July 08, 2004

Yeah – kill those HVTs!

Those would be "high-value targets" like Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban government of Afghanistan we ousted after 9/11. The New Republic Online has a piece today that claims the Bush administration has ordered the government of Pakistan to produce some of our most-wanted terrorists dead or alive before Nov. 2, and preferably on July 26, 27 or 28, the first three days of the Democratic National Convention. This is either one hell of a story or the biggest New Republic screwup since Stephen Glass faked his way to fame at the mag in the late 1990s. I'd suspect the latter, except that the primary authors are John Judis and Spencer Ackerman, who know what they're doing. Anyway, here's the gist: "This spring, the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, or the Taliban's Mullah Mohammed Omar, all of whom are believed to be hiding in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan." The message was delivered during visits by high-level U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Colin Powell and outgoing CIA chief George Tenet. ... "This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November." The Bush administration denies, via National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack that there's any connection between the war on terrorism and the electoral calendar. ... "But The New Republic has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election." Or else what? Well, we might not sell them some F-16s they want to maintain military parity with India, or Americans might elect John Kerry, who might resume a supposed historical Democratic tilt toward India. One of three anonymous Pakistani source says, "The last ten days of July deadline has been given repeatedly by visitors to Islamabad and during [Pakistani security chief Ehsan ul-Haq's] meetings in Washington." McCormack, the NSC flack, replies: "I'm aware of no such comment." Which is somewhat short of a specific denial (but then we don't know precisely what question he was asked, either). ... The rest is pretty much window-dressing to flesh the tale out a bit. As it stands, this is an interesting but half-baked tale that needs to be reported out, as we say in the biz. Gregory Djerejian at Belgravia Dispatch thinks it's a crock, and cites his reasons. Read it all and decide for yourself.

Posted by tbrown at 02:14 PM

It's called diversification, stupid

John Edwards, Kerry's choice for vice president, is vulnerable on one major point: a relative lack of government experience. This should, and no doubt will, be examined during the campaign. But some of the other reasons being proffered to reject him are just plain ludicrous. Exhibit 1: He claims he understands ordinary people, but, but … he's a millionaire! (So, of course, is President Bush, who claims he's an ordinary Joe despite having been born into a patrician New England family). Here's Edwards' story: His father was a millworker. His family scraped by. Edwards was determined to do better than that, paid his way through college – the first member of his family to get a degree – went to law school, became a good lawyer and got rich. In other words, he made The American Dream work. Isn't that what Americans are supposed to do? Exhibit 2: Good God! He put part of his wealth into a mutual fund that invests in foreign companies! This makes him a hypocrite, according to columnist James Pinkerton, because some of those companies, unsurprisingly, have operations offshore (they are foreign after all) and some of them – gasp! – are pharmaceutical companies, a group that Edwards has criticized. Wow. It's hard to know where to begin with an argument this dumb. But let's try this: It's called portfolio diversification, stupid. Millions of ordinary Americans, including some who no doubt are worried about their jobs moving overseas, practice it daily in their 401(k) plans. Exhibit 3: He's a protectionist, and all us good Americans believe in free trade. Yes, it's true that Edwards is not in favor of letting market forces determine every detail of American economic life. It apparently would shock people like this, but neither is George Bush. He unilaterally imposed tariffs on foreign steel (then repealed them after they were ruled illegal by the World Trade Organization), softwood products from Canada, Chinese-made bras and, most recently, jumbo shrimp from Vietnam. Edwards is more protectionist than I am, but so what? At this late date, no one, including Edwards, is going to put the toothpaste of globalization back in the tube.

Posted by tbrown at 02:10 PM

Anybody but Cheney?

Does the GOP just want to stay in the headlines, or is there a serious movement to dump Dick Cheney as veep? Either way, it's getting more entertaining daily. Now columnist Bruce Bartlett is suggesting Condoleezza Rice might be Bush's running mate this fall. She's a woman, she's black, she had an oil tanker named for her and she has even less government experience than John Edwards. What more could the GOP base ask?

Posted by tbrown at 02:03 PM

'Fraud, waste and abuse' possible at the Pentagon?

Tell me it isn't so. But it seems the blame lies primarily with a few thousand antiquated, unintegrated databases.

Posted by tbrown at 02:01 PM

We know public memory is short …

… but is it nonexistent? Jack Ryan – yeah, the guy who thought trying to force his actress wife into sex acts in public constituted a "romantic getaway" -- is considering getting back into the race for the U.S. Senate seat in Illinois.

Posted by tbrown at 02:00 PM

Fire up your TiVo: Wonkette on the tube

One of the most entertaining bloggers going, the brash, foul-mouthed Ana Marie Cox, a.k.a. Wonkette, apparently is going to cover the Democratic National Convention for MTV. Now that's entertainment.

Posted by tbrown at 01:58 PM