Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* Senate Dems have abandoned plans for a comprehensive climate change bill, because they can't find any GOP support for it. Without carbon pricing, it should pass with GOP backing this summer.

* Depressing: Stephen Stromberg says Dems telegraphed that they were willing to fold in the face of GOP attacks by making it obvious early on that they viewed carbon pricing as expendable.

* And: The odds of reviving the climate change push anytime soon may be close to zero.

* Ben Smith goes there: "Breitbart's sites now have a growing credibility problem." Uh, yeah. It's astonishing how few mainstream media figures are willing to come out and say this.

* Relatedly, Instaputz recaps many of the puff pieces about Breitbart previously done by big news orgs that now won't say word boo about what's happened to his credibility.

* Politico's Jim VandeHei allows that maybe Huffington Post might not really be equivalent to Breitbart.

* A must-watch segment from Rachel Maddow putting the Shirley Sherrod case and the right's ongoing efforts to stoke racial resentment into the context of the larger sweep of history.

* Time to hold hearings! Joe Klein 'fesses up to his role as a card carrying member of Journolist.

* National Review's Daniel Foster joins liberal bloggers calling on Tucker Carlson to release the J-list threads.

* But: Tucker explains why he won't release them.

* Sharron Angle's campaign staffers privately vent their frustration with the state of the campaign. Key nugget: They say they're overwhelmed by the Reid campaign's attacks.

* Norm Coleman begins plotting a run for RNC chair.

* Marc Ambinder: "The chaos at the Republican National Committee threatens to cost Republicans the chance to take control of the House of Representatives, Republican strategists fear."

* Charlie Rangel faces multiple ethics violations.

* Obama will sign the unemployment benefits extension tonight, proclaiming victory over the "partisan minority" that tried to block it.

* Relatedly, a random question: When's the last time a White House statement didn't contain the phrase "partisan minority"? Seems like this is the talking point of choice heading into the fall.

* And millions of bereft Americans weep as a technical glitch at Facebook temporarily deprives them of a chance to ponder the wisdom of Sarah Palin's attack on the Ground Zero mosque.

Maybe from now on Palin should just send her statements directly to CNN, where she can count on them getting posted in full with little or no context or analysis.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  July 22, 2010; 5:45 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Climate change , Happy Hour Roundup , House Dems , Political media , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Tucker Carlson: We will not publish full J-List emails
Next: The Morning Plum

Comments

Greg,

Is there talk in Democratic circles that the cost of Defending Reid's seat may cost them other Senate seats, and is he worth saving if money that could go to, say, Senator Boxer of Senator Murray instead goes to Senator Reid? I would also include corporate pacs and union pac money that could go to the parties overall GOTV effort as well as certain House races.

What's the calculation for the Democrats to spend the money in Nevada versus other races?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 22, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

So Carlson's defense against not releasing all the threads is "some aren't newsworthy"? LOL

Hack.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 22, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Re Grizzly Palin's attack on the proposed Muslim Center in New York City.

What ever happened to The Right Wingers", such as Grizzly Palin, political stance, that all such decisions should be made by the State and local officials, and should not be dictated to by outsiders.

By interfering in this New York city issue, is Grizzly Palin actually REFUDIATING The Republican Party's Home Rule Doctrine?

It is downright Shakespearean, I tell you folks!!

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

BBQ, that's an insult to hacks everywhere.

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 22, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

I hear that The Teabagger Republicans are planning to run a challenger against Lindsey Graham, in his next primary.

Since Democrats will have no chance winning that race in South Carolina, can they cross over, in the primary, to save the nomination for Senator Graham?

I would hate to see the Teabaggers get away with punishing the guy for being a stand up guy, and A Profile in Courage.


http://www.thestate.com/2010/07/22/1386645/grahams-courageous-stand-for-the.html

" THROUGHOUT the first two centuries or so of our nation’s history, what Sen. Lindsay Graham did on Wednesday when he voted to confirm President Obama’s appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court would have been thoroughly unremarkable. What would have been remarkable would have been for a senator to do otherwise — to vote against confirming a nominee who did not have serious ethical, legal, mental or intellectual problems.

But as Sen. Graham told the Judiciary Committee, things are changing. The voters no longer care about the fundamental values that made our country great. What matters today are individual agendas, and punishing anyone who doesn’t agree with their every opinion.

That’s a threat not just to the independence of the judiciary but to the republic itself. Our founding fathers understood that legislators need to be able to study the issues, debate those issues with similarly studied colleagues and come to the best position for the nation, rather than merely reflect the passions of the masses. That’s why they created a republic rather than a democracy. Of course, you’d hardly know we have a republic these days; every vote is driven by sophisticated polling that clearly defines the correct partisan position.

This is not just a Republican problem. Democrats are every bit as quick to pander to the extremists in their base. And any Democrat courageous enough to confirm a Republican president’s nominee to the high court would be pilloried by voters, just as Mr. Graham is being today.But any one who actually believes in the Constitution has to side with Sen. Graham, and be sickened by the fact that he is alone. As he reminded the committee, the Federalist Papers left no doubt as to the limited reasons the founding fathers had for requiring Senate confirmation of presidential appointments, and they had nothing to do with senators’ own political preferences: “It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the president, would tend generally to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from family connection, from personal attachment, and from a view to popularity.”

As when he voted to confirm Mr. Obama’s first Supreme Court appointment a year ago, Sen. Graham said Wednesday that Ms. Kagan was not someone he would have appointed, but Mr. Obama won the election; the job of the Senate is merely to stop a president from appointing people who are objectively unfit to be judges. "

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Oh god...that video in the link you provide about Angle's campaign.

THAT is her Las Vegas office? Oh wow, she is in real trouble.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 22, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

If you missed the Meddow takedown last night I second Greg's insistence that you watch it. Great stuff.

The best part was her juxtaposition of Fox hosts completely, hypocritically, contradicting themselves. They pivoted seamlessly from blaming the black woman to blaming the black President with no admission that they were the ones doing the conclusion-jumping.

And let's add: without Fox, how would the likes of Breitbart ever get any air time anywhere?

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 22, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Sharron Obtuse Angle will be able to spend all the money, on her campaign, that she saved by not fluoridating her water.

Is Sharron the Only "Christian" Scientology Member Extant?

That Science Fiction Writer; L Ron Hubbard, sure knew how to pull of an elaborate Mumbo Jumbo Hoax.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

"The odds of reviving the climate change push anytime soon may be close to zero."

No rush. It's not like untold damage is occurring from our desperate extraction of fossil fuels in, say, the Gulf of Mexico ... or that our foreign policy has been crippled for decades by our dependence on oil by, say, supporters anti-nationalist tyrants and causing anti-American revolutions ... or that the earth is heating up as we sit here today .. or the seas are rising and will soon, say, swallow SE Louisiana and drown New Orleans once and for all ... or that our economy is monstrously deformed by Big Oil's stranglehold on the country by, say, providing hideous tax breaks to greedy plutocrats that sink the nation ever deeper into debt ... or that as we speak America is losing the mantle of world leadership and economic dominance, in part, because we are frozen in the past ... or ... or ... or ...

Posted by: wbgonne | July 22, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Liam, I think I speak for just about everyone who comments on this site when I say I'm really hoping your comments mean you're out of retirement for good. :)

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

"Liam, I think I speak for just about everyone who comments on this site when I say I'm really hoping your comments mean you're out of retirement for good. :)"

Yeah, Bro, this country needs people with ATTITUDE!

Posted by: wbgonne | July 22, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

'zackly, wbgonne. especially that kind of attitude. :)

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

We can not solve the climate change, because we can not get the large nations, such as China, India and Brazil to sign on to any real effective control measures.

We must face the truth, that we will not be able to avert the coming warming and sea rises. None of the major polluters want to clean up their acts, so we must just push ahead with implementing as much domestic green renewable energy production efforts as we can. We must also plan ahead for massive domestic population migrations inland, away from coastal areas, as the seas start to rise.

We will probably have to build many nuclear energy plants to replace much of the coal burning power plants.

No one seems to have any idea how to store the left over nuclear waste.

I wonder if it would be at all possible to launch it into deep space, since it is already full of radiation anyway? It might be just as cost effective to launch tons of it, at a time, into deep space, from some isolated desert site, than to try and keep on storing it safely, for around a hundred thousand years.

Probably can not be done, but I would like to see some more outside the box thinking about what to do with the stuff.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

@TrollMcWingnut:

Based the healthy 2nd Qtr fundraising numbers the Reid campaign recently released, I think that the cost of defending Reid is not a significant consideration.

There's also this:

"Reid raises $19.2 million for re-election"

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/14/reid-raises-192-million-for-re-election/

Posted by: associate20 | July 22, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Actually, I am here because of a heat wave, that has confined me to the indoors. When the heat wave has lifted, I will stop bringing the heat to all you folks.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

I say we just we find another planet and leave this one behind as our garbage dump. Mars, maybe.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 22, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Anyone care to wager on the outcome of the Constitutional challenge to Arizona's anti-Mexican law? I'll take the federal government and give 2 to 1 odds. Make it 5 to 1. Fair is fair.

Goodnight, All.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 22, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Carlson's defense of why he won't print the whole threads is just weak, weak, weak.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 22, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

If the men and women who fought WWII are remembered as The Greatest Generation, we will be remembered by our grandchildren as The Greediest Generation. There is no cost, no risk, no environmental degradation we are not willing to push onto our grandchildren in order to save ourselves a buck.

Presidents want to prove their machismo by fighting two needless wars? Borrow the money, and let the grandkids pay.

Want to enjoy artificially cheap fossil fuels? Go ahead. We'll all be dead when the environmental bill comes due. Better yet, we can keep our consciences clear by denying science and pretending that it is all a fraud perpetrated by Al Gore.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | July 22, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Carlson's arguement may be week but I still contend he's protecting friends, particularly straight news reporters that he knows and likes. I think the newsies, if revealed,would have some trouble with their employers.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 22, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Mars is a silly pipe dream, and not even worth landing on.

If we could make that place suitable for humans to thrive on, we could accomplish the very same thing, in all our own vast deserts, without having to spend trillions of dollars to ferry supplies from Earth to Mars.

Further more. Moving some people to Mars will not ensure the survival of the species. Only escaping to another solar system will provide that chance, and we have no propulsion systems that would get us there.

Furthermore; Our entire Galaxy is destined to become devoured by another one; I think it may be Andromada, so not even our own vast Galaxy will provide an eternal safe haven for our species.

Chances are; we will become extinct, long before we have to worry about any of that stuff happening.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

"Joe Klein 'fesses up to his role as a card carrying member of Journolist."

I take that as proof that he is the leaker.

Posted by: disputo | July 22, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Ezra responds to Carlson:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/when_tucker_carlson_asked_to_j.html

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 22, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Quote of the day from Josh...

"Still, you just have to back up from that and realize that as disappointing as Tom Vilsack's first crack at this was, the idea that he or Obama is the bad guy in this story is not only preposterous but verging on obscene."
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/07/shame_on_obama.php#more?ref=fpblg

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

@Schrod - thanks for the Ezra link.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

Time for a bit of Mel Brooks type humor, since the serious aspects of the topic have already been hanged, Drawn, and Quartered;

Vilsack at the drop of a hat!

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Gosh, a reporter for the Daily Caller was a member of Journolist. HA! From Ezra's post:

"He doesn't detail why his stories haven't mentioned that one of his own reporters was on the list -- his readers would presumably be interested to know that the Daily Caller was part of the liberal media conspiracy."

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 8:25 PM | Report abuse

David Frum, writing on a debate between Chaz Freeman and Robert Satloff on the value of the US's relationship with Israel, makes the following argument. Focus, if you will, on the portion following the hyphen...

"Second, Israel is a huge source of information to the US – and the most valuable live-fire test laboratory for US military equipment and doctrine."

Quite aside from the Israel issue, consider how this "necessity" of a military laboratory might have consequences for the inexplicable continuation of the War on Drugs, for example.

http://www.frumforum.com/israel-us-relationship-too-hot

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Gosh, a reporter for the Daily Caller was a member of Journolist. HA! From Ezra's post:

"He doesn't detail why his stories haven't mentioned that one of his own reporters was on the list -- his readers would presumably be interested to know that the Daily Caller was part of the liberal media conspiracy."

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

And let's add: without Fox, how would the likes of Breitbart ever get any air time anywhere?

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 22, 2010 6:01 PM |
=======================

You can find Howie Kurtz sticking up for his buddies in today's Washington Post.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 22, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Hi Liam - You're quite right, of course. Somehow, my humor dipstick is measuring dangerously low these days.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Take a moment to let this one sink in...

"Over the past year, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has spent nearly $3 million a week in opposition to President Obama's major agenda items, breaking all previous lobbying records..."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106086.html

And that is ONLY the C of C.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Which makes President Obama's Legislative Record; in just his first year and a half, all the more remarkable.

Not sure that I would still be calling myself: The Chamber Of Commerce, after I had pissed three million a week down a rat hole, for the past year, and had almost no results to show for it.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

At least Anderson Cooper has shifted the convo where it should be, and that is directed at Breitbart the race baiter.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/36814_Anderson_Cooper-_Breitbarts_a_Race-Baiting_Smear_Artist

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 22, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse


Hi Liam - You're quite right, of course. Somehow, my humor dipstick is measuring dangerously low these days.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 22, 2010 8:40 PM

.................

Damn you BP. You have leaked Bernie's Humor Reserves into the Gulf Of Texaco.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Finally a bit of good news, for millions of people, who are out of work and have been wondering where their next meal was going to come from, or how they were going to be able to take care of their children, because of the stalling tactics of those heartless Republican Bastards in the US Senate.


When ever those Republicans see a poor drowning person, going down for the third time, they always rush to throw lifelines to those on board their yachts.


"Checks are coming: Obama signs unemployment bill
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer Andrew Taylor, Associated Press Writer 31 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Federal checks could begin flowing again as early as next week to millions of jobless people who lost up to seven weeks of unemployment benefits in a congressional standoff.

President Barack Obama on Thursday signed into law a restoration of benefits for people who have been out of work for six months or more. Congress approved the measure earlier in the day. The move ended an interruption that cut off payments averaging about $300 a week to 2 1/2 million people who have been unable to find work in the aftermath of the nation's long and deep recession.

At stake are up to 73 weeks of federally financed benefits for people who have exhausted their 26 weeks of state jobless benefits. About half of the approximately 5 million people in the program have had their benefits cut off since its authorization expired June 2.

They are eligible for lump-sum retroactive payments that are typically delivered directly to their bank accounts or credited to state-issued debit cards. Many states have encouraged beneficiaries to keep updating their paperwork in hopes of speeding payments once the program was restored.

In states like Pennsylvania and New York, the back payments should go out next week, officials said. In others, like Nevada and North Carolina, it may take a few weeks for all of those eligible to receive benefits.

Thursday's 272-152 House vote sent the bill to the White House.

" Americans who are fighting to find a good job and support their families will finally get the support they need to get back on their feet during these tough economic times," Obama said in a statement issued after signing the measure."

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Never mind the skin color of TeaBaggers. There are no Democrats among their ranks. They do not engage in any primary activities for Democratic Candidates.

They only held rallies for Republican Politicians. They only backed what the elected Republicans backed.

Recall how the Republicans came out to address them, while the health care vote was being debated in Congress.


The MSM are a bunch of useful idiots that keep calling them The Tea Party Movement, when in fact their entire political operations are confined solely within the the election activities of Republican Candidates.

They are the usual right wing Republican Activists, pretending to be something else, and the idiots in the MSM have been taken in by their Kabuki act.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Bernie, do not despair, I have it from the WSJ who got if from Geithner this morning that the Administration will let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire. I also read somewhere that Geithner said he does support Warren for head of the CFPB.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703467304575383131306753688.html

Posted by: lmsinca | July 22, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca,

"Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has frequently clashed with Wall Street bailout watchdog Elizabeth Warren, but today he praised her work on financial reform and said she would be "a very effectively leader" of the powerful consumer protection agency to be created under the new Wall Street reform law.

"She is one of the most effective advocates of reform in the country," Geithner told reporters at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. "She has enormous credibility. ... I think she would be an very effective leader of that institution."

But even as he praised Warren, Geithner made it clear he has not endorsed her to run the agency.

"You heard me praise her as an effective leader," Geithner said. "We have not yet made a recommendation to the president" about who should run the new agency.

The White House has mentioned two others as possible candidates for the job: Treasury official Michael Barr and Eugene Kimmelman at the Justice Department.

"Those are excellent candidates," Geithner said, referring to Barr and Kimmelman. "And I am sure there are others too."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/elizabeth-warren-picked-run-consumer-protection-watchdog-agency/story?id=11219994

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

On a sad note, Dan Choi was discharged today under DADT. He was on Rachel's show.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Sue, I knew I read something somewhere. I know I probably have too many expectations and may be disappointed but I just keep hoping they choose her if she'll have it.

I read that earlier about Dan Choi and will watch him later on Rachel, he's such a courageous soul and has fought bravely to end discrimination in the military. I'm sure he'll keep fighting on behalf of others.

I remember fighting Prop. 8 out here two years ago and thinking to myself that this was the civil rights issue of our time. Little did I know that the right wing would bring back the ghost of the civil rights fight of the 50's and 60's. I'm utterly disgusted by all of it.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 22, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama on Good Morning America tomorrow, here are a few highlights.

"President Obama said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack erred in pushing out Shirley Sherrod over allegations of racism that later proved unsubstantiated, but the real culprit, he told ABC News, was the media.

"He jumped the gun," Obama said of Vilsack, "partly because we now live in this media culture where something goes up on YouTube or a blog and everybody scrambles."

Obama's charge was broadcast by ABC News Thursday night, excerpted from a longer interview scheduled to run Friday on "Good Morning America."

"I've told my team and I told my agencies that we have to make sure that we're focusing on doing the right thing instead of what looks to be politically necessary at that very moment. We have to take our time and, and think these issues through," Obama said.

"If there's a lesson to be drawn from this episode," the President continued, it's to avoid "jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers at each other."

Posted by: lmsinca | July 22, 2010 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan Alter was on Rachel debating her on how Obama and the WH should be fighting back. Alter's suggestion....better surrogates at the DNC. BINGO!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 11:20 PM | Report abuse

I wish Obama would just stop using the phrase "partisan minority" and call them Republicans.

Most of America don't catch on to who he means. Sad, but true. Americans have had the subtlety beat out of them by reality shows...Mr. President, you gotta spell it out.

Posted by: Dema | July 22, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

This is a quote from Bob Cesca this week that sort of captured my attention. It seems like everyone is dancing to the tune of the right wing on racism. I think that's where a lot of criticism from the left is coming from. We're fighting against the Brietbart's of the world every day, fact checking, ridiculing, calling out their lies and false equivalencies and when we get one big chance to champion a real American with a post racial message everyone folds like a cheap suit. Who was her champion?

"Last week, Dave Weigel, a reporter who I normally admire, advised that we avoid the debate about the tea party and racism because it invites a "backlash" from the right. It's baffling to me that so many otherwise smart people would want to walk away from injustices like these simply to avoid the subsequent loud noises from the right. This attitude is what helped to marginalize and weaken liberals and progressives for too many years. An unwillingness to fight."

Posted by: lmsinca | July 23, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

lmsinca, very well said

Posted by: SDJeff | July 23, 2010 12:43 AM | Report abuse

All, morning roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/the_morning_plum_58.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 23, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company