Major Clinton Backer Switches to Obama

Clinton supporters keep switching to Obama not the other way around:

The Obama campaign announced Thursday that former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew — who was appointed to that post in 1999 by then-President Clinton — is withdrawing his endorsement of Hillary Clinton, and backing Barack Obama instead.

The campaign said Andrew would appear at a 10 a.m. press conference at its state headquarters in Indianapolis, then join campaign manager David Plouffe on a conference call with reporters.

"Many will ask, why now? Why, with several primaries still remaining, with Senator Clinton just winning Pennsylvania, with my friend Evan Bayh working hard to make sure Senator Clinton wins Indiana, why switch now? Why call for super delegates to come together now to constructively pick a president?" said Andrew in a letter released Thursday.

"The simple answer is that while the timing is hard for me personally, it is best for America. We simply cannot wait any longer, nor can we let this race fall any lower and still hope to win in November. June or July may be too late. The time to act is now."

Obama wants pro-Clinton Group Investigated

The Clinton will do anything to win including violating the rules. They are essentially employing the swiftboat tactics of the Republicans during the 2004 campaign:

Barack Obama's presidential campaign wants federal regulators to investigate fellow Democrats who are backing Hillary Rodham Clinton's candidacy, taking intraparty discord to a new level of confrontation.

Obama's campaign lawyer, Robert Bauer, filed a complaint Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission, accusing the pro-Clinton American Leadership Project of violating campaign finance laws by running ads against Obama. The group is spending $920,000 for an ad in Indiana questioning Obama's economic policies.

The group is largely financed by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and is run by Democratic operatives, many of them based in California and who have past connections to Clinton or her husband. Its organizers say they are abiding by the law and a 2007 Supreme Court ruling.

Bauer, in his complaint and in a teleconference with reporters, likened the group to organizations that had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines for ad campaigns in the 2004 presidential election. Among them was the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which attacked Democrat John Kerry's service in Vietnam and his subsequent anti-war stance.

"This organization is a Swift Boat wannabe and it's violating the law in exactly the same way," Bauer said.

Senator John Kerry, who was the victim of those swiftboat ads in 2004, is denouncing the press' preoccupation with Reverend Wright. This is what Kerry had to say during a MSNBC interview:

KERRY: Can I say something to you? Obviously it is painful and he said it. You folks need to let go of this. Television needs to stop dwelling on something that is in the past. I thought Barack Obama yesterday gave America his second big presidential moment of this campaign. The first when he spoke out about the issue of race. The second yesterday, when he made it clear, every one of the statements of the minister are just unacceptable. They're not the person that he knew before. Now let's move on to how we'll put people to work. How are you going to give people health care? How are you going to create jobs in america? What Barack Obama is offering in this gas price issue is real leadership. I mean, do we want people who sort of put their fingers in the wind and throw out an idea for the short term that is sort of politically pleasing, or do you want a here who stands up and says, no, what we need is to really lower gas prices by having a real energy policy, an intelligent policy that puts in place the incentives for renewable fuels and alternative fuels. That's what Barack Obama is doing. And it is you guys have to focus on the thing that really matter to the American electorate. The other thing is just worn out, old history now. This guy had his narcissistic moment and it is finished.

WITT: Okay. Point well taken. Did I say to begin, can I just say, sir, I knew you weren't going to like that question. On the record.

KERRY: Let's move on to the thing that really matter to people. I think people in America are tired of this stuff.

Economy in Crisis: GM Posts $3.3B Losses In 1st Quarter

This will mean more job losses which will make the recession worse:

General Motors Corp. struggled to a $3.3 billion first-quarter loss, due in part to a weak U.S. market, a strike at a major supplier and plummeting sales of sport utility vehicles and pickups.

The loss reported Wednesday for the January-March period, which amounted to $5.74 per share, also reflected one-time charges. It was much larger than the company's loss of $42 million, or 7 cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago.

GM said a two-month strike at American Axle and Manufacturing Holdings Inc. has cost it $800 million and 100,000 vehicles. The strike has affected 30 GM plants.

GM's loss included a $1.45 billion charge to reflect a change in the value of GM's interest in GMAC Financial Services and $731 million to increase GM's liability in Delphi Corp.'s ongoing bankruptcy.

Excluding the one-time items, GM lost $350 million, or 62 cents per share, beating Wall Street's expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial had expected a loss of $1.60 per share.

GM's total revenue for the quarter was $42.7 billion, down from $43.4 billion a year ago. GM said revenues were up 20 percent outside North America thanks to strong growth in China, Russia, Brazil and India, but were impacted by the slowdown in North America and losses at GMAC.

Did I mention that bad economic news affects consumer confidence:

Soaring gas prices and weaker job prospects made Americans gloomier about the economy in April, sending a widely watched measure of consumer sentiment to a five-year low, a private research group said Tuesday.

The New York-based Conference Board said that its Consumer Confidence Index, which had plummeted in March, fell again to 62.3 in April, down from the revised 65.9 last month and 76.4 in February. While the reading was a little better than the 61.0 expected by analysts, the index remains at its weakest point since March 2003, when it registered 61.4, ahead of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

"This continued weakening suggests that not only has the feeble level of growth in the first quarter spilled over into the second quarter, but the economic conditions may have slowed even further," Lynn Franco, director of the Conference Board Consumer Research Center, said in a statement. "And not only are lackluster business and job conditions eroding confidence, but rising gasoline prices are undoubtedly heightening concerns."

The Present Situation Index, which measures shoppers' current assessment of economic conditions, dropped to 80.7 in April from 90.6 in March. The Expectations Index, which measures the outlook over the next six months, was little changed at a depressed 50.1, compared to 49.4 in March.

Eroding consumer confidence foreshadows weakening consumer spending, which could further hurt the already deteriorating economy since consumer spending accounts for more than two-thirds of the nation's economic activity.

Investors were unfazed, however, by the fourth straight month of declines in the consumer sentiment reading. In midmorning trading, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 0.32, or less then 0.01 percent, to 12,871.43. Broader markets were narrowly lower.

The downbeat news on confidence came as the widely watched Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller index showed that housing prices dropped in February at the fastest rate ever, showing that the housing slump is gaining momentum.

Girl Thrown on Fire for Being 'Low Class'

Sadly we could be going backwards in terms of women's rights worldwide:

A man, incensed that a six-year-old girl chose to walk through a path reserved for upper caste villagers, pushed her into burning embers, police in north India said Wednesday. She was seriously burned.

The girl is a Dalit, or an "untouchable," according to India's traditional caste system.

India's constitution outlaws caste-based discrimination, and barriers have broken down in large cities. Prejudice, however, persists in some rural areas of the country.

The girl was walking with her mother down a path in the city of Mathura when she was accosted by a man in his late teens, said police superintendent R.K. Chaturvedi.

"He scolded them both and pushed her," Chaturvedi said. The girl fell about three to four feet into pile of burning embers by the side of the road.

The girl remained in critical condition Wednesday.

The man confessed to the crime and was charged with attempted murder, Chaturvedi said.

The assault took place in India's Uttar Pradesh state, about 150 km (93 miles) south of Delhi. The state is governed by Mayawati, a woman who goes by one name and is India's most powerful Dalit politician.

Her Bahujan Samaj Party seeks to get more political representation for Dalits, who are considered so low in the social order that they don't even rank among the four classes that make up the caste system.

Were have no reason to be so proud as to how we treat women in the U.S.:

One of the hundreds of young polygamist-sect members taken into state custody gave birth Tuesday to a healthy boy while child welfare officials, state troopers and fellow sect members stood watch outside the maternity ward.

"The boy is healthy and the mother is doing well," Patrick Crimmins, spokesman for the state Child Protective Services, said of the noontime birth at Central Texas Medical Center.

The mother is "younger than 18," Crimmins said, and will remain with her new son in a nearby foster-care facility until a formal custody hearing will determine the pair's fate sometime before June 5. Crimmins declined to give any other details about the girl or where she and the baby would stay.

Transcript: Obama Press Conference on Jeremiah Wright

Read the full transcript:

OBAMA: Yesterday we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday. I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992. I’ve known Reverend Wright for almost 20 years. The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.

They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs. And if Reverend Wright thinks that that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well. And based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought either.

Now, I’ve already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons. As I said, I had not heard them before. And I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church. He has built a wonderful congregation. The people of Trinity are wonderful people, and what attracted me has always been their ministries reach beyond the church walls.

But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st centuries, when he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses.

They offend me. The rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced. And that’s what I’m doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.

Let me just close by saying this. We started this campaign with the idea that the problems that we face as a country are too great to continue to be divided, that in fact all across America people are hungry to get out of the old, divisive politics of the past.

I have spoken and written about the need for us to all recognize each other as Americans, regardless of race or religion or region of the country, that the only way we can deal with critical issues like energy and health care and education and the war on terrorism is if we are joined together.

And the reason our campaign has been so successful is because we have moved beyond these old arguments.

What we saw yesterday out of Reverend Wright was a resurfacing and, I believe, an exploitation of those old divisions. Whatever his intentions, that was the result. It is antithetical to our campaign. It is antithetical to what I am about. It is not what I think America stands for.

And I want to be very clear that, moving forward, Reverend Wright does not speak for me. He does not speak for our campaign. I cannot prevent him from continuing to make these outrageous remarks, but what I do want him to be very clear about, as well as all of you and the American people, is that when I say that I find these comments appalling, I mean it.

It contradicts everything that I am about and who I am. And anybody who has worked with me, who knows my life, who has read my books, who has seen what this campaign is about, I think, will understand that it is completely opposed to what I stand for and where I want to take this country.

Last point. I’m particularly distressed that this has caused such a distraction from what this campaign should be about, which is the American people. Their situation is getting worse. And this campaign has never been about me. It’s never been about Senator Clinton or John McCain. It’s not about Reverend Wright.

People want some help in stabilizing their lives and securing a better future for themselves and their children. And that’s what we should be talking about.

And the fact that Reverend Wright would think that somehow it was appropriate to command the stage for three or four consecutive days in the midst of this major debate is something that not only makes me angry, but also saddens me.

So with that, let me take some questions.

QUESTION: Why the change of tone from yesterday? When you spoke to us on the tarmac yesterday, you didn’t have this sense of anger and outrage.

OBAMA: Yes, I’ll be honest with you — because I hadn’t seen it yet.

QUESTION: And that was the difference you…

OBAMA: Yes.

QUESTION: You heard the reports about the AIDS comments.

OBAMA: I had not. I had not seen the transcript. What I had heard was he had given a performance, and I thought at the time that it would be sufficient simply to reiterate what I had said in Philadelphia.

Upon watching it, what became clear to me was that it was more than just him defending himself. What became clear to me was that he was presenting a worldview that contradicts who I am and what I stand for.

And what I think particularly angered me was his suggestion somehow that my previous denunciation of his remarks were somehow political posturing. Anybody who knows me and knows what I am about knows that I am about trying to bridge gaps and that I see the commonality in all people.

And so when I start hearing comments about conspiracy theories and AIDS and suggestions that somehow Minister Farrakhan has been a great voice in the 20th century, then that goes directly at who I am and what I believe this country needs.

Obama Takes Lead in Senate Endorsements

Wasn't Hillary supposed to be very popular among her Senate colleagues:

Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) is now a more popular choice among his Democratic Senate colleagues than rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.).

Obama, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, received the backing of New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman on Monday, and now leads Clinton with 14 endorsements to 13. In addition, Bingaman is the latest in a string of committee chairmen to support the Illinois senator.

While only two of Clinton’s 13 backers chair Senate committees, eight of Obama’s supporters head a panel.

