Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

* It's the disclosure, stupid: With the war between Obama/Dems and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce entering into its second week, it's important to keep in mind that the foreign money charges should only be a small part of this story. What this really should be about is disclosure across the board.

The Obama/Dem assault on the Chamber's foreign cash has reframed the debate, and the Chamber, in forcefully denying the charges, has also moved the discussion in that direction. But the broader problem here is the refusal of the Chamber and other groups to disclose most of the sources funding this massive ad onslaught, and the foreign cash standoff is a distraction from that debate. More on this later.

* Shocker of the day: Karl Rove, whose group is spending millions in anonymous campaign donations to sway the midterms, is just absolutely outraged that President Obama would attack the Chamber of Commerce for spending millions in anonymous campaign donations to sway the midterms.

* Laughably misleading pushback of the day: Wow, so Rove's group is now claiming it's pulling in some small-dollar donations too, as conservatives send money to protest the Obama/Dem attacks. Too bad the amount is a comically small percentage of what the group is spending.

* Connecting outsourcing to foreign money: MoveOn is up with a very tough new ad in Illinois targeting GOP Senate candidate Mark Kirk for favoring outsourcing while benefitting from Chamber-funded ads:

* White House snared in trap of its own making: Paul Krugman argues that the Obama administration's failing message on the economy can be traced directly to its ongoing claim that the stimulus was just the right size, when it should have acknowledged throughout that it wasn't big enough.

* GOPers against science: Ron Brownstein has been doing terrific work pointing out the astonishingly large range of climate change denial and skepticism among Republicans:

Indeed, it is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here. Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, says that although other parties may contain pockets of climate skepticism, there is "no party-wide view like this anywhere in the world that I am aware of."

* It's reality, stupid: Steve Benen notes that it's this lack of "commonly shared reality among Democratic and Republican policymakers" that is rendering bipartisan compromise impossible.

* Yes, there is something that can disqualify a Tea Partyer: It appears the NRCC may have scrubbed that House GOP candidate who impersonates Nazis from its list of promising canddiates.

* What to watch this week: With the House playing field showing dozens and dozens of races are competitive, national Dems will begin making some very tough choices about which embattled incumbents to continue funding and which are lost causes.

* Reality-check of the day: Nate Silver on why the claim that incumbents who poll below 50 percent are in trouble -- which is central to many pundit predictions of doom for Dems -- may no longer be operative.

* Rick Sanchez clarifies: As I suspected was possible, Rich Sanchez now says he did not mean to say Jews were running the networks.

* Revising my view: The other day I asked whether the Politico piece on the "hicky" GOP ad was a non-story, because the person who used that word was twice removed from the NRSC. But a colleague points out that this was a legit story simply because it offered a revealing behind-the-curtain glimpse at how such ads are made.

In retrospect, that seems right to me. My main point was that the NRSC shouldn't take the hit for the word "hicky." I still think that's true, and news outlets that are pinning this on the NRSC are badly distorting what happened. But it was wrong to suggest the overall tale was a "non-story."

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | October 11, 2010; 9:00 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Campaign finance, Climate change, Morning Plum, Tea Party, economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sunday Open Thread
Next: Carl Paladino's Homophobic Extremism

Comments

OBAMA KNEW ABOUT IMPROPER FORECLOSURES


According to an article in the Washington Post, Obama officials "acknowledged they had been aware of flaws in how the mortgage industry pursues foreclosures."

REALLY?

Obama KNEW that big banks were foreclosing on people - improperly - with forged documents ...


LET'S GET ALL THE ANSWERS THIS TIME - WHAT DID OBAMA KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT ????


_________________________

This is an extremely serious issue - The American People deserve an investigation.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 11, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

" It's the disclosure, stupid: With the war between Obama/Dems and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce entering into its second week, it's important to keep in mind that the foreign money charges should only be a small part of this story. What this really should be about is disclosure across the board. The Obama/Dem assault on the Chamber's foreign cash has reframed the debate, and the Chamber, in forcefully denying the charges, has also moved the discussion in that direction. But the broader problem here is the refusal of the Chamber and other groups to disclose most of the sources funding this massive ad onslaught, and the foreign cash standoff is a distraction from that debate. More on this later."

Go get 'em, Greg. This is where the real battle is being fought.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

" It's reality, stupid: Steve Benen notes that it's this lack of "commonly shared reality among Democratic and Republican policymakers" that is rendering bipartisan compromise impossible."

Yes, we at the PL at quire familiar with the GOP's War On Reality. Glad that Benen is on the case. More of this, please.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Greg

You were right - a nation can not have a body of laws which include "independent expenditures" - and then expect responsibility to flow through those firewalls.

Raese himself is three-times removed - because his campaign didn't even know what the NRSC was doing.


NOW Joe Manchin is out there - trying to pin it on Raese - however in doing that, isn't Manchin TALKING DOWN TO WEST VIRGINIANS - as if Manchin can fool the people about what independent expenditures really are ???


Independent expenditures are just that - and for the democrats to start to lie and deceive is just wrong.

It is disrespectful to the people of West Virginia.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 11, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

If people are listening to the anonymous campaign funding they need to turn up the heat right now on Koch money.

Right now GMU is opening up an investigation against an economics/statistics professor that's worked with Mercatus Group, the Koch funded GMU anti-climate science libertarian group, to write a paper being used by Ken Kuchinelli to try and go after Virginia Tech climate scientists and also to dispute the EPA's new regulations on CO2.

Koch has managed to infiltrate our country with his junk science to protect his petrol empire. His libertarianism is a farce that doesn't work. It's propaganda to further enrich the billionaire oil barons and global industries that exploit cheap labor for global dominance.

These people can't hide much longer.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 11, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Chamber of Commerce

Was Obama demanding that MoveOn.org disclose everything in 2004, 2006 and 2008 ??? Is is an absolutely ridiculous issue for Obama to make - and Obama runs high risks running on such a set of deceptions.


Obama's CREDIT CARD operations from 2008 should be investigated. Obama and his Treasurer of his campaign have affirmative obligations TO MAKE SURE foreign contributions DID NOT come through those credit cards - if that software was TURN OFF, THERE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS.


Furthermore, Obama had a $700 Million to $87 Million money advantage in 2008 - over $600 Million dollars.


So now Obama is complaining about $50 Million - that is a little silly.

Any thinking person familiar with this issue has to know that Obama is being deceptive at best - a liar at worst.


The AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER


____________________________________

"The Washington Post" - "Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations
Contributions Reviewed After Deposits" By Matthew Mosk Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 29, 2008:

"Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged.”

So what is it that Mr. Obama accuses the Chamber of Commerce of that he has not already done himself?

If you think the reading public has no memory, you are wrong.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 11, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

SERIOUS PROBLEM


Government Officials should not be accusing American Citizens of illegal activity without EVIDENCE.

That is an Abuse of Power.

Clearly - if there is illegal activity and evidence, the Justice Department should be contacted and those proper offices should follow proper procedures.


HOWEVER - Obama should not be on the campaign trail accusing the Chamber of Commerce of illegal activity with no evidence.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 11, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

So -- disclosure is good, right? All questions will be answered, with disclosure, right?

Of course, Obama wasn't that good with it in '08, but that apparently was OK. Unions receive half (or so) money from foreign parties, just as the Chamber of Commerce does. Don't see big hue and cry for the unions to disclose. And how about Moveon? No? That organization doesn't have to disclose EITHER? How curious...

And for the utter hypocrisy of the "well, let them PROVE they haven't done anything wrong, let's turn that to the stupid birth certificate kerfuffle. Let Obama PROVE there's nothing on his birth certificate that's untoward. He should release is to PROVE it. No? Why not -- remember, it's the disclsure, stupid.

Posted by: bethIllinois | October 11, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

So -- disclosure is good, right? All questions will be answered, with disclosure, right?

Of course, Obama wasn't that good with it in '08, but that apparently was OK. Unions receive half (or so) money from foreign parties, just as the Chamber of Commerce does. Don't see big hue and cry for the unions to disclose. And how about Moveon? No? That organization doesn't have to disclose EITHER? How curious...

And for the utter hypocrisy of the "well, let them PROVE they haven't done anything wrong, let's turn that to the stupid birth certificate kerfuffle. Let Obama PROVE there's nothing on his birth certificate that's untoward. He should release is to PROVE it. No? Why not -- remember, it's the disclsure, stupid.

Posted by: bethIllinois | October 11, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Krugman in his columns has argued for a far larger stimulus. To be fair to him, in more detailed settings, he has distinguished between "good" and "bad" spending policies, but in many of his columns, he seems to simply call for "more".

The trick when we have already mortgaged the family farm in good times is how to wisely borrow with the roof leaking like a sieve. Or, in more prosaic terms, how to deleverage and grow at the same time.

Here are two fairly recent articles addressing the conundrum:

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/johnson11/English

http://www.economist.com/node/17173886

Johnson, also a Nobel Laureate, is more pragmatic than Krugman, IMO. The "Economist" article presents a western world view that offers some food for thought for Americans.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 11, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Beth, disclosure IS good. It is no way a panacea.

I represent management [against unions, sometimes] and am surprised at your "...half[or so]foreign money..." allegation.

Please provide a link. I might be able to use it to advantage.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 11, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

If people are listening to the anonymous campaign funding they need to turn up the heat right now on Koch money.

Right now GMU is opening up an investigation against an economics/statistics professor that's worked with Mercatus Group, the Koch funded GMU anti-climate science libertarian group, to write a paper being used by Ken Kuchinelli to try and go after Virginia Tech climate scientists and also to dispute the EPA's new regulations on CO2. Koch has managed to infiltrate our country with his junk science to protect his petrol empire. His libertarianism is a farce that doesn't work. It's propaganda to further enrich the billionaire oil barons and global industries that exploit cheap labor for global dominance.

These people can't hide much longer.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 11, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

The entire Global Warming Denial movement is funded by Koch and his ilk along with the the Chamber of Commerce. It is they who are making it impossible for Americans to solve common problems. They are anti-American and must be exposed for who and what they are. And scientists who take bribe money to falsify research for political reasons are a disgrace and should be fired from universities. Make these people stop hiding under rocks. Full disclosure NOW!

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Chamber Of Commerce/Tea Party/ Republican Party.

AXIS OF TAX BREAKS FOR OUTSOURCERS.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"Unions receive half (or so) money from foreign parties, just as the Chamber of Commerce does."

Do you know how much money the Chamber of Commerce has compared to unions? 30 years ago it was 500 to 1. SInce then unions have declined and the Chamber is in its glory days. There is simply no comparison between the two.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

@Greg

Media Matters is out with an incredibly well done story about the connection between Glenn Beck and the violent right-wing - including discussions with Byron Williams, who attempted to shoot up the ACLU.

It's a long piece that will surely not get the attention it deserves. I really, really hope you can pass this along to your readers by doing a post on it, with your thoughts on it's implications.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201010110002

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | October 11, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

* Rick Sanchez clarifies: As I suspected was possible, Rich Sanchez now says he did not mean to say Jews were running the networks.

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

Just great, Mr. Sanchez. After I spent the past week sucking up to them, because you convinced me they were all powerful, now you go and demote them. Thanks a lot Mr. Sanchez for causing me to deplete my sucking up arsenal, for nothing.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

STR:

If they are going after the Koch brothers, let's make sure that George Soros is properly investigated as well. At least Mr. Sargent agrees that the NRSC shouldn't take the hit for the word "hicky."

Some other interesting stories:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/man-streaks-front-obama-1-million_501259.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1319448/Obama-book-thrown-Philadelphia-rally.html

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Attacking the Chamber of Cmmerce is a non-starter waste of time. Few voters care about where ad money comes from, and all those are Democrats anyway.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 11, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin

Thanks for the Johnson link, I hadn't read that one. He's the most level headed economist out there IMO, with solutions that will work for everyone, but it doesn't necessarily appear that anyone is listening. Baker and Krugman both know what they're talking about but get carried away with the rhetoric sometimes and Johnson just gives it to you straight.

Obama recognizes the long term fiscal implications of rising health care costs and took a stab at it, unfortunately the cost controls in the bill will barely make a dent at this point. It was too bad so many politicians and citizens didn't realize the real emergency we're facing.

I posted a link last night to a comment re the AEI meeting from last week. It appears that a few of the MOTU are beginning to realize that we have some serious fiscal problems and are more realistically trying to figure out ways to address them that don't necessarily just put large business profits and tax breaks first. I wondered how long it would take for everyone to wake up, hopefully it's happening now.

We can't just decimate the fortunes of the middle class and expect to climb our way out of this kind of recession.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 11, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

HALPERIN: "hite House in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless"

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2024718,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/10/white-house-staff-quit

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

NEWSFLASH: Jews not running networks according to Rick Sanchez.

Protestants still running government though.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 11, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

hite = White (darn Spellchecker ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

54465446:

I'm still not convinced that Obama is a Protestant.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

My Question Of The Day Is:


Does Carl Paladino's Child, Which He Fathered By His Mistress, While He Was Married To Another Woman, Get Exposed To The Gay Lifestyle Of Carl's Nephew, Who Is Working On Carl's Campaign?

Or; As Long As Carl Keeps His Mistress and Child Away From Gay Pride Parades, Will That Make Sure That Carl's Secret Child Will Not Be "Given Gay"?

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Per Oprah Sargent's Book Club I have another recommendation though it isn't unequivocal. "Right Turn: The Decline of the Democrats and the Future of American Politics," by Thomas Ferguson & Joel Rogers argues persuasively that the Democratic Party turned right in the 80s even as the American public stayed where it was. This disconnect, I think, plays out still as, for example, where the country overwhelmingly supported more aggressive health care reform but the Democratic Party runs in terror from anything conceivably labeled Left, thereby disappointing the American people. The reason my recommendation of Right Turn is muted is that it is a curious mix of researched history and political predictions. Still a fascinating piece of the explanation for the Democratic Party's disastrous turn to the Right.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

bethIllinois:

Great pointa : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

It's a beautiful Monday!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

"If they are going after the Koch brothers, let's make sure that George Soros is properly investigated as well."

OK.

"George Soros, the billionaire financier who was an energetic Democratic donor in the last several election cycles but is sitting out this one, is not feeling optimistic about Democratic prospects. “I made an exception getting involved in 2004,” Mr. Soros, 80, said in a brief interview Friday at a forum sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee, which promotes understanding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. “And since I didn’t succeed in 2004, I remained engaged in 2006 and 2008. But I’m basically not a party man. I’d just been forced into that situation by what I considered the excesses of the Bush administration.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/soros-i-cant-stop-a-republican-avalanche/?ref=politics

So that takes care of the unions and George Soros. Next.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Some people have recently being comparing what Greg does on Plumline, to what Bill Kristol does. With that in mind; can someone provide an answer for this question, please?

Greg provides a comment feature, on all his threads. Does Mr. Kristol provide a similar chance for the public to challenge his positions and claims?

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

That is "obviously" not a proper investigation. I'm talking about FBI, IRS, everything that Al Franken wants to unleash against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

* Held-Up Fed Nominee Peter Diamond Wins Economics Nobel *

MIT economist Peter Diamond, President Barack Obama’s final nominee for the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, was among three winners of the economics Nobel.

[...]

Diamond’s expertise in the labor market, which is of particular concern in the current economic environment, was noted when he was nominated for the Fed. However, his nomination was sent back to the White House. Several Republicans object to his candidacy on the grounds that he has limited macroeconomic policy experience. The White House renominated Diamond, but his nomination requires another vote of the Senate Banking Committee before it can go to the floor.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/10/11/held-up-fed-nominee-diamond-wins-nobel/

So typical. We can't have this guy helping our economy because he was nominated by a Democratic President.

Shame on Republicans for doing everything in their power to prevent a stronger American economy.

Shame, shame, shame.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 11, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The Chamber Of Commerce Supports Republicans Who Gave Special Tax Incentives To American Companies Who Outsourced Jobs To Foreign Countries.

The Chamber Of Commerce Favors Putting Americans Out Of Work.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

For the record, Democrats held up lots of GWB's nominees too : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Luckily, Congress is not "officially" adjourned so Obama can't make any recess appointments. I wonder if Congress will put up a fight over his purported pocket veto as well?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

"What is "obviously" not a proper investigation. I'm talking about FBI, IRS, everything that Al Franken wants to unleash against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce."

Investigate what? George Soros is a human being and can donate money however he likes. The Chamber of Commerce is an entity, not a human being, and the COC's members are themselves business entities. So there are 2 degrees of separation between the Chamber's expenditures and its financial sources. Soros is a person; there is nothing to investigate. Your difficulty lies in equating human beings and business entities.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

JakeD2: "For the record, Democrats held up lots of GWB's nominees too"

Actually, the number of nominees getting held up as gone up with every administration since Reagan, I think. Bascially, GHW had several held up, Clinton had even more held up, George W. Bush had several more held up, and now Obama has had most of 'em held up. Next Republican president will have 100% of his nominees held up, and all appointments will become recess appointments. That's me theory, anyway.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 11, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "I'm still not convinced that Obama is a Protestant."

I'm pretty well convinced, at this point, that Obama is a cactus.

I mean, just look at him.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 11, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

All, new Adam Serwer post on Carl Paladino's "homophobic extremism":

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/carl_paladinos_damage_control.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 11, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

And your difficulty lies with the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, via the Citizens United ruling ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis:

Very funny (not). Obama has not had anywhere NEAR 50% of his (arguably illegal) nominees held up. Get a grip!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

"And your difficulty lies with the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, via the Citizens United ruling ; )"

You bet I have a problem with a Radical Right Supreme Court that is determined to turn the United States of America into a corporate subsidiary.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 11, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

For example, Obama has nominated eighty-five individuals for federal judgeships. To date, only two (2) of those nominations have been the subject of any filibuster attempt and both were brought to a successful cloture motion:

1) United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Barbara Milano Keenan (of Virginia), to seat vacated by H. Emory Widener: Keenan was nominated on September 14, 2009. Cloture was successfully invoked on March 2, 2010 by a vote of 99-0, and Keenan was confirmed later that day by a vote of 99-0. Keenan's nomination was not considered controversial, but was subjected to what Virginia Senator Mark Warner called "unnecessary filibusters that came to an end with two unanimous, bipartisan votes." Prior to Obama's successful appointment of Keenan, President George W. Bush had unsuccessfully nominated three (3) separate individuals to succeed Judge Widener: William J. Haynes, who was initially nominated in September 2003 and withdrew from consideration in January 2007; E. Duncan Getchell, who was nominated in September 2007 and withdrew from consideration in January 2008; and Glen E. Conrad, whose nomination in May 2008 expired at the end of Bush's presidency in January 2009.

2) United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

David F. Hamilton (of Indiana), to seat vacated by Kenneth F. Ripple: Hamilton was nominated on March 17, 2009. Cloture was successfully invoked on November 17, 2009 by a vote of 70-29, and Hamilton was confirmed on November 19, 2009 by a vote of 59-39. Hamilton's nomination generated opposition from groups who objected to some of his rulings while serving as a judge on the District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, particularly those dealing with abortion and prayer. However, Hamilton received the support of both Senators from Indiana, including Republican Senator Richard Lugar. Lugar was the only Republican to vote for final confirmation of Hamilton. Prior to Obama's successful appointment of Hamilton, President George W. Bush had unsuccessfully nominated Philip P. Simon to succeed Judge Ripple, who assumed senior status in September 2008.

So far, therefore, NONE of Obama's judicial appointments have been held-up. By contrast, GWB nominated thirty-nine (39) people for twenty-seven different federal appellate judgeships that were blocked by the Senate Democrats either directly in the Senate Judiciary Committee or on the full Senate floor using a filibuster.

Maybe, next year the GOP can start catching up to that record set by the Dems ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Lessig interviewed by Hiatt on campaign finance. Excellent.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/09/20/VI2010092004943.html

Posted by: bernielatham | October 11, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

Well, until you can overturn Citizens United then, George Soros should be investigated to the SAME EXTENT as the Chamber of Commerce is ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

wow, the Democrats seem to hate it when their tactics are used against them.

The chamber of commerce issue is perfectly designed to hammer Obama. First, he acts very unpresidential by singling out one prominent organization. Americans may not know everything that the Chamber does but it has been around for longer than most of us. Attacking it makes Obama seem unpresidential.

next, one of the themes of Obama's poltical opposition is that he's at war with American businesses. The parallels between Obama and FDR on this subject have been discussed on the right side of the internet for months now. By taking on the Chamber Obama simply cements that anti business image in the minds of the voters.

If unemployment is the issue and businesses do the hiring, Obama is on the wrong side of this one.

And finally as others have noted Obama's petulance about the source of money brings up the long forgotten questions that were being asked in '08. How smart is that? Obama just gave that sleeping dog a swift kick and now must contend with a resurgence of questions about his own campaign financing.

The Admin is just not looking good on this.

and I love the enviro denier crapola we're being treated to here. As I've said it is important for true believers to truly believe that their dogma explains everything. since the American left accepts man made global warming as a significant part of their dogma they cannot understand, nor tolerate dissention.

This is written by Hal Lewis, a UCSB physics professor. It is part of his resignation from the American Physical society, his profession's association:
"It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare."

it seems that dissent is out there. It is just not acceptable to liberal true believers.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 11, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

What part of "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech" are you having trouble understanding?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, skipsailing28, that last question was directed toward wbgonne, not you : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

"physics professor"

'nuff said.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 11, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

What part of "a well regulated Militia" do the gun nuts not understand?

Posted by: Liam-still | October 11, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

jaked2 wrote:

"54465446:

I'm still not convinced that Obama is a Protestant."

To the extent that he has any religious feelings at all, I think he is a deist. I don't believe the Christian stuff about him any more than I believe the Muslim.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 11, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

If anyone ELSE wants to discuss what "Militia" means, please let me know.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

54465446:

At least we've found something to agree on finally.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "Very funny (not). Obama has not had anywhere NEAR 50% of his (arguably illegal) nominees held up. Get a grip!"

Really? I thought he had. No doubt, I was confused. How many of Obama's nominees have been held up compared to Bush's nominees? Because I really did think the number had gone up.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 11, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "For example, Obama has nominated eighty-five individuals for federal judgeships. To date, only two (2) of those nominations have been the subject of any filibuster attempt"

That's interesting. Especially given that, arguably, judges are going to do more damage over time. What do you think the thought process is for just letting every Obama nomination sail through, when Democrats certainly won't return the favor?

What about cabinet members?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 11, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

The real issue here is that Democrats, liberals all, always point to conspiracy type culprits when things turn sour for the Democrat party. They always do.

"It's the stupid people out there! They are too dumb to know what's good for them".

"It's Rupert Murdoch and FOX NEWS".

"It's the Chamber of Commerse and foreign money that is killing us".

"It's Obama! He's not getting his message out".

"It's the Koch brothers and their nefarious shadow organizations".

No, no, and no!

The message is clear to all Americans. Elections cannot be truly bought. Americans are smart, observant people for the most part. Obama's message has been received and it is being rejected by most.

There's big change going on this year and it seems it will make Obama's change look like chump change.

It's a really good show with a new plot and nail biting suspense. November will conclude the first act.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 11, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I am not aware of ANY Cabinet members filibustered (from either Obama or GWB), and I can only recall Ms. Johnson, nominated to head DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel, as actually "held-up". For all the negative press about Ms. Warren being held-up, she was never technically "nominated".

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"It's the disclosure, stupid: With the war between Obama/Dems and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce entering into its second week, it's important to keep in mind that the foreign money charges should only be a small part of this story. What this really should be about is disclosure across the board."
---------------------------------------------

This I think is one of those features vs. benefits arguments. As a former marketeer, I know that one of the things people who teach ad copywriting try and pound into your head is that you ~always~ discuss features in terms of the benefits they bring. For example, don't get hung up on technical details about the lining of a winter coat, talk about how it keeps you snuggly warm.

In that sense, talking about disclosure in terms of the potential dangers of not disclosing may be the more persuasive argument. People who immediately connect that not having disclosure of who's funding political ads is a bad thing aren't the ones you're trying to sell it to. We're already on board. It's the people who are still wondering what the fuss is about that you need to convince and pushing their xenophobic button may not be such a bad way to go about it.

Posted by: CalD | October 11, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Some data, for what it's worth:

"After a year in office, Obama had submitted 326 nominations. The Senate had confirmed 262 of them, leaving 64 pending. At the end of George W. Bush's first year, there were 46 nominations pending; there were only 29 in limbo at the close of Clinton's first year."

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0410/042110e1.htm

Posted by: stonedone | October 11, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

stonedone:

None of those are JUDICIAL nominees (which arguably are the most important). There is a very real dispute as to the power given to these "czar" positions too.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis:

You can keep track of the rest right here at the WaPo.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2009/federal-appointments/

(Although "Head Count" is only tracking full-time positions and does not include Ambassadors, Marshals or U.S. Attorneys -- you will also note that no one complained about Obama replacing U.S. Attorneys this time around ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

"Paul Krugman argues that the Obama administration's failing message on the economy can be traced directly to its ongoing claim that the stimulus was just the right size, when it should have acknowledged throughout that it wasn't big enough."
---------------------------------------------

For once, I have to agree with Dr. Krugman about something that isn't economics. While I generally think that as a political strategist, Paul Krugman makes a very fine economist, when he's right he's still right. People are unpredictable and excitable animals and economic forecasting in general (Krugman's included) is a fuzzy science at best as a result. And even if everything you tried worked exactly in line with the most optimistic projections, it would still take time to heal a wound this deep and we are ~not~ a patient people.

So regardless of how right or wrong anyone ended up being about the actual policy, it's probably a good rule of thumb that politicians should always hedge their bets as much as they can possibly get away with when talking things economic. Of course hedging one's bets can very much get in the way of making a sale so there are probably definite limits on how much you can actually get away with. But in retrospect, not doing more of that was arguably a rookie error on the Obama administration's part. So score one for Krugman the political analyst perhaps.

Posted by: CalD | October 11, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Unless the WaPo has miscounted, these are the only twenty (20) pending nominees -- that's not bad at all -- 424 have been confirmed so far:

Mimi Alemayehou
Position: Executive Vice President
Agency: Overseas Private Investment Corporation

Donald Berwick
Position: Administrator of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

William R. Brownfield
Position: Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Agency: State Department

Jack Buckley
Position: Commissioner of Education Statistics
Agency: Education Department

James M. Cole
Position: Deputy Attorney General
Agency: Justice Department

Philip E. Coyle
Position: Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs
Agency: Office of Science and Technology Policy

Joshua Gotbaum
Position: Director
Agency: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Beatrice Hanson
Position: Director, Office for Victims of Crime
Agency: Justice Department

Michele Marie Leonhart
Position: Drug Enforcement Administrator
Agency: Justice Department

Jacob Lew
Position: Director
Agency: Office of Management and Budget

Cora B. Marrett
Position: Deputy Director
Agency: National Science Foundation

Warren F. "Pete" Miller Jr.
Position: Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management
Agency: Energy Department

Ramona Emilia Romero
Position: General Counsel
Agency: Agriculture Department

Mary L. Smith
Position: Assistant Attorney General for Tax Division
Agency: Justice Department

J. Patricia Wilson Smoot
Position: Parole Commissioner
Agency: Justice Department

Teresa Takai
Position: Assistant Secretary for Networks and Information Integration
Agency: Defense Department

Paul M. Tiao
Position: Inspector General
Agency: Labor Department

Solomon B. Watson IV
Position: General Counsel of the Army
Agency: Defense Department

Jonathan Woodson
Position: Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs
Agency: Defense Department

Leocadia I. Zak
Position: Director
Agency: Trade and Development Agency

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Shockingly, Obama hasn't even nominated / appointed anyone to the following 86 positions:

Appalachian Regional Commission
Alternate Federal Co-Chairman

Commerce Department
Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere
Chief Scientist
Assistant Secretary for Observation and Prediction

Council on Environmental Quality
Members

Defense Department
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
Deputy Under Secretary for Logistics and Materiel Readiness
Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations and Environment
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research Development and Acquisition

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Member

Delta Regional Authority
Alternate Federal Co-Chairman

Department of Health and Human Services
Inspector General
General Counsel

Department of Homeland Security
Chief Financial Officer

Department of Housing and Urban Development
Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs

Department of Veterans Affairs
Under Secretary for Benefits
Assistant Secretary for Management
Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs

Education Department
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Secretary for Management

Energy Department
Director of the Office of Economic Impact and Diversity

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Commissioner

Export-Import Bank of the United States
First Vice President and Vice Chairman
Member, Board of Directors

Farm Credit Administration
Member, Farm Credit Administration Board

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Inspector General

Federal Housing Finance Agency
Director
Board Director

Federal Maritime Commission
Chairman

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
Members

Federal Reserve System
Governors

General Services Administration
Inspector General

Interior Department
Special Trustee for American Indians
Inspector General

Justice Department
Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Assistant Attorney General for Office of Legal Counsel
Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance
Administrator of Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Deputy Administrator of Drug Enforcement Administration
Director of the Office of the Attorney General

Labor Department
Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
Wage and Hour Administrator

Merit Systems Protection Board
Member

National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities
Director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services

National Labor Relations
Board Member

National Transportation Safety
Member

Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Inspector General

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

Office of Government Ethics
Director

Office of National Drug Control Policy
Deputy Director for Supply Reduction

Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation
Commissioner

Office of Personnel Management
Inspector General

Office of Special Counsel
Special Counsel

Railroad Retirement Board
Inspector General

Social Security Administration
Inspector General

State Department
Inspector General
Assistant Secretary for Resource Management
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs

Tennessee Valley Authority
Inspector General

Treasury Department
Special Inspector General for Financial Stability
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs and Director of Policy Planning

United States Agency for International Development
Inspector General
Assistant Administrator for Legislative and Public Affairs
Assistant Administrator
Assistant Administrator
Assistant Administrator for Europe and Eurasia
Assistant Administrator

United States International Trade Commission
Commissioner

White House Counsel
Director of Communications
Domestic Policy Adviser to the Vice President
Assistant to the Vice President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison
Director of White House Military Office

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

"Reality-check of the day: Nate Silver on why the claim that incumbents who poll below 50 percent are in trouble -- which is central to many pundit predictions of doom for Dems -- may no longer be operative."
---------------------------------------------

I was about to say that this sounded suspiciously like an article he posted on 538 back in February*, which I always thought rated among his best work. On closer reading though, there is some new stuff in this one. So call it the second in a series.

