Tomorrow's NYT on Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal

The article makes clear that President Obama decided months ago that 2010 was going to be the year to repeal DADT. Which makes it all the more troubling that the Pentagon is clearly trying to derail the President's plan by suddenly calling for yet another study that will delay the repeal for years. Read More......

The stimulus

From Ezra Klein at the Post:

The story on the stimulus is similarly depressing. At its base, the stimulus is Keynesian economics in practice. A recession hits, and individuals and businesses become scared that they're next on the chopping block, so they stop spending and start saving to protect themselves from the hard times to come. That drains demand from the economy, and without demand, the hard times get even harder. Government is the only player able to disrupt this vicious cycle. By sharply increasing its spending, it can generate demand, improving the economy until individuals and businesses are comfortable reentering the marketplace.

Key to this whole theory is that the government should act "counter-cyclically": In good times, it should save and store, and in bad times, it should spend and borrow. The exact opposite holds true for businesses and individuals, which makes the whole project pretty unintuitive.

Students in macroeconomics classes learn all this in the first week of September. After a year of trying to explain it to an economically distressed nation, however, Obama basically gave up. Instead, he bowed before the entrenched, incorrect, conventional wisdom. "Families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions," he said. "The federal government should do the same.

Well, no. It shouldn't. The government should not tighten its belt until the people can loosen theirs. That's why the stimulus was a good idea, and why Obama is asking Congress for another stimulus, although this one's being called a "jobs bill." But the stimulus proved almost impossible to explain, and it was far too small, given the size of the recession. As a result, people are very worried about jobs, and they're very worried about deficits, and instead of trying to convince them that deficits make good sense until job growth is back to normal, the administration is trying to appease those fears so it can get on with the rest of its agenda.

I don't think the Obama administration tried hard enough, or smartly enough, or long enough to explain the necessity of the stimulus, or the bail outs for that matter. I've been complaining for almost a year now that they weren't fighting hard enough to promote, and then defend, the stimulus. It's not that the American people are inherently stupid. But in a vacuum, they'll believe the only idiot talking, even if he's a Republican who's spinning a lie. Read More......

Is haggling destroying the economy?

The Post has an interesting read on haggling. As I've mentioned before, I love to haggle from time to time and see nothing wrong with it at all. In the comments section of the article I was floored to read the negative reactions against haggling. Some say it's a bad use of time, which I agree, it can be if you spend more than a minute or two on it. My haggling in Paris is fairly brief compared to say, my haggling in Tunis or Hanoi, where it can go on and on. If it's a substantial purchase, even 10% can make a difference. In the case of my bike, it was enough savings to add in a few biking accessories on the spot. Did anyone really lose there?

Another funny and incredibly silly comment was that it was taking money out of the pockets of the sales people. As a person who has made commission from sales for a few decades, the thought never once crossed my mind. Every deal that I've done eventually ends up with a purchasing director and guess what they do? They negotiate. The corporate world pays purchasing people very well to negotiate deals. They often receive substantial bonuses in addition to their salary that is based on the savings for the company. Would I rather sell at full list? Of course. But like anyone, I'd also rather have a deal in my pocket instead of the customer going to the next shop. How much is 7% or 9% commission on $0 because the client shopped elsewhere?

It's not clear why negotiating on a corporate level is acceptable and a standard part of the process yet if an individuals asks for something, it's killing the free market system. Isn't that what the free market is supposed to be about or has that idea gone away during the Republican trashing of the American economy? It's similar to the debate with health care/Big Pharma. It's normal for them to negotiate hard with vendors selling to them (as I know from experience) but to ask them to negotiate with a buyer (the government) is somehow out of bounds and offensive. Huh?

There are always going to be time wasters no matter what but is adding an extra thirty seconds or a minute or two to the process really so awful? So what if it's "only" $15 from a $150 sale. I didn't hear any of the commenters offering to hand over $15 even though it's supposedly nothing. Is it really so bad asking? Your money is your money so why would you want to give it away so easily? Our old bank charged us a fee for something that turned out to be their mistake. When they snatched our money for the penalty, it was normal and acceptable. When we complained and showed how it was their fault, the bank manager dismissed it as a "small fee so why bother?" Fine, give me the "small fee" out of your pocket then. I think that's the day we canceled our account and changed banks.

If you don't want to haggle, don't, but don't be mad with others who care about their hard earned money. Read More......

Krugman calls FOX News 'deliberate misinformation' to Roger Ailes' face

It really is sick that an organization like FOX even exists. Even sicker is having to explain to conservatives the difference between FOX and CNN, or FOX and the NYT. They quite literally don't get the difference between trying to be objective and trying to be Republican. To paraphrase something a friend said years ago about a different topic, FOX is lucky that we don't live in the kind of country it's trying to create, because it would be the first to go.


(Hat tip FDL) Read More......

Obama's bank tax gaining steam elsewhere

Now that the probable next PM of the UK is in agreement with the current regime, it should be a lot easier to bring others onboard as well. The bankers are all screaming though for the rest, questions still remain if this is even enough. After all, everyone saved them from crashing on the rocks which enabled them to hand out massive bonuses. If nothing else, it's a start.

Both David Cameron and Alistair Darling expressed support for Barack Obama's proposals to force banks to pay into a fund that would provide compensation in the event of the failure of a financial institution.

Cameron said at the World Economic Forum summit at Davos that he thought a so-called Tobin tax was unworkable because of a lack of international support, but said he would back an insurance levy if he became prime minister in this spring's election. "We would work for a new international levy on banks – one of the ideas being considered by the IMF – to protect the taxpayer from footing the bill for banking crises," the Conservative leader said.

The chancellor said he was working with the US on a permanent insurance levy, an idea the Treasury believes will win more support than a Tobin tax. "We are keen to work on a plan on this with other countries," Darling added.

Read More......

Sunday Talk Shows Open Thread

Good morning.

The Sunday shows will undoubtedly be consumed with the week that was. And, it won't be just the State of the Union. Several GOP House leaders, including John Boehner on NBC and Paul Ryan on FOX, will be trying to spin themselves out of the thrashing they got from Obama on Friday.

The White House has dispatched Axelrod to NBC and Gibbs to CNN. Be great if those two can confirm that we'll see more of the Obama we saw this past week. We'd like our President to be a leader -- a leader who keeps his promises and fights for what he believes. That's not too much to ask.

As the guest host of "This Week," Barbara Walters has the "get" of the weekend. She has the first interview of Scott Brown. I saw an ABC ad for the show, which also promoted a smackdown between Arianna Huffington and Roger Ailes from FOX News. Now, I'd bet on Arianna any day. But, why the hell is ABC giving a platform to FOX and its propaganda?

Full lineup is here. Read More......

Hey, it's the neighbor on TV

A few years ago a new neighbor moved in to the building. Anytime we bump into him, he's always quite friendly and very mild mannered. Talking with neighbors is not done quite as much here but from what we understand, he's also an actor. Last year our neighbors upstairs mentioned that they saw the neighbor on TV but we didn't imagine this. Read More......

UK climate secretary fights back against deniers

Maybe, but talking about science might be a little too radical. And of course, fighting can be so risky and we really don't do risk. The Guardian:

The perceived failure of global talks on combating climate change in Copenhagen last month has also been blamed for undermining public support. But in the government's first high-level recognition of the growing pressure on public opinion, Miliband declared a "battle" against the "siren voices" who denied global warming was real or caused by humans, or that there was a need to cut carbon emissions to tackle it.

"It's right that there's rigour applied to all the reports about climate change, but I think it would be wrong that when a mistake is made it's somehow used to undermine the overwhelming picture that's there," he said.

"We know there's a physical effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leading to higher temperatures, that's a question of physics; we know CO2 concentrations are at their highest for 6,000 years; we know there are observed increases in temperatures; and we know there are observed effects that point to the existence of human-made climate change. That's what the vast majority of scientists tell us."

Read More......

Frank Rich on the SOTU and where Obama goes from here

Frank Rich in the NYT:

[Obama] must be less foggy on the specifics of what that agenda is. Though on Wednesday night he asked Congress to “take another look” at the health care bill, even now it’s unclear what he believes that bill’s bedrock provisions should be. He also said he wouldn’t sign any financial regulatory bill that “does not meet the test of real reform,” yet tentatively praised a House bill compromised by a banking lobby that is in bed with Democrats and Republicans alike. The Senate, of course, has yet to produce any financial reform bill.

Americans like Obama far more than they like any Congressional leader. They might even like more of his policies if he spelled them out. But none of that matters if no Democrat fears him enough to do any of his bidding and no Republican believes there’s any price to be paid for always saying no.

Read More......

Feed Me Bubbe

I'm a complete sucker for family cooking and stories about sweet old grannies. The Boston Globe has a nice article about the the 83 year old granny (Bubbe, in Yiddish) who has a fun cooking website. I jumped over to the site that she has with her grandson and loved the cholent recipe. (I'm also a complete sucker for stews.) A few years ago Joelle and I kept returning to a tasty Kosher restaurant in Jerusalem that had family cooking from Morocco and North Africa. If only I could remember the name or get their recipes. Family style restaurants can often be so good, with great atmosphere.

As for Bubbe, have fun going through the recipes. It's just like cooking with family. Read More......

Old England ate pretty well at the theater

The food options at the old theaters in London sound pretty high end compared to what we often see today at many theaters, cinemas or stadiums. I might opt out of oysters following my recent battles with them but the rest sounds tasty. Archeologists will probably discover completely intact hot dogs when they dig in 400 hears.

The preferred snacks for Tudor theatre-goers appear to have been oysters, crabs, cockles, mussels, periwinkles and whelks, as well as walnuts, hazelnuts, raisins, plums, cherries, dried figs and peaches.

Some clues even suggest that 16th-century fans of William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe also ploughed through vast quantities of elderberry and blackberry pie – and some may even have snacked on sturgeon steaks.

