TGIF Reads
Posted: January 28, 2011 Filed under: commercial banking, Egypt, FBI raids, Foreign Affairs, morning reads, Voter Ignorance, We are so F'd | Tags: Egypt, FBI misconduct, FCIC report, filibuster laws, horrible jail conditions, Rahm Emanuel eligibility 10 Comments
Good Morning!
It’s finally Friday.
Rahm Emanuel was back on the ballot and part of a debate for candidates for the Mayor of Chicago last night. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled unanimously in his favor. Evidently the case relied a lot on the ‘intent’ of Rahm whose lawyers argued that he had left books in the basement of his old house, rented the house out instead of selling it and other behaviors that showed that he was just away temporarily performing some kind of national service. The city is now free to print its ballots.
The justices found that Emanuel never displayed an intent to permanently abandon his Chicago home, which they said would have been the trigger to render him ineligible. Instead, they said, it was clear that when he went to Washington, he always planned the move to be temporary and to return to Chicago one day.
The court said the appellate panel hung its decision on a misinterpretation of an 1867 Illinois Supreme Court case involving a judge who temporarily moved to Tennessee but always planned to come back. In essence, the Appellate Court concluded that the 19th century decision didn’t cover Emanuel and that residency should be defined as where one rests his head at night.
It seems unlikely that reform on the senate filibuster will have much of an impact. It looks like it will be small if at all.
But Democrats never seemed able to reach an agreement on the scope or type of changes, and Reid announced a more modest set of changes on which the parties would vote Thursday afternoon.
The reforms include an end to secret holds, a reduction in the number of presidential nominations subject to the lengthy Senate confirmation process, an end to mandatory readings for amendments if they’ve been publicly available for at least three days, an agreement by Republicans to limit their filibusters of motions to begin debate, and an agreement by Democrats to limit instances in which they “fill the tree” — or limit the number of amendments Republicans can put to a given piece of legislation.
Perhaps the most significant agreement was that of changing the filibuster, the principal tool of the minority to stall or block legislation. Republicans used the tactic to great effect in the last Congress, though Democrats griped that the process had been abused at an unprecedented level.
Protests continue in Egypt as the scent of Jasmine spreads. The Economist looks at what this could potentially mean to Arab leaders as the people in the era look for democracy. The US is obviously nervous about any potential uptick for groups like The Muslim Brotherhood who could take the country in the opposite direction.
Mr Mubarak, like the rest of the Arab world’s autocrats, will be pondering the despot’s eternal dilemma. Is it better to loosen controls in order to satisfy their people with a whiff of freedom, or to tighten them in an effort to ensure their docility?
The fate of Tunisia’s strongman, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, suggests that an angry people will be satisfied with neither. If Mr Mubarak truly put his country’s interests first, he would immediately promise to retire before the next presidential election, due in September. At the very least he would ensure that the contest is a genuinely open one, not another farce.
The NYT looks at the possible role of religion in the Egyptian protests.
Heightening the tension, the Muslim Brotherhood, the largest organized opposition group in the country, announced Thursday that it would take part in the protest. The support of the Brotherhood could well change the calculus on the streets, tipping the numbers in favor of the protesters and away from the police, lending new strength to the demonstrations and further imperiling President Hosni Mubarak’s reign of nearly three decades.
“Tomorrow is going to be the day of the intifada,” said a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood here in Egypt’s second largest city, who declined to give his name because he said he would be arrested if he did. The spokesman said that the group was encouraging members of its youth organization — roughly those 15 to 30 years old — to take part in protests.
But Islam is hardly homogeneous, and many religious leaders here said Thursday that they would not support the protests, for reasons including scriptural prohibitions on defying rulers and a belief that democratic change would not benefit them. “We Salafists are not going to participate in any of the demonstrations tomorrow,” said Sheik Yasir Burhami, a leading figure among the fundamentalist Salafists in Alexandria.
One troubling thing is that the Egyptian government has ‘shut down the internet‘. SMS messages have also been blocked. The US government has called on the Egyptian authorities to stop the block.
While access directly to the Facebook and Twitter websites are inaccessible from within Egypt, protesters are circumventing the blocks in place by using mobile applications which still work. Proxy websites are also being used, as they mask the address of website, allowing those to access social networking sites.
But as the blocking measures are failing, it appears that Egypt has sanctioned measures to ’shut down’ web access, fearing the same reprisals as seen in Tunisia earlier this month where the government collapsed and the president was forced into exile.
Axelrod explains it all …
Posted: January 27, 2011 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, Barack Obama, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, John Birch Society in Charge | Tags: access bloggers, axelrod road table, Chamber of Commerce Agenda, chris bowers, digby, State of the Union Confusion 14 Comments
A tweet and facebook post from Digby alerted me to an Axelrod/Blogger “roundtable” where he explained the semantics game in the SOTU. I just found the SOTU contradictory and rather schizophrenic. Except for the fact he still appears to know nothing about economics, Obama was full of on the one hand on the other hand kinds of policies. It was full of dichotomous metaphors along the lines of building up things while tearing them down and defunding things down while investing them up.
Chris Bowers has further coverage here at the Giant Talking Cheeto. It appears the usual “neoliberal” apparatchiks were there. Digby calls it a matter of semantics. Digby also believes we’re about to see a campaign of ‘strengthening Social Security’ argument by doing things that actually weaken it. She calls it “strength through weakness”. It’s that old Reagan game of labeling offensive, deadly missiles ‘peacekeepers’ to make them sound less offensive and deadly. She’s got a really good list of examples where the language mixes up the intent of the actions. At least some one else is noticing the schizophrenic policy and language.
As far as I can tell from Axelrod’s conversation with the bloggers and everything we’ve seen and heard from the political establishment, the only real “principle” here is bipartisanship. Obama gets high marks from the Villagers and Democrats when he forges a bipartisan deal with the Republicans — no matter what the deal is. That he was praised and rewarded for cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans in a time of deficit fever tells you how far the American people have fallen down the rabbit hole. Don’t think he doesn’t get that.
Here’s the bottom line on Social Security from Chris Bowers who–at the moment–is less than enthusiastic. Let’s see how long that lasts.
The answers that we received are not answers that will make anyone entirely happy. Here is what I took from them:
- The Obama administration is not willing to repudiate the “crisis” narrative surrounding Social Security that dominates the national political media.
- President Obama explicitly repudiated privatization of Social Security in his speech last night, and David Axelrod reaffirmed that repudiation today.
- If there is going to be a “bi-partisan” agreement to alter Social Security, it will be brokered by President Obama himself. Congress is not going to pass a deal to which President Obama has not given his prior approval.
- President Obama strikes generally strong notes in defense of Social Security when it comes to other possible ways to cut the program. However, other than privatization, both he and his administration are unwilling to get too specific about where the line is drawn.
At least now, there’s a general realization that this doublespeak means we’re going to clearly get the pro-business, highly Republican alternatives for the next two years. Obama has gone full throttle on the Chamber of Commerce agenda and language. At this point, however, I think there’s also a general recognition that that the access bloggers will eventually throw their hands up and throw in the towel behind Obama because of the usual deal. That is the Republicans are clearly bug fuck nuts so we can do worse. The Republicans seem hell bent at showing exactly how worse they can be right now. Even Bohenerella couldn’t shut up Michelle Bachmann and her twisted sister audiovisuals and crazy delivery to some camera some where stage right. Don’t even get me started on her revisionist history of slavery and the founding fathers. She’s a good example of what you get when you dumb down education via religication.
All you had to do was listen to Paul Ryan and Michelle Bachmann to see that both have a less than firm grasp on reality and the facts. They are deniers of history, economic theory, science, math, and facts. The more they speak, the more those independent voters flip the approval switch on the Presidential mumbo jumbo policy gumbo. This just puts the president in the catbird seat to continue the Corporate Takeover of America and its institutions.
Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest Speeches
Posted: January 25, 2011 Filed under: just because 47 Comments
So, we got three essentially Republican speeches. One was schizophrenic, one was creepy, and the other one came with audio visuals. Just clap really loud if you think Tinkerbama can convince every one that he’s going to be able to make all those ‘investments’ on the list? Now, how many of you think that Tort reform, corporate tax rate cuts, and decreased spending on the country is the more likely scenario?
Boehnerella didn’t even cry when his sweeping the family bar story was spun!
So, Bachmaniac didn’t sound crazy, but what was going on with those eyes?
So, my next question is what is a real Democratic voter to do?
Okay … some one explained the weird look …
BetsyMTP Betsy Fischer
Bad decision, bad producing ! RT @CBSWashUnplug: Bachmann was looking into Tea Party Exp camera & not network pool cam, hence it looked off
Stupid Congresscritter tricks:
Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), was blunt in his Twitter feed: “Mr. President, you don’t believe in the Constitution. You believe in socialism.” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), released a statement blasting Obama while the president was still working his way down the aisle to start his speech.
No show SCOTUMs:
The three most conservative Supreme Court justices — Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito — skipped the speech
In the spirit of the congressional prom data buddy system for the SOTU, here’s a tweet from my prom blog buddy chosen in the spirit of postpartisanship errr … bipartisanship …. err prepartisanship….. errr ….something we all can agree on.
iowahawkblog David Burge
Switching between channels is depressing. How did we get afflicted with the world’s worst politico-media industrial complex?
Okay, final thought from me. Some one should have told POTUS that the acronym for Winning The Future is WTF.
State of the Union Address Live blog (Continued) Blah, Blah, Blah …
Posted: January 25, 2011 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, Live, SOTU, The Bonus Class | Tags: blah, blah response, Paul Ryan, Republican Blah, Schizophrenic SOTU 83 CommentsThis is our generation’s Sputnik moment. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research
and development we haven’t seen since the height of the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We’ll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology – an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people
SusieMadrak Susie Madrak
How will we pay for all this innovation and infrastructure creation with a DOMESTIC SPENDING FREEZE? #bullshit#sotu
ddayen David Dayen
“Let’s fix what needs fiing and move forward” just like torture! #sotu
rickklein Rick Klein
big shout-out for malpractice reform from the president.
SusieMadrak Susie Madrak
Oh, the tort reform crap again. Even though it’s been proved it’s a myth. #sotu
PaulRieckhoff Paul Rieckhoff
We must remember we still have troops in Iraq–and some dying. The war is not over. #SOTU#NonCombatMyAss
Let’s make kissy face with the SPEAKER!!!
That dream is why I can stand here before you tonight. That dream is why a working class kid from Scranton can stand behind me. That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father’s Cincinnati bar can preside as Speaker of the House in the greatest nation on Earth.
It’s the birth of BOEHNERELLA!!!!
owillis Oliver Willis
that was a b- speech for obama #highbar
digby56 digby
Borger:” It wasn’t a transformational speech…I’m not sure that by not talking more about the deficit and jobs they got that done.”
Now Up Paul Ryan who is also politicizing Congresswoman Giffords.
More about how reducing spending during high unemployment actually isn’t actually flat earth economics.
More blah blah blah … I wonder if he reads his kids old Ayn Rand newsletters to his kids to put them to sleep at night?
Transcript from NPR here.
What we already know about the President’s health care law is this: Costs are going up, premiums are rising, and millions of people will lose the coverage they currently have. Job creation is being stifled by all of its taxes, penalties, mandates and fees.
Businesses and unions from around the country are asking the Obama Administration for waivers from the mandates. Washington should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. The President mentioned the need for regulatory reform to ease the burden on American businesses. We agree — and we think his health care law would be a great place to start.
Last week, House Republicans voted for a full repeal of this law, as we pledged to do, and we will work to replace it with fiscally responsible, patient-centered reforms that actually reduce costs and expand coverage.
Health care spending is driving the explosive growth of our debt. And the President’s law is accelerating our country toward bankruptcy.
Our debt is out of control. What was a fiscal challenge is now a fiscal crisis.
We cannot deny it; instead we must, as Americans, confront it responsibly.
Some one needs to tell him it’s not trust in government, it’s trust in politicians that’s at an all time low. Well, I’m depressed now.
Just take a look at what’s happening to Greece, Ireland, the United Kingdom and other nations in Europe. They didn’t act soon enough; and now their governments have been forced to impose painful austerity measures: large benefit cuts to seniors and huge tax increases on everybody.
Countdown to SOTU
Posted: January 25, 2011 Filed under: Barack Obama, Republican presidential politics, SCOTUS, SOTU, U.S. Economy, U.S. Politics | Tags: Michelle Bachmann, Scalia, State of the Union 8 CommentsHe shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to
their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
We’re going to be live blogging the SOTU address to night so be sure to join us. However, dribs and drabs of SOTU preview are hitting the media channels already. It’s probably good to do a round up of them before we settle in with our popcorn and disappointment.
Pursuing a path of deficit reduction and government reform, President Obama will tonight in his State of the Union address call for a ban on earmarks and he will propose a five year budget freeze on non-security related discretionary spending, ABC News has learned.
The proposals come as the president prepares to tackle the deficit and debt and as he faces a House of Representatives in Republican hands, many of whose members include those affiliated with the Tea Party who may be willing to embrace both moves.
The president will propose some new spending in certain areas that address the speech’s theme of “How We Win the Future”: innovation, education and infrastructure. But those increases will be proposed within the context of a proposed partial budget freeze.
In other words, the President’s State of the Union address will embrace the politically expedient while denying the obvious. Our country has a severe lack of critical mass of buyers with incomes to support their own discretionary spending. We also have levels of unacceptable unemployment all over this country which means less taxes and more outlays. To not specifically address what we know from 70 years of economic theory directly and continue living in a Reagan-like stupor over what really drives things like jobs and GDP growth is just morally reprehensible for any educated person in a leadership position. Look at that picture up there. There appears to be a huge group of them.
Earmarks aren’t a huge deal as I’ve showed in post after post on the actual numbers of the budget deficit. They make up less than 1 percent. That’s a political potato chip and no one seems to be able to eat just one. No wonder all the economists left the west wing and have been replaced by investment banker/lawyers. You can only fight an uphill right wing meme so long coming from a Democratic President.
ABC has a SOTU primer up that gives some history and sets some expectations. They believe that POTUS will make hay of the productive lame duck session.
While the election was heated, there has been a move since to tamp down the rhetoric and move toward bipartisan solutions. The lame-duck period after the election was particularly productive as Democrats and a few Republicans passed a number of bills before Republicans took control of the House this month.
Obama will likely point to this period as the way government should work. Obama will likely point to this period as the way government should work. Republicans grumbled at the time that Democrats took advantage of the lame-duck session, passing legislation before Republicans officially took control of the House in January.
If there is a possibility to get some infrastructure spending through at any meaningful level, then I could experience a little sense of relief. TPM believes that even some key Republicans will go along with that type of spending. Of course, that actually is a bit of an earmark isn’t it? Doesn’t every congressperson want their share of road funds or that new airport? How these get chosen and funded might just mean we see more earmarks in reality. However, any government spending that increases demand and spurs jobs at this point is preferable to none. I’d even take a few bridges to no where at this point.
One area the Republican party’s anti-spending crusade puts them in a bind is infrastructure spending. Repairing roads and bridges, modernization, etc. have historically been bipartisan priorities — but they’ve also always cost a lot of money.
Ask Republicans whether they want to include transportation infrastructure in their calls for broad spending cuts, and you don’t get a very specific answer.
“We’ve got to learn how to prioritize and do more with less in all areas of government,” said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor at his weekly press conference today. “It just is what it is. In the terms of transportation, we’ve got to figure out ways how to leverage dollars, how to come up with innovative ways to address the nation’s ailing transportation infrastructure.”
The biggest problem getting these through congress will have to do with the Federal Accounting system as much as anything. You see, the government doesn’t depreciate or amortize things like battleships and dams. Expenditures are fully expensed so in terms of the budget deficit, things will get worse in the short term. This means there has to be a cease fire on the ‘size’ of the deficit on these kinds of items. Their benefits last for years. They create do create jobs and jobbers. The problem is they are an upfront cost and we live in a world of political football rhetoric that includes deliberate misunderstanding of economics as well as economics deniers.
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
jjlo
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Recent Comments