But I think it's been pretty proven long since that the old 50% incumbent rule was bunk. It was probably one of the first casualties of a more data driven approach to polling analysis. Silver I think has done a better job of explaining it than I'd seen before but he certainly wasn't the first to raise this point -- just don't ask me who was because I really can't remember where I first heard it.

Anyway, chuck that one in the dustbin along with the Bradley effect. It's just one of those things that a lot of intelligent people believe that simply doesn't hold up to careful scrutiny.

* http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/myth-of-incumbent-50-rule.html

Posted by: CalD | October 11, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

It appears that Jake the troll has learned two new words: Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.

Posted by: CalD | October 11, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2:

"http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2009/federal-appointments/"

Thanks!

@stonedone: "After a year in office, Obama had submitted 326 nominations. The Senate had confirmed 262 of them, leaving 64 pending. At the end of George W. Bush's first year, there were 46 nominations pending; there were only 29 in limbo at the close of Clinton's first year."

That's what I had heard. Thanks for that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 11, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

PS: No one tell Jake that those aren't really words, OK? He's obviously quite proud of his new-found "literacy."

Posted by: CalD | October 11, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

CalD:

Very funny (not).

Kevin_Willis:

You're welcome. I see that Peter Diamond isn't even on the WaPo list -- keep in mind that I consider all of Obama's purported nominations / appointments to be illegal -- but, assuming arguendo that he was born in Hawaii, no one should be complaining about the lack of confirmations.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

The big money is being thrown at the party with the potential to win the jackpot in Novemeber. Big deal! In 2008, Obama was sitting on a pile of money that would make an oil shiek envious. Obama won pretty big but has not lived up to his billing and now his minions have deserted him. They are fair weather friends, plentiful in politics.

The Obamacrats have blown it just as every Democrat regime since JFK has blown it.

The Democrat party is not the party of the American majority anymore. It began being the party of a dozen, or so, aggrieved minority groups when American leftists became its base in the 1960s.

This splintered the old Roosevelt coalition and drove many Democrats into the hands of Republicans. These former Democrats run back home, once in a while, but their former home has turned into a multicultural bedlam.

It is the fault of the Democrat party that Republicans are benefitting from Democrat blunders. There are only two viable parties, after all.

But, the Republican party is being transformed. The TEA PARTY is a manifestation of the old "silent majority" spoken of by Richard Nixon. It is a new coalition. It may become the new Republican party and it will be what the Democrat party should have been.

A party of and for the American majority.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 11, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Being in the majority, we will (by definition) not be "deviant" either.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 11, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Climate Change deniers. The fact that the GOP Does Not Care about the consequences of Climate Change, does not care if 8 million people in Pakistan are homeless, does not care if sea levels rise and that it will cost TRILLIONS to save/protect urban coastal areas, does not care if the oceans become too acidic for most sea life, does not care, if 50% of all ecosystems and biomes fail; The fact that the GOP Does Not Care requires them to be deniers, because some how doubting the science is better than just not caring about the fate of the entire planet.

Posted by: bcinaz | October 11, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Climate Change deniers. The fact that the GOP Does Not Care about the consequences of Climate Change, does not care if 8 million people in Pakistan are homeless, does not care if sea levels rise and that it will cost TRILLIONS to save/protect urban coastal areas, does not care if the oceans become too acidic for most sea life, does not care, if 50% of all ecosystems and biomes fail; The fact that the GOP Does Not Care requires them to be deniers, because some how doubting the science is better than just not caring about the fate of the entire planet.

Posted by: bcinaz | October 11, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

O.K, let me understand the Left's take on the "Hitler" GOP canidate: The enactments of the civil war, which take place all over the East on a regular basis, make all the participants wearing military uniforms of the South pro slavery.

Posted by: chitownmonkey | October 11, 2010 11:16 PM | Report abuse

Barack Hussein Obama II was born August 4, 1961 at the Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

There is no way he is a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ as required for the office of President by the US Constitution. We need to demand Congress fully investigate all matters related to Obama’s eligibility and, if justified, remove him from office.

Check out the Website, WasObamaBornInKenya.com, which allows free downloading of several important documents, including a copy of Obama’s Kenyan Birth Certificate and a Poster that states, Demand Congress Fully Investigate Now!

Posted by: bsteadman | October 12, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company