Posts Categorized Politics

Progressives Get Played Again By Their Own

In Opinion, Politics on Feb-23-2010 with
no comments

Many progressives often like to point out to the religious right that many Republicans play them for fools. They talk about the abortion issue and a “right to life” to obtain their votes and contributions, but do little if anything to change the laws once in power. Well sadly the same thing often happens to my party and we often can’t/won’t admit it either.

Politics Daily, October 4, 2009:

Jay Rockefeller has waited a long time for this moment. [....] He’s a longtime advocate of health care for children and the poor—and, as Congress moves toward its moment of truth on health care, perhaps the most earnest, dogged Senate champion of a nationwide public health insurance plan to compete with private insurance companies.“I will not relent on that. That’s the only way to go,” Rockefeller told me in an interview. “There’s got to be a safe harbor.”

President Obama often says a public option is needed to drive down costs and keep insurance companies honest. To Rockefeller, it’s both more basic and more vital: The federal government is the only institution people can count on in times of need.

The Huffington Post, yesterday:

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) threw a wrench into Democratic efforts to get a public option passed through reconciliation, saying that he thought the maneuver was overly partisan and that he was inclined to oppose it [....]

“I don’t think the timing of it is very good,” the West Virginia Democrat said on Monday. “I’m probably not going to vote for that” [....] In making his sentiment known, Rockefeller becomes perhaps the most unexpected skeptic of the public-option-via-reconciliation route. The Senator was a huge booster of a government run insurance option during the legislation drafting process this past year.

Rockefeller seemed to be on CNN and MSNBC almost daily throughout much of 2009 saying what a righteous champion he was for the public option. That it was basically the cause of his life. Doing all of this while he knew it had no chance to pass with 60 votes.

But now that Democrats are considering the reconciliation process—which will allow passage with 50 rather than 60 votes—Rockefeller is all of a sudden “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” Pretty strange excuses for Rockefeller to make with regard to something that he claimed, just a few months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass of course), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its passage.

“Sure,” The POTUS Could Order A Village Massacred

In Opinion, Politics on Feb-22-2010 with
no comments

This is just hard to comprehend. Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff found this little exchange in the DoJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report’s discussion of John Yoo’s August 2002 memo (.pdf) that is widely seen as one of the key legal opinions authorizing the use of torture by the Bush White House. On page page 64 of the report you get this exchange:

Q: I guess the question I’m raising is, does this particular law really affect the President’s war-making abilities ….

Yoo: Yes, certainly.

Q: What is your authority for that?

Yoo: Because this is an option that the President might use in war.

Q: What about ordering a village of resistants to be massacred? [....] Is that a power that the president could legally [.....]

Yoo: Yeah. Although, let me say this. So, certainly, that would fall within the commander-in-chief’s power over tactical decisions.

Q: To order a village of civilians to be [exterminated]?

Yoo: Sure.

Just hard to comprehend on so many different levels. And John Yoo is actually a law professor and has not been disbarred. I mean what exactly do you have to do these days to lose credibility?

Update: In an interview today with San Francisco radio station KQED did not back away from his previous statements and added that congress cannot stop the President from using nuclear weapons.

Look at the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. [....] Could Congress tell President Truman that he couldn’t use a nuclear bomb in Japan, even though Truman thought in good faith he was saving millions of Americans and Japanese lives? [....] My only point is that the government places those decisions in the President, and if the Congress doesn’t like it they can cut off funds for it or they can impeach him.

What Economic Recovery Looks Like

In Politics on Feb-17-2010 with
no comments

It’s become a running joke by Republicans in speeches and at town hall meetings  to ask, “do you feel stimulated?” The implication of course is the stimulus package is such an obvious failure that just a mention of it is worth a few good laughs.  But really, if this is a failure what would success look like?

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was passed one year ago today.  This insightful chart,  from Organizing for America, does a better job than a thousand works to highlight the success of the stimulus bill. Obviously, there is much more work to be done. But to even remotely attempt to say we’ve not seem drastic progress, well that is just crazy (and not very funny).

Beck Losses 100+ UK Advertisers

In Advertising, Politics on Feb-16-2010 with
no comments

This is so hilarious and couldn’t happen to a “nicer” guy. Color of Change and StopBeck.com announced today  that the United Kingdom has forcefully rejected Fox News host Glenn Beck. In fact, the UK broadcast of his show was forced to run without any advertisements for five straight days in a row as of yesterday. And if that isn’t bad enough, 103 former advertisers have made public their intent  to halt all future advertising on his program.

Elections Used To Have Consquences

In Politics on Feb-14-2010 with
no comments

From Steve Benen at Washington Monthly has some pretty spot on things to say about Republicans and their near 24/7 use of the filibuster (emphasis mine):

I was looking over the election returns from 2008 last night. I hadn’t thought about it in a while, but I was reminded just how remarkably successful Democrats were in the cycle. It was a genuinely impressive electoral display—Dems didn’t just win, they dominated.

Obama won states a Democrat hadn’t carried in a generation. Democratic candidates won Senate races in states where the party is supposed to be weak—Alaska, North Carolina, Louisiana, Montana, and Arkansas. House Dems built up the largest congressional majority in three decades. Obama’s 52.8% of the popular vote was the highest of any candidate in either party in 20 years, and the highest for a non-incumbent in 56 years.

[....]

It’s part of what makes the Republican tactics of the last 13 months so extraordinary—it’s the first time in memory that a major political party decided, en masse, that elections simply shouldn’t have consequences. We’ve never had a minority lose a national landslide and then decide that the huge governing majority must not even be able to vote on its own agenda.

