Change We Can Believe In

Some readers of this blog have a near-pathological hatred of Obama.  Others have fallen out of love.  Myself, I realize he's a consummate politician, with all the failings that entails.  But I still think of him as a net positive.  And here's a few reasons why:

He can walk into the lion's den and savage the lions so badly they start regretting the cameras.

Under his command, we're finally seeing some terrorist ass kicked - depite all this "palling around with terrorists" bullshit the Cons so love to spew.Post Options

And here's actual change we can believe in:

It's easy to lose sight of these developments, especially when we're caught up in the day-to-day fights over various political disputes, but the federal government has changed in some pretty dramatic ways over the last year. When we talk about the differences between Obama/Biden and Bush/Cheney, we tend to think about economic, national security, legal, and social policy.

But John Judis reminds us of regulatory policy, which on a day-to-day level, is just as important as the other policy areas.

[T]here is one extremely consequential area where Obama has done just about everything a liberal could ask for -- but done it so quietly that almost no one, including most liberals, has noticed. Obama's three Republican predecessors were all committed to weakening or even destroying the country's regulatory apparatus: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other agencies that are supposed to protect workers and consumers by regulating business practices.

Now Obama is seeking to rebuild these battered institutions. In doing so, he isn't simply improving the effectiveness of various government offices or making scattered progress on a few issues; he is resuscitating an entire philosophy of government with roots in the Progressive era of the early twentieth century. Taken as a whole, Obama's revival of these agencies is arguably the most significant accomplishment of his first year in office. [...]

Republican presidents didn't just undermine scientific administration by making poor appointments; they also slashed or held down the regulatory agencies' budgets, forcing them to cut personnel. This was a particular problem in the all-important area of enforcement: If regulatory agencies can't conduct inspections and enforce rules, it doesn't matter how tough those rules are.... Now Obama is reversing these trends.

Judis added that Obama's regulatory appointments "could not be more different" from those we've seen in recent years, and "the flow of expertise into the federal bureaucracy over the past year has been reminiscent of what took place at the start of the New Deal."

There's far more than just those few items, such as the few I meant to highlight awhile back and was too knee-deep in stupidity to get to: granting Temporary Protected Status to Haitians, providing the kind of leadership that inspires the DOJ to go after discrimination rather than engaging wholesale in it, giving a shout-out to the atheists... along with plenty else, large and small. 

Is he perfect?  Absolutely not.  Is he often wrong?  Of course.  Does he play really fucking annoying political games?  Definitely.  And is he the great progressive president everybody was hoping for?  No, and he never was. 

But for all that, I consider him a net positive.  Especially when I consider what the alternative would've been.

Further Thoughts on the President's Peace Prize

I've been seeing a lot of invective against the President and the Nobel Committee from both the left and right, perhaps one of the only times this year they'll find themselves in agreement on anything.  There is a substantive difference in the invective: Cons are screaming incoherently, while the lefties are a little more analytical about their criticism.  Obama doesn't deserve it, they say.  He hasn't done anything, they say.

Bullshit.

Even the fine folks at Firedoglake, who never miss an opportunity to bash Obama, have to admit it's bullshit:

FDL’s writers have been among the sharpest of the reality-based critics of the Obama administration, as posts like this one will show.  But, contrary to what’s been claimed, we’re not so steeped in reactive Obama hatred that we won’t give the man credit when it’s due.   Case in point:  His being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Yes, he’s only been in office a little over eight months.   Yet he’s already made more progress with both Russia and Iran than George W. Bush and the neocon cabal made in eight years, which makes experts on the Middle East like Juan Cole quite happy:

President Obama is slowly putting Iran in a box. His cancellation of the useless and expensive so-called missile shield program in Eastern Europe, which had needlessly antagonized Russia, has been rewarded with greater Russian cooperativeness on Iran. The U.S. right wing accused Obama of a failure of nerve. But in fact his move was shrewd and gutsy, since he predisposed Russia to increased cooperation with the U.S. in regard to Iran’s nuclear research program.

Obama’s full-court press for a United Nations Security Council resolution on nuclear disarmament also pulled the rug out from under Iran’s previous grandstanding tactics, whereby it accused the U.S. and its allies of only wanting nuclear dominance, not the abolition of nukes.

Cole goes on to note that President Obama chaired the U.N. Security Council at the summit level on Thursday, and pushed through an important resolution on nuclear disarmament.

Spencer Ackerman, no gentle soul he, makes much the same point in a hard-hitting post, and concludes:

Progressives have a unique responsibility to hold Obama to his own stated vision, and the vision that the Nobel committee honored today. But there is a difference between an incomplete agenda and a counterproductive one. And in truth, the agenda is never complete. The work goes on. But we are on a path. Fired up, ready to go.

And PalMD quotes the Nobel Committee, then makes the point:

What the committee may or may not have meant is that Obama seems to be more interested in at least understanding the beliefs and desires of our friends and enemies, and using this understanding as a basis for diplomacy.

So while the award may seem quixotic, it's not unprecedented. The Nobel committee is in essence saying, "we know the US is enormously powerful and influential, and we're happy to see that you may be using your powers responsibly." To paraphrase Sally Field, they really like us!

How should we, as Americans, respond to this honor? It is and honor. We are a true representative democracy, and our elected head of state was just given the world's most prestigious award. It is an endorsement by others of many of our basic values. This is an opportunity for us to say to the world, "yes, we are uniquely important" Many of our values are universal. The world still looks to us as a model democracy. After years in the wilderness of world opinion, we are being recognized for our accomplishments and ideals. I like that.

So do I.

And the Obama administration is taking this very, very seriously:

The State Department reflects on the significance of President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.

"Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes."
That's the take of Hillary Clinton's State Department on President Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, according to her spokesman, Assistant Secretary PJ Crowley.

Crowley added, "There is an opportunity here. The tone has changed -- but obviously we recognize that, while the tone in the world has changed, the challenges remain. They are very significant."

So forgive me if I see you pissing and moaning that Obama didn't deserve this and the Nobel Committee's a bunch of idiots, and call bullshit.  It is bullshit.

Besides, it's not Obama's fault he won this thing.  The right, as in so much else, is to blame.  And, furthermore:

Larisa Alexandrovna has hit it right on the mark when she says, ‘When that recipient happens to be the leader of a nation - representing his country all over the world - then that honor is also bestowed on the citizens of that nation.’ 

Yup, Obama didn’t win this Nobel Peace Prize. America did.

Before you start shrieking we don't deserve it, keep in mind that we finally voted the Cons out.  And the Nobel Committee recognizes that peace is a work in progress.  This is a call to action, not a reward for a job well done.  If you can't take it in that sense, I'm very sorry for you.

The rest of us are going to go do some celebrating.  And one of the things we'll be celebrating is how very far we've come.

The Case for Diplomacy: Iran Edition

So, Bush spends eight years puffing out his chest and threatening death, mayhem and an ass-whuppin' if Iran doesn't do exactly what he tells them to do.  Accomplishment: Iran hid its nuclear facilities, informed the administration that they could go fuck themselves, and went on about their uranium enrichment.

Obama spends eight months in office, has a nice chat with Iran after letting them know that he's got both carrots and sticks on offer, their choice.  Accomplishment: Iran's letting the inspectors in, shipping its uranium off to other countries where it can be enriched precisely the way we want it, and agreed to reduce its stockpile by 75%.

I rest my case.

The Next Time Some Fuckwit Tells You Obama's Soft on Terrorism...

... Hand them this list.

Just because the current President isn't a self-aggrandizing jackass like the last one doesn't mean he's not getting the job done. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Obama's Reform Speech: The Good, the Bad, and the Absolutely Fucking Ridiculous

President Obama gave his big health care reform speech, which I missed because I was thinking in Pacific rather than Eastern time. But I don't feel like I've missed a thing. After all, the transcript's online, a bunch of folks live-blogged it, and there was plenty of follow-up.

We'll begin our review of the highlights with the lowlights, as it were.

Saxby Chambliss had the utter gall to demand humility from Obama before the Big Speech. Hey, Sax - how about humility from the losers just this once, K? Thank you, Steve Benen, for breaking the Smack-o-Matic over his arse.

And if you thought the rest of the GOP would act like grownups, well, you don't know Cons. They treated the solemn occasion as if they'd been bused in on the Glenn Beck Express:

Tonight during his joint address to Congress, President Obama attempted to set the record straight on some of the “key controversies” surrounding the health care debate. While it’s normal for members of the opposition party to occasionally not clap at statements with which they disagree, congressional Republicans went further tonight, being outright rude at times.

At one point, President Obama addressed the myth that his health care proposals would insure undocumented immigrants: “This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.”

In response, Republicans not only began booing him, but Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) shouted out, “LIE!” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) shot an angry look in his direction, and Vice President Biden shook his head. The rudeness shocked even veteran political observers such as NBC’s Chuck Todd, who wrote on Twitter, “Wow. What’s next a duel?” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough also wrote, “Whoever shouted out that the president was lying is a dumbass who should show the President respect.” On MSNBC after the speech, Newsweek reporter Howard Fineman said, “The Republicans were mostly stage props in this speech tonight and they behaved like it.”

Indeed they did. If you didn't catch the speech on teevee, Greg Sargent and Steve Benen liveblogged it, and caught the Cons in all their unglorious action.

Note how quickly Wilson apologized after his Democratic opponent made thousands off his idiocy? Ah, pissed-off small donors, how I love thee.

Olympia Snowe, who apparently has delusions of grandeur now that she's confirmed as the only Con sane enough to work across the aisle with, "personally asked President Obama to remove any mentions of the public option from his speech to Congress." I'm afraid she vastly overestimated her importance, but it was a nice try.

In fact, all those folks who were fearing Obama wouldn't so much as mention the public option were in for a bit of a shock. He made his case for it. Granted, he didn't say "Public option or bust!", and that's a shame, but let's consider the reaction of listening Dems for a moment, shall we?

There's Rep. John Dingell:

"I think a). he was clear enough and b). he was strong enough because he made it plain that the public option was the way to create an absolutely necessary thing for the bill to succeed--and that is competition."

Does that mean the public option is more viable now than it was this morning?

"The answer to the question is yes," Dingell told me.

And Sen. Sherrod Brown:

"He wants to always be open to ideas...but he sets his standard. And the standard is it's gotta offer better choice... it's got to discipline insurance companies... and it's got to bring prices down," Brown said in response to a question from TPMDC. "The other options don't even come close to doing it."

Brown's statement amounts to a belief that Obama has implied a demand for a public option. Obama has insisted that the plan he signs must increase competition and bring prices down. But though he's said he's open to triggers and co-ops, Brown says those options fall short enough that they likely won't meet the President mark. "I think he laid it out in a way that only a public option will get us where we want to go."

And even House Progressive leader Raul Grijalva wasn't too disappointed:

"It was very encouraging," Grijalva said. "Obviously our policy point is the public plan and I thought the President dealt with it. He didn't get into a lot of specificity of what he does support and doesn't support."

In an official statement, which I've pasted below, Grijalva said "the President needs to be more direct on what the public option means and what it will do for the American people."

So it sounds like Dems will take that implicit endorsement of the public option and run with it. All to the good, sez I.

There were a lot of interesting people with gripping stories present to witness said speech. Digby's got their bios. Here's hoping the media pays attention to them instead of screaming Teabaggers for once.

