Tuesday, July 06, 2004

WASHINGTON — American and Iraqi joint patrols, along with U.S. Special Operations teams, captured two men with explosives in Baghdad on Monday who identified themselves as Iranian intelligence officers, FOX News has confirmed.

Senior officials said it was previously believed that Iran had officers inside Iraq stirring up violence, but this is the first time that self-proclaimed Iranian intelligence agents have been captured within the country.

The Defense officials also confirmed to FOX News that in recent days there has been significant success in tracking down “known bad guys” based on information from local citizens. While those captured aren’t from the list of former regime members or from terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s network, they are “active” bombers and organizers of recent violence.

The arrest of the two Iranians suspected of attempting to carry out a vehicle bombing has focused new attention on how Tehran is trying to protect its interests in the country it fought for eight years in a devastating war.

So far, Iran is believed to have used money, not guns, to influence Iraq — particularly by spreading wealth among Shiite political factions — while avoiding a direct confrontation with its longtime rival the United States.

Monday’s arrests came on the heels of comments by Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari (search) saying some neighboring countries were financing and training terrorists in Iraq, apparently referring to Iran and Syria.

Syrian President Bashar Assad (search), at the end of a two-day trip to Iran on Monday, said developments in Iraq are “the most important issue” for Syria and other neighbors of Iraq, including Iran.

Iran’s powerful former President Hashemi Rafsanjani (search) said Syria, Iran and Turkey should coordinate their policies to prevent the disintegration of Iraq, the Islamic Republic News Agency reported on Monday.

The “conspiracies” being hatched by “Washington and Tel Aviv” against Iraq call for increased “strategic cooperation” between Iran and Syria, Rafsanjani was quoted as saying.

The announcement of the arrests by the Iraqi Interior Ministry was a rare instance tying Iranians to a particular attack.

Iranians enraged that Shiite shrines in Iraq were damaged in fighting between U.S. troops and Iraqi insurgents have volunteered to join the battle against the Americans.

Iranian officials have said they would try to stop zealots from crossing the border — and Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (search), has refused to give a green light to one group, the Devotees for Martyrdom, that says it’s eager to fight in Iraq.

Tehran insists it has no interest in fomenting instability in its neighbor to the west — and many observers say that a smooth path to elections could benefit mostly Shiite Iran, since a vote will likely bring an Iraqi government dominated by Shiites.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters Sunday that Tehran wants only “stability and security in Iraq.”

“We haven’t done any action that may smell of an act of interference in Iraq’s internal affairs from the very beginning, and won’t do so in the future either,” Asefi said.

Tehran fears the United States is cementing its influence in Iraq. But at the same time, Iran can little afford an open clash with the Americans — something that backing for anti-U.S. violence would likely bring about.

To date, Iran has not been considered a source of manpower or financing for Iraq’s mainly Sunni Muslim insurgency, said a Western diplomat in Baghdad who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Instead, it is believed to be involved in intelligence gathering inside Iraq, while quietly funding Shiite political parties in a bid to influence the government that emerges from January’s elections, the diplomat said.

“Iran wants to be a silent power broker,” said Iranian political analyst Davoud Hermidas Bavand. “And Iran needs to make sure that the government in Iraq will not be America’s puppet.”

The United States, which has been at odds with Iran since the pro-U.S. shah was toppled in the 1979 Islamic revolution, fears Iran wants to establish a fundamentalist Shiite regime in its own image in Iraq.

Saddam brutally suppressed Iraq’s Shiites and fought a devastating war with Iraq from 1980-88 that is thought to have killed a million people from the two sides.

Since Saddam’s fall, Washington has repeatedly accused Tehran of sending money to various Iraqi groups, dispatching intelligence agents and allowing foreign anti-American fighters to travel to Iraq through its territory. Iran has persistently denied the charges.

Iranians have been detained previously in Iraq — U.S. records show several people listed as born in Iran as currently in American custody — but none has been publicly accused of involvement in violence.

Members of Devotees for Martyrdom (search), a loose grouping of Iranian religious extremists, have said they will go to Iraq as soon as Khamenei gives them the go-ahead.

But Khamenei did nothing when Iranian officials barred volunteers from entering Iraq earlier this year when fighting between U.S.-led coalition forces and militiamen loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr (search) damaged Shiite shrines.

