This is how whacked our legal system is: Paris Hilton will have spent more time behind bars than Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was convicted in the CIA leak case. President Bush saw to that on Monday, commuting Libby's 2 1/2-year prison term. And we thought Paris got special treatment.

Here's breaking news from the Associated Press:

Bush's move came hours after a federal appeals panel ruled Libby could not delay his prison term in the CIA leak case. That meant Libby was likely to have to report to prison soon and put new pressure on the president, who had been sidestepping calls by Libby's allies to pardon the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Hilton spent 23 days in jail for violating probation in an alcohol-related reckless-driving case. That's fine for Paris, but the president said Scooter has suffered enough for his misdeeds. Here's a quote from Bush:

"I respect the jury's verdict," Bush said in a statement. "But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."

Here's our editorial on the issue.

Seems fitting to have this come just days before the nation celebrates Independence Day. July 2 will now be known as Scooter Libby Independence Day.

Posted by Jim Boren at 3:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)

Vice President Dick Cheney must have been playing with his shotgun that doesn't shoot straight again. He is charging that the Democrats' attempt to stop President Bush's troop surge in Iraq will "validate the al-Qaida strategy."

Talk about an Alice-In-Wonderland view of the Iraq war. The Veep has it upside down. What's validating al-Qaida is the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld strategy of mismanaging the war. They jettisoned Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the voter backlash in November, but they kept a tired old war policy that's not working.

So instead of figuring out how to develop a winning strategy, the Bush/Cheney machine does the same old thing, and we get the same old results. Maybe the Democrats don't have a better idea about the war, but you can't blame them for the Iraq debacle. That came from the Bush/Cheney brain trust.

Now Cheney wants to divert attention from the mess by questioning the Democrats' patriotism. It's an old strategy by the Republicans. The public will see through it.

Bush and Cheney are right about one thing. We must fight terrorists on their soil, not ours. But the Taliban is reasserting itself in Afghanistan and now Iraq is a haven for terrorists. How are Bush and Cheney going to turn this around?

Posted by Jim Boren at 8:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

President Bush will be focusing on domestic issues during his State of the Union speech tonight, but the war in Iraq will loom large over the address. Bush reportedly will talk about reducing America's oil dependence (haven't we heard that before?) and making health care affordable (another talking point without substantive action on the part of the president).

So what's his health insurance plan? The anti-tax president (at least for big-salaried folks) wants to tax health insurance that we get from our employers as income. That's a big tax on the middle class, although a lesser burden on the wealthy. But then there would be a tax deduction for those with health insurance, suposedly offsetting the taxable income. But it never seems to work out that way for the middle class.

It's going to take some persuading to bring the public around to the president's plan. But maybe that's the idea: Keep the status quo by offering a plan that is DOA.

The president's handlers say he'll ask that Americans cut their usage of gasokline by 20% by 2017. Bush thinks that can be done by using more alternative fuels, including ethanol.

This is from an AP story: "The president is proposing to set the amount of ethanol and other alternative fuels that must be blended into the fuel supply at 35 billion gallons by 2017, up from 7.5 billion gallons in 2012. He also wants to expand the standard to include not just ethanol but a wide range of oil alternatives, such as biodiesel, methanol, butanol and hydrogen," said Joel Kaplan, White House deputy chief of staff.

Posted by Jim Boren at 9:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

The Bee's editorial page has laid out its objections to President Bush's commitment last night to increase Iraq troop levels by 21,000. Here's our editorial on what's being called a "surge" in troop strength in Iraq.

This is the first time we have called for a "phased withdrawl" in Iraq. It took a great deal of discussion before our editorial board finally concluded that the Iraq strategy is a failed one. The almost four-year campaign in Iraq has not worked, and there is no indication that adding troops -- at least the number we are adding -- will control the situation or stop the violence. The president said this is a new strategy. Sounds like just more of the same with different packaging.

The Bee's editorial positions are developed by a five-member editorial board made up by Publisher and President Ray Steele; Deputy Editorial Page Editor Russ Minick; Associate Editors Gail Marshall and Lisa Maria Boyles. As editorial page editor, I chair the editorial board.

So what do you think about the president's latest Iraq strategy?

Posted by Jim Boren at 8:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (14)

I was going through some old files today when I came across a front-page story that I wrote for The Bee almost two decades ago about the first President George Bush's acknowledging that there was an Armenian genocide. It was a stunning position to take at a time when the Reagan Administration was fighting efforts to formally recognize the Armenian genocide.

The issue came up during a campaign stop in Fresno when Bush was running for president: He said he persoanlly believed there was a genocide and "it's a matter that the Turks have been unwilling to face up to."

Bush made that statement on May 17, 1988, when he was vice president. He was elected president later that year. His position on the issue became a matter some controversy. But I know George H.W. Bush made that statement because I asked the question and heard the answer.

The statement put Bush at odds with Reagan's State Department, which feared offending Turkey. Bush admitted at the time that the genocide question was sensitive for the U.S. government because of the strategic importance of military bases in Turkey. Bush also said, "You can never make up for the suffering that took place. But getting the facts out (will help). It is sensitive ... and there are some strategic considerations there."

But after he was elected president, Bush switched positions on supporting a formal recognition of the genocide. He later wrote a letter to Congress opposing efforts to name April 24, 1990, as a day of remembrance for the 1.5 million Armenians killed early in this century.

Those who believe there was an Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks are still fighting to get the U.S. government to formally recognize the massacre. Bush's son, President George W. Bush, also presides over a State Department that opposes passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

But this isn't a partisan issue. State Departments under presidents of both parties have long opposed the resolution

It's time to put this issue behind us. Congress should pass the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

After this item was posted, Lanny Larson, a former Bee colleague now working at Fresno State, sent this note, which should be of interest to readers:

Saw your blog and wanted you to know that Taner Akcam, a Turkish scholar who has published a book with what he says is evidence from Turkish government records that the Genocide was a planned extermination with approval well up the chain of command, will speak at Fresno State on Jan. 21. http://www.fresnostatenews.com/2006/12/turkishscholar.htm

Posted by Jim Boren at 3:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (11)

Not every California city is worried about job creation and fixing potholes. In Santa Cruz, the City Council has been debating a measure to ask city voters in the Nov. 7. election to say whether they think President George W. Bush should be impeached. On Tuesday, the council finally voted 4-3 against putting the question on the ballot. Here's the Santa Cruz Sentinel's report on the emotional debate on Tuesday night.

Councilman Tim Fitzmaurice pushed the impeachment measure because of the war in Iraq and wiretapping of American citizens, according to the Sentinel. But a majority of the council decided that the symbolic measure shouldn't be on the ballot. But don't even think that was because the president has some supporters on the Santa Cruz council.

The council had its say on the Bush administration. According to the Santa Cruz newspaper, a resolution was passed that said "President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney have committed high crimes and misdemeanors" and that warrants "their impeachment and removal from office."

So there you have it. Why put the impeachment question on the ballot when the City Council can speak so clearly for its citizens?

Posted by Jim Boren at 10:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This had to be one of those Internet rumors that would quickly turn out to be false: The Bush administration has given a contract to provide security and oversee other operations at six American ports to a state-owned business of the United Arab Emirates. But it's no rumor -- and Bush administration representatives even say it was a wise decision.

Who cares if the United Arab Emirates had been a base of operations and a financial haven for terrorists who attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001? Who cares if the UAE continues to allow terrorists to thrive?

I have a four-word response for the Bushies: What are you thinking?

This not only doesn't make sense from a security point of view, it's bad politics from an administration already reeling from its mishandling of Hurricane Katrina, the Medicare prescription drug mess, the CIA leak case and the recklessness of Vice President Dick Cheney.

But it seems that nothing has really changed since 9/11, at least when it comes to handing out government contracts. They'll outsource anything.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff doesn't see a problem, according to the Associated Press. Of course, Chertoff also oversaw the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina. Maybe it's time to put Britney Spears in charge of homeland security. At least we'd know what we're getting. Britney couldn't be any more out of touch than Chertoff.

Call me silly, but I'm very concerned about the six ports whose operations are being outsourced by the Bush administration. Those ports are in New Jersey, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. Can't the administration find someone in this country to run these ports?

Please say this is a joke!

Posted by Jim Boren at 3:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)