Historic Meeting of Ambassadors Called By Hillary Clinton (& other Hillary news)
Posted: January 31, 2011 Filed under: just because 22 Comments
Secretary Clinton meets with former first lady and presidential candidate Mirlande Manigat in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. January 30, 2011.
From Politico:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called top envoys from U.S. embassies to gather in Washington on Monday for a wide-ranging foreign policy meeting.
Ambassadors from almost all 260 U.S. embassies, consulates and other posts in more than 180 countries are expected to convene at the State Department for what’s being billed as the first meeting of its kind.
Officials say the meeting will include discussion of foreign policy priorities for 2011, The Associated Press reported, as well as an assessment of the fallout from the release of secret diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks. Clinton will meet individually with diplomats working in unstable countries.
I just picked the picture from yesterday because it looks kind of historic, too!
This is an Open Thread. I have to run some errands, but I’ll try to update with some more afternoon news later.
Updates
Well I’m back, and I see Kat’s got a breaking news thread up and running on HCR being ruled unconstitutional, so I’m just going to update this with some Hillary headlines.
Looks like our Energizer Secretary is having to put on a bit of a referee hat these days when it comes to elections. “Hillary Clinton presses Haiti’s René Préval to break election stalemate” (via CSM):
After two months of electoral stalemate from Haiti‘s disputed national election, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited the Caribbean nation on Sunday with a clear message for their president: Move out of the way.
“It is important that the election go forward so there can be a new president,” she said in a series of interviews Sunday. “There is so much work to be done in Haiti, and the international community stands ready to help.”
Mrs. Clinton met with outgoing President René Préval – whose existing term expires Feb. 7– and the three leading presidential candidates from an initial round of voting on Nov. 28. The two leading vote-getters are to compete in a second round of presidential voting, now set for March 20 after a delay. The electoral council has said it would finalize the ballot Wednesday.
Clinton did not mince words about who she prefers to see in the runoff, saying she would push for Mr. Préval to accept the recommendation of the Organization of American States (OAS). While initial election results showed former first lady of Haiti Mirlande Manigat winning the vote and Préval-backed candidate Jude Célestin placing second, OAS election monitors analyzed a sample of ballots and found popular singer Michel “Sweet Micky” Martelly had placed second.
“We have made it very clear we support the OAS recommendations, and we would like to see those acted on,” she told reporters, according to a transcript, adding that “at this time” there was no talk of suspending aid to Haiti.
This next one is actually from a few days ago, but I just saw it pop up again and I get a kick out of it, because for months I was telling the Hillary 2012 crowd that Hillary isn’t going to run, she’s put decades into public service, she gave it her all in 2008, and she’s got other priorities she’s allowed to think about like spending more time with her family and possible grandkids someday. Someone actually got mad at me once for saying that and questioned my intentions in bringing up grandkids since she doesn’t have any yet. Well here you go, straight from the Big Dawg’s mouth — “Bill Clinton Says Wife Wants Grandchild More Than Presidency” (Bloomberg):
“I’d like to live, I’d like to be a grandfather. I have nothing to do with that achievement, but I would like it,” Clinton, 64, replied, laughing. “I would like to have a happy wife and she won’t be unless she’s a grandmother. It’s something she wants more than she wanted to be president.”
Oh, this one I’m about to post is a real doozy, though not very unique in its theme, just exceptionally over the top in its delivery and rage directed at Hillary — the Progressive’s Matthew Rothschild asks, “Who’s Hillary Clinton Kidding on Egypt?“:
On Friday, Hillary Clinton urged “restraint” and Obama urged “reform.” But neither endorsed the demand of the Egyptian people to be rid of their dictator.
And then Clinton told a whopper on Sunday. “We are on the side” of the Egyptian people, “as we have been for more than 30 years,” she told Candy Crowley of CNN.
Who does Clinton think she’s fooling with this crap?
Was the United States on the side of the Egyptian people as Mubarak’s security forces engaged in rampant and hideous torture?
Was the United States on the side of the Egyptian people as Mubarak rigged one election after another?
At times like this, such bald-faced lies don’t fool anyone, especially not the Egyptian people.
Now, first of all I actually agree completely that the Egyptian people aren’t fooled by Hillary’s statement that we’ve been on the side of the Egyptian people for more than 30 years. Second, even before I saw Rothschild’s rant at Hillary, I wrote something in the last thread’s comments that is relevant here and that I thought of frontpaging afterward so this is as good a place to stick it as anywhere else. Pardon me as I commit the blogger sin of copy/paste…
I love Hillary, but I’m not sure to the Egyptians her being the face of the Admin really changes much. I can’t blame Egyptian protesters if they don’t see much daylight between Hillary and Obama on this, because in the end, no matter how well Hillary packages O’s indecision, it’s still his indecision that she’s representing. Frankly, as much as I love Hill, I don’t know anyone quote unquote ‘electable’ in the American political class who I could be certain would “turn away from the policies that got us here” where it concerns the Middle East. That’s the larger piece of the puzzle that’s missing, and no amount of “orderly transition” statements on Hillary’s part cleaning after Joe-please-stay-in-the-cone-of-silence-Biden changes that. If people wanted it to be her call and her policy to blame her for, they should have elected her. It’s O’s policy and frankly no one has a damn clue what it is as usual.
Well this is interesting… from the Independent’s write-up on Hillary’s historic ambassador meeting, “Clinton calls home US envoys in post-mortem on WikiLeaks crisis“:
The unprecedented gathering at the State Department began yesterday and brought together America’s most senior diplomatic representatives from 180 countries. Most have been told to stay in Washington all week for a series of meetings and pep talks. Ms Clinton is set to address them tomorrow and will have face-to-face meetings with envoys from front-line countries where the stakes for America are highest.
Officials stayed quiet about the initial purpose saying only that Ms Clinton was anxious to complete planning for 2011. However, it comes at a time of multiple challenges for the US in its foreign dealings, including the growing clamour on Capitol Hill for cuts in foreign aid and the impact of the turmoil in Egypt on Middle East policy. That is not to forget the running sores of Iran and North Korea or the perils of American policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
While President Barack Obama focuses on domestic issues as he nears the start of his re-election campaign, Ms Clinton is almost alone in the foreign policy storm surrounding her. Only a few days ago she commented that she had not committed to staying in her job should Mr Obama get a second term.
Now is really the time for O to give up the Fierce Urgency of the Permanent Campaign and turn off the Candidate Obama so he can be a President. 2012 really doesn’t matter if he can’t get this one right. With all the news releases about the WH preparing for Huntsman to leave, though, seems like the WH has its priorities same as always and they’re dumping Hillary with the ones that should be theirs/his.
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.
About 99 percent of us have that sinking feeling
Posted: January 23, 2011 Filed under: just because, Populism, right wing hate grouups, Second Amendment, Social Security, SOTU, The Bonus Class, the villagers, U.S. Economy, U.S. Military, U.S. Politics, Voter Ignorance, We are so F'd | Tags: Kevin Drum, leftwing, liberals, libertarians, political ideology, Right Wing 21 Comments
You know me and my wonky graphs. You also know I blog a lot about rising income inequality and that I think it’s a huge problem. So, this MOJO Power graph and the article it came with piqued my curiosity. It’s from an article by Kevin Drum writing on a Timothy B Lee blogpost on the preemption of ‘genuine left wing voices’ by libertarians. I’m not sure how libertarians could be confused for moderates, liberals or lefties but given that establishment conservatives have an orthodoxy so tight that few fit, I suppose everything else gets to wear the liberal label. But, maybe there’s more to it than that.
We talked about this a little on a thread yesterday. Both Ariana Huffington and Kos used to be Republicans. They left the party when the religious right took over and because, frankly, I don’t think they like the fact that so many blue collar Reagan Democrats had just up and joined their old country club. There’s also the odd phenomenon of tea party populists that don’t seem to know where they are or where they belong either. We’ve seen how a lot of these folks have made their way into policy circles through their support or their horror of the current administration so I think it’s worth viewing three blog writers on that topic. Why are so many people confused about their political identity any more?
Libertarian ‘insight’ used to the butt of jokes at academic cocktail parties where you discussed Utopian moonbattery and even worse fiction. Now there seems to be an industry around producing what they call journals, institutions, and philosophy that is some how running loose in mainstream conversations demanding to be taken seriously. It’s hard to do that because they don’t associate with data and they seem to thrive on passing memes that have no basis in reality. (The ones on the FED just kill me.) They’re in the tea party, they’re all for Rand and Ron Paul, and yet, some of them have made their way to the liberal blogosphere. What’s going on? Plus, what’s the deal with all these solid working class–in some cases UNION folks–heading to tea party rallies? Haven’t they ever heard of Dick Armey?
Drum shows how the worst of the libertarian assumptions they hold up as facts just don’t hold up to the light of day. He starts with a shared assumption from the right wing and libertarians as described by Will Wilkinson. This meme is the mild form libertarianism from the Hayek-Friedman sect.
It’s best to just maximize growth rates, pre-tax distribution be damned, and then fund wicked-good social insurance with huge revenues from an optimal tax scheme.
We’ve got scads of data that show this meme to be a completely false assumption. We’d have a better economy right now if that were true. In fact, the only time we had a decent economy in recent history was when that particular assumption was rolled back during the Clinton years. But, don’t take it from me, read what Kevin Drum has to say. Those assumptions are very wrong.
First, it contains an implicit conviction that libertarian notions of tax and regulatory structures will maximize growth rates. This is practically an article of faith on the right, but there’s virtually no empirical evidence to support it. As it happens, I’d argue that my preferred brand of the modern mixed economy is, on the whole, probably more efficient than a stripped down libertarian state, even one that includes lots of centrally-directed income redistribution. But not by much. Personally, I’d be pretty happy if both sides accepted the notion that within a fairly wide range of modern capitalist systems — from Sweden to the U.S., say — overall growth rates change very little. For the most part, we’re really arguing about other things.
Second, I suspect there’s no feasible path to Will’s state of the world. The problem is that a system that generates enormous income inequality also generates enormous power inequality — and if corporations and the rich are allowed to amass huge amounts of economic power, they’ll always use that power to keep their own tax rates low. It’s nearly impossible to create a high-tax/high-service state if your starting point is a near oligarchy where the rich control the levers of political power.
Third, look at the graph. We’ve had this trickle up to the one percent form of economic nonsense since the Reagan years and all it’s done is made things radically worse. It’s led to this situation where the supply side of the curve completely craps all over the demand side of the curve in product markets. The outright hostility to unions and the abuse and disempowerment of human beings–not human “capital”–have completely shifted income levels and underlying market power to some place where you truly think you’d see some kind of general revolt, strike, or overthrow.
It should be patently obvious now that Wall Street has recovered, bonuses have recovered, and corporate profits have recovered while any one not up at the top of that racket can hardly survive these days. The unemployment rate, the numbers of foreclosures, and the numbers of bankruptcies are tips of the icebergs. We’re not going to see growth rates of GDP that will clear that up too. More frightening is that the powers that be don’t seem to even fake caring.
When you point all these things out to libertarians, they’ll shift the ground on you and say point me where it says in the constitution and mutter something about Wilson and the imperial presidency. This is the place where they firmly intersect the right wing. Look, Wilson is dead. The Bush legacy lives and the Obama legacy is still being written. Still, some of them have crept over and become neoliberals and identified with the left. Why?
Clarence Thomas didn’t include wife’s income on SCOTUS disclosure forms
Posted: January 23, 2011 Filed under: just because, SCOTUS, U.S. Politics | Tags: Clarence Thomas, dishonesty, judicial ethics, Virginia Thomas 12 Comments
Clarence and Virginia Thomas
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to report his wife’s income from a conservative think tank on financial disclosure forms for at least five years, the watchdog group Common Cause said Friday.
Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, according to a Common Cause review of the foundation’s IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled “none” where “spousal noninvestment income” would be disclosed.
A Supreme Court spokesperson could not be reached for comment late Friday. But Virginia Thomas’ employment by the Heritage Foundation was well known at the time.
Common Cause also claims that Virginia Thomas was paid for her work for the right wing group Liberty Central, which she founded; but Clarence Thomas did not report any spousal income for 2009.
Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas’ omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.
