A.I.G. is big, but this is bigger:
Government spending on most domestic programs is growing at its fastest pace in nearly 30 years, and a lot of worried Democrats are seeking ways to rewrite and reduce the size of President Barack Obama’s budget proposals.
[...] The Senate is likely to consider the budget the same week, and Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., is also voicing reservations about the package’s size. “When I look at this budget, I see the debt doubling again, and that gives me great concern,” he said. Obama’s budget projects that by 2019, debt held by the public will reach $15.3 trillion, roughly double the current level.
What did anyone expect? The headline about moderate Democrats being Obama’s problem in passing legislation is absurd. Anyone not disgusted isn’t reading the fine print; either that or they can’t add.
At least the so called Blue Dogs aren’t demanding pay-go for health care. That’s because it’s not possible if you want reform.
The Fed chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, appearing on “60 Minutes” on CBS on Sunday night, said: “Of all the events and all of the things we’ve done in the last 18 months, the single one that makes me the angriest, that gives me the most angst, is the intervention with A.I.G.”
He went on: “Here was a company that made all kinds of unconscionable bets. Then, when those bets went wrong, they had a — we had a situation where the failure of that company would have brought down the financial system.”
In deciding to rescue A.I.G., the government worried that if it did not bail out the company, its collapse could lead to a cascading chain reaction of losses, jeopardizing the stability of the worldwide financial system. …
We’ve got a lot of very smart lawyers who need to immediately start working on recovering the bonuses paid out by A.I.G. There’s got to be a way.
Netanyahu and Lieberman together at last:
The deal with Mr. Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu Party, which placed third in February’s parliamentary election, was concluded Monday morning, according to spokeswoman Irena Etinger, and is a critical first step in Mr. Netanyahu’s bid to form a governing coalition.
An aide to Mr. Netanyahu confirmed that a deal had been reached between the two men.
Pakistan takes a breath as judges are reinstated.
WJC parts with another source of big bucks, Yucaipa Partnerships.
Iran and Russian, together on energy.
Khatami out? Reports saying he will not run against Ahmadinejad.
Roger Cohen on Israel and Iran.
God’s speed, Mr. Silver.
I am starting to wonder if Obama is what we hoped he was. Court documents filed Friday by Obamas lawyers are arguing that Gitmo detainees have no constitutional rights. They also argue in their brief, that Rumsfeld and other officers should be immune from prosecution because, detainees’ right not to be tortured was not clearly established. I didn’t vote for this kind of shit and I am really dismayed and saddened.
Welcome to campaigning meets the presidency.
Mr. Obama’s campaign should never be confused with reality, which is the way it is with all politicians running for the presidency. It is the OFFICE individuals hope to hold, with the idealism inherent in the position of president for which they campaign. But the job of governing has absolutely nothing to do with forming the image needed to convince people you are worthy of the OFFICE, thus getting them to vote for you. It is why disillusionment is often experienced by people such as yourself, angels81, and is why seeing these people for who they are, not the office they hold is critical. That requires constant evaluation and criticism so that the person’s image doesn’t explode, leading to how you feel right now.
I agree with everything you said, I just hope the left and progressives raise their voices and let Obama know that this is not what we want out of his administration. This is no different then bushes policy, and it is not right. I sent off three e-mails this morning expressing my concern, I hope others do the same.
Agreed.
But in my view the courage required for the job at hand isn’t there. If it were Obama would have vetoed the budget and told Congress to take the earmarks not important to communities out of it, if for no other reason than to show his seriousness about focusing on what’s important to fund.
Write on.
Get a grip. Obama has committed to close Gitmo and end torture, and we have the Boumedienne decision. Anyone who doubts Obama’s bona fides on this is an idiot.
The court filing is a separate matter. It acknowledges the obvious -that there is just enough legal cover for what Bush/Cheney did. As the court papers say, “Boumedienne – decided four years after plaintiffs’ detention ended – cannot support a finding that the law was so clearly established that a reasonable official would have known that his or her conduct violated the Constitution or the RFRA statute.”
I hate to say I told you so, but I have been arguing for some time that torture/Gitmo were not black and white issues legally: http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/01/09/panetta-and-blair-announced-steve-kappes-stays/
So no one should be surprised. Aim your ire at Bush and Cheney, not Obama.
Speaking of idiots, this is Obama’s problem now.
Oh, and by the way, torture is black and white when it comes to the law. You know, that thing that allows us to actually punish these thugs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/opinion/15danner.html
I won’t debate the issue anymore. I’ve said all I need to say. And Obama’s lawyers agree with me. As should anyone who actually read and comprehended the laws in question.
But I do agree that foreign policy, the economy etc etc are all Obama’s problems now. Yet another reason we need to get over our collective obsession with Bush and Cheney’s misdeeds and start looking forward.
Your condescension does not make your arguments any more cogent, especially when it comes to torture and the rule of law.
TM, I’m not sure what you mean by condescension. As for “my arguments,” that’s another misnomer. Do I believe that Bush & Cheney authorized torture? Absolutely. Do I believe the claim would hold up in a court of law? Absolutely not. The two statements are not inconsistent. Which is why Obama proscribed torture and closed Gitmo, but takes the position that the law was sufficiently unclear that the case against Bush/Cheney should be dismissed.
Oh, and I’d ask you to explain how my arguments are not cogent, but what’s the point? If you could’ve, you would’ve.
Taylor Marsh says:
16 March 2009 at 11:52 am
Speaking of idiots, this is Obama’s problem now.
______
there’s the ugly turn I suspected was coming. A new theme has arrived, read the top 4 threads… It’s PUMA-light. “teleprompter usage” is now an urgent issue.
GeoT says:
16 March 2009 at 5:06 pm
there’s the ugly turn I suspected was coming.
____________
Please tell me this does not come as a shock to you.
ogenec says:
16 March 2009 at 5:28 pm
GeoT says:
16 March 2009 at 5:06 pm
there’s the ugly turn I suspected was coming.
____________
Please tell me this does not come as a shock to you.
_____
that’s why I said I “suspected” it, aka expected it.
To some an “ugly” turn is any criticism of Obama at all. You all are far too sensitive and need to buck up.
I am guessing we won’t stop until China’s recent remarks come true….and nobody buys treasury bonds.
At that point, we’re at the bottom.