Underplayed News of the Day?

In a recent post, Glen Greenwald asked Joe Klein the following question:

"Can you or someone at Time please ask Rick Stengel why he thinks he is entitled to go on national television and make factually and demonstrably false statements (see Update) about what Americans think and not retract, correct or clarify what he has said once he realizes it is false? Ana Marie Cox linked to that discussion and said she passed it on to him, yet he has never corrected his falsehoods. He's Time's Managing Editor. Why is nobody at Time bothered by that behavior?"

Could you also follow up on this? If you can't get Rick Stengel to answer you, please answer the final question for yourself - "Why is nobody at Time bothered by that behavior?"

To Richard Stengel: please reconcile what you and your fellow panelists told the MSNBC audience regarding Americans' opposition to investigations with the following actual evidence about what Americans believe (thank you to commenters sirmarcos and br):

First, a CNN poll from August 30-September 2, (shows the opposite)

And then we have this USA Today poll, taken over the weekend (exactly when Stengel and his colleagues were warning Democrats that Americans would be angry if they pursued Karl Rove):

14. Do you think Congress should -- or should not -- investigate the involvement of White House officials in this matter?

Yes, should - 72%; No, should not - 21%

15. If Congress investigates these dismissals, in your view, should President Bush and his aides -- [ROTATED: invoke "executive privilege" to protect the White House decision making process (or should they) drop the claim of executive privilege and answer all questions being investigated]?

Invoke executive privilege - 26%; Answer all questions - 68%

16. In this matter, do you think Congress should or should not issue subpoenas to force White House officials to testify under oath about this matter?

Yes, should - 68%; No, should not - 24%

Just compare those facts to the wild assertions made by Stengel and friends on MSNBC:
Mr. STENGEL: I am so uninterested in the Democrats wanting Karl Rove, because it is so bad for them. Because it shows business as usual, tit for tat, vengeance. That's not what voters want to see.

Ms. BORGER: Mm-hmm.

MATTHEWS: So instead of like an issue like the war where you can say it's bigger than all of us, its more important than politics, this is politics.

Mr. STENGEL: Yes, and it's much less. It's small bore politics.

O'DONNELL: The Democrats have to be very careful that they look like they're not the party of investigation rather than legislation in trying to change things.

This is what I think is so notable here: I would never dream of coming to this blog and just start making assertions that "Americans believe X" or "Americans oppose Y" unless I had actual evidence to support those claims. That's because I would not expect readers of this blog to view what I write as being credible if I just spewed assertions with no empirical basis like that. No credible blogger would do that. Why don't pundits on MSNBC -- including the Managing Editor of Time Magazine -- recognize those same basic constraints?

What makes you think there acutally is a Plan B? Just because President Bush said so? There are really people who believe anything the president says about Iraq? Buhs's secret contigency plans are just like Nixon's secret plan to end the war.

It's....

SURGE II: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO

Should last to Jan. 20, 2009, and how dare you not give it at least 6, 12, or 18 months before you call it a failure under our new military leader, GENERAL FAILURE!

"... After all, if there was actually anything moderate about their opinions of Iraq they wouldn't have decided that 2002 was a good year for lockstep support of the Bush administration's Iraq policy that was well followed-up by offering lockstep support of the Bush administration's Iraq policy in 2003, after which 2004 turned out to be an ideal moment for lockstep support of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, much as 2005 was also a good year for lockstep support of the Bush administration's Iraq policy and, indeed, that in 2006 lockstep support of the Bush administration's Iraq policy was just what the doctor ordered.

Even today, the moderates aren't doing anything ..."
-- http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/05/well_then_do_something.php

"The House members pressed Bush and Gates hard for a 'Plan B' if the current troop increase fails"

I read this as a plea for Bush to come up with a Plan B, not an acknowledgment one is in the works.

^ I think that is the point of Karen's post. If the administration claims that it does, in fact, have a Plan B, than people want to know what it is.

I think you can interpret the 'wanting to know what it is' and the 'wanting to know if it actually exists' as the same thing...nobody believes it actually exists until they hear what it is.

Sorry, my above comment was made in response to Bo234 (not memekiller)

NO THIS IS THE MOST UNDERPLAYED:

"The Bush administration has withheld a series of e-mails from Congress showing that senior White House and Justice Department officials worked together to conceal the role of Karl Rove in installing Timothy Griffin, a protégé of Rove's, as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

The withheld records show that D. Kyle Sampson, who was then-chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, consulted with White House officials in drafting two letters to Congress that appear to have misrepresented the circumstances of Griffin's appointment as U.S. attorney and of Rove's role in supporting Griffin."

MURRAY WAAS, Best Reporter in town.

Here is the link to the MURRAY WAAS story that I forgot to add:

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/070510nj1.htm

Anyway.

CONGRATULATIONS TO TIME MAG.

The 100 most influential persons of the world and not Bush.

YOU ARE RI-DI-CU-LOUS.

CHILDISH, FAR-LEFT FANATICS.

YOU JUST BURIED YOUR CREDIBILITY.

Go get another job. Journalism is for adults.

This is like, the sixth version of Plan B since this entire fiasco began. Why don't we just out with it and declare ourselves bloody imperialists.

