Disclosed Location

2004-04-27T09:08:00.000-04:00

Mickey Maus

Hey! Would you like to know when a blogger has become OFFICIALLY not worth reading? When he refers to John Podhoretz of the NY POST as....J-Pod.

See it here.

2004-04-26T11:36:00.000-04:00

NEUTRALIZING ATTACKS ON KERRY'S VIETNAM RECORD

How's this for an easy one. The Kerry campaign needs to say this loudly and clearly: Nixon tried to smear Kerry in the same way.

Voila! Associate the Bush campaign with Nixon. This serves two purposes. 1) Portray this administration with Nixon's (certainly not an unfair description. 2) Drive up Kerry's hard support amonh those who truly detested Nixon's presidency. Hey, G.W. wasn't being noticed and fretted over by the most crooked admin. ever. Kerry was. That should be a position he can be proud of.

2004-04-23T13:24:00.000-04:00

WHAT HAGEL IS DOING

As you are, I'm sure, well aware by this point, Sen. Chuck Hagel revived the issue of a military draft this week and it has sent the blogosphere buzzing. It has also made the Pentagon and White House answer gaggle questions that they would rather avoid.

What is the real reason as to why Hagel would bring such a momentous idea up? I think the answer to that is fairly easy, but I have not seen it explained....as of yet.

Chuck Hagel wants to tank the election for Bush. So does McCain and so does Dick Lugar. These three men have been burnishing their (I) credentials in a more pronounced way as of late and I view them as a secret weapon for Kerry.

It is they who have been raising issues that the Administration would rather not confront and they give these criticisms the patina of authority that comes with being (R).

I suspect the three of them understand that another four years of Bush would really be disastrous for the United States and not only because of his policies. These men are process and systems men, not ideologues and with Bush, they see the international systems and processes they care about being eroded.

Further, I think they take seriously the constitutional obligations of being a senator very seriously. They feel marginalized and unable to affect the nation they care about.

If John Kerry wants a sure winner, it will be to run as a uniter, not a divider. There are many in Congress, both (D) and (R) who would welcome such a change. Some sort of National Unity platform would create an inspiring vision (if not policy details) that people can latch on to.

It would be a bold step for this country, and for Kerry, to announce that, in the interests of unity, he would appoint a bipartisan cabinet and (maybe, hopefully) a moderate Republican vice president.

As the past four years have shown, we could do a lot worse.

2004-04-22T08:59:00.000-04:00

Carlos Watson

I enjoy Carlos Watson's political analysis report thursdays on cnn.com and this week is no different.

He makes the same point I do in discussing the release of Kerry's military records, namely that it helps him. Somehow, I think the Kerry campaign saw this opportunity coming and decided to shrewdly let the "scandal" simmer.

2004-04-22T08:53:00.000-04:00

I SAID SO!

Yesterday, after scanning Kerry's military records, I asked why this is the nit that Ed Gillespie so wanted to pick?

If Mr. Gillespie wanted the next news cycle's stories to read like this or this, then he's done well.

2004-04-21T16:37:00.000-04:00

GET YOUR ONION!!

Here.

2004-04-21T14:48:00.000-04:00

John Kerry's Military Records

After perusing the records on Kerry's website, the only thing I can hope for are more silly "scandals" to be brewed by the cauldron-tenders at the RNC.

Go read Kerry's request for swiftboat duty.

Make sure to read itemized paragraph number four.

This is the can of worms Ed Gillespie wanted to open? Really?!

2004-03-19T13:58:00.000-05:00

PINKERTON

There has been an understandable cacophony of voices dismantling the view of Spaniards as appeasers in electing Zapatero in and Aznar out, but I do think one of the most effective pieces thus far comes from James Pinkerton, writing in Salon.

Delight in his evisceration of Andrew Sullivan, Chris Hitchens, Tony Blankley, Tom Friedman (becoming exponentially untenable), and David Brooks (so easily evisceratable!)

2004-03-18T09:08:00.000-05:00

FASCINATING

Found this on Slate and I think it is completely fascinating. It has to be one of the most interesting pieces I've read on post-war Iraq. There are too few (I think) pieces written about Iraqis themselves. I do not think they have been very humanized in the American press.

Great stuff.

2004-03-17T15:00:00.000-05:00

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH

The CIA will begin an investigation into who leaked surveillance video taken by a predator unmanned aircraft flying (apparently) directly over Osama bin Laden's head.

My advice: Please don't hold your breath. The only leaks that EVER come out of this Administration are planned ones. This hit piece certainly has the hallmark.

2004-03-17T14:33:00.000-05:00

WOLFOWITZ DECEIVES AGAIN

Juan Williams and Eric Westervelt interviewd Dep. Sec. Def. Paul Wolfowitz today on NPR and, once again, a Bush Administration hawk plays a little loose with the truth.