The evidence has emerged from the most detailed study ever carried out on a Tudor or early Stuart playhouse. Archaeologists have been analysing the thousands of seeds, pips, stones, nutshell fragments, shellfish remains and fish and animal bones found on the site of the Rose Playhouse on London's South Bank.

Read More......

Not Politics: Should you or shouldn't you turn the heat down at night?

I've been researching this lately, and boy am I getting divergent answers. The repair guy told me the other day, for example, that if you have a heat pump that also has emergency heat (i.e., an expensive-to-use heating coil), it will turn on the heating coil to help the heat pump warm up the house IF the temperature you set the thermostat at is more than 2 degrees over current room temp. So, for that kind of a system, he said not to turn it down at all at night. But I've heard others say that no matter what kind of heat you have, you use just as much energy to heat the place back up as you save letting it cool down at night, but you save energy during the time the home sits at the cooler temp overnight.

So at this point, I have no idea. Do you guys turn the temp down at night over the winter? Does anyone have evidence that this actually saves energy? Does it really depend on what kind of heating system you have? Just curious if we can group-think an answer here in the comments. Thanks. Read More......

Krugman and Ezra have apparently had it with Obama on health care reform

Krugman was over Obama for most of the first year of the Obama presidency, then something happened and he suddenly became a cheerleader for the administration on health care reform. Seems he's now put down the pompons.

As for Ezra Klein, he's always been a bit of an administration cheerleader throughout, so to see him becoming depressed about the president, and the prognosis for health care reform, is very interesting, and likely indicative of a whole new level of disillusionment with the administration - even the true believers, the remaining true believers, are starting to have serious doubts.

This is not good for Democrats at all. The President did a great job with the State of the Union the other night, and he did an absolutely amazing job taking on the Republicans yesterday at the Q&A; he had with them in Baltimore. But the occasional talk tough isn't enough, and it's not going to turn the President's or the party's prospect around when immediately after the tough talk administration officials start backpeddling.

To answer the age-old question of where the liberal base can possibly go in November if Obama abandons them, yet again: They can simply go home and stay there. Just like they did in Massachusetts. Read More......

Pentagon slow-walking DADT repeal. Will be 'several year process'

Over the past couple days, we've seen conflicting signals about whether Don't Ask, Don't Tell will be repealed "this year" as Obama led us to believe in the State of the Union.

The day after Obama's speech, Eugene Robinson stated on MSNBC that a White House official told him the repeal probably would not happen this year.

Via a report from the Associated Press, we learned today that the Pentagon thinks the repeal will be a "several-year process." Even worse, the Pentagon is going to do another study (a "special investigation") on this issue.

Obama promised to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He's the Commander-in-Chief. He tells the Pentagon to do it faster and stop delaying the process. And, it's a very bad idea to leave the details to Congress.

Yesterday, Obama showed real leadership when he faced down the House GOP caucus. He needs to be that leader across the board. And, the repeal of DADT is one issue that is demanding it. Remember, "It's the right thing to do":

Don't forget, until it's done: Don't Ask, Don't Give. Read More......

Saturday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

We're under a "Weather Winter Advisory" Winter Storm Warning as of 10:07 a.m. in D.C. No snow as of 8:30 a.m. The salt trucks are out, which is helpful to drivers, but not so great for the paws of our dogs. We're only getting 2 - 4 inches 4 - 6 inches of snow here. Pam Spaulding reports there's already 7 inches of snow in Durham, NC and now they're getting sleet.

KarenMrsLloydRichards again delivered excellent and biting commentary on the week via her haikus. Here's one for James O'Keefe, who has been ordered by a judge to live with his parents:

Me, take out the trash?!
I'm a shit hot player, mom:
I brought down ACORN!

And, one for the Joint Chiefs:

The Joint Chiefs of Staff:
Fig leaves made of white knuckles
Against gay attacks!

The pundits and talking heads are still agog over Obama's performance at the GOP House Issues Conference yesterday. We'll be hearing about it for awhile. And, as hard as those GOPers try to spin it, Obama won the day. Big. And, we need to see more of THAT Obama.

What's going on this weekend? Read More......

How to report the news

So true. If it was Fox, they'd probably try to somehow add in a slam against the Democrats. It wouldn't even have to fit in any way because the viewers wouldn't notice or care.

Beautiful day over here with sunshine and temperatures in the mid 30's. Hopefully this means biking in an hour or two. Read More......

Blair has 'no regrets'

What else is he really going to say, but it's still disgusting to hear. During his testimony he stuck to his same old points, though did update the argument to blame Iran for many problems. As if Iran should somehow not been part of the equation in the first place. Maybe his deep discussions with Bush failed to ever kick around the idea of a power vacuum. Obviously because the world has never, ever experienced such a situation before.

A few protesters called him a "liar and a murderer" at the end and thankfully, Blair was no longer able to have the British police arrest them and charge them with a violation of the anti-terror laws as we witnessed a few years ago.

Tony Blair ended an epic six-hour inquisition by the Chilcot inquiry last night by insisting he had "no regrets" over toppling Saddam Hussein, arguing that the world was more secure and that Iraq has replaced "the certainty of suppression" with "the uncertainty of democratic politics".

The former prime minister blamed "the very near failure of the Iraqi occupation" on Iranian interference, misplaced assumptions and a lack of US troops.

During the long-awaited cross-examination, he gave no substantial ground over why he sent 40,000 UK troops to war to disarm Saddam of weapons he did not possess, arguing that if the west had backed off Saddam would have reassembled them, as he had the intent and ability to do so. "I had to take this decision as prime minister. It was a huge responsibility then and there is not a single day that passes by that I do not think about that responsibility, and so I should," Blair said.

Read More......

Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad may be based on falsehood, power lawyer alleges

His mom "chose" not to have an abortion in a country in which abortion was illegal anyway, according to attorney Gloria Allred:

Despite resistance from women's groups, the ad is expected to air during the Super Bowl. It is believed that the commercial will focus on Pam Tebow's 1987 pregnancy, during which time she fell ill in the Philippines. According to reports, doctors recommended that she abort the pregnancy, but she chose to go through with the birth of her son Tim.

Tebow grew up to be one of the most accomplished and celebrated stars in college football history, capturing two national championships and becoming the first sophomore to win the Heisman trophy.

Because abortion under any circumstance has been illegal in the Philippines since 1930 and is punishable by a six-year prison term, Allred says she finds it hard to believe that doctors would have recommended the procedure.

The attorney, who has represented a roster of famous clients, claims she will lodge a complaint with the FCC and FTC "if this ad airs and fails to disclose that abortions were illegal at the time Ms. Tebow made her choice," according to RadarOnline.

The religious right is behind the ad, and we all know how fast and loose the religious right can be with the truth. Read More......

Sour grapes

Waah!

[M]any of the Republicans in attendance were less conciliatory, accusing Obama of coming to their conference for the purpose of scoring political points – exactly the kind of cynical ploy he accused them of.

"His purpose was to talk to the American people...but I think the American people will see through it...and that he continues to push forward with proposals with which they strenuously disagree," said Tom Price (R-Ga.), chairman of the Republican Study Group. "[W]hen he says he's not an ideologue, the chuckles in the room were only compounded by the chuckles across the land,” he added.

Read More......

Bank sues customer who was victim of $800,000 cyber theft

Only in Texas. Read More......

Stiglitz talks regulation and income redistribution at Davos

Unfortunately CNBC hasn't enabled the video for embedding, but if you follow the link, you can watch the five minute discussion. He always makes so much sense when he talks yet for some reason, the White House keeps siding with Wall Street instead. One very interesting tidbit from the interview is when he talks about the median income in the US dropping 4% in the last decade. Wow. The only changes with distribution of wealth in the US has been squeezing the middle and the poor to the advantage of the wealthiest Americans. Even then, somehow the Democrats have managed to lose that debate to the Republicans who scream "socialism."

Critics of increased regulation for banks said this would stifle innovation, but Stiglitz argued that it is difficult to see how the innovative banking products in the past 10 years helped society.

"You ask what was the social value of the CDO squares? They were doing things we should have known were stupid," he said.

A CDO square is a derivative where a collaterlized debt obligation is used to invest in other collateralized debt obligations.

Exactly. How brilliant was that "innovation" when nobody in senior management had any idea what was going on? The only thing they understood was the bonus money that piled into their bank account. Read More......

The debate we should be having, instead of the spending freeze

I wrote a few days ago about what a silly idea a spending freeze is. We need to be working on getting ourselves out of a recessionary hole and back on a self-sustaining growth path, not cutting the spending that's helping us do just that. The job initiatives the president has proposed are all fine and dandy, but are just a drop in the ocean of 10% unemployment (more than 17% unemployed if you add in discouraged workers and those who are working part time when they would rather have a full time job).

Paul Krugman is right to denounce the freeze as a gimmick, but he should go even further. The gimmick can't even work on its own terms. Even if we think closing the deficit gap is the right policy for January 2010 (which it isn't), a spending freeze won't get us there. The gap is too big for a freeze on just 25% of the total budget -- it will do little more than slow down the rate of increase. Even worse, if we exempt the military, national security, Medicare, Medicaid and interest on the debt from a freeze, we are left with the 25% of the budget that contains almost all of the actual investment that the federal government does. And investment is the key. If we are going to spend money, we should be doing it in ways that increase future productivity. It is great that the president sees the need for investing in education, but there is also a major need for physical investment as well. And while a few miles of bullet train tracks in Florida is a good start, if that is as far as it goes, then it is just one more gimmick.

Republicans and teabaggers are unable to participate in a debate like this because they believe that ALL government spending is wasteful. They compartmentalize the part of their brain that sees the pot-hole ridden roads we drive on, the ports and harbors that our trade flows through, the airports that are increasingly decrepit and crowded, and the Internet infrastructure that lags behind our foreign competitors.

The debate we should be having is over how to make sure a second stimulus gets spent on real investments, rather than tax breaks for people who don't need them and spending on consumption that isn't necessary. We should NOT be debating how to cut non-defense discretionary spending. Read More......

