European governments knew of the CIA flights: since Condoleezza Rice's declarations in December, it had become more and more obvious.
The latest installment of the European Parliament's investigation, before the publication of the full report in January, documents the complicity of 12 out of 25 governments (Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the UK), and the scale of the operations (1245 stop-overs, including those organized for "extraordinary renditions"). Claudio Flava, who heads the investigation, has commended Germany and Spain for their cooperation with his inquiry. Other governments, he notes, have been extremely reluctant to help. So was apparently Javier Solana, the former NATO secretary-general, now EU Commissioner for International Affairs: according to Claudio Flava, his testimony was less than complete.
The French judiciary certainly is not very curious. It rejected the complaint by two human rights organizations, about 5 suspected flights that stopped in the Paris region. The official explanation: not enough information is available about those flights.

Race creeps back in the media conversation: The topic of the day is Michael Richards racial rant at a West Hollywood club. The man whose claim to fame is to have played the obnoxious neighbor Kramer on the "Seinfeld" show lost it to a couple of hecklers. An ugly, vulgar, not funny side came out in full view as he hurled one racist epithet after the other, with increasing rage. A very miserable performance, which starts a cycle of more miserable performances, with the predictable "apology tour". The American media asks gravely if this is the sign that racism is still alive and well - making it sound like it would be a real surprise. Yet that same media regularly reports on racism, but it is mostly the institutional kind, tagged to a malevolent bureaucracy or corporation, or the cartoon sort - imputed to marginal or marginalized losers. The surprise, if any, can only be that it was uttered by a television icon that the media assumed was "one of them": well groomed, properly progressive, and mostly inoffensive.

Nancy, Segolene... great day for women? Not so sure. The California democrat and the French socialist triumphed today. It was expected. The first one will be speaker of the House; the second, her party's candidate at the presidential election.
Much was made of the fact that Nancy Pelosi did not get what she had wished for: John Murtha as her main man. The veteran Marine turned politician in the seventies is the most outspoken - if not always articulate - opponent to the way the Bush administration has been conducting the war in Iraq. Her fellow party members preferred the man less likely to annoy them, the unctuous Steny Hoyer.
Segolene Royal, the French socialist motherly figure, beat two old timers to the presidential candidacy: Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former Finance minister, and Laurent Fabius, former Prime minister.
In spite of having been a cabinet member herself, and glossing over her long-time involvement in the party's mechanics (and we're not thinking of hubby party president François Hollande), the first female candidate managed to instill the idea that she is a "fresh face". So fresh, in fact, that she should be forgiven the lameness of her program, and her frequent veering into conservative social positions. Could she have been watching Hillary?
Never-the-less, the mood is set for "change" in France as well, with the forecast of a presidential duel opposing the populist and popular interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy to Segolene Royal.
Yet it will be interesting to see how long it takes before the first female candidate is tightly "counseled"... and how long it takes the French left to lament the import of American-style "primaries", a first in France to select a presidential candidate.

One week after the election, the surviving republicans are clinging to old habits. Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott... Lamar Alexander, beaten for the whip position, likes to call it a "come-back"; it is more like a flash-back. And it the "nothing changes" category, the testimonies of the intelligence and army chiefs insist on the continuation of more-of-the-same in Iraq and Afghanistan. And the democrats? Waiting for Baker. Or Hillary. Or somebody.

George Allen thanked God. Again. He did not thank "the owners of the government of Virginia" as he calls the citizens of the State. By the slimmest of margins, they have elected the democrat Jim Webb to the Senate.
Yet it might not be the final uprooting of George Allen: in his concession speech, he alluded to the trees surviving the tempest, with the other senator from Virginia, John Warner, by his side. And the senior senator will not run for reelection in 2008.

Sore, George Bush tried to spin his "tell it as it is" technique to regain control of the situation.
As expected, he went back to the early days of his first mandate to demonstrate that he can work in a bipartisan manner... Even on the conduct of the war in Iraq, he says, since he is convinced that both republicans and democrats "want to win", and bring the troops home without sacrificing the goals of their mission. As if "the difference in strategies" that he acknowledges were a mere detail, and not the core of the debate.
The swift replacement of Secretary Rumsfeld will (temporarily?) occupy the minds with the suspense of inside baseball. Is Condoleezza Rice gaining the upper hand, against the Cheney clan? Is the vice-president now effectively on the sidelines of the president's decision-making process? Is the appointment of Bob Gates the signal that Bush-the-father's old guard is coming to the rescue of a contrite son? Are there other changes to be expected in the White house team?
And then, soon enough, the events on the ground should force a real debate about the end strategy in Iraq, as well as the principles and practices of the so-called "war on terror". That should be an urgent exercise not only for the White House, but for the democrats as well. They will have to sort out the muddled call for "change" delivered by an electorate that rewarded anti-war candidates, but also pro-war candidates with various opinions on the best exit strategy, such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman.

Democrats won Montana, leaving the only uncertainty for control of the Senate in Virginia. A "thumping" indeed.

"Register their displeasure with the lack of progress" in Iraq: that's how George Bush qualified the electorate intention. With nuances: he added that the races were close, some of them lost because the Americans want their representatives to be "honest", and that the cumulative effect was a "thumping".

"Secretary Rumsfeld and I agree that the timing is right for a change of leadership at the Pentagon" said the president as he praised the outgoing Defense Secretary. A more formal announcement is to follow, but George Bush explained that the change was planned, regardless of the election results, after Bob Gates' visit with him last Sunday.

Other things that need to get done, according to George Bush include the renewal of the "no child left behind act", entitlement reform, energy policy, and immigration reform. He assures he can collaborate with Nancy Pelosi, saying he knows the difference between campaign time and governing time.

Rumsfeld is going! Finally. It took loosing the House, and probably the Senate, for George Bush to snap out of his cocoon and hear the discontent with his leadership in the Iraq war.
His replacement, former CIA director Bob Gates, would be a perfect candidate to hear and implement the conclusions of the task force on Iraq lead by old timers James Baker and Lee Hamilton.

More good news as it becomes clear that several bigoted initiatives (comprehensive ban on abortion in South Dakota, against stem cell research in Missouri, against gay marriage in Arizona tough a similar measure passed in several states) have failed to gather majorities.

Jim Talent is defeated in Missouri, and the democrats are getting closer to winning the majority in the Senate. They need Virginia and Montana to break any tie that could be otherwise settled by the Dick Cheney's vote - as the vice-president is, by constitutional law, a member of the Senate. Recounts? The margins will help the candidates to decide later this morning.
One obvious fact: the six year curse and the unpopular war took their full toll on the party that controlled every branch of government. An oversight was long overdue; the nasty paradox is that it might just be the thing that will save a future "independent" so called "rebellious" republican presidential candidate.

George Allen is thanking God, and then his wife.
"It has been an interesting election, and the election continues", he said around 12:35 AM. Once a presidential hopeful, he is trying to project maximum confidence as the votes are still counted. Thanking his supporters for their efforts in making sure that all will be accurately counted, and for their prayers, he reminded them that he won his first election by 18 votes. Both campaigns have lawyers on their payroll, ready to spring into action for a recount.

No such luck for Harold Ford Jr.: the democrat has officially failed in his attempt at winning the seat left open in Tennessee by the republican leader of the Senate, Bill first.

Three races to go, and the democrats might win the Senate: at midnight, the only certainty was that there would be uncertainty early Wednesday morning.
Virginia, too close to call in spite of Jim Webb's apparent advantage, is headed for a recall mandated by the local law if the margin of victory is as tight as half of a percentage point.
The democrats were loosing hope on the Tennessee front, where Harold Ford Jr. did not seem likely to become the first black senator since reconstruction. They were more optimistic regarding Missouri and Montana, where the two republican incumbents were in trouble.
The night might be long, but a sweep of both houses was at hand.
That would be the strong reaction that a lot of the world opinion had stopped to believe possible - even though there might be some over-reaching in chalking it all to the discontent about the war in Iraq, and ignoring the more domestic preoccupation with massive corruption scandals.

The democrats have won the majority in the House, and the speculations are immediately rampant about the possible investigations to be launched under the guidance of the prospective new chairmen of committees.
Dick Gephardt, for one, is already assuring that the ranking members, often the most militant of representatives, will behave well under the authority of Nancy Pelosi. The former majority leader, unseated by the 1994 republican tsunami, was trying to strike the most moderate of balance between the urgent need for oversight of the Bush administration and the dangerous temptation of political revenge after 12 years in the opposition, pointedly ignored by the administration.
Speaking of which, one can only wonder how long it will take George Bush to try and control the situation by reminding everyone that he came to Washington "as a uniter, not a divider"? He just might distance himself from his loosing party... as fast as republican candidates who had rubber-stamped his policies tried to run away from him in their latest campaign, realizing belatedly that the Rove charm had ceased to work on the electorate.

Hillary Clinton looked really happy too, flanked by the clapper-in-chief. Not that the victory was in any doubt for the junior senator from New York, but the "re-recentering" of the democratic party can only benefit her ambitions. Her praise for all and call for cooperation between republicans, independents and democrats left little doubt about her hopes... nor did the rush by Harry Reid, still at that hour minority leader of the Senate, to endorse her comments. They were definitely more tactful than his own, when he congratulated the electorate, saying he was "proud" of the American public "listening to what we said".

Nancy Pelosi sure looked happy, tasting a possible victory that might make her the first "Madam Speaker" of the House.
Still, all the pundits talk is about the re-centering of the democratic party, not really in line with the views of the California progressist. Clinton-Gore once campaigned as born-again Christians, an effort obliterated by subsequent events. According to exit polls, some of the evangelical Christians, upset at the recent republican corruption scandals and distraught by the war in Iraq, might have found their way back to the "Reagan democratic" wing of the party.
Commentators, armed with that information, are already speculating that the new stars of this election might well be the socially conservative and hard-nosed vets. Jim Webb, the democratic challenger in Virginia, would be one of those symbols of change. The once Reagan cabinet member is still battling in a tight race with George Allen. The republican incumbent is laboring under two burdens: the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq, even in a traditionally militaristic State, and his own shortcomings, revealed by his racist remarks.

Rick Santorum is thanking God, after conceding his defeat. The ultra-conservative was once talked about as a great hope for the Christian right's tight grip on the congressional leadership.
The Senator-elect from Pennsylvania is Bob Casey, a pro-life centrist democrat. No telling yet if he'll be thanking God as well.

Lincoln Chafee's defeat, announced at 9:30 PM, is the bellweather the US media was looking for to predict the collapse of the conservative majority.
Yes, Joe Lieberman is projected to be reelected in Connecticut as an independent, against Ned Lamont, the candidate supported by the democratic party and all its leaders - including Chris Dodd, the other senator from Connecticut, and Hillary Clinton, the senator from New York and reigning favorite presidential non-candidate. It will be awkward, but the former vice-presidential candidate will caucus with the democrats - in spite of being elected largely with republican votes, a thank-you for his unwavering support to George Bush's "war on terror".
Lincoln Chafee, the moderate republican who succeeded his centrist father in Rhode Island, was another of these one-of-a-kind North-Eastern politician. All his pleadings with the electorate to avoid a "national referendum" failed: more than his personal record, it was his republican label that defeated him. His case is the clearest, but will not be the only one. Many republican incumbents are projected to fall victim to the same disgust with the White House unilateralism in conducting the war in Iraq, as well as in its dealings with Congress on social and economic issues.

Results showing up at the bottom of the screen during commercials: it seems to be a first on CNN, and one way to reduce the temptation to zap away to another network during those breaks. Of course, shutting off the pompous Wolf Blitzer and demagogic Lou Dobbs might be another winning strategy - if it were not that on the competiting network one has to endure their alter egos, Keith Olbermann ad Joe Scarbourough.

Projections, conventional wisdom, and flashy graphics: the cable news network were up to their usual hype and tricks as soon as the first polls closed.
"Too early to call", claimed MSNBC about the Ohio Senate race with... 0% of the results tallied - just about 10 000 thousand votes, as a matter of fact.
The political parties were doing just as well, spinning away and arguing about voter intimidation all afternoon. The republicans jumped to be the first to claim irregularities - in the Santorum race in Pennsylvania. His defeat would deprive the Village Voice readers of one of their favorite pastime (popularizing the particularly vulgar alternate definition of the conservative's name, now the first item to appear as one googles the word). Vocabulary games have been very unkind to republicans this season, as George Allen of "macaca" fame can attest.
Now word games are done. Electoral maths and stats are taking over the screens. The networks were projecting as soon as 8:35 PM Bob Menendez's victory in New Jersey, a seat the democrats had to hold if they hoped to conquer the Senate.

While Americans were at the polls for the midterms, the French were watching the third and last debate of the first-ever socialist "primary" for the presidential election. The three candidates to the nomination were facing off on international issues. Nothing that would captivate an American audience: Turkey's entry in the European Union, and more generally the future of the European construction, were the most discriminating topics between those candidates who will most likely confront the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy - France's Interior minister, and habitual Bush-impersonator. The exercise, somewhat constrained, was still a stunning contrast with the formulatic american political debates: the French politicians were surely prepared, but not yet stale.

The results of the midterm elections are eagerly awaited world-wide, with the expectation that they will be a sanction for George Bush. The details of the inner workings of Congress escape much of the international audience, but the potential significance of a change in majority in Washington is plain for all. Yet, the election is mostly followed as a precursor to the presidential choice in 2008. There is considerable interest in the fate of potential headliners: George Allen's melt-down, Hillary Clinton's sovereign campaign, or Barack Obama's emergence. The results tonight will be followed more closely than ever - in that light, but also as an indication of future restrains on the Bush administration's foreign adventures. (photo: call for "change" and vote on November 7 at the Art parade in NYC, september 06).