• Get ready to hear a lot about this race. It pits challenger Mark Pera against incumbent Dan Lipinski — one of the worst Bush Dogs, and one serving in a solidly Democratic district. A recap of the race:

  Democrats upset by how Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-Ill.) acquired his seat and what he’s done with it will give the second-termer another primary challenge in 2008.

  Cook County Assistant State’s Attorney Mark Pera has filed papers with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), and yesterday told The Hill that he will announce his candidacy for Lipinski’s seat after July 4.

  Lipinski won his seat in 2004 after his father, Rep. William Lipinski, decided not to run for reelection after having won the Democratic primary. In a move that has not sat well with some Democrats, the younger Lipinski, a political science professor in Tennessee who had not lived in the state for years, was nominated to replace his father with no opposition.

  He sailed through the general election in a solidly Democratic district that contains southwest Chicago and its suburbs.

  Daniel Lipinski’s detractors contend that he is out of sync with the district on social issues — he is socially conservative on issues such as abortion and stem cell research — and he has riled the liberal base with what it sees as his continued support for the Iraq war.

  Like all good Lieberdems, Lipinski yesterday held hands with a Republican — in this case endangered Rep. Mark Kirk — to join forces for … I don’t know. For something, I guess. The Pera campaign had someone file a report from the event:

  Lipinski and Kirk told the private gathering of members of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs that they are speaking out together to forge a new path forward in Iraq.

  “The best possible outcome for Democrats is to invite in Republicans such as Kirk to join us. I’m aware every Democrat will not support the Iraq Study Group and this bipartisan solution,” Lipinski said. “For the last four months, we’ve maintained the status quo because legislation brought forward could not be passed without a veto from the President.”

  And what grand solution would their happy-happy-holding-hands-together legislation accomplish?

  The Lipinski-Kirk plan calls for a phased withdrawal similar to the one that U.S. Gen. David Petraeus outlined on Monday. Under the plan, one troop brigade would return to the U.S. in December and three more would be removed in the spring, without replacement. It would provide for troop levels in July 2008 of about 130,000, which is equal to “pre-surge” troop levels.

  Got that? We’d simply hit the “reset” button, taking 10 months to get us back to the pre-surge status quo. And somehow, this “bipartisan” bill (which Bush will announce this week anyway) is supposed to be a solution to anything?

  Nope, it’s two endangered congressmen — one a Republican, the other a Lieberdem — clinging together for dear life in the face of an unpopular war that they in reality support. Their actions don’t change the facts on the ground (the surge was always unsustainable for the long haul). It does nothing to end a conflict in which a solution is far beyond our grasp.

  On the web:
  Mark Pera for Congress
  Dan Seals for Congress (Kirk’s Democratic opponent, and 2006 netroots candidate)

  

  
  Comments Off

• 

  
  Comments Off

• What is The Capitulation Caucus?  That’s what we want to know and we need your help.

  So began a diary I posted earlier today, where I asked you to call your Democratic Representative to urge them to oppose the Abercrombie/Tanner bill, H.R. 3087.  Here’s what this bill would do:

  (a) Strategy Required- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act , the President, in coordination with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other senior military leaders, shall develop and transmit to Congress a comprehensive strategy for the redeployment of the Armed Forces in Iraq.   […]

  (1) nothing in this Act shall be construed as a recommendation by Congress that any particular contingency plan be exercised;

  In other words, it would do nothing.  Check that.  It would provide cover for Republicans so they can claim that they are doing something to end this war.  At a time when Republicans are starting to feel the pressure, is not the time for Democrats to settle for meaningless legislation.  The vast majority of Democrats in this country want a timeline for troop withdrawal and any bill that does less is nothing but a token gesture.

  So please, call you Representative and urge them to the oppose the  Abercrombie/Tanner capitulation bill and post their response in the comments.  And then call another Representative so we can find out who really wants to end this misbegotten war.  

  The main switchboard for the House of Representatives:  (202) 224-3121    
  And for those outside of Washington D.C., the toll free number:  1-800-828-0498

  And below the fold, the name and phone number of every Democratic Representative, and if you are unsure who your Representative is, information on how to find out.

  Here are the results so far:

  Capitulators:

  Hall
  Meek
  Watson
  Tauscher
  Delahunt

  Undecided:

  Hodes
  Jackson Lee
  Inslee
  Van Hollen
  Boucher
  Walz
  Peterson
  Herseth
  Baron Hill
  Altmire
  Cleaver
  Tubbs-Jones
  Emanuel
  Lee

  And props to the following Democrats who won’t support this meaningless bill:

  Lewis
  Gutierrez
  Woolsey

  

  
  Comments Off

• Here they are:
  

  Iraqi officials said the five leaders had agreed on draft legislation that would ease curbs on former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party joining the civil service and military.

  Consensus was also reached on a law governing provincial powers as well as setting up a mechanism to release some detainees held without charge, a key demand of Sunni Arabs since the majority being held are Sunnis.

  But the big news? Oil revenue sharing isn’t quite figured out yet…but there is progress.
  

  Yasin Majid, a media adviser to Maliki, told Reuters the leaders also endorsed a draft oil law, which has already been agreed by the cabinet but has not yet gone to parliament.

  But a statement from Talabani’s office said more discussions were needed on the draft oil law and constitutional reforms. Committees had also been formed to try to ensure a “balance” of Shi’ites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds in government.

  More as it develops…

  Comments Off

• It was just over eight months ago that George Bush announced his latest strategy for victory in Iraq. And so he sent in an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to curb the unending violence so the Maliki government could have the “breathing room” needed to pass key legislation, at which point Al-Qaeda would run for the hills and the Iraqi people would drop their guns, hold hands, and sing kumbaya.  But as the violence continues unabated, with the Maliki government on the verge of collapse, and with the date of the Petraeus White House report on the progress of the “surge” fast approaching, that fairy tale is getting a bit harder to peddle to an increasingly skeptical public, so naturally it’s time for significant political developments:

  Iraq’s top Shi’ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.

  Well hallelujah, the surge is working!  Which caused the White House to immediately break out the champagne and declare this to be, “an important symbol,” which causes any thinking person to put down their glass and read the article very carefully.  And what does this so-called breakthrough really mean?  

  The five leaders representing Iraq’s major political communities …. affirmed the principle of collective leadership to help deal with the many challenges faced by Iraq.

  So, the five leaders have reached a “consensus” on a “road map” to reform de-Baathification laws and to release an unspecified number of detainees being held without charge.  Oh, and they also endorsed a draft law for oil revenue sharing.  Now that is huge news, just as it was when they made the same announcement in February and in July.  But they aren’t revealing any details, perhaps remembering that the last time Maliki announced a breakthrough like this, the deal fell through the next day.

  And while a story like this certainly plays into the White House fantasy of military and political gains in Iraq, it can’t be overlooked that it also benefits the embattled Maliki. After all, this is a man who heads a government that nearly half of the cabinet ministers are boycotting.  A government who recently saw the largest Sunni bloc withdraw, and whose largest Shiite bloc, the group whose support got Maliki elected, has:

  …threatened to bring criminal charges against Maliki, who they said was personally responsible for a U.S. raid in Baghdad’s Shoala neighborhood that they say killed 20 people, including women and children…Maliki “is commander in chief of the Iraq forces and upon him lies the responsibility of protecting civilians,” said Nassar al Rubaie, the head of the Sadrist bloc in parliament. “We see the Iraqi government has weakened and submitted to the occupation … It’s comparable to the bloody regime of Saddam.”

  And of course there is the well-funded and publicized PR campaign by Ayad Allawi to get his old job back.  Throw in the increasing number of calls for his ouster by prominent American politicians and you can see why it was time for such a “significant political development.”  One that will no doubt rank right up there with the last throes and mission accomplished.

   

   

  

  
  Comments Off

• Proving that it really is all just politics, the Pentagon is setting up a campaign style war room to campaign for the war.

  For the Pentagon, getting out Iraq information will now include a 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week Iraq Communications Desk that will pump out data from Baghdad _ serving as what could be considered a campaign war room.

  According to a memo circulated Thursday and obtained by The Associated Press, Dorrance Smith, assistant defense secretary for public affairs, is looking for personnel for what he called the high-priority effort to distribute Defense Department information on Iraq….

  The Pentagon dismissed suggestions that the communications desk will be a message machine or propaganda tool, and instead said it is being set up to gather and distribute information from eight time zones away in a more efficient and timely manner.

  Right, it’s not “propaganda” they’re foisting off on us, it’s “information.” And the Petraeus White House report will tell us the truth about progress in Iraq.

  

  
  Comments Off

• So Bush is coming to Washington state Monday, for a VIP reception costing $10,000 and a general reception costing $1,000, money that will go into the campaign coffers of his good buddy and stalwart Iraq occupation supporter, GOP Rep. Dave Reichert.

  Maybe Bush can come a little early and stop by the Iraq Town Hall forum Darcy Burner has organized, which will also be streamed online. He’d hear a thing or two about Iraq and what the people of Washington’s 8th congressional district think about it–things he’s never going to hear from Dave Reichert.

  I’m honored to be moderating this forum and to announce the impressive list of panelists who will participate:

  Jon Soltz — the co-founder and chairman of VoteVets.org, Jon is a veteran of the Iraq War, where he served as a captain with the 1st Armored Division during Operation Iraqi Freedom. His considered one of the country’s most authoritative voices on veterans and military issues and is a regular contributor to the MSNBC program “Countdown” with Keith Olbermann. He also blogs on military and veterans issues at the Huffington Post.

  Navy Capt. Larry Seaquist (ret.) — a former US naval officer, Captain Seaquist commanded a number of warships including the battleship USS IOWA during his distinguished 32-year career. He also served as a senior security strategist in the Pentagon including an appointment as the Director of Policy Research in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. During the period leading up to the Gulf War he was Acting Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Planning. He currently serves in the Washington State legislature and writes regularly for major newspapers and defense journals.

  Lorin Walker — serves as vice-president of VetPac, a political action committee dedicated to electing candidates who preserve the values for which veterans have served, fought and died. She is the daughter of Captain Bruce C. Walker USAF, MIA 1972. A resident of Washington State, she is active in veterans affairs and Democratic politics and works at Microsoft.

  Professor Clark Lombardi — teaches comparative law at the University of Washington and is an expert on Islamic legal systems. He recently returned from a trip to Iraq, and speaks knowledgably about the difficulties the United States faces in Iraq in creating effective civil institutions that are critical to the functioning of a stable and effective democracy.

  Major General Paul D. Eaton (ret.), who went ot Iraq in 2003 to lead the effort to recreate the Iraqi military from scratch and who since his retirement has stepped forward to speak plainly about the Bush administration’s incompetence in conducting the Iraq War and callousness in treating its active duty forces and veterans, is unable to attend in person but has submitted a video statement for the “Send a Message” virtual town hall. The same is true of Ambassador Joe Wilson, a netroots hero who was one of the first voices to speak out in exposing the administration’s efforts to falsely hype the Iraqi regime’s efforts to acquire nuclear materials in the run-up to the war.

  The forum will be streamed live at Darcy Burner’s site at 3:00 pm PT, 6:00 pm ET Monday. You can submit your questions for the panel. Actual space at the event is limited, but if you’re local and are interested in attending in person, contact the campaign for details.

  And while you’re at it, kick in a few bucks. Back up your message to Bush on Iraq by making it hurt where it matters most to Republicans–the money. We have a goal today of 2,000 contributions. As of 12:30 PT, we’re at 1,683.

  

  
  Comments Off

• Are these voices going to be heard in the halls of Congress and on our teevees in the next few weeks?

  “I don’t see any progress. Just us getting killed,” said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush’s speech aired last month. “I don’t want to be here anymore.”
  ….
  “This occupation, this money pit, this smorgasbord of superfluous aggression is getting more hopeless and dismal by the second,” a soldier in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, wrote in an Aug. 7 post on his blog, www.armyofdude.blogspot.com.

  “The only person I know who believed Iraq was improving was killed by a sniper in May,” the blogger, identified only as Alex from Frisco, Texas, said in a separate e-mail.
  ….
  “There are two different wars,” said Staff Sgt. Donald Richard Harris, comparing his soldiers’ views with those of commanders in distant bases. “It’s a dead-end process, it seems like.”

  Asked to rank morale in his unit, Harris gave it a 4 on a 10-point scale. “Look at these guys. This is their downtime,” he said, as young soldiers around him silently cleaned dust from their rifles at a battle position south of the capital. A fiery wind blasted through the small base, an abandoned home surrounded by sandbags and razor wire.

  “It sounds selfish, but if we just had phones and Internet service,” said Staff Sgt. Clark Merlin, his voice trailing off.

  You have to wonder who’s going to speak for them this September, to rebut the “happy talk that they say commanders on the ground and White House officials are using in their discussions about the war.” You also have to wonder if the White House will call these soldiers enemies of freedom.

  (H/T to Turkana)

  

  
  Comments Off

• Glenn Greenwald has quickly become indispensable to what we’re trying to do here in Left Blogistan. He proved it again with this story on Philip Zelikow, former counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and his role in what is looking more and more like a White House strategy to oust Maliki in favor of Allawi.

  But currently, Zelikow in particular runs around Washington holding himself out — and being held out — as an Expert on the Future of Iraq while concealing that his firm is being paid by Allawi to undermine Maliki. As but one example, Zelikow was a featured Iraq Expert on ABC News with Charles Gibson three nights ago, on Tuesday.

  Reporter Martha Raddatz narrated the story which began (via LEXIS): “today, for the first time, President Bush said Maliki could be replaced.” The story then flashed to Michael O’Hanlon, who said: “I think Mr. Bush made a very significant change in his policy today. He made it clear that his support for al-Maliki is on very thin ice.”

  Shortly thereafter, Raddatz said: “The former counselor to Secretary of State Rice says a plan B is now likely being considered,” and then showed Zelikow — identified on-screen only as a “Former Counselor to the State Department” — who said:

  I can confidently guess that our government is quietly speculating about a lot of different options knowing how much concern Iraqis have about their leadership.

  So Zelikow, an Extremely Respected Washington Leader, strongly insinuates that the Bush administration is working to depose Maliki and warns the country of “how much concern Iraqis have about their leadership” without disclosing that his lobbying firm is being paid to achieve that result and that the prime beneficiary is his client. This is fraud and deceit of the highest order. How can this not, by itself, destroy Zelikow’s credibility on every level? Just fathom the reams of pious journalistic condemantion if a blogger did something like this.

  Here’s the news–ABC responds to Greenwald:

  When ABC News interviewed Philip Zelikow on August 21, he did not disclose that he was working for Barbour Griffith & Rogers; this information did not become public until several days later. We are deeply disappointed that Mr. Zelikow did not disclose his lobbying relationship to us. As a former advisor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and now a professor at the University of Virginia, we believe that his statement to us accurately reflects ongoing, internal discussions at the State Department. Nevertheless, his statement is sullied by the fact that he did not disclose his relationship with Barbour Griffith & Rogers.

  If ABC really wanted to make amends, they will not only tell their viewers that they were lied to, they’d do a little investigating into what this administration and the shadowy, sleazy bunch of war cheerleaders is actively doing to undermine Maliki, Bush’s tepid endorsement of Maliki notwithstanding.

  Clearly, the administration’s next step in buying more time for this debacle is forcing a change of government–I can hear them now, “How could we possibly withdraw when Allawi needs our support to begin reforming and uniting the govenment?” Hopefully this little embarrassment for ABC will encourage them to start reporting that story.

  

  
  Comments Off

• Remember this when the Petraeus White House report comes ’round in a few weeks. While the adminstration is doing its damnedest to move the goalposts on the goals of the escalation, this was the stated goal, from Bush himself:

  When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq’s Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace — and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

  Fast forward seven months.

  BAGHDAD, Aug. 24 — Escalating a political crisis that has paralyzed the Iraqi government, three secular cabinet members will formally resign Saturday, according to a senior member of the group.

  The Iraqi National List, an umbrella group of several political parties composed of secular Sunnis and Shiites, had boycotted cabinet meetings since Aug. 7 because of frustrations with what they saw as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s divisive leadership style. The party, headed by former prime minister Ayad Allawi, will now submit the official resignations, National List member Iyad Jamal al-Deen said.

  “We have sent several letters to the prime minister asking for a discussion that would keep us in the government, and he did not respond to any of them,” Deen said. “Our participation in the government would have no meaning now, so we will not participate.”

  Now that Allawi is on a full-fledged, GOP supported campaign to oust Maliki, and has taken all his marbles and gone home, I think we can sink the final nails into that escalation-for-political-reconciliation plan, however Petraeus the White House cares to spin it in their report.

  Congress, your move.

  

  
  Comments Off

• 

  This is sure to ruffle some feathers:
  

  WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half, potentially creating a rift with top White House officials and other military commanders over the course of the war.

  Administration and military officials say Marine Gen. Peter Pace is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military. This assessment could collide with one being prepared by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, calling for the U.S. to maintain higher troop levels for 2008 and beyond.

  Petraeus is expected to support a White House view that the absence of widespread political progress in Iraq requires several more months of the U.S. troop buildup before force levels are decreased to their pre-buildup numbers sometime next year.

  Of course Bush won’t listen, but this is Pace planting a flag in the ground saying our presence in Iraq is hurting our chances for response to new threats…
  

  According to administration and military officials, the Joint Chiefs believe it is of crucial strategic importance to reduce the size of the U.S. force in Iraq in order to bolster the military’s ability to respond to other threats, a view that is shared by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.

  Will Bush ignore his Defense Secretary too?

  More as it develops…

  UPDATE:
  Al Jazeera is reporting that Pace hasn’t made up his mind yet…
  

  The most senior military officer in the US has denied a report saying he has decided to recommend a reduction in US troops serving in Iraq.

  Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was expected to recommend to George Bush that troops be reduced to less than 100,000 next year, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday.

  “The story is wrong. It is speculative. I have not made nor decided on any recommendation yet,” Pace said in a statement.

  This doesn’t mean he won’t recommend what the LA Times reported, but it’s an interesting development.

  I wonder who leaked the info about Pace in the first place?

  Comments Off

RSS Feed