Must see TV: Obama and the GOP

UPDATE: The White House just posted the transcript for the entire meeting.

As I mentioned in the morning open thread, Obama planned to attend the "Issues Conference" of the House GOP Caucus this afternoon. Well, he did. Fortunately for all of us, the parties agreed to allow live coverage of the meeting. CNN covered the whole session (as did MSNBC, although I saw on twitter that FOX cut away early.)

It was very, very compelling television. There's going to be a lot of buzz about this appearance today. I have to say, Obama owned it.

Obama gave opening remarks, then took questions from a lot of GOP Representatives (some of the really nasty ones) including Mike Pence (IN), Jason Chaffetz (UT), Jeb Hensarling (TX), Marsha Blackburn (TN), Tom Price (GA), and Peter Roshkam (IL) among others.

The GOPers asked pretty typical questions. Some of them tried to play "gotcha." Didn't work. Obama answered their questions and provided his own commentary on them. He called Republicans out for their attacks on him. He noted that they've pretty much called his health care plan a "Bolshevik plot." One of the best moments was when Obama dissed Hensarling's question as a recitation of talking points. (UPDATED: Here with Obama's response to Hensarling, which I got from the WH transcript:

Jeb, with all due respect, I've just got to take this last question as an example of how it's very hard to have the kind of bipartisan work that we're going to do, because the whole question was structured as a talking point for running a campaign.

Towards the end, Obama pointed to GOP pollster Frank Luntz, who was sitting in the front row. He noted that when many of the GOP Representatives stand on the House floor to talk issues, Luntz "has already polled it" -- and they get the talking points from him on how to box Obama in. The President kept going back to the theme that the GOPers were in a constant attack mode -- and how that prevented them from being able to work with him.

Obama was impressive. He was on the offense and didn't back down. That's the President we need to see. He looked like a leader -- a very smart leader. Read More......

Orrin Hatch threatens to disrupt Democratic agenda if Democrats actually try to follow through with their agenda

The Republicans have already decided to obstruct the entire Democratic agenda, so what's the incentive to play nice in return? Hatch is a liar. He's complaining that the Democrats better not use the reconciliation process for passing health care reform when Hatch repeatedly supported using reconciliation when the Republicans were in power. Someone official, in the Senate and the White House, needs to step up and call Orrin Hatch a liar. Now. This is how the Republicans win the spin wars. They lie with impunity, they accuse us of doing what they've already done, and Democrats sit back and take it, until the public just assumes it's true. Let's see some leadership from both the Congress and the White House. Read More......

Scott Roeder convicted of murdering abortion doctor George Tiller

Good. Read More......

WH Communications Director: 'With 59 Senators, it is mathematically impossible for Democrats to do everything on their own.'

Found this little gem via Greg Sargent:

And [White House Communications Director] Dan Pfeiffer tells Politico that the White House will step up efforts to spotlight GOP obstructionism, but this quote may irk folks a bit:

“With 59 Senators, it is mathematically impossible for Democrats to do everything on their own."

Some will respond that it’s only mathematically impossible if Dems accept the filibuster as an inevitable fact of life, rather than something that might be campaigned against and changed. But the White House doesn’t appear to have an appetite for doing that.

It irks me. Apparently, the White House accepts the fact that Senate Republicans will filibuster every single legislative item. Or, they accept the fact that the Senate Republicans have no fear of repercussions for obstructing the Democrats' agenda because the President doesn't make them pay a price. Mitch McConnell is putting his political interests above the well-being of the nation. We're in two wars and slowly climbing out of the Great Recession (maybe.) But, there's no price to pay for blocking everything and anything in the Senate. Obama should be picking the GOPers off one-by-one. And, he should spend some time in Maine to let everyone up there know the games that the two alleged Republican moderates are playing with our nation's future.

Thern there are the Democratic obstructionists who not only don't get called out, they get rewarded for their bad behavior. Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu and Joe Lieberman come to mind.

Remember how George Bush whined about the mathematical impossibility of doing anything when he only had 49 GOP Senators for most of the first two years of his first term? I don't either. As John noted earlier this month, during Bush's presidency, the most Republican Senators he had to work with was 55.

On the good news front, Chris Bowers reports that David Axelrod seemed somewhat amenable to efforts to supporting a change in the filibuster rules for the next Congress. Read More......

US proposes 17% emissions cut by 2020

Not a bad start but will the administration actually make an effort to fight for this or will we see the familiar big talk and then fold? The Republicans will no doubt spin this as a cost that's too high for an economy in trouble. Business can't afford it, they will charge. So what about families? Can they afford it? What about their health care costs due to pollution? Why are business costs more important than family costs? If anyone has more cash in their pockets today, it's business. Unless Obama and the Democrats decide to fight, it won't matter.

The United States pledged Thursday to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent by 2020 from 2005 levels under an international climate agreement, though it made its commitment contingent on passing legislation at home.

The Obama administration submitted its much-anticipated reduction target to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat under the Copenhagen Accord, a non-binding deal brokered by the United States last month at the U.N.-sponsored climate talks. Under the deal President Obama helped secure in Copenhagen, major emitters of greenhouse gases are expected to "inscribe" their reduction targets by Jan. 31.

Read More......

Rahm says we'll get to health care reform later

Not sensing that fierce urgency. Mind you, Scott Brown hasn't been seated yet. The Republicans would have taken their 60 seat majority and just passed the bill and be done with it. Yes, several Dems are being a pain. Because they can. Perhaps now would be a good time to teach them a lesson, and set the tone for rebooting the presidency. (H/t Greg Sargent) Read More......

Pentagon already backing off President's promise to repeal DADT this year

Maybe President Gates should have given the State of the Union. Read More......

Friday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Capping off his busy week, Obama is heading to Baltimore today to meet with the House Republicans at their "Issues Conference." The President is committed to bipartisanship. The House Republicans are committed to destroying his agenda. But, this will undoubtedly be a productive meeting with lots of smiles and good photo ops for both sides. They can resume the battle when they're all back in D.C.

Next week is critical for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The President submits his budget to Congress on Monday. That's where Obama can send the signal that he's serious about taking action to repeal the law -- and that's where the repeal language needs to be according to SLDN. Then, the Senate Armed Service Committee's first hearing on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell are scheduled for Tuesday at noon. Chairman Levin promised hearings and he's keeping that promise. We'll have a good sense by Tuesday afternoon of how this is going to play out.

Let's get threading... Read More......

Bernanke approved for second term

How much more change can a person really handle? Was the vote really about "market stability" as some suggested or is it all about maintaining the same status quo that brought us to this crisis in the first place? Somehow it's "populist" (as if that too is a bad word) to be disgusted with this failed system.

Bernanke was completely wrong about the economy even before he was Chairman the first time and he hardly deserves lavish praise for his efforts. Maybe he wasn't Chairman when the crisis was building but there's nothing that suggests he would have acted any differently from Greenspan. Another wasted opportunity to bring the previously discussed (but now missing) change to Washington. Once again, this is why voters think so little of everyone in Congress and the White House.

Bernanke's nomination was approved 70-30 by the Senate after clearling a procedural roadblock with a 77-23 vote. A simple majority of 51 votes in the 100-person chamber was needed for approval.

Senators debating his nomination credited Bernanke with steering the U.S. economy through a wrenching financial crisis but leveled withering criticism at him for policies they argued sowed seeds for the turmoil and for an initial slow response.

Read More......

Bill Gates slams Berlusconi for being stingy

If I can date myself a bit, I remember when Gates was at the top of the stingy list. He was brutalized in the press for making millions (at the time) and holding onto every penny. It took him a while but when he came around, he really came around. Today he does an impressive job with spreading his billions around the world to help those in need. Berlusconi, who is much older, never had an "ah ha" moment when he decided to help make a difference.

"Dear Silvio, I am sorry to make things difficult for you, but you are ignoring the poor people of the world," he told the Frankfurter Rundschau.

And in a clear reference to the notoriously image-conscious Berlusconi, Gates told Süddeutsche Zeitung: "Rich people spend a lot more money on their own problems, like baldness, than they do to fight malaria."

In an annual report issued on Monday by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Italy's aid was listed in 2008 at 0.21% of GDP, compared withthe UK's 0.48%. Italy then decided to halve aid in 2009, which made it "uniquely stingy among European donors", Gates wrote.

Read More......

Hitler isn't loving the iPad

I'm sorry, I just find these Hitler videos a fascinating phenomenon. And yeah, they're cliché, but that's part of what makes them even funnier. Read More......

Poll: Giannoulias only Dem who beats GOP candidate for US Senate race in Illinois

from Taegan:

A new Public Policy Polling survey in Illinois finds Alexi Giannoulias (D) leading Rep. Mark Kirk (R) in the U.S. Senate race, 42% to 34%.

However, Kirk leads the other two candidates, topping Cheryle Jackson, 38% to 36%, and edging David Hoffman, 37% to 36%.

The primary to choose the candidates is next week.

PPP is the polling firm Joe actually trusts. Read More......

Hackers hit Web sites of House members with anti-Obama screeds

There was intense security at the Capitol yesterday in anticipation of the State of the Union. But, there was a vulnerability. Online security was breached. A number of House websites were hacked according to Hotline On Call:

Hackers struck at least 10 House websites overnight, substituting expletives aimed at Pres. Obama just hours after his State of the Union address.

The hackers targeted many House Dem freshmen, including Reps. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Harry Teague (D-NM), John Boccieri (D-OH) and Steve Driehaus (D-OH), as well as at least 5 other more senior Dems and the site owned by GOPers on the House Oversight Committee.

"F--- OBAMA!! Red Eye CREW !!!!! O RESTO E HACKER!!! by HADES; m4V3RiCk; T4ph0d4 -- FROM BRASIL," the messages read.

Read More......

Judd Gregg flips out on MSNBC reporters who ask him what he'd cut in the budget

Put aside for a moment that Gregg is insane if he thinks the economy is out of the woods. And he clearly thinks that. But his treatment of these two reporters is equally insane.

