"The APH Scorecard"

The SCORECARD (as best as we could publish it on Blogger).

Highlighted names were to have hyperlinks direct to some of the candidates' websites, but this is not possible in this version. It's not even possible on on Blogger Spreadsheets. See our URL: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?id=o07721031387181705812.6341877707587248164.11027402322352108688.6834865794577715051#
Look for updates in the future.

Apparent Coverup At The DOJ?

Appearing before the Senate Hearings on the firings/resignations of 8 US attorneys...

Kyle Sampson suddenly appeared with little flourish or warning at an ominously red cloth covered table. He was completely alone and sitting bolt upright. He looked like he was made of stone and about to start sweating blood and bullets. You could imagine hearing the sound of his ventral orifice screwing shut like an iris valve used in camera in innumerable horror movies...

Reportedly, Mr. Sampson testified that the firings were "benign" and had been discussed years before. Apparently, Mr. Gonzales was aware of this according to the now-former top aide. URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070329/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fired_prosecutors.

And what revelations will the Monica Goodling testimony bring? Probably nothing...as her attorneys have said she will invoke her fifth amendment rights.

The suggestion here might be that Mr. Sampson resigned prior to the hearings so as to have appeared as not resigning in disgrace. It is extraordinary and unprecedented (we have heard - still fact checking this) for a DOJ official (Ms. Goodling) to take the fifth amendment when asked for sworn testimony. Is her license in jeopardy - she will have to reportedly report this to the bar association?

Updated: 4/9/07

Monica Goodling has indeed resigned her WH liaison DOJ post. John Conyers is still pursuing her for answers despite her invoking the fifth. URL: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/despite-resignation-conyers-still-wants-goodling-to-testify-2007-04-06.html. We don't see the resignation as a good sign...was she intimidated into resigning and invoking the fifth? What is the missing information here? Conyers appears to be right in pursuing the answers. Now that she is no longer part of the staff, we believe that she cannot be impeached. However, will she take immunity to give her side of the story?

Will Mr. Gonzalez choose to resign before giving testimony?

Sigh...wake up and smell the skatole.

The Edwards' Campaign, The Edwards' Brush With Tragedy

The topic is so hot that we thought at first we might not touch it. But, being an upstart publication with enough brass (or gall) to call itself "The American Political Handbook", we decided we couldn't leave it.

No man nor woman can have a life without a future. Likewise, no politician can have a political life without a political future. The Edwards' family must have grasped this fact before the announcement was made.

They may have been prepared for the bad news with her previous bout of cancer. Still, it had to take superhuman courage to make the decision when faced with this ocean of kryptonite.

To have looked deep into this abyss and turned it into a wellspring of political will shows an immense depth of character. It shows leadership in the face of extreme adversity. A leader is gaged by his/her actions and words, no more, no less - the rest is nothingness.

A personal note/connection: One of our parents has recently had to face the "C" word. He is 72 years old and has basal cell carcinoma. Its not a particularly nasty cancer and he still manages to get around and do his daily thing. But, left untreated it can grow into the bone and spread. Its not an easy thing to live with, but it can be managed. The d****d disease is everywhere, it pervades our society.

They must also have considered the public good in their decision. Adversity demands it. Character requires it. Cicero wrote "Salus populi suprema est lex - the good of the people is the chief law". (from De Legibus - The Laws).

The sharks are circling around after smelling this blood in these waters - and should steer clear of these survivors. Lest they be dashed against the reefs and rocks of public condemnation in the tide of popular outrage. Even, so it is likely the presumed first family would weather such a storm.

Theirs is a judgement that exceeds all passing. In another century, that wild mustachioed philosopher Nietzsche wrote "That which is done out of love is beyond good and evil"... from his book of the same name (Maxims and Aphorisms). To paraphrase, that which is done out of love exceeds all judgement. We've waited a lifetime to quote that line. We wish the circumstances were different. The presumed first family must have drunk deep from the well of human compassion and kindness. These are other fine qualities in a leader.

Disraeli wrote "Man is only truly great when he acts from the passions". The presumed first family has shown great passion combined with great calmness. Rock-solid hands ready for a steady wheel. Even so, they must have considered the pain and weakness that may be yet to come. They must be wise to know that we all face this in the end. We are all frail. We are all temporary. We are only human and we shall all pass.

Should the man win a place on the ticket for the presidential election, would we consider voting for him? You can bet the farm on that. Is he the kind of leader we would follow to hell and back? You bet your ass we would.

Extraordinary note: We have just read that Tony Snow's cancer is back and has spread to his liver.

The "I" Word

Congress seems to be getting a bit peevish (too) with the Prez's handling of the Iraq war. The following report is about whether Congress will vote to impeach or not: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070326/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq.