I don't have a transcript but listen to Wolfowitz continue to talk up links between Al Qaeda and Saddam. This leads me to believe that, despite official Administration backtrack on Saddam/Osama connections, the White House still really wants those connections to be made in the minds of voters.

2004-03-17T13:39:00.000-05:00

KERRY GETS FOUR (MORE) STARS

Former Chariman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili has endorsed John Kerry for President. Add him to the ranks of Wesley Clark and Anthony Zinni. How long until vindicated Gen. Shinseki joins the team?

Generals are great to have on your side, to be sure. Much more effective, I think, would be a retired career NCO as spokesman. The argument that Clark would chip away at Bush's military vote was a specious one, frankly because he was a four star general. His military biography is completely (and by definition) atypical. The Kerry campaign would have a very effective spokesman if it could find an anti-Bush Sergeant Major or Gunnery Sergeant.

2004-03-15T11:43:00.000-05:00

FROM COOTER TO CATFISH

a great WaPo Outlook piece on how Kerry should target the South.

While I am not going to go on a limb and pretend Kerry can win a lot of Southern votes (particularly the electoral kind), he can at least do something.

For what it is worth, here is my political consulting advice, in one sentence.

Kerry, say this: "Hey, you guys have a lot to be proud of as (Alabamans, Georgians, South Carolinians, etc..) and I've got a lot to be proud of being from Massachusetts.

There it is! Say every state is great (which, really, is true) and deflect criticism of Democratic weakness in the South. Don't play this using the GOP's rubric. Do this on your terms, by uniting the people, or at the least erasing divisions. People who can't pay bills in Vermont look remarkably similar to people who can't pay their bills in Mississippi.

2004-03-15T09:36:00.000-05:00

NEW SENATE INVESTIGATION.....CIA, FALL ON YOUR SWORD!

USA Today's John Diamond has an intriguing article on a Senate Investigation into pre-Iraq war CIA claims.

Now, this is all well and good. The CIA provided misleading and mischaracterized information to the White House and Congress. I understand. But I don't.

As has been made seemingly clear (I guess not), the CIA loaded its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NEI) with caveats and qualifiers. Clearly, in hindsight, some of the more alarming aspects of the NEI don't hold up well.

But what really bothers me is the ease with which the Administration and Congress are ordering the CIA to fall on its sword, as if Tenet and Co. were the primary catalyst for the steady 2002-2003 drumbeat to war and had somehow duped everyone with false information.

Did the Senate adequately investigate the caveats and qualifiers in the NEI? Not really. Did the Bush Administration want to tie up all loose ends in the report before advocating for war? No.

As Washington is wont to do, it found a convenient scapegoat in the CIA. Congress egregiously failed in its oversight duties to properly vet and pull concrete information from the various Gov't Intelligece agencies. Had it done so and in a public forum, the rationale for war would, I think, have seemed far less compelling than they became to some.

Now that the Bush Administration has lost intelligence credibility, it has faulted faulty intelligence. This implies the CIA, meaning one would have to disregard the fact that a great deal of the intel on Iraq came from the Pentagon (which controls a vast majority of the national intel budget). Ahmed Chalabi's group also came to be used as a vital source of information, despite CIA reservations concerning his power-grabbing inclinations in Iraq.

A review of the CIA as leading donkey to pin the blame tail on doesn't wash.

I'm sorry this post has not been that eloquent or, once I reread it, very organized or succinct.

Please understand what the CIA does is very nuanced and intelligent decisions have to be made by the powers that be for CIA's intel to look good. Caveats and qualifiers are included in reports so that they can be discussed further as well. Intelligent decisions were not made by the Bush Administration regarding intel and the CIA has suffered for it.

Note to White House and Congress: Read past the headlines.

2004-03-15T08:50:00.000-05:00

Reich's Gloves Come Off

Excellent. Robert Reich (now of Brandeis U. and NPR opinion segments) talks patriotism, not the benefits of increased hiring v. overtime pay here.

Thanks again to TAP, the best political mag in the land.

2004-03-12T16:10:00.000-05:00

More on Penn's piece by Noam Scheiber over at TNR. Find it here.

2004-03-12T15:22:00.000-05:00

MORE HALLIBURTON HUSTLE

I am shocked at this admission of Hallibrton overpricing!

How many "oops" and "sorry" stories need to be heard from them boys down in Houston before there are SERIOUS ramifications here?

2004-03-12T15:03:00.000-05:00

Latest Poll Released

Well, here are some encouraging new numbers, thanks to American Research Group via /Kos.

We'd all do well to heed the advice found below the numbers.

2004-03-12T13:38:00.000-05:00

Arianna on Nader

Great quote from Arianna Huffington here on the Nader candidacy.

"When your house is going up in flames, your first priority must be putting the fire out, not remodeling."

Kerry would do well to ask for her help. I cannot see an Arianna speech coming out of his mouth, nor can I see her campaigning by his side, but I can see how her incredible wit could be of some use. Get her to come up with some one liners for you. Think they don't matter? One word: RODEO.

2004-03-12T13:33:00.000-05:00

I can ad

A highly instructive piece by Mark Penn in today's TNR on a better way to strategize and produce early campaign ads.

It makes sense and who's gonna doubt him?

2004-03-12T12:46:00.000-05:00

One More Manufacturing Job Lost

Here is an example of the increasing ineptitude of the Bush political machine.

This is RoveCo. in action? Nobody bothered to ask this guy "Hey, you haven't built any factories in China, have you?"? That is an incredibly poor lapse in vetting procedure.

Good for us.

2004-03-12T11:41:00.000-05:00

This news is certainly distrubing but, alas, not so surprising. Essentially, the Bushies lied about the cost of their flopped Medicare drug bill.

Bear with me on this one, because it does relate to the above link. At last Friday's Council on Foreign Relations speech given by Sen. Ted Kennedy, Daniel Schorr of NPR asked him a question (though I believe he was asking as a private citizen and not as a reporter) whether or not Bush Administration deception and half-truths regarding Iraq could constitute High Crimes & Misdemeanors. Wisely, Kennedy side-stepped that one.

I, however, am not a high-profile U.S. Senator. This makes me free to answer that (whatever my opinion is worth). I think, indeed, the Iraq run-up is impeachable and, if the current medicare report is true, then that is too.

Thanks to Knight-Ridder. They have increasingly become the best source for true and critical reports about the Bush Administration.

2004-03-12T11:10:00.000-05:00

Glad C-SPAN is getting some props. I do not know what I would do without C-SPAN, as it has certainly informed my view of politics and has helped me define my own politics while being completely and emphatically non-partisan. It is easily the best thing cable t.v. has ever produced.

2004-03-12T10:49:00.000-05:00

Good to see the Washington Post critique Bush campaign claims

It would seem to me good journalism when a patently false or misleading statement by either campaign is called out for what it is, rather than relying on the tried and (un)true "Democrats say Bush attack misleading." If something walks like a turd and quacks like a turd, please call it a turd!

2004-03-12T10:39:00.000-05:00

Predictions

You might not have heard it here first, but you heard it here.

1. New Hampshire will go rather easily to Kerry. I do not see the fine people of New Hampshire buying into what has become a very right-wing and ideological administration. Remember, they chose McCain.

2. Nevada will go to Kerry as well. Las Vegas is becoming a major union town and the Yucca Mountain fiasco is deeply unpopular in the state. Put this one in Kerry's column.

3. With some work, Arizona will go to the Democrats as well. California transplants and a rising Hispanic population will allow for victory. Good stumping by popular Gov. Janet Napolitano and NM Gov. Bill Richardson (in whatever capacity) should tip the balance.

That is all

2004-03-12T09:59:00.000-05:00

If anyone is reading this at all, can someone please explain this to me:

Indications are that the Kerry campaign has raised $7 million since his Super Tuesday victories. Much of this had to have come from contributions made to his website and, I would have to assume, many of those contributions are in monthly, recurring form. So, if someone is donating $10/month to the campaign, has that been recorded as $10 or an assumed $80 from now until election day? If counting only the initial $10, then fundraising would be going swimmingly.

Let me know.

cschatz@lawsonproducts.com

2004-03-12T08:26:00.000-05:00

Hey All,

This is my first non-introductory post and it is still exciting.

My topic this morning: Howard Stern. I am not a particular fan of his humor or the show but, thanks to recent chest-thumping by the FCC, Chairman Powell, and Congress, his outspokenness concerning his rights as a broadcaster and the Bush Administration has me tuned in.

What I'd like to consider is how Howard can harness his complete antipathy towards Bush and the FCC. It is not nothing when a man with a loyal following of 15-18 million people decides to get on a soapbox.

I think the best course Howard can take, though certainly not the most exciting, is to establish a voter registration organization. Though I don't think numbers are available, I'm sure a large portion of his listening audience does not vote and is not registered (much like the U.S. population at large). Howard has the funds and in this climate, I believe there are many hard-working young people willing to work for Howard Stern to achieve positive change.

Write to Howard to encourage this. Call the show to encourage this.

Do not look a gift-horse in the mouth.

2004-03-11T16:48:00.000-05:00

Well it is wonderful to have finally started a terrific and, I'm sure soon to be, lucrative blogging career!

My name is Carl Schatz and I am a newshound. I am also a liberal Democrat and proudly so. However, I also consider myself a shrewd pragmatist. It is in both of those veins that I plan to conduct my blog.

I hope you enjoy my posts to come!