TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Archive | August, 2009

Obama Not Only One with Decision to Make

szep_gop-noreform

The countdown to a decision on will he or won’t he has begun for Joseph P. Kennedy II.

So, for now I’ll refrain from recounting the challenges and scrutiny that would bring another round of excavating his past, including the annulment scandal, which the Boston papers are already covering; reminding everyone what will be part of any campaign fight if Joe II enters. Though it’s unclear how much anyone can stomach a rehashing, given it’s Teddy’s seat he would be trying to win, with much romanticism and nostalgia lingering in the air. But will it last or transfer to Joe II?

Meanwhile, what about Vicki Kennedy? The Boston Herald offers up some speculation and unsourced rumors:

A Democratic operative with Kennedy contacts told the Herald yesterday Vicki Kennedy is “very much interested” in occupying the seat to see his life’s work completed. A family friend said nephew Joseph P. Kennedy II also is being urged by friends and family to run. …

George Stephanopoulos, whose info is usually good, trumps the Herald’s “Democratic operative with Kennedy contacts”, offering a “solid source” (via Twitter), plus that Gov. Patrick is scheduled to make an announcement around 3pm today:

The trial balloon launched yesterday by Kennedy friends Chris Dodd and Orrin Hatch isn’t going anywhere. A solid source assures me that Vicki Kennedy won’t run in a special election to fill the Massachusetts Senate seat. She’s not interested in an interim appointment if it becomes available.

There is little doubt Democrats will need reminding of what Sen. Ted Kennedy wanted, not just the history that he worked via bipartisanship to pass legislation whenever possible, which Republicans will be flaking at every turn, over his nearly five decades of service in the Senate. Because it should be noted that no one was a harder partisan when it came to making the case for liberal causes. Like I said in one of the interviews I did over the weekend, with Al Jazeera English: If Sen. Kennedy couldn’t get it done through bipartisanship, there is no question he’d push forward with only Democrats if that’s what it took to get important legislation passed. However, bipartisan agreement out of competition and confrontation was always Kennedy’s collaborative goal, if it was possible.

This might have been doable before the wingnuts took over. But now the Republican Party is more about doing nothing or obstructing, seemingly more intent on keeping Democrats from adding to our social justice legacy than they are about offering solutions to America’s challenges.

The sight of Joseph P. Kennedy II picking up Teddy’s mantle on health care could perhaps be the person Pres. Obama needs to haunt his every compromise, which we can all sense is coming. As for Mrs. Vicki Kennedy, it makes you wonder if anyone could be more powerful. But does she want it?

So, many things remain in the wind until Gov. Patrick makes his announcement.

One thing that remains constant is what Sen. Ted Kennedy said to his “Committee for a Democratic Majority” in his final email, which restated his commitment and his goals on health care reform. Something no Democrat should be allowed to forget.

Friend,

I’ve seen our health care system up close over the past year.

I’m fortunate to have the finest medical care in the world. But I’ve seen far too many people unable to obtain the care they need because they can’t afford it.

That’s wrong. It’s got to change, and it’s about to change.

We’re fighting for legislation in Congress to fix our broken health care system. Under President Obama’s leadership, Republicans and Democrats are working together to write a bill that will guarantee good care at long last to everyone who needs it.

But we’ll need strong nationwide support to produce the 60 Senate votes that will probably be required to avoid a filibuster and actually pass the bill.

Friend, I need your support. Please sign our petition for quality, affordable health care for every American:

http://www.democraticmajority.com/healthcare (TM NOTE: This site is now EMK’s memorial site.)

Our legislation includes five major provisions:

  • We give Americans better choices for health insurance. We follow a simple principle: If you like the coverage you have now, you can keep it. If you don’t like your current coverage, our bill offers new and more affordable options. We’ll negotiate with insurance companies to keep costs low, make it illegal for companies to deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions, and give Americans the option to enroll in a public insurance program.
  • We reduce the cost of health care. We’ll crack down on fraud and abuse, and we’ll reduce red tape to keep costs down. We also make sure doctors use the most effective therapies to treat illnesses, so patients aren’t paying extra for treatments that don’t work.
  • We put new emphasis on prevention. The best way to treat a disease is to prevent it from ever striking, or to catch it at an early stage. By giving every American access to affordable health care, we’ll enable millions of people to be screened for diabetes, heart disease, cancer and depression.
  • We bring more help to the elderly and the disabled. We make it easier for these Americans to live independently. We help pay for home upgrades such as wheelchair ramps, and for regular home care to enable people to live in their own homes, not nursing homes.
  • Finally, we develop a better health workforce, delivering modern and responsive care. We invest in doctors, nurses, and other health professionals to meet the needs of patients more effectively for years to come.

These changes won’t be easy to enact — but we can’t afford to wait, and we can’t afford to fail.

Show your support for health reform that will benefit all our citizens, reduce the financial burdens on our nation’s people and businesses, and put our health care industry on a strong and sustainable basis for the future:

http://www.democraticmajority.com/healthcare (TM NOTE: This site is now EMK’s memorial site.)

I’ll be working hard to pass this bill in the weeks ahead, and I hope you’ll be there with me.

Thank you so much for the very real difference you can make in achieving this great goal we share.

Sincerely,
Senator Edward M. Kennedy

Read full story · Comments are closed

…and now it begins

Photobucket

Sarah Palin’s first big speaking gig of her rehabilitation tour, foreign affairs edition, will be in Asia. Via AP:

Former U.S. vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, once questioned about her lack of foreign policy experience, will make her first trip to Asia in September.

The former Alaska governor will visit Hong Kong to address the CLSA Investors Forum, a well-known annual conference of global investment managers, the host announced Monday. …

Other political heavy hitters who have spoken at CLSA including former President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore, as well as former fed chairman Alan Greenspan.

This is only one of the reportedly “1,070+” speaking invitations coming Palin’s way.

It remains to be seen whether simply traveling to Asia will count as actual foreign policy experience. …and I’m not being flip.

This is the beginning of her gravitas point gathering, something that is critical if she’s intending on eventually making a run for the presidency, though she’s got a long way to go before proving to people beyond the base that she has a chance in any general election.

It’s not yet clear whether in 2012 any part of the Republican Party will matter beyond the base. But you can bet that Mitt Romney’s people will be keeping a close watch.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Why I Remain A (Reluctant) Feminist Hawk on Afghanistan

Photobucket

It’s lonely out here. And for a very good reason. But even though the Taliban will out last our efforts, the fact remains that if we don’t secure Afghanistan to the point where women aren’t subjugated, tortured and murdered, Afghanistan will likely once again turn to teeter on failed state status, something candidate Obama pledged he would not permit.

Reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, and Washington – The Obama administration is racing to demonstrate visible headway in the faltering war in Afghanistan, convinced it has only until next summer to slow a hemorrhage in U.S. support and win more time for the military and diplomatic strategy it hopes can rescue the 8-year-old effort.

But the challenge in Afghanistan is becoming more difficult in the face of gains by the Taliban, rising U.S. casualties, a weak Afghan government widely viewed as corrupt, and a sense among U.S. commanders that they must start the military effort largely from scratch nearly eight years after it began.

A turnaround is crucial because military strategists believe they will not be able to get the additional troops they feel they need in coming months if they fail to show that their new approach is working, U.S. officials and advisors say. …

President Hamid Karzai also hasn’t exactly distinguished himself, with ridiculous laws against women, siding with long established tribal and religious customs that continue to keep women down. It doesn’t exactly give people like me a very good chance at inspiring company on this side of the argument. That staying in Afghanistan and supporting his corrupt, inept government will actually change Afghan women and girls’ tortured path to better lives.

But nobody on the left seems to care, with their focus on withdrawal, which includes Sen. Russ Feingold who once again talked about a timetable for Afghanistan withdrawal, but without even mentioning the women and girls of Afghanistan even once in his recent op-ed. Having great respect for this progressive Senate leader, I continue to be stunned that the best on our side remain mute on this issue. My friend Steve Clemons, someone who I respect, as well as Rachel Maddow, gave evidence months ago that represented the common feelings on the left, when Steve quoting Dan Priest’s idea, “to find a way to tunnel out women.” Something I couldn’t accept then and don’t now, even amidst my gathering doubts and tortured resolve.

This year’s elections proved that women are already losing hope and the road forward.

“Everywhere I went before elections, I urged women in the villages to vote. But when the day came, even professional women in the city who normally felt free to go to work and shops and weddings stayed home. I was shocked,” said Safia Siddiqui, a legislator from Nangahar province. “There has been a lot of talk about women’s civic life and political movements, but security comes first.”

[...] The sense of eroding political rights for women did not begin with this election. In the past several years, Taliban attacks on prominent women have sent a powerful message to others who dreamed of entering public life. In the southern province of Kandahar alone, a female legislator, a women’s affairs official and a female prosecutor were gunned down by terrorists. Others have received constant threats, travel with armed guards or rarely visit their constituencies. …

There is family pressure, rooted in a long history of women being kept in their place, with the Taliban adding more fear until not even the strongest activists are willing to lose their life. Washington Post:

Some rights activists said the election-day chill signified a wider, continuing setback for Afghan women’s role in social, political and economic life after a brief period of hope for change after the Taliban regime was ousted in late 2001. They noted that domestic violence against women is increasing, that the Taliban has attacked and shut down hundreds of girls’ schools and that most women remain economically in thrall to their fathers and husbands, even when they are abused.

“Things are reverting, and it’s because of a mix of insecurity, economy and culture,” said Soraya Sobrang, a physician and member of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission. “For a few years when security was better, women could participate in public life and the new constitution gave them political rights. But then the attacks started, and people were warned not to send their daughters to school, not to send their wives to work. All their new rights came under threat, and nothing really changed in their lives.”

Now, Sobrang said, many Afghan women have lost hope.

“We have lost a lot of the ground we made. Women still face forced marriages, still work in the fields, still depend on men who beat them every day,” said Sobrang, who voted on Aug. 20 in a very short line of nervous, unsmiling women. “We can give a card to a woman and tell her to vote, but that does not protect her from danger, and it does not give her any real rights at all.”

When Obama first began talking about his limited increase in troops and focus on Afghanistan, I was for the plan. Though I’ve become skeptical in the last month over what is clearly mission creep, a Vietnam throw back term that should send chills up anyone’s spine, the reason I haven’t come out against further escalation is simple. No one has explained to me how we support the gains of women and girls without being engaged militarily.

Yet amidst these stories, even as I was never for the Iraq war, visions of Obama as LBJ dance across my nightmares. So, I in no way can embrace the talk of Mr. Anthony H. Cordesman of CSIS, whose rhetoric about “the United States win in Afghanistan leaves me slack-jawed.

We cannot win anything for the Afghans, because there will always be the Taliban who will out last us. What we need are leaders, male at first, because that is the culture of this country, to stand up and be a real partner with us trying to help bring some kind of stability on which the Afghans can build, which begins with security and no corruption so eventually women can make progress and eventually the difference. That in no way includes fixing jails and other ludicrous ideas leaking out of what could be our mission in Afghanistan going forward.

Because without the women and girls of Afghanistan, the country has no long-term hope and no future at all, which means nothing good for the region and U.S. interests in the long view.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Teddy, Barack and The Torch

“…The work begins anew. The hope rises again. And the dream lives on.”Senator Ted Kennedy (Democratic convention 2008, Denver)

I’ll be doing some media today, including on Al Jazeera English, talking about Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (so I’ll be checking in via Twitter). As the insanity on the right continues to mount, Huckabee the latest screwball to add his ignorant musings to the batch.

Some final thoughts as Ted Kennedy is brought back to Washington to be laid to rest near his brothers Jack and Bobby at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia.

People have been asking why Barack Obama? Why is he giving the eulogy when Sen. Kennedy had so many friends, colleagues and family members closer?

Once Ted became the patriarch of the Kennedy family, one of his duties was to also protect and further embed the Kennedy legacy into American history. Jack may have started the push towards civil rights, which you can feel in this forgotten speech, but it came with a push from others, including Dr. Martin Luther King and his brother Bobby, because Jack, for one thing, was worried about losing southern voters in ’64. Bobby took up the cause of social justice after Jack’s inspiration, adding an impassioned challenge, but was also stopped short, with Ted taking the torch and completing so many of the Kennedy family’s missions, starting with his maiden speech in the Senate, which was on the Voting Rights Act of 1964.

When Ted passed the torch to Barack Obama in the primaries in 2008, many were enraged. Kennedy would certainly forgive that, because he came from a family of red meat politics. So, like him, people like me moved on, never holding a grudge, always remembering what he’d done for this country. Understanding that endorsing Barack Obama was an act of passion, pride and politics, but also of family mission completed to the nation the Kennedys served.

Sen. Kennedy saw in Obama a new generation, much as people saw in Jack Kennedy when he began rising in the 1950s, with Bobby and the whole clan around him, soon to include Teddy, a part of a new wind whipping up an era of big changes. When the hip, cool, handsome and in generation of the political 1960s was born.

Pres. Obama giving Ted’s eulogy is personal, no doubt, a point of honoring a mentor, but it is also a matter of American history. Given the Kennedy family’s legacy on civil rights, but also in ushering in a new era over 50 years ago, Pres. Barack Obama is the manifestation of their dreams, but also Bobby Kennedy’s foretelling that it would happen, though it took way too long the get our first black president.

However, unlike some, for me Obama accepting the torch had nothing to do with continuing the Kennedy legacy, as their time, their era has now fully passed, regardless of what future Kennedy generations do, a mark that must now be their own.

As it is with the Democratic Party that must now wrestle with losing its liberal light and whether we can keep that alive ourselves, even with the path laid out so clearly.

That said, like Jack began civil rights legislation that he never got to realize, Ted’s life’s mission of getting health care for everyone, something he saw as a right and not a privilege, still awaits. The one thing we must make sure is done, even if it’s in Ted’s 80-20 compromise, getting eighty percent, if that’s what it takes, coming back later for the twenty, though as Teddy knew all too well you sometimes don’t get to go that last mile.

More important for the Kennedy legacy is that Ted Kennedy completed the play begun by Jack, then Bobby. Passing the torch; manifesting in the end the completion of his brothers’ work, which began with Kennedy family hopes and dreams, adding so very much of his own. A legacy that cannot be forgotten because Ted accomplished what Joe Kennedy couldn’t himself, not even through Jack or Bobby, waiting a long time before it was finally manifested through his own life’s work.

An American story completed. Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chapter, the longest and most thoroughly well lived, closing the book on the Kennedy brothers’ family legacy.

The rest is now up to us.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Teddy Kennedy’s Foreign Policy Idealism

kennedy_treebangladesh
A tree Teddy planted in Bangladesh.
Located at Dhaka University to replace one
destroyed by the Pakistan army still stands.
_____________________________________

Little is talked about when it comes to Sen. Kennedy and foreign policy. Adam Clymer wrote a great piece for the Daily Beast on the subject. Domestic issues pervaded Teddy’s mission, but also his image at home. However, he was intensely interested and engaged in world matters, especially where human rights and the plight of the oppressed, as well as refugees were concerned. Even if he didn’t hold the appropriate Senate committee seat or ranking member slot in the foreign affairs arena.

One obvious link was Sen. Kennedy’s ties to Ireland, which go back to the 70s. Jean Kennedy Smith, the surviving sister of Teddy, was ambassador to Ireland, appointed by Clinton through Teddy’s prodding. But little is still known about the details of his efforts to aid Ireland on the road to peace back in the 90s. What is public is that he lobbied Pres. Bill Clinton, the first president to become engaged in Ireland’s struggles, directly and determinedly to give a limited U.S. visa to Sinn Fein’s Gerald Adams. It’s thought this was a move that eventually led to the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. Time has featured a piece about it, exploring the complexities and contradictions.

It was Kennedy who, on Hume’s advice, persuaded Bill Clinton to grant a controversial U.S. visa to Gerry Adams, leader of the Irish republican party Sinn Fein, in 1994. At the time, the move was strongly opposed by the British government, but today the visa is seen as an important turning point in Northern Ireland’s recent history. Adams was able to convince IRA supporters on U.S. soil of the merits of backing the peace process. Seven months later, the IRA announced its first military ceasefire, ending a 25-year terror campaign, with Protestant paramilitary groups calling their own ceasefires shortly after.

Let’s hope more details surface, even as Kennedy refused to take credit at the time, as there is no reason not to tell the history today.

Another story comes out of Bangladesh. That tree at the top of this post was planted by Teddy and still flourishes today.

I could write the history of the war of independence between East Pakistan (formerly East Bengal) and West Pakistan and India in 1971, which led to nothing less than a massacre. A civil war for independence that created Bangladesh. When Teddy took on the Administration policies of Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who backed Pakistan against independence. Something the U.S. simply does over and over again to our detriment.

But someone I call a friend, who has written stellar foreign policy pieces for this site many times, Mash, whom old time regulars will no doubt remember, wrote a piece about it as someone who was impacted personally by the Pakistani horrors inflicted on the Bengalis. But especially the independence won for Bangladesh. “The Lion in Winter” is a wonderful piece, which I hope you’ll read in full:

Thirty five years ago when the Pakistani military was slaughtering my people by the millions, President Richard Nixon quietly offered arms to continue the killings. Along with Senators Frank Church and William Fulbright, Senator Kennedy took to the floor of the United States Senate and spoke out against the atrocities. His was one of the lonely voices in the United States government that defended the right of the Bengali people to exist. He spoke out against the massacres, the rapes, and the persecution when the Nixon administration chose to look the other way.

On August 11, 1971 Senator Kennedy visited Bengali refugee camps in Calcutta, India. There he visited with some of the 10 million Bengalis who had fled the massacres in East Pakistan. Kennedy was scheduled to visit East Pakistan but was refused entry by the Pakistani government. Nevertheless, with his visit, Senator Kennedy helped shine the world’s spotlight on the ongoing genocide. With his visit, he became a friend of the Bengali people.

On December 16, 1971 Bangladesh was liberated from Pakistan. On Valentine’s Day the following year, Senator Kennedy visited the newly formed nation. Kennedy arrived in the capital city, Dhaka, as the crowds shouted “Joi Kennedy!’ (Victory to Kennedy). He was mobbed everywhere he went.

About 8,000 people crowded into the university courtyard and jammed lecture hall balconies and roofs, to hear the most popular American among Bengalis tell them what they have been telling themselves since their war for independence began last March.

“Even though the United States government does not recognize you,” Kennedy said, “the people of the world do recognize you.”

In his speech, Kennedy drew parallels between the liberation of Bangladesh and the American Revolution. He said America had prospered despite people who predicted it would collapse following independence, and so would Bangladesh.

Kennedy’s early support for the Bengalis’ fight against Pakistan’s army has made him a symbol of the friendship with the United States which the Bengalis desperately want. When criticizing President Nixon for supporting Pakistan, Bengalis invariably mention Kennedy as the example to prove that the American people sympathize with their cause.

Mash also cross-posted this piece at DK, where Senator Kennedy made sure his appreciation was noted.

Mash – Thank you for this thoughtful and beautifully written diary. I read it this morning and am grateful for your words. You have reminded us all to be mindful of battles of the past as we fight to change the current course of history.

With warm regards,
Senator Edward Kennedy

Then there is South Africa. From Clymer:

He also heartened the opposition in South Africa. He visited that country in 1985, after Archbishop Desmond Tutu persuaded him that his presence would draw attention to apartheid through the American television crews that followed him. He visited slums and resettlement areas. His trip was denounced by the South African government and by the United States ambassador, Herman Nickel. Kennedy staged an illegal protest outside Pollsmoor Prison, where Nelson Mandela was being held. He said, “Behind these walls are men that are deeply committed to the cause of freedom in this land.” Years later, Mandela said he knew Kennedy had been at the gate of the prison and that “gave us a lot of strength and hope, and the feeling that we had millions behind us both in our struggle against apartheid but in our special situation in prison.”

On his return, Kennedy led an effort to impose economic sanctions on South Africa. In 1986, Congress overrode a veto by President Reagan and enacted a ban on all new investment by Americans in South African businesses and on the importation of such products as steel, coal, ammunition, and food from South Africa. “The time for procrastination and delay is over,” Kennedy said. “Now is the time to keep the faith with Martin Luther King, Desmond Tutu, and all those who believe in a free South Africa.”

However, Senator Kennedy’s most important foreign policy contribution was his vote against the Iraq war. Teddy watched Bobby’s anti Vietnam stance, not fully embracing his brother’s passion at first, even as they both knew what Jack’s legacy on Vietnam was on his death. Though historians like Robert Dallek have offered that JFK would have withdrawn if he’d live. We’ll never know.

What we do know is Teddy Kennedy was one of the leaders against the Iraq war from the start. I was a very lonely voice on a.m. radio at the time, railing against all the Democrats who didn’t have Teddy’s courage, Biden, Kerry and Hillary. He was smarter than them all. …so was Barack Obama, which, through a little noticed speech at the time, would change the course of history. A beginning for what would develop into a powerful political kinship between Kennedy and Obama.

“My vote against this misbegotten war is the best vote I have cast in the United States Senate since I was elected in 1962.”Senator Edward M. Kennedy

Read full story · Comments are closed

Cheney Didn’t Torture! Nixon Bugging Teddy, and Other News


“The Great White Hope” controversy

Racism and Republicans linked again. See video. Sheesh.

It takes a lot of nerve for Stephen Atta had a meeting in Prague Hayes to call someone else on honesty, but that’s what he does to Greg Sargent, who has been in an amusing back and forth with Cheney’s hagiographer for a few days. My favorite from Hayes on this one, there are after all so many, is the same that Sargent closes with today.

So I pointed out that the CIA Inspector General’s report make clear that senior CIA officials, not Dick Cheney, conceived and executed the controversial interrogation techniques.

Absolutely incredible. According to the Stephen Hayes view of Dick Cheney, he’s innocent, had nothing to do with torture! You know, because Cheney didn’t turn the screws, drown the detainees himself. Stunning, even for Stephen Hayes.

The Glenn Beck advertising boycott continues, amidst reports that his ratings are skyrocketing, with the LA Times “Show Tracker” giving the best report I’ve seen.

On the Middle East, which will be up front this fall, Aluf Benn analyzes:

“Settlement freeze in exchange for Iran sanctions” – that was the gist of an article published in Britain’s The Guardian newspaper on Wednesday, in advance of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with U.S. envoy George Mitchell in London later that day. The two discussed the anticipated announcement next month by U.S. President Barack Obama on the imminent renewal of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, as well as the subject of construction in West Bank settlements and gestures from Arab states toward normalization with Israel. The issue of Iran’s nuclear program, however, hovered in the background of their meeting. …

… After stripping the expected rhetorical flourishes from Obama’s gesture – the talk of peace and quotations from the Koran – its strategic purpose is laid bare: the formation of a regional coalition against Iran, led by the United States and with the participation of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the small Gulf states. Every member will have to contribute something…

Holbrooke and Karzai reportedly have words over election: The Obama administration official described the session with Karzai as a “difficult meeting” and “very tough,” but denied media reports that Holbrooke “stormed out.”

Okay. Well. Moving on…

Explosive allegations of Iranian rapes of detained Iranians, charged by reformer Mehdi Karroubi against the regime after the election, is reported in the Guardian:

An Iranian MP said today there is proof that some reformists were sexually abused in prison after the disputed presidential election in June. “Raping of some detainees through baton and soda bottle has been proved to us,” the unnamed member of the investigative committee was quoted as saying. His comments are the first official acknowledgment that prisoners were violated. Until now, Iran’s leaders had dismissed such opposition claims as mischief-making. One of the defeated reformist presidential candidates, Mehdi Karroubi, has alleged that some of those arrested after mass demonstrations were raped.

The death of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the clerical leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, has been big news, as the U.S. begins to mourn, honor and celebrate the life of Edward M. Kennedy. Juan Cole’s piece on it is important. Also see Gulf Analysis:

More than anything, through his political career, Hakim became a symbol of the chaos, the contradictions and the opportunism that have characterised Iraq in the post-2003 period. Having abandoned religious studies at an early level, Hakim made a professional career in the 1980s as a political-military operator in what was then called the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), a Khomeinist outfit created by Iran in 1982 in order to maximise its control of the Iraqi opposition during the Iran–Iraq War. He returned to Iraq from Iran after the start of the Iraq War in 2003, and in August that year, after the death of his brother Muhammad Baqir al-Hakim in a terrorist attack in Najaf, was propelled to the top leadership position in SCIRI.

What happens to the Iraqi Shiites in this vacuum is anyone’s guess.

Moving to the topic of the moment, health care…

szep_teddy

Karen Tumulty, someone entrenched in the health care debate, writes a very sobering article about the fate of any health care reform, post Teddy.

Students of history will likely appreciate revisiting the history of Kennedy – Nixon, Teddy edition, when the taping and watching of Teddy became a Nixon preoccupation: One reason to extend Kennedy’s protection was that the White House was could assign a Secret Service agent who would report on Kennedy’s activities. Via Nixon Tapes (h/t HuffPost):

… Early in the taping system’s existence, on April 9, 1971, President Nixon, Chief of Staff H.R. “Bob” Haldeman, and Press Secretary Ron Ziegler discussed the Kennedy family, monitoring democratic candidates, and Chappaquiddick (2:41, 2.5m) as well as the desire to tape Senator Kennedy (0:16, 290k), even though Haldeman reminds Nixon it is a crime to “bug” a Member of Congress. One of the rationales offered for bugging Kennedy and other democrats was that it cost less than hiring researchers or investigators.

Later in the spring of 1971, on May 28, the topic of conversation again between President Nixon and Bob Haldeman turned to wiretapping and creating a fund to monitor Kennedy (3:23, 3.2m). That summer, on July 2, again the idea was raised that funds “stashed away” could be used to “tail” Kennedy (1:15, 1.2m). Haldeman reported that there was approximately one million dollars available for such monitoring activities. President Nixon suggested that closer to two million would be needed. More than anything else, the White House was interested in catching Kennedy having an extramarital affair, which would presumably end his chances of making a presidential bid in the 1972 election.

During the fall, the White House continued to be concerned that Senator Kennedy would be the “dark horse” presidential candidate of the Democratic Party. On September 8, in a conversation in the Executive Office Building between President Nixon and John Ehrlichman, Nixon suggested “a little persecuting” (3:14, 3.0m) of Kennedy…

Mitt Romney to replace the Liberal Lion? Bad joke. So, who will be the place holder senator for Teddy’s seat? Could be Michael Dukakis, which is the current scuttlebutt. I decided to add one note here… My choice is Mrs. Vicki Kennedy, Teddy’s widow. She’s smart, classy, was invaluable to her husband, someone who knows the issues, including health care, and rumored to also have been Sen. Kennedy’s preferred choice.

And in the some things don’t change category, Mark Penn and the Wall Street Journal op-ed crew prove they deserve each other. Removing all doubt that he’ll ever change, Mr. Penn once again earns his pariah status (and that’s being kind).

Read full story · Comments are closed

TM-DC Podcast: Teddy, the Kennedys, Carter, Hillary… and Right-Wing Haters

The podcast is up, which is available through ITunes (and RSS feed).

A lot of history remembering Teddy, but also the ending of an era. …and of course, if you’re covering an iconic Democrat, especially the last great Kennedy patriarch, the right-wing screed machine isn’t very far behind. Rush Limbaugh couldn’t wait to start, with Glenn Beck’s invoking of Paul Wellstone, with other wingnuts joining in, a case in sheer, unadulterated PANIC!

Emitting flop sweat, as Hannity does whenever he thinks of “The Kennedy Bill,” the right just doesn’t know what to do, especially considering they’ve got no leaders of any class, depth or star power, who know anything about anything, on their side. From Media Matters:

Hannity on Kennedy’s death: “a lot of this was the politicizing of — remember Paul Wellstone’s death?” Discussing Kennedy’s death during his radio program, Sean Hannity asserted, “We’ve got The Wall Street Journal reporting — and by the way, a lot of this was the politicizing of — remember Paul Wellstone’s death? You know, ‘Let’s do everything for Paul.’ And we’re now being implored to get behind Obamacare because it’s what Ted Kennedy would have wanted.” [The Sean Hannity Show, 8/26/09]

Christopher Hayes brings up a point on which there can be little disagreement:

It occurred to me that if Hillary Clinton had delivered word for word the same speech that Teddy Kennedy did in 1980, his famous, justly praised “The Dream Will Never Die” speech, Clinton would have been excoriated. Kennedy only mentioned Carter one time in that speech. Just sayin’.

That and Teddy’s passing got me to thinking. There has been much talk over the months and years, as people get to know the history of my politics, with people loving to remind me that I was a “Reagan Democrat,” as if it was some crime, especially given the time and temperature of Democratic politics, especially where foreign policy was concerned. See Iran hostage crisis, gas lines (designated days to fill my tank in New York City), Desert One…. Reminding me of when Teddy took on Carter in a primary challenge of all challenges, going all the way to the convention in 1980. When Teddy finally and officially lost the nomination, he could barely tolerate shaking Carter’s hand at the time, with this picture saying it all, Tip O’Neill negotiating the surrender, which was supposed to be an over the head joining of hands of the two rivals. A lot of Democrats felt as Teddy did back then. Not all became “Reagan Democrats,” but standing against Carter, even as Teddy couldn’t make it all the way (stopped in part by history’s ghost of Chappaquiddick), I’m reminded that I never regretted that one vote in ’80. I doubt if Teddy regretted taking on Pres. Carter at the convention either, even though Carter beat him handily. That fight helped inspire him to become the Lion of the Senate.

And just maybe, Sen. Kennedy’s passing and the reminder of all this Liberal Lion of the Senate achieved will make the word liberal something more people will embrace. A word the right learned they had to demonize in order not to be engulfed by its power, and which the passing of Teddy should remind us all is an important word, especially when it comes to enacting policies that actually change peoples lives for the better.

Enjoy the podcast!

…and for posterity, the front page of today’s Washington Post:

teddy_fp_front
Read full story · Comments are closed

8.27.09 – Teddy, the Kennedy Legacy… and right-wing hate.


Photobucket
 

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Liberals’ Liberal

cross-posted at Huffington Post

“… For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.” – Edward Moore Kennedy

Photobucket

Senator Edward Moore Kennedy has died. You could visualize the flop sweat dripping off of Sean Hannity yesterday during his show, as he tried to hide his nervousness about what the Senate Patriarch‘s passing would mean for health care reform, dreading “The Kennedy Bill” push that is building steam with each passing minute. But it was Andrew Breitbart going on a screed bender against the man the right could never foil, the frustration of which is also chronicled by Michael Calderone in full, which proves the strength of Senator Kennedy’s power, which his adversaries could never dim, no matter what they tried.

Last week upon the succession letter being uncovered, regardless of denials and bravura statements that he might fly in to rescue a close vote, having studied John F. Kennedy my entire life as well as producing a one-woman show on his life and legacy, I knew this was Kennedy lore being spun for the very last time. So, Edward is gone. The Kennedy who dodged “the curse” lived 77 long years, able to achieve what his brothers could not, no matter the legend surrounding Joseph, the Kennedy who was supposed to be king but died in a daring mission in war, John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy, the darlings who died by assassins bullets. With one of the greatest historical moments of modern times Edward’s eulogy of his brother, Robert F. Kennedy; the vision of this country clear in every sentence, as well as the purpose of every person who is driven by his or her passions for what can be for people. It applies to Edward M. Kennedy on his passing:

… My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.

Those of us who loved him and who take him to his rest today, pray that what he was to us and what he wished for others will some day come to pass for all the world.

As he said many times, in many parts of this nation, to those he touched and who sought to touch him:

“Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not.”

Born of the closest thing America will know as royalty, Edward Moore Kennedy gave his life to help those who had less, always endeavoring to make the lives of Americans better. It was a tenet of the Kennedy family to give, as much was expected of people who had everything. As a family man, he has served as the Kennedy patriarch for decades. As a public servant, he is possibly the greatest legislator in United States history. But more than anything he was the liberals’ liberal, true to his political passions from beginning to end, with a body of work to back it up.

From The Kennedy Legacy, by Vincent Bzdek, an excerpt of which covers Kennedy’s “Last Hurrah.”

Kennedy has cast more than 15,000 votes and written more than 2,500 bills. His fingerprints are on most of the major social programs that have been launched in the last 40 years. “He has done more for human happiness than anyone in Congress,” said Carol Chodroff, a human rights attorney who works closely with Kennedy. He made his maiden speech in the Senate in support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed segregation in theaters, restaurants, hotels, swimming pools, libraries and public schools. He continued as a strong advocate for civil rights during the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and the current decade, helping to ensure passage of the Voting Rights Act and substantially improving the rights of the handicapped, women in the workplace, immigrants and refugees. He introduced the bill that created the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. He got 18-year-olds the right to vote.

He has campaigned for universal health insurance for 30 years, and from his hospital bed last year was orchestrating efforts to pass a bipartisan healthcare reform plan in early 2009. Along the way toward his elusive goal he has dramatically increased cancer research funds, created portable health insurance for workers, hammered through a patient’s bill of rights and instituted closer government supervision of health maintenance organizations.

The mountain of achievements he has compiled or played a significant part in include the creation of Medicare, the family and medical leave bill, national service legislation, worker retraining laws, freedom of access to abortion clinics, the lifting of the abortion gag rule, women’s health legislation including fetal tissue research, and student loan reform. Ted Kennedy helped create Meals on Wheels for senior citizens. He won greater justice for Native Americans, created a host of programs to combat hunger in the United States and abolished the poll tax. His immigration bill in the 1960s changed the very complexion of America, replacing a black-white divide with a multi-hued diversity of immigrants. He also has a strong history of gun control efforts–including early support for the Brady bill and opposition to the National Rifle Association dating from 1968.

His causes have been large and small and have crossed party lines. Working closely with President George W. Bush, he pushed through the controversial No Child Left Behind law intended to improve standards at public schools. In the 1990s, he and Republican Orrin Hatch cosponsored a bill to give health insurance to nine million uninsured children. Hatch and Kennedy rewrote the country’s sentencing laws, ending parole in the federal prison system. In the 1980s, he and Republican senator Alan Simpson crafted immigration reform together. He and Senator John McCain did it again in the 1990s. He forged a balanced budget bill, helped Ronald Reagan deregulate the airlines and single-handedly blocked the confirmations of two Republican nominees to the Supreme Court, G. Harrold Carswell and Robert Bork.

Some have called him the Imperial Senator, running a kind of shadow government out of the Senate. His involvement in foreign affairs, for example, is little known but broad. It was his activism that pushed the world toward a condemnation of apartheid in South Africa. He is the one who initiated the sanctions that eventually forced the end of second-class citizenship for blacks in that country. New York Times journalist Adam Clymer said Kennedy’s influence “has extended from Vietnam to the Soviet Union, from Bangladesh to Chile, from Biafra to China, from South Africa to Ireland.”

Kennedy’s first big job was managing John F. Kennedy’s re-election campaign to the Senate. After J.F.K. became president, Bobby A.G., Edward was too young to take his brother’s seat. So a “seat warmer” was appointed, Benjamin A. Smith 2d, a family friend, until the younger brother turned 30, when he entered the race, winning in a barn burner of an election. It was the start of an historic career. He happened to be presiding over the Senate on one particularly Friday when the nation cracked it two, Nov. 22, 1963. The next year Edward would have his own brush with death, as his small plane crashed while ferrying him to accept his re-election nomination for Senate, killing everyone on board, saving Kennedy; though Edward’s back was broken, along with several ribs. He did his job from bed while convalescing for months and months.

In 1965, Edward Kennedy returned to work in the Senate taking up the Voting Rights Act, which Lyndon Johnson was continuing after the murder of J.F.K., putting up an amendment to abolish the poll tax that ultimately failed. It was the era of Vietnam, but it would be his brother Bobby who inspired him to come out against the Vietnam War, which coincided with Bobby’s move to seek the presidency. An event that would cost him his life and take the remainder of America’s innocence.

“There is no safety in hiding,” he declared in a speech at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Mass., in August. “Like my brothers before me, I pick up a fallen standard. Sustained by the memory of our priceless years together, I shall try to carry forward that special commitment to justice, excellence and courage that distinguished their lives.”

Then came 1969. The year that would change Kennedy’s life forever. Coming from a family of drinking and carousing lotharios, Edward was no different, but his adventures coincided with the sexual revolution that changed this country forever, also his life. Partying with former campaign workers on Chappaquiddick Island, off Martha’s Vineyard, in the wee hours, Kennedy drove a car carrying Mary Jo Kopechne off a very narrow bridge, sinking the car in around 8 feet of water, as is chronicled in the Washington Post today. Edward Kennedy did not report the accident for 10 full hours, saying he got so exhausted from trying to save the woman that he simply came home and went to bed. He plead guilty to leaving the scene of an accident. The tragedy would unleash a torrent of questions and recriminations, some of which last to this day, that got so bad that Kennedy asked the voters of Massachusetts if he should resign. The voters said no, loudly. …and continued saying yes to Kennedy to keep him serving for 46 years. But the stain of Chappaquiddick lasted for the rest of his life, hovering over his dreams of the presidency that would always be an impediment for accomplishing his biggest dream.

The Carter – Kennedy collision began with Edward backing Carter, but it wouldn’t last. By 1978, draft Kennedy die hards sprung up in the face of Carter’s failing presidency and his inability to speak to the people in a time of malaise, a word Carter eventually made famous and enduring. When Kennedy announced his candidacy one of the things he said, as quoted today in the Post, encapsulated Carter’s presidency perfectly: “Our leaders have resigned themselves to defeat.” The campaign was an unmitigated disaster, with the ending his speech at the convention, a moment that will never be forgotten, but not before the campaign battle fractured the Democratic Party to smithereens. A moment of history that was teased about being replayed in 2008, when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were battling for the nomination, though the rumors of a Carter-Kennedy repeat were mere hallucinations of deranged activists than anything as cataclysmic as what Kennedy managed against Carter being played out.

After his defeat in 1980, Kennedy reconciled himself that he would never be president, using the Reagan years to stand against everything the conservatives tried to do, especially when Reagan tried to weaken the Voting Rights Act. But it was the Americans with Disabilities Act that became Kennedy’s signature accomplishment, no doubt driven by his sister Rosemary’s mental handicaps. In 1994, Kennedy became one of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s strongest advocates for national health insurance, which he’d been working on since the late 60s. It was a disaster, but he kept pushing, also helping to enact S-Chip, as well as No Child Left Behind Act. But it was health care that he so longed to see manifest for the American people.

It was not to be, at least not in his lifetime.

There will be much speculation about what might have been, if Edward M. Kennedy, the Lion of the Senate, had been present to roar once more, able to be out front on the current health care campaign. There can be little doubt that had he been well enough to become the face and force in public once again we would be looking at health care reform from a different place, for Edward had all the passion for this legislation that Pres. Obama lacks. But not even Kennedy could have stopped the “death panel” squeal of Sarah Palin, because the era of Kennedy politicians is gone. And I’m not just talking about the name. It’s about the passion to policy over polemics; the mission to work for the people above all else, including ego. There will never be another era of public servants represented by Edward M. Kennedy, who stands as the lion amidst legislative lambs.

A man who could never fulfill the dream of becoming president, but chose to be his own kingmaker, like his father, when Edward M. Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama for president, putting the Kennedy name behind a novice that the last Kennedy brother believed was the heir to their political throne. It was a move that fractured Democratic friendships of long standing, caused a rift with the last two-term Democratic president William Jefferson Clinton, ignited a war among activist partisans, and helped orchestrate one of the most powerful political pictures in modern campaign history. That moment when Teddy Kennedy, obviously ailing, stood beside Barack Obama, along with Caroline Kennedy, John F. Kennedy’s sole surviving child, to pass the last torch to the newest generation, the finale of this dynastic family.

Edward Moore Kennedy, son, brother, husband, father, grandfather, friend, citizen of America and the greatest living senator in U.S. history, gone. He will never be forgotten. He cannot be replaced.

The courage of life is often a less dramatic spectacle than the courage of a final moment; but it is no less a magnificent mixture of triumph and tragedy. — John Fitzgerald Kennedy

And just maybe, Sen. Kennedy’s passing and the reminder of all this Liberal Lion of the Senate achieved will make the word liberal something more people will embrace. A word the right learned they had to demonize in order not to be engulfed by its tide, and which the passing of Edward Moore Kennedy should remind us all is an important word, especially when it comes to enacting policies that actually change peoples lives for the better.

Read full story · Comments are closed

EXCERPT: The Kennedy Legacy, by Vincent Bzdek

–see “The Liberals’ Liberal” on Huffington Post

The courage of life is often a less dramatic spectacle than the courage of a final moment; but it is no less a magnificent mixture of triumph and tragedy. – —John Fitzgerald Kennedy

kennedy_book
THE KENNEDY LEGACY, by Vincent Bzdek

PROLOGUE
THE LAST HURRAH

August 25, 2008: With just two hours to showtime, Ted Kennedy and the speech of a lifetime languished uncertainly on a hospital bed. Exhausted, experiencing excruciating pain, Kennedy waited in a nondescript room at the University of Colorado Hospital in East Denver as the setting sun torched the sky behind the Rocky Mountains. He was just a few miles away from the convention hall, but it was beginning to feel like a million. He lay unnoticed by hospital workers, hoping against hope that doctors would clear him to make the speech. His wife, Vicki, was with him, and the last-minute ironies of their long, difficult trek were not lost on them. A very sick, 76-year-old Kennedy, fighting an arduous fight against brain cancer, had secretly made it all the way across the country in a chartered plane to be at the Democratic National Convention. During a long summer of chemotherapy and radiation treatments, he and his former speechwriter, Bob Shrum, had worked diligently on the speech he wanted to give. He’d endured a sleepless night after his arrival in Denver and fought off the effects of the altitude only to have the excruciating pain of a mysterious new ailment stop his last-ditch dream in its tracks.

After successful surgery in June to remove the tumor from his brain, Kennedy had called family members together at his white clapboard house in Hyannis Port to tell them all that he was determined—no, hell-bent—on giving his speech in August. Family members remember emotional, difficult conversations about the wisdom of such a trip. Kennedy’s wife, his doctors, his children and his aides warned that the speech could very well kill him. Some pleaded with him not to go to Denver at all, even for an appearance. They argued adamantly that the risk to Kennedy’s health wasn’t worth it. After two seizures in May, Kennedy had been diagnosed with malignant glioma, which is fatal for 50 percent of its sufferers by the end of a year’s time. If he went to Denver, family members feared, it could be his last speech. Everyone close to Kennedy sensed that a curtain was slowly closing on both his life and a 50-year-long political drama in American history. And they did not want him to hurry that finale. They had been making their case for rest and caution for eight weeks, all during the “shock and awe” phase of his treatment. Kennedy repeatedly acknowledged his family’s concerns about his health during those two months, largely agreed with them that going to Denver was reckless, and then vowed that he was going to do it anyway. “It was a risk to his health,” said Shrum, “but he really wanted to do this.” Said another friend: “He gave every ounce of courage to attend that convention.”

Doctors were at first concerned that the pain he was experiencing after his arrival on Sunday, August 24, was due to his cancer or the chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Radiologists were reluctant to let him fly during treatment because the pressurized air in the plane cabin can wreak all sorts of havoc on the immune system of a weakened body. Kennedy’s doctors were also concerned that Denver’s mile-high altitude might complicate his condition, making his lungs and heart work harder as they coped with the reduced oxygen in Colorado’s thin air. One of Kennedy’s close associates said the senator had suffered a serious setback in July after he flew to Washington to cast a crucial vote on a Medicare bill. Doctors had pleaded with him not to make that trip, either.

Kennedy had been taken straight to the University of Colorado Hospital from the plane for a routine check. At the hospital Sunday night, less than 24 hours before he was scheduled to give his surprise speech, doctors discovered what was causing Kennedy’s pain. In addition to all his other health concerns, the senator had a case of kidney stones. The new ailment had nothing to do with his cancer, it was just bad luck and worse timing. The pain of passing kidney stones, it is said, feels something like childbirth, and doctors were almost certain the speech was off. Kidney stones are typically treated with morphine or other powerful painkillers—drugs that make it difficult to stand up, let alone deliver a rousing speech.

“We got there, and we went through a perilous period,” said Shrum, who had flown out with Kennedy. “I mean I stayed in my hotel room basically for 24 hours in case he needed me, eating room service food, playing with text and trying to figure out what we were going to do.” When Shrum heard about the kidney stones, he cut the speech Kennedy had planned to deliver in half to make it easier to get through, and he also wrote a three-sentence version, which he sent over to Kennedy’s hospital room. Kennedy told Shrum that he wasn’t going to let a few kidney stones keep him from speaking. “He said, ‘I’m not getting up in front of the Democratic Convention to deliver three sentences.’” They had been working together in Hyannis Port for three weeks on the speech, and Kennedy had something he wanted to say.

Kennedy was treated for the kidney condition early Monday, the day of the speech, but the pain didn’t abate right away. The problem didn’t resolve itself until the middle of the night Monday. At about 5 P.M., two hours before the speech was scheduled, family and friends were not at all sure he had the strength to give it. Kennedy still “just wasn’t feeling well,” and “there was a second round [of discussion] about ‘is he going to be able to do it?’” Caroline Kennedy said. Kennedy finally told his wife that he was going to deliver the speech regardless. He rested until the last possible moment, then got up out of his hospital bed at 5:15 and rode by ambulance to the Pepsi Center.

“There was nothing that was going to keep him away,” said Caroline, who knew her uncle was determined to follow through despite concerns of his friends and family. “He knew it all along. There was no way he was not going to do it.” After the ambulance ride, Kennedy was taken by golf cart through the convention hall to a VIP room backstage. There he waited as Caroline took the stage to introduce a video tribute to her statesman uncle. Out on the floor, word was filtering through the hall that an army of Kennedys would take the stage at the end of the tribute, including the revered matriarch of the family, Bobby’s widow, Ethel Kennedy. Convention-goers were quizzing each other about which Kennedys might show up, jogging their brains to remember the names of all of Bobby’s 11 children. Word had started to leak out that Ted was in Denver, but thousands of people in the hall still didn’t know.

An elaborate, two-tiered stage that looked as if it consisted almost entirely of video screens jutted far out into the floor space at the Pepsi Center. That meant the floor was more crowded than usual, and conventioneers were packed tightly against each other as they listened to Caroline. More than 15,000 members of the media—10,000 more journalists than delegates—were in Denver for the convention as well, and many of them were crowded into the lower seats just above the floor. Ten rows of giant blue risers, all bristling with video cameras, stair-stepped up the stands facing the stage. More than 100 cameras watched as Caroline made her usual graceful entry to sustained applause and the strains of Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline,” a song that had been written for her.

JFK’s last child had been left alone by America after the tragedies that had befallen her father, uncle and brother. For once in a celebrity-crazed country, a public figure was granted her privacy. As a consequence, she had preserved a kind of quiet dignity about her. This expressed itself as an unspoken moral authority as she took the stage in a simple blue dress.

But in 2008, Caroline assumed a high profile in the country’s political slipstream. After Barack Obama won the Iowa caucus, she made an enthusiastic endorsement of his candidacy, saying she hadn’t been as excited about a politician’s potential to lift the country’s sights since her father had run. She penned an editorial for the New York Times explaining her rationale back in January, and it stood as a strong testimonial to the little-known candidate at just the time he needed it the most. She went on after that to campaign vigorously for Obama, and she and Ted became perhaps his most visible high- profile supporters early in the campaign, anointing him the newest standard-bearer of the Kennedy legacy. When Obama won the nomination, he tapped Caroline to lead his efforts to pick a running mate. And here she was, again in the public eye she had shied away from for so long, paying homage to her uncle at what was likely his last Democratic convention ever.

The floor suddenly blossomed with hundreds of Kennedy signs. Delegates pumped them up and down enthusiastically, creating a blue spray of “K-E-N-N-E-D-Y”s above their heads. “I am here tonight,” Caroline began, “to pay tribute to two men who have changed my life and the life of this country: Barack Obama and Edward M. Kennedy. Their stories are very different, but they share a commitment to the timeless American ideals of justice and fairness, service and sacrifice, faith and family.”

The video tribute that followed was a poignant voyage through the Kennedy legacy, beginning and ending with images of Ted Kennedy at sea. The highlight of the eight minutes was footage of a much younger Ted Kennedy, grizzled at the temples, pounding the lectern during one of his rafter-ringers on health care. “Long as I have a voice in the United States Senate,” Kennedy intoned from giant screens throughout the hall, “it’s going to be for that Dem- (pound) ocratic (pound) plat- (pound) form (pound) plank (pound) that provides decent (pound) quality (pound) health care (pound) for NORTH AND SOUTH, East and West, (drowned out by cheers) FOR ALL OF AMERICA . . . as a matter of right (pause for effect) and not privilege.”

The 20-year-old speech still got a standing ovation. As the tribute wound down, people there had the sense of being present at a monumental kind of ending in America’s political history. “It kind of felt like this grand finale,” said Kennedy’s son Patrick. But it was a different kind of ending for many of those in the hall who had been affected by the Kennedys. This ending was tinged by sadness, as so many Kennedy endings are, but it was also undergirded by a satisfying sense of completion. Finally, it seemed, the life of one of the sons of Camelot had not been cut short.

And he still had enough fire in his belly to deliver a rousing valedictory.

With Vicki holding him by his left arm, Kennedy shuffled gingerly out to the podium for his twelfth Democratic convention. The crowd erupted out of their seats as he came into view, and he acknowledged their “hurrahs” and applause by hoisting his left arm crookedly up in the air. Dozens of teary-eyed delegates claimed they were utterly surprised when Ted walked out. He let a wide Irish smile take over his swollen face as he arrived at the lectern. The delegates all stayed on their feet as they slapped their hands together, and the blue Kennedy sign garden bloomed again. With the spotlights occasionally revealing patches of his scalp where he’d lost hair during radiation treatments—as if he were proudly displaying, just for this one night, the visible scars of a lifetime of battle—the last Kennedy brother began his speech. “My fellow Democrats, my fellow Americans,” he began. “It is so wonderful to be here.”

***

The Kennedy brothers have delivered many memorable addresses in the 50 years they have been part of the landscape of American politics. “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” “The torch has been passed to a new generation.” “There are those who look at things the way they are and ask why, I dream things that never were and ask why not?” “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” “Ich bin ein Berliner.” “Like my brothers before me, I pick up a fallen standard.” “The work goes on, the cause endures, hope still lives and the dream shall never die.”

Eleven of the top 100 American speeches of the twentieth century were delivered by the Kennedy brothers, according to a ranking by several historians. They are words that have stood the test of time. Yet for pure grit alone, Ted Kennedy’s speech to the 2008 Democratic convention probably has to be counted among the brothers’ most dramatic. Democratic operatives had sworn that, if he were by some miracle to show up for the convention, it would be for a wave and a smile, not a speech. Instead, Ted Kennedy gave a full-throated rallying cry for Barack Obama and the reinvigoration of the Democratic Party. His tone wavered a bit in the upper registers at times, but otherwise the instrument that had brought the Senate down so many times was its usual basso profundo.

“For me, this is a season of hope,” he declared despite his ill health. “I pledge to you that I will be there next January on the floor of the Senate,” offering support to the new president, a promise he kept. Occasionally, as he has in the past when evoking the memory of his brothers, he teared up a little. In the crowd, monitors repeatedly caught his niece Maria Shriver crying during the speech, and tears could be seen on the faces of hundreds of delegates. Other family members in the hall—his children, Edward Jr., Patrick
and Kara; his brother Bobby’s widow, Ethel Kennedy; Bobby’s son, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.; and a raft of fourth-generation Kennedys—all held their collective breath as Ted delivered his speech. The looks on many of the faces in the wings seemed to say, Hurry, get through this, and just make it to the end. Shrum made sure the 10-minute version of the talk was loaded into the teleprompter rather than the 20-minute one, a concession to the kidney stones. But Kennedy delivered all 10 minutes in full voice, and almost every sentence was met with cheers.

And, as he has in nearly every major speech for the past 30 years, Kennedy spoke again of “the cause of my life,” the delivery of “decent, quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege.”

He compared 2008 with 1960, when his brother called Americans to higher purposes. “We are told that Barack Obama believes too much in an America of high principle and bold endeavor, but when John Kennedy called of going to the moon, he didn’t say it’s too far to get there. We shouldn’t even try. Our people answered his call and rose to the challenge, and today an American flag still marks the surface of the moon.

“This is what we do. We reach the moon. We scale the heights. I know it. I’ve seen it. I’ve lived it. And we can do it again.”

His passion rose and the crowd revved as he barreled toward another memorable finish. “He actually got stronger as his speech went on,” said his son Patrick, who was on stage with him just as he had been as a 12-year-old in 1980 when his father delivered his best-remembered line, “the dream shall never die.” In his closing, Ted Kennedy echoed both that speech and his brother’s 1961 inaugural address. “This November,” he said, “the torch will be passed again to a new generation of Americans, so with Barack Obama and for you and me, our country will be committed to his cause. The work begins anew. The hope rises again. And the dream lives on.”

***

“The man never quits,” said a longtime friend, retired senator Alan Simpson (R-WY). “He’s indefatigable. He’s a fighter.” Dogged perseverance—whether it’s fighting political battles, overcoming personal shortcomings or coping with family tragedies—has become something of Ted Kennedy’s signature after a half-century in the political limelight. Ted was only 12 when his oldest brother, Joe, died in a warplane explosion during a secret mission over Europe. Ted lost his sister “Kick” in a plane crash when he was 16. His brother, the president, was assassinated when he was 31. He himself broke his back and nearly died falling from a crashing plane when he was 32. And Ted was only 36 when Bobby, the would-be president, was slain. A year after that day in California, just after a party to salute some of Bobby’s campaign workers, Ted Kennedy’s car went off a bridge and the woman in the passenger seat drowned.

The catalogue of death and suffering didn’t stop there for Ted Kennedy. In the decades that followed, Ted’s oldest son lost his leg and nearly his life to cancer. Ted lost three of his nephews: one to a heroin overdose, another to a freak skiing accident, and JFK’s son, John Jr.—the next generation’s brightest hope—to yet another airplane crash. And now, after years of desperately fleeing from death much of his life, the last Kennedy brother is facing his own. But there is something about the Kennedys that, after 50 years and all that misfortune, simply refuses to fade. There is still something fierce burning at the heart of the Kennedy legacy.

Patriarch Joseph Kennedy Sr., the father of John, Bobby and Ted, first sculpted that legacy three generations ago. His political clout helped Franklin Delano Roosevelt win the presidential nomination in 1932 and usher in the New Deal. John Kennedy’s public service idealism in the 1960s drew an entire generation of inspired young people into politics. His invocation of a New Frontier restored the country’s optimism about itself and led directly to a man landing on the moon nine years after he was elected. Robert Kennedy
broadened the legacy into to a deep compassion for the disenfranchised. And then Ted Kennedy struggled for 46 years to make the Kennedy legacy a permanent piece of America’s superstructure.

“The younger brothers Bobby and Ted were infected by one particular aspect of John, which was his idealism. . . . Bobby was the suffering idealist. And Ted became over time the pragmatic idealist,” said Joe Klein, a columnist with Time magazine. Generally, Americans are much more familiar with the enormous toll the task of being the surviving Kennedy brother has taken on Ted than with his own contributions to that legacy. Chappaquiddick, numerous affairs, drunken outings, and arrogant tirades most defined Ted Kennedy during a long fall from grace during the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1990s he was dismissed as an arcane throwback to old-school liberalism, out of touch with today’s politics.

A worshipful mystique forever surrounds his slain brothers, despite their flaws, but Teddy has lived long enough for the nation to see a Kennedy at his best and at his worst. Despite tabloid headlines and the sneers of conservative pundits, though, he still managed to keep the Kennedy legacy relevant. And today, it seems we are in another Kennedy moment. The traditional liberalism he has long stood for has made a comeback. Of late, standing ovations in the Senate are what define Ted Kennedy. For 50 years, in a life filled with tragedies, embarrassments, controversy and triumph, he has done the one thing his brothers never got the chance to do: He has persevered.

Perseverance may well be Edward Kennedy’s crowning contribution. He has been the only real constant in the half-century construction of the Kennedy legacy. In stubbornly keeping on, he has managed to keep alive something many of JFK’s and then Bobby’s contemporaries thought died with those men in the 1960s. “When Bobby was killed, my generation was almost critically wounded,” Senator Walter Mondale said five years after that night. “As a matter of fact, I don’t know, we may never get over it.” What those kinds of sentiments about JFK and Bobby deny is all the good that’s been done in their names since. More than anyone else, Ted took their deaths and tried to alchemize something positive out of them. For 49 years, Ted’s guiding purpose has been to keep aflame the torch of sacrifice, optimism and public service that JFK first lit in 1960. What they dreamed, he built, law by law. And he’s been helped by legions of people inspired by his brothers, an entire Kennedy Generation.

Yet in the Kennedy pantheon, Ted is still the overlooked son, “the runt of the litter,” “the baby of the family,” the one who has never quite risen to the stature of his martyred brothers. It may be finally time to rethink that legacy. John and Robert captured the country’s imagination, but it has been Ted who has most improved people’s reality. If Ted himself had ever been elected president, his influence would not have lasted so long. In many ways, because of his longevity and single-minded dedication to the memory of his brothers, Ted has become a greater politician and left a greater legacy than either John or Bobby. John always called Ted the best politician of the family. In nearly five decades of behind-the-scenes Senate work, he has finished much, though not all, of his brothers’ unfinished dreams. “This is the most consequential legislative career in the country’s history,”6 said Thomas Oliphant, who as a correspondent and columnist for the Boston Globe has chronicled Kennedy’s career. “It probably had more impact on more people than many presidents. In actual, measurable impact on the lives of tens of millions of working families, the elderly and the needy, Kennedy belongs in the same sentence with Franklin Roosevelt.”

Whether you agree with Kennedy or not, he has made flesh the progressive idealism of John and Bobby—and he has made that idealism last. Political commentator Molly Ivins said, “To tell the truth, Ted Kennedy has had a greater impact on this country than either of his famous brothers.” No other Kennedy can claim a 47-year legacy. Few senators can, either—he’s currently the second-longest-serving senator, and the third longest in the history of the chamber. JFK had his 1,000 days in the White House. RFK had his 82 days on the campaign trail. Ted Kennedy’s days in the Senate number more than 17,000—and counting. Political columnist David Shribman put it this way: “His brothers’ words are in large letters on the sides of buildings and in the hearts and memory of a nation. But the youngest brother is the fine-print Kennedy. His words are in the fine print of the nation’s laws.”

Kennedy has cast more than 15,000 votes and written more than 2,500 bills. His fingerprints are on most of the major social programs that have been launched in the last 40 years. “He has done more for human happiness than anyone in Congress,” said Carol Chodroff, a human rights attorney who works closely with Kennedy. He made his maiden speech in the Senate in support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed segregation in theaters, restaurants, hotels, swimming pools, libraries and public schools. He continued as a strong advocate for civil rights during the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and the current decade, helping to ensure passage of the Voting Rights Act and substantially improving the rights of the handicapped, women in the workplace, immigrants and refugees. He introduced the bill that created the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. He got 18-year-olds the right to vote.

He has campaigned for universal health insurance for 30 years, and from his hospital bed last year was orchestrating efforts to pass a bipartisan healthcare reform plan in early 2009. Along the way toward his elusive goal he has dramatically increased cancer research funds, created portable health insurance for workers, hammered through a patient’s bill of rights and instituted closer government supervision of health maintenance organizations.

The mountain of achievements he has compiled or played a significant part in include the creation of Medicare, the family and medical leave bill, national service legislation, worker retraining laws, freedom of access to abortion clinics, the lifting of the abortion gag rule, women’s health legislation including fetal tissue research, and student loan reform. Ted Kennedy helped create Meals on Wheels for senior citizens. He won greater justice for Native Americans, created a host of programs to combat hunger in the United States and abolished the poll tax. His immigration bill in the 1960s changed the very complexion of America, replacing a black-white divide with a multi-hued diversity of immigrants. He also has a strong history of gun control efforts—including early support for the Brady bill and opposition to the National Rifle Association dating from 1968.

His causes have been large and small and have crossed party lines. Working closely with President George W. Bush, he pushed through the controversial No Child Left Behind law intended to improve standards at public schools. In the 1990s, he and Republican Orrin Hatch cosponsored a bill to give health insurance to nine million uninsured children. Hatch and Kennedy rewrote the country’s sentencing laws, ending parole in the federal prison system. In the 1980s, he and Republican senator Alan Simpson crafted immigration reform together. He and Senator John McCain did it again in the 1990s. He forged a balanced budget bill, helped Ronald Reagan deregulate the airlines and single-handedly blocked the confirmations of two Republican nominees to the Supreme Court, G. Harrold Carswell and Robert Bork.

Some have called him the Imperial Senator, running a kind of shadow government out of the Senate. His involvement in foreign affairs, for example, is little known but broad. It was his activism that pushed the world toward a condemnation of apartheid in South Africa. He is the one who initiated the sanctions that eventually forced the end of second-class citizenship for blacks in that country. New York Times journalist Adam Clymer said Kennedy’s influence “has extended from Vietnam to the Soviet Union, from Bangladesh to Chile, from Biafra to China, from South Africa to Ireland.”

His persistence has kept the Kennedy flame burning long and bright enough to hand the torch off to Barack Obama. “I would not be sitting here as a presidential candidate had it not been for some of the battles that Ted Kennedy has fought,” Obama said in one of his campaign speeches. “I stand on his shoulders.” More than anything, the sanctity of that torch was the reason Ted Kennedy was so determined to make it to Denver. “He wanted to be here to demonstrate that this was another epic moment in the history of this
country, when there was a real passing of the torch to a new generation,” his son Patrick said. After bearing the torch for so long, Ted Kennedy had come to own it, and he wasn’t going to let anyone else pass it along.

***

Kennedy’s speech at the Democratic convention in 2008 marks the closing of a fascinating chapter in America’s political and cultural life. Many who were there believed they were witnessing the last major address a Kennedy would ever give at a national convention. It also means that, for the first time perhaps, the real measure of the Kennedy legacy can finally be taken. The brothers’ three stories can be seen as essentially one now, each successive brother striving to fulfill the interrupted promise and finish the unfinished life of the brother before. This book is the story of the birth of that legacy three generations ago, how it was built, when it nearly died, what caused it to spark again and to whom it is being passed. It’s a story of a brotherhood, really, in four acts. Act I charts Joe Jr.’s influence on the brothers as they were growing up. Act II is the road to John F. Kennedy’s inspiring presidency, as seen from Ted’s front-row seat; Act III is Robert Kennedy’s five brief years as the family standard-bearer, including his tenure in the Senate with his brother Ted and the memorable 82-day campaign that redefined what the Kennedy legacy was all about. And Act IV is Ted’s 40-plus years in the Senate as keeper of the flame. It is the story of how a flawed, sometimes self-destructive, death haunted man forever embedded into the country’s DNA the ethos of idealism treasured by all three brothers. In the final assessment, the last Kennedy brother, the one who was least likely to succeed, may have succeeded beyond any other.

Thanks to Palgrave Macmillan for this excerpt from THE KENNEDY LEGACY, by Vincent Bzdek. Emphasis above was added to highlight Edward M. Kennedy’s extraordinary legislative accomplishments.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Lion Is Gone

cross-posted on Huffington Post, “The Liberals’ Liberal”

“For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end… For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.”Edward Kennedy, Senate Stalwart, Dies

Edward_Kennedy

Senator Edward M. Kennedy has died of brain cancer. Only something so historic could bring me out from my brief writing break, my end of summer respite. Last week it was hinted, though as I have studied John F. Kennedy, I knew that when Sen. Kennedy passed, regardless of bravura statements that he might fly in to rescue a close vote, I knew this was Kennedy lore being spun again. So, Edward is gone. The Kennedy who dodged “the curse” lived 77 long years, able to achieve what his brothers could not, no matter the legend surrounding Joseph, the Kennedy who was supposed to be king but died in a daring mission in war, John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy, the darlings who died by assassins. With one of the greatest historical moments of modern times his eulogy of his brother, Robert F. Kennedy, the vision of this country clear in every sentence, as well as the purpose of every person who is driven by his or her passions for what can be for people. It applies to Edward M. Kennedy on his passing today:

Photobucket

… My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.

Those of us who loved him and who take him to his rest today, pray that what he was to us and what he wished for others will some day come to pass for all the world.

As he said many times, in many parts of this nation, to those he touched and who sought to touch him:

“Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not.”

Born of the closest thing America will know as royalty, Edward Kennedy gave his life to help those who had less, always endeavoring to make their lives better. It was a tenet of the Kennedy family to give, as much was expected of people who had everything. As a family man, he has served as the Kennedy patriarch for decades.

Kennedy’s first big job was managing John F. Kennedy’s re-election campaign to the Senate. After J.F.K. became president, Bobby A.G., Edward was too young to take his brother’s seat. So a “seat warmer” was appointed, Benjamin A. Smith 2d, a family friend, until the younger brother turned 30, when he entered the race, winning in a barn burner of an election. It was the start of an historic career. He happened to be presiding over the Senate on one particularly Friday when the nation cracked it two, Nov. 22, 1963. The next year Edward would have his own brush with death, as his small plane crashed while ferrying him to accept his re-election nomination for Senate, killing everyone on board, saving Kennedy; though Edward’s back was broken, along with several ribs. He did his job from bed while convalescing for months and months.

In 1965, Edward Kennedy returned to work in the Senate taking up the Voting Rights Act, which Lyndon Johnson was continuing after the murder of J.F.K., putting up an amendment to abolish the poll tax that ultimately failed. It was the era of Vietnam, but it would be his brother Bobby who inspired him to come out against the Vietnam War, which coincided with Bobby’s move to seek the presidency. An event that would cost him his life and take the remainder of America’s innocence.

“There is no safety in hiding,” he declared in a speech at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Mass., in August. “Like my brothers before me, I pick up a fallen standard. Sustained by the memory of our priceless years together, I shall try to carry forward that special commitment to justice, excellence and courage that distinguished their lives.”

Then came 1969. The year that would change Kennedy’s life forever. Coming from a family of drinking and carousing lotharios, Edward was no different, but his adventures coincided with the sexual revolution that changed this country forever, also his life. Partying with former campaign workers on Chappaquiddick Island, off Martha’s Vineyard, in the wee hours, Kennedy drove a car carrying Mary Jo Kopechne off a very narrow bridge, sinking the car in around 8 feet of water, as is chronicled in the Washington Post today. Edward Kennedy did not report the accident for 10 full hours, saying he got so exhausted from trying to save the woman that he simply came home and went to bed. He plead guilty to leaving the scene of an accident. The tragedy would unleash a torrent of questions and recriminations, some of which last to this day, that got so bad that Kennedy asked the voters of Massachusetts if he should resign. The voters said no, loudly. …and continued saying yes to Kennedy to keep him serving for 46 years. But the stain of Chappaquiddick lasted for the rest of his life, hovering over his dreams of the presidency that would always be an impediment for accomplishing his biggest dream.

The Carter – Kennedy collision began with Edward backing Carter, but it wouldn’t last. By 1978, draft Kennedy die hards sprung up in the face of Carter’s failing presidency and his inability to speak to the people in a time of malaise, a word Carter eventually made famous and enduring. When Kennedy announced his candidacy one of the things he said, as quoted today in the Post, encapsulated Carter’s presidency perfectly: “Our leaders have resigned themselves to defeat.” The campaign was an unmitigated disaster, with the ending his speech at the convention, a moment that will never be forgotten, but not before the campaign battle fractured the Democratic Party to smithereens. A moment of history that was teased about being replayed in 2008, when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were battling for the nomination, though the rumors of a Carter-Kennedy repeat were mere hallucinations of deranged activists than anything as cataclysmic as what Kennedy managed against Carter being played out.

After his defeat in 1980, Kennedy reconciled himself that he would never be president, using the Reagan years to stand against everything the conservatives tried to do, especially when Reagan tried to weaken the Voting Rights Act. But it was the Americans with Disabilities Act that became Kennedy’s signature accomplishment, no doubt driven by his sister Rosemary’s mental handicaps. In 1994, Kennedy became one of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s strongest advocates for national health insurance, which he’d been working on since the late 60s. It was a disaster, but he kept pushing, also helping to enact S-Chip, as well as No Child Left Behind Act. But it was health care that he so longed to see manifest for the American people.

It was not to be, at least not in his lifetime.

There will be much speculation about what might have been, if Edward M. Kennedy, the Lion of the Senate, had been present to roar once more, able to be out front on the current health care campaign. There can be little doubt that had he been well enough to become the face and force in public once again we would be looking at health care reform from a different place, for Edward had all the passion for this legislation that Pres. Obama lacks. But not even Kennedy could have stopped the “death panel” squeal of Sarah Palin, because the era of Kennedy politicians is gone. And I’m not just talking about the name. It’s about the passion to policy over polemics; the mission to work for the people above all else, including ego. There will never be another era of public servants represented by Edward M. Kennedy, who stands as the lion amidst legislative lambs.


Kennedy’s 2008 convention speech.
So proud I was there to hear it.

A man who could never fulfill the dream of becoming president, but chose to be his own kingmaker, like his father, when Edward M. Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama for president, putting the Kennedy name behind a novice that the last Kennedy brother believed was the heir to their political throne. It was a move that fractured Democratic friendships of long standing, caused a rift with the last two-term Democratic president William Jefferson Clinton, ignited a war among activist partisans, and helped orchestrate one of the most powerful political pictures in modern campaign history. That moment when Teddy Kennedy, obviously ailing, stood beside Barack Obama, along with Caroline Kennedy, John F. Kennedy’s sole surviving child, to pass the last torch to the newest generation, the finale of this dynastic family.

Edward Moore Kennedy, son, brother, husband, father, grandfather, friend, citizen of America and the greatest living senator in U.S. history, gone. He will never be forgotten. He cannot be replaced.

Statement from The Kennedy Family

“Edward M. Kennedy – the husband, father, grandfather, brother and uncle we loved so deeply – died late Tuesday night at home in Hyannis Port. We’ve lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever. We thank everyone who gave him care and support over this last year, and everyone who stood with him for so many years in his tireless march for progress toward justice, fairness and opportunity for all. He loved this country and devoted his life to serving it. He always believed that our best days were still ahead, but it’s hard to imagine any of them without him.”



This post has been updated.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Joe Talks About His Good Friend Teddy

Joe Biden didn’t want to talk politics today. It was all about his friend. “The unique thing about Teddy was he was never about him. It was always about you. It was never about him,” Biden said about his friend. After talking to Kennedy’s wife, Vicki, she simply talked of what those left behind always feel. “He was ready to go, Joe, but we were not ready to let him go.”

Below are Vice President Biden’s remarks. Spoken off the cuff, no paper in hand, simply a man talking about someone he’d known for decades whom he’d fought with and loved. It was the most moving moment of the day.

To add, you can visit a special tribute site, TedKennedy.org, even share your own memories. In lieu of flowers, the Kennedy family has asked donations be given to the EMK Institute, which being built across from the J.F.K. Library in Boston.

“My wife Jill, and my sons Beau and Hunter, and my daughter Ashley — and I don’t say that lightly, because they all knew Teddy, he did something personal and special for each one of them in their lives — truly, truly are distressed by his passing. And our hearts go out to Teddy Jr., and Patrick and Kara, and Vicki, with whom I spoke this morning, and the whole Kennedy family.

“Teddy spent a lifetime working for a fair and more just America. And for 36 years, I had the privilege of going to work every day and literally, not figuratively sitting next to him, and being witness to history. Every single day the Senate was in session, I sat with him on the Senate floor in the same aisle. I sat with him on the Judiciary Committee next — physically next to him. And I sat with him in the caucuses. And it was in that process, every day I was with him — and this is going to sound strange — but he restored my sense of idealism and my faith in the possibilities of what this country could do.

“He and I were talking after his diagnosis. And I said, I think you’re the only other person I’ve met, who like me, is more optimistic, more enthusiastic, more idealistic, sees greater possibilities after 36 years than when we were elected. He was 30 years-old when he was elected; I was 29 years-old. And you’d think that would be the peak of our idealism. But I genuinely feel more optimistic about the prospect for my country today than I did — I have been any time in my life.

“And it was infectious when you were with him. You could see it, those of you who knew him and those of you who didn’t know him. You could just see it in the nature of his debate, in the nature of his embrace, in the nature of how he every single day attacked these problems. And, you know, he was never defeatist. He never was petty — never was petty. He was never small. And in the process of his doing, he made everybody he worked with bigger — both his adversaries as well as his allies.

“Don’t you find it remarkable that one of the most partisan, liberal men in the last century serving in the Senate had so many of his — so many of his foes embracing him, because they know he made them bigger, he made them more graceful by the way in which he conducted himself.

“You know, he changed the circumstances of tens of millions of Americans — in the literal sense, literally — literally changed the circumstances. He changed also another aspect of it as I observed about him — he changed not only the physical circumstance, he changed how they looked at themselves and how they looked at one another. That’s a remarkable, remarkable contribution for any man or woman to make. And for the hundreds, if not thousands, of us who got to know him personally, he actually — how can I say it — he altered our lives as well.

“Through the grace of God and accident of history I was privileged to be one of those people and every important event in my adult life — as I look back this morning and talking to Vicki — every single one, he was there. He was there to encourage, to counsel, to be empathetic, to lift up. In 1972 I was a 29 year old kid with three weeks left to go in a campaign, him showing up at the Delaware Armory in the middle of what we called Little Italy — who had never voted nationally by a Democrat — I won by 3,100 votes and got 85 percent of the vote in that district, or something to that effect. I literally would not be standing here were it not for Teddy Kennedy — not figuratively, this is not hyperbole — literally.

“He was there — he stood with me when my wife and daughter were killed in an accident. He was on the phone with me literally every day in the hospital, my two children were attempting, and, God willing, thankfully survived very serious injuries. I’d turn around and there would be some specialist from Massachusetts, a doc I never even asked for, literally sitting in the room with me.

“You know, it’s not just me that he affected like that — it’s hundreds upon hundreds of people. I was talking to Vicki this morning and she said — she said, “He was ready to go, Joe, but we were not ready to let him go.”

“He’s left a great void in our public life and a hole in the hearts of millions of Americans and hundreds of us who were affected by his personal touch throughout our lives. People like me, who came to rely on him. He was kind of like an anchor. And unlike many important people in my 38 years I’ve had the privilege of knowing, the unique thing about Teddy was it was never about him. It was always about you. It was never about him. It was people I admire, great women and men, at the end of the day gets down to being about them. With Teddy it was never about him.

“Well, today we lost a truly remarkable man. To paraphrase Shakespeare: I don’t think we shall ever see his like again. I think the legacy he left is not just in the landmark legislation he passed, but in how he helped people look at themselves and look at one another.

“I apologize for us not being able to go into more detail about the energy bill, but I just think for me, at least, it was inappropriate today. And I’m sure there will be much more that will be said about my friend and your friend, but — he changed the political landscape for almost half a century. I just hope — we say blithely, you know, we’ll remember what we did. I just hope we’ll remember how he treated other people and how he made other people look at themselves and look at one another. That will be the truly fundamental, unifying legacy of Teddy Kennedy’s life if that happens — and it will for a while, at least in the Senate.

“Mr. Secretary, you and your staff are doing an incredible job. I look forward to coming back at a happier moment when you are announcing even more consequential progress toward putting us back in a position where once again can control our own economic destiny.

“Thank you all very, very much.”

Read full story · Comments are closed

Newsline – Redactions, and ‘Profanity-Laced’ Tirades Edition

Photobucket

Lots of stirring on Holder hiring a prosecutor to look into alleged CIA interrogation abuses. Even with Holder’s breathless “I fully realize that my decision to commence this preliminary review will be controversial”, caution is in order; for starters because it’s only a preliminary review. For all the hoopla that Holder has appointed a prosecutor, a wait to see if it’s a serious effort should apply. It could be a political appeasement approach to quiet those of us who think Pres. Obama’s Let’s Look Forward strategy from the start has allowed things that happened during the last Administration to slip through history’s grasp.

In appointing a prosecutor to investigate alleged CIA interrogation abuses, including episodes that resulted in prisoner deaths, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday shook off warnings from President Obama to avoid becoming mired in past controversies.

Holder has named longtime prosecutor John H. Durham, who has parachuted into crisis situations for both political parties over three decades, to open an early review of nearly a dozen cases of alleged detainee mistreatment at the hands of CIA interrogators and contractors.

In a statement Monday afternoon, Holder cautioned that the inquiry is far from a full-blown criminal investigation. Rather, he said, it is unknown whether indictments or prosecutions of CIA contractors and employees will follow. Lawyers involved in similar reviews said that any possible cases could take years to build because of challenges with witnesses and evidence.

More on Durham in the article.

Dick Cheney’s two cents on it, from Stephen Atta had a meeting in Prague Hayes:

The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002. The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States. The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions. President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security.

Spencer Ackerman @ The Washington Independent has documents Cheney says validates the use of torture. (They don’t.) Lots of redactions.

Speaking of redactions, also from Ackerman, the CIA Inspector General John Helgerson’s 2004 report into the CIA’s Bush-era interrogations operations. Some real classics if you can read it.

92. –redacted– The debriefer assessed Al-Nashiri as withholding information, at which point REDACTED reinstated –redacted– hooding, and handcuffing. Sometime between 28 December 2002 and 1 January 2003, the debriefer used an unloaded semi-automatic handgun as a prop to frighten Al-Nashiri into disclosing information. After discussing this plan with REDACTED the debriefer entered the cell where Al-Nashiri sat shackled and racked the handgun once or twice close to Al-Nashiri’s head. On what was probably the same day, the debriefer used a power drill to frighten Al-Nashiri. With –redacted– consent, the debriefer entered the detainee’s cell and revved the drill while the detainee stood naked and hooded. The debriefer did not touch Al-Nashiri with the power drill

Perfect segue to the dish of the day, compliments of ABC News. Complete with CIA screaming match, simultaneously denied, of course, along with lots of national security speculation, which has been making the rounds for weeks. It’s spy chatter, TMZ edition.

A “profanity-laced screaming match” at the White House involving CIA Director Leon Panetta, and the expected release today of another damning internal investigation, has administration officials worrying about the direction of its newly-appoint intelligence team, current and former senior intelligence officials tell ABC News.com.

… According to intelligence officials, Panetta erupted in a tirade last month during a meeting with a senior White House staff member. … “Leon will be leaving,” predicted a former top U.S. intelligence official, citing the conflict with Blair. The former official said Panetta is also “uncomfortable” with some of the operations being carried out by the CIA that he did not know about until he took the job. …

Rendition will continue, which doesn’t surprise me at all. However, it’s not exactly what candidate Obama wrote in Foreign Affairs in the summer of 2007, during the primaries. Though the report begins by stating rendition will “continue the Bush administration’s practice”, but should mention Clinton first, which happens much later, as rendition actually began under a Democratic administration, which Obama will continue, with modifications.

The administration officials, who discussed the changes on condition that they not be identified, said that unlike the Bush administration, they would operate more openly and give the State Department a larger role in assuring that transferred detainees would not be abused. “The emphasis will be on ensuring that individuals will not face torture if they are sent overseas,” said one administration official, adding that no detainees would be sent to countries known to conduct abusive interrogations.

Rendition began to be used regularly under President Bill Clinton and its use expanded rapidly under President Bush after the terrorist attacks in September 2001.

On another note entirely, Fouad Ajami unloads on Pres. Obama. A neocon, pro Iraq war apologist, Mr. Ajami, a scholar on the Middle East turned right wing propagandist, also treats us all to a white washed version of Mr. Reagan, making his Sean Hannity op-ed in the Wall Street Journal his own rhetorical town hall belch.

On a personal note, congrats to Laura Rozen, who is leaving Foreign Policy to join Politico, something that began circulating recently that has now been announced. I like Laura very much and have been reading her forever, since War and Peace. Politico’s lucky to have her. None better.

Anyway, quite an intel dump, as many of us take a step back while Pres. Obama enjoys his holiday on Martha’s Vineyard. Though that doesn’t mean we’re not paying attention.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama’s Vacation Week Newsbites

Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen says that Afghanistan is “deteriorating and worsening”, getting more dangerous, as the Taliban gets craftier in their tactics. This could be seen as preparing everyone for Gen. McChrystal’s evaluation, which many think will include the request for more boots on the ground. The image of Obama as LBJ continues to haunt me right now.

“I think it is serious and it is deteriorating,” Admiral Mullen said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “The Taliban insurgency has gotten better, more sophisticated, in their tactics.” He added that General McChrystal was still completing his review and had not yet requested additional troops on top of the those added by Mr. Obama.

International Lockerbie outrage reaches Scottish shores:

Scotland’s parliament was Monday being recalled for an emergency session amid growing international outrage over last week’s release of the man convicted for the Lockerbie plane bombing.

It sure didn’t help that the freed terrorist Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi got a hero’s welcome in Libya.

Israel and Sweden are in a battle over body organ story:

A diplomatic row between Sweden and Israel has intensified, with Israeli politicians urging Stockholm to condemn a newspaper article they have described as “blood libel”. In the report, published in Sweden’s leading tabloid, a freelance journalist accused the Israeli army of stealing body organs from Palestinian men after killing them.

“The statements in the Swedish press were outrageous,” Benyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, was quoted as telling his cabinet on Sunday. “We are not expecting an apology from the Swedish government … We are expecting condemnation.”

Avigdor Lieberman continues to play bad cop, amidst Netanyahu’s PR outreach, while talks continue. As the Holy Month of Ramadan began, King Abdullah of Jordan continues to insist on immediate talks to set an agreement. From Haaretz:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to tell the special U.S. Mideast envoy on Monday that Israel will not accept any limitations on its sovereignty over Jerusalem, and will allow settlers to continue to live in the West Bank. …

[...] The U.S. would like to be given guarantees by Israel that it will freeze settlement construction for at least a year, while Israel is offering a six-month hiatus. A political source in Jerusalem estimated that a compromise of 9-12 months will be reached for construction in the West Bank, but will not include East Jerusalem or most of the 2,500 housing units whose construction has already commenced. …

The health care debate churns on, says the LA Times.

Breaking News!!! Joe Lieberman is still a jackass.

ChangeofColor continues to make Glenn Beck’s TV life an advertising nightmare.

Via the AP:

But it could mean advertising time becomes cheaper on (Glenn Beck’s) show than such a large audience would normally command. Some of his show’s advertisers last week included a male enhancement pill, a law firm looking to sue on behalf of asbestos victims, a company selling medical supplies to diabetics and a water filter company.

A.G. Holder has a dilemma:

The Justice Department’s ethics office has recommended reversing the Bush administration and reopening nearly a dozen prisoner-abuse cases, potentially exposing Central Intelligence Agency employees and contractors to prosecution for brutal treatment of terrorism suspects, according to a person officially briefed on the matter.

Read full story · Comments are closed

It’s 3 a.m., Clinton’s Soaring at State, So No Kidding They Didn’t Get It

It’s 3 a.m. Do You Know Where Hillary Clinton Is?
She’s not answering those crisis calls at the White House. But she’s quietly revolutionizing American foreign policy.

Photobucket

David Rothkopf writes an op-ed in the Washington Post that proves just how fatal the progressive derangement of all things Hillary has been for some so called progressive big shots. Men who wouldn’t accept Hillary even when Pres. Obama showed his daring and brilliance by picking her for State, which had some chasing their analytic tails from the start of the Sect. Clinton rumors.

Of course, the lead on that one was Josh “don’t get it” Marshall.

Secretaries of State don’t usually last more than a single presidential term. And sometimes they don’t make it that long. So, for the life of me, I do not understand why Hillary Clinton would want to give up what is in all likelihood a senate seat for life to run the State Department for Barack Obama.

Late Update: This post, not surprisingly, has generated a big response. And a few of you have suggested that this is a way for Hillary to angle for another shot at the presidency in 2012 or 2016. But that strikes me as deeply, deeply improbable. Never an easy thing to challenge a sitting president of your own party, next to impossible to do it from his own cabinet. I don’t have an answer on why either party would want this appointment. But that ain’t the reason.

Women’s issues never crossed his mind.

Foreshadowing came through Linda Hirshman’s piece during the primaries, when TPM dropped her, then she confronted a editor asking him if they had many writers addressing “female voters”, which Hirshman deemed an important demographic during the primaries. Golis said: “I recognize that you think female voters should be one of those things, we disagree.”

No political analysis or editorial decision could have proven more wrong, short-sided or on the wrong side of history, especially where 21st century foreign policy is concerned.

TPM is a much respected progressive media company, deservedly so in some respects, with a recent influx of cash to prove it. But like other big name sites, their political analysis has been continually wrong whenever covering Clinton, but also when it comes to women’s issues. That is when they deign to decide women’s issues and opinions are important at all, which is rarely.

On another media plain, “Meet the Press” under the late Tim Russert, women’s issues were only discussed by men. Mr. Russert never invited a female on to discuss abortion, family or faith, preferring religious leaders like Richard Land and Rick Warren, as well as conservative male pundits, to women, even when they were the actual experts on the subjects. How do you discuss abortion without women? But the Sunday shows often ignore women, especially progressive women as main guests, with a flood of men usually the fare.

As Rothkopf proves today, however, as do the amazing articles in the New York Times Magazine, in the 21st century it will likely be women and girls who could actually tilt the balance of the world. This leaves new media outlets that market that they cover all the news, while choosing to ignore women’s issues, in the dust, proving that “new media” has nothing to do with understanding the changing role of women as leaders across the globe.

This is critical to cover, though it’s not popular to do so, because it’s a reminder of just how neglected women’s issues are by some of the most respected progressive new media news sites. I’m not talking blogs who cover issues, or smaller blogs who cannot, but big news clearinghouse sites. Progressives who also missed completely and continue to ignore the foreign policy aspect of what Clinton’s State Department means to Obama’s foreign policy, but also countries around the world, especially where women’s roles are concerned. Some sites choosing to focus soley on the Maureen Dowd political porn of anything Clinton.

It’s also critical that a simultaneous nod is given to Obama for thinking of Clinton in the first place, which gives me great pleasure to do, which I do often. Something that’s never been hard for me (which includes enthusiastically supporting his candidacy the second he won the nomination). I cannot say the same for the grace of the CDS crew, which has tried at every moment to minimize the Secretary’s work by not covering it or diminishing it, and by ignoring what Nicolas Kristoff continues to report. At every turn, I’ve done my best to cover the real parts of Clinton at State, including mistakes. But from the start of Obama’s candidacy and throughout his presidency, even as I’ve rightly analyzed his domestic weaknesses, I’ve been able to see his foreign policy clearly, backing him strongly, including on Afghanistan up until recently when my questions outweighed Obama’s mission creep strategy, but particularly on the Middle East.

This is personal to me, not because of Hillary Rodham Clinton, but because women and girls around the globe need the U.S. now more than ever; the writing I do on the subject part of 21st century feminism, which I am committed to continuing, against all odds, it would seem so far. If U.S. foreign policy is to turn towards the 21st century we all need big progressive news outlets to take our issues seriously, particularly when we have Sect. Clinton and her team at State, along with Obama’s foreign policy leadership (with new hopes in the Middle East), focusing like a laser on them when the opportunity arises.

It’s the partnership of Pres. Obama and Sect. Clinton that makes this all possible, something that was easy to recognize from the start if you understood Clinton at all. The CDS crew actually believing and preferring to promote that Hillary would mount a challenge in 2012 against Obama, as ignorant an idea as the unhinged puma fringe was for not believing what an Obama presidency would mean once he won, especially around the world.

Rothkopft’s piece outlines what I have titled “revolutionary” vision at State, which includes Clinton’s understanding that women and girls can save the world, but that’s not his only focus. G8? Try G20. North Korea, too. And just look at Clinton on the Middle East, that infamous “back channel” people hypothesized would undermine Obama non-existent. Rothkopft explains it all, as Clinton’s contributions stand today, taking on his own website, Foreign Policy for its fluff.

… Even venerable publications — such as one to which I regularly contribute, Foreign Policy — have woven into their all-Hillary-all-the-time coverage odd discussions of Clinton’s handbag and scarf choices. Daily Beast editor Tina Brown, while depicting herself as a Clinton supporter, has been scathing and small-minded in discussing such things as Clinton’s weight and hair, while her “defense” of Hillary in her essay “Obama’s Other Wife” was as sexist as the title suggests.

Indeed, sexism has followed Clinton from the campaign trail to Foggy Bottom, as seen most recently in the posturing outrage surrounding the exchange in Congo when Clinton reacted with understandable frustration to the now-infamous question regarding her husband’s views. Major media outlets have joined the gossipfest, whether the New York Times, which covered Clinton’s first big policy speech by discussing whether she was in or out with the White House, or The Washington Post, where a couple of reporters mused about whether a brew called Mad Bitch would be the beer of choice for the secretary of state. [...]

… [...] So far, according to multiple high-level officials at State and the White House, the two seem aligned in their views. In addition, they are gradually defining complementary roles. Obama has assumed the role of principal spokesperson on foreign policy, as international audiences welcome his new and improved American brand. Clinton thus far has echoed his points but has also delivered tougher ones. Whether on a missile shield against Iran or North Korean saber-rattling, the continued imprisonment of Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma or rape and corruption in Congo, the secretary of state has spoken bluntly on the world stage — even if it triggered snide comments from North Korea.

It is still early, and a president’s foreign policy legacy is often defined less by big principles than by how one reacts to the unexpected, whether missiles in Cuba or terrorism in New York. Promising ideas fail because of limited attention or reluctant bureaucracies, and some rhetoric eventually rings hollow, as the self-congratulatory “smart power” already does to me.

Nevertheless, there is evidence that, seven months into the job, Obama’s unlikely secretary of state is supporting and augmenting his agenda effectively. Not as Obama’s “other wife,” not as Bill Clinton’s wife, not even as a celebrity or as a former presidential candidate — but in a new role of her own making.

David Rothkopf is the first op-ed columnist to get the breadth and depth of the Obama-Clinton partnership, but also the groundbreaking work of Secretary of State Clinton, which many of Obama’s die hard supporters missed and still ignore, but Pres. Obama sensed would manifest from the start.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Women and Girls Can Save the World

Photobucket

If you read one thing today this is it, “The Women’s Crusade.” No, it’s not about U.S. health care reform. It’s about something even more important, which is close to blasphemy to say these days but it’s true, because it’s about saving the world.

…Yet if the injustices that women in poor countries suffer are of paramount importance, in an economic and geopolitical sense the opportunity they represent is even greater. “Women hold up half the sky,” in the words of a Chinese saying, yet that’s mostly an aspiration: in a large slice of the world, girls are uneducated and women marginalized, and it’s not an accident that those same countries are disproportionately mired in poverty and riven by fundamentalism and chaos. There’s a growing recognition among everyone from the World Bank to the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff to aid organizations like CARE that focusing on women and girls is the most effective way to fight global poverty and extremism. That’s why foreign aid is increasingly directed to women. The world is awakening to a powerful truth: Women and girls aren’t the problem; they’re the solution.

And if you haven’t read the interview with Sect. Clinton, take time to, but only after you’ve read the first article above.

And if you haven’t read this article, read that too, but only after you’ve read the first article above.

But by all means read this article, if you haven’t already, about the only female leader on the continent of Africa, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. But again, only after you’ve read the first article at the top.

Why do you think we’ve never had a female president in the United States?
I have to ask you that question. You’ve got to vote for her.

All of this in The New York Times Magazine today. Take a day off to see what’s happening around the world. It’s important.

On a different note and as an extra task, count how many women you see today on the Sunday shows. Not just on panels, but as headline guests. Experts being asked their opinion on politics and policy. One good development is that Christiane Amanpour will soon anchor her own Sunday show, which will air after GPS with Fareed Zakaria. That’s something, especially on Sunday.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama and L.B.J.

Photobucket

I’ve been struggling a lot lately with Pres. Obama’s words to the VFW last week. Thinking more and more about Afghanistan as a “war of necessity,” which I believe it was immediately after 9/11. But the new escalation possibilities worry me a lot, even as I think about the women and girls, with the importance of continuing to support whatever changes can manifest for them amidst the culture.

L.B.J. has been on my mind as these thoughts trudge across my mind, so when I saw Baker’s piece the questions came even quicker.

Afghanistan could turn the picture here of L.B.J. into a 21st century casting of Pres. Obama in his place.

The conundrum is that we can’t leave right now, but support for Afghanistan is dwindling, while the reality that we can never out last the Taliban harkens back to something L.B.J. didn’t learn.

Americans aren’t paying attention to it either, which is how L.B.J. was able to do what he did with Vietnam. So, the very same thing could easily happen again.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama’s Trouble with Independents Trumped by Base Woes


Trailer to Michael Moore’s new film.

Greg Sargent has the nutshell in the Washington Post/ABC poll that should certainly get the White House’s attention. With general economic woes, of which health care reform is a major solution, now a huge political problem.

When Obama came into office, what he was handed from Bush-Cheney was frightening. The economics alone was enough to give anyone a terminal migraine. But Obama chose to look forward, basically letting Bush off the hook on that message. Because if you don’t drive it home people quickly forget. Segue to the Friday deficit dump:

A White House budget official says the Obama administration expects the federal deficit over the next decade to be $2 trillion bigger than previously estimated.

The projection now is for a deficit of $9 trillion.

Independents care about this stuff, and the right will blow it through their trumpet until we’re all deaf.

Sargent’s breakdown of the Washington Post/ABC poll is important:

The numbers tell the story: In three key cases where Obama has dropped significantly, he’s also dropped by sizable margins among Dems and liberals. Let’s take the major findings driving the discussion today, and compare them with his drop among Dems and libs:

* The WaPo poll found that “49 percent now express confidence that Obama will make the right decisions for the country, down from 60 percent at the 100-day mark in his presidency.”

On that question, among liberals, Obama has dropped a surprising 12 points, from 90% to 78%, in the same time period. Among Dems, he’s dropped eight points, from 90% to 82%.

* The WaPo poll found that “forty-nine percent now say they think he will be able to spearhead significant improvements in the system, down nearly 20 percentage points from before he took office.”

On that question, among Dems, Obama has fallen a surprising 11 points during that time period, from 90% to 79%. Among liberals it was even steeper: A drop of 13 points, from 84% to 71%. (This could also partly be a referendum on Congress, but it’s still suggestive.)

* The WaPo poll also found a steep drop in approval of Obama’s handling of health care, which now stands at 46%, down 11 points from 57% in April.

But guess what: The drop during that time period was the same among liberals: Down 11 points, from 81% in April to 70% now. Among Dems overall, Obama fell six points, from 83% to 77%.

With these numbers and the reality that health care could drag even further through the fall, which isn’t hard to imagine at all (Lawrence O’Donnell has been saying this for a while). The Blue Dogs are going to see themselves as the next candidates on the endangered species list as they look towards 2010, likely digging their heels in further on health care reform.

Obama’s got serious challenges. The first is getting back his base, which is disillusioned, to put it mildly. All the while the right is readying to rev it up to full squeal, with the deficit number all the fuel they need. Not getting something done on health care before August break may turn out to be the ultimate turn of the screw.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The President of Cool

The White House position, though, is vintage Obama: Lay out some broad principles, seek consensus, and try to float above the nitty-gritty details of the argument on the way there. Obama has never claimed he was a doctrinaire liberal; in fact, part of his message last year was that he’d get past the tired debates that paralyzed Washington in the name of finding common ground, even if that common ground – as he described it – mostly tended to involve Democratic policy ideas. His approach on healthcare has followed that model; he started the process off by enlisting the very industries the reform legislation will affect, in an attempt to get them into his consensus. – Obama’s just not that into you, by Mike Madden

Photobucket

Most ardent Obama supporters, the people who have been beside him for a very long time, just don’t get who he is as a politician. Neither do many of the big name opinion makers, Eugene Robinson leading that pack. Paul Krugman writes about “Obama’s Trust Problem” today. Since Krugman was never enamored with Obama’s health care ideas, I’m sure writing this column didn’t come as much of a surprise. The Washington Post revealing that Obama’s now suffering from a crisis of confidence on health care that if he’s not successful could scuttle any major changes he wants to enact.

When I wrote “Flyover,” you cannot imagine the emails I received and this was back when I had absolutely no intention of going partisan in the presidential primaries. I bring this up because Mike Madden of Salon.com reached back into the primaries to be one of the only people to get the foundation that is our President. Obama “never claimed he was a doctrinaire liberal.” Madden’s subheading, however cute, is also to the point: Liberals and the president struggle to find common ground on healthcare. But are they really meant for each other?

Maybe not, but we’re certainly stuck with each other.

George Stephanopoulos is the only interviewer to get at the root of Obama, a quote to which I refer whenever we’re in situations like the current one on health care, with Pres. Obama in a war with the activists who believe manifesting Democratic policy changes is more important than Obama’s signature kumbaya.

“I think that I have the capacity to get people to recognize themselves in each other. I think that I have the ability to make people get beyond some of the divisions that plague our society and to focus on common sense and reason and that’s been in short supply over the last several years. I’m not an ideologue, never have been. Even during my younger days when I was tempted by, you know, sort of more radical or left wing politics, there was a part of me that always was a little bit conservative in that sense; that believes that you make progress by sitting down listening to people, recognizing everybody’s concerns, seeing other people’s points of views and then making decisions.” – Barack Obama (on ABC’s “This Week”, )

Segue to Eugene Robinson, who reveals his political analysis is about as good as anyone blinded by Barack Obama’s star power, gift of oratory, as well as his once in a lifetime candidacy, which never had anything to do with doctrinaire liberalism, something Robinson has never gotten. Mr. Robinson’s column today is proof that the Pulitzer Prize will never equate to astute, even if he was part of the Obama wave.

There’s not enough passion on the Democratic side, not enough heat. There’s some radiating from the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives, too little emanating from the Democratic majority in the Senate, and not nearly enough coming from President Obama. Republicans, by contrast, have little going for them except passion — but they’re using it to impressive effect.

Heat? Seriously? Expecting “heat” from Barack Obama on a point of policy?

Barack Obama was never about heat, not ever. Maybe from his supporters to him, or from the sheer star power of his oratory and sheer coolness, but on policy the man has always been lacking, especially on passion for manifesting liberal policy prescriptions.

Obama’s cool pegs him over any other description, which has been a big part of his charm across the political divide. It’s also why he’s the ultimate Blue Dog, THE Blue Dog in fact, which for me has never just been about conservatism, but more about cool; the coolness of any passion towards liberal ideas and the ideology we are supposed to manifest because it represents what’s in the long-term best interests of the American people.

But Obama isn’t a believer, never has been.

It’s also why Obama, even as he invoked Reagan, now has revealed he never got Ronnie. Reagan was sunny, optimistic, but he was also a hard core ideologue. Yes, he compromised when he had to, did what he must, had cocktails with Tip O’Neill after hours, but Reagan never forgot what he was there for, the purpose of his presidency, which was to enact conservative principles through policy, something we’re paying for right now. Obama just saw the character actor, missing the passionate conservative message of the man, which was never in doubt.

But that’s just not Obama’s style. And it never has been his purpose. Go back to the quote with Stephanopoulos. Obama’s the President of Cool, the anti-ideologue, at a time when what we really need is a fire breathing liberal to utilize the majority we’ve got and implement change, especially on health care, that will last.

That’s where we come in, though there’s no guarantee we will win.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Terry McAuliffe to Fundraise for Dem On Public Option

More than three out of every four Americans feel it is important to have a “choice” between a government-run health care insurance option and private coverage, according to a public opinion poll released on Thursday. A new study by SurveyUSA puts support for a public option at a robust 77 percent, one percentage point higher than where it stood in June.Huffington Post

I’ll leave the polling to experts, but maybe this is why liberals have been raising money like mad off of Kathleen Sebelius’s “not essential” public option blooper. Oh right, she “misspoke”. But at least she can do something right. Put money in the pockets of progressive legislators who are standing up for a public option. It’s making news everywhere. Even Terry McAuliffe is getting in on the act, but more on that in a minute.

Maybe Pres. Obama’s latest dismissal of the people who put him in office will do the same. From The Hill:

President Barack Obama said Thursday that despite “hand-wringing” by liberals and the media, he guarantees healthcare reform will pass.

Obama, appearing on conservative radio host Michael Smerconish’s show live from the White House, also defended his Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, for remarks she made last week.

Yeah, can’t have any of those “hand-wringing” liberals messing up your messaging, even though we’re the ones giving Congress the backing to yank you and your crew back on track.

We criticize and bitch a lot about Congress not doing enough, so when they stand up we should stand behind them.

The Obama and Sebelius comments during the weekend reignited liberal fears. In a joint letter, the Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus scolded Sebelius for her comments. And they attached the 60-signature letter. – Left flexes muscles on healthcare reform

It’s got to be obvious by now that Obama won’t get Republicans to sign on. They’re posturing, so Obama postures back. But he’s also taking shots at liberals, including the “hand-wringing” remark over the public option, even though we’ve got more support for the public option than he does on his ideas. What are they again? Oh right, he’s waiting for Congress to tell him, which is why Democratic voters have risen up, even as Obama uses his own base to woo the right and separate himself from us icky liberals, even though the right is gone for this President, as are many Independents.

The tell at how badly Obama was missing this political fight came when he ceded the stage to Sarah Palin after her “death squeal” rant, the President pumping oxygen into the wingnuts tent by the ton through publicizing Palin’s message.

On the activist side, we’ve got Matthew Yglesias who evidently thinks it’s better to reveal what he’ll accept, before anyone has shown us what we’ll have to swallow, joining the Ezra Klein contingent.

Classic statement by Big Tent Democrat:

I do not think Matt, or Ezra Klein, or Kevin Drum, or Paul Starr are closet Blue Dogs, but I DO think, in terms of political bargaining, they DO represent well why Democrats and progressives are the worst political bargainers I have ever seen. More . . .

Look, I have negotiated civil litigation settlements for 20 years. The one thing you never can do, ever, is state beforehand what you are willing to accept as a final result of a negotiation. Advising political negotiators to do so is simply stupid. It just is.

However, I do think some in this argument are indeed Blue Dogs. You can tell by the way they fight. Compromise is the first tenet of their code.

We don’t have Hillary, with Bill already caving to the “we’ve got to get a bill” White House contingent, but we’ve got Terry. McAuliffe that is. Via NotLarrySabato:

Terry’s agreed to host a fundraiser with Virginia and national bloggers who are insisting on a public option for the first Virginia Congressman who will take our pledge!

Why?

“Health care was a key issue on which we all campaigned so hard for in 2008, and I’m happy to see that progressive bloggers are working to ensure we take advantage of this historic opportunity to get the reform we need. Now is the time to act. Our elected officials in Congress should insist on including a public option.” – Terry McAuliffe

Goes to show up an old Democratic dog can learn new tricks; aided by a painful lesson learned in the presidential primaries of 2008.

Good for Terry. This is how we get it done.

Read full story · Comments are closed