You know, from all the lying.

From yesterday's Ireland Online, "Govt urged to cancel planned Bush v isit":

Irish MEPs Patricia McKenna and Pronsias de Rossa have called on the Government to cancel US President George W Bush?s planned visit to Ireland in June.

The Green Party and Labour Party MEPs said the EU-US summit that Mr Bush is due to attend should be held in Brussels rather than in Ireland.

They made the comments at a press conference organised by anti-war groups to promote a demonstration this Saturday to mark the first anniversary of the US/British invasion of Iraq.

The groups said the protest would give people an opportunity to express their opposition to Mr Bush?s visit to Ireland.

Speaking at this morning?s press conference, Ms McKenna said Mr Bush would use his planned visit to Ireland as part of his re-election campaign.

"Clearly, there?s no Irish-American votes to be had in Brussels and that?s the one priority for Bush - to get re-elected," she said.

"I don?t think that Ireland should facilitate his re-election. He has done untold damage to global security. He has made the world a more insecure rather than a more secure place and I believe it would be in the interests of the international community not to give support to Bush?s re-election campaign by allowing him to come to Ireland."

From an article by William Saletan on Slate yesterday, "Enemies of the States - If you're against Bush, you're against America":

If you oppose George Bush's policies, or if you're supported by anybody who opposes George Bush's policies, you're anti-American.

That was the message of the 1988 presidential campaign of George H.W. Bush, who suggested that his opponent from Massachusetts was against the Pledge of Allegiance. Now it's his son's campaign message, too.

Facts don't matter when you run on this theme. In June 1988, George H.W. Bush said of Michael Dukakis, "I'll never understand, when it came to his desk, why he vetoed a bill that called for the Pledge of Allegiance to be said in the schools of Massachusetts. I'll never understand it. We are one nation under God. Our kids should say the Pledge of Allegiance."

The bill Dukakis vetoed didn't "call for" the pledge to be said. It imposed criminal penalties on teachers who fa iled to start the day by leading students in the pledge. The Massachusetts Supreme Court told Dukakis it was unconstitutional. But never mind. According to Bush, Dukakis was against saying the pledge and being one nation under God.

History repeats itself. Last week, George W. Bush aired a TV ad in which the following charges appeared on the screen for nine seconds: "John Kerry's Plan: Weaken Fight Against Terrorists"; "John Kerry's Plan: Delay Defending America."

What was Bush's evidence for the first charge? His campaign cited four Kerry quotes. In the first, Kerry called for "replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time." In the second, Kerry called for "provisions to guarantee that there is not this blind spot in the American justice system that there is today under the Patriot Act." In the third, Kerry said, "I voted for the USA Patriot Act in the Senate right after 9/11 to advance our security at home, but I am concerned that Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department is abusing the powers conferred on it by that act." In the fourth, Kerry said, "We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night."

Among those four statements, I count zero in favor of weakening the fight against terror ists and two in favor of protecting American security. But never mind. According to Bush, "Kerry's Plan" is "Weaken Fight Against Terrorists."

What was Bush's evidence for the second charge? His campaign cited eight quotes, of which four expressed a position. In the first, Kerry said Bush should "take the time, for a period of time, to continue to build [support]" for using force against Iraq. In the second, Kerry said he would have "exhausted the available remedies with the French and the Russians." In the third, Kerry speculated that if Bush had built up U.S. troops around Iraq more gradually, "It might have allowed you to use the United Nations process to really build consent." In the fourth, Kerry said, "You have to try to build the multilateral effort, even if it fails."

Among those four statements, I count four in favor of delaying the use of force in Iraq, zero against ultimately using force in Iraq, zero in favor of making the use of force contingent on U.N. approval, and zero in favor of delaying the defense of America. We now know that contrary to what Bush told us, Iraq had no WMD programs capable of threatening America. But never mind. According to Bush, "Kerry's Plan" is "Delay Defending America."

The bad news is these techniques got his father elected.

The good news is that they didn't get him re-elected.

This memento from the 2000 campaign trail comes to us via our favorite D.C. gossip-monger, Wonkette:

OTTAWA (AP) Stung by a pop quiz about foreign leaders earlier in his campaign, U.S. Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush has fallen victim to a foreign affairs prank.

Canadians are chuckling over his on-air answer when a comic posing as a reporter made up a story that Canadian Prime Minister "Jean Poutine"; had endorsed him.

"I appreciate his strong statement[,] he understands I believe in free trade," Bush replied. "He understands I want to make sure our relations with our most important neighbour to the north of us, the Canadians, is strong and we'll work closely together."

Canada's prime minister is Jean Chretien, not Poutine, and he has endorsed no one in U.S. politics. Poutine is a popular food in the French-speaking province of Quebec, consisting of french fries, gravy and cheese curd.*

[?]

The real prime minister's office took the episode in stride, offering this response: "Clearly, Canada is not in the Bush leagues."

*Side note from Rhonda: I once made the mistake of ordering poutine at a Burger King in Vancouver (it came in a bucket, and this American girl couldn?t resist the urge to supersize). With all due respect to our Canadian friends, I must report that it was quite vile.

Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines.

The videos are intended for use in local television news programs. Several include pictures of President Bush receiving a standing ovation from a crowd cheering as he signed the Medicare law on Dec. 8.

The materials were produced by the Department of Health and Human Services, which called them video news releases, but the source is not identified. Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting."

But the production company, Home Front Communications, said it had hired her to read a script prepared by the government.

Another video, intended for Hispanic audiences, shows a Bush administration official being interviewed in Spanish by a man who identifies himself as a reporter named Alberto Garcia.

Another segment shows a pharmacist talking to an elderly customer. The pharmacist says the new law "helps you better afford your medications," and the customer says, "It sounds like a good idea." Indeed, the pharmacist says, "A very good idea."

The government also prepared scripts that can be used by news anchors introducing what the administration describes as a made-for-television "story package."

In one script, the administration suggests that anchors use this language: "In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare. Since then, there have been a lot of questions abou t how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details."

The "reporter" then explains the benefits of the new law.

[. . .]

Federal law prohibits the use of federal money for "publicity or propaganda purposes" not authorized by Congress. In the past, the General Accounting Office has found that federal agencies violated this restriction when they disseminated editorials and newspaper articles written by the government or its contractors without identifying the source.

(via the New York Times)

From ?Deficit Study Disputes Role of Economy? in today?s New York Times:

When President Bush and his advisers t alk about the widening federal budget deficit, they usually place part of the blame on economic shocks ranging from the recession of 2001 to the terrorist attacks that year.

But a report released on Monday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that economic weakness would account for only 6 percent of a budget shortfall that could reach a record $500 billion this year.

[. . .]

The new numbers confirm what m any analysts have predicted for some time: that budget deficits in the decade ahead will stem less from the lingering effects of the downturn and much more from rising government spending and progressively deeper tax cuts.

From Reuters via the Boston Globe:

President Bush marked International Women's Week yesterday by paying tribute to women reformers -- but one of those he cited is really a man.

"Earlier today, the Libyan government released Fathi Jahmi. She's a local government official who was imprisoned in 2002 for advocating free speech and democracy," the president said at the White House.

The only problem was that, by all other accounts, "she" is in fact "he."

"Definitely male," said Alistair Hodgett, spokesman for the human rights advocacy group Amnesty International, whose representatives tried to see Jahmi in prison during a recent visit to Libya.

The US House Committee on International Relations listed Jahmi as a 62-year-old civil engineer who was sentenced to five years in prison "after he reportedly stated during a session of the People's Conference . . . that reform within Libya would never take place in the absence of a constitution, pluralism, and democracy."

In remarks before a VIP audience, Bush cited Jahmi as a courageous reformer along with Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy icon and Nobel peace laureate living under house arrest in Myanmar. All told, the president made references to more than a dozen other women, ranging from his wife, first lady Laura Bush, to last year's Nobel Peace Prize winner, Shirin Ebadi of Iran.

Remarks by the President and Mrs. Bush in Interview by Television of Spain
The Embassy of Spain
Washington, D.C.

Q First of all, I would like to thank you very much on behalf of the Spanish people for being able to send a message. And I'd like to ask your feelings about this horrifying thing that happened yesterday in Madrid. First question: What are your feelings?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I can remember when our citizens lost life. I remember the horror, the outrage, the anger, and the incredible sadness. So I guess my -- I feel the same way today. My first reaction is, my heart breaks for those who are mourning the loss of their loved one. It must be a sense of emptiness and a sense of real -- their hearts are broken. And we send our prayers to those who are so sad --

Translation: It's all about us!

