Obama General Discussion

[deep]

Bayh Protests GOP Obstructionism By Handing Over His Seat To Them

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, blessed with $13 million in his campaign coffers and a commanding lead over any and all contenders, sees trouble on the reelection horizon. With all the anti-Democrat fervor sweeping the red and purple states at the moment, the newest computer models don't paint a pretty picture. Experts now say that Bayh might only defeat his as yet undetermined opponent by 40 percentage points or less, and he just couldn't put his family or his supporters through that kind of public humiliation.

So, Bayh looked back to the Indiana values on which he was raised and thought long and hard about what a good and courageous man ought to do when faced with mild adversity. That was when he decided to do the honorable thing and run like hell.

To that end, Bayh held a press conference on Monday to announce his decision, careful to surround himself with his wife and children just in case things got ugly and he needed a human shield or two.

"It's just so frustrating not being able to get anything done in the divisive climate on Capitol Hill," said Bayh, weeping into his handkerchief. "Sorry. I told myself I wasn't going to cry. Republicans are just so mean! So, I've decided to drop out and effectively hand over my seat to the GOP. That'll show them!"

Throughout his three terms in the Senate, the center-right Democrat has earned a reputation as an independent thinker. His legislative record demonstrates this perfectly. For example, when Republicans were in charge of the Senate, he begrudgingly went along with their agenda. When Democrats took over a few years ago, he went along but did so grudgingly.

Based on the comments posted on the Indianapolis Star's website, Indiana voters fully support Bayh's decision. They see Bayh as a courageous figure for standing up to the gridlock in Washington by bravely buggering off and leaving it for someone else to deal with. A few years ago, a move like this would have looked like a surrender, but now it's just part of a larger trend. In his hasty retreat, Bayh is walking a path cut by trailblazing quitter Sarah Palin, another political figure who is hugely popular in the state for no reason at all.

Other than the partisan difficulties, one of the biggest factors in Bayh's decision to retire from the Senate has to do with his health. Though his family managed to keep it a secret for decades, Bayh suffers from a genetic condition known as Myotonia Congenita, the same disorder that afflicts the fainting goats featured so often on the Discovery Channel. At the first sign of danger or even mild conflict his legs stiffen up and he falls over in a heap.

.

 

[Irvine511]

i think everyone can view this as good news and an unqualified success for the Obama administration:

Secret Joint Raid Captures Taliban’s Top Commander
By MARK MAZZETTI and DEXTER FILKINS

WASHINGTON — The Taliban’s top military commander was captured several days ago in Karachi, Pakistan, in a secret joint operation by Pakistani and American intelligence forces, according to American government officials.

The commander, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, is an Afghan described by American officials as the most significant Taliban figure to be detained since the American-led war in Afghanistan started more than eight years ago. He ranks second in influence only to Mullah Muhammad Omar, the Taliban’s founder and a close associate of Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Mullah Baradar has been in Pakistani custody for several days, with American and Pakistani intelligence officials both taking part in interrogations, according to the officials.

It was unclear whether he was talking, but the officials said his capture had provided a window into the Taliban and could lead to other senior officials. Most immediately, they hope he will provide the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, the one-eyed cleric who is the group’s spiritual leader.

Disclosure of Mullah Baradar’s capture came as American and Afghan forces were in the midst of a major offensive in southern Afghanistan.

His capture could cripple the Taliban’s military operations, at least in the short term, said Bruce O. Riedel, a former C.I.A. officer who last spring led the Obama administration’s Afghanistan and Pakistan policy review.

Details of the raid remain murky, but officials said that it had been carried out by Pakistan’s military spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, and that C.I.A. operatives had accompanied the Pakistanis.

The New York Times learned of the operation on Thursday, but delayed reporting it at the request of White House officials, who contended that making it public would end a hugely successful intelligence-gathering effort. The officials said that the group’s leaders had been unaware of Mullah Baradar’s capture and that if it became public they might cover their tracks and become more careful about communicating with each other.

The Times is publishing the news now because White House officials acknowledged that the capture of Mullah Baradar was becoming widely known in the region.

Several American government officials gave details about the raid on the condition that they not be named, because the operation was classified.

American officials believe that besides running the Taliban’s military operations, Mullah Baradar runs the group’s leadership council, often called the Quetta Shura because its leaders for years have been thought to be hiding near Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan Province in Pakistan.

A spokesman for the Taliban insisted on Tuesday that Baradar was still free.

“This is just rumor spread by foreigners to divert attention from the Marja offensive,” said the spokesman, Zabiullah Mujahid.

“They are facing big problems in Marja. In reality there is nothing regarding Baradar’s arrest. He is safe and free and he is in Afghanistan.”

The participation of Pakistan’s spy service could suggest a new level of cooperation from Pakistan’s leaders, who have been ambivalent about American efforts to crush the Taliban. Increasingly, the Americans say, senior leaders in Pakistan, including the chief of its army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, have gradually come around to the view that they can no longer support the Taliban in Afghanistan — as they have quietly done for years — without endangering themselves. Indeed, American officials have speculated that Pakistani security officials could have picked up Mullah Baradar long ago.

The officials said that Pakistan was leading the interrogation of Mullah Baradar, but that Americans were also involved. The conditions of the questioning are unclear. In its first week in office, the Obama administration banned harsh interrogations like waterboarding by Americans, but the Pakistanis have long been known to subject prisoners to brutal questioning.

American intelligence officials believe that elements within Pakistan’s security services have covertly supported the Taliban with money and logistical help — largely out of a desire to retain some ally inside Afghanistan for the inevitable day when the Americans leave.

