I'm sorry mcjoan.  I respect you a great deal, and I understand the value of seeing the glass as half full, but I'm with edgery on this. In fact I'm throroughly pissed off.

So what if Clinton and Obama are going to vote no on cloture?  Ferpetesake even Harry Reid is going to vote no on cloture.  You want me to praise them just for showing up a couple of hours early on SOTU day?  (we've all figured out the 4:30 vs noon thing by now, right?)

Suppose they bravely vote no but cloture passes anyway?  Will they pay a price?  No. We're the ones who will pay the price.  Clinton and Obama hadn't even committed to participating until today, even though we all knew they'd be in town.  Why the hell should I be happy with the candidates when it's still up to me to lean on the following Senators?  

* Bayh (202) 224-5623 * Carper (202) 224-2441 * Inouye (202) 224-3934 * Johnson (202) 224-5842 * Landrieu (202)224-5824 * McCaskill (202) 224-6154 * Mikulski (202) 224-4654 * Nelson (FL) (202) 224-5274 * Nelson (NE) (202) 224-6551 * Pryor (202) 224-2353 * Salazar (202) 224-5852

Here (briefly) is how news of the extension came out.  Any corrections would be welcome.

On Monday, a "defense official speaking on condition of anonymity" told an AP reporter (Pauline Jelinek?) that the Pentagon is considering a plan to extend the tours of duty for up to 15,000 U.S. troops serving in Iraq.  The initial leak suggested that the decision had not yet been made, that it would not apply to all troops, and that the extensions would be up to 120 days.  The news itself seems to have broken Tuesday morning, closely following Monday's announcement that 13k NG troops would be deployed/redeployed to Iraq.  Not surprisingly, it quickly created a stir among military families.  

On Wednesday (whoa! that didn't take very long!), SecDef Robert "What Iran-Contra Scandal?" Gates confirmed that "active army units now in the Central Command area (Iraq and Afghanistan) and those headed there will deploy for not more than 15 months and will return home to home station for not less than 12 months."  

Wow.  Just wow.  

Per Landay, Strobel, and Walcott of McClatchy, George Tenet gave Ben Veniste and Zelikow (of the 9/11 commission) the same (classified) briefing which he and Cofer Black had given to Condi Rice on July 10 2001.  

This second briefing took place, according to Strobel et al's sources, on January 28th of 2004. A little over a month after Tenet got the Medal of Freedom, BTW.  (Via TPM)

See also NYT quoting a State Department spokescritter confirming that the first briefing took place...

You are currently making the single most significant political mistake of the 2006 electoral cycle.  Never mind the moral dimension -- my own conscience is the only one I have the energy to worry about nowadays.  I'm talking strictly about electoral politics.  

And I sincerely apologize for the presumptuousness of telling you your own business, and in crude terms at that, but I honestly don't see any way to simply trust you on this.  I've been doing the "political calculus" on the back of a laptop and it's pretty grim.  

This is a bit of rambling about the importance of knowing who to lean on, and how to lean on them, in order to drive home the idea that the netroots are a force to be reckoned with...  

Have you checked out Maura in VA's diaries (first one, second one) about John Cosgrove and his attempt to criminalize failure to report a miscarriage?  Holy Mackerel.  The 2005-1-11 2:29:21 update particularly fascinating.  You can almost see the stains on the poor man's trousers.  Go Maura!  

And then there's Josh Marshall.  He's forging tirelesssly ahead with the Fainthearted Faction project and carrying on with the Conscience Caucus project.  Whaddaya wanna bet there are several congresscritters already experiencing a mild unease about that harmless-looking snowball as it starts rolling slowly down the steep mountainside of Social Security policy toward their offices?  

Are you watching the CAP panel on CSPAN?  I've got it on in the background and one of the questioners just quoted someone else (a writer or commentator) as suggesting that Dems "go for the jugular" on the SS issue by pointing out that the real motivation for SS reform is to prop up the collapsing dollar which is making the US financial sector desperately nervous.  

Since this is my preferred strategy and I'm not familiar with any "real" commentators putting quite as bluntly as that, I'd love to know who that questioner was talking about.  Unfortunately I didn't catch the beginning of the guy's question...

I was thinking about posting something like this a couple of days ago and didn't.  I try to resist giving unsolicited amateur advice, especially when it's vague and philosophical and I'm not 100% convinced that it's correct.  Originally, BetaCarbon's excellent post really highlighted the trivial, easy answer to the "what should Democrats be all about" question.  

But then the GOP managed to literally and directly call Jones and Boxer (third largest "mandate" in the 2004 election) liars and conspiracy theorists and crazy and enemies of democracy, on the record, on the House floor.  No evidence or anything, they just said it over and over.  How do they get away with stuff like that without nonstop howls of derision?  Why aren't they laughed at?  Seriously.  And what does it tell us about credibility that this happened while there was only one Dem Senator who felt secure enough in their seat to vote against accepting the OH electors' votes?  

The president of the united states said out loud in so many words on live television that he wanted to appoint Supreme Court justices because some of them voted for him.

Let me repeat that, and a few other things beelow the fold.

A lot of recent diaries about conversations with Republicans, as well as my own observations, suggest that Dems have gotten very good at using their own jitsu (High Energy, Hard Points, Yang Action) but are still not very good at observing their opponents' kyo (Low Energy, Soft Gaps, Yin Action).  

Before you read further, think back on conversations you've had with Bush supporters recently.  Mostly pretty frustrating, huh?  Better yet, go out and talk to some Bush supporters, tape the coversations, then take them home and listen to...  It's important, because neither side really trusts the media, and this election will be won or lost at the kitchen table.

If you're not going to read the rest, at least read Devilstower's awesome strategy post, ultrageek's inspirational smackdown moment, and walou's simple yet effective way to get Big Media to do its job.  Go, right now, and read them.  They are chock full of tasty goodness, and remind us that fretting about what the Kerry/Edwards campaign is doing isn't nearly as productive as getting up off our asses and doing what we're supposed to do.  

John McCain's figurative (and literal!) embrace of BC04 is kind of perplexing isn't it?  Some theories below the fold, the last of which I like best -- namely that he thinks we may yet see a Bush/McCain ticket.  Not necessarily with Cheney's consent.  Don your foil hat before continuing...

very funny "what liberal media?" moment recently...  I thought this was coffee-on-the-keyboard hysterical when I noticed it, but it's kinda subtle, so YMMV.

I guess this is just preaching to the choir, but check out the new "General Security Directorate" being created in order to "annihilate" insurgents...

after a certain amount of confused floundering ("Otter amendment" or "Sanders amendment?" unanimous or by-vote?  apparently Otter introduced but Sanders authored?), I finally found the roll call for HA654 to HR4754 by looking at all the roll calls for July 8.

No, wait...

they're Misleading Numbers!

No, wait...

it's Inflammatory Rhetoric!

Michael Isikoff's feelings must be hurt.  I say this in the most charitable way, because this Isikoff/Hosenball attempt at an F911 takedown is...  well, let's take a look.

you want optimism?  here's some optimism.  the Bush campaign sucks.

I am genuinely surprised -- no, make that utterly astonished -- by how lame the Bush campaign strategy has turned out to be.  the "coalition of the wild-eyed" ad is what caused me to write this, because while the other ads are just weak, that one seems downright counterproductive, and overall the Bush team appear to be doing things that would get any marketing team working for me fired in a hurry.

Like many kossacks, I am surprised and deeply disturbed by the Spain-bashing taking place in the American press.  I am dismayed that David Brooks can proclaim, without a hint of irony, that the Spanish people should have postponed their elections rather than surprise the pollsters and pundits.  And, like many of you, I am waiting to hear from our nominee.  In the meantime, let's make our voices heard and turn the narrative around NOW, before it's too late.

it would appear that despite some embarassing publicity the Bush administration considers operation Haitian Divorce (thanks Billmon) a roaring success and is turning their attention to Venezuela, and possibly Cuba...  one can only hope that President Aristide has a pleasant vacation. (you already know why the French wanted him out, right?)

there was a phrase which I edited out of my letter to factcheck on account of being off topic, but it does relate to my other recent comments and also to something I noticed about Tacitus' recent confessional about the possibility that the leaders of his party may have, as the saying goes, left him.  looks like the grownups are reluctant to let the teenagers borrow the car for a second term.

mea culpa mea maxima culpa, I find myself unable to resist the combined cheap shot this affords.

the cheap shot is below, but I am also mentioning this as a supporting data point for the hypothesis that many staunch Republicans will be happy to ditch Bush in favor of Kerry because they believe can obstruct and denigrate Kerry the way they did Clinton, prevent a midterm coattail effect, and get rid of him in one term.   a Kerry presidency would prevent the derailing of the "Republican Hegemony Train" which would occur with Dean or Clark and also give the GOP a chance to evade some of the responsibility for the economic and military disasters which Bush, DeLay and friends have inserted into our path as a nation.