Pakistan’s top military spy agency has arrested some of the Pakistani informants who fed information to the Central Intelligence Agency in the months leading up to the raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden, according to American officials.
Pakistan’s detention of five C.I.A. informants, including a Pakistani Army major who officials said copied the license plates of cars visiting Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in the weeks before the raid, is the latest evidence of the fractured relationship between the United States and Pakistan. It comes at a time when the Obama administration is seeking Pakistan’s support in brokering an endgame in the war in neighboring Afghanistan. [...]
But it’s no wonder we couldn’t “find” Osama bin Laden all these years. Our relationship with the Pakistanis has been duplicitous for a long time, with Pakistan’s own leadership threatened by internal challenges, making the entire endeavor to maintain a stable channel of communication a nightmare.
We need a bigger diplomatic stick. Time to do another mangoes for nukes deal with India?
Let it be known that the 15th day in June 2011, ten brave members of the United States Congress have found the Institution’s spine, assembled it, and however rickety the experience will be, as they haven’t used it for a very long time, are taking on the Executive Branch on the War Powers Act.
Today, I have the honor of representing ten members of the United States House of Representatives in challenging the constitutional basis for the Libyan War — and the underlying claims made by President Obama. These members include Democrats and Republicans from across the political spectrum. They share a belief that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution expressly requires the authorization of Congress before a president can commit the nation to war. The lawsuit will be heard in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. We filed this afternoon and held a press conference with the members in front of the courthouse. A copy of the complaint (which will be heard by Judge Reggie Walton) is below.
This challenge goes beyond Libya and challenges the claim by the Administration that the President has the inherent authority to order combat operations without the approval or declaration of Congress. The Plaintiffs in this action include the second most longest standing member of Congress, John Conyers, as well as leading members from both parties. The members are Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Dan Burton (R., Ind.); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx).
They are seeking injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as requesting a judicial review of undeclared wars under Article I of the U.S. Constitution.
This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief. In addition to challenging the circumvention of express constitutional language, it will also challenge arguments that no one (including members of Congress) has “standing” to submit this question to judicial review. These members will ask the federal district court for review of the constitutional question and for recognition that the Constitution must allow for judicial review of claims of undeclared wars under Article I.
I am being assisted in this case by a team including Jodie Cheng, David Fox, Kyle Noonan, Eric Sidler, and Geoff Turley (no relation to Professor Turley).
Barack Obama is certainly not the first president to think he’s king, but his hubris is continuing to drive the United States into the empire ditch. Libya follows a list of worthless wars, beginning with Vietnam, the latest being preemptive war in Iraq, which was predicated on a lie that former Speaker Pelosi thought unimportant to investigate.
The Executive Branch was never meant to be a position where the president could deliver such overarching and consequential policy decisions as war without Congress weighing in.
The two senior administration lawyers contended that American forces have not been in “hostilities” at least since April 7, when NATO took over leadership in maintaining a no-flight zone in Libya, and the United States took up what is mainly a supporting role — providing surveillance and refueling for allied warplanes — although unmanned drones operated by the United States periodically fire missiles as well.
They argued that United States forces are at little risk in the operation because there are no American troops on the ground and Libyan forces are unable to exchange meaningful fire with American forces. They said that there was little risk of the military mission escalating, because it is constrained by the United Nations Security Counsel resolution that authorized use of air power to defend civilians.
“We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own,” Mr. Koh said. “We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped, or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of ‘hostilities’ envisioned by the War Powers Resolution.”
Norquist might have to take a hard line and pretend he’s appalled to see it crossed, but in focusing everyone on that line, he’s effectively distracting them from how far the goalposts have been moved. Instead of revenues being an assumed part of a deficit deal, with the only question being how much of the deal they make up, the question has become whether Republicans will accept any revenues at all in the deficit deal. Including any new revenues at all has been framed as a major concession for the Republicans, which means it’s easier for Republicans to include far less revenue in total. And no matter how you look at it, that’s a win for Grover Norquist. – Wonkbook: Grover Norquist’s small loss and big win
Well, that was a weird exchange with Ann Curry that explains a lot.
The most amazing thing about the Republican debate this week was that there were no ideas on the economy or jobs. It’s the most infuriating thing about the era of austerity in which we live. Pres. Obama, having bought into the same thing a long time ago, except when it comes to dispensing our military in other countries, has now relegated the Democratic Party to the same status as the GOP, a tax-cutting priority party.
Progressive Democrats are launching a tour to call for good jobs for the working and middle classes, putting pressure on House Republicans and President Barack Obama to push for more job measures.
“Let’s get mad,” Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said at a press conference. “Let’s tell the man that we love in the White House to get off of his butt and start supporting some legislature for jobs. … He’s the best speaker in the world, and now we want some action.”
But the Democrats saved their harshest words for House Republicans, whom Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) called “spineless” in their support for tax cuts and subsidies.
It would be nice if progressive legislators also remembered that it was Pres. Obama who touted tax cut last year, while ignoring tax hikes for mil-billionaires, but that would require mutiny.
I just don’t get any sense that Pres. Obama is all that excited about taking on the challenge, except as a campaign theme or as some panel exercise. If he was he would.
Pres. Obama says he’s got enough energy to keep doing the work he’s doing, but without a vision for what his presidency means I’m not sure that’s good enough. It’s striking that he talks about finishing the work he started in 2009, mentioning energy and education, when the word j-o-b-s should be the first word out of his mouth.
Asked about his family’s reaction to his wanting another term, Obama said: “Michelle and the kids are wonderful in that if I said, `You know, guys, I want to do something different,’ They’d be fine. They’re not invested in daddy being president or my husband being president.” – Obama: My family would be fine with just 1 term
The idea here is that Barack Obama would be fine with one term, something that he’s implied before. Perhaps that’s because he’s floating along letting events pull him, rather than having a driving ideological passion and purpose that inspires him to begin an infrastructure project that would revitalize our country, whether it’s roads and bridges, airports, with the manifested results also putting people back to work.
Negotiator is one role he plays, but Pres. Obama’s presidency long ago turned into administrating through the events unfolding. There isn’t a passionate purpose to his presidency that I can sense, feel or hear. Americans like Pres. Obama, with his family a remarkable model. But the celebrity persona that helped land him in the White House hasn’t inspired him to change into a man on any mission.
There is no great vision to Barack Obama’s presidency and everybody knows it. The recent jaw-boning flurry is campaign talk without a plan. There’s no driving dream, no sense of where he wants to take the country. Any direction was better than where George W. Bush was taking the country, but now there is a listlessness to the American journey Pres. Obama’s supposed to be leading.
The thrill is also gone in watching Pres. Obama and I’m not sure revving up his trademark rhetoric will alter this dynamic. He’s certainly still a formidable candidate, but if a Republican challenger with a vision for America finally gets around to offering one people will listen.
Americans are desperate.
Obama also says he wants to finish what he started, but somehow it simply sounds like something a one-term president says, because he wants another. George H.W. Bush showed the same kind of nonchalance to the office of the presidency before Bill Clinton came out of nowhere to knock the dreams of a fourth Reagan legacy tour off the calendar.
The economy’s the biggest reason Pres. Obama could lose his job. He could keep it if the current Republican crew continues what they revved up last night: attacks with no ideas, coupled with tax cuts. Another reason Obama could lose is that he isn’t making a case in policy, passion or in vision for why he deserves to keep it.
After Rep. Michele Bachmann’s star turn in the Republican debate, Sarah Palin’s fans have been very active rebutting the notion that Palin can’t run because of Bachmann, while encouraging her to jump in. On MSNBC, Martin Bashir claimed that Bachmann is “the thinking person’s Sarah Palin.” Many on the Left have been saying she can’t run for president because of poll numbers showing she can’t win the general election. That isn’t stopping Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum or Herman Cain, so it shouldn’t stop Sarah either. Mark Halperin has opined on “Morning Joe” that if Sarah wants to run she’ll be a factor. I’m in that camp as well, though I think she’s got a serious impediment to prevailing for the nomination.
Althouse on Palin email saga. She’s absolutely correct about one item. That nothing of note was found, still hasn’t been found, should be reported as widely as the frenzy Jon Stewart mocks.
2. The fact that there was nothing was actually news, and the journalists should have protected their integrity — appearance of integrity — by reporting the nothing with clarity. In the run up to the receipt of the boxes of xeroxes, air time was devoted to speculating about what might be in those emails. Most notable — it’s in the middle of the “Daily Show” montage — was the suspicion that the governor’s husband was secretly running the show, pulling the strings. (You know, the shameful sexism.) But there was absolutely nothing that looked at all like that. Maybe there’s another montage that could be made of these reporters spelling out clearly what was disproved by the emails. But I think what they did was dribble out statements like “no smoking gun yet” — seemingly expecting that we’d gradually lose interest and move on to something else.
I did one post on it, linking to news organizations that were covering it or putting together a database. After requesting the information after she became veep, the expectations from those sending reporters to cover the story was huge.
As I said in the comments at the time, the only thing that is regrettable is that Sarah Palin is no longer the politician who took Alaska by storm. Like so many others in the game, she’s been corrupted by money, fame, then add Fox News. The thing I learned from the very few emails I read is the same thing I learned from Alaska newspapers online and other sources. She started out taking on her own party, as well as working with Democrats, but always having the people of her state in mind. Now all she thinks about is keeping her own star’s trajectory in orbit and her fans at her feet.
But it doesn’t change one thing. If Sarah Palin decides she wants to get serious she can still impact the Republican nomination process, because her fans are loyal and ready. What they don’t understand is the likelihood of her doing this depends on the bottom line: can she financially afford it at this point? Can she raise enough money to support a candidacy? It’s not a small consideration against Mitt Romney, whose plan is to slog it out until the end, and also Jon Huntsman. Palin cannot self finance and there’s no evidence of any major donors willing to help her, though there’s little doubt if Sarah’s circus came to town she’d get press and give the GOP establishment the vapors.
Pres. Obama started bombing Libya out of humanitarian reasoning, with there no strategic interest there for the U.S. Now he’s turning to Yemen, which is no doubt a dangerous place that does have wider implications. However, why is everyone just shrugging at his Executive hubris? Why is he getting to do it without congressional approval?
The CIA is expected to begin operating armed drone aircraft over Yemen, expanding the hunt for al-Qaeda operatives in a country where counter-terrorism efforts have been disrupted by political chaos, U.S. officials said.
The plan to move CIA-operated Predator and other unmanned aircraft into the region reflects a decision by President Obama that the al-Qaeda threat in Yemen has grown so serious that patrols by U.S. military drones are not enough.
Because it operates under different legal authorities than the military, the CIA may have greater latitude to carry out strikes if the political climate shifts in Yemen and cooperation with American forces is diminished or cut off. [...]
This is taking the excuse to bomb countries and send in covert forces, as long as there are no traditional boots on the ground, to a level that is potentially very messy.
Jon Huntsman has said he thinks we should no longer be in Afghanistan, that Libya is of non-strategic interest, and that he’d rethink our Middle East wars. I wonder what he thinks about drone power?
As commander in chief, Pres. Obama is so far off the reservation I’m not sure he could find his way back to the man who gave the anti Iraq war speech that snared him the nomination.
Over on Breitbart’s site, at the moment of writing this piece, there were only 36 Facebook recommends for Bruce’s plea for Palin to run, which has been up for hours. Bruce’s rationale is ridiculous, but it’s shared by a lot of Palin devotees.
They fear a Palin nomination because they know if she wins the GOP nod, she wins the general election. How? Consider these years of frantic and pathological attacks on Palin, all of which she has survived with the grace and dignity so void in her accusers. Now imagine what the establishment will try to do to her during the nominating process. If she wins the nomination despite what they do, it means she not only has convinced Republicans under extraordinary circumstances, she will have convinced the rest of the nation as well. If she wins the nomination with all that she will undoubtedly face during the Republican primaries, the presidency is hers.
Talk about the mother of all hail Marys.
The comments are telling, as are the reactions to people reading them, with Bruce bringing out Sarah’s fans in droves.
After seeing Michele Bachmann last night, it’s got to be a hard day in Palinland.
As world food prices surge to the highest levels ever recorded due to a combination of production constraints and rising demand from expanding middle classes, many poor families teeter on the edge, and it is the mothers who often quietly bear the brunt.
It’s difficult to measure the impact of the food crisis on mothers, but even before it began, the U.N. World Food Program said women made up about 60 percent of those going to bed hungry every night worldwide. With cultural practices in some countries dictating that women and girls eat last, many are now making do with even less.
“They are more likely to skip meals and eat less to ensure their children and husbands get most of their meals,” said Hassan Zaman, a World Bank economist on poverty reduction and equality. [...]
The ghosts of Bush-Cheney-Rummy torture still hangs over the C.I.A., no matter what Leon Panetta has done to infuse the agency with honor. From TIME magazine:
Manadel al-Jamadi
It has been nearly a decade since Manadel al-Jamadi, an Iraqi prisoner known as “the Iceman” — for the bungled attempt to cool his body and make him look less dead — perished in CIA custody at Abu Ghraib. But now there are rumbles in Washington that the notorious case, as well as other alleged CIA abuses, could be returning to haunt the agency. TIME has learned that a prosecutor tasked with probing the CIA — John Durham, a respected, Republican-appointed U.S. Attorney from Connecticut — has begun calling witnesses before a secret federal grand jury in Alexandria, Va., looking into, among other things, the lurid Nov. 4, 2003, homicide, which was documented by TIME in 2005.
TIME has obtained a copy of a subpoena signed by Durham that points to his grand jury’s broader mandate, which could involve charging additional CIA officers and contract employees in other cases. The subpoena says “the grand jury is conducting an investigation of possible violations of federal criminal laws involving War Crimes (18 USC/2441), Torture (18 USC 243OA) and related federal offenses.” [...]
I’ll never understand the sense in allowing former Pres. Bush, V.P. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld to walk out of Washington without a serious hearing on the malfeasance surrounding their prosecution of the Iraq war. I never wanted impeachment hearings to be the primary goal after he won reelection, but there’s something craven about the Democratic cowardice to hold our own leaders culpable by investigating their actions when in office. It’s one of Speaker Pelosi’s gravest errors in judgment.
Seeing Tim Pawlenty fall on his face last night, Jon Huntsman knows there’s room for the anti Romney and he wants to fill it. From the AP:
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican who until the spring served as President Barack Obama’s ambassador to China, is running for president, officials said Tuesday.
The Republican planned to formally announce his intentions June 21 at Liberty State Park in New Jersey, with the Statue of Liberty in the background, these officials familiar with Huntsman’s thinking told The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to avoid publically pre-empting Huntsman. He was set to suggest as much later Tuesday in an appearance in New York City.
To add, he’s launching in New Jersey as an ode to Ronald Reagan, with the Statue of Liberty as backdrop.
Now she can do her celebrity turn, continue to fascinate her fans, but not be bothered with the business of having to think about governing, something Sarah Palin long ago lost interest in.
That is not to say that Ms. Palin will necessarily engage in such a careful analysis when she decides whether to run for president. But it’s possible that she’s missed her moment — whether or not she decides to run. Rather than being a proxy for Ms. Palin, Ms. Bachmann may instead be preferred to her in the eyes of Republican voters. – Debate Swings Door Open for Perry, Closed for Palin
Being unaccountable and free to opine at will on friendly Fox News is what she’s cut out to do, at least for now.
After watching Michele Bachmann last night I can’t think of one driving reason Palin has for running. Bachmann’s politics are extreme, but she can articulate them better than Sarah can. A long time ago when Sarah showed up to campaign for Michele Bachmann it was clear the Iowa native had gone to school on Sarah. After a make-up, hair and image revamping, Bachmann came out as the polished package she was last night, though she’s not yet learned the softer side of what’s needed, but that’s a minor detail.
It looks like the Tea Party maven, Michele Bachmann, has just made the life of T-Paw a whole lot harder, because he just can’t catch solid ground. There’s also no evidence T-Paw has what it takes to confront Bachmann and survive rhetorically.
We’ve finally entered the Sarah who? stage of Tea Party politics. She had 2010 but this year she’s been eclipsed; for women on the Right, the stage now belongs to Bachmann.
Granted, it was a fundraiser, not a free rally. But the empty seats were hard to miss. The top level of the 2,200-seat concert hall at the Adrienne Arsht Center for Performing Arts was entirely empty, as were the seats along the side of the second and third levels. – Obama fundraiser underwhelms
E.J. Dionne didn’t expect it, but it didn’t surprise me at all after watching her during the budget battle. So, not only was Michele Bachmann the only one who had any star quality, she made news too. But she should have skipped this very weird webvid of her announcement.
Tim Pawlenty blew it big time. What the strategy on that was all about is anyone’s guess, but it was a colossal mistake. It’s also hard to imagine T-Paw not panicking a bit upon imagining his Iowa chances vanishing with Bachmann’s strong performance. His record may delight Republicans, but he has no presence at all. I don’t now how he comes back from this, as his first debate was a snooze.
Mitt Romney made it through untouched, choosing to draw a picture for viewers of him debating Obama, saying to everyone I’m your nominee. He also tried to weave an answer on Afghanistan that didn’t offend Republican primary voters, while having it both ways by not trying to alienate the general election voter, most of whom want out of Afghanistan.
If Jon Huntsman was watching and you can bet he was, he’s got to sense Romney’s vulnerable to a Republican who actually knows his mind and is clear on matters of foreign policy.
Republicans will now have to deal with Rep. Bachmann. Her politics are not only representative of the Tea Party, but also of their extreme views. From TeamBachmann on Twitter:
Here’s a #prolife solution from MB: Let’s require mothers to hear the heartbeat before getting an abortion. #cnndebate
Few things are as offensive coming from a conservative than demanding government intervene in a woman’s most wrenching decision and moment in her life, while being subjected to steps along the way that are beyond any legal requirement of Roe or Griswold. I’d really like to take Republicans seriously, but this type of rhetoric against women’s freedoms is reprehensible from an American political party that lectures everyone on freedom and liberty.
Obama’s Libya policy, such as there is one, wasn’t popular last night either and I’d like to talk further about foreign policy, but John King didn’t introduce it until there was around 15 minutes left in the 2-hour debate.
Where Jon Huntsman fits in this group, well, he doesn’t. Maybe that will be his ace if he decides to get in, which is what everyone is waiting to see.
It starts at 8 pm EST. Gary Johnson was banned by CNN, but Dylan Ratigan gave him a few moments today on his show.
Big question: How long will it take for them to tee off on Anthony Weiner?
While the challenge for Tim Pawlenty is seeming relevant, something that he’s still not done. Looking like a freshman against Romney’s varsity letter persona is his biggest problem.
As for Newt, I’m wondering how quickly after this debate he’ll throw in the towel.
update below..
– …and we’re off. Newt looks like Calista just walked out with all the money.
– The buzz words so far: Obama depression and destructive Newt, oppressive X3 (Santorum), “declinist” and defeatist (that’s Tim Pawlenty’s contribution).
– Newt sets up Michele Bachmann… who ANNOUNCES SHE’S RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT in the middle of the boys floundering around being vicious. Classic and well done, not to mention humorous.
– “Obamacare” time.
– Bachmann says “the left fears” the Tea Party.
– Michele Bachmann is letting Sarah Palin off the hook. She won’t have to give up her Fox job now. T-Paw’s seeing Iowa flash before his eyes.
– Classic flip-pop from Romney on the auto industry bailout. GOPer Mike Murphy immediately tweeted that this clip was flagged in Chicago.
– Pawlenty and Newt square off; Newt wins angry man award.
– I miss Gary Johnson. Where’s the marijuana question?
– From Michele Bachmann’s team: Here’s a #prolife solution from MB: Let’s require mothers to hear the heartbeat before getting an abortion. #cnndebate — Invasion of privacy. We can’t challenge these people in court soon enough.
– With 15 minutes left, John King finally goes to foreign policy.
– “I am the commander in chief,” Ron Paul reminds Mitt Romney; no involvement in Libya from Paul. Bachmann also says no to Libya, policy is “substantially flawed.”
– John King mentions Jon Huntsman in absentia.
– QUICK REVIEW: Tim Pawlenty big loser tonight. Michele Bachmann did herself a lot of good. Mitt Romney got off without a scratch.
“We inject less libido… We don’t necessarily inject our own egos…” – Christiane Lagrande, French Foreign Minister (possible IMF replacement for Strauss-Kahn)
Foreign policy studies find that when women are included in a nation’s national dialogue that country has not only a better chance of stability, but it’s the only way developing nations can thrive. There are now studies that women make companies more economically successful when they’re in the lead. On ABC’s “This Week” yesterday, Christiane Amanpour teed up the topic with Cecilia Attias (ex-wife to Pres. Sarkozy), Torie Clarke, Claire Shipman.
Rush Limbaugh was even more unhinged than usual today because of this subject. Limbaugh talked about the “chick-i-fi-cation” of the U.S. One female caller said that women today having affairs with politicians are “greedy,” because in the old days they’d keep their mouth shut. Classic example of Rush’s female audience. This same caller opined that men should run the household, while Rush blamed liberal women for the fate of a bullies, Weiner and everything that ails the male populace.
After all these years of tuning in to Rush, however briefly when I can. I’m still amazed that his criteria for a successful woman includes marriage, children, heterosexualism, but especially beauty.
But while countries and corporations need women to thrive and succeed, there are other examples where women haven’t made any difference at all.
Where foreign policy, diplomacy and militarism meet, women still fail as miserably as men, because they’re intent on channeling what any man would do or say. Sometimes, of course, foreign policy answers aren’t gender based, with the obvious answer showing itself no matter the gender. But in tough geopolitical situations, so far women still have not found their own way.
Let’s remember who was at the forefront of Obama’s decision to get involved in Libya, which began with Samantha Power and Dr. Susan Rice, but also Sec. Clinton, who was convinced bombing Libya was the right move. It wasn’t.
There is no evidence whatsoever of women being more restrained, thoughtful or less militaristic. See Liz Cheney, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, but also women like Anne-Marie Slaughter, who wrote an op-ed entitled “Fiddling While Libya Burns.” You could also add Sec. Madeleine Albright’s comment that Colin Powell recalled in his memoir: “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about, if we can’t use it?” It blew his mind.
From the LA Times we find out just what a disaster the team of Bush and Rumsfeld were for the U.S. From tax cuts that exploded the debt and an unjustified preemptive war kept off the books, add in Abu Ghraib and the plummeting of American credibility throughout the Arab and Muslim world, it’s hard to name a worse run operation than Dick Cheney’s Iraqi debacle.
After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the George W. Bush administration flooded the conquered country with so much cash to pay for reconstruction and other projects in the first year that a new unit of measurement was born.
Pentagon officials determined that one giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane could carry $2.4 billion in shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills. They sent an initial full planeload of cash, followed by 20 other flights to Iraq by May 2004 in a $12-billion haul that U.S. officials believe to be the biggest international cash airlift of all time. [...]
There is much more at the link, including that the Iraq government believes it was the job of the U.S. to guard the cash, so they intend to try to recoup it.
On a tangential note, there’s simply no reason to be in Iraq anymore.
Republicans’ support for Mitt Romney as their party’s 2012 presidential nominee has increased significantly to 24%, compared with 17% in late May. As a result, Romney has widened his advantage over Sarah Palin… – Gallup
Playing coy during serious times is never a winner, as Sarah Palin is finding out, while Romney starts pulling away for the first time.
..and it’s no more Mr. Nice Guy either.
Video Text: “Millions Have Lost Their Jobs Under President Obama” Video Text: “Long Term Unemployment Is Now Worse Than The Great Depression” Video Text: “June 3, 2011 Unemployment Hit 9.1%” Video Text: “President Obama Called It A Bump In The Road” President Obama (audio): “There are always going to be bumps on the road to recovery.” Mark: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Derrick: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Melissa: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Jessica: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Jerry: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Kevin: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” American Family: “We are Americans, not bumps in the road.” Matt: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Dustin: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Shirley: “I am an American, not a bump in the road.” Ryan: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Jason: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Group: “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” Video Text: “BELIEVE IN AMERICA November 6, 2012.”
If you’re around tonight, hope you will join me for the Republican debate in New Hampshire.
When Democrats congregate, some lawmakers are going to argue “why are we cannibalizing ourselves,” said a senior Democratic aide. “Plus, he’s not going anywhere, so we just look like a bunch of idiots.” – Democrats worry Anthony Weiner will hurt agenda
A bunch of idiots gets it exactly right.
When a leader targets one of her own she needs to hit him; on Rep. Anthony Weiner, Democratic minority leader Pelosi (and DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz) missed by a mile. It’s not Debbie Wasserman Shultz’s place to tell Mr. Weiner to focus on his “well being” or his family. Pelosi and Wasserman Schultz played female moralists instead of remembering their job is as political party leaders, something the men don’t forget.
As I wrote this weekend, if Democrats want a real disaster all they have to do is serve up an ethics investigation, with the results landing in the heat of the 2012 presidential race. Hoyer gets it, even as he clearly hopes Weiner will take one for the team who can’t force him to do anything.
Still, several House leaders — Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland, Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson of Connecticut and Vice Chairman Xavier Becerra of California — pointedly did not join the choreographed team push. None of them has directly called for Weiner to resign, though Hoyer did say Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that he hopes “he would make that judgment.” – Politico
If Democratic leaders were smart, they are not, they would instead muster some discipline and a united front saying that Anthony Weiner’s personal challenges won’t keep seniors from losing Medicare. Weiner’s got a long journey to rehabilitate himself, but the Democrats job remains the same: We’re focused on the most important job we have and that’s standing up for protecting people from the Republican and Paul Ryan’s budget scheme, which threatens the safety net Americans have had since F.D.R.
It’s predictable Republicans will run ads using Weiner, but Democrats can answer those ads with the GOP’s greatest scandal hits, perhaps starting with Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani or maybe Tom Delay, even David Vitter or Mark Foley. There are innumerable options.
As for messaging, the Democratic message for 2010 under Tim Kaine was a historic disaster. Pres. Obama didn’t help, because all he could muster was compromise and capitulation on economic message that further blew out the budget and has his 2012 road looking rougher than it has before, though certainly not impossible to traverse.
Whatever problems Democrats have with messaging aren’t Anthony Weiner’s fault, however infuriating he is as a distraction, though he’s an easy scapegoat.
The Democratic problem is that in the Obama era they can’t figure out what’s worth fighting for and won’t make a case for the Democratic alternative for all things Republican.
Say what you will about Anthony Weiner he never had that problem. As one of the most prominent grandstanding politicians for Democratic ideals, though his Middle East stance is appalling, Weiner knew there was no mileage in parroting Republican economic talking points or selling out people on health care, both of which got Democrats in the ditch they’re in today long before Weiner went wild on Twitter.
“Patti fired me,” Reines recalled, adding with a smirk, “I just sort of ignored it, like George Costanza. I was in the office the next day at 7 a.m.” He said that Clinton had known about the profile before it ran and that she decided to keep him on. “Ultimately, the organization was and is run by one person,” he said. “One person wanted me there.” Solis Doyle declined to comment on the incident. … The prize destination for Clinton’s Senate staffers was campaign headquarters in Arlington, but Reines wasn’t welcome there. Adding insult to injury, Clinton hired Reines’s rivals in Schumer’s press office. They disparaged him as the “purse holder,” after the New York Times described Reines toting Clinton’s handbag.
Reines was patient. “I knew that the first ones in are not always the last ones out,” he said. – Washington Post
Patti Solis Doyle firing Reines is laughable, but everything about her leadership inside Hillaryland could go under that heading. As if being canned by anyone but the boss would matter to Reines.
I’ve traded innumerable emails with Reines over the last years. We’d been attempting to meet for cocktails for months and when a time opened up we could both book, at the time, I still didn’t navigate Washington, D.C. very well. I got so lost that I was over an hour late, something that never happens to me, texting him my travails as I tried to find a hotel that was in the center of everything. Mortified when I showed up at the hotel bar, there he sat waiting patiently in the back, with another Clinton confidante. He was gracious and even bought a round of drinks.
One of the things we talked about was McChrystal’s implosion in Rolling Stone, which I found untenable for him and explained why. Reines clearly disagreed, but didn’t show Sec. Clinton’s hand while staying loyal to the administration until the inevitable ax came down.
It’s fitting that as Sec. Clinton enters the shank half of her secretary of state tenure, the man who’s served her unfailingly as the dogged political lineman of Hillaryland gets drawn out.
In the end, the buck always stops with Hillary:
On Sept. 26, 2007, Clinton met her campaign team for a debate preparation session at the Phoenix Park Hotel. In the middle of the session, she excused herself for an appointment on the Hill and then, to the horror of her campaign, voted for a measure to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization — a disastrous move for a candidate looking to shed a hawkish reputation in a Democratic primary. Her campaign’s senior strategist, Mark Penn, fired off an e-mail to Reines, one of the 859,200 Senate and campaign e-mails Reines has saved, expressing frustration that the Senate staff didn’t tell the campaign that the vote was coming. “We didn’t know she was leaving prep to vote,” Reines wrote at the time. “And were surprised when she did.”
Former campaign officials still blame Reines for failing to flag the vote. Reines places the blame elsewhere. “In fairness to her,” Reines said of Clinton, “she did what she always does; she looked to other people to see how they were voting. So she looked at Chuck. Chuck voted for it. She looked at Harry Reid. Harry Reid voted for it. She looked at Carl Levin. Carl Levin voted for it. It was the first time that a vote had become so charged” in the run-up to the 2008 election.
After the primaries of 2008, Howard Wolfson landed in Mayor Bloomberg’s office. Where Phillippe Reines lands after Clinton leaves State is anybody’s guess.
I’m going out on a very strong limb to judge a toss up on this one.
First, the New York Times, Jared Bernstein and everyone but Pres. Obama is pushing for the fed to get involved and create some kind of jobs program, while Larry Summers asks for more stimulus. But there’s still no real movement from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. yet.
A New York Times editorial today suggests that the federal government do some direct job creation to offset the weak economy. Why don’t we? Why won’t we? Why didn’t we do more of that in the Recovery Act? Is it because, as a Republican mantra would have it, “the government doesn’t create jobs — only the private market can do that?” Um… that can’t be it. There are over 20 million government jobs, about 17% of the total right now. And remember a few months ago, when temporary Census-taker jobs were boosting the employment rolls? It’s true we can’t have a robust job market if the other 83% aren’t generating jobs. But do me a favor–the next time someone touts that mantra, change the channel, stand up and shout something, or just do whatever it is you do when you hear an untruth. – Jared Bernstein
Then from the latest in the Anthony Weiner stupid files we have TMZ’s eye-popping gym photo spread. The rolling disclosure not shocking in the least, because this guy was in deep denial about his predilections, but the never ending crotch shots make Narcissus look humble, and adding exhibitionism to the list of gratuitous ugliness adds a new layer of creepiness to Weiner’s idiocy (though I still don’t think the Dem establishment has any authority to overturn an election by demanding he resign).
However, topping it off from the New York Times we get Pres. Obama’s reelection team working on their best pucker for Wall Street as they prep for 2012:
Mr. Obama, who enraged many financial industry executives a year and a half ago by labeling them “fat cats” and criticizing their bonuses, followed up the meeting with phone calls to those who could not attend.
The event, organized by the Democratic National Committee, kicked off an aggressive push by Mr. Obama to win back the allegiance of one of his most vital sources of campaign cash — in part by trying to convince Wall Street that his policies, far from undercutting the investor class, have helped bring banks and financial markets back to health.
Last month, Mr. Obama’s campaign manager, Jim Messina, traveled to New York for back-to-back meetings with Wall Street donors, ending at the home of Marc Lasry, a prominent hedge fund manager, to court donors close to Mr. Obama’s onetime rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton. And Mr. Obama will return to New York this month to dine with bankers, hedge fund executives and private equity investors at the Upper East Side restaurant Daniel.
“The first goal was to get recognition that the administration has led the economy from an unimaginably difficult place to where we are today,” said Blair W. Effron, an investment banker closely involved in Mr. Obama’s fund-raising efforts. “Now the second goal is to turn that into support.”
At least Anthony Weiner can be rehabilitated, even if he’s forced to do it outside of Congress.
Neither Obama nor Romney can be cured of campaign money junkie mania, while the middle class tries to stay afloat.
On this day in history, June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court in the landmark case Loving vs. Virginia, struck down state laws prohibiting interracial marriages.
I’ve rounded up some news links, you know, so you can sound smart and on top of the news at breakfast or lunch…
~As everyone who hasn’t been stranded on a deserted island knows, Representative Weiner is taking some time off to get some sort of treatment for something (they didn’t say what), do some soul-searching and probably more to the point- sit back and hope this all blows over so he can stop the flow of fellow Democrats calling, one after the other, for his resignation. Anyone care? No? Ok, moving right along…
~What is wrong with the Democrats that they can’t make this a political issue? The GOP is waging war on Elizabeth Warren of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)- could the GOP make it any more obvious that they don’t give a damn about the average American, preferring instead to create a platform based on enriching the very people that caused the collapse of the global economy? And yet what are the Democrats doing to get this message out? All I hear is *chirp* *chirp*
~GOP Rep. Dana Rohrbacher has been asked by the Iraqi government to please leave their country after he publicly called for Iraq to repay the U.S. for the cost we incurred invading and occupying their country.
~So, how much have the Bush tax cuts cost the U.S. thus far? $2.5 trillion. And yet the Democrats and the media continue with the farce that the GOP is serious about deficit reduction. They weren’t during the Bush years and they aren’t now. Rather, they are interested in gutting social programs they never liked to begin with and are using the deficit as an excuse. Anyone who takes defense spending completely off the table can’t be taken seriously about deficit reduction.
~I’d like to introduce you to Texas Governor and possible GOP Presidential candidate Rick Perry.
~The neocon hawks who want to “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” don’t really understand the Green Movement there although they are more than willing to use their purported concern for the Green Movement to try to make it sound like their war-mongering is born of humanitarian concerns.
~After the death of Osama Bin Laden, will Obama take advantage of the opportunity to make a significant reduction in troops in Afghanistan or will he follow the advice of the departing Secretary Gates and General Petraeus? The question everyone should be asking is ten years from now, will we still be saying “we’re making some progress but if we leave we could lose what gains we’ve made”? I can’t help but think the answer to that is “yes.”
~The real reason the WH rejected the French proposal to hold a Mideast peace summit with the Palestinians and Israelis- the administration is afraid another country might actually act like an honest broker and mediator.
~Dana Milbank provides a good example of everything that is wrong with the Washington press in this piece. Note he makes sure to tell us he knows Goolsbee personally and that Obama’s economic policies were initially “extreme” (the stimulus that didn’t have enough stimulus?).
~Daniel Ellsberg of “Pentagon Papers” fame reminds us just how crappy our government really is. He notes that much of what Nixon did would be legal today under an expanded definition of Executive power and laws like the PATRIOT Act. By the way, the Pentagon Papers have finally been declassified.
~The Obama administration’s war against whistleblowers was dealt a major blow in the NSA leak case. The government’s case fell apart in an effort to not have to expose some evidence to public scrutiny. Former NSA employee Thomas Drake was charged under the seldom used Espionage Act, which many felt was a draconian way to go after whistleblowers such as Drake, who exposed a multi-billion-dollar government boondoggle of waste and fraud and in the process, also revealed the NSA’s illegal (at the time) domestic surveillance data mining operation. If that isn’t the definition of “whistleblower” I don’t know what is. If we actually had a major media figure with some guts, they would actually dain to ask President Obama exactly what his definition of “whistleblower” is, particularly given he lauded them as champions of justice as a 2008 Presidential candidate. Oh, but he said a lot of things in 2008, didn’t he.
~Rep. Giffords has released her first set of photos since the Arizona shooting in January. She really has made an amazing recovery thus far. She’s a very strong woman.
Texan4Hillary offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.
Thanks to Rachel Maddow for hammering the hypocrisy of our puritanical pols in saying progressive Congressman Weiner resign. Unlike Ed Schultz, who has begged all week for Weiner to go, Maddow has hammered at the Right. She gets that having a progressive who can speak with passion on the issues is critical. She notes Weiner never campaigned on being high and mighty like many in the GOP do all the time. But leave it to the puritans of DC to try and dictate this man’s career. Cantor, Foley (yes), Huckabee, Tim Kaine have no shame. Here is Maddow’s must see bit on our DC puritans:
Trumka took it a step further against both parties at the National Nurses Union conference this week. This was one hell of a speech, and even had a four letter word in it about corporate Dems:
“For too long, we’ve been left after Election Day holding a canceled check, waving it about—‘Remember us? Remember us? Remember us?’—asking someone to pay a little attention to us,” recalled Trumka, who like many union leaders was frustrated with the failure of the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act and other needed labor law reforms. “Well, I don’t know about you, but I’ve had a snootful of that shit!”
There was no way to misread Trumka’s message for Democrats who have strayed on issues …
“When it comes to politics, we’re looking for real champions of working women and men. And I have a message for some of our “friends.” It doesn’t matter if candidates and parties are controlling the wrecking ball or simply standing aside—the outcome is the same either way,” he explained. “If leaders aren’t blocking the wrecking ball and advancing working families’ interests, working people will not support them. This is where our focus will be—now, in 2012 and beyond.”
Single Payer champion Margaret Flowers, among others, are organizing mass protests in Washington DC October 6th against the austerity mania sweeping the political elite and the war machine. Here is part of her stirring message and plan:
… We have witnessed the Arab Spring and the blossoming of the European Summer. We ask ourselves if now we will experience the American Autumn.
People in America see that corporate power controls the political process and the media. The Forces of Greed steal our treasure and squander it on militarism and needless wars for empire. Forces of Greed render our White House, Congress and Supreme Court dysfunctional so that the denizens of these bodies regurgitate what their corporate paymasters feed them.
Our country faces crises on every front: the economy, education, jobs, the environment, health care, housing, the wealth divide, an empire stretched too thin and ready to shred. None of these crises has to exist. Just and sustainable solutions are available and known. What stands in the way of all these solutions is concentrated corporate power.
The normal tools of democracy no longer work.
October 6 is the 10th anniversary of the Afghanistan invasion, and the beginning of the new federal budget year—an austerity budget for everything except for war and the corporate security state. On this day, we are calling for sustained and nonviolent mass resistance in Washington, D.C. The action, Stop the Machine! Create a New World!, portends an American Tahrir Square at Freedom Plaza between the White House and Congress, a block away from the National Press Club and a few blocks from the Chamber of Commerce and K Street, the stomping ground of corporate lobbyists.
An impressive array of people have already signed on. Among them: Ann Wright, …Chris Hedges, Cornel West, .. Glen Ford, Jane Hamsher, Jodie Evans, Leah Bolger, Medea Benjamin, Mike Ferner, Larry Pinkney, Rabbi Michael Lerner, …
We know however, that it is not leaders who make change, but people united who insist on change that will succeed!
If interested in this new progressive organization go here.
In the same vein the Guardian’s Peter Wilby may have one very good idea for why we have not yet seen massive civil unrest from the vanishing middle and working classes:
One reason why the working classes so often disappointed the left was that, having little daily contact with the rich and little knowledge of how they lived, they simply didn’t think about inequality much, or regard the wealthy as direct competitors for resources. As the sociologist Garry Runciman observed: “Envy is a difficult emotion to sustain across a broad social distance.” Nearly 50 years ago he found manual workers were less likely than non-manual workers to think other people were “noticeably better off.” Even now most Britons underestimate the rewards of bankers and executives. Top pay has reached such levels that, rather like interstellar distances, what the figures mean is hard to grasp.
But the gap between the richest 1% or 2% and everybody else in the top 20% or 30% is now so great and growing so rapidly that, one might reasonably think, it should change the terms of political trade. The income distance may be huge but the social distance is not. Those in the top 2% and the next 28% have often been to the same schools and universities. More important, they compete for scarce resources: places in fee-charging schools, houses in the best areas, high-end personal services. The super-rich have provoked raging inflation in the prices of these goods. Many of the not-so-rich were born into the professional classes and high expectations. Now, to their surprise, they find themselves struggling. In income distribution, their interests are closer to those of the mass of the population than to people they once saw as their peers.
They are not, however, imminently likely to join a crusade for equality. This generation of the middle classes has internalized the values of individualist aspiration, as zealously propagated by Tony Blair as by Margaret Thatcher. It does not look to the application of social justice to improve its lot. It expects to rely on its own efforts to get ahead and, crucially, to maintain its position.
Reagan, Thatcher and the Right have brainwashed a generation that we do not need social justice per say. Nope we can solve our problems if we simply work harder. But we are approaching a breaking point here.
Labor makes a primary threat on Dem Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD). He is not up for re-election until 2014, but he currently chairs the Banking Cmte. And he is a corporate hack who is flirting with undoing provisions of FinReg. So AFL-CIO has told him if he screws with Wall St. reform he will be primaried.
Arianna Huffington’s piece slamming Obama on his mishandling of the economy has gained much attention since she supported him so in 2008. There is a growing cry from the Left for Obama to change course on jobs and Arianna gives a must read:
..the White House embraced the GOP message that the deficit is a bigger problem than jobs, kneecapping its ability to push for additional ways of stimulating the economy. And now the president and his team wanly claim there’s not much they can do. But what they don’t mention is how complicit they were in creating the conditions that have left them with not much to do. They gave away all the ammo and now plead helplessness because of… a lack of ammo.
The conventional wisdom is that “there is no appetite in Congress” for additional stimulus measures. But, in fact, members of Congress have an appetite for whatever their constituents have an appetite for. And for months, the American people have been hearing the president agree with the GOP that the deficit is the biggest problem in the country. Had the White House told the truth — that the lack of jobs and anemic economic growth are far greater threats to the country — people would be a lot more open to job creation proposals.
Instead the president, even on the heels of the latest round of depressing numbers, is oddly passive. “This economy took a big hit,” he said Friday. “It is just like if you had a bad illness, if you got hit by a truck, it’s going to take a while for you to mend.”
Being hit by a truck is not a bad metaphor — but he left something out. If you get hit by a truck, you are taken to a hospital for major interventions. When you are wheeled through the emergency room doors on a gurney, people react; they move purposefully and quickly; machines are brought out; desperate measures are taken. But that’s not at all what happened with the economy. Instead, the economy got hit by a truck, was wheeled into the ER, and those in charge largely left the patient to heal on his own while they went into a back room to talk about the long-term building plan for the hospital. And, every now and again, they come out to tell the patient: “Remember, you were hit by a truck. It’s going to take a while to mend.”
You know what might help speed along the mending? Surgery.
Many are worried about the WH cutting a deal on Medicaid spending with the GOP. 41 Senate Democrats wrote to Obama and told him they will block any cute deals altering the Medicaid program. Sen. Rockefeller, from W.V., is pushing against any deals on the program and his state, one of the poorest, cannot afford such bargains.
Early this week the Obama WH said Senate Democrats shouldn’t persue job creation programs because it would cost too much. You that correctly. Ah but Senate Dems have their own ideas and met with progressive economist Jared Bernstein on crafting a jobs package.
Liberals and even some conservadems are rallying around the need for stimulus. One way might be a infrastructure package funded by closure of offshore tax breaks. The Hill reports:
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, endorsed Harkin’s argument for more infrastructure spending, and said it is gaining support in the broader caucus.
“There’s very broad support,” Rockefeller said. “There’s no other way to get at this problem.”
Rockefeller said a spending package was discussed at several meetings Wednesday and that there’s a recognition Democrats need to be tougher in negotiations with Republicans.
“We have to be much more aggressive about all this, because as soon as they say ‘We’re not going to do that,’ as they’ve been saying for so long about so many things, you just kind of say ‘oh.’ We’ve got to stop saying ‘oh,’ ” he said, referring to the hard line Republicans have taken for Medicare cuts and against tax increases.
Even centrists like Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) say a major infrastructure package funded by tax revenue-generating measures is what’s needed to strengthen the economy….
Bernstein told the Dems in the Senate that they:
…should not shy away from spending money to energize the economy.
“There are some things you can do without spending money, but that’s obviously a very tough constraint and not one that politicians should accept,” he said.
Bernstein, who met with the Democratic Caucus Thursday, said it would be ambitious to hope that more infrastructure spending could reduce unemployment by 2 points, but nevertheless said it’s a smart idea.
Even if it passed the Senate, the GOP House would kill it since it makes sense and would improve lives. But Dems should push it especially if there is a grand budget deal.
Capitalism Out of the Closet **UPDATED** Would we be any worse off with Stephen Colbert as president? I doubt it. Politifact has watched the video [...]
Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama **Postscript added** President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics [...]
Fan Politics Despite rising public concern about the federal budget deficit, Americans favor keeping Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are [...]
Good morning and welcome to Sunday!