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.

Tag Archives | Israel

Obama and the Boiling Middle East

By on 07 February 2012

“So what do we do? Well, faced with a neutered Security Council, we have to redouble our efforts outside of the United Nations with those allies and partners who support the Syrian people’s right to have a better future. We have to increase diplomatic pressure on the Assad regime and work to convince those people around President Assad that he must go, and that there has to be a recognition of that and a new start to try to form a government that will represent all of the people of Syria,” [Secy. Hillary Clinton] said. – Josh Rogin

It’s no secret I was against the Libya bombing and remain so. Watching the carnage in Syria reveals the flaws in the Obama administration’s strategy, as much as there was one. The unspeakable, which Josh Rogin said outright last night, is civil war in Syria. Even as Secy. Clinton worked the Arab League hard to make the NATO mission feasible, regime change looks differently once it’s over and the fallout begins.

See Egypt, where Americans are reportedly to be tried, including Secy. Ray LaHood’s son. Our so-called relationship today in that country as bad as it’s been in decades, which Josh Rogin explained with Chris Hayes last night. No doubt Secy. Clinton’s first instinct to bolster Mubarak came from this dreaded place. However, the truth is wider and deeper, of an American policy supporting dictators who are our allies in torture and rendition, as both Mubarak and Assad have been, while the people suffer.

The Arab Spring has unleashed a lot of energy, none of which Pres. Obama can predict, contain or manage very easily, but considering we engaged in the contagion to try and impact it, he’ll have to take ownership of something that is uncontrollably unpredictable.

Stephen Walt offers some thoughts on Syria, after the Libyan NATO mission.

One can argue that this was the right course of action anyway, because getting rid of a thug like Qaddafi was worth it. That’s a debate for another day, although I would note in passing that post-Qaddafi Libya remains deeply troubled and the collapse of the regime seems to be fueling conflicts elsewhere. But what if the Libyan precedent is one of the reasons why Russia and China aren’t playing ball today? They supported Resolution 1973 back in 2011, and then watched NATO and a few others make a mockery of multilateralism in the quest to topple Qaddafi. The Syrian tragedy is pay-back time, and neither Beijing nor Moscow want to be party to another effort at Western-sponsored “regime change.” It is hardly surprising that Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin condemned the failed resolution on precisely these grounds. In short, our high-handed manipulation of the SC process in the case of Libya may have made it harder to gain a consensus on Syria, which is arguably a far more important and dangerous situation.

Also read Marc Lynch on what a horror it is that the U.N. failed, which no doubt is making the neoconservatives gleeful.

I wrote about this just a few days ago, but if you count Iran and Israel, the economy may be the least of Obama’s worries, with the Middle East possibly throwing a curve to all the prognosticators.

With Pres. Obama’s foreign policy credentials including ordering the slaying of Osama bin Laden, there is no sense whatsoever that Mitt Romney can make a serious challenge to Pres. Obama if the Middle East goes south.

What that means to Republicans picking a nominee is anyone’s guess. It also could be why Newt Gingrich has seduced himself into thinking the race isn’t over.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Economic News Buoys Obama, as Israel & Iran Chatter Grows

By on 03 February 2012

The pace of job creation surged in January, with the US economy generating 243,000 new positions while the unemployment rate dropped to 8.3 percent, according to government data released Friday. – CNBC

Official White House Photo by Pete Souza



This is fantastic news. Besides the people impacted by the turn in the economy, Obama reelect gets a boost too.

“What’s not to like about the report?” said Andrew Wilkinson, chief economic strategist at Miller Tabak in New York. “Not only did payrolls exceed forecasts…but between the November and December revisions employers added 160,000 more jobs than first thought.” – CNBC

I’d like to just offer one note of caution as 2012 election season starts to be seen only through the jobs and unemployment numbers. This is understandable, but as we learned on the run-up to George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004, when Osama bin Laden popped up in a video, what is suspected to be the issue, Bush-Cheney’s screw-up on Iraq, didn’t turn out to do him in. Obama gave the order for a daring SEAL Team Six mission to take out Osama, for which he doesn’t get enough credit, but there other foreign policy areas where he is less surefooted.

There is growing chatter about developments surrounding Iran and Israel. Richard Haas talked about it this week on “Morning Joe,” stressing a new element, the “zone of immunity.” David Ignasius wrote about it yesterday:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has a lot on his mind these days, from cutting the defense budget to managing the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. But his biggest worry is the growing possibility that Israel will attack Iran over the next few months.

Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June — before Iran enters what Israelis described as a “zone of immunity” to commence building a nuclear bomb. Very soon, the Israelis fear, the Iranians will have stored enough enriched uranium in deep underground facilities to make a weapon — and only the United States could then stop them militarily.

In his State of the Union Speech, Pres. Obama trotted out the old and tired war rattling words “no option off the table” to make the point about Iran. I mentioned earlier when talking about Newt Gingrich and Sheldon Adelson (see Wayne Barrett here and here), who’s whole reason for being is to saber rattle on Iran, that DNI Clapper had warned about Iranian attacks inside the U.S.

There’s an interesting post up at Huffington Post on the entire subject of Obama and Iran.

Mitt Romney is so incredibly weak on national security issues that there can be little doubt he’d have to trip the full neoconservative wire to pass muster with Republicans.

Pres. Obama has shown his Bushesque colors throughout his foreign policy decisions, with an election year bringing even bigger challenges to him. As many of you remember, he ducked an important vote on Iran as a senator running for president. There has been much criticism on his Israeli policy as president, most undeserved. Pres. Obama has been a steadfast friend to Israel, as all American presidents must be, with Romney’s “appeasement” lines absurd.

It has leaked that US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Gen. Martin Dempsey warned the Israelis that if they launched a strike on Iran that spiralled into a war, they would be on their own. – Juan Cole

It’s a long way until November. However, never underestimate election year foreign policy problems to distract people who remain unhappy about the direction of the country. If Iran and Israel become front and center the Middle East could raise its head and turn the election into something no one anticipates today.

This election year is primed for shock waves.

This column has been updated.

Read full story · Comments { 10 }

Hillary Never Said ‘All the Way to the Convention!’

By on 30 January 2012

Gingrich is making the case that Romney can’t get a majority at the convention, his small circle of advisers are already eyeing favorable states in March and April, and those close to the former back-bench bomb thrower are testifying to his legendary perseverance. – Newt Gingrich’s long march, by Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman

Newt’s clinging to NewsMax. Their “Insider Advantage Poll” is propping him up the day before Florida in hopes that the bottom doesn’t drop out before voting tomorrow. If people start believing Romney is about to walk away with the state, leaners will bolt for Mitt, because no one likes to back a sure loser.

From Quinnipiac:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has a 43 – 29 percent lead over former House Speaker Newt Gingrich among Republican likely voters in Florida, the nation’s first big-state presidential primary, according to Quinnipiac University poll released today. Only 7 percent are undecided, but 24 percent say they might change their mind by tomorrow’s election

However, if you’re listening to people on Newt world, none of this will matter. The cry today is all the way to the convention!

