There is a foreign influence in Iraq's contemporary politics … we all know that. For sure most of this interference in modern day Mesopotamia is of the military sort with the United States, Britain and the rest of the “coalition” providing the greatest majority of this. And yes there are those entering Iraq with the intent of causing grief from another angle, and this group too includes supposed allies of the United States: 

(Saudi's role in Iraq insurgency outlined, LA Times, 07/15/07)

Not often noticed is another type of influence. This other is much more positive, encourages Iraqis working together, supplies basic necessities and provides evidence that a quick and total U.S. military withdrawal will not end up in bloodshed … if we do it right.

(Cleric Switches Tactics to Meet Changes in Iraq, NY Times, 07/18/07)

For sure Sadr does present a less pretty public persona, but even that is viewed as a relief by many Iraqis. Sadrs Mahdi Army has been involved in two major offensives against the U.S. backed government, and that same militia has been part of the sectarian violence currently engulfing Iraq.

On the other hand Shiites who live in neighborhoods controlled by the Mahdi Army often appreciate the semblence of physical security that militia brings with it.

I think the explanation for our government's antipathy towards Sadr, however, is best expressed thusly:

(ibid)

The fact our nation's government would turn its back on populist movements should not be a surprise. In the early 19th century Haitian slaves held an uprising that led to Haiti becoming the second nation in the western hemisphere to throw off the European yoke (the US, of course, was the first).

In World War II agreements were made between the Allied forces in the Pacific and such people as Mao ZeDong. The promise was made to Mao and the Vietnamese that should they assist the Allies in fighting the Japanese the nation's of French Indochina would be given independence and sovereignty. Well … Mao, who held George Washington in high esteem, lived up to his bargain, but we know the history of continued military domination committed by France and then the United States.

The 1960s and '70s saw the rise of Liberation Theology among the Catholic clergy in Central and South America. Our government labeled this movement, who's basic tenet was all people are equal and deserve equal treatment as a matter of a god given right, as communist and a danger to our sphere of influence.

Fidel Castro's first choie for protector nation was the United States. It was only after we refused him and threatened him and his revolution with death that he turned to the USSR.

Those are certainly not the only examples, but they do expose our history of fighting populist movements, and they do explain why Hezbollah and Hamas are on our shit list.

The Haitians, Mao, Catholic priests, Castro, Hezbollah, Hamas and Sadr all share one attribute: they want(ed) to answer to their local constituency and not to whatever interest du jour the United States wanted adhered to. As a result we've supported many, many brutal regimes … including Saudi Arabia where 15 of 19 attackers of 09/11/01 came from and now a majority of non-Iraqi anti-US fighters/terrorists come from resulting in continued violence and confusion for Iraq.

Our way out of Iraq should depend upon stability, and that stability is only going to come from the likes of Sadr with his public storefronts providing municipal service. But then again we'd have to accept someone who answers to Iraqis and the US government, wouldn't we?

 Loading ...

This is from a Blue Hampshire diary: “Policy Straw Poll: Health Care” that asked candidates about their HC positions and the “rule” was that the response must start with the phrase “I am the only candidate who”…

Of course, the campaigns stretched the rules in some cases and were a bit long-winded, but here are just the opening lines that met this rule. You can go to Blue Hampshire for the rest.

From the Edwards campaign:
I am the only candidate to propose a specific plan that guarantees true universal health care and also gives Americans the option of a public plan.

From the Obama campaign:
I am the only candidate who will sign legislation by the end of my first term that will cover every American and cut the cost of every family’s premiums by up to $2,500 — the biggest cost-savings that any presidential candidate has proposed.

From the Dodd campaign:
I am the only candidate that has over 20 years of experience getting things done.

From the Gravel campaign:
I am the only candidate that has proposed a single-payer Health Care Voucher plan.

From the Kucinich campaign:
I am the only candidate to recognize the single payer not-for-profit comprehensive solution to the problem of providing access to health care is a solution that includes everyone and excludes no one

From the Clinton campaign:
Ignored the rules, did not say what was unique about her, released her statement in third-person, pol-speak. (yes, I found it annoying)

From the Biden campaign:
I am the only candidate who knows first-hand what it is like to survive a life-threatening emergency surgery.

From the Richardson campaign:
I am the only candidate who believes that all stakeholders – government, individuals and business – must share the goal and the sacrifice of providing universal health care coverage for all Americans.

