Schumer recommends Obama nominate first openly gay man for federal court seat.
Today, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) announced that he is recommending that President Obama nominate Daniel Alter to serve as a judge in the Southern District federal court of New York. Alter was an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District, becoming an expert in terrorism and security. He has also served as the National Director of the Civil Rights Division of the Anti-Defamation League. Alter would be a historic pick for Obama, becoming the first openly gay man to be nominated to the federal bench. From Schumer’s statement:
His outstanding leadership skills, his commitment to justice, and his extensive experience make him an exceptional choice for a position on the federal bench. I’m proud to nominate Daniel Alter. Period. But I am equally proud to nominate him because he is a history-maker who will be the first openly gay male judge in American history.
Although Obama chooses his judicial nominees, presidents generally defer to the recommendations of home state senators. In 1994, President Clinton nominated the first LGBT person, Deborah Batts, to serve as a federal judge for the Southern District, where she currently sits. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) is currently blocking the nomination of Marisa Demeo, an openly gay Latino woman, to serve on the D.C. Superior Court.
- Comments
- 1
Nelson signals intent to join Republican filibuster of Obama labor board nominee.
Late yesterday, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) announced that he would not vote for cloture on the nomination of former AFL-CIO and SEIU attorney Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), effectively joining a Republican filibuster. Republicans have been using Becker’s nomination as a proxy battle over the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) — which would level the playing field for workers who want to form a union. And Nelson bought into that frame in his statement against Becker:
Mr. Becker’s previous statements strongly indicate that he would take an aggressive personal agenda to the NLRB, and that he would pursue a personal agenda there, rather than that of the Administration. This is of great concern, considering that the Board’s main responsibility is to resolve labor disputes with an even and impartial hand. In addition, the nominee’s statements fly in the face of Nebraska’s Right to Work laws, which have been credited in part with our excellent business climate that has attracted employers and many good jobs to Nebraska.
As the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein pointed out, Nelson had no problem voting to invoke cloture on Bush administration nominees like UN Ambassador John Bolton and EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. Bush’s last nominee to the NLRB — Peter Schauber — was confirmed uncontroversially, along with a host of nominees for various positions. Now, Nelson is helping the GOP employ the filibuster to obstruct and stall Obama’s mere ability to govern.
Cantor backtracks on his bluff, says he’ll show up to health care meeting with Obama.
House Republican leaders John Boehner (R-OH) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) sent a letter to the White House yesterday, stipulating some preconditions for Republican participation in a bipartisan health care meeting proposed by President Obama. Boehner and Cantor’s letter said that unless Obama was willing to scrap the current health reform proposals, Republicans “would rightly be reluctant to participate.” Their letter was met with some derision from conservatives, who called it “silly” and “politically dangerous.” The Plum Line’s Greg Sargent reported today that Republican insiders said it was unlikely their leaders would follow through on their bluff. Indeed, appearing on Fox News this afternoon, Cantor backtracked on his letter. “We’re going to show up,” he said. Fox host Jane Skinner observed that his letter to the White House “wasn’t in the tone of bipartisanship.” The segment concluded:
SKINNER: But again, quickly, you’re showing up to this televised thing, right?
CANTOR: Absolutely. Republicans have always said, we stand ready and willing to work with this President.
Watch it:
Cantor has stood “ready and willing” to obstruct health care from the beginning. He has been unable to offer any compromises that the GOP would be willing to make; he has lifted Frank Luntz’s language on how to kill reform; and, he has even advised his constituents to seek out “charitable organizations” if they’re in need of medical care.
Kristol Calls GOP’s Preconditions On Health Care Meeting ‘Silly’
On Sunday, President Obama announced his intention to host a televised bipartisan meeting on health care reform “to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward.” Yesterday, congressional GOP leaders responded with a list of preconditions for simply sitting down with the President and Democrats.
In a letter to White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, Reps. John Boehner (R-OH) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) wrote that, “[i]f the starting point for this meeting” is the bills that passed the House and Senate, “Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate.” They also called on Obama to take reconciliation off the table as a “show good faith” to the GOP.
Yesterday on Fox News, Bill Kristol — who has made no secret of his desire to kill health care reform — criticized Boehner and Cantor for setting preconditions and being disrespectful to Obama, adding that they should instead be more direct about their intention not to meet the President half way:
KRISTOL: Obviously when the president invites you to the White House you go. They should politely go and tell him he should kill this terrible bill that the House and Senate — or two bills the House and Senate Democrats have put together and start over. [...]
