As if we needed further evidence that the Bush administration is inept --

Since January – and until the rule was suspended two weeks ago – Americans have been required to present a passport when flying within the Western Hemisphere, a rule Congress created as part of its response to the Sept. 11 attacks. ... In the weeks before the rule went into effect, hundreds of thousands of Americans without passports requested them; a backlog that now numbers 2 million started to develop as early as last fall.

The fiasco happened because (as in Iraq, New Orleans, and fill in the blank) the administration didn't anticipate the problem.

Federal officials in Washington acknowledge that they failed to anticipate just how much the post-Sept. 11 travel regulations would fuel demand for passports; did not hire enough workers to handle the increase; and neglected to notice or react to signs early this spring of a burgeoning problem. ...

For nearly two years, federal officials knew the revised rules were coming, along with a crush of applications. And Tuesday, during a packed subcommittee hearing on the passport backlog, senators assailed Maura Harty, assistant secretary of State for consular affairs. ... Acknowledging the department's miscalculation, Harty said that employees had been swamped by "a record-setting demand in a compressed period of time."

So Michael Bloomberg is contemplating an independent unaffiliated run for the Presidency. The question is why. He has no chance, absolutely none, of even carrying one state, much less winning. So what is Bloomberg up to? Is he starved for attention? Has he lost his mind? Is there some big issue that draws him in?

Let's first state the obvious - Michael Bloomberg has the political charisma of a potato. Even worse for us, he has no entertainment value. Saturday Night Live can't do a funny parody of him. He is fairly nondescript. Indeed, I wager that not 10% of the country knows who he is. This is not the bombastic Rudy we're talking about.

So the question must be, after all the guy made 5 billion dollars or some such obscene amount, what's in it for him?

Whoops. The Treasurer of South Carolina, a 44 year old millionaire and the Chair of Rudy Giuliani's South Carolina presidential campaign, has been indicted on cocaine distribution charges.

Thomas Ravenel, a former real estate developer who became a rising political star after his election last year, is accused of buying less than 500 grams of the drug to share with other people in late 2005, said United States Attorney Reggie Lloyd. Mr. Ravenel, a 44-year-old millionaire, is charged with distribution of cocaine, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Mr. Ravenel, a Republican, is also the state chairman for Rudolph W. Giuliani’s presidential campaign.

Mr. Ravenel is innocent unless and until proven guilty. Still, a federal indictment on drug charges is hardly what the Rudy campaign needs right now.

Honored at the Take Back America conference.

She makes us proud.

Another ordinance designed to drive undocumented aliens out of town has been enjoined.

The [Farmers Branch, TX] ordinance would have required apartment managers to verify that renters are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants before leasing to them, with a few exceptions. Landlords would have faced fines of up to $500 for violating the measure with each day considered as a separate violation.

The mean-spirited idea seems to be that undocumented aliens should be forced to join sex offenders who, in the absence of legal housing alternatives, are forced to live under a bridge.

A similar ordinance in Hazleton, PA met a similar fate.

"Around the nation, every judge who has reviewed these local anti-immigrant ordinances has put a stop to them," said Nina Perales, the regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund who argued for the preliminary injunction. "Immigration reform is a federal responsibility and local anti-immigrant ordinances only hurt city economies and community relations."

I have seen none of the speeches, but the wonkosphere loved John Edwards, and especially, Barack Obama. Adele Stan writes:

I found myself weeping during Barack Obama's levitational address, during which I found myself embodying a veritable panoply of cliches, including goosebumps and smeared mascara. It's not that the junior senator from Illinois said anything that I hadn't already heard him say: it was the way he made use of the energy that was in the room. He took what the crowd so eagerly wanted to give him, channeled it through, and gave it back to them. He became more preacher than politician -- no, make that faith healer -- as he delivered his standard lines about how hope is the reason he is standing here before us, meaning the hope that the civil rights activists had that they could indeed prevail against racism.

On Edwards, Ezra Klein writes:

Via, Atrios and Yglesias, one of the Fox News liberal types, Michael O'Hanlon, writes a "stirring defense" of General Petraeus:

Sen. Harry Reid's recent statements questioning the forthrightness of Gen. David Petraeus in reporting on conditions in Iraq are unseemly and unfair. . . . It is true Gen. Petraeus was too optimistic about the training program of Iraqi forces when he was in charge of it. But he was not alone in having undue confidence about the course of events in Iraq at that point. . . It is also true Gen. Petraeus chose to highlight the "normalcy" of much of Iraq in recent comments about how things are going there. Such comments were indeed a bit forward-leaning . . .