As an institutional matter, it’s almost tragic to see Republicans deliberately break the American political process, and then stand to reap rewards for their reckless intransigence. But as an electoral matter, I’m not at all sure Democratic policymakers appreciate the situation they find themselves in.

There is much more, and well worth a read. Although I’ve had many of these thoughts myself, I’ve never expressed them in this type of focused manner, and a message that might just work with the American public.

John Brennan: Kicking Butt & Taking Names

In Politics on Feb-9-2010 with
no comments

John Brennan, President Obama’s senior counterterrorism adviser, has become the point man for the administration’s pushback against all the Republican criticism related to how he is handling national security and terrorism specifically. This appears to a pretty darn smart move, cause  Brennan does not seem suffer fools gladly.

This weekend on the Sunday talk shows Brennan was both forceful and persuasive. Now he has a  brief, yet  powerful op-ed in USA Today . It isn’t even 400 words, but Brennan’s pretty can still identify and then beat down all the BS Republican talking points.

Republicans insist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was interrogated for under an hour, during which time he provided nothing of value. The Obama administration, Republicans argue, should have coordinated with other agencies outside the Justice Department. Brennan explains:

Immediately after the failed Christmas Day attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thoroughly interrogated and provided important information. Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court.

Republicans are also outraged that Abdulmutallab was read his Miranda rights, when he should have been labeled an enemy combatant and carted off to gosh knows where. Brennan explains:

The most important breakthrough occurred after Abdulmutallab was read his rights, which the FBI made standard policy under Michael Mukasey, President Bush’s attorney general. The critics who want the FBI to ignore this long-established practice also ignore the lessons we have learned in waging this war: Terrorists such as Jose Padilla and Saleh al-Mari did not cooperate when transferred to military custody, which can harden one’s determination to resist cooperation.

It’s naive to think that transferring Abdulmutallab to military custody would have caused an outpouring of information. There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical.

Would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid was read his Miranda rights five minutes after being taken off a plane he tried to blow up. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then.

Furthermore, Republicans also now seem to believe military courts are a far more effective place to try terrorism cases. Brennan explains:

Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation. There have been three convictions of terrorists in the military tribunal system since 9/11, and hundreds in the criminal justice system — including high-profile terrorists such as Reid and 9/11 plotter Zacarius Moussaoui.

Republicans are also convinced the Obama administration isn’t being effective or nearly aggressive enough on counterterrorism activities. Brennan explains:

This administration’s efforts have disrupted dozens of terrorist plots against the homeland and been responsible for killing and capturing hundreds of hard-core terrorists, including senior leaders in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond — far more than in 2008. We need no lectures about the fact that this nation is at war.

Finally Republicans seem to perceive terrorists as these Super Villains with Super Powers beyond mere mortals. Brennan explains:

Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America’s counterterrorism professionals and America’s system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.

That is what I call a blunt, focused, and flat-out beat down in just 389 words. Here is hoping we see and hear a lot more from Mr. Brennan. I think it is clear he is the most powerful advocate for Obama’s counterterrorism policies.

What Happened To Organizing for America?

In Marketing, Politics on Feb-7-2010 with
no comments

For months I’ve been asking myself, as I watched the Democrats lose the governorship in Virginia and New Jersey, then a Senate seat in Massachusetts, and finally the “train wreck” of the primary in my home state of Illinois last week, where the heck is Organizing for America (OFA)? Former known as Obama for America, OFA is the grass-roots organization set-up and run by David Plouffe that powered Obama’s bid for the Presidency. By election day the group had 13 million e-mail supporters, 4 million donors, 2.5 million activists connected through the My.BarackObama social network, and an amazing $18 million left in the bank.

Well Tim Dickinson has an article in Rolling Stone that outlines in detail exactly what happened. To sum it up in a sentence what happened was a lack of leadership, no strategic planning, and political infighting. Wow, surprising something like that happens in Washington, DC.

Lets See How Fox Reports This Story

In Politics on Feb-6-2010 with
no comments

This ought to be pretty darn interesting. Friday we learned that Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has put a “blanket hold” on several, if not 70+ nominations for the executive branch. The move has the effect of requiring 60 Senators to vote for cloture to break it. Shelby’s office would not confirm that the senator is blocking all of Obama’s nominees, but did confirm he was blocking “several.”

Talking Points Memo has been all over this story and reported Friday:

“Sen. Shelby has placed holds on several pending nominees due to unaddressed national security concerns,” Shelby spokesperson Jonathan Graffeo said in a statement. “Among his concerns” are the progress on multi-billion dollar defense contract that would see planes built in Mobile, AL and Obama’s decision to scrap a $45 million FBI improvised explosive device lab Shelby secured an earmark for in 2008.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs fired back at Shelby:

“I guess if you needed one example of what’s wrong with this town, it might be that one senator can hold up 70 qualified individuals to make government work better because he didn’t get his earmarks,” Mr. Gibbs told reporters today. “If that’s not the poster child for how this town needs to change the way it works, I fear there won’t be a greater example of silliness throughout the entire year of 2010.”

One can only imagine the outrage that would ensue, the shit storm actually, at Fox News if a Democrat were holding up several nominations, much less of a Republican President, because of unfulfilled earmarks. As of this morning Fox News has not covered the story once. “Fair and Balanced,” you betcha.

The Cause Of Kennedy’s Life

In Politics, Video on Jan-19-2010 with
no comments

I sure hope the folks in Massachusetts get out and vote today, or the shitty plan (but better than nothing) we could have will fold almost overnight, cause somehow 41 votes can stop 59 in our Senate.

There Is No Flag Large Enough …..

In Culture, Politics on Jan-9-2010 with
no comments