Weekend Open Thread: House Dem Leaders May Nix Detainee Photo Measure
* This could turn into a big story, so it’s worth watching: The House Dem leadership is considering dropping a measure from the big war spending bill that would block the release of detainee photos, which could mean parting ways with the White House on a highly sensitive national security issue.
A Democratic aide confirms that the Dem leadership is in discussions with the White House about possibly dropping the Lieberham-Graham amendment from the House version of the war supplemental, which passed the Senate and would empower the President to nix the release of detainee photos for national security.
If House Dems do strip the measure, which is strongly opposed by civil libertarians and House liberals, it could make the White House look incapable of keeping Dems in line for something Obama says is necessary for troop safety. The aide’s confirmation comes after reports in the Weekly Standard and The Politico about unrest among House Dem leaders about the measure.
********************************************
* A good catch from Matt Corley: Looks like Michael Steele has gone back to slammin’ and rammin’ again.
* Newt Gingrich appears to walk back his walk-back of the Sotomayor “racist” comments. His current position: She’s not a racist, and there’s no evidence of racism in her court filings, but the things she says are racist.
* Others have linked this, but it’s too good not to share: Check out Sean Hannity’s truly hilarious editing of Obama’s Cairo speech. That really deserves some kind of prize.
* Dan Froomkin says that Obama’s refusal to use the word “terrorism” in Cairo was a “major step in unraveling one of the most toxic rhetorical legacies of the Bush era.” And he rounds up a bunch of interesting opinion on the question, too.
* Salon goes after the National Review’s Asian Sotomayor cover.
* The National Review defends itself, sort of.
* TPM leads the way in squeezing a big correction (er, “editor’s note”) out of the mighty New York Times on that big Gitmo “recidivism” story.
* Steve Benen weighs in with a must-read on Liz Cheney’s nonstop network exposure.
* Jason Linkins says the larger problem is the “sudden and unquestioned elevation of the Cheneys” to the President’s level.
* Joe Klein versus Charles Krauthammer on the settlements.
* Josh Marshall versus Gary Ackerman on the settlements.
* And I won’t be posting this weekend, so please consider this an open thread. Back first thing Monday morning.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Steve Benen’s must-read linking to …ugh… Instapundit. I’ll find it.
Yeah Greg I think you linked the wrong thingy for Steve Benen
Here is the right link
.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_06/018504.php
thx sg, I’ll fix.
alright, done, and thanks to you too Kathleen. must have been a shocker to land on that other link.
have a good weekend, all…
You have a good one also Greg.
Just had a thought who Liz reminds me of/fills the gap for:
Kate O’Beirne, the next generation.
Especially for sbj
.
http://www.1115.org/2009/06/05/on-the-genetic-persistence-of-compulsive-delusional-revisionism/
Interesting story on who might be behind the push to call Judge Sotomayor a racist.
.
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/05/corporations-behind-efforts-to-label-sotomayor-racist/
OK. Enough of this bullѕhit about poorly chosen words and inartful expression. (And that’s from the likes of Obama and DiFi!)
.
There’s nothing wrong with what she said:
Is that not an admirable thing to hope for? To aspire to be better at reaching the right conclusion? To strive for excellence?
“There’s nothing wrong with what she said.” That’s very true, jzap. It’s not like she said a Latina woman is always wiser than a white male, but that’s how it’s been characterized. But just off the top of my head, I’d say that a given Latina woman like Sonia Sotomayor is always wiser than a white male like Pat Buchanan.
I’d say any given rock is always wiser the Pat Buchanan.
The “King” Breakfast, Lunch & Dinner Schumer is a happy camper one by one they are coming on board the Gillibrand express for Senate. With Big Brother Obama as the head engineer and Biden as the conductor you can bet all the seats will be filled up shortly. But one always has to worry about a derailment.
VJ Machiavelli
NO MORE SCHUMER
NO MORE PELOSI
NO MORE RANGEL
NO MORE ENGEL AND HIS MILLION DOLLAR HOME IN MARYLAND
Congress… real men & women of genius. Sure, lets release those photos… lets get the Arab street incensed & undo what the President is trying to accomplish.
Now is not the time.
I just read the Times piece on Obama’s plan to take a greater role in health care legislation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/us/politics/07policy.html?hp
Given this blog’s frequent concern with Obama’s statements on bipartisanship, I thought these quotes from two senators were noteworthy:
According to Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), Obama told him, “If I get 85 percent of what I want with a bipartisan vote, or 100 percent with 51 votes, all Democrat, I’d rather have it be bipartisan.”
.
That may be enough to alarm Greg and others, but it’s followed closely by a comment from Ron Wyden (D-Oregon): “The president is very much aware that to bring about enduring change — health care reform that lasts, gets implemented, wins the support of the American people and does not get repealed in a couple of years — you need bipartisan support.”
.
I think there’s some real insight into why Obama values bipartisanship in that statement. He thinks fundamental changes need broad support to stick. And history suggests that he’s right.
sg – good rawstory link, thanks. As Lewis Lapham’s “The Tenacles of Rage” (google the title – required reading) describes, the Chamber of Commerce crowd has been one of the key behind-the-scenes players (perhaps THE key player) in the politics and propaganda of the last four decades.
.
re the Cheneys and their attempt to overwhelm other narratives…I’m not convinced (as Greg appears to be) that Cheney’s chief concern here is his personal reputation or legacy. This is a big discussion and as so many people who are more familiar with Cheney personally or more familiar with how Washington works are having trouble trying to sort out just why he’s doing what he’s now doing, it would take a substantial argument here to make my case. For now, I’ll just point to the oddness of pushing for a a historical legacy for oneself which depends upon so many falsehoods and deceits. What’s to be gained?
.
But, this weekend morning, I wanted to underline a couple of quotes I find very interesting. The first is from Rove which came during a conversation with O’Reilly on the disparity in how the Muslim world regarded Bush and how it regards Obama. Rove said,
” You know what? Who cares about whether or not they approve or like the president of the United States? The question is do they respect the policies of the United States government? And you bet they did. Because we showed strength and power and influence.”
That set of notions…the importance of forcing “respect” through “strength” and “power” and “influence” is not just how these people understand foreign politics but domestic politics as well. It is why they intimidate and bully as a matter of first policies. It is a very good illustration of the authoritarian or totalitarian mind as it shows up in a modern and somewhat democratic system.
.
The second quote comes from a WP editorial in today’s paper written by Gorbachev in a statement on why and how the US must now engage in its own version of Perestroika…
“The time has come for “creative construction,” for striking the right balance between the government and the market, for integrating social and environmental factors and demilitarizing the economy.”
.
It’s the last three words in that paragraph which are particularly remarkable in that you’ll be hard pressed to find the phrase “demilitarizing the economy” (where America is the subject) anywhere in mainstream American media. I don’t know of a case of even Krugman considering this. It constitutes an enormous blind spot in the American psyche. And one has trouble finding a more powerful rationale for this than money – it is a happy thing for very many business interests if Americans don’t think to question or rail against national militarism. Those Chamber of Commerce types that our man in Florida alluded to up top were, in the late sixties and early seventies, far more alarmed by weed-smoking pacifist stoners than they are by AK47-wielding and crazed, hateful Freeman today.
Brief additional thought that just occurred…one wonders what the results would be if a poll was done of modern Republican voters asking a question something like this one, “Who do you consider more dangerous to the true values and traditions of America, a pacifist or the man recently accused of shooting abortionist Tiller?”
ABC – I think you got it. If the singular criterion for establishing the wisdom of a political policy is the partisan membership of its source, then we chuck almost all the rational tools we have available for establishing best ways forward. Somehow, the prior ways of thinking (built on the ad hominem framework of Republican/Democrat bad, the other good) has to be surmounted.
VJMachiavelli – I’m having some trouble making sense of your post above. I even read it twice, once here and once more here…
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/05/odds-and-ends-463.html
The repetition didn’t clarify. Perhaps you pasted it in a third or fourth place as well. Point us to them so we can read it again and again and perhaps then light will dawn for the rest of us.
Thomas Frank has a smart column at the WSJ today… http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124398498687479161.html
Most of you will have read this Times piece on the torture memos… http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/us/politics/07lawyers.html?hp
Hopefully, as many will have read Greenwald’s discussion on the Times piece…
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
(this feels like a sci-fi morning where you wake and find that some mysterious virus has killed everyone else on the planet leaving you quite alone but there’s lots of food and there’s the Maserati dealership a short walk away and gasoline for the taking – and all else that’s our lonely Sunday morning story requires is one other survivor, a blonde leggy thing in a distant city who happens to have a shortwave radio set up)
Good piece by Ed Kilgore on present polling re success/failure of conservative attempts to injure Obama…
http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/
bernie–not alone, or at least 2 of us survived the alien take-over. thanks for the links, all good.
Distant city. Still somewhat blonde. Never made it to leggy and no shortwave set. But good comments otherwise, Bernie.
Bernie, that’s a particularly useful comment to quote from Rove: “The question is do they respect the policies of the United States government? And you bet they did. Because we showed strength and power and influence.”
.
I think you’re right about the significance of that attitude and its ubiquitousness in certain quarters. I’m not quick to ascribe things to manhood insecurities, but just look at that crowd. Bullies are rarely people who’re grounded and comfortable with who they are.
Jason Linkins is one of my faves at Huffpo and I agree with him. How did this happen, that suddenly Cheney gets as much publicity as Obama?
What is it with Cheney and the media? How does he manage to get the media to do what he wants every time?
Bernie – what do you care if she’s blond and leggy if you are communicating via shortwave radio? You can’t see her, ya know.
Hey Obama’s economic goons predicted unemployment would top out at 8%! Well, we’re here at 9.4% and rising – with double digits around the corner – This sure is change!
This guys a one-term wonder folks. This is Carter 2.0
Tena – my lonely sci fi morning had that choice of Maseratis and free gas for a reason.
.
ABC – I took a quick look back this morning at John Dean’s “Conservatives Without Conscience” (he draws on the research done within the social sciences on authoritarianism and the ‘authoritarian personality’) to help clarify the bully/manly/need to dominate thing but don’t have enough time to do the book or your response justice. But I did find a wonderful quote I’d forgotten. It’s a description of the modern neoconservative foreign policy wonks from Philip Gold, ex-Marine intel officer and former Georgetown U prof.
.
“…a new aristocracy of aggression that combines 19th-century Prussian pigheadedness with a most un-Prussian inability to read a man or a ledger book, and a near total lack of military – let alone combat – experience. Ask these people to show you their wounds and they’ll probably wave a Washington Post editorial at you.”
For a truly enlightening and careful discussion of single-payer medical delivery vs the present arrangement in the US, see here:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/bill-moyers-single-payer-plan-health-ca
The National Review cover is wholly racist, and it doesn’t stop there, they somehow also manage to poke fun at religion. I guess they figure they more social others they pick on the more cover they will have against critics: http://www.newsy.com/videos/wise_latina_cover_to_cover
100% free classified ads at the newly launched http://www.jjoey.com
Just wanted to say hello all. This is my first post.
I expect to learn a lot here.
Чёто я смарю по дыхает форум давайте девчёнки говорите – хаха жжёте я аж возбудилась (; – будет интересней!
Welcome to my new gallery
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3631/3858682598_8aa7b9c3d3_m.jpg
I want my abs to show a little more, already doing some excersising but I have decided to take additional supplements.
Now I heard about this thing called Acai Force Max, was wondering if anyone here ever tried it succesfully? Thanks for your advice..
BTW Don’t fall for that loophole with free acai trials, they’re not free, they’ll charge you for you S+H