There’s no evidence yet that Newt Gingrich can amass 18 million votes, as Hillary did back in 2008. He’s a completely different type of candidate than Clinton, with only one casino banker, while Hillary had legions of fans and supporters. But on he trudges, with the help of Kelly Ann Conway, touting the south as his promised land. The biggest difference between Newt and Hillary is that never once was there any indication whatsoever that she would have taken her fight to the convention floor. It was never going to happen, as I wrote repeatedly at the time, getting vilified by Hillary fans for giving sound analysis that turned out to be true.

Of course, the cable yakkers tried hard to whip up a frenzy saying otherwise, as I recount in my book The Hillary Effect, with even the esteemed Rachel Maddow falling for this line, though she was hardly alone.

Newt Gingrich’s primary cry the day before Florida, however, is exactly that, threatening to start a war inside the Republican Party on the floor in Tampa.

“We have no evidence yet that Romney anywhere is coming close to getting the majority and I think when you take all of the non-Romney votes, it’s very likely that the convention will be a non-Romney majority and maybe a very substantial one. My job is to convert that into a pro-Gingrich majority.” – Newt Gingrich, via the Wall Street Journal

Make my year.

In the interim, Gingrich is spewing Adelson talking points to Jewish Floridians: “[Mitt Romney] eliminated serving kosher food for elderly Jewish residents under Medicare.”

Wrenching voters out of their comfort zone one inflammatory statement at a time.

If the projected polling today is correct and Romney wins big in Florida, Newt’s viability will rest in Sheldon Adelson’s hands, because it’s clear the Republican establishment isn’t going to help and neither are their bankers.

What if Adelson folds? Newt’s never run a grass roots campaign in his life. He’s learning this anti-establishment schtick as he goes along. It’s just not clear whether his ego can survive being second to Santorum and Ron Paul.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Sheldon Adelson Couldn’t Buy Newt Florida

By on 30 January 2012

If you wanted to know the state of Newt Gingrich’s campaign right now all you had to do was watch Fred Thompson on Meet the Press on Sunday. With his hair slicked back and wisps of uncut frizz flipping out in the back, Thompson delivered his lines haltingly and with his head bowed, while focusing downward as he talked. I won’t get into the fantasy Thompson floated that if Republicans had held out during the government shutdown in the mid-90s they’d have… er, won. It was a tour de force whine from camp Gingrich about how big bad Mitt had played too dirty. Hypocrisy unlimited, the bellyaching stems from the reality that Newt can’t match Mitt’s money, because if he could he’d be doing the same thing. Anybody doubt that fact?

Favorite recent headline: Newt May Be Mad and Mental Enough to Fight On Long After Florida, an article by John Heilimann.

Here’s an excerpt:

In a weekend of trailing the former speaker to a series of events along the I-4 corridor, there was just no escaping that a campaign that was flying high (and even into outer space) ten days ago has now come crashing back to earth. At what was billed as a Hispanic town hall meeting at another church yesterday in Orlando, Gingrich was greeted by row after row of empty pews and maybe 40 voters in attendance. For a full hour after the scheduled starting time, Gingrich and his wife, Callista, sat outside, cloistered in his campaign bus — possibly sulking, possibly fuming at his campaign’s horrid advance work, and surely praying that a few more souls would show up. When Gingrich finally entered the building, it was announced that the event was a town hall no more; the candidate would speak briefly, then take pictures with the scant few who’d turned up. And “briefly” was an understatement: Standing behind a Lucite lectern, Gingrich talked for a bare eight minutes and eleven seconds, looking deflated and exhausted. By no small margin, it was the worst and saddest campaign event that I have witnessed in this presidential cycle.

Now all the talk in the political world is about how badly Newt Gingrich could get beat tomorrow, with everyone anticipating a large margin win by Mitt Romney.

A lot of Republicans are hoping for it and an end to the savage bloodletting, as well as the debates. Sen. John McCain said on Meet the Press Sunday that they’ve got to end. Chris Wallace said the debates were “ridiculous,” “insane,” and “stupid” recently on a radio show. The next one is at the end of February, which will be a very long month for Newt Gingrich.

Sheldon Adelson bought Newt Gingrich South Carolina. What he’s gotten for his money is another story. It’s about Israel and Iran, but having a candidate in the race that can define the debate rightward where the Middle East is concerned.

RT @RyanLizza: Newt warning Iranians could easily blow up Jacksonville with nuclear weapon (via boat).

I retweeted the above to make the point. You may remember Gingrich saying the Palestinian people were “invented.”

We should all be thankful Mitt Romney’s rich, organized and that his campaign is not going to take their foot off Gingrich’s throat again.

“It not about winning here anymore,” one Romney staffer told BuzzFeed. “It’s about destroying Gingrich — and it’s working.” – Zeke Miller, BuzzFeed

There’s no comfort when you look at Mitt Romney where the Middle East is concerned either. To say foreign policy isn’t his forte is an understatement. So with neoconservatives and John Bolton in the background, with Newt in cahoots with Adelson, it’s all very weirdly counterproductive for Israel and for the U.S. on the right.

Mr. Adelson and his wife were evidently cynical enough to believe that American Jews living in Florida would buy Newt’s message. It doesn’t look like it’s selling. The question is whether Adelson will keep the money flowing if Gingrich loses big in Florida, because where this race heads next depends on it.

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

A Word About the ‘Israel Firster’ Debate

By on 27 January 2012

From Spencer Ackerman in The Tablet:

Some on the left have recently taken to using the term “Israel Firster” and similar rhetoric to suggest that some conservative American Jewish reporters, pundits, and policymakers are more concerned with the interests of the Jewish state than those of the United States. Last week, for example, Salon’s Glenn Greenwald asked Atlantic writer Jeffrey Goldberg about any loyalty oaths to Israel Goldberg took when he served in the IDF during the early 1990s. (On Tuesday, writer Max Blumenthal used a gross phrase to describe Goldberg: “former Israeli prison guard.”) The obvious implication is that Goldberg’s true loyalty is to Israel, not the United States. For months, M.J. Rosenberg of Media Matters, the progressive media watchdog group, has been throwing around the term “Israel Firster” to describe conservatives he disagrees with. One recent Tweet singled out my friend Eli Lake, a reporter for Newsweek: “Lake supports #Israel line 100% of the time, always Israel first over U.S.” That’s quite mild compared to some of the others.

“Israel Firster” has a nasty anti-Semitic pedigree, one that many Jews will intuitively understand without knowing its specific history. It turns out white supremacist Willis Carto was reportedly the first to use it, and David Duke popularized it through his propaganda network. And yet Rosenberg and others actually claim they’re using it to stimulate “debate,” rather than effectively mirroring the tactics of some of the people they criticize.

…and the ruckus on the left beats on.

As I’ve written before, this is about a very real battle on the left and in progressive circles, with American Jews pushing back very, very hard on being called anti-Semitic when they criticize Israeli policy.

Giving the right and so-called analysts of the Middle East who interpret any criticism some of their own medicine to see how they like it is exploding the debate, but also making an important point. Ackerman’s take seems to miss this point entirely.

