By Albert Samaha
By Steve Weinstein
By Devon Maloney
By Tessa Stuart
By Alison Flowers
By Albert Samaha
By Jesse Jarnow
By Eric Tsetsi
The bottom line on Iraq is whether an attack against Saddam Hussein helps or hinders the Republican Party's chances in midterm elections next November. A quick air strike on Iraq with no U.S. casualties might make Bush look extra special tough. But any protracted campaign on Iraq involving a large number of casualties and large numbers of troops would raise serious questions, not the least of which would be the administration's casting aside of the War Powers Act, under which it is supposed to consult with Congress. As it now stands, the OPEC states in the Middle East are generally opposed to an invasion, and they have pegged the price of oil in such a way that fuel costs are likely to rise here whatever happens. If they get pissed and throw down an embargo, gas prices would go through the roof. That probably would be instant death to Republican congressional contenders, who, no matter what, will still be defending themselves for doing nothing during the recession.
Meanwhile, Democrats are slowly beginning to frame their election-year challenge to the president on a range of different issues. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle issued a mild criticism of Bush for not telling Congress he was setting into motion a secret shadow government that, for now, does not include either Congress or the judiciary. (Such shadow cabinets have hovered over D.C. for years.) Over the weekend, Daschle seemed almost stern in another threat to subpoena homeland security czar Tom Ridge to try to learn what he plans to do with all the money Bush wants to give him.
And there are less publicized moves afoot in other areas. George Miller in the House is leading an effort to tackle the Enron mess by revising the 401(k) laws to mandate that workers sit with employers on boards that run these pension funds. The GOP doesn't want workers running anything. Miller's proposed legislation will allow the Dems to look like defenders of the little guy, even if they aren't. On defense, Rhode Island's Jack Reed, who heads the key House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, is claiming that Bush's missile defense program could cost "a prodigious sum of money" (some say $150 billion), and all for a system that couldn't block attacks on the U.S. or its forces abroad.
Last week, the conservatives sent guru William Bennett into the fray, setting up a new organization to target people they consider to be too critical of the war effort. The group, which operates out of Bennett's Empower America, is called Americans for Victory Over Terrorism (AVOT). It promises to "take to task those groups and individuals who fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the war we are facing." Likely targets are liberal members of Congress. And it poses the war against terror as a crusade against radical Islam, which it calls "an enemy no less dangerous and no less determined than the twin menaces of fascism and Communism we faced in the 20th century."
Bennett told the Voiceon Monday that he wanted to keep "enthusiasm" for the war going strong, adding, "This war can take longer than World War II, and we just want to make sure we all are together at the end."
This looks like a rather feeble attempt by the neoconservatives, some of whom are ensconced at the American Enterprise Institute, to start up a blacklist. Bennett disagreed. "It's not a blacklist, it is a wrong-list," he said. "We just think that these people are wrongheaded, unhelpful, and misguided. We live in a free country, so we have the right to debate and go back and forth with them. I am sure I am not going to make president Jimmy Carter shut up if I say that I don't agree with him." And he promised the list would grow. "We don't add them," he said cheerfully. "They add themselves."
Who Were the Cops Shooting At?
Cover Fire at Columbine
Many people have already expressed disgust at the apparent timidity of the Jefferson County and Denver, Colorado, police to put their lives on the line during the Columbine massacre three years ago. On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot and killed 12 kids, one teacher, and themselves, wounding 23 others. At least one victim is believed to have bled to death while waiting hours for rescuers to make their move.
Now it appears that some cops laid down a hail of bullets that may well have endangered lives while protecting their own.
Newly found FBI diagrams suggest that the cops themselves were shooting wildly into the school while the students were waiting inside to be rescued. Diagrams show where different bullets were lodged and where they came from (the material's posted at www.alternewswire.com/columbine). Police bullets went into the library, the teachers' lounge, corridor, and front door. In addition, one student appears to have been shot through the chest while standing outside the school. At least one cop told his parents the boy was killed by police fire.