“To make progress, we must rise above the partisanship and the issues that divide us to find common ground. We must move the country in a dramatically new direction,” Bingaman stated. “I strongly believe Barack Obama is best positioned to lead the nation in that new direction.”

Obama is pledging a positive campaign despite the constant attacks from the Clinton mob:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, attempting to regain his momentum after losing the Pennsylvania primary, promised to shun negative campaigning as his race drags on against Hillary Clinton.

Obama, 46, an Illinois senator, began his drive for the nomination with a message of unity and the pledge that he wouldn't run a typical political campaign. Today, Obama said he realized his campaign had strayed in recent weeks.

``I told this to my team, you know, we are starting to sound like other folks, we are starting to run the same negative stuff,'' Obama told a crowd of about 5,000 in Wilmington, North Carolina. ``It shows that none of us are immune from this kind of politics. But the problem is that it doesn't help you.''

Obama and Clinton are campaigning in North Carolina today ahead of the state's May 6 primary. Indiana voters also go to the polls that day, and Obama said he expects to win both contests. While he continues to lead Clinton in delegates needed for the nomination, the next round of voting has taken on renewed importance since his April 22 loss to Clinton in Pennsylvania.

During the 1 1/2 hour town hall, Obama adopted a relaxed pose, shirt sleeves rolled up and a hand in one pocket for much of the time. He addressed concerns by some Democrats that the prolonged race would hurt the party in November, saying he had no doubt that the party would be united.

We need less negative campaigning more on the issues:

Differences With McCain

Both Obama and Clinton today emphasized their differences with presumed Republican nominee John McCain. Obama said he considers McCain, a former prisoner of war, a ``hero'' yet said, ``I differ with him profoundly when it comes to identifying what the country needs right now.''

Clinton criticized McCain and Obama as she proposed a windfall profits tax on oil companies to pay for a suspension of the federal tax on gasoline.

Clinton said the money from taxing oil-company profits ``would help to pay for what we need to do to continue to repair and modernize and rebuild our roads,'' while a moratorium on fuel-tax collections ``would give people during the peak driving months of the summer some temporary relief.''

She noted that Obama opposes suspending the 18.4 cents a gallon federal levy on gasoline and McCain, who proposed shelving the tax during the summer driving season, would use general revenue to replace money lost from the highway fund.

``That's a mistake,'' she said.

The economy, with the loss of a quarter-million jobs so far this year, has moved to the forefront of the presidential campaign as rising fuel costs add to pressure on consumers. The national average price of a gallon of gasoline is $3.60, up 66 cents since last year, and diesel prices average $4.24 a gallon, up from $2.92 a year ago, according to a survey by AAA.

Suspending fuel taxes would require congressional action before lawmakers take their summer recess, and previous attempts to pass a tax moratorium have failed.

McCain, 71, an Arizona senator, proposed in an April 15 economic speech a ``gas-tax holiday,'' from the May 26 Memorial Day holiday to Labor Day, which falls on Sept. 1. He also would lift the 24.4 cents a gallon tax on diesel fuel.

Obama says a fuel-tax moratorium would take money away from highway and bridge construction that the U.S. needs to spend while saving most people about $25 over the summer.

Economy in Crisis: Rice Shortages in the U.S.

While the press is talking about Rev.Wright America is experiencing unprecedented food shortages:

Reports of India and Thailand cutting exports of high-priced and fragrant gourmet rice have sent Asian families and restaurant owners in North Texas scurrying to buy what they can.

"When people see the prices, they say, 'Something is wrong,'" said Surinder Singh, owner of southwest Fort Worth's India Bazar, which specializes in South Asian and East European groceries. "Then they shop all around, even go to Arlington. When they come back, they're angry but they'll buy three 20-pound bags instead of their usual one."

Singh still has supplies, but they're getting tighter.

Costco and Sam's Club now allow a maximum of two to four institutional-size bags per customer, depending on supply.

On Saturday, Costco's Fort Worth store was sold out of both Indian basmati and Thai jasmine. And a Sam's nearby on Bryant Irvin Road has been out of basmati rice "for months," an employee said. Its Westworth store still had 20-pound bags at $15.42.

Richard Galanti, Costco's chief financial officer, said panic buying at his chain began about eight days ago in the San Francisco Bay area when a store manager limited sales to a single bag in response to a run on supplies. A local reporter who happened to be shopping wrote a story that got picked up around the region, then nationwide, spreading panic buying, he said.

For the week ending Sunday, Costco sold four times its typical volume of rice in that region, which includes Washington, Oregon, Montana, Alaska and Hawaii, Galanti told the Star-Telegram.

If that weren't bad enough, there's still the mortgage crisis:

The number of U.S. homes heading toward foreclosure more than doubled in the first quarter from a year earlier, as weakening property values and tighter lending left many homeowners powerless to prevent homes from being auctioned to the highest bidder, a research firm said Monday.

Among the hardest hit states were Nevada, Florida and, in particular, California, where Stockton led the nation with a foreclosure rate that was 6.6 times the national average, Irvine, Calif.-based RealtyTrac Inc. said.

Nationwide, 649,917 homes received at least one foreclosure-related filing in the first three months of the year, up 112 percent from 306,722 during the same period last year, RealtyTrac said.

The latest tally also represents an increase of 23 percent from the fourth quarter of last year.

RealtyTrac monitors default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions.

All told, one in every 194 households received a foreclosure filing during the quarter. Foreclosure filings increased in all but four states.

The most recent quarter marked the seventh consecutive quarter of rising foreclosure activity, RealtyTrac noted.
[...]The surge in foreclosure filings also suggests that much-touted campaigns by lawmakers and the mortgage lending industry aimed at helping at-risk homeowners aren't paying off.

Hope Now, a Bush administration-organized mortgage industry group, said nearly 503,000 homeowners had received mortgage aid in the first quarter. Most of the aid was temporary, however.