This post has been updated.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Hillary Clinton has Attended Last SOTU as Obama’s SoS

By on 26 January 2012

“I think after 20 years — and it will be 20 years — of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.” – Secy. Hillary Clinton

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton meets with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on January 25, 2012. State Department photo/ Public Domain

I tweeted about this likelihood on Tuesday. She’ll no doubt work up until the very last second on her very last day, for which Pres. Obama is no doubt grateful, as are we all.

We can only imagine that it’s “a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season,” as she also admits she “didn’t watch any of those debates.”

After she leaves State, Hillary Clinton will be able to rest, write, and then assess other options. This includes, come 2014, coming to grips on whether she’s ready to walk away from another run for the White House and possibly being the first female president of the United States.

There will be a different breed bidding for the Democratic presidential spot in 2016. However, no one in politics would be more prepared. She would, however, have to defend her continued militaristic foundation, whether it’s Libya or her continued belief in the war in Afghanistan. Her close relationship to the Pentagon and the U.S. defense industry would also be at issue. Mrs. Clinton’s closeness to Israel’s leaders and the trust built between them, would, however, hold great possibilities. Her involvement during the Libya bombing proved unparalleled, as she worked to convince Arab leaders to come on board. It would be a serious campaign, not a walk in the park, at least with progressive primary voters, though there would also be great emotions on the left to making a Democratic female a seminal part of American history.

Mrs. Clinton has also said time and again she will not run for president again.

TM NOTE: An international women’s foundation, raising money from all sides, like her husband’s CGI, and impacting women’s lives in countries around the world, is one very good bet, which I’d put money on myself.

Taylor Marsh is the author of The Hillary Effect, which traces the history of the near twenty years of press coverage and political events that followed Hillary Clinton into the 2008 presidential race and helped make her candidacy as impossible as it was part of her destiny.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

Israel’s ‘False Flag’ Op, Posing as C.I.A.

By on 14 January 2012

President Barack Obama talks on the phone with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in the Oval Office, Jan. 12, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The most interesting article you’ll read today is my must read for Saturday.

It comes from Foreign Policy’s Mark Perry:

Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives — what is commonly referred to as a “false flag” operation.

The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah — a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.

But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel’s Mossad.

As a follow up, read Daniel Drezner.

Juan Cole is always an important read on these subjects.

I wonder if Bret Baier will ask the Republican candidates on Monday what they think about these allegations? Ron Paul’s answer would be illuminating, no doubt.

With Mitt Romney being endorsed by John Bolton, it’s not hard to surmise where he’d come down. The question is what is he prepared to do about it? Like Pres. Obama, that answer is an easy guess.

Read full story · Comments { 1 }

Who is More Pro Israel?, Progressive Edition

By on 29 December 2011

“This is where James Baker and George H.W. Bush were, this is where Brent Scowcroft is, this is where Tom Pickering and Colin Powell are – this is not crazy stuff, we’re talking about mainstream, bipartisan positions,” said Jeremy Ben Ami, the executive director of J Street, which has sought in recent years to build an American “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobby. – Israel rift roils Democratic ranks, by Ben Smith

File this under in case you missed it.

With Ron Paul’s foreign policy views finally getting attention, especially his Israeli views, as he shakes the race in Iowa, it’s important to review what’s been happening in December on the left.

Unfortunately, the piece by Ben Smith linked above, posted in early December, begins with an unfair characterization of MJ Rosenberg, someone with whom I’ve had exchanges, usually after New America Foundation events on the Middle East, back before I began work on my book, which has taken my focus elsewhere. Smith’s report will give you a foundation for what’s been brewing, for those who care about progressive power inside the Middle East debate, though you’ll have to skip over the editorializing.

It revolves around Media Matters and the Center for American Progress, both of which are trying to open up debate on U.S. Israeli policy. It begins with pushing back on the idea that criticizing Israel means you’re anti-Israel or worse, anti-Semitic, the most scurrilous accusation hurled at people in order to silence dissent, debate or discussion.

Justin Elliot reported on a right wing listserv, first reported by Smith in 2010, which revealed Josh Block, a former AIPAC spokesperson, was fishing for coverage of a screed against anyone who dared to discuss Israel openly, honestly and critically. One of Block’s targets was Eric Alterman, himself a Jew, with Block leveling a full tilt attack. From early December:

Block was quoted in the story accusing CAP columnist Eric Alterman of writing “borderline anti-Semitic stuff,” a charge Alterman (who is himself Jewish) dismissed as “ludicrous.”

Block’s email to the Freedom Community list arrived under the subject line “Important piece to echo and the research to do it….” – a reference to the Politico story. He wasted no time throwing around more accusations of anti-Semitism.

“This kind of anti-Israel sentiment is so fringe it’s support by CAP is outrageous, but at least it is out in the open now — as is their goal – clearly applauded by revolting allies like the pro-HAMAS and anti-Zionist/One State Solution advocate Ali Abunumiah and those who accuse pro-Israel Americans of having ‘dual loyalties’ or being ‘Israel-Firsters’ – to shape the minds of future generations of Democrats,” Block writes. “These are the words of anti-Semites, not Democratic political players.”

Greg Sargent has also written about the anti-Semitic slurs and tactics.

Well, it finally came to a head last week when Josh Block was officially excommunicated, so to speak, from the pack.

From another report from Smith, this one just before Christmas Day:

“There’s two explanations here – either the inmates are running the asylum or the Center for American Progress has made a decision to be anti-Israel,” said Josh Block, a former spokesman for AIPAC who is now a fellow at the center-left Progressive Policy Institute. “Either they can allow people to say borderline anti-Semitic stuff” – a reference to what he described as conspiracy theorizing in the Alterman column – “and to say things that are antithetical to the fundamental values of the Democratic party, or they can fire them and stop it.” (Alterman called the charge “ludicrous” and “character assassination,” noted that he is a columnist for Jewish publications, and described himself as a “proud, pro-Zionist Jew.”)

Truman National Security Project founder Rachel Kleinfeld notified Block he was out.

“This has nothing to do with your policy views, and is a decision solely made on the basis of the need for this community to privilege the ability to debate difficult topics freely, without fear of mischaracterization or character attacks,” she said in the email. “Your actions outside the community have caused too many to fear conversation within the community. That fear is not baseless, given your own actions. As the point of the Truman Fellowship is to help the next generation of leaders think about hard topics together, we need people to feel that they can debate with security.”

Ms. Kleinfeld made the right decision, in my opinion, and she deserves credit for calling Mr. Block out, which his actions and words proved was earned.

With 2012 about to heat up, as they say, stay tuned, because Who is more pro-Israel?, however shameful to ask, is a seasonal political sport during elections.

If you know anything at all about Harry Truman, beyond his important backing of the state of Israel, it’s hard to imagine Mr. Truman allowing invective like “anti-Israel” or “anti-Semitic” without push back. Truman was never afraid of debate, which is all we’re talking about here.

As for the “Clinton Democrat” view, which Smith characterizes in one of his posts as the “Clinton Democrats’ traditional staunch support for Israel,” once again he joins in to imply that criticism of Israel is inherently proving lack of support, which is nonsense and damaging to open debate.

