June 21, 2009 - June 27, 2009 Archives
Jun 26 2009, 10:45PM
Pelosi, Waxman, Markey, Slaughter Triumph
The margin of victory was small, but the significant can't be understated: in passing the largest and most ambitious overhaul to the nation's energy policy in decades, Democrats in the House of Representatives are celebrating a genuine policy accomplishment. The bill is so big, so audacious, even in its watered down form, that if it somehow manages to pass the Senate, it will almost immediately change the lives and lifestyle of every American, the fortunes of major industries, and the economic future of regions, cities and towns. That's one of the reasons why opponents -- not opponents who thought it didn't go far enough, but the ones who were opposed to the cap-and-trade idea itself -- went to great lengths to fight back against it. This is one of those bills that does something.
Jun 26 2009, 6:02PM
Is Obama Moving Toward An Executive Order On Detention Policy?
The Washington Post and Pro-Publica [ed note: collaboration!] report that the White House counsel's office has drafted an executive order authorizing -- or, rather, asserting, that the President has the inherent authority to detain certain classes of people indefinitely. (Update: Ben LaBolt, an Obama spokesperson, flatly denied the report to me. "There is no executive order. There just isn't one.") For what it's worth, administration officials say that
the story seems to overwrite something that is common knowledge, that President Obama hasn't decided on a course of action yet, and that the task force he appointed to figure out these issues is weeks away from presenting its recommendations to the White House. It is not clear whether the draft executive order applies to detainees held at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, or in camps in Iraq, or detainees collected in future operations, or even in cases where suspected terrorists are identified in non-contiguous countries. I note, at 10:40 p.m., the Washington Post has softened the story a bit, referring to the "drafting" in the present. And the administration refuses to parse verb tenses with me -- is drafting, might draft -- those are still possible. "Have drafted" is apparently untrue.
Jun 26 2009, 5:58PM
Boehner's Friday Afternoon Treat
If you're like to watch some interesting television, flip on over to C-SPAN and watch House Minority Leader John Boehner read 300 pages worth of an energy bill. A delaying tactic? Yep. Will the vote be pushed into the morrow? Maybe. Anyway, the leader's staff is calling this a "Fili-Boehner." I giggled. I admit it.
Jun 26 2009, 3:13PM
Greenpeace Wants None Of It
Some late news on the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation: Greenpeace, the influential activist environmental group, contends that industry lobbyists watered down the bill to the point where it won't do much of anything. The bill, they contend, would create a "whole new generation" of coal and nuclear plants and would not limit emissions in the volume they say current science required. Greenpeace's announcement won't do much to the vote count because most fellow travelers have already decided to oppose the bill for the same reasons, but it has become a news story, and that may influence the mood of the majority... and the mood of the majority may well influence the votes of individuals.
Jun 26 2009, 2:37PM
A Provocative Preventative Detention Proposal
I've gotten a copy of the model detention proposal that Brookings' Benjamin Wittes and colleague Colleen Peppard have prepared. Why is this paper so significant? It represents an effort -- one of the first -- to deal with an acute matter of national interest, and one that is by no means settled from the perspective of the government. And it will be read by the powers that be. Here's a summary of its main points: The two propose a model for a "targeted and highly regulated detention authority " that supplants the authority granted to the president by Congress. Why is this paper so significant? It repersents an effort to deal with an acute matter of national interest, and one that is by no means settled from the perspective of the government.
Jun 26 2009, 2:15PM
Capital, Technology, Policy: The three critical ingredients to prevent climate change
The recent focus on climate change has been the House of Representatives, which is scheduled to vote on the Waxman-Markey bill today (or possibly tomorrow.) But a number of parallel, nonprofit efforts to cut carbon emissions are also ramping up. They include the Clinton Global Initiative, another effort by Richard Branson, and the Gigaton Throwdown, a project of a team of high-powered technology investors and academics that met in Washington Wednesday to share the results of an interesting study. The Gigaton folks want to move much faster and more aggressively to cut global carbon emissions than most people--they want to cut 5 to 7 billion tons (gigatons) of carbon from the atmosphere by 2020, and see the private sector playing a critical role in making this happen. They met to unveil what is essentially a feasibility study for what these ambitious reductions would entail as measured across eight different technologies, including wind, solar, plug-in electric, and--attention Republicans!--nuclear. The broader goal is to provide a "road map for laboratory-to-industry partnerships."
Jun 26 2009, 10:45AM
The Wittes Preventative Detention Proposal
The influential constitutional and national security thinker Benjamin Wittes has found a solution to the conundrum that is vexing the Obama administration's task force on detention policy: how does the United States simultaneously provide dangerous, non-triable detainees with due process rights and keep them, well, detained until (if ever) rehabilitated.
Jun 26 2009, 9:25AM
What Barack Obama Owes Michael Jackson
They were born three years and 24 days apart. And a more than an ocean separated the only child of a Kenyan father and a Kansan mother and the Gary, Indiana kid who was the seventh of nine children. It would be wrong to read too much political meaning into the career of Michael Jackson and that of Barack Obama. (No one is thinking tonite that Hillary Clinton owes a debt of gratitude to Farrah Fawcett.) But it would be myopic to say that Jackson had a huge cultural impact and no political impact, either.
Jun 25 2009, 11:25PM
Democrats Growing Confident About Climate Bill Passage
Democrats on Capitol Hill say that historic and controversial climate change legislation is likely to pass the House of Representatives tomorrow. A top Democratic aide estimated that Speaker Nancy Pelosi had banked just enough votes as of this evening. Included are a handful of Republicans. Other Democrats said that they weren't sure where the vote count stood, but that they expected the bill to pass. (Republicans say they're confident it will fail.) Late today, the AFL-CIO endorsed the bill, which might boost its fortunes among Democrats in Pennsylvania. And on the other side, the Chamber of Commerce said it would count the vote as "key," which means they'll hold a "yes" vote against lawmakers.
Jun 25 2009, 10:50PM
Dennis Ross's Dilemma Is Solved
Thursday, the National Security Council confirmed in a short statement that Dennis Ross, formerly of the State Department and a member of Washington's uber-establishment, will become the senior director for the "central region" at the NSC, giving him a portfolio that includes oversight of a wide swath of territory, including Iran. For weeks -- months, even, Ross's status at the Department of State was unclear, even to his friends.
Jun 25 2009, 7:21PM
Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/25
I follow more than 1,500 tweeps so you don't have to....
@kerryeleveld Jared Polis presses House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton to move on DADT: http://www.youtube.com/user/JaredPolis31275
@AdamSerwer read @AriMelber in @thenation on the recession and prison reform http://is.gd/1drcO then read me! http://tinyurl.com/cspjsa
@JaseLP: For an Originalist, Clarence Thomas certainly seems to hate the Fourth Amendment. #scotus #liberty
@michaelluo Perceptive story from NYT mag abt the fall of the black middle class with the contraction of the Detroit Three http://bit.ly/deWzy
Jun 25 2009, 7:00PM
The Day In Politics, 6/25
Today, Jenny Sanford put out a long, thoughtful statement on her husband; the U.S. Open sparked a climate change debate; and Dennis Ross was given a defined role.
We also considered whether Mark Sanford's admission will change politics; the new nomadism of economic displacement; how to read an Iranian news story; where Clarence Thomas would be if not for the Anita Hill scandal; Mitt Romney's image rehab; and whether fans will cheer or boo President Obama at the MLB All-Star Game.
We also considered whether Mark Sanford's admission will change politics; the new nomadism of economic displacement; how to read an Iranian news story; where Clarence Thomas would be if not for the Anita Hill scandal; Mitt Romney's image rehab; and whether fans will cheer or boo President Obama at the MLB All-Star Game.
Jun 25 2009, 6:11PM
Spy v. Spy: Joe Decides
Vice President Joe Biden has been asked to quickly mediate a long-standing institutional dispute between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of National Intelligence, a signal that President Obama's National Security Council could not reach a consensus, sources with knowledge of the situation said.
When Congress created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2005, it neglected to specify how the DNI and the Central Intelligence Agency director would share authority. For decades, the CIA director had executive authority over the entire intelligence community, reported directly to the president, and would designate its station chiefs as the nation's intelligence representative for the country.
Beginning with the first DNI, John Negroponte, the new intelligence directors wanted more control over who served as the country's chief intelligence representative in foreign countries, reasoning that that there would be instances where the CIA's station chief might not be the best person for the job, and noting that the CIA was but one of 16 different intelligence agencies that served the president, policy-makers and the Department of Defense.
Even more important -- and more institutionally tender -- the DNIs want the authority to coordinate and manage resources in those countries without having to go through the CIA director. Who reports to whom? Does a station chief have two masters? The answers -- Biden's answers -- could shape the future of the U.S. intelligence community.
In separate pleas to National Security Adviser James Jones, CIA director Leon Panetta and current DNI Dennis Blair asked for a speedy resolution. The New York Times reported that Blair, in a classified memo, simply granted himself expanded authority over appointments in early May, which Panetta, in an equally classified memo, quickly countermanded.
The Blair memo, known as ICB 402, contained provisions that had been agreed to by Panetta, but when it was circulated, career agency officials objected to its language, and Panetta registered their objections.
There had been reports that John Brennan, Obama's top counterterrorism adviser and a former senior CIA official, was tasked by Jones with making the decision. Brennan reportedly proposed a compromise, but the National Security Council, of which Biden is a member, could not agree on the details. Biden, who had access to classified intelligence as chairman of the Foreign Relations committee, will now the make decision, a sign, administration officials said, that ending the confusion about authority and chain-of-command was a critical, if not readily discussed, priority for President Obama.
Spokespeople for the White House, Biden's office, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Council did not comment.
An ongoing conflict has the potential to create a personal rift between Blair and Panetta, who get along fairly well at the moment. With the new administration, the number of station chief vacancies has grown. Some of Obama's national security advisers worry that chiefs were improperly supervised during the Bush administration, leading to charges of criminal misconduct in at least one instance. As the nation's top intelligence official, Admiral Blair wants the power to designate who represents the United States's intelligence interests in foreign countries, reasoning that the CIA's choice in certain cases might not be the right choice for the entire intelligence community. Blair does not seek the power to appoint stations chiefs, who primarily supervise clandestine and covert operations. Other intelligence observers worry that the CIA has used the system for, in the words of a former top agent, a "pre-retirement" circuit for aging agency bureaucrats.
Beyond high-level political wrangling, the dispute has real ramifications on the ground. Traditionally, officers, analysts and managers from other agencies sought permission from the station chiefs before they entered a new country, and the station chief usually had veto power over their movements and operations. The government has created quick reaction task forces that are supposed to be able to flood a country or a region within days of being dispatched. In some countries, the station chiefs do little -- think of Canada, where the U.S. intelligence community conducts most of its operations jointly with the native country's agencies. In other countries, the National Security Agency has far more personnel on the ground.
Even before the DNI post was established, its critics questioned whether a new layer of bureaucracy would improve information sharing and coordination among the nations' 16 intelligence agencies. But the DNI was invested with few formal powers and almost no budget authority, largely a result of lobbying by the Department of Defense, which nominally controls the budget of the largest agency, the NSA, and several others. Reasonably, if the DNI can't appoint his own representatives, then he has indeed become a glorified presidential briefer. President Bush signed an executive order that modestly increased the DNI's authority... key word here is modestly. The daily access to President Obama is important, but controlling budgets and operational tasking is probably more useful.
Jun 25 2009, 6:10PM
American Politics, With A New Skin
Just in time for the fourth of July, the Atlantic is pleased to unveil an easier-to-read, gently refurbished politics website. It'll be easier to see more content, more quickly, and it'll be easier to find content by your favorite authors.
The site is curated by the Atlantic's political editor, Marc Ambinder, and features writing by Chris Good and contributions by Matt Cooper and other reporters. Bob Cohn, the Atlantic.com's editorial director, is the boss.
As always, our aim is to provide you with instant, forward-leaning analysis of the days events, with conceptual scoops that help you understand Washington and politics, and with a chronicle of the most active period of government in at least a quarter century.
We're not automatons, and you'll see certain themes repeat themselves. Our quirkiness is one way we distinguish the site from our many worthy competitors. To borrow the favorite metaphor of jurisprudence, when we make judgments, we do as umpires or analysts, not as participants.
The editors of this site are human and have political biases, but -- and this is important -- we are humble enough to know that there is rarely a right answer or a single perspective that explains it all. Don't mistake humility for relativity: we prize intellectual honest, clear thinking and plain speaking.
We continue to be grateful for the time our readers spend on our site, and we hope that this reskin makes that experience a little more pleasant.
Jun 25 2009, 5:40PM
Question Of The Day, Answered
Some reader responses to our question of the day, which was, "As public admissions/apologies go, Mark Sanford's was remarkably open, perhaps verging on too much information. How does Sanford's press conference stack up to the historical likes of Clinton, Spitzer, and Vitter?":
From cat:
From cat:
The press conference verged on criminal. I cannot believe his staff let him come out and ramble like that. TMI comes to mind. It was like watching a train wreck. The staff is obviously very angry at him.
Jun 25 2009, 5:19PM
The Invisible Primary, 6/26
Tracking the GOP race to 2012
Tim Pawlenty opposes the climate change bill moving through the House; the Star Tribune speculates that Mark Sanford's fall helps him; Haley Barbour will headline a GOP fundraiser in Iowa tonight; and Sarah Palin blasted a blogger for doctoring a photo of her and her son, Trig, replacing Trig's face with that of a conservative Alaska talk show host.
Tim Pawlenty opposes the climate change bill moving through the House; the Star Tribune speculates that Mark Sanford's fall helps him; Haley Barbour will headline a GOP fundraiser in Iowa tonight; and Sarah Palin blasted a blogger for doctoring a photo of her and her son, Trig, replacing Trig's face with that of a conservative Alaska talk show host.
Jun 25 2009, 2:16PM
The MLB All-Star Game As Obama Referendum
President Obama will throw out the first pitch at the MLB All-Star Game in St. Louis July 14, becoming the fourth sitting president to do so (Kennedy, Nixon, and Ford being the others). Obama is no stranger to St. Louis--he held a massive, record-breaking campaign rally there under the Gateway Arch in October, drawing 100,000; he spent his 100th day as president there, holding a town hall meeting, talking about the economy, health care, and energy/the environment in the suburbs.
Sporting events offer a remarkably raw window into the sentiments of the hoi polloi, and Obama, no doubt, will be judged--by cheers, boos, or both. Although it's the first pitch, fans will have been enjoying the festivities all day. They won't be on their first beers--and they won't be afraid to show their true colors. Just ask President Bush, who was booed and jeered by Washington Nationals fans when he threw out a first pitch in March of 2008. Or Dick Cheney, who got a similar reception in DC in 2006. That wasn't the end for Bush, though--he was greeted by an enthusiastic, hometown cheer when he returned to the mound at Rangers Ballpark for a first pitch in Dallas this April for the team he formerly owned.
Sporting events offer a remarkably raw window into the sentiments of the hoi polloi, and Obama, no doubt, will be judged--by cheers, boos, or both. Although it's the first pitch, fans will have been enjoying the festivities all day. They won't be on their first beers--and they won't be afraid to show their true colors. Just ask President Bush, who was booed and jeered by Washington Nationals fans when he threw out a first pitch in March of 2008. Or Dick Cheney, who got a similar reception in DC in 2006. That wasn't the end for Bush, though--he was greeted by an enthusiastic, hometown cheer when he returned to the mound at Rangers Ballpark for a first pitch in Dallas this April for the team he formerly owned.
Jun 25 2009, 2:04PM
What Mitt Romney's Doing Right
John Ensign and Mark Sanford are revealing TMI. Sarah Palin is struggling with her state legislature. John Huntsman, Jr. is headed to China. Mike Huckabee is ubiquitous. Haley Barbour is meeting with strategists in smoky back rooms. Tim Pawlenty has to get through the rest of his term.
And Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney
is writing a book. His final draft is due to a publisher by the end of July,
and it will hit bookshelves in 2010, right at the time the Republican Party
will be settling on a communications strategy for the midterm elections.
Romney and his team are clear about his political future. The door to another presidential race is open, but that would be true regardless of how Romney spends his days. It adds nothing to ask whether Romney will run for president.
The prevailing narrative today is that Romney has risen to the top of the 2012 Invisible Primary because he's the last man standing.
- Romney is picking and choosing
his battles. He shares an Obama-esque disdain for the superficial daily
scrum that cable channels whip up. It's a credit to his communications
team that he can appear on television once every two or three weeks and
seem to be part of the dialog. When Romney has something to say, he'll
find a venue to say it. On auto
restructuring, on the Republican stimulus plan, on a free market approach
to health care, on the Employee Free Choice Act, and on missile defense,
Romney matches his opinions to key constituencies, and he always draws
respectful news coverage. What's
Romney saying about Mark Sanford? Nothing. (Mike Huckabee called into Fox.
He's pursuing a different communications strategy.)
- He's not consumed by anger or
sarcasm. Romney can get angry, and he
can be sarcastic. But his public appearances today are calm, measured; his
interviews are given in dignified settings. Romney's political team
believes that the public has no appetite for presidential adversaries who
are driven by personal dislike. To
Romney, this dignifies the office of the presidency.
- He's not frantic about the
invisible primary. Obviously,
Romney has a base of staff, donors and supporters, and he doesn't need to
panic about grabbing strategists and consultants who might defect from
other potential candidates. He keeps in touch with key supporters in
- Pew finds that Romney's
fav/unfav ratio is pretty darned good. The same guy who was pegged as a
flip-flopper, as a fake (or too real) social conservative, as a guy who
said what people wanted to hear... is relatively popular. Plenty of time has passed, and a very
distracting election probably helped.
But Romney did himself many favors as the 2008 presidential
campaign wound down. He got out of the race at the right moment, letting
arch-enemy Mike Huckabee try and rally the right against John McCain. He
became the establishment frontrunner to be McCain's vice presidential selection,
and when McCain didn't pick him, he became the '08 ticket's chief
economics spokesman (when Carly Fiornia, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO,
flamed out.) He turned over his
scheduling to McCain's team, winning goodwill. He's rehabbed his image fairly successfully. Some of the old baggage may whip around on the conveyor belt, but there'll be less of it.
- He's kept in touch with the
right people, including McCain. While it's known that the two former
rivals have had dinner since the election, it's not well known that McCain
occasionally calls upon Romney for policy advice. As Romney slowly expands
his circle, his inner ring advisers remain intact, including every
significant member of his
- He's helping the party. His
donor base and personal wealth allow him to be a generous fundraiser for
other candidates, campaigning for Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris
Christie in
- Good Bye To All That. There's a sense among Romney regulars
that the stuff that tripped him up in 2008 will not be relevant if he
decides to run in 2012. The number of people who will oppose him because
of his faith probably won't grow. He made his rookie mistakes in 2008.
Jun 25 2009, 1:26PM
Clarence Thomas, Outcast? Or President?
Today, the Supreme Court issued its second 8-1 decision with Clarence Thomas providing as the lone dissenting voice. Last week, it was the court's ruling in a case on the Voting Rights Act. Today, the court ruled that Arizona public school officials violated a 13-year-old girl's constitutional rights when they stripped searched her in a search for prescription strength drugs. The majority ruled that, had the search been for illicit drugs or something else that might have cause more imminent harm, then the search might have been justified, but not in a mad search for something like Tylenol. As it happens, no pills were found on the girl. Officials acted on a tip from another student.
Jun 25 2009, 12:07PM
U.S. Open Sparks Climate Debate?
"Debate" is, I'm sure, too lofty a word here, but Climate Progress suggests Tiger Woods fell prey to global warming at last weekend's extra rainy U.S. Open; Newsbusters, ever looking to call out climate (or any liberal) hype, thinks this is ridiculous. Personally, I think his putting had more to do with it. But it was downright rainy.
Jun 25 2009, 11:04AM
Jenny Sanford's Statement
Jenny Sanford, the first lady of South Carolina, issued a fairly long, thoughtful statement on the situation. Say what you want about the governor's disappearance and press conference yesterday, both the Sanfords have been particularly open about their situation and what's transpired, an observation that hasn't been lost on those in and outside the media commenting on it. In the statement, Mrs. Sanford says she asked the governor to leave two weeks ago, and that she "believe[s] Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage." Full statement after the jump:
Jun 25 2009, 10:27AM
Two Ways To Read An Iranian News Story
With massive amounts of unconfirmed information floating about on Twitter and unsourced, generally unaccredited sites around the Web, it's difficult to contextualize any news we get out of Iran--especially what's coming from its state-run press. Every statement and action can be taken in different ways, and, without a comprehensive picture of what's going on there from reported sources, it's tough to know which way to choose.
With the arrest of 70 professors and this terrifying report from a CNN caller, we can tell things are bad. But with Mousavi's defiance, the opposition could still be thriving in the face of it.
With that in mind, here are two ways to read a story posted yesterday afternoon on Iran's state-run Press TV, with the headline "Leader: Iran not to give in to pressure."
With the arrest of 70 professors and this terrifying report from a CNN caller, we can tell things are bad. But with Mousavi's defiance, the opposition could still be thriving in the face of it.
With that in mind, here are two ways to read a story posted yesterday afternoon on Iran's state-run Press TV, with the headline "Leader: Iran not to give in to pressure."
Jun 25 2009, 9:41AM
The New Tom Joads
The Wall Street Journal has a great story this morning about people who have become semi-nomad because of the recession. (Subscription required.) Our own Christina Davidson is making her own recession roadtrip. I recently rented an apartment from a former Democratic press secretary, Jill Greenberg, who is riding out the recession in South America, as much for adventure as economic necessity. Makes you think of Tom Joad from The Grapes of Wrath and his famous speech and how it might be written today:
"Wherever there's a foreclosure on a condo, Ma, I'll be there....Wherever there's a banker turned barista, I'll be there...."
Are there political implications to this, the new Okies, the new migration of the economically displaced? Probably not. Most people aren't getting all peripatetic in order to earn a living and so it's not some constituency that needs catering to. On the other hand, it's not impossible that the recession will stir forces that will lead to or exacerbate large scale dislocations. Michigan was emptying out before the recession came. What's it going to be like by the time of the 2020 Census? Our former Atlantic colleague, Nicholas Lemann, has written extensively about the great black migration from South to North in the middle of the last century. In general, recessions haven't been enough to shake already prevalent trends, but they probably speed them up.
The political party that figures out migration patterns is going to have a huge advantage. Obviously, at the moment, the growing Hispanic population and its fanning out far beyond the West and Southwest had been a boon to the Democrats. The party that recognizes that we're all migrants now, or at risk of becoming them, would have a big advantage. Is it any wonder that the always cutting-edge HBO is moving ahead with "Americatown," a series set 25-40 years in the future with struggling American migrants huddled in the shadows of a foreign city. America's always been a mobile society, but the forces roiling the economy are maiming it more so, and it'll be interesting to watch which party gets it first.
"Wherever there's a foreclosure on a condo, Ma, I'll be there....Wherever there's a banker turned barista, I'll be there...."
Are there political implications to this, the new Okies, the new migration of the economically displaced? Probably not. Most people aren't getting all peripatetic in order to earn a living and so it's not some constituency that needs catering to. On the other hand, it's not impossible that the recession will stir forces that will lead to or exacerbate large scale dislocations. Michigan was emptying out before the recession came. What's it going to be like by the time of the 2020 Census? Our former Atlantic colleague, Nicholas Lemann, has written extensively about the great black migration from South to North in the middle of the last century. In general, recessions haven't been enough to shake already prevalent trends, but they probably speed them up.
The political party that figures out migration patterns is going to have a huge advantage. Obviously, at the moment, the growing Hispanic population and its fanning out far beyond the West and Southwest had been a boon to the Democrats. The party that recognizes that we're all migrants now, or at risk of becoming them, would have a big advantage. Is it any wonder that the always cutting-edge HBO is moving ahead with "Americatown," a series set 25-40 years in the future with struggling American migrants huddled in the shadows of a foreign city. America's always been a mobile society, but the forces roiling the economy are maiming it more so, and it'll be interesting to watch which party gets it first.
Jun 25 2009, 9:12AM
Will Sanford's Sins Change Politics?
Yes They Will:
1. He's the latest in a line of potential GOP presidential candidates to fall victim to his personal appetites. This means that the GOP primary electorate is more likely to choose a nominee with stellar, unimpeachable family-values, socially conservative credentials, which means that anyone who evinces moderation hasn't got a shot. Remember: Rudy Giuliani lost the presidential race because news reminded voters about his previous indiscretions.
2. Gov. Haley Barbour, as the new RGA chair, is the most powerful Republican in politics today, second only, I think, to Mitt Romney. Barbour has always craved a return to the respectable power circles in Washington. The race just lost a real Southerner, ceding to Barbour the GOP's juiciest territory. Watch for Barbour to be more aggressive about his national ambitions. (I'm not saying he WILL run for president, just that he wants to.)
3. The GOP loses one of its most articulate anti-spending, anti-deficit spokespersons. Sanford's machinations may not have been popular, but he articulated a view of the world that many conservatives share. He was to many the face of opposition to President Obama's increasingly unpopular stimulus bill.
4. The topsy-turvy world of South Carolina Republican politics is now even more chaotic, if you can believe that. This may give Democrats a chance to move in that state.
5. The media will have more license to investigate rumors of personal indiscretions, and politicians will be more defensive. A few years ago, the media would ignore the rumors, owing to a post-Clinton detente/public wariness about the private lives of politicians. Not anymore.
6. This may be a tipping point: a few examples of conservative moralists who cheat on their wives (Vitter, Ensign) can be, perhaps, accepted as evidence that human beings are normal. But at some point, the liberal talking point about GOP hypocrisy starts to have the ring of truth, even though plenty of Democrats have been implicated in affairs of their own. Moralizers in politics don't have the clout they once did, and Sanford joins the list of politicians who are responsible. The usual "blame the culture of New York and Washington" line, which was used to explain the indiscretions of the two most recent New York Democratic governors and of Senators Ensign and Vitter, don't apply to Sanford. He was as South Carolinian as all get out.
7. The GOP will find itself distracted at a time when the party needs to be disciplined on health care and energy. Every GOP officeholder will be forced to spend valuable time explaining why their party stands for family values.
No They Won't:
1. As one correspondent put it to me, the GOP is at a market bottom already. The public's image of the party can't really go down much further.
2. Most Americans probably didn't know who Sanford was before today, so it'll hard to attribute any massive change in politics to his sudden emergence.
3. Sanford was never a viable 2012 candidate because of his eccentricity; to put him in the same category as a Mitt Romney or a Sarah Palin misjudges the impact he would have had.
4. What policy will change because of this? It's a fantasy to think that voters will get the joke about how gay people keep ruining straight politician's lives.
5. Enough already. Wars, economic crises, major reform of health care and fiscal policy, Jon and Kate, the Iranian revolution: our collective bandwidth may be at capacity.
6. Logically, Mark Sanford's affair tells us nothing about the rightness or wrongness of policy (although it does hurt the way one particular brand is sold.)
1. He's the latest in a line of potential GOP presidential candidates to fall victim to his personal appetites. This means that the GOP primary electorate is more likely to choose a nominee with stellar, unimpeachable family-values, socially conservative credentials, which means that anyone who evinces moderation hasn't got a shot. Remember: Rudy Giuliani lost the presidential race because news reminded voters about his previous indiscretions.
2. Gov. Haley Barbour, as the new RGA chair, is the most powerful Republican in politics today, second only, I think, to Mitt Romney. Barbour has always craved a return to the respectable power circles in Washington. The race just lost a real Southerner, ceding to Barbour the GOP's juiciest territory. Watch for Barbour to be more aggressive about his national ambitions. (I'm not saying he WILL run for president, just that he wants to.)
3. The GOP loses one of its most articulate anti-spending, anti-deficit spokespersons. Sanford's machinations may not have been popular, but he articulated a view of the world that many conservatives share. He was to many the face of opposition to President Obama's increasingly unpopular stimulus bill.
4. The topsy-turvy world of South Carolina Republican politics is now even more chaotic, if you can believe that. This may give Democrats a chance to move in that state.
5. The media will have more license to investigate rumors of personal indiscretions, and politicians will be more defensive. A few years ago, the media would ignore the rumors, owing to a post-Clinton detente/public wariness about the private lives of politicians. Not anymore.
6. This may be a tipping point: a few examples of conservative moralists who cheat on their wives (Vitter, Ensign) can be, perhaps, accepted as evidence that human beings are normal. But at some point, the liberal talking point about GOP hypocrisy starts to have the ring of truth, even though plenty of Democrats have been implicated in affairs of their own. Moralizers in politics don't have the clout they once did, and Sanford joins the list of politicians who are responsible. The usual "blame the culture of New York and Washington" line, which was used to explain the indiscretions of the two most recent New York Democratic governors and of Senators Ensign and Vitter, don't apply to Sanford. He was as South Carolinian as all get out.
7. The GOP will find itself distracted at a time when the party needs to be disciplined on health care and energy. Every GOP officeholder will be forced to spend valuable time explaining why their party stands for family values.
No They Won't:
1. As one correspondent put it to me, the GOP is at a market bottom already. The public's image of the party can't really go down much further.
2. Most Americans probably didn't know who Sanford was before today, so it'll hard to attribute any massive change in politics to his sudden emergence.
3. Sanford was never a viable 2012 candidate because of his eccentricity; to put him in the same category as a Mitt Romney or a Sarah Palin misjudges the impact he would have had.
4. What policy will change because of this? It's a fantasy to think that voters will get the joke about how gay people keep ruining straight politician's lives.
5. Enough already. Wars, economic crises, major reform of health care and fiscal policy, Jon and Kate, the Iranian revolution: our collective bandwidth may be at capacity.
6. Logically, Mark Sanford's affair tells us nothing about the rightness or wrongness of policy (although it does hurt the way one particular brand is sold.)
Jun 25 2009, 6:00AM
Sanford's Style
As public admissions/apologies go, Mark Sanford's was remarkably open, perhaps verging on too much information. How does Sanford's press conference stack up to the historical likes of Clinton, Spitzer, and Vitter?
Jun 24 2009, 7:00PM
The Day In Politics, 6/24
Today, we learned that Bill Richardson thought it was "fantastic" to have Manny Ramirez in New Mexico; Mark Sanford returned; held a press conference; said he'd been in Argentina and admitted to an affair; Sarah Palin ranked as America's most popular Republican; the Iranian government leveled allegations of terrorism and spying; and Nico Pitney explained his arranged conveyance of an Iranian question.
Jun 24 2009, 6:15PM
Question Of The Day, Answered
Some interesting reader answers to our question of the day, which was, "President Obama expresses undisguised contempt for the habits of the American media. And they luuuuv it. Do his low-grade insults make him irresistible? Who taught him this pop seduction technique?":
Multimedia
Jun 24 2009, 5:36PM
Mark Sanford's Press Conference
Video of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's press conference Wednesday, in which he explains his disappearance to Argentina and admits an affair.
Jun 24 2009, 5:35PM
The Invisible Primary, 6/24
Tracking the GOP race to 2012
The big news of the day, of course, was Mark Sanford's admission of an affair, commentators commenting that GOP stars are falling, as John Ensign and Sanford made similar admissions in short succession; in related news, Haley Barbour will take over as head of the Republican Governors Association now that Sanfor's stepping down; in non-Sanford-related news, Sarah Palin ranked as the most popular Republican figure in a Pew poll that compared her to three other top partisans (none of them being Mike Huckabee, who addressed the Southern Baptist Pastors Conference this week).
The big news of the day, of course, was Mark Sanford's admission of an affair, commentators commenting that GOP stars are falling, as John Ensign and Sanford made similar admissions in short succession; in related news, Haley Barbour will take over as head of the Republican Governors Association now that Sanfor's stepping down; in non-Sanford-related news, Sarah Palin ranked as the most popular Republican figure in a Pew poll that compared her to three other top partisans (none of them being Mike Huckabee, who addressed the Southern Baptist Pastors Conference this week).
Jun 24 2009, 4:44PM
What Bill Clinton Can Teach Mark Sanford
I made the point earlier that Bill Clinton was famously saved by the perception that he was undistracted by his affair and the he was still focused on the country's business. The public tended to blame the GOP for the impeachment trial, the circus, the vast distraction that was the Monica Lewinsky affair. And so Clinton survived. My point is that the I'm-getting-back-to-work ethos could save Sanford if his painful press conference didn't already. Interestingly, Sanford didn't stress getting back to work. He mostly stressed the healing that lay ahead. Clinton did that, too but in politician's fashion almost seemed to throw it off to a commission. He announced that he was going to be seeking pastoral counseling--psychiatry or psychology would have been too unsettling for the body politic--and let it go at that. Sanford would probably benefit from the same but with a pronounced emphasis on getting back to work. He shouldn't go to the john without leaving a forwarding number.
(As a side note, it's worth pointing out that Sanford called on Clinton to resign.)
I mentioned GIuliani as another pol who benefitted from this. John Podhoretz wrote to remind me that Rudy went from moving out of Gracie Mansion to battling cancer to abandonning his bid for the U.S. Senate against Hillary Clinton. True. But the sense that he was still a man of action helped preserve his viability for 2008. That and 9/11 24/7.
(As a side note, it's worth pointing out that Sanford called on Clinton to resign.)
