Cartoon of the Day

* Signe Wilkinson, Daily News

Don't forget to vote! Vote early (so the polls won't be crowded when I get there later) & often (this is Philly, after all).

If you need some suggestions, see Nuts for Nutter and Who Else.

Tags: Political Cartoons, Philadelphia, Philadelphia Politics, Election

Feeling Frisky

As a follow up to my Nutter for Mayor discussion, Nuts for Nutter, one topic has drawn much controversy. The issue of Michael Nutter's proposed "stop & frisk" tactic as an answer to the violence plaguing Philly has been the subject of debate, from friends and foes alike. The Inquirer addressed the matter in, Stop-and-frisk controversy: What price for a safer city?:

One expert says such policies may well help get guns off the street - but carry a potential risk of civil-rights violations.

"The empirical evidence from New York City is that stop-and-frisk as a policy for getting guns off the street helped. I think that's fair to say. The fact is that more surveillance in society tends to be effective," said University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt.

"The only question is, where do you want to set the level of surveillance? It's a cost-benefit analysis," he said. Cities need to weigh the potential benefits against "liberty interests and the inevitable racial disparities and increased complaints of police misconduct" that have followed such programs, he said.

Nutter, for his part, is unswayed.

"We will protect people's civil rights, but no one has a right to carry an illegal weapon," he said in a recent debate. "People are desperately crying out for something to be done now. People have a right to be safe and not to be shot."

Clearly, the murder rate in Philly is at epidemic proportions. And I am somewhat insulated from the effects, as much as anyone can be -- I work in the suburbs and live in a relatively "safe" section of the City. Yet, as a member of the community, I want what's best for the city -- and its members. Nutter has garnered kudos for being one of the few candidates to so directly address the problems and search for viable solutions. As Phawker put it:

Nutter has been the only candidate courageous enough to state the obvious: That Philadelphia is in the grip of a “black genocide,” as self-inflicted from within as it is aggravated from without; that it simply a statistical fact that black people do most of the shooting and most of the dying in this city. It only perpetuates the crisis to pretend otherwise in the name of political expediency or white liberal guilt.

"But on the street, the line between a permitted frisk and an illegal one can be blurry," is how the Inquirer summed up the problems with stop & frisk. That's the ultimate problem. As the article continues:

This intense style of enforcement is often referred to as the "broken windows" approach - the theory that cracking down on minor problems can reduce larger crimes and violence.

Critics say the approach can backfire.

"You don't want to create unnecessary contacts that are debilitating to the community," said Harcourt. "Police have to proceed with extreme caution."

Proponents say it's also been effective.

Using stop-and-frisk to crack down on illegal guns in one high-crime neighborhood in the early 1990s, an elite squad of Kansas City, Mo., officers increased gun seizures by 65 percent.

Gun crimes, including killings and aggravated assaults, went down by 49 percent, according to University of Pennsylvania criminologist Lawrence Sherman, who helped create the program. Nutter often cites Sherman's work to support his stop-and-frisk proposal.

Similar programs in Los Angeles, New York and Minneapolis also have succeeded in dialing down homicide rates.

But New York's success has not been without controversy, including the 1999 killing of Amadou Diallo, an unarmed man.

Also in 1999, a report by then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer analyzed data from 175,000 police stops and found stark racial disparities.

"Blacks were more than six times more likely to be stopped than whites, and Hispanics were more than four times more likely to be stopped than whites," wrote Pace Law School professor Bennett L. Gershman in a law-journal article that asked in its title, "How Far Can the Police Go?"

Unfortunately, human nature tends to err on the side of too far. As much as we like to think otherwise, it happens over and over again. When this occurs, it ends up reinforcing, rather than reducing, the opinion that the police engage in racial profiling, which results in more suspicions of police motives and conduct. Even putting aside the constitutional objections with the policy, that's the problem from a practical perspective. Coincidentally, Bill Maher addressed the issue of police abuse as his final New Rule this week.

Tags: Bill Maher, Commentary, New Rules, Philly, Election

Right on the Button

A Mother's Day present from my daughter -- I guess she knows me pretty well.

Who Else

As noted in my Nuts for Nutter post, I'm with Nutter for Mayor. Some of my other picks:

I live in West Mount Airy -- the anyone but Donna Reed Miller -- 8th District, Four-way fight has Eighth District in play. On this one, I'm with Irv Ackelsberg. Based upon the plethora of signs around my neighborhood, it wouldn't surprise me if he were to win. As the Inky said:

For 30 years, Ackelsberg was a senior attorney at Community Legal Services, which has its offices within the Eighth District. The organization provides legal help to low-income Philadelphians and community groups, and in 2005 Ackelsberg was named the nation's top consumer advocate for his work there by the National Consumer Law Center.

"We're very optimistic that our message is taking hold, and that people are ready for the kind of experience and integrity and leadership that I bring to the table," Ackelsberg said. "I'm reaching out to communities that feel neglected, and they're realizing that I'm a person who's been with them for 30 years, and that I'll continue to be with them in this new capacity."

Ackelsberg is part of a loose group of reform-minded Council candidates who have made joint appearances during the campaign. His son, Dan Urevick-Ackelsberg, is the founder of Young Philly Politics, perhaps the city's most active online political community.

Mark Steir is my pick for the At-large council seat. As the Inky said, At-large Council challengers are intent on change:

Philadelphia voters in the mood for change will have a bounty of accomplished at-large City Council challengers to choose from in Tuesday's primary.

Though the pack is arguably led by mayoral sons Sharif Street and Bill Green, 12 other Democrats are looking to knock off the five incumbents. Included is a loose and unofficial slate of candidates who disagree on some issues but share the same core message: The city's political system is broken, and it needs new leadership.

That group - most prominently including Derek Green, Matt Ruben, Marc Stier and Andy Toy - is generating significant buzz in the growing ranks of the city's self-described progressive reformers.

* * * *

Stier, who left his job as a Temple University professor to run, has been building toward this election for years. He cofounded Neighborhood Networks - an organization designed, in part, to counter the political power of the Democratic establishment - and is a prominent public-transit advocate and a principal foe of the casinos.

'If one or two or three of us get elected, we can use that as a platform to help build a progressive movement in the city,' said Stier, who has a doctorate in political science from Harvard University."

See also, Metro: The Week that Was... Marc Stier, City Council candidate at-large.

For Judge, there are 2 candidates I'm behind. As noted in the Daily News endorsement, THE BENCH PRESS: HOW TO NAVIGATE JUDGE RACES, one is Ellen Green Ceisler: "Her work as the Police Department's integrity and accountability officer set a high and necessary standard for the department and for government as a whole."

I attended an Evans meet & greet at her house a few months ago and was impressed by her, along with Darnell Jones, who is running for a seat on the Supreme Court. Despite his impressive credentials and experience, see Above Average Jane, he has the misfortune of running for a statewide office and being from Philly. The rest of the state hates Philly (and I should know, having lived a few of those other areas), so that makes the race even more difficult. At least he's been endorsed by both the Philly Inky and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, see President Judge C. Darnell Jones.

Tags: Election, Philadelphia, Philly, Politics

Cartoon of the Day

* Momma by Mell Lazarus - Creators.com

Happy Birthday, Yo Mama

Stephen Colbert
Born this day, 1964

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

And, as an added feature, here's Colbert on Mother's Day:

Tags: Humor, Stephen Colbert, Mother's Day, Quote of the Day, Video

CNN Breaking News

CNN International's CNN Today program, airing on May 10th, led with the graphic 'Bush Resigns"

Via mediabistro.com: TVNewser

Tags: Bush, News and Media, Humor

Cartoon of the Day

M.E. Cohen - HumorInk.com

Tags: Political Cartoons

The Good George

George Carlin

Born this day in 1937

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."

In honor of Mother's Day, here's a George Carlin skit, "Fuck the Children." He is one of my favorite comedians (and I apparently have a few video clips to prove it). For more George, see:

On Religion

Expletive Deleted

Life is Worth Losing

The Big Club

Tags: George Carlin, Humor, Quote of the Day, Video

Limbo Rocks

Non Sequitur - Yahoo News

A few weeks ago, I wrote about that Catholic concept of never-neverland, Limbo, and noted that it had been sent to nowheresville, in Limbo's been in Limbo. Little did I know that a pro-Limbo contingent would object to its banishment.

A conservative Philly paper, the Bulletin, has published an ode of sorts to Limbo, by John Vennari, who expounds upon his reasons for rejecting the banishment of Limbo. And expound he does -- in a BIG way: 24 Reasons Why Not To Reject Limbo:

A new document from Rome's International Theological Commission . . . states that Catholics may virtually ignore the teaching on limbo and may have "many reasons for hope" for the salvation of unbaptized infants.

* * * *

Yet despite this latest study, many intend to hold to the conventional teaching that the souls of infants who die before baptism do not attain heaven, because they have not obtained the remission of original sin that only baptism provides. They go to limbo, a place of natural happiness wherein they suffer no pain of punishment since they are guilty of no personal sin.

In essence, Vennari argues that innocent babies who die before baptism don't go to hell, so what's the big deal? He then lists 24 reasons (yes, 24) in favor of ignoring the Pope (which, by the way, I'm in favor of, on general principle) on eliminating Limbo, which can be pretty much distilled as: We've had limbo for a very long time, so we shouldn't go changing our minds about it now, and anyway, how are we going to keep people in line with original sin without the fear of limbo?

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one fascinated with the concept of Limbo. Via Kiko's House, I see that Christopher Brauchli of The Human Race & Other Sports, also pondered this question in In Limbo No Longer:

The most recent good news from the Vatican was Pope Benedict XVI’s approval of a Vatican report released April 20 by the International Theological Commission that said there were “serious” grounds to hope that unbaptized children might get into heaven. Prior to this report it was believed that unbaptized children went to a place called “limbo”. Theologians (none of whom, I have it on good authority, has ever visited) describe “limbo” as a place where children enjoy an eternal state of perfect natural happiness. It almost certainly has enough teeter-totters and swings for everyone as well as cotton candy, lemonade, computer games and all the other things children enjoy. According to those in the know, the only thing lacking in limbo is communion with God which in the vernacular means the children there have no adult supervision, a condition that most of the children would find very much to their liking and in many cases probably comports with their idea of heaven.

As I noted in an earlier post on Limbo:

The change in the concept of Limbo also raises another an interesting thought. What will the Church say happens to all of those babies who have been in Limbo? Do they get the call from God to proceed directly to heaven, without passing GO? Or is Limbo just closed to new members? Just wondering.

Brauchli has obviously studied the issue with much more depth than I, observing:

If the International Theological Commission in its continuing studies of this issue concludes that the unbaptized can go straight to heaven without passing limbo and that view becomes church doctrine, there are two obvious questions. Will the new policy be retroactive and will there be an age or geographical cutoff?

With respect to the first question, it seems likely that in the divine order of things there are a certain number of unbaptized infants who die each year and if they are now permitted to enter heaven, their entry will occur in an orderly fashion. Those presently in limbo present an entirely different problem. There are surely billions of unbaptized infants cavorting about in unsupervised perfect happiness in limbo. Although all may not want to leave their perfectly happy state, others may welcome the chance to get to heaven which, even though none of them as been able to visit it, almost certainly enjoys as good a reputation in limbo as it enjoys here on earth. If billions decide all at once that they want to go to heaven, the question is can heaven accommodate what might be described in today’s parlance as a “surge”.

The second question is whether there is an age or geographical cutoff for invocation of the dispensation. At what age does failure to be baptized become an offense that warrants limbo or, worse yet, hell, and is there consideration of where the child is located geographically. It is a lot easier to get baptized in Manhattan than in a remote village in Tibet. Those are questions that I, being a columnist and not a theologian, cannot hope to answer. I suspect the Vatican will appoint yet another commission with an appropriate Latin moniker to study the question and make appropriate recommendations to the Pope. The children in limbo as well those still on earth will eagerly await its conclusions.

Gee, maybe getting rid of Limbo wasn't such a good idea after all. It just leaves so much stuff in limbo.

Tags: Humor, Religion, Limbo, Catholic Church

Nuts for Nutter

Signe Wilkinson, Daily News

So I'm back where I started. Actually, I'm not sure I ever really left. But, I can say that I did consider the options before I made my final decision. And apparently, I did it just in time -- when the wave was with him.

I believe that Spin Dentist from All Spin Zone expresses my views perfectly (saving me the time & trouble of writing it myself):

I had narrowed my support down to two candidates for a very long time. Bob Brady is the Democratic Machine personified here in Philly, and that way leads to corruption in my view. Brady’s got the unions endorsing him, but that means the union bosses here in Philly, and not a real sign of who the working man likes. Dwight Evans is a good man, and he might be able to provide fine linkages to the PA Statehouse, but Dwight is a career guy in the Statehouse, and I’m wondering how he relates to me, a simple city resident. Same with Chaka Fattah, I suppose. Boy he’s been a US Congressman for a long time, and I’ve little quarrel with the work he does. Sure, there are people in his District that love him, but I’m unconvinced that he’s as focused on Philly as he is on his political career. . . . Good man, but not the best for the job.

That’s what has been the wonderful thing this primary season. We had four good candidates, Nutter, Fattah, Evans and Knox. Tom Knox impressed me because of his work with the Rendell administration. . . . He’s a businessman who promises to make Philly run more like a business, and if he finances his campaign with his own wealth that tells me he is committed, not that he’s somehow “buying” the office. But I wonder how he gets anything done. City Council is a big stumbling block in this city. Sure, one can have goals of increasing police on the streets, of cutting waste and making the city itself more productive. All good ideas. But Knox would have to work with City Council to get that done, and he hasn’t the experience.

* * * *

That leaves Michael Nutter.

* * * *

Michael Nutter, as the Philadelphia Daily News notes, is strong against corruption, strong for dealing with the onerous city wage tax, and strong on ethics. He’s a policy wonk concerning the budgeting process, and Michael Nutter is genuinely concerned that the crime rate in this city is an emergency. As they say in the Daily News, he’s got “smarts and integrity.” I’m buying it. The Philadelphia Inquirer sold me when they noted that the people of Philly want someone with “emotional intelligence.” It may be a cliche someday, but it’s what I see in Michael Nutter on a personal basis. He’ll remember me and my concerns, and he’s got the smarts to connect those concerns to the big picture of budgets, crime, job creation, etc.

My biggest concern with Nutter has been his "stop & frisk" proposal, Nutter's 'stop & frisk' emerges as flash point. I'm not quarreling with the fact that a crisis situation exists in Philly, which needs to be dealt with, based upon the gun violence that has made Philly the Baghdad of the United States. I'm just not crazy about any infringement of our constitutional rights, whether it originates from the left or the right.

Yet, I haven't seen any other reasonable alternatives to address the problem from the other candidates either -- other than a response like that of Fattah, which was dismissive of Nutter's platform with a racially polarizing rant, Outraged reaction at race's inclusion in the race. The other candidates propose more police on the street. Without more, what will that do? I'm old enough to remember the reign of Rizzo. Absent proper oversight, it will just result in more stop & frisks, or worse, right? Of course, this is Pennsylvania, so forget "gun control" laws as a potential alternative pro-life policy that has any chance of passage in my lifetime, at least while there is a human left standing (or a gun to be sold to that human).

On the other hand, I've never been a "litmus test" voter. I can accept someone who does not agree with all of my positions -- even important ones. For example, I supported Bob Casey for Senate, even though I knew that he was not pro choice, see e.g., Ricky's Gotta Go. Likewise, I may strenuously disagree with the stop & frisk policy (police abuse is police abuse, even for the best of motives), yet I still think that overall, Nutter is the best choice for our city. As Dave Davies of the Daily News said, in How would Nutter stack up as a leader?:

In 15 years on City Council, Nutter has amassed an impressive record of legislative accomplishment, including a smoking ban and some of the most far-reaching ethics reforms in the nation.

He's known for long hours and hard work. He has a reputation for intelligence, honesty and persistence, and has long been a favorite of good-government policy wonks.

Ultimately, that's what counts. I'm a believer, like Bill Maher, that "elite" should not be a bad word when it comes to politicians. I want an "elite" doctor to help me when I'm sick and an elite politician to make my city better.

As Dave Davies said in another piece, this has been A really different Philly primary. Unlike the last mayoral race, when we were dealing with wiretaps in the mayor's office, the focus has been more on the issues and the platforms of the candidates than on race or negative campaigning. No wonder John Street (the subject -- and beneficiary of -- the wiretaps) labeled this election "boring." See Street wants some buttons, darnit.

Give me quality boring any day over John Street. As with the end of the Bush time, I'm counting the days.

UPDATE (5/12): More on why Nutter from Phawker.

Tags: Philadelphia, Philly, Politics, Election, Michael Nutter, Mayor

Cartoon of the Day

* Ann Telnaes, CBS News

Tags: Political Cartoons

The Cover up

* Steve Sack, Star Tribune

No wonder Monica Goodling decided to invoke the 5th Amendment rather than testify before Congress. Turns out she was involved in a coverup at the Department of Justice during the reign of John Ashcroft.

As TPMmuckraker noted:

From National Journal's Inside Washington column (not available online):

Psst! Sources tell us that none other than Monica Goodling, former aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, was responsible for draping over the ample bosoms of the Art Deco statues in the Justice Department's Great Hall during the reign of the prim John Ashcroft. The coverings were removed, accompanied by a sigh from an appreciative public, in 2005 ...

Truly, if these "loyal Bushies" hadn't so screwed up the country, this stuff would be hysterical!

Tags: Attorneygate, Monica Goodling, Law, DOJ, Political Cartoons

Gates of Hell

Online Videos by Veoh.com

All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia, W.C. Fields is said to have remarked would be a fitting epitaph for his tombstone. He might have changed his mind after listening to Assif Mandvi discuss the Gates of Hell on the Daily Show who, along with Jon Stewart dissects the GOP debate.

First Jon Stewart provides the summation of the day for the GOP debate, followed by Mandvi. As noted by The Next Mayor:

So on the Daily Show tonight, Jon Stewart and Aasif Mandvi are riffing on John McCain saying in the GOP debate that he'd chase Osama bin Laden to the 'gates of hell.'

Mandvi appears by a chain link fence, talking about all the excitement buzzing around the Gates of Hell, where he happened to be 'visiting some family.'

Mandvi: '... There's no question this could really revitalize this whole region.

'There's no secret times have been tough. Whether it was the closing of the Navy Yard, or the Eagles' crushing loss to the Saints in the division playoffs, this town is as broken as its famous Liberty Bell ... '

Jon Stewart: 'Wait, Asif, are you telling me the Gates of Hell are in Philadelphia? Is that what you are saying? That cannot be what you're saying.'

Mandvi: 'South Jersey, Jon. But close enough.'

Gotta love the Gates of Hell/Philly analogy & the implied reference to Fields. Yet, better to be at the Gates of Hell in Philly than the Bush White House in D.C.

(Video via Crooks and Liars)

Tags: Humor, Philadelphia, Philly, Daily Show, Jon Stewart, Aasif Mandvi, Video

Cartoon of the Day

* M.e. Cohen

Tags: Political Cartoons

Feeling Good

Light posting over the week-end was due to busy schedule.

Our daughter's Junior Prom was Saturday, so I spent Friday afternoon and Saturday on the beauty regime tour of duty. First, on Friday was accessory shopping and a facial. Saturday was the hair appointment, followed by makeup and nail salon. The grand finale was the dress. Somehow, the store neglected to take off the security device and we managed to leave the store without setting off any alarms. When she put on her dress, she discovered the device. My husband was able to remove it, but it sprayed an ink dye on the dress (and his shirt). The chemical in the dye also caused the dress to tear. Luckily, it was mostly hidden, so she was still able to wear it. But after all of that, by the time she left with her date, I was exhausted and needed to just hang out and relax.

Last night was our turn. We went to The Keswick Theatre to see Joe Sample and Randy Crawford. They are on a tour promoting their new album, Feeling Good.

I love the Keswick. Small, intimate venue with good sound. We had great seats (4th row, center), so could really enjoy the show. The music was wonderful (what else would you expect from legendary Joe Sample). Both entertained the crowd with stories between songs, although I think Randy Crawford was feeling good herself (not that it hurt her singing).

In the end, we all were feeling good after a good concert.

Tags: Music Video, Joe Sample, Randy Crawford

Tears of a Clown

In the this beats all category, Bloomberg reports, Goodling Shed Tears Before Revelations About Firings:

A former U.S. Justice Department official and central figure in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys tearfully told a colleague two months ago her government career probably was over as the matter was about to erupt into a political storm, according to closed-door congressional testimony.

Monica Goodling, at the time an aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, sobbed for 45 minutes in the office of career Justice Department official David Margolis on March 8 as she related her fears that she would have to quit, according to congressional aides briefed on Margolis's private testimony to House and Senate investigators.

She's crying? Is she shedding tears for the US Attorneys who were fired and who've had to endure (unjustified) smears to their reputations and careers? No, she's crying because she knew she was going to lose a job she never should have had in the first place. See, The New & Improved 5th Amendment and The Face of a "Loyal Bushie". See also Department of Just-Christians (Bill Maher on Monica Goodling's "credentials").

Compare that to this comment from a reader of Talking Points Memo, who is a prosecutor from Washington state, discussing the firing of Seattle US Attorney John McKay:

Apparently during [former Deputy Attorney General] Comey's testimony today he said that one of the reasons McKay got himself in hot water with the DOJ heavyweights was because he was pushing for additional resources to investigate the murder of Tom Wales, who was an Assistant US Attorney in Seattle. Tom Wales was shot and killed in 2001. What nobody has talked about, and what you may not be aware of, is the fact that Tom Wales was extremely active in attempting to get tighter gun control laws passed here in Washington.

Think about that for a second. A pro-gun control federal prosecutor was shot and killed. John McKay was agitating for more resources to bring his killer to justice. That pissed off DOJ, who apparently thought that McKay should spend his time going after bogus voter fraud prosecutions rather than solve the murder of a guy who was in favor of gun control. If you don't think the fact that Tom Wales' political views weren't taken into consideration by the higher ups at DOJ when they decided to punish McKay for fighting to find his killer, you haven't been paying attention to the way these guys have operated for the last 6 years. Every single thing they do is about politics, and the political views of those they help or hurt.

There it is again. As I noted in, A Long History, the US Attorney scandal has exposed the Bush Administration's politicization of the Department of Justice. However,John DiIulio, who served as the head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, was prescient about this when he said in a 2003 Esquire interview with Ron Suskind, Why Are These Men Laughing?:

"There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus," says DiIulio. "What you’ve got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

Yes. The Bush Administration: Politics is all.

Happy Birthday

For you Karen, Happy Birthday & remember the words of Robin Williams: "divorce ... from the Latin word meaning to rip out a man's genitals through his wallet."

The Ends Justify the Means

Born this day in 1469
Niccolo Machiavelli

It is necessary for him who lays out a state and arranges laws
for it to presuppose that all men are evil
and that they are always going to act according to the wickedness of their spirits
whenever they have free scope.

Tags: Quote of the Day

The Company Man

"Making tracks"

Mike Luckovich, Atlanta Journal Constitution

It's amazing. Everything that touches the Bush Administration seems to turn out exactly the opposite of what is said (or done). Mission Accomplished -- not. WMD -- none. Iraq behind 9/11 -- not really. No torture -- only kidding. We don't spy -- except when we do.