Grand Ayatollah Kazem al-Hosseini al-Haeri, al-Sadr’s Iran-based spiritual mentor, has said it wasn’t yet time for military confrontation with the United States.

Iran is believed to be trying to win influence with both al-Sadr and Iraq’s most influential Shiite cleric, the Iranian-born Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani (search).

Iraqis in the southern holy cities have expressed suspicions that offices set up by Iranians ostensibly dispensing charity or providing assistance to Shiite pilgrims might be covers for Iranian government agents.

Mohammad Ali Samadi, a spokesman for the Devotees for Martyrdom, said private Iranian charitable funds were going to a variety of Iraqi groups. He would not specify the groups.

“Iran enjoys a lot of spiritual influence in Iraq,” Samadi told The Associated Press. “Iran does offer financial support to Shiites, but in the form of charity. However, it doesn’t send any intelligence agents.”

Iran long has maintained close ties with a variety of Iraqi groups, including Iraq’s largest Shiite group, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution of Iraq (search), and the two powerful Kurdish groups controlling northern Iraq, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (search) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (search). The Kurdish parties are not Shiite.

Iran’s contacts with Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress (search) led to U.S. accusations that Chalabi, once a U.S. favorite to replace Saddam, passed classified intelligence to Iran. Iran said it has had a constant dialogue with Chalabi, whose group had offices in Tehran before the war, but denied that he handed over sensitive information.

THIS JUST IN: A VEEP CHOSEN – NUMBER THREE WITH A BULLET

And BTW, John Kerry chose his Vice President today, Tuesday, July 6th (earlier than any other candidate in 50 years): John Edwards. Chris Matthews on Hardball reports that Edwards was Kerry’s third choice, behind John McCain, and Florida Senator Bob Graham. Rumor has it that Tuh-RAY-zuh doesn’t care for Mr. Edwards due to the prior rhetoric. OFW. BABAGOI.

The United States turned over sovereignty to Iraq two days prior to the officially acknowledged day.

My father, who is 84, and I have had numerous discussions about this very same topic and we, to this day, agree to disagree. I believe there are many factors shadowing our respective views.

Whereas I prefer to research and predicate my views and writings upon facts and reality, I am temporarily abandoning my research tendencies for the nagging and twisted feelings (how I dislike writing that word!) I am experiencing regarding Iraq and its interlinked future with the United States.

First: my father clearly thinks we made a horrible mistake by even considering moving into Iraq. He’s never given me an alternative action, but believes we shouldn’t be spending millions and millions of dollars and the lives of soldiers for this action.

I tend to think in these terms (because it is my current job to manage people, parts, tools and assets): Okay. Then what’s your suggestion? What is your alternate course of action? What would you have done? What would you do now?

I suppose what I’m saying is this: it’s easy to criticize. But unless you propose solutions to the questions raised, you have nothing for me. What matters is not the criticism. What matters are the solutions and answers proposed. And from these, a logical and systematic sifting of these ideas.

Don’t just tell me you don’t like something. Give me some options. Provide proposals, alterate thoughts, logical arguments based in facts, history, precedent and, moreover, concise thinking directed at the specific problems at hand. For lack of a better phrase (Ucko! Hok! Ptui!): “thinking out of the box.”

I see very little of this from the “liberal” or “left wing” side of things. Any 4th grader can criticize. Do more: “give me solutions or shut the hell up.”

A “conservative” radio talk show host recently went to a showing of Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11” and made an observation that the greater bulk of the audience consisted of persons over 60+ years of age — which tends to indicate that this age group is buying into Mr. Moore’s propagandic exposition, running quite artistically and profitably, thank you, to hundreds and hundreds of theatres nationwide.

I believe I have an explanation for this phenomenon and the fact that my very own father finds our response to Iraq overboard and beyond logic. I chalk it up to the fact that he and many others of his time represent, in truth, “The Greatest Generation.”

And that, truly, may be their greatest downfall.

It is why their generation of elderly make the easiest targets for half-baked solicitations, advertisements, door-to-door criminals, gypsies, transients and the like.

Despite what they’ve seen and experienced, they still believe in the Inherent Goodness of Man. It was true for their time and many wish to believe it still.

I believe that, in their hearts and guts, they cannot understand nor stomach anything even remotely resembling a pre-emptive response to threats made upon their country (I’m still not convinced the country itself realizes Militant Islam is a threat).

In their day, in their schools, in their society, there was logic and common sense and a systematic progression to life that is not present today. Very little makes sense anymore. Society is nothing like what they experienced growing up.

STANDBY, PERIPHERAL RANT APPROACHING, CAUTION, CAUTION:

And this perception ranges from our music to our movies to our television (which they find themselves almost prisoners of) to our newspapers, to our magazines, to our children and our grandchildren (many of whom are cared-for by Grandparents on behalf of their brain-dead, stupid or loser children — which they cannot acknowledge because, after all, they believe in the best in us all).

It’s as I’ve said before to many of my friends: Life will get better when my generation, the Baby Boomers, die out. It can’t happen too soon. We took our parents’ ethos, codes, sense of duty, honor, loyalty, responsibility and turned them upside down because we could — because we took advantage of our parents’ inherent and innate goodness.

And then we took things further because we could: we wanted it all because we thought we deserved it — but at the expense of our children. We thought Quality Time meant just that: a few minutes every day expended just for our children when, in fact, children demand minute-by-minute monitoring.

After all, we took our children to T-ball, to Soccer practice, to after-school activities. Weren’t we good parents? Couldn’t we prove it? We raised them in nice secular homes in good neighborhoods with day care, in good schools with computers and games and transported them in leather-clad vans and SUVs. White guilt certainly over-rode our sense of Life. Hey: if we managed our children well, just like our DayMinder, all would be fine.

Wouldn’t it?

OFFICIAL END OF PERIPHERAL RANT:

Ramp back up to today:

My dad can’t understand my response to Iraq and terrorism. My visceral, emotional, unfettered, improper, horrible response is this: we need to make a stand and a statement because no other President, including Reagan, up to this point has drawn a line in the Middle Eastern sand. Militant Islam understands nought but power. Reagan didn’t understand because the concept was relatively new (let us not forget Lebanon). Bush Senior didn’t understand because he didn’t take things far enough. Clinton didn’t understand because he was hampered by his mindset and philosophy from the onset.

Collectively, WE didn’t understand because Militant Islam was something someone else experienced — some other “Third World dirtball nation;” although, now we can see the signs for what they were — but only because we learned, grudgingly, to read said signs aloud.

It cost us roughly 3,600 lives to read those signs.

Pre-emptive strikes to save the union are, in my opinion, warranted.

Pre-emptive strikes, in the eyes of the Greatest Generation, are forbidden, cheating, an admission of inadequacy, poor form, unwarranted. Because there is almost always something MORE that we could or should do to avoid confrontation.

Logic, common sense, decorum and propriety would dictate this.

Except that Militant Islam doesn’t care to sit down at a nice ebon table, pour some tea, make some conciliatory statements, play some new age music, sign some documents, “mean well,” and promise to understand our way of thinking.

Their view is this: either you convert to Islam or we’ll kill you.

I think they’d rather just kill us anyway, and be rid of us.

BACK TO IRAQI SOVEREIGNTY:

I do not believe in the Inherent Goodness of Man. I’m not a believer in Altruism. I am a believer in history, in patterns, in closely examining the past in order to discern the future. I believe in substance over form, in deeds and not words. The closest thing to a democracy in the Middle East, save for Israel, is Jordan — ruled by a king.

I wish I could believe that, in a few weeks or months, maybe a year, all will be well. I wish I could believe that the Common Man and Woman in Iraq will rise up against their inner oppressors and acquire that sensitive balance of accommodation for each form of Islam, to the satisfaction of all.

Unfortunately I tend to think this: absent iron-fisted, unbending rule, Iraq will degenerate back into tribal and ethnic divisions irrespective of and spanning boundaries, borders and regions.

Knowing this, my father says: so, you acknowledge we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq. We shouldn’t be wasting our time there, spending our billions there. Letting our boys die there.

And my response is: no. Wrong. Militant Islam was at work there, and we need to do what we can when we can. And like a bully, they will push and push until stopped. If we don’t react, if we don’t push back then, like any bully, it will only get worse.

If we don’t want to see one kiloton backpack tactical nukes (SADMs) exploding on continental US soil, if we don’t want to see chemical and biologic weapons pierce our borders and strike at the very beating heart of our society, then we need to change our mindset and deal with what IS rather than what we WANT.

