Debbie Wasserman Schultz Smacks Chris Shays

OK, I admit it, I've had a crush on Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) for a long time and watching her deal with a wimpy Chris Shays (R-CT) on Hardball Tuesday night has made it worse.

After listening to Shays whine multiple times about how House Democrats aren't moving forward in a bipartisan way -- obviously forgetting how the Republicans did nothing but kick Democrats in the groin when the GOP held both houses of Congress -- Wasserman Schultz put the smackdown on Shays with this exchange:

Shays: But the point I'm just trying to make is, why aren't we using the Iraqi Study Group, that Democrats and Republicans both support…

Wasserman Shultz: Ask the president…

Shays: Debbie, you're interrupting me, let me just make this point…

Wasserman Shultz: Ask the president why we're not asking the Iraq Study Group, Chris.

Shays: What I'm asking the Democrats in Congress is why not bring a resolution that Republicans and Democrats can both agree on, we can support that, and there are three recommendations. Transfer the Iraqis to do the work that we're doing in the streets, have the Sunnis and the Shia sit down with consequence and finally engage Iran and Syria -- I could support a resolution like that and so could a lot of other Republicans.

Wasserman Shultz: What we need to make sure we do, Chris, is we need to make sure we have the armor and the protection and the funding and the training for our troops that we're sending over there. We should not be escalating this war, we should be making sure that we developing a plan and we press the president to develop a plan to eventually bring our troops home and make sure that the Iraqis can stand up on their own and move forward with the Democracy that we helped them create.

That is on the president. It's his responsibility. And Congress is finally, under Democratic leadership, pressing the president and putting the accountability where it belongs -- where you and your colleagues asked no questions and gave him a blank check for the last six years, which was absolutely inexcusable.

Shays: Well, you know, it's strong, fierce words, but, I've been to Iraq 15 times…

Wasserman Shultz: This is a strong and fierce situation, Chris.

Shays: Debbie, I've had…

Wasserman Shultz: And the American people on November 7 insisted and voted to make sure that we could address what's going on in Iraq -- they are deeply, deeply concerned.

You can see the rest of why we love Debbie Wasserman Shultz at Crooks and Liars.

Major Swift Boat Donor To Kerry: "You're A Hero"

There are some things that you just don’t want to read about or watch on a full stomach -- this is one of those.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on Tuesday to consider the nomination of Sam Fox, a wealthy St. Louis businessman, to be the new U.S. Ambassador to Belgium. While it is not unusual for big political donors to be rewarded with ambassadorships -- and Fox is a huge donor to all things Republican -- what made everyone take note of this guy is that Fox gave a whopping $50,000 to help fund the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smear campaign against John Kerry in 2004.

And in being questioned by the Senate panel yesterday, Fox had to face one of the senior members of that committee in… Senator John Kerry.

What followed was riveting theater, with Kerry coldly staring down a clearly-nervous Fox and Bush's nominee withstanding a barrage of questions from Kerry that the Massachusetts Senator nicely referred to as questions of Fox's "judgment" while many of us would have just flat-out called him a scumbag.

It all started out nicely, with glowing introductions, including one nauseating passage from Senator Kit Bond (R-MO) who said that "professionally and morally, Sam is eminently qualified to hold the post for which he's been nominated."

But it gets far worse than just hearing someone rave about the high morals of a guy who gave 50 grand to the Swift Boat Liars.

Kerry got his turn to question Fox and started out politely enough, praising Fox's up-by-the-bootstraps life story and his generosity with non-political charities, while also asking him about American foreign policy vis-à-vis the European community.

The tone then changed sharply when Kerry switched gears and, indicating he had concerns about Fox's judgment, said "I assume that you believe the truth in public life is important."

"Yes, sir," answered Fox.

"And might I ask you what your opinion is with respect to the state of American politics, as regards the politics of personal destruction?" said Kerry.

This started a lengthy monologue from Fox in which Bush's nominee railed against how campaigns are funded in the United States, saving most of his bile for 527 groups, saying " I'm against 527s, I've always been against 527s. I think, again, they're mean and destructive, I think they've hurt a lot of good, decent people."

I'm sure some people in the hearing room must have been stifling laughs hearing something like that coming from a man who was a major contributor to the scummiest 527 group ever, but the worst was to come in the next few sentences.

"Senator Kerry, I very much respect your dedicated service to this country," said Fox. "I know that you were not drafted -- you volunteered. You went to Vietnam. You were wounded. Highly decorated. Senator, you're a hero. And there isn’t anybody or anything that's going to take that away from you. But yet 527s tried to."

Here's the exchange that followed:

Kerry: I certainly appreciate the comments you just made, Mr. Fox, and I'm not looking for anyone to call me a hero. I think that most heroes died, and do die, and those of us who are lucky enough to get out of there are lucky.

But notwithstanding the comments you made, you did see fit to contribute a very significant amount of money in October to a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, correct?

Fox: Correct.

Kerry: Why would you do that given what you just said about how bad they are?

Fox: Well, Senator, I have to put it in the proper context and bear with me. Marilyn and I have lived the American dream -- there's no question about it. My father came here with the clothes on his back and the Fox family and the Woodman family have truly lived the American dream that's been very, very good to us.

I heard someone mention here that we gave to 250 charities. I also went back and had my staff count in '05 and '06, we've made more than 1,000 contributions. More than 100 of those were political, 900 and some odd were charitable and to institutions of learning and so forth. A great deal of those had to do with basic human needs. I think it was Senator Danforth who mentioned every time he got a letter that had Harbour Group on it, he shuddered because it was going to cost him money. Marilyn and I both raise a lot of money from a lot of people.

The point I'm making is this: We ask a lot of people for money and people ask us for money. And very fortunately, we've been blessed with being successful financially and when we're asked, we generally give -- particularly if we know who gave it.

Kerry: So, well, who asked you to give to the SBVT?

Fox: I can't tell you specifically who did because, you know, I don’t remember. As a matter of fact, if I…

Kerry: You have no recollection of why you gave away $50,000?

Fox: I gave away $50,000 because I was asked to.

Kerry: But you have no recollection of who asked you to give away $50,000?

Fox: No, sir. I've given away sums much larger than that to a lot of other places and I can't tell you specifically who asked me, no.

Kerry: Well, you don’t think that's it's important as a citizen, who doesn’t like 527s to know where your money is going and how it’s going to be spent?

Fox: Well, I think with most contributors and if you go to the other side of the political campaigns and we give to individual candidates, we don’t know how they’re going to use that money and what…

Kerry: Well at least it's accountable to an individual candidate for whom people have to vote or not vote. 527s as you said are mean, ugly and not accountable.

Fox: I agree with that. I absolutely agree with that.

As Kerry pressed Fox to explain why he would give $50,000 to a 527 group when he claims to despise them so much -- and that he now knows spewed lies at Kerry that were quickly discredited -- the Swift Boat Sugar Daddy repeated a theme he used several times in his testimony, which is essentially that he did it to level the playing field with the attacks coming from liberal 527 groups.

In other words, he all but said Kerry was simply collateral damage in a political fight.

Kerry: Why would you give $50,000 to a group you have no sense of accountability for?

Fox: Well, because if 527s were banned, then it's banned for both parties. And so long as they’re not banned…

Kerry: So two wrongs make a right?

Fox: Well, I don’t know, but if one side is contributing then the other side…

Kerry: But is that your judgment? Is that your judgment that you would bring to the ambassadorship? That two wrongs make a right?

Fox: No, I didn’t say that two wrongs make a right, sir.

Kerry: Why would you do it then?

Fox: Well, I did it because politically, it's necessary if the other side is doing it.

And no matter what Kerry asked, Fox played dumb, saying he forgot who asked him for the $50,000 and that he had no clue that the Swift Boat Liars were doing such dirty deeds with his money.

Kerry: My question to you is why? When you say you couldn’t have known -- these were people very publicly condemning it. How could you not have known?

Fox: I guess, Mr. Senator, when I'm asked I just generally give.

Kerry: So, again, I ask you the question, do you think now that you and others bear responsibility for thinking about where we put money in American politics? What we're saying, what we present to the American people -- is truth important or isn’t it?

Fox: Senator, if I had reason to believe and if I were convinced that the money was going to be used to, in any untruthful or false way, knowingly, I would not give.

Kerry: Well, sir, let me ask you this question: Did you or did you not in any of the public comments being made at the time, which I assume you were following, hear or read of any of the public statements at that point in time, with respect to the legitimacy of these charges and these smears?

Fox: Mr. Senator, I can say this…

Kerry: Did you miss this: In September of 2004, Vice Admiral Ruth, with the Navy Inspector General, wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Navy that was made public -- the New York Times, the Washington Post, every major newspaper in the country carried, saying their examination found that the existing documentation regarding my medals was legitimate.

Did you miss that too?

Fox: I don’t remember those, but I'm certain at the time I must have read them.

Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), who was chairing the meeting, told Fox that he found his answers to Kerry "somewhat unsatisfying" and said that "The swift boat ads were of a different degree, even in the ugly arena of politics. They were extraordinarily well publicized, that there was essentially a fraud being perpetrated on the American people. It had a profound impact on the election."

And Obama tied a nice bow around the whole afternoon by basically calling Fox, who spent the entire time disavowing any knowledge of the Swift Boaters' mission or methods, a liar.

"To say that you gave because it's ugly out there and somebody asked you to give. I mean, it sounds to me like you were aware of it -- that this was not the best of political practices -- and you thought it was OK to go ahead and contribute to that," said Obama. "By the time you contributed, it was pretty widely noted -- it would have been hard for you to miss the fact that there was something particularly nasty and insidious about these ads. It had been well publicized at this point."

"I don’t think you necessarily crafted the message but you certainly knew at that point what the message was."

I have a lengthy, partial transcript here of Kerry questioning Fox about his involvement with the Swift Boat Liars and how that lack of ethics and judgment should disqualify Fox from representing our country at a cocktail mixer, much less with an important ally abroad.

Kerry Versus Swift Boat Benefactor: The Transcript

Here's my transcript of John Kerry questioning Sam Fox, George W. Bush's nominee to be U.S. ambassador to Belgium -- and a massive 2004 donor to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth -- before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday. There was a bit more than this at the start of Kerry's segment, but this is the part where Kerry questions Fox about being involved with such notorious smear merchants.

* * * * *Kerry: Let me ask a few questions that go to something that I think is important, which is a question of both a combination of citizenship and judgment, if you will, is the way I might phrase it. And I want to try to ask these questions as fairly as possible, and not try to play some kind of gotcha game here, I assure you. But it's important to me in thinking through this issue of judgment to explore this a little bit.

I assume that you believe that the truth in public life is important.

Fox: Yes, sir.

Kerry: And might I ask you what your opinion is with respect to the state of American politics, as regards the politics of personal destruction?

Fox: Senator, I am on record more than one time, several times, being interviewed by the press and particularly the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. And I am very concerned with the amount of money that's going into politics and I'm more concerned about the fact that politics has become mean and destructive. And, when I was interviewed in 2000, I said that I was very… I was for campaign finance reform because I felt that if less money was going into politics, it would turn the whole volume down. And if we turn the volume down, I would hope there would be less meanness and destructiveness.

When 527s came along, I had the very same thing to say about them. So that's the way I feel and, Senator, let me just say this: I'm against 527s, I've always been against 527s. I think, again, they're mean and destructive, I think they've hurt a lot of good, decent people.

And, Senator Kerry, I very much respect your dedicated service to this country. I know that you were not drafted -- you volunteered. You went to Vietnam. You were wounded. Highly decorated. Senator, you're a hero. And there isn’t anybody or anything that's going to take that away from you.

But yet 527s tried to.

And with the same token, on the other side of the aisle, 527s, one 527 went so far as to compare the president of the United States with Adolph Hitler. So I am on public record as being against 527s because of all the meanness and I'm against the amount of money that goes into political campaigns, for the same reason. Not once or twice, but three or four times. And I would just, I wish, that Congress could find a way to either ban 527s or at least regulate them.

Kerry: I certainly appreciate the comments you just made, Mr. Fox, and I'm not looking for anyone to call me a hero. I think that most heroes died, and do die, and those of us who are lucky enough to get out of there are lucky.

But notwithstanding the comments you made, you did see fit to contribute a very significant amount of money in October to a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, correct?

Fox: Correct.

Kerry: Why would you do that given what you just said about how bad they are?

Fox: Well, Senator, I have to put it in the proper context and bear with me. Marilyn and I have lived the American dream -- there's no question about it. My father came here with the clothes on his back and the Fox family and the Woodman family have truly lived the American dream that's been very, very good to us.

I heard someone mention here that we gave to 250 charities. I also went back and had my staff count in '05 and '06, we've made more than 1,000 contributions. More than 100 of those were political, 900 and some odd were charitable and to institutions of learning and so forth. A great deal of those had to do with basic human needs. I think it was Senator Danforth who mentioned every time he got a letter that had Harbour Group on it, he shuddered because it was going to cost him money. Marilyn and I both raise a lot of money from a lot of people.

The point I'm making is this: We ask a lot of people for money and people ask us for money. And very fortunately, we've been blessed with being successful financially and when we're asked, we generally give -- particularly if we know who gave it.

Kerry: So, well, who asked you to give to the SBVT?

Fox: I can't tell you specifically who did because, you know, I don’t remember. As a matter of fact, if I…

Kerry: You have no recollection of why you gave away $50,000?

Fox: I gave away $50,000 because I was asked to.

Kerry: But you have no recollection of who asked you to give away $50,000?

Fox: No, sir. I've given away sums much larger than that to a lot of other places and I can't tell you specifically who asked me, no.

Kerry: Well, you don’t think that's it's important as a citizen, who doesn’t like 527s to know where your money is going and how it’s going to be spent?

Fox: Well, I think with most contributors and if you go to the other side of the political campaigns and we give to individual candidates, we don’t know how they’re going to use that money and what…

Kerry: Well at least it's accountable to an individual candidate for whom people have to vote or not vote. 527s as you said are mean, ugly and not accountable.

Fox: I agree with that. I absolutely agree with that.

Kerry: Why would you give $50,000 to a group you have no sense of accountability for?

Fox: Well, because if 527s were banned, then it's banned for both parties. And so long as they’re not banned…

Kerry: So two wrongs make a right?

Fox: Well, I don’t know, but if one side is contributing then the other side…

Kerry: But is that your judgment? Is that your judgment that you would bring to the ambassadorship? That two wrongs make a right?

Fox: No, I didn’t say that two wrongs make a right, sir.

Kerry: Why would you do it then?

Fox: Well, I did it because politically, it's necessary if the other side is doing it.

Kerry: Let me ask, did you ever see on August 20, 2004, a St. Louis Dispatch editorial, wrote the following: "The smear campaign was funded and orchestrated by a coterie of Texans with strong ties to the Bush family and the president's political director, Karl Rove. The president should disown the ads and tell his friends that he wants them to stop. Mr. Bush can't wash his hands of the Swift Boat Veterans' smear because of his close personal connections with the principals. The Swift Boats Veterans on Mr. Kerry's boat including the man he pulled from the river support Mr. Kerry's version of events. So do the records documenting the medals Mr. Kerry received. The attack ads, by contrast are riddled with inconsistencies, for example…"

And it goes on.

That was in your own newspaper, in your hometown. But a month later, you nevertheless contributed to that very group that is smearing and spreading lies.

Fox: Yes, sir. All of the 527s were smearing lies. And that…

Kerry: So you see no responsibility as an individual citizen to try to guarantee that you're not going to support that kind of politics of personal destruction?

Fox: I think if one side is giving then the other side almost has to and I think that the real responsibility should rest with the Congress to either ban 527s or to certainly curtail and regulate them. That's the problem.

Kerry: So you do believe anything goes in a political campaign?

Fox: I'm sorry?

Kerry: You do believe that anything goes in a political campaign?

Fox: No, sir, I don't. In fact …

Kerry: Well, if you don’t believe it, why wouldn't you not fund it?

Fox: I had never gotten involved in the campaign side. I'd raised money, I'd contributed money. I've never gotten involved in the campaign side and I've never gotten involved in the 527 side of looking at scripts or any of that.

Kerry: Well, let me ask you as a matter of judgment, as a citizen. Don’t you think individuals ought to take some responsibility for making sure they know what they're giving money to?

Fox: Mr. Senator, when we ask lots of people for lots of money and we're asked by people for lots of money, we just generally give. I mean, we know generally what it's used for and that's it.

Kerry: And you don’t know who asked you?

Fox: No, sir, I really don’t. I do not know who asked me. If you were to take my 1,000 contributions and go right down the list, I bet you I couldn’t give you five percent of them… Of who asked me.

Kerry: Do you recall whether it was somebody in Missouri? Was it a person? Was it by telephone?

Fox: I have no recollection.

Kerry: You have no recollection of how that came about?

Fox: No, sir.

Kerry: Do you recall thinking about it at all?

Fox: No more than that somebody must have asked and I gave.

Kerry: Why, no wonder so many people are here to embrace your… What about now? How do you feel about it now -- knowing what you know today?

Fox: Mr. Senator, let me say this: Be it 527 or anything else, if I thought what they were printing was not true, I would not contribute to it. But I personally have no way of knowing, generally, when I give.

Kerry: Let me ask you about that. On August 5, 2005, John McCain called the SBVT "completely nauseating, dishonest and dishonorable." McCain pointed out "it's the same kind of deal that was pulled on me" when he ran against Bush in 2000.

On August 15, John Warner, Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and former Navy Secretary said "I can speak to the process, that we did extraordinary careful checking on that kind of medal, a very high one, that it goes through the Secretary. So I'd stand by the process that awarded Kerry that medal and I think we best acknowledge that his heroism did gain that recognition. I feel he deserved it."

He was then, incidentally, in the Navy -- he signed my award.

August 8, 2004, General Tommy Franks called the smear boat attacks "vitriolic and hyperbole."

On August 7, 2004, Mike Johannes the Republican governor of Nebraska says the ads were "trash."

Now these are Republican leaders. These are the leaders of your own party. President Bush said that he thought that my service was honorable and they shouldn’t be questioning it. Yet, even when your own candidate does that, you saw fit to put $50,000 on the line to continue the smear.

My question to you is why? When you say you couldn’t have known -- these were people very publicly condemning it. How could you not have known?

Fox: I guess, Mr. Senator, when I'm asked I just generally give.

Kerry: So, again, I ask you the question, do you think now that you and others bear responsibility for thinking about where we put money in American politics? What we're saying, what we present to the American people -- is truth important or isn’t it?

Fox: Senator, if I had reason to believe and if I were convinced that the money was going to be used to, in any untruthful or false way, knowingly, I would not give.

Kerry: Well, sir, let me ask you this question: Did you or did you not in any of the public comments being made at the time, which I assume you were following, hear or read of any of the public statements at that point in time, with respect to the legitimacy of these charges and these smears?

Fox: Mr. Senator, I can say this…

Kerry: Did you miss this: In September of 2004, Vice Admiral Ruth, with the Navy Inspector General, wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Navy that was made public -- the New York Times, the Washington Post, every major newspaper in the country carried, saying their examination found that the existing documentation regarding my medals was legitimate.

Did you miss that too?

Fox: I don’t remember those, but I'm certain at the time I must have read them.

Kerry: Do you think this should matter to me?

Fox: I'm sorry?

Kerry: Do you think this should matter to me?

Fox: Yes, I do.

Kerry: Do you think this should matter to everyone here, as a Senator?

Fox: Absolutely. As a matter of fact, going back to the time when I said I was on record and was interviewed a number of times about campaign finance reform and about less money going in, I said one of the big reasons was not just the nastiness and so forth associated with it, but the abuse the candidates had to take to run for public office, I think it's disgraceful, I think it's terrible.

But that's the world we live in. It's what it's come to. It's unfortunate, I don’t know of a campaign, a political campaign or a 527 that's ever had anything but that as part of it. And I think it's terrible -- I do. I wish there's some way it could be changed and I think the best way to change it is to restrict the amount of money that can go into campaigns and to restrict the amount of money that can go into 527s and regulate both of them even more.

Kerry: We've been trying to do that for the 22 years I've been here and one of the most effective ways to do it would be for people like yourself and others who write the checks to know what they're giving to -- and to care about it.

So you know, there's a question here, obviously of judgment and I'm not going to try to be unreasonable about it, I'm not trying to -- you know sometimes you go to these hearings and Senators rant, rave and scream and I'm not a screamer. But I do think that this is important and I know your family's here and I'm sure they’re sitting there saying 'why are they giving my dad a hard time right now?. I understand that, I'm sympathetic to it.

But I hope -- and it's not going to make a difference in the outcome of where I am -- but it's important to the future. I think it is robbing this country of legitimate dialog, of real discussion of important issues that we face and it's a tragedy that the American people have to put up with that.

The last week alone, in Ohio, $4 million was spent on those ads. $4 million. So it has profound impact, sir. And I think it's question of judgment. A question of whether we are fighting the status quo or whether we're part of the status quo. So I'm not sure where this goes with respect to this but I certainly thought it deserved to be properly vetted.

'60 Minutes' Report On Troop Dissent

Here's some must-see television from Sunday night as American troops discuss their true feelings about the Iraq war on CBS's 60 Minutes.

Part One:



Part Two:

On Team Bush, Scumbags Become Ambassadors

It should be an interesting afternoon in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as hearings begin to consider Sam Fox as George W. Bush's nominee to be the new U.S. Ambassador to Belgium.

While the White House lauds Fox's qualifications for the role, it's obvious from a tiny bit of searching that Fox's primary qualification is that he is a big rainmaker for the Republican party with a healthy portfolio of donations over the years -- this is a guy who has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush, Dick Cheney, the Republican National Committee and every GOP candidate you can shake a stick at.

But what's especially interesting is that if you really look under the hood of where this guy's political heart is at, you find that in late 2004 he gave $50,000 to no less solid citizens than the Swift Boat Liars who made it their mission to discredit a highly-decorated Vietnam Veteran in John Kerry.

Now if that won't buy you an ambassador's post from George W. Bush, nothing will.

Here's the entry from PoliticalMoneyLine.Com:



And here's a double-check from the Center for Public Integrity:



And he made this donation after the Swift Boaters had been entirely discredited.

What should make this hearing even more profound today is that sitting on the panel questioning Fox, will be Senator Jim Webb -- who is a Vietnam Veteran -- and one…. John F. Kerry.

Stay tuned…

Update: Before any of you right-wingers start with the hate mail asking how I know that the Sam Fox who donates to people like the Swift Boat Liars is the same one nominated to represent our country in Belgium, look here. He's the guy.

And here's further confirmation via IRS Form 8872 -- warning: big file -- the Boaters' Political Organization Report of Contribution and Expenditures for the period 10/14/04 to 11/22/04.

Senator Boxer: Katrina Damage "Foreseeable"

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the new chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, held a field hearing in New Orleans Monday to examine how the federal government can more proactively move forward with helping Louisiana residents recover from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

"There have been serious failures by our government, and we must learn from the past. But I want to focus on the future. We want to be constructive, and to see what we can do now," said Boxer, in the hearing's opening statement. "The levees and floodwalls should have protected the people of New Orleans . But they failed, unleashing a tragedy and a horror that was to some unimaginable, but in fact was foreseeable."

The California Senator took control of the panel in January from Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) -- who spent the majority of his time as the previous chair of the environmental committee denying the existence of global warming -- and was joined in New Orleans by six other Senators, including Democrat Mary Landrieu and Republican David Vitter, both of Louisiana.

Boxer described arriving in the city on Sunday night and touring areas still devastated by the 2005 storm and seeing that much of the original damaged has gone without repair.

"The tragedy suffered by this region will be forever fixed in our minds," she said. "Although there are many signs of hope, much of the devastation from Katrina is still all too clear. A year and a half after the storms, a lot of work remains."

"As the new Chair of this Committee, I felt that it was important for our very first field hearing to be here in New Orleans . The critical issues we will address today — hurricane protection, wetlands restoration and management of the massive amounts of debris left in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Rita, are a top priority for this Committee."

Senator Boxer thanked Landrieu for pushing for the hearings as soon as the new Congress began and made it clear both by being in New Orleans and with her words that, after years as a rubber stamp for the White House, Congress is back in business.

"One thing I can assure you is that Congressional oversight of our government is back," said Boxer, who then noted that the Army Corps of Engineers comes under the purview of her committee. "When the Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, or other federal agencies are doing something right, we will commend them. But when they are not doing their jobs, we want to know so the problem can be fixed—cooperatively, and in a bipartisan way."

At many times during the hearing, Boxer said that reauthorizing the Water Resources Development Act would be a top priority for the committee this year -- the legislation was last authorized in 2000 and had languished under the last Republican-led Congress.

Discussing the importance of wetlands in protecting New Orleans from hurricanes, Boxer said that "We must commit ourselves to restoring Louisiana ’s natural hurricane protection system -- the wetlands."

"We know that when storms pass over warm, open Gulf waters, they strengthen. For centuries, the protective wetlands of the Louisiana coast blunted the force of countless storms, absorbing their energy and softening their impact. But those wetlands have been disappearing before our eyes. Today, Louisiana's coastal wetlands are only half as wide as they were 50 years ago. If we fail to restore Louisiana ’s disappearing wetlands, there will be no floodwall high enough, no levee big enough, and no pumps strong enough to protect this city and coast."

And Boxer reinforced that the new Congress is going to push for greater progress in New Orleans, saying "I want to assure all involved that we will stay focused on what needs to be done."

"This great American city, this beautiful state and region, continue to need our attention and will not be forgotten."

Reid Highlights GOP's Bogus National-Security Cred

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the floor of the Senate on Monday and set the stage for a week that will see the Senate considering efforts to truly bolster national security and with little patience for the Republican stonewalling of security measures proposed by Democrats (and killed) in the last Congress.

"We will take steps to protect America from the greatest threat we face -- nuclear terrorism. We will enhance the security of our transportation system and our ports," said Reid on Monday. "We will provide America's first responders with the technology they need to communicate with each other during a crisis. In the process, we will make America more secure."

"Five and a half years after 9/11, we don't have a day to waste."

And Reid took a direct shot at Senate Republicans who somehow still manage to position themselves with a clueless corporate media as the party of national security, despite showing no leadership on the subject since September 11, 2001 and, in fact, overtly fighting investments in America's security infrastructure.

"For 6 years, this White House and past Congresses have talked a good game about protecting America, but while they were distracted and consumed with staying the course in Iraq, they failed to heed the lessons of September 11, 2001 -- that we must do more to protect and secure our communities from the real terrorist threat here at home," said the Senate Majority Leader.

Reid then pointed out in very specific terms what was proposed by Democrats in the last Congress, only to be shot down by Republicans -- and almost always on straight, party-line votes, with the GOP providing no alternative measures.

"In the last Congress, Democrats tried to move forward with tough and smart solutions to keep the homeland safe. Unfortunately, those of us who tried to follow the Commission's roadmap hit nothing but speed bumps.

"In 2005, we tried to increase funding for first responders by $1.6 billion. Our effort was rejected on a party-line vote.

"Days later, we tried to restore $1 billion to the COPS Program, so important for law enforcement throughout the country. We were rejected again along party lines.

"In July 2005, just days after the subway bombings in London, the Senate considered legislation that would have improved security on rails. Again, with a party-line vote, we went down.

"That same day, the Senate voted on legislation to allocate money to secure our ports. The measure fell along party lines.

"The end result of this obstruction: America today is not as safe as it can be, should be, or must be."

And Reid could have mentioned many more of these instances, including multiple attempts by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) to get better communications equipment for first responders and a bill by Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that would have provided critical funding for air-cargo security screening.

True to what we've seen of a Republican administration filled with so many Chickenhawks, this shines a bright light on how the GOP talks tough on national security, but seldom backs up that rhetoric with action or deeds.

With 21 Republican Senate seats up for grabs in 2008, this will be excellent and valid information to share with voters.

Rail Security Act Comes To Senate Floor

Legislation to enhance the security of America's rail system will come to the Senate floor today in the form of the Surface Transportation and Rail Security Act of 2007. Proposed by Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) and cosponsored by Ted Stevens (R-AK) -- Inouye is the chair of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee and Stevens is the ranking member -- the bill has bipartisan support and an excellent chance of passing.

(Showing yet more legacy of the Republican, do-nothing Congress, the legislation, which is cosponsored by 22 Senators, was never championed by Stevens when the Alaska Republican ran the Commerce Committee over the last two years.)

Inouye's legislation (S. 184) will provide more than $1 billion for nationwide rail security improvements, including security upgrades for Amtrak, new freight and passenger rail security grants and specific stipulations for a program to re-route dangerous toxic inhalation or poisonous cargo around areas with large populations. The bill also includes $84 million for security enhancements to other surface transportation systems including truck, intercity bus and hazardous materials carriers.

"We have all seen the possible consequences of an attack on critical surface transportation systems in Madrid and London. We have all heard about possible threats and foiled plots aimed at our rail tunnels and stations here at home," said Inouye in introducing his legislation last month. "The time has come for us to address these vulnerabilities and risks in a comprehensive and coordinated way that ensures that in the rush to protect one mode of transportation we don't shift vulnerability towards other, less secure, transportation modes."

The Surface Transportation and Rail Security Act specifically provides $400 million for security improvements at rail tunnels in the New York City metropolitan area, a subject of huge concern to New York residents since the 9/11 attacks. The money provided by the bill will be used in part to provide for greater passenger egress and smoke ventilation in the event of an emergency.

"This is a major step forward for our region and for the millions of commuters who rely on commuter rail everyday," said Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), one of the bill's cosponsors.

"I am very pleased that this critical bill has been approved by the Commerce Committee," said Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY), also a cosponsor of the measure. "This is a very positive forward step in our long campaign to increase security for New York and the nation's transportation systems. Our transportation systems remain vulnerable to attack. It is past time that we address this major infrastructure and economic risk."

Debate on the full set of recommendations from the 9/11 Commission, which passed the House of Representatives last month, is expected to come next on the Senate floor.

Senate Birthdays

I missed this while I was on vacation last week but thought you should know that Democratic stalwart Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts celebrated his 75th birthday on February 22.

He has been in the United States Senate since 1962.

Happy belated birthday, Senator Kennedy -- and thanks for the minimum wage increase.

Fox News Sponsoring Democratic Debate; Fur Council and PETA Merge

When I came back from my two-week vacation on Friday -- the one where I promised my wife and son I would unplug from the news entirely -- and found out that right-wing media outlet Fox News will be hosting a Democratic presidential debate later this year, I felt a bit like Dr. Emmett Brown in Back To The Future when he heard who would be president in 1985 and exclaimed "Ronald Reagan! The actor?"

And, as much as I was sure I was hearing something that was fabricated on, well, Fox News, I have since found out that it's true that the Nevada Democratic Party will indeed allow the network that loves to hate on Democrats to broadcast the state's August Democratic presidential debate.

What are you going to tell me next? That Britney Spears shaved her head while I was gone?

This is the same Fox News that partnered with the Swift Boat Liars in 2004 and did everything they could to destroy John Kerry's presidential bid and that, so far in the fledgling 2008 campaign, have lied about Barack Obama's religious upbringing, made fun of his name and said that he's only a viable candidate because he's black.

Fox management even sends news directives to their "journalists," such as the internal memos instructing them to taint the news by avoiding the 9/11 Commission recommendations, the Abu Ghraib scandal and the entire Iraq war. Almost all of their "news analysis" is provided by Republican politicians and operatives and, although thinking Americans don’t really consider Fox a legitimate news source, the pseudo-network takes even the smallest, most insidious, attempts at smearing Democrats, such as mislabeling Republican pedophile Mark Foley as a Democrat multiple times during their reports on that scandal.

I don't even want to think about what their little scrollbar will be saying at the bottom of the screen during the Democratic debate. "Jeffrey Dahmer was a Democrat," anyone?

But I was so surprised that I had missed something this bizarre while on vacation that I spent some time over the weekend seeing what similar news had surfaced while I was incommunicado. Here's what I found:

• General Motors' Hummer division will team with former Vice President Al Gore to sponsor a conference on energy independence and global warming.

• People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the Fur Information Council of America will co-host a spring fling barbecue in May and will illustrate their new spirit of compromise by discouraging fur clothing at the event, but allowing a piñata made to look like a baby harp seal.

• The National Rifle Association (NRA) will merge with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and unveil the new motto "Guns don’t kill people -- well, OK, maybe they do."

• A revival of the blockbuster musical "Cats" will open on Broadway and will be sponsored by the American Kennel Club.

• Tony Perkins' Family Research Council will partner with the San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus to produce a holiday musical titled "Not That There's Anything Wrong With That."

• In a bold pairing, Nazi Skinheads will join with the Jewish Defense League to hold the 2007 Passover Latke Feed in Brooklyn

• The National Restaurant Association will reverse its longstanding fight against any minimum wage increases by announcing their support for a one-dollar-per-hour yearly wage increase through 2030.

• Debuting on the posh Style Television Network: "Pimp My Double-Wide Trailer"

• Tom DeLay, Bob Ney and Duke Cunningham will take over "The Ethicist" column in the Sunday New York Times magazine.

As strange as all of that is, it's this bizarro-world thing about Fox News being allowed to broadcast anything bigger than a Democratic softball game that's really thrown me for a loop.

I only hope the good people at the Nevada Democratic Party will come to their senses far sooner than later. Because, by the time, Fox begins promoting this debate as "The Battle of The Democratic Bin Laden Lovers" it's going to be way too late.

Boxer, Snowe Introduce Passengers’ Bill Of Rights

In the wake of the latest airline customer-service nightmare two weeks ago, in which Jet Blue Airlines kept hundreds of passengers trapped in one of its planes for 11 hours at snowed-in JFK airport in New York City, legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Senate to keep it from happening again.

Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) last week introduced the “Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act of 2007,” to ensure that travelers can no longer be unnecessarily trapped on airplanes for excessive periods of time or deprived of food, water or adequate restrooms.

“I am pleased to introduce a Passengers’ Bill of Rights today to protect the safety and well-being of travelers,” Boxer said. “Occasional delays may be unavoidable, but no one should be held hostage on an airplane for hours without food, safe drinking water or functioning restrooms. This bill ensures passengers the right to deplane after being in a closed aircraft for three hours, and it requires airlines to attend to the basic needs of passengers.”

Snowe added that "the airlines have a responsibility to treat passengers with dignity and give them the right to de-plane an aircraft and prevent the type of misery that too many passengers have recently experienced.”

The legislation requires airlines to offer passengers the option of safely leaving a plane they have boarded once that plane has sat on the ground three hours after the door has closed. The bill would also require airlines to provide passengers with necessary services such as food, potable water and adequate restroom facilities while a plane is delayed on the ground.

While this is the kind of response we have the right to expect from our representatives in Washington, a first glance at the legislation shows that it leaves two major loopholes through which the airlines can crawl to continue making us miserable despite the proposed three-hour rule.

One exception allows the pilot to keep people on the plane beyond three hours if he or she believes passenger safety or security would be at risk due to extreme weather or other emergencies. That's not as bad as the second loophole, which says that if the pilot reasonably determines that the flight will depart within 30 minutes after the three hour period, he or she can delay the deplaning option for an additional 30 minutes.

And if 30 minutes later, they still think the plane might take off any minute, they can continue to keep you trapped -- which means this legislation changes almost nothing.

We'll keep an eye on it and see if teeth are put in this long-overdue legislation before it hits the Senate floor for a vote.

Monday Check Of The Osama Clock

Hey, if it's Monday, it's time to check the BobGeiger.com Osama clock.

It has now been well over five years since our country was attacked on September 11, 2001 and exactly 1,988 days since George W. Bush (The Resolute One) said that he would get Osama bin Laden dead or alive.

And so, as we ask every week... Mr. Bush: Where's Osama?

This Week's Senate Committee Schedule

Hearings of Note: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Peter Pace, will appear before the Senate Appropriations Committee on Tuesday to explain the $100 billion George W. Bush is demanding for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also on Tuesday, Carl Levin (D-MI) and the Armed Services Committee will take a hard look at "current and future worldwide threats to the national security of the United States." Despite the presence of Joe Lieberman (I-CT) on that committee, I feel confident that they'll talk about the 80 countries not named Iraq that now host al Qaeda operations.

The Budget Committee will examine the total cost for the war and Bush's Defense budget request for fiscal year 2008 and, in an interesting turn, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and the Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a "field hearing" in New Orleans today -- the subject is "Moving Forward after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita."

For those of you who have forgotten during the Republican reign, this is what it looks like when Congress works for a living.

Here's the full Senate Committee schedule for the week:

Appropriations

Feb 27, 2007 at 10:00 a.m.. To hold hearings on the fiscal 2008 USDA and FDA budgets. (Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Feb 27, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. To hold hearings to examine the Supplemental Request for fiscal year 2007.

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:30 a.m. To hold hearings on fiscal 2008 Department of Defense budget. (Defense Subcommittee)

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:30 a.m. To hold hearings to examine AMTRAK 2008. (Transportation Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Feb 28, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. To hold hearings to examine one year after the Sago and Alma coalmining disasters relating to efforts to improve mine safety. (Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Mar 1, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings on the Department of Commerce budget request and justification. (Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Mar 2, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings on the fiscal year 2008 budget request for the Office of the Architect of The Capitol. Legislative Branch Subcommittee)

Armed Services

Feb 27, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To receive testimony on current and future worldwide threats to the national security of the United States.

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:30 a.m. Hearings to examine the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program

Budget

Mar 1, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings on the president's Defense budget request for fiscal year 2008 and war costs

Commerce, Science, and Transportation

Feb 27, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings to examine S.294, to reauthorize Amtrak. (Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety and Security Subcommittee)

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings to examine vehicle safety for children. (Consumer Affairs, Insurance, and Automotive Safety Subcommittee)

Feb 28, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. To hold hearings to examine the President's budget request for fiscal year 2008 for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (Space, Aeronautics, and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Mar 1, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine universal service.

Energy and Natural Resources

Feb 28, 2007 at 9:45 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the President's budget request for fiscal year 2008 for the USDA Forest Service.

Mar 1, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the Energy Information Administration's Annual Energy Outlook.

Mar 1, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. To hold hearings to examine S.380, to reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. (Public Lands and Forests Subcommittee)

Environment and Public Works

Feb 26, 2007 at 11:00 a.m. This will be a full committee "field hearing" held at the Louisiana Supreme Court Building in New Orleans. The subject is "Moving Forward after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita."

Mar 1, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. “State, Regional, and Local Perspectives on Global Warming”

Finance

Feb 27, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. "America’s Energy Future: Bold Ideas, Practical Solutions"

Mar 1, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. "Medicare Payment for Physician Services: Examining New Approaches"

Foreign Relations

Feb 27, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. To examine nominations of Sam Fox to be Ambassador to Belgium and Stanley Davis Phillips to be Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia.

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

Feb 27, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the need for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation of tobacco products.

Mar 1, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. Hearing on "Asbestos: Still Lethal/Still Legal – The Need to Better Protect the Health of American Workers and Their Families." (Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee)

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Mar 1, 2007 at 3:00 p.m. A hearing to broadly examine the improvements made in federal financial management since the enactment of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990.

Intelligence

Mar 1, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. Closed Business Meeting

Judiciary

Feb 27, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. To hold hearings to examine the John R. Justice Prosecutors and Defenders Incentive Act of 2007 relating to strengthening the criminal justice system.

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings on hearing on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform."

Mar 1, 2007 at 10 a.m. Business meeting to consider:

S.236, to require reports to Congress on Federal agency use of data mining
S.378, to amend title 18, United States Code, to protect judges, prosecutors, witnesses, victims, and their family members
S.442, to provide for loan repayment for prosecutors and public defenders
S.261, to amend title 18, United States Code, to strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting
S.376, to amend title 18, United States Code, to improve the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers
S.Res.78, designating April 2007 as "National Autism Awareness Month" and supporting efforts to increase funding for research into the causes and treatment of autism and to improve training and support for individuals with autism and those who care for individuals with autism
S.Res.81, recognizing the 45th anniversary of John Hershel Glenn, Jr.'s historic achievement in becoming the first United States astronaut to orbit the Earth

The nominations of Thomas M. Hardiman, of Pennsylvania, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit, John Preston Bailey, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia, Otis D. Wright II, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of California, and George H. Wu, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of California.

Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Feb 28, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the president's budget request for fiscal year 2008 for the Small Business Administration.

Veterans' Affairs

Feb 27, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold joint hearings with the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs to examine the legislative presentation of the Disabled American Veterans.

Mar 1, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Veterans Administration adjudication process.

Has A New Sheriff Come To Town?

Photo Credit: Matthew C. Wright, Texas Observer Blog

Could be. Could be...

The Saturday Cartoons

All cartoons are posted with the artists' express permission to BobGeiger.com. Please visit the following sites to see more work from these fine cartoonists:

Nick Anderson, Houston Chronicle
Tony Auth, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Jeff Danziger, Syndicated Political Cartoonist
Matt Davies, NY Journal News
Paul Jamiol, Jamiol's World
Steve Kelley, New Orleans Times Picayune
Mike Luckovich, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Jim Morin, Miami Herald
Jack Ohman, Portland Oregonian
Dwane Powell, Raleigh News & Observer
Ann Telnaes, Syndicated Political Cartoonist

Gone Fishin'

On Wednesday, I will fly to San Francisco with my wife and son for a well-deserved vacation and to show my little boy the beautiful city of his birth in 1997. I'm convinced that by the time my young son is my age, he will not care that his Dad had a political blog with thousands of readers, but he will remember if his father took the time to thoroughly enjoy a vacation with his family.

So I'm going away for 10 days and temporarily turning off the lights on BobGeiger.com. It's not an easy thing to do… It's an exciting and perilous time in our national politics and the Senate I cover may see some activity surrounding the Iraq war over the next week or so -- though the Senate is scheduled to be in recess the week of February 19.

And taking time off from one’s web site feels a bit like leaving a loved one for too long. But I always promised my wife that it would be family first, writing and politics second and it’s time for me to keep that promise.

I'll be back on February 24 and I hope you will be too. But, if I have to make the choice, I'd rather make my readers unhappy for a few days now, than send my son into the world someday as a man who is sad when he looks back on his time as a boy.

I bet anything you understand.

See you on the 24th.

White House Arrogance Kills

Just how blindly arrogant and full of baseless pride is White House Press Secretary Tony Snow? I've got the answer for you.

At the daily press briefing on Monday, a reporter asked a simple question about why members of the House and Senate cannot advocate getting the U.S. military out of Iraq without being accused of not supporting the troops by the White House and the Republican party.

Snow's answer said it all… He basically said that people in Congress are free to disagree all they like -- as long as they can come up with a plan to meet George W. Bush's goals.

"Well, again, if 'bring them home' -- I want somebody to fill in the blanks," said Snow. "Bring them home achieves victory in the following way. If the simple goal is to bring them home, that is different than having a goal of providing victory in Iraq… And if critics have a better way of achieving the aims that we've laid out, we'd love to hear them."

So, according to Tony Snow, it’s OK to think the president's plan is about as lousy as every other bad idea he's put forth in Iraq, but only if you have a strategy that will further the horrible ideas the president has already thought of.

Clear as mud yet?

What this White House doesn’t leave even the slightest bit of room for, is the notion that their goal, this mythical "victory" of which they speak, may not be achievable or even desirable at this point. In other words, Bush -- who most thinking Americans now consider the worst president in modern history -- sets the benchmarks and conditions for the only way we can leave Iraq.

How's that for brass balls? An administration that lied us into this war, that has screwed up every aspect of it from top to bottom and that has the blood of 3,100 American troops on its hands, gets to continue setting the rules by which we should move forward.

Right. And Salma Hayek is coming over to give me a backrub tonight. Watch for Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the House of Representatives to send Bush a clear signal of what they think of his latest scheme by the end of the week.

But the idiotic, pigheadedness of this administration reminds me of a couple of winters ago where we had heavy snow for many consecutive days in New York and every time I went out to shovel my driveway, snow would once again be covering the top before I got to the bottom. So I accepted the reality of that situation as an undeniable fact of life and went inside to get cozy and wait until the snow quit falling.

Bush and Tony Snow would have us believe we should keep shoveling… Just ignore the snow that keeps falling and describe as unpatriotic anyone who has the temerity to point out that the weather's getting worse.

Except, in this case, it's not snow, it's human lives. It's sons, daughters, moms and dads, brothers and sisters who keep getting killed because the people at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue don’t realize it's not going to quit snowing in Iraq for a very long time.

The situation faced by our troops remains the same or gets worse daily and these guys think we're suddenly going to get a different result. The arrogance of the Bush White House would be so much more forgivable if only it weren't killing so many people.

Jeff Danziger Cartoons Here

I'm very happy to announce that editorial cartoonist Jeff Danziger has given me permission to run his work in my Saturday cartoon round-up. Here's some examples of his work:




Jeff is a two-time Pulitzer Prize nominee and the winner of the 2006 Herblock Prize for editorial cartooning. He is also a Vietnam Veteran and this undoubtedly influences Jeff's take on the Iraq war.

Please visit Jeff at his site and take a look at his latest book Blood, Debt & Fears.

House Anti-Escalation Resolution Moves Forward

Democrats in the House of Representatives have an advantage over their brothers and sisters in the Senate due to greater procedural ease that allows the House's majority party to ram things through much faster than is possible in the Senate. That, and the fact that Democrats enjoy a more comfortable majority in terms of sheer numbers in the House, makes it much easier to do the right thing there.

You'll see that this week as House Democrats will introduce their anti-escalation, Iraq resolution this afternoon and it will be debated all week starting tomorrow. A vote is expected by Friday.

The resolution is short and sweet, as follows:

110 TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. CON. RES.

Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. SKELTON (for himself, Mr. LANTOS, and Mr. JONES of North Carolina) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on .....................................................................

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq .

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That—

(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and

(2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

Period -- end of story.

It's also important to note that the measure is cosponsored by Representative Walter Jones, the North Carolina Republican who was so gung-ho leading up to the Iraq war, that he pushed to have the House cafeteria rename French fries, "Freedom Fries" to slap the French for how smart they ended up being about the whole mess. Jones has since become an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraq war and now favors withdrawal of U.S. troops.

The White House can continue to try to hold back this wave of opposition, but it just got a lot bigger as of today.

This Week's Senate Committee Schedule

Hearings of Note: Armed Services will be talking about the depleted state of the U.S. Army and Marine Corps… The Energy and Natural Resources and Environment and Public Works Committees will hold meetings on climate change that never would have happened under Republican leadership. It would be fun to sit in on the Environment and Public Works hearing just to watch environmental troglodyte James Inhofe (R-OK) twitch every time the phrase "global warming" is used.

The Foreign Relations Committee will look at the nomination of Ryan Crocker to replace Zalmay Khalilzad as Ambassador to Iraq…That could be interesting because Crocker has been a critic of the conduct of the war.

And there will be a closed meeting of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday to talk about Bush's domestic spying program… Would love to be a fly on the wall for that one.

Here's the full Senate Committee schedule for the week:

Aging

Feb 15, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine Boomers and the budget.

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

Feb 13, 2007 at 9:45 a.m. To hold hearings to examine challenges and opportunities relating to rural development.

Appropriations

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold oversight hearings to examine the Outer Continental Shelf oil and natural gas royalty management by the Department of the Interior. (Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee)

Armed Services

Feb 15, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the current and future readiness of the Army and Marine Corps; there is a possibility of a closed session in SR-222 following the open session.

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

Feb 14, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the semiannual monetary policy report to the Congress.

Budget

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the President's Fiscal Year 2008 budgetary proposals for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Feb 14, 2007 at 10 a.m. The President's Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Proposals on Tax Compliance

Commerce, Science, and Transportation

Feb 14, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine overseas sweatshop abuses, focusing on their impact on U.S. workers and the need for anti-sweatshop legislation. (Trade, Tourism, and Economic Development Subcommittee)

Feb 14, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. To hold an oversight hearing to examine recent setbacks to the Coast Guard Deepwater Program. (Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard Subcommittee)

Feb 15, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the Administration's proposal to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration - Part 1. (Aviation, Operations, Safety and Security Subcommitee)

Energy and Natural Resources

Feb 12, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. To hold hearings to examine recommendations on policies and programs to improve the energy efficiency of buildings and to expand the role of electric and gas utilities in energy efficiency programs. (Energy Subcommittee)

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change; examining the economic impacts of climate change and stabilizing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Feb 15, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the President's proposed budget request for fiscal year 2008 for the Department of the Interior.

Environment and Public Works

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to review and report the recommendations of the United States Climate Action Partnership Report.

Finance

Feb 15, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the Administration trade agenda for 2007.

Foreign Relations

Feb 15, 2007 at 9:15 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the nominations of Ryan C. Crocker, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq, and William B. Wood, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine The Healthy Families Act, focusing on safeguarding Americans' livelihood, families and health with paid sick days.

Feb 14, 2007 at 10 a.m. Business meeting to consider Mental Health Parity Act of 2007, Head Start for School Readiness Act, and any pending nominations.

Feb 16, 2007 at 10 a.m. Higher Education, Higher Cost and Higher Debt: Paying for College in the Future

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine the Homeland Security Department's budget request for Fiscal Year 2008.

Indian Affairs

Feb 15, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. Oversight hearing on the President's Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request for Tribal Programs.

Intelligence

Feb 13, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. Closed Hearing: China

Feb 14, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. Closed Hearing: Renditions

Feb 15, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. Closed Hearing: NSA Warrantless Surveillance Program

Judiciary

Feb 14, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine judicial security and independence.

Rules and Administration

Feb 14, 2007 at 11:30 a.m. Senate Committee Budget Requests

Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Feb 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. To hold hearings to examine alternatives for easing small business health care costs.

Monday Check Of The Osama Clock

Hey, if it's Monday, it's time to check the BobGeiger.com Osama clock.

It has now been well over five years since our country was attacked on September 11, 2001 and exactly 1,974 days since George W. Bush (The Resolute One) said that he would get Osama bin Laden dead or alive.

And so, as we ask every week... Mr. Bush: Where's Osama?

Obama Is All In

Invoking Abraham Lincoln before a massive, cheering crowd at the State Capitol in Springfield, IL, Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) formally announced on Saturday that he wants to be the next President of the United States.

"It was here, in Springfield, where North, South, East and West come together that I was reminded of the essential decency of the American people -- where I came to believe that through this decency, we can build a more hopeful America," said Obama. "And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a divided house to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for president of the United States of America."

It was an excellent speech and I urge you to go to Obama's web site and watch it in its entirety.

The Saturday Cartoons

All cartoons are posted with the artists' express permission to BobGeiger.com. Please visit the following sites to see more work from these fine cartoonists:

Nick Anderson, Houston Chronicle
Tony Auth, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Justin Bilicki, City Pulse
Matt Davies, NY Journal News
Paul Jamiol, Jamiol's World
Steve Kelley, New Orleans Times Picayune
Mike Luckovich, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Jim Morin, Miami Herald
Jack Ohman, Portland Oregonian
Steve Sack, Minneapolis Star Tribune

Friday Night Music: Lily Allen

She's from London and, if you haven't heard of her -- you will.

Barack Obama: "This Is Our Time To Lead"

I didn’t get this posted last week but, since the word is out that Barack Obama (D-IL) will say tomorrow that his exploratory committee has run its course and he's a full-fledged presidential candidate, I wanted you to see the speech he gave at the Democratic National Committee Winter Meeting in Washington, D.C. on February 2.

An excerpt:

We've got 130,000 Americans fighting halfway across the world in a war that should have never been waged, led by leaders who have no plan to end it. We don’t have time to be cynical. Democrats, this is not a game. This can't be about who digs up more skeletons on who, who makes the fewest slip-ups on the campaign trail. We owe it to the American people to be more than that. We owe them an election where voters are inspired. Where they believe that we might be able to do things that we haven't done before.