In the other of his posts (linked above), Smith gets a blind quote from “a liberal Israel policy thinker and CAP ally”:

“They’re obviously a progressive place, but if you want to attract a mainstream Clinton, New Democrat milieu, you can’t really do real progressive Israel stuff.”

Smith goes on to write that most of the criticism doesn’t come from Clintonites, citing Matt Duss, someone also present at most of the Middle East forums at NAF I’ve attended.

What side you come down on is another subject, but free and open discourse simply must be the foundation of any foreign policy discussion, especially when it comes to the Middle East.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Crooks, Congress, Scalawags, and Spending

By on 17 December 2011

But after the vote, Casey and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y) dismissed the Keystone project as “inside baseball,” arguing that middle-class families are more interested in getting a tax cut than an oil pipeline. [...] “I was responsible for putting it in this bill,” Reid said flatly. “That’s how legislation works. … Along with Manchin, Vermont Sens. Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders, both members of the Democratic caucus, voted against the payroll package. – Politico

(Click on the picture for scathing Wall Street Journal article on Newt.)

In the complaint against the former Freddie Mac executives, the SEC alleged that they and Freddie Mac led investors to believe that the firm used a broad definition of subprime loans and was disclosing all of its Single-Family subprime loan exposure. Syron and Cook reinforced the misleading perception when they each publicly proclaimed that the Single Family business had “basically no subprime exposure.” Unbeknown to investors, as of December 31, 2006, Freddie Mac’s Single Family business was exposed to approximately $141 billion of loans internally referred to as “subprime” or “subprime like,” accounting for 10 percent of the portfolio, and grew to approximately $244 billion, or 14 percent of the portfolio, as of June 30, 2008. – SEC CHARGES FORMER FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC EXECUTIVES WITH SECURITIES FRAUD

 

The latest AP-GfK Poll shows the American electorate has very complicated feelings about Pres. Obama, as well as his challengers. It’s another poll that supports what I’ve been writing for months and months, as well as in my book. Yes, Pres. Obama is beatable, deserving challenges, with a majority of people believing he doesn’t deserve reelection. However, the alternative isn’t inspiring at all.

Although the public would prefer Obama be voted out of office, he fares relatively well in potential matchups with Republicans Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Another bit of good news for the Democrat: For the first time since spring, more adults said the economy got better in the past month than said it got worse.
The president’s approval rating on unemployment shifted upward — from 40 percent in October to 45 percent in the latest poll — as the jobless rate fell to 8.6 percent last month, its lowest level since March 2009.

But Obama’s approval rating on his handling of the economy overall remains stagnant: 39 percent approve and 60 percent disapprove.

The contest for who is more pro-Israel is now on. As Ben Smith noted in a piece this week, Ronald Reagan would have failed today’s GOP litmus test by a mile.

In Pres. Obama’s speech before the 71st General Assembly of the Union for Reform Judaism, a critical element to Israeli security was mostly left un-mined. From the New York Times:

Less than a year before the presidential election, a pattern is emerging. The Republicans will outdo themselves to say the most provocative things they can to demonstrate they love Israel more than anyone else. And President Obama will counter by saying as little as he can about the Palestinians.

Obama on the peace process:

“As president, I have never wavered in pursuit of a just and lasting peace — two states for two peoples; an independent Palestine alongside a secure Jewish State of Israel. I have not wavered and will not waver.”

That’s the bare minimum a U.S. president should ever say. However, anyone attempting to make the case that Pres. Obama is anti-Israel is standing in ideological quick sand.

Now over to the spending bill, which Politico characterizes as a “turning point,” with a report from Huffington Post saying Democrats are declaring victory:

The Democrats provided an extensive list of what they see as bragging points, saying the bill:

  • Prevents policy riders that would have restricted funding for Planned Parenthood and eliminated funding for Title X family planning programs, severely limiting women’s access to health care.
  • Prevents restrictions that would have reversed President Obama’s policy allowing family travel and money remittances to Cuba.
  • Saves 60,000 New Head Start slots created by the stimulus act and spends more than $550 million for the Race to the Top program.
  • Boosts the Student Aid Administration with nearly $50 million in new funding for loan servicing and collections.
  • Preserves the AmeriCorps program by stopping a GOP provision that would have cut the program.

They also pointed to a string of riders that were cut from the bill, including items that would have:

  • Barred use of funds for the CPSC’s public product safety database, SaferProducts.gov.
  • Cut federal funding of National Public Radio
  • Stopped a new military chaplain training curriculum written after the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
  • Ended the Home Affordable Modification Program, which aims to help homewoners avoid foreclosure
  • Prohibited use federal funds to develop and finalize EPA rules naming coal ash as a hazardous waste
  • Stopped the FCC from implementing new neutrality rules
  • Stopped federal spending to run and implement the heath reform law until 90 days after any legal challenges are complete.
  • Republicans also declared wins in adding many other restrictions, including blocking a phaseout of 100-watt incandescent lightbulbs, stopping express funding for a number of President Obama’s “czars,” cutting the budget overall, and placing restrictions on funding for the United Nations.

Yet it was some of the things that made it into the bill that attracted scathing denunciations from Republicans concerned about waste, especially in the defense budget.

[...] “There’s $3.5 billion of unrequested, unauthorized [spending] … projects like for Guam. You thought the Bridge to Nowhere was bad?” McCain said. “This is 53 civilian school buses and 53 repair kits for $10.7 million; $12.7 million for a cultural artifacts repository. That’s in the name of defense.

“I have amendments to save the taxpayers billions of dollars as associated with this bill,” McCain said. “But never mind because we’re going to go home for Christmas.”

Oh, and the latest attack against Pres. Obama surrounds the cost of the First Family’s Christmas vacation.

Bah! Humbug!

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

What Might Happen Around the World in 2012?

By on 14 December 2011

Global recession with a surprise winner or two – The Eurozombies may avoid catastrophe but instead produce a macroeconomic remake of Night of the Living Dead. Recession in austerity-bound Europe will only be worsened by the sweeping downturn already taking place in the emerging world, and the result could be a deeper slump worldwide. But here’s the twist: the United States will win, as it is a destination for those in the midst of one of the most confusing, frustrating flights to quality in recent history. Japan too. They won’t do very well at all, but in the global ugly contest they may take home least-ugly honors. – David Rothkopf

So, what could happen in 2012?

David Rothkopf over at Foreign Policy has done his next year headlines in review list, many of which don’t take an expert’s mind to name. Stephen Walt has his own that includes Israel accepting the Arab League Peace Plan. Rothkopf thinks the Eurozone will strengthen. More are below.

The end of Ahmadinejad, but it won’t come through Dick Cheney’s fantasies or any neoconservative getting his war wishes in a Christmas stocking. From Erin Burnett’s “Out Front,” when Burnett brought up the RQ-170 sentinel:

CHENEY: I would assume that’s the case. Or they’ll send it back in pieces after they’ve gotten all the intelligence they can out of it.

The right response to that would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it. You can do that from the air. You can do that with a quick airstrike, and in effect make it impossible for them to benefit from having captured that drone. I was told that the president had three options on his desk. He rejected all of them.

BURNETT: And they all involved removing the drone immediately?

CHENEY: They all involved sending somebody in to try to recover it, or if you can’t do that, admittedly that would be a difficult operation, you certainly could have gone in and destroyed it on the ground with an airstrike. But he didn’t take any of the options. He asked for them to return it. And they aren’t going to do that.

The world is going to continue to have major shifts in power centers.

The collapse of Assad in Syria, which couldn’t come soon enough as far as I’m concerned.

Political unrest in China? It’s the beginning, Rothkopf predicts.

Power struggle in Pakistan?  Nothing new there.

Say goodbye to Castro and Hugo Chavez?

Incoming “cybershocker” that will take down somebody financially.

Putin’s not going to return to power easily.

…and get ready for extremism in Africa to become an American strategic interest.

Interesting list, as is Stephen Walt’s.

Do you have any thoughts on what might happen in the world next year?

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Romney’s $10,000 Bet Trends Worldwide, While Gingrich Flunks History

By on 11 December 2011

While Twitter and the press were giddy over Romney’s $10,000 bet-pocalypse line, the serious gaffes of the night went to “historian” Newt Gingrich, who called himself a Reagan conservative, doubling down on his “invented” Palestinian line, which doesn’t come close to Reagan’s views at all.

Throughout this period of difficult and time-consuming negotiations, we never lost sight of the next step of Camp David — autonomy talks to pave the way for permitting the Palestinian people to exercise their legitimate rights. – Ronald Reagan (h/t Ben Smith via Twitter)

You can make your own bets over which will get more coverage.

“He’s going to own that $10,000 bet line,” DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse said on Twitter. “Nothing else he has said in this debate matters.” – TPM

Earlier in the debate, Newt landed a beautiful zinger that pretty much characterized Gingrich’s demeanor the entire debate.

“The only reason you didn’t become a career politician is you lost to Teddy Kennedy in 1994.” – Newt Gingrich to Mitt Romney

However, Mitt didn’t go “beet-red,” as has been predicted, with this providing a moment that proved Romney could take a punch, which he turned around with a nice line that if his dreams to be a pro football player had come true he’d have had a career in the NFL.

But at the end of the debate, Matthew Dowd proclaimed Newt Gingrich now the candidate to beat, as Mitt Romney’s $10,000 bet line ricocheted across Twitter. It’s stunning Romney’s people are trying to push that it won’t hurt him, as #What10kbuys was trending worldwide.

“I’ll bet you a bottle of 1961 Chateau Lafitte that I’m a regular guy.” – Paul Begala

There was little discussion of jobs, with climate change not addressed at all, neither was China or the war in Afghanistan. Diane Sawyer took a beating on Twitter.

I’m still not there on Newt Gingrich and this debate moved people like Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann up, maybe even Santorum and Perry, because he served up the Romney trap. Maybe I’m blind to Gingrich, because I know his history, but tonight I simply disagree with the majority who think he “won.” I found him pompous, though the base will like that, though I think his surly demeanor, but also his clear petulance at Bachmann’s bites, made him look like an elite who doesn’t like to be questioned.

Newt will tell “the truth” all the way to losing 40 states in November… – Mike Murphy

Michele Bachmann grabbed hold of Mitt and Newt, conjuring up the perfect political clone of the two heavy weights, naming it “Newt Romney” and never let go. She even was able to draw first blood on Gingrich, whom she clearly pissed off by going after his record, making Newt look surly and small at one point. Bachmann was able to remind her home state fans just why she won the Ames straw poll, while invoking Herman Cain every chance she got to try to pull his supporters over to her side. Watch her numbers this next week.

Rick Santorum, yes, him, had his best night.

It’s why neither Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney will be impacted much by what happened last night, though the problem for Romney is the reverberation of the $10,000 bet line. For one thing, it will aid Obama and the Democrats greatly and help them continue to drill down that he’s slick Mitt, the one-percenter, because the line wasn’t off the cuff, it came out like a serious bet.

Kathie Obradovich of the Des Moines Register tweeted this: Not too many Iowa caucusgoers are the sort to offer a $10,000 bet, even on a sure thing.

The fact that Romney would have won the bet hardly matters (h/t @JakeTapper). That’s not what it was about. The tone deafness rang like John Kerry’s I-voted-for-the-87-billion… yada-yada line, which stuck to him like a bad smell the whole campaign.

However, Newt Gingrich’s Palestinian line has real legs too and an impact that would have real and lasting damage if this wasn’t a Republican primary. Rick Santorum backed up Romney’s analysis of the line in the debate.

Newt during the debate (emphasis added in the quotes shown below):

“Is what I said factually correct? Yes. Is it historically true? Yes,” he answered. “Are we in a situation where every day rockets are fired into Israel while the United States? The current administration tries to pressure the Israelis into a peace process… Somebody ought to have the courage to tell the truth. These people are terrorists. They teach terrorism in their schools. They have textbooks that say, if there are 13 Jews and nine Jews are killed, how many Jews are left? We pay for those textbooks through our aid money. It’s fundamentally time for somebody to have the guts to stand up and say, enough lying about the Middle East.”

Romney countered:

“The last thing [Israeli Prime Minister] Bibi Netanyahu needs to have is not just a person who’s a historian, but someone who is also running for president of the United States stand up and say things that create extraordinary tumult in… his neighborhood,” Romney said. “And if I’m president of the United States, I will exercise sobriety, care, stability and make sure that I don’t say anything like this. Anything I say that can affect a place with — with rockets going in, with people dying. I don’t do anything that would harm that — that process. And, therefore, before I made a statement of that nature, I’d get on the phone to my friend, Bibi Netanyahu and say, would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do? Let’s work together because we’re partners. I’m not a bomb-thrower. Rhetorically or literally.”

When Diane Sawyer asked who won the debated between them, Santorum cited Romney:

“I think you have to speak the truth. But you have to do so with prudence.. it’s a combination,” Santorum said. “I sat there and I listened to both. I thought they both… made excellent points. But we’re in a real life situation. This isn’t an academic exercise… We have an ally here that we have to work closely with. And I think Mitt’s point… was the correct one. We need to be working with the Israelis to find out, you know what? Is this a wise thing for us to do? To step forward and to engage this issue? Maybe it is. My guess is at this point in time, it’s not. Not that we shouldn’t tell the truth, but we should be talking to our allies. It’s their fight.”

Newt’s second gafferiffic moment came when talking about Iran he said, “If we do survive…” it will be because of people like Rick Santorum, tipping his hat to him. Survive? It’s Middle East dog whistle stuff that matches his dream of John Bolton as his secretary of state. Establishment Republicans will be downing antacids like candy on this one.

The other effective candidate was Ron Paul. Romney tipped his hat to Paul’s supporters. Perry tipped his hat to him on the Federal Reserve. Newt tipped his as well. While Paul just continued to illustrate and proclaim his constancy. Watch his numbers, too.

After last night, more than ever before, Iowa is anybody’s ballgame.

Well, it’s not Romney’s, and I don’t think it’s Newt’s either, though he clearly has perfect pitch with right wing primary voters, while getting a thumbs down from the conservative intelligentsia. But it’s anyone’s guess who wins it after last night, with it really about who has the more sophisticated caucus goers, because it’s never easy inside that voting brawl.

“I think Obama won tonight.” – Al Gore on CurrentTV (The only network to do live analysis after the debate.)

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

The Things Newt Says

By on 10 December 2011

A classic Newt bomb:

“I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state,” Gingrich said in the interview. “Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, who are historically part of the Arab community.”

Oh, but not to worry. He still supports a Palestinian state.

Read full story · Comments { 16 }

Republican Debate on Foreign Policy

By on 12 November 2011

There are four main reasons that Republicans have been ignoring foreign policy. First, polls show that voters hardly care about it. “Republicans realize this will be a referendum on Obama’s economy, and they’re speaking to that,” said Greg Mueller, the president of CRC Public Relations, which works with conservative candidates and advocacy groups. “It’s like in 1992, except that instead of saying, ‘It’s the economy, stupid,’ they’re saying, ‘It’s the Obama economy, stupid.’ ” Second, national security hasn’t been a weak point for Obama… – The National Journal

CBS News and the National Journal team up for tonight’s debate. Live streaming is here.

With the economy on everyone’s minds, Pres. Obama’s disapproval now at a new high, and after Bush-Cheney’s foreign policy adventurism, foreign policy isn’t the Republicans’ trump card any more. The other problem is that Pres. Obama has continued much of what George W. Bush started, while expanding in Afghanistan, with his assassination order on bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki proving Mr. Obama is anything but “weak on national security,” the favorite talking point of the right.

NJ has compiled terrific cheat sheets on the GOP candidates’ foreign policy dossiers.

Mitt Romney’s foreign policy ideas deserve the closest scrutiny, as he’s still likely to be the nominee.

But I’m wondering how Herman Cain will survive the night. He can’t revert to his 9-9-9 regurgitated talking points, with foreign policy his jaw dropping weakness.

This is a chance of Jon Huntsman to shine and keep his hopes of challenging Romney in New Hampshire alive, while Ron Paul, even though he rarely gets the credit he deserves on foreign policy, will certainly be challenging the Republican establishment and making them very uncomfortable.

As for Rick Perry, he’s launched a $975,000 ad buy on Fox News Channel to try to resurrect his candidacy, which I believe is actually about being able to go back to Texas short of disgraced.

Of course, on Saturday night it’s hard to imagine just how many potential primary voters will even be watching.

However, the political junkie class will have the popcorn ready, because Newt Gingrich has got to think he’s within striking distance of being the Romney alternative. Conservatives are desperate for one.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

No Love for Netanyahu

By on 08 November 2011

Hot mic? Who knows?

It’s just one of those classic moments between presidents.

NÉTANYAHOU "MENTEUR" : LA CONVERSATION SECRÈTE OBAMA-SARKOZY

Sarkozy and Obama’s Netanyahu gaffe broadcast via microphones

The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, described the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, as a “liar” in a private exchange with Barack Obama at last week’s G20 summit in Cannes that was inadvertently broadcast to journalists.

“I cannot stand him. He’s a liar,” Sarkozy told Obama. The US president responded by saying: “You’re fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day.”


Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Hillary’s Close-Up

By on 30 October 2011

“We came. We saw. He died.” – Secy. Hillary Clinton, TIME magazine

The issue above is slated to hit newsstands on November 7, the day before my book, The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss comes out. I urge you to read this article, which is behind a subscriber wall. It will cost you $2.99 to get access for one week. Do it, if you possibly can. The media establishment needs to see evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton, whether you love her or hate her, is a woman worthy of coverage and that people will pay to read candid articles and books about her, because of what she has accomplished. It’s how Sarah Palin happened, even after her vice presidential candidacy collapse. Sarah became bankable because of her fans. No one deserves to become monetized in media terms, that people will pay to read about her, more than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

They say timing is everything and I certainly hope so. Because Hillary has earned it, that’s why I wrote my book. This woman, this dynamo, this fighting female made history and her story matters to American politics, but now even the world.

The TIME article also has an iconic Hollywood type shot of Secy. Clinton looking positively fabulous, by Diane Walker. You will love it. As she heads into what will be her last year at the State Department, at least according to her own statements, there can be no doubt that Hillary Rodham Clinton is riding the wave she created, the Hillary Effect.

Beyond American politics, including the galvanizing impact her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington, which is the focus of my book, the Hillary Effect can be seen across her diplomatic efforts, but also in the latest action by Pres. Obama, the bombing of Libya. It’s one of the things over which Secy. Clinton and I differ greatly. But if you believe the New York Times reporting, among others, which I do, Hillary was instrumental in what manifested. The militaristic reaction by Pres. Obama and his administration, including Clinton, toward Kaddafi’s threats to massacre Libyans made them act through NATO with bombings and force. And guess what, it worked to get rid of Kaddafi.

I was strongly against Pres. Obama’s decision and disagreed with Clinton’s choice to side with Samantha Power and Dr. Susan Rice, though I understand and sympathize greatly with their humanitarian reasons to suggest bombing Libya to save the people. But what will replace Kaddafi? The stories so far are not promising, nor is what this action means to U.S. foreign policy as part of an overall strategic vision.

It’s the militaristic reaction from women, now represented very well through Libya, that proves we’ve got a long way to go before females can add the dimension needed on foreign policy matters. Of course, it helps that it’s just not practical anymore to send a large footprint into nations. However, a smaller force doesn’t mean no involvement or that our impact will not be costly to the U.S., not just financially, but more importantly in our global focus.

When it comes to military action, Secy. Clinton, as well as Power and Rice, but also Madeleine Albright, have proven women aren’t yet ready to lead differently than men. Albright once saying “What’s the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can’t use it?”

Will it be different as American women take larger roles in the military and get more involved on the front lines of battle? Conservative women are always the first to say fight, “man up,” while simultaneously spewing that women shouldn’t have combat roles. The irony is not lost on people like me who study these issues and the surrounding hypocrisy.

There’s a story that’s gone around for a long time about Clinton being one of the most trusted Democrats by the Pentagon establishment, because she understands the military. It’s something former Pres. Bill Clinton did not enjoy. All of the research I’ve done proves this to be the case regarding Hillary. It comes out of her generation and her persona, which has at its core traditionalism, something that informs all she does, particularly her larger foreign policy philosophy, beyond her diplomatic instincts, but particularly her domestic priorities.

If Secy. Clinton wasn’t the star talent she is, knowing how to speak the language of men and might, she would never have convinced the Arab League and leaders of the Arab world to approve of Pres. Obama’s actions through NATO.

This is also part of the Hillary Effect.

But so was Sarah Palin’s history making presence on the Republican presidential ticket; Michele Bachmann’s Tea Party candidacy, which also made her the first Republican female in U.S. history to win a straw poll, primary or caucus; so is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who’s stepping out to help women like Rep. Hochul and many others; as is Elizabeth Warren, whose fan base makes her look like a presidential contender. These are just a few examples of women breaking out since Hillary’s historic candidacy that made her the first woman in U.S. history to win a major party presidential primary.