The ability of the Taliban’s top leaders to operate relatively freely inside Pakistan has for years been a source of friction between the ISI and the C.I.A. Americans have complained that they have given ISI operatives the precise locations of Taliban leaders, but that the Pakistanis usually refuse to act.

The Pakistanis have countered that the American intelligence was often outdated, or that faulty information had been fed to the United States by Afghanistan’s intelligence service.

For the moment it is unclear how the capture of Mullah Baradar will affect the overall direction of the Taliban, who have so far refused to disavow Al Qaeda and to accept the Afghan Constitution. American officials have hoped to win over some midlevel members of the group.

Mr. Riedel, the former C.I.A. official, said that he had not heard about Mullah Baradar’s capture before being contacted by The Times, but that the raid constituted a “sea change in Pakistani behavior.”

In recent weeks, American officials have said they have seen indications that the Pakistani military and spy services may finally have begun to distance themselves from the Taliban. One Obama administration official said Monday that the White House had “no reason to think that anybody was double-dealing at all” in aiding in the capture of Mullah Baradar.

A parade of American officials traveling to the Pakistani capital have made the case that the Afghan Taliban are now aligned with groups — like the Pakistani Taliban — that threaten the stability of the Pakistani government.

Mullah Baradar oversees the group’s operations across its primary area of activity in southern and western Afghanistan. While some of the insurgent groups active in Afghanistan receive only general guidance from their leaders, the Taliban are believed to be somewhat hierarchical, with lower-ranking field commanders often taking directions and orders from their leaders across the border.

In an attempt to improve the Taliban’s image both inside the country and abroad, Mullah Baradar last year helped issue a “code of conduct” for Taliban fighters. The handbook, small enough to be carried in the pocket of each Taliban foot soldier, gave specific guidance about topics including how to avoid civilian casualties, how to win the hearts and minds of villagers, and the necessity of limiting suicide attacks to avoid a backlash.

In recent months, a growing number of Taliban leaders are believed to have fled to Karachi, a sprawling, chaotic city in southern Pakistan hundreds of miles from the turbulence of the Afghan frontier. A diplomat based in Kabul, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said in an interview last month that Mullah Omar had moved to Karachi, and that several of his colleagues were there, too.

The leadership council, which includes more than a dozen of the Taliban’s best-known leaders, charts the overall direction of the war, assigns Taliban “shadow governors” to run many Afghan provinces and districts, and chooses battlefield commanders. It also oversees a number of subcommittees that direct other aspects of the war, like political, religious and military affairs.

According to Wahid Muzhda, a former Taliban official in Kabul who stays in touch with former colleagues, the council meets every three or four months to plot strategy. As recently as three years ago, he said, the council had 19 members. Since then, six have been killed or captured. Others have since filled the empty seats, he said.

Among the council members killed were Mullah Dadullah, who died during a raid by NATO and Afghan forces in 2007. Among the captured were Mullah Obaidullah, the Taliban defense minister, who reported to Mr. Baradar.

“The only man more powerful than Baradar is Omar,” Mr. Muzhda said. “He and Omar cannot meet very often because of security reasons, but they have a very good relationship.”

Western and Afghan officials familiar with the workings of the Taliban’s leadership have described Mullah Baradar as one of the Taliban’s most approachable leaders, and the one most ready to negotiate with the Afghan government.

Mediators who have worked to resolve kidnappings and other serious issues have often approached the Taliban leadership through him.

As in the case of the reclusive Mullah Omar, the public details of Mullah Baradar’s life are murky. According to an Interpol alert, he was born in 1968 in Weetmak, a village in Afghanistan’s Oruzgan Province. Terrorism experts describe him as a skilled military leader who runs many high-level meetings of the Taliban’s top commanders in Afghanistan.

In answers to questions submitted by Newsweek last summer, Mullah Baradar said that he could not maintain “continuous contacts” with Mullah Omar, but that he received advice on “important topics” from the cleric.

In the same interview, Mullah Baradar said he welcomed a large increase in American troops in Afghanistan because the Taliban “want to inflict maximum losses on the Americans, which is possible only when the Americans are present here in large numbers and come out of their fortified places.”

Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mullah Baradar was assigned by Mullah Omar to assume overall command of Taliban forces in northern Afghanistan. In that role, he oversaw a large group of battle-hardened Arab and foreign fighters who were based in the northern cities of Kunduz and Mazar-i-Sharif.

In November 2001, as Taliban forces collapsed after the American invasion, Mullah Baradar and several other senior Taliban leaders were captured by Afghan militia fighters aligned with the United States. But Pakistani intelligence operatives intervened, and Mullah Baradar and the other Taliban leaders were released, according to a senior official of the Northern Alliance, the group of Afghans aligned with the United States.

Taliban?s Military Chief, Mullah Baradar, Is Captured - NYTimes.com

 

[BVS]

i think everyone can view this as good news and an unqualified success for the Obama administration:

Pfttt, if they haven't been tortured yet it's not good news...

Call me when they're tortured, dead, or both.

 

[Irvine511]

can i preemptively note concern about Miranda rights?

 

[mikal]

Pfttt, if they haven't been tortured yet it's not good news...

Call me when they're tortured, dead, or both.

i think Obama should also make a speech with the phrase "Mission Accomplished" on a banner.

 

[deep]

i think everyone can view this as good news and an unqualified success for the Obama administration:

I think so.

If Obama naps Osama, the planets might need to be realigned.

 

[Irvine511]

another Obama success: the stimulus.

Judging Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success
By DAVID LEONHARDT

WASHINGTON

Imagine if, one year ago, Congress had passed a stimulus bill that really worked.

Let’s say this bill had started spending money within a matter of weeks and had rapidly helped the economy. Let’s also imagine it was large enough to have had a huge impact on jobs — employing something like two million people who would otherwise be unemployed right now.