Pennsylvania was a notable standout in the latest foreclosure data. The number of homes in the state to receive a foreclosure-related filing plunged 24.4 percent from a year earlier.

Sharga credited the decline to the state's foreclosure relief measures, noting that cities such as Philadelphia put in place a moratorium on all foreclosure auctions for April and implemented other measures aimed at helping slow foreclosures.

Wheat prices have doubled in only a few months:

Breaking the dollar barrier "scares me," said the Bronx-born owner of Bethesda Bagels. But with 100-pound bags of North Dakota flour now above $50 -- more than double what they were a few months ago -- he sees no alternative to a hefty increase in the price of his signature product, a bagel made by hand in the back of the store.

"I've never seen anything like this in 20 years," he said. "It's a nightmare."

What's a big part of the problem:

But underlying this food inflation are changes that are transforming U.S. agriculture and making a return to the long era of cheap wheat products doubtful at best.

Half a continent away, in the North Dakota country that grows the high-quality wheats used in Fleishman's bagels, many farmers are cutting back on growing wheat in favor of more profitable, less disease-prone corn and soybeans for ethanol refineries and Asian consumers.

"Wheat was king once," said David Braaten, whose Norwegian immigrant grandparents built their Kindred, N.D., farm around wheat a century ago. "Now I just don't want to grow it. It's not a consistent crop."

Shoved aside by other crops
In the 1980s, more than half the farm's acres were wheat. This year only one in 10 will be, and 40 percent will go to soybeans. Braaten and other farmers are considering investing in a $180 million plant to turn the beans into animal feed and cooking oil, both now in strong demand in China. And to stress his hopes for ethanol, his business card shows a sketch of a fuel pump.

Columnist: "No Debate about it: Clinton's a Bully"

This from columnist, Michael Goodwin:

Debates about debates are common in campaigns, but that is no ordinary invitation Hillary Clinton is extending to Barack Obama. It's a gang-girl taunt when she tells a big rally she will go anywhere, anytime for a throwdown.

She offers to do it without a moderator, just the two of them asking and answering questions. Stripped of her gauzy spin that it could be like Lincoln-Douglas, she's really challenging him to a bareknuckle punchout. On TV.

It's what a schoolyard tough would do: Knock on a rival's door and dare him to come out and fight on the street. Right here, right now. No rules, just a slugfest, you and me.

She does it because she needs to bloody Obama to win. And because she knows she can kick his butt in a debate.

Obama says no to her because he thinks he can win the nomination without facing her. He also knows she can kick his butt one on one.

This much they agree on: She's tougher than he is. So she wins the debate on debates by demanding one that he ducks.

Welcome to yet another defining moment in the Long March toward the Democratic nomination. He's soft and wounded and she's nasty and desperate.

She's even talking about "obliterating" Iran to prove how tough she is. And she calls Dick Cheney Darth Vader!

[...]Although her fierce attacks on Obama are pushing her negative ratings into the danger zone even among Democrats, she has little choice. The delegate math is against her and time is running out. A loss in Indiana, where she should win, could finish her next week. A blowout by him in North Carolina, where he is favored, could also end it.

In fact, she could lose the nomination even if she keeps winning primaries and pulls out a narrow win in the total popular vote. That's because Obama is quietly closing in on a majority of delegates.

According to Real Clear Politics, Obama now has 1,727 total delegates to Clinton's 1,592. There are about 400 pledged delegates available in the remaining contests, with 187 up for grabs May 6.

Assume Clinton and Obama split the 400, adding 200 each to their totals. He would then have 1,927 - just 98 short of the 2,025 needed for the nomination. She would have 1,792, or 233 from a majority.

With about 300 uncommitted superdelegates left to pick the winner, Clinton would need almost 80% of them to get a majority, while Obama would need only 33%.

Bill Kristol: Hillary Clinton not Getting Respect from Press

William Kristol is one of the leaders of the neocons. He would like us to believe that his kind words for Hillary are sincere. What he won't tell you is that he and his boy, McCain, want to drag out the democratic primaries indefinitely. They would love to see her win but know that won't happen:

I normally don’t claim to speak for other members of the vast right-wing conspiracy. After all, we’re each nefarious in our own, individual way. Indeed, we often disagree with one another.

But I do think I can speak for most of my fellow right-wingers when I say this: We once looked forward with unambivalent glee to the fall of the house of Clinton. Many of us still do. But we also see the liberal media failing to give Hillary Clinton the respect she deserves [just like the kind of respect she would get during any potential general election]. So, since we conservatives believe in giving credit where credit is due [unless your running against a Republican], it falls to us to praise Hillary.

The fact is Hillary Clinton has turned out to be an impressive candidate. She has consistently defeated Barack Obama when her back was to the wall — first in New Hampshire, then in several big primaries on Super Tuesday, on March 4 in Ohio and Texas, and then last week in Pennsylvania, where she was outspent by almost 3 to 1, yet won handily.

She is, of course, still behind in the race, and Obama will most likely be the nominee. His team has run the better campaign. In particular, it realized how important the caucus states could be: Obama’s delegate lead depends on his caucus victories.

But Hillary may well be the better candidate. After all, for all the talk of Obama’s extraordinary ability to draw voters to the polls, Clinton has defeated him in the big states, including California, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Obama won his home state of Illinois, but she won Florida, where both were on the ballot but didn’t campaign.

Furthermore, if you add up the votes in all the primaries and caucuses — excluding Michigan (where only Hillary was on the ballot), and imputing the likely actual totals in the four caucus states, where only percentages were reported — Clinton now trails in overall votes by only about 300,000, or about 1 percent of the total. By the end of the nominating contest, she may well be ahead on this benchmark — one not entirely to be scorned in a democracy.

Hillary has achieved this despite much disparagement of her candidacy by liberal commentators, and in the face of the media’s crush on Obama. Even those who started out being well disposed to Clinton have moved toward Obama, if only out of concern that the prolonged race is damaging Democratic prospects in the fall.