Honestly -- how many really, seriously, want to leave the Middle East. People are making so much cash from the bloodshed over there it's obscene, and destabilising the region is exactly what was wanted. These old men have to make like they want out because they'll lose poll points otherwise.

Seriously, I don't even know why the war is reported on any more.

Karen, the underplayed news item of the day is surely the Gonzales hearings and AGAG's ongoing nonsensical answers: Miers wanted to fire Yang because she was concerned about her financial situation. "I think I may be aware of that." And so on.

Then again politicization of the justice system is apparently no big deal. So the fact that the Attorney General is transparently dissembling about it is no big deal as well. Impartial justice is an antiquated notion like the Geneva Conventions, I guess.

As for the meeting, this strikes me as more a cynical PR ploy than anything else. They're trying to buttress the street cred of Republican Congressmen in swing districts on the cheap without actually having them vote against the President. A secret "Plan B" fits in with this perfectly. (Something similar worked for Nixon, no?)

I read somewhere that Plan B was to make Plan A work. Which I believe has been the plan all along.

It's a 'Secret Plan To End The War.'

Had to pay an arm and a leg to the Nixon Library for the rights, but Dubya thinks it's worth it.

I thought the surge was Plan B? So are they looking for Plan C?

And I love how the Republicans who had this meeting are trying to spin it as a moment where they had courage and confronted the president--these guys saw what happened to their buddies in the '06 elections and are starting to realize they're going to be in the voters' crosshairs in '08. They're starting to hit the panic button.

Karen-

If you are interested in the "underreported news of the day," perhaps you might be tempted to report on the underreported news of the entire Bush Administration. That is, that all of his failures, from Iraq to Katrina to cronyism to demogoguery regarding patriotism and "family values" to incompetent appointees in charge of government agencies to bankrupting the Treasury, etc. etc. etc. ARE WHAT REPUBLICANS STAND FOR. Once again, it is not a bug; it is a feature. It is what Grover Norquist meant when he said he wanted to shrink government down to where it could be drowned in a bathtub.

You are an occasional guest on Chris Matthews' show. Tell the truth: why don't you confront Chris when he makes statements like: "McCain deserves to be President"? After all, the name of his show is "Hardball." One would think that the host could take a high inside fastball every now and again.

"Davis said that administration officials convinced him there are contingency plans, but that the president declined to offer details"

This is not acknowledgment of a "Plan B," only that Thomas Davis thinks there's a "Plan B." He doesn't know anything about it, but he's convinced it must exist. No evidence, but he belives in it anyway...

Clearly, "Plan B" is "Santa Claus Conquers the Sunnis."

What is utterly laughable is that the time for a Plan B was in 2002, when they were planning the invasion. That the GOP is now discussing a "Plan B" just shows how utterly irresponsible they have been throughout this catastrophe and how undeserving they are of respect or power.

I'm with Attaturk. I hadn't seen that till his link. That is simultaneously the biggest and most underplayed story of the day. The White House signed off on false statements to Congress. Here's TPM on the case:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003194.php

By the way, I think it's pretty telling that the anonymous source thought he had to leak to the relatively obscure National Journal rather than the Times or WaPo or Time. Now I wonder why that would be?

I heard Congressman Jim Gerlach on a talk radio show this morning. He attended the meeting and said that this story is over-blown. He didn't mention a Plan B.

You guys are blogging old media b.s. Grow up and face the facts. Your news is old news.

Underplayed news of the day?: George say there is a plan B but won't tell anyone what it is.

Watching paint dry in humid conditions is more exciting news story.

Such a sad testament to our deplorable news media.

They have a secret Plan B like Richard Nixon had a secret plan to end the war. I'm frankly shocked the Post didn't call Davis an "anonymous source with knowledge of the conversation" to try and make such an implausible concept sound more realistic and insider-information-like.

Sen. Conrad Burns says he believes President Bush has a plan to win the war in Iraq but is keeping it quiet, a statement Democrats pounced on Wednesday as reminiscent of comments made during another divisive war.

Burns, at a debate Tuesday night with Democratic challenger Jon Tester, said he believes Bush has a plan to win — but added: "we're not going to tell you what our plan is."

(Some things never change)

Karen, I'd really be interested to hear your sense of the nature of the meeting. Do you think the main purpose was the exchange of views or do you think it was the press coverage?

(My view, expressed above, is that it was done for the predictably breathless news coverage that would allow a certain visual distancing of congressmen in swing districts from the President without costing him any acting votes.)

When Plan A - "stay the course" was soundly repudiated at the polls, Plan B -"the surge" suddenly became Plan A. Now that Plan B is now Plan A, then cleary the new Plan B is "stay the course".

So simple a child could do it.

I'm amazed that there has been no discussion of 'Plan C.' Let's suppose that by some miracle, our military operations in Iraq were successful and acheived some measure of stability in that country. How much would it cost us to maintain the peace for the decades following? The cost would be astronomical, yet no one in Congress has raised this question.

How can Plan A fail if the Iraq invasion never failed? That man never failed a day in his life. We're winning, or haven't you heard?

When will you show us the good news?

Duh. Plan B = Make Plan A work.

Plan B, isn't that a pill that the rapturist pharmacists refuse to sell?

Plan B, Noah didn't have one, 'cause if he did he would have taken baby dinosaurs on the Ark so they wouldn't be extinct.

Plan B, Willard as Pres.

Plan B, throw frozen zygotes in the garbage.

Plan B, appoint enough Judges to protect their arzes.

Plan B, finish 'my pet goat'.

Plan B, keep dummying down education so that no child feels left behind having to deal with real science, math, literature, and history.

Plan B, party with the MSM.

Plan B is actually part of Plan A which is to stay in Iraq as long as possible. If Plan A requires pretending to have a Plan B to extend the war-profiteering, then 'Plan B' will be enacted.

And if you're looking for underplayed news you might try this story here.

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/070510nj1.htm

Apparently the White House has been corrupting the DoJ or something like that. No biggy, an independent justice department is so pre-9/11.

Tim: " I heard Congressman Jim Gerlach on a talk radio show this morning. He attended the meeting and said that this story is over-blown. He didn't mention a Plan B. "

Jim Gerlach is my Congressman. He wouldn't know the truth if it fell on his face and wiggled. At a recent town hall meeting he couldn't answer any questions with out either playing the Fear card or simply dodging the question asked of him.

Possible Plan Bs:

1) Come up with a Plan A.
2) Make Plan A work.
3) Hope harder. (See Plan A).
4) Win. (see Plan A).
5) I can't tell you. (See Plan A).
6) Invade another country, only, have a Plan A this time. (See Plan A).
7) What's wrong with Plan A?
8) It's spectacular! Twice the budget, three times the special effects! Premieres Jan. 2008. (Until then, see Plan A).
9) Plan A worked. We won. Hasn't the media told you?
10) Leaving is losing. We'll never leave, so we'll never lose.

(Note: Plan A: Trust me. Why? (Refer to Plan A))

Linda, nice! Is teh funnah. Can I play?

Plan B, sneak Jeff Gannon past the RA so he doesn't have to sign in.

Plan B, remember "Internet" is singular.

Plan B, nix Stephen Colbert for WHC dinner.

Plan B, talk Rudy into Village People Cowboy garb rather than Miss America evening gown(s).

Plan B, have AF1 parachute down personal floatation devices as Bush flies over the devastation
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6133/bushguitar1zo2.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/images/20050831_p083105pm-0117jas-515h.jpg

Plan B, come up with better cover story than "the pretzel"

Plan B = blue pills for everyone.

I thought this Administration was against Plan B? Something about it killing potental babies?

Skip down to the Rep. Cramer's under the radar quote.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/10/us.iraq.ap/index.html

Tristero of Hullabaloo has an amusing take on the 5% approval rating factoid here:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/bushs-approval-remains-ridiculously.html

While I'm at it I had missed till now the "Lord of the Rings" Giuliani/Yankees scandal:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/lord-of-rings-by-digby-i-think-rudy.html

Plan B, Cont...:

11) Over there! Look! Immigrants! (Return to Plan A)

Ms. Tumulty,
It is a tragedy more Americans do not experience Canadian culture.

From the seminal, prescient 2002 Canadian motion picture, _Fubar_:
Dean Murdoch: As it stands Plan B is to just keep on Given'r.
Farrel Mitchener: Giving it to her?
Dean Murdoch: No given'r
Farrel Mitchener: Can you maybe explain given'r? What exactly does that mean?
Dean Murdoch: Give'r. You just go out and you give'r. You keep on working hard.
Farrel Mitchener: Is that a plan?
Dean Murdoch: Yeah that's a plan right there.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0302585/quotes

Oh, come now Karen, surely you know the storyline by now...

Revealing Plan B would prove aid and comfort to the enemy. Democrats asking for details would be further proof that they're rooting for the enemy. For "balance," Wolf and Tweety equal time to this argumentation. After all, presenting "Republicans say..." is now intrepid reporting...

Plan B.

Everything is OK becuz we said its OK. Continue as normal.

Sidenote: Why are you mad at us? Everyone knows all of this really stems back to the clinton administration.

Plan B con't:

12) Clenis!! (Return to Plan A)

Plan B: Appoint a WAR CZAR, LOL

Plan B: Send Darth, LOL

Plan B: Compromise on Benchmarks, LOL

Plan B: More time, LOL

Plan B: Throes and tantrums, LOL

Anonymous,

The truth? The Washington Post and these lame bloggers present the truth?

tim

Linda,

There is NO PLAN B. Shrub didn't have a plan to start with. We are "so" (as in the Rick Stengel sense) screwed, it is unbelievable. Bush trashes America and we are powerless to stop him. If the best we can say is that History will not be kind, we are lying to ourselves. America as we know it has been fundamentally changed so that W can show how tough he is. The former Bush may have been aloof, but at least, he knew what he was doing when he started a fight. He knew how to get in and get out. And here's a quote for the Time.com guys:

It doesn't do any good to win a few battles if you have no plan to win the war.

Bryan

Ms. Tumulty,

Good catch on this, as there has been much speculation as to whether there is a "Plan B" beyond "making plan A work". The house minority leader seemed to indicate a while back that they had a plan b, which they (the GOP members of congress & WH) would implement if need be, in August of 2008, cutting out the democrats (which would certaintly be interesting to see how they go about accomplishing that as they aren't in the majority).

My guess is that there is a Plan B, and it will be implemented in August of 2008, and it will have something to do with declaring Hillary/Obama/Edwards an enemy combatant and sending them to Gitmo. Just kidding.....I hope.

