You Disappoint, Claire

I helped elect Claire McCaskill in 2006 because I thought she would better represent Missourians. Now, I'm not so sure. Two recent actions are feeding my disappointment in the first-term senator.

McCaskill Urges Anheuser-Busch Board to Reject Offer in which the senator informs us she "sent [a] letter to the Anheuser-Busch board of directors urging them to reject InBev’s offer to purchase the company."

Anheuser-Busch is a big company and can easily make its own business decisions. A U.S. Senator has more important issues to tackle than whether a Belgium brewer is able to buy an American brewer.

Should the government really be involved in this at all?

Then there's this:

Senate passes Bill to educate public on the transition to digital televsion
McCaskill co-sponsors legislation to increase funding for consumer education efforts
With the end of the transition to digital television (DTV) less than eight months away, the United States Senate unanimously passed legislation to invest as much as $9 million on consumer education. The bill, co-sponsored by U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill, would ensure that more Missourians are prepared for the switch to DTV by providing funding for consumer education and assistance, as well as technological upgrades for smaller television stations.

[snip]

The DTV Transition Assistance Act, which McCaskill co-sponsored, would allow the National Telecommunication and Information Agency (NTIA) to partner with, and provide grants to, non-profit organizations or public interests groups, for consumer education and technical assistance efforts that target vulnerable populations such as senior citizens, individuals residing in rural areas, and minorities. The legislation has been sent to the House of Representatives where McCaskill hopes it will be quickly approved and sent to the President for his signature. In 2006, Congress dedicated $5 million for consumer education about the DTV transition converter box coupon program.

(I'd love to provide a link, but McCaskill doesn't have this news release on her web site yet.)

Nine million dollars is a drop in the bucket of the U.S. budget. But this $9 million is a complete waste.

In February, Reuters reported:

Consumer awareness of the transition to digital television (DTV) grew 80 percent since 2006, according to new market research released today by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA(R)).

The event featured Commerce Secretary Carols M. Gutierrez, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin, and executives from CEA, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA), and Best Buy, each discussing their efforts to educate consumers about the transition.

"The digital television transition is on time, on track and consumers understand that it is coming next year," said Jason Oxman, vice president, communications and member relations, CEA. "Our survey results show the joint educational efforts of government and the private sector are working, and the digital television transition will be a success. CEA's research revealed that the top sources consumers are using to learn about the transition include television (72%), family and friends (39%) and the Internet (26%)."

Note the above group includes two government agencies, three industry trade groups, and a big box retailer, all saying consumer awareness of the digital transition is way up. So why does McCaskill want to spend another $9 million of taxpayer dollars to solve a problem two government agencies, three trade groups and a big box retailer all say doesn't exist?

The National Association of Broadcasters released its own survey results in January (pdf):

Consumer awareness of the federally-mandated transition to digital television (DTV) has grown substantially over the past year, reaching 79 percent according to a survey commissioned by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).

The survey, which was conducted in January 2008, includes a national sample of television households including those that rely solely on over-the-air television signals. Seventy-nine percent of respondents reported that they have “seen, read or heard something about the February 17, 2009 transition to digital television.”

Awareness was even greater among exclusively over-the-air households, where 83 percent of respondents reported they are aware of the transition. Overall, consumer awareness has more than doubled since January 2007 when an NAB survey asking the same question found that only 38 percent of consumers were aware of the transition.

At its annual convention, NAB's president said "every household in America would be hit with 642 messages on the digital TV transition and what it means, by the time Feb. 18 of next year arrives."

Broadcasters, cable operators, and consumer electronics retailers all have an incentive to make sure every television user is aware of the transition to digital television. Additional taxpayer funding isn't necessary, no matter how much or how little the amount.

With these two actions, Claire McCaskill has confirmed the stereotype conservatives like to place upon Democrats: they want to tax and spend, and have the government insert itself into everything.

Missouri, and America, deserves better.

There's more: "You Disappoint, Claire" >>

Truman Days 2008 - Day 2

Oh, but it is good to be a Democrat! Oh, my, yes. Last night was the banquet, and the evening started off with a wine-and-cheese reception hosted by Mike Sanders, who was our host and master of ceremonies for the weekends festivities, and he is well suited for it. He is charming and witty and thinks on his feet. He gives a good speech and engages the public and one of these days we are going to share him with the state, cause he is just that good. We owe our out-state brethren the opportunity to be represented by this guy.

We heard speeches by State Auditor Susan Montee, Senator Claire McCaskill, Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Jay Nixon, Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, and Jesse Jackson Jr.

Every speaker was excellent and I heard some words I wanted to hear from Claire. As you know if you read me, I have been mad as hell at her since August, and every bit of my anger is over telecom immunity. In the view of this civil libertarian and long-standing card-carrying member of the ACLU, that is a betrayal I can not reconcile.

In her speech she acknowledged that the Democratic Party is messy and prone to squabbling amongst ourselves, and that there are times we don't like one another. What I read between the lines of her speech was "I know I am polling at 30% disapproval among Missouri Democrats and I've pissed a lot of you off. "

Yes, she certainly has. But the thing is, I will let her out of the box if she starts acting like Harry Truman, who defined the oeuvre of the hell-raisin' Missouri Democrat when he occupied that seat. If she stops acting like a blue-dog and tells Jay Rockefeller to go fuck himself, her constituents are overwhelmingly against telecom immunity, and he should accompany her on a trip back home and meet some of us if he thinks that she won't pay a terrible price for taking his position, that would go a long, long way. Other than that one issue, she has been just fine. Here's hoping I didn't hear her speech through a rose-colored filter, hearing what I wanted to hear.

My congressman, Emanuel Cleaver II.


Claire and Kay Barnes. I will likely start spending more time in the northern tier so I can vote in the Sixth in November. EC is safe. He has no primary challenger and we don't have any republicans in the 5th. We are still a Democratic town, but they tell me the "machine" was busted up decades ago - however, I have seen no evidence of this.


DNC Member and KC Councilwoman Melba Curls, engaged in conversation with Kay Barnes.


Kay and Mike Sanders catch up at the reception before the banquet.


Claire McCaskill and "Ruckette" Mary O'Halloran - who is as much fun in person as she is when she is on the verge of jumping out of her chair and throttling Woody Kozad his chair on the set.


Claire, EC and Kay. I want this picture to be the norm once Kay is elected. That will flip Missouri back to blue, you know. Right now our congressional delegation is as evenly split as it can possibly be using whole numbers. Our Senate delegation is one of each and the house is five/four with the advantage to the republicans. That will reverse in less than 180 days, when Kay is elected! (At the Blue Girl blog, there will be an Act Blue link for Kay in the sidebar for the duration of the campaign - Graves has a lot of out-of-state and PAC money. Every penny counts.)

Overall, the weekend was a success, and a blast and I am already looking forward to next year! I will attend this function every year for the rest of my life, because I am a true, Truman Democrat, and I have the good fortune to have generations of history and a sense of place that is rooted in the soil of the northern tier counties of this state.

We are going forward and we are going to win in November. We are going to take back the Governor's mansion, and we are going to take back at least one chamber of the statehouse. We are going to elect Kay Barnes and we are going to retain the Secretary of State's office, and we have a deep bench for Attorney Generals race (Jeff Harris, Margaret Donnelly, and Chris Koster) and meanwhile I can't even tell you who is running in the republican primary for that office.

And I can't close this post without thanking Senators Koster and Victor Callahan. They used parliamentary procedure and ran out the clock on the session, and in so doing, they strangled Rosemary's Baby - the proof-of-citizenship-to-vote amendment to the state Constitution - in it's crib.

A lot of Democrats have given Koster a hard time since he switched parties last year, and I started cringing soon after - don't we want the Missouri republicans with some common sense and decency to have that "come to Harry" moment? I sure as hell do!

Chris gets full marks from me for his clever application of the rules on Thursday and Friday. I won't have any problem marking my ballot for him when his name appears. I told him last night when we were talking before the banquet that the way I understood it, he was the last person to realize he was a Democrat, and he laughed and said he has heard that and it's quite possibly true.

Let's get busy, Missouri, and start growing the grassroots (this is where DFA comes in...) and let's elect Democrats all the way down the ticket in November.

There's more: "Truman Days 2008 - Day 2" >>

McCaskill lets me down yet again

Claire McCaskill just can't get it right. She continues to disappoint spectacularly. I don't think she's even trying to represent her constituents any longer. She knows we all pretty much hate her by this point, and she is pinning her hopes for a political future on Obama being elected and appointing her head of the GAO or something. But as far as I can tell, she has pretty much written off having a career in the Senate. That's what it looks like, anyway, her performance has been so lame.

I am really pissed off at her over FISA. For me, it's all about the Constitution, and I put a pretty steep premium on the Fourth Amendment. So when I get a weak-kneed, pathetic response like this, I crank up the livid a couple of notches, and go right to full-tilt, write-a-check-to-the-ACLU outraged.

Dear [Blue Girl]

Thank you for contacting me regarding efforts to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also known as FISA. I appreciate hearing from you, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

On February 12, 2008, after months of debate, the Senate passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 (S.2248) by a vote of 68-29. I voted in favor of this effort to modernize the 30-year-old FISA in order to allow us to effectively monitor terrorist communications overseas.

As the FISA Amendments Act was debated on the Senate floor, I voted in favor of three amendments introduced by Senator Feingold (D-WI), all of which sought to add further safeguards against Executive Branch surveillance on innocent Americans. Unfortunately, these amendments failed to garner enough votes to pass. However, the Senate-passed FISA Amendments Act does include several measures to improve our national security without violating the constitutionally protected privacy rights and civil liberties of law-abiding Americans. For example, it would require the government to obtain a warrant whenever the target of surveillance is a U.S. citizen as well as bolster the authority of the FISA courts to oversee the eavesdropping activities of the National Security Agency.

As you may know, I joined 18 other Democrats in voting against Senator Dodd’s (D-CT) amendment to remove provisions granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies (telecoms) that cooperated with the Bush Administration’s wiretapping program. Please keep in mind that this is a limited immunity that applies solely to the telecoms, not the government. I just don’t think we should punish these companies for their good-faith reliance on government assurances that they were assisting in a legal effort to combat terrorism. If the government violated our surveillance laws by eavesdropping without the necessary warrants, then it is the Administration – not the telecoms – that needs to be held accountable. That’s why I supported Senator Specter’s (R-PA) amendment, which would have substituted the federal government in place of telecoms as the defendant in lawsuits, allowing existing legal actions to move forward in an appropriate manner. While this measure was rejected, the underlying legislation would still allow citizens to sue the government for past violations and telecoms for future violations of the new law. As your United States Senator, I remain determined to get to the bottom of any government misconduct. (emphasis added)

Currently, the Senate-passed FISA legislation needs to be reconciled with the House-passed version. I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as Congress continues to debate this important issue.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding other matters of interest or concern to you.
All best,
Senator Claire McCaskill

Claire, you ignorant slut. The telecoms have fully staffed legal departments , and I presume that all of those attorneys on staff took at least one course in Constitutional Law when they were in law school, and presumably the Fourth Amendment was addressed.

Those attorneys knew that the government was asking them to abrogate the Constitution, and gave the go-ahead anyway. Hell, they probably insisted on indemnity contracts to make the government the payer in any future awards because they knew damn good and well what they were signing off on.

And now, this crazy woman wants to immunize them, and in so doing, immunize this criminal president. That's what her "solution" amounts to - let the telecoms (who donate a significant amount of money to McCaskill) skate away with no consequence, and the American taxpayers foot the bill for damage awards, and Bush skates away scott free?

What the fuck, over?

Get this through your bleached-blond head, Claire. You have been had. Immunity isn't about protecting the telecoms. It's about protecting Bush. He would never, in a million years, fight this hard if his ass wasn't the one in jeopardy, and you ought to know it.

If you want to get to the bottom of it, you oppose immunity for these companies - who started spying on us before September 11, by the way - and you let the civil courts sort it out. The discovery process of a civil trial is the best chance we have of determining the real, bedrock truth about just how far these criminal bastards have gone.

By insisting on immunity, McCaskill is aiding and abetting the criminal Bush.

Hold her accountable for that.

Not one dime, not one moment of my time.

There's more: "McCaskill lets me down yet again" >>

Claire McCaskill and the telecoms

Dodd will lead the charge and filibuster today to stop retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that were more than happy to spy on you and me at the whim of the president.

And even my Democratic senator appears to be willing to play along.

This is just embarrassing (especially when one stops to consider that the seat held by McCaskill is the same seat once held by Harry Truman!)

It is one thing to be for sale, but to be for sale at fire-sale prices is just humiliating. When she was the Jackson County prosecutor she locked up prostitutes and their johns, and put the johns on teevee.

Now she has joined their ranks.

[Keep reading...]

[Updated below the fold...]

Back here in Missouri we have been more than a little pissed off at her since August, when she put her leisure time ahead of the Fourth Amendment. And then there was her pathetically lame response to my concerns when I contacted her office to express my outrage.

This morning I called her office to let her know what I think about telecom immunity - and the staffer I spoke with couldn't - or wouldn't - tell me how she intends to vote. But I'm pretty cynical, and I think I have a pretty good idea. After all, telecoms have a lot deeper pockets than this midtown housewife and full-time Nana.

I may not have a ton of money to throw around, but I have time to visit open secrets . org

Alcatel USA

$1,000

Level 3 Communications

$2,500

Sprint Nextel

$5,000

Verizon Wireless

$2,500

AT&T Inc

$1,000

CenturyTel Inc

$2,000

Embarq Corp

$2,000

TDS Telecommunications

$2,000

Time Warner Telecom

$1,000

I couldn't (legally) contribute several thousand dollars even if I had it to give, so I'm as pissed off about the low, low price tag as I am the selling out of the Bill of Rights.

Right now, I am counting days to 2012, when I can support a primary challenger to take away the seat she so obviously does not deserve to occupy.

UPDATE I from the original post at BG,RS - by PALE RIDER

If you click those links, you'll see this nifty breakdown:


Update II - via Gadfly:

Here's the list of the 12 Democratic Senators who voted to kill the Senate Judiciary Committee's FISA renewal plan without telecommunications company immunity:

Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN), Tom Carper (D-DE), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), and Ken Salazar (D-CO).

There's more: "Claire McCaskill and the telecoms" >>

Claire McCaskill & Jim Webb advance legislation to rein in "contractors"

For more than two years I have been screaming for a reprise of the Truman Committee.

Before Claire McCaskill announced her Senate bid, I was encouraging her to run for the Class I seat that Truman once held, and touting her background as our state auditor and as a tough prosecutor as reasons she should run and reasons we should vote for her, because the Iraq fiasco needed a good auditing, in the spirit of Harry Truman.

During her campaign, she seized on my the idea of a modern day Truman Committee to investigate waste, fraud and corruption in the reconstruction of Iraq. During a speech in Harry S Truman's hometown of Independence last year, she spoke admiringly of the former President and his diligence in reining in war profiteers. "He was fearless. He uncovered enormous undeserved profits. I believe we need a new Truman Committee. I will fight for such a committee."

Less than a year after she was elected, and a mere nine months after taking her seat, she is very close to bringing the notion to fruition. The Senate recently agreed to a plan from Senators McCaskill and Webb to get a handle on the Pentagon's scattershot method of awarding private contracts for work in Iraq. It was added to the Defense Authorization Bill for 2008.

The legislation sponsored by McCaskill and Webb, if it survives and is signed into law, will give oversight authority over private defense contracts to an independent, bipartisan commission. To the incoming Democratic freshmen, plus Bernie Sanders, the McCaskill-Webb amendment is symbolic of their pledge to restore integrity and accountability - the platform on which they stood for election.

The two freshmen senators wanted their bill on the FY 2008 DAB, and were tole to take a number. Some 500 amendments were in the air, most by far more senior members of the chamber than the two of them, Webb's tenure as Secretary of the Navy notwithstanding.. He has an insiders knowledge of just exactly how things don't work.

Then Blackwater went on a killing spree in Nisoor square on September 16th and suddenly there were more than a couple of senators and a handful of bloggers paying attention to the issue of contractor corruption and criminal conduct, and the Webb-McCaskill amendment gained some traction. "We see stories of the corruption of these defense contractors and people are outraged by it." said freshman Sen. Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio.

Now - I am all for giving the Senator the benefit of the doubt for her good intentions. But this in no way gets her a pass on the votes she has cast that disappointed us bitterly. She could advance 'round the bend of redemption quite convincingly if she just stood up and stopped voting to fund the occupation of Iraq.

I thought we had made pretty damned clear during the campaign just exactly why we were working so freakin' hard to elect her - the war in Iraq, and bringing it to an end were number one. Civil liberties and the restoration of Habeas Corpus and the Fourth Amendment were a real damned close second. Yet she voted for the supplemental last spring, and she stabbed the Fourth Amendment in the back in a rush to get her vacation started.

On both of those counts, Claire has been a crushing disappointment, and a deserved recipient of blogger ire. She has a ways to go to restore our faith.

Claire, you represent Missouri.

Show us.

We demand as much and will accept no less.

There's more: "Claire McCaskill & Jim Webb advance legislation to rein in "contractors"" >>

Taking a step to right a wrong

There is a travesty occurring in our midst, and my Senators are doing something about it.

Yesterday, Missouri Senators Christopher (Kit) Bond and Claire McCaskill joined forces to sponsor an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 that would temporarily suspend the Pentagon’s use of Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13: “Separation Because of Personality Disorder” discharge for combat veterans, pending a thorough and comprehensive review of the current procedures and the establishment of an independent discharge review board. They were joined by additional co-sponsors Barack Obama, Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray.

Senator Bond was the only Republican to sign on, and this Missourian gives him a standing ovation for putting sound policy and the welfare of those who step up to serve ahead of politics.

"Abuse of personality disorder discharges is inexcusable. This amendment will put a stop to these discharges until we can fix the system," said Senator Bond. "The men and women who put their lives on the line to defend our freedom have earned a debt of gratitude from all Americans that we will never be able to pay in full. The very least we can do is take care of their battle wounds, whether physical or mental, and ensure they receive the treatment and benefits they deserve."

The abuse of the 5-13 is especially insidious, because it is being used to deny combat veterans the benefits and care we owe them. A Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine discharged under Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13 stands to lose all benefits. They can not collect disability pay; even for life-altering injuries sustained in combat; nor are they entitled to medical care through the VA for those very combat injuries.

In a prepared statement, Senator McCaskill said “We have no greater obligation to those who serve our country in the Armed Services than to ensure they get the care they’ve been promised. We cannot stand tall and proud as Americans if we allow one single service member to go without the benefits they deserve due to a misdiagnosis. Far too many combat troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are returning with mental health injuries that bear the potential for misdiagnosis, and we need to do all we can to prevent that from occurring.”

(Click to enlarge)

The use of the 5-13 has skyrocketed in recent years, rising precipitously as the occupation of Iraq takes its toll. G.I.’s who are seriously affected by PTSD and traumatic brain injuries (TBI) the signature injury of this conflict, have been discharged from service under the 5-13, which implies a pre-existing condition – even when they have received service commendations, been allowed to reenlist, and received reenlistment bonuses – only to find out when they are out-processing that they will have to repay thousands of dollars of their reenlistment bonuses. The bonuses carry with them a commitment to serve the entire enlistment. If it is not served, they leave with no benefits, no care for their injuries, and in debt for the portion of their bonus that the military paid and did not get service for.

I could go on for pages. I really could. I have. (See here, here, here, here, and here) But if a picture is worth a thousand words, the video of those who have been screwed over by this sickening scam should be worth a thousand calls to the Senate switchboard. Here is the number (202) 225-3121.



After serving honorably and going to war, they are simply thrown away.

Makes you proud to be an American, doesn’t it?

There's more: "Taking a step to right a wrong" >>

Standing Up for Soldiers

“Combat stress and its impact on our soldiers and their families is a serious problem that continues to grow. Reports that our military is unprepared or unwilling to deal with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome or other mental health problems are unacceptable. Being unprepared for these problems is no excuse for inaction. It is our duty to take care of the brave men and women who have answered the call to duty," Senator Kit Bond.

“Our men and women returning from war should receive mental health care equal to the physical medical care they are given, and anything less is unacceptable. It took this country 15 years after Vietnam to look at the mental health needs of veterans. We can’t do that to another generation of soldiers.” Senator Claire McCaskill

A bipartisan senate panel on Thursday sent a letter to the General Accountability Office (GAO) requesting a review of the mental health care afforded our veterans in light of a flood of damning reports on conditions at Walter Reed and Ft. Carson. (Since I mentioned Fot. Carson, let me say: IG – Fort Carson. - NOW!)

The Senators who have stood up for our veterans by sending this letter are Kit Bond (R) and Claire McCaskill (D) of Missouri, Tom Harkin (D-IA), Barack Obama (D-IL), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Barbara Boxer, (D-CA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT).

Senators Bond, Boxer and Obama get credit for being ahead of the curve on this issue. They have consistently expressed their concerns on mental health and the returning soldier. I wish to thank them for taking up the issue, and also for their steadfast persistence in pursuing it and demanding it get the attention it deserves.

Kudos to all of the Senators of both parties for requesting the GAO review of mental health services. This is a vital and firm first step to rectifying a travesty of abuse, neglect and mistreatment of Veterans by the Department of Defense. Abuse of the 5-13 discharge needs special attention. Especially those issued at Fort Carson.

Remember, folks, I read the GAO reports so you don’t have too. This is definitely one I am looking forward to. (But the white paper I really want to see is an Inspector General’s report on Fort Carson…)

There's more: "Standing Up for Soldiers" >>

Folded like a cheap suit...

Thankfully, Swift Boat Liars are not a fortified bunch.

In the face of questioning by the man he helped malign, St. Louis businessman Sam Fox has had his specious nomination as Ambassador to Belgium withdrawn.

But the genie is out of the bottle, and both senators from Missouri need to be accountable for their support of this creep.

A feckless, mendacious jackal is a feckless, mendacious jackal, and I don't care whether he's a home-town boy or not.

There's more: "Folded like a cheap suit..." >>

McCaskill should rethink support for Fox

We exist to hold congress accountable. That means that when we are unhappy with the actions of our elected representatives, we do not simply look away if they have the "right" party signifier behind their name. In the spirit of this endeavor, I am calling Claire McCaskill on the carpet for her support of the nomination of Sam Fox to be the ambassador to Belgium.

Fox was a donor to the Swift Boat Veterans smear campaign during the 2004 presidential election.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats are raising concerns about President Bush's nominee for ambassador to Belgium because he gave money to the group that impugned Sen. John Kerry's war record during the 2004 presidential campaign.

With a vote set Wednesday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, said Tuesday he opposes the nomination of businessman Sam Fox because Fox "refused to apologize for his behavior" during a confirmation hearing last month.

"U.S. ambassadors need to be both responsible and credible, and Mr. Fox's support for an organization known to have spread falsehoods illustrates neither," said Dodd, who is seeking the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

Fox, one of the nation's most prominent Republican fundraisers, made a $50,000 contribution to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Many Democrats blamed the group for sinking Kerry's presidential bid after it aired a series of TV ads that claimed the Massachusetts Democrat did not deserve his Vietnam War medals.

[snip]

"I would have preferred you saying, you know, 'In retrospect, looking back, contributing to the Swift Boat campaign was a mistake and I wish I hadn't done it,' " Obama told Fox.

Fox has garnered the public support of Sens. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, and Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut Independent, both of whom testified for him.

I’m sorry – but Josh Marshall is right – there are some things that are just beyond the pale. The Swift Boaters crossed a line and should, as a result, be denied participation in the political process forevermore – not rewarded with plum ambassadorships.

There is simply no excuse for this, and I hope Senator McCaskill rethinks her support of this man.

(*Her office has been contacted for comment but has not returned calls as yet. When they do, the comment will be posted as an update.)

If you want to contact the Senators office to express an opinion about this, her office phone number is 202-224-6154 and her web page with all contact information is here.

There's more: "McCaskill should rethink support for Fox" >>

KILEY FIRED

General Kylie needs to be removed from his duties as surgeon general of the Army, because it's that culture of command. And by the way, General Kylie, I documented in the Armed Services hearing this week, he knew of these problems. He's known of them for several years, and he was in the position to do something about it, and he needs to change--he needs to go. We need a new commander over the medical command of the US Army, and a
new culture of command. --Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) 3/11/2007 , Face the Nation

Lt. General Kevin Kiley was asked for his resignation today. His desk is cleaned out and the locks have probably already been changed.

He is the third flag-rank casualty in the wake of the the scandal unleashed by reporters from The Washington Post.

He is also the most deserving of the sacking.

The decay of the facilities and the denigrating treatment of the troops happened on his watch, when he was the commander of Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He has known about the conditions, and about the personnel issues. He was in the position to do something, and he did nothing.

I shed no tears for the demise of his career, and only wish his pension could be impacted for his display of perfidy.

There's more: "KILEY FIRED" >>

McCaskill Faces the Nation

[Updated Below]

On Sunday, Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill was a guest on Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer. McCaskill has been at the forefront of the problems with healtchcare delivery to wounded soldiers, and offered significant legislation to deal with the matter almost as soon as the story broke.

Since the CBS website just flat-out sucks, rising to a level of uselessness and pointless advertising downloads that puts it firmly in the running for the title of absolute worst website ever, let's refer to the transcript - reproduced here for your .pdf-loathing convenience:

SCHIEFFER: And we're back now with Senator Claire McCaskill, freshman senator
from Missouri. She is joining us from St. Louis today.

And, senator, we ask you, because you were one of the first senators, when
this story broke about the trouble going on at Walter Reed hospital, to
recognize the seriousness of what was happening. You moved quickly to try to
introduce legislation. I just wanted to check in with you this morning to see
what's been going on. How do you think things are moving on this?

Senator CLAIRE McCASKILL (Democrat, Missouri; Armed Services Committee):
Well, I'm a little worried, Bob, because what happens in Washington when there's a scandal is everybody appoints a commission. The president has done a commission, and--and Secretary Gates has done a commission. And I'm sure all the people that will serve on those commissions are good people. But--but, you know, we need to act. You know, commission is just another way
of delaying and--and contributing to the bureaucracy, and that's a huge part of the problem. This is going to take a lot more than a coat of paint on the walls of a--of, frankly, a bad motel, which Building 18 really is. I suggest that everyone in Washington spend some time talking to the soldiers at Walter Reed. That's what I've been doing, and it's very easy to see where
the problems are. And frankly, some of this is just as simple as fixing a--a morass of paperwork that is freezing families into a level of stress. It just is unacceptable for our wounded and the people who love them.

SCHIEFFER: Well, so what should they do? Do we need to just get more people out there, assigned on temporary duty, to help these people? What would be some of the things you would suggest?

Sen. McCASKILL: Well, as we say in the bill--and a lot of the things that we
do in the legislation that Senator Obama and I introduced, a lot of that can
be done without legislation. But they need to combine the physical evaluation
and the medical evaluation into one process. Right now you have two silos of
bureaucracies, and, as a wounded soldier tries to figure out where they're
going to end up after they leave Walter Reed, they get caught up in this
tangle. Those need to be combined, those bureaucracies.
I had Sergeant Rutter, a wonderful man from Missouri, who lost both of his
legs in Iraq, who's been at Walter Reed for 10 months. He told me that after
the doctor signed his narrative summary, which is very important to these
soldiers, it took the report two and a half weeks to go across the hall. Now,
come on, we can do better than that. And--and they need more social workers,
they need more case workers, they need more legal advisers, and they need a
change in the culture of command.

General Kylie needs to be removed from his duties as surgeon general of the Army, because it's that culture of command. And by the way, General Kylie, I documented in the Armed Services hearing this week, he knew of these problems. He's known of them for several years, and he
was in the position to do something about it, and he needs to change--he needs
to go. We need a new commander over the medical command of the US Army, and a
new culture of command.
SCHIEFFER: Now, one of the things we've found out over the past couple of
weeks, that these problems go beyond Walter Reed. They go to some of the
other military hospitals, and they also extend into the Veterans
Administration, where we've seen the secretary of the Veterans Administration
in at least two television appearances that I--I have seen him where he seemed
unfamiliar with the services that were being offered by his own agency. How
serious is the problem there?

Sen. McCASKILL: Well, the Walter Reed syndrome spreads to other military
hospitals around our country and also into the VA. And frankly, the VA is
really a problem. The president has cut the budget in Veterans Administration
for the past five years. In the budget that he just submitted to Congress, he
went in the veterans' pockets for another $5 billion for the health care they
were promised for free. And with all due respect to the head of the Veterans
Administration, this is a man that was chairman of the Republican National
Committee. The appearance isn't right. You know, this--this--this looks like
a brownie situation. Let's put somebody...

SCHIEFFER: "Brownie" as in FEMA?

Sen. McCASKILL: As in FEMA. You know, this is a political appointment.
This is somebody who has spent a whole lot of the last few years defending
everything about the White House. Really, that's not the right person to be
leading the agency that's supposed to protect our veterans. And I really
think it's time we put somebody in charge of the Veterans Administration whose
first priority are the veterans and not the politics surrounding the agency.

SCHIEFFER: Do you see the Congress moving as quickly as it ought to on this,
senator? Because it seems to me--and you get a pass on this because you just
got to Washington, you were elected in November--but it seems to me that some
of the oversight committees should've been watching this a lot more closely
than they did and should have identified some of these problems long ago.

Sen. McCASKILL: Well, there's a new day in Washington when it comes to
oversight. In January of--of '06, the general accountability office testified
three times in Congress. In January of '07, they testified 18 times. I think
you're going to see a lot more oversight and accountability from this
Congress. But I think the--the biggest challenge, Bob, is making sure that
senators and Congressmen don't lose interest when the headlines fade.

SCHIEFFER: Right.

Sen. McCASKILL: This is about going back out to Walter Reed in six months.
And by the way, I advise all the members of Congress to talk to the soldiers.
That's our resource at Walter Reed, not the brass.

SCHIEFFER: All right. Thank you very much, senator. We are out of time, but
thank you.

Sen. McCASKILL: Thank you very much, Bob.

Way to go, Claire. Keep the pressure on. I know what you are capable of, I live in the county where you were the prosecutor and the state where you were the auditor. Now the rest of the country needs to wake up and watch this one we chose.