Bush Letter to Congress: I Can Torture If I Want to

Spoken like a true Fascist:

CIA interrogation techniques otherwise prohibited by international law might be legal in the face of an impending terrorist attack, the Justice Department says in newly disclosed letters to Capitol Hill.

The letters show that the Bush administration is taking the position that it has latitude in dealing with restrictions from the Supreme Court and Congress designed to limit how far interrogators in the U.S. intelligence community can go.

Among the issues is a Geneva Conventions ban on outrages upon personal dignity, a provision the Supreme Court ruled in 2006 applies to prisoners in American captivity.

"The fact that an act is undertaken to prevent a threatened terrorist attack, rather than for the purpose of humiliation and abuse, would be relevant to a reasonable observer in measuring the outrageousness of the act," said a Justice Department letter dated March 6.

The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 prohibits cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

The detainee act requires an exact analysis of the circumstances in determining whether it has been violated, the department said in a separate letter.

Actions which may in one setting constitute a denial of fundamental fairness may in other circumstances fall short of a denial, said one of the Justice Department letters that relied on a decade-old Supreme Court decision.

Did I mention Bush is a lousy commander-in-chief:

Millions of dollars of lucrative Iraq reconstruction contracts were never finished because of excessive delays, poor performance or other factors, including failed projects that are being falsely described by the U.S. government as complete, federal investigators say.

The audit released Sunday by Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, provides the latest snapshot of an uneven reconstruction effort that has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $100 billion. It also comes as several lawmakers have said they want the Iraqis to pick up more of the cost of reconstruction.

The special IG's review of 47,321 reconstruction projects worth billions of dollars found that at least 855 contracts were terminated by U.S. officials before their completion, primarily because of unforeseen factors such as violence and excessive costs. About 112 of those agreements were ended specifically because of the contractors' actual or anticipated poor performance.

In addition, the audit said many reconstruction projects were being described as complete or otherwise successful when they were not. In one case, the U.S. Agency for International Development contracted with Bechtel Corp. in 2004 to construct a $50 million children's hospital in Basra, only to "essentially terminate" the project in 2006 because of monthslong delays.

Transcript: DNC Chairman Dean on Meet The Press 4-27-08

Here are some excerpts or read the complete transcript:

MR. RUSSERT: Let's look at the latest number. These are elected delegates. Barack Obama has 1491, Hillary Clinton has 1334. You need 2,025. Upcoming Democratic contests: Guam, Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico; ending on June 3rd, Montana and South Dakota. Four hundred eight delegates available with all those contests. Lastly, the so-called superdelegates, Clinton has 263, Obama has 240, and 292 remain uncommitted.

When you look at all that, how and when is this nomination fight going to end?

DR. DEAN: Well, I'm hoping it'll be over by the end of the month of June. We've made great progress in the last few weeks that I think about 50 or 60 unpledged delegates have said who they're going to be for. And, you know, it'd be a lot of fun for you if we had a divided convention with 104 ballots; it'd break the record. But the truth is we need to figure this out before the convention. We need time to heal. And actually, I'm not the most important person in terms of bringing the party together. The most important person is the, is the person who doesn't win the nomination. Because I can remember when, I can remember when I lost to John Kerry, I had to go out and convince my supporters--it took me about three months--that they needed to support Senator Kerry. I endorsed him, I campaigned for him, I went all--to all the college campuses. And that's what the person who doesn't win this, with 49 percent of the delegates, is going to have to do in order to keep the party together.

Dean puts cold water on the Clinton argument:

GOV. ED RENDELL (D-PA): The popular vote is, to me, a much fairer indicia than the pledged delegates because the pledged delegates are elected in a very undemocratic way.

(End audiotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Do you agree with that?

DR. DEAN: Well, no, I don't. First of all, I don't agree with it. And secondly, look, we have a set of rules. My job here is not to side with one candidate or the other and talk about pledged delegates or superdelegates or any of that stuff. My job is to take the rules that everybody started with and enforce the rules without fear or favor of any candidate. The--somebody's going to lose this with 49 percent of the delegates in Denver, and that person has to believe that they were treated fairly if--otherwise, we can't win. Look, John McCain is a weak candidate. He's wrong on Iraq, as far as the American people are concerned. We don't want to stay there for a hundred years. He's wrong on the economy; it wasn't the mortgage holders that, that, whose fault this was. He's wrong on healthcare. We should have health insurance for all our kids. He is not a strong candidate.

The only thing that's going to beat us is if we're not unified. And my, in order to be unified, both the losing candidate and the winning candidate have to feel like the system was fair. So Senator Rendell may say--I mean, Governor Rendell may not like the rules, but the rules are what we started with. Most of them have been in place for the last 25 years. That's what we've got to go by, whether you like the rules or you don't like the rules.

Transcript: Obama on FOXNews 4-27-08

Obama refused to appear on FOX until today. Here are excerpts or Read the entire transcript:

WALLACE: We checked - anyway. Your defeat in Pennsylvania raises new questions about your candidacy and especially about some of the pillars of the Democratic base. Let’s take a look at the numbers. Among white union households, Clinton beats you 72 percent to 28 percent. Among white Catholics, again, same margin, 72 percent to 28 percent.

Senator, why are you having such trouble convincing white, working class voters that you’re their guy?

OBAMA: Keep in mind that Senator Clinton was well-regarded in the state of Pennsylvania. Just as she was well-regarded in the state of Ohio. The fact that they voted for her shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. We started off 20 points down in that race. Just like we started 20 points down in Ohio. And we actually made significant progress there.

And when you look at the polling that’s now being done, post Pennsylvania, about how we match up in a general election, I think Senator Clinton does a couple points better than I do. But it’s not substantial. Most of those voters will vote for me.

But they are more familiar with her. They shared a - she is from a bordering state. On the other hand, in Wisconsin I won those same voters over Senator Clinton. In Virginia I won those voters over Senator Clinton. In Iowa I won those voters over Senator Clinton.

So I think - I am confident that when you come to a general election and we are having a debate about the future of this country, how are we going to lower gas prices? How are we going to deal with job losses? How are we going to focus on energy independence? Those are voters that I will be able to appeal to.

The name "Wright" appears 5 times in the interview, "Iraq" only 7 times. "housing" and "mortage" were not mentioned once:

WALLACE: Senator, you say a lot of good stuff. Reverend Wright (INAUDIBLE) are distractions from the real issues. But especially for someone like you, who’s a newcomer to the national scene, people don’t know a lot about, don’t voters have a legitimate interest in who you are and what your values are?

OBAMA: Absolutely and so the question becomes, how do voters draw conclusions about my values? Do they talk about, do they look at the 20 years in which I’ve devoted my life to community service? Do they about the work I did as a community organizer working with Catholic parishes and churches to bring people together to set up job training programs for the unemployed and the poor. That’s a reflection of my values.

Do they look at how I’ve raised my children and how I speak about my family? That’s a reflection of my values. I don’t think that the issue of Reverend Wright is illegitimate. I just think that the way it was reported was not I think a reflection of both that church that I attend and who I am.

I don’t think - let me just use another example. On flag pins, I have worn flag pins in the past. I will wear flag pins in the future. The fact that I said that some politicians use the flag pin and then aren’t acting in a particularly patriotic way, for that to someone be translated into me being anti-patriotic or anti-flag, I think that is a distraction.

I think that that is not reflective of me or the love that I have for this country. Keep in mind, I think (INAUDIBLE) the scene nationally at the Democratic convention, giving what I would say was about as patriotic a speech about what America means to me and what this country’s about as any speech that we’ve heard in a long time.

We are in a Unprecedented Worldwide Food Crisis

This from the Washington Post:

The globe's worst food crisis in a generation emerged as a blip on the big boards and computer screens of America's great grain exchanges. At first, it seemed like little more than a bout of bad weather.

In Chicago, Minneapolis and Kansas City, traders watched from the pits early last summer as wheat prices spiked amid mediocre harvests in the United States and Europe and signs of prolonged drought in Australia. But within a few weeks, the traders discerned an ominous snowball effect -- one that would eventually bring down a prime minister in Haiti, make more children in Mauritania go to bed hungry, even cause American executives at Sam's Club to restrict sales of large bags of rice.

As prices rose, major grain producers including Argentina and Ukraine, battling inflation caused in part by soaring oil bills, were moving to bar exports on a range of crops to control costs at home. It meant less supply on world markets even as global demand entered a fundamentally new phase. Already, corn prices had been climbing for months on the back of booming government-subsidized ethanol programs. Soybeans were facing pressure from surging demand in China. But as supplies in the pipelines of global trade shrank, prices for corn, soybeans, wheat, oats, rice and other grains began shooting through the roof.

At the same time, food was becoming the new gold. Investors fleeing Wall Street's mortgage-related strife plowed hundreds of millions of dollars into grain futures, driving prices up even more. By Christmas, a global panic was building. With fewer places to turn, and tempted by the weaker dollar, nations staged a run on the American wheat harvest.

Foreign buyers, who typically seek to purchase one or two months' supply of wheat at a time, suddenly began to stockpile. They put in orders on U.S. grain exchanges two to three times larger than normal as food riots began to erupt worldwide. This led major domestic U.S. mills to jump into the fray with their own massive orders, fearing that there would soon be no wheat left at any price.

"Japan, the Philippines, [South] Korea, Taiwan -- they all came in with huge orders, and no matter how high prices go, they keep on buying," said Jeff Voge, chairman of the Kansas City Board of Trade and also an independent trader. Grains have surged so high, he said, that some traders are walking off the floor for weeks at a time, unable to handle the stress.

"We have never seen anything like this before," Voge said. "Prices are going up more in one day than they have during entire years in the past. But no matter the price, there always seems to be a buyer. . . . This isn't just any commodity. It is food, and people need to eat."

Obama has Electoral Vote Advantage Come November

I plotted the general election electoral for November at the Washington Post website (you can do your own). My estimate shows Obama barely winning; but winning. The issue being Barack has to win either Ohio or Pennsylvania.

<p><strong>><a href='http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/electoral-college/'>Electoral College Prediction Map</a></strong> - Predict the winner of the general election. Use the map to experiment with winning combinations of states. Save your prediction and send it to friends.</p>

Our Troops Endangered by Faulty Rifles?

If it weren't bad enough that our troops in Iraq are dying at the hands of insurgents. Now they face having to fight with guns that don't shoot:

No weapon is more important to tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than the carbine rifle. And for well over a decade, the military has relied on one company, Colt Defense of Hartford, to make the M4s they trust with their lives.

Now, as Congress considers spending millions more on the guns, this exclusive arrangement is being criticized as a bad deal for American forces as well as taxpayers, according to interviews and research conducted by the Associated Press.

"What we have is a fat contractor in Colt who's gotten very rich off our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

The M4, which can shoot hundreds of bullets a minute, is a shorter and lighter version of the company's M16 rifle, first used 40 years ago during the Vietnam War. At about $1,500 apiece, the M4 is overpriced, according to Coburn. It jams too often in sandy environments such as Iraq, he adds, and requires far more maintenance than more durable carbines.

"And if you tend to have the problem at the wrong time, you're putting your life on the line," said Coburn, who began examining the M4's performance last year after receiving complaints from soldiers. "The fact is, the American GI today doesn't have the best weapon. And they ought to."

[...]In 2006, a nonprofit research group surveyed 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan and found 89 percent were satisfied with the M4. Colt and the Army have trumpeted that finding, but detractors point out that the survey also revealed that 19 percent of these soldiers had their weapon jam during a firefight.

Chicago Killings Raise Parents' Fears

What the hell is going on here? Are we seeing the disintegration our society? Then you have a worthless dynasty politician blaming the victims--the mothers:

All day, Chicago was a city on edge, with police gearing up to combat the waves of violence that have hit the city hard over the past few weeks.

Police SWAT teams are saturating the city's South Side, the area where most of the 331 shootings in the city this year have occurred. The teams are out in street patrols, backed up by helicopter surveillance.

It's their response to last weekend's shooting spree, which alone counted for an estimated 36 of those shootings, seven of them deadly.

Jitters Weatherspoon, a South Side native, said the violence in his neighborhood is forcing him and other parents to hold their children hostage in their own homes, for fear of seeing them get shot.

"That's a parent's worst dream is to have to bury their own kid and yes, it's happening. People are burying their kids," he said.

[...]A fired up Mayor Richard Daley held an emergency community meeting on Friday in which he blamed parents for letting the problem spiral out of control.

Kim Jong-il builds ‘Thunderbirds’ Runway for war in N. Korea

From The Sunday Times (UK):

North Korean military engineers are completing an underground runway beneath a mountain that can protect fighter aircraft from attack until they take off at high speed through the mouth of a tunnel.

The 6,000ft runway is a few minutes’ flying time from the tense front line where the Korean People’s Army faces soldiers from the United States and South Korea.

The project was identified by an air force defector from North Korea and captured on a satellite image by Google Earth, according to reports in the South Korean press last week.

It is one of three underground fighter bases among an elaborate subterranean military infrastructure built to withstand a “shock and awe” assault in the first moments of a war, the defector said.

The runway, reminiscent of the Thunderbirds television series, highlights the strange and secretive nature of the regime that provided the expertise for a partially built nuclear reactor in Syria, film of which was released by the CIA last week.

The reactor was destroyed by Israeli aircraft last September in an operation that may have killed or injured North Koreans at the site in the remote deserts of eastern Syria.

The airstrike appears to have convinced North Korea to harden its own defences and to spend more on its military, even as it struggles to cope with a new food shortage that could see millions of its citizens go hungry. In recent days North Korea has ordered its people to be vigilant against “warmongers”.

“The prevailing situation requires the whole party and army and all the people to get fully prepared to go into action,” North Korea’s state media said on Friday.

Although the media unleashed a volley of abuse against the United States and Lee Myungbak, South Korea’s conservative new president, it also said “sincere and constructive” negotiations on nuclear disarmament were in progress, an apparent effort to play off hawks against doves in Washington.

Olympic Torch Relay Protests In Japan

The Olympic torch can be extinguished but not the desire for human freedom:

Huge security along the route of the Olympic torch relay in Japan failed to prevent scuffles breaking out and demonstrators from attacking the flame.

More than 3,000 police were deployed in Nagano, the site of the 1998 Winter Olympics, following major disruption during the relay legs in London and Paris.

Demonstrators are keen to use the publicity surrounding the Beijing Games to highlight human rights issues in China and the occupation of Tibet.

Police guards in track suits surrounded the first runner, the manager of Japan's national baseball team, and another 100 uniformed riot police trotted alongside six patrol cars and two police lead motorcycles.

Two men tried to charge at the torch in separate incidents during the first half of the relay, but were arrested.

Another was held after throwing eggs at the flame.

Demonstrators also threw rubbish and flares towards the torch at different points, briefly holding up the relay.

Pro-Chinese supporters and protesters kicked and punched one another, leaving at least four Chinese injured, officials said.

[...]The 1,400-year-old temple, which was the showcase of the 1998 Olympics, last week declined to host the start of the relay, citing security concerns and sympathy among monks and worshippers for their religious brethren in Tibet.

After Nagano, the Olympic torch heads to South Korea, North Korea, Vietnam and Hong Kong.

If the grievances of the Tibetan people are not addressed violence could worsen and harm innocent people, including athletes attending the Olympics in China:

Interpol has warned of a "real possibility" that the Beijing Olympics will be targeted by terrorists - or that anti-China groups could attack athletes.

The warning came in the wake of the Olympic torch relay being dogged by pro-Tibet protests.

Ronald Noble, secretary general of the International Criminal Police Organisation, said: "An attempted act of terrorism is a real possibility and a real concern that all Olympic host countries have shared in recent years.

"In light of recent events, all countries whose athletes will participate and whose citizens will attend the Beijing Olympics must be prepared for the possibility that the groups and individuals responsible for the violence during the global torch relay could carry out their protests at the actual games."

He said the actions could range from disruptive behaviour, like blocking major transport routes or interfering with competitions, to more violent acts like assaulting officials or athletes or destroying property.

"Worse yet, we must be prepared for the possibility that al Qaeda or some other terrorist group will attempt to launch a deadly terrorist attack at these Olympics," he said.

The warning comes as air passengers in China will be restricted from taking more than one piece of carry-on baggage on flights from May 1.

Earlier this month, China added matches and lighters to a list of banned items on board domestic flights after what it said was plot to bring down a flight from the western region of Xinjiang.

The government has now restricted luggage allowances and also banned passengers carrying liquids on board domestic flights.

Is Bush Preparing for War with Iran?

The Bush presidency has been a total disaster. He needs something to distract the American people's attention from his failure. What is the solution? Wag the dog: start a war. Bill Clinton bombed Iraq during his Monica Lewinsky troubles. In addition, it was the neocon plan all along to overthrow the regime in Iran. They've been thwarted up to this point by the press, especially the blogs, from carrying out that dream. We'll need to stop them again:

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff accused Iran yesterday of "ratcheting up" its arms and training support to insurgents in Iraq, and warned that the United States has the combat power to strike Tehran if needed.

Adm. Mike Mullen told a Pentagon news conference the military has evidence - such as date stamps on newly found weapons caches - that shows that recently made Iranian weapons are flowing into Iraq at a steadily increasing rate.

Some of that firepower was used to support insurgents during the recent fighting in Basra in southern Iraq.

Mullen said he has seen evidence "that some of the weapons are recently not just found, but recently manufactured."

Both Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have made it clear that while all military options are on the table, they prefer to use other pressures on Iran.

"The solution right now still lies in using other levers of national power, including diplomatic, financial and international pressure," Mullen said.

Mullen also said that launching a third conflict in that region would be extremely stressing for US forces,

But "it would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability."

"Unusual public accusations":

U.S. military leaders have issued a series of unusual public accusations and warnings about Iran, saying they have new evidence of Iranian-backed attacks on U.S. troops as part of a broader effort to destabilize Iraq.

On Friday, the top uniformed officer in the U.S., Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, accused Iran in a televised news briefing of increasing its shipments of weapons to militants in Iraq, in violation of its promises to stem the flow of arms.

The comments by Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came days after angry complaints by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.

In addition, military officers in Iraq are planning to publicize evidence of what Mullen called Iran's "malign influence" there.

Military officials said there was no concerted U.S. campaign to intensify pressure on Iran. But taken together, the remarks represent a shift in the military's thinking. Hopes expressed last year that Iran might be tempering its involvement in Iraq seem to have evaporated, and military officials have renewed warnings about the potential for military action.

[...]Underscoring the latest tensions, a cargo vessel under contract to the Defense Department fired on a group of small boats in the Persian Gulf on Friday, briefly touching off alarm in the world energy markets. U.S. military officials said they believed the boats involved in the confrontation were Iranian, but military officials in Tehran denied the incident took place.

President Bush and officials in his administration have been accused by political opponents of using criticism of Iran to shift public attention away from the protracted war in Iraq.

U.S. intelligence experts reversed earlier assessments in December and concluded that Iran was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program. But in releasing classified information this week on an alleged nuclear reactor being built in Syria with the help of North Korea, the White House also warned Iran against pursuing such technology.

Here's another view from another blog:

As previously noted, Admiral Mike Mullen told a gathering at the Atlantic Council that he fears the United States and its allies “will have to deal with Iran in the very near future.” That statement left a lot of room for strategic ambiguity. He removed a bit in a press briefing yesterday, Ann Scott Tyson reports.

The nation’s top military officer said today that the Pentagon is planning for “potential military courses of action” against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government’s “increasingly lethal and malign influence” in Iraq. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a conflict with Iran would be “extremely stressing” but not impossible for U.S. forces, pointing specifically to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force. “It would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability,” he said at a Pentagon news conference.

Related Links:

• Clinton warns Iran of U.S. nuclear response
• UN nuke watchdog to revisit Iran: report
• Naval Incident Raises US-Iran Tensions
• Iran says no confrontation with US in Gulf - reports
• Oil prices up on word US ship fired on boats in Persian Gulf
• Questions Linger on Scope of Iran’s Threat in Iraq
• Iran's involvement in Iraq may not have increased: report

The Coming Civil War Among Democrats

Her victory in Pennsylvania guarantees Hillary Clinton will continue her destructive campaign until the convention. This assures a battle royal that could rival the chaos of the 1968 Democratic convention. Such a bloodbath would hand the election to John McCain. This might explain why some in the Democratic party are blasting the Clinton distraction:

If Democratic leaders strip Barack Obama of the nomination when he holds the lead in pledged delegates, they might as well call it "Driving Miss Hillary" - and watch as the party is torn asunder, long past the November election.

For decades, black voters have been the very core of the Democratic Party.

Without their near-total allegiance, Bill Clinton would not have served a single term, nor would Jimmy Carter have occupied the Oval Office.

Early on in this race, black voters viewed Obama as almost too good to be true, and they supported Hillary Rodham Clinton, as well.

They suspected Obama must be like all the other "black candidates" - a vent for them, but hopeless at the polls.

In the wake of Clinton's win in Pennsylvania, a new round of speculation has begun about whether to cut throats and whose to cut.

Clinton's blue-collar supporters are far more likely than Obama's black supporters to back John McCain if their candidate doesn't get the nomination, the theory goes.

Therefore, according to speculation, Democratic Party elders should dismiss Obama's advantage among "pledged" delegates - those won at the ballot box and the only true currency in this campaign - and give the nomination to Clinton.

But to be tricked now and sent once again to the back of the bus by the party they have loyally supported for decades would be a cruel, twisted insult for black Democrats.

Dem bigwigs are terrified of a convention fight and want a conclusion before then:

Democratic Party bigwigs are preparing to push superdelegates to get off the fence once state primary elections end in June, officials said yesterday.

The leaders, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, might pen a joint letter to the party insiders.

The letter would send a clear message to about 300 insiders who have stayed on the sidelines while Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have mounted increasingly harsh attacks on each other.

"The three of us, we may write a joint letter," Reid said yesterday. "We might do individual letters."

"We need to solve this before the convention," said Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly. "The way to do that is to have the superdelegates make their choices known."

And if you think the solution is a Obama-Clinton, Clinton-Obama ticket, Speaker Pelosi poured cold water on that idea:

KING: If you had your power, would you want them to run together?

PELOSI: No.

KING: No?

PELOSI: I don't think it's a good idea.

KING: Not a good idea?

PELOSI: No, I don't think so.

KING: Because?

PELOSI: I think that, first of all, the candidates -- whoever he or she may be -- should choose his or her own vice presidential candidate. I think that's appropriate. That's where you would see the comfort level on not only how to run, but how to govern the country. And there's plenty of talent to go around to draw upon for a good strong ticket. I'm not one of those who thinks that that's a good ticket.

KING: Really?

PELOSI: Really. KING: There's too much animosity?

PELOSI: No, I just think that -- well, let's put it this way, if they think that it's a good ticket, maybe it is. But I don't think that we should thrust the vice presidential choice onto the presidential nominee. That's her or his decision to make.