The latest casualty of opposite Bush effect is George Tenet, former CIA Chief. Wrote a book to repair his reputation and ended up looking more a fool than the Administration officials he claimed fooled him.

As Sidney Blumenthal wrote in Salon, George Tenet, spook for all seasons:

If former CIA director George Tenet's "At the Center of the Storm" were an intelligence operation, it would have to be assessed as achieving precisely the opposite of the results intended. Tenet hoped that his elaborate apology for his government service would cast him as honest, prudent and professional; his admission of his own mistakes would shine a light on his integrity; his disclosures of the machinations of Vice President Dick Cheney and the neoconservative cabal would show him as a truth teller; and his refusal to say nary a bad word about President Bush would demonstrate his respect for the presidency.

Maureen Dowd also takes on George Tenet in Better Never Than Late (also available at Rozius Unbound), with her caustic pen:

There should be a course on government called “The Ultimate Staff Guy.” A morality saga about how much harm you can do as a go-along, get-along guy, spending so much time trying not to alienate the big cheese so he doesn’t can you that you miss the moment where you have to can him or lose your soul.

If Colin Powell and George Tenet had walked out of the administration in February 2003 instead of working together on that tainted U.N. speech making the bogus case for war, they might have turned everything around. They might have saved the lives and limbs of all those brave U.S. kids and innocent Iraqis, not to mention our world standing and national security.

It would certainly have been harder for timid Democrats, like Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and John Edwards, to back up the administration if two members of the Bush inner circle had broken away to tell an increasingly apparent truth: that Dick Cheney, Rummy and the neocons were feverishly pushing a naïve president into invading Iraq with junk facts.

General Powell counted on Slam Dunk — a slender reed — to help him rid the speech of most of the garbage Mr. Cheney’s office wanted in it. Slam, of course, tried to have it both ways, helping the skeptical secretary of state and pandering to higher bosses. Afterward, when the speech turned out to be built on a no-legged stool, General Powell was furious at Slam. But they both share blame: they knew better. They put their loyalty to a runaway White House ahead of their loyalty to a fearful public.

Slam Dunk’s book tour is mesmerizing, in a horrifying way.

* * * *

Six former C.I.A. officials sent Mr. Tenet a letter . . . berating him for pretending he wrote his self-serving book partly to defend the honor of the agency . . . . One of the signers, Larry Johnson, told CNN that Slam “is profiting from the blood of American soldiers.”

“By your silence you helped build the case for war,” the former C.I.A. officials wrote. “You betrayed the C.I.A. officers who collected the intelligence that made it clear that Saddam did not pose an imminent threat. You betrayed the analysts who tried to withstand the pressure applied by Cheney and Rumsfeld.”

* * * *

They concluded that “your tenure as head of the C.I.A. has helped create a world that is more dangerous. ... It is doubly sad that you seem still to lack an adequate appreciation of the enormous amount of death and carnage you have facilitated.”

Thus endeth the lesson in our class on “The Ultimate Staff Guy.” If you have something deadly important to say, say it when it matters, or just shut up and slink off.

There seems to be no end to the ripples of damage that the reign of George Bush has strewn. From Iraq to New Orleans to our internal constitutional crisis. On a more personal level, he has damaged or destroyed our reputation as a country in the world, and he done the same for many individuals -- his political opponents and allies alike.

Every former Administration official who has dared to critcize the President has been swiftboated by the party faithful. Of course, Colin Powell is probably the sorriest case. Before Bush, Powell's reputation was universally held in high esteem, both here (by Republicans and Democrats alike) and abroad. I know that I was a supporter of his. Now? A sad spectacle.

However, Tenet seems to have ended up in the worst shape, due to his own doings. He seems to be the subject of scorn from all quarters. If he thought he looked bad after he left the CIA based upon the so-called "slam dunk" attribution, based upon the reception he's getting now, he's going to look at that time as the good old days.

An Open Letter to George Tenet by Larry Johnson & the other former CIA members is available at The Huffington Post. Johnson has more on Tenet at his blog, NO QUARTER.