UPDATE: I think Claire gets a bit of rhythm off the Kiley resignation.

There's more: "McCaskill Faces the Nation" >>

Crack the Whip, Claire!

Missouri’s junior senator, Clair McCaskill (who I worked tirelessly to elect) is emerging at the forefront of the Medical Hold scandal. After careful and considerable deliberation, McCaskill issued a statement yesterday calling for the firing of Army Surgeon General Kevin Kiley. McCaskills remarks came in the wake of Maj. Gen. George Weightman, Walter Reed Army Medical Center’s commander, being relieved of his command earlier in the day.

“It’s clear that General Kiley, the surgeon general at the Army, knew about the conditions at Building 18,” McCaskill said. “The irony of this situation is General [George] Weightman stepped up. He’s only been there a year.” McCaskill said in calling for the resignation or firing of General Kiley.

Kiley is the former commander of Walter Reed, and the Washington Post reported Thursday that he was informed of the problems in 2003 that, unpalliated, have emerged as a scandal in 2007. Yet Weightman is relieved of command, and Kiley is back in charge.

“I Felt Sick”

“This is about a system that is not trying to make it easy for the wounded to get what they deserve,” McCaskill said during a news conference Thursday with Obama after introducing their bill.

[Snip past the commentary about Obama’s rock-star status]

How did McCaskill, still waiting to move into a permanent office on the Hill, seize the reins on such a highly charged issue with such a high-megawatt candidate for the White House?

Upon reading the Sunday newspaper reports, “I felt sick,” McCaskill said.

“Somewhere along the line, someone saw this and said to themselves, ‘We’re not supposed to complain.’ Any fresh set of eyes looking at rotting ceilings and peeling mold, and realizing our battle-weary men and women are being forced into those circumstances would say, ‘Whoa. This is wrong.’ Somebody ought to have pounded the table somewhere.”

She directed her staff to collect information about the problems and how she could help fix them.

In the Senate hierarchy, McCaskill knows her place — fourth from the bottom in seniority. She figured more senior colleagues would quickly wade into the controversy. The outrage level was blinking red, after all. Still, there was no harm in being prepared.

At the time she directed her “staff” to get on it, that staff still consisted of one overworked legislative assistant – but she has since added more, including an infantry Captain who was part of the Iraqi invasion to advise her on military affairs. One of his first acts was to go tour Walter Reed.

Earlier this week, McCaskill and her top aides gathered in her small, temporary office to prep her for her own tour Wednesday. A key question to the hospital brass would be: In light of the problems, where is the accountability going to be in the senior chain of command?

McCaskill was already cynical: “It’s going to be like the prison,” she told them, referring to the scandal over Abu Ghraib, a U.S. military prison in Baghdad. “The guys at the bottom will be held accountable and the guys at the top will not.”

Stepping up

After her tour, she said most of the top officials she met recognized how steep a climb they face to restore trust. But some “seemed very closed-minded and defensive,” she said. “One bragged this process has to be dispassionate, which seems to me to be oxymoronic.”

Her bill with Obama has begun to draw bipartisan support, including the backing of Missouri Sen. Kit Bond, a Republican. Hearings on the problems will start next week.

“Introducing legislation is not anything exceptional,” said Ross K. Baker, an expert on the Senate at Rutgers University. “What is exceptional is if it eventually improves the conditions at Walter Reed. She would be in a charmed circle. Very few freshmen are able to author a major piece of legislation.”

Keep it up, Claire. You occupy the seat once held by Harry S Truman. It is your legacy as the occupant of that seat to hold feet to the fire, blisters be damned.

McClatchy recaps the scandal highlights for your convenience

Problems at Walter Reed

The problems at Walter Reed pertain not to the quality of medical treatment for wounded soldiers but rather to the care for those who are well enough to be outpatients:

•Seriously wounded soldiers outnumber hospital staff 17 to 1. As a result, recovering soldiers, some with psychological issues, are asked to oversee other patients.

•Case managers for the wounded are overwhelmed and sometimes untrained.

•Building 18, a decrepit former hotel housing 80 recovering soldiers, had mold on the walls, secondhand furniture, soiled carpets, rodents and cockroaches.

•Bureaucratic delays stem from Army computer systems that do not interact, leaving the typical soldier to file 22 different documents with eight Army commands.

•Disoriented patients and their relatives get little help dealing with the 113-acre campus or the confusing paperwork.

There's more: "Crack the Whip, Claire!" >>