Forward-leaning? You mean rose-colored glasses? The notion that Reid demanding candor from someone who has been "overly optimistic" as bad is just bizarre. I hope General Petraeus is more forthright than O'Hanlon has been, for he is one of those folks who believes in extended Friedman Units:

Although it has been said before about previous new years, it seems very likely that 2007 will be make or break time in Iraq.

Is it ok if we demand a little candor from Mr. O'Hanlon and would he please be forthright in telling us how and why he has been wrong on EVERYTHING about Iraq?

Rudy quit the Iraq Study Group last May after he was told he would actually have to show up and work on the issue:

Rudolph Giuliani's membership on an elite Iraq study panel came to an abrupt end last spring after he failed to show up for a single official meeting of the group, causing the panel's top Republican to give him a stark choice: either attend the meetings or quit, several sources said.

Now if Rudy missed a meeting to get a haircut, perhaps the Media would think this a big story. But since it was not for a haircut, but rather in order to travel and collect 11 million dollars in speaking fees, I think Josh Marshall's prediction that this might end Rudy's campaign will be wrong. But the funniest thing is Rudy just plain lies about why he quit:

As someone considered a potential presidential candidate, the Mayor didn’t want the group’s work to become a political football. That, coupled with time restraints led to his decision.

Here's the thing -- Rudy did not voluntarily resign. He was told to show up or quit. He chose to turn his back on working to help the country on the Iraq issue BECAUSE he needed the time to cash in on 9/11.

As Dan Froomkin points out, the White House has been casual in its approach to law breaking. As practiced in the White House, the Unitary Executive theory means that the executive branch of government need not obey laws passed by the legislative branch or decisions rendered by the judicial branch. Hence the casual approach to complying with, say, the Presidential Records Act, and the apparent lack of concern that at least 88 White House officials used email accounts with the Republican National Committee to conduct the nation's business, or that the email records of 51 of those officials have gone missing.

The argument that officials used RNC accounts so that they wouldn't violate the Hatch Act is difficult to understand, because the Hatch Act prevents federal employees from engaging in political activity while on duty. Whether the officials used a White House account or an RNC account is less significant than whether they were using the accounts for a forbidden political purpose while they were supposed to be earning their federal salaries. Of course, whether they engaged in improper activities is difficult to judge when the emails that may answer that question can't be found.

Did officials use RNC accounts to conduct public business to avoid making the public record that the Presidential Records Act requires? Or did they use RNC accounts solely to engage in political activities while they were on duty in their government jobs? Either way, as Froomkin suggests, they've managed to avoid scrutiny by using email accounts that have conveniently failed to keep a record of their emails.

This should come as no surprise:

And as the new House Oversight Committee report points out, the White House counsel's office -- then headed by current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- was aware of these violations of e-mail policy, but chose to do nothing about it.

Kos writes:

Being a blogger has been on-the-job training for me. I was obsessive about the presidential polls in 2003. Then, as you see above, they meant squat. Kerry had 9 percent heading into Iowa. He won the thing easily. I learned my lesson. These months are an opportunity for candidates to raise money, build organization, hone their message, and prep for the storm that'll hit them in September when they'll enter the stretch run of the race. At this point, the numbers mean little, and candidates have little incentive to lead the horse race.

You are correct sir. With a caveat. At Blogometer, Conn Carroll commented:

There is a name plate for Digby at the Take Back America conference. Does that mean Digby will be revealed? Atrios links to this funny post and to pictures of some of our good friends.

Sure there are lots of good things going at the conference I bet, but "who is Digby?" is the story of the day.

I'm on my way out of town, but first, had to post this new interview with Bernie Kerik lamenting the loss of Rudy as a friend. The more remarkable part is how he describes his own troubles. Brutally honest about his depression.

He's in Jordan and reportedly about to face a federal indictment in the U.S. (More here.)

I wonder if the feds could or would extradite him back from Jordan. Whichever way you cut it, exile in Jordan or a a federal criminal trial in the U.S., life hasn't been easy for Rudy's friend since Rudy got the brilliant idea of Bush nominating him for Homeland Security chief. (More here.)

Kerik was a deer caught in the headlights -- in way over his head. Rudy should have known better.