Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has joined CBS News as a contributor, just in time for inauguration coverage.

Rice, who served as secretary of state during President George W. Bush’s second term, made her debut on the network’s “Face the Nation” program Sunday and will be included in inauguration coverage on Monday.

CBS News Chairman Jeff Fager and president David Rhodes made the announcement Sunday, saying Rice “will use her insight and vast experience to explore issues facing America at home and abroad.”

Let Rice's new gig serve as a reminder to all that being consistently wrong about U.S. foreign policy is a great way to break into the mainstream media.

[Photo Credit: Reuters]

By Richard Tofel, ProPublica, Jan. 21, 2013

As we did four years ago, we asked Richard Tofel, ProPublica's president and author of a book on President Kennedy's inaugural address, to provide instant analysis of today's speech. Here are his thoughts:

In 2009, in the flush of his first election, Barack Obama declared in his inaugural address that, "What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply." Today, perhaps chastened by the trials of governing and the difficulty of gaining election a second time, he did not so much acknowledge that the cynics of 2009 had been right as devote himself to trying, one more time, to move the ground beneath them.

The critical portion of the address seemed to be this: "Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government for all time – but it does require us to act in our time…. We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate." Whether such a call, even with the president's present strength and confidence, will shift the ground will be the great question of the next period in our politics and history.

The speech centered on the two fundamental American texts, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Obama quoted the heart of Jefferson's Declaration verbatim, and then turned repeatedly, as his organizing rhetorical device, to the opening words of the Constitution: "We, the People." By the speech's end, seeking a call to action and perhaps a counterweight to the polarization of Washington, "we, the people" became "you and I, as citizens."

Along the way, in addition to drawing on the words of Jefferson and Martin Luther King, Jr., Obama managed to reference Lincoln four times in two paragraphs, adverting to the Gettysburg Address ("government of, and by, and for the people"), Lincoln's second inaugural ("blood drawn by lash and blood drawn by sword"), the "House Divided" speech ("no union… could survive half-slave and half-free") and Lincoln's second message to Congress ("made ourselves anew"). The one source not quoted in the speech, in a striking departure from inaugural tradition, seems to have been the Bible.

Continue reading »

A new U.N. report claims that widespread torture and abuse of detainees continues at Afghan police and intelligence facilities. Earlier this month President Hamid Karzai said that all detainees held by the U.S. and its allies would be transferred to Afghan custody. But the new allegations of torture could make such a transfer illegal. The 100-page report, that was released on Monday, was based on several hundred interviews and about half of the interviewed detainees and former detainees alleged torture or abuse. In 2011, a similar report caused the U.S. to halt transfers of detainees to nine Afghan facilities.

Via:

More than half of the 635 detainees questioned by U.N. investigators in the 12 months ending in October were ill-treated or tortured, including being subjected to severe beatings or electric shocks, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan said.

The allegations, which the Afghan government calls "exaggerated," are likely to complicate discussions about the handling of detainees, a source of debate between the United States and Afghanistan as the countries prepare for the departure of most foreign troops next year.

Many of the suspected fighters who end up in Afghan custody are captured by U.S. and allied troops. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization-led force said it has suspended the transfer of detainees to the facilities identified in the U.N. report and is working with Afghan authorities to address abuses.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has frequently maintained that the handling of detainees is a question of national sovereignty. During discussions with President Obama this month, he reiterated his demand that all Afghan prisoners be turned over to Afghan authorities.

Torture decreased at some facilities after the U.N. issued a report in 2011, and transfers of detainees to Afghan authorities were halted, but again increased after transfers resumed, according to the new report.

In all, 14 methods of abuse were documented. The report said evidence of torture occurred most frequently at facilities in the southern province of Kandahar, the heartland of the Taliban insurgency.

U.N. investigators received what they described as credible reports about the disappearance of 81 people who were arrested by Kandahar police between September 2011 and October 2012. They were also told about the reported existence of several unofficial detention sites and said some detainees held by intelligence officials were hidden from international observers — allegations denied by the intelligence agency.

Of the prisoners interviewed, 105 were children under international law, and a large majority of these juvenile prisoners had been tortured. Only a very small portion of prisoners had been in Afghan army or Afghan local police custody, but they also reported torture by those forces.

"A majority of NDS and ANP [Afghan National Police] officials do not accept that torture is ineffective and counter-productive as a tool to obtain strategically valuable and actionable intelligence to fight terrorism and conflict-related activities, let alone a serious crime under Afghan and international law," the report said.

DOWNLOADS: (66)

PLAYS: (568)

Embed

Conservative MSNBC host Joe Scarborough on Sunday warned Republicans that fringe elements were causing the party to shrink and it was "just gerrymandering" that allowed the GOP to keep control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2012 elections.

A Republican State Leadership Committee report released earlier this month acknowledged that a "Strategy of Targeting State Legislative Races in 2010 Led to a Republican U.S. House Majority in 2013."

On Sunday, Scarborough pointed to this as evidence that the Republican Party needed to become more inclusive.

"William F. Buckley in the 1960s at some point had to start defining the boundaries of conservatism," Scarborough explained to NBC's David Gregory. "He went after the John Birch Society, Ayn Rand, George Wallace. That has to happen again with this party because it’s getting smaller and smaller."

"In this debate, we actually have conservative thinkers, talking about Ronald Reagan being a RINO -- a Republican in name only -- because he supported an assault weapons ban. They keep pushing themselves closer and closer to the cliff."

"But I just have to say one other really important point, because I made a mistake over the past month talking about how Republicans have also won a majority in the House," he continued. "We actually got a minority of votes nationwide in House races."

"It was just gerrymandering from 2010 that gave us the majority."

A post-election analysis by Think Progress' Ian Millhiser determined that House Democrats actually received almost 1.4 million more votes than House Republicans in 2012, but thanks to partisan gerrymandering, Democrats would have needed to win by 7.25 percentage points to take back control of Congress.

(h/t: Think Progress)

There's a reason why Martin Luther King Jr., the great man whose birthday we celebrate today, was such a threat to the establishment. Not because of the soft-and-fuzzy, non-threatening MLK the media so loves, cherry-picking his legacy to leave only the pacifism, but because of his radical views on social and economic justice. (As he said, "I take the gospel seriously.")

It saddens me that so many young people seem to have no real understanding of who he was, or why he was so revolutionary. To them, it's just a day off from school, or a day taking part in public service. But why? And why do so many political pretenders claim his legacy while shunning the hard work of justice? Only the Occupy movement echoes the same moral voice as King's.

"Beyond Vietnam: A Time To Break The Silence" might be the greatest speech of our generation. I can think of nothing that comes close.

Dr. King attacked the military-industrial complex, calling the U.S. government "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today." He said war was the enemy of the poor. He was right then. Sadly, he still is.

If you listen to the entire speech, you'll see how very little has changed since he made it.

I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I'm in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together: Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: "A time comes when silence is betrayal." And that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns this query has often loomed large and loud: "Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King?" "Why are you joining the voices of dissent?" "Peace and civil rights don't mix," they say. "Aren't you hurting the cause of your people," they ask? And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (35)

PLAYS: (340)

Embed

Looks like Tommy Christopher at Mediaite figured out what we've been saying over here for a long time now... that David Gregory is a right wing tool who's constantly advocating for really bad Republican economic policies along with a bunch of his fellow Villagers in the media: David Gregory Tells Morning Joe That President Obama Must Gut Medicare To Succeed:

On a very special 2nd Quadrennial Barack Obama Day edition of Morning Joe, Meet The Press host David Gregory provided some more evidence against the mythical “liberal media bias” when he endorsed the emerging Beltway media consensus that in order to deal with debt and deficits, President Obama is going to have to gut Medicare. “He’s got to be able to convince his own party, but also to do something that, frankly, Americans don’t want done,” Gregory said of Medicare, “which is to have to give back some things.”

[...] what’s significant is that Gregory wasn’t offering merely pragmatic political advice, but actually endorsing the idea that the way to solve our fiscal problems involves cutting Medicare for beneficiaries.

Unfortunately for America, President Obama has already indicated a willingness to move in that direction, having already placed raising the Medicare eligibility age on the table. Raising the age will only shift those costs, at higher rates, and only partially away from the federal government. Those two extra years will either be paid for by the seniors themselves, who will be charged up to 3 times as much for health insurance on the individual market, or by the government in the form of Medicaid for those who can’t afford private insurance, or by private insurance companies.

What no one is talking about is that Medicare is a huge break for private insurers, who get to lay off their highest-risk patients onto the government. People with retiree group health insurance will be covered by their health insurance for those two extra years, at great expense to those companies. The amount of money they pay out in claims will far outstrip what they can take in in premiums, and the additional premiums will fall on those retirees’ employers.

The other problem is that, relatively speaking, 65 and 66 year-olds are bargains for Medicare, and eliminating them from the program would only succeed at making the overall pool of Medicare recipients older and sicker. If there was a way to eliminate the last 2 years of eligibility, you’d be on to something.

Gregory and his fellow beltway hacks Joe Scarborough and Tom Brokaw have been singing this tune for some time now as we've pointed out here over, and over, and over, and over and over again. And as Christopher rightfully noted out, there are ways to make Medicare solvent without turning it over to the private insurance market:

Continue reading »

enlarge

Five people were wounded in a shooting at the intersection of LaSalle Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on Monday afternoon.

Officials said none of the injuries were life-threatening.

Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas was among those who responded to the scene. He said that a group of six teenage boys or young men was gathered outside a small grocery when a late model white sedan - possibly a Nissan or Pontiac - drove past. Shots were fired from inside that vehicle.

The car sped off in the direction of the Mississippi River.

Read more...

Gun lovers have a habit of seizing on the rare instances where having a gun does actually protect you (as opposed to it being used against you or going off from mishandling) that I was going to compile my own list to balance things out, but since Gawker already did it, I might as well point you to their "Gun Appreciation Day" casualties:

Yesterday was deemed a day to appreciate your guns in America, and boy did we. Five people were shot at gun shows in North Carolina, Ohio and Indiana. These were not, however, the only instances of gun violence yesterday.

As happens everyday, numerous people were either injured or killed by guns on "Gun Appreciation Day," be it on purpose or accidentally. Spanning Alaska to Florida, here are those people:

• A 14-year-old suburban Atlanta boy shot and killed his 15-year-old brother while playing with their mother's handgun.
• A 26 year old was shot and killed while driving in San Francisco.
• A man was found dead from a gunshot wound in his home in Kansas City, Kansas.
• A woman in an El Paso County, Texas CO shooting range was hit in the knee by a bullet that ricocheted off a trash can.
• Two women were shot to death in a Dallas-area home.
• Two women were injured after someone opened fire at a crowded soccer field in Las Vegas.
• A 15-year-old girl was shot while sleeping in her bed when her Anchorage home was shot at.
• A 7-year-old boy in Tallahassee shot a 5 year old with a gun he found in a 22-year-old relative's room.
• A Huntsville woman shot her boyfriend after the two had an argument.
• A 23-year-old man died after being accidentally shot in a Greshman, Oregon home.
• A Cleveland father has been charged in connection with the death of his 6-year-old daughter from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
• One man was shot in Elyria, Ohio, just west of Cleveland, early Saturday morning.
• A man was found shot dead in a parking lot in Greenville County, South Carolina.
• Two people were shot and killed outside an inn in Hampton, Virginia.
• At least 10 people were shot in Chicago, at least two were fatal.
• A Colorado Springs man was driven to the hospital with a gunshot wound.
• A Jackson, Mississippi police officer was shot while responding to a disturbance call.
• One man was shot at a Martin Luther King Jr. parade in Jackson.
• Two men and one woman were shot at a home in Oakland.
• An 11-year-old boy was shot in an Oklahoma City apartment complex.
• Police in Richmond, Virginia are looking for three men who shot another man in his thirties.
• Police believe gang violence is to blame for the shooting death of one man in Santa Ana, California.
• An early morning shooting in Tuscaloosa injured two teenagers.

Oh, and here's another one: Father shoots wife and then himself at daughter's 16th birthday party.

So remember, kids: Guns don't always keep you safe. Sometimes they're the very things that hurt you!

DOWNLOADS: (108)

PLAYS: (2321)

Embed

White House senior adviser David Plouffe on Sunday called out CNN host Candy Crowley for making a "false equivalency" by suggesting both Democrats and Republicans had made the same efforts to hold the debt ceiling hostage to push their agenda.

In a preview of President Barack Obama's second inauguration, Crowley asked Plouffe if it was necessary for the president to engage the American people in political debates by arguing that an "evil motivation" was driving Republicans.

"It's hard to see a president calling for unity when he is suggesting that people who disagree with him don't disagree with him on policy, but disagree with him because they care more about the NRA or they don't care -- in the case of the debt ceiling -- whether the country falls into recession again," Crowley charged.

"Well, on the debt ceiling, it's the truth," Plouffe pointed out. "Think about this, Candy. For the first time in our country's history..."

"Just reminding people that the president himself, when he was in the Senate, voted against the debt ceiling," Crowley interrupted. "So these people that he's suggesting want the country to go into default are doing the same thing he did when he was a senator."

"No," Plouffe replied sternly. "He did vote against it, he's spoken to that. That's a political vote and he's learned from that. But at the time, Congress wasn't threatening to say we're not going to pay our bills unless we get what we want -- deeper cuts in Medicare than are required -- or we're going to tank the economy."

"I mean, this false equivalence needs to stop," he added. "The barrier to progress here is not the president. We need more Republicans in Congress to think like Republicans in the country who are seeking compromise who are seeking balance because we are poised here to really grow."

President Obama's 2nd inaugural speech is one for the ages. Jonathan Alter asked via Twitter shortly after what lines from it will be engraved in granite one day.

My answer: "We, the people."

President Obama used the pronoun "we" 88 times in his speech. He spoke of climate change, of health care, of poverty, and of history, and did so in the context of our shared citizenship.

It was as much a call to citizenship as it was a call to unity. Two sections stand out for me. The first is his call to action:

That is our generation’s task -- to make these words, these rights, these values of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness real for every American. Being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life. It does not mean we all define liberty in exactly the same way or follow the same precise path to happiness. Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government for all time, but it does require us to act in our time.

I don't think he could have made clearer the need for Congress to stop obstructing and start acting. But he didn't limit that call to Congress alone. He concluded his speech with a clarion call for every citizen to engage, to act, and to fulfill their duties as citizens, too:

My fellow Americans, the oath I have sworn before you today, like the one recited by others who serve in this Capitol, was an oath to God and country, not party or faction. And we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service. But the words I spoke today are not so different from the oath that is taken each time a soldier signs up for duty or an immigrant realizes her dream. My oath is not so different from the pledge we all make to the flag that waves above and that fills our hearts with pride.

They are the words of citizens and they represent our greatest hope. You and I, as citizens, have the power to set this country’s course. You and I, as citizens, have the obligation to shape the debates of our time -- not only with the votes we cast, but with the voices we lift in defense of our most ancient values and enduring ideals. (Applause.)

Let us, each of us, now embrace with solemn duty and awesome joy what is our lasting birthright. With common effort and common purpose, with passion and dedication, let us answer the call of history and carry into an uncertain future that precious light of freedom.

There has been so much punditry about what the President has to do and say in his second term, but very little said devoted to what citizens do. This is a real failure on the part of the pundits, in my opinion. They leave viewers thinking that the work of government is something which should take place among elected officials with no real engagement by the citizens.

This is how we failed in 2010. There was a sense that we elected this gifted politician to office and then most people checked out. President Barack Obama has called for that to end, and end now. By tying his own oath of office to the military's oath of duty, the immigrant's oath upon being conferred citizenship, and our own pledge of allegiance which is said at everything from sporting events to elementary schools, he called for us all to look at it as more than mere words, but our own duty to participate in democracy and raise our voices.

I can't think of a better way for him to have begun his second term. It was a speech of unity and tolerance, but also one intended to remind everyone that citizenship carries responsibility with it. While I'm sure there are some exploding wingnut heads, I do think reasonable people should hear what he said for what it is: A reminder that it's not just about Barack Obama, but every one of us.