Flush twice... it's a long way to Sally Quinn's place!

Pundit Pap
for Sunday, April 20, 2003
The "War" Must Be Over ... because they're talking tax cuts again!
By JJ Balzer

April 20, 2003 (apj.us) -- Well, now that the Bush boy's team have pretty much declared victory in Iraq (just like they did in Afghanistan, where the situation continues to deteriorate), the Washington-based Sunday morning network chat programs can get back to their official job: propagating Karl Rove's latest talking points.

And naturally, the producers and hosts were on message, making that all-important transfer of wealth to the rich in the form of so-called "tax cuts" the most oppressing... ahem, er, make that pressing domestic political issue of the week. The Sunday spinmeisters would still spend a good deal of time on the question of what should happen next in Iraq (while avoiding America's unforgivable debacle in the form of allowing the nation's library and museums to be sacked, looted and burned by a "celebrating" rabble that have confused their own treasures with deposed Iraqi tin-pot scum-bucket strongman Saddam Hussein's personal property).

Here's the lowdown on this week's inadequate semblance of political discussion.

This Weak Players: George Stephanopoulos, looking happy to be talking politics again Ahmad Chalabi, alleged bank scammer and gang leader of the Richard Perle National Congress for Giving the Defense policy Board Control of Iraq Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), on a mission to Damascus Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV), also in Damascus, and one Democrat who does know the foreign policy score Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), who has put the partial kibosh on tax givebacks Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), selling the "official" White House position on wealth transfer

In a refreshing change of pace, George Stephanopoulos opened This Week by saying that with the war over, the program would get back to red-meat politics.

Nevertheless, Steph opened by playing footage of American servicemen who had been POWs in Iraq returning "just in time for Easter." (Okay, we know it's heartwarming -- and we're glad they are back in the USA -- but you could practically gag given the way ABC News has gone overboard with the sentimental-patriotic angle).

Steph immediately turned to the next hot-button nation on Donald "Dr. Strangelove" Rumsfeld's Private Axis of Conquest: Syria.

Darrell Issa said that the US has already "complained" to Bandar al-Assad about the need for Syria to expel seven Iraqi leaders allegedly in Syria already -- but he expects Assad to keep his word on their "Iraq qraqdown". Nick Rahall said nothing much about US-Syria relations until Steph asked how Assad was handling the situation -- and Rahall said that Syria has helped the US in the war against Al Qaeda, and that lumping Syria and Iraq in the same category is wrong: Syria wants to be the friend of the US. Steph said that Syria and Israel are enemies and Hezbollah has a presence in Syria; Issa encouraged Assad to shut down Hezbollah's "informational" (translation: recruiting) presence in Syria and to replace Hezbollah militias with Syrian soldiers on borders near Israel (and we predict that Assad will move to quietly do this in the next couple weeks).

Steph also brought up the impact of shutting down the Iraq-Syria oil pipeline -- and Rahall essentially said enough with needless Syria-bashing!

Go, Nick! This was an important point -- Syria may not have a clean track record, but they are the dominant secularized Arab player in the region and should be encouraged to act as a stabilizer, not threatened into war. And Issa followed up with a swipe at Junior and his doctrinaire "advisors" by pointing out that Congress is often a step ahead of the State Department (we think even Colin Powell, who looks about as comfortable rattling Little George's saber as one would be having root canal, might well agree). The proceeds of the oil going through that pipeline, he added, should go to "the Iraqi people" (the problem is that in BushSpeak, "the Iraqi people" means whoever privatizes the Iraqi Oil Ministry).

Steph then interviewed the shady Ahmad Chalabi -- and did not ask him ONE question about a sleazy banking scandal in which Chalabi finds himself engulfed. Instead, Steph chose to legitimize and heroicize Perle's Iraqi National Poodle by saying he a target for assassination and bringing up some shooting near his compound last night. Steph did ask him about his plans to set up an interim authority -- a de facto acknowledgment that Chalabi is to an extent in charge, and Chalabi gave a typically obtuse answer about "top down" and "bottom up" approaches along with the requisite acknowledgment that there are many ethnic populations to deal with. Chalabi also said that Gen. Jay Garner is taking care of infrastructure -- and that his "job is to put [himself] out of a job." (That'll be the day.) Steph asked about Islamist anger as an obstacle, naturally, to "democracy". But Chalabi said that Islamists had been suppressed under Saddam, and that these Islamists are now at last able to express "acts of defiance against Saddam."

What? Saddam is, as the kids say these days, so last Thursday (or at least so April 9th) -- and these Islamists ARE protesting against US occupation.

Steph asked if an Islamic state ruled by Islamic law would be acceptable to him; Chalabi avoided a direct answer to an obviously inflammatory question, instead saying that there would be a constitution (as in secular) with a separation of (secular) power (translation: no damn way).

Steph then asked about the US request for long-term access to four military bases in Iraq. Chalabi praised the efforts of the US to support Iraq, and said that it is necessary for the US to have access for at least two years, and then it would be the job of the Iraqi government

Lastly, Steph asked Chalabi about his political (i.e. Iraqi presidential) aspirations, and Chalabi, sounding awfully like an American "non-candidate Presidential candidate," said that he is focused on helping to rebuild an Iraqi political system (make that a "Yes, but now is not the time to say so").

Next up -- the faltering economy. Smirky's solution -- big tax givebacks for the rich. And, as ABC correspondent John Cochrane reported, the GOP isn't buying the huge cuts -- with three high-profile Republican Senators (Charles Grassley, Olympia Snowe and George Voinovitch) leading the fight. Chimpy's Inner Circle even claims Grassley broke a promise to them.

Steph welcomed Grassley -- and asked if he has put the line at $350 billion in tax cuts. And Grassley admitted it was a political decision -- the votes for anything bigger are not there (translation: Grassley is sensible enough to know that the GOP declared class war and big transfers of wealth to the rich will not fly with an electorate that votes their pocketbook). Steph (who, like Bob Novak, seems conspicuously upset that he is not getting his "piece of the pie" now that he's a member of the media oligarchy and wants his cut of the tax giveback), said he is hearing a different story -- the House and the White House are not happy (translation: their greedy patrons are, as they say over at FAUX Jazeera State News, "miffed"). Grassley said that nobody from the House has consulted with him (translation: he's no longer a member of the Konservative Kool Kids Klub) -- and he has a responsibility to "the American people" to stand firm (translation: screw the little reactionaries). "My word is my word," and he cannot get 50 votes for the cut (translation: he, Snowe and Voinovitch have made up their minds, Chafee, Collins and Specter might join them, and Generalissimo Monkey Boy can eat it). Grassley, who sounded more and more like a Democrat to Steph's George Will Junior, said he also wants to see fiscal discipline.

Interestingly, Grassley also made passing mention of Frist -- showing that there is a wing of the GOP that knows how badly he is stumbling and may well turn him into the scapegoat if Smirk's domestic "policy" sputters and dies. Steph said that the White House had denied that Grassley had called them -- but Grassley said he had talked to a top liaison in the White House. (We believe Grassley.) Steph brought up a snide comment from idiotarian Congressman Jim Nussle (R-Shallow and Stupid), who said, "Even the French had the decency" to tell Smirk they would not support war with Iraq. Grassley said that he stands by his position -- and nobody from the House bothered to talk to him (regrettably, Grassley missed a chance to bash Nussle's French-bashing, maybe by mentioning that the French had the decency to help us during the Revolutionary War). Steph asked about fear from the White House that Grassley's move would hurt their re-election chances. Grassley than completely destroyed the bit of respect we'd gotten for him by letting fly a litany of supply-side nonsense about how tax cuts supposedly create jobs.

George turned to this week's Smirk surrogate, Senator Roy Blunt, who previewed a big political push this week by Junior and his pals in the Senate and House to get the maximum tax cut for the rich. We think the whole idea is nuts -- but Blunt is articulate and effective in explaining the lunatic position of the Misadministration. Blunt also said that Grassley is his friend (the obvious signal that there's trouble in supply-side paradise), but that he wants to put more money back into the economy (read: more cash into savings accounts of the rich, which does not stimulate the economy). Blunt talked a good game about "commitments" (in other words, GOPers who do not "commit" to enriching the rich more may find themselves targets of retaliation from Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove).

We actually stayed for the round table -- just to hear how badly Paul Krugman would bitch-slap neo-fascist adulterer George Will. To our delight, it happened repeatedly. Will and Fareed Zakaria talked a little about the next Iraqi "constitution" -- but Krugman said that during this hiatus, armed factions, including Shiite religious groups, run Iraq. Zakaria predicted that, like the Soviet Union, Saddam would be revealed to be an incompetent tin pot dictator with no significant WMDs. Krugman said the war was without the claimed justification -- the world will think that we made up a reason for war, and other nations that may be a target of US invasion will not be able to stop us through diplomatic overtures or international forums. Krugman predicted that something in the way of chemical or biological weapons will be found, but it will be a miniscule amount of material -- and the world will believe that the US planted the goods. Will said that Iraq admitted they HAD tons of the stuff (and that is the problem -- it may be they destroyed it, huh, George?), but Krugman and Zakaria jumped all over Will before Steph changed subjects.

Steph turned to the latest North Korea flap -- including a bad translation of a claim that the nation is processing plutonium. Zakaria said the real problem was the fight over bilateral or multilateral talks -- and that there was a compromise, giving Kim Jong-Il a chance to "save face." (But will there be any further diplomatic breakthroughs? It's reminiscent of the "debate" over the size and shape of the table to be used for peace talks with Vietnam.)

When Steph turned to GOP moderates holding the line on tax cuts, Krugman said that Snowe is being realistic over insane and outrageous tax cuts. Will they hold firm? There's no way to tell, but Krugman believes the GOP will fudge the accounting and include some loopholes. Will tried pitching numbers that "prove" there is a recovery underway -- but Krugman interrupted him and explained what is really going on with unemployment numbers: more and more people are NOT looking for jobs. When Will said something about official government numbers, Krugman said there are more than government numbers -- and they are an indictment of tax cuts, which are NOT about stimulating the economy.

Talk about an unfair fight. Poor George Will even looked like the 98-pound weakling.

We switched channels when Will got his requisite 2 minutes to spin about something -- we don't remember what it was, but it's notable that "Mr. Baseball" didn't have something to say in "defense" of Baseball Hall of Fame chairman (and former Reagan flak) Dale Petrosky canceling an event celebrating the 15th anniversary of the film "Bull Durham" because he had "suspicion" that stars Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins would say something truthful about Smirk's feud with Saddam.

FAUX Jazeera Christian Sunday Praise Smirk and pass the Easter Eggs

Players: Tony Snow, still Sunday morning's most entertaining interviewer Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), palatable enough to the wingnuts that run FAUX Jazeera that he can appear on FNS Pat Roberts (R-KS), obscure wingnut GOPer R. James "World War" Woolsey, promoter of American imperial empire building in the Middle East

Yes, it's Easter -- and FAUX Jazeera News won't let you forget it.

What? You're not "saved"? Then stay tuned and believe, pagan!

Tony Snow first turned to the completely obscure, red-meat conservative Sen. Roberts, asking him about troop presence in Iraq. Roberts, who immediately came across as a knuckle-dragging Cro-Magnon, said Clinton had claimed we'd be in Kosovo for a year, but we've been there a decade. (Clinton bashing! How... nostalgic! Someone wake up Roberts and remind him that the GOP draft dodger is in the White House.) Bayh, by comparison, remained in the realm of sane discourse, saying that the Iraq matter is going to take a while to settle in that we have to help rebuild the country's government and infrastructure, defend America and quash terrorism. Roberts, going into flying wingnut mode, said terrorists have access to weapons of mass destruction. (Oh, please -- if they did, they would've used them by now -- and probably wouldn't have wreaked a fraction of the havoc that Osama bin Laden's thugs did.)

Tony tried something different -- GERMANY bashing, pushing the claim that Germany tipped off Iraq about US intelligence gathering. Roberts said he could not be specific, but helped flog the story. Bayh said there was in fact a commercial relationship, as there was with Russia and France -- and if they want to get on board with us now, they should consider forgiving the Iraqi national debt (ha, ha -- by the looks of things, Tony and Roberts did NOT expect that one).

Tony then turned to speculation about Scott Speicher, an American military flyer whose plane was shot down during the Desert Storm era. Roberts pushed the idea that Saddam may have Speicher with him if he's alive! Bayh said we have a moral obligation to find him IF he is alive.

Tony then played the alleged April 9 tape of Saddam cavorting with supportive Iraqis -- but Roberts raised doubts about the tape and whether or not it's really Saddam or one of his doubles before saying Saddam's been deposed; Bayh got a laugh even out of us when he said the only thing that's obvious is that the citizens are the only thing in the tape that are genuine.

Bayh turned to WMDs -- and Bayh said they're likely buried deep, and admitted there is talk that they've made their way to Syria (though one could hear a hint of skepticism).

Tony then put surprise guest Darrell Issa on the phone. Issa said that Assad says that he's not aware of WMDs that have crossed the border, but he makes no secret of Syria's own WMD programs -- as a deterrent to Israel. Issa said he was also encouraged by talks with Assad about closing Hezbollah's "informational" offices. Additionally, Assad has cracked down on more than just the 55 "deck of cards" Iraqi leaders -- some in fact are wanted in Syria. Issa said that Assad is concerned about the possibility of military force being used against Syria -- but Powell is on the way to negotiate.

Should the US withdraw a threat of force against Syria? Bayh's response: there has been NO threat of force (he hinted there should not be). Roberts said that under the "new" doctrine of preemption there's no ruling out the use of force, and Assad has some "old guard" looking over his shoulder. Can we do business with Assad? Roberts, to our surprise, said, "Sure." Bayh said there is the matter of that old guard, but Assad has no patron (i.e. the defunct Soviet Union) and they've lost Iraq as an oil customer.

Are the North Koreans trying to refresh their nuclear weapons? Roberts said they pose a real problem -- and could sell their nukes. We tried grain sales to alleviate starvation in North Korea. China's attitude toward their neighbor has changed. Are they reprocessing spent nuclear fuel? Bayh said there's no way of telling -- but the world is being blackmailed. They could test their weapons, they could test a three-stage rocket. Roberts made an interesting comparison and then got one nearly right: Kim Jong-Il wants to be the Pervez Musharraf of East Asia, and he is the number one threat to the US (one could argue that Islamist criminal terror groups are the top threat, but Kim is the number one state threat).

We stuck it out for a little of James "World War" Woolsey's appearance. He sounded like a true believer in the whole hard-right "twilight struggle" model of politics and ideology, and, when Tony asked him about the need for US presence in the Middle East region, agreed it was necessary, and we have shown that we can wield a Rooseveltian "big stick" without bluster.

Without bluster? Read between the lines of what Dicky Perle, Paulie "Walnuts" Wolfowitz and "Doctor" Strangefeld have to say -- it's called "bluster" and it's got the world worried and angry.

Will Iraq be run by democrats or theocrats? Woolsey said that Khomeini-style theocracy is alien to most Shiites, and some grand Ayatollahs have distanced themselves ideologically from theocrat-leaning mullahs.

Juan Williams asked if he's been approached by Junior's Junta, and Woolsey would not deny it. Williams was throwing nothing but softballs to Woolsey, allowing Woolsey to legitimize the occupation of Iraq as a pretext to establishing "democracy" and dismissing a large role to the UN. Tony threw a far more interesting topic to Woolsey: the impending fall of Iranian theocracy. Woolsey gave specifics about key religious leaders opposing the Islamic regime -- Woolsey claimed they are being told to leave government and go back to holy cities and the mosque (this may be a bit of an oversimplification, as facts indicate that the philosophical breach is far more complicated).

It was clear that Woolsey was trying to paint theocracy as a form of totalitarianism -- and on that he's correct. But perhaps he should reflect on the Smirk Regime's attempts to "Christianize" the executive branch of the US government and the Federalist Society's attack on the exclusion clause of the Constitution with the help of activist extremist judges in the judicial branch.

Woolsey also put an interesting gloss on the Iraqi "WMD" debacle, saying that we would have to be looking for vials of anthrax and canisters of nerve gas.