Dad believes he is right. I believe I am right. Only time will tell.

And that time will become known as our history. . .

Catch A Wave And You’re Sitting On Top Of the World.

Or: Viewing California From Your Rear View Mirror

Born and raised in California and living here now, I clearly have a Californian’s bias. It was only for a few short years, four or five, that I lived in Ohio, in what we call the Midwest but, upon viewing a map, is most anything BUT midwest. Ah, that’s history for you. And what did I know? I was in my teens and early 20’s at the time. I primarily recall Ohio as being very humid. My first year, when I was 16, my parents had to literally pull me out of my bedroom to engage and meet my surrounding peers. And after a while, the humidity didn’t seem to matter. It became Home. With a capital H.

I graduated from Fairmont East High School in 1972, whilst commuting from nearby Kettering. My parents and I moved into a beautiful two-story brick house (with a basement — whoever heard of a basement in California!) at 444 E Street, on Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. I can still recall the zip code: 45440. What a magnificent home for the family of an early 70’s full bird Colonel in the USAF!

The visions come back even now: having apparent carte blanche on the base, visiting the on-base official Air Force Museum so many times that the staff just let me in any time I wanted, riding my bicycle (and later my red Yamaha 125 motorcycle) anywhere I wanted, making voyages and discoveries at will, the entire base my proverbial oyster. I can recall laying on the hood of my first car: a pristine, white four-door 1966 Ford Fairlane on base at dusk, near Fairborn, watching incoming SAC B-52s crabbing into the wind, making their western approach directly over my head — JUST like the opening scene in the original Star Wars movie. I can smell the clouds of kerosene settling over me even now. How glorious that was!

And my greatest, most vivid memory: driving to the west end of WPAFB, again at dusk in the early 70s, parking, getting out and watching B-52 after B-52 after B-52 after B-52 que up for an eastbound night-time departure, running up their horribly loud, filthy and smoking engines and I saluted them, individually, as they made the final hard right nosehweel turn to the concrete active runway. And watching, with pride, as some of them saw me, took notice and saluted back, unknown faces behind perspex canopies. Who were they and where were they going? I never knew. How many came back from their mission? I never knew.

Another last minute thought: coming and going from WPAFB anyone was subject to search, even the son of an USAF Colonel. Having my car searched two or three times. And being stopped at exit gates, at the conclusion of the day, by USAF APs who turned to the flag when the Star Spangled Banner played. During this time, no one entered or exited any WPAFB gate until the conclusion of our national anthem. Soldiers, citizens, airmen and women would exit their cars, hands on heart, facing the flag, as the music played through speakers.

That was a bit of what I remember about Ohio. And recalling that I always wanted to go back to California, to see my friends, to resume my life. Getting into radio in 1973 at Wright State University’s WWSU, and using the Move’s “California Man” as my anthem: I may be here in Ohio, but you know where my heart lies. . .

Fast forward. My mother passed away on May 14th in 2002, a few days past her 80th birthday and her 60th wedding anniversary. My father still lives in Sacramento, in the house he originally purchased for $4,000 in the late 40’s, now worth $250,000 +. Both of my older brothers have done much better than me in their lives: Jim lives with his wife in the paradise of Coronado, occupying a $1 million dollar + home, having raised one boy and two girls — he recently purchased his own 40-foot fishing boat which plies the San Diego harbor and even a bit of coastal blue water; my other brother Don, an electrical engineer, helped to found Motion Control Engineering in Rancho Cordova (east of Sacramento) and had his portion of the stake bought out recently for more than a few million bucks. Me? I work for the County of Sacramento, sucking at the government tit for my pay.

But go ahead: ask my brothers, either Jim or Don, what they think of the state of California and its “business-friendly climate.” Jim works in real estate and Don works with corporations. Both have real world experience with state mandates, laws, policies and the real world results of California’s politics.

Ah. California politics. How ex-Governor Gray Davis managed to readily turn a billion dollar + surplus to a billion dollar + deficit in the blink of an eye, one summer in 2001.

An overview: in 1996, Gray Davis signs the deregulation law which allows the market to determine prices. Following his election as governor in 1998, electricity prices climb in Southern California and, by May of 2000 in San Diego, prices rose 300%. 2000

” Electricity prices climb. The effect is felt first in San Diego and south

Orange County, then throughout the state. In the spring, energy executives

warn Davis a crisis looms. By May, energy costs have risen 300 percent in

San Diego. Summer shortages reported.

” Consumer groups, lawmakers and utilities demand Davis intervene with

emergency authority. He declines.

” Edison and PG&E, unlike SDG&E, are unable to pass their costs on to

consumers because, by law, they can’t raise their rates. Edison loses $1

billion by the end of July.

” The Davis administration – and others – blame the crisis on energy

profiteers, federal inaction, the failure of previous administrations to

build power plants and the flawed deregulation law.

” On July 31, Duke Energy offers to sell California 2,000 megawatt hours at

$55 per megawatt – less than the state was paying in the spot market at the

time. Davis declines. Other power companies also offer long-term contracts.

All are rejected.

” On Aug. 2, Davis issues executive orders to speed up power-plant licensing

and cut energy consumption. He asks the attorney general to investigate

possible price gouging.

2001

” Early January: Davis threatens “drastic action” – possibly including

seizing power plants.

” Jan. 17: Davis orders the state to buy energy on behalf of credit-starved

utilities.

” The spot-market price of energy reaches $1,000 per megawatt. The state

suffers rolling blackouts Jan. 17, 18 and 21.

” Consumer groups and state Treasurer Phil Angelides say Davis should seize

power plants. He declines.

” PG&E declares bankruptcy.

” The Davis administration buys $43 billion worth of energy through long-

and short-term contracts. The average cost per megawatt is about $80; later,

the market price drops to the $50 range. Also, some contracts require

California to buy power when it doesn’t need it, forcing the state to sell

back energy for cents on the dollar.

THE AFTERMATH

” Price tag of energy crisis is put at $50 billion.

” Davis appeals to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, demanding

nearly $10 billion in refunds for California consumers. Consumers might get

back $3.2 billion, although that hasn’t happened yet and many believe it

never will.

” Davis renegotiates the $43 billion in contracts down to about $35 billion.

//////////////////////// full story ////////////////////

SACRAMENTO Gov. Gray Davis confronted California’s electricity crisis in

fits and starts, at first hesitant as outraged consumers and utilities

clamored for help, then fearful that a misstep could cost him votes as the

state spent $50 million a day to keep the lights on.

Foes and some supporters of the governor agree that he didn’t intervene

early enough and forcefully enough in the crisis during the first half of

2000. They say he missed an early chance to buy power at reasonable prices

and that he declined to raise rates because he feared the political fallout.

They also said Davis was bluffed by wily energy merchants, who pushed prices

through the roof because they knew he wanted to avoid blackouts at all

costs.

“There was a game of electric chicken going on,” said San Diego consumer

advocate Michael Shames.

Two years later, Davis said this: “I know many of you feel that I was too

slow to act during the energy crisis. I accept that criticism. I played the

hand I was dealt as best I could.”

Voters will pass judgment Oct. 7, in part, on his handling of the crisis.

It erupted in spring 2000 in San Diego. The governor’s first major actions

occurred in August, when he issued orders to speed up power-plant licensing

and boost conservation, while asking the state attorney general to

investigate the electricity market.

Energy experts acknowledge now that delays occurred but that what appears

clear in hindsight was obscure during this time of great confusion.

“I give him great credit,” said Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, who headed a

Senate investigation into alleged market manipulation. “As we rolled into

the spring and summer of 2000, the market was getting more and more

dysfunctional.”

Davis demanded that federal energy regulators step in. He approved

conservation measures. He set up task forces to resolve the problem. He met

with power company executives and threatened sanctions to force action. He

lobbied for wholesale caps on prices, which went from $750 per megawatt hour

at the beginning of the year to $250 by the fall, and then were reduced

further to $100 – although this was still more than double the pre-crisis

cost of energy.

“There wasn’t a thing that we could have done that we didn’t do,” said

Michael Kahn, picked by Davis to head the state’s power grid at the height

of the crisis.

In the end, California’s strapped power grid suffered 39 days of high

emergency between Dec. 7, 2000, and summer 2001, as the cost of wholesale

power skyrocketed 10-fold and beyond. On seven of those days, the state had

rolling blackouts. In 1999, the state’s electric bill was about $7 billion.

In 2000 and 2001, it was about $27 billion each year.

By spring 2000, San Diego’s electricity rates were spiraling as SDG&E

struggled to pass on the soaring wholesale costs to its customers. The

state’s two largest utilities, Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas

and Electric Co., racked up huge debts. They were refused the right to raise

rates.

Many agree that Davis’ Jan. 17, 2001, decision – his most important action

during the crisis – to order the state to buy energy for the utilities on

the spot market ultimately broke the back of the crisis, although at

enormous cost to the state.

The state also bought $43 billion worth of future energy on contract, which

ultimately stabilized the roiling market. By the middle of 2001, the

skyrocketing prices were over.

But what Davis did, and when he did it, is not nearly as significant as what

he didn’t do, his sharpest critics contend.

“In the spring of 2000, the merchant generators met with him personally,

warning him of rising costs and potential shortages. The reaction we got was

just a wave of the hand,” said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading

Forum.

At least four power companies offered long-term energy contracts at prices

slightly higher than existed before the crisis but far less than hit the

state just weeks later. One company, Duke Energy, wrote directly to Davis on

July 31, offering 2,000 megawatt hours over five years at $55 per megawatt.

Davis declined. Later, prices hit $1,000 per megawatt.

One consumer critic said Davis’ fundamental problem was failing to act early

in three critical areas – seizing power plants, raising rates and signing

power contracts – because he feared political backlash.

“He stood on the sidelines as opportunity after opportunity passed. He had

his finger up, testing the political winds,” said Doug Heller of the

Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.

FIRST:

As a total neophyte to my blogging host ., I’m still attempting to discern how to “make things go,” so to speak. I noted this with the very first post but thought: oh well, I just must not have hit the right keys for a hard return. My very first comment did not post with any spaces between paragraphs.

My second post, however, was much, much longer than the first and, upon its first publishing, appeared to be nothing more than one horrendous run-on sentence. Even my family avoided it (and hey, don’t we write to family first, in order to proclaim: look, here I am, on the World Wide Web!) — and rightly so. It was, shall we say, visually ucky. A hint for blogger.com newbies: go back to the tab under “Settings,” click the “Formatting” tab and then under “Convert Line Breaks” click on “yes.” What you originally saw under POSTING will now miraculously appear on the final post. Voila!

THE F-BOMB:

Some “convservative” or “right wing” pundits and radio hosts have called Democratic candidate John Kerry “John F-Bomb Kerry” for his public usage of the f-word in a Rolling Stone magazine article in late 2003 where he was quoted as saying “I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, ‘I’m against everything’? Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f – – – it up as badly as he did? I don’t think anybody did,” Kerry told Rolling Stone.

In a WorldNetDaily article dated 12-06-2003, “Stephen Hess, a Brookings Institution presidential scholar, says he can’t recall another candidate attacking a president by using foul language in a public interview, according to the New York Post.

” ‘It’s so unnecessary,” Hess told the paper. ‘In a way it’s a kind of pandering [by Kerry] to a group he sees as hip . . . I think John Kerry is going to regret saying this.’ ”

Go back to Tuesday, June 22nd, 2004, and Vice President Dick Cheney’s f-bomb comment to admittedly dopey Vermont Democratic US Senator Patrick Leahy during a heated exchange on the Senate floor, while awaiting a group senatorial photo out of session. In a terse discussion between the two that touched on politics, religion and money, Cheney told Leahy to “f— off” or “go f— yourself.” The comment was in response to Leahy’s personal attack on Cheney with regard to Halliburton.

“I think he was just having a bad day,” Leahy was quoted as saying on CNN, which first reported the incident. “I was kind of shocked to hear that kind of language on the floor.”

Now fast forward to Fox News’ Friday, June 25th interview by Neil Cavuto of Mr. Cheney:

Neil Cavuto: “What happened?”

VP Dick Cheney: “You could say we had a little floor debate in the United States Senate.”

NC: “I heard it was more than a debate.”

VP: “Well, it was, I expressed myself rather forcefully. Felt better after I had done it.”

NC: “Alright. Did you use the “F” word?”

VP: “Ahhh, that’s not the kind of language I usually use.”

NC: “The reports were that you did.”

VP: “That’s not the kind of language that I ordinarily use.”

NC: “So what did you tell him?”

VP: “I, ah, I expressed my, ah, dissatisfaction with Senator Leahy.”

NC: “Over his comments about you and Halliburton?”

VP: “No. It was partly that, it was partly also it had to do with, ahh, he is the kind of individual who will make those kinds of charges and then come act as though he’s your best friend, and I expressed in no uncertain terms my views of his conduct, and walked away.”

NC: “Did you curse at him?”

VP: “Probably.” (laughter by the VP)

NC: “Do you have any regrets?”

VP: “No. I said it. And I…”

NC: “So let me understand. He comes up and he sees you, says ‘Mr. Vice President,’ and he’s a little nice, shakes your hand, and then what do you do, lit into him?

VP: “Ah. Expressed my unhappiness with the way he conducted himself. Part of the problem here is that instead of having this substantive debate over important policy issues, ah, he had challenged my integrity, and I didn’t like that, but most of all I didn’t like the fact that after he’d done so, then he wanted to act like, ah, now things are peaches and cream, and I informed him of my view of his conduct in no uncertain terms, and as I say, I felt better afterwards.”

NC: “Alright. Now they say you broke decorum for normally a Senate or Congressional session. Technically, I guess, it wasn’t in session.”

VP: “No, we weren’t in session. What we were doing was waiting to take our pictures, our official Senate photos, and I go up and sit in the chair as president of the Senate and preside.”

NC: “What was the reaction from the crowdd?”

VP: (Vice President laughing) “I think a lot of my colleagues felt that, ah, what I said badly needed to be said. That it was long overdue.”

NC: “Pretty feisty guy, aren’t you?”

VP: “Well, I am usually calm, cool, and collected, and ordinarily I don’t express myself in strong terms, but I thought it was appropriate here.”

Okay. So it happened. But Republicans, gather this: don’t typify one side of the aisle as an “F-Bomb” dropper then, as Hugh Hewitt did on his Friday, June 25th radio show, attempt to excuse the Veep of the same precise thing — no matter the circumstances. It simply is a matter of fundamental fairness no matter which side of the aisle one represents. “Leahy has more hair,” “Cheney has less hair,” it’s about “personal attacks,” whatever. All immaterial.

If it’s not good for the Dems, it’s not good for the GOP — and, after all, isn’t it still all about some semblance of decorum and discussion, when all is said and done? Of course it is. Hugh: I feel badly. You’ve let me down, sir.

A slap on the wrist to Mr. Cheney and, likewise, to Hugh Hewitt for trying to excuse what he would normally lambaste coming from the Democratic side of the aisle.

I, like many people, recently watched last Sunday’s (June 20th) “60 Minutes” interview of former President Bill Clinton by Dan Rather. And after having watched the series of poofy softballs underhanded to Mr. Clinton (though Dan furrowed his brow a few times in order to appear the ever-serious journalist, and lowered his voice in a reverential fashion), I was reminded once again of Clinton’s thirst for the spotlight, his overwhelming reliance on denial and megalomania — oh gosh, did I offend? Rephrased for ill-educated WJC apologists not up on multisyllabic words: sense of “it’s all about me.” Of course, those lifestyle hedonists who believe “it’s all about me” won’t see the humor in this anyway. BABAGOI.

Whereas perhaps a few years ago I would have excoriated Mr. Clinton for the seemingly-odd timing of the release of his new book “My Life,” on the apparently sagging polling numbers of Mr. John F. Kerry (JFK — get it?), I now realize I really should “move on” about this man — except: he won’t let me do that. Just when I thought the right thing had been done — we’d “moved on” from the Lewinsky and other sordid affairs — boom. Back comes Bill with his face on the news, out with a book, unveiling a portrait, hitting the proverbial visual Softball Halls of Fame on major media and, oops, maybe having made a mistake on Auntie Beeb with his UK interviewer.

As the BBC News, UK edition indicated: “Mr Clinton reacted after presenter David Dimbleby asked him why he had an affair with Ms Lewinsky when he knew he was under investigation by special prosecutor Kenneth Starr for other matters.

“Wagging his finger and getting visibly agitated, Mr Clinton expressed anger at the media’s behaviour.

“He said: “Let me just say this. One of the reasons he [Kenneth Starr] got away with it is because people like you only ask me the questions.”

Ouch. But not really.

He hates the name Slick Willy, doesn’t mind being called Bubba (according to the Rather interview) but, on the Oprah Winfrey show aired Tuesday, June 22nd, admitted the he did not expect to “get caught.” He said the pressure to “get him” came out of the frustration of his adversaries with Whitewater. When asked by Oprah, “why didn’t you tell the truth from the start?” there was a large pause. Large. Clinton said that he considered what he should do and thought about former President Grover Cleveland, who had a child out of wedlock. Except that the difference was: Cleveland didn’t have someone trying to put him in jail. Ah, I get it now. It’s all about Bill in his role as The Victim. “I was all alone again,” Bill said on Oprah. “Just the way I had been as a little boy.” Did anybody know (the full situation, the truth), did you tell anybody? Oprah asked. “No. Nobody. I was all alone. You know, before I got married to Hillary I was afraid that I’d spend my whole life alone. I was always afraid that I would never make a successful marriage because there was part of me that was just walled off to everybody else.”

Mr. Clinton also said that “you can make all your judgments about me.” But he was afraid that if he told the truth, “he’d [Starr] indict a lot of people and I’d be run from office and the bad guys would win.”

The Bad Guys. Who would those Bad Guys be, Mr. Clinton? People who were asking you to tell the truth? I know: when the going gets tough, the tough get to lying. Gosh, you didn’t think you’d get caught. And that’s the Bitch Kitty of it all, isn’t it? You simply got caught. I hate it when that happens.

Time perhaps for a current Clinton Reality Check (CRC). Let’s look at some reviews of Mr. Clinton’s new book, “My Life,” from the clearly left-leaning New York Times and then the Associated Press. Michiko Kakutani of the Times wrote that the book, like his 1993 DNC speech, is “so long winded and tedious that the crowd cheered when he finally reached the words ‘in closing. . .’ ” Kakutani typifies the book “as a mirror of Mr. Clinton’s presidency: lack of discipline leading to squandered opportunities. . .” She further describes the book as “sloppy, self-indulgent,” (do ya think?) “and often eye-crossingly dull — the sound of one man prattling away, not for the reader, but for himself and some distant recording angel of history.”

“Legacy.” I’m sorry, did I just write the word legacy?

Or the Associated Press “My Life” review: “The effect is mind-numbing. It’s like being locked in a small room with a very gregarious man who insists on reading his entire appointment book, day by day, beginning in 1946.” Or the summation of the review: “You dig and you dig. And in the end, it just isn’t worth it.”

This is going so poorly now, let’s allow some facts to get in the way:

– 40 government officials were indicated or convicted in the wake of Watergate under Nixon;

– There was a total of 31 convictions for Iran-Contra and HUD scandal under Reagan;

– 47 individuals and businesses pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of these occurring during the Clinton administration. There were 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were imprisoned.

Clinton was or had:

– The first president to establish a legal defense fund [and actually acquire persons to contribute];

– The first president to be accused of rape;

– The first president to be sued for sexual harassment;

– The largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case;

– The greatest number of witnesses against him to flee the country or refuse to testify;

– The greatest number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation;

– The first president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance, and, only one of two ever impeached.

Number of times persons (partial list: I don’t have that much space!) testified in court or before Congress they didn’t know, or didn’t recall something:

– Hillary Clinton: 250

– Bill Kennedy: 116

– Jennifer O’Connor: 343

– Patsy Thomasson: 420

And, of course, Bill Clinton claimed he would have “the most ethical administration ever.”

James Carville once said: “If they focus on Clinton’s accomplishments it’ll have to be a 10-year course.” He also said: “You all will never get over the fact that Bill Clinton was the greatest president in the last 50 years. You’ll never get over the fact that this guy in here [GW Bush] can’t walk and chew gum at the same time.”

Sigh. I repeat, at the risk of being repetitive (The Department of Redundancy Department): this is in fact the Legacy That Won’t Go Away — though not for lack of trying on my part.

It really is quite sad. I have no true animus towards Mr. Clinton. He is a lamentable and pathetic creature, plagued by his upbringing (I shall not even go into the paths created by divorce here) and inflated sense of self esteem and worth. A brilliant mind, yes. A wonderful manipulator, yes. But a legacy?

Here it is: here is Mr. Clinton’s “Legacy:”

Semen stains on a dress. “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” Impeachment.

And, oh, Bill? Guess what? You only have yourself to thank for that.