AAC Blog
By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
In his 17 years pitching in the big leagues, Jim Bunning was known for his graceful curveball, his rising slider and his sidearm fastball. Now 78 years old and about to retire from the Senate, the Republican of Kentucky is apparently down to only one pitch: the screwball.
This Story
'Enough!' is enough: Bunning backs down
Bunning, Reid spar over jobs bill
Hurling beanballs at the unemployment line
For four days, he has been on a one-man campaign to cut off unemployment benefits, kick the unemployed off of health insurance, cut Medicare payments to doctors, deny satellite TV to rural Americans, shut down federal flood insurance and highway projects, and furlough thousands of federal workers.
Democrats can hardly believe the gift Bunning has given them by single-handedly shutting down these popular programs. Bunning's fellow Republicans are aghast. If this were baseball, the Hall of Famer would be on his way down to triple-A. But this is the Senate, where any one of the 100 members has the ability to bring proceedings to a halt, and Bunning continues to hurl his wild pitches.
The leadoff hitter Bunning faced on Monday was ABC News producer Z. Byron Wolf. Wolf, intercepting Bunning as he left his office, asked the senator to stay and talk to the cameras. Bunning, according to Wolf, flashed him the middle finger.
Next batter: ABC's Jonathan Karl, who caught Bunning at the elevator, with the camera rolling. "Excuse me! This is a senators-only elevator!" Bunning shouted.
On deck was Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, who asked for the 10th time for the Senate to approve, by unanimous consent, a temporary measure that would avoid the furloughs and the cutoff of unemployment benefits and highway funds.
"I object!" Bunning called out from the rear of the chamber, raising his right hand.
Reid was almost gleeful. "The fact is my friends on the other side of the aisle are opposing extending unemployment benefits for people who are out of work," he said.
The ornery Kentuckian said he was merely insisting that Congress find a way to pay for the $10 billion, 30-day extension, but that was difficult to square with his recent votes against attempts to rein in debt and spending.
This left people puzzling over Bunning's motives. Was he taking revenge on his senior colleague from Kentucky, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who helped to push Bunning into retirement? Or was he just being, well, crazy? This second possibility cannot be dismissed out of hand. With the Phillies and the Tigers, he had enviable accuracy, boasting one of the best strikeout-to-walk ratios. But since his reelection campaign, in 2004, Bunning has had some serious control problems.
He said his opponent looked like one of Saddam Hussein's sons. He suggested that he and his wife had been roughed up by "little green doctors" at a political picnic. He refused to debate in person, instead doing so by teleconference from Republican National Committee offices in Washington, where he used a teleprompter.
Just over a year ago, Bunning resumed his erratic form when he predicted in public that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would probably be dead from pancreatic cancer within nine months.
Yet, with the possible exception of that perfect game in '64, the events of the past week have been Bunning's most visible.
Reid opened Monday's Senate session with the same business that had been on the floor for Thursday's and Friday's sessions: trying to get Bunning to release his objection. Bunning, his face red, stared angrily at Reid. Bunning claimed the standoff was Reid's fault, for removing the provisions from an earlier piece of legislation. Pointing at Reid, Bunning blurted out: "He did it!"
True, there were many ways in which Democrats could have passed the extension earlier. But then they would have missed the satisfaction of fighting with Bunning. As Republicans went to the Senate floor to try to change the subject, Democrats held a teleconference with reporters. "This is a part of the wake-up call to the American people that Republicans are abusing procedures in the Senate and it is costing the American people," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), head of the House Democrats' 2010 campaign.
On the Senate floor, Democrats lined up for the chance to denounce Bunning for his "outrageous" affront to the unemployed. Two hours after Reid forced Bunning to make his 10th objection, the deputy Democratic leader, Dick Durbin (Ill.) went after Bunning for an 11th time. For 20 minutes, Durbin, looking up at the visitors in the gallery, spoke of all the programs Bunning had temporarily killed. "I don't get it," he said. "I feel we ought to be standing behind the people in our nation who are struggling to find a job," he said.
Listening to Durbin, Bunning grinned, laughed and muttered to himself. At one point he extended his right hand -- his pitching hand! -- to the floor, shook his fingers and clenched them into a fist. But instead of slugging Durbin, he merely raised an objection, his 11th, and promised to do it again and again. "As many people that get up and propose that," he said, "I will be here, whenever it is."
That's right where the opposing team wants him.
March 2, 2010 | Asheville Citizen-Times
By Joel Burgess
Challenges spurred by dissatisfaction could help, hurt
Winter and spring are usually safe seasons for incumbents.
That’s when political challengers are just cranking up their campaigns, or are busy fighting members of their own party, hoping to win a primary and get a shot at the incumbent in the general election.
But this year is different. In and around Buncombe County, three high-profile elected officials will face opponents in May primaries.
The early challenges to Congressman Heath Shuler, state Rep. Bruce Goforth and Buncombe Sheriff Van Duncan – all Democrats -- are uncommon, political observers say, and could be a symptom of widespread dissatisfaction among party members.
“It is extremely unusual. I don’t know what is going on with the process,” said Goforth who has represented Buncombe residents of the 115th district for four two-year terms and who is facing former congressional candidate Patsy Keever in the primary.
“Normally, if a Democrat is there and you think he is doing the job, you don’t run somebody against (him) because you spend all your money running against the primary opponent,” he said.
Still, it’s not certain the primary contests will hurt incumbents, one expert said, noting they could actually help depending on the strength and direction of the challenge.
Types of challengers
Going after a sitting elected official from your own party is generally not a good bet, said Bill Sabo, UNC Asheville political science professor.
“It is a long shot running against an incumbent in a primary, so you have to figure there are three basic reasons for doing this,” Sabo said.
First, there are those who see the campaign as a way to bring attention to their views “and possibly get a headline,” he said. Those challengers usually don’t have much chance of winning and are not taken seriously by incumbents.
Then there are those who feel the incumbent has drifted from the party mainstream and want to push the politician back to the left or right.
Politicians naturally move toward the center, Sabo said, and a strong challenger in this category often succeeds in making an incumbent take more liberal or conservative stands, depending on party.
Keever, a retired school teacher and environmental advocate, said that happened when Goforth recently announced he would introduce a bill restricting construction on steep mountains.
“I’m delighted that my opponent has finally seen the light that we do need standard state-wide development regulations,” Keever said.
Goforth, who describes himself as a conservative Democrat, said pressure from Keever’s campaign did not influence him and that the proposal reflects his view that local governments, not the state, should control development.
“That is crazy. My position has not changed,” he said.
The third kind of challenger is a combination of the first and second types, Sabo said. The candidate might know chances of winning aren’t good but might be trying to get publicity for a future race. Or that person might think they are running out of time to get into elected office.
Jerry “Rocky” Owenby, a former Buncombe sheriff’s deputy, said timing did play a role in his decision to run for the county’s top law enforcement position.
After leaving the sheriff’s department in 2007, Owenby, 42, said he had calls “within 24 hours” by two Democrats and two Republicans asking him to run.
But he was dealing with a death in the family and put off the idea.
“I was still unsure until recently, but there was a lot of support,” he said.
If elected, Owenby said he will cut the administration budget and be more available to the public than Duncan, whom he accused of putting off requests to meet with residents.
Duncan could not be reached for comment Monday. In 2006, the one-term Democrat beat long-time incumbent Republican Bobby Medford. Two years later Medford was sentenced to 15 years in prison for his role in wide-ranging bribery and gambling scheme.
Sign of dissatisfaction?
The party infighting could be a symptom of national dissatisfaction.
“Democrats are just as frustrated as can be,” Sabo said. “They have solid majorities in the Senate and Congress and they don’t really feel the agenda has been enacted.”
Blame often goes to legislators or rank-and-file elected officials, the political science professor said.
Congressional candidate Aixa Wilson, an archeologist from Asheville, is new to politics and said he understands his lack of funds and name recognition will badly hamper him.
But Wilson said he is challenging Shuler because he feels the two-term lawmakers is not up to the job of crafting complex legislation and is too conservative, especially on some social issues.
He criticized Shuler’s affiliation with a group of conservative Christian Washington legislators, known as the Family or the Fellowship.
“I think he is pretty much doing the best that we can, but this Fellowship alignment really disturbs me, and I hope it disturbs a lot of people around the district,” he said.
Shuler did not address any of Wilson’s particular concerns, but directed comments at the economy.
“When re-elected to Congress, the people of this community can be confident that I will continue fighting to create jobs, end the partisan gridlock in Washington, and represent our community’s mountain values in the U.S. House,” he said in a statement through spokeswoman Julie Fishman.
Help or hurt
The affect the challenges will have on incumbents is up in the air. If a popular and well-funded opponent doesn’t succeed in winning, the newcomer could still inflict serious damage and send the incumbent limping into the general election, Sabo said.
But a challenge from someone with few resources or who is viewed as too extreme could actually help the incumbent.
“As an incumbent, you want a challenge that allows you to clarify, streamline and articulate your message,” Sabo said. “But you don’t want a challenge that is going to sap your resources or leave you with all kinds of bloody marks.”
Wilson, for example, could actually be helping Shuler by criticizing his religious views in a largely conservative district, he said.
Keever, though, might be mounting a more serious challenge in Buncombe County where recent elections have turned out large numbers of liberal voters.
“They might think I am too conservative,” said Goforth, who said his focus is providing jobs and that everything else is “window dressing.”
Keever said that her challenge would “in no way divide the party,” and could actually help in the end.
“What you are doing is part of the democratic process of giving people a choice. That is why we have the primary system set up, and when the primary is over we all get behind whoever the Democratic winner is and support that person in the general election,” she said.—
Scott Martelle
AOL News
LOS ANGELES (March 2) -- The number of American anti-government militia and "patriot" groups, largely dormant since their heyday in the mid-1990s, mushroomed at an "astonishing" rate last year, raising "grave concern" about the potential for future domestic terrorism, according to a new report by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The nonprofit civil rights organization, which tracks the hate movement and anti-government groups, counted 512 militias and related groups in 2009, up from 149 groups the year before. And, it said, the movement has added a layer of racism largely absent a decade ago.
At the same time, the organization has observed a spike in what it calls "nativist extremist groups," defined as those that "confront or harass suspected immigrants," to 309 groups last year, up from 173 the year before.
David McNew, Getty Images
Members of the National Socialist Movement, a white supremacist group, march at a rally against illegal immigration on Oct. 24 in Riverside, Calif. The number of groups that "confront or harass suspected immigrants" has surged from 173 in 2008 to 309 last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center said.Hate groups also grew slightly, from 926 to 932, continuing what the SPLC said was a trend that began around 2000, and rising 54 percent in the decade. The growth was "driven largely by an angry backlash against nonwhite immigration and, starting in the last year of that period, the economic meltdown and the climb to power of an African-American president."
Fear and frustration were the fuel, the report said.
"The anger seething across the American political landscape ... goes beyond the radical right," the report said, adding that the rage was fed by "racial changes in the population, soaring public debt and the terrible economy, the bailouts of bankers and other elites, and an array of initiatives by the relatively liberal Obama administration that are seen as 'socialist' or even 'fascist.'"
"The 'tea parties' and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups," the report said, "but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories and racism."
And some of the underlying beliefs of the militia movement have found their way into the mainstream, according to the report, "Rage on the Right: The Year in Hate and Extremism," which was written by Mark Potok, director of the SPLC's Intelligence Report.
"While in the 1990s, the movement got good reviews from a few lawmakers and talk-radio hosts, some of its central ideas today are being plugged by people with far larger audiences, like Fox News' Glenn Beck and U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann," Potok wrote. "Beck, for instance, re-popularized a key Patriot conspiracy theory -- the charge that FEMA is secretly running concentration camps -- before finally 'debunking' it."
HO / AFP / Getty Images
Daniel Cowart, here in an undated photo, is one of two men accused of plotting to kill more than 100 people, including Barack Obama, in 2008. He is awaiting trial. The SPLC said resentment of Obama is one factor fueling anti-government sentiment.The report adds to a similar finding by the federal Department of Homeland Security nearly a year ago, which warned that the crumbling economy "and the election of the first African-American president present unique drivers for right-wing radicalization and recruitment." That report was criticized by conservatives and veterans' groups, drawing an apology from DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.
The SPLC last year reported on the resurging militia movement, which it said was propelled by conspiracy theories about pending martial law and a move by Mexico to reclaim portions of the American Southwest. With the election of Barack Obama as president, that report said, the new wave of militia activity had taken on a much more racist cast than the movement that gave rise to Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995.
The SPLC's new assessment comes less than two weeks after Joseph Stack became a hero to some anti-government crusaders when he crashed a small airplane into an Internal Revenue Service office in Austin, Texas, killing himself and an IRS employee. Stack had posted an online "manifesto" detailing his financial problems and frustration with the federal government, and said he intended to give the IRS "my pound of flesh."
Experts are already concerned that Stack's suicidal plane crash could make him a martyr to anti-government zealots, and, like the deadly federal raid on David Koresh's Branch Davidian Ranch in Waco, Texas, and the violent siege of Randy Weaver's cabin in remote Ruby Ridge, Idaho, could spawn a fresh wave of right-wing violence.
The SPLC said it already has noticed "signs of similar violence," including the killings of six law enforcement officers, arrests of extremists in alleged assassination plots against Obama, a shooting rampage by a white supremacist in Brockton, Mass., and the arrests of "individuals with anti-government, survivalist or racist views ... in a series of bomb cases."
Gov. Perry beats Hutchison in Texas GOP primary
Published - Mar 03 2010 01:25AM EST
By KELLEY SHANNON and JAY ROOT - Associated Press Writers
AUSTIN, Texas— Riding a wave of growing anti-Washington anger, Texas Gov. Rick Perry easily dispatched Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and a challenger backed by some in the tea party movement Tuesday to once again become the Republican nominee for the state's top office.
Speaking shortly after Hutchison called him to concede, Perry continued the attack on the nation's capital that powered him past the state's senior senator, slamming Washington on spending, job losses, the heath care debate and for "trying to impose education standards" on Texas.
"From Driftwood, Texas, to Washington, D.C., we are sending you a message tonight: Stop messin' with Texas!" Perry said to a throng of cheering supporters at the famous Salt Lick barbecue restaurant in Driftwood, just outside of Austin.
With more than 90 percent of precincts reporting, Perry led with 51 percent to Hutchison's 30 percent. Perry managed to avoid a runoff even though nearly one in five voters cast ballots for the third candidate _ Debra Medina, a GOP party activist who has strong libertarian leanings and supporters in the tea party movement.
Medina raised relatively little money and told talk show host Glenn Beck there were "some very good arguments" that the U.S. was involved in the 2001 terrorist attacks, yet she still managed to win over scores of voters who might have otherwise sided with the deeply conservative Perry.
She might have done better had Perry not identified with the same anti-Washington sentiment just as the tea party movement was taking off a year ago _ and jumped aboard. He spoke to tea party activists on April 15, 2009 _ federal income tax filing day _ and in response to a question by The Associated Press even flirted with the idea of Texas seceding from the Union.
"I think he sensed at that early date that there was a very strong feeling that Washington was going too far in taxation and regulation," said longtime Republican consultant Reggie Bashur.
"A lot of people did not understand, including myself, the growing resentment, the growing opposition in the state toward Washington, D.C.," Bashur said. "I think the governor and his team recognized and became a leader in the anti-Washington movement. And movement I think is the appropriate word. It was in its infancy then."
Perry will face former Houston Mayor Bill White, who easily defeated Houston hair-care magnate Farouk Shami and five other Democrats to win his party's nomination for governor and immediately turned on Perry.
"Today, the Texans who cast their votes ... sent a clear signal," White said in Houston. "Texas is ready for a new governor."
White saluted the two Republicans who challenged Perry for the GOP nomination, saying he admires their courage for taking on a "career politician" who knows every "trick in the book."
Already the state's longest-serving governor, Perry hammered Hutchison for her ties to the nation's capital as he pressed hard for a third, full four-year term. He criticized her votes in favor of bailing out troubled financial institutions when George W. Bush was president; Perry's spokesman called her "Kay Bailout."
Hutchison said last week she tried to remind voters that she always fought for Texas values in Congress, but admitted during an interview that Perry had succeed in sticking her with a Washington label.
"I think the senator tried to focus on Texas issues and what she would do to lead Texas into the future. And I think she was just overtaken by a wave of anti-Washington sentiment that all members of Congress are being swept up in," said Hutchison spokeswoman Jennifer Baker.
"Her record is conservative. It was unfortunate that there was that national anti-Washington sentiment that overtook the race and took the focus off Texas issues."
Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas, said Perry's campaign "honed in on where the Republican election was and defined Hutchison in a way that she couldn't escape on the other."
"She never recovered," Henson said. "Her campaign never managed an effective response ... and the timing turned out to be horrible for her."
Hutchison conceded to Perry fairly early Tuesday evening, appearing well prepared to end what had been a heated, multimillion-dollar fight between the party heavyweights.
"We have fought valiantly for our principles, but we did not win," Hutchison told supporters in Dallas. "I will work with Gov. Perry and our fellow Republicans to keep Texas strong in the future."
Medina, in brief comments to reporters, swiped at Perry: "I'm very disturbed by the numbers we are seeing in the campaign tonight. I think there are many around this state ... who are very disappointed in the work he has done for Texas."
White saluted the two Republicans who challenged Perry for the GOP nomination, saying he admires their courage for taking on a "career politician" who knows every "trick in the book."
Already the state's longest-serving governor, Perry hammered Hutchison for her ties to the nation's capital as he pressed hard for a third, full four-year term. He criticized her votes in favor of bailing out troubled financial institutions when George W. Bush was president; Perry's spokesman called her "Kay Bailout."
Hutchison said last week she tried to remind voters that she always fought for Texas values in Congress, but admitted during an interview that Perry had succeed in sticking her with a Washington label.
"I think the senator tried to focus on Texas issues and what she would do to lead Texas into the future. And I think she was just overtaken by a wave of anti-Washington sentiment that all members of Congress are being swept up in," said Hutchison spokeswoman Jennifer Baker.
"Her record is conservative. It was unfortunate that there was that national anti-Washington sentiment that overtook the race and took the focus off Texas issues."
Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas, said Perry's campaign "honed in on where the Republican election was and defined Hutchison in a way that she couldn't escape on the other."
"She never recovered," Henson said. "Her campaign never managed an effective response ... and the timing turned out to be horrible for her."
Hutchison conceded to Perry fairly early Tuesday evening, appearing well prepared to end what had been a heated, multimillion-dollar fight between the party heavyweights.
"We have fought valiantly for our principles, but we did not win," Hutchison told supporters in Dallas. "I will work with Gov. Perry and our fellow Republicans to keep Texas strong in the future."
Medina, in brief comments to reporters, swiped at Perry: "I'm very disturbed by the numbers we are seeing in the campaign tonight. I think there are many around this state ... who are very disappointed in the work he has done for Texas."
Hutchison kept other politicians guessing for the past year about when she might step down from the Senate. Initially she said she would leave by the end of 2009 to concentrate full time on her race for governor. But later she decided to stay awhile, saying she needed to fight President Barack Obama and the Democrats on their health care legislation.
Her continued presence in Washington gave Perry more ammunition to use against her in his Texas campaigning as he continued to paint her as a Washington insider. Last week, she said again that she would leave some time after the conclusion of the health care debate.
Byron Egan, a 40-year friend of Hutchison, said he was surprised she came out so early, but hopes she doesn't quit the Senate.
"She has influence there. She has seniority," said Egan, who attended the University of Texas at Austin. "Each vote she makes in the Senate is important for Texas. We need her to stay."
Associated Press writers Jim Vertuno in Driftwood; Ramit Plushnick-Masti in Houston; and Danny Robbins, John McFarland, Schuyler Dixon and Linda Stewart Ball in Dallas contributed to this report.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Michael A. Lawson <mamlawson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
Today I received an unexpected call from Leanne Powell from Congressman Kissell’s office that the Congressman would be presenting a Congressional Resolution, H. Con. Res. 238, “Recognizing the difficult challenges Black veterans faced when returning home after serving in the Armed Forces, their heroic military sacrifices, and their patriotism in fighting for equal rights and for the dignity of a people and a Nation.”
This past weekend during the NC Black Leadership Caucus Banquet, I spoke with the Congressman about one particular thing. The month of February, we celebrate Black History month and I told Congressman Kissell of the little known role of the first all black fighting regiment had during WWI.
The 15th New York Infantry, (“The Harlem Hell Fighters”) later federally designated, as the 369th Regiment Army (received just before the war was over in 1919) was the only American Fighting Unit to fight in a World War or any War under their State Flag (New York) and NOT the American Flag. I also told the Congressman that to this date Feb. 20, 2010 there has been no mention of the 369 Regiment anywhere by the American Government, no medals, no monuments, no proclamations, nothing recognizing the dedication and sacrifice 3925 plus young men of which more than half loss their lives during the battles of Champagne-Marne, Mouse Argonne (Argonne Forest), Ainse-Marne and the Vosages Mountains.
The documentary “Men of Bronze” a 60-minute video Directed by Black War Historian William Miles and Produced by Paul Killiam details the exploits of these young men from Harlem is one of two places where history speaks to what these brave young men did to help bring World War I to an end. The other official record can be found in Sechault Northern France wear a monument is dedicated to these American Hero’s by the French government.
There needs to be a monument dedicated to these Black soldiers by the American Government and a much-needed recognition of these soldiers who gave their lives during World War I. My Grandfather, Major Melville T. Miller served more than 50 years in the United States Army through two World Wars and the Koran action he was 16 ½ years old when he first went into the army and 17 years when he landed in France.
I would like to say thank you to my Congressman Larry Kissell for sponsoring this Congressional Resolution, H. Con. Res 238.
Michael A. Lawson
1st VP 8th Congressional District
North Carolina Democratic Party
President
African American Caucus
Mecklenburg County
Chairman
Pct#4
Michael,
He was honored to be able to this.
Kindest Regards,
Leanne Powell, Congressman Larry Kissell Office
WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAS ACCOMPLISHED
1. Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending
2. Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices
3. Instituted enforcement for equal pay for women
4. Beginning the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
5. Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB
6. Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information
7. Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier's family
8. The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act
9. Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible
10. Limits on lobbyist's access to the White House
11. Limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration
12. Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
13. Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren't even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan
14. Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research
15. Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research
16. New federal funding for science and research labs
17. States are permitted to enact federal fuel efficiency standards above federal standards
18.. Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect
19. Funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools
20. New funds for school construction
21. The prison at Guantanamo Bay is being phased out
22. US Auto industry rescue plan
23. Housing rescue plan
24. $789 billion economic stimulus plan
25. The public can meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (the new plan can be completed in one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying
26. US financial and banking rescue plan
27. The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed
28. Ended the previous policy; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with the Geneva Convention standards
29. Better body armor is now being provided to our troops
30. The missile defense program is being cut by $1.4 billion in 2010
31. Restarted the nuclear nonproliferation talks and building back up the nuclear inspection infrastructure/protocols
32. Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic
33. Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions
34. Visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any president in his first six months in office
35. Successful release of US captain held by Somali pirates; authorized the SEALS to do their job
36. US Navy increasing patrols off Somali coast
37. Attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles
38. Cash for clunkers program offers vouchers to trade in fuel inefficient, polluting old cars for new cars; stimulated auto sales
39. Announced plans to purchase fuel efficient American-made fleet for the federal government
40. Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
41. Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program
42. Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return home to visit loved ones
43. Ended the previous policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions
44. Expanding vaccination programs
45. Immediate and efficient response to the floods in North Dakota and other natural disasters
46. Closed offshore tax safe havens
47. Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
48. Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to bring jobs back
49. Ended the previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry's predatory practices
50. Energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources
51. Lower drug costs for seniors
52. Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now realizing hundreds of millions in savings
53. Increasing pay and benefits for military personnel
54. Improved housing for military personnel
55. Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses
56. Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals
57. Increasing student loans
58. Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program
59. Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy
60. Established a new cyber security office
61. Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20 years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force; this includes new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology and cyber units and operations, etc.
62. Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts
63. Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness
64. Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient
65. Students struggling to make college loan payments can have their loans refinanced
66. Improving benefits for veterans
67. Many more press conferences and town halls and much more media access than previous administration
68. Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud
69. The FDA is now regulating tobacco
70. Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules
71. Ended previous practice of having White House aides rewrite scientific and environmental rules, regulations, and reports
72. Authorized discussions with North Korea and private mission by Pres. Bill Clinton to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons
73. Authorized discussions with Myanmar and mission by Sen. Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive
74. Making more loans available to small businesses
75. Established independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare
76. Appointment of first Latina to the Supreme Court
77. Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans
78. Limited salaries of senior White House aides; cut to $100,000
79. Renewed loan guarantees for Israel
80. Changed the failing/status quo military command in Afghanistan
81. Deployed additional troops to Afghanistan
82. New Afghan War policy that limits aerial bombing and prioritizes aid, development of infrastructure, diplomacy, and good government practices by Afghans
83. Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production
84. Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters
85. Paid for redecoration of White House living quarters out of his own pocket
86. Held first Seder in White House
87. Attempting to reform the nation's healthcare system which is the most expensive in the world yet leaves almost 50 million without health insurance and millions more under insured
88. Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform
89. Has announced his intention to push for energy reform
90. Has announced his intention to push for education reform
In honor of this moment, we're offering a special gift to thank our supporters.
Make a contribution of $30 or more before midnight on Thursday, March 4th, and receive a free "Elaine Marshall for Senate" T-shirt!
This election will come down to what we can - or can't do - in the next few months.
As we lay the groundwork for victory, we need to make sure our campaign is well funded, and ready to go. We wouldn't have made it this far without supporters like you - and I'm asking for your help in pushing this campaign past the finish line.
Can you chip in $30 or more today?
As a special gift, we'll send you an "Elaine Marshall for Senate" T-shirt:
http://elainemarshall.com/donate
This movement for common sense in Washington is just getting started, and I look forward to continue working with you as this campaign moves forward.
Thanks for everything,
Elaine Marshall
P.S. If you can't afford a $30 donation, you can also receive an "Elaine Marshall for Senate" bumper sticker with a contribution of $5 or more by clicking here!
Paid for by The Elaine Marshall Committee
Friday 05 February 2010 | t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
http://www.truthout.org/the-great-escape56669
by: William Rivers Pitt
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: "War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know" and "The Greatest Sedition Is Silence." His newest book, "House of Ill Repute: Reflections on War, Lies, and America's Ravaged Reputation," is now available from PoliPointPress.
With each passing day, it becomes more and more astonishing to encompass the fact that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and their henchmen from the prior administration have managed thus far to escape any accounting whatsoever for the massive battery of criminal activity committed during their time in office. More than a year has passed since these men had their hands on the levers of power, and evidence of their myriad crimes and frauds is laying all over the countryside, yet nothing has come of it.
The British government has been running a wide-ranging inquiry into the manner in which the UK and United States were led to war in Iraq by then-President Bush and then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. An astonishing amount of damning evidence and information has been uncovered and publicly aired, including the following statements delivered by a senior member of Parliament (MP) on Tuesday:
A senior Welsh MP said last night he knew "for certain" Tony Blair and George Bush struck a deal to invade Iraq at their notorious Crawford Ranch meeting in 2002 - a year before war was declared. Elfyn Llwyd, Plaid Cymru's parliamentary leader, said he had seen a confidential memo to that effect, although he would not divulge its exact contents.
Critics of the military action in Iraq have long suspected Mr Blair and President Bush came to an agreement at the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas in April 2002, a claim Mr Blair denied in evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry last week. Mr Llwyd said he had offered to give evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry himself, in private if necessary.
The Meirionnydd Nant Conwy MP said: "I think other things should have been pursued [at the inquiry], in particular the detailed conversation at the ranch in Crawford in April 2002. I do know that the deal was struck, I know for certain it was struck at that stage so just to pretend months down the road that no deal had been struck I think is unforgivable. I have offered to give evidence and Chilcot has said 'I'll come back to you'. At that stage I will have private discussions with him."
MP Llwyd refers here to the infamous Downing Street Memos, a collection of British government documents that lay out George W. Bush's intent to invade and occupy Iraq whether or not there was any WMD/terrorism evidence to support the action, documents that further demonstrate Prime Minister Tony Blair's willing acquiescence to the plan. Most damning of all is the secret memo dated 23 July 2002, explaining that war in Iraq was coming, and if the facts did not support the action, those facts would be twisted and buried. "There was a perceptible shift in attitude," read the memo [emphasis added]. "Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."
These documents, along with testimony from the likes of MP Llwyd, offer a vivid portrait of a Bush administration far gone in the pursuit of its own militant plans, and more than willing to break laws and deceive the public to achieve the ends they sought. It was a nest of criminals that occupied the White House for those eight long years, proof of this continues to pile up in vast drifts, and nothing comes of it.
Quite the contrary, in fact. A recent report from the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility slapped a big fat "Not Guilty" stamp on the jackets of John Yoo and Jay Bybee, the two central authors of the notorious "torture memos" that argued the legal justifications for the use of torture by the Bush administration. Worse, it appears Obama's DOJ went out of the way to make sure Bybee and Yoo escaped free and clear from any censure for their despicable activities. According to a recent Newsweek report:
An upcoming Justice Department report from its ethics-watchdog unit, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), clears the Bush administration lawyers who authored the "torture" memos of professional-misconduct allegations.
While the probe is sharply critical of the legal reasoning used to justify waterboarding and other "enhanced" interrogation techniques, NEWSWEEK has learned that a senior Justice official who did the final review of the report softened an earlier OPR finding. Previously, the report concluded that two key authors - Jay Bybee, now a federal appellate court judge, and John Yoo, now a law professor - violated their professional obligations as lawyers when they crafted a crucial 2002 memo approving the use of harsh tactics, say two Justice sources who asked for anonymity discussing an internal matter.
But the reviewer, career veteran David Margolis, downgraded that assessment to say they showed "poor judgment," say the sources. (Under department rules, poor judgment does not constitute professional misconduct.) The shift is significant: the original finding would have triggered a referral to state bar associations for potential disciplinary action - which, in Bybee's case, could have led to an impeachment inquiry.
The truth of the matter is plain enough. Yoo and Bybee are not going to turn themselves in. Neither are any of the other actors in this gruesome play. If any measure of justice is going to be achieved, it will fall upon Congress, President Obama and his Department of Justice to get it done. Subpoenas must be issued, evidence gathered and testimony heard for the truth to be brought forth and for punishment to be meted out.
But this DOJ cannot even accept the judgment of its own OPR on two comparatively minor foot soldiers of the Bush administration without sanding down the conclusions enough to spare Yoo and Bybee the punishment they so richly deserve. Is there any hope at all that the larger players in the Bush-era criminal activities - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz most prominently - will be brought to justice when those two lesser lights are allowed to return to a law school classroom and a seat on the federal bench?
Disgraceful as it is to say, don't hold your breath.
Speaking of evidence, there is this: a bomb in Karbala exploded on Wednesday, killing and wounding dozens of Shiite pilgrims. Another bomb in Karbala was attached to a military vehicle and killed and wounded dozens on Wednesday. Another bomb killed and wounded several other pilgrims outside Baghdad on Wednesday. Gunmen shot and killed a police officer in Kirkuk on Wednesday. The day before, a suicide bomber killed 54 and wounded dozens more in the outskirts of Baghdad. As of Wednesday, almost 5,000 US soldiers had been killed in Iraq, and nearly 50,000 more have been wounded. More than a million Iraqi civilians have likewise been killed and wounded.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz, Rice, and a dozen other members of the Bush administration, including Yoo and Bybee, are directly responsible for this carnage. They lied through their teeth and broke any number of laws to see it done. They are guilty of much more than the war crimes they committed in both Iraq and the United States. They are guilty of bankrupting this nation with two wars begun on false pretenses and perpetuated to enrich the few, while further cementing the stranglehold "defense spending" has on our growth as a civilized nation.
Thanks in no small part to the Iraq debacle, there is no political impetus to lay a finger on the wildly bloated "defense" budget, even as the fabric of our society shreds and shatters under the economic yoke placed upon our necks by the previous administration. Ours is a government staffed from stem to stern with political cowards who refuse to heal these wounds, and with those who are just as culpable as those members of the Bush administration (read: members of Congress who voted to support each and every criminal act that led us to this place).
Justice? When it comes to the Bush administration, the word has no meaning. They have escaped that justice, and we are all less free because of it.—
Comments (14 as of 5:10 PM ET, 02/05/2010)
Citizen's arrests?
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 20:27 — Anonymous (not verified)
Citizen's arrests? Unfortunately, anyone who were to try such a thing would be shot or beaten, hauled away in leg irons, and held indefinately, perhaps with no charges.
ALL thanks to our NAPPYS (No
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 20:49 — Vic Anderson (not verified)
ALL thanks to our NAPPYS (No Account President and Party of Yoo're Screwed), whose only explanation for such abject dereliction of duty to US can be Bushist blackmail for their lives. And have no doubt BushCo.'d do it, having 911'ed over 3000 of US (and NOT having done so since in order to APPEAR to "prevent" such attacks), but now claiming the power to execute US citizen sans due process on mere suspicion of "terrism"! How much more transparency is necessary for citizen Desistance and CHANGING THEIR NAPPYS?!
You can thank the Democrats,
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 20:59 — Professor Emeritus Pete Bagnolo (not verified)
You can thank the Democrats, who with few exceptions, enabled the Bush treason. You can also blame his cowardly, celebrity bound, successor, B. Obama, who showed yellow out of fear of being targeted by the Fascists, but more so because he fully intended to allow the Military, Industrial, Medical, Complex to continue and had he looked for indictments on Bush, he would not have been able to pursue his own homage to the Big Oil and Big Arms/ordinance dealers, because he planned to follow the Bush lead thus betraying those who voted more against Bush/McCain, than for Obama.
He has also failed to attempt, either by executive order or by intimidating congress with humiliation each day as did FDR with his own rash of executive Orders shaming congress into action.
I shall not again vote for the likes of Mr. Obama, and since I cannot in good conscience vote for a fascist, I shall not vote for one of the two major party candidates.
If OBama brings "Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz, Rice, and a dozen other members of the Bush administration, including Yoo and Bybee" he would cry himself to sleep nightly for he is a coward and a seeker of dynastic wealth and celebrity. I am ashamed to have voted for him. He is no FDR.
When your dad's ex-Director
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:09 — ME Browning (not verified)
When your dad's ex-Director of the CIA (and just why *was* he in Dallas on November 22, 1963?), you can get away with anything.
Well, there you have it,
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:21 — EDGEOFNOWHERE (not verified)
Well, there you have it, folks! If you still think that you are living in a democracy or a republic, then you just aren't paying any attention. But, wait: there's more! Stick around for the finale, if you dare.
Indeed, a great many
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:23 — Anonymous (not verified)
Indeed, a great many Democrats helped facilitate Bush's crimes, whether through cowardly inaction or blatant support. And we can certainly add the cowardly Obama to the list. As president, he has done nothing significant to rebuke what the Bush?Cheney cabal put into place, let along prosecute the war criminals. I will also not vote for Obama again, which means I will almost certainly cast my vote for a third party candidate...the Republican party being completely overrun and controlled by fascists.
You are preaching to the
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:27 — Anne (not verified)
You are preaching to the choir, Mr. Pitt. This column, and similar ones by others, should be printed in every paper in the country, on every blog, in every news magazine. It should be shouted from the rooftops if necessary! Well, none of that is likely to happen, and one has to wonder how it is possible to wake the general public up to these facts. I have been preaching for years to anyone who would listen about the crying need for "justice" to prevail in our country by using our legal system to hold these criminals accountable for their actions; I've written letters to the editors of local papers, signed petitions, forwarded same to hosts of email contacts, etc., etc., and I have sadly and reluctantly arrived at the same conclusion: I am not holding my breath. To say I am disappointed in Obama for the position he has taken on this issue is a vast understatement. I have finally reached the point of hopelessness. If there is no justice in the land for criminals at the very top of government, where is there justice for anyone at all?
They escaped because the
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:33 — Anonymous (not verified)
They escaped because the whole system is rotten to the core now.
Obama would not be in the
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:40 — ravenna (not verified)
Obama would not be in the hot water he appears to be in now if he had kicked ass and named names the minute he became president. By not holding his predecessors accountable for their criminal actions he simply emboldened the Republicans who lie, cheat and obstruct for their own gain.
When you do not clean house, the rats prosper. This is what we're now seeing in Congress. Rats such as Limbaugh, Coulter and the like would have nothing to say if Bush and his cronies had been exposed and made accountable for the terrible state we're in now.
Possibly the only reason Obama didn't take them to task is that he knows the Supreme Court is stacked against America, and fully in league with the corporate world which brought us the past 8 years, as witnessed with the Bush/Gore decision.
Very well said Mr. Pitt!
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:41 — James Matson (not verified)
Very well said Mr. Pitt! The signs were there awhile ago that Obama was "gotten to" by the billionaires club. Why do you think they "allowed" him to become President?
One particular phrase that gets my attention these days is, "poor judgement". This seems to be the new excuse for levity pleaded by lawyers for their accused clients, mostly Conservative clients I might add.
So Mr Professor Emeritus,
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:42 — S.O.Teric (not verified)
So Mr Professor Emeritus, the US will go on as it did during the Bush years? I hope you have a rock-solid retirement program, but really you know the "banksters" salivate every time they look at all the money in retirement accounts. They are trying to figure a way to get it. Say good-bye to your "dignified retirement." Can't you see that you are reacting exactly as the Republicans hope you will? Their strategy of "No!" is working. There will be no reform of health insurance fee structures, no limit on how high oil prices can go, no regulations on the financial/banking monopolies,and continued wars just for the sake of having wars to burn up ordinance so military industrial corporations will get to build more at ever higher cost-overruns. If you are the vanguard of a large number of like-minded people, the middle class is over, democracy is over, the United States constitutionally will be over, thanks to our Republican Supreme Court. I cannot tell you how sad your anger makes me because at least some of it is justified. All I'm doing these days is praying. Seriously.
We partly have to place some
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:44 — Curt (not verified)
We partly have to place some of the blame long, long ago, when a B-grade movie actor named Ronald Reagan broke the law and that criminality was overlooked, and (as many of us warned at the time) the failure of the US to fully prosecute those crimes set the precedent and the stage upon which the crimes of the Bush II administration were acted out. And it wasn't just the illegal arms traded to S.A., as you'll recall the CIA was importing 'hard' drugs into the US in order to finance those weapons going to the death squads in South America and historians attribute the crack cocaine epidemic in Los Angeles to the CIA's imports under this program.
Wouldn't you think someone
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:45 — Anonymous (not verified)
Wouldn't you think someone who writes for the Times would know the difference between "lie" and "lay." "Evidence is . . . laying all over the countryside." Laying eggs perhaps? I hope they don't hatch!
When AIG bigshots get $100
Fri, 02/05/2010 - 21:47 — granny (not verified)
When AIG bigshots get $100 million in bonuses and nothing is done about it; when John Yoo gets off; when Bush et al go on obscenely paid "speaking tours" (George, speaking in public? and getting paid to do it?); when the military top brass in charge of torture at Guantanamo get not even a reprimand; and when a few courageous members of the lower ranked military get prison and worse for speaking their consciences about America's illegal and unethical wars; and when the American public is not out in the streets protesting - we deserve whatever we get.
February 4, 2010 | Harper's Magazine | Scott Horton's 'No Comment' blog
http://harpers.org/archive/2010/02/hbc-90006466
By Scott Horton
Dr. Michael Baden, the former chief medical examiner for New York City, was host of the HBO series Autopsy and is the forensic science contributor to Fox News. I furnished Baden copies of the official autopsy reports for the three Guantánamo prisoners who died under mysterious circumstances in 2006, as well as information about secondary autopsies arranged by the families of the deceased.1. When the U.S. government released its autopsy reports, it redacted the names of the pathologists and observers involved in preparing the report. It suggests that this was done to protect their privacy. Is this a normal practice?
Redacting the names of pathologists is not normal in either civilian or military practice. It is necessary to know the pathologists’ names to be able to evaluate their qualifications, certifications, and experience. This may also help the family assess whether a second autopsy should be done. Mistakes can be made. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in a recent decision establishing a right to cross-examine forensic experts, wrote that “A forensic analyst responding to a request from a law enforcement official may feel pressure—or have an incentive—to alter the evidence in a manner favorable to the prosecution.” Science must remain independent of politics. It is necessary that names of the pathologists be known to the family for accountability purposes.
2. Do deaths in the context of confinement in prison raise any special concerns for a medical examiner conducting an autopsy?
Yes, a death in prison raises a special set of concerns that are not present when a person dies at liberty. The prison keepers have a duty to care for and protect prisoners. They must provide a reasonable level of health care, and they must address mental health issues of prisoners. They need to ascertain whether a prisoner has suicidal tendencies, and if so, they have to develop strategies to prevent suicide such as security cameras or one-on-one observation. A medical examiner presented with a death in prison needs to independently determine the cause and manner of death and how it happened so that such deaths can be prevented in the future.
3. It appears that the autopsies of the three Guantanamo prisoners were commenced within one day of their deaths and that no effort was made to notify their families or secure permission for an autopsy. Does this strike you as normal procedure?
The steps that were taken to conduct these autopsies need to be measured against the rules that had been established for deaths at the prison. Family permission is not needed in these circumstances. However, it is always proper procedure to notify the next of kin of a death and of the decision to conduct an autopsy. The next of kin will need to arrange removal and burial, or may also arrange for a second autopsy. Should there be religious objections to an autopsy, explanations should be provided as to why the autopsy was necessary.
4. The throats and internal organs were removed from all three prisoners and were not turned over to the families together with the remainder of the bodies. A lawyer acting for one of the families wrote a letter to Armed Forces Institute of Pathology demanding the missing materials, but thus far has been unable to examine them. Does this strike you as irregular?
When an autopsy is finished, all organs are normally returned to the body except those necessary for further tests, such as toxicology or histology. In cases where death is attributed to neck compression, as here, the neck organs may also be retained for further study. The families of the deceased always have the right to have a second autopsy performed. Properly qualified pathologists representing the families should be able to examine any organs retained and not present in the body at the time it is turned over. If the pathologists who conducted the first autopsy still need those parts for testing or examination, they should make them available to the pathologist conducting the second autopsy—either by sending the removed parts to the pathologist, or by allowing the pathologist to examine the parts at the site where the organs have been kept. It is not appropriate to be unresponsive to the pathologists conducting the second autopsy. If the body parts that were removed have been properly preserved, they can still be examined years later to assist in independently establishing how the death occurred.
5. One of the autopsy reports notes that the hyoid bone was broken, but it states that this occurred accidentally in the process of removing the throat. Do you attach any significance to these facts?
Yes. A fracture of the hyoid bone occurs more commonly in homicidal manual strangulation than in suicidal hanging. A pathologist performing the second autopsy should be able to examine the hyoid bone and larynx to independently determine if the fracture happened while the decedent was alive or inadvertently after death during autopsy removal of the larynx.
6. The government has accounted for the presence of rags in the mouths of the three prisoners by suggesting that they stuffed the rags in their own mouths to muffle noise which might alert guards, and that the rags were “inhaled as a natural reaction to death by asphyxiation.” Are you familiar with any other cases in which prisoners committed suicide by binding their feet, binding their hands, stuffing rags down their throats (and putting on a surgical mask to keep the rags in place), and while so bound, climbing up onto something to put their heads through a noose? In your opinion, would it be appropriate for a medical examiner to reach a conclusion that rags “were inhaled as a natural reaction to death by asphyxiation?”
I am not aware of any other case in which suicide was accomplished in this way, at least not with a gag in his mouth covered by a surgical mask. Occasionally someone ties his feet and wrists and then tightens a noose around his neck—but this is more common in accidental deaths during autoerotic activity than when someone intends to commit suicide.—
