Mark Fiore makes light (sort of) of Bush’s clear tendency to schedule potentially controversial matters when they won’t be noticed, like signing the equivalent of Patriot Act II on the same day Saddam Hussein was captured — who noticed? mjh

Weekenders 1/7/04

The Stump Speech: Edwards Promises a Positive Vision and to Change the ‘Two Americas’ By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD, NYTimes

Voters say, ” `You haven’t been in politics all your life, you haven’t even been in Washington that long, how in the world are you going to change this country?’ ” Mr. Edwards said here. ”Here’s my question to you: You think people who have been in politics all their lives, have been in Washington for decades, you think they’re going to change America?”

Mr. Edwards portrays doubts about him as the work of cynics and of the privileged whom he is campaigning against.

He says that when he was young, the son of a mill worker, the doubters said of him: “You really think you’re going to college? You’re going to be a lawyer? How in the world is that ever going to happen?”

“Then, when I walked into courtrooms and these armies of these big corporate lawyers, much older and more experienced than me, they would be in there and they’d say, `What’s that young fellow doing in here? What? Does he think he’s going to take us on?’ And over and over and over I won those fights.”

“How many times in your life has somebody said something like that to you? Think about that for a minute.”

Mr. Edwards cites his 20 years as a personal injury lawyer suing corporate America as proof he is tough enough to challenge Mr. Bush, seeking to answer doubts among some voters. “We need somebody who has been fighting these fights and winning these fights their whole lives,” Mr. Edwards said.

Op-Ed Columnist: The God Gulf By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, NYTimes

America is riven today by a ”God gulf” of distrust, dividing churchgoing Republicans from relatively secular Democrats. A new Great Awakening is sweeping the country, with Americans increasingly telling pollsters that they believe in prayer and miracles, while only 28 percent say they believe in evolution. All this is good news for Bush Republicans, who are in tune with heartland religious values, and bad news for Dean Democrats who don’t know John from Job.

So expect Republicans to wage religious warfare by trotting out God as the new elephant in the race, and some Democrats to respond with hypocrisy, by affecting deep religious convictions. This campaign could end up as a tug of war over Jesus.

Bush has expanded executive powers far beyond any recent president, with the willing cooperation of the legislature and by-passing the judiciary (until he controls it completely, too). (Thanks, Lisa!) mjh

Patriot Act II: WITH A WHISPER, NOT A BANG by David Martin – San Antonio Current
Bush signs parts of Patriot Act II into law — stealthily

On December 13, when U.S. forces captured Saddam Hussein, President George W. Bush not only celebrated with his national security team, but also pulled out his pen and signed into law a bill that grants the FBI sweeping new powers. …

By signing the bill on the day of Hussein’s capture, Bush effectively consigned a dramatic expansion of the USA Patriot Act to a mere footnote. The Bush Administration and its Congressional allies tucked away these new executive powers in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, a legislative behemoth that funds all the intelligence activities of the federal government. The Act included a simple, yet insidious, redefinition of “financial institution,” which previously referred to banks, but now includes stockbrokers, car dealerships, casinos, credit card companies, insurance agencies, jewelers, airlines, the U.S. Post Office, and any other business “whose cash transactions have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters.”

Congress passed the legislation around Thanksgiving. … The Senate passed it with a voice vote to avoid individual accountability. While broadening the definition of “financial institution,” the Bush administration is ramping up provisions within the 2001 USA Patriot Act, which granted the FBI the authority to obtain client records from banks by merely requesting the records in a “National Security Letter.” To get the records, the FBI doesn’t have to appear before a judge, nor demonstrate “probable cause” – reason to believe that the targeted client is involved in criminal or terrorist activity. Moreover, the National Security Letters are attached with a gag order, preventing any financial institution from informing its clients that their records have been surrendered to the FBI. …

This broadening of the Patriot Act represents a political victory for the Bush Administration’s stealth legislative strategy to increase executive power. …

The leak [of Patriot II in February, 2003] and ensuing public backlash frustrated the Bush administration’s strategy, so Ashcroft and Co. disassembled Patriot Act II, then reassembled its parts into other legislation. By attaching the redefinition of “financial institution” to an Intelligence Authorization Act, the Bush Administration and its Congressional allies avoided public hearings and floor debates for the expansion of the Patriot Act. …

The Bush Administration has yet to answer pivotal questions about its latest constitutional coup: If these new executive powers are necessary to protect United States citizens, then why would the legislation not withstand the test of public debate? If the new act’s provisions are in the public interest, why use stealth in ramming them through the legislative process?

More on SAFE Act
The Security and Freedom Ensured Act (SAFE)
09/22/2003: “Patriot Act, Part II”
09/12/2003: “Victory Act no victory for public”
08/19/2003: “Bush Administration Plans Defense of Terror Law”
06/18/2003: “Devil in the Details: Patriot Act II”
05/15/2003: “Urinating on Jefferson’s Grave”
03/15/2003: “Patriot Act II – ACLU”
02/10/2003: “Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003”

NPR : Highlights of the NPR Debate

You can listen to different segements of this two hour debate on the Web.

mjh’s Blog: On the Radio (yes, the radio!)

I hope you listened to part of the radio-only debate among the Democratic candidates. This was the first of its kind in nearly 60 years: no cameras, no audience. The candidates sat around a table with the one moderator (NPR reporter Neil Conan). [read more]