‘Senator Cruz Has Gone Over The Line’: Colleagues Slam Ted Cruz For Irresponsible Rhetoric On Hagel

By Ben Armbruster on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:05 pm

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) criticized Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) during an Senate Armed Services Committee meeting today on Chuck Hagel’s Defense Secretary nomination for suggesting that Hagel is being influenced financially by foreign countries.

During the meeting, Cruz objected to moving forward with Hagel’s nomination, saying — without offering any evidence — that the former Republican senator may have received money directly from countries like North Korea and Saudi Arabia.

“This Senator feels like that Senator Cruz has gone over the line,” Nelson shot back at Cruz. “He basically has impugned the patriotism of the nominee.” The Florida Democrat continued:

NELSON: In your conclusions which you are entitled to come to about him in essence about him being cozy with Iran. And you have also stated your opinion that you don’t think he has been truthful with this committee. Now those are two fairly strong statements. And I couldn’t help but having had the privilage of serving on this committee for a while, and seeing the two former chairman on either side of the nominee and I looked at the former Repubican chairman John Warner’s face as some of the questions were asked as he visibly winced. There’s a certain degree of comity and civility that this committee has always been known for. And clearly in the sharpness difference of opinion to question in essence whether somebody is a fellow traveler with another country I think is taking it too far.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) piled on: “I just want to make it clear. Senator Hagel is an honorable man. He has served his country and no one on this committee at any time should impugn his character or his integrity,” he said. Watch the clip:

()

Alyssa

Teju Cole On President Obama’s Drone Program—And His Reading List

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:03 pm

Teju Cole.

I always spending time in the novelist Teju Cole’s head, and I was struck by his most recent piece in the New Yorker, a meditation on how President Obama, whose billing of himself as a serious reader has been a way of selling him as a serious, empathetic man, has also become an active user of drone strikes to kill terrorists and suspected terrorists. He argues that enjoying the way literature makes you empathize with someone else, even someone very different from you, doesn’t necessarily mean that said empathy extends once we look up from a book, much less once we’re entrusted with immense power:

Toni Morrison, in her Nobel lecture in 1993, said, “We die. That may be the meaning of life. But we do language. That may be the measure of our lives.” This sense of literature’s fortifying and essential quality has been evoked by countless other writers and readers. When Marilynne Robinson described fiction as “an exercise in the capacity for imaginative love, or sympathy, or identification” she was stating something almost everyone would agree with. We praise literature in self-evident terms: it is better to read than not to read, for reading civilizes us, makes us less cruel, and brings the imaginations of others into ours and vice versa. We persist in this belief regardless of what we know to the contrary: that the Nazis’ affection for high culture did not prevent their crimes…

How on earth did this happen to the reader in chief? What became of literature’s vaunted power to inspire empathy? Why was the candidate Obama, in word and in deed, so radically different from the President he became? In Andrei Tarkovsky’s eerie 1979 masterpiece, “Stalker,” the landscape called the Zona has the power to grant people’s deepest wishes, but it can also derange those who traverse it. I wonder if the Presidency is like that: a psychoactive landscape that can madden whomever walks into it, be he inarticulate and incurious, or literary and cosmopolitan.

I also think it’s worth noting that empathy, while a worthwhile value, is actually a fairly neutral tool when it comes to literature. Convincing your reader (or viewer) to suspend disbelief and to enjoy spending time seeing the world through your characters’ eyes is a basic task of fiction. But it can be employed to any number of ends. Which is why so many people fall for Atlas Shrugged, or end up with bad ideas about what sex should look like from Norman Mailer and Philip Roth.

()

Justice

NRA Responds To ‘Connecticut Effect’ Controversy, Falsely Claims No Association With Lobbyist

By Scott Keyes on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:00 pm

The NRA responded to the “Connecticut effect” controversy on Tuesday by claiming no connection to the lobbyist who represents the NRA’s Wisconsin chapter.

On Monday, ThinkProgress broke the story about how NRA lobbyist Bob Welch said the organization will simply wait for the “Connecticut effect” to subside before resuming its push to weaken the nation’s gun laws. Welch’s comments came at the 2013 NRA Wisconsin State Convention over the weekend.

Now, the NRA is attempting to disavow any association with Welch or its Wisconsin chapter. In an email to TPM on Tuesday, the NRA wrote that “Bob Welch is neither a staff lobbyist nor a contract lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. He does not speak for the NRA.”

The NRA’s attempt to claim no association with Welch and its Wisconsin state chapter is laughable. Welch is a registered lobbyist for the Wisconsin NRA group, known as WI-FORCE (Wisconsin Firearm Owners, Ranges, Clubs & Educators), so any association between WI-FORCE and the NRA is an association between Welch and the NRA.

Let’s briefly review whether or not WI-FORCE is connected with the NRA.

WI-FORCE’s website notes that the group is “An NRA Chartered State Association.” Their annual convention last weekend, where Welch’s comments were made, was billed as the “2013 NRA Wisconsin State Convention.” Among the attendees at the event was NRA President David Keene, who sat right next to Welch before the lobbyist’s speech.

The brochure pictured below, which notes that WI-FORCE is the NRA’s 2011 Association of the Year and a National Rifle Association Chartered State Association, even includes a testimonial from Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R): “As the NRA’s chartered State association, Wisconsin FORCE’s support for Constitutional rights of Wisconsinites was helpful as I signed important legislation into law.”

Given how offensive Welch’s comments were, it’s clear why the NRA is trying to confuse the public about its association with its Wisconsin chapter.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) is fighting back over the controversy. The Connecticut senator condemned the comments in a Senate subcommittee hearing and a Huffington Post op-ed.

()

LGBT

‘Family’ Group: Arlington Cemetery Is Too ‘Hallowed’ For Same-Sex Partners

By Zack Ford on Feb 12, 2013 at 4:39 pm

On Monday, the Defense Department released a new list of benefits that the same-sex partners of military servicemembers could access in spite of the limitations imposed by the Defense of Marriage Act. One spousal benefit that was not specifically mentioned was eligibility to be buried in Arlington National Cemetery, but that didn’t stop the American Family Association from making that its primary complaint. In an action alert sent out after the Pentagon’s announcement, the anti-gay hate group warned that same-sex partners would violate the cemetery’s “hallowed grounds,” complete with the misspelled graphic pictured at right:

This means the military will recognize homosexual lovers as “married” and will give a full slate of benefits, including burial in Arlington National Cemetery.

Panetta, at every turn, has exposed the military to open homosexuality, which presents an unacceptable risk to good order, discipline, morale and unit cohesion – qualities essential for combat readiness.

Actually, the new guidance allows the military to recognize same-sex domestic partnerships specifically so it doesn’t have to recognize same-sex marriages. Nevertheless, AFA is encouraging supporters to send the following letter to members of Congress:

Under your watch, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has effectively devastated our nation’s military by allowing the “gay agenda” to take priority over national defense.

This week, his decision to grant “marriage” benefits to homosexuals in the military presents an unacceptable risk to good order, discipline, morale and unit cohesion – qualities essential for combat readiness.

Most disturbing is his decision to allow homosexual partners to be buried on the hallowed grounds of Arlington National Cemetery.

I urge you to do your part in restoring sanity to the Department of Defense and stop social experimentation in the military.

Besides the fact that plenty of gay people are surely already buried in Arlington National Cemetery, repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell had no consequential impact on the military’s “good order, discipline, morale, and unit cohesion.” DADT was the social experiment, and all that came of it was the firing of soldiers. The social experiment of shame and discrimination is over.

()

Economy

Why Senate Democrats Are Right To Revive A Minimum Tax On Million Dollar Incomes

By Pat Garofalo on Feb 12, 2013 at 4:35 pm

Both Politico and the Wall Street Journal reported that Senate Democrats are planning to revive the Buffett rule, a minimum tax on income in excess of $1 million, in their plan to avert the so-called “sequester” spending cuts scheduled for March. President Obama proposed a minimum millionaires’ tax during last year’s State of the Union address.

The rule would have raised about $50 billion in revenue, and fixed a tax code that allows some millionaires to pay lower tax rates than middle-class families. Here are two charts showing why the Buffett rule is so vital:

Republicans last year filibustered the Buffett rule in the Senate.

()

Climate Progress

Shell Sending Arctic Vessels To Asia For Repairs, Casting Doubt Over 2013 Drilling

By Climate Guest Blogger on Feb 12, 2013 at 4:22 pm

Kulluk oil rig after running aground near Alaska. (Photo: U.S. Coast Guard)

By Kiley Kroh

As the question of whether to move forward with high-risk Arctic offshore drilling in 2013 looms large, there’s a chance Shell Oil may take that decision out of the Obama administration’s hands. In another costly setback to its long and problem-filled quest to drill for oil off Alaska’s shores, Shell said yesterday that the company will be towing its two Arctic drilling rigs to Asia for major repairs, instead of Seattle as was originally planned.

The announcement comes as the company’s Arctic drilling program is the subject of a high-level review by the Department of the Interior – the biggest question now being whether the vessels could even be ready to resume drilling operations this year.

Despite a year full of technical problems, permit violations, and failures to meet safety standards, company spokesman Curtis Smith said in an email to Forbes:

“The pace of our Alaska operations will always be dictated by safety. The lessons learned from 2012 will be applied to all future exploration programs. Having said that, the drilling program we executed in 2012 was safe and successful. We look forward to building on that progress in the future.”

The Kulluk oil rig sustained damage to its hull and electrical systems during the New Year’s Eve grounding of the vessel, after it encountered a massive storm while being towed from Dutch Harbor.

Smith said Shell’s second rig, the Noble Discoverer, has problems with its propulsion system and could require a full engine replacement. In July, Shell briefly lost control of the Discoverer as it nearly ran aground in Dutch Harbor. And in November, it was damaged by an explosion and fire while in port in the Aleutian Islands. Critics have long been skeptical of whether the aging vessel — built in 1966 and converted from a log carrier — was capable of operating in harsh Arctic conditions.

The grounding of the Kulluk in January was only the latest in a litany of mishaps and struggles with Mother Nature that characterized Shell’s entire 2012 Arctic drilling season. The company’s own troubles were added to a growing number of entities voicing their opposition to Arctic offshore drilling, due to the extreme risk and cost accompanying any operations in the fragile and remote area.

As the Center for American Progress has detailed numerous times, the region lacks even the basic infrastructure — roads, railroads, ports, a permanent Coast Guard facility, adequate facilities to house and feed responders — that would be necessary to mount a large-scale response to an oil spill or other major incident. These obstacles, added to the extreme and volatile conditions in which companies would be operating, led the insurance giant Lloyd’s of London to warn companies that responding to an oil spill in a region “highly sensitive to damage” would present “multiple obstacles, which together constitute a unique and hard-to-manage risk.” And Total SA, the fifth largest oil and gas company in the world, announced it wouldn’t seek to drill in the Arctic because an accident there would be a “disaster.”

These concerns, coupled with Shell’s repeated demonstrations that the oil and gas industry is not prepared to meet the enormous challenge of Arctic offshore drilling, led CAP’s John Podesta and Carol Browner to call on the federal government to take its cautious approach to Arctic Ocean drilling a step further. In a recent Bloomberg op-ed they stated:

“The Obama administration shouldn’t issue any new permits to Shell this year and should suspend all action on other companies’ applications to drill in this remote and unpredictable region.”

If Shell’s rigs cannot be repaired in time to resume exploratory drilling operations this July, it may give the administration the breathing room it needs to consider the myriad risks that were exposed last year. Rushing into Arctic offshore drilling is not an imperative, and the decision to move forward must be based on a clear demonstration that the industry is fully prepared for the realities of Arctic operations. Right now, the American people have no reason to continue taking oil companies at their word when they tell us they can operate safely and responsibly in this far-flung and dangerous region.

Kiley Kroh is the Associate Director for Ocean Communications at the Center for American Progress.

Health

21 Companies Lower Their Products’ Salt Content Under New York City’s Public Health Initiative

By Sy Mukherjee on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:55 pm

As part of a voluntary public health initiative led by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) to lower the amount of sodium in popular foods, 21 companies — including Butterball, Heinz, Subway, Starbucks, and Kraft Foods — have cut salt content in certain products by as much as 30 percent.

As CBS News reports, the affected products include a variety of foods including hot dogs, cold cuts, cheese singles, sandwiches, and crackers. Bloomberg lauded Kraft in particular for “reducing sodium in its Kraft Singles American Slices by 18 percent” and Subway for eliminating sodium entirely from two of their popular sandwiches.

Bloomberg and public health advocates welcomed the companies’ decisions, noting that Americans consume an excessive amount of sodium, and that the source of the excess is in pre-packaged foods rather than salt manually added to products by consumers:

“These companies have demonstrated their commitment to removing excess sodium from their products and to working with public health authorities toward a shared goal — helping their customers lead longer, healthier lives,” said Bloomberg.

Noting that Americans eat about twice as much salt as they should and citing its link to high blood pressure and resulting diseases, the city set voluntary guidelines in 2010 through the National Salt Reduction Initiative for various restaurant and store-bought foods. Bloomberg said that 80 percent of salt came from prepackaged foods, not people adding salt.

“Consumers can always add salt to food, but they can’t take it out,” NYC Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas Farley said at the time.

Bloomberg has established himself as a leader in battling America’s obesity, diabetes, and smoking-related public health epidemics, enforcing strong public smoking bans and limits on soda sizes in his city.

While some critics have labeled his methods as overbearing, some of the evidence vindicates Bloomberg’s tactics, as cities with stronger nutritional regulatory regimes tend to be healthier and less obese — particularly children in such cities. And the companies’ decisions to voluntarily lower salt content is a welcome change from the tendency of Big Food to market heavily processed products, thereby undermining public health.

Curbing obesity rates in the United States would go a long way toward reducing health care costs and improving general wellness among Americans. Other recent efforts aimed at addressing obesity and public health include initiatives to promote healthy school lunches and Obamacare provisions requiring chain restaurants to conspicuously post caloric information on their menus.

()

Justice

Chicago Teen Killed After Performing At Inauguration Was Victim Of Gang Violence

By Annie-Rose Strasser on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:45 pm

The 15-year-old girl who was killed just days after performing at President Obama’s second inauguration was a victim of Chicago’s rampant gang violence, authorities told the AP on Tuesday.

Hadiya Pendleton was shot and killed on January 29 in a case of mistaken identity; her murderers, 18-year-old Michael Ward, and 20-year-old Kenneth Williams, thought that Pendleton was a girl in a rival gang:

Pendleton, a popular high school majorette, was with a group of friends who took cover during a rainstorm under a canopy in a park about a mile from the Obama home on the city’s South Side. Police said a man hopped a fence, ran toward them and opened fire with a handgun before fleeing in a waiting car. Pendleton was struck in the back and died later that day. Two others were injured.

McCarthy said Ward told investigators he thought he was shooting into the crowd of a rival gang, and that the shooting was meant as retaliation for Williams being shot in the arm in July. Police said neither Pendleton nor her friends were affiliated with gangs.

Gang violence has plagued Chicago over the last year. In January of 2013 alone, the city reported more than 40 homicides.

Pendleton’s parents will be attending the State of the Union on Tuesday night, where the President will likely discuss his recent initiatives to curb gun violence. Among those initiatives is an effort to close the gun show loophole. Criminals in Chicago, and other cities facing the horrors of gang violence, can easily obtain weapons thanks to federal gun loopholes that allow anyone to buy a gun from a private seller without a background check.

()

Alyssa

David Beckham’s Butt Double In His H&M Ads And Body Image Standards For Men

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:33 pm

Today in male body image news, David Beckham apparently has been using a stand-in for shots of his posterior during an ad campaign for H&M. The explanation the brand gave doesn’t entirely track to me: if Beckham has enough time to be ogled by tourists, jump in a pool, and have his shirt torn off by hedges that a couple of shots of him readjusting his trunks would be the thing that busted the production schedule and had to get left off the list:

But I’m totally sympathetic to the idea that even David Beckham wants to make sure when his body isn’t in motion, when it isn’t being celebrated for its capacities, but merely as a piece of meat, that even he might want a substitute. There may be more variety in archetypal male body types in popular culture than there are for women. But when it comes to the kinds of bodies designers want to put clothes on, whether they’re walking the runway or posing in print and video ads, the standards for men and women are both pretty brutal. There’s been a lot of work done to expose what women put themselves through to meet the physical standards required of them to model, but it would be delightful to make it clear that the expectations for men aren’t any more realistic or attainable, even for ones who stay in shape professionally.

()

Economy

Three Charts That Show America Doesn’t Have A Spending Problem

By Travis Waldron on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:20 pm

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) claim this weekend that the government doesn’t have a spending problem has been met with typical outrage from Republican politicians (and several members of the Washington media) who have spent the greater part of the last three years arguing that reining in America’s supposed out-of-control government spending would put the country on a more stable economic footing. There is, however, no basis to those claims, as actual evidence points in the opposite direction.

As this chart from Slate’s Matt Yglesias shows, overall government spending has plateaued under President Obama after rising sharply under George W. Bush and during Obama’s first year in office, when the economic recovery act went into effect.

In fact, the reduction in growth of spending under Obama is unprecedented in the last half-century, and government spending under Obama is growing at the slowest rate since Dwight Eisenhower was president:

This reduction in spending, however, is not necessarily a good thing. This chart, flagged by Brian Beutler, highlights how perilous rapid fiscal contraction can be. As Investor’s Business Daily notes, “The federal budget deficit has never fallen as fast as it’s falling now without a coincident recession.” Even during the 1990s, a time of rapid economic expansion and low unemployment, the deficit fell only half as fast as it is scheduled to in 2013. The Congressional Budget Office, meanwhile, estimates that full implementation of the sequester (factored into this 2013 projection) will significantly dampen economic growth:

This chart from the Federal Reserve’s Janet Yellen illustrates the effect of fiscal contraction of economic growth. In previous recessions, government spending has encouraged faster recoveries, and the stimulus initially helped boost this recovery. But the spending cuts that have resulted since 2010 have had the opposite (and a totally predictable) effect, driving down consumption and slowing the recovery:

Despite the hand-wringing from conservatives and media types about the federal debt and deficits, these charts make it clear that America’s problem isn’t that the government is spending too much. Rather, it’s that the government isn’t spending enough. Investments into infrastructure, education, teachers, public workers, and other programs could boost the economy. Instead, Washington has turned its attention to cutting spending, and the results have been dire, even if they are totally predictable to anyone who has read about the plight of the European economy over the last three years.

()

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Jan				Mar »
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28