David Corn in the Washington Post rebutts neo-con hack Bill Kristol's seemingly delusional assertion that history will remember George W. Bush's presidency as a roaring success (and that, my friends, was a hard sentence to type without laughing or crying).

The whole piece is a must read, but one particular sentence just made me think for a moment:

Still, Kristol advises, stick with the “surge,” train more Iraqi troops, and all will be well. The United States has already spent $19 billion training 346,500 or so Iraqi troops and police officers, and now merely six battalions — down from 10, according to Gen. Peter Pace — can function independently. That is, only 3,000 Iraqi troops are operating on their own after all this time and money.

Now if you do the math it means that the going rate for each successful Iraqi military or police officer to “stand up so we can stand down” is a breathtaking 6.3 million dollars (in the Bush ledger, that’s one post-Katrina superdome repair).

Hey, it's only money.

The following is an op-ed I wrote that appears in today's Times-Argus, for which I am suitably braced for much grief. In fact, I promise to keep my mouth shut in the comments…

The Vermont Impeachment Movement has taken many forms over the last year-and-a-half. At its best, it represented a political cross-section of Vermonters, united in little more than their view that President Bush had broken the law and should be removed from office. At its worst, it’s been an echo chamber inhabited by a handful of activists with axes to grind against virtually everyone else inhabiting the political system.

The announcement that “the Impeachment Movement” has decreed that Rep. Peter Welch is contemptuous of the Constitution because he doesn’t agree with them and must be punished in November by facing an “impeachment” candidate (who, of course, would only take office after Bush was gone) suggests that the echo chamber is all that remains.

I, for one, am saddened. I was among the earliest organizers of the impeachment movement that swept Democratic Committees last year, demanding action from the Vermont Legislature. When our efforts merged with activist Dan DeWalt’s town meeting movement, I was thrilled.

But gradually, we Democrats who had started the legislative push found ourselves marginalized. When our own party’s leadership spurned us, they created a leadership vacuum that was filled by activists with a different agenda ? one quickly made known to us in no uncertain terms. As Welch dealt with all of us honorably ? bringing our shared concerns to the House floor even though he disagreed ? it seemed clear that the fix was already in. Behind the scenes and before the cameras, Welch became the whipping boy for an increasingly shrill, politically exclusive crowd whose real target was anybody they considered to be in the political mainstream and who dared to disagree.

As such, everybody saw this announcement coming a mile away.

I am saddened because this development will retroactively color the work we did before the movement so rapidly descended into the echo chamber. The echo chamber closes itself off to all voices but those of a chosen few, who then tell themselves they are all there is. It bypasses the hard work of organizing ? winning over those that don’t agree with you ? by creating the conceit that everyone already agrees. The echo chamber voices excite themselves into a fever pitch until it’s impossible to notice the wall ahead. Instead of a grand revolution carrying the anointed candidate into office, the real future holds crushing electoral defeat and political irrelevance.

I still believe firmly that anyone who is inclined to run for political office, should ? but that doesn’t mean that I’m not saddened at the obvious, inevitable result of this particular run, and the unfair attack on Welch underlying it.

I think Peter Welch’s rationale for not pursuing impeachment against a president whose illegal actions continue to have real impacts on people’s lives is thin and poorly considered. His suggestion that such proceedings would delay our exit from Iraq and should therefore not be initiated send the counter-logical message that a future president can violate the law and avoid the consequences by simply starting an illegal war of his or her own.

But I’m still voting for him for two reasons. One, our sincere disagreement on one issue does not invalidate our agreement on most others, or otherwise change the fact that he’s been doing a good job. Two, I have no doubt that he remains a more effective force in Washington for my values than a candidate from the echo chamber would be.

And, honestly, that’s all it’s really about, isn’t it?

Americans are just giddy over this “Homeland” thing.

We judge the US Homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years. The main threat comes from Islamic terrorist groups and cells, especially al-Qa’ida, driven by their undiminished intent to attack the Homeland and a continued effort by these terrorist groups to adapt and improve their capabilities.

The statement above comes from the “National Intelligence Estimate” (NIE) which was issued today by the office of the director of National Intelligence,  Mike McConnell.

I read the so called NIE this morning and the most interesting thing that I learned was that the word “homeland” was used eleven times in a page and a half. The 766 word document that probably cost millions to compile, print, bind and distribute informs me of ….. nothing new. al Quaeda is a threat and will continue to be, and so on, they still hate us. Pardon me, but ho hum.

