lil chimp and inept cronies

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
The events of the past months have awakened the press to the true nature of the Bush administration. It is overrun with hacks--that is, government officials with waifish resumés padded like the Michelin man, whose political connections have won them important national responsibilities. But, in the face of this rush to flay the Bush hacks, we should consider their achievements.

To fully appreciate the virtues of this administration, we must first recall the administration that came before. Back in the 1990s, Bill Clinton recruited a small army of Arkansans and Rhodes scholars to the West Wing. Although there was the occasional kindergarten buddy who was out of his depth, most of these FOBs (friends of Bill) were insufferable wonks who never let you forget their dense resumés. President Bush put his finger on the smug mindset of these Clinton meritocrats when he said, "They're all of a sudden smarter than the average person because they happen to have an Ivy League degree."

Now we can consider this problem solved. The Bush era has taken government out of the hands of the hyper-qualified and given it back to the common man. This new breed may not have what the credentialists sneeringly call "relevant experience." Their alma maters may not always be "accredited." But they have something the intellectual snobs of yore never had: loyalty. If not loyalty to country, then at least loyalty to party and to the guy who got them the job. And their loyalty has been rewarded: Even if they fail, they know they can move up the chain until they find a job they can succeed in or until a major American city is destroyed, whichever comes first.

The hackocracy, of course, reflects the virtues of its architect, George W. Bush. Like Michael Brown and lesser known hacks, the president hasn't allowed personal setbacks to stymie him. The old-fashioned values of fortitude and family have given him the strength to rebound from a doomed oil company called Arbusto, a doomed congressional candidacy, and catastrophic failures at Harken Energy. That may be why, while cronies populate every presidency, no administration has etched the principles of hackocracy into its governing philosophy as deeply as this one. If there's an underappreciated corner of the bureaucracy to fill, it has found just the crony (or college roommate of a crony), party operative (or cousin of a party operative) to fill it. To honor this achievement, we've drawn up a list of the 15 biggest Bush administration hacks--from the highest levels of government to the civil servant rank and file. The tnr 15 is a diverse group--from the assistant secretary of commerce who started his career by supplying Bush with Altoids to the Republican National Committee chair-turned-Veterans Affairs secretary who forgot about wounded Iraq war vets--but they all share two things: responsibility and inexperience.

Although he could not possibly have envisioned what Bush has accomplished, Theodore Roosevelt delivered the single most poetic appreciation of this hackocratic style: "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again...."

Bush, who may or may not be familiar with the Bull Moose, has lived and governed by this dictum. Never before have we so rewarded the valiant striver who comes up short by placing the fate of the nation in his hands. Never before have so many gotten so far with so little.

15: Israel Hernandez
Assistant Secretary for Trade Promotion and Director General of the United States and Foreign Commercial Service, Department of Commerce (confirmation pending)

Fresh out of college and seeking a job on George W. Bush's 1994 Texas gubernatorial campaign, Israel Hernandez showed up an hour early for his interview with the candidate. Impressed by his punctuality, Bush hired Hernandez within days and eventually invited him to live with the Bush family in their Dallas home, where Hernandez reportedly became like an older brother to Jenna and Barbara Bush. Serving as Bush's travel aide for the next few years, "He was always there with the Altoids, the speech box, the schedule, whatever I needed," Bush later wrote in his autobiography. After getting a master's degree at (where else?) the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M (named after H.W.), Hernandez--or, as Bush called him, "Altoid Boy"--joined Bush's 2000 presidential campaign and later worked in the White House as an assistant to Karl Rove. There, he helped choreograph Bush's events and was once made part of the first lady's official delegation on a trip to Europe so that he could keep an eye on Jenna. All of which, apparently, was good preparation for managing more than 1,800 employees in more than 80 countries, because, earlier this year, Bush nominated the 35-year-old Hernandez to serve as an assistant secretary of Commerce and to run the United States and Foreign Commercial Service, the federal government's key export promotion agency.

14: Andrew Maner
Chief Financial Officer, Department of Homeland Security

Andrew Maner comes to his job with unimpeachable credentials--not in finance or accounting, admittedly, but as a dues-payer in the Bush family empire. In the first Bush administration, Maner helped to plan presidential travel and served as a junior press aide. Later, he followed the defeated George H.W. Bush back to Texas to be a spokesman and political fixer for the ex-president. After several private sector years working in information technology and procurement, he took over the U.S. Customs Office of Trade Relations, whose mission is to foster "positive relationships with the international trade community." Billing himself as a trade expert, Maner called the Customs gig a "logical next step in [my] career." Less logical, however, was his leap (after a short stint as chief of staff to the Customs commissioner) to managing DHS's sprawling $40 billion budget. Given his slim management background, it's convenient that Maner landed the only Cabinet department CFO slot that doesn't require Senate confirmation. Perhaps it also explains why, when DHS officials recently unveiled a revamped organizational chart, Maner's office was accidentally omitted. (Hack bonus: "Of all the things we do in the Department, charts may not be our strength," said the Department's undersecretary for management, Janet Hale.)

13: Claire Buchan
Chief of Staff, Department of Commerce

As deputy press secretary at the White House, Claire Buchan gained a reputation as a kept-in-the-dark spokesbot who was often relegated to baby-sitting reporters on long trips. But all that changed last spring, when Buchan was promoted to chief of staff at the Commerce Department, where she now helps the secretary oversee a $6.3 billion budget and some 38,000 employees. Buchan owes this stroke of good fortune to her years in the Bush family trenches. Previously, she served as a public affairs underling for the Treasury Department under former President Bush, a flack for the Republican National Committee, and (during the Clinton years) an image czar for the lawn care, extermination, and appliance repair company ServiceMaster. Some of Buchan's erstwhile colleagues in the White House press corps were left speechless when her new assignment was announced in February. One White House reporter who worked closely with Buchan for five years called her "the most useless in a Bush universe of enforced uselessness. She took empty banality to a new low."

12: Paul Hoffman
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior

Paul Hoffman is an avid angler, hunter, skier, and horseman. So it was only natural to tap this former chief of the Chamber of Commerce in Cody, Wyoming, (population 9,000) to help run the National Park Service. Sure, Hoffman had no parks experience other than recreating in them and, as head of the Cody Chamber, advocating for more snowmobiles in nearby Yellowstone National Park. But he had spent four years in the 1980s working as the state director for then-Wyoming Representative Dick Cheney. Since arriving at the Interior Department in 2002, Hoffman has demonstrated a knack for thinking outside the box. In April 2003, he went against the wishes of the staff of Yellowstone and asked the U.N. World Heritage Committee to remove the park from its "In Danger List." Last year, he overruled geologists at the Grand Canyon National Park and instructed the park's visitor centers to stock a creationist book that explained how God made the canyon 6,000 years ago, ordering up a flood to wipe out "the wickedness of man." And, this year, Hoffman pushed for wholesale revisions to the Park Service's management policies. Instead of giving priority to protecting natural resources, Hoffman proposed that managers emphasize multiple uses for their parks--including snowmobiling, Jet-Skiing, grazing, drilling, and mining. After Hoffman's proposed reforms set off a firestorm of criticism from Park Service employees and members of Congress--"The inmates are in charge of the asylum," one Park Service retiree complained--the Bush administration claimed that Hoffman's suggestions were "no longer in play" and that he had merely been playing "devil's advocate."

11: Patrick Rhode
Acting Deputy Director Federal Emergency Management Agency

As acting deputy director of fema, 36-year-old Patrick Rhode had, until recently, the unenviable job of backstopping the hapless Michael Brown, a man who needed much backstopping. Unfortunately, it's not clear that Rhode is much more qualified than Brown to be managing the nation's worst disasters. Before joining fema, the biggest disaster he had helped manage was the Small Business Administration (see Hector Barreto)--and even that was something of a stretch. Rhode entered federal government in 2001 as deputy director of advance operations for the Bush White House, a job he had also held for Bush's 2000 campaign. Never fear, though: Rhode has covered disasters--as a TV anchor for local network affiliates in Alabama and Arkansas, in which capacity he developed "an acute interest in what responders do in times of crises." Perhaps not acute enough. He recently said that >fema's response to Katrina was "probably one of the most efficient and effective responses in the country's history."

10: Steven Law
Deputy Secretary, Department of Labor

Since 2004, Steven Law has helped run a department with 17,000 employees and an annual budget of over $50 billion. Pretty good for a guy who started out as a lowly Capitol Hill legislative aide. In 1990, Law's boss, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, tapped him to serve as campaign manager for his reelection race. Law didn't disappoint, running a notably nasty campaign that insinuated McConnell's Democratic opponent was both mentally ill and a drug addict. Law returned to Washington as McConnell's chief of staff, and, six years later, when McConnell was chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, he made Law the group's executive director, relying on him for help in vacuuming up campaign contributions for Republican Senate candidates and thwarting campaign finance reform legislation. In each job he did for McConnell, Law proved to be an unusually dedicated--and worshipful--worker. Asked once by Campaigns & Elections to name his political heroes, Law answered: "Ronald Reagan, for his vision of America; Abraham Lincoln, for his moral statesmanship; and Mitch McConnell, for his principle and tenacity." It was little wonder, then, that, in 2001, the newly appointed Labor Secretary Elaine Chao--who happens to be McConnell's wife--hired Law as her chief of staff, a stepping stone to his current position; after all, once you've found such loyal help, you want to keep it in the family.

9: Hal Stratton
Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission

A former state representative and attorney general in New Mexico, Hal Stratton never asked for his current job, protecting American citizens from such dangers as lead-laced toy jewelry and flammable Halloween costumes. Instead, the former geology major who went on to co-chair the local Lawyers for Bush during the 2000 campaign initially wanted a job in the Interior Department. "That didn't work out," he told the Albuquerque Journal, "but I told them, 'Don't count me out' ... and they came up with this." "This" being the not-unimportant position of deciding which of 15,000 types of consumer products pose a health risk and might need to be recalled. Shortly before Stratton's confirmation hearing, Senator Ron Wyden expressed concern that Stratton "has no demonstrable track record on public safety." (Bill Clinton's cpsc chief, Ann Brown, spent 20 years as a consumer advocate and served as vice president of the Consumer Federation of America.) But now he does have a track record: rare public hearings and a paucity of new safety regulations, as well as regular (often industry-sponsored) travels to such destinations as China, Costa Rica, Belgium, Spain, and Mexico. But at least Stratton won't let personal bias influence him: Despite saying that he wouldn't let his own daughters play with water yo-yos--rubber toys that are outlawed in several countries because of concerns that children could be strangled by them--he refused to ban them in the United States.

8: Mark McKinnon
Member, Broadcasting Board of Governors (confirmation pending)

The Broadcasting Board of Governors oversees Voice of America and other U.S. media beamed to the Middle East; and, in the spirit of accurately representing the United States, it reserves seats for members of both major political parties. For one of the four Democratic slots, President Bush recently nominated Mark McKinnon, or "M-Cat" as he affectionately calls him. M-Cat's Democratic credentials, however, are somewhat wanting. McKinnon's career highlights include overseeing media strategy for Bush's two presidential bids, in which capacity he masterminded a spot predicting that John Kerry would "Weaken [the] Fight Against Terrorists." And, in last year's campaign, his company, Maverick Media, accepted over $177 million in fees from Bush and the Republican National Committee--money we assume was not intended to help return the Democrats to power.

7: Stewart Simonson
Assistant Secretary for Public Health and Emergency Preparedness, Department of Health and Human Services

According to his official biography, Stewart Simonson is the Health and Human Services Department's point man "on matters related to bioterrorism and other public health emergencies." Hopefully, he has taken crash courses on smallpox and avian flu, because, prior to joining HHS in 2001, Simonson's background was not in public health, but ... public transit. He'd previously been a top official at the delay-plagued, money-hemorrhaging passenger rail company Amtrak. Before that, he was an adviser to Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, specializing in crime and prison policy. When Thompson became HHS secretary in 2001, he hired Simonson as a legal adviser and promoted him to his current post shortly before leaving the Department last year. Simonson's biography boasts that he "supervised policy development for Project BioShield," a program designed to speed the manufacture of crucial vaccines and antidotes. "That effort, however, has by most accounts bogged down and shown few results," The Washington Post reported last month.

6: Hector Barreto
Administrator, Small Business Administration

No one can accuse Hector Barreto of being unfamiliar with small business. His Los Angeles firm, Barreto Insurance & Financial Services Company, had only ten employees. Alas, now that he is in charge of a bigger operation--the Small Business Administration (SBA) has over 3,000 employees, a budget of about $600 million, and a portfolio of loans totaling $45 billion--Barreto is struggling. Last year, the SBA failed to notify Congress that it needed additional funding for its largest and most popular loan program and was forced to temporarily shutter it because, as Barreto's spokesperson explained, it was "out of money." Meanwhile, the SBA was doing such a poor job managing the $5 billion in loans the government set aside to help small businesses recover from September 11 that, according to an Associated Press investigation, the vast majority of the money went to businesses not affected by the terrorist attacks--including a South Dakota country radio station, a Utah dog boutique, and more than 100 Dunkin' Donuts and Subway sandwich shops. Last month, the Senate Small Business Committee, prompted by complaints from Gulf Coast small-business owners, held hearings on the SBA's response to Hurricane Katrina. Barreto pledged that his agency would approve Katrina-related loans in days, not months, but a SBA deputy conceded in late September that, out of 12,000 loan applications from small businesses affected by the hurricane, the SBA had so far approved only 76.

5: David Wilkins
American Ambassador to Canada

An unspoken rule dictates that politically appointed ambassadors should be seen and not heard--or, at the very least, not heard provoking international incidents with close U.S. allies. But David Wilkins--a former South Carolina legislator whose chief contribution to world affairs before this year was raising $200,000 for President Bush's 2004 campaign--is not one to stand on ceremony. Though he'd only been to Canada once (Niagara Falls) prior to his nomination in April, the Bush Ranger assured Congress that "I won't be afraid to talk about the tough issues." A man of his word, Wilkins promptly escalated the two countries' dispute over softwood lumber by accusing Canadians of being overly emotional and by threatening an all-out trade war that would have affected multiple industries, from broadcasting to eggs. The Canadian government fought back, however, and, although generally disinclined toward mea culpas--"You talking about regrets by the United States?" he asked a Canadian reporter with incredulity--Wilkins eventually admitted his approach to the lumber dispute had been flawed. "My attempt to bring the emotion down increased the emotion," he said. To demonstrate his diplomatic sensitivity, he continues to open speeches with a jolly, "Bonjour, y'all!"

4: Jim Nicholson
Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs

In contrast to the four most recent VA heads--who had previously held leadership positions with Disabled American Veterans, the Department of Defense, a state-level VA department, and VA itself--Jim Nicholson brings a refreshing lack of experience to veterans' advocacy. Although he is one of the country's 25 million military veterans, Nicholson--who, after Vietnam, went into real-estate law and development in Colorado--is best known as a campaign veteran. He chaired the Republican National Committee from 1997 to 2000, raising close to $380 million for the 2000 cycle. In Bush's first term, Nicholson was rewarded with the ambassadorship to the Holy See. But he traded vespers for vets last February, joining his brother John, who was already head of the National Cemetery Administration. In June, he admitted that VA had underestimated the number of veterans who would be seeking medical treatment this year by nearly 80,000 because it had failed to take into account the surge in enrollment by veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts--13,700 of whom have suffered blown-off limbs, bullet wounds, and the like. The miscalculation was a surprise to Congress, since Nicholson had written on April 5: "I can assure you that VA does not need [additional money] to continue to provide timely, quality service." Republican House Appropriations Committee Chair Jerry Lewis said VA's failure to identify the problem and notify Congress earlier "borders on stupidity."


3: Rear Admiral Cristina Beato
Acting Assistant Secretary for Health, Department of Health and Human Services

In June 2004, Cristina Beato admitted to her hometown newspaper that she hadn't paid much attention to the details of her resumé. That's too bad, because those silly little details seem to have stalled her confirmation for assistant secretary for health for over two years now. Beato said she earned a master's of public health in occupational medicine from the University of Wisconsin (but the university doesn't even offer that degree). She claimed to be "one of the principal leaders who revolutionized medical education in American universities by implementing the Problem Based learning curriculum" (but the curriculum was developed while Beato was still a medical student). She listed "medical attaché" to the American Embassy in Turkey as a job she held in 1986 (but that position didn't exist until 1995). She also boasted that she had "established" the University of New Mexico's occupational health clinic (but the clinic existed before she was hired, and there was even another medical director before her). For her part, Beato has offered a simple explanation: English is her third language, after French and her native Spanish, and sometimes the language barrier is just too much to handle. How does one say "pants on fire" in Spanish?

2: John Pennington
Director, Region Ten, Federal Emergency Management Agency

The Pacific Northwest is a catastrophe-prone area-- from tsunamis and volcanic eruptions in Washington and Oregon to wildfires in Idaho and oil pipeline ruptures in Alaska. That's why former Washington Representative Jennifer Dunn knew that fema needed "a natural" to head its disaster response efforts in the region. And that's exactly what Dunn said she found in 38-year-old John Pennington. Pennington would have to be a natural, given his utter lack of disaster-relief experience. A former state representative who ran a coffee business with his wife in rural Washington, Pennington served as Cowlitz County co-chairman of the Bush campaign in 2000. Dunn, who had been the Bush campaign's state chairperson, approached Pennington about the fema post, to which he was appointed in 2001. Alas, in the wake of former fema Director Michael Brown's resignation, Pennington's disaster of a resumé has come under increasing scrutiny. Last month, The Seattle Times reported that, just before he was appointed to his fema post, Pennington received his bachelor's degree from an unaccredited California correspondence school that federal investigators later described as a "diploma mill." Pennington's defenders have responded to questions about his qualifications by arguing that he has surrounded himself with competent staff.

1: Harriet Miers
White House Counsel, Nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

When we started researching this guide to the Bush hackocracy, nobody was sure who would wind up as number one. Competition was fierce. From under every bureaucratic rock, out scurried a Bush buddy. But we endeavored to be fair. There was spirited debate over the nuances between merely mediocre officials blindly loyal to the president and those with a demonstrated history of incompetence. (Alas, Andrew Card wound up on the cutting room floor.) Some argued that, by our own strict criteria, the president himself should be judged the number-one hack, but our deference to the wisdom of the electorate kept him off the list.

Truth be told, Harriet Miers could have easily slipped through quality control. But fate intervened. On Monday, Bush nominated Miers, the personal lawyer who fixed the paperwork on his fishing cabin, to the Supreme Court of the United States. Suddenly, it was no longer a competition. "I picked the best person I could find," Bush said Tuesday. And so have we.

We'd like to think that our process was slightly less arbitrary than the president's. Judging such matters is admittedly subjective, but if one were to express hackishness as a formula, it would look something like the adjacent equation.

Miers's croniness quotient is high. After all, the president has given her five jobs over the past eleven years. And senior White House aides have repeatedly remarked about her devotion to Bush. A Bush official's Danger to the Republic factor can generally be gleaned by the importance of his or her new job. And, while we grant that some unqualified candidates have turned out to be capable justices (see Jeffrey Rosen, "Judge Not,"), Miers's lifetime appointment to the highest position Bush is authorized to fill is like winning the hack lotto.

What, then, about Miers's qualifications? This is where she left the competition in the dust. Take, for example, her two-year stint on the Dallas City Council. Although she may not have been guided by any awe-inspiring understanding of constitutional law, she is credited with calming down a crowd of protesters after a county commissioner punched a police officer.

In announcing his choice, Bush pointed to her storied career as chairman of the Texas Lottery Commission. Although the Commission has historically not produced many Supreme Court justices, Bush has reason to be pleased with her lottery service. Miers may not have dealt with issues like civil rights or the death penalty, but she dealt with bingo. As chairman, she opined that she wanted all bingo-related games "to look and feel and smell like the game of bingo," which seems like a reasonable position.

Miers's solid job at the Lottery Commission and her other work for Bush catapulted her into the upper ranks of the White House. After three years as staff secretary, she beat out Brett M. Kavanaugh, a bright conservative lawyer with a John Roberts-like resumé, for the job of White House counsel. It was this job that positioned her to lead Bush's search for a court nominee.

This is quite a resumé, even before getting to some of Miers's legal writings. A search of the Nexis news database returns three articles by Miers. One is an opinion piece urging legislative calm in the wake of a string of deadly shootings. The second reveals Miers, who ran the corporate law firm of Locke Liddell & Sapp, to be an expert on a legal issue of great importance to the American people: managing the merger of two firms. The final article is a 1996 ABA Journal piece advertising the American Bar Association's new telephone seminars. "If you have heard any of the buzzwords of product promotions lately," she writes cheerfully, "we hope you will spot 'ABA Connection.'"

In hindsight, Harriet Miers was always the obvious choice for the Supreme Court. She is the logical conclusion of the unchecked Bush administration hackocracy. Bush's case for Miers actually rests on her being a crony. "Because of our closeness," he said Tuesday, "I know the character of the person."

In Federalist No. 76, Alexander Hamilton warned that, in presenting nominations to the Senate, a president "would be both ashamed and afraid" to nominate cronies--or, as Hamilton called them, "obsequious instruments of his pleasure." Maybe politics was different back in the 1780s, but we have watched Bush appoint many obsequious instruments of his pleasure. It may be his legacy: George W. Bush--he took the shame and fear out of cronyism.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
What a bunch of righteous baloney !

You could do the same spin on every President of US and Prime Minister of Canada, easily.

Easily.

Same as it ever was.
Same as it ever was.

We know friends help friends.

You see this in every sphere of life from government to business to even on this board.

And really, if you were in charge, which I guess you are, you would appoint friends to help you, certainly not some separate entity for which you have no sense of personal trust.

In fact cronyism got solidified by the guy on our 20 dollar bill, Andrew Jackson, the people's President.

Lincoln entertained hours of long lines of office seekers a part of his every day in the White House.

The world is like Halloween out there every day, and you want someone who is your friend, although President Truman said if you want a friend around here in the capital, "Get a dog."
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
speaking of lil chimps :lol: :lol: :lol: ya, but usually they choose cronies that are a little qualified and alot less inept. But than not everybody is a lil chimp. Bwhahahhahaahahahahahha!
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Like the title of this thread-good job;-)


IS THIS THE DEATH OF AMERICA?

America's sense of itself - its pride in its power - has been profoundly damaged.

THIS week Karen Hughes, long-time political adviser to George Bush, began her new mission as the State Department's official defender of America's image with a tour of the Middle East.

She might have been more help to her beleaguered president had she stayed at home and used her PR skills on her neighbours. At the end of a cruel and turbulent summer, nobody is more dismayed and demoralised about America than Americans.

They have watched with growing disbelief and horror as a convergence of events - dominated by the unending war in Iraq and two hurricanes - have exposed ugly and disturbing things in the undergrowth that shame and embarrass Americans and undermine their belief in the nation and its values.

With TV providing a ceaseless backdrop of the country's failings - a crippled and tone-deaf president, a negligent government, corruption, military atrocities, soaring debt, racial conflict, poverty, bloated bodies in floodwater, people dying on camera for want of food, water and medicine - it seemed things were falling apart in the land where happiness is promoted in the constitution.

Disillusioning news was everywhere. In the flight from Hurricane Rita, evacuees fought knife fights over cans of petrol. In storm-hit Louisiana there were long queues at gun stores as people armed themselves against looters.

AMERICA, which has the world's costliest health care, had, it turned out, higher infant mortality rates than the broke and despised Cuba.

Tom De Lay, Republican enforcer in the House of Representatives, was indicted for conspiracy and money laundering. The leader of the Republicans in the Senate was under investigation for his stock dealings. And Osama bin Laden was still on the loose.

Americans are the planet's biggest flag wavers. They are reared on the conceit that theirs is the world's best and most enviable country, born only the day before yesterday but a model society with freedom, opportunity and prosperity not found, they think, in older cultures.

They rejoice that "We are No.1", and in many ways they are.

But events have revealed a creeping mildew of pain and privation, graft and injustice and much incompetence lurking beneath the glow of star-spangled superiority.

Many here feel the country is breaking down and losing its moral and political authority.

"US in funk" say the headlines. "I am ashamed to be an American," say the letters to the editor. We are seeing, say the commentators, a crumbling - and humbling - of America.

The catalogue of afflictions is long and grisly. Hurricane Katrina revealed confusion and incompetence throughout government, from town hall to White House.

President Bush, accused of an alarming failure of leadership over the disaster, has now been to the Gulf coast seven times for carefully orchestrated photo opps.

But his approval has dropped below 40 per cent. Public doubt about his capacity to deal with pressing problems is growing.

Americans feel ashamed by the violent, predatory behaviour Katrina triggered - nothing similar happened in the tsunami-hit Third World countries - and by the deep racial and class divisions it revealed.

The press has since been giving the country a crash course on poverty and race, informing the flag wavers that an uncaring America may be No.1 on the world inequities index.

IT has 37 million living under the poverty line, largely unnoticed by the richest in a country with more than three million millionaires.

The typical white family has $80,000 in assets; the average black family about $6,000. It's a wealth gap out of the Middle Ages. Some 46 million can't afford health insurance, 18,000 of whom will die early because of it.

The US, we learn, is 43rd in the world infant mortality rankings. A baby born in Beijing has nearly three times the chance of reaching its first birthday than a baby born in Washington. Those who survive face rotten schools. On reading and maths tests for 15-year-olds, America is 24th out of 29 nations.

On the other side of the tracks, 18 corporate executives have so far been jailed for cooking the books and looting billions. The prosecution of Mr Bush's pals at Enron - the showcase trial of the greed-is-good culture - will be soon.

But the backroom deal lives on and, in an orgy of cronyism, billions of dollars are being carved up in no-bid contracts awarded to politically-connected firms for work in the hurricane-hit states and in Iraq.

The war, seen as unwinnable, is becoming a bleak burden, with nearly 2,000 American dead. Two-thirds think the invasion was a mistake.

The war costs $6billion a month, driving up a nose-bleed high $331billion budget deficit. In five years the conflict will have cost each American family $11,300, it is said.

Mr Bush says blithely he'll cut existing programmes to pay for the war and fund an estimated $200billion for hurricane damage. He won't, he says, rescind his tax cuts. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel says Mr Bush is "disconnected from reality".

Americans have been angered by a reports that US troops have routinely tortured Iraqi prisoners. Some 230 low-rankers have been convicted - but not one general or Pentagon overseer. Disgruntled young officers are leaving in increasing numbers.

Meanwhile, further damaging Americans' self image, there's Afghanistan. The White House says its operations there were a success, yet last year Afghanistan supplied 90 per cent of the world's heroin.

America's sense of itself - its pride in its power and authority, its faith in its institutions and its belief in its leaders - has been profoundly damaged. And now the talking heads in Washington predict dramatic political change and the death of the Republicans' hope of becoming the permanent government.


( good thread to add the increasing number of valid descriptions of the bush et al regime.....and its RECORD NUMBER of failures.

..........shall we count the ways?.......... :wink: :(
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Bush's Fantasy Foreign Policy
Rami G. Khouri
October 11, 2005


Rami G. Khouri is editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper, published throughout the Middle East with the International Herald Tribune.

I heard then read President George Bush's speech on the war on terror last Thursday while my wife and I enjoyed a wonderful two-day, two-night train journey across most of the United States, from Chicago to San Francisco. But I only fully grasped the meaning of Bush's "global war on terror" when I arrived here and had a useful discussion with one of my sons on the fantasy football league that he and my other son in Beirut are deeply engaged in.

For readers who may not follow these things closely, fantasy football is a virtual world over the Internet in which individuals create their own teams by choosing real players from the existing rosters of the National Football League. Every week the performances of the real players are tallied to give the fantasy team a score, and the fantasy team with the highest score at the end of the season wins. The exciting week-to-week interaction between the actual and imagined worlds makes it hard to separate fantasy from realityŠ which brings me back to George Bush's speech and policy on terrorism.

My conclusion after this rich week of travel and conversation is that sensible middle class Americans get on with the hard work of making a living in challenging times, while their federal government in Washington conducts a fantasy foreign policy based more on make-believe perceptions and imagined realities. The latest public opinion poll figures here bear this out, showing that about one-third of Americans approve of Bush's handling of the Iraq war, while nearly two-thirds disapprove -- a sharp reversal of the situation two years ago.

The long train ride through the American heartland was an opportunity to visually see the varied beauty of this land and the socio-economic variety of its inhabitants, and to engage a small sample of ordinary Americans about the problem of terrorism and how they relate to it in their everyday lives. The Americans I spoke to -- a computer engineer from Denver, a train service employee from Chicago, a retired professor from Omaha, a seminary student from South Carolina, a young university engineering graduate from Alabama, among others -- expressed lingering anger about 9/11 and concern about a future attack. They also seemed perplexed about two important points: why this terror threat remains so vivid, and why so many people around the world criticize the United States.

I sensed a great disconnect in America today between the sentiments and perceptions of ordinary citizens and the rhetoric and foreign policies of their federal government, articulated again last week by Bush's cosmic speech about fighting the new global threat of Islamist jihadi terrorism. Bush and his ideological warhorses in Washington want to take this fight to the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere and keep fighting until freedom prevails everywhere. Ordinary Americans would settle for a more effective, productive policy that makes them feel safer at home and less opposed around the world. Bush's speech at the National Endowment for Democracy last week reaffirmed to me that Washington's policy to fight terrorism is a mishmash of faulty analysis, historical confusions, emotional anger, foreign policy frustrations, worldly ignorance, and political deception, all rolled into one. The fundamental flaw is that Bush confuses and conflates a range of separate issues that have very different causes and consequences. As a result, he formulates an ineffective or even counter-productive strategy on the basis of distorted analysis and a wrong reading of the symptoms and causes or terror.


He sees the Islamist jihadi movement of Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi as a global totalitarian threat in the same tradition as Communism and fascism, and sees all acts of terror, against American, Arab, European or Asian targets, as emanating from a single, common inspiration. This is nonsense taken to peculiarly Texan heights of intellectual contortion and confusion.


He completely ignores the impact of American, Israeli and other foreign policies on the mindsets of hundreds of millions of people in the Arab-Asian region, whose degraded political and economic environment eventually spawns the desperate and futile criminality of terrorism. This is willful political blindness that makes the analytical basis of American foreign policy a laughing stock around the world.

He correctly notes that more democratic, prosperous and free societies in the Arab-Asian region would spawn fewer terrorists, but he refuses to acknowledge that America's war-making, military-based approach to promoting democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq is more feared than admired in our troubled region, and creates more resistance to, than embrace of, America's rhetoric and policies.

He wildly exaggerates the capacity of Bin Laden-style jihadi terrorists to achieve their goals, which he correctly identifies as ejecting the U.S. and other foreign armies from the region, toppling Western-supported Arab regimes, and imposing their vision of Islamic rule. He also grossly misdiagnoses the relationship between the jihadi terrorists and regimes such as Syria and Iran, both of which have established records of political enmity and warfare against such Islamist movements.

Bush keeps making the same speech about fighting terror and promoting freedom around the world month after month, but with progressively less credibility with his own citizenry on every occasion. The cautious, sensible wisdom of ordinary Americans is challenging the emotional zealotry and reckless global militarism of the Bush foreign policy team. This is because Bush's policies have proved less effective than the rousing rhetoric of his speeches, and after a while Americans prefer genuine security to perpetual warfare, and reality to fantasy.

re:
Washington's policy to fight terrorism is a mishmash of faulty analysis, historical confusions, emotional anger, foreign policy frustrations, worldly ignorance, and political deception, all rolled into one. The fundamental flaw is that Bush confuses and conflates a range of separate issues that have very different causes and consequences. As a result, he formulates an ineffective or even counter-productive strategy on the basis of distorted analysis and a wrong reading of the symptoms and causes or terror.


above is obvious. So why don't "they" fire this inept bunch of losers??? Are we to assume that Amerikans like /approve incompetence THAT much.......and particularly in hi offices???

chimp has long been "promoted to his level of incompetence "----and reflecting on his pathetic history........not sure he ever made the competence level. Quite sad ...to see such a person running/ruining what was a reasonably fine country.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
You should spell "competence" correctly.

I'm sure if Bush spelled it wrong, you'd be the first to note what an uneducated chimp he is.

And I'm no fan of Bush, but rather aghast at how much that article in no way is a fair broker of the issues it blithely discusses.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
And I'm no fan of Bush, but rather aghast at how much that article in no way is a fair broker of the issues it blithely discusses.


so, instead of ridiculing the article itself (in generalities).........how about some substansive rebuttal to the issues mentioned???
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
I get too exhausted picking away at all the spin in that unthinking article.

But here goes one sample, and I'll quote part of your quote:

He completely ignores the impact of American, Israeli and other foreign policies on the mindsets of hundreds of millions of people in the Arab-Asian region, whose degraded political and economic environment eventually spawns the desperate and futile criminality of terrorism. This is willful political blindness...."

----end quote.

What an assumption?

I'll bet if Bush acted like Clinton and many previous emissaries (all who have been failures) wishing for peace in that region did all the lip service opinion writers need to feel like something is getting done, then this article is yet more proof how the world reacts more to lip service than actual deed.

You think Bush (even if I'm no fan) has no clue about the effect of Palestine?

What an amazing assumption.

What more would you have Bush do when knowing everyone else has failed miserably?

And do you not see more progress today over there then you have seen in years?

Sharon, the "Bulldozer" is doing what the world has wanted forever. He is retreating majorly. And he has courage to face half an electorate that doesn't like it.

By the way it will never be enough.

But it's a bigger and better start than what you and I have seen for the 50 odd years Israel has existed.

And by the way, the public relations gambit of terrorism has succeeded in such a way that the Kurds who always wanted a country since the Versaille peace treaty are scratching their heads at this metaphorical squeaky wheel called Palestine who was not given its own independent status when Jordan controlled the west bank for 20 years and when the supremely oil rich arab countries invested little, forcing the Palestinian to go for jobs in Israel.

The world never held the arab world to a higher standard to invest and build up Palestine and create jobs, did it?

Nasty business over there.

And I fear most of the world citizens know less about it than our leaders do, and that is quite a guffaw to read an article that assumes any leader doesn't know the impact of Palestine.

Even if you don't like the guy, you should be very wary of rushing to embrace every opinion supporting yours.

I don't like the guy, but this article is full of ridiculous assumptions.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Even if you don't like the guy, you should be very wary of rushing to embrace every opinion supporting yours.

excuse me??? :roll: for the record: Please STOP (curtail) .....or abort the patronizing lectures and stick to the topic. (thx) :) Assumptions about what a poster embraces or does not ........is not part of this scenario. "liking" or "disliking" the guy is not the issue.either.......the issue is his capabilities, his smarts, (or lack of) , his efficiency, his decision making abilities, and his overall leadership SKILLS or lack of.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Emperor with no mental clothing

The emperor wears no mental clothes

by Helen & Harry Highwater, Unknown News

Oct. 11, 2005

I know it's masochistic, cruel and unusual self-abuse, but on a dare I watched another Bush press conference last week. And George Bush was, as usual, a gibbering baboon.

Bush always sounds like he's explaining complicated matters
to third-graders -- we the people -- but an average third-
grader has a keener grasp of the issues than does the
President. Your average drunk or mentally-vacant pan-
handler on the street downtown makes more sense. I get


stage fright easily and I don't do drugs, but criminy, I could be higher than the space shuttle on any three illegal drugs of your choice, and still answer questions on camera more coherently, more to the point than this man George W Bush.

Amidst the malapropisms and dingbattery that came from the President's increasingly-impaired mind, this exchange from last week's press conference seemed especially outer-space-worthy:

Reporter: A couple of weeks ago, you stood in the Rose Garden with Generals Abizaid and Casey and you cited the accomplishments regarding standing up of Iraqi troops there and said that there were 12 battalions that were working on Fallujah in the western part, 20 in Baghdad, 100 across the nation.

And that afternoon, Abizaid and Casey went up to Capitol Hill and said, Well, there's one battle-ready battalion, which led some Republican senators to say, Well, the situation is getting worse.

So, the questions is, sir: It appears that between what you said and what they said, something's not adding up here.

The President of the United States: Well, what is happening in Iraq is the following: More and more Iraqi are able to take the fight to the enemy.

And that's important to achieve our goal. And the goal is for a stable, democratic Iraq that is an ally in the war on terror.

Right now, there are over eighty army battalions fighting alongside coalition troops. When I say army battalions, Iraqi army battalions. There are over thirty Iraqi battalions in the lead. And that is substantial progress from the way the world was a year ago.


So, a few weeks ago this President said the Iraqis had 132 serviceable battalions. The day before, his Generals testified that the Iraqis had exactly one battalion ready. And Bush resolves the discrepancy by explaining that eighty, or thirty battalions are "in the lead" in Iraq.

Does anyone think the President of the United States even knows what a battalion is?

The next day, I searched through the mainstream coverage for the ever-obvious but never-stated fact that the President of the United States has lost his marbles if he ever had any.

But in the mainstream media, nobody reports what everybody knows, that the emperor wears no mental clothes. Instead they discuss Bush's initiatives as if he's proposed any initiatives, they analyze his strategy as if there's a strategy to analyze.

I'm not a psychiatrist, and cannot claim to know what's miswired inside the mind of the President of the United States. He may be insane, or delusional, or mentally ill. He may be certifiable, or merely psychotic. He may be drunk, or perpetually drugged to a stupor, or suffering from early Alzheimer's. He may be mildly retarded (and I suggest this seriously, certainly not as a joke).

Mr Bush may be dancing on moonbeams, sloshed on moonshine, or a victim of fetal alcohol syndrome due to his mother's endless alcoholism. Again, lacking the access and expertise to say which of these might actually be the case, I can only state the obvious: The President of the United States is seriously, seriously out of kilter.

One needn't be an expert to recognize that extremely obvious fact. It's not like there's any doubt, or any reasonable argument that Bush is mentally healthy.

Can there be an honest observer of the President, anywhere in the world, who dares claim that Bush is engaged and aware of his surroundings, and is making America's national policy decisions? Can anyone who's not a professional liar state that President Bush is there?

There's no 'there' there. Nobody's answering at roll call. The President's escalator doesn't go up, and his stairway is two or three planks short.

To be sure, I don't claim that any of this is a revelation -- it's amazingly obvious. I'm not saying anything here that isn't whispered and shouted by many millions of people every day. And the familiar follow-up question, asked by you and me and everyone we know, asked by Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, asked by Americans and foreigners everywhere on Earth:

Who's pulling the puppet President's strings?

Anyone who hasn't asked that question is either in a coma ... or works for the mainstream media, where that utterly obvious question can never, ever be uttered.

Does not mentioning the truth mean the truth isn't true? Does pretending that President Bush is leading America, make him a leader? Are we supposed to take Brian Williams and The New York Times seriously, when they report on the President's comings and goings, speeches and meetings, as if there's a man inside the President's suit -- as if George W. Bush has ever been in the room, when any presidential policy has been decided?

You know, of course, that the ultimate CEOs behind every American news network and most major American newspapers could all meet at your dinner table, if you've got six chairs and don't mind stepping out of the room yourself. Those half-dozen silk-suited white guys are in ultimate control of every channel on your TV set, every newspaper you read, and every radio station you listen to, unless you're going out of your way to find alternative media. They control the horizontal, the vertical, and they set the limits of what's acceptable discourse in America.

And none of their stations, none of their newspapers ever ask the obvious question: "Who's pulling the puppet President's strings?" ... because the answer leads right back to those same six guys.

That's why American mainstream media will never report the obvious phoniness of the President, though it's as plain as cattlecrap on the carpet. Paid pundits -- left or right -- won't mention the President's mental feebleness, at least not until he begins to drool or suck his thumb during a joint session of Congress.

Instead, they debate Bush's accomplishments, as if he's had some. The disastrous wars, the crony appointments, and the insipid pronouncements that come from the President's lips, are dissected in detail on talking-head TV, and always framed as if they're discussing Bush's actual ideas.

You could almost believe this man Bush was President of the United States ... if only you don't believe your own eyes and ears.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Again another partisan screed posing as wisdom.

Nothing like Iraq having a chance interests this guy.

Nothing like really researching what Iraqis are doing in those battalions ?

The Washington Post did a much more accurate job examining the status of those Iraqi battalions and the Washington Post is no friend to Bush, but at least it has the maturity to really assess a more accurate picture.

This guy is stuck on the stupid idea that Bush is someone's puppet.

The echo of that idea started a long time ago. And the echo chamber has you convinced, eh?

An amazing thing happens when you meet the public image in flesh and blood right before you.

It's a concept the masses don't quite get.

Believe me, every one of these leaders know more than you or I and are much more acquainted with the complexity of the problems whether created by themselves or not.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
The Iraq invasion is costing American tax payers $6 billion per month now. Where is this money going? I’ll tell you where…to the war profiteers of the military industrial complex.

The top priority of Donald Rumsfeld was to downsize our military and conduct a privatization campaign where privately owned, for profit companies, can increase the size of the industry that makes a business out of war. This private and expanding war industry has, as their representative, the Defense Secretary of the United States. This is the man that has input on the decision to use our military and who and stages and coordinates the actions. This means he decides how the resources are used…he decides who gets the money. Wouldn’t you say that this is a little bit of a conflict of interest?

Well let me tell you a little bit about the Iraq invasion and privatization. We don’t have enough troops there. We never had enough troops there. One reason that Donald Rumsfeld did not send enough troops there is so that the US tax payer would have to pay private militias, also known as security firms, to perform the tasks that our military would have and should have done. These private firms are making billions. They can afford to pay their private security guards $500 per day. This is why our valuable highly trained members of the military are not reinstating and they are signing on to these high paying tax leech companies, further weakening our military.

The companies making money from the prolonged insurgency are owned by friends of Rumsfeld, Cheney and the members of the Bush administration. You can trace many of the war bucks to members of Congress as well. A prolonged insurgency is a dream come true for these war profiteers. Is it any wonder that the entire operation was handled so poorly and that no effort was make to keep the peace once we went it? Is it any wonder why there was never even a plan to keep the peace? Actually there was a plan…it was to prevent peace.

Put all these pieces together and logic tells you that this disaster of an occupation is working out perfectly for the people who sent us there in the first place. Too bad most of America has replaced logic and critical thinking with faith; they can’t see the obvious even when someone takes the time to point it out to them.

There are many reasons that the Project for a New American Century and their hand puppet George W. Bush took this nation to war. Some reasons were religious or related to Israel, some reasons were ideological (good vs. evil), some reasons related to the acquisition of oil and some reasons relate directly to personal financial greed. One thing is for sure…we did not invade Iraq in order to protect America or it’s freedoms (which are being attacked, not by Iraq, but by the Bush/PNAC administration), and we are surely not there for any of the reasons that our media have forced you to believe and that is becoming more obvious as each day passes. Think about it! –
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
((( sweet-peapod))))


......The US running out of $$$$$$??

By Rick Jervis, USA TODAY
Mon Oct 10, 7:33 AM ET



On paper, the Iraqi Army barracks was a gleaming example of the future

Iraq. The plans called for a two-story, air-conditioned barracks housing 850 soldiers, a movie theater, classrooms, basketball courts, a shooting range, even an officer's club.

ADVERTISEMENT

But when the $10 million project in southern Iraq is finished this month, it will fall far short of those ambitious plans. The theater, classrooms, officer's club, basketball courts and shooting range have all been scrapped. The barracks will be one story instead of two.


The reason for scaling back the barracks? The U.S. government is running out of money. The higher than expected cost of protecting workers against insurgent attacks - about 25 cents of every reconstruction dollar now pays for security - has sent the cost of projects skyward.


The result: Some projects have been eliminated and others cut back.


"American money has dried up," says Brent Rose, chief of program/project management for the Army Corps of Engineers in southern Iraq.


And tracking the billions of dollars that flooded into a war zone in the wake of the U.S.-led invasion has proved difficult, too. Nearly $100 million in reconstruction money is unaccounted for.


The ultimate price of a slowdown in Iraq's reconstruction could be steep. U.S. strategy here is based on the premise that jobs and prosperity will sap the strength of the insurgency and are as important as military successes in defeating terrorists.


"A free and prosperous Iraq will be a major blow to the terrorists and their desire to establish a safe haven in Iraq where they can plan and plot attacks," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said last week.


But there are signs that some of the early momentum is gone, particularly for big infrastructure projects. The Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works initially planned to use U.S. funds for 81 much-needed water and sewage treatment projects across the country, says Humam Misconi, a ministry official. That list has dwindled to 13.


Canceled projects include the $50 million project that was supposed to provide potable water to the second-largest city in the Kurdish region, and a $60 million water treatment plant in Babil province, which would have served about 360,000 residents, Misconi says.


Some progress has been made. More than 2,800 projects have begun since the transfer of sovereignty last summer, and 1,700 of those have been completed, according to the Army Corps of Engineers. They include refurbished schools, new police stations, hospitals, bridges and new roads.


It is the larger, more expensive projects such as water treatment plants, sewage networks and power grids that are being cut back.


Congress appropriated $18.4 billion for Iraq reconstruction in November 2003, but last year nearly $5 billion of it was diverted to help train and equip Iraq's security forces as the insurgency grew in strength.


And the security costs keep increasing. Originally estimated at 9% of total project costs, security costs have risen to between 20% and 30%, says Brig. Gen. William McCoy Jr., commander of the Army Corps of Engineers in Iraq.


Power outages throughout Iraq


By 2003, Iraq's infrastructure was run down after years of

United Nations-mandated sanctions and neglect. Rebuilding it has proved tougher than first envisioned. Nearly half of all of Iraqi households still don't have access to clean water, and only 8% of the country, excluding the capital, is connected to sewage networks.


And despite progress in fixing Iraq's antiquated oil production system, the country's oil wells produce about 1.9 million barrels of crude oil a day, lower than 2003 levels and well under the 3.5 million barrels Iraq was producing before the 1991

Gulf War.


Iraqi households still endure about 10 hours a day of power outages. In Baghdad, the power is out about 14 hours a day, according to the Electricity Ministry. Iraqi power plants are now generating nearly 4,800 megawatts, up from 4,400 before the U.S.-led invasion.

The increase hasn't been enough to keep up with demand. Since the end of the war, demand for electricity has increased by about 60% as Iraqis have bought new refrigerators, televisions, air conditioners and satellite dishes, says a Corps of Engineers spokesman.

The lack of dramatic economic progress has hurt efforts to win over Iraqis, says Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Unemployed young men are more easily drawn into the ranks of the insurgency than those with jobs.

And if other Iraqis don't see an improvement in their daily lives, they may sympathize with rebels. "The economy is not helping us win the war," O'Hanlon says.

The U.S. Coalition Provisional Authority originally set a goal of employing 50,000 Iraqis on reconstruction projects, but the target wasn't achieved, according to a recent report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In August, unemployment and underemployment were estimated at 50%, the report said.

Security is the largest obstacle to rebuilding. As of June 30, 330 contractors, mostly Iraqis, had been killed, according to the U.S. Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.

"It's a challenge," says Col. Larry McCallister, commander of Gulf Region South District, the Corps of Engineers unit in southern Iraq. "We can't get to projects as often as we'd like. In the U.S., you go to projects every day. Here, you get to them maybe once a week."

Western contractors can't visit projects without elaborate planning and preparation.

On a recent morning at Camp Adder, the fortified base near here where the Corps of Engineers is housed, a team of engineers huddled around the armored Ford SUVs of an Erinys International security team for the daily briefing. The Army Corps hires private security firms, such as Erinys, to take them to sites.

The civilian and military engineers are briefed before being ferried by the guards in a convoy of three vehicles. A guard sits in the back of the last vehicle, his assault rifle trained on any car that gets too close.

Missing $100 million


Ahmad Al-Rubaye, AFP/Getty
Workers roll out cable to be laid in ditches in Baghdad.


Besides escalating security costs, reconstruction also has been dogged by allegations of fraud and mismanagement. Nearly $100 million in Iraqi funds distributed by the Coalition Provisional Authority for reconstruction was either spent without supporting receipts or vanished, according to an April audit by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq reconstruction.

The U.S. Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation, says Jim Mitchell, a spokesman for the office.

The White House said it hasn't decided whether to request additional funds from Congress. "It is too early to know what may be needed," McClellan said.

If

President Bush does ask Congress for more money, there will probably be tough questions about oversight and rising security costs.

"Reconstruction in Iraq has been slower, more painful, more complex, more fragmented and more inefficient than anyone in Washington or Baghdad could have imagined," said Rep. Jim Kolbe (news, bio, voting record) (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations, during a subcommittee meeting last month. .

Much of the security cost is buried in "cost-plus" contracts in which companies get reimbursed for all costs plus a percentage of those costs as a fee.

All 11 multinational firms working on projects through the Iraqi Project and Contracting Office have "cost-plus" contracts, says Karen Durham-Aguilera, the office's director of programs.

One "cost-plus" project is the water treatment plant under construction here, which is managed jointly by London-based AMEC and California-based Fluor Corp. The project was originally estimated to cost $80 million, according to Army Corps of Engineers records.

But the original Iraqi subcontractor pulled out after he was threatened. Delays, drive-by shootings and land-acquisition snags followed, driving security and other costs up, according to Corps officials and records. The project's estimated completion cost rose to $200 million, the corps said.

AMEC officials declined to comment. Bob Fletcher, Fluor's director of water programs, disputed the corps' figures but would not elaborate on the project's cost.

Iraqi contractors, not saddled by steep security costs, say they can do the work for less. The Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works is using Iraqi funds to build two similarly sized treatment plants in Karbala and Kut, says the ministry's Misconi. Combined cost of both projects: $185 million.

"We keep saying, 'Give us the money and we could do it better, cheaper,'" Misconi says. "Estimated cost of security on the Nasiriyah project is $54 million. We could build a whole new plant with this amount of money."

Salty water

As funds run dry, some projects are being handed over to Iraqis. In Najaf, for example, Army Corps officials bought parts to upgrade the city's electrical distribution system, including transformers, lines and wires, then handed them to local construction officials for them to do the work, saving millions on labor, security and administrative costs, McCallister says.

In the next few years, Najaf will benefit from 30 projects costing $100 million in U.S. taxpayer money, including new hospitals, clinics and police stations, McCallister says. But bigger projects, such as water treatment plants and electrical grids, are too expensive to launch, he says.

"Will (the projects) make a difference? Yes," McCallister says. "Will it make a major, major difference? No. We could continue putting three times that much money into that city."

The refurbished hospitals and new clinics in town are nice, says Abdul Hussein Ali, 52, a retired hospital worker living in Najaf with six children. But what would bring real joy, he says, is water that doesn't pour into his sink cloudy and salty and needing chemicals to purify.

"The water here is as salty as the desert," he says.

"Since the start of the war to today, you cannot say there has been remarkable change," Ali says. "The situation is improving, but very, very slowly."
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Nearly $100 million in reconstruction money is unaccounted for.

this has been playing under the radar for a while........and another area where accountability is not there.

........yet no one is asking THE HARD QUESTIONS?? WHAT GRIP does bush inc. have on the press and the population??? Can't still be the phoney fear mongering??
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Finally an excellent article posted there.

Is America running out of money?

I'm sure the world is gleeful about that while it sits on the sideliness tut tutting and doing nothing but hoping the US fails, nevermind whether Iraq survives.

Righteous.

Yep.

Don't lift a finger.

You're watching a struggle of an American making, but Iraq will notice that the world sat by contributing nothing.

But, nevertheless that article examined and retailed the rebuilding efforts.