Read More......

Eugene Robinson: Someone at White House said 'probably not this year' for DADT repeal

So not helpful. Read More......

SEC will now require climate change risk details

Very interesting development. As you might imagine, the Republican members rejected the idea. Heaven forbid such a touchy subject be addressed.

The commission, in a 3 to 2 vote, decided to require that companies disclose in their public filings the impact of climate change on their businesses -- from new regulations or legislation they may face domestically or abroad to potential changes in economic trends or physical risks to a company.

Chairman Mary L. Schapiro and the two Democrats on the commission supported the new requirements, while the two Republicans vehemently opposed them.

Read More......

Isn't it illegal to use soldiers as political props?

Rob Diamond over at Huff Post would like to know. So would I. Imagine had a Democrat done this. Read More......

Michele Bachmann pulls out of Teabagger conference

Apparently the entire thing is crashing down. But Palin is still going. Read More......

Obama to lay out plan to repeal DADT in next few weeks, senior adviser says

That's a lot 'o promising going on, the last 24 hours in Obama-land. I think it's great. Doesn't mean I'm convinced it's going to happen. But it does mean they've now given us concrete promises with concrete timetables that we can now hold them accountable to. So this means Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal will be in the budget submission next week? Read More......

Alito's 'You Lie!' moment

Glenn Greenwald explains why this video of Alito, shaking his head and saying "not true" to Obama, during the State of the Union, matters:

On a night when both tradition and the Court's role dictate that he sit silent and inexpressive, he instead turned himself into a partisan sideshow -- a conservative Republican judge departing from protocol to openly criticize a Democratic President -- with Republicans predictably defending him and Democrats doing the opposite. Alito is now a political (rather than judicial) hero to Republicans and a political enemy of Democrats, which is exactly the role a Supreme Court Justice should not occupy.

So did Alito just become a teabagger? Read More......

If we sent the men home, we'd reach a health care reform deal

Maybe in the House. But in the Senate, Olympia Snowe had her chance, and blew it. Then there's Blanche Lincoln. And Susan Collins was being a pain as well. In the House, you can just ignore the likes of Michele Bachmann. In the Senate, the Republican women are no more helpful than the men.

Want to get health care legislation passed in Congress? Send the elected men home, one congresswoman reportedly suggests. Shea-Porter, a New Hampshire Democrat, said as much at a Manchester town hall meeting last weekend, according to The Hill.com. It reports someone released 55 seconds of her remarks, which went viral and made national headlines.

"We go to the ladies room and the Republican women and the Democratic women and we just roll our eyes," she said. "And the Republican women said when we were fighting over the health care bill, if we sent the men home. ..." At that point, The Hill.com reports loud applause interrupted Shea-Porter's remarks.

She continued, "You know why? I'm not trying to diss the men, but I'm telling you it's the truth that every single woman there has been responsible for taking care of a [relatives] and so we think we can find a common ground there," according to The Hill.com.

Read More......

Pelosi signals renewed momentum for health care reform

From Greg Sargent:

This got a bit lost in the noise yesterday, because of the excitement in the runup to Obama’s speech and also because of some inaccurate reporting, but it’s important: Yesterday Nancy Pelosi strongly suggested there’s real momentum behind passing the Senate bill in the House with a reconciliation fix.

Pelosi met with a group of columnists yesterday and talked about the bill, and initial reports wrongly said she had flatly predicted she had the votes for passing the Senate bill as is. Then Pelosi’s office disputed that interpretation, and everybody more or less forgot about her comments.

But what she actually said is worth a look. A transcript is right here. Here’s the key bit, in which she addresses the likelihood of passing the bill if the Senate agrees to pass fixes to the billl via reconciliation, or what she calls “constitutional majority rule,” making the bill more palatable to House members:

“If there is a willingness for us to pursue with the constitutional majority rule, then I think we’ll be able to come up with something that sufficiently addresses the concerns of House Members of the policy in the Senate bill. All of this was agreed to, say a week and a half ago, and we’re pretty confident about going on a positive course there, because the changes were I think very important and we could make a case for them.”

By constitutional majority rule, I think she means a process by which 51 Senators vote up or down the legislation - e.g., reconciliation (or eliminating the filibuster). Read More......

Jt Chiefs dissed Obama last night on DADT repeal

It seems the Jt Chiefs are not required to stay all stoney-faced as a matter of protocol. The only time they don't clap about military matters is when they don't like what their commander in chief is ordering them to do. But as Joe Jervis notes, then they like something he says, they clap. Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal, not so much. Insubordination is alive and well in inside the uniformed military. Read More......

Ford makes a profit

When a U.S. car company is profitable, it's considered breaking news in 2010. I got "Breaking News" alerts from all the major outlets because Ford is making money again:

The Ford Motor Company earned $2.7 billion in 2009 and said Thursday that it now expected to be profitable in 2010 as well.

The profit for 2009, equal to 86 cents a share, was a swing of $17.5 billion from 2008, when the company lost $14.8 billion. It is Ford’s first full-year profit since 2005.

The company ended 2009 with $25.5 billion in cash reserves, nearly twice the $13.4 billion it had at the start of the year.

Ford was the only U.S. auto maker that didn't get a bailout. But, the government (meaning taxpayers) did save the auto industry (including Ford)::

To be sure, the industry's modest progress has come at a large cost to taxpayers. Fitch, the credit-rating service, estimates total direct and indirect government assistance to the U.S.-based manufacturers during the recession at a staggering $125 billion. That includes the cost of capital injections for GM, Chrysler and their respective financial arms, as well as Cash for Clunkers, supplier guarantees, Energy Department loans (which Ford also has tapped) and aid from other governments such as Canada.

Looks like our investment is paying off, in the short term anyway. Read More......

Obama's speech approval hit 83% in CBS poll. Teabaggers disapprove.

Obama's speech was a big hit with the American people according to a CBS poll:

A large majority of Americans who watched President Obama's State of the Union Address generally approve of the proposals he outlined in his speech, according to a CBS News Poll conducted online by Knowledge Networks immediately after the President's address.

Of the randomly selected 522 speech viewers questioned by CBS, 83 percent said they approved of the proposals the President made. Just 17 percent disapproved — typical of the high support a president generally receives among those who choose to watch the State of the Union. In January 2002 — when George W. Bush gave the State of the Union Address a year into his presidency — 85% of speech watchers approved.

Keep in mind that was when Bush was riding high in the polls and the country was still relatively united after September 11th.

You get the sense that people do really want this President to succeed. Because, most people get that his success matters to their daily lives. And, the GOP now represents those 17 percent who disapproved. That's the hard-core, teabagger crowd. And, no surprise, the Teabagger Party did not approve of Obama's speech calling it "hot air."

In the CBS poll, while people approved of the speech, they didn't expect Obama to deliver:

However, a sizable 57 percent said the President will not be able to accomplish all of the goals he set out in his speech. Most Democrats who viewed the speech (63 percent) said the man they elected would be able to accomplish all of his goals, but only 11 percent of Republicans and 33 percent of independent voters agreed.

Most Democrats and independents who watched said the president shares their priorities, while most Republicans did not.

Getting the economy moving again and creating jobs for Americans isn't a priority for the Republican party. And, they admit it. Read More......

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Well, it's the day after the BIG speech and the reviews are mostly good. But, we've been down this path before. We've seen great speeches from Obama. What we need to see is action. He was pretty tough on the GOPers last night over their obstructionist tactics. But, let's face it, they've been calling his bluff for a year. Obama needs to follow through.

That's true for the promise to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." He said "this year." The best indicator of whether he's serious will come on Monday when the President submits his budget to Congress. SLDN wants the repeal in the budget. We'll soon see if the rhetoric matches the reality.

And, finally, how about Justice Alito pulling a Joe Wilson? John posted video here. That was shocking and so beyoned the pale for a member of the Supreme Court. Wow. Alito really is a Republican hack.

So, your thoughts on this Thursday morning.... Read More......

New Bank of America CEO to receive 19% pay raise

And really, why not? Just because his company is still floundering and his industry is not lending money - as they were supposed to do with the massive handouts - he really worked hard. Definitely harder than me or you. You don't deserve a pay raise though because you're not part of the privileged elite who can't fall down no matter what screwup they churn out. The bank has such little regard for the White House that it didn't even bother to consult the pay czar. Imagine that. Another banker kicking sand in the face of the president because they know the consequences will be minimal. For the brilliant minds working inside the White House, this is precisely what annoys the public. It's good to be da king.

Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan will be paid $950,000 a year for his new job, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

The bank's board of directors has approved the salary, which is 19 percent more than Moynihan's 2008 base pay, according to the Journal.

Moynihan will not receive a bonus for 2009, the Journal reported, citing sources familiar with matter. Pay czar Kenneth Feinberg was not consulted, the source said.

Read More......

Will cash win the day in Afghanistan?

It sounds like it's been a driving factor for building troops on the other side so why not try it? If it helps win over the marginal supporters who are driven by hunger and poverty it's worth the effort.

The multimillion-pound "peace and reintegration" fund would seek to lure low ranking Taliban fighters, who join out of poverty rather than ideology, by giving them jobs, schooling or land for farming. An effective amnesty for these men, now believed to make up 75 per cent of the insurgency's ranks, means that even those who took part in attacks involving the deaths of British or US soldiers would be rehabilitated.

The UN sanctions had been imposed under a resolution aimed at punishing the Taliban for their support of Osama bin Laden's network. More than 100 Taliban names including that of Mullah Omar, the hardline Taliban spiritual leader, remain on the list. But the move to rehabilitate five former senior Taliban officials, greeted with deep suspicion by human rights groups, could be a pathway to direct negotiations with senior figures in the movement. While they remain on the UN blacklist, they cannot appear in public or attend talks. The decision was warmly welcomed yesterday by Richard Holbrooke, the US special representative for Afghanistan, who said it was "a long overdue step".

Read More......