CBS News: Obama Faces Gay Groups' Growing Anger

Great story from CBS News about the growing rupture between President Obama and the gay community. CBS synthesizes the story perfectly. This is a must-read if you're trying to get your head around what's going on with this story. CBS also notes how Obama's DOJ invoked "incest" when talking about why it's okay to ban gay marriages, meaning that despicable angle of the story is now hitting the mainstream media.

CBS News:

The anger from gay rights advocates toward President Obama is starting to boil over....

Many of the staffers in the Obama White House also served under President Bill Clinton, and they remember well how much political capital taking on gay rights cost Clinton early in his administration. But while gay rights advocates signaled sympathy to those concerns early in the Obama administration, their patience appears to be running out.

No, it has run out. Incest pretty much sealed that deal. Read the rest of this post...

Arianna: Whistling Past the Economic Graveyard, The Audacity of Misplaced Hope

Arianna at Huff Post:

Too many in Washington -- and in the media continue to take the well-being of Wall Street as the proper gauge for the well-being of the rest of America. Yes, the Dow is up 33 percent since March. But another 345,000 jobs were lost in May, raising the number of the unemployed to 14.5 million, and the unemployment rate to 9.4 percent. Since the start of the recession in December 2007, unemployment has almost doubled.

What's more, as this chart shows, over the past two decades, the top one percent of Americans has done very well in terms of wage growth. Things have not been nearly as good for everybody else.

Are the reforms going to be sufficiently fundamental to avoid a repeat of the boom and bust cycles, in which only a select few enjoy the boom and everybody else pays for the bust?

Read the rest of this post...

Don't search for 'free'

Sounds like it will end up costing you. CNN:

If you like to search for "music lyrics" or "free" things, you are engaging in risky cyber behavior. And "free music downloads" puts 20 percent of Web surfers in harm's way of malicious software, known as "malware."

A new research report by U.S.-based antivirus software company McAfee has identified the most dangerous Internet search words that places users on pages with a higher likelihood of malware.

The study examined 2,600 popular keywords on five major search engines -- Google, Yahoo, Live, AOL and Ask -- and analyzed 413,000 Web pages.

Read the rest of this post...

DNC gay fundraiser starting to fall apart over rupture between Obama and gay community

Note to our friends in the media. This is a story deserving a little national attention. It seems the Obama folks have gotten to the mainstream media - you'll note that practically none of the corporate media are covering the growing rupture between Obama and the gay community other than on their blogs, even after HRC sent probably the first chastising letter to a Democratic president since 1996 (and reporters always have told me in the past, it's not a story until HRC weighs in - well now they have, twice). Guess that means we'll just have to ramp up the pain.

Speaking of pain, I contacted top gay blogger Andy Towle today to ask if he'd be attending the big gay fundraiser the DNC was holding later this month with VP Biden as the special guest. Andy was on a list I'd seen of already committed attendees. Andy told me that he had already contacted the DNC to say that he wouldn't be attending at this time (yet another reason we like Andy and his blog). The DNC had planned to raise a lot of money from gay A-listers by coinciding this fundraiser with the 40th anniversary of Stonewall. Instead, the DNC may be about to witness Stonewall 2.0.

(Oddly, we've heard nothing in four days, since the DOMA brief scandal broke, from gay congressional leaders - Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, and Jared Polis - all of whom are hosting this rather ill-timed and inappropriate Democratic effort to milk money from our community at the same time Democrats are equating us with incest and not lifting a finger on any of our legislation priorities in Congress or the White House. It's not awfully clear why any gay person would give a Democrat a dime ever again. Check back, we'll be updating you daily on whether Barney, Tammy and Jared ever decide to say boo about the hate brief and their role in this fundraiser that is quickly turning into a major fiasco for the Democratic party.)

