ThinkProgress Logo

Security

Stewart Misdiagnoses Afghanistan Governance Problem

rory-stewartIntrepid diplomat, scholar, and writer Rory Stewart has a piece critical of the Obama administration’s new Afghanistan strategy up in the London Review of Books. Stewart argues that “state-building” is meaningless in “a mountainous country, with strong traditions of local self-government and autonomy, significant ethnic differences, but strong shared moral values,” and that the U.S. and its international partners should refocus by decreasing force levels to 20,000 (made up largely of special forces) and increasing development aid and assistance.

Leaving aside Stewart’s tendency toward self-congratulation — he believes those who think like him possess “detailed knowledge of each country’s past, a bold analysis of the causes of development and a rigorous exposition of the differences, for which few have patience” while others apparently are dull, impatient conformists — Stewart’s proposal is fundamentally flawed. Its proposed focus on development runs aground on the problems of security and financial integrity. All the development aid in the world isn’t going to make a whit of difference if development workers are being brazenly killed in the field or can’t make it to project areas. Then there’s corruption –- development aid isn’t going to matter much if corrupt officials line their pockets with it.

Ultimately, these are problems of effective governance -– a concept that Stewart goes out of his way to deride. While there are no doubt problems developing and putting into practice programs that result in effective governance, simply pointing these issues out doesn’t invalidate the diagnosis that ineffective, corrupt, and incompetent governance is at the heart of Afghanistan’s woes. The problem isn’t that good governance and legitimacy are pie-in-the-sky foreign notions as Stewart argues, it’s that there’s so little of either.

Read more

Politics

Meghan McCain: ‘Joe the Plumber — you can quote me — is a dumbass.’

joeThe day before the White House Correspondents dinner, Jamie Kirchick interviewed Meghan McCain for Out, largely focusing on her outspoken support of gay rights. During the interview, McCain took a crack at a man her father made famous during last year’s presidential campaign, Joe the Plumber:

Yet even as the balance begins to shift, the old guard is still yapping in the foreground. Shortly before McCain sat for this interview, Samuel Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber, gave an interview to Christianity Today in which he complained about “queers” and declared, “I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children.” Unprompted, McCain rails against the man her father’s presidential campaign touted as an American everyman and made a showpiece in the weeks before the election. “Joe the Plumber — you can quote me — is a dumbass. He should stick to plumbing.”

Wurzelbacher later followed that comment up by saying, “Men kissing each other…it throws me off.” “It’s not something I want around my family,” he told a local ABC affiliate in Toledo, OH.

Politics

Bush Department of Justice blacklisted applicants from LGBT, immigrant advocacy groups.

goodling.jpgThe Washington Blade reports that, during the Bush administration, “applicants for Justice Department internships and honors programs may have been rejected based on their membership in LGBT” and immigrant advocacy groups. Pro-immigrant groups reportedly made up 25 percent of the list. Some other blacklisted organizations:

The Blade recently learned that among the blacklisted groups was Immigration Equality, which focuses on LGBT-related immigration issues.

Also blacklisted was the immigration project for the Gay Men’s Health Crisis. […]

Rachel Tiven, Immigration Equality’s executive director, said in a statement that her organization was “proud to be the only national LGBT organization included in the Bush Justice Department’s list of dangerous organizations” and that “opponents of equality and justice are right to fear us.”

A 2008 report by the Justice Department concluded that former Bush loyalists at the DoJ broke the law by allowing politics to influence hiring decisions. The Justice Department’s screening process was headed by Monica Goodling, a graduate of Pat Robertson’s Regent University who acknowledged that she “crossed the line of the civil service rules.” Goodling blocked the hiring of someone she viewed as a “liberal,” and she frequently checked the backgrounds of candidates for their views on “abortion” and “homosexuality.”

Yglesias

Endgame

It must take a wide Latina indeed to restrain herself from slugging some of these guys:

Shrinking Flint, Michigan.

— The complicated health care status quo.

— The waning of culture war politics.

— Something about driving a car turns people into sociopaths.

— I’ll believe there are green shoots when Julian Sanchez doesn’t have time to put stuff like this together.

Between Bikini Kill and Le Tigre, there was Julie Ruin; this is “V.G.I.”

Politics

Obama birther claims soldier’s revoked orders will have ‘disastrous’ ‘consequences’ for the U.S. military.

The reserve soldier who argued he should not have to go to Afghanistan because of far-fetched claims that President Obama is not legally eligible to be commander-in-chief has had his deployment orders revoked. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook filed a request with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia on July 8 seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector because he believes Obama is not a natural born citizen. Though the military has refused to say why the order was revoked, Cook’s lawyer, renowned Obama conspiracy theorist Orly Taitz, was spinning it as a victory. “They have no cards to play with,” Taitz gleefully told Military.com:

Can you imagine what are the consequences? This is disastrous” for the administration, she said. “We’ll have no military. Because anytime any Soldier, any Sailor, any Airman does not want to follow any orders, all he has to do is call an attorney and say ‘I don’t want to follow this order because I question the legitimacy of the commander in chief.’ “

Cook, an Individual Mobilization Augmentee, had volunteered for a year’s deployment to Afghanistan on May 8 and his orders were issued June 9. But all is not over for Cook or Taitz. A hearing on Cook’s requests will take place Thursday in the Columbus, Georgia federal court.

Climate Progress

Energy Analyst: Cap-And-Trade Advocates Should Welcome Palin ‘To The Debate With Open Arms’

Sarah PalinGov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) has garnered much attention for her op-ed in the Washington Post attacking President Obama’s clean energy policies as “an enormous threat to our economy.” Palin is positioning herself as the face of the opposition to the American Clean Energy and Security Act, legislation that would establish federal standards for renewable electricity, energy efficiency, and global warming pollution. But New Energy Finance, “the world’s leading provider of industry information and analysis to investors, corporations and governments in clean energy, low carbon technologies and the carbon markets,” argues the “Thrilla From Wasilla” may actually end up helping clean energy reform become a reality:

NEF “FIRST TAKE”: Palin’s popularity among the right wing of the Republican Party stems mainly from her stances on cultural issues such as opposition to abortion. So it is intriguing that she has chosen an economic issue to pursue immediately after leaving office. Most likely, this represents an attempt to broaden her appeal to economic conservatives in the party as well ahead of 2012. In addition, energy policy is an area where Palin has some expertise, having chaired a key energy committee in Alaska after serving as mayor of the town of Wasila but before winning the governorship. That said, Palin’s reputation for zany off-the-cuff comments precedes her. While she is knowledgeable in this area, she is also bound to stray well off message and create memorable sound-bites. Advocates for cap-and-trade should welcome her to the debate with open arms.

Fred Hiatt‘s decision to publish yet another global warming denier in the Post is an embarrassment, and Palin’s energy “expertise” is a gross exaggeration. But taking NEF’s advice, let’s hope Palin doesn’t figure that out. Go, Sarah, go!

Politics

Venezuelan president floats the possibility of Obama assassination.

hugo-chavezThis past Sunday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez broadcasted a series of anti-Obama comments over his “Alo Presidente!” show, at one point even toying with the possibility that President Obama might be assassinated. The Hill quotes Chavez:

On the “imperial” U.S. forces that Chavez thinks killed JFK: “I hope they do not kill Obama, because Obama is biting off more than he can chew.”

Chavez also demanded that Obama “stop dithering” on the military takeover of Honduras. Obama, however, has strongly condemned the Honduran coup and “diffused” Chavez’ charges. Earlier this year, Chavez called Obama a “poor ignoramus” who has the “same stench as Bush.” Obama, however, has vowed to turn a new page in hemispheric relations and it seems that, for the most part, Latin American leaders and their constituents believe him.

Yglesias

Ben Nelson Attributes His Zeal for Defending the Interests of Rich People to the Public at Large

The absolute most annoying tick of the “centrist” block of Democratic Senators is their tendency to deny their own agency in the legislative process. A set of political institutions that is and always has been entirely wrongheaded has given Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, and others vast authority over the fate of the nation. And while wielding it, the wielders have a horrifying tendency to simply deny that wielding power and making choices is what they’re doing. Here, for example, is Nelson slamming the idea of paying for health reform with higher taxes on the wealthy:

“Tax is a four-letter word” with voters, said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). Even families not ranking in the top 1 percent of earners “hope they’re going to be there someday,” he said. “So they don’t necessarily think it’s fair.”

Jon Chait reminds us that we can actually just look this up:

highend-1

Taxing the rich is popular. Really popular. Maybe Ben Nelson thinks it’s unfair. But if so, he should say so. He’s a US Senator! Tons of people are eager to hear what he thinks about things and understand his point of view. Instead, he just tells us that other people don’t like the idea.

Politics

Sessions claims Roberts and Alito answered questions more ‘crisply’ and with more ‘clarity’ than Sotomayor.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who has been searching for excuses to vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor, said on CNN today that Sotomayor’s testimony was “muddled” and lacked clarity. “I do think Roberts and Alito are far superior in terms of answering questions crisply and with clarity and having very little inconsistencies in what they said,” Sessions claimed. The Senate Democratic Leadership office quickly assembled a video reminding Sessions of how “crisply” Roberts and Alito dodged questions that they didn’t want to answer:

Ian Millhiser writes that Sessions clearly “doesn’t remember the Roberts and Alito hearings very well.”

Health

Republicans Respond To HELP Bill Passage By Lying About The Bill

Today, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) passed health care reform legislation that extends coverage to all Americans, protects employer-based coverage, lowers the growth of health care spending, and contains a public health insurance option. Despite the fact that the committee accepted 160 Republican amendments and spent 13 days and more than 60 hours debating the legislation during mark-up, no Republicans voted for the final bill.

Throughout the mark-up process, Republicans delayed progress by offering nonsensical amendments, eliminating affordability measures for middle class families, offering non-starter alternatives, and arguing that the committee should terminate its hearings. Responding to today’s vote, the HELP committee Republicans reiterated their claims that the bill would add to the deficit, leave millions without coverage, push Americans out of their current insurance plans, and lead to greater unemployment with choreographed repetition. Watch a compilation:

Unfortunately, repeating talking points doesn’t make them true. Below is a fact check of Republican claims:

CLAIM: The bill will contribute trillions of dollars to the national deficit.

FACT: The budget framework requires a deficit-neutral health care reform bill, and the Democrats have pledged to fully finance coverage expansion from savings within the system and new sources of revenue. The Senate Finance Committee is responsible for financing the measure.

CLAIM: Force millions of Americans out of their current coverage.

FACT: According to CBO’s comprehensive analysis of the HELP committee bill, the legislation increases the number of Americans with private insurance and strengthens the employer-based system of coverage (as a result of the employer-mandate an extra 1 million Americans will have employer-sponsored coverage by 2017).

CLAIM: 34 million Americans will remain uninsured.

FACT: Since the HELP committee does not have jursidiction over Medicaid expansion, its bill officially covers an additional 20 million Americans. Republicans claim that 34 million would be left uninsured by subtracting that 20 million from the 54 million who are projected to be without coverage by 2019. However, if we assume Medicaid expansion — which the Senate Finance Committee will include in its health care bill — reform would expand coverage to 20 million additional Americans, covering nearly 97% of all legal Americans by 2019.

CLAIM: Employer mandate will tax employers and make people lose their jobs.

FACT: The bill exempts small businesses from the mandate and even offers them a credit to help make providing coverage more affordable. The madante for large employers will help pay for health care reform and, rather than resulting in “massive job losses” as Republicans claim, actually preserves the employer system of coverage. Real life experiences with employer mandates in Hawaii and Massachusetts have found no evidence of reduced employment.

As GOP pollster Frank Luntz conceded during a recent interview with the New York Times Magazine, Republicans will label the Democratic reform effort a “government takeover” of health care, regardless of the actual legislation. They are more interested in obstructing health care reform than they are in engaging in a bipartisan compromise. A new strategy memo by GOP consultant Alex Castellanos, for instance, suggested that “it is crucial for Republicans to slow down what it calls ‘the Obama experiment with our health.’”

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up