MRS. BUSH: Grieving. Who are grieving today. We all are thinking about them. And I want all the people who lost somebody yesterday in Spain to know that th e American people are sending our love and our condolences. And we know what it feels like, and we know how tough it is.

Translation: Let me do the talking from here on out.

Q That would be the second question. The message for the people of Spain is that of solidarity and love?

THE PRESIDENT: Of course. I think the people of Spain are going to rally around those who have lost life. It's amazing what happens when something like this happens to a society. There's an outpouring of love and concern. There's an outpouring of love here in America from people that the families in Spain will never know. There's just a lot of people who care deeply about the fact of the lost life. Neighbors will help neighbors.

Translation: Too bad your term is up, Jose, you could really ride this wave. Get all misty-eyed and say 'neighbors will help neighbors' 'n shit.

I think you're going to find, as well, that the people of Spain -- or we'll find, as well -- the people of Spain will refuse to be intimidated, that they're not going to allow killers, cold-blooded killers, to intimidate the country. And these people kill because they hate freedom and they hate what Spain stands for. Spain is a great culture and a great people, with great traditions of democracy. And the killers hate freedom and they're trying to intimidate. And the Spanish people will not be intimidated.

< b>Translation: Gee, that 'blame everything on haters of freedom and democracy' talking point really does cover everything.

[...]

Q Mr. President, you've been dealing with this situation for four years. I'm sure it's been very hard. What could you say to the Spanish government, now dealing with a hard thing?

THE PRESIDENT: My first reaction is that the people of Spain are lucky to have Jose Maria Aznar as the President during these times. He is a man who understands the war on terror, clearly knows the stakes, and knows that we must never give an inch to the terrorists. He will be able to be a strong voice, a compassionate voice and a strong voice during these times.

Translation: Call out to my main man Jose (dude, ya gotta lose the 'Maria'). Thanks for the troops, man.

The government must stay strong. But the Spanish government has been fighting terrorist organizations for a while. Jose Maria has been strong against terrorist organizations like ETA. He knows what the stakes are. We don't know who did this yet. I wouldn't rule anybody out. You'll hear all kinds of rumors, and it will take a while to find out the facts. And the United States government will help the Spanish government find out the facts, if they so desire.

Translation: Heh heh, pretendin' Spain can desire anything it wants. Good thinkin', 43.

People will find the re's going to be a lot of speculation here, and that's all it's going to be. People will claim credit, or not claim credit. People will say, "We didn't do it," or, "We did do it," to create a sense of confusion. But the facts will become known after a while. It takes a while; it took us a while to find out exactly who ordered the attacks on America. And once the facts are known and once we find out who did it, America will join the Spanish government to hunt the terrorists down and bring them to justice.

Translation: Hot damn! Another war, and just in time for the election.

[...]

Q Let's talk a bit about the future. As you know, we have elections in a couple of days, the day after tomorrow. And some people say that if it's al Qaeda, that could mean that somebody is trying to punish the Spanish government for backing the war. What do you think about it?

THE PRESIDENT: I think that's a feeble excuse. Killers kill. And I think we shouldn't give them any great credit. All they're trying to do is shake the will of the free world. They hate freedom and they're willing to try to create -- intimidate people to change. And the Spanish government will never change its love for freedom. It's one of the great things about Spain, is its embrace of liberty.

Translation: I can tell Laura is impressed by my grasp of Spanish history...we should put this in a campaign commerc ial!

But people shouldn't speculate right now as to who did it. It's going to take a while, it just is. These were very coordinated bombings, and it's going to take some good forensic work to get the facts.

And so I hope the people of Spain just go about their business and -- participate in the elections, of course -- after all, Spain is a democracy -- and not let the speculation decide how to vote. They ought to vote for who they think is going to be the best government.

Translation: Look! I'm a spreader of freedom and democracy....

Q Thank you very much. As I said, on behalf of the Spanish people, thank you for sending a message and for being close to us.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Well, we care deeply about our friends, and the people of Spain are friends. May God bless them.

Translation: Ha! Screw you France and Germany.

From today's New York Times:

A Justice Department investigation that criticized F.B.I. agents for taking relics from the Staten Island landfill that held the rubble of the World Trade Center also found that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld kept a piece of the airplane that struck the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Rumsfeld's excuse?

"It would be incorrect to say this is a souvenir," [Defense Department spokesman Lawrence] Di Rita said in a telephone interview Friday night. "It's not the secretary's. It's a memento on display in the Pentagon."

From the New York Times via the Indianapolis Star:

Is cooking a hamburger patty and inserting the meat and trimmings inside a bun a manufacturing job, like assembling cars? That question is posed in the new Economic Report of the President, a thick annual compendium of observations and statistics on the health of the U.S. economy. The latest edition questions whether fast-food restaurants should continue to be counted as part of the service sector or be reclassified as manufacturers. No answers were offered.

Counting jobs at McDonald's and Burger King alongside those at General Motors and Eastman Kodak might seem like a stretch.

But the presidential report points out that the current system for classifying jobs "is not straightforward." The White House found this section of the report important enough to highlight it.

"When a fast-food restaurant sells a hamburger, for example, is it providing a 'service' or is it combining inputs to 'manufacture' a product?" the report asks.

The report notes that the Census Bureau industry classification system defines manufacturing as covering enterprises "engaged in the mechanical, physical or chemical transformation of materials, substances or components into new products."

David Huether of the National Association of Manufacturers, said he had heard that some economists wanted to count hamburger flipping as manufacturing, which he noted would result in statistical reports showing many more j obs in a declining sector.

"The question is: If you heat the hamburger up are you chemically transforming it?" Huether said. His answer? No.

From Reuters yesterday, "Medicare Ads Ruled Not in Violation of Rules":

Bush administration advertisements touting the new U.S. Medicare law did not violate a ban on using taxpayers' money for partisan purposes but did omit important facts about prescription drug benefits, congressional investigators said on Wednesday.

The General Accounting Office reviewed the Medicare ads at the request of Democrats, who charged the promotions were political in nature and may have violated a law against using tax dollars for "publicity or propaganda."

Medicare is the federal health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, and the new $530 billion measure was passed by the Republican-led Congress and recently signed into law by President Bush.

The $12 million ad campaign by the Department of Health and Human Services included a national television commercial, "Same Medicare, More Benefits." The ad featured an older man rhetorically asking, "So, my Medicare isn't different, it's just more?"

"Notwithstanding the omissions and other weaknesses in the materials, their content does not constitute a purely partisan message," the GAO said in a report.

By law, a federal agency is allowed to communicate with the public using materials that include some political content, the report said.

The report said the ads' notable omissions included failing to mention that Medicare patients may have to pay an annual fee of up to $30 for enrolling in a discount card program, or that savings may vary among the drugs covered, the GAO said.

The new Medicare law provides prescription drug coverage for seniors starting in 2006. Seniors can start enrolling in a drug discount card plan later this year.

But critics say the new drug benefit will be a boon for the pharmaceutical industry, and the government will not get the best deal because it cannot negotiate prices directly with drug makers.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released results from a survey that indicate physical activity among the nation?s youth is increasing as a result of a national youth media campaign launched by the agency in 2002. The award winning multicultural campaign known as VERB had one of the largest effects, a 34 percent increase, in weekly free-time physical activity sessions among 8.6 million children ages 9-10 in the United States.

A telephone survey of 6,000 youth and their parents was conducted in 2002 prior to launching the VERB campaign and it w as repeated among the same families in 2003. A rigorous analysis of the data collected made it possible to measure changes in physical activity attributed to the VERB campaign among youth ages 9-13 in the U.S. population.

"The results of this evaluation are impressive and substantiate that the VERB campaign has surpassed expectations and is responsible for improving physical activity levels among youth," said CDC Direc tor Dr. Julie L. Gerberding. "Our national, multicultural efforts are helping young people to realize that physical activity is fun, cool and can be a part of everyday life. This is critical to reducing the epidemic of overweight among today?s youth."

The Youth Media Campaign Longitudinal Survey, conducted by an independent research company, also showed that the VERB campaign was especially effective in shrinking the gap in physical activity levels between boys and girls. There was a 27 percent increase in free-time physical activity sessions among U.S. girls in the entire 9-13 age range. Likewise, 6 million children from lower-middle income households registered a 25 percent increase in free-time physical activity sessions despite the barriers they faced, which included transportation issues, safety concerns and less access to physical activity resources.

In communities that received higher levels of VERB marketing activity, the increases in physical activity were even more dramatic. The CDC found that the number of least active 9-10 year olds was reduced by 33 percent as a result of the VERB campaign. The number of least active 9-13 year old girls decreased even more, by 37 percent, in these communities. There was a 38 percent decline among least active 9-13 year olds from lower-middle income households.