We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have constrained the ability of al-Qa’ida to attack the US Homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the Homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.

We (the people of the United States) have spent an unimaginable amount of money, (500 billion, half a trillion, who’s counting,… not these rummies, they’re way too busy spending) and squandered the lives of thousands of our Children and Grandchildren, as well as the physical and emotional well being of many tens of thousands more during the the last five years. Not a damn thing has been accomplished and these bastards have the nerve to offer “assessments?” “progress reports?”

---

Every time I hear the word “homeland” or just about any phrase which contains it, like “homeland security,” “protect the homeland,” or “threats to the homeland,” for some reason my blood runs a little colder. I guess the term was first popularized in the wake of the 911 attacks, but even back then it then it made my hair stand on end.

---

We are concerned, however, that this level of international cooperation may wane as 9/11 becomes a more distant memory and perceptions of the threat diverge. Al-Qa’ida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the Homeland, as its central leadership continues to plan high-impact plots, while pushing others in extremist Sunni communities to mimic its efforts and to supplement its capabilities. We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safe haven in the Pakistan Federally Administered tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al-Qa’ida senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.

The level of international cooperation has and will continue to wane. Not because the memory has faded nor perceptions of the threat diverged (what the hell does that mean?) interest is “waning” because most of the rest of the world has come to the inescapable conclusion that the control of the American government has fallen into the hands of liars fools and criminals. Our military itself has said that in Iraq, the major threat is from the radical Shia militias, not from al Quaeda in Iraq. These bastards are lying out of both sides of their mouths and spitting in our faces down the middle.

---

Maybe it’s just a psychological connection caused by a lifetime of exposure to the now ancient black and white war and spy movies, or a remembrance of the propagandistic documentaries of my youth, growing up as I did during the early years of the “Cold War.” The term never fails to bring to my mind visions of Hitler on the dais, arm raised before the admiring and hysterical crowd, or Stalin, standing rigidly, peering over his mustaches as Soviet armor and missiles parade past the Kremlin, “Homeland” conjures images of Stalinist art or Maoist posters.

---

As a result, we judge that the United States currently is in a heightened threat environment. We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to enhance its capabilities to attack the Homeland through greater cooperation with regional terrorist groups. Of note, we assess that al-Qa’ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the Homeland. In addition, we assess that its association with AQI helps al-Qa’ida to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks.

Back in 2001 bin Laden was “assessed” by these same chowder heads, to be worth a couple hundred million bucks,  now we spend that amount in Iraq in less than a week and most of that money is going into the pockets of those who backed this caper in the first place. At the rate things are going I’m not the least surprised that al Quaeda or Mutaqa al Sadr will have more success recruiting suicidal idiots than we are at recruiting the last kid who wants to die in Iraq.

---

It is, to me, as if the word itself, represents some distant archetype of terror and madness, contains vestigial memories of barely realized childhood fears and insecurities, dim memories of the saga of war and holocaust, of witch hunts, of persecutions.

---

We assess that al-Qa’ida’s Homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent political, economic, and infrastructure targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the US population. The group is proficient with conventional small arms and improvised explosive devices, and is innovative in creating new capabilities and overcoming security obstacles.

Well, gee, I hope to shout that they are proficient, they have been practicing on the proving ground which we provided for five years, and during that time personnel, weapons and mountains of cash have been pouring across every border,  Syria, Jordan, Iran, most of it from Saudi Arabia. The Iraqis want us out, hell everybody in the region wants us out, except of course those who so persistently demand that the Iraqi parliament come to an agreement on the awarding of oil concessions and division of the revenue…. hmmmm.

---

I don’t like the word, “Homeland” especially in the context that it currently used, nor do I like the collection of phrases which include it that have been concocted by the Goebellian band of spinmeisters and inveterate liars that compose the current concert of neo-con government functionaries and media shills that passes for the press these days.

---

We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to try to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material in attacks and would not hesitate to use them if it develops what it deems is sufficient capability.

This wholly asinine statement reminds me of the months after Bush’s fraudulent State of the Union address and when, in trying to dissemble and back pedal like some little frat boy caught out after curfew, he said that Saddam was guilty of having the “intent” to develop weapons of mass destruction. Is anyone listening to these people?

---

America is not the Homeland, except perhaps to the Seneca or the Shoshone, the ancient Anasazi or the more recent indigenous people that we gave a fast push across the country and onto useless land that no one else wanted,  until oil and the internal combustion engine came along that is.

---

We assess Lebanese Hizballah, which has conducted anti-US attacks outside the United States in the past, may be more likely to consider attacking the Homeland over the next three years if it perceives the United States as posing a direct threat to the group or Iran. We assess that the spread of radical?especially Salafi?Internet sites, increasingly aggressive anti-US rhetoric and actions, and the growing number of radical, self-generating cells in Western countries indicate that the radical and violent segment of the West’s Muslim population is expanding, including in the United States. The arrest and prosecution by US law enforcement of a small number of violent Islamic extremists inside the United States? who are becoming more connected ideologically, virtually, and/or in a physical sense to the global extremist movement?points to the possibility that others may become sufficiently radicalized that they will view the use of violence here as legitimate. We assess that this internal Muslim terrorist threat is not likely to be as severe as it is in Europe, however. We assess that other, non-Muslim terrorist groups?often referred to as “single-issue” groups by the FBI?probably will conduct attacks over the next three years given their violent histories, but we assess this violence is likely to be on a small scale.
We assess that globalization trends and recent technological advances will continue to enable even small numbers of alienated people to find and connect with one another, justify and intensify their danger, and mobilize resources to attack?all without requiring a centralized terrorist organization, training camp, or leader.

“I assess that in the paragraph above they are setting the stage for operations in Iran and Lebanon and the preparation of domestic internment camps. But what the hell the last five years have made me a little jumpy.”

---

We’re not the Fatherland either, nor are we the Motherland (which, I think, is pretty well synonymous, except for that gender thing) Fatherland implies, to me, ethnicity, something that America doesn’t have one of. Instead we have all of them. In our wisdom, and in the liberal spirit of the age at our foundation, we decided to have all ethnicity’s, to be a land of liberty and opportunity for all the downtrodden of the earth. I’m proud of that, so were my parents and Grandparents proud, of THAT.

---

The ability to detect broader and more diverse terrorist plotting in this environment
will challenge current US defensive efforts and the tools we use to detect and disrupt
plots. It will also require greater understanding of how suspect activities at the local
level relate to strategic threat information and how best to identify indicators of
terrorist activity in the midst of legitimate interactions.

Since I’m in an assessing mood after reading all this high dollar assessing, I will go further out on this limb and assess that the paragraph above this one tells me not to say anything on the telephone that I don’t want Karl Rove reading a summary of in the morning.

---

Speaking of summaries this whole National Intelligence thing could have been done for a lot less money. They’re always talking about privatizing these things, aren’t they? Had they brought it to us here at Worldwide Sawdust we would have turned the project over to our subsidiary, Worldwide Bullshit. They would have brought that baby in for less than fifty grand.

We also wouldn’t have got it completely wrong, al Quaeda isn’t the main threat facing America, now or in the near future, not even close. We would have assessed instead, that the major danger to America is represented by the people who delivered a “National Intelligence Estimate” and used the word “Homeland” eleven times and the word “America” not at all.

That frightens me.

Bob Higgins
Worldwide Sawdust

Related Stories
WaPO
Intelligence Report Warns of al-Qaeda’s Capabilities
Salon
A persistent and evolving terrorist threat

Montpelier's re-appraisal process has been extraordinary, to say the least. According to state law, a town-wide appraisal (for purposes of setting property taxes) is mandated when it is estimated that the grand list is less than 80% of the actual value of the town's property. Montpelier continues on a bit of a real estate “boom” track, and hasn't been hit by the housing sales recession in play in much of the rest of the state and nation, so prices are still up, up, up.

But the result has been a shock to many, with average appraisals going up by nearly 40%. My own house went up by about 80%. Many others have seen increases of more than 100%. All this while commercial properties have seen their appraisals stay level or even drop significantly. National Life has had its property evaluation drop by a staggering $11 million, leaving the residents to pick up the slack in the budget. Presumably this means that the average non-commercial increase was far higher than 40%.

In the theoretical, this has spurred renewed discussion of the inherent problems with the property tax (at least on primary, non-mansionesque homes) as a funding source, both in terms of fairness and practicality. But there are likely to be more immediate, more concrete repercussions for the town, as well as next years elections, when you consider the sheer totality of the mess created by the process and its mishandling:

• There was no information sent out with the new assessments on taxation; that is, people were left wondering how a doubling of their assessments would affect their tax bills. Would they too, double? (they wont, but if your assessment when up by more than that magic 40%, they will go up)
• In the narrow, two week window of opportunity to appeal one's assessment, city staffers were reported to have been rebuffing questions, reportedly comparing such requests to a judge advising a criminal how to beat the rap. This left confused residents with questions, no recourse but to file an appeal to have an audience – except for the fact that residents were specifically told the appeal process was not for q&a, and had to meet the textbook definition of a proper appeal. A classic catch-22.
• The assessor did not take into account land condition on the assessment because she did not feel qualified to. This despite the fact that it has been considered in the past. Residents with a high assessment and a cliff in their back yard are at a disadvantage if they don't read the fine print.
• The assessor opted to use new software, which required data to be hand entered. Reportedly, the new system is replete with mistakes.
• The assessor changed the way by which business properties were taxed, basing it largely on their potential rental income. Former city councilor Chris Smart received clamorous criticism a few years back at his suggestion that residential and commercial property should be considered differently, yet this appraisal represents a unilateral, bureaucratic change in appraisal methodology that massively benifits commercial properties (again, at the tune of $11 million for National Life) at the financial expense of homeowners.
• It's hard to find anyone who hasn't filed an appeal in Montpelier – including members of the Board of Civil Authority, which sits as the final appeal arbiters (appealing members will be recused), suggesting a paperwork and procedural backlog unprecedented in the city.

It's a mess which could have implications beyond Montpelier's borders, by echoing into next year's legislative election.

Mayor Mary Hooper is widely understood to be intending to challenge gubernatorial appointee Jon Anderson for his seat in the State Legislature. Before this reappraisal, she was a virtual shoo-in for the seat, having trounced the largely unpopular Anderson in the mayor's race.

But the fact is, although voters' memories are notoriously short-term, if there is one thing that they will hold active grudges about, its a bureaucratic clusterfuck that bumps up their taxes into the stratosphere – especially when that increase fills a hole left by commercial and corporate tax relief.

Fair or no, this issue will be more than just an albatross around Hooper's neck, it'll be a pterodactyl.

And Anderson is already making moves to keep the seat he has so badly wanted. Anderson, whose right-wing ideology is underscored by his strong support from not simply the Governor, but from conservative statehouse interests such as developer lobbyist (and GMD concern troll “Pizzaman“) Tayt Brooks, has been trying very hard to reinvent himself as a Montpelier leftist, broadly trumpeting his votes on impeachment and global warming legislation (and hoping folks will forget his support of a gubernatorial veto and alliance with the GOP and Vermont Right-to-life on campaign finance). He already has a campaign website up,  (with a Dean-esque title, of course) prominently featuring the name of Treasurer (and Hooper predecessor as Mayor), Chuck Karparis.

By moving to the left, Anderson is also hoping city Democrats will forget how he undermined their caucus and used his personal pull with the Governor to get the legislative appointment. And he should not be underestimated, given that he has shown no qualms about using some behind the scenes political intimidation to quiet critics.

But Montpelier Democrats may be in trouble if they count on Hooper to deliver them if things don't change. Of the other two potential appointees originally nominated by the caucus, one is likely not to be up for a bruising, “from scratch” primary slugfest. The other – activist Matt Levin – certainly has the skills and the energy to defeat Anderson, but it's unclear whether he remains interested.

In any event, if Montpelier Dems leave Anderson unchallenged, the Progressive Party will undoubtedly see their best chance ever to take the Montpelier seat they have coveted. Montpelier's Progressives have generally not fared well electorally, but a run against a conservative D who has dissed the activist wing of his own Party and is associated with corporate interests (not to mention the Governor) is not an opportunity they will let pass.

Hooper could still make it work, though. The asessment process is so flawed and – by accident rather than design – so stacked against homeowners, it seems that the only just solution is to scrap it completely and start again from scratch with a more actively inclusive process with a fully, loudly vetted discussion on any changes in appraisal methodologies (especially if they are to the detriment of individual homeowners).

Short of that, Montpelier Dems would do well to start candidate shopping.

An email sent yesterday by the Vermont Democratic Party. Let your virtual vote be your virtual voice…

Over the past couple of months the Vermont Democratic Party has undergone some significant changes.  We've added new staff, moved into more effective office space and started sustaining grassroots programs that will help us win in 2008!

 

We are investing more time and energy into working on issues that we believe Vermont can and should be taking the lead on.  These important issues affect us all, like the environment, the economy and health care.

But, we're also gearing up for one of the most important presidential elections this country has ever seen, and we're excited about the great group of Democrats who have stepped up to the plate and are vying for our Party's nomination.  Each and every one of our candidates has presented a compelling vision for how to restore America to its path of progress at home and its respected leadership role abroad.

In anticipation of the campaigns heating up in Vermont, we're launching our official online straw poll of our candidates.  The results will give our candidates a measure of support in the state, and we'll report the results to the DNC and the media.

So, please go to our website and vote  in this important democratic exercise or http://www.vtdemocrats.org/page/s/strawpoll 

 

And, while you're there,  please sign up to volunteer with the VDP and help us continue  to advocate for positive change in the face of Jim Douglas' failure of leadership.

Thank you for your  participation,

Jill Krowinski,
Executive Director, Vermont Democratic Party

P.S. We're working to recruit, support and elect candidates here in Vermont with bold visions for our state, but we can't make that happen without your support, so sign up for our People Powered Pledge today!

We don't often quote conservatives like Andrew Sullivan around here, but he has a very interesting discussion in his blog last week, and I think it's interesting precisely because he's a conservative.

If you're like me, you don't have any trouble with the fact that Libby and Cheney arranged to do whatever they had to do to destroy Valerie Wilson and her husband, and you really don't have any trouble believing that the stories they used to mislead the United States into invading Iraq were just lies.

Sullivan doesn't want to believe it, especially the part about lying, so he spends more time that we might trying to psychoanalyze Cheney and Libby's motives. What he comes up with is really pretty clear:

I can still just about believe that Bush thought the WMD case was sound. I can't believe, given all that we now know, that Cheney did. He's too smart. The data he read, we now know, was far more equivocal than the data the public was provided with. He's not new at this. He probably never wanted to make the WMD argument anyway, put it in to appease the UN crowd, and certainly wasn't going to query its validity. We may never know, of course, because Cheney will have destroyed the evidence, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's obvious Cheney knew all along that the WMD line was a cover, not a real threat, but realized by the summer of 2003 that any hint of this leaking (even from a two-bit blowhard like Wilson) needed swift and brutal rebuttal. They were embarrassed enough by the WMD bust, but if it was revealed that they had ignored all the caveats beforehand, it could get really dicey. One has to assume that Libby and Cheney are indistinguishable in their knowledge and involvement. Miller was also trying to cover her tracks that, in retrospect, had begun to look shady. Hence the weird Cheney-coordinated hit on Wilson and Plame. Hence Libby's clumsy perjury. Has Libby ever done something as clumsy in his entire life? Sometimes, even the smoothest cannot escape their own lies.

This sounds like a reasonable explanation of what happened, but get what he says next:  

That's not just worth 30 months in jail. It's worth impeachment.

Isn't that what we've been saying? 

 

By RAY MCALLISTER

TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST

Graduates from Richmond's Binford Middle School get a diplomalike certificate, signed by the teacher and principal.

It is ringed by six graphic marks, including icons of a notebook, an apple, the school mascot and such.

Then there is a picture of a man. And who is this icon of American education?

Not John Dewey or Horace Mann, both of whom were called fathers of American education.

The AP is running a piece that both the Reformer and the Rutland Herald picked up, Critics Say Governor Not Serious on Climate and it doesn’t paint Douglas in a very good light.  An excerpt:

[Douglas]… repeatedly called on lawmakers to get past the climate change issue and focus on his agenda of job creation, lowering taxes and making Vermont more affordable.

Democrats maintain that they are the real guardians of the state’s economy.

They point to fast-growing companies like NRG Systems Inc. of Hinesburg, which makes testing equipment for the wind power industry, as well as to the jobs they said would have been created insulating houses and upgrading boilers had their bill become law.

The bill “had to do with creating job opportunities for Vermonters,” House Speaker Gaye Symington said. “It had to do with helping to make energy more affordable for Vermonters, as well as reducing our carbon footprint, which is critical to our economy in the long run.”

An open question is whether Vermonters care as much about climate change as legislative leaders think they should, and whether Douglas’ veto of an energy bill aimed at addressing it will cost him at the ballot box.