The Republicans quite simply have nothing left to say

And my other favorite moment of the evening was when Giuliani bellowed "I am a conservative Republican!" Sure you are, honey.

Read More......

Mayor Giuliani, it was Dick Cheney who cut our armed forces by 20%, not Bill Clinton

Rudy Giuliani just said, again, that it was Bill Clinton who cut the military in the 1990s. Wrong, it was Dick Cheney, and the proof is on the Department of Defense's own Web site, in Dick Cheney's official bio:

In subsequent years under Cheney the budgets proposed and the final outcomes followed patterns similar to the FY 1990 budget experience. Early in 1991 the secretary unveiled a plan to reduce military strength by the mid-1990s to 1.6 million, compared to 2.2 million when he entered office....

Over Cheney's four years as secretary of defense, encompassing budgets for fiscal years 1990-93, DoD's total obligational authority in current dollars declined from $291.3 billion to $269.9 billion. Except for FY 1991, when the TOA budget increased by 1.7 percent, the Cheney budgets showed negative real growth: -2.9 percent in 1990, -9.8 percent in 1992, and -8.1 percent in 1993. During this same period total military personnel declined by 19.4 percent, from 2.202 million in FY 1989 to 1.776 million in FY 1993. The Army took the largest cut, from 770,000 to 572,000-25.8 percent of its strength. The Air Force declined by 22.3 percent, the Navy by 14 percent, and the Marines by 9.7 percent.

That means Cheney wanted to cut the number of US servicemembers by 27% but ended up settling for 20%. He cut the Army by 25%. The Air Force by 22%. Dick Cheney decimated our military in the 1990s. Why is nobody talking about this? Oh that's right, because we suck. Read More......

NYT endorses Hillary

NYT:

As Democrats look ahead to the primaries in the biggest states on Feb. 5, The Times’s editorial board strongly recommends that they select Hillary Clinton as their nominee for the 2008 presidential election....

As strongly as we back her candidacy, we urge Mrs. Clinton to take the lead in changing the tone of the campaign. It is not good for the country, the Democratic Party or for Mrs. Clinton, who is often tagged as divisive, in part because of bitter feeling about her husband’s administration and the so-called permanent campaign. (Indeed, Bill Clinton’s overheated comments are feeding those resentments, and could do long-term damage to her candidacy if he continues this way.)

We know that she is capable of both uniting and leading. We saw her going town by town through New York in 2000, including places where Clinton-bashing was a popular sport. She won over skeptical voters and then delivered on her promises and handily won re-election in 2006.

Mrs. Clinton must now do the same job with a broad range of America’s voters. She will have to let Americans see her power to listen and lead, but she won’t be able to do it town by town.

When we endorsed Mrs. Clinton in 2006, we were certain she would continue to be a great senator, but since her higher ambitions were evident, we wondered if she could present herself as a leader to the nation.

Her ideas, her comeback in New Hampshire and strong showing in Nevada, her new openness to explaining herself and not just her programs, and her abiding, powerful intellect show she is fully capable of doing just that. She is the best choice for the Democratic Party as it tries to regain the White House.

Read More......

GOP debate open thread

Yeah, there's another one. I have to watch. Ugh. It's on MSNBC. Read More......

Soros: The worst market crisis in 60 years

From an essay by George Soros in the Financial Times

The current financial crisis was precipitated by a bubble in the US housing market. In some ways it resembles other crises that have occurred since the end of the second world war at intervals ranging from four to 10 years.

However, there is a profound difference: the current crisis marks the end of an era of credit expansion based on the dollar as the international reserve currency. The periodic crises were part of a larger boom-bust process. The current crisis is the culmination of a super-boom that has lasted for more than 60 years....

Credit expansion must now be followed by a period of contraction, because some of the new credit instruments and practices are unsound and unsustainable. The ability of the financial authorities to stimulate the economy is constrained by the unwillingness of the rest of the world to accumulate additional dollar reserves. Until recently, investors were hoping that the US Federal Reserve would do whatever it takes to avoid a recession, because that is what it did on previous occasions. Now they will have to realise that the Fed may no longer be in a position to do so. With oil, food and other commodities firm, and the renminbi appreciating somewhat faster, the Fed also has to worry about inflation. If federal funds were lowered beyond a certain point, the dollar would come under renewed pressure and long-term bonds would actually go up in yield. Where that point is, is impossible to determine. When it is reached, the ability of the Fed to stimulate the economy comes to an end.

Although a recession in the developed world is now more or less inevitable, China, India and some of the oil-producing countries are in a very strong countertrend. So, the current financial crisis is less likely to cause a global recession than a radical realignment of the global economy, with a relative decline of the US and the rise of China and other countries in the developing world.

Read More......

Obama vs the Clintons

Lots of discussion about the race between Obama, Hillary, and now Bill. A sample of four different news stories:

TIME:

Not making a real effort [in South Carolina] allows her to discount an Obama win as uncontested, and hence less meaningful. But by leaving the state to her husband, who won two presidential contests here, she makes it impossible for Obama to relax or focus his energies elsewhere. This week in South Carolina Obama is essentially running against the former President, and he knows it.... Obama spent the day on the defensive, growing visibly frustrated at times with the Clintons.... Still, Hillary Clinton's triumph in Nevada, where Bill Clinton was particularly vocal, seemed to show that, in the final equation, her husband does more good than harm.

AFP:

A poisonous new exchange erupted on the Democratic campaign trail Wednesday as former president Bill Clinton accused his wife's chief rival Barack Obama of a political "hit job."

After the jump, Ben Smith wonders if Bill is a liability, but Chris Cillizza says Bill has been a net plus for Hillary.

Ben Smith:

On one hand, Bill Clinton is a beloved figure among many Democrats and more popular than his wife.

But on the other, the former president is the face of the past, and his high profile may diminish his wife's....

In fact, Obama and Clinton are both in uncharted waters, particularly when it comes to how the dynamic will affect the female voters on whom Clinton depends. Will they be jarred away from Hillary by Bill's emergence as an equal partner?

Or will they be offended by Obama's statement of that fact?

Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post:

Days before the South Carolina Democratic primary and less than two weeks before the potentially decisive Feb. 5 Super Tuesday contests, former President Bill Clinton and his aggressive, hard-edged advocacy of his wife has emerged as THE issue in the race for his party's presidential nomination....

What's clear from this poll -- and many, many other data points just like it -- is that whatever elected officials may think of Bill Clinton, he remains perhaps the single most popular political figure in the Democratic party. Democratic voters like him and remember the eight years he spent in the White House for the relative peace abroad and a prosperous economy at home rather than the series of scandals culminating in the Monica Lewinsky affair.

That depth of good feeling toward Bill Clinton makes him -- in the words of one longtime party strategist -- the "ultimate surrogate." The strategist, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, added that having Bill Clinton on the trail was "like having another candidate out there" due to his ability to draw crowds and TV cameras.

Those cameras, and Bill Clinton's penchant to commit news in front of them, has -- without question -- rubbed many within the party leadership the wrong way. But, in The Fix's conversations with a number of unaligned party strategists, the general consensus was that while Bill Clinton might be breaking a few eggs he was not in danger of fouling the omelet -- so to speak.

Read More......

Kucinich is out, won't endorse another Democrat

AP.

Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is abandoning his second bid for the White House. In an interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the congressman said he was quitting the race and would made a formal announcement Friday.

"I want to continue to serve in Congress," he told the newspaper.

Kucinich said he will not endorse another Democrat in the primary.

Another Democrat? Is that a variation on the "no man can defeat me" line? Read More......

Unions increasing productivity

The stereotype of unions and union workers is unfair and misleading, for a variety of reasons. Ezra has a great story -- and analysis -- about an elevator conversation (always good times!) that's highly instructive and also pretty entertaining. Go read. Read More......

Rep. Al Wynn, facing tough primary challenge from Donna Edwards, resorts to fake news interview video

This makes Congressman Wynn seem really desperate.

Matt Stoller captured a fake news video from the Al Wynn campaign. Representative Wynn is being challenged in the February 12th Democratic primary in Maryland's Fourth Congressional District by Donna Edwards. As Matt accurately notes, the video is "really stupid." Wynn is pretty much the Democratic lobbyist for the telecom industry and Comcast. You'd think with all Wynn's friends in the communications industry that his campaign could come up with some better than a fake news interview.

I've known Donna Edwards for more then ten years. We worked on domestic violence issues together. She is a committed progressive who needs to win because we need really need more better Democrats. AMERICAblog has an ActBlue page for Donna.

Fake news interviews from one of the telecom industry's biggest supporters -- or a real and better Democrat. That's the choice on February 12th for voters in Maryland's Fourth CD. Read More......

Bill Press blasts right-wing radio host as racist

From Bill Press:

Who says racism is dead in America?

It’s alive and well – on talk radio – WABC in New York – and talk show host Bob Grant.

Grant’s record of racist, hate-talk is as old as he is.

He once complained about New York: “Minorities are the Big Apple’s majority, you don’t need the papers to tell you that, walk around and you know it. To me, that’s a bad thing. I’m a white person.”

He hated the fact that Magic Johnson was still alive: “Why is it taking so long for the HIV to go into full-blown AIDS?”

And he was disappointed in Ron Brown’s plane crash: “I have a hunch Brown might be the lone survivor. But then, I’m a pessimist at heart.”

Radio & Records magazine announced plans to honor Bob Grant at their March meeting in Washington, but changed their mind after complaints about his hateful comments.

Get this. So now conservative talkers Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Neal Boortz are threatening to boycott the meeting because, they say, Grant’s First Amendment rights are being violated.

Read More......

To ensure success, Bush invokes national security to give immunity to telecoms.

Here we go again. The Hill reports that Bush is putting pressure on the Senate to pass his the FISA bill giving immunity to the telecoms -- and of course, Bush invokes national security:

“If Congress does not act quickly, our national security professionals will not be able to count on critical tools they need to protect our nation, and our ability to respond quickly to new threats and circumstances will be weakened,” Bush said in a statement.

We've seen this play out too many times. In a column from last November, Dan Froomkin explained what Bush does -- and how Democrats respond:

...Bush has learned that the higher he ratchets up the rhetoric, especially if he can accuse his critics of being weak on terror, the more likely Congressional Democrats are to fold. He's simply counting on that happening again.

Senator Dodd is going to filibuster FISA. This should be a no-brainer for Democrats.

But now that Bush has played the terror card, Democrats will undoubtedly cave. Not a question of whether it happens, more like how quickly it happens. Read More......

Hillary and Bill for president

Gail Collins in the NYT:

The implicit promise of Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy was that she had learned from Clinton I. In her, Americans would have a candidate who had been in the very center of White House decision-making. And the very fact that so much had gone wrong was added value. She is nothing if not a good learner, and — the story went — she had discovered at great price where all the landmines lay, both in the presidency and her own character. And she had forged a separate political identity in seven years in the Senate. During an era when the challenges to a new president could be sudden and overwhelming — and here Hillary isn’t ashamed to play the terror card — she was uniquely prepared to hit the ground running and achieve the greatest do-over in American history.

Now, Bill’s role as Chief Attack Dog undermines all that. If he’s all over her campaign, he’s going to be all over her administration. Instead of the original promise of the thoroughly educated Hillary, we’re being offered the worst-case scenario — that the pair of them are going to return to Pennsylvania Avenue and recreate the old Clinton chaos.

A lot of people are O.K. with that. (After all, we’ve lived for seven years with a disciplined Oval Office that runs like clockwork while it spreads chaos everywhere else.) Only it’s not change, it’s not a breakthrough moment in American history. It’s just a nervous decision that we’d rather go back than risk going forward.

It’s a story, all right, with Bill at the center. If Hillary expects anybody to get misty-eyed about the first woman president at the inauguration, she’s got to send him home and go back to the original plotline.

Read More......

Retention crisis in the military

Andrew Tilghman, fast becoming my favorite long-form journalist, has another fantastic, must-read piece in the Washington Monthly. It focuses on why the military's "best and brightest young officers" are leaving at an alarming rate (and yes, Iraq is part of it, but not the only part), and what the implications are of this exodus. Tilghman is a former reporter for the (independent) military newspaper "Stars and Stripes" and has a real feel for the community and the issues he covers. Within military and intel circles, the screwing over of some great people in the military has been a hot topic lately, and the article does a great job of explaining much of the situation. To wit:

Of course, every generation of young officers is critical of their superiors. But the botched management in Iraq and a sense of squandered momentum in Afghanistan have intensified those feelings among today's young officers. It's one thing for young officers in the 1980s or '90s to stand around at a training facility at Fort Polk, Louisiana, complaining about the higher-ups; it's another when junior officers have to see soldiers under their command dying in missions they believe are strategically flawed or futile.

There is a similar problem in the intelligence community, albeit one affected much less by the strains particular to the uniformed services. On one hand, the pressures aren't as bad for intel professionals (especially regarding deployments, obviously); on the other hand, it's much easier for civilians to leave, *especially* with security clearances being so lucrative in the private sector, so the departure rate may even be worse. Either way, this administration is crippling this nation's ability to defend itself in the long term. Crippling. Read More......

The Republicans really loathe Mitt

It's easy for us to dislike Mitt Romney. He's loathsome. But, what's interesting is how those who know him best -- his fellow Republican -- really can't stand the guy:

At the end of the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire this month, when the Democrats joined the candidates on stage, Mitt Romney found himself momentarily alone as his counterparts mingled, looking around a bit stiffly for a companion.

The moment was emblematic of a broader reality that has helped shape the Republican contest and could take center stage again on Thursday at a debate in Florida. Within the small circle of contenders, Mr. Romney has become the most disliked.

With so much attention recently on the sniping between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama on the Democratic side, the almost visceral scorn directed at Mr. Romney by his rivals has been overshadowed.

I'd like to see more focus on the visceral scorn aimed at Romney. Much more. Mitt could be the GOP nominee -- and they hate him. Read More......

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Couple things floating around today. We should be getting the details of the economic stimulus package today. It's happening fast. Really fast. So as much as Bush keeps saying the economy is strong, his actions indicate the economy is in trouble. Big trouble.

The Senate starts debating whether or not to give immunity to the telecoms. Democrats do control the Senate, right? Why are they still intimidated by Dick Cheney and George Bush on issues like this?

The Republicans are having a debate in Florida tonight. Instead of being Rudy's crowning victory, Florida is looking like Rudy's last stand. All those sixth place finishes have taken a toll.

Two days til the Dems. vote in SC.

Okay, what else? Read More......

France's 2nd largest bank uncovers $7.14 billion fraud

It's hard to imagine something so serious could go undetected. Adding to the problems of Societe Generale are more subprime write downs (less $3 billion more) leading to the bank starting it's own hat-in-hand begging for new cash reserves. The global economy needs a new model, with global oversight. The current system is not working in its current form. Soros is correct when he says we are "at the end of an era" with the banking system. No need to throw away the entire system, but it's time we step up and re-think the current model. Read More......

Obama talks to CNBC and Jack Welch

It's an interesting exchange to watch because Welch, who has financially supported countless Republican presidential candidates including Bush II twice, responds well to Obama. Others on the program who are also obvious Republicans are also responding positively towards Obama. For me it's very interesting to see such a warm response to a Democrat because after the interview, they go on to bash Hillary and Edwards.

Of course, considering the economic meltdown I don't necessarily think being hostile to Wall Street is such a bad place to be. It's undeniable that Welch was successful at GE but listening to him today, he seems like a leftover from a long-gone era and has no idea what the real world is about in 2008. He talks about job security and great benefits as though it's a few decades ago, big company or small. Obama was very good in the exchange and impressed me with his response to why Welch and business people should vote for him.

"The [U.S.] economy is strongest when it's working for everybody ... When people in the bottom and middle do well, everyone does well."

Barack said he seeks to "create a health care system that doesn't waste billions of dollars," as well as shape energy and security policies that garner public trust and peace of mind.

Read More......