"Obesity costs the country $117 billion dollars a year in medical expenses," said Dr. Ja mes Marks, director, CDC?s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. "Marketing programs like this one are proving to be successful in reducing the health and economic impact of this disease and are encouraging us to adopt similar strategies to address other priority health problems."

That was from a CDC press release dated February 17, 2004. And here's the latest fromYahoo! News:

...the Bush administration is seeking to cut funding for the VERB campaign, a CDC project to promote physical activity among 9-to-13-year-olds, from $36 million this year to $5 million in 2005.

In a speech delivered yesterday at the University of Louisville, National Securit y Advisor Condoleezza Rice outlined Bush's "vision" on foreign policy:

This vision stands on three pillars. First, America will defend the peace by opposing and preventing violence by terrorists and outlaw regimes. Second, we will preserve the peace by fostering an era of good relations among the world's great powers. And third, we will extend the peace by seeking to extend the benefits of freedom and prosperity across the globe.

So how is Bush doing?

Well, on the first pillar, we give him a C-minus. Yes, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein were removed from power as a result of U.S. military actions. Both were responsible for gross human rights violations. But American actions have actually increased terrorist activity, particularly in Iraq. The average Iraqi is not safer than before the U.S. invasion, nor is the average American, whether at home or abroad.

Bush flat out flunks the second pillar, preserving the peace by fostering good relations throughout the world. In fact, Bush has fostered nothing but bad relations from the first weeks of his administration when he abandoned the Kyoto treaty. Instead of capitalizing on the goodwill shown by other countries after the 9-11 attacks, Bush responded with his 'you're either with us or against us' doctrine, alienating our allies and thumbing his nose at the U.N.

The final pillar, extending th e benefits of freedom and prosperity across the globe, garners Bush a D if nothing else for the sheer audacity of the claim. What we're seeing in Iraq and Afghanistan is not freedom, and it will be decades before either country sees any prosperity, if ever. The Bush administration uses the ideals of freedom to justify its actions and achieve moral superiority over its enemies (thus terrorists are haters of freedom, the press does not support freedom, the Democrats are impediments to freedom...). The Bush administration is more interested in installing American-controlled regimes in these countries than fostering true democracy or freedom. Otherwise it would be complaining about the military government in Pakistan and the lack of democracy on a large chunk of the African continent.

With these grades, maybe someone should send Bush the "three pillars" memo. He's got a lot of work to do before November, and the Cliffs Notes don't seem to be working.

Courtesy Helpful Reader Rob, a double dose of perniciousness from the Republican National Committee:

The Republican National Committee on Friday asked about 250 television stations to pull a Berkeley-based group's ads critical of President Bush.

The RNC sent the stations a letter Friday suggesting the outlets may be complicit in breaking campaign finance laws if they air the MoveOn.org Voter Fund ads. It asked them to decline to broadcast the ads.

The RNC argues that the group, financed by so-called soft money, is spending it on ads to influence a federal election. The campaign finance law broadly bars the use of such corporate, union and unlimited donations to influence federal elections.

MoveOn founder Wes Boyd said Friday that the ads are legal and were financed by contributions from individuals.

"It's silly,'' he said of the RNC letter. "It's an attempt in the name of the president to silence the opposition to this administration.'' (via the San Jose Mercury News)

And in other news, proving that RNC knows whereof it speaks when it comes to breaking campaign finance laws:

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has entered into conciliation agreements with the Republican National Committee (RNC), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), and the Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") resolving violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act).

The conciliation agreement resulted in total civil penalties of $132,000. Fannie Mae will pay $10,000, the NRSC will pay $24,000, and the RNC will pay a penalty of $98,000. (from a press relea se on the Federal Election Commission web site)

It's gonna be a long seven months.

From today's San Diego Tribune, "February hiring falls far short of predictions":

The nation's employers added only 21,000 new workers last month, fewer than the low est economists' forecasts and far below the number of job seekers hitting the unemployment lines.

In a further sign that the three-year "jobless recovery" is continuing, nearly all the new jobs came from government hiring, the Labor Department reported yesterday. Private-sector hiring was flat for the month, according to a survey of employers.

A separate survey of households found that 265,000 fewer people said they had jobs than the month before.

"This is a terrible number," said Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells Fargo. "The economic recovery is almost three years old, and the economy should be producing 200,000 to 300,000 jobs per month. Obviously, the relationship between economic growth and employment has broken down."

Making matters worse, the Labor Department lowered its figure for new hires for the past two months. The count of job gains for January was revised to 97,000 from 112,000 and for December to just 8,000 from 16,000.

The sluggish hiring did not come close to matching the 150,000 or so workers that enter the work force each month. Nevertheless, the jobless rate held steady at 5.6 percent largely because unemployment benefits have expired for many Americans, who are no longer reflected on the unemployment rolls.

It is estimated that 392,000 Americans dropped off the jobless rolls in February, unable to find work within the six months that unempl oyment insurance covers.

If current trends continue, President Bush may be the first president since Herbert Hoover to suffer a net loss of jobs during a term. Currently, there are more than 2 million fewer payroll jobs in the United States than when Bush took office.

To stir job creation, Bush pushed a package of tax credits that he said would create 2.5 million jobs by February. About 294,000 jobs have been added since the tax cuts took effect last June just 12 percent of Bush's projected job gains and far less than the typical job growth after a recession.

From yesterday's AP wire, via Yahoo! News, via Helpful Reader E, "Some 9/11 Relatives Angered by Bush Ads":

President Bush's campaign commercials ? on the air just one day ? have angered several relatives of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and a fire fighters union that has endorsed Democratic rival John Kerry demanded the ads be pulled.

The White House defended the commercials, which show images of the skeletal remains of the World Trade Center and firefighters bearing a stretcher through the rubble.

"It makes me sick," said Colleen Kelly, who lost her brother Bill Kelly Jr., in the attacks and leads a victims families group called Peaceful Tomorrows. "Would you ever go to someone's grave site and use that as an instrument of politics? That truly is what Ground Zero represents to me."

In Bal Harbour, Fla., the International Association of Fire Fighters Union approved a resolution asking the Bush campaign to pull the ads, spokesman Jeff Zack said. The resolution also urges Bush to "apologize to the families of firefighters killed on 9/11 for demeaning the memory of their loved ones in an attempt to curry support for his re-election."

A top U.S. military commander said yesterday he will remove U.S. forces from the palaces of toppled leader Saddam Hussein and has ordered the military to hand over Baghdad International Airport within a year.

The move to leave the palaces is designed to counter the view that Saddam's government has been replaced by U.S. soldiers occupying the same opulent seats of power. The U.S.-led occupation is scheduled to hand over sovereignty to Iraqis at the end of June, and U.S.-led forces are trying to encourage the impression that Iraqis are increasingly governing and policing themselves.(via the Seattle Times)

Even our grandmothers could have told the Pentagon that moving U.S. troops into Saddam Hussein?s palaces - symbols of privilege and dictatorship ? was a bad idea. Apparently, no one in the Bush administration stopped to think that the sight of American soldiers splashing in Saddam?s swimming pools might fan the flames of anti-Americanism among the Iraqis.

But then, these are the same people who brought us the war in the first place. They're still scratching their heads wondering where all the 'we welcome you with open arms' Iraqis are.

We never thought we'd see the day, but the Log Cabin Republicans have finally decided that enough is enough:

Gay activists who helped deliver more than a million votes for George W. Bush in 2000 are so outraged that the president endorsed a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that they are setting up organizations and planning advertising campaigns against the amendment that could undermine Bush's re-election effort.

Two of the largest Republican gay-rights groups, Log Cabin Republicans and the Republican Unity Coalition, have broken with the president, accusing him of turning against gays to rally his conservative supporters.

[...]

Exit polls from the 2000 election indicated that about 1 million gay voters had voted for Bush, or one-fourth of the total gay turnout.

"Those million gay votes are gone. People are just beside themselves," said one Republican activist. "Those voters in 2000 are dealing with a whole new set of facts now. There is nothing for gays now." (via the Seattle Times)

High fives all around to the Log Cabins -- doormats no longer.

He already told the media, and he'll be sending a memo to George any day now.

Thought the Patriot Act was bad? Just wait until the Bushies get ahold of the Persian poets on your bookshelf.

Writers often grumble about the criminal things editors do to their prose. The federal government has recently weighed in on the same issue ? literally.

It has warned publishers they may face grave legal consequences for editing manuscripts from Iran and other disfavored nations, on the ground that such tinkering amounts to trading with the enemy.

Anyone who publishes material from a country under a trade embargo is forbidden to reorder paragraphs or sentences, correct syntax or grammar, or replace "inappropriate words," according to several advisory letters from the Treasury Department in recent months.

[...]

Laws and regulations prohibiting trade with various nations have been enforced for decades, generally applied to items like oil, wheat, nuclear reactors and, sometimes, tourism. Applying them to grammar, spelling and punctuation is an infuriating interpretation, several people in the publishing industry said.

"It is against the principles of scholarship and freedom of expression, as well as the interests of science, to require publishers to get U.S. government permission to publish the works of scholars and researchers who happen to live in countries with oppressive regimes," said Eric A. Swanson, a senior vice president at John Wiley & Sons, which publishes scientific, technical and medical books and journals.

[...]

Esther Allen, chairwoman of the PEN American Center's translation committee, said the rules would also appear to ban translations. "During the cold war, the idea was to let voices from behind the Iron Curtain be heard," she said. "Now that's called trading with the enemy?" (from the New York Times)

From Thursday's New York Times, "U.S. to Study Importing Canada Drugs but Choice of Leader Prompts Criticism":

Hoping to mollify its critics, the Bush administration said Wednesday that it would conduct a yearlong study of how prescription drugs might be safely imported from Canada. But it then infuriated the critics by sele cting Dr. Mark B. McClellan, the commissioner of food and drugs, to lead the study.

Dr. McClellan has adamantly opposed any relaxation of the rules barring drug imports. He says such imports would be unsafe, and his agency has threatened legal action against cities and states that help people import Canadian drugs.

The study is required under the new Medicare law, signed by President Bush on Dec. 8. But the administration announced it with fanfare, in an effort to deflect criticism of its policy on the issue, which threatens to delay Senate confirmation of Dr. McClellan for a new position as administrator of the Medicare program.

Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of health and human services, said the panel studying the matter would be a "balanced commission," would hold hearings and would take testimony from governors and members of Congress on both sides of the issue.

But Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, said he was astounded that the administration would put Dr. McClellan in charge of the study.

"It's like putting the fox in charge of the chicken house," Mr. Dorgan said. "Dr. McClellan has clearly made up his mind not to allow importation and has done everything in his power to stop it."

A spokeswoman for Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican who like Mr. Dorgan has long been involved in the issue of drug imports from Canada, said he b elieved that the administration should have chosen "a more objective person."

From yesterday's AP wire, via theMiami Herald, "Bush Replaces Members of Bioethics Panel":

President Bush on Friday replaced two members of a panel that advises him on issues such as cloning and stem cell research, drawing criticism that he is stacking the bioethics group with ideologically friendly members.

Elizabeth Blackburn, a cell biologist at the University California San Francisco and former president of the American Society for Cell Biology, and William F. May, a medical ethicist and retired professor at Southern Methodist University, were dismissed from the President's Council on Bioethics.

Bush created the council in 2001, replacing a similar commission that advised President Cli nton, to tackle issues including embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia and assisted reproduction. He named its 17 members to two-year terms in January 2002.

Elizabeth Marincola, executive director of the American Society for Cell Biology, a nonprofit group representing basic biomedical researchers, said Blackburn and May were often in the minority on the council as they provided dissenting views.

In their place, Bush named Benjamin Carson, director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Children's Center in Baltimore; Peter Lawler, chair of the Department of Government and International Studies at Berry College in Georgia; and Diana Schaub, a political science professor at Loyola College in Maryland.

''It does seem alarming. It concerns me profoundly,'' Marincola said of the move. ''The president is trying to ensure the advice he receives is the advice he wants to hear.''

From today's Boston Gl obe, "Bush bio on Web inflates Guard service":

Questions remain about President Bush's long-ago service in the Texas Air National Guard. But the basic outline of his Guard service is not in dispute: After a year in flight school, Bush spent five months learning how to fly an F-102 fighter-interceptor and then 22 months as a part-time pilot. He stopped flying in April 1972 -- 30 months before his formal commitment would normally have ended.

Nonetheless, the biography of Bush on the US State Department's website credits him with almost six years in the F-102's cockpit -- two years on active duty flying the plane and nearly four more years of part-time service as an F-102 pilot. The websites of at least five American embassies -- those in Germany, Italy, Pakistan, Vietnam, and South Korea -- use the identical language, even though Bush spent barely two years flying the airplane.

After the 2000 election, when evidence of Bush's abbreviated flying career and his propensity to miss required drills became public, the presidential biography written for the White House website made no mention of the period of Bush's service, only that he served as an F-102 pilot.

But the State Department biography of Bush, which has been on its website since 2001, makes th e president out to be more of a frequent flyer than the embellished account in Bush's 1999 autobiography, "A Charge To Keep." In that book, Bush said he flew with his unit for "the next several years" after his five months of training on the F-102 concluded in June 1970.

The errant biography on the State Department website was called to the Globe's attention yesterday by Hugh E. Scott, a retired Continental Airlines captain and former Air Force pilot from Newbury Park, Calif.

The State Department site -- http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/presbush/bio -- says that before Bush graduated from Yale in 1968, "he went to the offices of the Texas Air National Guard at Ellington Air Force Base outside Houston to sign up for pilot training. One motivation, he said, was to learn to fly, as his father had done during World War II." It continues: "George W. was commissioned as a second lieutenant and spent two years on active duty, flying F-102 fighter interceptors. For almost four years after that, he was on a part-time status, flying occasional missions to help the Air National Guard keep two of its F-102s on round-the-clock alert."

Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director, asked yesterday about that language, said: "It does not reflect the facts of his service. It will be corrected."

From today's Washington Post, "U.S. Demands More Abortion Records":

The Justice Department has expanded its demands for private medical records of abortion patients, issuing subpoenas this week for hundreds of files from six Planned Parenthood affiliates, including the one serving metropolitan Washington, according to officials and court records.

The demand for records from Planned Parenthood affiliates in Washington, New York City, Los Angeles, San Diego, Pennsylvania, and Kansas and mid-Missouri follows similar demands in December for abortion records held by five hospital centers in the Northeast and Midwest. The hospitals have resisted those requests.

The disputes come as part of a series of lawsuits filed by Planned Parenthood and others seeking to overturn the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, which was signed into law last fall but has been sharply limited by court injunctions since then. Lawsuits filed in New York, Nebraska and San Francisco challenge the constitutionality of the ban, which covers a type of abortion known as "intact dilation and extraction," in which the fetus is partially delivered.

Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and Justice Department lawyers say the subpoenas are necessary in order to determine the veracity of doctors' claims that the type of abortion covered by the ban has been medically necessary as the plaintiffs claim.

"We sought from the judge authority to get medical records to find out whether indeed the allegation by the plaintiffs that it's medically necessary is really a fact," Ashcroft told reporters on Feb. 12.

President Bush on Tuesday declared his support for an amendment to the Constitution that would ban gay marriage, saying the union of a man and a woman is "the most fundamental institution of civiliz ation" and that it cannot be separated from its "cultural, religious and natural roots" without weakening society. (New York Times)

It?s sad to see the President take this step, even though we all knew was coming. The Constitution is a document revered for giving rights to individuals ? women, blacks, voters ? not about taking them away.

Yes, many Americans oppose gay marriage. But that doesn?t mean the debate is over. There was a time when it was considered immoral for blacks and whites to marry each other. How ashamed we?d be if we had adopted a Constitutional amendment against that. Times will change, opinions will change. We are already seeing debate in the states, which are certainly up to the task of sorting out what their citizens want:

Why can't California be trusted to sort out the situation in San Francisco, and Massachusetts legislators and voters to address whatever deficiencies they find in their own court's rulings? And if down the road the voters of some state opt for a legal regime different than that favored by Mr. Bush, why should the Constitution impede their democratic choice? The federal Defense of Marriage Act already guarantees that no state has to recognize a same-sex union performed in another state. (Washington Post)

The President?s actions threaten to dismantle the legal protections gays have received in recent years. Not to mention the fact that he is using the power of the federal government to isolate a subgroup of Americans ? something usually associated with shameful episodes from our country?s past (slavery, actions against Native Americans, WWII-era internments). Now we have Bush?s proposed Constitutional amendment to add to this sad list ? an action that he couches in lofty language of ?decency? and ?kindness?:

The President clo sed his endorsement of the amendment by insisting that "our government should respect every person" and requesting that Americans "conduct this difficult debate in a manner worthy of our country . . . with kindness and goodwill and decency." In the context of a divisive proposal, this request didn't just ring hollow; it clanged. (Washington Post)