Whether or not he's acting like a "monarch", does that qualify for impeachment? We at the Handbook thought that Congress can only impeach a sitting president for criminal offenses. We're not defending him - we just don't know if the evidence justifies impeachment.

If, however, the obstruction of justice (see our earlier post: http://americanpoliticalhandbook.blogspot.com/2007/03/totalitarianism-and-solipsism.html) charge or charges arise from the terminations of the eight US attorneys, impeachment seems much more likely.

Sigh...wake up and smell the skatole.

The Real End of Reaganomics?

We weren't terribly shocked to hear about this...but David Stockman (the late Ronald Reagan's ex-budget director) is facing criminal and civil charges for securities fraud in the Collins & Aikman securities fraud scandal. URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070326/ap_on_bi_ge/reagan_aide_9

Is this the real end of "Reaganomics"? We hope so. Seems like everytime we've had a "conservative" administration, suitable employment has been difficult to find.

Totalitarianism and Solipsism

We might be off on a rant here, and we apologize up front for that. But, in the discussions heard with some of the talking head/pundits on MSNBC and the like, the legal term obstruction of justice was used more than once. This term was, of course, applied to the firings/resignations of the 8 US attorneys.

The conjecture has also been made, that in the GOP's zeal to create a "permanent Republican majority" (a possible brain child of Karl Rove) they may have done serious political damage to our American legal system and, possibly, to our way of life. That is, the 8 US attorney firings may have been politically motivated and may have targeted those US attorneys handling indictments (some sealed) against Republicans (notably, one Duke Cunningham - now convicted). This is where an obstruction of justice charge or charges might come in to play. Of course, subpoenas have been voted for in Congress and they will get to the bottom of this whole deal.

Of course, replacing the "traitors" would have resulted in a major step to creating the so-called "permanent Republican majority". Perhaps, even an Evil Empire, one ghost-run by Karl Rove? (Sigh...there we go with Star Wars analogies). This does matter to the Democratic Party (and to democracy, too, we believe). Hopefully, the Congress will get to the bottom of this, and, if charges are to be made then they will be made. Hopefully we can stop this headlong slide into a Totalitarian state right here in the good ol' USA. Although, this point may not matter much to the Libertarians, like this one here.

The end of this business week also brought us the strange, peevish political theater foisted by Dubya over the rejection of his War Funding renewal and apparent replacement by a bill with a withdrawal. Fostering a myopic viewpoint - or worse, a solipsist point of view. One wonders if our Leadership is aware of the point that many Americans would rather not have daily press conferences on the war. Perhaps if we could get out of this war, maybe we could spend more time on other important topics - like education, veterans administration,health care reform, health care for all, housing for all, jobs, the economy, immigration, the coming crisis with China, etc... Maybe the Democrats have not spoken to the ground commanders in the war, but maybe they have. Maybe they will put us on the right path. We hope so. We hope they don't have a solipsist point of view like our leadership.

We've Seen This Before, Too (II)...

After four years of war, and over 3000 fatalities and growing, scandalous medical maltreatment of our veterans, re-deployment or consideration for re-deployment of seriously injured American veterans, "Dubya" came on the air with his overwhelming message for the denial of reality. It was pure corporatese cheer leading, urging us all on into inexorable war. Our commander-in-chief even exhorted our Congress not to recall funds for the war nor to vote down the war in Iraq. Straight from the lips and pen of Zbigniew Brzezinski, the fearless one urged us on in the war on terror, it was strictly "Manichean Paranoia".

The Missing Backbone

The title of this posting has meaning on several levels. Mainly, it concerns one of the newest scandals coming out of the US Military. Namely, that seriously injured military personnel are being re-deployed to the battlefield or are being reviewed for the same.

We recently had the opportunity to watch an interview with a certain Sergeant J*****s on MSNBC the other night. Sgt. J has had to undergo military medical reviews so that he may get a decision not to be re-deployed to the battle. Just what is Sgt. J's injury? He is missing four vertebrae, his C3 through his C6 vertebrae have been replaced with a titanium backbone, joints and discs.

Although Sgt. J may have been very heroic in covering any pain, he (apparently) will not be shipped back and his medical discharge should take place in 70 days. At which point he said his military career will be "done". Sgt. J seemed genuinely sad that his military career is over, but relieved that he will not be sent back into battle. We agree with him. If any of us were missing major parts (like vertebrae), we're just not sure we could be combat-ready.

This leads to other definitions of backbone. What kind of backbone does our military and government have to even consider sending personnel with that kind of injury back to the zone? Is the victory that important? Nearing the end of WWII, Germany was drafting its children and senior citizens into the army for a failed campaign. As we all know, fortunately, their side lost.

The message is quite clear. The US government's Iraq campaign is a failure and should be declared as such lest any more damage be done to our military, our credibility, our power and our treasure. It seems clear that this an ideological campaign now, and no longer a military campaign. As Zbigniew Brzezinski recently said, our leadership may be suffering from "Manichean Paranoia".

We've Seen This Before...

US Attorney General's (Alberto Gonzales) attitude toward the "appropriate" firings of 8 US prosecutors was that it was the "appropriate" one and he stands by that decision. Well, of course he does. It's corporatese (there we go, coining another term) - meaning that he has elected to take the moral low ground by standing by a political superior(s)'s decision to injunct immoral conduct in the DOJ (Department of Justice) - but this term could apply to any corporate or political stance of the same specious nature. You don't need a backbone in this political environment, you're packed together like a bunch of proverbial sardines. URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_co/congress_prosecutors

Sigh, this also leads us to coining another term: Gonzalizing. Or, the ineffective, inappropriate and specious approach to providing a corrupt political, bureaucratic and/or corporate environment. Which leads us to speculate, are all US political, bureaucratic and corporate entities corrupt in this fashion - or just the ones we hear about? See also URL: http://theantizenhandbook.blogspot.com/2007/03/hows-that-patriot-act-working-for-ya.html

Updated 3/14/07: Bush has (finally?) weighed in on the latest, saying that the firings were flawed, but he still stands by Gonzales and finds the firings "appropriate". Well, of course he does! URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070314/ap_on_go_pr_wh/gonzales_prosecutors

It is almost at times surreal, even Daliesque (there we go, another word, but we don't think this word is entirely original - is it? Just its application...) , when one looks at the huge canvas of scandals that the administration has painted.

Updated 3/27/07: Monica Goodling (DOJ to White House liaison) has reportedly had her attorneys inform the senate of her attention to invoke her Fifth Amendment Rights. URL: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/goodling-to-invoke-fifth-amendment-right-not-to-testify-in-firings-scandal-2007-03-26.html Ummm...does this not suggest that there might have been some possible wrongdoing in the case? Sigh...wake up and smell the skatole. (We hope to follow up on this later).

The "Scooter" Libby Trial(s) and Verdict(s)

In light of the four guilty verdicts handed down in the "Scooter" Libby trial, we at the Handbook ask how deep does this presumed cover-up go, if at all? An appeal trial is obvious in the next few months, so how does that affect the appearance or presumption of a cover-up?

This has led us to coin some new terms for our sister publication, "The Anti-Zen Dictionary".

libbying: To take the fall for a higher government official when no cover-up or other crime or conspiracy has been proven and/or much less charged.

scootering: See libbying.

Response from Senator Carl Levin RE. Walter Reed Medical Center

Regarding our Email on the controversy at Walter Reed Medical Center posted recently in our sister publication, "The Anti-Zen Handbook" (URL: http://theantizenhandbook.blogspot.com/2007/03/building-18-most-all-of-us-have-become.html) we received the following response from Senator Carl Levin the next day.

Thread:
Subject:
Hearing earlier today on the conditions at Walter Reed
From:
senator_levin@levin.senate.gov
To:
georgek1029@yahoo.com
Date:
Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:12:26 -0500
Dear Mr. K:
"In light of your previous correspondence, I thought you would be interested in knowing about the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, which I chaired, on conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center on March 6, 2007.

As you may know, a recent series of Washington Post articles described deplorable the living conditions, the failure to account for, and the bungled administrative processing of injured troops in an outpatient status at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. New reports indicate that these problems are not confined to Walter Reed. Unfortunately, they exist elsewhere in the military and VA medical systems.

Our nation has a moral obligation to provide quality health care to the men and women who put on our nation's uniform and are injured fighting out nation's wars. This obligation extends from the point of injury, through the evacuation from the battlefield, to first class medical facilities in the United States, and ends only when the wounds are healed. Where the wounds cannot be healed, we have an obligation to provide quality care throughout the lifetime of the veteran.

Today, the Committee heard testimony from Dr. David Chu, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; Dr. William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs; General Peter Schoomaker, Chief of Staff of the Army; and Lieutenant General Kevin Kiley, Surgeon General of the Army in an attempt to understand both what went wrong at Walter Reed and to ensure that it does not happen again.

I, as Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Akaka, the Chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs, and our ranking members Senator McCain and Senator Craig are determined that our Committees will work together to improve the care of our troops and veterans throughout their period of care. We will hold a joint hearing of our two Committees in the near future to identify remedies to the problems our wounded soldiers and veterans are facing.

The American people are deeply angry as they should be about the shortfalls in care. Americans may disagree about the war in Iraq, but the cause of supporting our troops unites us all. We will do everything we possibly can, not as Democrats or Republicans but as grateful Americans, to care for those who have served our nation with honor and distinction.

My complete opening statement at the March 6th hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee can be found on my website at [http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=270147].
Sincerely,Carl Levin"
End of thread.