The Changing Political Landscape

2010 is shaping up to be quite an interesting election year after all. While many experts would agree that Democrats would expect to lose seats in the House and Senate and perhaps some statehouses, the numbers weren't expected to be a deluge.

That's why yesterday's surprise announcements that Sen. Bryan Dorgan (D-ND) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT/Friend of Mozilo) would not seek reelection are so surprising. They were considered safe seats this year, and now their retirements open the door for challengers. Democrats had expected to lose some seats, but the prospects of holding together a filibuster proof majority in the US Senate now appear dim.

Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut's Democratic attorney general, said Wednesday he would run for Dodd's seat. The ripple effect means that elections down the line will be affected by the incumbent retirements and provide opportunities for fresh blood to come into the political process.

Further, another Democrat, Gov. Bill Ritter of Colorado, will not seek a second term.

Then there's word that Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN) may attempt to unseat New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

Even David Paterson, the embattled Democratic governor of New York, isn't safe from attacks by the White House on down and that's even with potential Republican challenger Rudy Giuliani saying he wont run.

All this opens the possibility that Republicans can eliminate the filibuster proof majority in the Senate and cut into the Democrats overwhelming numbers in the House as well as improve their numbers at the state and local level.

Yet, all is not well for Republicans. Michael Steele, the RNC chairman, didn't exactly have kind words for the GOP yesterday, and pretty much called Republicans on the carpet for their poor performance over the past 20 years, a rebuke of both Bush Administrations and a squandering of their Congressional fortunes. Scandals, corruption, and a willful disregard for fiscal responsibility all play a role in the GOP fortunes, and that many Republicans are enthralled with creationism and anti-science agendas isn't going to attract new voters and support among those who have found that the Democrats tax and spend agenda is unsustainable.

Democrat overreach in trying to ram through the widely unpopular health care overhaul isn't going to help the Democrats, but knowing that the Democrats are bound to lose seats will only encourage Democrat leaders in Congress to push harder to get a deal done.

The same political calculus is pushing the gay marriage agenda in New Jersey; Gov. Corzine's term ends in just about two weeks, and his successor, Chris Christie has said that he would veto a gay marriage bill. Supporters don't know if they have the numbers to pass the bills in the Democrat controlled legislature, so if they can't get it done now, they'll have to wait at least four years before trying again. The State Senate has scheduled a vote for today.

More Reason For NY Democrats To Be Upset With Obama Administration

At a time when New York City Democrats are smarting over the way President Obama snubbed Democrat Bill Thompson in his election bid to unseat incumbent mayor Independent Mike Bloomberg last week and Governor David Paterson is trying to overcome largely negative ratings and antipathy from the White House, President Obama has decided to campaign for Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, who's embroiled in scandals arising from his cozy relationship with Countrywide Mortgage.

Embattled Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-Ct.), whose low approval ratings make him one of the most vulnerable Democrats seeking re-election next year, gets help from President Obama tonight.

Obama will appear at a $1,000-per person fundraising event for Dodd in Stamford.

(snip)

Dodd’s low approval ratings stem from several factors, including the sluggish economy and questions raised about favorable treatment he received on a mortgage from Countrywide Home Loans.

So, why is Obama willing to appear with Dodd? Well, it's all about the politics of securing passage of financial services overhaul legislation. Never mind that Dodd is ethically challenged over his ties to the industry and his committee has failed in its oversight function on numerous occasions. In fact, Dodd purposefully excluded AIG from employment compensation limits, causing a kerfuffle over bonuses provided AIG executives paid out from bailout funds, even though Congress was well aware of the existence of the exclusion.

New York Democrats have to wonder why they aren't getting the support that their fellow Democrats in New Jersey and Connecticut received, even though in both instances, the candidates were seriously flawed.

Countrywide Was On Their Side

Not only did Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Chris Dodd get advantageous mortgage deals, but they knew all about it when the mortgages were originated.

Both of these Democrats benefited, and knew it despite their protestations to date to the contrary.

Despite their denials, influential Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad and Chris Dodd were told from the start they were getting VIP mortgage discounts from one of the nation's largest lenders, the official who handled their loans has told Congress in secret testimony.

Both senators have said that at the time the mortgages were being written they didn't know they were getting unique deals from Countrywide Financial Corp., the company that went on to lose billions of dollars on home loans to credit-strapped borrowers. Dodd still maintains he got no preferential treatment.