Secy. Clinton’s tenure at the State Dept., through the brilliance of Pres. Obama choosing her to not only run State but resurrect it from the ashes of Bush-Cheney, has shifted the world in the short-term. This shift is one reason why Clinton’s work post-State will be so important, because it’s a continuation of her “human rights are women’s rights” speech in Beijing, China as first lady, which began the charge of her life: convincing the world that women and girls matter to countries and that the stability of nations depends on females being part of the political process and economic future of each country.

Clinton’s feminist philosophy, if you will, has established “human rights are women’s rights” as a tenet to U.S. diplomacy, which includes women’s ability, no matter where they live, to have access to reproductive health care, in order for women to plan their life and their family.

How she’s altered the State Dept. through her leadership is the story yet to be told, which will no doubt happen once she starts her next chapter. Experts on diplomacy and statecraft will no doubt weigh in soon, though I’ve offered a brief preamble in my book.

Clinton opens a chance for women to succeed in the hierarchy of U.S. foreign policy. What has not happened is that women today have yet to break out of the male dominated militaristic language and attachment to use of force tactics to solve problems that are well outside America’s strategic interest.

Secy. Clinton has made U.S. history in putting women and girls at the forefront of U.S. diplomacy. Her impact in Afghanistan, Africa, but also in the world at large is undeniable. Across the globe backward countries like Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan still abuse and marginalize women, as will no doubt happen in Libya if sharia law is implemented. But Clinton gave women a voice, a megaphone and a platform, and though there will be brutal battles ahead to drag religious fundamentalist Arab and Muslim countries and the citizenry into modernity, it has begun.

It’s another facet of the Hillary Effect.

Read full story · Comments { 31 }

Hamas Frees Gilad Shalit as Prisoner Swap Begins

By on 18 October 2011

From the New York Times:

Buses containing the Palestinian prisoners — the first group of what will eventually be more than 1,000 — made their way into Egypt and from there to the West Bank and Gaza Strip where jubilant relatives awaited and celebrations were planned.

The soldier, Sergeant First Class Gilad Shalit, was taken from Gaza, where he had been held since being abducted in a cross-border raid in 2006, into Egypt and from there to Israel, where he was given a quick medical check and declared in good health. He changed into a military uniform before being flown by helicopter to an Israeli military base where he met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was reunited with his family.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Netanyahu Negotiates Deal with Hamas

By on 12 October 2011

I don’t know if the cliché applies, that this is Mr. Netanyahu’s China moment, but I bet a lot of people never thought they’d read a headline like the one above.

However, I am reminded of a variation on Lawrence O’Donnell’s line, which is that the negotiated swap for Gilad Shalit isn’t done until it’s actually done.

If it’s completed this is a big moment for the new Egypt, whose involvement was reportedly central to the outcome.

From the New York Times:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel told his nation in a live address on television that the soldier, Staff Sgt. Gilad Shalit, who was captured in June 2006 at the age of 19, could be home “within days,” ending what has been widely seen in Israel as a national trauma.

In Damascus, Syria, Khaled Meshal, the political leader of Hamas, said in a televised address that the negotiations had been “very, very difficult” and called the deal “a national accomplishment” that augured well for the Palestinians, who he said hoped to “cleanse the land, and liberate Jerusalem, and unite the Palestinian ranks.”

It was unclear what drove the two to accept a deal that had been on the table for years. But both stand to benefit politically and had reasons to distract attention from the efforts of Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, as he circles the globe seeking votes for his bid to gain United Nations membership for a state of Palestine.

Jeffrey Goldberg brings up a good point: If Marwan Barghouti is released as part of the exchange that will be some deal for Hamas.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }

The Sunday Early Bird News Round-Up

By on 02 October 2011

Good morning and welcome to Sunday.

On this day in history, October 2, 1967 my favorite Supreme Court justice, Thurgood Marshall, was sworn in to sit on the nation’s highest Court.

Some interesting news and tid-bits from around the net:

~Congress has suspended aid to the Palestinian Authority as punishment for their UN bid. Apparently Bibi Netanyahu asked them not to do this because he knows that it could jeopardize the security cooperation between the PA security forces and Israel and lead to more violence.

~Wall Street is pointing their big guns at Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren.

~Justice Clarence Thomas’ financial disclosure oversight needs to be investigated.

~The targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki has generated some debate (also see here, here and here) about the legality of targeting known/suspected terrorists who are American citizens abroad. Among politicians, libertarian Republican candidate Ron Paul is the only one willing to raise the legality issue. Clearly he hates America.

~The administration is pushing back against the criticism of the legality of targeted assassinations by leaking information to the Washington Post explaining why such assassinations are legal based on an internal review the administration did. The rationale given by a slew of anonymous officials is eerily similar to those given by the Bush administration for various constitutionally questionable actions. Basically, we are at war everywhere against anyone deemed a threat so in the name of security, we can do whatever we want.

~Fox News still thinks President Obama is very weak on terror.

~Newt Gingrich thinks that the repeal of DADT demonstrates President Obama’s anti-military prejudice. Newt who?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussing Egypt the other day with Al-Hayat TV:

~Since when did public protests where people exercise their First Amendment rights become such an annoyance to everyone in this great land of ours? The mainstream media has largely been criticizing if not outright mocking the Occupy Wall Street protests and Mayor Bloomberg really feels bad for Wall Street and says “we’ll see if the city will allow Occupy Wall St. to continue.” What?

~You would think the police might be a little more sympathetic to the Occupy Wall St. protesters.

~I’m a big Barbara Ehrenreich fan and so I was glad to see her commentary in the WaPo where she calls out the media and other elites for turning America’s millionaires and billionaires into victims of class warfare.

~Is Iran really an existential threat to Israel and the U.S.? This particular CIA veteran and counter-terrorism expert says no.

~Anti-gay marriage organizations are targeting lawmakers up for re-election in NY who support gay marriage by implying that such support was what sank Democrat Dave Weprin’s campaign in the NY-9 special election.

~Bank of America still sucks. The law Congress passed to limit unfair practices regarding bank/credit card fees is useless b/c the banks just add new fees/charges onto other services. It never ends.

~Our great ally Bahrain has sentenced 20 medical professionals to 15 year jail sentences for providing first aid to wounded protesters. Of course, that’s not the reason Bahrain gave, but that’s essentially what happened. Congress is currently approving the sale of $53 million worth of weapons to our great ally.

~Congratulations America, research shows that when compared to all the other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member nations, we come in dead last when it comes to worker protections.

~Montana Governor Schweizer is moving to enact single-payer health coverage in his state. Good on him.

~The Palestinians are waging a full frontal diplomatic assault on Mideast Quartet head Tony Blair. There have been revelations in British newspapers and television about possible financial conflicts of interest related to his diplomatic work in the Middle East which make the Quartet look even worse than it already does.

~The California Attorney General has reportedly rejected the massive foreclosure fraud settlement that would essentially reward the big banks/mortgage companies for wrongdoing leading to the collapse of the real estate market. The Obama administration has been leaning hard on states to support the settlement.

~Here is a video and transcript of President Obama’s speech before Human Rights Campaign last night.

~Justice Scalia continues to demonstrate that judicial ethics isn’t his strong suit. Church and State? What’s that?

~Speaking of the Supreme Court, their new session begins Monday and the issues on their plate for this term will have significant impact on issues including privacy rights, the health care law, affirmative action, the rights of gay adoptive parents and the limits (or not) of federal power.

~Congress has slashed the State Department budget because, you know, who needs diplomacy?

~Obama approved a controversial weapons sale to Israel and people still are running around claiming he’s anti-Israel.

~Chelsea Clinton on her father’s announcement that he would run for President 20 years ago.

The End.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

Progressive Notes: Disabled Protest in DC, Warren’s Youtube Smash, Perrymandering and Other Doings

By on 24 September 2011

Art offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.

Hundreds of disabled Americans protested in DC this week demanding the super committee not touch their Medicaid. Expect a lot more of this:

From TPM, reporting on ADAPT’s protests:

“The language we’ve been hearing is that they’re going to take a lot of that money from Medicaid and other services,” Wittie said. “That’s wrong because we know that people depend on that, we know that peoples’ lives are in danger if their services are in danger. People can die because of these cuts.”

Ian Engle came from Colorado to protest cuts to home and community-based services. “It will make it so that folks like us can live in the community, maintain jobs, contribute to the community, pay taxes. It’s not only morally irresponsible to house people in congregate facilities, it’s fiscally irresponsible because it just costs more,” Engle said.

Elizabeth Warren stumping in Andover MA has made the headlines with her populist Democratic pitch. In fact this short Youtube clip of her pitch has become a sensation. Imagine if more Democrats adopt her strategy:

The best populist snippet is this I think:

“I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever,’” she said. “No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

“You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.

“Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

The House Progressive Caucus, which has become much more vocal in their critiques of Obama and the GOP of late, have a plan and are assembling and executing it:

Grijalva said the caucus showed its independence during the debt limit debate, where 95 Democratic Members voted against the deal that President Barack Obama had crafted with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). And while liberals “used to just be a ‘no’ vote” on Republican bills, Grijalva said they’re now offering alternatives. In the case of the debt limit, Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) spearheaded an effort to pass a “clean” debt limit increase. More recently, the group put forward its own jobs proposal, which includes increased infrastructure spending and higher taxes for wealthy Americans.

“Our view is we need more attention on jobs in America, and the outreach that Raúl and Keith are doing in all these cities is mobilizing support for an economic agenda that helps the middle class,” Welch said.

The CPC held its first retreat earlier this year and released a budget proposal in April, which was drafted with the help of the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute. The caucus also recently hired a new executive director, Brad Bauman, whom aides describe as an aggressive and press-savvy strategist. Staff to Members within the caucus also are working together more closely, aides said.

So CPC puts forward progressive alternatives to legislation proposed by the leadership, has begun having strategy retreats, has hired a media savvy director and more. The more progressives speak up the better.

Some of those alternative were announced this week on jobs. From CPC some great programs which would slay unemployment:

The Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act, introduced by Rep. Conyers, would create a national Full Employment Trust Fund that would put the long-term unemployed and Americans living in our hardest-hit communities to work rebuilding our infrastructure, weatherizing homes, fixing our schools, tutoring our children, and expanding high speed broadband access in urban and rural communities.

The Rebuilding America’s Schools Act, introduced by Rep. Rangel, would increase aid to renovate schools nationwide that badly need repair by allowing the Qualified School Construction Bond (QSCB) and the Qualified Zone Academy Bond (QZAB) programs to continue financing school construction projects through 2015.

The Emergency Unemployment Compensation Expansion Act, introduced by Rep. Barbara Lee, would provide a critical lifeline to the long-term unemployed by extending emergency unemployment compensation for an additional 14 weeks to those who have exhausted their benefits.

Wow. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) has come out with a great progressive bill to preserve Social Security for 75 years by taxing the rich a bit more. It’s called the Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act. Even Senator McCaskill (D-Mo) has co-sponsored the bill to protect SS for generations. Read more details on it here. If McCaskill is on board it is a possible very good sign emerges on this whole debate.

Tricky Ricky Perry’s Texas congressional and state house maps have been now struck by the DOJ, which calls for a remap. The craven GOP got slapped around in the DOJ report as it called the maps full of intent to discriminate. Those hoping for a tough DOJ on the issue of voter rights got as it is going after the Texas maps. It is now up to the DC court on whether or not to force a redraw. With the DOJ saying sect. 2 and 5 have been violated justice may be done in Texas. More here.

Also in Texas, Perry’s voter i.d. bill has been held back by the DOJ. DOJ has many concerns and it wants them answered if clearance is to be given:

…Among the information requested is the how many of the 600,000 registered voters who lack a driver’s license have Spanish surnames as well as where they live.

The Justice Department is also asking for details on how the state will educate voters and election officials about the change in law and how voters can get alternative identification that will suffice for voting purposes.

A aggressive DOJ is what is needed and so far it is looking very aggressive. It will have to be in the months ahead as millions face disenfranchisement.

On a international note the Israeli Labor Party made waves by electing former journalist and MK Shelly Yachimovich this past week. She won by the youth vote and her outspoken voice for social justice will make her a key player in Israel. She also is the 2nd woman to lead Labor. Golda Meir was the first. Some of what she had to say sounds promising. And note she is anti-establishment:

Yachimovich was the candidate of the young people, the big cities and the kibbutzim, but not of the party’s historic leadership, sources said.

That could also be seen in her opening words to her supporters in her speech: “I won’t address you as ‘comrades,’ because you are a little younger than I am,” she said.

Later, Yachimovich made her first significant political statement, calling on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “offer recognition of a Palestinian state by negotiation. Don’t allow a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state. It’s in your hands.”

At her new offices in Beit Berl college yesterday, Yachimovich said: “We will present a real alternative to Likud,” adding, “Kadima does not constitute opposition because it does not present an alternative, but speaks in the same capitalist neoliberal language.”

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Bill Clinton: It’s Netanyahu’s Fault

By on 23 September 2011

Josh Rogin’s piece is a perfect button on the drama unfolding this week at UNGA.

But the Netanyahu government has moved away from the consensus for peace, making a final status agreement more difficult, Clinton said. “That’s what happened. Every American needs to know this. That’s how we got to where we are,” Clinton said. “The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu’s government’s continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he’s just not going to give up the West Bank.” – Bill Clinton: Netanyahu killed the peace process

Mr. Netanyahu had his chance at a “Nixon goes to China” moment. He walked away from it.

Then there is what Clinton emphasizes regarding the Saudis, the most important player in the region.

“The King of Saudi Arabia started lining up all the Arab countries to say to the Israelis, ‘if you work it out with the Palestinians … we will give you immediately not only recognition but a political, economic, and security partnership,‘” Clinton said. “This is huge…. It’s a heck of a deal.”

The Netanyahu government has received all of the assurances previous Israeli governments said they wanted but now won’t accept those terms to make peace, Clinton said.

Former Pres. Bill Clinton is right. Bibi blew it.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }