The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Protect the Vote: "More than 80 percent of the population of Detroit is black. This is very well understood by John Pappageorge, who is white and a Republican state legislator in Michigan. 'If we do not suppress the Detroit vote,' said Mr. Pappageorge, 'we're going to have a tough time in this election.' Oops! Republicans aren't supposed to actually say they want to suppress black votes. That's so retro. It's so Jim Crow. This is the 21st century, and the thing now is to do the dastardly deed, but never ever acknowledge it. That's where our friend Pappageorge went wrong. After his startling quote was published several weeks ago in The Detroit Free Press, Mr. Pappageorge, who is 73, apologized and said he certainly never meant to suggest that anything racist or illegal take place. But he reiterated to me in a phone conversation last Friday that he did indeed mean that the vote in Detroit needed to be kept down." A lot of other Republicans have similar views about the vote in areas with large African-American populations. Most blacks vote Democratic. If those votes can be suppressed, Republicans benefit. And there is increasing evidence that a big effort to suppress the vote among blacks and some other heavily Democratic voting groups is under way, which is why it is important to keep the following phone number handy: 1-866-OUR VOTE. That's a hot line set up by the Election Protection Coalition, a group that was formed to identify and stamp out attempts to disenfranchise voters, especially in predominantly black and Latino precincts around the country. On Election Day in November, the coalition expects to have as many as 25,000 volunteers, including 5,000 lawyers, available to provide assistance to voters who encounter irregularities or feel they are not being treated fairly at the polls. Voters who call the hot line will immediately be put in touch with volunteers in their local area. The coalition is also urging people to call the hot line now if they are aware of efforts to discourage or prevent people from voting. Among the groups included in the Election Protection Coalition are the People for the American Way Foundation, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the League of Women Voters, the N.A.A.C.P., the American Civil Liberties Union and the Advancement Project, a civil rights advocacy group in Washington. The attempt to prevent blacks from voting has been a staple of America's political history, like long-winded speeches and balloons. I wrote three columns last month about a situation in Orlando, Fla., in which armed state police officers went into the homes of elderly black voters to question them as part of a so-called criminal investigation involving absentee ballots. This tactic sent a definite chill through voters who were old enough to remember the torment inflicted on Southern blacks who tried to vote in the 1950's and 60's. A new study by the People for the American Way Foundation and the N.A.A.C.P. describes many recent examples of voter harassment and intimidation - the latest entries in the long and sordid history of disenfranchisement in the U.S. The study, called "The Long Shadow of Jim Crow," noted: "Voter intimidation and suppression efforts have not been limited to a single party, but have in fact shifted over time as voting allegiances have shifted. In recent decades, African-American voters have largely been loyal to the Democratic Party, resulting in the prevalence of Republican efforts to suppress minority turnout." … http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/13/opinion/13herbert.html

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Amnesia in the Garden: "… W. took a page from Arnold Schwarzenegger's 'Total Recall,' a futuristic movie about inserting fully formed memories into the minds of unsuspecting victims. The president and vice president ignored all the expert evidence now compiled indicating no link between 9/11 and Saddam, and no Saddam threat to U.S. security. After talking about 'the fanatics who killed some 3,000 of our fellow Americans,' Dick Cheney boasted: 'In Iraq, we dealt with a gathering threat, and removed the regime of Saddam Hussein.' Though the convention mythologized Mr. Bush's bullhorn moment at ground zero, there was no mention of Osama, the fiend W. vowed to catch that day. The speakers did not acknowledge the brutal spiral in Afghanistan and Iraq, or the re-emergence of the Taliban, now finding sanctuary with our ally, Pakistan. " Mr. Cheney, king of hooey, bragged about a "Taliban driven from power," even though just as the convention got under way, at least seven people, including two Americans, were killed by Taliban fighters in Kabul. W. stormed ahead with the discredited domino theory of democracy promoted by the neocons and Ahmad Chalabi - ignoring the widening F.B.I. probe into alleged leaks from neocon central at the Pentagon to Mr. Chalabi, an accused Iranian spy, and to an Israeli lobby. "Because we acted to defend our country, the murderous regimes of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban are history," the president said, adding that "democracy is coming to the broader Middle East." The $445 billion deficit? Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney erased it. In their inside-out universe, the economy is blossoming, there's money to pay for Mr. Bush's to-do list and No Child Left Behind is more than an empty slogan. … Inside Madison Square Garden, W. kept insisting he'd made the world safer. Outside, the exploding world didn't seem safe at all.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/05/opinion/05dowd.html

OJR article: Letters Editors Flummoxed Over Weed-Like 'Astroturf' Growth: "The practice of creating a fake grassroots campaign is known as 'astroturf,' and it has been employed by groups on all sides of political debate, mainly to create an organized groundswell of support for an issue or candidate with the hope that the organizational apparatus won't show through. But Republicans struck astroturf gold in 2003, with a letter on Bush 'demonstrating genuine leadership' running in more than 100 newspapers including The Boston Globe and USA Today. That was one of many form letters generated by the GOPTeamLeader.com site, where volunteers earn 'points' (redeemed for merchandise) for getting letters printed. While that instance and others led to many media reports on the practice, that didn't stop a recent outbreak of astroturf ("America's economy is strong and getting stronger") generated by the GeorgeWBush.com campaign site's letter-generating tool, this time hitting 29 smaller newspapers and counting." http://ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1093396596.php

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Feel the Hate: "For many months we've been warned by tut-tutting commentators about the evils of irrational 'Bush hatred.' Pundits eagerly scanned the Democratic convention for the disease; some invented examples when they failed to find it. Then they waited eagerly for outrageous behavior by demonstrators in New York, only to be disappointed again. There was plenty of hatred in Manhattan, but it was inside, not outside, Madison Square Garden. Barack Obama, who gave the Democratic keynote address, delivered a message of uplift and hope. Zell Miller, who gave the Republican keynote, declared that political opposition is treason: 'Now, at the same time young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats' manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief.' And the crowd roared its approval. Why are the Republicans so angry? One reason is that they have nothing positive to run on (during the first three days, Mr. Bush was mentioned far less often than John Kerry). The promised economic boom hasn't materialized, Iraq is a bloody quagmire, and Osama bin Laden has gone from 'dead or alive' to he-who-must-not-be-named."… "I don't know where George Soros gets his money," one man said. "I don't know where - if it comes from overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from." George Soros, another declared, "wants to spend $75 million defeating George W. Bush because Soros wants to legalize heroin." After all, a third said, Mr. Soros "is a self-admitted atheist; he was a Jew who figured out a way to survive the Holocaust." They aren't LaRouchies - they're Republicans. The suggestion that Mr. Soros, who has spent billions promoting democracy around the world, is in the pay of drug cartels came from Dennis Hastert, the speaker of the House, whom the Constitution puts two heartbeats from the presidency. After standing by his remarks for several days, Mr. Hastert finally claimed that he was talking about how Mr. Soros spends his money, not where he gets it. The claim that Mr. Soros's political spending is driven by his desire to legalize heroin came from Newt Gingrich. And the bit about the Holocaust came from Tony Blankley, editorial page editor of The Washington Times, which has become the administration's de facto house organ. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/03/opinion/03krugman.html

Who's FlipFlopping Now!

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > In Retreat, Bush Says U.S. Will Win War on Terrorism: "President Bush moved to put out a political brush fire on Tuesday with a forceful declaration to the nation's largest veterans group that the United States will win the war on terrorism and that the country will never show 'weakness or uncertainty' on his watch. A day after NBC broadcast an interview with Mr. Bush in which he said he did not think the United States could win the war against terrorism, which has become the focus of his presidency and his re-election campaign, he raced back to his optimistic statements that America will prevail.…" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/01/politics/campaign/01bush.html

The New York Times > Washington > Census Policy on Providing Sensitive Data Is Revised: "The Census Bureau announced on Monday that it would no longer assist law enforcement or intelligence agencies with special tabulations on ethnic groups and other 'sensitive populations' without the approval of senior bureau officials. The policy shift comes in response to weeks of criticism after the recent disclosure that the bureau had compiled detailed demographic data on Arab-Americans for the Department of Homeland Security. " Findings of a Freedom of Information Act request disclosed in July showed that the Census Bureau had produced two specially tabulated demographic tables on Arab-Americans for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, a division of the Department of Homeland Security. One table provided ZIP code-level breakdowns of Arab-Americans of various national origins. The cooperation was legal and the statistics used to compile the tables were publicly available. But the assistance sparked complaints from ethnic, privacy and civil rights groups that the Census Bureau was using its powers to aid law enforcement. "We recognize that simply making sure we obey the law may not always be enough to ensure that people trust us," said C. Louis Kincannon, the census director. "Perception also affects how people view and cooperate with the census. This is an interim step to restore trust." The Census Bureau already has rules requiring senior-level approval of special tabulation requests for which the agency is paid. The new procedure, to take effect immediately, extends that rule to informal, nonreimbursable requests from government agencies, private organizations and individuals. The expanded policy will cover the data on a wide variety of demographic groups including racial and ethnic minorities, the disabled and noncitizens. "Over all, the policy change is welcomed as a positive step," said Helen Hatab Samhan, the executive director of the Arab American Institute Foundation, which this month sent the Census Bureau a letter of complaint signed by more than 50 organizations and individuals. Ms. Samhan and others said questions remained about how the new policy would be carried out.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/31/politics/31census.html

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > The President: Bush Cites Doubt America Can Win War on Terror: …"In the interview with Matt Lauer of the NBC News program 'Today,' conducted on Saturday but shown on the opening day of the Republican National Convention, Mr. Bush was asked if the United States could win the war against terrorism, which he has made the focus of his administration and the central thrust of his re-election campaign. 'I don't think you can win it,' Mr. Bush replied. 'But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world.' As recently as July 14, Mr. Bush had drawn a far sunnier picture. 'I have a clear vision and a strategy to win the war on terror,' he said. At a prime-time news conference in the East Room of the White House on April 13, Mr. Bush said: 'One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we are asking questions, is, 'Can you ever win the war on terror?' Of course you can.'…" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/31/politics/campaign/31bush.html?pagewanted=all&position=

News: E-Voting Reform in the U.S. - Aug 30 2004 04:00AM: "These ten steps, while no replacement for the voter-verified paper trail, will, if implemented help reduce real and perceived paperless e-voting risks. 1) 'Paper or Plastic?' option Give voters in electronic voting jurisdictions the choice of casting a paper ballot in their polling place if they prefer to do so. Every polling place should have an ample supply of paper ballots available in case the voting equipment fails. An 'ample supply' would be a supply of paper ballots equivalent to at least 25 percent of a jurisdiction's registered voters. 2) Paper, not electronic provisional voting Federal law now requires pollworkers to allow voters whose names don't appear on the voter list to cast a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are counted after the polls close. To protect a voter's ballot secrecy, a paper provisional ballot is placed inside an envelope that bears the provisional voter's name on the outside of the envelope. After election officials determine whether the voter's ballot should be counted, the paper ballot is separated from the envelope and is counted. In this way, a provisional voter's status can be verified without violating that voter's right to cast a secret ballot." Electronic provisional balloting, which has already been implemented in some jurisdictions, places the voter's right to ballot secrecy at risk, since adequate privacy or security measures typically have not yet been developed to ensure that the voter's right to cast a secret ballot is protected in an electronic environment. For both security and voter privacy reasons, electronic provisional balloting should be prohibited. 3) Access to source code by election officials Election officials should have the right to inspect any source code being used in their voting system. This reform has been endorsed by DeForest Soaries, chairman of the federal Election Assistance Commission. 4) Paper audit trail summary results Many voting machines can print a paper summary at the close of polls of all the votes cast throughout the voting day. These paper audit trails should be used to verify that the results reported at polling places are accurately reflected in the final election results. These audit trails should also be posted outside of polling places at the close of polls. In places using machines that cannot produce a printed report, pollworkers should be given charts of the races and measures on the ballot in that precinct to be filled in, with one returned to the election office and another posted outside the polling place at the close of polls. 5) Public reconciliation of results The verification process described above should be performed in public. The number of voters checking in at each polling place should also be publicly compared to the number of ballots recorded and counted from each polling place. Such proceedings should be open to videotaping and properly noticed to the public. 6) Public posting of equipment and procedures The security procedures that will be followed before, during and after the election should be publicly posted, on the Internet and/or in local election offices. Procedures should be set and published no less than 45 days in advance of Election Day. All jurisdictions should disclose the vendor, equipment name and model number, and all software and firmware version numbers of their voting equipment to the public online and/or in election offices and at polling places. Contracts with voting equipment vendors should also be made readily accessible to the public. 7) Federal and state equipment approval All voting equipment used should be fully tested and certified by state and federal authorities. All states should conduct an inventory of their equipment hardware and software to verify that what they are using has been approved by the proper oversight authorities. All equipment should be approved at least 45 days prior to Election Day. In addition, as recommended in the EAC's Best Practices, last-minute changes and software patches that have not been tested, qualified and certified should be prohibited. 8) Chain of custody of equipment and software It is up to states and local jurisdictions to ensure that the versions of software and firmware used in electronic voting machines, peripheral devices (such as smart card encoders) and vote tabulation servers are the versions that have been state certified and/or federally qualified. Election officials must also ensure that any voting equipment or device that stores electronic ballots is protected at all times. Voting equipment left in insecure locations before and after the election undermines voter confidence in election security. Voting equipment should be sealed in a secure manner before and after the election. The seal used for this purpose should be one that is less easily tampered with than the typical plastic "seals" used on voting machines. Election officials must develop procedures that describe how equipment will be securely delivered and retrieved from polling places in a timely fashion, as well as how machines will be warehoused and protected before and after the election. 9) Security plan for every jurisdiction Security plans for all aspects of the voting process should be drawn up and published at least 45 days prior to the election. These security plans should include a communications plan for polling places to ensure pollworkers have access to a phone, and an environmental plan to ensure polling places are equipped with ample electricity and lighting and are wheelchair-accessible. All tasks associated with administering electronic voting equipment should be overseen by election officials. Critical tasks such as training pollworkers, programming machines, delivering equipment, and tabulating results on Election Night should be managed by the elections department and not outsourced to the vendor. 10) Truly "stand-alone" systems Any electronic voting equipment that is used in polling places or at the local election office to tabulate results must truly be "stand-alone" devices. No modems, modem ports, wireless devices, or wireless ports should be available for use with any electronic voting equipment. Any communication ports on voting devices should be disabled. Computer equipment used to tabulate results should not be connected to the Internet.… http://www.govtech.net/news/news.php?id=91298

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Bush Takes On Direct Role in Shaping Election Tactics: "President Bush will accept his party's nomination in New York this week on the crest of a campaign that aides say reflects an unusual level of involvement from the president himself, particularly in driving attacks on Senator John Kerry that have characterized his re-election effort since the spring. Several aides said Mr. Bush viewed this as the campaign of his life and had intervened on matters as large as the themes it should strike and as small as particular shots of him in his television advertisements. While making sure Mr. Kerry is challenged at every opening, they said, the single most consuming concern for Mr. Bush is that there is an elaborate get-out-the-vote operation in November in anticipation of a contest as tight as the one in 2000. " Mr. Bush, in an interview in New Mexico last week, was careful to present himself as above his campaign, saying he was busy dealing with the problems of the country.… Still, aides say that while Karl Rove continues to dominate the campaign as the top White House political adviser, the president's involvement and interest is far deeper than is widely known. [Page 24.] Mixed in with the updates on national security by Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, and Vice President Dick Cheney that Mr. Bush receives in his daily Oval Office morning briefings is a quick campaign overview from Mr. Rove. Mr. Bush's role in his own campaign was described in extensive interviews with aides and party leaders as Republicans gathered in New York to nominate Mr. Bush for a second term. They arrived buoyed by three new polls suggesting Mr. Bush's standing had improved at least somewhat against Mr. Kerry. Democrats contend that any damage to Mr. Kerry's popularity was caused by unsubstantiated claims by veterans disputing his Vietnam combat medals and that Mr. Bush will ultimately be hurt by their accusation that his campaign was secretly orchestrating the veterans' attacks. Beyond the involvement of the president himself, aides say the strategy that has brought Mr. Bush to this point is quietly being directed not from the Oval Office, or even his campaign headquarters, but by what his inner circle privately calls the Breakfast Club: a small group of advisers who gather on weekends at Mr. Rove's home in northwest Washington, where, over eggs and bacon cooked by Mr. Rove, they measure the campaign's progress against a detailed plan devised 18 months ago.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/politics/campaign/29elect.html?pagewanted=all&position=

Definitions of politics on the Web:

social relations involving authority or power www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

the study of government of states and other political units www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

the profession devoted to governing and to political affairs www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

the opinion you hold with respect to political questions www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

Sites providing political information. These may include campaign or candidate sites, political resources, or political news sites promoting a political cause or action. www.webbyawards.com/main/webby_awards/cat_defs.html

, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. richardgingras.com/devilsdictionary/p.html

The science and methods of government. Derived from the Greek word "Polis" which means community. www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/hancock/pol204/definitions.htm

Competition for power and leadership between competing interests or groups. May be characterized by artful and sometimes dishonest practices. www.projectauditors.com/Dictionary/P.html

activity within the current political party in power that may have conservative or liberal social views based on current economic, military and social activities. imet.csus.edu/imet2/herzj/websites/fashion/resources/glossary.htm

politics: 1: ~ the sum of political actions; www.nephridium.org/features/anarchy/dissertation/glossary.html

Understading of government and manipulation of others. Politics is a prerequisite for starting a player alliance. Each level gives you the possibility to gain 10 members to your alliance. So each player alliance must find a bureaucrat to act as political advisor in order to be officially recognized. (Bureaucrat only.) Level 1- Cost: 750XP 10 members allowed Level 2- Cost: 1,000XP 20 members allowed Level 3- Cost: 1,500XP 30 members allowed (Allows you to also run for Senate.) Level 4- Cost: 2,000XP 40 members allowed Level 5- Cost: 2,500XP 50 members allowed coolboar.com/d6/classes/skillsglossary.html

(POL-i-tics) the practice of government. www.ipl.org.ar/inksub/Vol1No3/lograph/glossary.html

In Harold D. Lasswell's words, "who gets what, when, and how." (See 356) highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072435569/student_view0/glossary.html

noun. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites. www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/3550/diction.htm

Transcripts and Video: View All by Speaker - 2004 Democratic National Convention Official Site: "Roberta Achtenberg David Alston Rep. Tammy Baldwin Senator Barbara Boxer Marcia Bristo Tom Carper President Jimmy Carter Elizabeth Cavendish President Bill Clinton Senator Hillary Clinton Senator John Corzine Howard Dean Dianna DeGette Rep. Rosa DeLauro Rep. John Dingell Gloria Feldt of Planned Parenthood Shirley Franklin Rep. Richard Gephardt Vice-President Al Gore Teresa Heinz Kerry" http://www.dems2004.org/site/apps/nl/newsletter3.asp?c=luI2LaPYG&b=130840

Podium Videos - Tuesday - 2004 Democratic National Convention Official Site: "Day 3: A Stronger More Secure America State Senator Barack Obama" … Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation, not because of the height of our skyscrapers, or the power of our military, or the size of our economy. Our pride is based on a very simple premise, summed up in a declaration made over two hundred years ago, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” That is the true genius of America, a faith in the simple dreams of its people, the insistence on small miracles. That we can tuck in our children at night and know they are fed and clothed and safe from harm. That we can say what we think, write what we think, without hearing a sudden knock on the door. That we can have an idea and start our own business without paying a bribe or hiring somebody’s son. That we can participate in the political process without fear of retribution, and that our votes will be counted—or at least, most of the time. This year, in this election, we are called to reaffirm our values and commitments, to hold them against a hard reality and see how we are measuring up, to the legacy of our forbearers, and the promise of future generations. And fellow Americans—Democrats, Republicans, Independents—I say to you tonight: we have more work to do.… http://www.dems2004.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=luI2LaPYG&b=125925&ct=158769

The New York Times > Washington > Scientists Say White House Questioned Their Politics: "In a report released yesterday, a scientific advocacy group cited more instances of what it called the Bush administration's manipulation of science to fit its policy goals, including the questioning of nominees to scientific advisory panels about whether they had voted for President Bush.…" Dr. Kurt Gottfried, an emeritus professor of physics at Cornell University and the chairman of the scientists group, said that the administration's actions could cause researchers to leave the government. "You can destroy that in a matter of years and then it can take another generation or two to get back to where you were in the first place," Dr. Gottfried said during a conference call with reporters yesterday. Dr. Gerald T. Keusch said that frustration led him to resign last year from the directorship of the Fogarty International Center at the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Keusch said the procedure for appointing members of advisory panels changed markedly with the change of administrations in 2001. Dr. Keusch, who became director in 1998, said that before Mr. Bush took office, he proposed candidates and if the director of the National Institutes of Heath approved, officials at the Department of Health and Human Services in the Clinton administration invariably signed off on the nomination. But under the Bush administration, he said, Secretary Tommy G. Thompson's office rejected 19 of 26 candidates, including Dr. Torsten Wiesel, a Nobel laureate. Dr. Keusch said that when he questioned the rejection, he was told that Dr. Wiesel had signed too many statements critical of Mr. Bush.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/09/politics/09data.html

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Bad Iraq Intelligence Cost Lives, Kerry and Edwards Say: "Senator John Kerry and Senator John Edwards declared on Friday that slipshod intelligence invoked by President Bush to invade Iraq had cost the nation lives, billions of dollars and international prestige, signaling that the Iraq war would be a central issue in their White House campaign. The presumptive Democratic candidates for president and vice president, in a 30-minute joint interview given after the release of a Senate Intelligence Committee report challenging the prewar Iraq intelligence, said Mr. Bush's policies abroad had probably increased, rather than decreased, the prospects of domestic terrorist attacks. " And they said the discrediting of much of Mr. Bush's case for going to war had fed cynicism toward government by young Americans, reminiscent of the mistrust of authority that swept the country when Mr. Edwards and Mr. Kerry came of age during the Vietnam War. "They were wrong and soldiers lost their lives because they were wrong," Mr. Kerry said as Mr. Edwards, in an adjacent seat in the front of their chartered Boeing 757 jet, nodded in agreement. "And America's paying billions of dollars because they were wrong. And allies are not with us because they were wrong.…" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/11/politics/campaign/11TICKET.html?pagewanted=all&position=

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Noonday in the Shade: "In April 2003, John Ashcroft's Justice Department disrupted what appears to have been a horrifying terrorist plot. In the small town of Noonday, Tex., F.B.I. agents discovered a weapons cache containing fully automatic machine guns, remote-controlled explosive devices disguised as briefcases, 60 pipe bombs and a chemical weapon — a cyanide bomb — big enough to kill everyone in a 30,000-square-foot building. Strangely, though, the attorney general didn't call a press conference to announce the discovery of the weapons cache, or the arrest of William Krar, its owner. He didn't even issue a press release. This was, to say the least, out of character. Jose Padilla, the accused "dirty bomber," didn't have any bomb-making material or even a plausible way to acquire such material, yet Mr. Ashcroft put him on front pages around the world. Mr. Krar was caught with an actual chemical bomb, yet Mr. Ashcroft acted as if nothing had happened. Incidentally, if Mr. Ashcroft's intention was to keep the case low-profile, the media have been highly cooperative. To this day, the Noonday conspiracy has received little national coverage. At this point, I have the usual problem. Writing about John Ashcroft poses the same difficulties as writing about the Bush administration in general, only more so: the truth about his malfeasance is so extreme that it's hard to avoid sounding shrill." In this case, it sounds over the top to accuse Mr. Ashcroft of trying to bury news about terrorists who don't fit his preferred story line. Yet it's hard to believe that William Krar wouldn't have become a household name if he had been a Muslim, or even a leftist. Was Mr. Ashcroft, who once gave an interview with Southern Partisan magazine in which he praised "Southern patriots" like Jefferson Davis, reluctant to publicize the case of a terrorist who happened to be a white supremacist? More important, is Mr. Ashcroft neglecting real threats to the public because of his ideological biases? Mr. Krar's arrest was the result not of a determined law enforcement effort against domestic terrorists, but of a fluke: when he sent a package containing counterfeit U.N. and Defense Intelligence Agency credentials to an associate in New Jersey, it was delivered to the wrong address. Luckily, the recipient opened the package and contacted the F.B.I. But for that fluke, we might well have found ourselves facing another Oklahoma City-type atrocity. The discovery of the Texas cyanide bomb should have served as a wake-up call: 9/11 has focused our attention on the threat from Islamic radicals, but murderous right-wing fanatics are still out there. The concerns of the Justice Department, however, appear to lie elsewhere. Two weeks ago a representative of the F.B.I. appealed to an industry group for help in combating what, he told the audience, the F.B.I. regards as the country's leading domestic terrorist threat: ecological and animal rights extremists.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/22/opinion/22KRUG.html

How did we get from September 12th , 2001,-- to the horror that we all felt in witnessing the pictures of torture in Abu Ghraib.: "George W. Bush promised us a foreign policy with humility. Instead, he has brought us humiliation in the eyes of the world. He promised to 'restore honor and integrity to the White House.' Instead, he has brought deep dishonor to our country and built a durable reputation as the most dishonest President since Richard Nixon. Honor? He decided not to honor the Geneva Convention. Just as he would not honor the United Nations, international treaties, the opinions of our allies, the role of Congress and the courts, or what Jefferson described as 'a decent respect for the opinion of mankind.' He did not honor the advice, experience and judgment of our military leaders in designing his invasion of Iraq. And now he will not honor our fallen dead by attending any funerals or even by permitting photos of their flag-draped coffins. How did we get from September 12th , 2001, when a leading French newspaper ran a giant headline with the words 'We Are All Americans Now' and when we had the good will and empathy of all the world -- to the horror that we all felt in witnessing the pictures of torture in Abu Ghraib.… " http://www.moveonpac.org/goreremarks052604.html

Chalabi's Seat of Honor Lost to Open Political Warfare With U.S.: "By all appearances, Ahmad Chalabi reached the pinnacle of influence in Washington four months ago, when he took a seat of honor right behind Laura Bush at the president's State of the Union address. To all the world, he looked like the Iraqi exile who had returned home victorious, a favorite of the Pentagon who might run the country once the American occupation ended. " In fact, as Mr. Chalabi applauded President Bush, his influence in Washington had already eroded. The intelligence about unconventional weapons that his Iraqi National Congress helped feed to senior Bush administration officials and data-starved intelligence analysts — evidence that created the urgency behind the march toward war — was already crumbling. Intelligence officials now argue some of it was fabricated. The much-discussed, much-denied effort by Pentagon officials to install him as Iraq's leader had already faded. By Thursday morning, when his home and office were raided by the Iraqi police and American troops seeking evidence of fraud, embezzlement and kidnapping by members of his Iraqi National Congress — and perhaps an explanation of his dealings with Iranian intelligence — Mr. Chalabi was already engaged in open political warfare with the Bush administration.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/21/politics/21EXIL.html?pagewanted=all&position=

The New York Times > Washington > White House's Medicare Videos Are Ruled Illegal: "The General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, said on Wednesday that the Bush administration had violated federal law by producing and disseminating television news segments that portray the new Medicare law as a boon to the elderly. The agency said the videos were a form of 'covert propaganda' because the government was not identified as the source of the materials, broadcast by at least 40 television stations in 33 markets. The agency also expressed some concern about the content of the videos, but based its ruling on the lack of disclosure." The consequences of the ruling were not immediately clear. The accounting office does not have law enforcement powers, but its decisions on federal spending are usually considered authoritative and are taken seriously by officials in the executive branch of the government. The decision fuels a raging political debate over the new Medicare law. President Bush and many Republicans in Congress say the law will provide immense assistance to millions of elderly and disabled people. But Democrats say the law will do little for the elderly and is so seriously flawed that the government had to resort to an illegal public relations campaign to sell it to voters. The General Accounting Office said that a specific part of the videos, a made-for-television "story package," violated the prohibition on using taxpayer money for propaganda. People seeing the videos in a newscast would "believe that the information came from a nongovernment source or neutral party," it said.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/20/politics/20medicare.html

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > White House Is Trumpeting Programs It Tried to Cut: "The administration has been particularly energetic in publicizing health programs, even ones that had been scheduled for cuts or elimination. Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of health and human services, announced recently that the administration was awarding $11.7 million in grants to help 30 states plan and provide coverage for people without health insurance. Mr. Bush had proposed ending the program in each of the last three years. The administration also announced recently that it was providing $11.6 million to the states so they could buy defibrillators to save the lives of heart attack victims. But Mr. Bush had proposed cutting the budget for such devices by 82 percent, to $2 million from $10.9 million. Whether they involve programs Mr. Bush supported or not, the grant announcements illustrate how the administration blends politics and policy, blurring the distinction between official business and campaign-related activities.…" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/19/politics/campaign/19GRAN.html?pagewanted=all&position=

The New York Times > Washington > Commission to Allow Insurance Cuts for Retired Employees: "The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission voted Thursday to allow employers to reduce or eliminate health benefits for retirees when they become eligible for Medicare at age 65. The agency approved a final rule saying that such cuts do not violate the civil rights law banning age discrimination. The vote was 3 to 1, with Republicans lining up in favor of the rule and a Democrat opposing it." Employers and some labor unions supported the change, saying it would help preserve coverage for early retirees. But AARP, which represents millions of Americans age 50 and older, strenuously objected. The new rule creates a potentially explosive political issue, because it will create anxiety for many of the 12 million Medicare beneficiaries who also receive health benefits from their former employers.… http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/politics/23RETI.html