On Dec. 12, 2000, a divided U.S. Supreme Court halted the presidential recount in Florida, effectively making Republican George W. Bush the ”winner.”

The judicious thing would have been to split Florida’s electoral votes. Gore would have won, just as he won the popular vote. mjh

Sharpton implores Dems to return to their liberal roots / ‘Stop apologizing,’ presidential hopeful says in S.F. speech John Wildermuth, Chronicle Political Writer

The 2000 election, which was decided when the Supreme Court ruled against Democrat Al Gore in the Florida recount, ”was the undermining of democracy itself,” [Al Sharpton] said.

Since then, Sharpton added, ”there’s been a nonmilitary civil war led by the right-wing,” including efforts to put in a new, pro-Republican redistricting plan in Texas [and Colorado] and the successful recall of Democratic Gov. Gray Davis.

Now the Bush administration has put together a “no dissent” policy when it comes to the war in Iraq or the war against terrorism.

“We’re called unpatriotic if we question (the war in Iraq),” he said. “(But) we’re unpatriotic if we don’t question it.”

Dean’s Band of Outsiders By Harold Meyerson

By winning office with a negative 540,000-vote margin and then proceeding to govern in the most relentlessly partisan fashion from the right, the president has made unmistakably clear that the concerns of Democrats are of no interest to him. On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, the Republican leadership relies solely on Republican votes to get its measures passed, going so far as to exclude mainstream Democrats from conference committees. When America’s new laws are to be negotiated, Republicans talk only to themselves. …

In this Congress … no Democrats are allowed into the deliberations that matter. …

Bush is bent on repealing the New Deal and replacing the internationalist order that the United States had erected after World War II with a more nationalist vision of his own. If you aren’t with him, you are against him. And he is against you.

Remember in 2000, how Bush called himself “a uniter, not a divider” and touted his bipartisan efforts in Texas? Liar.

Meyerson goes on to explain why these facts have benefitted Dean, while many Democrats ignore these truths. (Thanks to Sharon for noting this article.) mjh

High Payments to Halliburton for Fuel in Iraq By DON VAN NATTA Jr., NYTimes

The United States government is paying the Halliburton Company an average of $2.64 a gallon to import gasoline and other fuel to Iraq from Kuwait, more than twice what others are paying to truck in Kuwaiti fuel, government documents show. …

Gasoline imports are one of the largest costs of Iraqi reconstruction efforts so far. Although Iraq sits on the third-largest oil reserves in the world….

Independent experts who reviewed Halliburton’s percentage of its gas importation contract said the company’s 26-cent charge per gallon of gas from Kuwait appeared to be extremely high.

“I have never seen anything like this in my life,” said Phil Verleger, a California oil economist and the president of the consulting firm PK Verleger LLC. “That’s a monopoly premium — that’s the only term to describe it. Every logistical firm or oil subsidiary in the United States and Europe would salivate to have that sort of contract.”

In March, Halliburton was awarded a no-competition contract to repair Iraq’s oil industry, and it has already received more than $1.4 billion in work. …

In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Waxman responded to the latest information on to costs of the Halliburton contract. “It’s inexcusable that Americans are being charged absurdly high prices to buy gasoline for Iraqis and outrageous that the White House is letting it happen,” he said.

Waxman says the White House is ‘letting’ this happen. They are making this happen. mjh

See also: mjh’s weBlog: 2 in House Question Halliburton’s Iraq Fuel Prices October 16, 2003

Two senior Democratic congressmen are questioning whether Halliburton is overcharging the United States government in the procurement of gasoline and other fuel for Iraq, which is now importing oil products to stave off shortages.

Pentagon Bars Three Nations From Iraq Bids By DOUGLAS JEHL, NYTimes

The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying it was acting to protect ”the essential security interests of the United States.”
The directive, issued Friday by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, represents the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq. …

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a statement criticizing the Pentagon move as a “totally gratuitous slap” that “does nothing to protect our security interests and everything to alienate countries we need with us in Iraq.”

A Republican congressman who recently returned from Iraq said in a telephone interview on Tuesday that it was a mistake to exclude particular countries from the rebuilding effort.

”Howard Dean really is the only candidate who has been able to inspire at the grass-roots level all over this country, the kind of passion and enthusiasm for democracy and change and transformation of America that we need.” — Al Gore

Like a lot of people, I was at first a bit disappointed that Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean. First, I was still dreaming that Gore might be drafted when no one else proved as popular. Second, though I like Dean most of the other candidates (after Gore), I was looking forward to the primary process to weed out some of the Nine. Let the voters speak.

On the other hand, many have been bothered by too many candidates with little or no chance. For example, though I greatly respect Carol Mosley Braun, like much of what she has said and would, in fact, vote for her instead of Bush, she doesn’t really have a chance — and I am truly sorry to say that. I could say the same about Dennis Kucinich. I don’t fault any of these candidates for trying and appreciate the messages they have communicated. If only they had stayed on target with attacking Bush and uniting voters against him. The last few “debates” seem mostly to be try-outs for VP — who will bring the most to the presumptive Dean ticket? Who has attacked Dean the least?

There should be one thing that unites ALL Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, and countless others: dump Bush. Get Bush out of the White House. This is going to be much more difficult than it should be — the Radical Right literally has a stranglehold on power. It is already time for the general campaign against Bush. It is time to stop spending money and time undermining the eventual Democratic candidate. I’m afraid that Gore’s announcement will not succeed in uniting everyone NOW, not later, but that may have been the right idea.

Dump Bush and the Radical Right. Vote for the Democrat! mjh

Dump Bush — Keep George W. Bush a one-term president

News Analysis: Dean’s Role Is Redefined by Gore’s Endorsement By R. W. APPLE Jr., NYTimes

Al Gore’s endorsement confirms the status of Howard Dean as that rarest of animals in the jungle of presidential nominating politics: an insurgent front-runner. It gives him the legitimacy he has been seeking, but it also presents him with problems of self-definition.

Gore’s endorsement divides Dems / Race now pits Dean against everyone else

Gore praised Dean’s early opposition to the war in Iraq, calling him “the only major candidate who made the correct judgment.” He urged Democrats to rally around the former Vermont governor, saying “we don’t have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win” the White House back.

Gore, the party’s standard-bearer in 2000, declared Tuesday morning that Dean is the strongest candidate to defeat Bush. By evening, none of the other candidates would even acknowledge the possibility that Dean could win the presidency, an indication of potential divisiveness ahead.