“It wasn’t a miscalculation; he simply omitted his wife’s source of income for six years, which is a rather dramatic omission,” Gillers said. “It could not have been an oversight.”
Unfortunately, according to the LA Times article, Thomas is unlikely to be disciplined in any way for his latest ethical misstep. It seems that people of his class can get away with such infractions.
Common Cause has also requested that the Justice Department investigate whether Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia should have recused themselves from the Citizens United decision after they participated in a private meeting sponsored by the ultraconservative, tea-party funding Koch brothers.
This is an open thread.
Friday Reads
Posted: January 21, 2011 Filed under: just because 32 Comments
Miniature Marshmallows and cup of Cocoa from Daily Painters of Michigan
Good Morning!
It seems that most of the country is getting some form of nasty precipitation again today. We’ve had some rain and clouds that have made for a few dreary days and I’ve just about had enough of it. I keep looking for some cheery news and all I can come up with are links about Republicans cutting budgets, Republicans attacking reproductive rights, and Republicans wanting to repeal Health Care Reform. I guess some one in the country has some energy right now. It just isn’t me. I’ve been suffering from blurry brain all week. I was on campus yesterday and the students and faculty still standing after Jindal’s hack and slash budget cuts don’t look cheery either.
So, let’s see if any of us can do some justice to headlines today. Right now, I’d just like to see something other than hacked off Republicans in the news.
So, let me start off with this odd couple bit of news from Politico: Walmart joins FLOTUS health push.
In an unusual endorsement, Michelle Obama appeared with Walmart executives at a community center on Thursday as the discount giant announced long-term plans to encourage healthy eating, including cutting prices of fresh fruits and vegetables and working with suppliers to reduce the content of sugar, fat and sodium in the products on its shelves.
The first lady – whose signature cause is reducing childhood obesity and promoting nutrition and exercise, particularly among low-income families – praised Wal-Mart as a retail giant with “the potential to transform the marketplace and let Americans put healthier foods on their table.”
Their plans “show us that, yes, we can improve how we make and sell food in this country,” the first lady said. “It’s a huge victory for folks all across this country. It’s a victory for parents. It’s a victory for families. But most of all, it’s a victory for our children.”
As part of the program, Walmart plans to overhaul thousands of packaged food items by 2015 to reduce salt and sugar content as well as eliminate unhealthy ingredients such as trans-fats. In addition, the chain would help create a seal to be placed on packages which would help consumers identify healthy products.
Suppose that will cause an increase in pedestrian deaths in Virginia?
Okay, so here’s some presidential political warm ups from NBC: First Thoughts: Are the political winds changing?
Are the political winds changing? … New NBC/WSJ poll has Obama approval at 53%… Also, 40% now label him a political moderate — which is maybe why we haven’t heard “Obama is a socialist” in a while… But is this bump for Obama a transition or a transitory moment?… Poll also shows a short honeymoon for the GOP… Handicapping 2012… And polling birthright citizenship.
Now, you know why we New Orleans folks put champagne in our orange juice! It’s the only way we can handle the morning news!
Maybe this is why we haven’t heard “Obama is a socialist” in a while: We’ll take it one step further: These might have been Obama’s best six weeks since Fall 2008. Indeed, the bump in Obama’s approval was across the board — independents moved from 35% approval to 46%; Democrats went from 76% to 86%, and Republicans went from 11% to 15%. Perhaps the most surprising result in the poll? Try 40% labeling the president as a political moderate, compared with 45% who see him as a liberal and 11% who view him as a conservative. That moderate number is the highest for Obama in the NBC/WSJ poll, even higher than it was before his inauguration.
Some people appear to be very sloooowwwww learners. Only took a little over two years for them to figure that one out. Now how long do you think it will take them to figure out that the Democrats passed the Republican Health Care Reform proposed as Dolecare to fight Hillarycare?
Congresswoman Giffords is own her way to to a rehabilitation center in Houston and made a trip outside today. She appears to be responding to various stimuli and her doctors continue to be encouraged. Gabby Giffords still has a long way to go but we’re pulling for her. Her next steps will be to recover the use of her right side and the use of language.
Dr. Michael Lemole, the chief of neurology at University Medical Center in Tucson, said Giffords has made “fantastic advances,” but he warned “she has a long road ahead of her.” Giffords’ husband Mark Kelly said his wife has tried to speak, but the breathing tube in her windpipe has made it impossible. Giffords will be transferred Friday to the TIRR Memorial Hermann Institute for Rehabilitation and Research in Houston, one of the world’s leading facilities for brain injuries.
In the meantime, Kompassionate Konservative Kooks continue to call for Governor Jan Brewer to appoint a replacement for the Congresswoman who survived an assassination attempt less than 2 weeks ago.
In an article published on theloop21.com, John Wilson, a “regular contributor to Hip Hop Republican,” mused that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) should resign her seat as she recuperates from her gunshot wounds. Citing media reports about Gifford’s medical condition, Wilson compared Giffords to the late Rep. Gladys Spellman (D-MD), who went into a coma while in office. He then asked, “Should constituents allow members to hold onto their seats like political Brett Favres with no concept of when it is time to go?” FrumForum, the conservative news site managed by former Bush administration official David Frum, promoted the article on its website this afternoon.
The Times of India reports on a survey which has grave implications for women, the spread of HIV and pregnancies. A survey showed that nearly half of HIV infected women in 13 “high-prevalence” districts in Tamil Nadu had no knowledge of contraceptives. More than half of the women were also not aware of sexually transmitted infections. A majority of HIV positive women had not shared their status with their children or any information about sex or sexually transmitted diseases. The women also do not have property rights which exacerbates attempts to manage their treatments.
The National Federation for Wildlife reports that Pesticides Poison more than 200 Endangered Species in the U.S. They are also endangering people. As a result, activists are filing lawsuits to stop their use and recover damages.
According to the Center for Biological Diversity and Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), more than 300 pesticides are seriously harming 214 species of endangered and threatened animals protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. What’s worse is that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fails to prohibit farmers from spraying these dangerous toxins in the regions that endangered species call home.
So PANNA and the Center for Biological Diversity are stepping up to the plate and actually taking legal action to help these struggling species. Today, the two groups filed a lawsuit against the EPA, claiming that the agency fails to conserve the hundreds of species offered federal protections under the Endangered Species Act. The groups aim to force the EPA to put measures in place that would prevent harmful pesticides from being sprayed in endangered and threatened species’ habitats.
That’s no small feat considering America’s massive chemical use. The EPA has registered more than 18,000 pesticides, with farmers spraying more than one billion pounds of the toxins on their fields every, single year. According to PANNA and the Center for Biological Diversity, more than 300 of these registered pesticides are posing huge health implications to people and 214 threatened and endangered species.
If you have 15 minutes to spare today, you may want to listen to NY Fed President Marco Del Negro speak to the European Economic Association in Glasgow on the Fed’s nonstandard monetary policy actions. The mp3 is available for a listen or a download are at VOXEU.
Will your state be the first to seek bankruptcy? There are a number of deadbeat states in the country. Illinois is one of the states in worst shape at the moment. Lawmakers all over the country are finding ways for states to restructure or weasel out of their debt because it’s pretty much assumed the federal government will not bail them. My guess is this is really a way for most of them to dodge their pension obligations to retirees. Yes, and there that small matter sits. Right there in the first paragraph. Maybe I should be glad I didn’t take the defined benefit plan offered here in Louisiana and have managed to barely keep my principle above water in an account that’s now heavily invested in other countries. Yes folks, I’m investing in the countries trying to pull their people out of poverty, not dump them into it.
Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.
Unlike cities, the states are barred from seeking protection in federal bankruptcy court. Any effort to change that status would have to clear high constitutional hurdles because the states are considered sovereign.
But proponents say some states are so burdened that the only feasible way out may be bankruptcy, giving Illinois, for example, the opportunity to do what General Motors did with the federal government’s aid.
Beyond their short-term budget gaps, some states have deep structural problems, like insolvent pension funds, that are diverting money from essential public services like education and health care. Some members of Congress fear that it is just a matter of time before a state seeks a bailout, say bankruptcy lawyers who have been consulted by Congressional aides.
Alas, in today’s new USA nothing is safe from the reapers of Wall Street.
Okays, so that wasn’t too rough of a read was it?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Recent Comments