Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* Dems, too: Ed Rendell calls on the White House and Joe Sestak to clarify what happened so they can put this behind them.

* At DailyKos, Barbara Morrill says it's time for Sestak to set this right.

* Must-read from Steve Benen on the question of whether there's any vileness/absurdity media threshold for Sarah Palin and the criteria one might use in deciding whether to cover her latest nonsense.

* Still more on that plan to revise Miranda: Sam Stein reports that the White House is negotiating the deal on how to do this with -- who else -- Senator Lindsey Graham.

* Labor keeps up the assault on Blanche Lincoln, with the labor-backed group Working America flooding Arkansas with 250,000 mailers hammering her ties to Wall Street:

blanchemailer.JPG

Check out the full mailer.

* The AP gets it right: Primary challenge to Lincoln is forcing her to move left. See, Lincoln knows that this is an actual left-wing challenge!

* British Petroleum is trying to plug the damn hole. Watch live.

* Michael Calderone reports that the White House invited in top columnists to persuade them to get Obama's handling of the spill right.

* But: New USA Today/Gallup poll: Majority, 53%, fault Obama's handling of the Gulf spill.

* The DNC is out with a new memo seizing on some Quinnipiac polling to argue that optimism about the economy is on the rise.

Key findings: For the first time, more think things are picking up than not; and 40 percent approve of Obama's handling of the economy, the best rating this year.

* Ben Smith defends Joe McGinniss' right to move in next to Palin, but also her right to complain about it (minus the claims about him peeping at her kids).

* And in an outrageous curtailment of free speech, the ban on wearing chicken suits to Nevada polling sites is upheld.

What else is happening?

UPDATE, 6:35 p.m.: The Natural Resources Defense Council is upping the stakes in the climate change wars, going up with this ad hitting Chuck Schumer and other key Senate Dems, demanding that they seize on the spill to push for real energy reform:


By Greg Sargent  |  May 26, 2010; 5:59 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Climate change , Happy Hour Roundup , Political media , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Time for Sestak to clean up his mess
Next: The Morning Plum

Comments

Does anybody really believe that Rendel was kept in the dark about conversations with Sestak? It's HIS state, of course he would be informed--if not the one actually setting up the conversation.

Posted by: Beeliever | May 26, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul gets dissed by the KY Libertarian Party.

"The reason why we would even consider running somebody in this race," Koch said,
"is because we're not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for. I'm here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology."

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/ky-libertarians-no-were-not-planning-to-run-a-candidate-against-rand-paul.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

*Rendell

Posted by: Beeliever | May 26, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

The AP article on Rand Paul is great:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/26/AR2010052602334.html

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 26, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

For those who want to watch the Top Kill but can't stand to go to BP's website:

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3&hpt=T1

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 26, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Adm. Mike Mullen supports the DADT compromise, although all the individual service chiefs disagree, and don't support it.

"But the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, reportedly supports the compromise. His spokesman, Capt. John Kirby, told Stars and Stripes that Mullen "supports the position articulated in the OMB letter."

Mullen also spoke at the Air Force Academy's commencement today. He didn't address DADT directly but he encouraged graduates to support a changing military.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/military-chiefs-oppose-dadt-compromise-mullen-supports.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

* Obama's national security strategy breaks from Bush's unilateral approach *

the Obama strategy explicitly ties security to the need to "build new partnerships with emerging centers of influence," and a "push for institutions that are more capable of responding to the challenges of our times," according to talking points prepared by the White House.

The document also offers a broad definition of national security at home, including a sustained economic recovery and commitments to education, clean energy, science and technology and a reduced federal deficit, describing them as sources of U.S. strength and influence in the world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/26/AR2010052604234.html

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 26, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Photos from the spill. OMG!

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/oil_reaches_louisiana_shores.html

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

thanks for that alternate link, Ethan, the BP one seems like it's on the blink...

Beeliever, I think that's a fair point about Rendell, unless the conversation Sestak says happened never actually did :)

And Sue, my sense there (though maybe I'm wrong) is that Mullen and Gates know DADT has to change but have to pretend to drag their feet for their own internal political reasons....

