The Toll Continues to Rise

Four more US soldiers died in Iraq. That brings the total for November to 45. We're halfway through the month and if this pace continues, sadly approximately 90 soldiers and marines will lose their lives.

Yesterday, Gen. John Abizaid said essentially we should stay the course, give the Iraqis about 6 more months to have their troops stand up and we can stand down. In the meantime, the Defense Intelligence Agency tells us that Iraq probably has about 6 months until all hell breaks loose.

At 90 servicemen (and women) a month, that means about another 540 will be coming home in body bags.

I don't know about you, but that is simply unacceptable. Perhaps Gen. Abizaid should have to place the calls to each of those families personally. Maybe then he'd get it.

The Washington Post has more on this story.

A Michigan-sized Mistake

There are some voters in California who remember voting for Proposition 13. It seemed like a good idea at the time. Property taxes were soaring and Prop 13 promised to bring necessary relief. It passed in 1978, but its real effects were not felt for several years to come. As property tax revenue shrank, California's state budget suffered. Former Governor Gray Davis can blame at least a part of his recall from the state's top office a few years ago as an after-effect of Prop 13. It seemed like such a good idea at the time.

In a few months, or maybe years, the voters in Michigan will realize what a gigantic goof they made when the approved Prop 2, the state anti-affirmative action constitutional amendment which may become effective as soon as mid-December.

In short, the proposition voids the use of affirmative action (by race, gender, color, ethnicity, national origin) in employment, education, and public contracting. The wording seems innocuous enough, and the second part of the proposal states that discrimination is also illegal too.

And to think it all started because little Jennifer Gratz and young Patrick Hamacher didn't get admitted to the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Of course, they both could pinpoint their failure to get in to two minority students who did.

The university admissions process at any school is a maze which only a few students out of the many that apply are lucky enough to navigate. There are some shortcuts: if you're a Heisman-quality football player applying to a football school, if you're the re-incarnation of Wilt Chamberlain at a basketball powerhouse, if you are smarter than Steven Hawkings you'll probably get in, and if, as the song says, your daddy's rich and your momma's good looking, you'll probably get special consideration -- not for your brains, but daddy's dollars. The rest of us slog through the maze.

Although Gratz and Hamacher were both waitlisted for admittance to UofM, each chose to attend other schools in the state system. Gratz and Hamacher are the basis for the last round of lawsuits that eventually ended up at the Supreme Court (Gratz v. Bollinger). In a 6-3 decision, Gratz and Hamacher kinda won. I say "kinda" because the Supremes sent the case back to District Court where that court could amend the UofM procedure for undergraduate admissions. (There is much more to this story than can comfortably be told here.)

Gratz apparently wasn't satisfied with that result and elected to mind-meld with black super-conservative Ward Connerly. (Connerly, who is black, hates black folk.) Together they cooked up a scheme to amend Michigan's constitution to outlaw affirmative action. Not just pass a law, but amend the constitution.

This past November, Michigan voters voted to do just that.

It seemed like such a good idea at the time. I'm still studying all the ramifications of this law -- which affects not only public education, but public contracting and employment. It will apparently affect young girls and women, by making Title IX unconstitutional. So if Jennifer played a sport and wanted to do so in college under the provisions of Title IX: tough noogies, it's
unconstitutional. Title IX provided money to girl's sports that were unfunded or underfunded in public schools and colleges, and made adjustments to men's sports to accommodate the women's inclusion.

If Jennifer wanted to start a woman-owned business and seek state contracts, she might have been able to use the provisions of set-asides to insure that she could compete with larger male-owned business to secure state government contracts. Not any more. It's unconstitutional.

And if Jenny was searching for a job in Michigan, she once enjoyed the protections of the state's laws which made discrimination illegal, but more importantly, guaranteed that she had to be considered equally with her male counterparts. Now her resume can be "86-ed" right alongside, Tamika's and Schlomo's and Red Cloud's, and Tran's and Mohammed's and Sanjay's.

Yet it seemed like such a good idea at the time. Thanks, Jennifer.

Fire Abizaid: It's Time For Him to Go

After watching Army General John Abizaid testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee, I think it's time for him to step down as the head of CentCom, the US Central Command. General Abizaid seems to prefer the status quo, and that, for the US and for Iraqi civilians, is unacceptable.

Abizaid was reluctant to consider any other options to help the military get a handle on the situation there. And that is disappointing. Abizaid said more troops wouldn't help speed a proposed redeployment plan, was reluctant to consider timelines with enforceable benchmarks as an option. Abizaid even insisted that the situation in Iraq was much better than it was in August.

To suggest that commander on the ground be removed is a harsh step. Our strategy for Iraq must change, and we need a new guy to make it happen. Until we bring on someone who is willing to consider every possible option, we are just wasting lives and time.

Read more about it at The Washington Post.

What Defines A Civil War?

Iraqi Police Linked to Mass Abduction
Read the full story at The Washington Post

I read the news today. Oh boy.
When armed gunmen entered the Ministry of Higher Education in downtown Baghdad, they pretended to be securing the area for a visit from "the American ambassador." They came wearing official looking uniforms, in a large convoy in vehicles with mounted machine guns. Men and women were separated, some were detained and apparently removed from the Ministry, some were later released. On the face of it, and in light of similar kidnappings recently, it's easy to call this just another case of sectarian violence. Or is it?

To live in Baghdad today, must be to live in constant fear. Every day bodies -- not just two or 3 -- but 20, 30, 40 at a time are found beaten, tortured and executed. Every day. Ride a bus to school or to the market, and you're likely to be blown to bits. Choose your method: road side bomb or a seatmate who detonates himself and sends you to meet your maker. Are you a baker by profession? You're a marked man, and not just by the flour on your apron. Drive an ambulance? Not for long. Thought about joining Baghdad PD? That's probably gonna get you killed. And probably before you've had a chance to don your uniform for the first time.

When do we stop calling this sectarian violence and call it civil war?

In an excellent article that first appeared in The Washington Post, April 9, 2006, James D. Fearon, Professor of Political Science at the Freeman Spogli Institure for International Studies at Stanford University, defines it as:

Civil war refers to a violent conflict between organized groups within a country that are fighting over control of the government, one side's separatist goals, or some divisive government policy. By this measure, the war in Iraq has been a civil war not simply since the escalation of internecine killings following the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February, but at least since the United States handed over formal control to an interim Iraqi government in June 2004.

The Bush administration's hesitation to confront what they have wrought in Iraq, their "spreading of democracy," their nation building, takes it toll on the Iraqis daily. And their refusal to call it what it is, hinders -- no, prevents -- them from arriving at a solution to this terrible problem. Neither President Bush nor his Iraq Study Group will arrive at a solution until they acknowledge this painful -- especially for the Iraqis -- inevitable truth.

What defines a civil war? Iraq.

Can't a Brother Catch a Break?

From BET.com Black voters won one and maybe lost one.

If you read Retha Hill's commentary on the results of the midterm election, you get the same old rhetoric about the Democratic party mistreats us, overlooks us and takes us for granted. Retha suggests that the democratic sweep in the midterms might just sweep some long-time members of the Congressional Black Caucus out with the post-celebration confetti. She goes on to posit that the Republican party had done well by its black constituents, giving them a "substantial toe-hold in the Republican Party. Since at least 1994, many African Americans have concluded that putting all our eggs in one basket no longer makes sense, and that true participation means having a seat at both tables."

As her commentary continues, she noted that, "Substantial numbers of African Americans sided with Republicans in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio, and not just when the Republican candidate was Black." Retha? Honey? Were you watching the returns of the same elections I was?

For the record, Republicans put forward 8 black candidates in the 2006 election. Democrats, 41. Republican black candidates who won their races, zero. Democrats have elected the two black governors this country has seen (Doug Wilder and in this election cycle, Deval Patrick.)

If, as you note, black ministers endorsed George Allen because he supports a ban on same-sex marriage, they must have noticed that their man also likes to call black folk "nigger" and "Macaca (monkey -- even when the individual this remark was targeting was an Indian-American). If the Republican party is as welcoming to black voters as you suggest, just why didn't any, I mean not a single, f***ing black republican tell Ken Mehlman and the RNC that the ads against Harold Ford, Jr. had more than just a whiff of coded, racist, good ole southern strategy stink about them and they needed to be pulled. I've looked and I can't find one statement from black republicans on that count.

Michael Steele may have run a good race and picked up some key endorsements, too. But as you note, "in majority-Black Prince George’s County, 31 percent of the electorate voted for him, as did 21 percent of people in majority-Black Baltimore. Preliminary exit poll data show that Steele snagged 25 percent of the state’s Black vote." If Steele is such an appealing candidate, why didn't more blacks vote for him? [Author's note: I think you meant to write that 31 and 21 percents respectively of the black electorate voted for him. Regardless, it still ain't good news.]

Republican Party adviser Tara Wall. “It doesn’t benefit us as Black voters to give 90 percent of our vote to one party. We need to be able to come to the table and level the playing field and have a say in both parties.” Retha, Tara: the playing field isn't level, and y'all aren't welcome at the Republican table.

A little political history: there was a time when Yankee or New England moderates played a large role in the Republican party. They held fiscally conservative views, but were socially liberal. They were the antidote to the racist Dixiecrats of the old Democratic party. Barry Goldwater and Lyndon Johnson changed that. Goldwater yanked the Republicans to the far right and the "southern strategy" (grab the votes of disaffected. southern, conservative, anti-integration, anti-civil rights whites for the Republican party) was born. Meanwhile, Lyndon Johnson's progressive -- damn, let's just call it what it was -- landmark Great Society, with its War on Poverty and Civil and Voting (ahem, let me repeat that, VOTING) rights acts empowered black America as never before. If blacks have been loyal to the Democrats, this is one hell of a reason.

And now the reason for the headline: After all their crowing over what a wonderful campaign Michael Steele ran, and how he is so good for the Republican party comes this: Ken Mehlman, current chair of the RNC announced he's stepping down in January. Republican after republican promoted their new "boy" Michael Steele for the job. Steele was not coy about his interest in the job when asked about it as he made the rounds on the post-election news talk shows. After all, he'd be out of a job in January and could step right in. And since most of the job is dealing with the media, he'd shown that he was articulate and engaging speaker. And as all of his supporters said, he'd put a new face on the Republican party.

Today comes word that the Republicans intend to tap Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida as the next party head. Martinez was just elected to the Senate in 2004. If he takes the job, Florida's governor will have to name a replacement. Martinez is a Cuban-American.

Can't a brother catch a break? Apparently not.

Yep, Father Knows Best, Dubya

Check out the article at Newsweek: Father Knows Best

You know everyone goes through that recalcitrant stage growing up. We ignore sage advice, take risks that endanger ourselves and sometimes others, pay no attention to the little hairs on the back of our necks that signal we need to stop what we're doing right this minute and get the heck outta here, then realize when it's almost too, too late that we need help, but are too proud to ask for it, until dear old Dad steps in, grabs us by the scruff of the neck, and then pulls us to safety. After a stern talking to we're back in his good graces and off on another adventure.

Now it could be plot to some animated feature, but in actuality it might just be the plot that is unfolding in Houston, Crawford, Kennebunkport, and DC, with George W playing the stubborn young 'un and George HW starring as Father Fixer.

When GW ran for president the first time around, I was struck by just how many of the players from GHWB's White House showed up to help the boy, coach the boy, teach the boy. Heck, it was like old home week. But it made the little hairs on the back of my neck stand on end: Iraq. They're going back in. I had the feeling that some of these guys had unfinished business over there and that was why the came out of retirement to help GW. (Of course, now I can say I was right. But you probably had those feelings, too. Lots of us did.)

If you believe popular folklore, you know that GW hasn't been speaking to GHWB on matters of Iraq. He defers to a higher father figure. So whatever sage advice or suggestions that might have helped Dick and George's Excellent Adventure, was not welcome on the Good Ship Lollipop. But with approval ratings hovering just above "flushed away" status, somebody told GW to listen to his daddy and do what he says. Enter Robert Gates, exit Donald Rumsfeld. Enter James Baker in a limited engagement role. Brent Scowcroft has a brief walk-on part. I expect Dan Quayle may be back as GW's understudy and dialogue coach.

Okay... oh geez... now my hair is on fire.

The Bush Doctrine: Incompetence is Good Government

Iraqi Prime Minister Promises Government Shake-Up
Read the whole story at the New York Times


Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraqi Prime Minister, has promised a sweeping shake-up of his government to rid it of cabinet ministers he says are incompetent, corrupt, and weak. Maliki complains that he didn't have enough freedom to select ministers he could work with inside the Iraqi Parliament.

Meanwhile, Maliki has irked the American military by demanding that checkpoints be removed, searches for a missing US soldier and Shiite militia leaders believed responsible for his kidnapping be suspended, appearing to condone sectarian violence by those same militias. As the violence continues to spiral upward, Maliki -- concerned about his future -- asked the Bush administration if they were plotting against him in an effort to unseat him.

In yesterday's blog (A Plan of Action For Iraq), three out of four of the options to fix the Iraqi fiasco include getting rid of the current government.

Maliki seeks to blame the problems of his poor performance on his fellow cabinet ministers. But as the Prime Minister, the buck (and we're spending billions of them in Iraq) stops with him. Now Maliki does govern in an environment where politicians, judges, butchers, bakers, barbers and boys are kidnapped, beheaded, blown up, shot, tortured or just mysteriously end up in mass graves. So perhaps he is afraid of that same fate befalling him.

But Maliki also knew what to expect when he ran for office and when he was elected. So far he hasn't done anything to quell any of the violence Iraqis live with every day. Sure, he's working hard. And it's hard work. And you have to be a hard worker to do the hard work. But the Iraqis elected him to be a Uniter, not a Divider; to be the chief Decider and decide what is best for his people. Apparently he's decided that he better off being the Appeaser.

When are those Iraqi mid-term elections?

Rahm's Lullaby

Read the full story at The House That Rahm Built from the Chicago Tribune

Rahm Emanuel has supplanted Karl Rove as "the Architect" with the stunning Democratic sweep of House seats in the last week's election. But as the article by Naftali Bendavid in the Chicago Tribune makes clear, central to Emanuel's renovation of the party were a slash and burn, take no prisoners attitude that sometimes rubbed friends and foes the wrong way.

During the long sleepless nights of the campaign, Bendavid's chronicle shows us that Rahm's lullaby was not a tune you could easily sing and was likely to be laced with expletives, epithets and worse. But he got the job done.

Political junkies -- we know who we are -- will liken this up close and personal account to the documentary "War Room" about the Bill Clinton run for the White House in 1992. I hope Mr. Bendavid has enough information for a book. But his article will whet your appetite for now. A simply fascinating read.