That was a notable concession -- so much for "tons of VX gas and smallpox".

It reminded this writer of the legendary words of punk rocker Johnny Rotten that ended the last concert of the Seventies incarnation of the Sex Pistols:

"Ever feel like you've been cheated?"

Meet the Obsessed Players: Tim Russert, inveterate Democrat-basher Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-IN), somewhat sane Republican James "World War" Woolsey

We joined MTP as Tim was asking Woolsey if a legitimate Iraqi regime can emerge. Woolsey essentially said yes.

Good luck selling that to Iraq's neighbors, Jim!

Tim asked about Saddam's WMDs -- Dick Lugar acknowledged that there's been little found (little? Try NOTHING!), and, as he had done on FAUX Jazeera, Woolsey said that we should be looking for vials and canisters -- but they would be significant amounts.

Yeah, right -- significant amounts when measured in ounces!

There was a little talk about programs to encourage other countries to destroy weapons of mass destruction -- and Lugar said it is time to do a comprehensive survey of programs and stockpiles. Tim threw a softball at Lugar about the former Soviet Union's WMDs, and Lugar specified that Russian and the former Soviet states quite a bit of material.

Huh? Is Tim suggesting that it's time to go to war with Russia?

Tim then quoted a news report saying that Lugar said that Gen. Garner and others were ill-prepared for the postwar situation in Iraq. Lugar said the military plan was brilliant -- but Joe Biden held the hearings that showed there should have been better planning. Now Shiites want a theocracy -- and it is not clear to Congress or "the American people" what fixing Iraq will cost. How long will it be until democracy emerges in Iraq? Lugar said it could take five or more years -- Afghanistan, for example, is still a mess.

In response to Tim's comment that one Iraqi mullah is calling for a theocracy that would ban (gasp!) television (horrors!), Woolsey said that Iran's theocracy supports terrorism and most people pushing for an Islamic Iraqi state are close to Iran's political mullahs. What happens if radicals win an election in Iraq? (What happens if we can't fix the election like Smirk's pals did in Florida, Tim?) Woolsey talked about "good Muslims" (translation: Muslims who will cozy up to the US). Turkey, Woolsey said, is a democracy (right, Jim -- tell that to Kurds in Turkey). Can the US accept a popularly elected Islamic state in Iraq? Lugar talked a good game about pushing for democracy in Iraq and having to stay until the WMD situation is "under control," which means working with many Iraqis and keeping Congress and "the American people" in the loop.

Tim then put the focus on Ahmad Chalabi -- will he be perceived as an American puppet? Lugar had to say this could be the case -- but he could be a "very talented contributor" to a new Iraq (heck, with the money he allegedly scammed in sleazy bank deals, he might be able to help pay to rebuild the country). Woolsey said that the decision as to who runs the country must be decided by the Iraqi people (ha, ha, ha -- like you and your sneaky black bag pals would ever allow such a thing).

Tim then turned to the notion of a "World War IV" against religious dictators in Iran, fascists in Iraq and Syria, and terrorist networks; Woolsey said that Syria's Ba'athists are anti-Semitic fascists, and that the parallel is being drawn with World War III (his term for the Cold War). Should we use military action to stop WMD proliferation in Syria? Woolsey said that Syria has some chemical weapons, but no biological or nuclear program.

With respect to the North Korea crisis, Lugar said that there is "extraordinary opportunity" for diplomacy -- and suggested that a whole raft of old-school Bushies (Daddy Bush and James Baker, to name two) become emissaries. (Could that be because the current gang of idiots don't have clue one about international diplomacy?) If North Korea refuses to stop nuclear proliferation, the will you recommend military action? Lugar in effect said yes -- he supports a quick move to diplomatic efforts, but if there is an indication that they have taken an unacceptable path, we should be ready to act with other nations, including Russia, China and Japan.

But... but... but... Dick, that would require multilateralism!

When we saw that we'd have to suffer through a "round table" segment featuring not only Nixon apologist William "Satire" Safire but the huffy, overrated David "Blowhard" Broder, we grabbed the remote, turned off the TV, and headed for a nice Easter brunch.

-- JJ Balzer