And here's the video (about 16 minutes).

Anna Nicole Smith Died. So Did Three American Troops

Paul Rieckoff, an Iraq war Veteran and the Executive Director and Founder of IAVA (Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America), hits the nail squarely on the head with his piece in The Huffington Post today. Rieckoff talks about our brain-dead, corporate media and how quickly real news goes out the window if someone like Anna Nicole Smith dies.

An excerpt:

Anna Nicole Smith died about 24 hours ago. Over the same time period, at least three of our troops and countless Iraqis have died in a war that might turn out to be the greatest foreign policy blunder in our country's history. Even as I write this, all three networks are covering a live press conference by Smith's attorney. I want to put my fist through the TV.

Wake up, America. This is not news. It does not matter. Think of our troops. Think of the Iraqis. Think of the families of people serving in Iraq right now.

Please go to The Huffington Post to read the rest.

Media Chicken-And-Egg Question…

Are we a nation of idiots because this is actually considered the number one story of the week?



Or is this the number one story of the week because we're a nation of idiots?

Think Progress has a good video wrap-up of what they call "Our National Media Embarrassment."

Dumb Stuff Republicans Say On The Senate Floor

OK, folks, it's Friday, it's been a long week in the United States Senate and I've decided to bring some amusement into your lives by showing you some dumb things that Republicans said this week on the Senate floor. Nothing big… Nothing momentous…. Just enough to make you say "huh?"

DeMint Makes Theodore Roosevelt Spin In Grave

Or, one Chickenhawk uses Roosevelt's words to praise another Chickenhawk… Here's ultraconservative Jim DeMint (R-SC) getting all verklempt while giving a stirring floor speech about the "war on terror" and how George W. Bush stands alone in his heroic world vision -- and invoking Teddy Roosevelt to praise the man who brought us the Iraq quagmire:

"One of our greatest Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt, once said, 'It is not the critic who counts.' 'The credit,' he said, 'belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming.'

"The credit, Roosevelt said, belongs to the man 'who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.'

"At this very moment, our Commander in Chief and those he commands are daring greatly."

Kind of hard to picture guys like Bush or DeMint ever being "marred by dust and sweat and blood," isn’t it? DeMint did his time while of military age striving "valiantly" at the University of Tennessee and Clemson University while Bush, well, who knows where the hell he was?

But even considering that he's referring to Bush now, I have a feeling King George gets more "marred by dust and sweat and blood" clearing brush or tumbling from his mountain bike in Crawford, than he does wrestling with his hideous decisions on war policy.

Bond Implies Congressional Democrats Sending Good News To Osama

Here's that wacky Kit Bond (R-MO), taking to the Senate floor on Tuesday to slip a two-for-one deal into the Congressional Record. First he invokes "cut-and-run" as if he didn’t get the memo about that phrase being inoperable given how many people on his side of the aisle are starting to agree with Democrats in correcting the Iraq disaster:

"I have also heard in the Senate a number of comments from Members who do not support a cut-and-run policy. I have addressed previously the disaster of an immediate withdrawal from Iraq."

Bond was saying that anyone not supporting the Bush-McCain policy of escalating the war in Iraq is cutting and running… So that now accounts for about two-thirds of the Congress and 70 percent of the American people.

Which, according to Bond, means most of us are also guilty of sending messages that will make the enemy downright giddy. Saying that Iraq would "fall into chaos" if we begin withdrawing troops, the Bond Man had this to say:

"The primary beneficiary of that chaos would be al-Qaida. Osama bin Laden and Al-Jazeera have said how important it was for them to establish Iraq as their main base of operations. To send a message by adopting a resolution that says we oppose the President's plan, implementation of his plan, is not going to change sending more American troops there.

"But it will tell al-Qaida: Good news, boys, the Congress is opposing the President. Our chances look better to take over the country."

Memo to Republican National Committee: Please send Senator Bond newer slime.

Bond -- Again

Apparently convinced that he hadn’t sounded goofy enough with the old-school "cut-and-run" language earlier in the day, Kit Bond went back to the microphone again on Tuesday to talk about how proponents of the Warner-Levin resolution against sending more troops to Iraq might just want to listen to the military:

"The proponents of the resolution to limit troop strength must now believe that sitting here 8,000 miles away, this body is more equipped than our military leaders to say what our force structure should be in Iraq. That is unacceptable; it is totally unacceptable."

I think we can all agree on that. In fact, here's a critical passage directly from the text of the Warner-Levin resolution:

U.S. Central Command Commander General John Abizaid testified to Congress on November 15, 2006, "I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps Commander, [and] General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said 'no.'"

Now, Senator Bond, please return to your seat.

Hypocrite R' Us: The Republican Superstore

I don't think Judd "Smokescreen Man" Gregg (R-NH) is having fun being in the Senate minority. Addressing a question to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on bringing his own red-herring Iraq resolution to the floor, Gregg moaned loudly about minority rights in the Senate and even asked if the body was going toward a " Cuban model of democracy."

"Would it not be truly unusual in a democratic forum, which is supposed to be the most deliberative body in the world, to not allow the minority to bring forward a resolution -- which is probably going to get more than a majority vote should it ever be voted on -- which is not contestable as to its purpose -- its purpose being well meaning; it is certainly not a purpose that is anything other than to express a sense of support for those who are defending us.

"Would it not be a new form of democracy, maybe closer to the Cuban model, to not allow an amendment presented by the minority as their option but, rather, have the majority write the minority's amendment which would then be voted on?

"You have one-party rule, sort of a Cuban model of democracy."

No word on whether or not Gregg burst into tears and rushed into the arms of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) after that last line.

And Reid, a former boxer, probably didn’t know whether to slug Gregg or laugh out loud. Addressing Claire McCaskill (D-MO) the freshmen Senator serving as presiding officer at that moment, Reid simply said "The Presiding Officer is a new Member of this body, but she should have seen when the Republicans were in the majority."

Yeah, there was a lot of 'Kumbaya' being sung in the last Congress as the GOP killed almost every piece of Democratic legislation.

Hutchison Cracks Wise

Finally, we have Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) saying that, while some of George W. Bush's policies may have failed, his motives are pure as the driven snow.

"I don't agree with everything the President has done. Not one person on the Senate floor agrees with everything the President has done," said Hutchison. "But I will tell you this: no one -- no one -- can ever say this President isn't committed to one thing, paramount in all of his responsibilities, and that is to protect the people of the United States. He is doing what he thinks is best to protect our children and freedom for our way of life."

Stop, Senator, you're killin' me.

Have a good weekend -- and try not to say anything embarrassing.

John Edwards: "Will You Stand Up?"

I didn’t have time to post this last week, but here's Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards giving an excellent speech at the Democratic National Committee Winter Meeting in Washington, D.C.

An excerpt:

"I believe it is a betrayal for us to not speak out against the escalation of this war in Iraq. It is a betrayal for this president to send more American men and women to die in Iraq when he knows that this is not going to succeed. It will not be successful in stabilizing Iraq. And it is not right, through our silence, for us to enable this president to escalate this war.

"We cannot stand by quietly and silently and allow him to escalate this war. Silence is a betrayal. It is a betrayal not to stop this president's plan to escalate the war, when we have the responsibility, the power and the ability to stop it. We cannot be satisfied with passing non-binding resolutions that we know this president will ignore. We have the power to stop the escalation of this war. We have to use our power, we have to be strong, we have to stand up for what is right."

Here's the video (about 17 minutes):