• OpenCongress brings together, for the first time in one place, all the best data on what's really happening in Congress:
• Official information from Thomas, the website of the Library of Congress, made available by GovTrack.us:
• all the bills, Members of Congress, votes, committee reports, issue areas, and more.
• News articles about Congress from Google News. Blog posts about Congress from Technorati and Google Blog Search.
• Campaign contribution information from OpenSecrets.org, the website of the non-profit, non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources. Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office.

The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack. “There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.

Dave Wolf touched on a number of issues, so I'll address them from the bottom up:

Candidate recruitment is something we've done a miserable job of at the state level, and in some of the rural counties, our organization is nigh on nonexistent. We have some good progressive groups like the White House Project and others that particularly target women or ethnic minorities for candidate recruitment, but I don't think they have much of a presence out in the sticks. I'm thinking the unions have an important role out there because there is a surprisingly strong union contingent in many of the rural areas.

While I feel sorry for the occasional Dem that lives in a 90% Republican-performing precinct, areas like that are impossible to canvass. They are much better hit with phone banks, and believe me they get hit. Voter contact is both expensive and laborious, and when you can't get volunteers to put in time, you have to use the resources wisely. You want your volunteers and paid canvassers to spend more time knocking and talking and less time walking. Nothing is more frustrating than walking past ten 3/3 republican households just to hit the Dem who is not home because she is working three jobs.

The bottom line is that our voters are lazy. You have to hound them to get them to vote. On election day you have to conduct knock-and-drags, and drive them to the polls. The best thing we can do is make it easier for them.

Progressive organizations should use what we did in CD7 as an example. We mounted an aggressive vote-by-mail registration effort. That gave us 50 times as much time (30 days vs. 12 hours) to get out the vote. Ken Gordon would be Secretary of State today if the progressive groups had done in Denver what we did in Jeffco, Angie Paccione might have gained 10,000 or more votes if her campaign had just chased the 30,000 absentee ballots that were out in the last data update I saw a couple of days before the election. Just imagine what she could have done had the campaign actually ID'd the supporters they canvassed and pushed them to vote by mail and chased down every last ballot.

Absentee voting has been the cornerstone of the Republican's magic GOTV effort for years, and that's because it works. But it only helps if you actually ID your supporters, not just talk to them or drop literature. Raising awareness of Democrats is not enough, you have to aggressively target each voter and type them--are they persuadable? Are they solid supporters? Are they good voters? Are they died-in-the-wool flat-earth creationist homophobes with no hope of ever being on our side? Then you can target your efforts both regionally and in terms of message.

The best part of absentee voting is that we can stop bugging those people once they vote. Wouldn't it have been nice to stop getting those phone calls and mailers on Oct. 15th? It's a great incentive for people to turn their ballots in. It also gets the ballot in before the majority of the traditional super dirty push-polls and smear campaigns in the last 7 days and helps inoculate our people from right-wing voter suppression efforts.

And because of the idiotic campaign finance laws, the only way all of the candidates and progressive groups can know conclusively that a voter has been reached is when the ballot comes in as a matter of public record. Most people don't realize that state campaigns can;t talk to Federal campaigns and issue campaigns can't talk to either, and parties can't talk to a lot of advocacy groups and so on and so forth. So while it would be great to coordinate our efforts to set out who goes where, we can't do that. Everybody's going to continue to get hit by everybody multiple times, and I think it's going to wear very very thin in '08.

I was one of two civilian interrogators assigned to the division interrogation facility (DIF) of the 82nd Airborne Division...

The lead interrogator at the DIF had given me specific instructions: I was to deprive the detainee of sleep during my 12-hour shift by opening his cell every hour, forcing him to stand in a corner and stripping him of his clothes. Three years later the tables have turned. It is rare that I sleep through the night without a visit from this man. His memory harasses me as I once harassed him.

"The reactions to the suicide were that she was having a difficult time separating her personal feelings from her professional duties. That was the consistent point in the testimonies, that she objected to the interrogation techniques, without describing what those techniques were."

Murtha may use the war spending measure to close Guantanamo House Democratic leaders say they'll use the power of purse to "change the direction of the war" and possibly close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, NBC's Mike Viqueira reports. At a press conference yesterday, Rep. John Murtha said his defense appropriations panel will pass a version of Bush's $100 billion war spending request for this year on March 15. Since March 15 comes well before May, when the last brigades will be deployed as part of the increase, Murtha says that would leave time for Congress to act. He also said he may use the war spending measure to close Guantanamo: "I would like to close it." Speaker Nancy Pelosi also called the forthcoming House Democratic resolution opposing a troop increase in Iraq "a first step."

I then pointed out that just last month, in National Defense Magazine, Col. Robert A. Fitzgerald, the Marine Corps' head of aviation plans and policy, was quoted as saying that, in 2006, "Marine rotary-wing aircraft flew more than 60,000 combat flight hours, and fixed-wing platforms completed 31,000. They dropped 80 tons of bombs and fired 80 missiles, 3,532 rockets and more than 2 million rounds of smaller ammunition."

Chuck Hagel is just stringing people along. He is like Arlen Spector in being all bark but no bite. People were all excited about Chuck yelling and demanding accountability and what not, but when it is time for the rubber to meet the road...

Let's try this "logic" thing out:

Hagel says refusing to debate Iraq is "weak".

Hagel voted to refuse debate on Iraq.

Therefore, Hagel is "weak".

Time for him to go sell shoes.

Read the rest here.