Monday, January 23, 2006

Daily Downers

Bush is Back?

Bush is back, all right--to his lowest poll numbers: 36% approval for his job as president, 37% among registered voters, according to the American Research Group. Perhaps the most chilling number: all of 14% believe the U.S. economy is getting better, which is half of an already low percentage in December (30%).

How Halliburton Takes Care of the Troops

"Troops and civilians at a U.S. military base in Iraq were exposed to contaminated water last year and employees for the responsible contractor, Halliburton, couldn't get their company to inform camp residents, according to interviews and internal company documents,"according to the Associated Press .

Not So Fast, Scalito

Saying that "Judge Alito may be a fine man, but he is not the kind of justice the country needs right now. Senators from both parties should oppose his nomination. It is likely that Judge Alito was chosen for his extreme views on presidential power..." a New York Times editorial came out today against Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Many Democratic Senators, including Dianne Feinstein and John Kerry, have announced their opposition, with Kerry mobilizing his online forces. Only one Democrat has said he'll vote in favor, which seems to ensure that the Democrats have enough votes to enforce a fillibuster. It's not clear yet if they will "extend debate," or if the Republicans will actually use their majority to change the Senate rules to outlaw fillibusters entirely. But the easy path to the Court predicted just days ago seems a lot rockier at the moment.

And it's significant that even if the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee couldn't make an effective case on the topic, the Times zeroed in on Alito's "extreme views on presidential power." Which may be a reason that the Bushites are becoming so aggressive on the topic, well in advance of congressional hearings on the NSA widespread spying on Americans.

Guiding Indians to the GOP

Whether or not Republican operatives and pet blogs are being all that successful in spreading the grief of the Abramoff scandal to Democrats, the facts are coming out that while Indian tribes Abramoff was advising continued to donate to Democrats, he advised them to switch more of their gaming revenue contributions to Republicans. Though the Washington Post writer who started a firestorm when she wrote that Abramoff donated to both parties (he didn't) backpeddled on that, she defended herself by saying that his clients did, which is technically correct, but not at his behest. But the Post's Deborah Howell at least made one thing clear. On the charge that "I was trying to say it was a bipartisan scandal, as some Republicans claim," she wrote: I didn't say that. It's not a bipartisan scandal; it's a Republican scandal, and that's why the Republicans are scurrying around trying to enact lobbying reforms.

No comments: