Hardblogger.MSNBC.COM Click here for recent postings

• January 11, 2005 | 6:30 p.m. ET

Document flaps (David Shuster)

The decision by CBS News to fire four staffers over the document flap is appropriate.  And if CBS President Andrew Heyward was as involved in the story as Dan Rather seemed to suggest last fall, Heyward should resign as well.

But as concerned as I am about the integrity and credibility of any news organization, I am far more concerned about the credibility of the United States.  And to that end, CBS seems to have shown far more courage and accountability than our own government.

You see, a group of defense department policy makers had their own sort of "document flap" in the case for war with Iraq. 

Remember Ahmed Chalabi, the Iraqi opposition leader in exile who was paid millions of dollars by the Pentagon?  He gave the civilian leaders at the Pentagon some documents that were allegedly from Iraqi scientists... documents that allegedly proved Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States. Chalabi also provided written testimony from Iraqis who claimed Saddam was close to completing a nuclear bomb.

Were the documents authenticated? Were the claims confirmed?  The answer is "no."  Because to do that kind of fact checking might have undermined the story line.  Sound familiar?

Unfortunately, the Pentagon's document flap contributed to decisions that led to the loss of life... not just the loss of somebody's reputation. But guess how many people in this administration have been fired, reprimanded, or forced to resign because of any of the mistakes made before, during, or after the invasion of Iraq?  Try "zero."

Again, when mistakes are made in collecting, analyzing, or reporting information... the people responsible should be held accountable.  But that should apply across the board to everybody who speaks to the American public... and not just at CBS News.

Questions/comments: 

• January 11, 2005 | 6:25 p.m. ET

On Hardball tonight, Trippi says he'll support Simon Rosenberg for DNC Chair

Following is an from Chris Matthews's interview tonight with MSNBC analyst and former Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi, who says he will not support Howard Dean for DNC chair.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, we have a fight going on for DNC chairman, are you for Dean, Joe Trippi?

TRIPPI: I'm coming out for Simon Rosenberg, the head of the New Democratic Network.  I think he's somebody I think that's going to make a big difference, pull the party together and actually is very savvy about the internet grassroots and I think has proven himself...

MATTHEWS: So you're putting your old horse out to pasture here tonight? You mean you're so down on Howard Dean that here you are on national television dropping him?

TRIPPI: No, it's not about Howard, it's not about opposing him.  I think Howard Dean should run for-- if he asked me for advice, he doesn't do that these days— but I'd tell him to run for the U.S. Senate, to run for President in 2008 if he wanted to, I think he's got a lot of assets.  But I think this is, right now, about building this party.

MATTHEWS: Why wouldn't Howard Dean make a good Democratic National Committee chairman?

TRIPPI: I think this is really about pulling all the party elements into one house and moving forward, and really rebuilding this party from the ground up but knowing how to do that. I think Simon-- I've worked with all these guys, all of them, and I think Simon Rosenberg is the best person.

Tune in tonight!

• January 11, 2005 | 12:59 p.m. ET

Homeland Security pick

President Bush on Tuesday nominated federal appeals court judge Michael Chertoff, a former assistant attorney general in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, to be the new secretary of Homeland Security.

The choice of Chertoff, 51, came as a surprise as his name was not on any lists that have surfaced since Bernard Kerik withdrew his nomination. Chertoff is currently a judge with the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Bush said that Chertoff has “been confirmed by the Senate three times,” signaling that he should have no problem surmounting the advise and consent process.

Chertoff, whose appeal court nomination sailed through Congress, won immediate support on Capitol Hill, where even Democrats applauded the choice. Click here to read more about Michael Chertoff.

NBC's Chief Justice Correspondent Pete Williams, on MSNBC this morning, described Chertoff's reputation as that of one who "never drinks his milk past the expiration date and doesn't tear the tag off his mattresses."

Your thoughts? E-mail . Here are some of your reactions to yesterday's news and coverage on the CBS report:

On the results of the inquiry into the CBS report:

I am still waiting for CBS News and Dan Rather in particular to issue a formal and public apology to President Bush himself.  They have apologized to us, the viewers enough.  It is now time to stand up like a real journalist(s) and admit the failings of this piece.  To Dan Rather and Andrew Heyward, nothing short of the personal apology you owe President Bush will do.  These two men so far haven’t shown the intestinal fortitude to do that.  Frankly, I am surprised that the more conservative media haven’t been calling for this as well. -T. Gray, Germantown, TN
Go back and watch the CBSNews story - it holds up on evidence without the so-called forged documents - you’re all so happy to be taking down a rival network, you’re not paying attention.  The evidence is overwhelming that Bush used family influence to get out of going to Vietnam - the Texas Air National Guard was, by charter, never going to be deployed abroad.  Bush approved of the war, but wanted other men to die in it.  But the story, luckily for Bush, is all about CBSNews. —D. Irwin, Los Alamos

Excuse me, what’s the big news story about journalistic integrity this week?  Dan Rather & CBS or Armstrong Williams?  CBS has asked more people to resign, fired people, and disciplined people than the Bush Administration has over the following stories.
NO WMDs. Pooorly planned & executed occupation. Secretive Energy Task Force. Failures of 9/11. Purging of CIA. Flu Vaccine shortage. Inadequate armor for military. Haliburton et al.
THe list goes on.

CBS has disciplined more people over this story than the Bush Administration has over four years spanning dozens of scandals.  Many of which have cost countless lives.  I wish this administration showed the integrity that CBS showed, just once. —Tim Clancy, Lake Hopatcong New Jersey

"Hardball" on January 10th failed to look beyond the error of CBS news to other more troubling media issues such as Sinclair Broadcasting and Fox News which give out politically-biased reporting on a daily basis instead of just once during an election season.  All the attention to CBS without looking equally closely at Sinclair broadcasting and Fox news does not serve the public interest. —Stephen Veal, Olathe

On the Brad-Jen break-up coverage:

I can’t believe anyone would be in the least bit interested in the breakup of Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt with all the really serious news going on like the Tsunami and the Mud Slides in California and all the death.  Who care?! —Cathy Canzanora, Denver, CO

• January 7, 2005 | 6:00 p.m. ET

Below are some viewers' letters on recent blog posts

On the lack of a warning on the tsunami:

It’s funny that many people blame scientists for not giving proper warning concerning the tsunami, however, in 13 states, people want to rewrite the work of scientists turning evolution, biology and astronomy into “magical creation”.  Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t.  So, what is it?  Is science right or wrong? —Donato, Chicago

On Phares' blog on jihadists and their tsunami spin:

You hit the nail on the head regarding the idiocy surrounding jihadists and their lackeys as they banter about tsunami culpability, response and motive.

There’s something missing, however.  Where is the media in pointing fingers at the middle-east with regards to aid?  The press pounced on Bush like vultures for that insulting 10.... oopppsss... 15... oooppsss... 35... ooops... $350 million pledge of aid. 

However, I have yet to hear made public the tallies of aid pledged by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan or any other oil-field-rich nation in that muslim part of the world.

Why is the press incapable of  casting its raptor-like gaze upon that idiocy and lash its razor-sharp tong into that hypocrisy? The answer is that it simply is not part of their agenda. —Christopher Ficco, Aurora

Sir, I truly appreciated the opportunity to read your article on the thinking taking place in the Muslin world following the disaster in Indonesia. Was especially appreciative of the somewhat optimistic perspective that is so refreshing after all the others who prefer to offer a more pessimistic perspective. —Ralph Grimaldi, Mexico Bch, Fl 

So let me see if I get this right? By questioning Bush’s slow response (and less than half the cost of the coming coronation) to the disaster in Asia, critics are playing into the enemy’s hands?  So being the war president, he gets a blank check and a free ride on whatever harebrained empire building scheme he’s working on? Interesting times, indeed. —Anonymous

• January 6, 2005 | 4:47 p.m. ET

How are the jihadists receiving the tsunami coverage? (Walid Phares, MSNBC terrorism analyst)

As soon as the news of the killer tsunami aired, and the estimated fatalities started to escalate, most of the world reacted with sorrow and kindness. 

The reaction of jihadists and the clerics of radical Islam was something else all together.Various rumors swirled around their Websites and chat rooms, including:

• The "infidels" aren't doing enough. Web-based broadcasts blasted President Bush and Prime Minister Blair for "not doing enough to help Muslims victims, just because they were Muslims." The criticism came not only from jihadists though, but also from members of the U.S. Congress in both parties who felt the initial American pledge of $15 million was shockingly low given the size of the tragedy. Tragedy, like politics, makes odd bedfellows. 
  A former U.S. diplomat and a prominent American scholar wrote in The New York Times that this was a "grave miscalculation by President Bush, at a time he is suffering another disaster in Iraq." Whatever the intellectual case for this, from an Iraqi perspective, the criticism played into the hands of the jihadists.
• America knew beforehand. Diego Garcia is an American base in the Indian Ocean. The Jihadist version is that America's scientific centers knew about the tsunami's projected effects but Washington wanted to protect the base at the expense of warning Muslims. "They had to use their power to evacuate the main installations and prisoners," claimed one web post.
  In fact, Diego Garcia did receive a warning from the center based in Hawaii that monitors the Pacific for such developments. The director of the Pacific Warning Center says he repeatedly tried to reach authorities in the Indian Ocean region but, between the holiday and the lack of precedent, was unable to do so. Barry Hirshorn , one of the geophysicists on duty that day, told the Honolulu Advertiser, "We spoke to people in the foreign ministries, and everywhere we could think of. We were collecting phone numbers, e-mail addresses— whatever contact information we could.There was a conference call with officials in Madagascar." Unfortunately, none of the center's actions led to action in the region.
• Nuclear blasts provoked the tsunami. Another charge is in the making: Al-Arabiya TV threw the first stone when it reported that underwater nuclear blasts in the Indian Ocean could be behind the natural cataclysm. Chat rooms went further, claiming the nuclear activity— by Americans—was deliberate to provoke more tsunamis.

Had the tsunami hit the U.S. West Coast or the Japanese islands, their official theological story would have been that Allah punished the infidels for their aggression in Iraq.  Had the waves reached Iran's waterfront, the Salafi would have decreed that Shiia apostates angered the divine.

But these rumors they are circulating may not be working. As the relief effort picked up, a very different picture has been broadcast around the world. As images of American helicopters picking up the wounded and U.S. Marines are photographed cradling children, many Muslims are turning against the extremists.

"Where are al Qaida and its millions of dollars," asked voices on the voice moderated forums on Internet. "Why didn't Saudi Arabia pledge billions of its petrol-dollars to help fellow Muslims," asked others.

The Jihadi version of events has not been so thoroughly embraced by the survivors and their societies.

In Fallujah, Zarqawi's men kill the Marines, but in Aceh, the Marines save the lives of Muslims.

The tsunami tragedy, a wrath of nature, reminded all humanity that unity, solidarity, and peace are the real responses to planetary challenges.

The jihadists cannot and will not accept this lesson. The world they want is one of hatred and division.

Even nature's message is not enough to convince them otherwise.

E-mail or Walid directly by clicking here.

• January 5, 2005 | 10:25 a.m. ET

China fails the tsunami test (Mike Moran)

At a time when tens of thousands in its neighborhood are at risk of starvation, dehydration and disease, China’s focus remains right where it has been for centuries: China. That’s a shame, because there is a lot of good that could come from China taking a more active role in saving the lives of its neighbors.

In these early days of the 21st century, it is common to see talk of a “Chinese century” invariably following the American one just ended. Such talk is overblown, probably, and unknowable at this point, definitely.

But China’s rise to some grander status, too, seems a definite feature of the new century, and in that vein, it is deeply disappointing to see the way this self-styled “potential superpower” is reacting to the disaster in its neighborhood. Yes, China has pledged about $63 million dollars. But given the size and capabilities of its military, its state-owned airline and its enormous merchant fleet, this is the equivalent of the rich, civil war draftee paying an Irish immigrant to serve his stint in the Union Army.

The world has a right to expect more of China now that it is the world’s seventh largest economy. For more on this, check out my Brave New World column.

E-mail Mike at .

• January 4, 2005 | 2:04 p.m. ET

Mourning the loss of two greats (Chris Matthews)

This week, America mourns the loss of two groundbreaking U.S. lawmakers, Congressman Robert Matsui of California, a friend of mine, who served 26 years in the House of Representatives and was the third ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. 

As a child, when he was one-year-old, during World War II, he was held in an interment camp for Japanese Americans. He spent years in that camp and he came out a great guy, despite all that. Robert Matsui, who suffered as an American for being a Japanese American, served wonderfully as a U.S. lawmaker. 

Former Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm passed away at the age of  80.  She was the first ever African-American woman to serve in the United  States Congress.  She was an outspoken advocate for the poor people of  Brooklyn, which she served for seven terms in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Shirley Chisholm and Robert Matsui, two unique Americans who will be deeply missed personally. 

E-mail us at .

• January 3, 2005 | 6:10 p.m. ET

Passing the teflon torch (Michael Milberger, Hardball staff)

Ronald Reagan was dubbed the "Telfon President" for his ability to emerge from scandal unscathed. Thomas Friedman of ‘The New York Times’ called Yasser Arafat the "Teflon Guerrilla" for his ability to evade death and criticism for failing to achieve his proclaimed goal of a Palestinian state. With Reagan and Arafat both passing away in 2004, it's time to pass the teflon torch and President Bush is ready to take it.

As 'Time' Magazine's man of the year in 2004 prepares for his second term, speculation has already begun about the so-called "second-term curse". Nixon had Watergate. Reagan had Iran-Contra. Clinton had an intern. But after a tumultuous first term, can any scandal stick to this Teflon Texan?  Protected by his 9/11 invincibility cloak, President Bush has escaped scandal relatively untarnished: failure to find weapons of mass destruction, Abu Ghraib prison abuse, Richard Clarke's 9/11 commission testimony, the infamous White House P.D.B, and the protracted efforts to secure Iraq after the end of major combat operations. His brilliantly orchestrated Rovian campaign netted him more states then he won in 2000 and a swelled Republican majority in Congress. So what kind of scandal will it take to indelibly mar this second term?  Iraq is clearly a major vulnerability, but it will likely take years before Iraq can be judged a success or failure as a state. And despite simmering violence and waning support for the war at home, President Bush hasn't been forced to admit mistakes and his popularity hasn't suffered severely.

What about another terrorist attack on U.S. soil? Another massive intelligence failure would certainly have repercussions, but Americans would most likely rally around their President and give him even broader power to fight the "war on terror".        

A second-term scandal would likely have to penetrate the oval office and implicate the President in more direct wrongdoing. Bush's inner circle would undoubtedly do whatever is necessary to protect him from anything incriminating. But as history proves, it’s not always the crime, but the cover-up, that causes the problem.

Pass along your e-mails to .

• January 3, 2005 | 6:10 p.m. ET

Links to start your Web surfing this new year (Jesamyn Go, Hardball web producer)

If you're looking for ways to help out the tsunami victims, please click here.

While few of us have that much extra cash (like Sandra Bullock who has generously donated $1 million today), every little bit helps.

Former Presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush are leading a nationwide charitable effort for the victims—  and they're emphasizing that cash is what is needed most.

Amazon has a live running tally online, and many may be more comfortable donating to the American Red Cross via this familiar site.

***
A much lighter link: A group which compiles a list of words that should be banned from the English language has released their 2004 list.

Many of the words have graced Hardblogger— especially because of last year's election (it still feels weird to be referring to 2004 as "last year"). The list includes:

• blue and red states,
• battleground states,
• flip-flop,
• and I approve this message (the political ad tag line)

Janet Jackson and Donald Trump also contributed: "Wardrobe malfunction," and "You're fired!" are two catchphrases on the list.

Banishment nominees have included metrosexual (2003), chad (2001), and baby boomers (1989). Check out the list here.

"Blog" was also suggested for banishment, but I think the word may be here to stay.

Thoughts? E-mail .

• December 29, 2004 | 2:38 p.m. ET

Thirty five million dollars? (David Shuster)

I appreciate that the 35 million our government is sending to Southeast Asia is just the beginning.  And I'm confident the public and private contributions from the U.S. over the next few months will end up being a hundred times that. 

But, the initial American government response to this disaster feels awfully empty. For all of you sports fans, imagine if you were watching a slugger like Barry Bonds, Hank Aaron, or Babe Ruth at the beginning of a World Series. That first at bat is dramatic and highly anticipated, because after all, this is the league's "Home run king." And what do you see?  The slugger lays down a bunt.  Sure it's a contribution, maybe even a sacrifice.  But it would be disappointing and strange just the same.

The United States government is the wealthiest on the planet. At this time of worldwide horror and grief for the more than [117,000] people killed by the tsunami, and the millions of others who are now homeless, why not start with a billion dollar pledge? Compared to 35 million dollars, a billion would generate worldwide headlines and amazement... and it would  immediately give people across this earth a reason to be thankful for the United States.  And given recent polls showing that hatred for the U.S. is at an all-time high, we could certainly use a better image.

Besides, to put the 35 million dollars in context, consider this: To "help" the citizens of Iraq, our government is spending 5.8 BILLION dollars each MONTH.  That translates to more than 8 million dollars an hour. Or put another way, the $35 million we have pledged in disaster aid for Southeast Asia is less than the amount the U.S. military spent during the six hours it took on Sunday for the tsunami to cross the Indian Ocean.

I can hear some of you complaining about American "priorities."  Hmmmm.  Let's look at our "priorities."  Last year, Congress appropriated the following:

• $3 million for "shrimp aquaculture research." (Since 1985, this program has received 61 million dollars.)
• $3 million for the Utah Public Lands "Artifcact Preservation" program.
• $50 million for an "indoor rainforest project" in Iowa. Yes Iowa.

I could go on and on about our government's "priorities," and in 2005, I promise that I will.  But in the meantime, it's embarassing that at the moment, a disaster affecting more than a million people is only ten times more important than preserving artifacts in Utah or studying the behavior of shrimp, and is valued less than building an Iowa rainforest (or occupying Iraq for 6 hours.) 

I'm sure our government will eventually readjust this... and I know the generosity of the United States will exceed that of any other nation.   I just don't understand why we aren't making that statement right from the start, when the message of hope is needed most.  The United States I know is the one that leads and sets an example for the rest of the planet — not one that sits quietly and waits.

Questions/Comments: 

• December 28, 2004 | 4:31 p.m. ET

Zarqawi is the first "prince" in Iraq, but the Emperor is Bin Laden (Walid Phares, Terrorism Analyst, MSNBC)

To understand Osama Bin Laden's latest audiotape aired by al Jazeera, one must understand the ideological background of al Qaida and its perception of the war against the US and its allies. The tape will make sense from an al Qaida's perspective as follows:

1. The master of the Jihadi networks worldwide, OBL, is asserting al Zarqawi's leadership in Iraq, so that all Jihadi forces around the world and the region would assist the latter in his war against the Coalition and the Iraqi interim Government

2. At the same time, Bin Laden is asserting himself as a supreme leader of the network, by showing that he is the one who appoints "emirs." That is an important power, that only Emperors (or Caliphes)  of the Islamic State can do. Zarqawi is appointed as a "Prince -Emir" in Iraq, bypassing the other local Islamist leaders.

3. The strategic target in Iraq, according to al Qaida's plans is to obstruct the electoral process of January 2005. The direct enemy of Jihadism is Democracy, and the disruption of these elections is the most important objective to attain. Not only does Bin Laden threaten the Allawi Government, he is also sending a message to the other Sunni Islamists, ordering them not to take part in the elections. This indicates the existence of a debate among the Islamists themselves about the elections.

4. The audio tape indicates that the type of operations conducted by Zarqawi are acceptable – beheadings, bombings and others — in response to a number of clerics who are opposing the "operations " against civilians. But at the same time, bin Laden’s message shows a trend to "concentrate" Zarqawi's operations on a particular type of target.

5. From a variety of points made — and the style in Arabic — one can foresee that the message aims to call on Zarqawi and al other Jihadists to focus on the best ways to crush the elections.

6. The issue of the messenger — al Jazeera — is still raising issues in the Arab world, especially in Iraq. Sources are advancing many points about the reasons the tapes are constantly sent to al Jazeera, and why would the network should “widen the analysis" of Bin Laden. They make it accessible to millions of viewers via a number of "experts" on the Islamists movements, as was the case with this latest tape. The commentators seemed to rationalize the message to the masses, while repeating the entire audio many times. Al Jazeera calls it is a "newsworthy item."

Some analysts say that that the repetition of the whole audio, followed by sympathetic "panels" is a reproduction of the actual audiotape.

Thoughts?  E-mail

• December 27, 2004 | 4:57 p.m. ET

Thoughts about the Tsunami (David Shuster)

Earlier this fall, I had started checking the internet for Christmas week airfares to southeast Asia.  I visited Thailand two years ago and wanted to return to check out the beautiful beaches, coral reefs, and scuba diving excursions in Phuket.  Sometime after the November election, and with all of those campaign planes and trips still on my mind, I decided to stay a little closer to home for the December holidays.

This weekend, I was home in DC when I heard the awful news about the earth quake and tidal waves off the coast of Sri Lanka, India, Indonesia, and Thailand.   Nearly a thousand people lost their lives along the resort beaches of Phuket.  And I've heard one report that nearly 50 scuba divers, on an excursion from that island, are missing.

It's difficult to reconcile the image I had earlier this year (relaxing on a pristine white sandy beach or peacefully exploring the beautiful ocean coral) with the scenes of utter devastation that are feeding via videotape into our newsroom.  I can only imagine the sudden terror and helplessness the beach goers and divers must have felt when a quiet ocean, on a perfectly relaxing day, suddenly turned so violent.  The beaches in Phuket, like so many of those in south Florida or California, are known for their healing powers — their ability to help you forget about the pressures or life or the daily grind.  And for the thousands and thousands of visitors to Phuket every day, there are hundreds of thousands of people who live on that coast year round... simply because they consider it one of the most peaceful and relaxing places on earth.

All of us, of course, are deeply saddened by the enormity of this natural disaster.  Many of us, though, are also haunted by something else... the idea that so many people, just like you and me, were in the midst of treasuring mother nature's serenity and peace —  on a beach towel or with the help of scuba gear —  when everything, without warning, changed.

If you would like to help the victims southeast asia...  disaster specialists recommend sending a direct donation to the American Red Cross.

Comments/questions 

• December 22, 2004 | 10:31 p.m. ET

One person can make a difference (Joe Trippi)

"As we enter the New Year of 2005, I’ve been able to spend some time reflecting on the year that was and on the people who over the years caused me to cling to my stubborn belief that one person can make a difference.

For myself one person stands out, above all the rest, as having made the biggest difference in my life - my high school best friend, and fellow member of my high school track team,  Marc Cobb."

• December 21, 2004 | 5:21 p.m. ET

From a "missing fetus" to "a precious baby" (Dana Falvo, Creative Story Unit)

Last Friday, as I gathered my research for the morning I came across an Amber Alert, a rather unusual alert at that. Unlike any I have ever come across before, this alert was for a missing fetus whose mother had been murdered. It was and still is an amazing story that has captivated the country.

But as we continue to report and follow this story, we forget a small phase of development where the story takes a twist that was noticeably overlooked by the media. That is when the missing fetus suddenly became precious baby Victoria Jo.

Just look in a matter of hours how the language in the story changed:

The original news alerts were for a missing fetus

Then, when the fetus is found, it becomes a baby in the headlines

I’m not looking to begin a debate over when life begins. But why is it that when the baby was discovered missing from her mother’s murdered body, it remained a fetus? Whether the baby was found dead or alive the child was taken from the womb.

Regardless of your abortion beliefs, one understanding is that when the fetus is taken from the womb it becomes a baby.

Would the baby still be a baby if she was found dead? What happened between the time the Amber Alert for a missing fetus was released and the baby being found— that suddenly made the fetus a baby?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this small but important portion of the story.

E-mail .

• December 17, 2004 | 12:30 p.m. ET

What you got, they can’t deny it (Greg Ebben, Hardball Associate Producer)

Sometimes there is no other way to feel.  Seeing pictures of a wounded soldier come home to rehabilitate his or her injuries at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, one can only feel a simultaneous sense of sorrow and pride. 

No one ever wants to see someone go through that ordeal.  But when you hear the positive attitude that permeates the patients, you can only come to the conclusion that these are indeed our best, brightest, and bravest. 

Self-pity doesn’t exist at Walter Reed.  And negativity may as well be a curse word. There’s no question that the wounds suffered from battle abroad have changed their lives forever, but the outlook towards rebuilding and reframing their lives is truly a story of courage that every American could learn from.  

Casey Owens,   Dawn Halfaker, and David Glenn are just a few of those who have come home to rehabilitate their injuries at Walter Reed, and are featured on a special edition of Hardball entitled, “A Soldier’s Journey Home.” Their stories of how they lost a limb are humbling, but their valor is even more inspiring.  Determination and fortitude keep their spirits high, as well as the support from family and friends, who become part of their rehabilitation.

Since Vietnam, our nation has rebounded over the years and given a proper “welcome home” to our service men and women who return to our shores after weeks and months of deployment. But a special welcome is reserved for those who return wounded because their fight hasn’t ended.  To learn how to walk on a prosthetic leg or close the fist of an artificial arm takes time, physical effort, and emotional stability.  Perhaps, that’s the toughest battle of them all.

Through the decades our sons and daughters have displayed their honor, duty, and sacrifice across the globe for future generations of Americans.  From the Argonne Forest to Iwo Jima, Inchon to Con Thien, Kandahar to Fallujah. That legacy continues even for those who are at Walter Reed on the way to recovery. And for the rest of our Armed Forces, who are fighting for us overseas this holiday season; know that we are with you.  Your service is truly appreciated and not forgotten.  We hope you can get home soon.  Until then, stay safe and stay strong.   

Click here to send your well-wishes and messages of gratitude to the troops. Some of them have already been published. Hardball presents an encore presentation of 'A Soldier's Journey Home,' tonight, Friday, 9 p.m. ET.

• December 16, 2004 | 1:26 p.m. ET

A special show for our heroes

"Meeting the wounded soldier, learning about his recovery and rehabilitation, is an American duty," says Chris Matthews.  "We care about those heroes. We need to show it."

Tonight, Chris anchors a special edition of "Hardball," paying tribute to American servicemen and women by sharing their personal stories of courage, bravery, and grace under fire.  A behind-the-scenes look at the physical and occupational therapy departments of Walter Reed Medical Center reveals the personal struggles and steadfast determination of wounded soldiers as they slowly progress on the road to recovery. 

To help these U.S. veterans make the holidays special, "Hardball" has enlisted the help of companies including Pampers, Microsoft, Target and Toys R' Us for generous donations.  MSNBC and the NBC Experience Store are also donating holiday gifts to the families and children of the servicemen and women at Walter Reed.

Matthews will share with viewers a personal tour of the Fisher House, a special facility at the Walter Reed campus.  For the loved ones of those recuperating, Fisher House offers "home away from home" lodging and a support system that allows families to help each other during their time of need.  In addition to the soldiers and their families guests include Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf and General Barry McCaffrey— who was once himself a patient at Walter Reed—on the human cost of war and the value of Walter Reed to veterans and Ken Fisher, the chairman of the Fisher House Foundation.

Click here to send your well-wishes and messages of gratitude to the troops. Some of them are already published.

• December 15, 2004 | 10:32 p.m. ET

Casey Owens: Courage, resilience, and pride (David Shuster)

On September 20th of this year, an anti-tank mine exploded in Iraq, blowing the legs off of a 22 year old soldier from Texas named Casey Owens.  The bomb also broke Casey's jaw and collar bone... and pierced his body with 200 pieces of shrapnel. 

This past Monday, at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Casey told me he doesn't remember very much about the explosion or his evacuation out of Iraq.  "I was pretty much unconscious and sedated," he said, "until I arrived in the US about 3 weeks later.  During that time, my lungs collapsed, I had a bunch of blood clots including one that went into my heart.  So, I had a lot of close calls."

But Casey Owens is indeed a survivor.  This week, as our cameras were rolling, he was outfitted with new prosthetic legs and took his very first steps.  The technology is state of the art and incredible.   A computer first analyzed Casey's style of shifting weight across his thighs... and then set microprocessors in each prosthesis to help the device analyze and adjust to more than 70 variables a second.

According to certified prosthetist Michael Vogt, Casey's new "sea legs" will eventually enable him to go up and down stairs... as well as walk up inclines like hills or ramps.  And Casey plans to run a 10K this spring.  "But more than anything right now," said Vogt, "we are just looking to get Casey used to getting his balance, getting used to put the prosthesis on.  But he did great.  He did extraordinary.  I'm very proud of him"

You will be proud of him as well.   Watch Hardball on Thursday evening at 7 p.m./11 p.m. ET.  In addition to hearing from Casey Owens and watching as he takes his first steps, you will meet another inspiring young american named Juanita Wilson.  She lost her left arm in Baghdad due to a rocket propelled grenade.  At Walter Reed, we caught up with her during "occupational therapy."

All of us on the Hardball staff were inspired and moved by our interviews this week at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.  I promise you... you don't want to miss Thursday's show.  It will serve as a compelling reminder of the courage, resilience, and pride of some americans who are now working tirelessly to master what the rest of us, all too frequently, take for granted..

Questions/comments 

• December 15, 2004 | 10:57 a.m. ET

What took you so long Senator McCain? (Dominic Bellone, Hardball producer and newsletter editor)

In an interview this week with the Associated Press, Arizona Senator John McCain (a constant gadfly of the Bush administration) was at it again saying he has "no confidence" in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

While not expressly calling for Rummy's resignation or suggesting Bush dump him, McCain's comments are a diplomatic equivalent. What took you so long Senator McCain? 

I'm not one of those media McCain sycophants but on this score he's spot on, albeit too late. Perhaps McCain's statement might encourage other Republicans to come out and say the same. Much ballyhoo has been made over Bush's cabinet shuffle (a semi-interesting story in an otherwise dull holiday news cycle) and he's dumped most of them with the exception of Rumsfeld, the one that really matters...To do so would be to admit we're on the wrong course in Iraq, a truth that is the elephant in the oval office.

While dumping Rummy won't solve the problems in Iraq, it may begin a much needed course correction or at least provide fresh thinking... I understand partisanship and defending your party's President but the quagmire that is Iraq and the mendacious road of distortions, half truths and obscurity which got us there should compel more GOP statesmen to stand up and speak truth to power. Unfortunately those types are sorely lacking in today's Washington...

• December 14, 2004 | 6:31 p.m. ET

Debasing the Medal of Freedom (David Shuster)

I don't have a problem with Paul Bremer (former US administrator in Iraq), George Tenet (former CIA director), or General Tommy Franks (led the invasion of Iraq.)   And I'm convinced that all three did their jobs as best they could under exceptionally trying circumstances. 

However, I couldn't help but get sick to my stomach today as I watched President Bush award Bremer, Tenet, and Franks the Presidential medal of freedom.  Maybe it was because I spent most of yesterday at Walter Reed Army hospital, interviewing United States soldiers who are learning how to use prosthetic legs and arms because their own got blown off in Iraq.   (More on these courageous young men/women tomorrow on Hardblogger and Thursday night on Hardball.) Or maybe I just couldn't get over the apparent contradictions between the record of today's medal of freedom recipients and the qualifications listed on the web site.  According to the medal of freedom web site, "this great honor is reserved for individuals the President deems to have made especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interests of the United States, to world peace, or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors."  The award is "given only after careful thought, always sparingly so as not to debase its currency."

"Debase its currency."  Hmmm.  The 9-11 commission blames the CIA and Tenet for some of the crucial intelligence failures that prevented us from stopping the terrorist attacks.  On Iraq, before the invasion, it was Tenet who described the existence of WMD as a  "slam dunk."  Paul Bremer guided the postwar Iraq effort into chaos and insurgency.  And General Tommy Franks, while leading US troops brilliantly to Baghdad, had no plan once US troops got there to secure any part of the nation and prevent looting or sabotage.

Once upon a time, the Presidential medal of freedom was awarded to spies who quietly risked their life for our nation.  And in previous years, the medal of freedom has been given President Gerald Ford, President Jimmy Carter, Thurgood Marshall,  Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, civil rights leader Rosa Parks, educator Albert Shanker, former Senator and GOP Presidential candidate Bob Dole, philanthropist David Rockefeller, and etc. and etc.

My point is that it is a shame to see a meaningful award turned into the latest political photo-op.  I'm glad to hear that George Tenet, Paul Bremer, and Tommy Franks are doing so well in private life.    But if the Bush administration wants to review the record of these three, let's have an honest discussion instead of the historical revisionism and political theater that was on center stage today.

Questions/comments 

• December 14, 2004 | 11:39 a.m. ET

Rumsfeld under fire

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has come under attack from two well-known Republican figures over his handling of the Iraq war.

Yesterday, Chris Matthews interviewed Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who said he was "angry" at comments Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made last week in response to questions about Army equipment by U.S. soldiers in Kuwait.

From Hardball last night:

Chris Matthews: "What do you make of the service peoples' complaints last week—especially that one fellow from Tennessee to the Secretary of Defense saying that the military, the Marines and the Army are denied the armored protection they need on those vehicles?"

Gen. Schwarzkopf: "Yeah, well, you know the Humvee was never considered an armored vehicle to begin with. So the system to come up with is a jury-rigged system, which really doesn't give you much protection when you are going against— you know being blown up from a mine on the side of the road or something of that sort. But, you know, they deserve every bit of protection we can give them. Absolutely, and I was very, very disappointed--let me put it stronger, I was angry by the words of the Secretary of Defense. When he laid it all on the Army, I mean, as if he as the Secretary of Defense didn't have anything to do with it, the Army was over there doing it themselves screwing up." (Click here to read the full interview transcript and to watch the video from last night.)

Also Monday, U.S. Sen. John McCain, in an interview with the Associated Press, said he has “no confidence” in Rumsfeld, citing his handling of the war in Iraq and the failure to send more troops.

"The troop controversy reminds me of a conversation I had with one of Rumsfeld's closest aides while I was serving on the Armed Services Committee in Congress," writes MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on his blog today. "For the record, I remain a big fan of Donald Rumsfeld. But it's time for the Secretary to listen to his generals, and give them the troops they need."

What do you think of Rumsfeld under fire?

E-mail .

• December 10, 2004 | 3:50 p.m. ET

This twenty-something is thinking retirement

In the shadow of the newly passed intelligence bill lingers the president's plan for Social Security. For those following politics as of late, President Bush is surveying the area for his next big legislative push.

I know what you're thinking, why of all things is this twenty-something focusing on Social Security?

My mother last night even said "Dana, you're probably one in 40 'kids' your age that even thinks about Social Security."

I'll tell you why, ANY person under the age of 40 working towards a good living should pay attention to the upcoming Social Security overhaul planned by the President if they want to retire.

This is simply a question of numbers, and we (Gen X, Y, Z or whatever we are at now) don’t have them. The system of Social Security, although created with hopeful intentions, has been a flawed design since its conception.

The original idea was people were required to set aside part of their current salary which would then be paid out to them once they reached retirement age. In the 1930’s the idea of retirement savings wasn’t really that thought through. But the problem has always been that you aren’t saving for yourself, you are paying for grandma. This wasn’t a problem because when it was first created there were a lot more payers then payees. However, our parents' generation of "Baby Boomers" is reaching retirement age, and they decided to be a little less “productive” in the offspring department.

So now we will be suddenly faced with the problem of a huge retired population drawing Social Security Benefits, with a smaller population paying into the system. If you understand that, you can understand that our parents are taking more out of the Social Security account than we can to put in.

For us “kids,” we're paying our parents' way with nothing left for us when we reach 65, which is fine mom and dad—honestly, I don't mind. But I want a nice retirement too!

President Bush's plan includes an option for younger taxpayers to allocate funds from their Social Security payroll taxes in private investment accounts. Party lines aside, some reconfiguring must be made and considering our options a private fund would limit the need for an increase in taxes.

And since the United States always tries to portray itself as a cutting edge culture with the latest gadgets and the hippest trends, maybe we should move beyond the same system that has been in place for seventy years and try out something hip and new that is only 20 years old, like 401(k)s and IRAs. 

Here's the bottom line for young tax payers: Social Security is not something twenty-somethings really worry about. Some change must be made to the system, if we plan to retire anytime in our 60s. This bill will dramatically affect my generation, unfortunately, many of my peers can’t tear themselves away from the bars long enough to pay attention to it.

Articles on the issue:

• The proposal
• Would young people fare better?
•   Video: Chris Matthews analysis
• Scarborough's blog: Congressional memo to future generations— you're screwed

• December 9, 2004 | 5:07 p.m. ET

Armor shortages Vs. Shiny new toys  (Michael Moran)

A crusty old editor of mine at The New York Times once explained that newsroom's legendary disgruntlement to me thus: "A happy reporter is a lousy reporter."

So it is that good journalists should occasionally feel justified in ranting. Here goes:

The U.S. media currently is making a great deal of the fact that GIs put Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on the spot during a visit to Kuwait. When Rummy opened to floor to questions, a soldier demanded to know why at this late date troops still have to rifle through Iraqi dumps seeking sheet metal to armor their soft-skinned Humvees. The question brought a hail of applause from the ranks, and a side-stepping obfuscation from the SecDef.

The media loves this kind of thing, and I'm glad to see the story back in the headlines. But should we not be wondering how it every fell out? To me, the great shame of the story is that it took an American infantryman to put this question to him.

I feel justified asking this because, to the best of my knowledge, I was the first national journalist to write about the Humvee disaster back in April. The column and the accompanying coverage MSNBC Cable devoted to it sparked a flurry of stories and a Newsweek cover. 60 Minutes revisited the topic in October. By and large, though, it was dropped, particularly by cable news outlets with the air time that is needed to fully examine the problem. (They certainly spared no time for Swift Boats and George Bush’s National Guard records, remember, each with far fewer facts to justify the attention). Why?

To my mind, the main reason is that the administration has done an excellent job cowing the media when it comes to stories critical of the war effort. The general message put out by the White House and Pentagon spokesmen is that harping on things like Humvees or Abu Ghraib is not covering news, but rather supporting the opposition or – the nuclear option – being anti-American.

Is it anti-American to point out that faulty equipment and infantry tactics are killing American soldiers? The media has nothing to be proud of here, and we're letting Rumsfeld and Co. spin it all away with “war is hell” obfuscation.

Can someone not recast this debate properly? As men die in Humvees, the Pentagon has approved countless billions for the acquisition of two new classes of fighter, a missile shield that the Russians already have outflanked and a submarine construction of rather dubious value to our war against terrorism.

This is not a Bush-bashing issue, either. You can trace this back as far as the failure of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle to offer a proper replacement for the M-113 armored personnel carrier back in the early 1980s. It continued after the Cold War ended with the Army's fetish-like devotion to the big, glamorous M-1 Abrams tanks throughout the 1990s in the face of evidence that the Army desperately needed a wheeled light armored vehicle for modern missions. This sad fact was confirmed by after action reports on Mog which warned that Humvees were the wrong vehicle for this kind of combat, as documented in this Air War College report from 1997.

Rumsfeld's answer -- “You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have.” -- is nothing less than double-speak. The DOD knew of these shortcomings in the mid-1990s, but preferred – in part because of pressure from independent panels led by men like Rumsfeld – to pour money into gigantic procurement projects that have little relevance in an age gripped by fear of nuclear terrorism.

At the end of the day, the Humvee crisis is the personification of a procurement system that raids maintenance and upgrade budgets for flash and technology, and which prefers shiny new toys to the modification kits needed to keep American troops alive. Where is the news organization that will not mince words when pointing this out?

Thoughts?  Email us at

• December 9, 2004 | 12:26 p.m. ET

Vote of confidence? (David Shuster)

This has not been a great day for President Bush's cabinet. Secretary Rumsfeld, bombarded yesterday by American troops complaining about armor shortages, wasn't given any support on the matter today by the president. The President today said, "If I were a soldier overseas wanting to defend my country, I'd want to ask the secretary of defense the same question."

Has the President ever asked the secretary of defense that question?  I imagine we will get an answer at today's White House press briefing.  (And we will have a full report on the issue on 'Hardball' tonight at 7 p.m. ET.)

The President made his remark from the Oval office while meeting with Treasury secretary John Snow. Maybe I was reading too much into the video... but Snow looked like the unhappiest man on the planet. And who could blame him?  On the front page of "The Washington Post" today, the paper had a story explaining why Snow had been invited to stay last night in the President's cabinet.  "Snow was kept on only after the White House considered a variety of possible replacements and sounded at least one top official from Wall Street.  That executive turned the white house down...  Bush was looking for a republican replacement because Republican leaders on Capitol Hill said he needed a more dynamic outsider of stature."  Talk about a vote of confidence.  The guy in charge of the treasury department is being kept around "to put an end to rampant speculation" that the former railroad executive was on his way out. 

So, let me get this straight:  Snow, a former railway executive, is not being kept around because of his skills, talents, or finesse with Wall Street... but rather because the white house was tired of trying to find a replacement and wanted to "end the speculation?" 

Talk about being "railroaded."  Imagine if you found out your boss tried hard recently to replace you, but couldn't find anybody and is keeping you around to tamp down waves around the office. How would you feel?  Would you be a very productive or happy worker over the next few weeks or months?

Presidents who get re-elected always go through a "cabinet shuffle" in between their first and second term.  But as one of my colleagues noted this morning, while it may not be easy for a cabinet member to leave... sticking around isn't always the most pleasant experience either.

Questions/Comments: 

• December 8, 2004 | 2:27 p.m. ET

King Abdullah II of Jordan (David Shuster)

It's always facinating when King Abdullah, now 42 years old, comes to Washington.  He is a personable, articulate, and charming guy...  whether he is giving an interview to Chris Matthews (tune in to Hardball tonight at 7 p.m. ET) or talking with less recognizable Washingtonians on a street corner in Georgetown. A few years ago, I saw the King (he visits DC a few times a year) in the Georgetown Barnes and Noble. He and his security detail left with dozens and dozens of books. That same visit, one of my neighbors said she saw King Abdullah shopping in a local grocery store.

The King's "man of the people" approach is genuine and endearing... just as it was with his father the late King Hussein. One of my best friends is a doctor who worked at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota.  She remembers King Hussein as a warm and delightful patient... and aviator.   The King would routinely pilot his own 747 and land it at the airfield in Rochester, Minnesota.  After walking down the steps to the tarmac, he would climb behind the steering wheel of a beloved volkswagon beetle and drive himself to the clinic.   "Motorcades and flashing lights," said my friend, "were certainly not his style."

Before we get to King Abdullah II, his father's life story is worth repeating. In 1950, when he was 15 years old, "Prince Hussein" was visiting Jerusalem's Al-Aqsa mosque with his grandfather King Abdullah.  An assassin stepped forward and fatally shot Abdullah. Hussein grappled with the assailant, until he was wounded himself.  He was saved from the bullet by a medal his grandfather had recently awarded to him and insisted he wear. A year later, Prince Hussein was proclaimed "King."  He would assume full constitutional powers at age 18.  In the meantime, he continued attending Sandhurst military school in Great Britain where drill sergeants called him, "Mr. King Hussein sir."

From the start, the teenaged king took his responsibilities seriously.  As he later wrote in his autobiography, "Uneasy Lies the Head," "I had seen enough of Europe even at 17 to know that its playgrounds were filled with ex-kings, some of whom lost their thrones because they did not understand the duties of a monarch.  I was not going to become a permanent member of their swimming parties in the south of France."

King Hussein made a commitment to democracy, civil liberties, and human rights.  In 1950, water and electricity were available to only 10% of Jordanians.  By the time the King died in 1999, the figure was up to 99%.  In 1960, only 33% of Jordanians were literate.  In 1999, the figure was 90%  In 1990, King Hussein appointed a commission representing the entire spectrum of Jordanian political thought to draft a national charter.  Today, the national charter along with the Jordanian constitution, serves as a guideline for democracy and political pluralism in Jordan. And every four years, Jordan has parliamentary elections which have consistently been declared among the freest and fairest in the Middle East.

I could go on and on about the late King Hussein... from his crackdown on Palestinian extremists in the 1970's (which ostracized him in the Muslim world for years) ... to his desire to stay out of the Israeli/Arab war in 1973, to his 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty, to his 1997 efforts at Wye River, MD (while battling cancer) to broker a final peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians.  But consider the collection of dignitaries who attended King Hussein's funeral in 1999:President Clinton, former Presidents Bush, Carter, and Ford, British PM Tony Blair, Prince Charles, French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Syria's President Assad, Palestian leader Arafat, Israeli PM Netanyahu, Czech President Vaclav Havel, Russian President Boris Yeltsin, and leaders/representatives of more than a hundred other nations.

This is the legacy and shadow that King Hussein's son King Abdullah has been operating in for the past 5 years. But he seems to be wearing it well.  Like his father, Abdullah has been deeply and thoughtfully involved in trying to bring peace to the Middle East.  Like his father, King Abdullah was educated in the West and can bridge American and Islamic perspectives.  And like his father, King Abdullah is a brilliant diplomat who has the ear of the President of the United States as well as the key players in the Middle East.

There is one crucial difference, however, between King Abdullah and his father:  a major obstacle to Middle East peace, namely Yasser Arafat, is gone.  And now, with 2005 just weeks away, much of the Arab media is reporting that Palestinian and Israeli leaders are ready for a breakthrough deal.  Nobody will be more important in facilitating any agreement than King Abdullah of Jordan.  He has the credibility with the Palestinian leadership (and Arab leaders throughout the Middle East) that President Bush does not.  Furthermore, he is somebody that Americans can trust.

All of this is why Hardball was honored to sit down with King Abdullah this morning.  And it's why everybody on our staff, from Chris Matthews on down, is convinced we will be hearing a lot about King Abdullah of Jordan, (and his book and grocery store purchases), in the year ahead. 

Click here for a preview transcript of tonight's interview.

Questions/Comments: 

MORE FROM HARDBALL

Hardball Section Front

Gore: ‘Out-crazy the crazy’ Political odds improving for Palin? Bishop bans Kennedy from Communion Democrats face 2010 uncertainty Can the Dems keep their 60 votes? All roads lead back to Obama New information surrounding Kennedy assassination Barbour dodges Palin question Verdict is in on Burris Has Obama taken too many political risks? Hardball Section Front   Add Hardball headlines to your news reader: