Even though it is Friday the 13th things are looking up.

Saying no to superstition as the day wears on -- Those of us leaning Left feel a sense of relief that a return to justice may be on the way again, after eight years of Georgw W. Bush ignoring the rule of law. Attorney General Holder announced that several detainees will be brought to New York City to stand trial in federal court. And President Obama confirmed his belief that justice surely will be served there. Unfortunately, but predictably, Republican leaders quickly took up their old, tired-out tactics of fear mongering. I am beginning to believe that some of them are truly fearful, though I believed for a long time that it was a political tactic. What an awful way to live. What a pitiful way to lead.

Superstition and fear are first cousins. So it is wonderfully ironic that the worst fears of Republicans (almost the worst) came true on this Friday the 13th. Over the next few months they will be found out, branded as wrong-headed and seen for their lack of imagination and capacity to move on. What this administration is doing is returning to the way it was over most of our history, normal. And for all the Right Wing's accusations of radicalism from the President, it turns out he is just methodically normal.

For example -- Congress is to be treated as a more co-equal branch of government, though the President objected to their knee-jerk military spending on an unneeded airplane. In the end Congress gets to write the legislation and the President signs it, or not. Courts are where guilt and innocence are decided and where the rule of law is defined. The Executive branch executes the law of the land, adheres to treaty obligations. President Obama is on a trip to foreign lands, talking and listening, thank goodness. He does not seem to be bound by fears, or by anger, or by angst, or by jealousy, or by ignorance. He's just sort of a normal president running a normal administration. Eight years of the Bush administration made us forget what that is like.

Illustration is from Wordle.net.

Posted via email from Southwest Postings

Nobel's recognition of Obama will drive the Far Right even crazier.

My sentiments exactly -- The first thought of many of us was that this will drive the Republicans crazy. Matt Yglesias tweeted: "They should institute a Nobel Prize for driving conservatives crazy." As a matter of fact it is making the Right Wing even crazier than they were before. With a HT to Matt Cooper for this link, showing typical arrogance, The Weekly Standard invites you to "meet the people who were passed over for Obama." Politico quoted several very critical conservatives including RNC Chairman Michael Steele and strategist Craig Shirley. The publication also quotes Rush Limbaugh's reaction: "'greater embarrassment' than losing Olympics." To quote further,

"This fully exposes the illusion that is Barack Obama," Limbaugh told POLITICO in an e-mail. "And with this 'award' the elites of the world are urging Obama, THE MAN OF PEACE, to not do the surge in Afghanistan, not take action against Iran and its nuclear program and to basically continue his intentions to emasculate the United States."

Limbaugh continued: "They love a weakened, neutered U.S, and this is their way of promoting that concept. I think God has a great sense of humor, too."

Later more sane reactions -- The Huffington Post linked to President Obama's Nobel speech, and provides more analysis of the selection of Obama, headlining that "Twitter explodes in response to the Obama Nobel win." New York Times "The Lede" gathered world reaction "to a Nobel surprise." McClatchy gives out "more updates." Matt Cooper spoke of President Obama's "elegant remarks" from the White House rose garden.

Earlier items -- The White House was surprised by the announcement, according to NPR. Taegan Goddard at the Political Wire reported on Twitter that "Obama will make a statement on the Nobel prize in the Rose Garden at 10:30." (It was just been delayed until after 11:00). Goddard also provided a round up of reactions to the Oslo announcement. Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic rounds up some fascinating opinions on why Obama should turn down the prize.

In conclusion -- Those who would disparage the Committee's award as merely honoring the President's "aspirational" sentiments dismiss it too lightly. One cannot be a peacemaker without engendering hope for peace in those who are in conflict. Those who dismiss the award as "not George W. Bush -- thank God he's in Dallas," diminish the strength of Obama's influence over people who do not live in the United States. Those who dismiss the award because we are still fighting in Afghanistan should take note of how much trouble the President is taking to figure out how to narrow the conflict and find ways to build bridges to the people of Afghanistan, including reconcilable members of the Taliban. Those who feel the President does not deserve the Peace Prize because of his civil liberties shortcomings should take note of his long commitment to denuclearizing the world. Those who dismiss the award because the President has yet to fulfill his campaign promises should take note of the unusually long list of serious problems he inherited from the previous administration. Sometimes it is enough to be hopeful, respectful of others, inspirational and willing to tackle anything. That is the elemental stuff of which real peace can be made.

Reference: The Nobel Committee announced that President Barack Obama is their selection for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. To quote in full:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”

Oslo, October 9, 2009

Posted via email from Southwest Postings

Kuddos to ProPublica for its good investigative journalism.

ProPublica is a nonprofit investigative news organization that shares its material with all of us, making it available to freely republish. Following are a couple of very good articles.
The story of Alhurra has been on their agenda for over a year. The latest piece by Dafna Linzer (9/17/09) reports that Alhurra will now be reviewed by the State Department Inspector General. Alhurra is essentially a propaganda broadcast operation set up by former President George W. Bush to put out information on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. The original ProPublica investigation was undertaken jointly with CBS's 60 Minutes. It's investigation, according to Linzer,

revealed serious staff problems, financial mismanagement and long-standing concerns inside the U.S. government and Congress regarding Alhurra's content. Those stories led to congressional inquiries in the House and Senate. The station has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $600 million since it began broadcasting in 2004.

The problems that have plagued this broadcast operation are only part of what is currently on the Obama administration's radar screen. The State I.G. has sent out a questionnaire to all employees to begin its work. Alhurra, which has cost taxpayers $600 million so far, is rated very low in popularity in the Middle East, it has experienced high rates of staff turnover and it was investigated last year by both the House and the Senate.
The current administration's intentions are not clear at this point. The article reports that Walter Isaacson will be nominated to head the Broadcasting Board of Governors that oversees international government broadcasting, and believes that no decisions about the controversial broadcasting station will be made before the new BBG chairman is seated. Visit ProPublica's web page for a complete list of links to its previous articles on Alhurra.

**********

ProPublica recently published another very useful article by Emily Witt (9/10/09), titled: "Bush and Obama: A Counterterrorism Comparison." It is a side by side comparison to the two administrations' stances regarding "Interrogation, Rendition and CIA Black Sites, Detention, Military Commissions, Secrecy and Warrantless Wiretapping and Surveillance." Witt summarized by saying,

. . . what exactly has changed? Abusive interrogations have been banned, but renditions to other countries will continue. The prison at Guantanamo Bay has been ordered closed, but that hasn’t proven easy to do. Meanwhile, prisoners at the Bagram air base in Afghanistan — even those detained in other countries -- can still be held without charge. Memos on CIA interrogation practices have been released, but the details of some programs are still smothered In sum, there are clear differences between Bush and Obama, but some policies have stayed the same in the name of national security.

[Post date - September 18, 2009]

My all-in-one Home Page of websites where I post regularly: Carol Gee - Online Universe
Technorati tags: news news and politics middle east ProPublica

Posted via email from Southwest Postings

Recommending Investigative Journalists

Image via Wikipedia

TPMMuckraker is one of the features at Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo. Here's an interesting example of the kind of good work Zachary Roth does: "In Testimony, Rove Hedged On Role in Siegelman Prosecution" (8/13/09).

Glenn Greenwald's "Unclaimed Territory" is at Salon.com. (Image at left) He was previously a constitutional lawyer and civil rights litigator in New York. On of a number of collaborators on big investigative stories, he is incredible bright and passionate and tells it like it is without blinking. Here's a recent good post: "John Brennan's dangerous national security advice" (8/14/09).

ACLU Blog of Rights - "Because Freedom Can't Blog Itself" is from the American Civil Liberties Union. Posts are about capital punishment, civil liberties, drug law reform, closing Guantanamo, free speech, government spying, human rights, immigrant rights, LGBT rights, racial justice, religion & belief, reproductive rights, torture and abuse, Supreme Court, voting rights and women's rights.

Secrecy News is a publication of the Federation of American Scientists. The FAS Project on Government Secrecy reports on new developments in government secrecy and provides public access to documentary resources on secrecy, intelligence and national security policy. It is written by Steven Aftergood. Here's a recent good story: "Information Sharing as a Form of Secrecy" (8/17/09).

Emptywheel (Marcy Wheeler) writes at Firedoglake. Marcy is the very best at investigative digging, and is a widely respected member of the collaborators that do the major investigative work in the blogosphere. Here is a typically good piece of work (this time on Dick Cheney): "The crazy man above the garage" (8/18/09).

Spy Talk at CQ Politics is a daily blog by Jeff Stein. His slogan is "Intelligence for Thinking People." His post, "Interrogator:'Intolerance' Led to Torture" (8/11/09) is an example of his investigative work using good contacts.

The Washington Independent's "National Security" section features Spencer Ackerman, one of the most respected sources contributing regularly to the collaborative efforts mentioned above. His story, "U.S. Prepares for Questions of Legitimacy in Afghan Election" (8/18/09) is subtitled, "United States May Push Winner To Incorporate Losing Factions Into Government."

Wired: Threat Level is about privacy, crime and security online. David Kravets often writes the posts. This one by Kim Zetter is titled "Outspoken Privacy Advocate Joins FTC" (8/17/09). It is about Christopher Soghoian, an outspoken privacy advocate.

Suburban Guerilla is by former journalist Susie Madrack. Her slogan is "Keeping a jaundiced eye on corporate media." Featured as a moderator at the recent Netroots Nation Convention, she also writes for Crooks and Liars. Her post on Matt Taibbi's searing article on progressives and health care reform (8/18/09) is worth the read.

Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic is a prolific contributor to Twitter. I follow him. To conclude this post, this is one of his recent important linked articles, from which I quote fairly extensively:

A federal judge dealt a setback yesterday to the administration's ability to use information collected by intelligence agencies in Guantanamo prosecutions. In doing so, Judge John Bates weighed in on one of the core controversies of the cases -- the tension between the protection of intelligence sources versus the ability to make cases in federal courts. Bates told the government that it could not introduce evidence derived from a source whose identity cannot be disclosed unless there's some corrobarating evidence. And even if there is corroborating evidence, it'll be treated with a bit of suspicion.

Still, in this particular case, Bates rejected the habeas petition of detainee Shawali Khan . . .

To understand the ruling, understand this about the process: the government faces the burden of providing sufficient evidence that its initial detention was within the proper sphere of the government's detention authority as defined by Congress and the Supreme Court. If the government meets the burden, then the detainee has to convince the judge that the government is wrong.

. . . The government introduced at least three pieces of classified evidence where the identity of the source was not disclosed. If the court can't assess the reliability of an intelligence report because the source is shadowy, the government can't use the information to justify a detention.

Bates threw out four pieces of evidence out of eight. But the remaining evidence was sufficient to meet the detention burden.

Today's post is a roundup of some of the best investigative resources on the Internet. The way I collected them was by noticing how the authors references each others' work as they posted their stories. There is no better recommendation.

[Post date - 8/21/09]

My all-in-one Home Page of websites where I post regularly: Carol Gee - Online Universe
Technorati tags: news news and politics investigative journalism investigative journalism

Related articles by Zemanta

• ACLU to Argue Against Use of Evidence Obtained Through Torture in Federal Court (washingtonindependent.com)
• Tales of torture (carol-sandy1.blogspot.com)
• The CIA, the tapes, the ICRC report, the outrage -- (carol-sandy1.blogspot.com)
• Bloggers deserve kudos for their good work. (carol-sandy1.blogspot.com)
• OLC torture memos revealed - an overview (carol-sandy1.blogspot.com)

Obama versus the status quo --

President Obama inherited one of the biggest messes of any president. While George W. Bush saw himself as the commander in chief, President Obama has a much better balance of focus on both foreign and domestic policy. And Barack Obama usually has very good instincts. For example, President Obama and his family will likely pick the little nondenominational church at Camp David, Time has reported. His spiritual life will not be impeded there, which is one big advantage. He has much about which to pray.

The President had three big items on his legislative agenda when he came into office. They are education reform, energy independence and health care reform. President Obama is seriously planning to have a health bill by the end of the year, but it is still a fight that the administration could lose. Carrie Buddoff Brown at Politico thinks she can read the President's mind. Brown believes that a demand for bipartisanship will not sink his reform effort because he will go on without Republicans, and also that taxing health care benefits may become necessary, along with a mandate for everybody to be required to get insurance. The cost of health care reform will continue to drive many of the decisions made by legislators. Along with Brown, I predict that it will include a public option. The public still supports an activist government, a recent poll showed. Price competition will demand it. And there are enough senators that want it that way to make it happen, despite the fierce lobbying of Democrats by the health care, insurance and drug industries. And predictably, expectations about what is possible with reform have come down.

The balance of power among the three branches of government is becoming more rational, though President Obama still has too much of a tendency to accept a "unitary presidency" style. But courts are more often ruling against the Obama Department of Justice arguments, and over time Congress is asserting itself over President Obama's policies. Rural Democrats, fiscal Conservatives, foreign policy hawks -- all are candidates for revolt against the President's agenda. Last week, according to Politico's David Rogers, there were three skirmishes that proved to the President that politics is still local. To quote,

The topics ran from Iran sanctions to the future of the F-22 fighter jet to a $42.6 billion homeland security budget for the coming year. In each case, parochialism prevailed at the expense of the president, whether it was Republicans courting suburban Jewish voters, Democrats chasing defense jobs or both parties pursuing Homeland pork.

President Obama is already off to a great start in the face of terrible challenges: serious recession, rising unemployment rate, mostly frozen financial credit, mortgage foreclosures, wars in the Middle East, a Congress still finding itself, and what he calls "the way business is done in Washington." His optimism, his towering intellect, his good heart and his faith in the future are just what we need to overcome the status quo and eight years of ineptitude.

[Post date - July 3, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on impediments.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics health care reform obama congress

Approval of Obama policies is at times a mixed bag.

Are public opinion polls the only measure of reality? Citing recent polls that "make clear that there are rising concerns about his policies," Congressional Quarterly (6/18/09) declares the honeymoon is over and that "It's on Obama's watch now." The concerns seem to center around spending resulting in big deficits, his interventions with car makers, and closing Guantanamo. Even though these are often the favorite Republican talking points, the story said that "voters view the Republican party unfavorably by a 2-t0-1 margin." The excellent article thoroughly explores the latest polling data from two big recent polls.

It will truly President Obama's watch only when the key members of his administration have been nominated and confirmed by the Senate. Senators are still holding up several nominations, including that of the very crucial head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Dawn Johnsen.

The Department of Homeland Security is also still without an intelligence chief. Jeff Stein, in his (6/5/09) blog Spy Talk, reported that nominee Phil Mudd's name is being withdrawn by the White House. Stein concluded, "Mudd was going to be questioned sharply by the Senate Government Affairs and Homeland Security Committee on his relationship to the CIA's counterterrorism policies and pre-war intelligence on Iraq, committee sources said." Stein wrote previously that "the writing was on the wall," before Mudd withdrew his name from consideration. It seems that Mudd is carrying too much baggage from his service in the Bush administration, according to Yahoo! News (6/5/09).

President Obama's release of the original OLC torture memos is what made all these important Bush administration revelations possible. We all hailed the decision as the correct one. It would seem that the President now, however, is rethinking a number of his commitments to open government and true transparency. Public opinion has not yet been measured on these questions.

Is the Obama administration currently trying to operate in an open and transparent way? There is recent news that the White House is continuing to insist on keeping secret who visits the White House. MSNBC and a nonpartisan watchdog group (CREW) made requests for visitor logs and were denied by the Secret Service, who is subject to the FOIA laws. This is a continuation of the policy of the Bush administration, who claimed in court cases that the records are "presidential," not Secret Service. Federal judges have ruled several times against the administrations' OLC filings and each time the OLC appeals. The current administration has said the the policy is currently under review. This was explained in the MSNBC article with a short transcript of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' comments when questioned by reporters at a regular briefing.

In a related matter, Steven Aftergood covered President Obama's executive order to review the national security classification policy in Secrecy News (6/1/09). Over classification of government documents has been a growing problem for decades. But there are certainly very good reasons to classify information that relates to national security sources and methods. It is hard to say whether the CIA photos of detainee abuse fall into that category. I tend to think they do present a potential danger to troop safety, by providing incendiary arguments that terror networks can use for recruitment. But there are also very good arguments on the opposite side.

That same day Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com posted convincingly against "Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman secrecy law," called "The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009." The law would allow the government to suppress the remaining detainee abuse photos that President Obama originally intended to release. Greenwald asks,

What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people?

. . . Is there really anyone who wants to argue that defiance of a federal court's order and enacting a new law authorizing suppression of torture evidence -- the disclosure of which is compelled both by courts and FOIA -- are remotely consistent with anything Obama said he would do, or remotely consistent with what a healthy democratic government would do?"

The mixed bag of approval of, or dissaproval for, President Obama's policies will inevitable follow these same trends. That is normal and natural as the Bush administration's influence fades, and as our President governs, rather than campaigns. My list of disappointments grows as the Justice Department appears to take on Bush's Constitutional assaults as their own in court case after court case. The trend seems to be that of never giving back an ounce of the unitary executive power grabbed by Mr. Bush and his cronies. The same stance is not becoming to AG Holder and to President Obama, fine men who should know better.

[Post date - June 19, 2009]

My all-in-one Home Page of websites where I post regularly: Carol Gee - Online Universe

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics obama administration national security transparency public opinion

Health Care Overhaul -- Get on board the train.

Different legislative tracks intersect at several points -- cost, control, consumer needs, care-giver interests and collegiality. Republicans are almost universally skeptical. Democrats are very divided about health care reform between liberals and moderates. How fast the legislation can move through Congress depends on how fast the committees can complete their work. President Obama wants a vote in the Senate by August. The President now active in the debate using the town hall as his forum. So far the American Medical Association is opposed to a public option. And it is fairly apparent that a single payer plan is out of the question.

"The health care industry has a huge stake in reform" opines J.P. Green of the Democratic Strategist: "They will fight the public option, but they know that some form of expanded government health coverage is inevitable." To quote Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown, "The public insurance option remains the single biggest obstacle to a bipartisan bill, snarling the parties – and wings within each party – in a debate over the power of government, the role of the free market and the need to cover the uninsured."

A big part of the division in the Senate is associated with the so-called "public plan." Senators in the cross-hairs of several active advocacy groups include Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Kent Conrad of North Dakota. Other moderates with whom groups must contend are Evan Bayh of Indiana, John Tester of Montana, Tom Carper of Delaware, along with Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

Floor strategies in the Senate are not yet settled. The reconciliation process, needing just 51 votes is still on the table. Two senators, Kennedy and Byrd, are absent due to illness, and the Minnesota seat is still empty. Senator Chris Dodd is acting in a leadership role for Senator Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which has, quoting Politico:

. . . released a 615-page bill, but details on the most contentious issues, such as the public insurance option and the employer mandate, were left out for now . . . The bill calls for insurance market reforms, a prohibition on insurers’ denying coverage to sick people, a mandate on individuals to own coverage and the creation of marketplaces where people can compare and buy coverage.

In the U.S. House of Representatives -- According to Patrick O'Connor and Chris Frates of Politico, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer's top aides have prepared a joint memo indicating the unity of their leadership positions. To quote:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer are double-teaming powerful chairmen and rank-and-file members to save health care reform from a repeat of the Democratic Party infighting that helped kill it in 1994.

. . . Pelosi and Hoyer urged Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.), Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to heed the concerns of moderate Democrats.

. . . Waxman, Miller and Rangel — along with their respective aides — are trying to draft legislation in concert with each other so their committees will take up the same bill later this summer.

In the House, moderates include Blue Dog Democrats, constraining any public health plan option, and members of the New Democratic Coalition. Again, the public option provides a variety of sticking points for them including cost, Medicare rules. Rep. John Dingell of Michigan is a respected leader who has "offered a universal health care bill every year since he came ot Congress in 1955," the authors reported. To quote:

Toward the end of Tuesday’s caucus meeting, he rose on his crutches and told the audience that this measure has the promise of becoming a legacy like Social Security — a program his father helped create in the 1930s.

As he closed, he told members they should have the courage to move forward, eliciting a standing ovation from his fellow Democrats. Pelosi announced Tuesday that the bill will bear Dingell’s name.

. . . House Democrats expect to introduce actual legislation next week, Waxman and others said Tuesday. The preliminary goal is to move legislation out of the committees by the Fourth of July and then clear the House by the August recess, setting up a fall showdown with the Senate over a final bill.

Health Care Reform will happen this year, in my opinion. The train has already left the station. In fact change is already happening. The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is now the law of the land. Health Information Technology reform is being funded by the President's Stimulus monies. And the President will soon sign the bill to mandate tobacco regulation by the FDA. If all of us work hard, a new era can emerge. But it could also easily get derailed. It is going to be an interesting ride.

References:

• "Can Health Overhaul Heal the Economy," by Alex Wayne of Congressional Quarterly (6/3/09).


• "Axelrod Fuels Democratic Message Machine for Health Care Overhaul," by Drew Armstrong of Congressional Quarterly (5/13/09).
  

[Post date - June 12, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics health care reform obama congress U.S. Senate U.S. House

POTUS vs EX VEEP -- no contest

POTUS spoke, literally backed up to the Constitution. EX VEEP spoke and backed into the past. It was no contest; POTUS WON. Our best times are ahead of us. The ex Veep's dark past is just that -- deeply dark and past its prime. The worst time is behind us. America is turning the corner into the future.

What remains from the past? In the National archives, backing up POTUS, are the Constitution with the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These original documents established a set of brilliantly conceived checks and balances among three co-equal branches of government. That system is working again, after being down for the past two presidential terms. America is no longer as deeply bound to its recent dark past.

What does the future hold? Solutions to America' biggest problems are out there waiting to be discovered. Does POTUS have all the answers? Absolutely not, but he believes in the system and trusts what will emerge. Did the EX VEEP's speech have any answers? Absolutely not, because he does not believe in the system. He believes his own dark demons. Now that the system is beginning to rebalance itself without him, his impulses keep him fearful and desperate for power.

What does Constitutional re balancing entail? POTUS gave some clues in his speech. He talked about the lack of foresight in the past administration. And he demonstrates foresight as he leads us into the future. For example, he acknowledged that he expects oversight by Congress and the courts as he picks his way through the Constitutional legal minefield of "prolonged detention" and "military tribunals with rules."

Because the courts were active, even during the dark days, balances were kept in certain instances as courts prohibited Bush administration power grabs. Our new POTUS is also willing to live by court decisions on constitutionality. However, the same cannot yet be said about Congress exerting its proper authority, though there are hints. The Senate's demand for a plan before opening the purse to close Guantanamo was a good first step at reestablishing its prerogatives, though the process has been awkward. What lies in the future for the questionable solutions to the detainee problem? POTUS has been preparing a plan that will be completed in January of next year. It is typical of his operating method.

POTUS' governing style is to state the problem and assign members of the administration to work to find solutions. He announces the outlines of a preliminary plan, letting Congress know what its part is and when he would like to have something to sign. He gets feedback and makes changes. Eventually he realizes it is again time to teach the nation about what the problem and solutions will entail. Working with Congress and signing legislation finally leads to publishing the plan's full details.

EX VEEP's governing style, in contrast was to feel there was a problem, state the solution to his minions in secret, omitting the planning and reporting to Congress. He did not need feedback because the rule was "my way or the highway." Eventually he would be found out, but refused to admit any mistakes. Rather than teach, he worked through maintaining a fear posture and bypassed or deceived Congress whenever possible. He did not need a public plan and did not feel bound by the rule of law. Governing behind closed doors in secret, his loss of power has now produced a starkly contrasting new set of behaviors. He is out front and everywhere -- defending, obfuscating, prevaricating, fear mongering, insulting and angry for the most part.

POTUS is also out front and everywhere -- asserting, explaining, being transparent, truth telling, reassuring, and showing respect to adversaries and a positive demeanor, generally speaking. His ideas will be accepted or not. POTUS feel himself bound by what Congress and the courts decide. He feels that the government must be backed by the Constitution. He is quite willing to take on the EX VEEP because the man is mired in the past. The ex Veep's dark past is just that -- deeply dark and disturbing. The worst of him is gone now because he is powerless, though not without influence. He will eventually sputter out of the limelight. America is looking to the future, and honoring its beginnings. It is no contest; POTUS will win. Our best times have already begun.


[Post date - May 22, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics national security obama cheney

What is with this economy?

When President Barack Obama came into office in January, the economies in the U.S. and much of the rest of the world were in shambles. At the end of 100 days in office the President had instituted a huge corporate bailout program and pumped funds into the U.S. economy. He has started to answer that old riddle, "How do you eat an elephant?"

President Obama began work on the beast. Now, almost four months later the economy feels different. It may not BE significantly different, but there are signs that the financial plunge is bottoming out. Don't take my word for it. The Financial Times' in depth feature, Global Economy, headlined "Downturn bottomed out," and that the "World discovers it is still breathing."

While candidate Barack Obama was campaigning for office the Bush administration continued to run up the federal budget deficits. President Obama promised to trim out wasteful, unneeded and ineffective fat from his budget. Although this administration's initial efforts results are modest, according to a recent Washington Post story, "Obama's budget knife yields modest trims," it is at least started. Summarizing Lori Montgomery and Amy Goldstein's conclusion:

President Obama has said for weeks that his staff is scouring the federal budget, "line by line," for savings. Today, they will release the results: a plan to trim 121 programs by $17 billion, a tiny fraction of next year's $3.4 trillion budget.

President Obama's budget deficit problem remains as an easy target for Republican criticism. But there is another budget balancing effort that recently emerged. The President wants the business community's most lucrative tax breaks to be closed. Congressional Quarterly carried an excellent story recently that explained: "Tax plan calls for corporate hikes." Author Joseph Schatz begins,

The more the business community sees of the Obama administration’s tax plans, the less it likes.

As the White House completed its multipart budget release Monday with fresh details on a plan to scale back tax advantages for businesses operating overseas, a proposed tax hike on the life insurance industry and a bid to eliminate an unintended tax break claimed by paper companies, industry groups pushed back with forceful rhetoric, trying to convince lawmakers that President Obama’s tax agenda is bad for business.

President Obama introduced the idea of a "new economic foundation" (since been modified into "the five pillars") for the country at a speech at Georgetown University in mid April. That same day he discussed with the New York Times Magazine writer David Leonhardt, how his policies on schools, energy and health care might change daily life in America. Leonhardt's great 6-page, well-footnoted story, "After the Great Recession," is described by the author:

This was our third interview about the economy, the first two occurring during last year’s campaign. And while the setting was decidedly more formal this time — the Oval Office — the interview felt as conversational as those earlier ones. We sat at the far end of the office from his desk and spoke for 50 minutes. None of his economic advisers were there. As the conversation progressed, Obama spoke in increasingly personal terms. What follows is a lightly edited transcript of that interview.

At the end of our conversation, when I asked him if he was reading anything good, he said he had become sick enough of briefing books to begin reading a novel in the evenings — “Netherland,” by Joseph O’Neill.

President Obama knew the first day he was in office that his main focus had to be on the economic problems that looked so completely huge and insurmountable. Wall Street was undone. Main street was hurting in profound ways. So the Obama administration started to work. Congress went to work also. What has emerged is a somewhat different fiscal situation than when they started. Wall Street thinks it has been saved, but credit remains largely frozen and Main Street is seen as the way for banks to make a profit. To remedy that the President wants to be able to sign legislation instituting tighter credit card regulations by Memorial Day. Thus President Obama is still at work "eating the elephant, one bite at a time."

Reference: ProPublica's "Eye on the Bailout," a dynamic chart that follows the $1.1 Trillion Taxpayer-Funded Bailout

[Post date - May 15, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics economic crisis obama administration

Disappointed in the administration

President Barack Obama gets high approval ratings for his job perforamnce. And many Democrats share that opinion. I count myself among them, usually. But as a progressive, I feel it is only balanced to post a few less than rosy evaluations of how the administration is doing. The stories with quotes are listed in chronological order.

Former Marine General James Jones is President Obama's national security adviser. I have always liked him, and admired his candor and honesty. But some are saying that he is not like the usual Obama team members in this cut from Politico.com: "Reporters have a Jones for NSC profiles,"" (5/8/09). To quote:

Readers of The New York Times and The Washington Post opened their papers Thursday to find strikingly similar articles about President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, retired four-star Marine Gen. James L. Jones Jr. Funny coincidence — coming seemingly at random after 108 days in office. The stories, which featured some of the same anecdotes, weren’t pegged to any particular event or policy but, rather, focused on his management style.

. . . For weeks, Democratic insiders had been buzzing that Jones was strangely absent from key meetings, leaving to deputies the "staffing" of Obama — the delicate task of sitting with the president and shepherding national security meetings, large and small.

. . . Chatter like that could have led to a broader perception on Capitol Hill and with the public at large that Jones is ineffectual or out of the loop. So what looked on the surface like a publicity offensive by Jones on Thursday was likely more of a publicity defensive — an effort to contain a PR brushfire before it becomes a blaze.

One of the marks of the selection process for Obama appointees has been the controversy over their difficulties with the vetting process. One reason is that the standards set were very high, and another was the administration's willingness to make exceptions for people they really wanted. Get the lates facts from investigative journalism nonprofit, ProPublica: "Dig into more Obama admin. financial disclosures," (5/6/09). To quote:

What do you learn from reading these disclosures? You get a firsthand look at who is running government agencies and crafting new regulation. Lawrence Summers, director of President Barack Obama's National Economic Council, made millions speaking to banks that recently got bailed out. Assistant Treasury Secretary Alan Krueger received a book advance of at least $180,000 (plus royalties). Not all White House staffers live cushy lives outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is still paying off a $200,000 debt for his children's college expenses.

The reality is that President Obama and candidate Obama had to have been thinking about nominees to the Supreme Court almost from the beginning. And there is nothing wrong with that. But now the opportunity has arrived and we see this from CQ Politics: "Posturing on Supreme Court pick continues; no selection likely this week," (5/5/09). To quote:

In timing his first nomination to the nation’s highest court, President Obama is balancing competing political imperatives: He needs to wait long enough that key senators in both parties feel that he seriously entertained their suggestions and weighed their advice. But waiting too long would give his conservative critics the opportunity to mobilize and to attack potential candidates pre-emptively — making it more difficult for the Senate to confirm a new justice prior to the August recess.

President Obama is turning around an ocean liner that has been captained by lobbyists for far too long, as he tries to "change the ways things are done in Washington." But one does not make such a huge u-turn rapidly as we learn in another story from ProPublica: "In the stimulus bill, one zoo stands above all others," (5/4/09). To quote,

The economic stimulus law explicitly bans state and local governments from spending stimulus money on zoos. But it makes no mention of the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., where Luke and Soyono live.

. . . Despite multiple restrictions and cuts to appease budget hawks, federal and local officials have found ways to fund projects that were criticized during the congressional debate.

Creating jobs is at the heart of the first big legislation passed by the 111th Congress. The promises made regarding the Stimulus Package job creation are examined in another piece from ProPublica, "Fact-checking Obama on that job count," (5/1/09). To quote:

In President Barack Obama’s news conference [1] on Wednesday night, he said the $787 billion economic stimulus bill has already created or saved over 150,000 jobs. We decided to find out how the president arrived at that figure.

The simple answer: guesswork. It turns out the feds don’t have a way to measure exactly how many jobs have been created or saved, so they use projections instead, and it’s all rather academic.

Progressives are perhaps as hard on the President as are Republican right-wingers, though in a very different way. Here is an example from liberal Mother Jones Magazine: "Obama Sides With Banks accused of Racism," (4/7/09). To quote:

At the end of April, the Obama administration will go before the US Supreme Court to argue that those banks—including bailout recipients Bank of America, Citi, Wells Fargo, and JPMorgan Chase—should be allowed to duck a state investigation into their lending practices.

. . . Instead, the banks will be defended by the office of Obama's new solicitor general, former Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan, whom some conservatives have branded a "radical leftist" because of her record opposing military recruitment on college campuses.

President Obama's positions on accountability for the torture practiced by the previous administration, along with his failure to fix the civil liberties losses in the warrantless wiretapping program, are perhaps most difficult for Progressives and liberals to swallow since he was sworn in. One of our blogger favorites,"emptywheel"'s post is just one of hundreds of examples of such criticism: "Tell us how the signing statements were used," (3/9/09). To quote:

Obama says he will use signing statements, "with caution and restraint" (whatever that means).

. . . Which signing statements have executive officials been using? The one overriding the McCain amendment prohibiting torture? The one telling Congress to feck off in its requests for data on the uses and abuses of the PATRIOT Act? Or my personal favorite, the one saying that, even though Congress cut off funding for such things, the Administration could still use funds to data mine American citizens?

Really. I'm glad Obama is promising all this "caution and restraint." But aren't we owed some accounting for how these have been used in the last eight years?

Though I am sometimes disappointed in the Obama administration I am generally awed, admiring, amazed and pleased by how well he has done so far. So my little digest of criticism is at and end now, and I will probably not do a similar one again very soon.

[Post date - May 8, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics obama administration leadership

Dealing with personnel change -

New job duties -- There are a lot of changes in Washington these days. Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa), will have a different position on the opposite side of the aisle. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius attended her first cabinet meeting this morning. Key positions in her department are still vacant, along with several in the Justice Department. Supreme Court Justice David Souter (surprise liberal) is retiring in June. Speculation about his replacement is already ramping up, along with the Republicans' potential opposition tactics.

New challenges --With personnel changes come opportunities for their majority party Democratic bosses. But there is no question who is leading the nation. President Obama has both influence and authority in generous proportions*. And he is staffing his administration with personnel who are very smart and competent. And, no doubt, the next Supreme Court Justice will be chosen with the same kind of principled skill as the President had exhibited since taking office.

New people will be taking over Senator Specter's former Republican committee jobs. Many Republicans are not willing to deal with their new national party chairman, Michael Steele. A new Republican body is getting into gear for finding the new direction for the future. And a myriad of unofficial Republican leaders change power-up or power-down positions weekly.

New pressures -- Majority Leader Harry Reid will have a huge challenge, in my opinion, if he insists on putting Senator Specter in a key chairmanship in the front of a line of long-serving Democrats. The morning after being sworn in, Secretary Sebelius was forced in front of the cameras with Secretary Nanapolitano by her boss, to guide the nation through a threatened flu pandemic. Attorney General Eric Holder will probably be tasked by his boss to "vett" the possible Supreme Court appointees. And when the new justice comes on the court Chief Justice Roberts will be in charge of a completely "new" court, in terms of its dynamics.

New shifts -- With the steep losses suffered by Republicans, their leaders are faced with very different challenges. There are too few leaders and too many would-be leaders from among those who have no business there. Too many Republicans aspire to lead by influence rather than the authority of an actual position. Those left in authority who are not good leaders will be swept aside in the scrambles, losing the loyalty of those who should be following them. Divided and demoralized, their bosses must inspire their followers to unite around common goals, learning in the process to become the "loyal opposition."

New organization -- The cohort continues to shrink. And those losses are a reality is risking our country's well-being. So I am glad the old heads are gathering together to offer leadership to "The National Council for a New America," and fractious House Minority Whip Eric Cantor should be recognized for starting the process.

New personnel always challenge their bosses, not on purpose but because they are new. Once they have been hired and go through orientation, they need to feel welcomed and accepted in the organization. It is up to the President/CEO and the community representatives/board of directors to set the tone for taking in new people. It is yet another leadership capacity that the Democrats seem to have, and the Republicans seem to have lost. In a way I feel for them.

*Bonus feature from The Huffington Post: "300 Photos From Obama's First 100 Days: Behind The Scenes"

[post date - 5/1/09]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject. Making Good Mondays is about ancient imagery today. Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics change government leadership

Speaking up --

Congressional give-and-take with Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been successful in advancing the President's agenda, Shailagh Murray reported at the Washington Post a few days ago. Just prior to working on the 2010 budget resolution, 46 legislators came to the White House to meet with Emanuel. "On April 2 Emanuel's hospitality paid off," said Murray. All but 3 of his visitors voted for the measure. She explained further: "The White House legislative strategy blends Obama's vision and salesmanship with Emanuel's granular political expertise and deal-making skills."

Second-guessing the President's words -- Robert Schlesinger opines that, in his most recent economic speech, President Obama should have chosen a different concept than "new foundation" to illustrate how he wants to fix the economy. The author reminded us that the phrase was used unsuccessfully in the Jimmy Carter administration, and was discarded three days later. The post was found in the US News and World Report of 4/14/09.

Intergovernmental give and take -- “Over 700 Federal employees, contractors, academicians and interested members of the public have mounted a campaign to enhance collaboration, knowledge and learning in the Federal Government,” according to Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News. Additionally, "The initiative is developing its policy proposals along with educational and promotional materials on a public wiki site hosted by NASA."

Watching his words -- Aftergood also reports on a Presidential memo issued last month. President Obama said, "“If scientific and technological information is developed and used by the Federal Government, it should ordinarily be made available to the public,” according to a new memorandum on “Scientific Integrity” that was issued by President Obama on March 9. The president also promised to limit the use of signing statements, and to “make clear the nature and basis of the constitutional objection.” Also, this story appeared recently on Wired-Threat Level: "Legal Scholar: Obama Breaking Promise for Online Transparency (4/14/09).

Words don't always matter -- Former Vice President Dick Cheney's recently stated assertion, that President Obama's actions have increased the chances of a terrorist attack, fell mostly on deaf ears according to a (4/13) public opinion poll by CNN. To quote: "Seventy-two percent of those questioned in the poll released Monday disagree with Cheney's view that some of Obama's actions have put the country at greater risk, with 26 percent agreeing with the former vice president."

The power of words is illustrated in a slightly different way in a section of Thursday's CQ - Behind the Lines newsletter, by David C. Morrison:

Holy Wars: Obama pledges that the United States “is not and will never be at war with Islam,” but it has forcibly overthrown, and attempted to overthrow, Muslim governments perceived as hostile, a Countercurrents essay counters. “The Obama administration’s attempts to change the language in order to appease Islam ignores the fact that there is a significant body of Muslims who want to do America harm,” OneNewsNow quotes a “Christian” political scientist. “Though it’s not de rigueur to make such an observation, ‘Muslim terrorists’ is the right way to” characterize the Somali ship hijackers and it “makes eminent sense” to point that out, The National Review notes. “We know rationally that the extremists and jihadis form a tiny minority among the billion Muslims across the globe, [but we] need an image of good Muslims to offset the bad,” Deepak Chopra counsels in a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed.

President Obama has repeatedly stated that he wants people around him who will speak their own minds. That standard has served him well. Choosing very smart people who can speak out, and at the same time collaborate, will help Mr. Obama govern. The President generally speaks up for himself, choosing his words thoughtfully. He is a great "teacher," able to be plain-spoken when necessary. And we trust him and take his word for promises made. Broken promises can break our hearts. And we trust that his biggest decisions will keep us safe, despite what former officials claim. And finally we can celebrate that we live in a free country where people can speak up, even if they turn out to be wrong.

[Post 4/18/09].

My all-in-one Home Page of websites where I post regularly: Carol Gee - Online Universe

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics obama communication

OLC torture memos revealed - an overview

[4/17/09]

Image via Wikipedia

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder should be given a great deal of credit for releasing the latest memos produced by the Bush Office of Legal Counsel, to the American Civil Liberties Union. Glenn Greenwald makes this point strongly in his first post following the release of the mostly unredacted material. It contains a number of excerpts from the memos with interesting points about each. He and many others were unsure at the start of the day what the President would do, given the huge fight going on within the administration. Greenwald is sharply critical of the administration's decision not to prosecute however, pointing to an inability to reconcile certain basic principles of the rule of law, treaty obligations, etc.

President Obama's written statement upon the release of the memos, is included in Firedoglake blogger, emptywheel's post, which adds to the discussion and reflections on the lack of accountability for the wrong-doing. She makes a couple of useful points about the release: "The ICRC report may have made a difference in this fight. . . No mention of who wrote these memos. . ." And Wheeler closes with this: "If we're a nation of laws, then we cannot let those who have broken the laws to go unpunished. That's not retribution. That's what 'nation of laws' means."

More from emptywheel -- A further point made by this outstanding investigative writer, who labels the OLC memos "erroneous and inflammatory assumptions, and John Rizzo's lies," is that the OLC memos should not be taken as authoritative regarding the events surrounding the interrogation program. For example, the section on the supposed mental health of Abu Zubaydah is patently wrong. Also the ICRC report contradicts the section on the frequency and harshness of the use of sleep deprivation. Another post links to the ACLU website that has the original memos (in pdf) posted, and reminds us that the ACLU lawsuit was what freed up the memos from the DOJ in the first place.

Here is the latest on the torture memos from the investigative journalism organization, ProPublica:
1) Newly Released Memo Inadvertently Reveals CIA Held and Abused Missing Prisoner.
2) Obama Promises to Defend Interrogators, But No Promise on the Bush Lawyers Who Signed Off.
3) Resource: The Missing Memos

References: Following are several authoritative and complete articles on the story of the release of these OLC memos:

• "Interrogation memos detail harsh tactics by the C.I.A," by Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane of the New York Times (4/16/09). An earlier NYT story: "Memos reveal scope of the power Bush sought in fighting terror," by Neil Lewis (4/3/09).
• "Obama Releasing Four Torture Memos," by Zachary Roth at TPM Muckraker (4/16/09). Includes a good AP overview along with the official statements of the President and the Department of Justic
  
• "Obama says no prosecutions, no 'laying blame' for interrogation techniques," is by Keith Perine and Seth Stern of the Congressional Quarterly-Politics website (4/16/09).
• "Obama Releases Torture Memos, Vows Not to Prosecute," by David Kravets from Wired-Threat Level (4/16/09).

See also Behind the Links, for further info on scandals and excesses.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics obama

Standing on the shoulders of those before us --

[4/10/09]

Image of NATO via Wikipedia

Like all leaders before him, President Barack Obama has been shaped by those who came before him. Their leadership styles, the controversies that caught up with them, the assessments of how they operated, the alliances to which they were loyal, their capacities to have a global view and take global responsibilities seriously -- all these elements made them either good international leaders or not. This post is an overview of the President's first big trip abroad with the above items in mind. I begin with Madeleine Albright, who helped Obama during his campaign.

American leadership abroad -- Albright to Obama: The Audacity to Hope for Usefulness - Washington Whispers(usnews.com). To quote:

It was a simple message from one author to another. When Madeleine Albright gave President Obama a copy of her book, Memo to the President Elect: How We Can Restore America's Reputation and Leadership , she left him a clever note. "I inscribed it to him, 'With the audacity to hope that this book will be useful,' " Albright said. "Be useful or be read?" kidded Ambassador Karl F. Inderfurth, who moderated a conversation with Albright last night at George Washington University. And while the president may not have Albright's tome on his nightstand, some of the first things Obama accomplished as president were very similar to her recommendations, and the recommendations of other foreign policy pros.

Obama the rationalist -- Reflecting on the President's homecoming, John Harris and Eamon Javers at Politico have written an interesting analysis of the Obama thinking style as it emerged during the trip. To quote:

As Barack Obama returns from Europe on Tuesday, he has in bright, bold strokes revealed his signature on the world stage: He is Obama the rationalist.

A diverse set of Obama decisions in recent days have a common theme: a leader who sees himself building a more orderly, humane world by vanquishing outdated thinking and corrupting ideology.

With a rapid series of major announcements and rhetorical gestures, the new president has done more than turn from Bush-era policies. He has shined a vivid light on his philosophical outlook on the world — and how starkly he differs from his predecessor on basic beliefs about power, diplomacy and even human nature.

"Obama the visionary: end nukes, admit Turkey to the European Union," is how Juan Cole of Informed Comment defines President Obama. Cole said, "Barack Obama continues to shake up the world with his new ideas, demonstrating himself again among the more creative and bold leaders the world has seen in the past half-century." President Obama visited Turkey after attending a celebration of the 60th Anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Matthew M. Johnson of Congressional Quarterly has written a very interesting analysis of the "hazy future of the Atlantic Alliance." Before meeting with NATO and visiting Turkey, President Obama attended the G-20 meeting.

G-20 Meeting in the United Kingdom -- Is the outcome "a new world order, as Gordon Brown termed it?" What its implications for the world's poor? The Washington Note assessed it as "good for the developing world, though the stimulus was not addressed." The Financial Times has a very good in-depth piece that reports on the question, saying that harmony was the main item on the agenda. See also President Obama's interview with the Financial Times, his first with a foreign paper. It was a fine balance for the President to strike.

President Obama comes home to mini religious controversies. There was a bit of talk that some people were miffed because they did not get an invitation to the White House tonight for the first Passover Seder ever to be held there. US News and World Report has all the details about the occasion. The most visible conflict is over his invitation to speak at Notre Dame's commencement exercises. A letter to the editor at US News (4/9/09) calls it an "uproar." President Obama will attend Easter services in Washington , D.C., not necessarily the one he will join permanently, aids say.

President Barack Obama, helped by those before him, has a leadership style that is becoming apparent. Few serious controversies have caught him and the assessments of how he operated have been generally positive. The old alliances are getting to know the new president, with his outstanding capacities to have a global view and take global responsibilities seriously. All these elements could make Barack Obama a good international leaders or not. He will need more good help and some luck along the way.

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics foreign policy europe

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.K. sets bold summit agenda (money.cnn.com)
• Memo From Paris: NATO Struggles With Conflicting Views on Russia (nytimes.com)