My friends, Stereolab will be touring the West Coast (SF: March 30-131; Seattle: April 2). If you go, tell me how it is.

.. stereolab : tourdates ..

Here, Krugman adds it all up: 1) Plame affair; 2) September 11 stonewalling; and 3) crookedly partisan inspectors general (L. Jean Lewis). Then asks, "What the heck is the matter with us?"

Op-Ed Columnist: Where�s the Apology?: "Still, the big story isn't about Mr. Bush; it's about what's happening to America. Other presidents would have liked to bully the C.I.A., stonewall investigations and give huge contracts to their friends without oversight. They knew, however, that they couldn't. What has gone wrong with our country that allows this president to get away with such things? "

Wow, just a few weeks of steady Democratic campaign coverage and the mainstream press seems to be finally catching up on what we've known for over a year: the White House cherry-picked its intelligence estimate for Iraq's WMD. Editor & Publisher gives an overview of national editorial pages and their response to the Kay report and the possibility that the White House cooked the books.

Editorials Question Bush's Role in 'Cooking' Up a War: "An E&P survey of the top 20 newspapers by circulation found that as of Wednesday, 13 had run editorials on Kay's resignation as chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq last Friday, and his statement that no WMDs exist in Iraq, and likely did not exist in Iraq during the U.S. run-up to war.

Nearly all of those papers blamed intelligence failures for the miscalculation and called for a full probe. But eight of the 13 -- most of which supported the war -- also raised the issue of White House deceit and its possibly blind pursuit of intelligence that fit its plan for war. "

Absolutely, bloody-well right! Does Bush have to declare martial law before impeachment crosses enough people's minds?

Salon.com | The blue dress of Baghdad: "As David Kay's admission makes clear, the president misled Congress into approving his preemptive war. So why is there no talk of impeachment?"

So, David Kay thinks that it's not Bush who owes an explanation to the American people, but that the intelligence community owes and explanation to Bush (from NPR)! With Kay and the White House looking to scapegoat the intelligence community, the intelligence community is calling the bluff and daring the Congress to investigate the WMD intelligence assessment. Will the wider press figure out that >>this<< is a story?

Salon.com News | The CIA revolt against the White House: "for almost a year, the White House has been quietly fighting a contentious battle at home on the national security front -- against the U.S. intelligence community itself. Vocal retired intelligence officials, and anonymous active ones, have protested repeatedly that the White House has coerced intelligence agencies to rig findings and analysis to suit administration aims."

This interesting superlative was embedded an in article from the much-respected Baltimore Sun about the decline of neighborhood taverns (probably along with bowling leages, right, Professor Putnam?). It's right next to the B&O Railroad Museum. Gotsta go!

sunspot.net - maryland news: "Patrick's, at Pratt and Schroeder streets, is one such saloon. It has belonged to the Rowley family since 1847, and it has operated at its current location since 1862. It claims to be 'America's Oldest Irish Pub.'

'McSorley's is 20 years younger than us,' Patrick Rowley contended from behind the handcrafted 1860s bar desk, referring to the famous Lower Manhattan alehouse."

Where, oh, where is Spalding Gray? Let's hope for the best.

7Online.com: Spalding Gray Becomes An Official Missing Person: "The last time his family saw him was Friday, January ninth. There have been subsequent reports that he was seen on the Staten Island ferry later that night. His wife fears he may have tried to jump off the boat.
Spalding has tried suicide several times, including an attempt in late 2002 to jump off a bridge. A passer-by talked him down.
The actor had grown despondent following a 2001 car accident that left him with injuries from which he has yet to recover fully. "

Alas. Canya frippin' believe that I've never been?!

The Bottom Line, a Historic Nightclub, Calls It Quits: "Bottom Line, the Greenwich Village music club that was a launching pad for the likes of Bruce Springsteen and other rock stars, shut its doors on Thursday after almost three decades as a music industry landmark, its lawyer said yesterday."

And, of course, The Daily Howler does a better job than I could.

Peter Jennings begged Wesley Clark. Please, general--just fake the facts: "Peter Jennings begged Wesley Clark. Please, general�just fake the facts:"

This exchange really hooked me at last night's New Hampshire debate, and regards a comment that Michael Moore made at a Clark rally calling Bush a "deserter." Granted, Moore is a loose cannon, but what the heck does Jennings mean that the charge is "... not supported by the facts." Thank you, Pete, for that bit of editorializing greasily sandwiched within your question, but is there a difference between a "deserter" and someone who is AWOL? Because the latter was substantiated by the Boston Globe in a detailed article in 2000, with documentation posted by The Smoking Gin website. In fact, Bush representatives have >>never denied<< the charge or presented exculpatory evidence, so far as I know. Whatever could Peter mean . . . ?

Also, Clark's response was canny and avoided the traps Jenning set.

FOXNews.com - You Decide 2004 - Transcript: N.H. Democratic Debate: "JENNINGS: I get General Clark and Senator Edwards this time.
General Clark, a lot of people say they don't you well, so this is really a simple question about knowing a man by his friends. The other day you had a rally here, and one of the men who stood up to endorse you is the controversial filmmaker Michael Moore. You said you were delighted with him.
At one point, Mr. Moore said, in front of you, that President Bush � he's saying he'd like to see you, the general, and President Bush, who he called a 'deserter.'
Now, that's a reckless charge not supported by the facts. And I was curious to know why you didn't contradict him, and whether or not you think it would've been a better example of ethical behavior to have done so.
CLARK: Well, I think Michael Moore has the right to say whatever he feels about this.
I don't know whether this is supported by the facts or not. I've never looked at it. I've seen this charge bandied about a lot.
But to me it wasn't material. This election is going to be about the future, Peter. And what we have to do is pull this country together. And I am delighted to have the support of a man like Michael Moore, of a great American leader like Senator George McGovern, and of people from Texas like Charlie Stenholm and former Secretary of the Navy John Dalton.
We've got support from across the breadth of the Democratic Party, because I believe this party is united in wanting to change the leadership in Washington. We're going to run an election campaign that's about the future. We're going to hold the president accountable for what he did in office and failed to do, and we're going to compare who's got the best vision for America.
JENNINGS: Let me ask you something you mentioned, then"

A Boston Globe exclusive. So, if this is the conduct of Senate GOP staffers (what, no subpoenas yet?), is there any sense of propiety left the Congressional GOP?

Boston.com / News / Nation / Infiltration of files seen as extensive: "From the spring of 2002 until at least April 2003, members of the GOP committee staff exploited a computer glitch that allowed them to access restricted Democratic communications without a password. Trolling through hundreds of memos, they were able to read talking points and accounts of private meetings discussing which judicial nominees Democrats would fight -- and with what tactics."

And the crap is about to hit the same fan.

Op-Ed Columnist: Democracy at Risk: "A recent Zogby poll found that even in red states, which voted for George W. Bush, 32 percent of the public believes that the election was stolen. In blue states, the fraction is 44 percent."

In case you missed it last night, here's the link to the excellent and disquieting Frontline report on the WMD hunt and the donut hole they found. Interesting interviews with Kay, just as he resigns from the Iraq Survey Group.

frontline: chasing saddam's weapons | PBS

Kinsley on the State of the Union and the so-called conservative philosophy.

The Compassion Puzzle (washingtonpost.com): "So, to sum up: Talk loudly. Carry a big stick anyway. Spend money. Borrow to pay for it. Fiddle the books. I guess that's a governing philosophy of sorts. "

More truthsaying on the State of the Union

Op-Ed Columnist: The Other America: "'For the sake of job growth,' said Mr. Bush, to the loud applause of the Congressional bobbleheads at his State of the Union address, 'the tax cuts you passed should be made permanent.'
Job growth? That's the weirdest thing Mr. Bush has said since he told a CNN discussion group, 'As governor of Texas, I have set high standards for our public schools, and I have met those standards.'
Nearly 2.5 million jobs have been lost since Mr. Bush became president, and the most recent employment statistics have made a mockery of the claim that tax cuts for the rich would be the engine of job growth for the middle and working classes."

Conason picks up one of the more obvious falsehoods of the State of the Union.
Salon.com | Joe Conason's Journal: "Why we're in Iraq: WMD-RPA
Last night, the president had little to say about the weapons of mass disappearance that were the main topic of last year's State of the Union address -- and what he did say was, in a word, pathetic:
'We're seeking all the facts. Already, the Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations. Had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day ...' "

Hooray for . . . USA Today?! So at least someone there figured a reality check was in order. I wonder: why aren't any of these simply called "demonstrablelies?" My favorite:

USATODAY.com - Behind the address: "What Bush said: Search teams have 'identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities' in Iraq. 'Had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day.'
Context: The Bush administration has struggled to explain why weapons hunters have found no chemical or biological weapons in Iraq in 10 months of searching. On the eve of the war, President Bush said there was 'no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.' He said terrorist groups could acquire weapons from Iraq and use them against the United States. A search effort led by CIA appointee David Kay has turned up no weapons and no evidence of any advanced weapons program, raising questions about the quality of U.S. intelligence and the Bush administration's justification for war in Iraq."

I can say confidently, and by far, that the State of the Union last
night was the most nauseating in my life, and I'm including Nixon.
Giving the speech a run for its money was National Pansy Radio's
utterly lame non-coverage this morning. What's the matter NPR, were
there too many demonstrably false statements in the speech for you to
crack a few source materials and do some real reporting? And just
when I think Cokie Roberts's commentary couldn't be any more
superficial and inane, she delivers a career performance this
morning. That's your last State of the Union, mofo.

Bad taste in my mouth,
REY

Hi, everyone. Just started my first blog. Bring it on!