Blogs

Erik Prince: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier...Author?

| Tue Feb. 5, 2008 11:46 AM EST

557-US-NEWS-USIRAQ-BLACKWATER-R.standalone.prod_affiliate.91.jpg

Erik Prince, the founder and CEO of Blackwater Worldwide, accused of multiple unlawful killings in Iraq, will defend his company in a new book, due out this summer. Conservative newspaper Human Events reports on its website that Prince has signed a book deal with Regnery, a publisher of conservative political screeds. According to Human Events:

Prince's book, tentatively titled We Are Blackwater, will be released this summer. It is the only insider's account of the controversial company that has supplied bodyguards and support-and-rescue personnel to hot spots around the world, including the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Prince, a former Navy SEAL, will reveal how he created Blackwater, refute criticisms of the company, and take the reader on thrilling Blackwater missions into hostile territory, from rescuing teenage missionaries in Africa, to helicoptering wounded Marines to safety, to inventing, testing, and manufacturing armored vehicles to better protect our troops in the field.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Additional Details on Bush's Budget

| Tue Feb. 5, 2008 11:15 AM EST

Following up on our discussion of Bush's budget from yesterday, you can find more details here and here.

How Obama's Autobiography Convinced One Writer to Vote for Him

| Tue Feb. 5, 2008 10:35 AM EST

In the spirit of my post on the literature of campaign endorsements, I had to pass this on. Gary Kamiya (with whom I worked) at Salon has made up his mind on Obama after reading his autobio, Dreams From My Father. Biracial himself, Kamiya's appreciation of Obama's odyssey to understand himself, and his race, takes us along as the candidate allows himself to transcend that crazy category and move on to full humanity. It's a beautiful, beautiful piece, as Kamiya's always are. Should read the whole thing, but here's a taste:

More on Which Dem Can Beat McCain

| Tue Feb. 5, 2008 9:40 AM EST

I left out a couple things in my long blog post yesterday on which Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, can beat John McCain. So get ready...

The first thing I didn't mention is this: Hillary Clinton has more experience combating the right wing's attacks. Yes, there probably more mud to sling at her, and yes, conservatives have already spent decades doing research on the Clintons—but as she's said on the campaign trail, she's taken the worst they can throw at her and she's still standing.

Obama is coasting along with relatively low negatives right now, but in a general election the Right will find a way to drive those up. They'll find mud to sling at him too, and if they can't find any, they'll create some out of thin air. Obama won't mobilize Republican donors, volunteers, and voters the way Clinton will, but he will still get attacked as violently and as frequently as she would. Will Obama be able to respond effectively? We honestly don't know. He's never run a tough race against a nasty Republican.

It's fair to say that because Clinton is a known quantity for so many Americans, and because the Right has already revealed its cards in how it's going to attack her, she has a tight ceiling and tight floor. If she wins this election, it'll be an incredibly hard fought battle with McCain that ends up 51-49 or 52-48. If the Democratic wave that we all foresee doesn't occur, she could lose by that same two to four point margin.

Obama on the other hand has a higher ceiling and a lower floor. He's energizing young people, minorities, independents, and people of all ages who don't traditionally engage in politics. He has fewer angles of attack for the Republicans to use, and presents a greater contrast to McCain. He could win a huge electoral college landslide and usher in new Democratic senators and congressmen around the country. But he could also screw up in the general election when he starts facing real nastiness for the first time in his career and lose by a substantial margin.

More after the jump...

The U.N. Deception: What Exactly Colin Powell Knew Five Years Ago, and What He Told the World

| Tue Feb. 5, 2008 3:10 AM EST

Colin Powell presented the case against Iraq to the UN Security Council five years ago today, on February 5, 2003.

As much criticism as Powell has received for this—he calls it "painful" and something that will "always be a part of my record"—it hasn't been close to what's justified. Powell was far more than just horribly mistaken: the evidence is conclusive that he fabricated evidence and ignored repeated warnings that what he was saying was false.

Unfortunately, Congress has never investigated Powell's use of the intelligence he was given. Even so, what's already in the public record is extremely damning. So while the corporate media has never taken a close look at this record, anyone can go through Powell's presentation line by line to examine the chasm between what he knew, and what he told the world. As you see below, there's quite a lot to say about it.

