Advertisement

Progressive indexing? Oh, you mean cutting Social Security benefits?

AUSTIN, Texas -- Attention, all campers! "Progressive indexing" is just another word for "cutting Social Security benefits." Do not be fooled by this idiot locution. Just as sure as "extraordinary rendition" now means "shipping the guy to another country so he can be tortured," progressive indexing means cutting benefits. Got it?

In another interesting development from President Bush's news conference, if you make more than $20,000 a year, you are wealthy. That's what the president said -- "wealthy."

Would you hire this man as an investment consultant? Bush said, "I know some Americans have reservations about investing in the stock market, so I propose that one investment option will consist entirely of treasury bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government." These are exactly the same treasury bonds that currently guarantee Social Security and have been described by Bush, including in the very same press conference as, a cabinet full of "worthless IOUs."

Tricky politics: the return of the ivory-billed woodpecker

The big news in the bird world is, of course, the confirmed sighting of one of America's most fabled birds, the ivory-billed woodpecker, in southeastern Arkansas. The last official sighting date -- and I stress "official" -- in the United States was back in 1944. Other than that, the stylish creature, with its black body, white wingtips, ivory bill and crown of red feathers, lived on mostly in endless reproductions of Audubon's print.

Reading most news stories, you'd think that Big Woody's first convincingly reported sighting in 60 years came on Feb. 11, 2004, when Gene Sparling, on a canoeing trip in his kayak, reported he'd seen the ivory-billed woodpecker in the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge, in southeastern Arkansas.

Not so, as was made clear in an excellent story by Bob Marshall, outdoors editor of the New Orleans Times-Picayune and published April 29, the day after official announcement of the ivory-bill's renaissance. In fact, there had been several credible sightings of the prudent ivory-bill since 1944.

The Nuclear Option

Getting Out of Iraq Will Be Tougher than Getting Out of Vietnam

First Step: Getting Legislators to Sign Onto A Resolution Demonstrating the U.S. Intends to Leave

Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers Fame, gave the worst news of the day to those examining lessons from Vietnam thirty years after the end of the war – we're going to be in Iraq a long time. It will be tougher to get out of Iraq, than it was to get out of Vietnam. Why? The major difference between Vietnam and Iraq is Iraq has oil, Vietnam doesn't and we need oil.

It is much easier to start a war than it is to end one.

Ellsberg was speaking at a forum organized by the Institute for Policy Studies held Thursday, April 28 at the Rayburn House Office Building. He pointed out that in 1968 the anti-Vietnam War protests were at full force and the U.S. did not get out until seven years later, 1975. President Nixon even ran for office promising he had a secret plan to end the war – and we did not get out for years after that. If it had not been for Watergate, says Ellsberg, we might not have gotten out.

Columbus endorsement slate

WHY VOTE?

Because local politics matter. Because the smoking ban is on the ballot – again. Because if we don't back the good candidates now, there won't be anyone good on the ballot in November. Because the Columbus Public Schools budget is huge – who's minding the store?



The Slate

Appeals Court Nominee Janice Rogers Brown Merits the Filibuster

In 2003, President Bush nominated California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown to the U.S. Courts of Appeals.  However, due to her ultra-conservative judicial views, the Democrats in the Senate prevented her nomination from going forward by use of the filibuster. Mr. Bush re-nominated her again in February. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a party-line vote, approved of her nomination, with all 10 Republicans affirming her, and all eight Democrats opposing her. Unless Republicans elect to carry out the so-called “nuclear option” of abolishing the filibuster, Democrats will almost certainly block her nomination again. And for good reasons.

Iraq: War, Aid and Public Relations

American news outlets provided extensive -- and mostly laudatory -- coverage of Marla Ruzicka after she died in Baghdad on April 16. The humanitarian aid worker’s undaunted spirit and boundless dedication had endeared her to a wide array of people as she strived to gain acknowledgment and compensation for civilians harmed by the war in Iraq.

Ruzicka was determined to help Iraqi victims and loved ones. “Their tragedies,” she said, “are our responsibilities.” Her funeral, at a church in her hometown of Lakeport, Calif., was a moving occasion as friends and co-workers paid tribute to a woman whose moral energies led her to take great risks and accomplish so much in a life of 28 years.

By all accounts, she was a wonderful and inspiring person. Yet after I left the funeral, some key themes of the media eulogies and other testimonials kept bothering me. We were being encouraged to celebrate Marla Ruzicka’s life, her work and her message. But -- in the context of a continuing war -- what was her message?

There may be no more succinct summary than the words that Ruzicka

May-June 2005

Redesign of the journal section and new issue coming soon!

Don't forget to check out the columns and
dispatches sections for other articles included in the print edition!

Molly Ivins Article 4/26/05

As a lifelong democrat  I am becoming more and more frustrated with both my party and the media coverage.  If its okay to talk about Republicans changing the rules on Judicial fillibusters why is it never mentioned that the Democrats have changed the rules by using fillibusters where they've never been used before.

  Yes, Abe Fortas was fillibustered, sort of, but he lost the Senate vote only gaining 45 votes.  Was that not an important fact for your story?   

  The bottom line is the Dems lack leadership and understanding as to how to behave as a minority party.  The country has become more conservative and the Dems insist on becoming more liberal.  That is certainly their right but as they continue to lose the White House and margins in the legislature (not to mention Federal judgeships and the Supreme Court) they will eventually realize that the party must support the causes of its members not the other way around.  

Michael A. Mayer
Wallingford, PA

James Baker as head of an election reform commission?

I'm a friend and contributing writer, as you know. I don't want FreePress to think I've lost confidence in them, or vice versa. I hope we'll stay friends.

But really, folks! James A. Baker III was, more than any other individual, responsible for stopping the recount in Florida in 2000. He was summoned by the Bush family for that very purpose, and he fulfilled it. Baker is not interested in election reform any more than Victor Yanukovich is. Baker is interested in protecting George W. Bush from the public knowing that he was twice elected by fraud.

For FreePress to run an editorial that speaks of Baker as if he were a legitimate representative of the people, on a par with Jimmy Carter, is very, very disappointing.

Pages

Subscribe to ColumbusFreePress.com RSS