If that had happened, what would the economy look like today?

Well, it would look almost exactly as it does now. Because those nice descriptions of the stimulus that I just gave aren’t hypothetical. They are descriptions of the actual bill.

Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.

Yet I’m guessing you don’t think of the stimulus bill as a big success. You’ve read columns (by me, for example) complaining that it should have spent money more quickly. Or you’ve heard about the phantom ZIP code scandal: the fact that a government Web site mistakenly reported money being spent in nonexistent ZIP codes.

And many of the criticisms are valid. The program has had its flaws. But the attention they have received is wildly disproportionate to their importance. To hark back to another big government program, it’s almost as if the lasting image of the lunar space program was Apollo 6, an unmanned 1968 mission that had engine problems, and not Apollo 11, the moon landing.

The reasons for the stimulus’s middling popularity aren’t a mystery. The unemployment rate remains near 10 percent, and many families are struggling. Saying that things could have been even worse doesn’t exactly inspire. Liberals don’t like the stimulus because they wish it were bigger. Republicans don’t like it because it’s a Democratic program. The Obama administration hurt the bill’s popularity by making too rosy an economic forecast upon taking office.

Moreover, the introduction of the most visible parts of the program — spending on roads, buildings and the like — has been a bit sluggish. Aid to states, unemployment benefits and some tax provisions have been more successful and account for far more of the bill. But their successes are not obvious.

Even if the conventional wisdom is understandable, however, it has consequences. Because the economy is still a long way from being healthy, members of Congress are now debating another, smaller stimulus bill. (They’re calling it a “jobs bill,” seeing stimulus as a dirty word.) The logical thing to do would be to examine what worked and what didn’t in last year’s bill.

But that’s not what is happening. Instead, the debate is largely disconnected from the huge stimulus experiment we just ran. Why? As Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, the newest member of Congress, said, in a nice summary of the misperceptions, the stimulus might have saved some jobs, but it “didn’t create one new job.”

•

The case against the stimulus revolves around the idea that the economy would be no worse off without it. As a Wall Street Journal opinion piece put it last year, “The resilience of the private sector following the fall 2008 panic — not the fiscal stimulus program — deserves the lion’s share of the credit for the impressive growth improvement.” In a touch of unintended irony, two of article’s three authors were listed as working at a research institution named for Herbert Hoover.

Of course, no one can be certain about what would have happened in an alternate universe without a $787 billion stimulus. But there are two main reasons to think the hard-core skeptics are misguided — above and beyond those complicated, independent economic analyses.

The first is the basic narrative that the data offer. Pick just about any area of the economy and you come across the stimulus bill’s footprints.

In the early months of last year, spending by state and local governments was falling rapidly, as was tax revenue. In the spring, tax revenue continued to drop, yet spending jumped — during the very time when state and local officials were finding out roughly how much stimulus money they would be receiving. This is the money that has kept teachers, police officers, health care workers and firefighters employed.

Then there is corporate spending. It surged in the final months of last year. Mark Zandi of Economy.com (who has advised the McCain campaign and Congressional Democrats) says that the Dec. 31 expiration of a tax credit for corporate investment, which was part of the stimulus, is a big reason.

The story isn’t quite as clear-cut with consumer spending, as skeptics note. Its sharp plunge stopped before President Obama signed the stimulus into law exactly one year ago. But the billions of dollars in tax cuts, food stamps and jobless benefits in the stimulus have still made a difference. Since February, aggregate wages and salaries have fallen, while consumer spending has risen. The difference between the two — some $100 billion — has essentially come from stimulus checks.

The second argument in the bill’s favor is the history of financial crises. They have wreaked terrible damage on economies. Indeed, the damage tended to be even worse than what we have suffered.

Around the world over the last century, the typical financial crisis caused the jobless rate to rise for almost five years, according to work by the economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. On that timeline, our rate would still be rising in early 2012. Even that may be optimistic, given that the recent crisis was so bad. As Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson (Republicans both) and many others warned in 2008, this recession had the potential to become a depression.

Yet the jobless rate is now expected to begin falling consistently by the end of this year.

For that, the stimulus package, flaws and all, deserves a big heaping of credit. “It prevented things from getting much worse than they otherwise would have been,” Nariman Behravesh, Global Insight’s chief economist, says. “I think everyone would have to acknowledge that’s a good thing.”

So what now?

The last year has shown — just as economists have long said — that aid to states and cities may be the single most effective form of stimulus. Unlike road- or bridge-building, it can happen in a matter of weeks. And unlike tax cuts, state and local aid never languishes in a household’s savings account.

The ideal follow-up stimulus would start with that aid. It would then add on extended jobless benefits, which also tend to be spent, as well as tax credits carefully drafted to get businesses to hire and households to spend, like the cash-for-clunkers program.

By this yardstick, the $154 billion bill that the House passed in December is decent. It includes $27 billion in state and local aid, $79 billion for jobless benefits and other safety nets, and $48 billion in infrastructure spending.

The smaller bills being considered by the Senate are worse. They may end up with no state aid at all, and their tax credits sound better — with promises to help the long-term unemployed and small businesses — than they are. “The economic impact of the Senate bill, at this point, is starting to look very small,” Mr. Behravesh says.

Given what people have been saying about a successful stimulus bill, just imagine what they’ll say about one that doesn’t accomplish much.

Economic Scene - Success of Stimulus Bill Is Noteworthy as Another Is Weighed - NYTimes.com

 

[Irvine511]

and, to further prove the point how just how biased and "balanced" FoxNews is, check out their piece on the anniversary of the stimulus:

Silver Lining Hard to Find for Some on Anniversary of Stimulus

While the Obama administration and congressional Democrats are out in force this week touting the success of the $787 billion economic stimulus package signed exactly one year ago, critics are pointing to a still-dismal jobs picture and deflating public confidence as signs that the ballyhooed benefits of the stimulus bill, as one GOP leader put it, were a "fiction" and not worth the cost.

The United States of America owes $1.6 trillion more today than it did a year ago. The jobless rate has climbed from 8.1 percent to 9.7 percent. And the deficit has soared to record levels, with another record likely to be set this year.

Happy anniversary.

While the Obama administration and congressional Democrats are out in force this week touting the success of the $787 billion economic stimulus package, signed exactly one year ago, critics are pointing to a still-dismal jobs picture and deflating public confidence as signs that the ballyhooed benefits of the stimulus bill, as one GOP leader put it, were a "fiction." And certainly not worth the cost.

President Obama and Vice President Biden argued Wednesday that the stimulus has saved or created 2 million jobs.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele called that estimate "nonsense."

"I don't know what that is. I don't know what that looks like. If I can't put my fingers on it, if I can't touch it and if I can't get up at 6 o'clock in the morning and go to work there, then it's not happening, and that's the reality of a lot of people right now," Steele told Fox News.

While employers are shedding far fewer jobs than they were last year, the stimulus hasn't jolted hiring in the way it was advertised -- 49 states saw a net job loss in 2009, according to recent statistics. It's also contributed to record debt and deficits -- the national debt has reached nearly $12.4 trillion, while this fiscal year's deficit is expected to hit about $1.6 trillion. At the same time, President Obama is creating a panel to study ways to bring those numbers down.

The public is losing faith. A recent CBS News/New York Times survey showed only 6 percent of Americans believe the stimulus has created a significant number of jobs.

But here's the good news: The national economy as a whole is growing, a strong sign that the nation is not sliding back into recession. The jobless rate has pulled back from a high of 10.2 percent. Advocates of the stimulus argue that while unemployment is bad, the situation is better than it would have been without the stimulus -- a claim that can neither be proved nor disproved -- and that Republicans are talking out of both sides of their mouths, railing against the package while reaping its benefits in their home states.

"We acted because failure to do so would have led to catastrophe," Obama said Wednesday. "One year later, it is largely thanks to the recovery act that a second depression is no longer a possibility."

Biden said Wednesday on CBS' "The Early Show" that the package is only "halfway" done. Christina Romer, head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said on ABC's "Good Morning America" that state aid, a huge part of the package, has kept hundreds of thousands of state workers on the payroll and that the next step is to "translate" the GDP growth into more jobs. She and Biden both predict job growth by spring.

"We've seen a dramatic turnaround in this economy in the last year," Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine told Fox News on Wednesday. "We're not where we want to be yet, but it's great that we were able to ... stop the freefall in jobs."

But positive GDP growth isn't exactly the kind of thing that outside-the-Beltway Americans are going to notice on a day-to-day basis. Home values, 401k's, jobs and other real-world indicators are the proof many are looking for. While the stock market is back from the rock-bottom lows of early 2009, it's far from where it was before the crisis on Wall Street.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement Wednesday that the first anniversary of the stimulus is nothing to celebrate.

"In the first year of the trillion-dollar stimulus, Americans have lost millions of jobs, the unemployment rate continues to hover near 10 percent, the deficit continues to soar and we're inundated with stories of waste, fraud and abuse," he said. "This was not the plan Americans asked for or the results they were promised."

FOXNews.com - Silver Lining Hard to Find for Some on Anniversary of Stimulus

LOL @ "for some ..."

 

[Bluer White]

and, to further prove the point how just how biased and "balanced" FoxNews is, check out their piece on the anniversary of the stimulus:

Both articles seem pretty reasonable, Irvine.

 

[Bluer White]

and, to further prove the point how just how biased and "balanced" FoxNews is, check out their piece on the anniversary of the stimulus:

And actually, when I checked Foxnews this afternoon, they had this piece posted directly "above" the piece you didn't like.

FOXNews.com - White House: Stimulus Had 'Undeniable' Impact on Economy

 

[Irvine511]

Both articles seem pretty reasonable, Irvine.

really? one cites facts an analysis, the other cites the worst polls imaginable and Michael Steele.

it's text book right wing talking points, handed down by Ailes, and precisely how Fox operates. "economists agree that the stimulus has worked, but we found someone with a different opinion -- who's right? you decide."

 

[Irvine511]

And actually, when I checked Foxnews this afternoon, they had this piece posted directly "above" the piece you didn't like.

FOXNews.com - White House: Stimulus Had 'Undeniable' Impact on Economy

yes, of course, this is, again, how it works. don't like the good news? here's something with a more negative slant that will make you feel better.

and if you read it to the end, you get roughly the same copy:

Republicans were not so optimistic. Republican National Committee Chairman called the claim that the bill has saved or created 2 million jobs "fiction" and said the administration was not focusing enough on the private sector.

"This administration fundamentally doesn't understand that and the American people know it and they're responding in kind," Steele told Fox News.

A recent CBS News/New York Times survey showed only 6 percent of Americans believe the stimulus has created a significant number of jobs.

But White House economic adviser Christina Romer suggested that the best of the stimulus is yet to come.

Asked Wednesday on ABC's "Good Morning America" whether the "biggest bang" from the package has already been felt, Romer responded: "Absolutely not."

She said more jobs creation is on the way.

"Certainly in terms of the level of the things we care about, like employment and the unemployment rate, those effects are going to grow over time," she said.

That appeared to be a turnaround from her testimony before Congress last October.

At the time, Romer told the Joint Economic Committee that the recovery package would have its "greatest impact on growth" in the second and third quarters of 2009. By mid-2010, she said, the bill would be "contributing little" to growth.

But back then, Romer and other White House officials were hard at work managing expectations as unemployment was climbing. Romer was also talking about GDP growth in that section of the testimony.

 

[U2387]

another Obama success: the stimulus.

Leonhardt writes very well and is great at putting economic concepts in terms the average person can understand.

The most important things in this article are his citing of IHS Global Insight, Moody's and Macro. These are the non partisan, highly respected economic analysts who deal in things as they are. Its not like Brookings or Hoover, which are both credible but have a moderate bias toward one side or another. They are not bleeding heart liberals or tea party conservatives, their reputations are based on calling it like it is to private sector, gov't, media, etc clients.

So basically, everyone has to ask themselves a question: Do you believe the people mentioned above, or do you believe people like Michael Steele and John Boehner who not only have no demonstrable understanding of the economy, but have a partisan agenda to push?

If Obama were to get this simple message that Leonhardt is relaying out more, he would have independents back in a heart beat. All he has to do is say "don't listen to me, listen to IHS, listen to McCain's guy, Zandi, listen to the CBO, look at history of past financial crises." Basically, Congressional Republicans and the tea party (a small group of people relative to the country) are the only ones saying the stimulus has not worked.

Combine that with a constant reminder that it is the people who caused this that are now asking to be let back in to fix it, and independents move back toward the Dems.

The unemployment rate is going down, Biden and Romer are right, it will continue to go down as the economy strengthens through the Spring and Summer. Things are of course still tough, but anyone who thinks that Obama came in promising to wave the magic wand of hope and change and have everything be perfect clearly did not listen to him throughout the campaign. He made very clear things would get worse before they got better, there was no economically possible way around that. Obama even went as far as to flat out warn people not to project "martyr" or "chosen one" or "perfect" or any other fix all capabilities onto him.

@Steele. This guy is a joke, I don't even have any Republican friends who think otherwise! "He can't see it and feel it, go at 6 AM" Well, count yourself lucky, Mr Steele, that you don't have to get a real job. All he has to do is talk to the teachers who hit the classroom at 6 or the cop that hits the briefing room at 7 or the factory worker who hits the gate at 6 to "see it and feel it" Instead, he says he can not see it, so its not good enough, Obama is asking us to take his word for it. Actually, no he is just pointing out the objective, undisputable facts about the bill as compiled by independent sources.

It is fiction?! Is he out of his mind? If he wants to call this fiction, then he has to either a.)be ready to get called absurd or b.)show us his alternate, equally objective and reliable method to Moody's and IHS and CBO that he used to arrive at his conclusion that this is "fiction." Of course, the "liberal media" will not call him out on this, even though it is a blatant lie. All the credit to the Republican message machine, though, they have grasped one thing very well: we can lie about economics all we want, because there is not a person in the media who understands it enough to call us out anyway.

So once again, we have Republicans telling us to deny reality and take their word for it. Call it "faith based" if you will!

 

[Bluer White]

yes, of course, this is, again, how it works. don't like the good news? here's something with a more negative slant that will make you feel better.

Two viewpoints. I can see why that would be troubling


(And people wonder why Senator Bayh had enough...)

 

[Irvine511]

Two viewpoints. I can see why that would be troubling

no.

two articles, weighted as if they were of equal merit, wherein lies the bias.

it's like when people talk about "teach the controversy" when it comes to something like evolution.

there is no controversy. to even agree that there is one, much less to pretend that the "other side" has equal merit, is to create a false perception of the situation.

this is what Fox does. "does all this snow in DC mean that global warming is a hoax? that's for you to decide."

 

[solemole]

How the World Works: The Rich Got Richer, and paid less taxes - Salon.com

How the World Works - Salon.com

Tax Rates for Top 400 Earners Fall as Income Soars, IRS Data

Quoted from NYT:
The annual top 400 report was first made public by the Clinton administration, but the George W. Bush administration shut down access to the report. Its release was resumed a year ago when President Obama took office.

 

[Irvine511]

more progress:

In Blow to Taliban, 2 More Senior Leaders Are Arrested

By DEXTER FILKINS
KABUL, Afghanistan — Two senior Taliban leaders have been arrested in recent days inside Pakistan, officials said Thursday, as American and Pakistani intelligence agents continued to press their offensive against the group’s leadership after the capture of the insurgency’s military commander last month.

Afghan officials said the Taliban’s “shadow governors” for two provinces in northern Afghanistan had been detained in Pakistan by officials there. Mullah Abdul Salam, the Taliban’s leader in Kunduz, was detained in the Pakistani city of Faisalabad, and Mullah Mir Mohammed of Baghlan Province was also captured in an undisclosed Pakistani city, they said.

The arrests come on the heels of the capture of Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban’s military commander and the deputy to Mullah Muhammad Omar, the movement’s founder. Mr. Baradar was arrested in a joint operation by the C.I.A. and the ISI, Pakistan’s military intelligence agency.

The arrests were made by Pakistani officials, the Afghans said, but it seemed probable that C.I.A. officers accompanied them, as they did in the arrest of Mr. Baradar. Pakistani officials declined to comment.

Together, the three arrests mark the most significant blow to the Taliban’s leadership since the American-backed war began eight years ago. They also demonstrate the extent to which the Taliban’s senior leaders have been able to use Pakistan as a sanctuary to plan and mount attacks in Afghanistan.

A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the arrest of the two shadow governors was unrelated to Mullah Baradar's capture. Even so, Mohammed Omar, the governor of Kunduz Province, said in an interview that the two Taliban governors maintained a close working relationship with Mullah Baradar.

“Mullah Salam and Mullah Mohammed were the most merciless individuals,” said Gen. Razaq Yaqoobi, police chief of Kunduz Province. “Most of the terror, executions and other crimes committed in northern Afghanistan were on their orders.”

The arrests—all three in Pakistan — demonstrate a greater level of cooperation by Pakistan in hunting leaders of the Afghan Taliban than in the entire eight years of war. American officials have complained bitterly since 2001 that the Pakistanis, while claiming to be American allies—and accepting American aid—were simultaneously providing sanctuary and assistance to Taliban fighters and leaders who were battling the Americans across the border.

In conversations with American officials, Pakistani officials would often claim not to know about the existence of the “Quetta Shura,” the name given to the council of senior Taliban leaders that used the Pakistani city of Quetta as a sanctuary for years. It was the Quetta Shura — also known as the Supreme Council—that Mr. Baradar presided over.

It is still far from clear, but senior commanders in Afghanistan say they believe that the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies, led by Gens. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Ahmed Shuja Pasha, may finally be coming around to the belief that the Taliban — in Pakistan and Afghanistan — constitute a threat to the existence of the Pakistani state.

“I believe that General Kayani and his leaders have come to the conclusion that they want us to succeed,” a senior NATO officer in Kabul said.

Word of the arrests of the shadow governors came as American, Afghan and British forces continue to press ahead with their largest military operation to date, in the Afghan agricultural town of Marja. Earlier this month, on the eve of the Marja invasion, Afghan officials also detained Marja’s shadow governor as he tried to flee the country.

The Taliban figures are commonly referred to as “shadow governors” because their identities are secret and because they mirror the legitimate governors appointed by the Afghan government. The Taliban’s shadow governors oversee all military and political operations in a given area.

The immediate impact of the arrests of the two Taliban governors was unclear. In the short term, it could probably be expected to hurt the Taliban's operations somewhat and possibly demoralize their rank-and-file fighters. But probably not for long; in the past the Taliban have proved capable of quickly replacing their killed or captured leaders.

Even before the arrests in Pakistan, the American and Afghan military and intelligence services appeared to have been enjoying a run of success against Taliban leaders inside Afghanistan.

The senior NATO officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said American forces had detained or killed “three or four” Taliban provincial governors in the past several weeks, including the Taliban’s shadow governor for Laghman Province.

Another NATO officer, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Mullah Zakhir, the Taliban’s military commander for southern Afghanistan, had been ordered back to Pakistan at the around the time of the Marja offensive.

Indeed, the capture of two Taliban governors inside Pakistan may reflect the greater level of insecurity that all Taliban leaders are feeling inside Afghanistan at the moment.

“The Taliban are feeling a new level of pain,” the senior NATO officer said.

In Blow to Taliban, 2 More Senior Leaders Are Arrested - NYTimes.com

 

[diamond]

lets be sure give them their civil rights, a cell w a goose down pillow, blankie, rug and a koran.


<>

 

[deep]

never mind.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

abcnews.com

Dick Cheney: 'Barack Obama is a One-Term President'

Former Vice President, Scott Brown Make Surprise Appearance at CPAC to Rally Conservatives

By HUMA KHAN

Feb. 18, 2010—

Former Vice President Dick Cheney rallied conservative activists today during a brief yet surprise appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

"I think 2010 will be a phenomenal year for the conservative cause and I think Barack Obama is a one-term president," Cheney said to a standing ovation.

He walked out to applause, chants of "Cheney" and a standing ovation as he appeared after daughter Liz Cheney's speech.

"A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for office," Cheney said, laughing. "But I'm not going to do it."

The newly minted senator from Massachusetts, Scott Brown, also made a surprise appearance to introduce former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

"One Democrat said, 'There was no way in hell a Republican was going to get elected to the seat once held by Ted Kennedy.' Well, here I am," said Brown, who received a hero's welcome. "We collectively absolutely have changed the course of politics in America."

Romney, who is the frontrunner for the GOP 2012 nomination in the eyes of many Republicans, made a line-by-line attack against Obama and his agenda.

"President Obama's self-proclaimed B+ will go down in history as the biggest exaggeration since Al Gore's invention of the Internet," Romney said, referring to the president's assessment of his first year in office. "This president will not deserve the credit he will undoubtedly claim. He has prolonged the recession, expanded the pain of unemployment, and added to the burden of debt we will leave future generations.

"President Obama, [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi, [Majority Leader] Harry Reid and their team have failed the American people, and that is why their majority will be out the door," added Romney, whose conference appearance will be followed by a two-month-long book tour where he will attempt to build his case against Obama.

The former governor had high praises for former president George W. Bush, who has been relatively quiet since stepping out of office, unlike Cheney, who has emerged as a leading critic of the Obama administration. Romney today argued that history will judge Bush kinder than he is portrayed now.

"When it comes to pinning blame, pin the tail on the donkeys [Democrats]," Romney said.

 

[U2387]

abcnews.com

Dick Cheney: 'Barack Obama is a One-Term President'

Former Vice President, Scott Brown Make Surprise Appearance at CPAC to Rally Conservatives

By HUMA KHAN

Feb. 18, 2010—

Former Vice President Dick Cheney rallied conservative activists today during a brief yet surprise appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

"I think 2010 will be a phenomenal year for the conservative cause and I think Barack Obama is a one-term president," Cheney said to a standing ovation.

He walked out to applause, chants of "Cheney" and a standing ovation as he appeared after daughter Liz Cheney's speech.

"A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for office," Cheney said, laughing. "But I'm not going to do it."

The newly minted senator from Massachusetts, Scott Brown, also made a surprise appearance to introduce former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

"One Democrat said, 'There was no way in hell a Republican was going to get elected to the seat once held by Ted Kennedy.' Well, here I am," said Brown, who received a hero's welcome. "We collectively absolutely have changed the course of politics in America."

Romney, who is the frontrunner for the GOP 2012 nomination in the eyes of many Republicans, made a line-by-line attack against Obama and his agenda.

"President Obama's self-proclaimed B+ will go down in history as the biggest exaggeration since Al Gore's invention of the Internet," Romney said, referring to the president's assessment of his first year in office. "This president will not deserve the credit he will undoubtedly claim. He has prolonged the recession, expanded the pain of unemployment, and added to the burden of debt we will leave future generations.

"President Obama, [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi, [Majority Leader] Harry Reid and their team have failed the American people, and that is why their majority will be out the door," added Romney, whose conference appearance will be followed by a two-month-long book tour where he will attempt to build his case against Obama.

The former governor had high praises for former president George W. Bush, who has been relatively quiet since stepping out of office, unlike Cheney, who has emerged as a leading critic of the Obama administration. Romney today argued that history will judge Bush kinder than he is portrayed now.

"When it comes to pinning blame, pin the tail on the donkeys [Democrats]," Romney said.

This is just a sick joke.

Dick Cheney, possibly the most disliked public figure in America now and while he was in office, and someone who it has been proven, governed with a reckless disregard for the law, has no credibility in anything he says about Obama. This is a guy who is still out there flat out lying about a sitting President making the country more dangerous.Brennan: Cheney may be 'ignorant' of terror facts - POLITICO Live - POLITICO.com

He will be a "one term President." Maybe Cheney hopes that, but there is no way that anyone on either side can say that with certainty almost 3 years out. In case Cheney was counting, Obama got alot more votes than he or Bush ever did, so it is pretty bold to call him a 1 term President only a year in.

Scott Brown: Does anyone still think he is an independent minded reformer committed to doing what's best regardless of party? CPAC, front and center. Shouldn't Brown be brushing up on his knowledge of the issues facing the Senate/meeting his colleagues/talking to MA captains of industry, education leaders and state officials about their needs/learning his way around the committees he is assigned to? He wants to replace Ted Kennedy, but what he does not realize is that, despite his many personal shortcomings, he worked his ass off each and every day for the State. He would be on the phone with companies convincing them to locate in MA, he would be in constant touch with state officials clarifying federal laws, disbursement of federal funding, etc. Ted Kennedy did not get 60-70% of the vote every time based on his name and family history, he got it because he worked his ass off and earned it. He would not have had all those Brown voters behind him if he was as much of a left wing nut as Rush always claimed either. He had more of an independent streak than Brown has shown so far.

This guy has been on a month long victory lap that has only stopped long enough to press the "no" button on a perfectly good, mainstream nominee, Craig Becker.

Mitt Romney: Look at this guy when he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in 1994 and look at him now, it tells you so many things.

1.)He has no principles or values whatsoever. He has changed his position on every issue of any consequence based on the office he was running for and the trends in the Republican Party. Kerry, the "flip flopper" has always had the same principles and is the same person he was when he first got elected DA in 1978. Romney is completely unrecognizable in many ways from what he was in 1994.

1994 Mitt accuses Kennedy of not doing enough for gay rights, 2002 Mitt sends out a mailer to the gay community expressing his friendship, 2010 Mitt says gays are destroying our families.

1994 Mitt applauds Clinton for seeking to raise the minimum wage, applauds the family and medical leave act and vigorously denies Kennedy accusations that he will be a loyal Republican foot soldier. He even tells us he was not a registered Republican in the Reagan/Bush 41 years! 2002 Mitt proposes raising the minimum wage and indexing for inflation. 2007-today, Mitt strongly opposes any minimum wage increase. 1994 Mitt would never change from being pro choice as a matter of principle, he even has a family member who died from an illegal abortion. He attacks Kennedy for being pro life at one time. 2002 Mitt, all pro choice, all the time. 2010, abortion is the biggest evil in the history of mankind, therefore, the practice should return to the back alleys.

2.) In 1994, he came across as a smart person who answers questions thoughtfully and from his experience as a businessman and outsider, refraining from talking points and certainly not spouting absurd myths to throw red meat to the base.

Look at him now: The amount of lying just in that article is mind blowing. It is a widely discredited right wing myth that Al Gore ever claimed to have invented the internet. What he actually said was that he "took the initiative in creating the internet," which is mostly true, as the Gore sponsored Telecommunications Act of 1991 laid the groundwork for the establishment of widely accessible browsers.

The saddest lie from Romney comes on the economy. Here is a guy who has an MBA and was a co founder of one of the most successful venture capital firms ever. He knows damn well that Obama has not prolonged the recession or expanded the pain of unemployment, in fact, all objective evidence says his actions have stopped the bleeding much quicker than would have been the case otherwise. He knows economic history-how remarkable it was for a recession that took down the financial system to turn around to a recovery in the summer of 2009. He knows unemployment ALWAYS keeps rising after recessions, and that the recession was too deep and severe for Obama or anyone to have been able to snap their fingers and reverse it upon taking office.

This is a perfect example of how highly educated, smart Republican politicians have decided that the way to win elections is to play to the knuckle dragging idiot masses. You have Palin running around saying being clueless is a virtue, something that makes her more like the average citizen. The Republicans have decided to be the party of stupid people, and now even their educated politicians are playing the same game.

No one can tell me with a straight face that Mitt Romney does not know Obama has done the absolute best he could have done given what he inherited with the economy. He also knows damn well who has run up all the debt we have now through their chosen policies and who was left with no choice but to add to it to avoid another Depression.

Romney is also in possession of a juris doctorate degree. So there is also no way that he is unaware of our history of trying terrorists in Article III courts under both parties. He has chosen to be willfully ignorant of the facts.

Obama is getting raked over the coals and being ridiculed as a
lecturer for talking to the American voting public like adults. God forbid he do that. Romney is the perfect example of how the Republican Party has calculated that being stupid and appealing to stupid people is a winning formula. I guess it is, when I take that basic Pew current events quiz, easy as hell, but then I am told I was in the 2% of Americans who answered every question right. Little things, like who is the Senate majority leader and what is the unemployment, approximately. It is a winning formula when people think Obama is a socialist and that Judge Judy is a Supreme Court Justice. It is a winning formula when more Americans go to Super Bowl parades than vote in their State's Governor's election, etc.

It has been widely written about by mainstream people:

Amazon.com: Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free (9780767926140): Charles P. Pierce: Books

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/opinion/14friedman.html

"Pin the blame on the donkey" that is his strategy, and he and Palin are the front runners? Where is Mitt's plan for spending cuts to pay for his tax cuts? His plan for financial regulatory reform? Education? Health care? Reducing the budget deficit?

Bush is responsible for almost the entire mess we face today, no way around that. Obama has simply pointed this out but also acknowledged where Democrats went wrong in the 1990s. His focus has been on dealing with the situation at hand and trying to move forward with the best policies possible, learning from past mistakes. Obama has been trying to fix this through stimulus, regulatory reform, small business credit, health care reform, pay as you go, bipartisan deficit panel etc and as far as I can tell, all the Republicans are interested in doing is opposing him at all costs and then lying about his policies for political gain. Where have they shown any concern for a.)getting us out of this mess or b.)making sure it does not happen again? They have no leg to stand on.

We truly get the leaders we deserve in this country.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

It doesn't surprise me at all that Scott Brown went to CPAC-or said that the stimulus bill hasn't created one job.

He's a "Scott Brown Republican"

 

[U2387]

lets be sure give them their civil rights, a cell w a goose down pillow, blankie, rug and a koran.


<>

Dave, you're a good guy. I still think that.

But come on, that was a whole article talking about the Taliban feeling a "new level of pain" and validating the increased focus Obama and Biden have put on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region, something Biden has long been advocating. It is the most tangible progress since 2001.

All you have to respond to that is the long refuted claim that Obama is somehow coddling these people? These 2 governors will be coming nowhere near the US or our court system, but if they were, do you think they would have a good time in the supermax prison in Colorado? In fact, though the right would kick and scream if they were brought back here, they will probably be released in some deal with the Pakistanis for cooperation. The shoe bomber and the under wear bomber will be gone for life. Affording them the procedural rights does not in any way go easy on them, change our case against them, or change the fact that they'll spend the rest of their lives in jail unable to harm anyone else.

Have a look please, no plans to mirandize or coddle battlefield terrorists:

PolitiFact | GOP claims Obama has ordered FBI to read Miranda Rights to terrorist detainees captured on the battlefield

 

[U2387]

It doesn't surprise me at all that Scott Brown went to CPAC-or said that the stimulus bill hasn't created one job.

He's a "Scott Brown Republican"

Emphasis on "Scott Brown." LOL.

I actually met him just before he was sworn in. His campaign was having (another) party at the place next to the gym I go to and he came into the gym to talk to people. I walk in and there is Scott Brown standing at the desk, in shock that the attractive, tight bodied 22 year old brunette working there has not "seen him on TV." I walked up and said to her: "Kathleen, you did not know this guy is a move star." He laughed and shook my hand, I wished him best of luck and went on my way to the treadmill. He was nice enough, but he reminded me of the mirrorball man kissing the mirror as Desire starts.

Scott Brown is obsessed with himself, which is only one thing he has in common with his friend Romney. The other is both have reached the highest office they will ever attain.

 

[Irvine511]

lets be sure give them their civil rights, a cell w a goose down pillow, blankie, rug and a koran.


<>

yes, that's right exactly. maybe you can be the fluffer.

 

[Irvine511]

This is just a sick joke.

Dick Cheney, possibly the most disliked public figure in America now

he's also an admitted war criminal and should be brought to The Hague.

and he's hoping for a terrorist attack so that he can try to wring some validation from the death of innocent Americans.

 

[U2387]

44 - Poll limns provisions of a more limited health-care reform bill

This is only the latest on the topic. This shows 2 things:

1.)The American people are listening to the screaming nuts on this- the death panel, socialism, cut your medicare b.s. is what people actually think is in the bill.

2.)Obama missed, squandered, screwed up royally, however you want to put it, in rolling this out and not aggressively making clear and defending the specific provisions of the bill.

It's sad, and now they have chaos on their hands and a much more difficult time getting through something that is centrist in nature and overwhelmingly popular because it is governed by past perceptions. Horrible PR work for a team that did so well in the campaign.

Obama also needs to get more personally involved(he is starting with the panel next week) and let these Congress people know how it is going to be. They are talking about bringing back the public option, something that will go nowhere in delivering reform or cost reduction and has already been demonized beyond recognition by the right. It is time for Obama to drive the nail down hard into the public option coffin. It is just not necessary, and was never in his original plan or the plan he modeled it after, Kerry's in 2004.

 

[PhilsFan]

His biggest failure so far has been allowing Republicans to mislead, exaggerate, and lie about every aspect of his presidency. There's no doubt about it.

 

[Irvine511]

His biggest failure so far has been allowing Republicans to mislead, exaggerate, and lie about every aspect of his presidency. There's no doubt about it.

they do seem to be getting it together, slowly. and Obama plays chess while the rest play checkers. i just hope too much hasn't been lost.

 

[U2DMfan]

Obama needs to fire Rahm Emanuel, it's that simple.

And he should get Carville or one of those Clinton bulldogs in there as his C.o.S.

Unfortunately because Palin is calling for this, it won't happen.

But it's the right move.