I mentioned GIuliani as another pol who benefitted from this. John Podhoretz wrote to remind me that Rudy went from moving out of Gracie Mansion to battling cancer to abandonning his bid for the U.S. Senate against Hillary Clinton. True. But the sense that he was still a man of action helped preserve his viability for 2008. That and 9/11 24/7.
Jun 24 2009, 4:40PM
Sanford No Longer Featured On Values Voter Summit Site
UPDATE: Sanford was originally invited to speak, but the
Family Research Council (which runs the summit) was told last week that
Sanford wouldn't be able to attend, according to FRC spokesman J.P.
Duffy.
Which indicates Sanford's disappearance from the site is less sudden than it originally appeared, and that his dropping out of the lineup is not a result of today's press conference.
Mark Sanford, formerly featured prominently in the lineup of the 2009 Values Voter summit, to be held in Washington, DC September 18-20, isn't on the list anymore--nor is his picture on the Values Voter Summit website.
Sanford was listed in the lineup on the summit's websitebefore last week; now, after the admission, he isn't.
Which indicates Sanford's disappearance from the site is less sudden than it originally appeared, and that his dropping out of the lineup is not a result of today's press conference.
Mark Sanford, formerly featured prominently in the lineup of the 2009 Values Voter summit, to be held in Washington, DC September 18-20, isn't on the list anymore--nor is his picture on the Values Voter Summit website.
Sanford was listed in the lineup on the summit's website
Jun 24 2009, 3:59PM
Will Sanford's Admissions Change Politics?
I'll have more to say about this later, but I think the answer is yes: Once again, Americans have another reason to throw their hands up and say,
"There's another politician who couldn't keep it in his pants, and who
abused the public trust." Confidence in political institutions is as
low as it was after Watergate, and the less confidence the public has in
politicians, the less competitive elections will be; fewer good people decide
to run for office, and the cycle perpetuates. I'm not so sure the ultimate meaning of the revelation has anything to do with moral hypocrisy; the archetype of conservative moral scolds is no longer salient outside GOP primary politics. Imagine if Rudy Giuliani had run in this environment....
Jun 24 2009, 3:14PM
We've Got More Questions for Mark Sanford
Mark Sanford's extraordinary press conference leads to a number of questions about what happens next to a governor and former congressman who was once considered one of the brightest stars of the Republican party. It was a deeply embarrassing and painful moment and one that seemed to answer all of the questions that have been looming. But there are still others:
1. Will pressure grow on him to resign the governorship? Sanford said he'd quit as chair of the Republican Governors Association but will pressure gather from South Carolinians, the state's Republicans and editorial pages for him to quit his office? And if so what's the case against Sanford: Leaving town without telling anyone?
1. Will pressure grow on him to resign the governorship? Sanford said he'd quit as chair of the Republican Governors Association but will pressure gather from South Carolinians, the state's Republicans and editorial pages for him to quit his office? And if so what's the case against Sanford: Leaving town without telling anyone?
Jun 24 2009, 3:05PM
Nico Pitney Explains His Question
There's been a thread of discussion today about the question asked yesterday by The Huffington Post's Nico Pitney at President Obama's midday news conference. It was provided by an Iranian and asked by Pitney in person, after the White House heard Pitney was soliciting such a question from Iranians and called him to say they wanted him to ask one at the press conference. Some have said that this was too much stagecraft by the White House--orchestrating or even planting a question ahead of time (it was, however, clear that Obama knew it was coming as he looked at Pitney and said he understood he had a question ready to go from an Iranian). Pitney's question was a fairly challenging one. It was: "Under which conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad, and if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal of what the demonstrators there are working toward?"
This morning, Pitney called into C-SPAN's Washington Journal and explained the question and how he got it, and how he orchestrated its delivery with the White House.
This morning, Pitney called into C-SPAN's Washington Journal and explained the question and how he got it, and how he orchestrated its delivery with the White House.
Jun 24 2009, 2:24PM
Mark Sanford Reveals Affair, Cover-Up
A curated stream of information and tweets...
Sen. Lindsay Graham, in a statement: ""As for the future, I hope Mark will reconcile with his
family and can continue serving as our state's
governor."
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/CODE/t16c015.htm
South Carolina's Code of Laws, Title 16--Crimes and Offenses, Chapter 15
"Offenses Against Morality and Decency"
@AriMelber Why Sanford was so bad at being discreet? Typical sense of entitlement&arrogance. He'd have made it w/o that journo at airport.
@ATLNewsBrew: "SC Gov Haiku: Sanford Goes Down South / Divorce Soon Leaves Him Empty/ Wife Gets Hilton Head!
@ragley @laurinmanning: impeachment gets the state nothing. The man is ruined. What more can the liberals do to him
@dmataconis: Sanford was one Republican I could have supported in 2012. Who's left ? Romney, Huckabee, and Palin a/k/a Los Tres Losers
@AndrewSullivan said it best:, "But it's important to remember at these moments that we're all human. I just wish the GOP leadership would apply that lesson to everyone else."
@laurinmanning: Pray for Jenny and the four boys. Pray for Mark. Pray for those whose hearts are heavy with disappointment. Pray for South Carolina. #tcot
@ktumulty Fmr. DNC and SC Dem Chair Don Fowler explains how Mark Sanford has helped reverse the old rule of political scandal: http://bit.ly/4PKef
Spartanburg sounds off over Sanford affair: http://ping.fm/rTFSh
dbardallis Mark Sanford: Another "who cares?" story. Yay 21st-century big-media-driven public discourse!
Law Dork: New Definition of "Stimulus Funds"?Sanford traveled to Argentina on public's dime. http://tr.im/pD4X
Ensign, now Sanford. http://tinyurl.com/mkov32 . Who's going to implode themselves next-Who's left? Heard Dole is ready to avenge 1996.
@markosm: Every [REDACTED] time. Not an accident. RT@murshedzaheed On Fox: Mark Sanford "(D)" holds press conference http://bit.ly/yCZaz
@attackerman: "@JamilSmith, you think? Sanford *really* sounded like he loves his mistress. is it so crazy he'd go in person?
@gotchamedia "full video of crazy Mark Sanford press conference:http://bit.ly/3pOTh"
@nprnews A Gov. Mark Sanford 'Disappearance' Timelinehttp://tinyurl.com/l9ztaf
@thehotline: NY Daily News with best Sanford headline so far: "Sanford And Someone?" http://bit.ly/39ApFq
@dailykos if Mark Sanford had just resigned last wk he wouldn't have needed to humiliate his family. Shows you where his priorities are.
@manoleasa: "June has not been very kind to the GOP, has it? Wonder who's next! Do they have anybody else standing?
@stardragonca "Sanford, please. Stormfronts evolve. Viruses evolve. this is something that you DID!"
@murphymikeSanford bombshell. Very sad to watch; I know Mark and Jenny and like them both a lot.
@laurinmanning "#sanford apologized to @senatortomdavis about 14 more times than he did his wife and kids. Weird."
@half_Street: "Hard not to feel compassion for Sanford, but he's only being somewhat "open and transparent" b/c he has nowhere left to hide."
Press conference ends with his staff literally dragging him away.
Confesses affair / Resigns from RGA / Says wife and family knew about affair for "about the last five months." / Says that his mistress was separated at the time / Affair began via e-mail / Has Seen Her Three Times / "Spent the last five days of my life crying in Argentina."
He's been as open as I've ever seen a politician be under these circumstances.
So... this was Associative Fugue, Rather than Dissociative Figure.
Sanford: "There are moral absolutes. ... There are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence. The bottom line is this: I've been unfaithful to my wife. I developed a relationship with ... a dear, dear friend from Argentina. It began"very innocently...as many of these things do...over last year, it developed into something much more than that. I hurt her, I hurt you all, I hurt my boys...
@mattiscooper "Ouch. Here comes @marksanford 's wife-free "bottom line."
@mattizcooper "God's law?" Eeek. Backdrop of smiling interns and photographers adds to weirdness...
If you were to look at God's law, in every instance, they were designed to protect people from themselves. Not a "moral rigid list of dos and don't." Apologies to "people of faith."
This seems like an elegy to his career. Even though we don't know what the lede of the story is yet. This is uncomfortable to watch.
Apologies to staff, wife and children... says he created "fiction" in regard to where I was going. Apologies to people of SC for letting them down. Apologizes to his parents, who are staying with his wife. Says he "laid some cards on the table" a few weeks ago.
Sanford: "It's gonna hurt." Apologizes to wife and children for "letting them down."
Jun 24 2009, 1:55PM
Don't Cry For Me, Mark Sanford
Will be Twittering the Mark Sanford press conference at 2 PM Eastern. In the mean time, interesting reading can be done here on the Politics Channel and by my colleagues at Talkingpointsmemo.com who are using theiir crowdsourcing to solicit interesting reader comments on why it's suspect you would want to drive the Argentine coast this time of year.
Kind of wondering when we'll get reaction from the likes of Jim DeMint, Lindsey Graham and Sanford's pal, John McCain. Sanford was a McCain 2000 supporter and the two have long been close. Plus Sanford is still chair of the Republican Governors Association. Is there going to be any rumbling there to dislodge him? And if so, why? Of course, will be wondering whether Mrs. Sanford is by his side at the press conference.
Kind of wondering when we'll get reaction from the likes of Jim DeMint, Lindsey Graham and Sanford's pal, John McCain. Sanford was a McCain 2000 supporter and the two have long been close. Plus Sanford is still chair of the Republican Governors Association. Is there going to be any rumbling there to dislodge him? And if so, why? Of course, will be wondering whether Mrs. Sanford is by his side at the press conference.
Jun 24 2009, 1:51PM
State-Run Headline: "Iran uncovers plots in presidential election"
That's a top headline from Iran's state-run Press TV today (story here). "The Zionist and non-Zionist regimes outside the county" were responsible for plots, Iranian Intelligence Minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei said, reporting that two "terrorist" groups have been seized by police. He also claimed terrorists planned a bombing at a shrine of Ayatollah Khomeini. And the specter of foreign spies was raised:
According to the intelligence minister, the US and some western countries were aiming to achieve unrest in Iran's elections atmosphere.
When asked by a reporter about the arrest of foreign spies working under the guise of reporters, Mohseni-Ejei said, "Anybody who embarks on espionage activity in the country will be arrested. A foreign reporter has so far been nabbed and another one has been questioned and his things were confiscated."
Jun 24 2009, 12:53PM
Sarah Palin: America's Top Republican
Sarah Palin is the most popular (though most divisive) of the top GOP figures in the land, according to a new poll from Pew, which compared her to Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Michael Steele. This, of course, leaves out some other important GOP figures--most notably Mike Huckabee, whose strong showing in the 2008 GOP primary and continued presence on Fox News places him in the well-known category along with those four.
This comes after a June 2 CNN poll showed no clear frontrunner in the 2012 primary race, with Huckabee slightly ahead of the pack.
This comes after a June 2 CNN poll showed no clear frontrunner in the 2012 primary race, with Huckabee slightly ahead of the pack.
Jun 24 2009, 12:24PM
Tweeting The Sanford South America Fugue
It's not a revolution in Iran, exactly, but...if it consumes the political world, we're gonna cover it.
@thehyperfix: SC Gov Candidate Pulls Down Sanford Pick From Website
@DanaHoule: Sad. Becoming better traveled than George W Bush was before he was elected cost Sanford a shot at the presidency.
@SteveHaweeli Oh take me with you!!! #Sanford
@cwillk SC residents, its pretty clear Sanford was tracking down Carmen Sandiego, a known terrorist. You should be thrilled to have a gumshoe gov
@cn2news They say Scotty is dead, then how did he beam Sanford up from the AT, to Atlanta and then Buenos Aires?! Scotty Lives!!
@mdubno So #Sanford was told by his chief of staff to come home from #Argentina. Then staff continued to lie about whereabouts.
@surtsidegraphic Governor Sanford disappears to Argentina...Now the WSJ is reporting that the Argentinian peso dropped 'significantly' on Tues, I smell fish.
@GregMitch:S. Carolina paper that broke Sanford story, wonders where he was really "cruising."For bruising? http://bit.ly/8Byjl
@notellinuzip Hot news - Mark Sanford changes first name to Waldo and orders the retraction of all K-12 geography classes in SC
@goldberg3000: Does Gov. Sanford Suffer from Dissociative Fugue?
Jun 24 2009, 11:46AM
Quote Of The Day: Nixon On Looking For More Female Candidates
Understand, I don't do it because I'm for women, but I'm doing it because I think maybe a woman might win someplace where a man might not.
Jun 24 2009, 11:30AM
The Crucifixion of Nico Pitney
Okay, that's a bit of an exaggeration but the Huffington Post reporter is getting tweaked this morning for the question he posed to President Obama at yesterday's White House Press Conference. It was an odd moment because normally, of course, reporters raise their hands, the president calls on someone and they ask their question. In this case the president seemed to have Pitney in mind already.
Jun 24 2009, 10:35AM
A Public Plan Might Not Be The Panacea...
Would any public plan really force insurance companies out of business? Would it burden the government with significant new financial obligations? Is "public plan" really just a cover phrase for "single payer in 10 years?" This is a complex debate, but Congress is certainly capable of crafting a public plan that doesn't compete very well in the marketplace. Indeed, health reform advocates can make the case that a weaker public plan might be preferable to a stronger one. That sounds counterintuitive, but it's not. One reason why the Democrats refer to a government-run option as a "public plan" is that it's more easily swallowed that calling it a "government plan." That's the first knock against it. Advantage: private insurance. Then you've got to have faith that the Democrats can design a plan that would be attractive to people. Maybe they will. But if they're keen on putting the plan under the supervision of, say, a bipartisan team of well-meaning health care experts, they might produce a clunker. The private health insurers have advertisers and marketers and decades of experience selling their plans; the government has no comparable experience, and an expert-run plan might not be salable enough. Potential advantage: private insurance. Three: will a government plan require doctors to participate? That's the big concern of the American Medical Association. Let's assume that it won't. That means that, so far as one's choice of doctors is a value, you're likely to decide to perhaps pay a little more to preserve that choice. Potential advantage: private health insurers.
Jun 24 2009, 10:33AM
Sanford To Speak, 2pm ET
Gov. Mark Sanford, tanned and rested, will speak to the press at a 2:00 pm ET news conference in Columbia. If you could ask him one question, what would it be?
Jun 24 2009, 10:01AM
Sanford Emerges
Mark Sanford is back! And the weird tale of a disappearing governor has ended. The South Carolina governor was in Buenos Aires, he said, greeted by a reporter for The State (SC newspaper) in the Atlanta airport this morning.
Hearing him talk about it, he sounds...blase. Some gems from The State's story:
Hearing him talk about it, he sounds...blase. Some gems from The State's story:
Sanford said he had considered hiking on the Appalachian Trail, an activity he said he has enjoyed since he was a high school student.And:
"But I said 'no' I wanted to do something exotic," Sanford said "... It's a great city."
"I don't know how this thing got blown out of proportion," Sanford said.
Sanford said he has taken adventure trips for years to unwind. He has visited such places as the coast of Turkey, the Greek Isles and South America. He was with friends sometimes and sometimes by himself.
"I would get out of the bubble I am in." Sanford said.
Jun 24 2009, 9:43AM
How Far They've Fallen
If you're a baseball fan, then you know that steroid-pumping quitter Manny Ramirez returned last night from a 50-game suspension, imposed for testing positive for drugs associated with a performance-enhancing cycle. Actually, Manny has not completed his suspension, but the rules allow him to begin his comeback in the minor leagues, so he suited up with the Dodgers' Triple-A affiliate, the Albuquerque Isotopes (not to be confused with the Springfield Isotopes). The Ramirez steroids scandal is the biggest in pro sports this year. But on SportsCenter last night, there was a moment of politico-athletic scandal serendipity when it was reported that one-time Obama Commerce Secretary nominee Bill Richardson, who withdrew amid an ethics scandal, attended the game and pronounced Manny's joining the Isotopes "a fantastic day for New Mexico"...the circumstances of this "fantastic" turn of events being, let's remember, the entirely just punishment of an epic cheat who has forever tarnished baseball. Nice going, Bill! Ramirez went 0-for-2 with a strikeout. But on balance, I think Richardson proved himself the bigger sad sack.
UPDATE: A spokesman for Richardson e-mails to say that SportsCenter was wrong--Richardson never said it was a "fantastic day" for New Mexico. Richardson was at the game, but he didn't make any such comment, the spokesman said.
UPDATE: A spokesman for Richardson e-mails to say that SportsCenter was wrong--Richardson never said it was a "fantastic day" for New Mexico. Richardson was at the game, but he didn't make any such comment, the spokesman said.
Jun 24 2009, 6:00AM
Obama The Pickup Artist
President Obama expresses undisguised contempt for the habits of the American media. And they luuuuv it. Do his low-grade insults make him irresistible? Who taught him this pop seduction technique?
Jun 23 2009, 11:03PM
Sanford Files: His Car Is Found
Item: the governor's armored SUV is found in the parking lot of the Columbia, SC airport. A sleeping bag is inside. (H/T, Peter Hamby.)
Item: Numerous media outlets cite a "federal agent" who saw Sanford at an airport in Atlanta, which matches a report that his cell phone was last tracked on a cell tower in Atlanta. (Fact hidden in that sentence: some law enforcement entity was worried enough to convince the cell phone company to part with its cell data.)
Item: His staff provides conflicting information about whether his cell phone was turned off, and on, and whether he gave anyone a detailed description of his itinerary.
Item: He's back in Columbia tomorrow, so... we'll know.
Item: Numerous media outlets cite a "federal agent" who saw Sanford at an airport in Atlanta, which matches a report that his cell phone was last tracked on a cell tower in Atlanta. (Fact hidden in that sentence: some law enforcement entity was worried enough to convince the cell phone company to part with its cell data.)
Item: His staff provides conflicting information about whether his cell phone was turned off, and on, and whether he gave anyone a detailed description of his itinerary.
Item: He's back in Columbia tomorrow, so... we'll know.
Jun 23 2009, 7:30PM
The Day In Politics, 6/23
Today, we learned that the Obama administration is shutting down a domestic satellite surveillance program; Iran's Guardian Council says it won't annul the election results; a cheat site can help you understand health reform; health insurers are feeling the public drumbeat for a public plan; and President Obama held a news conference covering Iran, health care reform, and energy.
Jun 23 2009, 6:50PM
The Invisible Primary, 6/23
Tracking the GOP race to 2012
Potential 2012 hopefuls will attend the Values Voter Summer in DC Sept. 18-20--the lineup includes Eric Cantor, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry, Mike Pence, and Mitt Romney; Haley Barbour dined with some senior GOP strategysts in DC Monday night; he held a press conference with GOP lawmakers today and said he'll "probably never" announce he's running for president; John Ensign apologized for his affair privately in a meeting with GOP senators; and he accused a former senior aide--the wife of the staffer with whom he had the affair--of extortion.
Potential 2012 hopefuls will attend the Values Voter Summer in DC Sept. 18-20--the lineup includes Eric Cantor, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry, Mike Pence, and Mitt Romney; Haley Barbour dined with some senior GOP strategysts in DC Monday night; he held a press conference with GOP lawmakers today and said he'll "probably never" announce he's running for president; John Ensign apologized for his affair privately in a meeting with GOP senators; and he accused a former senior aide--the wife of the staffer with whom he had the affair--of extortion.
Jun 23 2009, 5:45PM
Why Are Obama's Polls Slipping?
Today's presidential press conference was supposed to be held in the Rose Garden, but it got canceled because of the heat. I suspect this was less a tender concern about the press corps, which would have to be seated long in advance of the president, and not wanting the president to sweat and drip on camera.
Obama's poll numbers have been going down, although they remain high. Why are they going down? A lot of it seems to have to do with spending and government intervention in the economy, which has roused fears of independents. 70 percent of respondents in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll said that they were concerned "a great deal" or "quite a bit" about the GM takeover.
I have a slightly different spin on this, which is that it's the spending and the modest success it seems to have brought in stopping the total collapse of the banking and financial system. If the economy felt like it was in the same free fall that it was a few months ago, he'd be doing better because there'd be less questioning of government spending and more calls to pour everything on the fire. But with the respite in the fall comes the freedom to question spending. Or, to put it another way: The firemen saved your house but now you're pissed off about all the water damage in the den.
That applies to Ben Bernanke, who raised questions about the deficit in his last testimony before Congress, and its true of the public. It's a paradox: If things were worse, Obama would be doing better. At this point, more economic decline isn't going to help Obama. More green shoots will, or passing health care reform or a good foreign policy showdown.
Obama's poll numbers have been going down, although they remain high. Why are they going down? A lot of it seems to have to do with spending and government intervention in the economy, which has roused fears of independents. 70 percent of respondents in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll said that they were concerned "a great deal" or "quite a bit" about the GM takeover.
I have a slightly different spin on this, which is that it's the spending and the modest success it seems to have brought in stopping the total collapse of the banking and financial system. If the economy felt like it was in the same free fall that it was a few months ago, he'd be doing better because there'd be less questioning of government spending and more calls to pour everything on the fire. But with the respite in the fall comes the freedom to question spending. Or, to put it another way: The firemen saved your house but now you're pissed off about all the water damage in the den.
That applies to Ben Bernanke, who raised questions about the deficit in his last testimony before Congress, and its true of the public. It's a paradox: If things were worse, Obama would be doing better. At this point, more economic decline isn't going to help Obama. More green shoots will, or passing health care reform or a good foreign policy showdown.
Jun 23 2009, 5:25PM
Voting Rights, Afterthoughts
My old colleague and friend, Abigail Thernstrom, makes the case against minority-majority districts in the National Review. The Nation reverts to paleoliberal stereotype in its piece on the Supreme Court's temperate 8-1 decision on an Austin, Texas utility district. The New York Times is also worried. Please. Does the Times believe that Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and David Souter have taken a crazy shift to the right? The decision seemed decidedly temperate, to me anyway. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is a serious infringement on local power and prerogatives but rightfully so given the country's history of racial discrimination. The question of whether it remains constitutional is a serious one. For the left and right, it seems like a no brainer but the Court seems to be taking a centrist position that this is a tough question without an easy answer. I found that pretty reassuring even if, I think, there's a coming showdown over this issue that won't be so temperate.
Jun 23 2009, 4:27PM
Unlocking Obama's Mind On Health Care
I want to pose two questions about President Obama, the White House, and health care. I don't know the answers.
First, would Obama veto a non-deficit neutral bill if that bill (a) provided insurance for everyone and (b) included other, longer-term cost-cutting measures?
Second -- was Obama's tactical flexibility on a public plan because he
(a) isn't convinced that the votes exists for the type of a public plan that would really reorient the health care marketplace?
(b) knows that a plan without a public option would never get to his desk but doesn't want to tip his hand?
Second -- was Obama's tactical flexibility on a public plan because he
(a) isn't convinced that the votes exists for the type of a public plan that would really reorient the health care marketplace?
(b) knows that a plan without a public option would never get to his desk but doesn't want to tip his hand?
Jun 23 2009, 4:07PM
The Atlantic's Boldest: Department Of Corrections
1. Former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie did not poll for John McCain during the '08 election.
2. The GOP-aligned Resurgent Republic is not a firm, but rather a non-profit group in the mold of the Dem-aligned Democracy Corps.
2. The GOP-aligned Resurgent Republic is not a firm, but rather a non-profit group in the mold of the Dem-aligned Democracy Corps.
3. Jonathan Cohn is a health care policy expert. Jonathan Chait is a valued Cohn colleague at The New Republic. They are not the same person.
Jun 23 2009, 3:52PM
Mousavi And Mossadeq: What The 1953 U.S.-Backed Overthrow Has To Do With Today
In the middle of the last century, the U.S. overthrew Iran's democratically elected leader, Muhammad Mossadeq. Some think it happened too long ago to be a major factor in today's protests; some disagree. But it's shaping how both the Iranian and U.S. governments react to what's happening in the streets of Tehran.
Accusations of U.S. interference have been rampant in the past weeks as the Iranian government plays on history and old fears. Even before the June 12 election took place, Iran's main state-run newspaper warned that Western interference in the election was likely; since then, warnings and accusations of intervention have been steady; today, Iran's foreign ministry accused the U.N. of interfering in its affairs.
Accusations of U.S. interference have been rampant in the past weeks as the Iranian government plays on history and old fears. Even before the June 12 election took place, Iran's main state-run newspaper warned that Western interference in the election was likely; since then, warnings and accusations of intervention have been steady; today, Iran's foreign ministry accused the U.N. of interfering in its affairs.
Jun 23 2009, 3:33PM
Quote of the Day: Obama on Neda Video
It's heartbreaking. Anybody who sees it knows that there is something fundamentally unjust about that.
Jun 23 2009, 3:27PM
Obama's Weird "AA" Crack
It tells you something that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq came up at the president's press conference. The United States is simultaneously prosecuting two wars in the Muslim world and neither merited a question of the president. It's the surest sign of how quickly attention shifts and flits from one topic to another and how surefooted the White House needs to be in a fluid news environment. Iran might have gotten one question a few weeks ago. Now it dominates the news conference. The collapse of the American automotive industry didn't come up either, nor did rail safety after yesterday's accident or hate crimes, which so dominated the news cycle after the shooting at the Holocaust Memorial. Nothing lasts.
Jun 23 2009, 3:07PM
Sanford's Disapperance: He's Just A Weird Guy
Let us presume that Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) will indeed return to work today, safe and sound, fresh from a long hike along the Appalachian trial, and that the state government figures out why so much misinformation about the circumstances surrounding his absence was spread. That still leaves us with the question: what's with this guy?
Jun 23 2009, 1:52PM
Did Obama Change His Position On Iran?
Did President Obama change his mind about intervening in Iran's election? With the words that he used: no, With the tone,setting, context, maybe. But he had no choice.
1. His statement referred to the Islamic Republican of Iran, which remains this administration's way of signaling that they acknowledge the legitimacy of the current government.
2. He reiterated the U.S. opposition to regime change and its support for Iranian sovereignty.
3. As he's done since the beginning of the crisis, he said that Iran -- and Iran only -- would decide Iran's future.
4. If the Iranian government were to respond to the administraiton's offer for direct talks today, the administration would engage in direct talks with the government.
The administration believes that there is a line, perhaps a red line, between supporting the aspirations of the demonstrators, expressing sympathy for their plight, expressing (key word) universally recognized outrage at the bloodshed, reiterating his belief that, even as American democracy isn't directly exportable everywhere, Islamic governments must recognize certain core human values that the current government isn't recognizing.
Jun 23 2009, 1:25PM
The Four Keys To Obama's Mind
Based on the 53 minutes and answers to 15 question, here's where President Obama's mind seems to be at:
1. Obviously, he wanted to send a direct message to Iranian people without intervening. (Non-intervening interventionalism.) He is still not willing to say that the election was illegitimate. He is still willing to talk to this regime, but he didn't say who that regime included. (Strategic ambiguity.) I think the key to understanding where he's at on Iran now: ""We don't know yet how this thing is going to play out. I know everybody here is on a 24 hour news cycle. I'm not." The soundbite will be the response to the Neda murder video. That's what the world -- and the Iranian protesters -- will hear.
2. He said the top priority for health care reform is cutting costs. During the campaign, it was about universal coverage, which is now his number two priority. The change reflects current political realities, as well as Obama's evolving understanding of what real reform would mean. The personal stories he hears still touch him, as he made clear. He refuses to say (at least at this point) that he would veto a health care plan without a "public plan" option. He did, however, give his strongest defense of that concept to date. Seems to me that he supports a public plan option but will not insist on one. And his message to Congress about costs couldn't be more clear: the CBO had better score your final proposals as deficit-neutral.
Jun 23 2009, 12:34PM
Obama's News Conference In Short Tweet Bursts
Q15: Neda video: "It's heartbreaking. Anybody who sees it knows that there is something fundamentally unjust about that."
Q14: Af-Am unemp. rate up to 14%, Romer on targeted intervention next year: O: "Lift everyone."
Q13: O on second stimulus package: "Not yet." Reiterates my blog post yesterday on economic predictions. (Not really. Well, maybe.)
Fourth media-meta-comment. Talks about timeframes and crystal balls. Key line: "In the absence of the stimulus, it would be much worse."
Q12: Colombia policy: O gives complex answer on subject I haven't had the time to read about. Sorry.
Q 11: Obama's smoking habits. Obama admits falling off the wagon. Not in front of kids or family. 95% cured.... times where "I mess up."
That's three meta-comments about the press now.
Q10: Obama: the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform... but if employers are forced / decide to change plans...
Key political point: Obama says that if there's no reform, then people could lose more choice...
Jun 23 2009, 12:29PM
Iranian Diplomats At 4th Of July Parties: Subterfuge?
There's a debate going on right now about whether or not the Obama administration should disinvite Iranian diplomats from its 4th of July embassy barbecues. The Plank's Jason Zengerle offers a creatively skulduggerous justification for why the administration shouldn't rescind the invites: maybe it will help us gather intelligence.
Jun 23 2009, 12:26PM
Health Insurers Feel The Public Plan Drumbeat
How quickly one's perception of public opinion transforgifies! Last week, the public plan seemed to be, well, dead. (It wasn't, but that was the perception.)
The two associations representing health insurance plans that cover 200 million Americans are now reminding members of Congress that they oppose adding a government option to the health care reform bills in Congress. The Association of Health Insurance Plans and Blue Cross Blue Shield contend that a government-run plan -- "no matter how it is initially structured" -- would "dismantle employer-based coverage, significantly increase costs for those who remain in private coverage, and add additional liabilities for those who remain in private coverage."
"Recognizing the substantial disruption to consumers and health care providers that a government plan based on Medicare would create, some policymakers are looking at alternatives that would attempt to achieve a level playing field," the industry's lobbyists writes. "We do not believe that it is possible to create a government plan that could operate on a level playing field."
The associations released their letter on the morning that President Obama uses the presidential pulpit to urge Congress to continue its work.
Jun 23 2009, 11:29AM
Useful Health Reform Cheat Site
We can't all have the steel trap minds of Ezra Klein and Jonathan Cohn, much less of Henry Aaron, Ken Thorpe or Peter Orszag. For the rest of us, Kaiser has put together a side-by-side comparison of the nine (or so) versions of health care reform legislation in Congress.
Jun 23 2009, 10:34AM
Guardian Council Decides Tomorrow; Has Said It Won't Annul Vote
Iran's Guardian Council will announce its final decision Wednesday on allegations that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's June 12 election victory was rigged, the Tehran Times reports. It has already been reported that the Council has ruled out annulling the results, so this final decision might not offer much hope to Iran's protesters; neither, probably, will this explanation from the Council's spokesman of why more votes were recorded there were eligible voters in at least 50 districts:
In response to the complaints that the number of votes in some provinces exceeded the number of eligible voters, Kadkhodaii explained that this occurred because there is no law requiring people to vote in their place of residence and people can vote anywhere in the country.
Jun 23 2009, 9:19AM
An Advance For Privacy
The Obama administration has decided to shut down the National Applications Office at the Department of Homeland Security, which allowed federal law enforcement agencies access to Defense Department satellites for surveillance and other domestic law enforcement activities. Now, only FEMA and the Department of Interior will get access to the imagery, and only for emergencies and routine mapping purposes.
Jun 23 2009, 6:00AM
Internet Surveillance And Iran: A Primer
If you're not an expert in Internet surveillance, and you've been following the Iranian protests, this post is for you.
It's widely recognized that Iran employs systems of Internet restriction and monitoring to keep its people from engaging in activities it deems subversive, and much has been made of that restriction (recently in a Wall Street Journal story on the communications network sold to Iran by Siemens and Nokia--a story later refuted by the companies). With so much information coming to us from Iran via YouTube and Twitter, and yet all the talk of monitoring, there's a fundamental discrepancy in the discussion: if Iran puts so much effort into monitoring its citizens, how come we keep seeing cell phone videos of protests and violence; how is so much information coming to us via Twitter?
And, more broadly, how does Internet surveillance work? How can the government restrict, monitor, or find you if you're doing something illegal/subversive?
It's widely recognized that Iran employs systems of Internet restriction and monitoring to keep its people from engaging in activities it deems subversive, and much has been made of that restriction (recently in a Wall Street Journal story on the communications network sold to Iran by Siemens and Nokia--a story later refuted by the companies). With so much information coming to us from Iran via YouTube and Twitter, and yet all the talk of monitoring, there's a fundamental discrepancy in the discussion: if Iran puts so much effort into monitoring its citizens, how come we keep seeing cell phone videos of protests and violence; how is so much information coming to us via Twitter?
And, more broadly, how does Internet surveillance work? How can the government restrict, monitor, or find you if you're doing something illegal/subversive?
Jun 22 2009, 7:30PM
The Day In Politics, 6/22
Jun 22 2009, 6:57PM
Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/22
Everyday, I, @marcambinder, follow 1,400 of the most interesting tweeps in the universe so you don't have to.
NeimanLab (@niemanlab) A lesson in aggregation: How @robinsloan created his "Iran election tracker for the easily overwhelmed" http://tr.im/plpU Clement Tan (@clemtan) AOL PoliticsDaily site surpasses Politico in terms of unique site hits in May, but can the site keep it up? http://bit.ly/3ODYh
Ryan Nobles (@ryannobles) Haley Barbour goes back in time. Why he is comparing 2009 to 1993 and why it is a good thing for @BobMcDonnell- http://decisionvirginia.com
James Bennet (@jbennet) Rohde escape reminds: W/ the US in 2 wars, the NYT has built the strongest team of war correspondents in a generation.
