Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

* Newcomers, welcome to The Plum Line. A brief description of this blog's mission is right here. Every morning at around 8:00 a.m. I'll be posting The Morning Plum, a rapid-fire guide to political news and opinion, mostly from the left. It continues below:

* The White House releases an extensive chronology of its response to the Gulf oil spill.

Look for the same people who demanded that the White House prove it's on top of the disaster to now argue that this reveals White House desperation to avoid the "Obama's Katrina" storyline.

* A question that's a tad more important than whether this is Obama's Katrina: Will the Gulf spill reinvigorate the push for energy reform? Environmentalists urge the president to seize this opportunity and to come through with a response that's "as big as the spill."

* But: Also in that link, a fascinating, if dispiriting, factoid: According to the Los Angeles Times, Obama has yet to link the spill to the need to move climate change legislation.

* And the flip side: The spill could actually dim the chances of climate change action, because Dem senators won't support an energy bill with any expanded drilling, and Republicans still won't support one without it.

* Indeed, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) confirms the Gulf oil spill makes energy reform less likely to win Republican support.

* Meanwhile, the war over Miranda rages: Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) argues, creatively, that the fact that the Times Square suspect is cooperating after being Mirandized doesn't mean a thing. Why? Because he could just as easily not have cooperated.

* Concession of the day (sub only): Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) acknowledges that the Times Square suspect's U.S. citizenship might make it a bit tougher to criticize the decision to MIrandize him.

* In a rational world, this would permanently deep-six the notion that the Tea Party movement is diverse and bipartisan: The Tea Party platform, such as it is, appeals almost exclusively to supporters of the GOP.

* Also: A majority of Americans doesn't want to know more about the Tea Partiers. A plurality says the more they hear, the less they like.

* Karen Tumulty asks: Could the Times Square plot leave the White House too queasy to proceed with plans to close Gitmo?

* It isn't easy being in charge: The oil spill and terror crises are making it impossible for Dems to break through with "jobs, jobs, jobs" message.

* Michael Steele gropes for some way, any way at all, to blame Obama and Dems for the oil spill.

* Not rewarding hissy fits: Climate change proponents may move forward without Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

* Question of the day: Will Republicans conclude that embracing the Arizona law is smart short-term politics, providing a lift in competitive races in the south and west? Maybe, but what about long term?

* Is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) open to Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman's plan to strip U.S. citizenship from those deemed to be "involved" with foreign terror organizations? Yup. Should be interesting to see how much Dem support in Congress this one garners.

* And apologies for the tech problems, we're moving to get comments working as quickly as possible. Thanks for your patience.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  May 5, 2010; 8:30 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Climate change , Foreign policy and national security , Immigration , Morning Plum , Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup -- and Welcome!
Next: GOP House candidate runs TV ad calling for racial profiling



apologies for the problems, everyone.

Posted by: sargegreg | May 5, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Up and running!

Posted by: SDJeff | May 5, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

"Is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) open to Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman's plan to strip U.S. citizenship from those deemed to be "involved" with foreign terror organizations? Yup."

Someone should ask those two, if we start retroactively stripping citizenship from people just so that we can maltreat them as prisoners, how long they they really think it will take to extend the practice to anyone we feel like rounding up and throwing in concentration camps?

Posted by: CalD | May 5, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Michael Steele is the poster child for the fecklessness that dogs the GOP. They are so devoid of message, they so lack any original policy that they are reduced to reflexively blaming Obama for cloudy days.

NOBODY believes that Obama had a damn thing to do with this oil spill. That b.s is even too much for teabagger types to swallow.

Posted by: Gasman1 | May 5, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Nice to see the comments are working. Congrats on the new platform, Greg. I hope it's a great success. Now I want to see if the new format allows both gay and gays without censoring!

Posted by: AllButCertain | May 5, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Gasman, you haven't seen the footage of Obama in the wet suit igniting the oil rig?

Posted by: AllButCertain | May 5, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Congrats on the move, Greg. It doesn't look like WaPo is keeping you down, and I hope they don't. They won't, if they know what's good for their online presence.

Now if they could just join web 1.0 and stop being the only left-justified website on the planet, they'd be on to something. No pun intended, of course.

Posted by: jamois | May 5, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Now can you please get them to create a FULL Rss feed instead of the half-assed one where we can't read the full text in the RSS reader? A mere couple of weeks after Weigel finally got that resolved we now have to go through this with you. Urgh.

Posted by: nhuixnhuix | May 5, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama vulnerability on the oil spill -- the first right from the WaPo today. First, his Interior Department gave BP a pass on complying with an environmental impact statement requirement for Gulf drilling. And Politico today notes that the largest recipient of BP campaign cash, covering the last 20 years, was a senator from Illinois with a short tenure and the initials BO.

Posted by: cossack2 | May 5, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

The new look is great. Well done on the mission statement as well.

RE: Schumer

It's my understanding that he has long believed that Dems in most parts of the country have to embrace these substantively extreme policies as a matter of political expediency. I believe he has said in the past that if there was a torture exception for "ticking time bomb" scenarios, a majority of Senate Dems would back it.

The obvious problem with this approach is that it cedes the debate to morally and intellectually bankrupt Cheney - ites who will call Dems "soft on terror doodie heads" or whatever regardless of what they do. The. GOP. Will. Not. Stop. Schumer might argue that this is a real time example that has the potential to really resonate, and is not good ground for Dem Senate candidates and endangered incumbents to stand on. He would still be wrong. At some point, we've got to punch the proverbial bully in the mouth. That time is now.

Not to mention, the Cheney - ification of national security policy makes us demonstrably less safe and scoffs at fundamental American values. That's completely unacceptable.

Posted by: MichaelConrad | May 5, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Intriguing until one contemplates the State Department's POV on terrorists and terrorism. If such a law were employed fairly, then I suppose we could all rejoice in the expulsion of all AIPAC members and supporters of the invasion of Iraq and...of course that's ridiculous, as is Lieberman's proposed law. As with the Arizona situation, this will inflame the groups which will be unjustly affected (e.g. Arab-Americans) and only exacerbate the ethnic divisions that are straining our nation. A very, very bad idea this is.

Posted by: LessofFear | May 5, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company