Former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called the worst leader by former US top military officer

The US had no reason to invade Iraq in 2003, and only did so because of "a series of lies" told to the American people by the Bush administration, says Gen. Hugh Shelton, who served for four years as the US's top military officer.

Shelton, who was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001, makes the comment in Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior, a soon-to-be-published memoir reviewed at Foreign Policy by Thomas E. Ricks.

"President Bush and his team got us enmeshed in Iraq based on extraordinarily poor intelligence and a series of lies purporting that we had to protect Americans from Saddam's evil empire because it posed such a threat to our national security," Shelton writes in his memoir.

According to Ricks, Shelton states that, in order to get the war going, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "elbowed aside Gen. Richard Myers and the other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and also intimidated and flattered Gen. Tommy R. Franks while working directly with him, and so basically went to war without getting the advice of his top military advisors."

The result, Shelton writes, was a war plan that amounted to a "fiasco."

Shelton reportedly saves his harshest criticisms for Rumsfeld himself, who he said had "the worst style of leadership I witnessed in 38 years of service."

After his first meeting with Rumsfeld, Shelton recalls thinking, "We're going to need some heavy-duty cleaning supplies if all we're going to do is waste time having pissing contests like this." When Rumsfeld was proven wrong in a meeting, Shelton says, he wouldn't admit it, but rather would press on and do "his best to stay afloat amid the bullshit he was shoveling out."

At one point, Rumsfeld utterly rejected a plan for how to deal with Iraqi attacks on U.S. warplanes in the old "no-fly zones." Shelton liked the plan how it was, so when ordered to revamp it, he let it sit on his desk for a couple of weeks, and then sent it back to the defense secretary with a new label on it: "Rumsfeld Auto-Response Matrix." "He loved every word of it," Shelton reports with unconcealed contempt.

Shelton goes on to criticize the Bush administration's assertions about Saddam Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction.

"Spinning the possible possession of WMDs as a threat to the United States in the way they did is, in my opinion, tantamount to intentionally deceiving the American people," Shelton writes.

Ricks notes that "[t]hese are pretty serious charges, given that they come from the man who was the nation's top military officer for four years immediately preceding 9/11."

Ricks also reports that Shelton has less-than-kind words for Sen. John McCain, who Shelton writes "had a screw loose because normal people just didn't behave in that manner."

In another part of the memoir, Shelton asserts that "[t]he John McCain that I knew was subject to wild mood swings and would break into erratic temper tantrums in the middle of a normal conversation."

Republican governor hypocritally accepts stimulus funds after filing a lawsuit to prevent those funds from being spent

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford (R) is breaking a major pledge as he quietly reaps $97.5 million in federal stimulus funds to extend unemployment benefits to countless individuals in the Palmetto State.

Just over a year ago, Sanford warned that the $700 billion aid package "ain't that far from a thing called slavery."

Prior to making the criticism, the South Carolina Governor called supporters of the stimulus measure "the real fringe."

"I think in this instance I would humbly suggest that the real fringe are those that are supporting the stimulus," explained Sanford shortly after the funding program was approved. "It is not at all in keeping with the principles that made this country great, not at all in keeping with economic reality, not in keeping with a stable dollar, and not in keeping with the sentiments of most of this country."

The outgoing South Carolina Governor even took his fight against the stimulus to court by filing a lawsuit to stop stimulus spending" based on the justification that "legislature has overstepped authority under federal law."

Now, Sanford is poised to accept millions of federal dollars, which will not have to be paid back, to provide financial assistance to part-time workers in South Carolina and individuals who left their jobs to care for a sick family member.

On Tuesday, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis signaled that the funds would be deposited into the state's financially troubled unemployment trust fund this week.

South Carolina lawmakers have found themselves struggling to combat sky-high joblessness in the state in recent months.

Former republican speaker Gingrich cheated on His wife while making speeches about "Family Values": Gingrich told his wife ‘It Doesn’t Matter What I Do’

In his recently published book and in speaking engagements, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich repeatedly warns that President Obama’s “secular, socialist machine” is threatening to destroy America by undermining the Judeo-Christian “values” upon which the country was built. But while Gingrich chastises the supposed erosion of values on the left, his past is tainted by his own contemptible value judgments, including numerous extra-marital affairs, and pressuring a divorce from his first wife while she lay stricken with cancer in a hospital bed.

In a new Esquire profile, Gingrich’s second wife Marianne, whom he cheated on with his current wife, Callista,  breaks her twelve year silence on her relationship with Gingrich to reveal a portrait of man who understood the deep hypocrisy of his actions, but simply didn’t care:

He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused.   

                               

He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, “How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?”

“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.“

Marianne, who was Gingrich’s “closest advisor” during his reign in the 1990s, went on to say that Gingrich “believes that what he says in public and how he lives don’t have to be connected.” But of course, as Gingrich himself demanded when he led a crusade to impeach President Clinton for personal infidelity, politicians’ private lives are inevitably connected to their public ones. Nonetheless, Gingrich has himself admitted to continuing his illicit affair with Callista, 23 years his junior, while simultaneously prosecuting Clinton’s adultery.

Perhaps Gingrich has no qualms about committing the sins he rails against because he doesn’t really believe in what he preaches. Esquire’s John Richardson notes that despite Gingrich’s apocalyptic rhetoric, when encountering radical conservative activists, Gingrich “over and over again…takes the long view and becomes the very soul of probity.” “I wouldn’t be able to describe what his real principles are,” former Republican Rep. Mickey Edwards said of the former speaker. “I never felt that he had any sort of a real compass about what he believed except for the pursuit of power.”

Republicans say they are for the US Constitution, yet want to take an ax to the 'Bill of Rights'

Since President Obama took office, Republicans have shrouded their agenda of opposition by wrapping it in the flag and the Constitution. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) even went so far as to label her radical anti-government views “constitutional conservatism.” Yet, for all of their constitutional pablum, the GOP’s agenda is nothing less than a direct assault on America’s founding document. Time and time again, Republicans have called for basic constitutional freedoms and fundamental aspects of our constitutional government to be repealed either by amendment or by activist judges:

REPEALING CITIZENSHIP: Numerous GOP lawmakers, including their Senate leader and the most-recent Republican candidate for president, are lining up behind a “review” of the 14th Amendment’s grant of citizenship to virtually all persons born within the United States. Such a proposal literally revives the vision of citizenship articulated by the Supreme Court’s infamous pro-slavery decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford. It has no place in the twenty-first century.

REPEALING CONGRESS’ POWER TO REGULATE THE ECONOMY: The Constitution’s “Commerce Clause” gives national leaders broad authority to regulate the national economy, but much of the GOP has embraced “tentherism,” the belief that this power is small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. The most famous example of tentherism is the ubiquitous frivolous lawsuits claiming that health reform is unconstitutional, but these lawsuits are part of a much greater effort.  In his brief challenging health reform, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli claims that Congress is allowed to regulate “commerce on one hand” but not “manufacturing or agriculture.” Cuccinelli’s discredited vision of the Constitution was actually implemented in the late 19th and early 20th century, and it would strike down everything from child labor laws to the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters.

REPEALING CONGRESS’ POWER TO SPEND MONEY: The Constitution also gives Congress power to “provide for the common defense and general welfare,” a broad grant of authority to create federal spending programs such as Social Security. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), however, recently called upon the Supreme Court to rewrite the Constitution’s clear language and repeal parts of the budget he doesn’t like. A Texas GOP official even went so far as to claim that the federal highway system is unconstitutional. Should this GOP vision of the Constitution ever be adopted, it could eliminate not just Social Security, but also Medicare, Medicaid, federal education spending and countless other cherished programs.

REPEALING CONGRESS’ POWER TO RAISE MONEY: The Constitution also gives Congress broad authority to decide how to distribute the tax burden. Thus, for example, Congress is allowed to create a tax incentive for people to buy houses by giving a tax break to people with mortgages, and it is allowed to create a similar incentive for people to buy health insurance by taxing people who have health insurance slightly less than people who do not.  Nevertheless, the frivolous assaults on health reform would eliminate this Constitutional power. Many Tea Party Republicans go even further, calling for a full repeal of the 16th Amendment, the amendment which enables the income tax. Paying taxes is never popular, but it would be impossible to function as a nation if America lacked the power to raise the money it needs to pay our armed forces, among other things.

REPEALING EQUALITY: The Constitution entitles all persons to “equal protection of the laws,” a provision that formed the basis of Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision yesterday that California cannot treat gay couples as if they are somehow inferior. Immediately after this decision was announced, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) called upon Congress to “act immediately” to overturn it — something that it could only do through a constitutional amendment.  Of course, Newt’s proposal does nothing more than revive President Bush’s call for a constitutional amendment repealing the parts of the Constitution that protect marriage equality.

REPEALING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: As Judge Walker also held, marriage is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution’s Due Process Clause. The GOP’s anti-gay amendment would repeal this constitutional protection as well.

REPEALING ELECTION OF SENATORS: Finally, a number of GOP candidates have come out in favor of repealing the 17th Amendment, the provision of the Constitution which requires direct election of senators, although many of these candidates also backed off their “Seventeenther” stand after it proved embarrassing. It is simply baffling how anyone could take one look at the U.S. Senate, and decide that what it really needs is even less democracy.

New York Congressman Anthony Weiner Rips Apart Republicans on 9/11Health Care Bill

House Republicans late Thursday were able to corral enough votes to defeat a bill that would have provided up to $7.4 billion in aid to those sickened by toxins resulting from the 9/11 attacks.

In the process, they set off a host of fiery speeches and denunciations from their Democratic colleagues and produced a veritable YouTube moment from Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y), whose district includes many of the affected.

At the heart of the debate was a procedural maneuver made by Democrats to suspend the rules before consideration of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. The move allowed leadership to block potential GOP amendments to the measure (there was worry that Republicans would attach something overtly partisan in hopes that it could pass on the otherwise widely-popular measure). It also meant that the party needed a two-thirds majority vote.

When the final tally was announced, there were 255 representatives for the measure, 159 against. The defeat of the bill, which would have provided free health care to those affected during the 9/11 rescue and recovery, likely means that the court system will have to settle compensation issues.

Watch Rep. Weiner's fiery admonishment here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zwCMf8dsc&feature=player_embedded

Republican Senate hypocrites filibuster job generating Small Business Bill after criticizing Democrats for delaying it

For several days now, Senate Republicans have ridiculed Democrats for prioritizing campaign finance legislation over a bill that would benefit small businesses, arguing that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was putting electoral advantages over jobs for everyday people.

On Tuesday, the DISCLOSE Act failed to get the needed votes for cloture, in the process providing the Senate the time needed to move on to other business. But when the democratic leadership brought a revised version of the small business bill to the floor on Thursday morning, they were met with united Republican opposition.

Despite complaining about the delay in consideration, Republicans filibustered the measure by a vote of 58 (in favor of cloture) to 42 (against).

There are fairly substantive bipartisan components to the legislation, which would eliminate capital gains taxes for investment in small firms, create a Small Business Lending Fund to underwrite loan through community banks and create a credit initiative for small business to help meet state budget shortfalls. Reid, moreover, has offered the chance to consider several GOP amendments already, and could well open the window for more.

The drama, which seems likely to extend throughout the day, is not only a reflection of just how ground-down the procedural elements of the Senate have become. It also shows how difficult it has been for Democrats to push forward on economic recovery -- which, in concept, has bipartisan support but always seems to come up a bit short when it comes to a roll call.

"Eighty-one percent of the jobs lost in America are from small business," said Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.). "So when the other side complains and complains and just flaps and flaps all day long about it's a jobless recovery, we put a bill on the floor to creates jobs for small business and they say no... They can color it, paint it any way they want, that's what it was."

Polls show half term Governor Sarah Palin's endorsement is hurting New Hampshire Republican Senate candidate

New Hampshire Senate numbers reveal the double edged sword that is a half term Governor Sarah Palin endorsement. In the short term Kelly Ayotte has opened a wide lead in the Republican primary. But the Palin endorsement could be hurting Ayotte’s chances of winning in the general election.

51% of New Hampshire voters overall say they’re less likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by Palin to just 26% who say a Palin endorsement would make them more inclined to be supportive. The disparity is even larger when it comes to moderate voters- 14% of them are positively swayed by a Palin nod while 65% say her support is more likely to turn them against one of her preferred candidates

When we polled New Hampshire in April we found Ayotte’s favorability numbers with moderates on positive ground at 32/27, something very unusual for a Republican candidate. Now in the wake of the Palin endorsement that is no longer the case- 27% of moderates see Ayotte favorably while 46% see her unfavorably- a 24 point drop in her favorability spread over the last three months.

Colorado Republican Senate candidate caught calling tea baggers "dumbasses"

Only "dumbasses" in the Tea Party movement question President Barack Obama's citizenship, according to one Republican Senate candidate in Colorado. In response, a spokesperson for GOP rival Jane Norton called Ken Buck a "self-proclaimed tea bagger who trashes tea partiers when he thinks no one is looking."

A Colorado Democratic Party worker taped Buck in a parking lot in June without his knowledge; the recording was obtained by 9 News and The Denver Post.

"Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates while I'm on the camera," Buck was heard saying. "God, what am I supposed to do?"

Buck later tried to walk back his comments, telling a local TV station, "You know there are times of frustration where I vent and in this case, I vented to the wrong person under the wrong circumstances."

Asked about the comments on Sunday at a political rally in Adams County, Buck said he wishes he had used different language and that he had not lumped all Tea Party members into one statement, but that he remains frustrated that some people are focusing on birth certificates rather than the country's $13 trillion debt and its $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

"The language is inappropriate," he told 9NEWS and The Post. "After 16 months on the campaign trail, I was tired and frustrated that I can't get that message through that we are going to go off a cliff if we don't start dealing with this debt.

"It is not the Tea Party movement on the whole. The Tea Party movement gets it. It's the Constitution, it's the debt, it's the other issues, but there are a couple people that are frankly frustrating for all candidates. I mean if you talked to other candidates and they're being honest with you, they'll say I know that. Now, they may not have used my choice words, but they have the same feelings."

Only last week, Buck found himself in the national spotlight for comments that seemed to suggest that voters choose him because he wasn't a woman.

"Why should you vote for me? Because I do not wear high heels," Buck told a crowd at an Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms picnic sponsored by the conservative Independence Institute.

Buck's opponent, Jane Norton, wasted no time in producing an ad spotlighting Buck's remarks about her footwear. It's doubtful she'll produce a new one defending birthers, but Buck's comments still are probably more likely to cost him votes than win any.

Watch his comments here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCcPeXd5MPs

Conservative commentator says Republicans are lying about not being the party of 'No"

Since President Obama first took office, Republicans have stood lock-step against his legislative agenda. In March 2010, Republican senators waged a record number of filibusters for a two-year term – after just 14 months. 

Given the GOP’s dearth of ideas, it’s understandable that Rep. Peter King (R-NY) told radio host Bill Bennett that Republicans shouldn’t “lay out a complete agenda,” because it could become “a campaign issue.”

Despite their blanket rejection of virtually everything President Obama has proposed, many prominent conservative leaders have urged the GOP to develop a substantive agenda instead of simply accepting their “Party of No” label.

Yesterday Red State founder Erick Erickson was asked by a Think Progress reporter of  his thoughts on the “Party of No” moniker. Erickson took the GOP to task for clouding the issue. He advised them to “stop lying” about being the “Party of No” because “everyone knows you are”.

The Think Progress reporter told Mr. Erickson that the Republicans are saying, if you accuse them of being the party of no or not having ideas, they will say “oh no!”

Erickson: That’s such crap. Say you’re the “Party of No.” Of course you are. Everyone knows you are. Stop lying.

Watch his comments here: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZZy5zU9kw8&feature=player_embedded

Conservative commentator blasts the Republicans' new political strategy to repeat the George W. Bush years

By Bruce Bartlett:

Over the weekend Republicans unveiled their brilliant new political strategy: the George W. Bush years were the good old days and we should go back to them. A stupider strategy is hard to imagine. The Bush years were an unmitigated disaster. Here is a quick list of his screw-ups off the top of my head in no particular order. Readers are encouraged to add others in the comments.

Thinking that Iraqis would welcome liberation and immediately embrace Western-style democracy, and failing to manage the occupation of Iraq properly. 

How can people defend Bush on the basis that he kept us safe after 9/11 without also blaming him for 9/11? If he had the power to keep us safe after 9/11 then why didn’t he keep us safe on 9/11?

Bullying the intelligence community into giving him the justification to start a war in Iraq over non-existent WMDs.

Ramming through a massive new, unfunded Medicare drug benefit when the system was already broke.

Rushing to enact the hugely expensive Sarbanes-Oxley Act in reaction to the Enron scandal even though there was no evidence that it would have prevented it from happening.

The total failure to deal with Katrina.

Nominating the totally unqualified Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court and appointing other nincompoops to high level positions solely on the basis of slavish loyalty.

Not vetoing anything until two years into his second term.

Thinking that tax rebates and tax credits stimulate growth and failing to make any of his tax cuts permanent.

Destroying the Doha round of trade negotiations by imposing steel tariffs and enacting a massive new agricultural subsidy program at its outset.  (The whole point of Doha was to reduce agricultural subsidies.)

Failing to name a new vice president in 2004 who would have been a viable Republican candidate for president in 2008.

Signing McCain-Feingold after promising to veto it during the 2000 election.

Neutering the Treasury secretary and failing to push for tougher oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, thus contributing to the housing crash and economic crisis we have experienced for going on two years with no end in sight.

Bruce Bartlett is a columnist for Forbes.com. He formerly served as executive director of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, Deputy Assistant Secretary for economic policy at the U.S. Treasury Department during the George H.W. Bush Administration, and as a senior policy analyst in the White House for Ronald Reagan.