Andy's news comes on the heel of word that veteran gay advocate, and longtime friend of Bill Clinton, David Mixner is pulling out the fundraiser as well. David wrote one hell of an essay this weekend about the hateful DOMA brief the Obama administration submitted late Thursday night. David is an amazing person. I met him for the first time when I was sitting in Senator Moseley-Braun's office, back in like 1993, waiting for a friend who worked there. David walked in for a meeting with someone, I recognized him, and walked up and introduced myself, and thanked him for standing up to President Clinton on Don't Ask Don't Tell. We talked for, what, 20 seconds? The next time I saw David was easily a good five years later. He immediately recognized me and said "I met you at Senator Moseley-Braun's office!" He is one scary dude. :-)

Here is a very long excerpt from David's essay:

You fully need to understand the ramifications of this brief: it undercuts every conceivable argument that the LGBT community would use to fight for the repeal of DOMA. Right-wing nut cases can now just simply quote horrible stuff from this hateful brief and proclaim loudly it was filed by the Obama Justice Department. The President and his team have not only undercut this community but have damaged his own ability to repeal this hideous law given to us by President Clinton. With Democratic friends like these, God helps us.

I will not attend a fundraiser for the National Democratic Party in Washington next week when the current administration is responsible for these kind of actions. How will they ever take us seriously if we keep forking out money while they harm us. For now on, my money is going to battles within the community such as the fight in Maine or the March on Washington! I am so tired of being told by Democratic operatives to 'suck it up' because so many other profound issues are at stake. It is as if our fight for our freedom is single handedly responsible for the fate of all other issues. Bullshit. Maybe, just maybe, it is time for others to 'suck it up' for us and finally, without conditions, join our fight for our freedom!

Just in case you think I am overreacting, take a look at a sampling of the reaction around the community in the previous post.. Even HRC and The Task Force issued strong statements against the brief and they are to be commended for doing so. Americablog.com broke the story and they deserve enormous credit for their excellence.

President Obama, even Dick Cheney is for marriage equality. Please don't try to placate us with actions already taken 16 years ago by President Clinton. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might be able to help you find the way since she has already written a policy for your approval ending discrimination in her agency. This community is no longer interested in hearing one more time your personal beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. We want you to rise above your own beliefs and hear you articulate a powerful vision of full equality for LGBT Americans. You must come out for a full, not partial, repeal of DOMA and liberate our brave LGBT soldiers fighting to protect America in order to restore our faith in you and your leadership.

We want to believe; give us a reason.

Read the rest of this post...

Credit card defaults hit new high

Not the most encouraging economic news in a still troubled industry. It's highly likely this problem will continue to remain high, especially as unemployment increases later this year.

U.S. credit card defaults rose to record highs in May, with a steep deterioration of Bank of America Corp's lending portfolio, in another sign that consumers remain under severe stress.

Delinquency rates -- an indicator of future credit losses -- fell across the industry, but analysts said the decline was due to a seasonal trend, as consumers used tax refunds to pay back debts, and they expect delinquencies to go up again in coming months.

Bank of America Corp -- the largest U.S. bank -- said its default rate, those loans the company does not expect to be paid back, soared to 12.50 percent in May from 10.47 percent in April.

In addition, American Express Co, which accounts for nearly a quarter of credit and charge card sales volume in the United States, said its default rate rose to 10.4 percent from 9.90, according to a regulatory filing based on the performance of credit card loans that were securitized.

Read the rest of this post...

Harry Reid: No plans to do squat on DADT, let Obama do it

So there you have it. The Democratic party at its homophobic, spineless, cynical best. Obama won't do squat on Don't Ask Don't Tell, he says it's the Congress' job. Harry Reid won't do squat on Don't Ask Don't Tell, he says it's Obama's job. And neither Reid nor Obama plan on doing anything to make anything happen on this issue.

It's not a priority for either of them. They'd rather pass a health care reform bill that excludes gay families from benefits. Oh yeah, didn't you know that? Do you honestly think Obama/Congress' health care reform bill is going to include gay families in their definition of spouses and dependents? Please. And while I'm told by at least one gay legal expert that Congress "could" include language providing benefits for gay families and not run afoul of DOMA (simply don't provide benefits based on "marriage" or quasi-marriage (aka civil unions)) - and it's not at all clear to me that DOMA, that other pesky little promise that Obama has now backstabbed us on, won't negate us getting benefits even if the bill provides them - does anybody really believe that Obama and Reid are going to include language recognizing gay families as dependents? Remember, it might upset the Republicans and the religious conservatives if we get our civil rights, and the Democrats don't do things that make 20% of the population angry.

It's all one big vicious circle of homophobic apathy and cowardice.

So how's that upcoming $1,000 a head DNC gay fundraiser going? I understand several high-profile gays have already pulled out in protest over the DOMA brief. (More on that later.)



Maybe someone should ask Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin and Jared Polis why they're still listed as hosts for the event, and why they've been too busy the past four days to say boo about Obama's betrayal of their own community.

PS Note how in the article Senator Reid says Obama does in fact have administrative ways of, for all intents and purposes, repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell. Which 100% contradicts what Obama and company are telling us. Read the rest of this post...

Wakey, wakey

It's even older than that thing in the back of my fridge. LiveScience:

After more than 120,000 years trapped beneath a block of ice in Greenland, a tiny microbe has awoken. The long-lasting bacteria may hold clues to what life forms might exist on other planets.

The new bacteria species was found nearly 2 miles (3 km) beneath a Greenland glacier, where temperatures can dip well below freezing, pressure soars, and food and oxygen are scarce.

"We don't know what state they were in," said study team member Jean Brenchley of Pennsylvania State University. "They could've been dormant, or they could've been slowly metabolizing, but we don't know for sure."

Dormant would mean the bacteria were in a spore-like state in which there's not a lot of metabolism going on, so the bacteria wouldn't be reproducing much. It's possible the bacteria could have been slowly metabolizing and replicating.

Read the rest of this post...

AP: Iranian anti-govt protester slain after hundreds of thousands march

UPDATE: More on the shooting and the protests.

This is how things get quickly out of control.

Gunfire from a compound used by pro-government militia killed one demonstrator Monday after hundreds of thousands of opponents of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad massed in central Tehran to cheer their pro-reform leader in his first public appearance since elections that he alleges were marred by fraud.

A group of demonstrators with fuel canisters attempted to set fire to the compound of a volunteer militia linked to Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard as the crowd dispersed from Azadi, or Freedom, Square after dark. As some attempted to storm the building, people inside could be seen firing directly at the demonstrators at the northern edge of the square, away from the heart of the demonstration.

An Associated Press photographer saw one person fatally shot and several others who appeared to be seriously wounded.

Read the rest of this post...

HRC pens letter chastising Obama over hate brief

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay civil rights lobby, just sent a letter to President Obama in response to the homophobic brief Obama's DOJ filed last Thursday night. It's a good letter, but more important than its content is its existence. In politics, sending a letter chastising a friend is a far more significant act than what the letter actually says. It's just not done unless something very big and very bad happens. Usually things happen quietly, behind closed doors (especially with friends). When they go public like this, it means serious trouble is brewing. (I'd also add that HRC is known as the "nice" gay group. They don't get angry at Democrats, and they don't send letters chastising Democratic presidents. When they do, it means something.)

I'd also add that HRC is perhaps the first major gay group to actually mention, and chastise the president for, the brief's invocation of incest. That's a big deal, and a hell of a news hook as well for any of your journalists out there.

I would quibble with HRC about one small point. At the end of the letter they call on Obama to send legislation to Congress that would repeal DOMA. That's great. But it's not enough. At this point, I think the community is far beyond the point of Obama "sending" legislation, and then doing nothing to get it passed. We want action. Action on DOMA, DADT and ENDA. We expect the president to stop filing briefs on behalf of DOMA, to actually lift a finger, or even two, to get DOMA passed, and to stop discharging gay soldiers, immediately. (ENDA is its own nightmare - I don't think it's going anywhere.) Submitting legislation will simply not cut. I sincerely hope the administration doesn't think it will.

June 15, 2009

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

I have had the privilege of meeting you on several occasions, when visiting the White House in my capacity as president of the Human Rights Campaign, a civil rights organization representing millions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people across this country. You have welcomed me to the White House to express my community’s views on health care, employment discrimination, hate violence, the need for diversity on the bench, and other pressing issues. Last week, when your administration filed a brief defending the constitutionality of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” I realized that although I and other LGBT leaders have introduced ourselves to you as policy makers, we clearly have not been heard, and seen, as what we also are: human beings whose lives, loves, and families are equal to yours. I know this because this brief would not have seen the light of day if someone in your administration who truly recognized our humanity and equality had weighed in with you.

So on behalf of my organization and millions of LGBT people who are smarting in the aftermath of reading that brief, allow me to reintroduce us. You might have heard of Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon. They waited 55 years for the state of California to recognize their legal right to marry. When the California Supreme Court at last recognized that right, the octogenarians became the first couple to marry. Del died after the couple had been legally married for only two months. And about two months later, their fellow Californians voted for Proposition 8.

Across this country, same-sex couples are living the same lives that Phyllis and Del so powerfully represent, and the same lives as you and your wife and daughters. In over 99% of U.S. counties, we are raising children and trying to save for their educations; we are committing to each other emotionally and financially. We are paying taxes, serving on the PTA, struggling to balance work and family, struggling to pass our values on to our children—through church, extended family, and community. Knowing us for who we are—people and families whose needs and contributions are no different from anyone else’s—destroys the arguments set forth in the government’s brief in Smelt. As you read the rest of what I have to say, please judge the brief’s arguments with this standard: would this argument hold water if you acknowledge that Del and Phyllis have contributed as much to their community as their straight neighbors, and that their family is as worthy of respect as your own?
Reading the brief, one is told again and again that same-sex couples are so unlike different-sex couples that unequal treatment makes sense. But the government doesn’t say what makes us different, or unequal, only that our marriages are “new.” The fact that same-sex couples were denied equal rights until recently does not justify denying them now.

For example, the brief seems to adopt the well-worn argument that excluding same-sex couples from basic protections is somehow good for other married people:

Because all 50 States recognize hetero-sexual marriage, it was reasonable and rational for Congress to maintain its longstanding policy of fostering this traditional and universally-recognized form of marriage.

The government does not state why denying us basic protections promotes anyone else’s marriage, nor why, while our heterosexual neighbors’ marriages should be promoted, our own must be discouraged. In other words, the brief does not even attempt to explain how DOMA is related to any interest, but rather accepts that it is constitutional to attempt to legislate our families out of existence.

The brief characterizes DOMA as “neutral:”

[DOMA amounts to] a cautious policy of federal neutrality towards a new form of marriage.

DOMA is not “neutral” to a federal employee serving in your administration who is denied equal compensation because she cannot cover her same-sex spouse in her health plan. When a woman must choose between her job and caring for her spouse because they are not covered by the FMLA, DOMA is not “neutral.” DOMA is not a “neutral” policy to the thousands of bi-national same-sex couples who have to choose between family and country because they are considered strangers under our immigration laws. It is not a “neutral” policy toward the minor child of a same-sex couple, who is denied thousands of dollars of surviving mother’s or father’s benefits because his parents are not “spouses” under Social Security law.

Exclusion is not neutrality.

Next, the brief indicates that denying gay people our equal rights saves money:

It is therefore permitted to maintain the unique privileges [the government] has afforded to [different-sex marriages] without immediately extending the same privileges, and scarce government resources, to new forms of marriage that States have only recently begun to recognize.

The government goes on to say that DOMA reasonably protects other taxpayers from having to subsidize families like ours. The following excerpt explains:

DOMA maintains federal policies that have long sought to promote the traditional and uniformly-recognized form of marriage, recognizes the right of each State to expand the traditional definition if it so chooses, but declines to obligate federal taxpayers in other States to subsidize a form of marriage that their own states do not recognize.

These arguments completely disregard the fact that LGBT citizens pay taxes ourselves. We contribute into Social Security equally and receive the same statement in the mail every year. But for us, several of the benefits listed in the statement are irrelevant—our spouses and children will never benefit from them. The parent who asserts that her payments into Social Security should ensure her child’s financial future should she die is not seeking a subsidy. The gay White House employee who works as hard as the person in the next office is not seeking a “subsidy” for his partner’s federal health benefits. He is earning the same compensation without receiving it. And the person who cannot even afford to insure her family because the federal government would treat her partner’s benefits as taxable income—she is not seeking a subsidy.

The government again ignores our experiences when it argues that DOMA § 2 does not impair same-sex couples’ right to move freely about our country as other families can:

DOMA does not affect “the right of a citizen of one State to enter and to leave another state, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State.”

This example shows the fallacy of that argument: a same-sex couple and their child drives cross-country for a vacation. On the way, they are in a terrible car accident. One partner is rushed into the ICU while the other, and their child, begs to be let in to see her, presenting the signed power of attorney that they carry wherever they go. They are told that only “family” may enter, and the woman dies alone while her spouse waits outside. This family was not “welcome.”

As a matter of constitutional law, some of this brief does not even make sense:

DOMA does not discriminate against homosexuals in the provision of federal benefits…. Section 3 of DOMA does not distinguish among persons of different sexual orientations, but rather it limits federal benefits to those who have entered into the traditional form of marriage.

In other words, DOMA does not discriminate against gay people, but rather only provides federal benefits to heterosexuals.

I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones:

And the courts have widely held that certain marriages, performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened public policy of th[at] state.”

As an American, a civil rights advocate, and a human being, I hold this administration to a higher standard than this brief. In the course of your campaign, I became convinced—and I still want to believe—that you do, too. I have seen your administration aspire and achieve. Protecting women from employment discrimination. Insuring millions of children. Enabling stem cell research to go forward. These are powerful achievements. And they serve as evidence to me that this brief should not be good enough for you. The question is, Mr. President—do you believe that it’s good enough for us?

If we are your equals, if you recognize that our families live the same, love the same, and contribute as much as yours, then the answer must be no.

We call on you to put your principles into action and send legislation repealing DOMA to Congress.

Sincerely,

Joe Solmonese

UPDATE: Pam Spaulding rightly asks, what comes next if Obama blows us off?

Sending [DOMA repeal legislation] passively up to the Hill's jellyfish leadership is akin to not sending it at all.

Also, what happens next if the President thumbs his nose at this letter? The gauntlet has been thrown down with an appeal to decency. Is the Obama administration going to toss this in the ashcan (hello, Rahm)? This is the dilemma that HRC faces as our advocacy group on the Hill. Now the WH knows HRC is angry, will it call a bluff of some kind, as in "you have nowhere else to go"?

Seriously, I'm glad this letter is finally heading to the President, but considering the callous way our issues have been treated -- by Obama's silence and the evasive contempt of Robert Gibbs, it's highly likely that the response will be silence or, humorously (NOT), telling us that they "feel for us" and again toss out "we had to do it" and try to take our eye off of the DOMA ball with the acceleration of hate crimes legislation. There needs to be a plan to follow up any response to the WH that doesn't look like a retreat or a whimper.

Read the rest of this post...

Howard Dean: Senator Conrad making a "big mistake" on health care reform

You'll recall that Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, said recently that he opposes the public option in health care reform (i.e., have a federal government health plan that would compete with private insurers, forcing them to actually give us quality coverage at a reasonable price). Howard Dean says Conrad is making a big mistake, and falling right into the insurance industry's hands.

Interesting that Kent Conrad, like Mary Landrieu, has no such problem with the federal government making sure that he and his staff get excellent health coverage and great rates (and you'd better believe that Blue Cross would never tell Senator Conrad that he hit his annual limit on prescription drugs). Conrad is just like all the politicians on the Hill. He wants to make sure that you don't get what he's got, otherwise what's the point in being king?

Feel free to ask the king why he and his staff are still sucking at the federal health care teat while denying us the same privilege:
Phone: (202) 224-2043 Read the rest of this post...

BREAKING: Legislation most of us don't care about is finally moving in Senate

Hallelujah. We're finally going to pass the Hate Crimes amendment - legislation that we all cared about 15 years ago, that already passed the last Congress, and that most of us now consider the least of our federal legislative priorities (though, in all fairness, we still "care" about it - just less than we care about DOMA, ENDA and DADT). I guess that means we can expect Obama to keep his promises on DADT, ENDA and DOMA some time around 2024. Read the rest of this post...

Noon news update

Ahmadinejad's "victory" complicates Obama's effort to reach out to Iran.

Tapper at ABC has lots of Iran updates, starting with yesterday morning, to give you a nice overview of just what happened yesterday.

How long until CIA Director Panetta apologizes to Dick Cheney?

South Carolina Republican apologizes for saying that Michelle Obama was descended from gorillas. (Surprise, a southerner.)

Health care costs are killing small businesses. Maybe if we just give Blue Cross another chance, which is what Democrats are talking of doing by killing the public option, the miserly insurance profiteers will find their hearts growing three times that day.

Newsweek: How lost are the Republicans? They're looking to Newt for answers.

Time for Norm Coleman to concede.

Cynthia Tucker: Republicans caused the budget deficit.

Iranians twittering their own revolution, very cool.

Shorter Republicans: Reagan, meh.

Shorter Democrats: When the cats away... Read the rest of this post...

What do we want?

Joe and I got an email the other day from a well-connected gay friend, and he said he was hearing rumors that the Obama administration, in an effort to woo back the gays, was thinking of possibly announcing the following this month:

1. Something on Hate Crimes.
2. Federal benefits for partners of gay federal employees.
3. A gay ambassador.

Let me explain something. All of that is very sweet and nice. But it's all very 1990s. Bill Clinton and George W Bush both appointed gay ambassadors, so you get no kudos there. Federal benefits for partners of gay federal employees is, again, nice, and will certainly benefit the handful of gays who work in the government. But again, it's very 1990s, in terms of issues on the gay community's radar. And finally, Hate Crimes. Nice bill, important, but totally bottom of the barrel in terms of its importance compared to DOMA, ENDA, and DADT. Not to mention, Hate Crimes already passed the Senate and House in the last Congress - we expect more with a Democratic president who has promised to be our "fierce advocate."

And a word about the federal employee benefits. How exactly are they going to pull that one off? First off, their own DOMA brief argues that it's not fair to ask straight taxpayers to pay for our benefits. So how is the administration going to pull a 180 on that one? Second, what about DOMA? Doesn't it have something to say about the federal government paying benefits to gay partners? Now, sure, I've been told by big gay lawyers that DOMA wouldn't necessarily ban the provision of federal benefits to partners provided they're not in a marriage-like relationship - meaning, DOMA would ban you from getting benefits if you have a civil union or an actual marriage in one of the states that permit it. So what that means is that should Obama decide to give benefits to the partners of gay federal employees, he may have to exclude any federal employees who have civil unions or marriages (in places like Massachusetts, CA, IA, CT, etc). Why? Because he hasn't done anything on DOMA, like he promised. Oops.

Relations are not going to get better between President Obama and the gay community - and in fact, they're going to keep deteriorating - until the White House does something real to move the agenda forward on DOMA, ENDA and DADT (and an openly gay cabinet appointee wouldn't hurt either). No more empty statements of "support." No more explanations as to how powerless you are to get anything done. We want action. You're the leader of the free world. Start acting like it. Read the rest of this post...

Iran protests continue. Supreme Leader approves investigation of election results

There really is no better source for what's happening in Iran than the Huffington Post. Nico Pitney's coverage surpasses anything I've been able to find. (I'll admit to becoming a little obsessed with Nico's reporting on Iran.)

The latest news is that there is a huge pro-Mousavi protest underway in Tehran (with no signs of violence, so far) and the Supreme Leader, the omnipotent one, is allowing an investigation of the election.

Events are unfolding quickly. Twitter has been an amazing source of info. too. (#iranelection) Great efforts are being made to keep the flow of info. coming from Iran. This is a new media revolution. Read the rest of this post...

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) wants Obama to break campaign promise so Baucus can be bipartisan

A top Senate Democrat wants Obama to break a campaign promise in order to achieve bipartisanship:

The rest of the cash will probably come from new taxes. But Democrats are deeply divided over which taxes to raise, and the issue has become a central stumbling block in the push to enact legislation by fall.

In recent days, Obama has revived a tax plan he first offered in February: limiting itemized deductions for the nation's 3 million highest earners. Polls show that the idea is popular -- it was Obama's biggest applause line last week at an event in Wisconsin -- and it would enable him to abide by a campaign pledge to pay for coverage for the uninsured with new taxes on the rich.

"He believes this is the most equitable way to do this," said senior White House strategist David Axelrod. "It places the burden on people who can most afford it."

But many Democrats, particularly in the Senate, have balked at the idea, saying they prefer a tax that has some hope of winning Republican support. In legislation that could be unveiled as early as this week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is expected to propose a new tax on the health benefits that millions of Americans currently receive tax-free through employers.

Senators are often idiots. They live in a bubble and have no sense of reality. Unlike Baucus, you may recall that during the campaign, Barack Obama repeatedly said he would not tax health benefits. That was John McCain's idea. Obama won that debate. Max Baucus wants Obama to break his promise.

Obama's idea to raise revenue would impact few Americans -- and has wide public support. Max Baucus supports a plan that would impact most workers -- because the Republicans claim to want it.

Now, if I was a Republican, I'd be laughing my ass off right now. Max Baucus is basically writing the t.v. ads for the opponents of health care reform. If he gets Obama to commit, ads will start running showing Obama saying he wouldn't tax benefits. That'll freak out the White House and the Democrats on the Hill. Also, if Obama breaks his campaign promise, Republicans will paint him as just another politician. That will surely damage the brand -- Obama can only screw over so many constituencies before he does look like just another craven pol.

I don't expect Max Baucus to have any strategic sense. He's been in the Senate too long. But, doesn't anyone in that body have a lick of political sense? For christ sakes, in 2006, there were 55 Republicans. Now, there are 40. Democrats have been winning because they promised to solve problems -- like health care. The American people aren't hoping that Baucus gets Republican votes. They want the damn problems solved. Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Obama is heading to Chicago today to speak at to the American Medical Association about health care reform. The insurance industry screws over businesses and doctors -- just like it screws over consumers. Everyone has problems with insurance companies. But, those entities let the industry insurance rule. And, it's becoming clearer every day that insurance companies control Capitol Hill. Also, watch how some Democrats on the Hill cater to the Republican allied groups, like the Chamber of Commerce, while ignoring groups that support Democrats. This thing is starting to feel like it's becoming a big mess.

If you're self-employed, don't forget to pay your quarterly taxes today. It's hard to forget to do that -- unless you're that financial whiz, Tim Geithner. And, if you're gay, remember, by not being able to marry, the Obama administration said you are saving the government money. From the now notorious DOMA brief:

DOMA ensures that evolving understandings of the institution of marriage at the State level do not place greater financial and administrative obligations on federal and state benefits programs. Preserving scarce government resources — and deciding to extend benefits incrementally — are well-recognized legitimate interests under rational-basis review.

So, send those tax dollars and realize you're helping to preserve scarce resources.

On a sad note, we want to send condolences to John Amato on the loss of his father. John is the genius who started Crooks and Liars. He's a good friend and we're thinking about him.

Let's see where this week leads us. Read the rest of this post...

Obama open to limiting malpractice payouts as Democrats wobble on compromise

None of this sounds like it's going down a very good path. Caving on malpractice suits and buying into one of the cornerstones of Republican (and doctors) reasons against health care reform is a major worry. While there may be exceptions this has generally been dramatized by those fighting against all change. Obama continues to reach out to the right and the Democratic rank looks dangerously close to crumbling in Congress.

If we're just nice to them, maybe it will all work out for the best. We're seeing much too much of this mindset in too many fronts (like banking) and the end results are likely to be the same. Good for industry and not so good for everyone else. And I thought we voted for change. Ha.

With Republicans fighting the idea of a government-run health insurance plan, members of President Barack Obama's team said Sunday that they are open to a compromise: a cooperative program that would expand coverage with taxpayer money but without direct governmental control.

Congress begins work this week on putting Obama's goal of universal health coverage into law. Some lawmakers are expected to introduce specific plans that run counter to Obama's political promises.

The concessions could be the smoothest way to deliver the bipartisan health care legislation the administration seeks by its self-imposed August deadline, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said.

"Smoothest way" is a gentler way of saying "half assed and worthless" I believe. Read the rest of this post...

Iran's supreme leader sides with Ahmedinejad

Even more reason to be suspicious about the election results in Iran. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's statement was very forceful, suggesting that a vote for anyone else would be a vote against Iran.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the record voter turnout in Friday's election showed Iranians value "resistance against oppressors," the agency reported.

"Pointing to enemies' massive propaganda campaign to discourage people from taking part in the elections, Ayatollah Khamenei also said there was really a divine miracle behind this elections, given its results that was 10 million higher than any of the previous ones in the 30-year history of elections in Iran," IRNA reported.

Official results showed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected with more than 62 percent of the vote. But the hardline incumbent's leading opponent, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Moussavi, has disputed the results, and his supporters have fought in the streets with police and Ahmadinejad's supporters since the vote.

Ahmedinejad meanwhile is feeding the street chaos, instigating protesters as he so often does with the world. He's finding new enemies hiding under his bed and the media is going along with the paranoia as if it's normal. Anyone who dared run against him or vote for the other candidate is now bad. It's going to be another long four years.

Less than two hours later, before the sweating thousands of his supporters in Val-y-Asr Square, we saw Ahmedinejad the Bad. "They are branding us as liars and corrupt," he screamed. "But they are themselves corrupt. I am going to use my position as president to name these people..." The crowd roared its approval. Of course they did. They all held Iranian flags or pictures of their pious leader amid heavenly clouds.

The day started badly with another of those dangerous, frighteningly brief statements from Tehran's loquacious police commander, Bahram Radan. "We have identified houses which are bases for the political mobs." This was the only reference the authorities would make about the outrageous street battles in which Radan's black-clothed cops beat Mousavi's supporters insensible on the streets of Tehran.

Then there was the front page of "Etemade Melli" – "National Trust" in English – which belongs to another of Ahmedinejad's enemies, Mehdi Karoubi. After the election results at the top of the front page – Mousavi officially won only 33.75 per cent of the votes and Karoubi 0.85 per cent – there was a caption: "Regarding the election results," it read, "Mehdi Karoubi and Mirhossein Mousavi made statements which we cannot publish in our newspaper." Beneath was a vast acre of white space. You could doodle on it. You could construct a crossword on it. You could draw a red light on it. But you couldn't read those statements.

Read the rest of this post...

Meat Free Monday

Putting a dent in climate change anywhere is not such a bad idea. Whether it's Monday or any other day doesn't really matter because it all adds up. Long time vegetarian Paul McCartney is helping to lead the effort in the UK. The Independent:

The McCartneys have attracted support from across the worlds of showbusiness, science, business and the environment. The singer Chris Martin, Hollywood stars Kevin Spacey and Woody Harrelson, actress Joanna Lumley and Sir Richard Branson are advocating meat-free Mondays.

Support has also come from comedians Ricky Gervais, David Walliams and Matt Lucas, the poet Benjamin Zephaniah and Vogue editor Alexandra Shulman.

Another supporter, Sir David King, the Government's former chief scientist, said: "The carbon and water footprints associated with producing beef are about 20 times larger than maize production. Eating less meat will help the environment."

The UN and Britain are concerned about the environmental impact of livestock, although the Government has shied away from urging people to eat less meat. Vast swathes of the Amazon rainforest are being cut down to make way for cattle ranches and to grow soy for feed. Belching from cows emits vast amounts of methane, which has 21 times the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide.

According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, meat is responsible for 18 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than transport's 13 per cent. Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has suggested one vegetarian day a week.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP goes back to the oil well

Surprise, surprise. Their answer is once again drilling for oil and gas and complain that promoting green energy is a tax. Right. So what would you call polluting the air? Who cleans that up? Who pays for the medical bills that come as a result of air pollution or does that magic hand that guides the economy also cover those bills? They're nuttier than ever and can't step away from their friends in Big Oil.

Republicans on Saturday slammed a Democratic bill before the House that seeks to address climate change, arguing that it amounts to an energy tax on consumers.

In the GOP's weekly radio and Internet address, Indiana Rep. Mike Pence said Congress should instead open the way for more domestic oil and natural gas production and ease regulatory barriers for building new nuclear power plants.

"During these difficult times, the American people don't want a national energy tax out of Washington, D.C.," said Pence, the third-ranking House Republican.

Next time they roll this one out they could at least explain how they're going to cover the costs for polluting the world. Read the rest of this post...