Powell's speech can be found on the State Department website here. All other sources are linked below.

Leno Reminds Brokaw That He Dissed Reagan in a 1983 issue of Mother Jones

| Mon Feb. 4, 2008 9:58 PM EST

When Tom Brokaw appeared on The Tonight Show Friday night to promote his new book, Boom!: Voices of the Sixties: Personal Reflections on the '60s and Today, Jay Leno surprised him by asking him about a 1983 Mother Jones interview in which Brokaw offered a surprisingly blunt assessment of Ronald Reagan.

In the interview, conducted by Frank Browning and appearing in the April 1983 issue, Brokaw opined that Reagan's values were "simplistic," that he had no understanding of the challenges faced by the poor, and that supply-side economic theory was a "disaster." In responding to Leno's question about the response to his interview, Brokaw made it sound like Nancy Reagan was the only one who had a problem with it. In fact, the interview set off a wave of criticism, with Brokaw getting hammered hard by conservatives, and even some liberal columnists, for his harsh assessment of Reagan:

Advertise on MotherJones.com

97.5 Million People Bored by Super Bowl Until Last Three Minutes

| Mon Feb. 4, 2008 8:46 PM EST

FootballThe overnight ratings are in, and initial figures show that not only was last night's Super Bowl the most watched Super Bowl ever, it was in fact the second most watched television event in history. Its 97.5 million number is bested only by the 106 million who apparently watched the 1983 finale of M*A*S*H. I never liked that show.

The Neocon Redemption: AEI's Bid to Save Afghanistan

| Mon Feb. 4, 2008 6:12 PM EST

marines.jpg

The American Enterprise Institute (AEI)—bastion of neocon thought, leading Iraq war pusher, and (a day late and a penny short) deviser of the "surge" strategy that at least helped mitigate some of the resulting carnage—is now focusing its collected wisdom on the war in Afghanistan. As Sean Naylor reports in the latest issue of the Navy Times, AEI's Afghanistan Planning Group, an assemblage of about "two dozen" experts, concluded three days of meetings on January 27. The project was led by Fred Kagan, one of the chief architects of "Choosing Victory—A Plan For Success in Iraq," which formed the basis of the Bush administration's decision to send 30,000 additional troops to Iraq early last year. Conservatives have lauded the "success" of the Iraq surge as evidence of a turnaround in American fortunes there. (Others, it should be pointed out, see the diminishing violence as a logical result of the ferocious ethnic cleansing that burned through Iraqi neighborhoods in the past couple of years.) AEI insists that the group's work was undertaken independent of the White House, but acknowledged that the official findings, which have so far not been released publicly, will be shared with government officials in the coming weeks.

According to Naylor in the Navy Times, those findings include:

* Deploy an extra U.S. brigade into Kandahar and a Marine battalion into Helmand in 2008 and maintain that force level through 2009. Some 28,000 U.S. troops are now in Afghanistan, about half the total coalition force there.

Which Dem Is Better Able to Beat John McCain?

| Mon Feb. 4, 2008 4:47 PM EST

mccain-vs-dems.jpg An interesting question that undecideds voting tomorrow might like to think through: which Democratic candidate is better suited to beat John McCain, the likely Republican nominee, in the general election?

McCain would be a tough opponent for either candidate. If he faces off against Clinton in the general, he will neutralize her primary arguments: experience and immediate fitness for office. McCain matches and beats Clinton's credentials on foreign policy, and can hammer her for playing the lobbyist/earmarks/special interest game.

But Obama has problems with the match-up too. One of Obama's strengths is that he is viewed as a candidate who would restore integrity to the White House and clean up Washington. McCain is viewed the same way. In fact, McCain can argue that because he took the lead on campaign finance reform, he actually has done more than Obama on one of Obama's key issues. What you are left with is a young(ish) man with no foreign policy experience facing off with a war hero and a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

But that doesn't mean the Democrats don't have advantages.

How Will the Media Measure Victory Tomorrow?

| Mon Feb. 4, 2008 4:36 PM EST

Ed Kilgore of Democratic Strategist has an interesting point about delegates—they may determine the actual winner of the Democratic nomination, but they aren't necessarily what the media will look to tomorrow night. In fact, the media can judge success in a number of different ways: