Black, white and Sarah

These women are feminists?

I found myself in a very weird comment thread last night on another blog.  I have a lot of respect for the blogger but something went horribly wrong in that thread and it occured to me that it is very easy to get the wrong idea about where a person stands with regard to Sarah Palin.  I finally understand what is mean by “polarizing” figure.  Sarah is becoming one.  But there really isn’t any reason why she has to be one, nor is there a reason why we feel we have to take sides.

Let’s examine the facts:

Sarah Palin, no matter how you slice her, is *not* a liberal.  She doesn’t believe in the common good, share the risk, allow your neighbors to pull themselves up by their bootstraps by providing them boots political philosophy of a typical liberal.  She’s free enterprise, pro-defense, small government (whatever that means to a Republican these days).  Her mindset is not ours.

Last year, I subscribed to Team Sarah because I like to keep up on what everyone is up to and love junk mail cluttering up my inbox.  Yesterday, Team Sarah sent me an email announcing Sarah’s resignation and in the body of the text was this message:

In a press release, Team Sarah co-founder Jane Abraham said, “Team Sarah members anxiously await Palin’s next decision on how she believes she can best serve our nation.  Since the 2008 Election, the continual presence of personal attacks on both Governor Palin and her family indicate that she remains a threat to the liberal feminist political establishment. Despite criticism, Governor Palin’s success will endure.  Team Sarah’s thousands of members remain as engaged as ever on TeamSarah.org.  The Governor has inspired millions, and her audience of enthusiastic support will only grow in the future.”

Ahhh, the “liberal feminist political establishment”.  It’s emails like this that have managed to make Sarah Palin a polarizing figure.  Because *I* consider myself a liberal feminist and I do not feel the least bit threatened by Sarah Palin.  But I can understand where the Democratic party might feel a bit uneasy. The women supporters of Barack Obama, like Naomi Wolf, Kim Gandy and Jessica Valenti did the party or the feminist movement no favors last year when they hitched their fortunes to Obama’s star. The party took the abortion issue  up to 11 and scared young women into voting for Obama in much the same way that Bush II frightened swing voters with the spectre of Osama bin Laden breaking into their homes in 2004.  It was a fear propaganda message and it worked.  Meanwhile, the cynical bastards of the Obama DNC carefully scrubbed most references of abortion and reproductive rights from Democratic candidates’ websites in an effort to capture the evangelical vote.  And who have the Obama administration been courting ever since they were elected?  Evangelicals of course.  That’s what Rick Warren was all about.

So, let’s get one thing straight here.  There are “liberal feminists”, such as myself and people like Violet Socks, who are pro-choice and anti-sexism.  Up until the election of Terry O’Neill as president of NOW a couple of weeks ago, we didn’t have much of a political voice.  Our champion, Hillary Clinton, was taken out by the women of the left who aligned themselves with Obama and undercut their own cause.

But in the meantime, the DNC cut its ties to millions of women who would have voted for Hillary and watched in shocked disbelief as they were characterized by their own party as old, stupid, uneducated, working class, post-menopausal idiots.  They were identified as Reagan Democrats, bitter knitters, the “old coalition”.  Many of these women became PUMAs when their own party nullified their primary votes and cast them out.  Then the Obama coalition took over promising change but delivering the party and its votes into the hands of the financial oligarchy that has many of the same values as, um, Sarah Palin.  Free enterprise, smaller government (for the non-oligarchy), pro-defense, etc, etc.  I mean really, what is it that separates what Sarah believes from what Obama actually practices?  And Obama is no more of a pro-choice person than Sarah when it comes right down to it.  What has he done about the Bush conscience rule?  Oh, sure, he reversed the Mexico City Gag Rule but that was an easy fix for the international audience.  Domestically, he stripped out millions of dollars from his stimulus bill for reproductive services in order to pacify the Republicans.

We don’t know much about Sonia Sotomayor except that she has on several occasions sided with anti-choice protestors.  But it doesn’t really matter.  The Supreme Court already has 5 votes to overturn Roe, which we *tried* to point out to the Obama women last year.  But getting through to them was as difficult as trying to reason with someone in 2004 who was convinced  that Al Qaeda was about to invade their neighborhood.  They were motivated by emotion, provoked by crafty propaganda artists who knew how to push the fear button while flattering them at the same time as the young and sexy saviors of their future.

I’m disgusted by the Naomi Wolfs, Jessica Valentis and Kim Gandys who either encouraged or didn’t stand up against the misogyny and sexism that occured in the primary season last year against Hillary and the general election season against Sarah.  The abortion issue has been out of our hands since Sam Alito was appointed.  We can do very little about the erosion of our abortion rights at this point.  Or, should I say, we can do little about it while the feminist movement stagnates and fails to take an adversarial stand against the erosion of our rights.  The so-called feminists who were flailing fecklessly for abortion  allowed themselves to be used against women last year.  They contributed to the perception of women as being stupid, bad campaigners, weak, easy to humiliate, obscene sex objects reducible to the sum of their parts and vulnerable to the tsunami of sexist stereotypes hurled at them by the media and the political establishment.  Feminists did that.

Feminists, though no one *I’d* want to know personally, have brought us to this point.  Now there is  a woman who has the potential to split this huge potential voting bloc of women.  The “Creative Class” has ditched millions of women whose votes are now up for grabs.  The Democratic party has turned its back on union women, poor women, vocational women, older women, retired women, women with health problems.  These women were reduced to non-persons who weren’t entitled to participate in their own government.  They were degraded, demoralized, dehumanized by their own party.  And here comes Sarah Palin, ready, willing and able to scoop them up in a third party run if she wants it.  She can distance herself from the Republicans and run as an independent if she chooses.  If she’s as tough as I think she is, she might be the crusader who takes on the media and beats them at their game.  I’ll be behind her 110% if she decides to do that.  I don’t have to vote for her in order to support her efforts against the media, something the so-called Naomi Wolf feminists should have been doing last year.

Here’s my point, and I know I’ve taken my time getting to it.  There are several things going on with Sarah Palin at the same time.  You can be for her without wanting to vote for her.  You can support her brand of feminism while insisting that she stay out of your doctor’s office.  You can be a liberal feminist without feeling threatened by her.  She’s a force to be reckoned with as well as a bright shiny object that will take your eye off the ball.

We pigeon hole ourselves at our own risk.

---

Digg!!! Tweet!!! Share!!!

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine

PDS: How Bad Can It Get? Really Bad.

Really bad, tasteless, disgusting. A stunningly repulsive headline was posted a short time ago at Huffington Post by Erik Sean Nelson, a self-described “fiction author and comedy writer.” The post was pulled quickly by someone at Huffpo, but here’s the screenshot (h/t Sweetness and Light)

Note that “Trig” is included in the tags. I guess Nelson thinks his readers at Huffpo are too slow to get his meaning without being hit over the head with a hammer.

The post is also still linked at the news site Memeorandum.

From Sweetness and Light:

We really don’t accept The Hill’s suggestion that Mrs. Palin is resigning her office so as to run for the Presidency. If anything, her comments imply just the opposite.

It is painfully clear that she is sick of being the target of the politics of personal destruction from the Democrat and their lickspittle slaveys in our watchdog media.

And who can blame her?

Anyone who seeks to run for or hold office as a conservative should have their head examined. They and their family and friends will be endlessly savaged in every way possible.

Mrs. Palin in every way embodies the kind of citizen-statesman that the Founding Fathers envisioned when they created our republic.

That she could be hounded out of office, and possibly politics altogether, by a ravening mob marks another nail in the coffin for representative government in our country.

This is a terrible day for our once great nation.

It truly is a sad day when anyone thinks it’s OK to publish something like that at a supposedly “progressive blog.” Arianna needs to dump Erik Sean Nelson immediately.

The hatred being directed at one woman and her family in this country is truly frightening.

UPDATE 1: Here is the full text of the original Huffpo article by Erik Sean Nelson. (h/t Hot Air)

“Palin Will Run in ‘12 on More Retardation Platform”
Friday, July 3, 2009

It was posted at the Huffington Post at 6 p.m. EDT.

The text of the article:

In Sarah Palin’s resignation announcement she complained about the treatment of her son Trig who always teaches her life lessons. She said that the “world needs more Trigs, not fewer.” That’s a presidential campaign promise we can all get behind. She will be the first politician to actually try to increase the population of retarded people. To me, it’s kinda like saying the world needs more cancer patients because they teach us such personal lessons.

Her first act as President: To introduce a Pre-K lunch buffet that includes lead paint chips. Sort of a Large HEAD-START Program.

She will then encourage women to hold off on pregnancies until their 40’s just to mix up some chromosomes.

She now is in favor of abortion only in case of diploid birth.

Her policies will increase jobs because Wal-Mart is building new stores each day and someone has to be the greeter.

This will lead to smaller government because fewer Americans will have the cognitive ability to hold a government job.

Look, she says she’s resigning as governor because people are making attacks on her and Trig. If she ever did become president, all Osama bin Laden would have to do to defeat the United States is Photoshop a picture of Trig and she’d surrender the country that night. As she said, “That’s not politics as usual.” It isn’t. Politicians don’t usually quit for so stupid of reasons.

UPDATE 2: Nelson’s scary-obsessive anti-Palin website.

---

Digg!!! Tweet!!! Share!!!

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine

Ohhhhhh Sarahcuda!!!!

How do they spin the unpredictable Governor of Alaska with her unorthodox (to say the least) brand of maverick Republican Politics?  The money’s on a move to lay low and go for the GOP presidential nod in 2012.

Let’s check some of the usual suspects and feel the spin!

Bill Kristol jumped right in at the Weekly Standard.  If you’re of those queasy progressives who doesn’t like unfiltered threads, skip ahead to the next link. (Sorry, I don’t predigest your thoughts for you.  Ignore my threads if that’s what you want.)

If Palin wants to run in 2012, why not do exactly what she announced today? It’s an enormous gamble – but it could be a shrewd one.

After all, she’s freeing herself from the duties of the governorship. Now she can do her book, give speeches, travel the country and the world, campaign for others, meet people, get more educated on the issues – and without being criticized for neglecting her duties in Alaska. I suppose she’ll take a hit for leaving the governorship early – but how much of one? She’s probably accomplished most of what she was going to get done as governor, and is leaving a sympatico lieutenant governor in charge.

And haven’t conservatives been lamenting the lack of a national leader? Well, now she’ll try to be that. She may not succeed. Everything rests on her talents, and on her performance. She’ll be under intense and hostile scrutiny, and she’ll have to perform well.

All in all, it’s going to be a high-wire act. The odds are against her pulling it off. But I wouldn’t bet against it.

So that’s one smarmy conservative talking head who votes for unusual step but she’s probably going to run for President in 2012.  Let’s move left.  I like Pam Spaulding and her blog Pam’s House Blend.  So she bedecked my facebook with this one  Bible Spice steps down to pack for the 2012 GOP Clown Car Caravan.

UPDATE: MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell makes it sound like Palin is stepping down for family reasons and is sick of politics… has told backers she wants OUT.

UPDATE 2 (by Pam): She figures Mark Sanford self-immolated, Charlie Crist (ha) is going for the Senate, Mitt’s Mormonism won’t pass the fundie test, and Bobby Jindal looks like a featherweight. I guess that leaves Huckabee. What a field that is for 2012.

Sarah Palin’s Resignation: What Does it Mean?

Chris Cillizza claims she is running for President:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will resign her office later this month, according to several sources familiar with her decision, freeing her to build a national political team and travel the country in support of an expected 2012 presidential bid.

The first term governor is stepping down “so that she can take the fight for her issues elsewhere,” according to a Palin aide.

Palin’s decision comes amid polling that showed her losing altitude from the stratospheric heights to which she ascended following her election in 2006 but remained a strong favorite to win reelection

The latest from AP:

Palin hastily called a news conference Friday morning at her home in suburban Wasilla, giving such short notice that only a few reporters actually made it to the announcement. Security blocked late-arriving media outside her home, and her spokesman, Dave Murrow, finally emerged to confirm that Palin will step down July 26. He refused to give details about the governor’s future plans.

[....]

Palin spokesman David Murrow said the governor didn’t say anything to him about this being her “political finale.” Murrow said he interpreted Palin’s comment about working outside government as reflecting her current job only.

“She’s looking forward to serving the public outside the governor’s chair,” he said.

Political analyst Larry Sabato, in Charlottesville, Va., said Palin’s announcement left many wondering what her plans were.

“It’s absolutely bizarre, and I think it eliminates her from serious consideration for the presidency in 2012,” he said.

Palin hinted that she had a bigger role in mind, saying she wanted to make a “positive change outside government.” But she kept supporters in suspense, promising later Friday on Twitter: “We’ll soon attach info on decision to not seek re-election … this is in Alaska’s best interest, my family’s happy … it is good. Stay tuned.”

I’m clueless but curious.

Full Text of Palin’s Resignationat TPM.

Digg!!! Share!!! Tweet!!!

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine

Sarah Palin Resigns as Governor of Alaska

From CNN:

Gov. Sarah Palin announced Friday that she will step down as Alaska’s chief executive by the end of the month. She will not seek election to a second gubernatorial term in 2010.

“People who know me know that besides faith and family, nothing’s more important to me than our beloved Alaska,” Palin said at an announcement from her home in Wasilla. “Serving her people is the greatest honor I could imagine.”

Palin, a Republican, was elected governor in 2006. She was tapped as Arizona Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential running mate last year.

Palin said she was transferring authority to Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who will be sworn in at the Governor’s Picnic on July 26.

So, what about the speculation that her move was a strategic one related to a possible 2012 presidental bid?

In an interview last month with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Palin said she was unsure about her re-election bid because she needed to focus on her state and her family.

“So, no decision yet on either 2010 or let alone 2012?” Blitzer asked.

“No decision that I’d want to announce today,” Palin responded.

Since there is nothing conclusive on the reasons, it appears all we can do is speculate.  What are your thoughts?

Digg!!! Tweet!!! Share!!!

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine

Bairly downgrading the FDIC. Recipe for disaster or 11 dimensional chess?

Sheila Bair is featured in a new article in the New Yorker by Ryan Lizza. Bair keeps coming off as an Elliott Ness type, even though she’s a Republican.  We’ve gotten so used to Republicans being the discredited bad guys that it’s hard to imagine one that might have the integrity of a Patrick Fitzgerald in the area of bank regulation.  Unfortunately, Obama’s claims of bipartisanship only go so far.  Bair, described as “not a team player” by Tim Geithner’s guys, is having her department subordinated to Treasury so that the bankers can escape the possibility that the FDIC can take them over.   For the first time since the FDIC was created, its power in the area of bank regulation and resolution has been become secondary to the power of the Treasury and the Fed. The backstory has a bit of that old familiar ring to it:

These debates entered into the Administration’s discussions about building a new regulatory architecture. In late March, Geithner previewed for Congress some of the key concepts that Treasury wanted. The outline seemed to match the Bair camp’s ideas.  [Ladies, has this ever happened to you?]  A new authority with the power to take over large financial institutions that posed a systemic risk to the economy was modelled on the F.D.I.C., which, Geithner suggested in his testimony, would be an equal partner with Treasury in resolving such firms if they failed. He seemed to be saying that although he and Bair may have disagreed about how to handle the current crisis, there was much more consensus about how to deal with a future one.

But in the white paper detailing the new legislation, which the Administration released on June 17th, all the new authority to regulate firms that posed systemic risk was vested in the Federal Reserve. During Geithner’s testimony before the Senate, Jim Bunning, of Kentucky, echoing Bair, was incredulous. “It took fourteen years for the Fed to write one regulation on mortgages after we gave it the power to do that,” he said. “What makes you think that the Fed will do better this time around?” In addition, while the March plan said that the “Secretary and the FDIC would decide” how to resolve a failing firm, the new plan said such power should “be vested in Treasury.” Geithner could appoint the F.D.I.C. to do the technical work of cleaning up the firm, but between late March and mid-June—when Bair’s aggressive ideas about how to handle Citigroup leaked to the press—Bair’s agency had been downgraded from Treasury’s equal partner to a sidekick. The senior Treasury official said that stripping authority from the F.D.I.C. had nothing to do with pressure from the banks. “Making a group decision on something that must be done really quickly is not easy,” he said. “At the end of the day, someone has to have the ability to make a call, and it’s better to have that authority vested in one person.”

When I asked Bair about the plan, she said, “I think it reflected a lot of input from a lot of different agencies, and the private sector, and insurance and consumer groups. It’s a very difficult task to try to balance all the different perspectives and come up with a package, and every compromise is going to have people who are unhappy about various parts of it. So I think it’s a starting point.” I said that she sounded disappointed. “I don’t know if ‘disappointed’ is the right word,” she replied.

Ok, to recap: Bair came up with a pretty good idea to regulate bank holding companies by the FDIC.  Geithner took that idea and made it his own with the additional spin that the department that does a superb job of actually regulating the banks, the FDIC, would be bypassed as regulator in favor of the Treasury, which has a record of one regulation in the past 14 years.  Problem solved!  There is something deeply unsettling going on here if the Obama administration is willing to trash one of the best departments it has in order to give the finance guys what they want.  We’re all going to suffer for this.

I would like to attribute part of this to stupidity but in the past couple of decades, the way women who know better have been dismissed as subordinates to be ignored or outliers who are unserious has been pretty astonishing.  Sexism costs.

Tid bits

On the economic front, Paul Krugman is downright dour this morning and his patience with the Obama administration appears to have been short-lived.  He probably resolved to give positive reinforcement to the Obamatons in the WH whenever they did something right but it looks like the adminstration is full of slow learners with cocky attitudes.  Um, that kind of s#!^ isn’t tolerated at Princeton.  Paul has always thought that the stimulus package was too small and now he thinks we are headed off a cliff if we don’t get another one.  Methinks Paul has been looking at some graphs and they’re bad, bad, bad.

Bad for us too.  As some of you may know, my industry has been going through a lot of changes recently and laying off obscene numbers of scientists.  It’s especially bad in the US where the workforce has no protections and labor here is even more of a variable cost than in Europe.  Some of my colleagues were talking about this just yesterday, hoping that they could ride it out and escape the Grim Job Reaper’s scythe until the economy picks up.  I said I had been reading Paul Krugman and this recession isn’t like the other ones in recent history and the economy probably isn’t going to pick up for the forseeable future, ie a decade or more.  Yep, Paul’s crepe hanging ways have gotten to me too.  Thanks a lot, Paul, for shattering our illusions of economic security.  Why can’t you just smoke hopium like your sell-out colleagues?

There’s more where that came from.  Simon Johnson is busting on the banks this morning at Baseline Scenario.  I’m getting a sick feeling that the Obama admin has completely lost the plot and is no longer in control.  They may have thought they could handle it but it’s clear that they don’t have the cojones to go up against the bankers.  It reminds me of Jon Corzine promising to rein in NJ’s property taxes and then just throwing up his hands in frustration a couple months after taking the job.  Neither Obama or Corzine has any fricking clue what their doing.

Alegre’s Corner has been going gangbusters lately.  I mean, Day-um!  There are some really good reads there.  Here are just a few you should check out:

A conversation with NOW’s new president, Terry O’Neill

America’s effective unemployment rate- 18.7%(?)

Senator Franken picks a good role model- Hillary

Regarding Franken, I respect his decision to put Minnesota first and to compromise when it’s in Minnesota’s best interest.  Let’s face it, even if he is the 60th vote, it is unlikely that his firewall against the filibuster is going to get much action except in the most unusual circumstance.  But his vote will clarify the fault line that exists in the Democratic caucus in a way that will be obvious to all voters.  And when we can clearly identify the culprits, some of whom may not be completely obvious right now, we can go after them in the primaries.  So, it’s all good.  Just do your best, Al.  Make the rest of us human and visible.  That’s all we ask.

For those who are waiting for it, here’s your Michael Jackson news du jour:

Debbie Rowe, who is the biological parent of two of the Jackson kids, is preparing to go mano a mano with Kathryn Jackson over custody. Ok, let me see if I have this straight: The biological mother who relinquished custody, hasn’t seen the kids in years and as recently as last week said she doesn’t want them in her life, is going to go up against the custodial grandmother who is a Jehovah’s Witness and is probably partially responsible for Michael’s lifelong pathological quest for his missing childhood.  Why can’t these ultra rich people ever get these things straight in their wills???  It’s obvious that Diana Ross, who has no biological connection, would be the better choice here.

Developing: My colleague alerted me to a new bill being pushed through the NJ legislature that would guarantee local energy producers a profit regardless of market conditions.  Not sure of the details but there was an organization canvassing her neighborhood the other day that was agin it.  After what Matt Taibbi reported the other day about Goldman-Sachs possible involvement in the profit making potential of cap and trade credits, it’s important to track all of this stuff down and figure out if there are any connections.

Hey!  Summer has arrived in NJ.  No, really!  We’ve managed to get a few days of mostly sunny skies with occasional WTF?! sunshowers and temperatures that justify ditching the sweater.  I might even put on a pair of shorts today.  OooooOOOOoooo!  Last Sunday was probably the nicest day for all of the month of June.  I have a picture for posterity of the Red Mill Museum in Clinton, the site of last Sunday’s Renaissance Faire (Still have the big bruise on my arm from taking up archery again for the afternoon).  You can almost feel the cool water of the Raritan River’s south branch…

New Jersey:  More than an exit.

Friday Morning at The Confluence: News and Views

Another rainy day in Boston

Good morning Conflucians! It’s another cold, rainy day in the Boston area. I’ve gone through the stages of grief, from denial to anger, and so on, and I think I’ve almost reached acceptance. Summer is just not coming to New England this year. It’s 57 degrees on July 3. So what? I should be grateful it’s raining and not snowing, right? The local papers have started publishing snarky little articles like this one about the “bright side” to all this rain and cold.

OK, it’s wet. OK, everyone’s miserable. OK, the sun shines on every other city in the country and Mother Nature is spitting on Boston.

But instead of thinking of this weather front as a personal affront, why not grab onto that silver lining and recognize the rainfall for what it is: a respite from the rat race known as summer.
Yes, summer, the ultimate setup for personal and recreational failure, when every day is supposed to be a mini-vacation….

But now, thanks to unremitting clouds and drizzle, it’s off.

No need to squeeze into the bathing suit. Or do your hair (it’ll frizz up faster than a flash flood). Or sport a tan. Or go for that walk or run or bike ride or show up for bootie boot camp at 6 a.m. It’s pouring!

As for the beach, no wonder everyone’s lying down, exposing themselves to deadly UVB rays. Getting there is exhausting. Lewis and Clark had an easier time looking for the Northwest Passage.

Oh hardy har har. Don’t get me wrong. I’m really happy for all of you Conflucians who don’t live up here in the Northeastern corner of the country. Who knows? Maybe God is punishing us for our sins or something.

The Boston Globe reports that there is one genuine positive to all this ghastly weather.

While the onslaught of miserable June weather played havoc with people’s plans and psyches, it has also provided a quiet benefit to many city neighborhoods. Fatal and nondeadly shootings in Boston have plunged, and police acknowledge the weather has been a key factor.

Well I’m glad there really is one positive effect of the horrible weather…. So let’s see… what’s happening in the rest of the country this morning?

You’ve probably heard the Washington Post did a quick reversal yesterday on its plan to sell access to politicans and Post writers and editors. It was all just a big misunderstanding, according to Howard Kurtz.

Washington Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth yesterday canceled plans for a series of policy dinners at her home after learning that marketing fliers offered corporate underwriters access to Post journalists, Obama administration officials and members of Congress in exchange for payments as high as $250,000.

“Absolutely, I’m disappointed,” Weymouth said in an interview. “This should never have happened. The fliers got out and weren’t vetted. They didn’t represent at all what we were attempting to do. We’re not going to do any dinners that would impugn the integrity of the newsroom.”

Sure Katharine, we believe you. Some guy in marketing is taking the fall for the public relations nightmare:

The fliers were approved by a top Post marketing executive, Charles Pelton, who said it was “a big mistake” on his part and that he had done so “without vetting it with the newsroom.”

I’d just love to know if the Post actually had an agreement with the White House to participate in these “salons.” It really does sound like something this administration would do, but we’ll probably never know for sure, since investigative journalism is dead.

It looks like the Washington Post still has at least one real reporter on staff though. R. Jeffrey Smith read some recent court filings and found some interesting background on the Valerie Plame case showing that Dick Cheney was in control of the Bush administration’s revelations about Plame’s status with the CIA in order to minimize the damage caused by her husband Joseph Wilson’s critique of the case for war in Iraq. Surprise, surprise, the Obama administration is trying to keep Cheney’s activities secret.

A list of at least seven related conversations involving Cheney appears in a new court filing approved by Obama appointees at the Justice Department. In the filing, the officials argue that the substance of what Cheney told special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald in 2004 must remain secret.

No such agreement was reached between Fitzgerald and Cheney at the time of their chat, according to a 2008 Fitzgerald letter to lawmakers. But the Bush administration rejected requests by Congress and a nonprofit group for access to two FBI accounts of the conversation, saying the material was exempt from disclosure under subpoena or the Freedom of Information Act.

The Obama administration has since agreed that the material should not be disclosed. A Justice Department lawyer at one point last month argued that vice presidents and other White House officials will decline to be interviewed in the future if they know their remarks might “get on ‘The Daily Show’ ” or be used as fodder for political enemies.

Gasp! Heaven forbid! You mean politicians could be laughed at? Or their actions might be used to defeat them in an election? I can certainly see why our Department of Justice would be fighting hard to prevent that. Seriously, do we live in anything event resembling a free country anymore?

THIS is Change?

Well, we know Obama flipped and voted for FISA as a candidate, would we expect anything else but a continuation of the Bush surveillance program?  Nope, more of the same. How’s this working for you?  Is it better than what we would have gotten from a President Hillary Clinton who voted against FISA?  Is this some kind of 11th dimensional chess move that will eventually show  the ACLU that there’s nothing to worry about a little domestic snooping.  What’s it with privacy anyway?  Isn’t reality TV voyeurism just the beginning?  Well, Einstein 3  is a major way for the NSA to watch any internet connection that goes to a government site and then, after that, we’re not sure.  It’s still under discussion.  Stay away from the Smithsonian gift shop!  You could wind up in Guantanamo if you’re just a little too interested in the wrong parts of American History.

This from today’s Washington Post.

The Obama administration will proceed with a Bush-era plan to use National Security Agency assistance in screening government computer traffic on private-sector networks, with AT&T as the likely test site, according to three current and former government officials.

President Obama said in May that government efforts to protect computer systems from attack would not involve “monitoring private-sector networks or Internet traffic,” and Department of Homeland Security officials say the new program will scrutinize only data going to or from government systems.

But the program has provoked debate within DHS, the officials said, because of uncertainty about whether private data can be shielded from unauthorized scrutiny, how much of a role NSA should play and whether the agency’s involvement in warrantless wiretapping during George W. Bush’s presidency would draw controversy. Each time a private citizen visited a “dot-gov” Web site or sent an e-mail to a civilian government employee, that action would be screened for potential harm to the network.

“We absolutely intend to use the technical resources, the substantial ones, that NSA has. But . . . they will be guided, led and in a sense directed by the people we have at the Department of Homeland Security,” the department’s secretary, Janet Napolitano, told reporters in a discussion about cybersecurity efforts.

Okay, so the Left Blogistan should be afire with protest yes?  Well, maybe they’re all watching something, I dunno, maybe a football opener in Canada.  Read the article carefully.  What we basically have is the NSA promising it won’t break any laws even though it will have a hell a lot of a capacity to do so.  All I can remember is all those folks processing the overloaded passport system last year that had a hey day looking up their favorite pols and celebs.  Can you imagine what they could do with this?  Can you imagine what they will do with that?

Is this the change we could believe in?

Tweet!!! Digg!!! Share!!!!

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine

Will Pennsylvania Democrats Get Kool-Aid Rehab and Vote for the *Real* Democrat?

Representative Joe Sestak worked hard on behalf of Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania. Could this be why he's being snubbed in favor of faux "fair weather" Dem Specter?

Today Democratic voters were presented with a choice in the Democratic Primary for the 2010 Senatorial race.  I for one am ecstatic that this choice now exists.  That choice is between “new” faux Democrat Arlen Specter and *real* Democrat, Joe Sestak, Congressional Representative from Pennsylvania’s 7th Congressional District. 

Sestak pulls the trigger

The Wayne (Pa.) Independent has posted a brief tease of an interview with Rep. Joe Sestak, in which the congressman declares unambiguously that he’ll challenge Sen. Arlen Specter in the 2010 Democratic primary:

In an interview with The Wayne Independent Wednesday morning, U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa.,confirmed his intention to run against Specter, a longtime Republican who switched to the Democratic party earlier this year.

“I am going to get into the race against Arlen Specter … for senator,” Sestak said in his first media interview as part of a three-week tour through all of the commonwealth’s 67 counties.

When Arlen Specter announced that he was switching to the Democratic Party I have to admit, I had feelings of ambivalence.  While I’ve almost exclusively voted Democrat, Arlen Specter was one of the few Republicans who has received my vote on more than one occasion.  Why? Because he’s never been a ultra conservative and has done some good things for our state.  Plus, it’s been quite a while since Arlen has had a legitimate contender in the Senatorial race.  In any event, I certainly preferred Specter to the nutjob the Republican party was planning to back — Pat Toomey.  So when Specter’s independent streak got him in trouble with his own party when he voted for the Stimulus bill and he switched to the Democratic Party, I quickly weighed the options.  If it was a race between Specter and Toomey, surely the weight of the Democratic electorate along with those who’ve respected his independence would ensure that Specter saved Pennsylvania from the devastation that would accompany a Toomey win. 

But then I heard…

Joe Sestak was making noise that he was interested in running.  Joe Sestak has been a tireless progressive working on behalf of the middle class.  His labor voting record is 96%.  This guy would be a GREAT senator for our state, and Specter, well…clearly his motivation was political and not driven by concern for the people of Pennsylvania.  In fact, he was heard to say before switching that the republicans should back him because if they didn’t (gasp!) they would lose that seat to a Democrat!  OMG!  We can’t have that!

Arlen Specter freely acknowledges that his switch from Republican to Democrat was driven by politics as much as principles. “I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate,” he declared upon his defection.

So lo and behold, Specter changes to Democrat!  Presto chango and having two democratic senators in Pennsylvania was not such a bad idea after all.  Sure…it didn’t have anything to do at all with his own party abandoning him. 

But to the real point.  Specter’s announcement was almost immediately followed by an open arms routine from Obama, Biden, and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell.  You would’ve thought they found the goose that laid the golden egg.  Everyone move aside…let the king through.  Uh…But what about Representative Sestak?  You know, the *real* Democrat?  Surely the Democratic establishment will kick their new friend to the curb to make sure we have a good liberal candidate to vote for.  Any minute now and the endorsement will come I thought…any minute…tap tap tap…

Word out of Washington is that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the political wise-guys from the Obama administration plan on “visiting with” Pennsylvania Democrat Rep. Joe Sestak. Their objective? A clear message: Get off of the stage and out of a possible primary race against “incumbent” Democrat Sen. Arlen Specter.

Whoa!  The administration gave him the big “get the eff outta the race! routine??? WTF???  Would Joe step aside and be a good little soldier?  Not if his strong support of Hillary Clinton through out the primaries was any indication of his strength and integrity.  Joe responded to the O’ministration’s backing of Specter over him by proclaiming rightfully that “There aren’t any kingmakers in the Democratic Party.”

We all know what this is really about don’t we?  It’s certainly not because the Democratic Party has extracted any promises of support for critical legislation from Arlen Specter.  In fact, Obama apparently welcomes Specter’s dissenting opinions:

“I don’t expect Arlen to be a rubber stamp,” Obama said. “In fact, I’d like to think that Arlen’s decision reflects recognition that this administration is open to many different ideas and many different points of view.”

Since there doesn’t seem to be any demonstrable “up-front” benefit for liberals, the only plausible explanation is that Joe is being punished for his support of Hillary Clinton during the primaries.  Thankfully, that hasn’t deterred Joe.

I for one will proudly support Joe Sestak.  He’s the real deal and in it for the people of Pennsylvania.  But will the Pennsylvania Democrats keep drinking the kool-aid and vote for whoever teh precious endorses or against the (gasp!) Hillary Clinton supporter. (just ask Harrisburg mayor Reed about the CDS that crushed his lengthy career, or the great Terry McAuliff who was castigated by his primary opponent for supporting the vajayjay against teh One). 

I think Joe Sestak himself, in questioning the benefit of Specter’s Democratic candidacy, said it best:

What’s in it for Pennsylvanian’s in the long term?

Next Strategy: Declare Victory, Go Home

(kinda graphic video, you’ve been warned)

The economy just won’t drink the koolaid and behave. I wonder if that old Mission Accomplished banner is still lying around the White House basement ? After all, white house economics adviser Christina Romer, via the FT says she’s “upbeat on economy.” So, who do I believe:  the Obama administration or my economist lying eyes?

The US economy will feel a substantial boost from the Obama administration’s emergency spending package over the next few months,says Christina Romer, a senior White House official, who has warned against tightening monetary and fiscal policy before recovery is well established.

Ms Romer, chairman of the US president’s council of economic advisers, told the Financial Times in an interview she was “more optimistic” that the economy was close to stabilisation.

But while hopeful that America could yet experience a V-shaped recovery, she said it was much too soon to begin tightening policy: “We do not want to repeat the mistake Japan made in the 1990s, when the moment things started to improve they tightened policy.”

Meanwhile, David Axelrod, a senior White House adviser, told NBC Television yesterday the administration would be open to further stimulus if needed. “Let’s see in the fall where we are, but right now we believe what we have done is adequate to the task. If more is needed, we’ll have that discussion.”

Ms Romer’s comments come as opposition Republicans step up their attacks on the $787bn fiscal stimulus, pointing out that it has not prevented unemployment from hitting a quarter-century high of 9.4 per cent.

Ms Romer said stimulus spending was “going to ramp up strongly through the summer and the fall”.

“We always knew we were not going to get all that much fiscal impact during the first five to six months. The big impact starts to hit from about now onwards,” she said.

Calculated Risk must not see what Christine sees in the numbers. If you still are in the dark as to how exactly bad the employment situation is, go check out their graphs. You can also follow my lying eyes over to the Washington Post where the headline and Neil Irwin’s headline: 467K Jobs Cut in June; Jobless Rate at 26-Year High. Come on guys!!! Drink koolaid or DIE!!!!

Employers kept slashing jobs at a furious pace in June as the unemployment rate edged ever closer to double-digit levels, undermining signs of progress in the economy, and making clear that the job market remains in terrible shape.

…

Wages, meanwhile, were little changed, with average weekly pay for non-managerial workers falling to $609.37, from $609.51. With many people losing their jobs, and those who remain at work making less money, American consumers will be hard-pressed to increase their spending later in the year, despite higher confidence and rising wealth through the stock market.