Plan B??? This would be funny if it weren't so pathetically tragic.

He didn't even have a Plan A.

13) Shock and Awe, baby!!!

You shocked? You in awe?

No?

(refer to Plan A)

Bush trashes america? Egads, some of you are hilarious if it wasn't so damn sad. I have to wonder what cave you must live in?

14) Is it January 2008, yet? Oh. (Return to Plan A)

Bush says there's a Plan B and the reporter automatically assumes there is one?

What in his conduct of the war would lead you to give the President the benefit of the doubt on this issue? Last time I checked, he has been wrong about EVERYTHING related to the war. I have more credibility on this issue, and I all do is sit in my basement everyday and watch TV.

Call my a cynic, but I think the only Plan B is to ride it out and hand the war off to the next president. Why doesn't somebody from the press ask Mr. Bush if that's among his plans?

Plan B: Rove sent Plan B with Plan A in an e-Mail on his RNC account which has now been deleted. Gonzo can't recall.

"Plan B" is a gradual withdrawl from Iraq.

That's why Bush won't say what it is. Because it would require him admitting that the war is lost, that the Democrats are right, and it would publicize the "drop dead" date for the Iraqi Gvt.

Tim:
"The truth? The Washington Post and these lame bloggers present the truth? "

I believe they like to be called Dirty F*****g hippies. And they've been far more accurate then anything the good Congressman has ever said.

Here is an item that if it were a Democrat, would warrant a front page screaming headline in the Washington Post and an article from John Solomon.

Since it is a Republican, you can be sure that the item will get zero play. Giuliani accepted 4 World Series rings from the Yankees (worth > $200k) while mayor, in addition to many, many other perks. That was against the law, and he could still be prosecuted for it.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0719,barrett,76566,2.html/full

“What's more troubling is that Giuliani's receipt of the rings may be a serious breach of the law, and one that could still be prosecuted. New York officials are barred from taking a gift of greater than $50 value from anyone doing business with the city, and under Giuliani, that statute was enforced aggressively against others. His administration forced a fire department chief, for example, to retire, forfeit $93,105 in salary, and pay a $6,000 fine for taking Broadway tickets to two shows and a free week in a ski condo from a city vendor. The city's Conflicts of Interest Board (COIB) has applied the gift rule to discounts as well, unless the cheaper rate "is available generally to all government employees." When a buildings department deputy commissioner was indicted in 2000 for taking Mets and Rangers tickets, as well as a family trip to Florida, from a vendor, an outraged Giuliani denounced his conduct as "reprehensible," particularly "at high levels in city agencies," and said that such officials had to be "singled out" and "used as examples." “

MORE UNDERCOVERED NEWS:

GUILIANI STIFFS POOR IOWA FARM COUPLE.

Lord knows the media be all over it if Hillary Clinton or John Edwards did this. I mean if $400 haircuts are all the rage...

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/05/rudy_snubs_farm.php

""I told [Rudy's aide] from day one that we were poor folks, just trying to scrape by...When they [asked us to host the event], I was just ecstatic. We were honored. It was an honor and a privilege. We worked so hard...Why would Rudy Giuliani not come speak to the average Americans that live in eastern Iowa, instead of qualifying you as a millionaire before he will show up to your place?"

AND THERE'S THIS:

"Deb also told me that she'd be willing to speak to the media about this, too."

You Reporter types might want to give them a call.

Plan B: Part I
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1619382,00.html

Anonymous,

Perhaps your right. You are at ground zero, not me.

tim

attaturk: Rudy blows off the field of dreams wearing his Super Bowl Ring.

Tim:

At one point during the town hall meeting, a man asked about the pre-9/11 budget. Specifically questions about the tax cuts and spending increases. The good Congressman's repsonse was "9/11 made that happen". Then the gentleman pointed out it occured pre-9/11 and Rep. Gerlach pretended not to hear him.

Plan B: See Plan 9 - Plan 9? Ah, yes. Plan 9 deals with the resurrection of the dead. Long distance electrodes shot into the pineal and pituitary gland of the recently dead. (See Plan A).

What possible 'Plan B' is there?

The Bush Administration has no reserves of military power or political capital/cred left, nor exploitable weakness- opening to intimidation or bribery- of its opponents remaining.

What's being employed in and brought to bear on Iraq is all that can be afforded. When it's used up there is no more.

The only possible redefinition of the stakes of the war is to give up the democratic Iraq policy and claim it's entirely a hand-to-hand fight with 'terrorism'. But that has no currency internationally or with Iraqis and only a few weeks' worth of refreshed Right/reactionary support domestically.

Actually, Karen, I'm betting that this is the underplayed news item of the day:

Rudy snubs Iowa farmer for not being rich enough
http://tinyurl.com/3exmps

The VonSpreckens (the snubbed farmers) have said they are willing to talk to the media about this, but a phone call FROM a member of the media would still be required. I know, such hard work to earn your six figure salary.

I know you're uncomfortable talking to poor people about money issues, Karen, but perhaps you or someone else at TIME could put away your hangups about being rich and just talk to these people. It seems like it's a good story, and, BONUS! it involves the 2008 election!

Or you could just keep talking about John Edwards' haircut. Whichever you think is more important WRT the '08 campaign.

Putin's Victory Day Speech (defeat of Nazi Germany) has a 'veiled' but direct reference comparing the Bush USA to the pre-WW II Germany.

Blair resigns.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Plan B: Rove to Scotty, "Beam us up"

How about this story for Exhibit 4,126 on how the media cover Republican campaigns (swoon) compared to how they cover Dem campaigns (false storylines and hyping non-stories:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/05/rudy_snubs_farm.php

"Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that the Rudy campaign badly shafted a disabled woman and her farmer husband because they weren't millionaires and hence wouldn't be adequate political props for Rudy's "death tax" campaign.

Oh, incidentally, Deb also told me that she'd be willing to speak to the media about this, too.

So will anyone from the media contact Deb? Does anyone doubt that if John Edwards or any other Dem did this it would be covered by all the major networks and chewed over endlessly by cable chat-show hosts for days and days and days?"

So if the farmers aren't millionaires, Rudy doesn't have time for them. Expect this story to get 1/1000th of the coeverage of Edrawrds' haircut:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=VonSprecken+Olin+Iowa&btnG=Search+News

How about this one:

Last weekend Deb and Jerry VonSprecken of Olin received a call from former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s campaign office asking them if they would be interested in holding a campaign rally on May 4, after she had donated to his campaign.

“We thought it would be an honor and agreed,” said Jerry.

The campaign office continued to contact the VonSpreckens throughout last weekend and were told a security check would be needed. The couple passed the security check and began putting plans in place.

“We started making phone calls. We got the sheriff and fire department and Olin school was going to let out early. We were also expecting kids from the Anamosa school,” Jerry explained. “Deb even went around and personally invited people.”

On Tuesday Deb received a call from Giuliani’s Des Monies office and was asked to call New York.

“They wanted to know our assets,” she revealed, and added that she and Jerry have a modest 80 acre farm and raise cattle.

Later she received a call from Tony Delgado at the Des Monies location.

“Tony said, ‘I’m sorry, you aren’t worth a million dollars and he is campaigning on the Death Tax right now.’ then he said they weren’t going to be able to come,” Deb continued.

http://www.anamosaje.com/NewsArchive/2007/May/3/news.html#1

"...MoveOn.org, in particular, has played a key behind-the-scenes role in the months since Congress convened under Democratic majorities. The group, which played a highly visible role in last year's election campaign, acquiesced in an early Democratic strategy of seeking approval for non-binding measures to pressure Bush to change his plans.

In recent weeks, that has changed. Fearing that Democrats ultimately will surrender and give Bush the money he wants, the organization sent Reid and Pelosi a letter recently saying that if Democrats "appear to capitulate to Bush on Iraq, MoveOn will move to a position of opposition..."

Meet the new Brown Shirts.

Same as the old Brown Shirts.

Oh well.

HILLARY HAPPENS.

Libs say PRE-MEDITATED WAR PLANS ARE EVIL.

Then libs say NOT HAVING A PRE-MEDITATED WAR PLAN IS EVIL.

Suggestion?

MAKE UP YER FREAKIN MINDS, LEFTARDS.

"CONGRATULATIONS TO TIME MAG.

The 100 most influential persons of the world and not Bush.

YOU ARE RI-DI-CU-LOUS.

CHILDISH, FAR-LEFT FANATICS.

YOU JUST BURIED YOUR CREDIBILITY.

Go get another job. Journalism is for adults."

Beauty!

Hi Karen, I was wondering if you could follow up on this comment:

In a recent post, Glen Greenwald asked Joe Klein the following question:

"Can you or someone at Time please ask Rick Stengel why he thinks he is entitled to go on national television and make factually and demonstrably false statements (see Update) about what Americans think and not retract, correct or clarify what he has said once he realizes it is false? Ana Marie Cox linked to that discussion and said she passed it on to him, yet he has never corrected his falsehoods. He's Time's Managing Editor. Why is nobody at Time bothered by that behavior?"

Could you also follow up on this? If you can't get Rick Stengel to answer you, please answer the final question for yourself - "Why is nobody at Time bothered by that behavior?"

This is Plan 'B'...it won't be in place until September...what is Patraues saying..."re-evalutate Plan 'A' in September??"

http://soldiersdad2.blogspot.com/2007/03/plan-b.html

Plan B=Bush stands before the American people, and wags his finger at us, saying FUBAR, FUBAR, FUBAR!

How about the fact that 144 members (of 275) of the Iraqi parliament have voted to end the US occupation?

Well, it looks like the fat lady is singing.

A Sovereign Nation's duly elected Constitutional Parliament just voted for the US to end its occupation. The ticket home has been punched.

Anything short of an orderly, and rapid redeployment of US-Coalition (if there still is such a thing)out of Iraq puts the US in violation of all that the USA stands for and has demand in principal for the International Community of Nations to recognize.

Here's one for the "underreported story o'the day":

"More than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected for the first time on Tuesday the continuing occupation of their country. The U.S. media ignored the story.

On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition."

"In recent weeks, that has changed. Fearing that Democrats ultimately will surrender and give Bush the money he wants, the organization sent Reid and Pelosi a letter recently saying that if Democrats "appear to capitulate to Bush on Iraq, MoveOn will move to a position of opposition..."
Meet the new Brown Shirts.
Same as the old Brown Shirts."

Geez, has Free Republic linked here again??? So a major progressive group states they will oppose a bill if it doesn't appear to be to their liking and this is somehow compared with the Gestapo tactics? Given Move-on's unfortunate history with the wingers, the absurdity meter goes to 11 with this assertion. And I love the all caps thing, makes your points oh so much more compelling.

There needs to be a plan! A Plan B assumes that tehre is a plan intact now. I think that for Iraq to escape turmoil, institutions and funding need to be in place to address and prevent further poverty. We need to play a supportive role and remain long enough to support economic growth and political stability.

If the original principle of why we are fighting this war is as important as Bush claims, the $340 billion already spent and the further $100+ billion to be spent should be redirected toward plans to fight poverty and develop the country to prevent another Afghanistan. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually can end starvation and $15 billion provides water and sanitation all over the world. If ending terror is the goal, programs such as the Millennium Development Goals to end poverty should be priority for our leaders.

What the hell is Plan A?

"... the contentious meeting yesterday between President Bush and moderate congressional Republicans ..."

Contentious? Ha! Those moderate Republicans are going fold like cheap deck chairs, just like they always do.

As John Podesta used to say about any plan that relied on moderate Republicans showing some spine and not caving in: "Bring me a new plan."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2007/05/10/did_yankees_cut_giuliani_deal_on_rings.html

PoliticalWire picks up on the Giuliani/Yankee 200k Swag story!

The funny thing is he just started wearing those rings on the campaign trail. Previously, they didn't go well with many of his dresses.

Karen, could you comment on the new update Glen Greenwald just posted:

"I was hoping to have the return courtesy of a response -- from [Klein] or anyone else at Time -- to Rick Stengel's lingering, uncorrected factual falsehoods. All journalists -- and everyone else -- make mistakes. The credible ones face up to them, acknowledge them, and correct them -- especially when they're made on national television and involve indisputably false statements about vitally important political matters.

Thanks!

As John Podesta used to say about any plan that relied on moderate Republicans showing some spine and not caving in: "Bring me a new plan.

I'd never heard that! I always had a good feeling about Podesta. Glad he's not another Panetta or Davis.

Karen, I again, appreciate you engaging us. I think a 'underplayed news of the day' is a great idea.

Have a good night.

Hey maybe there's hope for the Beltway media after all, once we relocate them to Bombay.

May 10, 2007
Calif. Web Site Outsources Reporting
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 8:41 p.m. ET

PASADENA, Calif. (AP) -- The job posting was a head-scratcher: ''We seek a newspaper journalist based in India to report on the city government and political scene of Pasadena, California, USA.''

A reporter half a world away covering local street-light contracts and sewer repairs? A reporter who has never gotten closer to Pasadena than the telecast of the Rose Bowl parade?

Outsourcing first claimed manufacturing jobs, then hit services such as technical support, airline reservations and tax preparation. Now comes the next frontier: local journalism.

James Macpherson, editor and publisher of the two-year-old Web site pasadenanow.com, acknowledged it sounds strange to have journalists in India cover news in this wealthy city just outside Los Angeles.

But he said it can be done from afar now that weekly Pasadena City Council meetings can be watched over the Internet. And he said the idea makes business sense because of India's lower labor costs.

''I think it could be a significant way to increase the quality of journalism on the local level without the expense that is a major problem for local publications,'' said the 51-year-old Pasadena native. ''Whether you're at a desk in Pasadena or a desk in Mumbai, you're still just a phone call or e-mail away from the interview.''

We numbingly reassure ourselves that over 3,300 U.S. deaths in Iraq are minimal compared to other wars, particularly given the amount of time we’ve invested there. Parlor Patriots nod approvingly that we must take the fight to the enemy in order to best defend our country against terrorists. Really though, no one outside of our extraordinary military families and friends sacrifices anything to support this war.

President Bush needs to lay his cards on the table to the American people by challenging them to become financially accountable for our involvement in Iraq. If President Bush won’t budget for this war through increased taxation to support our troops then he should reinstate the draft. Patriotism should be a responsible and accountable emotion. Too few Americans are sacrificing for a cause that the President too vaguely defines. If he can’t make the case to justify the financial and personal sacrifices of our proud citizens, then why are we there? President Bush should start with the following conditions to make his case:

1. Lay out the expected cost of this war in potential six-month increments.
2. Explain the payment plan for each six-month increment that we’re at war.
3. Describe troop rotations and number of personnel required for each potential six-month incremental extension that keeps us in Iraq.
4. Acknowledge the timeline trip-wire on our commitment in Iraq that will necessitate a draft to maintain the highest level of military readiness.
5. Define success for the Iraqi government. What do they want us to do?
6. Protect our troops. If new equipment is needed to deflect increasingly sophisticated IEDs, then plan for the cost and expedite production. Tell us when our troops can expect results.
7. Map the steps required to flow Iraqi oil profitably enough to allow responsible government officials in Iraq to pay for reestablishing infrastructure and training security forces.
8. Articulate the plan to neutralize the negative influences of Syria and Iran.
9. List our allies and their future commitments of troops, money, and time. What will Tony Blair’s departure mean for the coalition forces?
10. Don’t fearfully categorize provocative discourse as emboldening the enemy. The American spirit is defined by public debate. And the enemy is already emboldened.

President Bush has lost the credibility to justify committing us to war in Iraq. If he intends to keep us committed there, he owes his troops, his countrymen, and the world a clear vision of what he hopes to accomplish and how. It’s what we pay him to do. The “Father Knows Best” approach of this administration has failed to build faith in the public. It’s time to talk to us like grown-ups and demonstrate accountability.

Why Plan A or Plan B (even if we had one) would not work:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619556,00.html

Do NOT miss this one.

Why ya' got question everything that Snowjob sez (check paragraph 2):

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619539,00.html

Plan B: INVISIBLE COUNTERINSURGENCY !!!1!1!!1!

I think a couple Republican Reps have hinted at a plan B. I believe one of them was that Rep. from Minnesota who gets a clingy when the decider comes near her. Who knew they were in on the super-double secret plan. I thought they were just crazy.

UPDATE OF THE UPDATE: So many commenters offered their own candidates for "Underplayed News of the Day," maybe we should make it a regular feature here in the Swamp. Good idea?
***
What happened to the proposed Friday feature of answering questions from the Swamp Critters? You never answered the first round, and that was 3-4 weeks ago, I think.

The most under-reported aspect of the benchmarks brouhaha is exactly what sharing oil revenue, as our legislators are defining it, means.

In his idiotic earlier post, Joe whines about all the reporting columnists like him and David Broder do. Here's a great example of a columnist reporting something that both the MSM and liberal bloggers are ignoring.

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/51657/

Karen:

"Underplayed News of the Day," maybe we should make it a regular feature here in the Swamp. Good idea?

Ya, I think that would be a good idea.

Underplayed news of the day - you bet!

But if it appears on Drudge or in Politico it is immediately disqualified.

Page A14 in the Washington Post, might be an okay source. The editors there know how to both find a good story (on occassion) and underplay the story when it is required to preserve access.

My story from yesterday - DOJ / WH withheld incriminating docs from Congress.

Today's underreported might be the second half of Dan Eggen's report on USA-politicization.

Geez Louise!

You guys need to start reading the good stuff. Crooks and Liars has GOP Rep.Phil Gingrey's admission of a "Plan B" at http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/10/rep-gingrey-bush-gop-will-unleash-plan-b-in-aug-2008/
But it's a secret!

Swamplanders needs to get out more

Philly Boy and your alternet link:

If one can get through all the why Reid and Pelosi are the wicked witches of the left, one finds a small ill-defined point.

There are two points worth considering. The first being that 'stuff' gets lost in the 'fluff' and this goes for the briefings that Congress gets. All discussion of the Iraqi Oil Deal (IOD) that I have heard centers on the revenue sharing. The fact that the real hang up has been the 'colonialism clause' has not been reported with any significance. International news has carried the 'Iraqi oil workers strike' over the 'foreign oil contracts'. That is related to coverage and the link you gave us did the same thing: buried it at the 'bottom' and gave little definition of the 'problem' or added little to the understanding of IOD.

Why is this 'colonialism' a problem? Maybe somebody could reference the history of Venezualean Oil or Chevron in Nigeria. Understanding of the underlaying conflict of the IOD 'issue' just might advance the story more than an attack on Reid and Pelosi.

Why does Cheney to Iraq to the UAE pour 'oil' on the fire? Cheney-Halliburton-Halliburton CEO now in Dubai.

How about this story:

http://www.headlinejunky.com/permalink/2007_05_09_is_the_fat_lady_singing.php

Is Iraqi reconstruction being wound up?

Ms. Tumulty,
>So many commenters offered their own candidates for "Underplayed News of the Day," maybe we should make it a regular feature here in the Swamp. Good idea?

Yes.
That would be much better than the regular feature of "Most Deliberate Misreading of the Day".
Thank you.

Underreported news item: Bush ordered bombing of Al-Jazeera? How about that one?

Deliberately bombing civilian targets and killing civilians deliberately is a war crime.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/05/10/BL2007051001116_5.html

Al Jazeera Watch

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Sullivan also writes in The Washington Post: "Two former British government employees were convicted Wednesday of violating Britain's Official Secrets Act for leaking a transcript of a White House conversation between Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush, a disclosure that prosecutors said could have jeopardized the lives of British soldiers. . . .

"In that conversation, the news agencies reported, Bush referred to bombing the headquarters of the al-Jazeera television network. U.S. officials called the report 'outlandish and inconceivable.'"

But how inconceivable is it really? The White House has never issued anything more than a non-denial denial. (See my December 2, 2005, column.)

And the National Security Archives at George Washington University on Tuesday reported: "In January 2003 Defense Department planners recommended the creation of a 'Rapid Reaction Media Team' to serve as a bridge between Iraq's formerly state-controlled news outlets and an 'Iraqi Free Media' network, according to a White Paper and PowerPoint slides that were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and are posted today on the Web by the National Security Archive. . . .

"According to the media White Paper, 'civil-military transition of the new Iraq to a broad representative government' would take '1-2 years,' and the U.S. government would establish - in 12 months - an information system that would serve 'as a model for free media in the Arab world.' To ensure that the message would be controlled, Iraq was to be provided with a 'Temporary Media Commissioner' to regulate against 'hate media.' He or she would operate in a receptive environment: the team would 'identify the media infrastructure that we need left intact, and work with CENTCOM targeteers to find alternative ways of disabling key sites.'"

On April 8, 2003, a U.S. missile hit al-Jazeera's Baghdad bureau and killed reporter Tariq Ayoub. And as Dan Schulman wrote last year for CJR Daily: "In November, 2001, at the outset of its military campaign to oust the Taliban and hunt down Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, a U.S. missile leveled the Kabul bureau of the al-Jazeera television network. In his new book, The One Percent Doctrine, Ron Suskind alleges that al-Jazeera was intentionally targeted.

"So why isn't the press paying attention?"

An American Voice

I am an American. I love my country and what it’s supposed to stand for, but the Iraq war makes me feel ugly inside. It makes me feel like an imposter and a hypocrite; a bad example to the rest of the world that our resources are being used in such a dark way. When we first invaded Iraq I understood our position because Saddam violated his agreement to allow UN officials to do inspections and hindered the process in every way he could. After all this was a guy who invaded other countries on a whim, out of the clear blue sky. Maybe he was hiding weapons of mass destruction and maybe he wasn’t-it needed to be checked out and he wasn’t cooperating. I understood at that time that something needed to be done; but I don’t know why we are over there now. Iraq is going backward, not forward-the Iraqi people don’t want us there. It seems that Iraq is being used as a pawn to justify our presence in the Middle East and it’s wrong. What is the truth of this-this mission that our soldiers are dying for? Is it about getting rid of all the terrorists or changing their minds about hating us so they won’t try to kill us? Is it about money, power and greed? Do we need to make war to keep our economy going? Is it about stamping our foot down on the map over there to keep middle-eastern oil flowing our way? I know there must be a really big important secret-but I know I’m not in on it. Could someone at least whisper it to me-because the voice I hear in my heart is screaming, “GET OUT BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!!!”

There is a part of me that feels afraid to speak my mind,(isn’t that scary), that as an American citizen I’m supposed to be quiet and go about my day to day business-just be patriotic and go along with what the President says we need to do. That it’s all in the hands of great minds, people who are smarter than me and in positions of power because they represent the greater good-I am supposed to know that we are doing the right thing-Support our Troops. I want to support our troops by giving them a free ride home from Iraq TODAY-not tomorrow, not next week, not next year, not five years from now-TODAY. I want them out of Iraq, let the bomb fall where it may so to speak. I don’t want to spend any more of our money over there and I don’t want to see any more money being made over there at the expense of the American military and their families or the Iraqi people. We are not supposed to be taking over countries, our military is supposed to be defensive not offensive. We are not supposed to be sending our soldiers into harms way unless we need them to defend us. That is a sacred trust, it’s what all that stuff on the dollar bill stands for-even I know that.

To President Bush, the Bush Administration, and all the members of Congress, State and Local Governments-we need you. Please help us, the American people. We need your guidance and direction here, in the United States:

We need you to care today that most of us don’t have health insurance. We can’t afford to get sick, we can’t afford to stay in the hospital if we do get sick and we can’t afford to buy medicine to make us better or keep us from getting sick. We might go bankrupt if anyone in our family gets sick. If we are lucky enough to have health coverage we have to struggle through a maze of obstacles with insurance companies to get permission to get the medical care we need; whether we or our loved ones are allowed to live or not depends on the dictum of a faceless corporation.

We need you to care today that we might lose our jobs at any time and we might not be able to find another one because corporations have decided that they can make millions of dollars by sending jobs outside of the US or buying goods from other countries. How can a business survive here!

We need you to care today that we can’t live on minimum wage-only illegal aliens who don’t pay taxes and live thirty to a home can live on that amount of money-that is not the American Dream.

We need you to care today that our educational system is not working; kids are dropping out in high numbers or leaving school unprepared for college and the work world. The majority of us can’t afford to send our kids to college without going into major debt or re-mortgaging our homes into the next century.

We need you to care today that our inner cities are not getting the rehabilitation and futuristic planning they need. There’s just not enough opportunity out there for a young person to get their foot on the first step. Prisons are full; we pay a high price for that in every way. We need to work and plan as a society to provide opportunity to help get a person on the right track before they get sucked onto the wrong track.

We need you to care today that our elderly are not being taken care of. They are forced to stay in the rat race to survive and that’s not fair. We certainly cannot afford to look forward to getting old here.

We need you to care today about the drug problem that is plaguing our nation. How can we all work together to put a stop to it.

We need you to care today about the spirit of the American people. We need you to stop using 9/11 and all the people who died that day as an excuse to manipulate us. We will NEVER forget and we don’t need you to remind us. We are in a better position to fight the war on terror in our own souls than over in Iraq. I grieve for those who have given their lives and for those who have lost their loved ones; American and Iraqi.

Dodie O’Donnell
Slippery Rock, PA

Self serving justice,
The US presidential administration is one of self serving justice and in many instances tears at the essence of the US constitution. Secret programs of monitoring and surveillance in the name of national security when court approvals are not sought. CIA operatives moving freely throught the US and other countries to secretly sabotage the lives of innocent Americans and others only to hide the dark secrets of US government agendas. Justice is ultimately what the majority of people say it is, which is accepted by the international community. Too often in these modern times do we see the service of injustice moving ahead in secret. The reality as we know it will soon become so obvious a facad to the closed door secret agendas which will control more and more of everyone`s lives.

Visit http://anthonybrina.blogspot.com/ and see the devestation these ideals have on your life and what happens around you.