Posted by: Greg Sargent | May 26, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Greg, any news on the Halter-Lincoln debate?

(not to be confused with the Lincoln-Douglas debates, which actually happened; and for the record that Lincoln lost the election)

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 26, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

From Halter's web site:

"Great news! A new poll released yesterday shows that Bill Halter leads likely voters in the runoff, 48%-46%. This poll was conducted by Research 2000 for Democracy for America on Tuesday night. A total of 500 Democratic voters who voted in the Democratic Primary for US Senate were interviewed statewide by telephone."

Take it for what it's worth, but at least Halter is in there battling.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 26, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Greg, I hear ya about Mullen & Gates, and tend to agree. They know it's coming (when, NOT if), I think they believe it is a right and just change, but have to take care of their guys and not appear to be turncoats.

Funny though, I think the service chiefs may think they can still shut this down. Methinks the horse has already left the barn.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

For some local Florida politics, Crist the supposed moderate came out against repealing DADT on Monday while Meek has a petition online for people to show support for repeal. I have a funny feeling that the more social issues come up the more Crist will lose his moderate cred.

Posted by: sgwhiteinfla | May 26, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Q&A about the Top Kill

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/05/q--a-top-kill-procedure-next-up-for-bp-oil-spill/1?loc=interstitialskip

I'm out, but will be praying for the success of this procedure. Hopefully we should know before the night is out. According to Bobby Jindal, we should know "within hours."

Have a good night, all. Fingers crossed!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 26, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

sg -- Crist's campaign now won't say where he is on DADT. I'm trying to get an answer...stay tuned ...

and BG -- latest is that Lincoln is saying she'll debate when Halter reveals his position on card check!

Posted by: Greg Sargent | May 26, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

So, as I watch this oil in the marshes, I think back to when that ignoramus bildgeman said the tides brought the oil into the marshes, it'll wash out when the tide goes out.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Today is Limbaugh's first day back on radio after the weekend. Ron Paul? Somehow, this didn't come up. Nor did it last week as I'd noted.
http://mediamatters.org/limbaughwire/2010/05/26#0054

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Now that CNN is laser focused on this spill, hopefully the admin will step up the cleaning efforts. Maybe they don't have the technology to stop the leak, but they should have the man power and ability to provide ships/bodies to clean up the mess BP made.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

I've been watching the live feed of the leak and doing some calculations. That oil is flowing out of the three holes at a rate which is about .02 percent of the rate of dollars flowing into BP's Cayman Islands accounts (no live feed, unfortunately).

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

"Beware the Dreaded Streissandkorps"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/may/26/us-politics-adolf-hitler-vicious-gay-soldiers

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse

What I don't understand is why there aren't supertankers out in the GoM vacuuming the oil out of the water. They did that at the end of the first Gulf War, and from what I've read, they were able to reclaim about 85% of the spill.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

sue, that's a bit of a controversy right now regarding the tankers. They're full of oil and it would have to be off loaded first and then get them here. Some people say the reason is they're waiting for the price of oil to go up. BP has the tankers. This entire thing is a real disaster and if it doesn't rekindle a strong interest in passing some new energy legislation with big time investment in alternative fuels and clean energy nothing else will do the trick.

I've been monitoring the live feed and theoildrum all day and I've got my fingers crossed. It's been interesting and truly does remind me of Apollo 13. The scientists and engineers working on this are pretty amazing. I hope we find our way to invest in scientific education as a result of this disaster as well. A few less financial wizards and a few more scientists please.

Posted by: lmsinca | May 26, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca: "that's a bit of a controversy right now regarding the tankers. They're full of oil and it would have to be off loaded first and then get them here. Some people say the reason is they're waiting for the price of oil to go up."

Yes, I've heard that. Still, it makes no sense to me. Purely as business decision on BP's part, it seems stupid. The trade-off in losing out on some increase in profit they may make IF the price of oil goes up would have to be enormous compared the to amount of money it's going to take to clean up the oil once it lands, as well as the cost of ill will among American consumers, and really, worldwide consumers. BP is doing a lot of damage to their already horrid reputation.

One thing I'd like to see the administration do is start strong-arming on this issue. I also wonder if they have approached Exxon, Chevon, Conoco, etc. about hiring their tankers and then billing the cost to BP.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

sue, I know, I don't really get it either, seems that would have been priority two, after capping the leak but should have already have been done. I'm wondering if the decision to use dispersants entered into it.

Posted by: lmsinca | May 26, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Any chance the WH knows the details on how much impact on the economy there would be from taking down BP and redirecting the energies of the other oil companies?

I'm wondering whether there's a risk of big rises in oil (then gas) prices and the effect that might have on the economy. If so, it demonstrates how much we depend on oil and oil products and why the gov't can't just force the companies to do something big and drastic.

This is speculation, but I'd say that if the tanker solution, for example, was the obvious one, someone damn sure would have done it by now. BP and the WH have too much as stake to just let this thing go on like that.

I'd love to see some smart economists talk about how the spill and cleanup register in the bigger economic picture.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 26, 2010 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Good post from Digby on the fracturing Tea Party...
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/tea-party-circular-firing-squad-who.html

As she says, "The right wing has so many factions at this point that their circular firing squad has the circumference of the Grand Canyon"

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

More big time ouch! re the Paul tradition...
http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/strategist/2010/05/rand_pauls_flirtation_with_rac.php#comments

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Greg, WTF? I have posts in moderation?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

BG: "Any chance the WH knows the details on how much impact on the economy there would be from taking down BP and redirecting the energies of the other oil companies?"

Shorter version of post lost somewhere....

No other company is going to agree to take over for BP. Ain't gonna happen. Why? Liability. None of them would risk being on the hook in the event something else went wrong. The only way to do it would to get BP to agree to hold harmless the Exxon or Conoco or whomever. And I'm sure BP's lawyers would advise BP to not do that.

Bottom line, really, is that this is BP's gig.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

@Greg

He litteraly JUST said Monday he was against repeal. This could be one of the quickest flip flops in history. What I bet though knowing Crist is he will stall until it's clear whether the votes are there for repeal or not and then go with whichever side that prevails.

Posted by: sgwhiteinfla | May 26, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

So has the White House really been weak in communicating the steps the government has taken about the oil spill...

or has the media just not covered those facts much?

I lean toward believing that the White House has been trying to get the facts out into a scandal-obsessed media.

It's probably payback to Obama for not scheduling enough press conferences and angering the press corp.

Posted by: Beeliever | May 26, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Beeliever, I think the administration could have handled messaging better. I think they should have assigned one spokesman to hold a televised press briefing every day at an appointed hour.

I do not fault the administration in any way for the spill, and I think they are doing everything possible to stop it. That said, I'd have rather had them err on the side of too many press briefings than too few.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

@sue - posts of mine that have gone into moderation have included naughty words (eg, other word for poop). And so far as I know, they never escaped moderation-gitmo, though guilty of only misdemeanors.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

re live feed...not sure if temporary current variations (what sort of currents are there a mile down?) but all is aswirl with bits of crap moving about in an opague cloud

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

I just came across this exchange from today between Lamborn (R,CO) and Salazar. What some of these guys fail to understand is that during the Bush years, not only was the MMS compromised, they were completely in the pocket of oil. This is at the doorstep of MMS and BP and Bush et al. Obama could possibly have done a better job of explaining to all of us what the Feds were doing, and maybe could have sent the military (not just the Coast Guard) in to fight the oil coming onshore (never trust a corporate entity when they downplay the crisis), but the spill is in no way this administration's fault. Let's not let them deflect the blame on to this President's shoulders.

Lamborn: "We all want to get to the bottom of this tragedy. And I think we all agree that finger-pointing will not get us there. I don’t understand–I have to be real honest here–why you and others keep harping on what MMS did or didn’t do in the previous Administration, when you did know about these problems when you came into office and you have been in charge of them for more than a year now. Why aren’t we talking about the here and now?"

Salazar: "Well we are talking, Congressman Lamborn, about the here and now, and that’s why people have been terminated, people have been referred over to prosecution, and we’ve done a lot to clean house at MMS. Unlike the prior Administration, this is not the candy store of the oil and gas kingdom which you and others were a part of. And so we have moved forward in a manner that is thoughtful, that is responsible, that holds those accountable. And those who violate the law, Congressman Lamborn, will be terminated and whatever other sanctions of law are appropriate, those sanctions of law will be applied."

Posted by: lmsinca | May 26, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

First and third item at TP giving us a head-shaking picture of how bloody nuts the Christian right has gone on gays in military.
http://thinkprogress.org/

I really have real trouble comprehending how these people have moved so distant from sanity on this issue.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Ass-deep-in-irony quote for the day.

“I’m Dino Rossi. Join me. We’re running against an establishment that stands for the politics as usual that got us into this mess,”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37803.html#ixzz0p5i7lwQt

Before his long stint with Dick Armey and Freedom Works, this lying doofus was a senior lobbyist for Enron. Nothing "establishment" about that stuff.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

From Lamborn in Ims' quote...
"We all want to get to the bottom of this tragedy. And I think we all agree that finger-pointing will not get us there"

Darn pointy fingers! Hate em! They imply guilt and accountability and we are very uncomfortable with those unusual things.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Cheney brings his touch-of-gold endorsement reputation to the increasingly weird SC race. And again, coming out for someone not Palin's choice.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37821.html

Wouldn't ya love to hear a dinner-table conversation between Dickey and Lizey on Sarah?

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Rachel Maddow reported tonight that BP seems to feel that the swirly stuff coming out of the BOP is drilling mud, meaning the top shot may have worked. Here's hoping!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 10:21 PM | Report abuse

The oil gusher fiasco demonstrates something that happens to charismatic politicians a lot. Gaining power is one thing for glib, attractive candidates with the gift of gab (teleprompter aided, of course). Wielding power commensurate with the office obtained requires more than rhetoric, yet our president still rambles on in campaign mode. We are suffering from lack of leadership largely due to Obama's lack of any prior executive experience. It's as simple as that. The larger question is: has the electorate figured out yet that On the Job Training of this magnitude is not going to cut it?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/05/27/in_oil_soaked_news_obama_out_of_picture/

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Re live feed...things back to normal or possibly it's a replay of what things looked like before all hell broke loose. I'll assume the first.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 26, 2010 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully The BP Gulf Spill™ is blocked up tonight and we wake up tomorrow with only a clean up to deal with.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:26 PM | Report abuse

actuator, ever since you "finally" decided to read Ayn Rand, I "finally" decided to disregard your posts. Sorry, no can do.

Posted by: lmsinca | May 26, 2010 10:30 PM | Report abuse

bernie, if what I'm hearing from CNN was accurate is they are pumping the mud in so you would see the mud coming out the top. Maybe that's why things got crazy cloudy for a bit....I could be wrong though.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Obama should release some fly-over pictures to show the public he cares!

The right loves photo ops. It placates them. If Obama sent out photos of him showing concern, the right would surly be happy.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca, have you read "Atlas Shrugged"?

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

http://www.openleft.com/diary/18867/breaking-sen-byrd-to-vote-for-dadt-repeal

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Congratulations actuator!

You are the Troll of the Month. Your prize is that you get to write David Broder's op-ed in the Post.

Again, congratulations, your content-free, vapid posts really set you apart.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 26, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Actuator basis his ideology off of 24 also.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and Imsinca, what part of the philosophy of individualism based on the application of thought and development of one's abilities to achieve something with your life do you disagree with? I thought you were in business for yourself. This would indicate that you have chosen to at least make an attempt at individual accomplishment in your life.

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Mike, I've never watched 24, so you'll have to explain what that means.

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

BTW Mike, if you're saying I beat out QB or Bilgey, I am incredibly honored.

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Fiction, they are both fictional. You and others might try to attach various aspects of both the show 24 and objectivism, both of which I hear wingers try to use, as an explanation of real life events, but in the end, both are just fictional stories. They might be captivating but are detached from a humane reality.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 26, 2010 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Josh Marshall reprints an email he received from a reader regarding the spill that really deserves reading. He's obviously involved in what's going on at some level. Here's a portion of it:


First, BP is not tackling this mess alone. The entire drilling industry is involved, including Exxon (who has a great record when it comes to offshore drilling, not oil shipping). It's not like only BP engineers are calling the shots, all sorts of experts are involved.

At BP's West Houston complex, there's a command center filled with personnel from around the industry working with BP engineers. Several drill ships are in place. Tons of workboats are on site. There are 5 or more ROVs roaming the wellhead monitoring and cleaning things up.

All these efforts are reported heavily in the Houston Chronicle and nola.com, but doesn't seem to get much for national coverage. If you only monitor the national coverage, you'd think BP is going it alone while we all sit by, but the reality is this is an industry-wide effort because we all know what's at stake.

On having Obama "do more," WTF is he supposed to do? Everybody seems to be calling for more fire in his belly and scary, threatening speeches. What does that accomplish? It's like people want him to do a dramatic speech like post-9/11 about bringing the criminals to justice. It does nothing to actually plug the damn well.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/05/critical_perspective.php#more?ref=fpblg

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 26, 2010 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I believe the Republicans are pushing for the government to take over the management of the oil spill for two reasons:

to hang the catastrophe on Obama, ex. Limbaugh said today that the oil spill is all Obama's fault;

and also Republicans would like to relieve BP/Halliburton from the costs of this catastrophe: another taxpayer bailout.

Posted by: Beeliever | May 26, 2010 11:03 PM | Report abuse

As I asked Imsinca "...what part of the philosophy of individualism based on the application of thought and development of one's abilities to achieve something with your life do you disagree with?" While I realize that everyone is not up to it, the idea that a person should make an individual effort to accomplish something in life is one that I happen to like. That is the part that I took from the book and some other reading I've done.

Posted by: actuator | May 26, 2010 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Stupid! Read Gene Lyon's excellent summary of events, here http://www.salon.com/news/politics/2010_elections/index.html?story=/opinion/feature/2010/05/26/new_york_times_blumenthal_omission then apologize to Blumenthal for your multiple, infantile comments on what you refer to as his "fibs." (You might also take a look at Somerby's coverage of the Times stories for additional enlightenment.)

And, just so it relates to today's posts, you're obviously following the village line on the Sestak non-scandal.
Since being admitted to the "real" WAPO, your comments have clearly taken a turn to the shared wisdom of Versailles.
Get some self respect - getting a gig on the Sunday talk shows is not worth grovelling before the village elders.

Posted by: jamessilver | May 26, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Sue, I also recommend Josh's post you linked to from one of his readers. The national coverage on this story has been more about outrage (much of it deserved) than about what is actually happening in the effort to stop the spill and clean it up. If I'm going to be asked to be angry about something, I'd at least like to know where my anger should be focused and where it might be misguided. If local news outlets are full of close reporting on what is actually being done, why can't the national press at least provide the same info? Where are reporters when we actually need them?

Posted by: AllButCertain | May 27, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

The biggest jackoff I've seen in this "Obama needs to put on his cape and make it all stop" is James "Crazy Snake Head MARRIED to Mary Matalin" Carville.

Hey James, you have no credibility. You are a joke. Seriously. Even G Steph is smarter than you.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 27, 2010 12:27 AM | Report abuse

@sue - thanks for that letter to Josh. I hadn't seen it yet but it makes all kinds of sense, doesn't it? The national press has been doing insufficient reporting on that end of things but I think this is a trend we'll likely see continue as budgets get chopped and real reporting decreases.

There's another very real danger in this (the reportorial aspect). One can easily imagine how the effort being put into fixing the leak could be told as an Apollo 13 story (damned good chance it will be, too) - the hard-nosed independent oil engineers, the technical problems, the co-ordination, etc etc. It COULD BE told as a heroic story where the oil industry has most of the heroes (Bruce Willis style).

In other words, it have been done as pro-industry propaganda. And if their PR people were more on the ball, it would have been done that way.

What is the precedent example? The military. Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman, high tech wizardry human-killing videos, etc

Scary thought, ain't it?

Posted by: bernielatham | May 27, 2010 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Very bright observation from EJ within a very good column...

"Belatedly, the Obama administration has realized that citizens can never accept the idea that their government is powerless."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/26/AR2010052604013.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Posted by: bernielatham | May 27, 2010 7:36 AM | Report abuse

Hopefully The BP Gulf Spill™ is plugged 2day.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 27, 2010 8:16 AM | Report abuse

"Facing more than 100 lawsuits after its Gulf of Mexico oil spill killed 11 workers and threatened four coastal states, oil giant BP is asking the courts to place every pre-trial issue in the hands of a single federal judge in Houston.

That judge, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, has traveled the world giving lectures on ethics for the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, a professional association and research group that works with BP and other oil companies. The organization pays his travel expenses.

Hughes has also collected royalties from several energy companies, including ConocoPhillips and Devon Energy, from investments in mineral rights, his financial disclosure forms show.

Hughes, appointed to the bench in 1985 by then-President Ronald Reagan, declined to comment for this report."

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/26/94887/bp-wants-houston-judge-with-oil.html#ixzz0p8E3x6rm

Posted by: bernielatham | May 27, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Bernie: "The national press has been doing insufficient reporting on that end of things but I think this is a trend we'll likely see continue as budgets get chopped and real reporting decreases."

Josh Green at the Atlantic made the same point about how Rand Paul got all the way to a primary victory without anyone knowing what he's about.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 27, 2010 8:21 AM | Report abuse

Greg should add that story to the morning post bernie. That's a brazen move by bp.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 27, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

A top BP worker who was aboard the Deepwater Horizon in the hours leading up to the explosion declined to testify in front of a federal panel investigating the deadly oil rig blowout, telling the U.S Coast Guard he was invoking his constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination.

The move Wednesday by BP's Robert Kaluza raises the possibility of criminal liability in the April 20 explosion that killed 11 and five weeks later continues to spew hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico each day.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/26/94884/bp-could-be-held-criminally-liable.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz0p8GeH5ZZ

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 27, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

So, Obama is going to have a press conference today on the spill.

Question: what are the odds that someone will ash him to respond to Sarah Palin's comment that he's in bed with big oil?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 27, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

All, morning roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/the_morning_plum_17.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | May 27, 2010 8:35 AM | Report abuse

@sue - "Josh Green at the Atlantic made the same point about how Rand Paul got all the way to a primary victory without anyone knowing what he's about."

That one I find understandable simply in terms of it being a primary contest rather than an election, and because of the large number of candidates running in all the primaries all over the place. And he's clearly not the only nut around and not the worst. A better criticism (which I only perceive now retrospectively) is how poorly reporting was done on his father's ideas when he ran for the R presidential nomination. In any case, thank you jesus for blessing us with Rachel Maddow.

Posted by: bernielatham | May 27, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

It has been pointed out elsewhere that Obama filled the Secretary of the navy position BEFORE Specter became a Democrat Sestak might want to challenge, so if the position was offered, and Sestak actually turned it down, giving as his reason the fact the he intended to run for the Senate against Arlen Specter, the timeline may prove particularly embarrassing to republicans seeking desperately for anything to use against Sestak in the general election.

Posted by: ceflynline | May 27, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

"and maybe could have sent the military (not just the Coast Guard) in to fight the oil coming onshore (never trust a corporate entity when they downplay the crisis)"

Just which military would you be talking about?

ALL of the active Army, virtually all the Reserves, and about all of the National Guard are already exhausted after years of fighting Bush's wars, doing what little training they have time for, and rebuilding themselves and their personal lives. Perhaps your cavalier willingness to demand yet one more exhausting tasking is just out of ignorance and not out of republican contempt for any one foolish enough not to have better things to do than to serve their country.

There isn't an available brigade anywhere in the Army right now to accept that tasking, and I doubt there is an available marine brigade or a Navy CB battalion. Meanwhile the Air Force is going through a BIG RIF.

Maybe the Michigan Militia would be willing to be Federalized?

Posted by: ceflynline | May 27, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company