novakula

* novakula:

The once safely Republican congressional seat in the San Diego area formerly held by the disgraced Duke Cunningham is so endangered in the June 6 election that GOP House staffers are being urged to volunteer and travel across the country to help former Rep. Brian Bilbray in the last week of his campaign.

An appeal made to the Republican aides calls the race "way too close for comfort." Bilbray's Democratic opponent, school board member Francine Busby, is being assaulted by National Republican Congressional Committee radio ads as too liberal for the district."

Oh my. Imagine being in CA50 after an influx of GOPpers. (actually it'd probably be worth it to see all the WATBs the morning after a defeat.)

* Georgia10:

"However, where Busby beats Bilbray in personal fundraising, Bilbray is enjoying more support from his national campaign committee. In just about one month, (from April 11 to May 13), the NRCC has poured $1.6 million into campaign ads for Bilbray. That's three times as much as the DCCC has spent on Busby's campaign in the same period. A lot of the money is used on radio and TV ads attacking Busby as being too liberal for the solidly Republican district.
[]
What is crystal clear now is what we knew all along about CA-50: with the election just ten days away, this race will be won or lost on turnout. Turnout in April was not all that promising. But on June 6th, more Democrats may vote because of the primary race between Westly and Angelides. Or, a lot of frustrated Republicans may decide to sit this one out. Busby will need at least one of those things to happen in order to win."

* AP:

"In legal papers filed late Friday, Justice Department lawyers said it would be impossible to defend the legality of the spying program without disclosing classified information that could be of value to suspected terrorists.

National Intelligence Director John Negroponte invoked the state secrets privilege on behalf of the administration, writing that disclosure of such information would cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security.
[]
Justice Department attorneys said in their legal brief that the legality of the president's actions could only be properly judged by understanding "the specific threat facing the nation and the particular actions taken by the president to meet that threat."

"That understanding is not possible without revealing to the very adversaries we are trying to defeat what we know about them and how we are proceeding to stop them," they wrote."

mon dieu.