And Republicans should hold their ground and they shouldn’t be apologetic, they shouldn’t snipe at the president. This letter they sent today I think is silly. Is it really going to be bipartisan? Is it really going to be transparent? You said you were going to be bipartisan in the past.
Forget all that. Just say we welcome a substantive debate. We have been engaged in substantive debate in health care, we Republicans, for a year, and we are perfectly happy to continue that debate. And Mr. President if you want to come to the position of small incremental, sensible reforms in the health care system, more than happy to work with you.
Watch it:
Preconditions or not, it’s clear that both Kristol and the GOP want the same thing — to ultimately kill health care reform. Kristol is merely suggesting to his friends that they make it clearer. Indeed, the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein noted last night on MSNBC that the reality is that the GOP’s position means that a bipartisan compromise will be next to impossible to achieve:
KLEIN: There are two sides with different sets of ideas and they disagree about the ideas and if they can compromise on them, then we get a bill. In fact, you have two sides where one side wants a bill and the other does not want the bill, and it’s actually very hard to compromise between those two positions.
Steve Benen notes that the summit “puts Republicans in an awkward spot.” “If they participate, they’ll very likely lose the policy debate. If they reject the invitation, they’ll look petty and small (even more so than usual).”
Insurer Denies Life-Prolonging Treatment To Five-Year-Old Boy With Cancer
One of the worst abuses of private insurance companies is the practice of using spurious reasons to deny claims for medical treatments, which are often necessary for saving patients’ lives.
Kyler Van Nocker’s story shows that even 5-year-old kids are not exempt from this insurance company abuse. Van Nocker has neuroblastoma, which is a very rare form of childhood cancer that targets the nervous system and creates tumors throughout the body.
Due to successful treatment in 2007, Van Nocker’s cancer went into remission, giving him 12 months of pain-free life. Unfortunately, in Sept. 2008, the cancer returned, and Van Nocker was once again in need of treatment. Unfortunately, his health insurer, HealthAmerica, refused to pay for one form of treatment doctors believe could save his life (MIBG treatment) because they consider it “investigational/experimental” since it has yet to be approved by the FDA.
Yet in April 2008, the insurer approved cheaper treatment for Van Nocker that was also “experimental,” prompting Philadelphia Daily News columnist Ronnie Polaneczky to ask, “So why, pray tell, is HealthAmerica playing the ‘experimental therapy’ card in the case of the MIBG treatment Kyler now needs? Gee, money couldn’t have anything to do with the decision, could it?”
Van Nocker’s parents are suing HealthAmerica, citing the fact that the company has apparently been dishonest about its criteria for the types of treatment it will cover and is denying payment for treatment in this case because of the high cost of the procedure — $110,000 pays for only two rounds of MIBG treatment. “These companies have to be brought to the courthouse to get them to do the right thing,” says the VanNockers’s family attorney. “This child needs this treatment, or else.”
The sad truth is that Van Nocker is certainly not alone in having his claim denied by a major health insurer. The California Nurses Association (CNA), a nurses’ union and health care advocacy group, recently released a comprehensive study of claims denials across California. The study found that the six largest insurers in California rejected 47.7 million claims in the first half of 2009, nearly 22 percent of all claims submitted.
The United States is the only industrialized nation without cradle-to-the-grave, universal health care. In no other developed country would a child with cancer have to go without care because an insurance company decided it was not profitable enough to cover him.
Inhofe’s Grandchildren Build Igloo To Mock Killer Snow Storm: ‘Al Gore’s New Home’
The record-breaking snowstorm that has shut down the mid-Atlantic region for days has become a favored target for mockery by Republicans who deny global warming, seemingly on the supposition that deadly blizzards invalidate the science of climate change.
Before the storm hit, the Virginia GOP launched a web ad mocking “12 inches of global warming,” attacking Democrats who had voted in favor of climate and clean energy legislation. Now, after hundreds of thousands of people lost power, several people have been killed, and states of emergency declared in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware, Sen. Jim Inhofe’s (R-OK) family has joined in the mockery, building an igloo on the National Mall and calling it “Al Gore’s New Home“:
The Oklahoma Republican’s daughter, Molly Rapert; her husband, Jimmy; and their four children built an igloo — roomy enough to fit several people inside — at Third Street and Independence Avenue Southeast. They officially dedicated the humble abode in honor of global-warming crusader Gore, even posting a cardboard sign on the igloo’s roof reading “AL GORE’S NEW HOME” on one side and “HONK IF YOU [HEART] GLOBAL WARMING” on the other. Inhofe, the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, is famously one of Congress’ most vocal critics of global warming. And he told HOH that he found his family’s ironic tribute to Gore — which came during one of Washington’s snowiest winters on record — “really humorous.”
In reality, winter snows do not invalidate the reality that the planet just experienced the hottest decade on record. Scientists have been warning for decades that global warming would increase the severity of winter storms.
This past January was the warmest January on record for the planet. And as National Wildlife Federation climate scientist Amanda Staudt notes, winter storms are getting fiercer even as the season gets warmer. “The last few years have brought several unusually heavy snowstorms as warmer and moister air over southern states has penetrated further north, colliding with bitter cold air masses,” she explains.
Rep. Blackburn touts Social Security privatization.
Rep. Blackburn touts Social Security privatization.
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), one of the cosponsors to the radical budget proposal authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), went on Fox News yesterday to float one of the budget’s key components. Heralding “personal [Social Security] accounts” for “younger earners,” Blackburn touted Social Security privatization as the only way “you could get some of this under control”:
BLACKBURN: You know, people forget Medicare is a program that individuals have paid into every single year with their Medicare and their Social Security beneifts the federal government has first right of refusal on that paycheck. And this is one of the reasons we need to make sure individuals get the money out that they have placed in. This is one of the reasons we have had the discussion over and over for our younger earners of having accounts that have their Social Security number and their information on that — personal accounts.
VARNEY: You’re right, but it was roundly rejected when President Bush suggested doing just that. Didn’t fly. [...]
BLACKBURN: I was just going to say, and it’s interesting to me the number of people now that are coming to town hall meetings and are saying ‘you know what, if you were to scale back some of this bureaucracy and you began to look at some options for younger workers, you could get some of this under control.’
Watch it:
While Varney seemed supportive of the idea of subjecting the retirement safety net to the whims of the stock market, he rightly noted that President Bush’s attempt was “roundly rejected.” Indeed, if Bush were successful at his push to do what Ryan and Blackburn are proposing now, seniors would have lost tens of thousands of dollars in the 2008-2009 market plunge.
Shelby releases most of his blanket hold, but continues to block three military nominees.
Shelby releases most of his blanket hold, but continues to block three military nominees.
Last week, media reports revealed that Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) had placed a blanket hold on all of President Obama’s pending executive nominations, holding up more than 70 nominees, including those for top national security positions. Shelby’s obstructionist move was an effort to gain leverage for two defense projects in his home state. Following aggressive pushback from the White House and negative media attention, Shelby announced yesterday that he was relenting on his blanket hold, which he acknowledged as an effort “to get the White House’s attention on two issues.” But as Marcy Wheeler notes, he is still holding three key military positions hostage:
– Terry Yonkers, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment, and Logistics (Nominated August 4, 2009)
– Frank Kendall, Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (PDUSD) for Acquisition and Technology (Nominated August 6, 2009)
– Erin Conaton, Under Secretary of the Air Force (Nominated November 10, 2009)
In his statement, Shelby said he “decided to release his holds on all but a few nominees directly related to the Air Force tanker acquisition” because he wants “to ensure an open, fair and transparent competition that delivers the best equipment to our men and women in uniform.” But Wheeler points out that holding nominations hostage in order to benefit companies in his home state does not appear “open, fair and transparent.”
Bolton: Either Iran Gets Nukes Or ‘Israel Or Somebody Else Uses Military Force To Stop It’
Bolton: Either Iran Gets Nukes Or ‘Israel Or Somebody Else Uses Military Force To Stop It’
Last week, Iran’s President Mahmoud Amadinejad said Tehran would have “no problem” agreeing on a deal to send its enriched uranium abroad for further enrichment. But today, Iran told the IAEA that it would back out of the deal and begin enriching its uranium stockpile in Iran.
On Fox News today, John Bolton declared that “Iran simply has no intention of being talked out of its nuclear weapons program” and that “very severe sanctions” will not work. Later, when host Gregg Jarrett asked if military action is “the only answer,” Bolton agreed:
JARRETT: Is military force probably in the end the only answer?
BOLTON: There are two outcomes, one is Iran getting its nuclear weapons, the other is Israel or somebody uses military force to stop it. That’s where we are.
Watch it:
Bolton has been calling for military strikes on Iran to eliminate its nuclear program for sometime, despite claiming that he “always said, that the use of force against Iran’s nuclear program is deeply unattractive.” Last year, he said that “targeted force” is the “only option.”
But Bolton conveniently never discusses the sobering consequences of military action on Iran. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said war with Iran would be “disastrous” and “the last thing we need.” “There is no military option that does anything more than buy time,” Gates said last year. Retired Gen. Anthony Zinni answered war hawks like Bolton calling for military action against Iran:
After you’ve dropped those bombs on those hardened facilities, what happens next? … [E]ventually, if you follow this all the way down, eventually I’m putting boots on the ground somewhere. And like I tell my friends, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll love Iran.
A top defense official said an attack probably would “incentivize the Iranians to go all the way to weaponize” their nuclear material and have “a number of destabilizing” consequences for the region. Bolton actually thinks attacking Iran “would lead to greater stability in the region” but that if anything goes wrong, a simple “campaign of public diplomacy” will sort everything out.
Cantor Opens The Door To GOP Rejecting Obama’s Bipartisan Health Care Meeting
Cantor Opens The Door To GOP Rejecting Obama’s Bipartisan Health Care Meeting
In an interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric that aired before the Super Bowl yesterday, President Obama announced “that he would convene a half-day bipartisan health care session at the White House to be televised live this month.” “I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward,” said Obama.
The top Republicans in both the House and Senate responded by saying that while they “look forward” to the discussion and”appreciate the opportunity to share ideas with the President,” they believe that the “best way to start on real, bipartisan reform would be to scrap” the health care reform bills that have passed both the House and Senate. The office of another GOP leader, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), suggested that Republicans would not attend the White House meeting unless the Democrats abandoned their proposals:
After going it alone on health care reform for nearly a year, President Obama has decided he wants to bring Republicans into the conversation. Here’s the problem: unless the President and Speaker Pelosi are willing to scrap their government take over and hit the reset button, there’s not much to talk about.
Republicans believe the status quo is unacceptable, but so is any health reform package that spends money we don’t have or raises taxes on small businesses and working families in a recession. To that point, House Republicans have offered the only plan, that will lower health care costs, which is what the President said was the goal at the start of this debate.
The Plum Line’s Greg Sargent writes that Cantor is essentially saying “that the only way Dems can win bipartisan cooperation is to fully embrace the GOP health care plan and nothing more.” Cantor’s stubborn refusal to discuss health care openly with Obama appears to have support in the conservative base. Michelle Malkin wrote today that “Republicans should feel zero obligation to participate in yet another White House health care dog-and-pony show: Just say no.” On Fox News, conservative consultant Andrea Tantaros — who works for a PR firm that represents health care clients — declared that “the only way Republicans should meet with” Obama is if he “is committed to starting over, scrapping that stinker of a bill.” Watch it:
The White House does not intend to start over at the meeting. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein today that while Obama is willing to “add various elements” to health care legislation suggested by Republican lawmakers, he is “absolutely not” hitting the reset button on the legislative process.
The Wonk Room’s Igor Volsky notes that “at the end of the day, it will be up to the Republicans to meet the Democrats half way” and “if they still insist on starting over, they’re effectively taking themselves out of the process and giving the reins to the Democrats.” After crowing about the need for more transparency in health care negotiations, will Republicans follow through on Cantor’s threat to boycott public, televised discussions with the president that could result in more Republican ideas being incorporated into reform?
Fox News: Palin’s ‘Telepalmer’ Notes Were A Clever Plot To Call Attention To Obama’s Teleprompter
Fox News: Palin’s ‘Telepalmer’ Notes Were A Clever Plot To Call Attention To Obama’s Teleprompter
As ThinkProgress reported on Saturday night, paid Fox News contributor Sarah Palin was caught using “hand”-written notes during a Q & A session at the National Tea Party Convention this weekend. Ironically, during the appearance, Palin also criticized President Obama for using a teleprompter during speeches.
On Fox & Friends this morning, the hosts defended their colleague’s Telepalmer notes. Carlson suggested that it was a brilliantly clever plot to draw attention to Obama’s use of a teleprompter:
CARLSON: I think she did it on purpose. I think she did it on purpose, yeah. Because it’s an exact opposite of reading off the teleprompter with a script written for you with every word in a sentence and here’s she’s just taking crib notes on her hand. It makes her look like she can just talk off the cuff and she just jotted down a few couple notes before she went out to give a big long speech.
DOOCY: I think she did it because she probably does it a lot. I do that all the time. [...]
KILMEADE: But to sit there and look at, and do the interview and look down at her hand, I think that is — like you said before, Gretchen — folksy, absolutely, down-to-earth, I can identify. But if you’re going to write on your hand, why not just say, ’staffer, hand me a card.’ And then it would be okay.
CARLSON: Nah, like I said, I think it was on purpose. But anyway, we we may never know.
Watch it:
Event organizers admitted the questions were “pre-screened,” but a Palin spokesperson said the former VP candidate had not seen the questions ahead of time. Still, as Huffington Post’s Stefan Sirucek points out, Palin’s “extra help” in front of a friendly crowd is especially ironic because Obama wasn’t using notes of any kind during a recent unscripted Q & A with House Republicans. Obama has also recently held several town halls, where he took questions from the audience and spoke at length without notes.
Transcript: More »
Rep. John Murtha passes away.
Rep. John Murtha passes away.
Democratic Rep. John Murtha (PA), who served in Congress since 1974, passed away today. Murtha had been in intensive care after complications arose from his gall bladder surgery a couple of weeks ago. The statement from his office:
Congressman John P. Murtha (PA-12) passed away peacefully this afternoon at 1:18 p.m. at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, VA. At his bedside was his family.
Murtha, 77, was Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.
First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in February of 1974, Murtha dedicated his life to serving his country both in the military and in the halls of Congress. A former Marine, he became the first Vietnam War combat Veteran elected to the U.S. Congress.
This past Saturday, February 6, 2010, Murtha became Pennsylvania’s longest serving Member of Congress.
Murtha was close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who supported his bid to become Majority Leader, but he was eventually beaten by Steny Hoyer (MD). During the Bush administration, Murtha became a forceful, outspoken voice for Iraq redeployment. In November 2005, the former Marine and Iraq war hawk came out and called for an immediate U.S. withdrawal in Iraq. His stance was a turning point in the war debate, clearing the way for more Democrats to speak up. “The U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home,” he declared. Murtha had also been dogged by ethics allegations regarding earmarks and his relationship with defense contractors.
Opposition to gays serving openly in the military has ‘declined sharply’ amongst servicemembers.
Opposition to gays serving openly in the military has ‘declined sharply’ amongst servicemembers.
After Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen’s declaration that he believes it is time to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the Military Times has released a poll of 3,000 active-duty troops showing that opposition to gay men and women serving openly in the military “has fallen sharply from nearly two-thirds (65 percent) in 2004 to about half (51 percent) today.” According to the poll, among the servicemembers’ concerns were “how to effectively implement new policies for sharing close quarters and living facilities with openly gay members.” Polls of the American public consistently showing majority support for overturning DADT. A December 2006 poll of servicemembers who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan also found 73 percent of those polled were “comfortable with lesbians and gays.” On Thursday, the Senate Armed Services will be holding a hearing on DADT.
Bachmann’s Plan: To Deal With Debt, We Must ‘Wean Everybody’ Off Social Security, Medicare
Bachmann’s Plan: To Deal With Debt, We Must ‘Wean Everybody’ Off Social Security, Medicare
This past weekend, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) addressed the right-wing Constitutional Coalition’s annual conference in St. Louis. She had dropped out of the Tea Party Convention occurring on the same day in Nashville to make the appearance.
Speaking to a small group of conference attendees and ThinkProgress during lunch on Saturday, Bachmann outlined how the Republican Party and its 2012 nominee must address the national debt. Bachmann referenced Glenn Beck, who falsely warned about a $107 trillion in supposed “unfunded liabilities” from Social Security and Medicare. She then called for a “reorganization” of entitlements where people “already in the system” would continue to receive benefits, but “everybody else” would be weaned off:
BACHMANN: Is the country too big to fail? No, the country can fail. We can, we’re not invincible. And we’re so close now to being at that point because the thing is, as Glenn Beck said last night, it is true. The $107 trillion that he put on the board. We’re $14 trillion in debt, but that doesn’t include the unfunded massive liabilities. That’s $107 trillion, and that’s for Social Security and Medicare and all the rest. You add up all those unfunded net liabilities, and all the traps that could go wrong we’re on the hook for, and what it means is what we have to do is a reorganization of all of that, Social Security and all. We have to do it simply because we can’t let the contract remain as they are because the older people are going to lose. So, what you have to do, is keep faith with the people that are already in the system, that don’t have any other options, we have to keep faith with them. But basically what we have to do is wean everybody else off. And wean everybody off because we have to take those unfunded net liabilities off our bank sheet, we can’t do it. So we just have to be straight with people. So basically, whoever our nominee is, is going to have to have a Glenn Beck chalkboard and explain to everybody this is the way it is.
Bachmann is echoing a growing chorus in the GOP caucus. Recently, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) introduced an alternative budget plan which would privatize both Medicare and Social Security. As the Wonk Room’s Pat Garofalo has noted, the type of private Social Security accounts Ryan proposes would have cost seniors tens of thousands of dollars in the 2008-2009 market plunge. But Bachmann takes Ryan’s effort a step farther and seems to be suggesting a full repeal of the retirement safety net.
Bachmann, who has gained influence within Republican leadership circles, was a star at the event. At his speech on Friday, Glenn Beck proclaimed that Bachmann was the only person he trusted in Congress. Other accolades for Bachmann were heard throughout the conference. At one point, Heritage Foundation scholar Matt Spalding, who had been whispering in Bachmann’s ear while other panelists spoke, exclaimed, “if there’s one person who everyone at Heritage has a crush on, it’s Michele Bachmann.”
As Democrats Get Tough On Financial Reform, Republicans Court Big Banks
As Democrats Get Tough On Financial Reform, Republicans Court Big Banks
Wary of impending reforms following the financial crisisr, the financial sector — whose irresponsible behavior was a major factor in causing the global recession — donated heavily to members of both parties during last year’s election cycle. In all, the financial, insurance, and real estate industries (collectively known as “FIRE”) donated $476 million to federal campaigns in 2008, dwarfing nearly every other sector.
The 2010 election of Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) suggested the public is fed up with the financial industry’s heavy influence in our political system, combined with the fact that unemployment is abnormally high while big banks continued to dole out huge bonuses. A poll conducted among Brown voters who had previously supported Obama found that 51 percent of them believed “that Democratic policies were doing more to help Wall Street than Main Street.”
The Obama administration responded to the Massachusetts election by unveiling a new, tough set of financial reforms — crafted by former Fed Reserve chairman Paul Volcker — that would “put limits on the size of banks and…prohibit commercial banks from engaging in…proprietary trading,” prompting one financial observer to remark that the “administration will do anything to stop us revisiting the financial abyss of 2008, and now, the man who ended the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, has finally been heard.”
The New York Times reports today that the financial sector — which donated more to Democrats than Republicans in the 2008 election cycle — is responding to the Democrats’ populist push by channeling their contributions and support from the Democrats to the Republicans:
[JP Morgan Chase] chief executive, Jamie Dimon, is a friend of President Obama’s from Chicago, a frequent White House guest and a big Democratic donor. Its vice chairman, William M. Daley, a former Clinton administration cabinet official and Obama transition adviser, comes from Chicago’s Democratic dynasty.
But this year Chase’s political action committee is sending the Democrats a pointed message. While it has contributed to some individual Democrats and state organizations, it has rebuffed solicitations from the national Democratic House and Senate campaign committees. Instead, it gave $30,000 to their Republican counterparts. [...]
Republicans are rushing to capitalize on what they call Wall Street’s “buyer’s remorse” with the Democrats. And industry executives and lobbyists are warning Democrats that if Mr. Obama keeps attacking Wall Street “fat cats,” they may fight back by withholding their cash.
“If the president doesn’t become a little more balanced and centrist in his approach, then he will likely lose that support,” said Kelly S. King, the chairman and chief executive of BB&T. Mr. King is a board member of the Financial Services Roundtable, which lobbies for the biggest banks, and last month he helped represent the industry at a private dinner at the Treasury Department. [...]
“If the president wanted to turn every Democrat on Wall Street into a Republican,” one industry lobbyist said, “he is doing everything right.”
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) “made a pitch” for supporting Republicans to Dimon while having drinks at a Capitol Hill restaurant. “I just don’t know how long you can expect people to contribute money to a political party whose main plank of their platform is to punish you,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said.
Reflecting on the Democrats’ new aggressive stance against Wall Street, progressive strategist Mike Lux writes, “In my experience, the biggest single reason for Democrats avoiding populist rhetoric is worrying about the political donations you would lose as a result. … Democrats cannot win in the 2010 elections without going after the big banks, and that means they will have to give up a lot of money. The tradeoff is certainly worth it in terms of extra votes they will get.”
The Right-Wing, Pro-Business Advocacy Ad That Went Unnoticed During The Super Bowl
The Right-Wing, Pro-Business Advocacy Ad That Went Unnoticed During The Super Bowl
While people were focused on the fact that CBS allowed a pro-life advocacy ad by Focus on the Family to play during the Super Bowl, another one by a right-wing group slipped in unnoticed: a “Defeat the Debt” ad showing schoolchildren pledging allegiance “to America’s debt, and to the Chinese government that lends us money.” Watch it:
This ad has run on other national networks and is part of a campaign by the Employment Policies Institute (EPI) that has featured full-page ads in national newspapers and a billboard in Times Square. EPI is a project of right-wing, pro-business lobbyist Rick Berman, also known as “Dr. Evil.” Berman is “one of Washington’s most notorious PR operatives,” who uses his firm, Berman and Company, to fund non-profit front groups for his clients.
Over the years, Berman has gone after Mothers Against Drunk Driving, PETA, and right-wing bogeyman ACORN, and tried to convince Americans that healthier foods, raising the minimum wage, stopping smoking, getting rid of mercury in fish, and unions are bad for them. Berman refuses to reveal his clients, although in 2007, CBS’s 60 Minutes revealed that they included Coca-Cola, Tyson Chicken, Outback Steakhouse, and Wendy’s. According to the watchdog group CREW, Berman “runs at least 22 industry-funded projects, such as the Center for Union Facts, and holds 23 “positions” within these various entities.” Watch Rachel Maddow’s November 2009 report on Berman:
The New York Times reported that EPI, “a conservative research group with close ties to business,” launched its campaign last fall and planned to spend approximately $5 million.
Until recently, CBS and other networks said they had a policy against airing advocacy ads during the Super Bowl. In the past, ads by groups such as MoveOn.org, the United Church of Christ, and the pro-marriage equality group GetToKnowUsFirst.org were rejected (even though networks have selectively decided to air other advocacy ads). This year, CBS controversially decided to accept a pro-life ad from Focus on the Family, saying that it had changed its policy and was willing to accept appropriate advocacy ads.
MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Mocks Sarah Palin By Writing ‘Cheat Sheet’ On Her Hand
MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Mocks Sarah Palin By Writing ‘Cheat Sheet’ On Her Hand
On MSNBC’s Daily Rundown this morning, Andrea Mitchell reported that “one of the most interesting things” from Sarah Palin’s appearance at the Tea Party Convention this past weekend was the notes written on her hand. “Very clearly,” Mitchell observed, “were some cheat sheets.”
Mitchell then mocked Palin by displaying her own hand, which had some handwriting on it. Holding up her hand for the camera, Mitchell joked that she wrote some things down “just in case I didn’t remember” what she wanted to say:
Mitchell’s joke then segued into an interesting conversation about the press corps’ treatment of Palin. Host Chuck Todd — seemingly wary of taking a jab at Palin — attempted to defend her by arguing, “We’ve all done notes.” Mitchell responded by astutely noting Palin’s hypocrisy in attacking Obama for using a Teleprompter. “So she takes all these snarky shots at Barack Obama,” Mitchell said, leaving Todd to complete the sentence, “she undermined it a little bit.”
“If Mitt Romney had notes on his hand, wouldn’t we take it pretty seriously?” Mitchell asked. Todd responded, “She has different rules.” Watch the segment:
Palin says she’s fine with Limbaugh’s use of the ‘r-word.’
Palin says she’s fine with Limbaugh’s use of the ‘r-word.’
This morning on Fox News, host Chris Wallace asked Sarah Palin about her public call for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to resign after reports surfaced that he called a group of liberal activists “f—ing retarded.” Palin reiterated her call for Emanuel to “step down” and explained that while she’s not “politically correct” or “one to be a word police,” she was committed to “reaching out and to helping the special needs community.” But when Wallace asked Palin about Rush Limbaugh’s endorsement of the language, Palin said she was fine with Limbaugh’s satirical comments. “I didn’t hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with ‘f-ing retards,’” she said. “There is a big difference there”:
PALIN: I agree with Rush Limbaugh. He was using satire to politically correct —
WALLACE: He used the “r” word.
PALIN: He used satire. Name-calling by anyone, I teach this to my children and you teach it to your children and grandchildren, too. Name calling by anyone is just unnecessary. It just wastes time. Let’s speak to the issues and — [...]
PALIN: I didn’t hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with ‘f-ing retards’ and we did know that Rahm Emanuel has been reported, did say that. there is a big difference there. Again, name-calling, using language that is insensitive, by anyone, male, female, Republican, Democrat, is unnecessary. It’s inappropriate. Let’s all just grow up.
Watch it:
Emanuel, who has apologized for the remark to Special Olympics CEO Tim Shriver, now plans to host “a delegation of advocates, including two people with mental disabilities, at the White House” as part of his effort to make amends. Limbaugh, meanwhile, gleefully used a derivative of the word “retard” at least forty times, saying that “there’s going to be a retard summit at the White House. Much like the beer summit between Obama and Gates and that cop in Cambridge.”
Podesta Calls On McConnell To Apologize For Denigrating FBI Interrogation Of Abdulmuttalab
Podesta Calls On McConnell To Apologize For Denigrating FBI Interrogation Of Abdulmuttalab
Last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) besmirched the reputation of FBI agents who interrogated terrorist Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab after he was arrested. “He was given a 50 minute interrogation, probably Larry King has interrogated people longer and better than that,” McConnell said on Fox News.
This morning on ABC’s This Week, Center for American Progress Action Fund President and CEO John Podesta noted that intelligence agents have skillfully secured the cooperation of Abdulmuttalab’s family. Because his family was assured that Abdulmuttalab was not being tortured, they worked with the FBI to convince the terrorist to talk. Abdulmuttalab then provided intelligence, some of which was apparently used to capture terrorists in Malaysia.
“I think you can huff and puff as former Governor Palin likes to do, but the proof’s in the pudding — he’s talking, they’ve gotten actionable intelligence, they’re acting on it,” Podesta said. When conservative pundit Peggy Noonan complained that the administration shouldn’t have told the public that Abdulmuttalab was cooperating, Podesta suggested disclosure may not have been necessary if political leaders like McConnell weren’t criticizing intelligence agents:
PODESTA: Maybe if all those politicians stopped attacking the FBI – Mitch McConnell likened the FBI to a Larry King interview – maybe if they stopped with the politics –
RUTH MARCUS: Now that’s cruel.
PODESTA: Well, no, I think he owes the FBI an apology. But if they’d stop with the politics, maybe they wouldn’t have to respond.
Watch it:
Later, Podesta defended the FBI: “I tend to listen to the professionals, and other people tend to listen to Governor Palin.”
He also referenced Sen. Richard Shelby’s (R-AL) “blanket hold” on Obama’s 70 executive nominees — two of whom include the head of the State Department intelligence official and the Homeland Security intelligence official. “What gives here?” Podesta asked. “Are these people serious or are they just playing politics?
JOHN BRENNAN: On Christmas night, I called a number of-- senior members of Congress. I spoke to Senators McConnell and Bond. I spoke to Representative Boehner and Hoekstra. I explained to them that he was in F.B.I. custody. That Mr. Abdulmutallab was in fact talking. That he was cooperating at that point. They knew that in F.B.I. custody means that there's a process then you follow as far as mirandizing and presenting him in front of the magistrate. None of those individuals raised any concerns with me, at that point. They didn't say, "Is he going into military custody? Is he going to be mirandized?" They were very appreciative of the information. We told them we'd keep them informed. And that's what we did. So, there's been-- quite a bit of an outcry after the fact. Where again, I'm just very concerned on behalf of the counterterrorism professionals throughout our government that politicians continue to make this a political football. And are using it for whatever political or partisan purposes.
Palin: Obama could win reelection if he ‘played the war card’ and declared ‘war on Iran.’
Palin: Obama could win reelection if he ‘played the war card’ and declared ‘war on Iran.’
This morning on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace conducted a 25-minute interview with Sarah Palin, a paid contributor to Fox News. Palin told Wallace that she doesn’t think President Obama will win reelection in 2012 if he “continues on the path he has America on.” However, Palin indicated that his chances of winning would dramatically change if Obama simply declared war on Iran:
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama would be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things, say he played — I got this from Buchanan — say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decide to really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel–which I would like him to do. That changes the dynamics of what we can assume will happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today, Obama would not be elected.
WALLACE: You’re not suggesting that Obama would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I’m not suggesting that, I’m saying if he did, things would dramatically change if he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and secure our allies. I think people would shift their thinking a bit.
Watch it:
Palin appears to be fine-tuning her position on Iran. Late last year, Palin mistook Iraq for Iran when she suggested that the U.S. has to crack down on Iraq to prevent nuclear war in Iran. In 2008, Palin appeared to claim that the U.S. needs to “win” the non-existent war with Iran. During her interview with Wallace, Palin also confirmed that she would consider running for President in 2012 and that it would be “absurd” not to.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll