Also Also

Homestretch for Hackett in OH-2 Race?

As voting day for the special election in Ohio's 2nd Congressional District nears, I should finally mention this story that has been brewing on the blogs for a few weeks now: the formerly-long-shot candidacy of Gulf War II veteran Paul Hackett. Without a doubt, the best current source for frequent updates on the now-frenetic pace of the campaign is SwingStateProject.  Ever since an internal Republican poll showed Hackett surging to within the margin of error, the excitement has continued to ratchet higher with each passing day. Following that last link, I should mention that MyDD was one of the first prominent blogs to bring the campaign into the limelight, noting the interesting dynamic: Ohio's 2nd district is about as solidly Republican as they come, with no D candidate earning more than 30% of the vote in 20 years. 

What would it take for Democrats to break through in this very red area? First, a scandal-plagued state GOP, up to its neck in corruption charges surrounding Governor Taft and his staff  in what has become known as "Coingate."  Next, a candidate in the mold of progressive darling Howard Dean--brash talking, strong-willed, and fervently anti-war--but with credibility Dean could never hope to gain on the issue: that which you get by opposing the war and then volunteering to fight in it anyway.  Third, the aforementioned blogosphere buzz, which created both MSM coverage of his candidacy  (video link)  and some serious netroots contributions (which stand at nearly $400,000 from this source alone as of tonight).

Finally most recently, the whiff of scandal has begun to coalesce around Hackett's opponent, faux farm girl Jean Schmidt.  First it was merely that she didn't appear to have the kind of background she claimed, then it spread to her campaign manager who tried desperately to disavow HIS apparent background as a family values bondage and submission lover. And now tonight, the local networks are running with the story of Schmidt's denials that she even knew who Coingate-tainted Tom Noe was,  which just happen to be completely contradicted by public record.

It remains to be seen what will happen Tuesday. For all the hubbub, OH-2 is still solidly Republican, and the Cincy Enquirer went ahead and gave Schmidt the endorsement. Other smaller papers have gone for Hackett, but none with the Enquirer's readership and influence. But depending on how tightly the stink of Coingate now adheres to Schmidt in the face of her denials, and how well Hackett's Libertarian Democrat positioning will turn out the vote in what should likely be a low-turnout election, this could be a bellwether political event for the 2006 electoral season. Another Iraq veteran is running in PA-8, for instance. Keep an eye on this story the next two days...

--TJ

A Quietly Bloody Week in Iraq

There were some mainstream reports today on the deaths of five US soldiers Saturday, all resulting from IED attacks.  Weekends are slower news days, and these attacks appear to have been on the shoulder between two news cycles, so it's possible the major dailies couldn't get a solid story before deadline. But Saturday was just a capper for a particularly deadly week in Iraq, in which 22 US soliders lost their lives, including eight last Sunday. Two of those deaths were from vehicle accidents,  but the other 20 were the result of hostile action--17 of those from explosive devices.  A total of eight soldiers were killed last Sunday, one of the larger single-day totals since the war began, particularly considering no major offensives were underway, and no armaments like helicopters were shot out of the sky. Perhaps I haven't constructed my Google query right, but despite apparently being the result of four separate hostile incidents, I don't see any reference to the day's carnage.

If previous reporting from the field is still true, the fact that the deaths were from explosives suggests that the Iraqi portion of the insurgency continues with some strength--it is almost always the Baathists and Sunni agitants who make the bombs and target military personnel with them. Foreign jihadists, on the other hand, tend to favor suicide bombings against Iraqi police and civilians.  Which makes the Defense Department's writeup of Saturday's activity rather presumptively curious:

Elsewhere in Iraq, Marines from Regimental Combat Team 2 were attacked today with mortar fire from terrorists operating in a local schoolhouse just southeast of Haditha, according to U.S. military officials at Camp Blue Diamond in Ar Ramadi.

The schoolhouse was rigged with explosives and fortified with .30 caliber machine guns in the windows, officials said. Coalition forces determined that the school was being used as a weapons cache site.

The engagement began while coalition forces were conducting a cordon and search of the area, during which a weapons cache of rockets was discovered nearby. When coalition troops counter attacked the schoolhouse, they were supported by M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks and combat aircraft that dropped bombs on targets.

Officials described secondary explosions as being larger detonations than those from the bombs that were dropped.

No civilian casualties were reported and the school was not in session at the time.

Several terrorists were confirmed killed during the incident.

In Samarra, Task Force Liberty soldiers killed one terrorist and captured two others July 30 after observing them trying to emplace a 155 mm artillery shell roadside bomb in a hole one of them had been digging earlier in Samarra, U.S. military officials in Tikrit reported today.

During a search of the area, troops found two more 155 mm rounds, wire and a cell phone inside a nearby car.

While working in west Baghdad July 28, a Task Force Baghdad unit discovered a weapons cache containing bomb-making materials, detonation devices and a roadside bomb in the beginning stages of construction, officials noted.

Fifteen minutes later, another group of Task Force Baghdad soldiers found a car bomb in an old truck stopped in the middle of a road in the Karb de Gla district of south Baghdad. The soldiers noticed wires running from the car and followed them to a location where they found three suspected terrorists. The suspects were taken into custody and an explosives team safely detonated the bomb, officials said.

Overall, July was fairly par for the course this year; the two preceding months saw as many as 80 deaths. But on a weekly basis, with two significant death tolls to remark upon, it's sad that not much remarking actually got done. Rest well and thank you, gentlemen.

--TJ

SB1000-related: New Civil Unions Bill Introduced

As long as I'm here, I should mention this: via GayRightsWatch, this press release from Rep. Mary Nolan (D-Portland) indicates that a new bill has been introduced at the very tail end of the legislative session, in an attempt to revive the civil unions bill language passed in the Senate, and to try to force a vote in the House. The prior bill, SB1000, was stripped and then hidden in the Budget committee by Speaker Minnis, in order to prevent a vote.

The new bill combines the SB1000 language with HB3508, the Republican "reciprocal benefits" bill that would have extended a few legal rights of partnerships to both gays and unmarried couples with personal stakes in each other (such as two sisters).  The hope is that by including such language, the bill's appeal will be favorably broadened. Stay tuned to GRW and Basic Rights Oregon for action info and updates. Now that the bill is up, giving your rep and Karen Minnis another call/email would be a good idea, too.

--TJ

Spotty Blogging For Now

As with any enterprise in the Northern Hemisphere, summer is bound to include vacations. We're no different at A2 HQ; both Zap and Torrid are in the midst of, returning from , or returning to vacations between now and August 9. I'm currently in Virginia, Zap is between Alaska and Hawaii (the NonContinental Tour, apparently). While there may be blogging at times, it will be fitful. Feel free to talk amongst yourselves. Thanks for checking in; we'll be back and at full speed soon.

TJ (and Zap)

Rove's Omissions and the Missing Source

The floodgates seem to have opened at WaPo, as multiple sources are beginning to paint much more complete pictures of the Fitzgerald prosecution over the last couple years, particularly the evolution of its direction. The best reporting and worst paper readership of the week tend to collide with a giant 'meh' each Saturday.

I came at this a in a circuitous sort of way, first reading the diarist's synopsis of it at Kos, but only reading the quoted section. I then moved on to Horse's Ass, which has the story today's WaPo effort builds on--the Bloomberg article indicating contradictory testimony between Rove, Libby, Cooper and Russert. Within the comments was another link, this time to the Seattle Weekly and a column by Geov Parrish.

The gist from Parrish was  that because Democrats are so gleeful at the thought of taking Rove down, that's a form of tribute. And because it was tribute to his skill at being ruthless but successful, they're saying he's smart. And, in a leap farther than aides take when the President mounts some kind of personal transport, if he's smart--he must be innocent! Why? Because nobody so smart would be so sloppy as to lie to the Grand Jury!

Which, tortured as it is, makes a decent surface point. Sloppiness through complacency and arrogrance only takes you so far; at a certain point you're not sloppy if you're too complacent to create a workable alibi for your testimony. You're stupid. But that misses an equally likely scenario: that the alibi gets used and works for a while, but something you missed fills in the puzzle for them and now you've got trouble. And this is where WaPo and the Kos diarist swopa come back into the picture:

Fitzgerald has long been interested in a Time magazine article co-written by Cooper shortly after Novak's column was published on July 14, 2003. In the article, Cooper and two colleagues wrote about the administration's efforts to discredit Wilson and noted that some government sources had revealed that Plame worked for the CIA.

Lawyers involved in the case said there are now indications that Fitzgerald did not initially know or suspect that Rove was Cooper's primary source for the reporter's information about Plame. That raises questions about how much Rove disclosed when first questioned in the inquiry or how closely he was initially queried about his contacts with reporters. Rove has testified before a grand jury and been questioned by FBI agents on at least five occasions over the past two years.

Two lawyers involved in the case say that although Fitzgerald used phone logs to determine some contacts between officials and reporters, they believe there is no phone record of Cooper's now-famous call to Rove in the days before Novak's column appeared. That is because Cooper called the White House switchboard and was reconnected to Rove's office, sources said.

Also, when first questioned in the days after Plame's name appeared in the press, Rove left the impression with top White House aides that he had talked about her only with Novak, according to a source familiar with information provided to investigators.
...

The sources said Fitzgerald looked surprised in the August 2004 deposition when Cooper said it was he who brought up Wilson's wife with Libby, and that Libby responded, "Yeah, I heard that, too."

The prosecutor pressed Cooper to then explain how he knew about Wilson's wife in the first place, and Cooper said he would not answer the question because it did not involve Libby, the sources said.

That testimony contributed to a lengthy legal battle, as Fitzgerald sought to compel Cooper to testify before a grand jury about his conversation with the source.

That battle culminated in this series of events, from Needlenose. So here we might be seeing Rove's alibi. Because there is no direct phone record of the call, turning phone records over wouldn't pick it up. It's not clear to me whether the Novak call is or not, but since he published the conversation Fitz already knew they had called each other. Not so Cooper. And Rove knew that, and so said nothing. The alibi had worked.

But this is where sloppy and complacent may have come in: because Rove didn't do any blabbing via email, perhaps turning over email records wasn't perceived as a big deal. And since the phone records wouldn't show Cooper's call, he could play it like it never happened. But there was a record of that call, in the email he sent to Hadley, Rove reassuring him that he didn't "spill the beans to Cooper." He remembered the phone call, and that he did good--but maybe he didn't remember the crowing email to Hadley.

And this email sparked the call for Cooper. As Needlenose points out, it was only when Fitzgerald discovered that Cooper had heard it from someone in government and wouldn't say who it was, that the legal conflict began. All of a sudden, as the Judge noted, it would be highly relevant to know where Cooper had heard it if not from Libby. And he was willing to send people to jail to find out.

And so Rove and Co. skated all this time until Cooper was finally made to testify--or actually when Time outed his stuff on the company's kind behalf, and sort of forced the issue. Sure enough, it was Rove. As the Post says, either he artfully dodged the questions or simply wasn't asked the right ones. With Cooper's information, the fact that Rove was silent about it at first and then contradicted Cooper in several places, caused Fitzgerald to move from "who leaked" to "who told the truth or not."

Which brings me finally back to Horse's Ass, with a comment I must immodestly reproduce:

That’s why they’re so smart they couldn’t have done it–they thought they had plausible deniability. Turns out they’re not, they did, and they didn’t.

But there are still so many questions. Why is Judith Miller not talking? Is it none of the previously named players? Is he (or she!) the "some other government official" Luskin is now hedging about as a source for Rove? Is it Ari Fleischer, who may be in his own soup of hot water for some contradictory statements about whether he'd seen the infamous Memo on Air Force One enroute to Nigeria? Is it Colin Powell, who's now blowing the whistle on everybody? Was it Condi who played Haldeman and meted out the dirty jobs? Or was it Miller herself, fed by somebody like Chalabi or another entirely trusted and entirely untrustworthy Iraqi expat feeding Rumsfeld and Cheney poor intel?

Keep watching.

--TJ

SB1000: Minnis Maneuvers, Murders Marriage-like Mating

#58#

Certainly an eventful and quite possibly decisive day for SB1000, the Oregon Senate bill establishing same sex civil unions. As I indicated yesterday, the bill needed to be assigned to committee, and State and Federal Affairs was the likeliest. That's where it went today, one day before the deadline, at 11:30 AM and without notice. It spent all of a half hour in session, where it quickly had the inelegant "gut and stuff" procedure done upon it, excising civil unions and replacing them with what the Minnisites call "reciprocal benefits." That was voted on and passed out 3-2 party lines, to the budget committee. (My own rep, Greg MacPherson, was one of the nays. I love that guy.) For a little pre-switch background, the Eugene paper is able to make it very clear from the Office of the Speaker that the bill is dead, and it's because it's too much like marriage.

The Statesman-Journal is right on top of the story tonight; good for them, although it certainly was a big deal at the Capitol. By the time interest groups got the word that the bill had been placed, it was already out and locked down in budget, where it cannot come to the floor on a minority report. But here's what I think is possible (I'd like to get some of this answered by staff for Democratic leader Jeff Merkley tomorrow): in a long shot move, the Democrats and Republicans disaffected by Minnis' ethically precious maneuver could conceivably PASS the original House Bill on reciprocal benefits, passing it to the Senate sui generis of SB1000. The Senate could then do a gut and stuff on that one, putting civil rights back in, and send it back to the House. The House would then have to give it a floor vote for concurrence, if I understand correctly.

Obviously that will take some fairly courageous steps by not only Republicans in moderate areas but also Democrats in more conservative ones. And there may be maneuvers at Minnis' disposal to counter those moves, so we'll have to see what happens. But the issue, while not hitting the front pages so far, is building momentum. The O put the rally report inside today, too far inside apparently to make it into the online version. Man, does OregonLive suck. There was the Eugene piece this morning, and Salem's breaking news was an update of an earlier recap. Corvallis also printed a favorable letter this morning. Perhaps something from the Tribune tomorrow, although they may not have any bodies to write the story. To see some images from the rally, look at Bryan's, Lelo's, and HinesSight.

Perhaps most important of the day's postings was Merkley's statement later this afternoon, releasing an opinion from the Legislative Counsel. Merkley hits the highlights:

"Senate Bill 1000-A does not create a "marriage" by another name..."

"...Senate Bill 1000-A does not create a "same-sex marriage" under the guise of another name."

"In conclusing, we believe Senate Bill 1000-A is constitutional as written."

...but I think he misses the most salient point: Oregon's marriage ban is much like California's, and California has already decided the issue, finding that civil unions do not contravene the marriage ban. The precedent, in Counsel's opinion, is recent, clear, and highly applicable. This fundamentally undercuts Minnis' entire argument, and it remains to be seen how much sway that might have over simmering Republicans and seething Democrats. Thom Hartmann reports that hard and fast canvassing in her Wood Village district, plus multiple full page ads, are coming. But with only an apparently limited time to resolve it before session's end, the current outlook is dim. But perhaps, as Preemptive Carla so eloquently puts it, "perhaps someone will drop a house on her."*

--TJ

*obviously not in the literal sense, literal like the guy in the yarmulke at the corner of Broadway and Yamhill this evening, holding the sign saying "Get rid of Hamas, Islamic Jihad," etc.

 

 

SB1000: Rally Reminder; Targets of Advocacy

#58#

A reminder that this evening at 6pm there will be a rally held on the steps of the state capitol in Salem, to urge Speaker Minnis and the Republican-controlled state House to bring SB1000, the civil unions/non-discrimination bill, to the floor for an up or down vote this session. Goobernor Ted will headline the list of speakers (unless the rumored "special guest" turns out to be Barney Frank or something). The story is starting to build a minute amount of steam, although I assume there will be coverage after the fact tommorow since the media follow Ted's schedule for news. To return briefly to the item I linked just above, the entire Lincoln City Council drafted a letter calling for a vote on the bill. That's an excellent idea, and it's one that Mayor Potter in Portland should spearhead as well, given his strong support for gay rights of equality. Of course, for those of you who don't live in Portland or Lincoln City, it's worth calling your own local officials for similar statements. The more we can point to, the easier they will come.

As for making your own voice heard beyond the rally, there are some key people to contact on the issue. First obviously is Speaker Minnis (R-Wood Village), who is preventing the bill from reaching the floor. Be polite, but be direct and firm, and make it clear that Oregonians are watching, and taking note of the way the bill is being handled. Having called Minnis myself, I was able to confirm that the bill should be assigned to committee by the end of the week, and very likely that commitee will be State and Federal Affairs. As the majority, Republicans control three seats, the Democrats two--which means it will take either movement by Minnis, or a defection from one of her caucus. Another option is to attempt to pull the bill from committee directly to the floor, but that will take a greater number of defections, although it can be initiated by the Democrats, whereas in committee the majority controls the agenda.

So in the interest of applying polite pressure on the members of that committee:

Wayne Krieger (R-Gold Beach; Chair)
Brian Boquist (R-Dallas)
Linda Flores (R-Clackamas)
Jeff Barker (D-AlohaRanking Minority Member)
Greg MacPherson (D-Lake Oswego/Portland)

Again, it's obviously quite helpful if one of these is your representative, but because the issue concerns the action of the committee and not their home district, I think it's appropriate to counsel them on your opinion of their responsibilities. If you call one of the Democrats, simply offer your support (once you find out if they support SB1000), and tell them Oregonians will back them for taking a stand on rights for everyone. Tell the Republicans on the committee that their duty is to the entire body and the state, above their duty to party leadership. Remind them that if "up or down" is good for judicial nominees in Congress, it's good for bills passed strongly by the other chamber. But for God's sake, and I can't say this enough, DON'T BE RUDE. I know from personal experience it's hard not to get agitated sometimes when you're talking to a phone aide who clearly doesn't agree with your position, but all that does is get your opinion completely ignored--as well as those of others who shared your opinion. This is adult business; be an adult.

<--/lecture>

Finally, I've done a little analysis on who some weak links might be--whether they are weakly supportive Democrats, or weakly oppositional GOPers. This is based on their geography or their legislative or personal histories, suggesting they might be turn-able. I ran the list past someone with an ear open at the Capitol, and they agreed this was a decent list. You can find their phone numbers and email addresses by clicking their name:

Vicki Berger  (R-Salem)
Deborah Boone  (D-Cannon Beach)
Scott Bruun (R-West Linn)
Chuck Burley (R-Bend)
John Dallum (R-The Dalles)
Billy Dalto (R-Salem; Asst. Majority Leader)
Debbi Farr  (R-Eugene; Asst. Majority Leader)
Bill Garrard (R-Klamath Falls)
Derrick Kitts (R-Hillsboro; Majority Whip)
Betty Komp (D-Woodburn)
Mike Schaufler (D--Happy Valley)

Good luck, and keep up the work! Even if the effort fails, the call will have gone out, the members of the Legislature will have been put on alert, and you can look yourself in the mirror and fairly say you did what you could.

Update, 320pm--
Blue Oregon also reminds me that as long as we're on the phone or sending emails, Nike deserves support for taking a bold stand on SB1000. The fundamentalists are not happy about it.

--TJ

NW Portal Relaunches, Improves

Another milestone for NW Portal, the Northwest's premier clearinghouse of progressive voices from the Pacific Northwest: version 3.0 has been launched, nicknamed "True Blue." In many ways it looks much the same as it has before, but the interface is cleaner, the RSS feeds improved, and there are some new features that are quite helpful. In particular, I like the improved toolkit, which has traffic cams, business reports and weather. The state Democratic Party website links are also helpful as resources for activism/journalism. But my favorite part might be the new "Oregon Ticker" on the extended state page. As a primary Oregon blogger for the Portal, I'll be one of the folks putting stories onto the ticker, which you can click on directly to be taken to the item. They may be MSM pieces, they may be blog postings, but they'll be all Oregon, all the time.

Kudos to Andrew and the rest of the gang at NPI! If you like the Portal and want to see it become an even bigger and more prominent part of the Northwest media, you might want to toddle over to Kos and recommend the diary there that details the improvements, so it gets bigger play among the faithful.

--TJ

Pushing SB1000 For a Vote

#58#

While Plamegate is certainly the most interesting issue of the day on a few fronts, it's a well-covered national story and certainly in the way of journalism I have nothing to add to the discussion. Closer to (my) home, there is an inverted Washington power play going on in Oregon during this legislative session, and things are perhaps coming to a head. After passage of the state Senate Bill 1000--which both outlaws discrimination by orientation and passes civil unions for same sex couples--the focus turned to the Republican-controlled House, which has behaved this session as if it ran Congress and the Executive, instead of being the minority institution in an otherwise Democratic landscape. House Leader Karen Minnis has refused to schedule the bill on what appears to be grounds that it would run afoul of the recently-passed Measure 36 (bumper title: One Man One Woman).

The news--simultaneously that the bill passed the Senate and would likely die there--made some national ripples. The National Gay/Lesbian Task Force gave solid props to Basic Rights Oregon (BRO), who spearheaded the legislative challenge of getting the Senate to pass the measure. Gays from Pittsburgh to St. Louis caught the word, and I link to the St. Louis one because it indicates congratulations from Log Cabin Republicans as well. Even Southern Voice covered it, in a more triumphalist "Thank Goodness Minnis Will Stop It" sort of tone, if I don't mistake the placement of a large picture of her to accompany the Buck Stops Here story. The Statesman-Journal takes a better hack at it. 

This type of maneuver is generally accorded to majority leadership in legislature, it seems, although most of the time it's done because the measure wouldn't pass anyway. According to Bryan at GayRightsWatch, however, Minnis may actually be holding out because it would pass--but would represent a defeat for "her people." And that's where I think this is more than run of the mill obstructionism.

First of all, it's a shameless reversal of all the mouthings from the right on Measure 36--it wouldn't affect civil unions, that's what the legislature is for, etc. Now all of a sudden the thing that people in support of 36 said was definitely NOT applicable, is now a subversion of 36's core purpose. There is a BRO offshoot site called subtly enough Track the Lies, which has a nice little flash movie to demonstrate this particular hypocrisy. (Hat tip to B!x on that one.)

Second, to say it thwarts the will of the people as expressed by 36 is absurd, since while Oregonians do indeed not favor the pure right of marriage, larger majorities tend to favor the establishment of civil unions. Besides the Senate, Governor Ted is on board, and can't figure out why nothing is moving (on anything) over at the Capitol.  Nike is taking the fairly courageous stand in favor of the bill.  So given that support, to refuse a vote is really what would be thwarting the will of the people.

As Track the Lies indicates at their page, a rally is scheduled for Wednesday the 20th in Salem at 6pm, with a hoped-for surprise guest. Until then, you can register your support for SB1000, focusing on the need to get the thing onto the floor at least on principle. You can contact the various media with a letter to the editor; they get printed more often than you think if they're cogent, brief, and timely. You can bug Air America to stay on this story, particularly Thom Hartmann,  who does a show out of Portland during morning drive.

More to come on this.

--TJ

Congress Says "No Mas" On Social Security

Grassley and Thomas give up for the summer:

WASHINGTON, July 14 - With no consensus in sight, even among Republicans, the chairmen of the Senate and House committees with jurisdiction over Social Security have decided to postpone further consideration of the issue at least until September.

With every passing week, the prospects for major Social Security legislation, President Bush's top legislative priority, appear dimmer.

In interviews, Senator Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the Finance Committee, and Representative Bill Thomas, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said that with only two weeks remaining before the August Congressional recess, they were consumed with other legislative business.

They said they were still committed to trying to move Social Security legislation before the year is out. But with Democrats solidly against the president's proposal and Republicans split several ways about how to proceed, neither chairman has been able to forge legislation that stands a chance of enactment.

Given that September is budget deadline time for the next fiscal year, my interepretation of this public capitulation is "it's not gonna happen." And if it doesn't happen in 2005, you can forget it for 2006, and then of course all bets are off pending the midterms after that.

If you were looking for a sign to celebrate having turned back the enormously expensive and time-consuming effort to find a way out of paying back our Social Security obligations, I think this is pretty much it. So if you did something to help stop it, raise a glass and toast yourself.

Let this be a model for moving forward: the Democrats and interested third parties got way out ahead of the President and Congressional leaders on this one, framed the issue, made sure the press didn't wholly bite on the various prevarications used by the White House in selling it, and kept up the pressure when they could have declared premature victory and started negotiating away their power. Of course it helped that Social Security is the one major government program that most people think is a good thing, but getting Americans to vote against their economic interests has been a specialty of the Bush administration since 2000--so some credit must be due.

(clap, clap)

--TJ