Dodd got two Countrywide mortgages in 2003, refinancing his home in Connecticut and another residence in Washington. Conrad's two Countrywide mortgages in 2004 were for a beach house in Delaware and an eight-unit apartment building in Bismarck in his home state of North Dakota.

Robert Feinberg, who worked in the Countrywide's VIP section, told congressional investigators last month that the two senators were made aware that "who you know is basically how you're coming in here."

"You don't say 'no' to the VIP," Feinberg told Republican investigators for the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, according to a transcript obtained by The Associated Press.

The next day, Feinberg testified before the Senate Ethics Committee, an indication the panel is actively investigating two of the chamber's more powerful members:

Feinberg says that both Senators knew of the favorable treatment.

At his Feb. 2 news conference, Dodd insisted he didn't receive special treatment. The assertion was at odds with two Countrywide documents entitled "Loan Policy Analysis" that Dodd allowed reporters to review the same day.

The documents had separate columns: one showing points "actl chrgd" Dodd — zero; and a second column showing "policy" was to charge .250 points on one loan and .375 points on the other. Another heading on the documents said "reasons for override." A notation under that heading identified a Countrywide section that approved the policy change for Dodd.

Mortgage points, sometimes called loan origination fees, are upfront fees based on a percentage of the loan. Each point is equal to 1 percent of the loan. The higher the points the lower the interest rate.

How could these Senators not know what they were getting in terms of favorable treatment?

I think I have the answer.

They signed the paperwork without reading.

We already have proof of all that with every new massive piece of legislation that has been passed of late - without anyone reading for details, and members of Congress like John Conyers bellyaching about having to read for understanding being too difficult to do.

Now, none of this absolves these Senators of their obligations or their legal culpability for their actions. They signed for the mortgages, and they got the benefit of the deals.

Just don't expect Congress to hold them accountable. Accountability will only come from the voters, and I don't have much faith in them doing that either.

Sen. Dodd Hoping To Ride Obama Coattails?

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT-Countrywide) must think that President Obama has some serious coattails if he thinks that including Obama in one of his campaign ads is going to keep voters interesting in sending him back to Washington after all the revelations about Dodd's unsavory dealings with the financial industry. (Via Marc Ambinder)

Here's the ad:


Dodd wants to take credit for the credit card bill signed by the President just days ago. It's his right to do so, but curiously Dodd doesn't want to take credit for his other actions while as US Senator, including being on the Friends of Mozillo list and getting a sweetheart deal on a mortgage, the AIG bonus mess, and pushing for lenders to continue lending to subprime borrowers to keep the economy afloat even as it was creating a real estate bubble that would take out trillions of dollars in value when it popped. He also regularly misjudged the situation at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, claiming both were fundamentally sound.

His judgment is seriously flawed, but he hopes to win reelection using President Obama to do so. Let's hope Connecticut voters see through this charade.

Sen. Chris Dodd's Moral Muddle

Let's set aside all his many problems with being the focal point of the financial meltdown and various other ethical flaps.

Let's just focus on this nastiness courtesy of Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd:



Dodd takes Godwin's law, throttles it, waterboards it, throws it into a plastic shredder, and still finds that what Bush authorized in harsh interrogations is worse than what the Nazis did to murder six million Jews during the Holocaust.

These people have no clue. They are destroying the meaning of the English language with these kinds of pronouncements, and dishonor the memories of those murdered at the hands of the Nazis (who regularly engaged in torture, medical experimentation, rape, and other nastiness and pure unadulterated evil, which in no way shape or form could even remotely be compared to allowing harsh interrogations of three self-admitted terror masters, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who helped plan and instigate the 9/11 attacks.

Dodd also misstates the facts surrounding the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in claiming that he was waterboarded 180+ times. He was in fact waterboarded a grand total of five sessions, and the 180+ times refers to the individual instances water was sprinkled on his face.

This was done to obtain information of a critical nature to prevent further terrorist attacks, and KSM was no saint. He was behind multiple terrorist attacks and planned dozens of major bombings and high profile attacks, including assassinations, hijacking and destroying multiple airliners, flying hijacked airlines into other buildings, mass casualty attacks, destroying key infrastructure, and causing all manner of mayhem around the world, and focused specifically on US interests worldwide.

Dodd's attempted equivocation between what the Administration did to obtain needed intel and what the Nazis did is reprehensible.

Obama Backing Doddering Dodd?

President Obama feels that Chris Dodd is taking an unfair rap over his involvement in the Countrywide Mortgage mess (as a friend of Mozillo who got a sweetheart mortgage deal) and for his inclusion of a provision enabling AIG to pay executive compensation deals despite receiving federal bailout assistance, which has caused a stunning drop in his popularity in Connecticut. The President is using his prestige to prop up this clown?

President Obama is using his sky-high popularity to try to elevate embattled Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd -- whose public approval tanked amid the fury over his role in the AIG bonus scandal.

"I will be helping Chris Dodd because he deserves the help," Obama told the Boston Globe in a phone call from Air Force One on Thursday. "Chris is going through a rough patch."

A recent Quinnipiac University poll showed 74 percent of voters blamed Dodd "a lot" or "some" for the $165 million in bonuses that went to employees of insurance giant AIG even as the firm got government bailout cash.

Dodd's own approval in the survey was just 33 percent -- nearly 40 points below Obama's.

What is it with this President and his need to support clowns who have violated the public trust and who skirt ethical and legal obligations? This isn't the first time the President has backed people who have ethical or legal problems; his list of nominees includes those who have cheated on their taxes or have been embroiled in the NYS pension pay-to-play scandal.

This President was supposed to change the tone in Washington, DC, but the only thing I see is that he's turning it into Chicago on a grand scale.

Phony Outrage Alert

The Administration and Congress have been slamming AIG this past week for doling out executive compensation packages and bonuses to employees despite AIG receiving TARP money (and for the record, AIG is being used as a conduit to prop up banks around the world for the credit mess that started with the "affordable housing" mess and credit defaults and toxic paper outside the TARP regime). They're busy railing on the $165 million (or is it $218 million) that AIG is going to be sending out to its employees in the next few weeks.

Congress, led by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-Tax Cheat/NY), has pushed for a 90% confiscatory tax on all income earned by individuals receiving the bonuses from companies that have received $5 billion or more in TARP aid. That ignores the economic benefits that the bonuses have on the NYC metro area economy, let alone the ancillary benefit that such money has around the nation. It also ignores that the bonuses reflect a fraction of a percent of what the government has doled out to the banks and AIG thus far in their quest to prop up the banking system. The amount here is a rounding error under usual Government math practices, but the real crime isn't the AIG bonuses, but the bailouts in the first place.

It's hilarious to hear President Obama claim that he was blindsided by the bonus situation, especially since Obama was busy railing on the bonuses back in January. His Administration also knew that these bonuses would be paid out and his Treasury Secretary knew that the bonuses would be paid because he and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-AIG/CT) pushed to get language inserted into the porkfest stimulus package to authorize those payments. The situation with the bonuses has been known for months, and yet Congress declares its outrage and demands accountability from the new CEO of AIG, who had nothing to do with the bonus compensation packages in the first place and was brought in to clean up the mess left by the prior leadership group.

Keep in mind that Congress provided a bailout to Citigroup, and set conditions on its executive compensation and bonuses. It chose not to do so with AIG.

Why is that the case? Well, AIG has quite the record with its lobbyists. They got quite the return on their dollar; spreading the money among top Democrats, including Barack Obama (in his capacity as US Senator), Chris Dodd, and others. Speaking of Dodd, it seems that his actions require far more scrutiny from the media and his fellow Senators. He's skated along despite clear evidence of benefiting from cozy arrangements with Countrywide Home Finance (friends of Angelo plan) and inserted the AIG provisos that enabled the bonus money.

The real issue is that the government is engaging in outrage and attempting to cover its tracks for its miserable handling of a mess that it initiated all those years ago in the name of affordable housing. One bad policy was tacked on to the next, like a house of cards, and the current bailouts are exacerbating the mess by throwing trillions of dollars into the marketplace to unstick the credit markets because banks don't know how much they have on their books and don't want to lend to those who are a credit risk (despite Congress demanding that they continue providing subprime mortgages).

The Reason Behind Annette Nazareth's Nomination Withdrawal

She wouldn't be able to stand up to the scrutiny of her former job. What was her job that has brought such consternation and forced her to withdraw her name from consideration?

Nazareth headed the Security and Exchange Commission's market regulation division, where she was responsible for designing the "oversight" that missed Wall Street’s excessive risk taking.

I can see why that would be a problem. I also wonder why Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner thought she was the right person for the job in consideration given the fact that the regime that Nazareth put in place completely missed the warning signs of the credit melt-down and the toxic paper crisis? Once again, it looks like Geithner's judgment isn't what it needs to be.

Complicating matters is that Geithner is having trouble filling all of the needed positions surrounding him. Paul Volcker, who is Obama's Economic Advisory Board Chairman, and a former Chair of the Federal Reserve, believes that the inability to fill the other treasury slots is hurting Geithner's ability to deal with the multiple economic problems.

Who is supposed to fill those vacancies and new positions needed to untangle the toxic paper mess? Why it's going to end up being many of the same people who created the mess in the first place - and that's why Nazareth's nomination is so troubling on so many levels. You also have many players in Congress who are just as responsible for creating this mess - like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank - but who aren't going to recuse themselves from acting on these various issues despite conflicts of interest and their own incompetence.

Investigating the Friends of Angelo Mortgage Program At Countrywide

This investigation should have been underway months ago as it was evident that Countrywide Home Mortgages was throwing all kinds of perks to certain politicians that had the appearance of greasing the wheels and benefitting the company. I guess we should be thankful that it's underway now, although the results wont be available until well after the election next week.

"The Justice Department is making very serious inquiry into any possible wrongdoing that may involve (former Countrywide CEO) Anthony Mozilo, other Countrywide employees, Sen. Chris Dodd, Sen. Kent Conrad, (former Fannie Mae CEO) Franklin Raines or other public officials," said Feinberg's lawyer, Anthony Salvano. "Robert has always cooperated thoroughly with authorities and is strictly a witness in their investigation."

'Friends of Angelo's'
Salvano said the prosecutors and FBI agents seemed focused on whether the preferential treatment given to V.I.P. customers was part of an effort by Countrywide to buy influence - as well as on the conduct of each public official who received a mortgage from Countrywide.

Feinberg says that Countrywide's clients in this program were known by a nickname.

"We called them F.O.A.'s," Feinberg told NBC News, "which were Friends of Angelo's."

"Angelo" is Countrywide's then-CEO, Angelo Mozilo, who once called an ordinary borrower's plea for help on his mortgage payments, "disgusting."

Among those who are looking at having to answer tough questions? Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad. What's missing? Their party affiliation. They're both Democrats.

Feinberg's client list also runs the gamut. Among those benefitting from the VIP program were four former Cabinet members spanning Democratic and Republican administrations: Henry Cisneros, Richard Holbrooke, Alphonso Jackson, and Donna Shalala. Two former CEO's of Fannie Mae, James Johnson and Franklin Raines, heads of the government-sponsored entity which bought Countrywide's mortgages - also received VIP mortgages from Countrywide.

Those named indeed spanned both Democrat and Republican administrations, but let's be clear who's affiliated with which parties.

Henry Cisneros: Democrat (Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 1993 through 1997 for the Clinton Administration; Cisneros entered a plea deal for lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000; later pardoned by President Clinton)
Richard Holbrooke: Democrat (was in Clinton Administration in various capacities and worked for the Kerry campaign in 2004)
Alphonso Jackson: Republican (named to HUD by President Bush)
Donna Shalala: Democrat (Secretary of Health and Human Services for President Clinton from 1993 through 2001).

Was it really that difficult to point out the party affiliations here? Nope. It does offer up some clarity though. Countrywide was trying to influence the decision making process, and more Democrats than Republicans were involved. That's an issue that simply not in doubt. The media simply obfuscates the issue by not reporting as such, or conflating all those involved in one big jumble without noting that the key players involved were Democrats.

Senator Dodd continues to claim ignorance as to what the VIP/Friends of Angelo meant to the bottom line of his loans with Countrywide. That's simply not believable given that he knew, or should have known, what mortgage rates were and how his rates and fees differed from those of prime borrowers as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. If he doesn't know those basic pieces of information, that brings up the question of his competence as the chairman of that committee, whose function includes oversight over the banking and finance industries.

Finding the Narrative

Well, Iowa's done, as are Christopher Dodd's and Joseph Biden's campaigns to become president. They threw in the towel last night after failing to gain any traction in the campaign for the Democratic party nomination.

The new narrative percolating in the media is how Mike Huckabee's win in Iowa has thrown the GOP race into disarray. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me?

We're one state into this campaign and the pundits are already spinning furiously over what Iowa means. Huckabee threw all his eggs in this basket and he's lucky to have won here, but it likely wont translate into any momentum down the road since he simply doesn't have the money backing to sustain himself going forward. Romney and Thompson both get to fight another day, as does McCain and Paul. Rudy hasn't even gotten into the fight, and his first real test comes in Florida. It looks like Romney is in trouble given he needed a stronger showing in Iowa, but even that isn't a fatal blow to his campaign. In other words, things have gone more or less as predicted and no one has taken a commanding lead here. There was no real change for the GOP and the candidates all get to slug it out for at least another state or two. I'm not sure the public wants order in this race - and 49 other states get their chance to weigh in on who should represent the GOP in November.

On the Democrats side, things are actually in disarray. Hillary came in third, with Obama winning handily. Edwards slid into second place just ahead of Hillary. The bottom dropped out for Dodd and Biden, but I'd expect to see Gravel and Kucinich drop out as well - leaving a three person race. However, the surprise here is who's got the momentum and just how badly this leaves the Hillary campaign. Considering how many people put her as the frontrunner, I'd say this counts as disarray. Obama's surging in the polls and Edwards looks like he's got some momentum as well.

UPDATE:
ABC is cutting three of the candidates from its next debates: Republican candidate Duncan Hunter and Democrats Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel.

Late Night Vote Killed Immigration Bill?

That's what Politico.com is reporting. They note that a late night vote on an amendment to the huge immigration bill may have killed the deal. The amendment was proposed by Sen. Bryan Dorgan (D-SD) to eliminate the temporary guest worker program after five years:

By a one-vote margin, just after midnight, the Senate adopted a potential deal-killer amendment to the immigration bill.

The late-night voting spree tested the bipartisan Senate coalition's ability to swat aside so-called killer amendments, at times using procedural maneuvers to block their passage.

But they couldn't thwart adoption of an amendment from Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-S.D.) that would disband the temporary guest worker program after five years. It was unclear how the coalition would proceed.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., told the Associated Press that he or his allies would slightly reword Dorgan’s amendment and hope for a change of heart by one or more senators who “don’t want to kill the bill.”

Two weeks ago, the Dorgan amendment failed by a one-vote margin after Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) convinced Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) to change his vote on the Senate floor. It received broad Democratic support, and its inclusion could make the bill more palatable to Democrats, who dislike aspects of the guest worker program. However, the program is crucial to winning support from business groups.

This time, two strong opponents of the bill -- Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) and Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) -- switched their votes from "no" two weeks ago to "yes" this morning, as did Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.).

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) went from a "yes" two weeks ago to a "no" this morning.

The missing senators were Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), a presidential candidate, who has voted for the Dorgan amendment, and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), who is recovering from a brain hemorrhage.

Those who opposed the immigration bill, such as DeMint and Bunning, appear to have made the strategic and tactical move here to support a poison bill provision (the sunset provision on the guest worker program) that would effectively kill the entire package.

It remains to be seen whether immigration bill backers would have enough votes to get this deal through. The Washington Post claims that the immigration bill has sufficient support, but only barely. There were other amendments made last night as well, which alter the "flavor" of the bill from grossly distasteful to mildly distasteful:

Still, the bill took a decidedly conservative turn last night with the adoption of amendments that would at once declare English the national language and designate English the "common language" of the United States. The Senate also blocked the bill's newly legalized undocumented workers from receiving the earned-income tax credit, while denying legalized undocumented workers any Social Security benefits they may have earned after overstaying their visa.

Senators also undid a provision that would keep information from visa applications confidential.

But those changes were not immediately hailed as deal-breakers. The vote to sunset the guest-worker program came so late that its impact was not clear. The known challenges to the bargain were defeated, however. One such proposal, by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), would have blocked legalization for a broad array of legal infractions, including scrapes with immigration courts.

UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin has been covering all the events late into the night and has a mondo roundup of the amendments that passed and failed.

UPDATE:
If you want an example of why I think this immigration bill is ineffective and would not alleviate any of the problems that its proponents claim would be solved, I point you to the implementation of passport changes earlier this year that require US citizens going to Mexico, Canada and the Carribean to have passports. The government can't get that program operating correctly or process applications timely, and we're supposed to believe that illegal aliens who have already shown that they do not adhere to the law would follow the procedures or that the government has the capacity to process said forms properly (ie conduct proper background checks and not some asinine less than 24-hour check? I don't think so.

UPDATE:
The immigration bill is dead for now after the pro-amnesty bill folks couldn't get enough votes on a motion to end debate (cloture). Hot Air and Michelle Malkin have the details. Michelle has been live blogging the debate and various procedural moves all day long, and the latest move to end debate failed 45-50, which signaled to Reid that he simply didn't have the votes.

He's said that he'd try to pass various parts of an immigration package over the next few weeks.

Pyrrhic Victory

[T]hugo Chavez may have managed to shut down the broadcaster RCTV in Venezuela, but it may yet prove to be a pyrrhic victory. RCTV is now posting its broadcasts to YouTube:

Although the station is officially off the air, CNN's Harris Whitbeck said its news department continues to operate on reduced staffing, and the three daily hour-long installments of the newscast "El Observador" are uploaded onto YouTube by RCTV's Web department.

In addition, RCTV's Colombia-based affiliate, Caracol, has agreed to transmit the evening installment of "El Observador" over its international signal. The program, which will run at midnight, could reach about 800,000 people in Venezuela.

Although this is drastically reduced from RCTV's previous audience, its continued presence is a sign of hope for the staff.

"We're just doing our job as journalists," said an employee of RCTV. "As long as somebody is seeing us, we consider what we are doing to be valid."

Not as many Venezuelans may be getting the broadcasts, but a global audience may be learning about what Chavez is doing and the censorship he and his thugs are engaging in. Try shutting down the Internet Chavez. Let's see you try.

As Mark Levin says, this is nothing but the Venezuelan version of the Fairness Doctrine. I'd go a step further and call it the far-left version of the Fairness Doctrine.

That means government troops shutting down television stations and seizing the equipment:

Venezuelan troops have seized an anti-government television channel's broadcast equipment, the station said on Sunday, ahead of a controversial midnight EDT/0400 GMT takeover by President Hugo Chavez that will take the broadcaster off the air.

Chavez sparked international criticism with his decision to not renew RCTV's license and to replace Venezuela's most-watched channel with a state-backed network that will promote the values of his self-styled socialist revolution.

RCTV representatives said troops had taken over relay stations across the country amid a show of military force meant to deter possible violence by opposition demonstrators.

They have taken over the transmission stations," said Edgardo Mosca, Vice President of Engineering Operations at RCTV.

Gateway Pundit reports that the first opposition protestor was killed yesterday by Hugo's thugs.

Jungle Mom points out that possible GOP Presidential candidate Fred Thompson issued a statement denouncing Chavez. Good on him. Can we make Venezuela a litmus test to see where the various candidates stand on free speech, democracy, and civil rights around the world? It might produce some interesting results. The Senate passed a resolution condemning the action; Senate Resolution 211 was sponsored by Richard Lugar, (R-IN) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and McCain, Clinton and Obama signed on. The House is considering a similar resolution.

Senate Says No To Retreat

WASHINGTON — The Democratic Party's presidential field is dividing over the question of funding American soldiers in Iraq, with senators Obama of Illinois and Clinton of New York voting with an 82-to-16 majority for a Republican resolution against cutting any money for troops in the field. Senators Biden of Delaware and Dodd of Connecticut were in the minority.

The vote, along with the narrow 50-to-48 defeat of a binding resolution calling for the withdrawal of soldiers from Iraq by March 31, 2008, was a major victory for the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, a Republican of Kentucky who quietly worked for two months to persuade his caucus to vote together.

Assisted by two Democrats, Senator Pryor of Arkansas and Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and by an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, Senator Lieberman of Connecticut, the Republicans defeated a resolution sponsored by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, a Democrat of Nevada, which would mandate that the military begin a retreat from Iraq within 120 days of its passage. They did so even though a strong hawk, Senator McCain, a Republican of Arizona, was absent. He was in Iowa campaigning for the presidency.

At least the Senate understands how important it is to continue funding for the troops in Iraq. And at least 50 members of the Senate understand how important it is to keep the troops in Iraq until the mission is accomplished. The war in Iraq is central to the global war on terrorism. Forget the chicken/egg debate of whether Al Qaeda was in Iraq before America's invasion or not, the simple fact is that they are there now. Al Qaeda is spending considerable resources in trying to win Iraq. America can not let that happen.

Remember, Al Qaeda is a war mongering entity without a country. Engaging them in a foreign country is much better than engaging them in our own. If we can continue to disrupt their operations, gather intelligence on them and keep them centrally confined to Iraq and Afghanistan, that is a victory in its own right. Not allowing them the moment to regroup, rethink and retool against domestic American targets is as important a goal as anything. This is the first time that Al Queda has been militarily challenged, and while America has unfortunately taken casualties, the casualty rate on the other side is higher and costlier.