimony on Cuba that Mr. Bolton planned to give in June 2002, at least partly on grounds that Mr. Bolton was presenting as the government's view a conclusion that Cuba possessed biological weapons, when the intelligence agencies were not so certain.
The documents on Cuba were provided to the committee by the C.I.A., and were provided to The New York Times by a Democrat legislator opposed to Mr. Bolton's nomination. Many had initially been classified as secret, and they reflect intense, angry debate between Mr. Bolton's office and senior intelligence officials, including representatives of the National Intelligence Council, that focused in part on whether the intelligence agencies' had a right to challenge some of the planned assertions.

But it shies away from the charges discussed at The Raw Story and by Sam Seder on The Majority Report last night. From The Raw Story's "Larry Flynt: Bush UN nominee won't answer questions about troubled marriage:"

The controversial Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt has waded into the conflict surrounding the nomination of Bush hawk John Bolton to a UN post by revealing Bolton's divorce records and unanswered questions about his sexual past, RAW STORY has learned.
[. . .]
"The first Mrs. Bolton’s conduct raises the presumption that she fled out of fear for her safety or, at a minimum, it demonstrates that Mr. Bolton’s established inability to communicate or work respectfully with others extended to his intimate family relations,” said Mr. Flynt. "The court records alone provide sufficient basis for further investigation of nominee Bolton by the Senate." These court records are enclosed here as an attachment. Mr. Flynt continued, "The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations must be free of any potential source of disrepute or blackmail."

Ruth reports that NPR's Morning Edition also didn't address the charges in their story this morning on John Bolton.

Kara e-mails to note David Johnston's "Terror Suspects Sent to Egypt by the Dozens, Panel Reports:"

The United States and other countries have forcibly sent dozens of terror suspects to Egypt, according to a report released Wednesday by Human Rights Watch. The rights group and the State Department have both said Egypt regularly uses extreme interrogation methods on detainees.
The group said it had documented 63 cases since 1994 in which suspected Islamic militants were sent to Egypt for detention and interrogation. The figures do not include people seized after the attacks of September 2001 who were sent mainly by Middle East countries and American intelligence authorities.
But since September 2001, the transfers have accelerated in part because Egypt has been willing to accept the detainees as part of its effort to root out Islamic militants inside Egypt, a campaign that has extended to countries where extremists have taken refuge. Almost all those sent to Egypt are Egyptian citizens or were born there, the report said.

Yazz e-mails to note Leslie Eaton's "Mrs. Clinton Not at Fault, Prosecutor Tells Jury:"


Before Hillary Rodham Clinton's former chief fund-raiser went on trial here for underreporting donations to her Senate campaign, political speculation has revolved around what if anything Mrs. Clinton knew about his alleged transgressions, as well as what if anything the trial would do to her presidential aspirations (assuming she has them).
A federal prosecutor tried to answer at least one of those questions in his opening statement on Wednesday in Federal District Court, when he told the jury, "You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."
Indeed, the prosecutor, Peter R. Zeidenberg, said that the fund-raiser, David F. Rosen, tried to keep Mrs. Clinton's campaign from discovering how much money was donated to cover the costs of the star-studded event at the heart of this criminal case. The reason, Mr. Zeidenberg said, is that Mr. Rosen was afraid he would be fired if the campaign found out how much money he had spent on the August 2000 event, the Hollywood Gala Salute to President William Jefferson Clinton.

Ben e-mails to note Carollotta Gall's "Afghan Protest Against the U.S. Becomes Violent:"

Four protesters were killed and more than 60 injured Wednesday in the eastern city of Jalalabad as the police and troops struggled to contain the worst anti-American demonstrations in Afghanistan in the more than three years since the fall of the Taliban.
[. . .]
The demonstrations were started on Tuesday by students angered by a report in Newsweek that American interrogators at the Guantánamo Bay detention center had desecrated the Koran by flushing a copy down the toilet.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

We kid Brian Montopoli, we call him Candy Perfume Boy and we have an entire history for Candy Perfume Boy. But when Montopoli nails one down, we're glad to note that. Today at CJR Daily, our Candy Perfume Boy nailed one down with "There's Nothing About Mary."

Some (Rebecca) have offered we've confused our beloved creation (Candy Perfume Boy) with Brian Montopoli. That may or may not be true but when one community member e-mailed "There's Nothing About Mary" to both common_ills@yahoo.com and thirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com we eagerly read the copy and paste. And we were quite proud of Montopoli (whether as Montopoli or as our creation we'll leave to shrinks to decide).

Weighing in on Mary Matalin's appearence on Meet the Press, he lays out the problems with Matalin's facts and concludes with this:

Why, jaded readers might wonder, does this particular abomination so exercise us? After all, there are any number of talking heads out there willing to lie and spin with reckless abandon and then exhibit righteous indignation toward anyone who expresses disagreement -- and any number of talk shows eager to roll out the red carpet for same.
But Matalin, and "Meet the Press" itself, deserve to be singled out because they are thought to represent the best of political dialogue: a respected political operative who has worked in high places being grilled on the most revered political talk show in America. If anyone still thinks that the carnival barkers are confined to cable shoutfests while serious political dialogue endures elsewhere, last weekend's display should be enough to put that fleeting hope to rest once and for all.

Exactly to the point. On the money, illuminating and certainly something to take pride in. Like a really strong trailer that gives you goosebumps, "In a world gone crazy, one reporter . . . " Or, as a "critic" once said of The Professional, "makes Speed look like a slow ride to Grandma's."*

Earlier this week, on a blog report, Brian Montopoli/Candy Perfume Boy did disappoint us. As intrepid TV critics who fearlessly wade through the any and all drek, past and present, we read with sadness as he took on right wing bloggers convinced that Geena Davis' role in as the first female president in "an upcoming ABC drama" was a plot to elect Hillary Clinton president in 2008. We were saddened first of all because CPB quoted a right wing blogger without correcting the rwb. Geena Davis is not yet going to perform in "an upcoming ABC drama." It is pilot season where networks will look at various pilots and decide what will and what will not be added to the fall season schedule. It's the mistake of an amateur and we fully expect it from the rwb but we were disappointed that CPB didn't catch that.

We were further saddened to realize that CPB had no idea that, if the pilot is picked up, it wouldn't be the first female president on TV. In fact, if you drop back to 1985, you will find Patty Duke starring in Hail to the Chief! as . . . the first female president. Would rwbs argue that Hail to the Chief was an attempt to elect Nancy Reagan in 1988 or Big Babs Bush in 1988? Or maybe it was to prepare the country for Geraldine Ferraro's 1988 presidential run?

But today CPB took on Mary Matalin's Meet the Press appearence and did damn good. We're happy to note that. Thank you to Maria for giving us the heads up.

-- Ava and C.I.

* "Makes Speed look like . . ." written by Don Stotter, ENTERTAINMENT TIME-OUT SYNDICATION

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

 

Yesterday, we noted Folding Star's post on the filibuster. Mark asks if it can be excerpted:

Where do I even begin with Harry Reid? I am so frustrated and disgusted by this so called Democratic Leader. Each of those words is more unlikely than the next when applied to this man.Instead of standing firm, as pledged, we've seen him rush about making hollow, pointless assurances about future Supreme Court nominees and trying to make 'deals' with the right that would in effect be the kiss of death to the filibuster in all but name.

Now, Reid offers the Republicans an 'olive branch' in the form of not filibustering one nominee in particular, Thomas Griffith.

This step makes it look as if the Democrats are weakening on their pledge. Let's not forget that the Democrats have NOT filibustered 205 out of 215 of Bush's Nominees. All 205 of those nominees were confirmed by the Senate.

That's 95% of Bush's judicial nominees. Bill Clinton would have killed to have that rate. The fact of the matter is that these very Republicans who are talking about each nominee having an 'up or down vote by the full Senate' nixed a hell of a lot more of Clinton's judicial nominees in Committee, denying them an 'up or down vote', than the Democrats have even dreamed of doing with the filibuster.

Mark wanted this excerpted with a Third Estate Sunday Review piece. Though I wasn't worried Ava, Jim, Ty, Jess and Dona would say no, I did want to ask first. With their permission, it's below in full. [Disclosure, this entry was composed by Ty, Jess, Dona, Jim, Ava, Betty -- Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, Rebecca -- Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, and myself.]

From April 17th:

Harry Reid: Determined to lead us to the promissory note land?

Reading the Associated Press article "Dems. Adjust on Social Security Stance" (by Glen Johnson) from The Guardian, we started thinking how all the important issues should be farmed out to focus groups. (That's sarcasm.) We also wondered how stories would play out in the New York Times. What follows is a spoof. If, when reading it, you think for instance, "They are ragging on Helen Thomas!" We love Helen Thomas. We just couldn't see a Times reporter having anything nice to say about Thomas. The same thing with Senator Barbara Boxer and Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones as well as the United Nations.

"Dems. Adjust on Environmental Stance/ U.N. Continues to Plot World Destruction"
Judith Miller (New York Times)
May 21, 2005

After a very heated focus group session, annoying Senator Harry Reid announced the Dems would back off from their support for the environment."

People find the topic so depressing," Reid explained. "Like G.E., we just want to bring good things to life. Hey, if we say we're the party that brings good things to life, is that slogan different enough from G.E.'s that we can use it without being sued? Woah, rhetorical question! Let's put it to a focus group!"

In other news, the United Nations continued their secret plan to destroy the world with a dirty bomb set to go off as soon as they can stop raping third world citizens, destroying water supplies, farming out fat contracts to their friends, and implanting chips in the skulls of all people.

Inside sources in D.C. (Cheney) say that this is an important story and all Americans should focus on it. U.N. bad. U.N. evil. U.N. full of liars. Stinky U.N. makes me sick, sick, sick!

"Dems. Adjust on the Economy."
David E. Sanger (New York Times)
June 11, 2005

After a lively focus group with big lobbyists and Wall Street brokers, Harry Reid announced today that the Democrats would back off from their support for jobs.

"Only the working class needs them," explained Harry Reid wrinkling his nose. "We don't want to be the party of the little people. How many midgets vote anyway?"

"I'm just happy that big money is still interested in talking to us at all," Reid confessed. "Every now and then we'd throw a road block out there for them. Which is why it was so important that we support the Bankruptcy bill, to prove that we were for the big people. Having done that, we feel happy to ship jobs over seas and to turn the working class into indentured servants. Sure some people may whine, but didn't Charles Dickens write a lot of cool novels about a similar period? Write down that we support the arts and we support literature and we support education."

White House lovely Karen Hughes responded, "I am aghast at the Democratic Party's announcement this morning that they support the arts. Deep Throat? And I'm not talking Watergate. Nekkid statues? 'Smack My Bitch Up?' 'Move, Bitch, Get Out The Way?' This 'support' for the arts puts the Democratic Party on the opposite side of the American people."

"Dems Adjust on Support for the Arts."
Glen Johnson (Associated Press)
June 14, 2005

After a recent focus group that Frank Luntz conducted in a Rush Room, Democrats looked at the polling results and Harry Reid rushed out to speak to the press.

"I want to be very clear here, we do not support the arts," Reid explained. "We thought we did but we don't. When people hear 'art' they tend to think of two things, Europe or Hollywood and both are polling very badly. So we do not, take this down, support the arts."

When asked if they still supported literature and education, Reid responded that he'd have to get back to us on the issue of literature but that of course the Democratic Party supported education.

"We always have and we always will."

"Dems Adjust on Literature"
Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times)
June 15, 2005

Following what some are terming a "focus group" and others are calling a very painful blood letting on Bill O'Reilly's The O'Reilly Factor, stinky Senator Harry Reid warily approached the press this afternoon to announce that the Democrats were strongly against literature.

"Uh, well," Reid began wiping some fop sweat from his brow, "I don't know what to tell you. Somewhere, somebody spread a nasty rumor that we supported literature. It's not true, it never was. Have you read Nabokov? Lolita? That's just smut. What about D.H. Lawrence? Smut, smut, smut, smut."

When asked if the Democratic Party was against reading, Reid appeared to backtrack as the Democrats so often do.

"We are for children's picture books -- especially if they're retelling Bible stories -- and we are for coffee table books. We are also for cook books."

When an aide to Senator Reid reminded him of all the monies the TV dinner industry had contributed, he corrected the last remark.

"Cook books are smutty. We are officially against them and, of course, Martha Stewart as well."

Asked of education, Reid stated that as long as he was a functioning adult, the Democratic Party would continue it's "historical" support of education. (Unfounded) Rumors abound that the suit Harry Reid was wearing was picked out by infamous feminist Naomi Wolf prompting some (in the press corps) to make cheap jokes at his expense.

America's mother, former First Lady Barbara Bush, long term education maven and all round round-the-way-gal, declared Reid's remarks repugnant.

"How dare he leave out Jokes for the John?" admonished the lovely Mrs. Bush. "My family is a typical family, like everyone else's, and we have long enjoyed fart jokes. When Senator Reid refuses to include them but includes coffee table books, it's obvious that this is one more example of a Democrat elitist who's less interested in the people and more interested in being . . . well, I won't say the word but it rhymes with 'bitch.'"

"Dems Adjust Stance on Education"
by Glen Johnson (Associated Press)
June 16, 2005

Emerging from the hearings of his newly formed committee Education Is Bad For Everyone, Senator Harry Reid attempted to escape reporters who ran after him.

Shouting, reporters persisted in following him, "Are the Democrats backing off from their historical support of education?"

"Historical!" Reid snapped turning around to face the throng. "What historical? The Democratic Party has never stood for education. Didn't you get that when we started triangulating in the 90s? What are teachers' unions but unions? And we stand against unions. All unions! Except the sacred union of a man and a woman in holy matrimony."

And what of the fate of America's children, America's future?

"Good Lord!" Reid exclaimed, "Who wants a nation of smarty pants! What good does reading do anyway? Reading leads to cook books and literature and yes, depraved coffee books with photos of felines! Pretty soon you're some depraved maniac wanting to cook your own meals and think for yourself! We've got a man in the White House who's most famous for reading a picture book and it sure hasn't hurt him any. We need to return to the good old fashioned values of illiteracy and ignorance and fart jokes like the great American, former First Lady, Barbara Bush said. In fact, later today, I'll be putting a whoopi cushion in Nancy Pelosi's chair because I'm a good, upstanding, average American. And that's what today's Democratic Party stands for. Today. Right now. At this minute. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm late for a focus group."

"Dems Adjust Their Stance on Two Party Rule"
by Adam Nagourney & Janet Elder (New York Times)
July 7, 2005

Following the devasting results of the latest CBS News/New York Times poll which found that an overwhelming 99% of respondents could not tell the difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, Senator Harry Reid held a press conference in front of the Abe Lincoln monument today.

"If I can nutshell it for you," Reid offered, "it would be this: we're Republicans."

When asked of the need for an opposition party, Reid dismissed concerns.

"Look, we tried being the loyal opposition, believe me, no one was more loyal than we were. We damn near broke the rubber stamp from using it so often. It didn't work. The American people have spoken. Now we could be cry babies or dreamers and dig in for a fight, but what's the point? When Trump says, 'You're fired,' it's end of story, time to go home now."

Longtime D.C. reporter and all around nut case Helen Thomas stood up and hurled an unprintable remark at Senator Reid. Reid shrugged and sighed.

"What Helen doesn't get is that we want to be Republicans. Who wants to resist the easy and profitable thing? I mean maybe Helen likes being banished to the back row, but that's not going to send any of our kids to college our pay off the bank for our second home, is it? It's about being practical and doing what is doable. We're taking the off ramp to Easy Street and we'll all be better for it. The American people have spoken. And via the liberal media. If the liberal media like CBS and the New York Times is against us, what chance do we have? Haven't they always been our friends? And who can intimidate a paper or CBS? No one and we don't have the energy to waste on a battle. The Republicans wouldn't battle the press and neither shall we. So we're going to cruise on over to Easy Street where most of us own second homes, by the way, and we'll accept that the American people have spoken. They have been heard. All 900 of them polled. In a random sample. From people too dumb to check their caller i.d. and avoid the call. So with this large of a sample, it's obvious that America wants one party rule. Real one party rule that's honest about it. Not the kind of one party rule we've given them lately where we pretend we're Democrats, but open and full faith one party rule where we proclaim loudly and proudly that we are with the GOP. It's time to step out of the closet and say, 'I'm here, I'm Republican, I'm out and proud!' In a non-gay way, of course, because we do not support same-sex marriages, civil unions or really even the talk show Ellen."

Actually, Senator Reid was playing fast and loose with the facts, a Democratic trademark long noted in these pages and one some insiders (Nagourney & Elder) hope he will drop now that he's stepped over to the right side of the spectrum. In actuality, 858 Americans were polled randomly, not 900 as the Senator lied.

Responding on the poll results and on Reid's announcement, our personal pin up George W. Bush (put on your boxing gloves, Peggy Noonan, we'll fight you for him) said, "This just proves what I've always said. The American people are a hard working, decent peoples who wake up each morning wanting to see the moon shining up in the pink sky."

Again, Senator Reid lied. The polling sample was 858, not 900.

"Only His Tailor Knows for Sure LOL!"
by Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times)

On the heels of recent revelations that Republican Senator Harry Reid's spine was removed on the evening of March 14, 2001, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and Senator Barbara Boxer, two of the last elected officials who remain in the Democratic Party, called for an investigation.

"I think it's pretty clear what was done and I just want to know if the United States' Congress is going to have the guts to tell the American people," screeched Tubbs-Jones.

Vice President Dick Cheney announced to a crowd of people fashionably attired in white sheets, "I hear tell that Harry Reid loaned his spine out to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. In fact, we almost strong-armed Collie Powell into telling the U.N. that."

Urging the crowd to participate in voluntary bon fires on the homes of other people, our second in commanding commander-in-chief left the stage.

"What we have here is another case of the Democratic Party engaging in hyperbole and lies," explained smart and sexy GOP consultant Mary Matalin. "Obviously Senator Reid's spine was removed. We've all seen the x-rays. All over the TV! But maybe he wanted his spine removed? Maybe he thought it was the hot new look? Maybe he thought it would help him squeeze into those Dockers that had gotten too tight around the waistline? Why does everything have to be some sort of tin foil hat conspiracy plotted by Karl Rove? We have tried to work with the Democratic Party, with both of them, and they are resistant to our plans to end poverty by utilizing the death penalty. They say our plans are inhumane and we say that's pre-9-11 thinking on their part."

Senator Barbara Boxer made wild accusations supported by the public record.

"Karl Rove bragged about this to the press," Senator Boxer alleged waving a column by Robert Novak. "We have that in writing. On January 12, 2001, Bob Novak wrote it in his column 'I Want to Out a CIA Agent and Karl Rove Wants to Remove Harry Reid's Spine.' Karl Rove admits to giving some pills to Harry Reid on the evening of March 13th though he claims they were only Flinstone chewables. Harry's wife said he would never willingly part with his spine. She said he'd often commented that it was his best feature. From the records, we know that Karl Rove, who much of the press seems to forget is not a doctor, was acting as the attending in the operating room on the 14th when Harry Reid's spine was removed. From the X-rays, we know that Harry's spine was removed. From the tape of 2005 White House Press Club Dinner, we have Karl Rove bragging 'I removed Harry Reid's spine in 2001.' And laughing about it! For Mary Matalin or anyone to suggest that this is tin foil hat conspiracy talk begs the suggestion of a gigantic coverup."

For no real reason we can think of, our wonderful and fashionable Secretary of State Condi Rice released a statement responding to Senator Boxer's remarks. Since we live and die by our official sources and how well we're able to pimp for them, we'll reprint the text here in full:

Senator Barabara Boxer once again shows her liberal California roots and how out of touch she is with the American people in her statements just made to New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller minutes ago by questioning the loyalty of our troops. Baghdad Boxer would do well to hang her head in shame for those uncalled for remarks suggesting that our military is disloyal.

Not quite sure what to do since the x-rays are all over the TV news, so I phoned a tailor in France. What follows are a series of bantering remarks we exchanged on various topics such as off the rack fashion, pastries and the weather.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Matthew Rothschild (editor of The Progressive) has not one, not two, but three "This Just In"s.
Lucy e-mailed to note all three. Below is an excerpt from each. Click the title to read in full.

"Bolton a Test of Cheney and Rove"
On Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to vote on the nomination of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
It'll be an interesting test.
Not of whether Bolton deserves to be ambassador.
He obviously doesn't.
No one has been more unqualified for high office since Dan Quayle and Clarence Thomas.
Bolton's sneering at the UN and his laughably undiplomatic behavior should long ago have disqualified him.
Now the only test is whether Dick Cheney and Karl Rove can shove Bolton through, no matter how bad he is.

"A Socialist in the Senate?"
There may soon be an avowed socialist in the U.S. Senate.
Bernie Sanders, Vermont’s eight-term member of the House of Representatives, is likely to run for the seat that Senator Jeffords is vacating in 2006.
Sanders, a democratic socialist and independent, appears to have a strong early lead.
A recent poll has him crushing all possible challengers by more than a two-to-one margin, as David Sirota has reported.
And Sanders just got a big boost from his fellow Vermonter Howard Dean. Even though Sanders is not a Democrat, Dean, the head of the DNC, says he’s for Sanders.
"A victory for Bernie Sanders is a win for Democrats," Dean said.
Sanders in the Senate could stiffen the spine of Democrats.

"National Day of Prayer: Bush's Bone to the Dobsons"
Last Thursday, May 5, was the National Day of Prayer, which Congress made official back in 1952, at the apex of McCarthyism.
As an atheist and a believer in the separation of church and state, I'm offended that our government has set aside a day for this.
And it offends me even more that George Bush has given the day over to the far right.
Many of the day's events "are coordinated by the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a private group run by Shirley Dobson, wife of radio broadcaster and Religious Right kingpin James C. Dobson," according to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. It says the group "operates from the offices of Focus on the Family," which James Dobson heads.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Joy and Brad both e-mailed to ask that we highlight one headline from today's Democracy Now! and both were apologetic. There's no reason to be. It does deserve noting when someone demonstrates bravery and when the person goes on to prove that speaking truth to power doesn't mean you're shunned it's also important to note that.

So from today's Democracy Now! Headlines:

Antiwar NBA Player Steve Nash Named MVP, Beats Shaq
And in sports news, the NBA has named Steve Nash of the Phoenix Suns the league's Most Valuable Player, edging out the Miami Heat's Shaquille O'Neal. Nash has spoken out publicly against the occupation of Iraq. At the 2003 All-Star game, Nash wore a T-shirt that read, "Shoot baskets not people." When questioned about the shirt, Nash said, "I think that war is wrong in 99.9 percent of all cases." He went on to say that the invasion of Iraq "is more about oil than it is about nuclear weapons."

Again, it's important to note these things. So we'll let this be a stand alone entry.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Democracy Now! (Marcia: "always worth watching"):

Headlines for May 11, 2005
- Suicide Bombings Kill Scores in Iraq
- Iraqi Governor Kidnapped as US Faces Fierce Resistance
- Congress Gives $70 Billion More to Occupy Iraq/Afghanistan
- Congress Passes National ID Legislation
- Courts Martial Begin Against 2 Iraq War Resisters
- Cheney Energy Lawsuit Dismissed
- US Gives Halliburton a 'Bonus' of $72 Million
- Jordan Pardons Ahmed Chalabi- Latin American and Arab Leaders Hold Historic Summit

Seymour Hersh: Iraq "Moving Towards Open Civil War"
We spend the hour with Pulitzer prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. Hersh won the Pulitzer prize for exposing the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Last year, he broke the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. He is author of the book "Chain of Command: From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib." We hear an address he delivered at an event sponsored by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign entitled "Can Freedom of the Press Survive Media Consolidation?" And he joins us in the studio to talk about the resistance in Iraq, Ahmad Chalabi, the state of the media and much more. [includes rush transcript - partial]

From The Daily Howler, George notes that Bob Somerby is (among other things) addressing Matt Miller's op-ed. We'll note George's comments and my own, but first the excerpt from today's Daily Howler:

THE MILLER’S TALE: It didn't take Matt Miller long. At the Times, he's replacing Maureen Dowd for a month. And in the second paragraph of his very first piece, he boldly speaks on behalf of all Democrats. Miller makes a sweeping statement--a statement that is just flat-out wrong. For the record, Miller is explaining why Dems "should quit carping about Bush's evil 'cuts:'"
MILLER (5/11/05): Start with this poorly understood fact: Under today's system of "wage indexed"' benefits, every new cohort of retirees is guaranteed a higher level of real benefits than the previous generation. Workers retiring in 2025, for example, are scheduled to receive payments 20 percent higher in real terms than today's retirees. Today's teenagers are slated to get a 60 percent increase. When Democrats cry about "cuts," they mean trims from these higher levels. But that isn't what all Democrats mean when they "cry" about those "evil" cuts. Perfect, isn't it? Two grafs into his inaugural piece, Miller speaks on behalf of all Dems. And what he says is just plain flat-out wrong.
Why do Dems mean when they talk about Bush’s "cuts" in Social Security? Different Dems mean different things; given the party's endemic intellectual failures, many Dems may not know what they mean when they discuss these cuts. But what do some Democrats mean when they talk about these cuts? Here's what we mean here at THE HOWLER: Under current Social Security law, average earners get 36 percent of their prior income replaced when they get their SS check. Under Bush's proposal, they may get as little as 20 percent. It may even go below that.

George wanted to be on the record as "finding Matt Miller useless as an op-ed writer." I think there's another issue -- the one woman on the op-ed pages is on vacation. Call it affirmative action, call it whatever, but the slot doesn't need to be turned over a male. That at this late date, the Times still has only one female columnist on the op-ed pages is sad. That neoliberal Matt Miller's brought in is worse. My opinion.

As for Miller himself, I'll steer you to two NPR commentaries by Miller:

Morning Edition, February 24, 2003 · Although commentator Matt Miller disagrees with much of what President Bush is doing on the domestic front, he generally agrees with the need to oppose Saddam Hussein with military force. Miller says that waging war against Saddam would be less risky than trying to contain him. This is the latest installment of Morning Edition's series of commentaries on a possible war with Iraq.

Morning Edition, December 23, 2002 · Commentator Matt Miller says Democrats need to find a new political approach that's different from both George W. Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism" and Bill Clinton's "Third Way." He uses the health care issue to illustrate his point and suggests the "Fourth Way" as a name.

Moving on . . . (walk on, walkon.org.)

From Guerrilla News Network, Shawn e-mails to note Savanna Reid's "The Good News Roundup:"

Kabul's Karate Girls
Fitness clubs with women-only hours and school sports for girls are starting to open doors to a cloistered Afghani women and teens still struggling to establish a safe space for themselves in the public sphere. Karate student Nargas Rahimi, a former refugee who grew up in Iran, told The Christian Science Monitor, "I saw that Afghan women didn’t have the faintest idea about exercise. So I came here to act as an example for Afghan girls and to help them take part in Afghan society." Along with more basic advances like driving schools for women, shelters, and schools for midwives, activities like karate clubs for girls are about testing social limits on personal independence, public activity, and individual confidence-building, as well as improving women’s health and safety. [Thank you sublunari for this one]
Hope for Armenian Migrant Workers
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Armenia has seen a quarter of its population emigrate as economic refugees. Armenian workers are often badly abused by employers aware of their illegal status, but their government is working to change that with a new labor migration bill. IWPR reports, "The new legislation will seek to address two sides of the problem: enabling agreements to be drawn up with employers abroad to secure the best possible opportunities for migrant workers; and secondly to ensure that Armenians working in other countries are covered by labour rights and safety rules."
Respect and the 2005 ElectionsStealing a "safe" Labour seat, the anti-war and anti-discrimination Respect coalition won a seat in East London and placed second in two other races, an exciting start for a young, radical party. Partridge brings us their report: "Respect intends to be the stiff new broom that will sweep away those New Labour councils that feel they are above answering to their electors." The victorious Mr. Galloway said simply, "This is for Iraq."

That's an excerpt (selected by Shawn). Click the link to read it in full and, as I understood it on The Majority Report Friday, "The Good News Roundup" will be a regular feature at Guerrilla News Network.

Martha notes FAIR's "Smoking Gun Memo? Iraq Bombshell Goes Mostly Unreported in US Media:"

A leaked document that appeared in a British newspaper offered clear new evidence that U.S. intelligence was shaped to support the drive for war. Though the information rocked British Prime Minister Tony Blair's re-election campaign when it was revealed, it has received little attention in the U.S. press.
The document, first revealed by the London Times (5/1/05), was the minutes of a July 23, 2002 meeting in Blair's office with the prime minister's close advisors. The meeting was held to discuss Bush administration policy on Iraq, and the likelihood that Britain would support a U.S. invasion of Iraq. "It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided," the minutes state.
The minutes also recount a visit to Washington by Richard Dearlove, the head of the British intelligence service MI6: "There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
That last sentence is striking, to say the least, suggesting that the policy of invading Iraq was determining what the Bush administration was presenting as "facts" derived from intelligence. But it has provoked little media follow-up in the United States. The most widely circulated story in the mainstream press came from the Knight Ridder wire service (5/6/05), which quoted an anonymous U.S. official saying the memo was ''an absolutely accurate description of what transpired" during Dearlove's meetings in Washington.

Billie e-mails the latest from Bill Scher at Liberal Oasis:

Here's another John Bolton controversy that hasn't received much attention.
There's been an arms embargo on Haiti since 1991, when the democratically elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was overthrown.
The embargo was kept after the Clinton Administration helped Aristide regain power, over Aristide's objections. And it remained in place after the Bush Administration removed Aristide in a coup last year.
But that hasn't stopped the State Department from sending arms to the newly installed government anyway.
And Bolton, as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, presumably had a major role in the arms shipments.
Here's how the story unfolded.

To read how the story unfolded click here.

Lastly, I wrote the below this morning in the midst of a lengthy post:

Randi Rhodes was mentioned in the article and she has said herself on her show that she's of two minds (or still considering) on what is the proper path re: Iraq (pull out immediately or stay awhile longer). (That's a summary of Rhodes remarks and if I've done her a disservice, none was intentional. We've spotlighted Rhodes. We will continue to spotlight her.)

Rhodes' position, as I understand it, is that we shouldn't have gone there. That's not in question. Her position of what to do now, as I understand it, is of two minds a) bring the troops home now, b) an immediate withdrawal, after the destruction to Iraq, might cause more turmoil. Cindy e-mailed to ask what's the difference between Rhodes' second thought and ___ who shall remain unnamed?

The difference is Rhodes is forthcoming with her listeners about both possibilities. The differenence is that Rhodes is speaking truth to power and not going warm & fuzzy or playing Bob Hope. As someone who served in the military, it may be that Rhodes doesn't feel the need to pose Bob Hope or it might just be (I'd argue this) she has too much character to jump on the Good Ship Ignore Reality. Nor does she feel the need to "position" herself in a manner that makes her seem "loveable" to the right or AEI lurkers. Or to work up theaterical tears (to reference the most recent gina & krista round-robin).

That's my summary of Rhodes' position. That's based on my listening and on the input from members via e-mail. Listen to her show to bypass a summary and go straight the source. If she speaks to you, great. If she doesn't, find something else that does.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Blogger's maintenance delayed Rebecca and Folding Star's posting yesterday. (There's an entry at the mirror site for The Common Ills that I'll transfer tonight.)

From Folding Star's A Winding Road:

The Committee is expected to vote this coming Thursday, barring any further delay. The Democrats, lead by an admirably vocal and resolute Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, could potentially delay the vote further in light of the fact that the State department has continued to deny the Committee vital documents pertaining to Bolton.
This denial is yet another slap in the face to Congress, which is an EQUAL branch of Government, no matter how much the Bush Administration would like to think otherwise. The Republicans on the Committee should halt the vote on principle alone until the documents are handed over.
But, as we've seen far too many times already, most of the Republicans in Congress are happy to relegate their branch of Government to a subservient position to Bush.
I was hoping that we'd see this trend among them begin to die out as Bush entered his second term. He's now a lame duck President, after all. He can't be re-elected and his poll numbers are so low that you'd think his party in Congress would begin making an effort to distance themselves as they face upcoming elections in 2006.
No doubt this will happen eventually, hopefully after a crushing defeat in those Mid Term elections.

Folding Star also notes the British memo, as does Rebecca:

i will note [. . .] that rob reiner has a post. and i'll note john conyers jr.'s post because that was my favorite of all the ones up:
After reading this article and the leaked memo, I immediately crafted a letter to the president asking him to respond, and asked all of my House Colleagues -- both Democrats and Republicans -- to join me in signing the letter. So far, 88 Members, but not a single Republican, have joined me in putting truth to power. Unfortunately, the mainstream media has been slow to pick up on this important story.
My own blog includes much additional information on the topic, including an audio of my discussion with Stephanie Miller on Progessive Talk Radio on the subject. It has been covered on the Web by independent sites such as Daily Kos, Raw Story, Brad Blog , Salon, Scoop Independent News, Progressive Democrats of America, and Atrios. Finally, on Thursday, the mainstream media, in the form of Knight Ridder, picked up on the disclosure and my letter. I need your help to encourage others in the media, be they tv, cable, newspapers, and radio to cover this momentous matter.
in the lost post, i'd commented on the memo that congressman conyers is blogging on. instead i'll just link to the sunday times of london and offer your a sample of it. if you're interested, please read it in full [. . .]

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Congress barred the government on Tuesday from using any money in a newly passed emergency spending bill to subject anyone in American custody to torture or "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" that is forbidden by the Constitution.
Proponents said the little-noticed provision, in an $82 billion bill devoted mostly to financing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, amounted to a significant strengthening of current policies and practices in the treatment of prisoners.
Drafted since the disclosure of abuses in Afghanistan and Iraq and at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, it lays out a definition of illegal treatment that human rights groups say is broader than the Bush administration's current interpretation, and links the ban directly to military spending.

The above is from Eric Lichtblau's "Congress Adopts Restriction on Treatment of Detainees."

Also from this morning's New York Times, Kitty Killer Bill Frist is itching to push the button on the Republican termed "nuclear option," Carl Hulse reports in "Democrats Reject a Compromise on Judicial Nominees:"


Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, said Tuesday that a confrontation over judicial nominations could reach a climax next week, while his Democratic counterpart dismissed a Republican offer of compromise and made clear that his party was ready for the fight.
As the Senate braced for the showdown over Republican efforts to eliminate filibusters against judicial candidates, Dr. Frist said he first wanted to pass an emergency spending measure for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and a highway bill popular with lawmakers.
"Then we need to turn to 100 United States senators and move to the issue surrounding judges," Dr. Frist told reporters on Capitol Hill.

Elite Fluff Patrol squad leader Elisabeth Bumiller is brought to our attention by Ben. Her article today is entitled "Bush Encourages Georgia With a Warning to Russia." It's an article, not a "White House Letter."

Ben feels its "embarrassing" and she needs to be "taken to task for writing it."

I don't know, I read the opening paragraph:

President Bush told tens of thousands of cheering Georgians packed into the city's Freedom Square on Tuesday that the United States would stand with Georgia, a former Soviet republic, as it built its young democracy, and then pointedly he warned President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia that the sovereignty of Georgia "must be respected by all nations."

I couldn't stop laughing. Respect the sovereignty of other nations? Stop, my sides are hurting.
I think it's a stand up piece and possibly Bumiller is much funnier than anyone's ever given her credit for being?

A fault in it, my opinion, is her not noting the inactive grenade tossed at the stage Bully Boy was speaking on. We're a peaceful community and, while we gladly wish impeach on the Bully Boy, we don't wish an explosion. Years of shunning and humiliation, of the sort visited on Richard Nixon, is my own personal wish for the Bully Boy. (With no "triangulation" from a later administration to soften his image.) But it is news, at least for now while the AP is saying it's true. (That's not to slander the AP but I wouldn't be surprised if Bumiller didn't include it because it was questionable. The only thing I can find on it currently searching the net is stories similar to the one linked to, which Anne sent in, and AP appears the only source on it. Earlier versions speak of it possibly being a grenade. AP is now saying it was a grenade but it was "inactive.")

And Rachel Maddow is noting the grenade on her show as well right now. Hold on. Okay, Rachel Maddow's noting that there were many protestors but only the AFP has bothered to report it. At her site, she's provide a link to it but I'm not seeing anything on protestors so either the story's been altered or it's the wrong link (in which case, I may be seeing the wrong link, visit her AAR site).

Wally e-mails to note Sheryl Gay Stolberg's "Bolton's Fate in the Hands of 4 Senators With Doubts:"

The future of John R. Bolton, whose nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations has been caught up in controversy, hinges on four wavering Republicans, all of whom say they will not make up their minds until Thursday, when the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is to vote.
The four - Senators Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and George V. Voinovich of Ohio - are among 10 Republicans on the foreign relations panel, and a "no" vote by any one of them would doom Mr. Bolton's nomination.


Lloyd e-mails to note Michael Janofsky's "Pentagon Is Asking Congress to Loosen Environmental Laws:"

After three unsuccessful tries, the Pentagon is asking Congress again this year to loosen major environmental laws to allow military training exercises around the country to proceed unimpeded.
Military officials say the requested changes, which could be approved this week as part of the defense authorization bill for 2006, are essential [. . .]
Opponents to the waiver request say the Pentagon has not demonstrated a need to change the laws.
Genaro Lopez, a union leader from San Antonio who participated in the conference call, said health officials there had documented hundreds of cases in recent years of cancer and neuromuscular disease from groundwater contaminated by Kelly Air Force Base, which closed in 1995.
Another participant, Terry Dyer, the organizer of an environmental health group in North Carolina, said contamination from Camp Lejeune that began in the 1940's exposed residents to "a cocktail of chemicals" that have caused elevated levels of illness.
Jerry Ensminger, a 24-year Marine veteran based at Camp Lejeune, told Congress last year that his daughter, Jane, was 6 when she she received a diagnosis of leukemia in 1982. She died three years later.

Kara e-mails this Associated Press article from the Times web site entitled "Chain of Suicide Bombings Kills More Than 60 in Iraq:"

Five suicide attacks in three cities in Iraq killed more than 60 people Wednesday. In the deadliest, a man with hidden explosives set them off in a line of people outside a police and army recruitment center in northern Iraq, killing 30 and wounding 35, police said.
In Tikrit, meanwhile, a suicide car bomb exploded in a small market near a police station, killing at least 27 people and wounding 75, police said.
Three car bombs also exploded in Baghdad, killing at least four, police said.

Krista e-mails to note Warren Hoge's "U.N. Relief Director Appeals for Help in Crises Throughout Africa:"


The United Nations emergency relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, said Tuesday that relief crises in Africa were outpacing efforts to contain them and that the international community was failing to focus on the world's most pressing needs.
"The world's biggest drama is not found in Europe or the Middle East or North America - the world's biggest challenges and dramas are found in Africa," Mr. Egeland said in an interview before delivering a closed-door briefing on the subject to the Security Council.
[. . .]
While the killing and displacement of tens of thousands of people in the Darfur region in Sudan had engaged the world, he said, a crisis of similar horror was being largely neglected in northern Uganda, and new outbreaks were erupting in countries like Chad and Togo.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

The Free Press' National Conference for Media Reform currently has the following conference presenters listed:

Conference Presenters
Conference presenters will represent diverse perspectives on media policy issues and media reform activism. Speakers will include activists, academics, artists, policymakers, journalists, and leaders from various local, regional, and national groups. This list will be updated regularly. Confirmed presenters include:
Rana Abbas, American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee
Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Federal Communications Commission
Amalia Anderson, League of Rural Voters
John Arnold, Wayne State University
Medea Benjamin, Global Exchange
Frank Blethen, Seattle Times
Karen Bond, media activist
Wally Bowen, Mountain Area Information Network
João Brant, Intervozes, Brazil
David Brock, Media Matters for America
Sue Buske, The Buske Group
Michael Calabrese, New America Foundation
Ann Chaitovitz, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists
Rev. Robert Chase, United Church of Christ
Jeff Chester, Center for Digital Democracy
Inja Coates, Media Tank
Jeff Cohen, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
Lauren Coletta, Public Interest Public Airwaves Coaliton / Common Cause
Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America
Commissioner Michael Copps, Federal Communications Commission
Malkia Cyril, Youth Media Council
Lauren Glen Davitian, CCTV Center for Media & Democracy
Liza Dichter, Center for International Media Action
John Dunbar, The Center for Public Integrity
Harold Feld, Media Access Project
Saskia Fischer, Media Empowerment Project; United Church of Christ
Laura Flanders, Air America Radio [author, journalist]*
Bill Fletcher Jr., Trans Africa Forum
Linda Foley, The Newspaper Guild / CWA
Glen Ford, Black Commentator
Al Franken, Air America Radio, author
Des Freedman, Goldsmiths College, University of London
Eric Galatas, Free Speech TV
Susan Gleason, YES! Magazine; Reclaim the Media
Juan Gonzalez, New York Daily News [Democracy Now!]*
Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!
Peter Grant, Communications and Entertainment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault
Robert Greenwald, Director; Outfoxed
Robert Hackett, Simon Fraser University
Marjorie Heins, Brennan Center for Justice - Free Expression Policy Project
Jim Hightower, Author; Commentator
Leonard Hill, Leonard Hill Films
Representative Maurice Hinchey, US Congress
James Horwood, partner, Spiegel & McDiarmid
Janine Jackson, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
Morgan Jindrich, Consumers Union
Linda Jue, Independent Press Association
Myoungjoon Kim, MediaACT (South Korea)
Gene Kimmelman, Consumers Union
Naomi Klein, Author, Activist
George Lakoff, UC Berkeley, author
Peggy Law, National Radio Project; MediaWorks
Jonathan Lawson, Reclaim the Media
Sydney Levy, Media Alliance
Mark Lloyd, Center for American Progress
Stephen Macek, North Central College; Chicago Media Action
Jerry Mander, International Forum on Globalization
Bob McCannon, New Mexico Media Literacy Project
Robert McChesney, Founder, Free Press
Carrie McLaren, Stay Free! Magazine
R. Sean McLaughlin, Alliance for Community Media
Kembrew McLeod, University of Iowa
Sascha Meinrath, Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network
Ed Mierzwinski, U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Susanna Montezemolo, Consumers Union
Alyce Myatt, multimedia consultant
Garry Neill, International Network for Cultural Diversity
John Nichols, The Nation
Emmanuel Njenga Njuguna, Association for Progressive Communications, South Africa
David Olson, Cable Communications Director; City of Portland
Jeff Perlstein, Media Alliance
Carol Pierson, National Federation of Community Broadcasters
Chellie Pingree, Common Cause
Jonathan Rintels, Center for Creative Voices in Media
Tammy Ko Robinson, Video Machete
Luis Enrique Romero, APAGA
Randy Ross, Native Networking Policy Center
Nan Rubin, Community Media Services
Lisa Rudman, National Radio Project
Representative Bernie Sanders, US Congress
Representative Jan Schakowsky, US Congress
Graciela Baroni Selaimen, RITS, Brazil
Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project
Josh Seidenfeld, The SPIN Project
Rinku Sen, Color Lines magazine
Roanne Robinson-Shaddox, Native Networking Policy Center
Josh Silver, Executive Director, Free Press
Kavita Singh, Community Technology Centers' Network
Jeff Smith, Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy
Norman Solomon, Institute for Public Accuracy [author]*
Nestor Soto, UPAGRA
Thenmozhi Soundararajan, Third World Majority
Jerry Starr, Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting
Federico Subervi, The Latinos and Media Project
Makani Themba-Nixon, The Praxis Project
Karen Toering, Reclaim the Media
Jenny Toomey, Future of Music Coalition
Pete Tridish, Prometheus Radio Project
Gloria Tristani, United Church of Christ
Tim Walker, Adbusters Media Foundation
Antwuan Wallace, Funding Exchange
Representative Diane Watson, US Congress
Adam Werbach, Common Assets
Celia Wexler, Common Cause
Granville Williams, Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom (United Kingdom)
Rob Williams, MEME films; acme coalition
Dr. Ernest J. Wilson, Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Karen Young, Media Democracy

Chicago organizations are listed for identification purposes only.The conference program, including presenters, are subject to change.

Question/comment? E-mail conference AT freepress.net

For more information, visit the Free Press' web site for this conference. Also note that "*" indicates I've added something. Juan Gonzalez, as most members know, is also a part of Democracy Now! so I credited that. Laura Flanders is an author (and if Al Franken's going to be credited as an author and Flanders' isn't, I can imagine the e-mails that would come in on that). She's also a journalist so that was needed as well. Norman Solomon is also an author and I noted that. My apologies to members who think of others who should have additional credits. And certainly, some people, such as Medea Benjamin, could have a paragraph next to their names. Normally, I just copy and paste something like this but knowing how members feel about Laura Flanders I've added "author, journalist" (both of which she's more than earned) because with Franken (whom many members are not fond of to put it mildly) credited as an "author" but Flanders not being credited as such, I can imagine the e-mails that would pour in.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Danny Schechter will be attending the Free Press Media Reform conference this weekend in St. Louis, MO. (Showing WMD, a great film, and WMD" and on the "Creating a Media Democracy Act" panel Saturday afternoon.)

Below is an excerpt of an article he's written on the conference that Martha e-mailed yesterday.
(My apologies to Martha for the delay in this going up.) It's entitled "The Media Reformers Are Coming to Town:"

Mass media had then yet to totally dominate our culture although we have had experiences with the yellow journalism of William Randolph Hearst and, yes, the man that endowed journalism's primo prize, Joseph Pulitzer. Pulitzer founded his national newspaper company in St Louis in 1878.

No one then could have imagined how thoroughly Big Media would affect and infect our political life.

Media has now become a key issue in this new century.

The river town always had a rich media culture, The state's favorite son and one of this country's great writers, Mark Twain, wrote for the St. LouisPost-Dispatch. In 1881, he published a letter he wrote President Garfield to support anti-slavery crusader Frederick Douglass for a public office. He later led the anti-imperialism league against that Vietnam-before-Vietnam, the U.S. war on the Philippines.
It is a town with its own feisty Journalism Review which reports this month: "A new set of rules at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on alcohol and drug use on the job is aimed at curbing a longtime hazard for both employees and the company. But some employees say the rules, which call for searches and forced drug testing, is a violation of their civil rights."

I am sure the media activists responding to Free Press's call for a second national Media Reform Conference will leave their drugs at home because the assemblage of so many activists and "big names" in media criticism in one place will produce its own high.

Your news dissector will be on hand reporting for MediaChannel.org, showing "WMD" and participatingon a panel ("Creating a Media Democracy Act," Saturdayat 2PM).

In the weeks ahead, MediaChannel will feature diverse comments on the media battle.

For those keeping track, that's Amy Goodman, Laura Flanders, Robert McChesney, Victor S. Navasky and Danny Schechter (among others) that will be attending the conference.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]