Adam Schroeder (@staytuspro) This is a scary story. RT @ newscientist: Best brug to combat malaria is threatened by the appearance of resistance. http://bit.ly/15E0NW
Lawrence Lessig (@lessig) Fantastic 538.com study about effect of $$ on public option for healthcare: http://bit.ly/e6WnB
Jun 22 2009, 6:40PM
The Invisible Primary, 6/22
Tracking the GOP race to 2012
Gov. Mark Sanford has gone missing, and his staff won't say where he is; John Ensign's approval ratings dropped after admitting to an affair with an ex-staffer, but he is still more popular than Harry Reid; Mike Huckabee will travel to Alabama tomorrow to raise money for a congressional candidate; he'll also keynote an event for radio trade publication Radio Ink in December; and Haley Barbour will travel to Virginia, New Hampshire, and Iowa this week for candidate and party events.
Gov. Mark Sanford has gone missing, and his staff won't say where he is; John Ensign's approval ratings dropped after admitting to an affair with an ex-staffer, but he is still more popular than Harry Reid; Mike Huckabee will travel to Alabama tomorrow to raise money for a congressional candidate; he'll also keynote an event for radio trade publication Radio Ink in December; and Haley Barbour will travel to Virginia, New Hampshire, and Iowa this week for candidate and party events.
Jun 22 2009, 5:50PM
Metro Train Collision In Washington, D.C.
We're a bit of a DC-centric site, and I'm following the news closely on Twitter, so direct your browser here for more information.
Jun 22 2009, 5:39PM
The Coming Voting Rights Explosion
Having read the opinion in the voting rights case, I got a little bit of the feeling I did after the Israel-Hezbollah war of 2006. It ended unsatisfactorily for both sides and they're going to be at it again sometime. With a lot more cluster bombs and hostage taking.
Despite the bonhomie of the 8-1 opinion and even Clarence Thomas's dissent--all sides genuflected toward the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and all that it had done for the country--you got the sense that the inevitable showdown is coming: Eventually some jurisdiction is going to have a really good case for getting out from under the act and the Supreme Court is going to have to rule on why an emergency provision that was supposed to last just five years has now been extended to 2031.
Despite the bonhomie of the 8-1 opinion and even Clarence Thomas's dissent--all sides genuflected toward the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and all that it had done for the country--you got the sense that the inevitable showdown is coming: Eventually some jurisdiction is going to have a really good case for getting out from under the act and the Supreme Court is going to have to rule on why an emergency provision that was supposed to last just five years has now been extended to 2031.
Jun 22 2009, 3:59PM
Just Asking....
courtesy of a reader:
Why does the president keep making jokes about being in gay relationships with other straight men? (cf. Brian Williams joke, David Axelrod joke). It would be funnier if he had, you know, not been stonewalling on gay rights. Plus the jokes are weirdly aggressive... "I'm the alpha dog so I can make jokes about being gay, therefore you, the counterparty to the joke, are really the butt of it." Strange/gross.
Jun 22 2009, 3:36PM
Where Is Gov. Mark Sanford?
Not on a particular question of policy... but, as in, where is he, physically? South Carolina's press corps is in a meltdown today because it appears as if the governor skedaddled out of town in a black SUV on Thursday and hasn't been seen since. His cell phone was traced to a tower in Atlanta. His wife says she's not worried. His staff says he's taking some R and R but won't say where. There appears to be some confusion as to whether Sanford's state police security detail knows -- or is looking for him. And why wouldn't he tell his wife? I've heard stories of his personal libertarianism, but that's a little much.
Jun 22 2009, 3:00PM
When Will It Turn?
I detect among some Democrats in Washington a palpable unease about the direction of the U.S. economy, and about the unemployment rate in particular. Notwithstanding hindsight bias, it is fair to say that the decline in the rate of the growth of the unemployment rate -- read that carefully a few times -- isn't responding as well as some Democrats had hoped to the $800 billion stimulus package that was sold as a jobs creator.
Jun 22 2009, 2:28PM
Mousavi's Altered Meaning
Fareed Zakaria makes a good point about Mir Hossein Mousavi's relationship to the Iranian protests in a piece in the upcoming issue of Newsweek--namely that a victory for Mousavi would mean something far different now, after the protests and turmoil and bloodshed, than it would have on June 12:
Jun 22 2009, 2:05PM
More On Section Five: Congress On The Clock
Conventional wisdom about the ramifications of this morning's Supreme Court decision on the voting rights act has swung from relief to concern. The Court upheld the statute, but they seem to have also, laid the pretext for the statute's demise, and soon, according to astute Court watcher and litigator Tom Goldstein:
Though the Supreme Court by a wide margin today formally declined to resolve a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5, the reality is far different. The decision unambiguously served notice that the Justices are prepared to invalidate the statute as it stands. Congress is now effectively on the clock: it has the period between now and the date that it decides a follow-on challenge by a covered jurisdiction that is not permitted to "bail out" of the statutory scheme to amend Section 5. If the statute remains the same by the time the next case arrives, the Court will invalidate the statute.
As Goldstein notes, it's up to Congress to revise -- i.e., narrow -- the statute to account for the evolution in race relations and government election processes -- or else the Court will do it for them.
Jun 22 2009, 1:41PM
Provocation Of The Day: Iran's Opposition Elites Are Manipulating The Protestors
In a Financial Times article, reporters Najmeh Bozorgmehr and Roula Khalaf tease out evidence that what some analysts have likened to a clerical-state bureaucracy elite are deftly manipulating the legitimate popular outrage against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime as a way of hoisting themselves (back) to power.
Where the West sees the pictures and the blood and the green, the Iranian elite sees a contest for the spoils of power. There is no, as of yet, liberal political movement that can be extricated from the desires of a self-interested and powerful, conservative Islamic elite, one that might be, at most, slightly more congenial to American interests, and use less inflammatory rhetoric to prick the consciousness of Western minds. The uprising has appropriated the symbols, gestures and techniques of Western revolutions, but we still know so little about what type of Iranian state these people want. (As Mousavi himself has suggested, the goal isn't to disarm the state-sponsored paramilitaries. It's to co-opt them on the side of the real revolutionaries.)
A political party affiliated with Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, the former president and key member of the Iranian regime, on Sunday called on Mir-Hossein Moussavi, the opposition leader, to form a "political bloc" that would pursue a long-term campaign to undermine the "illegitimate" government.
Where the West sees the pictures and the blood and the green, the Iranian elite sees a contest for the spoils of power. There is no, as of yet, liberal political movement that can be extricated from the desires of a self-interested and powerful, conservative Islamic elite, one that might be, at most, slightly more congenial to American interests, and use less inflammatory rhetoric to prick the consciousness of Western minds. The uprising has appropriated the symbols, gestures and techniques of Western revolutions, but we still know so little about what type of Iranian state these people want. (As Mousavi himself has suggested, the goal isn't to disarm the state-sponsored paramilitaries. It's to co-opt them on the side of the real revolutionaries.)
There is immense disatisfaction among the Iranian people at the current state of affairs. The people are suffering and protesting about it. The United States political elite and the protesters in Iran share a common enemy: Ahmadinejad. They might not share a common future.
Jun 22 2009, 1:01PM
Siemens/Nokia Denies Being Iran's Enabler
Ben Roome, a spokesman for the joint Siemens/Nokia project that supplied Iran with a national mobile telephone system, is blasting back at media reports suggesting that the companies gave Iran the capacity to monitor the source and location of e-mail traffic. Not so, he says. With appropriate reference to international law, Roome says that the technology allowed the company to monitor telephones, but that the contract had nothing to do with web censoring. "Nokia Siemens has not provided any deep packet inspection, web censorship, or Internet filtering capability to Iran."
Jun 22 2009, 12:52PM
Health Care 2009 = Social Security 2005?
The prevailing concern among liberals is that health care reform in 2008 will follow in the footsteps of the 1993 debacle. This is a legitimate concern, and health care reformists would be wise to draw lessons from the Clintons' failure, but we don't need to reach back the 1990s for allusions to failed entitlement reform. Beleaguered Republicans could always sink health reform the way beleaguered 2005 Democrats torpedoed Social Security privatization: Paint the other side as radical conspirators against America.
George Will's Sunday column -- entitled We Don't Need Radical Health Care Reform -- accuses the Obama adminstration of coyly presenting a public "option" that will presage a universal public "system," a single-payer health apparatus entirely run the by the government. Obama's policies are far too ambitious given the problem of uninsured Americans, Will says, which could easily be solved with tax credits. In other words, for the most part, we should practically do nothing.
Will is right, for sure, that cutting a check to millions of Americans is a lot more politically feasible than trying dramatically change the landscape of private health care. And if you reach back one presidential term, the idea that a first-year attempt at entitlement reform threatens to change America for the worse sounds quite familiar. Here's Paul Krugman's 2004 op-ed on the Bush administration's attempts to walk Social Security toward privatization.
*Updated: Over at the Washington Monthly, Steve Benen takes me to task for saying that health care reform is just as unnecessary today as Social Security reform was in 2005. The thing is, I never meant to say that! And when I did, I was paraphrasing George Will. I did mean to say that the arguments against today's health care reform are remarkably similar to the arguments against Social Security reform, for all the reasons I state above. That's not to say the need for reform is equivalent at all -- only that the opposing arguments are similar, with Republicans now playing the role of spoiler. Just to be clear. Thanks Steve.
George Will's Sunday column -- entitled We Don't Need Radical Health Care Reform -- accuses the Obama adminstration of coyly presenting a public "option" that will presage a universal public "system," a single-payer health apparatus entirely run the by the government. Obama's policies are far too ambitious given the problem of uninsured Americans, Will says, which could easily be solved with tax credits. In other words, for the most part, we should practically do nothing.
Will is right, for sure, that cutting a check to millions of Americans is a lot more politically feasible than trying dramatically change the landscape of private health care. And if you reach back one presidential term, the idea that a first-year attempt at entitlement reform threatens to change America for the worse sounds quite familiar. Here's Paul Krugman's 2004 op-ed on the Bush administration's attempts to walk Social Security toward privatization.
Privatizing Social Security - replacing the current system, in whole or in part, with personal investment accounts - won't do anything to strengthen the system's finances. If anything, it will make things worse ... But since the politics of privatization depend on convincing the public that there is a Social Security crisis, the privatizers have done their best to invent one.
[Privatizers] come to bury Social Security, not to save it. They aren't sincerely concerned about the possibility that the system will someday fail; they're disturbed by the system's historic success ... And that's why the right wants to destroy it.
The elements are all there. Krugman then (like Will now) railed against a radical plan to give an entitlement system a facelift and beat the conspiracy drum to alert readers that the government was't being honest about their plans. In both cases, opponents argued that* dramatic entitlement reform wasn't necessary, but it was a microcosm of the perverse ideology that ruled the White House and sought to change the face of America forever.
Of couse, even if history echoes it doesn't exactly repeat itself.
Social Security reform in 2005 was always a battle against public
opinion. But as this NYT poll demonstrates, the public is far more willing to reform health care in 2009.
*Updated: Over at the Washington Monthly, Steve Benen takes me to task for saying that health care reform is just as unnecessary today as Social Security reform was in 2005. The thing is, I never meant to say that! And when I did, I was paraphrasing George Will. I did mean to say that the arguments against today's health care reform are remarkably similar to the arguments against Social Security reform, for all the reasons I state above. That's not to say the need for reform is equivalent at all -- only that the opposing arguments are similar, with Republicans now playing the role of spoiler. Just to be clear. Thanks Steve.
Jun 22 2009, 12:25PM
Health Care Opposition: Talk About Costs
Spin might be too harsh a word for it, but the GOP-aligned polling group Resurgent Republic has released a polling memo on health care strategy--i.e., what most concerns Americans, backed up with polling data, and what opponents to Obama's plan should talk about (whatever Obama's plan, specifically, ends up being).
One interesting nugget: the arguments against President Clinton's health care reform plan won't work again today, and this time around it's mostly about cost. The firm writes:
One interesting nugget: the arguments against President Clinton's health care reform plan won't work again today, and this time around it's mostly about cost. The firm writes:
Jun 22 2009, 12:03PM
Voting Rights For Our Time
Will have more later on the Roberts Court opinion on the Voting Rights Act. I guess a few things struck me after seeing the initial ruling.
1. You had to be impressed that the Chief Justice got an 8-1 ruling on this issue. Of course, it was a narrow ruling that sidestepped the larger controversial constitutional questions surrounding Section 5 of the VRA, which requires certain jurisdictions, mostly in the South, to have any electoral changes "precleared" by the Justice Department. The idea of Section 5 was to thwart any Jim Crow attempts at electoral subterfuge--annexing more white voters to dilute black voting strength, moving polling places, whatever. No one doubted that such an extraordinary heavy federal hand made sense to undo the legacy of disfranchisement of African-American voters. But over the years, the provision has come under fire as antiquated and cumbersome although civil-rights groups reflexively support its continued enforcement. Only Clarence Thomas dissented. He wanted Section 5 tossed out entirely. Even Antonin Scalia wasn't prepared to go there yet.
1. You had to be impressed that the Chief Justice got an 8-1 ruling on this issue. Of course, it was a narrow ruling that sidestepped the larger controversial constitutional questions surrounding Section 5 of the VRA, which requires certain jurisdictions, mostly in the South, to have any electoral changes "precleared" by the Justice Department. The idea of Section 5 was to thwart any Jim Crow attempts at electoral subterfuge--annexing more white voters to dilute black voting strength, moving polling places, whatever. No one doubted that such an extraordinary heavy federal hand made sense to undo the legacy of disfranchisement of African-American voters. But over the years, the provision has come under fire as antiquated and cumbersome although civil-rights groups reflexively support its continued enforcement. Only Clarence Thomas dissented. He wanted Section 5 tossed out entirely. Even Antonin Scalia wasn't prepared to go there yet.
Jun 22 2009, 11:37AM
Medicare And Competition: The Keys To A Real Public Plan
Ah, the priming effect. The public supports a health care plan if they're given information about its intention: by injecting competition, it would force private insurance companies to lower their prices and could possibly drive some out of business. When the public is asked to evaluate the public plan in bleaker terms, like when they're threatened with the loss of their choice of doctor, support drops, unsurprisingly. Unfortunately, policy makers are adding layers of complexity to what is a simpler debate: the public plan is basically Medicare with a different, less baggage-laden name.
Jun 22 2009, 10:37AM
Supreme Court Upholds, But Narrows Voting Rights Act
By a vote of 8 to 1, The Supreme Court upheld Section 5 of Voting Rights Act, but says that it raises "serious constitutional questions" and that localities can "bail out" if practices survive scrutiny.
That suggests that the Court wants a new challenge to the constitutionality of the provision, kicking the can down the road, in essence.
The lopsided majority is seen as a surprise, as is the opinion's author, Chief Justice John Roberts. During oral argument, he evinced considerable skepticism about the government's arguments that preclearing election procedures in localities with a history of racial discrimination was still necessary. Administration officials worried that Roberts intended to build a majority to strike down the entire provision.
A Justice Department spokesperson said the opinion was being reviewed.
Section 5 requires federal preclearance of voting procedure changes in places where minorities were discriminated against in the past. Congress overwhelmingly reauthorized Section 5 in 2006; most parts of the 1966 1965 Voting Rights Act are permanent.
The court did not explicitly rule on the constitutionality of the act, although it recognized that its implementation more than 40 years after passage of the Voting Rights Act raises "serious constitutional concerns," and that the "preclearance requirement represents an intrusion into areas of stateand local responsibility that is otherwise unfamiliar to our federal system."
The case involved an attempt by a small utility district in Travis County, Texas to seek relief from the preclearance provision. There had been no history of discrimination by the district itself. A court disagreed, ruling that only an entity that formally registers voters could apply for a so-called "bailout." The Supreme Court remanded the decision, concluding that a fair reading of the VRA's legislative intent did not mean to limit bail-out applications to those districts or municipal divisions that registered voters.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the act had run its course and the conditions that allow its imposition no longer exist.
A Justice Department spokesperson said the opinion was being reviewed.
Jun 22 2009, 8:46AM
PR Quote Of The Day: Facilitating Iran's Censorship
A joint venture between Nokia and Siemens sold technology to Iran that's giving the government the power to block and censor Internet communications, the Wall Street Journal reports. It falls to poor Nokia-Siemens spokesman Ben Roome to justify his company's business decision:
"We believe providing people, wherever they are, with the ability to communicate is preferable to leaving them without the choice to be heard."Or not to be heard. The company didn't only sell Iran a nationwide mobile communications network -- it also built a sophisticated "monitoring" center that gives authorities the ability to block and censor incoming and outgoing communication. Undoubtedly, or many doubtfully, Iran justified the purchase of the center under the guise of cybersecurity, and it's true that Western governments -- like the U.S. -- have the same technology....just ask your friends at Ft. Meade and Google "Eric Lichtblau" and "NSA."
Jun 22 2009, 8:37AM
The Demography Of The Obama Administration
National Journal profiles 366 top officials in the Obama administration for its quadrennial decision-makers issues and came up with a goldmine of interest demographic data about the administration.
A few items of note: ......12 percent of top Obama officials have served in the military, down from 18 percent of top officials at the start of Bush's first term.....although this statistic really has meaning when you think about the number of Obama officials from Illinois, New York and Washington, D.C.... and Virginia. ...... A top female Obama administration official is three times as likely to be single as her male counterpart. Four years ago, a top female Bush administration official was almost five times as likely to be single as her male counterpart..... The percentage of white Christians among top officials whose religious affiliation is known dropped from 71 percent during Bush's second term to 46 percent in the Obama administration. ....37 percent of top Obama officials graduated from an Ivy League institution..... with Harvard being the top college for undergraduate and graduate degrees.
For a completely different take on the Best and the Brightest in the administration, you'll want to read this month's Harper's cover story, which asserts that Obama's top-tier intellectuals are getting it -- as in everything -- all wrong.
A few items of note: ......12 percent of top Obama officials have served in the military, down from 18 percent of top officials at the start of Bush's first term.....although this statistic really has meaning when you think about the number of Obama officials from Illinois, New York and Washington, D.C.... and Virginia. ...... A top female Obama administration official is three times as likely to be single as her male counterpart. Four years ago, a top female Bush administration official was almost five times as likely to be single as her male counterpart..... The percentage of white Christians among top officials whose religious affiliation is known dropped from 71 percent during Bush's second term to 46 percent in the Obama administration. ....37 percent of top Obama officials graduated from an Ivy League institution..... with Harvard being the top college for undergraduate and graduate degrees.
For a completely different take on the Best and the Brightest in the administration, you'll want to read this month's Harper's cover story, which asserts that Obama's top-tier intellectuals are getting it -- as in everything -- all wrong.
Jun 21 2009, 2:58PM
Obama To Dawn: Your Country Can Fight The Fight
President Obama gave what's being billed as the first ever American presidential interview to a newspaper in Pakistan, the English-language "Dawn," on Saturday, telling reporter Anwar Iqbal that Pakistan was strong enough to defeat extremism with the country. Obama called Islamic radicalism a "cancer" on Southwest Asia.
Obama also professed not to be worried about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal -- and he made sure to call it "Pakistan's nuclear weapons" -- and said that India and Pakistan should continue their progress toward full and open talks between the two countries.
On Iran:
Obama also professed not to be worried about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal -- and he made sure to call it "Pakistan's nuclear weapons" -- and said that India and Pakistan should continue their progress toward full and open talks between the two countries.
On Iran:
'We respect Iran's sovereignty, but we also are witnessing peaceful demonstrations, people expressing themselves, and I stand for that universal principle that people should have a voice in their own lives and their own destiny. And I hope that the international community recognises that we need to stand behind peaceful protests and be opposed to violence or repression.'
Mr Obama said that since there were no international observers in Iran, he could not say if the elections were fair or unfair. 'But beyond the election, what's clear is that the Iranian people are wanting to express themselves. And it is critical, as they seek justice and they seek an opportunity to express themselves, that that's respected and not met with violence.'
Jun 21 2009, 2:38PM
The Sunday Shows In Five Sentences Or Less
1. Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu denies any rift with the Obama administration over Iran; says reaction to his Palestinian state proposal was across-the-board magnificent; denies that his own status as PM will be challenged if he seeks peace with the Palestianians. Guests on several shows agreed that Obama has moved to convince the American people, the Iranian revolutionaries and the world that he is not completely neutral on the Iranian election.
2. Sen. Lindsey Graham reiterated his opposition to a "public plan" option included as part of health care reform but said that Sen. Kent Conrad's "co-op" idea might be the right way to go. Sen. Chris Dodd pronounced himself "delighted to hear that."
3. Sen. John McCain said that the administration would provide more details about its military commissions plan soon and hinted that part of those plans involved a "special court" in Washington, D.C. He said that Pres. Obama didn't have to choose between intervening in an election and speaking out on behalf of justice; he called for Obama's language to more closely mirror that of the President of Germany's and the PM of Britain's.
4. The guests on many shows agreed that the new UN sanctions against North Korea were, as ex-Sen. Sam Sunn said, "toothless." The U.S. should be prepared to board ships regardless if the captain gives them permission, says Sen. McCain.
5. Chuck Todd says that the White House is frustrated that they're not getting credit for changing the dynamics of the Middle East (especially Iran) through the Cairo speech.
2. Sen. Lindsey Graham reiterated his opposition to a "public plan" option included as part of health care reform but said that Sen. Kent Conrad's "co-op" idea might be the right way to go. Sen. Chris Dodd pronounced himself "delighted to hear that."
3. Sen. John McCain said that the administration would provide more details about its military commissions plan soon and hinted that part of those plans involved a "special court" in Washington, D.C. He said that Pres. Obama didn't have to choose between intervening in an election and speaking out on behalf of justice; he called for Obama's language to more closely mirror that of the President of Germany's and the PM of Britain's.
4. The guests on many shows agreed that the new UN sanctions against North Korea were, as ex-Sen. Sam Sunn said, "toothless." The U.S. should be prepared to board ships regardless if the captain gives them permission, says Sen. McCain.
5. Chuck Todd says that the White House is frustrated that they're not getting credit for changing the dynamics of the Middle East (especially Iran) through the Cairo speech.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.