And the tearjerker moment: Ted Kennedy's letter from the dead:

At the end of President Obama's speech tonight, he read from a letter Ted Kennedy wrote to him in May, but which was only delivered upon his death.

"For me, this cause stretched across decades," Kennedy wrote. "[I]t has been disappointed, but never finally defeated. It was the cause of my life. And in the past year, the prospect of victory sustained me-and the work of achieving it summoned my energy and determination."

There will be struggles - there always have been - and they are already underway again. But as we moved forward in these months, I learned that you will not yield to calls to retreat - that you will stay with the cause until it is won. I saw your conviction that the time is now and witnessed your unwavering commitment and understanding that health care is a decisive issue for our future prosperity. But you have also reminded all of us that it concerns more than material things; that what we face is above all a moral issue; that at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.

And so because of your vision and resolve, I came to believe that soon, very soon, affordable health coverage will be available to all, in an America where the state of a family's health will never again depend on the amount of a family's wealth. And while I will not see the victory, I was able to look forward and know that we will - yes, we will - fulfill the promise of health care in America as a right and not a privilege.

We will, Teddy. Somehow, we will.

Mr. President, Might We Direct Your Attention to FDR?

Stop acting like a battered spouse and grow a pair, sir. You could learn a lot from a man with useless legs and an adamantium spine:

These days it seems that bipartisanship is all the rage.

Not in practice, mind you, but as a codeword sop to the masses as justification for defending the status quo.

The end result of bipartisanship is paring down a bill until it changes next to nothing of import. And then selling it as if it were the greatest thing since the last bucket of lukewarm spit to pass this way.

This is nothing new in politics. The money has always been on the side of the status quo, since change can be costly to one's bottom line.

[snip]

Jean Edward Smith has a fantastic op-ed in the NYTimes today talking about FDR, the false sop of bipartisanship and the real value of a little more backbone:

. . .this fixation on securing bipartisan support for health care reform suggests that the Democratic Party has forgotten how to govern and the White House has forgotten how to lead.

Roosevelt understood that governing involved choice and that choice engendered dissent. He accepted opposition as part of the process. It is time for the Obama administration to step up to the plate and make some hard choices.

He cites numorous examples of Roosevelt New Deal reforms which were enacted in spite of entrenched interests, and not because they'd been pared down to mere windowdressing to win their support.

Was Glass-Steagall passed in a bi-partisan fashion with entrenched interests on Wall Street given a seat at the negotiating table? Hell no. Social security? Are you kidding me?!?

Were there membes of Congress consorting with moneyed interests trying to block the bill, much like Max Baucus' lobbyist-filed anteroom? Undoubtedly. Although, as Krugman points out, there's a lot more of that lobbyist payola floating around these days.

But the real difference between then and now?

FDR sold the need for change at the grassroots by making that change actually happen. And without selling the public's interest down the river in the process. Which made his grassroots support all the stronger, and enabled him to fend off opposition by painting them as being against the public, fueling more public support in the process.

And something else to keep in mind, Mr. President:

Health care reform enacted by a Democratic majority is still meaningful reform. Even if it is passed without Republican support, it would still be the law of the land.

[snip]

There's far worse fates for history to judge than to be hated by right-wing extremists.

Indeed.

Want to Know Why Health Care Reform's in Critical Condition?

Look no further than the man in the Oval Office.

Wendell Potter unloads:

Former CIGNA PR chief Wendell Potter is very, very angry over Obama's movement away from true healthcare reform:

Not only is Obama clearly ready to throw the public option overboard, he is embracing the requirement that we all be forced to buy insurance from private insurers. That means your tax dollars and mine will be used to pay subsidies to the big insurers to provide coverage to people who can't afford to buy their policies, because the big insurers charge far more than they should because Wall Street investors demand that they do.

One of the people who undoubtedly talked Obama away from the public option and into supporting this mandate is his new BFF, Aetna CEO Ron Williams. Williams, who made $65 million off of Aetna's policyholders' premiums over the past two years and who was the mastermind behind Aetna's shedding of eight million members a few years ago to meet Wall Street's demands, is the insurance industry's leading champion of requiring us all to buy insurance. And, of course, without a public option, we'll all be forced to buy coverage from Aetna or one of the other private insurers.

According to a recent article in Forbes, Williams has been to the White House a half a dozen times recently to advise the president and his staff on health care reform. That same article quoted a Wall Street analyst as saying that Aetna likely will dump about 600,000 policyholders during the coming months to satisfy its investors' unrelenting profit demands.

There's more where that came from. Much, much more.

Jane Hamsher has the essential run-down of supposed allies of health care reform who are actually selling it up the river. And she reminds us who's responsible for seeing meaningful reform passed:

If a public plan gets into a final health care bill, it's going to be because of public pressure, because people who put Obama in office demand one.

My darlings, if you haven't already, it's time to get noisy.



Let's remind our political majority of who put them there, and why.

Viva la Differance

Compare and contrast time, my darlings.

Back when Bush was a burden, we had to watch supposed lawyers fuck the law up the back passage without lubricant, and his supposed lawyers are still trying to do so today:

David Shuster and Harper's Scott Horton break down John Yoo's poorly written op-ed at the Wall Street Journal, defending his part in allowing the Bush administration to spy on millions of Americans under the guise of keeping us safe from terrorists.

From The Anonymous Liberal--John Yoo: Still Lying:

In this morning's Wall Street Journal, John Yoo has an op-ed defending himself from the malpractice charges set forth in the recent Inspecter General's report. As with the opinions themselves, the op-ed is deeply disingenuous and misstates the law repeatedly.

Not surprisingly, Yoo begins the op-ed with a collosal straw man. He points out how important it is to intercept al Qaeda communications and writes: "Evidently, none of the inspectors general of the five leading national security agencies would approve." Of course, the issue is not whether intercepting communications is a good idea, but whether the program violated the law. Yoo was not a policy maker. He was a lawyer. His job was to state what the law was, not what it should be.

Now contrast Bush's assclowns with Obama's lawyers:

Last week, Assistant Attorney General David Kris and Department of Defense General Counsel Jeh Johnson appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to talk about Military Commissions. David Kris got into a little bit of a discussion with Sen. John McCain because McCain was shocked to learn that the Constitution may operate in ways that apply to non citizens. In his defense, McCain is not a lawyer, but I didn't think this was a novel concept. Yet, Kris had to patiently explain the fundamentals:

Ranking member Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) questioned Assistant Attorney General David Kris about his remarks on the appropriateness of administering the Miranda warning to terrorist suspects captured abroad. "It is the administration's view that there is a serious risk that courts would hold that admission of involuntary statements of the accused in military commission proceedings is unconstitutional," Kris said in his opening statement.

"Does that infer that these individuals have constitutional rights?" McCain asked Kris.

"Ah, yes," Kris answered.

"What are those constitutional rights of people who are not citizens of the United States of America, who were captured on a battlefield committing acts of war against the United States?" McCain asked.

"Our analysis, Senator, is that the due process clause applies to military commissions and imposes a constitutional floor on the procedures that the government sets on such commissions ..." Kris said.

"So you are saying that these people who are at Guantanamo, who were part of 9/11, who committed acts of war against the United States, have constitutional rights under the Constitution of the United States of America?" McCain asked.

"Within the framework I just described, the answer is yes, the due process clause guarantees and imposes some requirements on the conduct of (military) commissions," Kris said.

If you click the above link, you can watch Department of Defense General Counsel Jeh Johnson wipe the floor with Joe Lieberman, who "respectfully disagrees" that terrorists can and should be tried in the same civilian courts that have been trying and convicting terrorists by the truckload for a good many years now. 'Tis a thing of beauty.

I think we can all concur with the following sentiment:

I am gratified to see that New York Times thinks Messrs Kris and Johnson have provided good legal counsel to the Committee. From the Times editorial page:

After years of watching government lawyers undermine the rule of law, it has been especially gratifying to see President Obama's lawyers urging senators to do even more to create a system that will fairly try prisoners and no longer shame Americans.

I know that Obama's not perfect. I know that there's vast room for improvement on several aspects of his national security policy. But the improvement over the last administration is remarkable. And I can't even begin to tell you how relieved I am that we didn't elect that mega-fucktard John "Do Terrorists Really Truly Have Rights?" McCain.

You made a good choice this time, America. Keep up the excellent work.

The Regulators Are Coming

Remember when we were talking about speculators being responsible for spiking gas prices? Seems like said speculators may be in for a nasty shock:

I've been following this for a while, and it's encouraging news if the commodities regulators follow through. These guys have been driving up the cost of oil with the same sort of shady tactics used in the financial markets. Good for the Obama administration if they take this aggressive approach:

WASHINGTON — Reacting to the violent swings in oil prices in recent months, federal regulators announced on Tuesday that they were considering new restrictions on “speculative” traders in markets for oil, natural gas and other energy products.

The move is a big departure from the hands-off approach to market regulation of the last two decades. It also highlights a broader shift toward tougher government oversight under President Obama.

[snip]

In the case of oil and gas trading, regulators made it clear that they were willing to move, without waiting for Congress to act on Mr. Obama’s overhaul, invoking their existing powers.

Woot! You go, guys!

You know, I often wish Obama would do a better job - his Bush Mark II impression on various detainee issues and sundry other national security issues being the prime examples - but when I get news like this, I'm reminded just how much he doesn't resemble Bush.

Once we get the man disabused of certain notions, I think he's going to turn out to be a delight. Well, to folks who don't make their livings fucking over the financial markets, that is. This is change I can believe in.

Our Vulcan President

Ladies and gentlemen, the evidence that Barak Obama is, in fact, a Vulcan, despite his penchant for flashing beaming grins.

Exhibit A, which is evident in his every speech and appearance, and thus needs no link: his preternatural calm.

Exhibit B: His ability to flash a Vulcan salute.

And Exhibit C: His response to inane questions about public plans driving private plans out of business:

I believe it was David Jackson, from USA Today, who suggested to the president this afternoon that a public health care option would "drive private insurance out of business." I thoroughly enjoyed the Obama's response.

"Why would it drive private insurance out of business? If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care; if they tell us that they're offering a good deal, then why is it that the government -- which they say can't run anything -- suddenly is going to drive them out of business? That's not logical..."

Pure Spock, that is. And you know something? It's fantastic to have a Vulcan in charge, especially after the last eight years of Tweedledum and Tweedlevil.

Others have compared Obama's remarks to Spock, but none of them created a clip. This means that instead of filching one, I had to create my own:




Live long and prosper, Mr. Sp - er, President.

(Tip o' the shot glass to WavCentral.com and the unwitting fools at MediaResearch.org, who respectively supplied sound and image.)

Obama Better Do Better

This week isn't going down as one of the more inspiring of Obama's young presidency.

First, he's flirting with continuing Bush's indefinite detention policy:

Haven't we already seen this movie? Didn't we already reject this policy with Obama's election? I didn't vote for him because I wanted him to embrace Bush's policies, and if he does, I want a damned good legal explanation:

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on U.S. soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

[snip]

[...] Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), who met this week with White House Counsel Greg Craig to discuss the administration's plans, said among the proposals being studied is seeking authority for indefinite detentions, with the imprimatur of some type of national-security court.

Sen. Graham said he wants to work with the administration to pass legislation to increase judicial oversight of military commissions, but noted the legal difficulties that would arise.

"This is a difficult question. How do you hold someone in prison without a trial indefinitely?" Sen. Graham said.

You don't. You either try them or let them go. This indefinite detention bullshit is almost as outrageous as torture.

Speaking of trials, this doesn't cut it:

Bmaz hit this latest chapter in the “Yes we can, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're going to” tour on Saturday (and Spencer hit it again this morning), but today, the White House made it official—Bush’s military commissions have now become Obama’s military commissions:

Military commissions have a long tradition in the United States. They are appropriate for trying enemies who violate the laws of war, provided that they are properly structured and administered. In the past, I have supported the use of military commissions as one avenue to try detainees, in addition to prosecution in Article III courts. In 2006, I voted in favor of the use of military commissions. But I objected strongly to the Military Commissions Act that was drafted by the Bush Administration and passed by Congress because it failed to establish a legitimate legal framework and undermined our capability to ensure swift and certain justice against those detainees that we were holding at the time. Indeed, the system of Military Commissions at Guantanamo Bay had only succeeded in prosecuting three suspected terrorists in more than seven years.

Let me see if I’ve got this right: The previous extra-legal system wasn’t up to snuff because it wasn’t codified enough? The new! improved! Obama-era secret trials will be better because they are swifter and more certain? Seriously?

If this is the kind of shit America wanted, we would've elected McCain in a landslide. I don't care how many sparkles you sprinkle on military commissions, they're still pure bullshit. Our courts are more than capable of trying terrorists. We've got plenty of terrorists locked up who enjoyed the full protection of our laws. We didn't need kangaroo courts to convict them.

As far as new directions go, don't we have someone whose history doesn't include this?

General McChrystal, leader of the Joint Special Operations Command, is the man just put in charge of the war in Afghanistan. Fred Kaplan has more:

[snip]

This appointment will not be without controversy. McChrystal's command also provided the personnel for Task Force 6-26, an elite unit of 1,000 special-ops forces that engaged in harsh interrogation of detainees in Camp Nama as far back as 2003. The interrogations were so harsh that five Army officers were convicted on charges of abuse. (McChrystal himself was not implicated in the excesses, but the unit's slogan, which set the tone for its practices, was "If you don't make them bleed, they can't prosecute for it.")

Kaplan says the replacement of McKiernan with McChrystal means this is now unequivocally "Obama's war" and that this decision could make or break the Obama presidency. The fact that he's just appointed a man who supports torture is not a good sign.

Andrew Sullivan has a piece on this guy that gives one some serious doubts about his fitness for command. Is our military really so bereft of talented leadership that McChrystal's the least worst choice? I somehow doubt it.

And, for the toxic cherry on top, check out this genius nomination:

President Barack Obama has nominated a lawyer for the nation’s largest toxic polluters to run the enforcement of the nation’s environmental laws. On Tuesday, Obama “announced his intent to nominate” Ignacia S. Moreno to be Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division in the Department of Justice. Moreno, general counsel for that department during the Clinton administration, is now the corporate environmental counsel for General Electric, “America’s #1 Superfund Polluter“...

[snip]

This February, General Electric lost an eight-year battle to “prove that parts of the Superfund law are unconstitutional.” One of the 600-person DOJ environmental division’s “primary responsibilities is to enforce federal civil and criminal environmental laws such as” the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Superfund.

Obama hasn't been a perfect president, but this is the first time since the inauguration he's been this unrelentingly stupid. It's almost as if his brain has been replaced with a hash of Bush, Cheney, and William Kristol.

Mr. President, you have to do better than this.

Another Reason to Plant an Organic Garden

No, it's not just because Michelle Obama's doing it, although she makes it look good:

Michelle Obama helped with spring planting in the White House garden yesterday, along with some of the WH kitchen and grounds staff and students from Bancroft Elementary School in DC.

This is a great teaching moment on nutrition and activity in a nation where childhood obesity has become rampant. More and more children are taking diabetes and blood pressure medications, and that costs us all.

As Michelle Obama said yesterday (via WH transcript):

This is one of the main reasons we're doing this, is that what I've learned as a mom, in trying to feed my girls, is that it is so important for them to get regular fruits and vegetables in their diets, because it does have nutrients, it does make you strong, it is all brain food. And when you go to school, it is so important for you to have a good breakfast, to make sure in your lunches that you have an apple or an orange or a banana, that you have something green when you eat any meal, lunch or dinner.

And we're looking to you guys to help educate the country, not just in your own homes, but other people as they think about how to plan their meals for their kids, to think about the importance of making sure that we have enough fruits and vegetables. And doing this garden is a really inexpensive way of making that happen.

This is fantastic and sorely needed. Kudos to the WH and Michelle Obama for doing it, and for using the WH podium to promote healthy, sustainable gardening. And, more important, healthier eating for the nation's children.

Those are all excellent reasons to grow an organic garden, certainly. But you know what's also a good reason? Doing so really gets up the chemical companies' noses:

However, the Mid America CropLife Association (MACA) — which represents agribusinesses like Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and DuPont Crop Protection — are unhappy that no chemicals are being used on the food:

“Fresh foods grown conventionally are wholesome and flavorful yet more economical,” the Mid America CropLife Association (MACA) wrote the first lady last month a few days after she and fifth-graders from a local elementary school planted the White House Kitchen Garden.

“As you go about planning and planting the White House garden, we respectfully encourage you to recognize the role conventional agriculture plays in the U.S. in feeding the ever-increasing population, contributing to the U.S. economy and providing a safe and economical food supply.”

In other words, "Pour some fucking chemicals, lady!" Aren't they funny when they're in a snit? And if they're this upset over a lil ol' garden, imagine how they'd be if Michelle Obama started an actual organic farm.

You know what I think she should do next? Free range chickens on the South lawn, baby, yeah! I can't wait for the howls of outrage from the industrial chicken farms.

Doing the Right Thing

From time to time, Obama earns a trip to the woodshed. But let's not lose sight of the fact that he's also doing a hell of a lot of good, and taking the country in directions it should've been going all along:

I've been ragging on Obama relentlessly over the ways in which he has continued the vile policies of the Bush administration. Here's a big attaboy for changing one ridiculous decision:

The Obama administration will endorse a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality that then-President George W. Bush had refused to sign, The Associated Press has learned.

U.S. officials said Tuesday they had notified the declaration's French sponsors that the administration wants to be added as a supporter. The Bush administration was criticized in December when it was the only western government that refused to sign on.

Administration sources only spoke anonymously because they had not yet informed Congress of the decision, but they said exactly the right thing:

[snip]

"In the words of the United States Supreme Court, the right to be free from criminalization on the basis of sexual orientation 'has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom'," the official said.

Amen, brother. Amen.

It feels good to see us headed in the right direction. There was no reason not to endorse the U.N.'s declaration. Unless, of course, you're a homophobic, frothing fundie. I'm glad Obama's announcing this is no longer the case for the United States as a whole.

In other doing right news, Tim Geithner's fessed up:

Claiming full responsibility for the situation, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told CNN today that his office "asked Sen. Chris Dodd to include a loophole in the stimulus bill that allowed bailed-out insurance giant American International Group to keep its bonuses." He said he requested the measure to prevent costly governmental litigation.

It looked for a little while like the Obama administration was going to play the coward and let Dodd be their scapegoat. Kudos for resisting the urge.

You might also want to throw a little support Obama's way to ensure that obnoxious Bush Health Care Denial rule gets nixed. Y'know - the one that would've let religous fuckwit doctors impose their morality on their female patients. Obama's moving to axe that one. Let's show him we've got his back.

Wielding the Paddle So I Don't Have To

Eli at Firedoglake has a pretty damning piece on Obama's willingness (or lack thereof) to make the hard decisions:

One of the changes I most hoped for (but did not, however, expect) was to have a president who puts the rule of law and well-being of the country ahead of the narrow self-interest of the rich and powerful. Admittedly, it's still very early in Obama's term, but so far I've seen precious little evidence that he has the stomach for it.

No matter how high the stakes, he tiptoes around the elephant in the room rather than confronting it head-on.

He goes on to list three areas where Obama's seriously deficient in the hardnosed department. And these are areas - the economy, healthcare, accountability for the Bush regime - where a tough, merciless approach is needed. Yet, as Eli notes, "More than anything, Obama strikes me as a man who will spare no expense on balms and ointments to soothe a painful boil, but simply cannot bring himself to lance it."

It's early days yet. Obama may still find that lance - especially if we apply not-so-subtle hints that we expect lances to be found and duly employed. And while he's fallen far short of expectations in some departments, I can't help seconding Digby, who at the end of a post about McCain's unwillingness to defend his own daughter against Laura Ingraham's high-school attacks, says:

Whenever I find myself getting down about something the Obama administration is doing all I have to do is picture that man in my head and I immediately bring myself back from the brink. Imagine.

Exactly.

Still, no matter how grateful I am that we have an intelligent Democrat rather than a dumbshit Con in office, I can't sing nothing but hosannas. Especially not when Obama's administration plays dirty tricks such as this:

Good to see that the Treasury Department is so concerned about the AIG bonus babies that they are throwing Chris Dodd to the wolves to deflect criticism.

The administration official said the Treasury Department did its own legal analysis and concluded that those contracts could not be broken. The official noted that even a provision recently pushed through Congress by Senator Christopher J. Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, had an exemption for such bonus agreements already in place.

That's just not true, as both Jane and Glenn Greenwald explain pretty definitively. Under a Dodd-written amendment, the Senate version of the stimulus bill included executive compensation limits for all recipients of TARP money, only to have the amendment stripped of retroactivity and applied strictly toward future payouts, after negotiations with none other than Tim Geithner and Larry Summers...

[snip]

The President brought this upon himself through his hirings. But if he wants to find a way out, he could stop the practice of his team blaming others and start living up to his own rhetoric.

We had quite enough lying and refusal to take responsibility during the last administration. More won't be tolerated. A few sharp reminders may be necessary. The woodshed will remain open for business until the President grows a pair.

Woodshed Time

And just think, I don't even have to tire out my own arm.

On many fronts, Obama's doing a damned good job. However, this doesn't immunize him from criticism when he spectacularly fails to meet expectations. And just lately, it's become clear that he needs a bit o' reminding about this document called the Constitution, that we elected him to reverse Bush's abuses rather than continue them, and that keeping America safe involves making a clean break with the Bush policies that turned us into a nation of belligerent, torturing fucktards.

To that end, our very own Thinking Brain Dog has decided it's time for some consequences:

Every time I write an article about some extraordinary power the Obama Administration has decided is warranted for itself, I'm going to combine images of Obama with something that symbolizes that excess. Today, it's this. This picture symbolizes as well as any the unaccountable nature of the Bush Administration's rendition and torture policies. Both have been embraced, in slightly reworded form, by the Obama Administration.

If he's going to ignore the Constitution that is supposedly a scholarly interest of his, then he will wear the shame that comes with that action. At least, he will wear it around here.

Good.

Ed Brayton rolls up his sleeves and gets to work with the paddle.

And, for those who are horrified and wondering why a man who campaigned on hope and change seems so intent on continuing the worst abuses of the previous administration, there's something of an answer from Roger Shuler:

Why does President Barack Obama continue to embrace many Bush Administration policies related to justice and the war on terrorism? It's probably because Obama's White House counsel has myriad conflicts related to the Bush administration, says an Alabama lawyer who played a pivotal role as whistleblower in the Don Siegelman case.

The most recent curious move by Obama officials came when the Department of Justice filed a brief renewing the government's motion to dismiss Rasul v. Rumsfeld, in which plaintiffs allege that former Bush defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld was responsible for their torture.

This continues an alarming trend of Obama embracing policies that he appeared to criticize on the campaign trail, reports Scott Horton of Harper's.

How could this happen? How could the president of "hope" and "change" agree on important issues with George W. Bush? Alabama attorney Jill Simpson points a finger at White House Counsel Greg Craig.

And for good reason. The man's slept with far too many Bush officials.

I know Obama's got a lot on his plate, but it's not like this is small, ignorable stuff. He was elected to clean the rot out of our government. He's going to lose plenty of public support if he doesn't, and then watch his agenda come crashing down due to that rot he decided he liked.

Best get scrubbing, Mr. President.

Science Hero

I know all of you have probably seen this in one form or another, but I just want to point out that our new President is a champion for science:

As expected, President Obama today reversed Bush-era restrictions on stem-cell research, but that's not all he did today. While hosting a White House ceremony to announce the change, the president also explained a new memorandum addressing scientific integrity itself.

"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources, it is also about protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said. "It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

He said his memorandum is meant to restore "scientific integrity to government decision-making." He called it the beginning of a process of ensuring his administration bases its decision on sound science; appoints scientific advisers based on their credentials, not their politics; and is honest about the science behind its decisions.

Alex Koppelman noted that this carried with it an "unsubtle ... repudiation of the Bush administration and its attitude towards science."

Good. The previous administration's efforts to subvert science were unprecedented, ridiculous, and kind of dangerous. Melody Barnes, director of Obama's Domestic Policy Council, told reporters yesterday, "The president believes that it's particularly important to sign this memorandum so that we can put science and technology back at the heart of pursuing a broad range of national goals."

It feels so good to have a President who wholeheartedly supports science again. Now if we can just usher the fundies, Cons and other assorted lunatics out of the way, America might once again become a country on the cutting edge.

Thank you, President Obama.

Thankees and Spankees

I dream of blogging. Seriously. I took a nap this evening, and dreamt I was reading a very interesting post by Steve Benen (aren't they all?), and writing several posts of my own. I wish I could remember most of them.

One I do remember, though, was a thank-you letter to President Obama. And even in the dream, I was thinking, "Yeesh, isn't that a little much sap?" After all, I have concerns. Some of his DOJ's arguments recently have been concerning. I'm not at all sure over his Treasury Department. But, of course, every time I go to haul him to the woodshed, he does something that mitigates the concern, and then a little more. So I save my smackin' for them as deserves it more richly.

But a thank you letter? Oh, for crying out loud. I refuse to be that mushy-gushy.

However, I may have to rethink that position:

The establishment media, never one to turn down an easy story controversy slap fight might be focused on Limbaugh—they are the ones that have asked questions of Gibbs, Emanuel, etc., after all—but "Team" Obama seems focused on fixing the fucking the disaster left to them by "Team" Bush-Cheney. The Recovery Act, the budget fixes—hell, the whole damn budget—today’s healthcare summit, Clinton’s Mideast initiative, the initiative to cut military waste, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, this week’s release of the OLC memos. . . that's what the White House is focusing on.

Where is the Republican "loyal" opposition focusing? They are busy fearmongering about "socialism," saying "no" without proposing any implementable alternatives, and seeing who can kiss Rush's butt closest to his anus.

And how’s that workin’ for ya’? As the latest NBC/WSJ poll will tell you, not very well:

President Obama's favorability rating is at an all-time high. Two-thirds feel hopeful about his leadership and six in 10 approve of the job he's doing in the White House.

. . . .

By comparison, the Republican Party — which resisted Obama's recently passed stimulus plan and has criticized the spending in his budget — finds its favorability at an all-time low. It also receives most of the blame for the current partisanship in Washington and trails the Democrats by nearly 30 percentage points on the question of which party could best lead the nation out of recession. [emphasis enthusiastically added]

Really, the kid's not doing a bad job. When you kind of put it all together like that with the little NBC/WSJ Poll cherry on top, it's kinda eye-popping. So, y'know, Mr. President - thanks. And keep up the good work.

That work, o' course, would be easier if it wasn't for the abundance of assclowns he's having to deal with:

Via TPM, Bloomberg:

"President Barack Obama's economic advisers are increasingly concerned about the U.S. Senate's delay in confirming the nominations of Austan Goolsbee and Cecilia Rouse to the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

Without Senate confirmation, the two economists are barred from advising the president as the administration tackles the worst financial crisis in 70 years and tries to advance the spending plan Obama submitted to Congress last week.

[snip]

You know what's coming, don't you? Oh, yes, you do:

"There are some objections on the Republican side that we are trying to deal with," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid."

As Josh said: Please Grow Up.

Meanwhile, Sen. Robert Menendez and other anonymous Senators have blocked two of Obama's science advisors. This isn't just bad for science, it's bad for the economic stimulus package, which contains a lot of science funding:

"The holdup could slow timely science and environmental policy work between Congress and the administration, particularly the spending of roughly $21.5 billion dedicated to science in the economic recovery package."

Now mind you, Obama has managed to accomplish all of the amazing things highlighted above and more in a political zoo where Cons obstruct everything in sight and a good chunk of the Dems can't figure out whether they're supposed to be Democrats or not. (New Dems, Blue Dogs, a word if I may: fiscal conservatives are typically Republicons, you dumbfucks. How's about we hold off on the concern trolling until after the economy has recovered, eh? Or you can join the ranks of the outrageous idiots over on the other side of the aisle. Good luck getting reelected with that.)

So, once again: Thank you, President Obama, for managing to do so much in so little time while navigating so many obstacles. And for not mangling innocent English sentences every time you open your mouth.

That, together with all the other stuff, means a lot to this writer.

And, Senate? I'm carrying Josh and Hilzoy's motion, here: Grow the fuck up.

(Update: you know what they say about great minds thinking alike... or at least on related grooves. What was I saying about the Treasury?)

Another Noxious Bush Reg Bites the Dust

A few months ago, I alerted you to Bush's little scheme to allow healthcare providers to redefine birth control as abortion and then refuse to provide the service. At the time, I gave you what I considered wise advice:

We can't rely on Obama's ability to roll these rules back. Better for the country if they're never implemented at all.

It's nice to be half-wrong sometimes. Looks like we can rely on Obama after all:

Today, the Obama administration plans to rescind the controversial “conscience rule,” which “allows healthcare workers to deny abortion counseling or other family planning services if doing so would violate their moral beliefs.”

That's my President, that is. He's not got a perfect record in rolling back Bush abuses - in fact, if a few things don't change over the next week, a trip to the woodshed will be in order - but he's doing a tremendous amount of good very, very quickly.

This is why I find it rather difficult to apply the Smack-o-Matic in his case. Every time I pick the damned thing up, he does something that makes me put it right back down. Y'know, little things like, oh, I dunno,

Ending the war in Iraq.

Restoring Superfund, making polluters pay, and ending tax breaks for the fossil fuel industry.

Planning a budget even Paul Krugman can love.

Going for healthcare reform.

Delivering a kick-ass speech that helps prepare the country for progressivism.

And that's just a few items from the last few days.

It's a good thing the Cons have been such raging idiots, or the poor Smack-o-Matic would be gathering dust. We can't have that.

The following illustration describes the situation precisely:


Our President is practically MacGuyver. I'm loving this.

President Obama - My Woodshed. Now.

Explain this:

This is just wrong:

"In a closely watched case involving rendition and torture, a lawyer for the Obama administration seemed to surprise a panel of federal appeals judges on Monday by pressing ahead with an argument for preserving state secrets originally developed by the Bush administration.

In the case, Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian native, and four other detainees filed suit against a subsidiary of Boeing for arranging flights for the Bush administration's "extraordinary rendition" program, in which terrorism suspects were secretly taken to other countries, where they say they were tortured. The Bush administration argued that the case should be dismissed because even discussing it in court could threaten national security and relations with other nations.

During the campaign, Mr. Obama harshly criticized the Bush administration's treatment of detainees, and he has broken with that administration on questions like whether to keep open the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But a government lawyer, Douglas N. Letter, made the same state-secrets argument on Monday, startling several judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

"Is there anything material that has happened" that might have caused the Justice Department to shift its views, asked Judge Mary M. Schroeder, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, coyly referring to the recent election.

"No, your honor," Mr. Letter replied.

Judge Schroeder asked, "The change in administration has no bearing?"

Once more, he said, "No, Your Honor." The position he was taking in court on behalf of the government had been "thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration," and "these are the authorized positions," he said."

You know this is wrong. I know you're busy trying to rescue your stimulus package from the Cons and the centrists who are busily destroying it. I appreciate that you have a gargantuan amount of things on your plate. But your Administration, after such a lovely start, is headed down the slippery slope to Bush-style buffoonery. And it needs to stop now.

This is a man whose genitals were sliced up by people we handed him to for torture because he looked at a joke website. And you want to play the State Secrets game with this? This is utter bullshit.

You are smarter than this, and you are better than this. Fix it.

Telling It Like It Is

So I'm at work today, and when it finally slowed down, I was able to hop on Think Progress, where I read this bit of Obama's speech to the Dems:

"When you start hearing arguments on the cable chatter, just understand a couple of things. Number one, when they say, well, why are we spending $800 billion -- we've got this huge deficit? First of all, I found this deficit when I showed up."

Burst out laughing, didn't I just? Priceless. That's the Obama I've been wanting to see. So I read it out loud to my coworkers, who don't spend their lunch hours pounding out blog posts but spend the time watching teevee in the breakroom. One of them tells me, "It gets better. He said he found it wrapped up with a bow."

At first, I couldn't believe them. I mean, all we've been getting lately is post-partisan Obama, who wouldn't dream of saying something so snarky. But then again, he tried to be inclusive and accomodating and attempted to make Cons happy, and they ran over him with the spiked boots. That could tend to make someone stop playing nice and reach for the can of whoop-ass with a double-shot of snark.

And wouldn't you know it? He did:

Good on him:

Obama, speaking to about 200 House Democrats at their annual retreat at the Kingsmill Resort and Spa, dismissed Republican attacks against the massive spending in the stimulus.

"What do you think a stimulus is?" Obama asked incredulously. "It’s spending — that's the whole point! Seriously.”

Stabbing hard at Republicans who once aligned themselves with his predecessor, Obama made it clear that the problems he seeks to address with his recovery plan weren’t ones of his making.

“When you start hearing arguments, on the cable chatter, just understand a couple of things,” he said. “No. 1, when they say, ‘Well, why are we spending $800 billion [when] we’ve got this huge deficit?’ – first of all, I found this deficit when I showed up, No. 1.

“I found this national debt, doubled, wrapped in a big bow waiting for me as I stepped into the Oval Office.”

He's not just telling it like it is. He's doing what he always did best - using razor-sharp wit to cut his opponents into manageable pieces. It's what we've desperately needed ever since the Cons started demanding the winners make all the concessions to the losers. They don't understand the concept of playing nice - they see it as weakness. Give them a millimeter and they'll take megaparsecs, then whine it's not enough. I do believe Obama has realized that. The post-partisan gloves have come off. It's a beautiful thing.

Note to Cons: you had a chance to get something. You're about to end up taking your teeth home in a hat. Enjoy.