United States News Digest
Clinton on the Political Debate
Talk-show host Charlie Rose, during a June 28 interview, allowed former President Bill Clinton to expand on how the world has changed since he was President. Rose referred to him at one point as the key figure in the Democratic Party. He also asked him if he would like to serve as Sen. John Kerry's Vice President or Secretary of State. Clinton replied that Kerry has to pick someone he feels good with. Clinton said he had talked with Kerry several times. "He asked me about several people," Clinton said.
For his own part, he said that as former President "you acquire a big responsibility to help your country" and that if a President Kerry asked him to serve in some capacity, he would seriously consider it. Rose asked what he thought would be the Great Debate of 2004, Clinton replied. "It'll be 'What is the role of America in the 21st Century world?' and what should our country look like within our own borders?"
Clinton continued, "After 9/11 everyone was for us. When President Bush asked the UN to resume inspections in Iraq, everyone was for us. But then we didn't let Hans Blix continue his inspections and instead went to war. And then a combination of factors served to change that. It became clear that weapons of mass destruction were not the reasons we went to war, but that there were other reasons.
"We also changed our nuclear doctrine which was very troubling, and we ripped up the ABM Treaty and refused to ratify Kyoto [the greenhouse protocols]. The world then reacted negatively.
"The Bush Administration is following the lead of Robert Kaplan's Warrior Politics. We now have an image of doing what we want when we want and cooperating only when we have to, whereas my administration tried to cooperate on all issues, while maintaining the right to act alone if we had to. It's a different attitude entirely. The American people in the next election have to decide if they want to follow Kerry's approach or Bush's approach." Clinton said.
House Votes To Make Enron Documents Public
The House passed by voice vote an amendment offered by Rep. Ann Ashoo (D-Calif) to the appropriations bill that funds FERC, to bar the Commission from denying to the public the evidence related to its investigation of market manipulation by the energy pirates. Consideration of her stronger amendment to force FERC to order refunds to the Western states during the 2000-2001 energy crisis, which FERC has refused to consider, was stonewalled by the Rules Committee, and defeated 209-182 on the House floor.
During the debate on the amendments, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore), countered charges from the GOP that Democrats were just aiming for a witchhunt against the Bush Administration due to its ties to Enron, stating, "We have crimes, but what we don't have is restitution," adding that Enron executives have gone to jail for manipulating the market, yet, three years later, no payments have been ordered by FERC. DeFazio stated, "We are still paying more for our electricity, day in and day out" thanks to actions from both "Enron Corp., based in Texas," and from FERC, "led by Pat Wood of Texas.... This stinks."
Speaking on the House floor, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi scored the Rules Committee's action to quash debate, saying "Enron lied, cheated, and stole; it is long past time they paid back consumers and the states."
Senate Panel Approves Mississippi River Improvements
On June 23, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved, without debate, an amendment sponsored by Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo) that would authorize $1.46 billion for seven new locks on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois River systems. In doing so, the committee bucked opposition from at least half a dozen environmentalist groups, who claim that the improvements are "blatantly unjustified," and would create the most expensive waterway boondoggle in the nation's history. Bond replied, "Modernizing our lock and dam system will produce economic benefits now, including providing 48 million man-hours of construction work. This project will make U.S. producers more efficient and more competitive, while protecting jobs here at home."
Novak: 'Republican Holy (Civil) War,' Looms
Columnist Robert Novak warned in a June 28 New York Post column, that the "cunning parliamentarian, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman [Bill] Thomas ... fired an early shot in a destructive civil war looming for Republicans."
The immediate issue is a proposed bill, twice defeated through Thomas's leadership, that would have lifted the restriction on churches (which are tax exempt) acting as political/electoral agencies. The restriction stems from a 1954 law passed on the initiative of then-Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson. Acting on behalf of the theocratic movement, "devout Catholic" Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) introduced a bill in 2001 to repeal the restriction. But the Jones bill had impediments thrown in its way by 13-term Congressman Thomas (R-Calif), "party boss of Bakersfield." Novak complains that Thomas "represents old-line Republicans who resent Christian conservatives entering their party in 1980."
When Jones and the religious right (under Majority Leader Tom DeLay and Speaker Dennis Hastert) finally got their bill onto the floor for a vote in October 2002, Thomas and some 44 other Republicans joined Democrats in voting it down. Recently, when the Jones bill got attached to unrelated tax legislation, Thomas managed to out-maneuver the Hastert-DeLay leadership and kill the bill. Novak rails that those who voted against the Jones bill "represent a bloc of Republicans, from the corporate boardroom to the country club, who despise the religious right.... Bill Thomas is a secularist. He is entitled to his own views, but today's GOP relies on support not from secular Americans, but from church-goers."
Buckley Blasts Iraq War Policy
On his way out the door to retirement as editor of the ultra-rightwing National Review magazine that he founded in the 1950s, William F. Buckley, Jr. stated, "With the benefit of hindsight, Saddam Hussein was not the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago. If I knew then what I know now, ... I would have opposed the war." Buckley is thus joining the ranks of the former Cheney cheerleaders, who are now turning against "the neo-cons."
Extremely ironic, since National Review Online, is one of the regular journals for the neo-cons' most ardent Iraqi liars and warmongers: Michael Ledeen, Michael Rubin, Frank Gaffney (on occasion), Richard Perle, and others. Buckley will continue his column.
New Study on Stress in Soldiers Serving in Iraq
A new study by a group of Army and Navy researchers, published in the current issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, concludes that soldiers and Marines who have experienced combat are more likely to report symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and alcohol abuse. The study notes that 11-17% of soldiers may be at risk for mental-health disorders, three to four months after returning from combat duty in Iraq, as compared with 9% before. The study was based on surveys of several groups of soldiers and Marines, comprising nearly 6,000 people both prior to and returning from deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, a significantly larger sample than that used for the official Army Surgeon General's mental-health team study released last March. The authors of the NEJM study note that because certain groups were left out of their study, including those severely wounded in combat and those removed from their units for other reasons, including misconduct, "our estimates of the prevalence of mental disorders are conservative, reflecting the prevalence among working, non-disabled combat personnel."
The report found a direct correlation between combat experiences and the likelihood of a soldier or Marine reporting PTSD symptoms. The more intense the soldier's combat experience, e.g., the number of firefights during deployment, number of times shot at, handling dead bodies, knowing someone who was killed, etc., the greater the likelihood of PTSD.
Significantly, the study also notes that the magnitude of differences between the before and after deployment groups were also significant given that the before deployment group (a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division before leaving for a year-long deployment to Iraq in January of 2003) was already experiencing levels of stress that were higher than normal.
Broder on Bush and Blair: 'United They Fall?'
Writing from London on July 1, Washington Post columnist David Broder notes that, although the effort to dump British Prime Minister Tony Blair has stalled, and that he is likely to lead the Labour Party in the election next year, it is still the case that "Bush is scorned here." Among Blair's allies, "every time Dick Cheney or Don Rumsfeld opens his mouth, Blair's people wince." The problem, according to one senior adviser to Blair, is that "Blair feels that he is on all fours with Bush."
Conservatives Call for Draft; Rumsfeld Says No
Noel Koch, who served in the Nixon and Reagan Administrations, wrote a Washington Post op-ed July 1 titled, "Why we need the draft back." He says the draft "shattered class distinctions.... Class lines blurred, and so did racial lines. The military did more to advance the cause of equality in the U.S. than any other law, institution or movement. Not for nothing did 'Bro' come into common use in the Vietnam era: 'Who sheds blood with me shall be my brother.'" Koch does not take the next step, as Lyndon LaRouche and others have, to point out that the population will not so easily acquiesce to war if their sons are engaged, rather than a professional army.
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) has also called for revival of the draft, mainly because the Army is so badly overstretched today.
Asked about the proposal to reinstitute the draft, in an interview with Newsradio 600 KOGO, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, "Well, I can't imagine it. I just can't imagine it. There are people who argue that a draft is a good thing because it gives everybody a chance to serve and understand national service. But it was unfair, too many exemptions. But in terms of the need of the services, goodness no, we're perfectly capable of increasing the incentives and the inducements to attract people into the armed services."
|