Politics

by

So, Is Michael Steele Certifiable?

A week or so ago there was his comment about Republicans and how they wear their caps all different ways trying to show how diverse the party is, I think.   This happened on MSBC’s Morning Joe.

Then he said this about President Obama’s description of what he would look for in a Supreme Court nominee,

Crazy nonsense, empathetic,” said Steele. “I’ll give you empathy. Empathize right on your behind. Craziness.”

Here is the link from Talking Points Memo so you can hear Mr. Steele for yourself.

And finally here is what he said about the Minnesota Senate race, also from TPM.

I know what you’re all thinking. You’re thinking that if the Minnesota Supreme Court next month determines that Al Franken should be seated, the national Republican Party will graciously accept their decision, and Norm Colemen will offer up a kind and thoughtful concession speech.

“[N]o, hell no. Whatever the outcome, it’s going to get bumped to the next level,” said RNC chairman Michael Steele.

…

Somewhat implicit in that last sentence is the assumption that Coleman will ultimately lose. And implicit in that implication is the idea that the Republicans are doing this to keep another Democrat out of the Senate for as long as possible, and depriving Minnesotans of dual representation in the process.

Assuming the Minnesota Supreme Court sides with Franken, the question of whether to seat him, even if provisionally, will fall to Gov. Tim Pawlenty–a presidential hopeful who, as we’ve noted before, will face tons of pressure from his party not to certify the victory at all. If this is any indication, the GOP is already turning up the heat.

Can you imagine what Steele would be saying if the sides were reversed and Al Franken was refusing to concede?  Probably something not printable.

by

So Where is Howard?

Howard Dean, former head of the Democratic National Committee and inventor of the 50-states strategy, still does not have a job in the Obama administration.  I’m not the only one asking what’s going on.

Alexander Zaitchik has a post on Alter-net headlined “Is Howard Dean Getting Screwed and Why?” 

Given the debt Obama clearly owes to Dean — as well as the personal respect the president is known to hold for him — many Dean netroots loyalists are confused as to why their man was not chosen to head the Health and Human Services Department, given his experience and interest in health care reform (Dean was a doctor before entering politics, and enacted major health care reforms as governor of Vermont).

OK.  Howard may not have the best relationship with some members of Congress (heard or read somewhere that Rahm Emmanuel didn’t like him) and maybe he wouldn’t be the right person to move health care reform, but how about making him Surgeon General? 

We haven’t heard about Dr. Gupta for a while now.  (And I say, thank godness.)  Howard Dean may not be a doctor on TV, but it seems to me that his personality is well suited to the chief doctor role.  I like the idea of Howard in the C. Everett Koop role. 

Can we start a campaign for Howard Dean as Surgeon General?

by

Lessons from FDR

Tony Badger had an interesting article in the January 26 print edition of the Nation which I have just finished reading.  The history lesson and the review of the politics FDR had to deal with are instructive, but the lessons he draws for President Obama are to the point and worth noting.

First, in an economic emergency, however distasteful it may be, you have to bail out the bankers and corporations. Second, any economic recovery package has to be bold–to create jobs, you have to spend a lot. Third, infrastructure investment works–as the New Deal’s public works programs showed in highways, education, cheap electrical power and flood control. Fourth, while you do not have to postpone much-needed reforms, you don’t have to get all your reforms passed at once. Finally, you cannot expect a recovery program, no matter how well prepared, to sail through unchallenged. You have to be nimble enough to accept some of the things Congress will insist on that you may not like. But there may be new and unexpected crises that can, as in 1933, offer opportunities to a president willing to take them.

Badger is the author of the new book FDR: the first one hundred days which I have not read yet, but I believe I heard or read somewhere that Barack Obama was reading it.

by

W’s Last Minute Regulations

I am hopeful that the Obama Administration will find a way to overturn the slew of last minute regulations that the Bush Administration has been getting approved before he leaves.  The big problem is the time and effort is will take to ferret them all out and to do the legislative process in time to reverse them without having to re-do the regulatory process. 

So here is a great video about some of them – Bush’s Nightmare Before Christmas.  Funny, but very sad.

by

Science Makes a Comeback

My father who was a physicist would, I think, be very pleased with Barack Obama’s science appointments.  He would have been appalled at the way George Bush treated scientists working on global warming for example.

In June 2003, CBS News  reported that

(CBS) President Bush dismissed on Tuesday a report put out by his administration warning that human activities are behind climate change that is having significant effects on the environment.

The report released by the Environmental Protection Agency was a surprising endorsement of what many scientists and weather experts have long argued — that human activities such as oil refining, power plants and automobile emissions are important causes of global warming.
…

“I read the report put out by the bureaucracy,” Mr. Bush said dismissively when asked about the EPA report, adding that he still opposes the Kyoto treaty.

With the appointments of Steven Chu to be the Energy Secretary, Jane Lubchenco  to head NOAA, and John Holdren to be his science advisor, the Obama administration seems to be taking science and global warming seriously.  This appointments cover marine biology and physics and include a Nobel Prize winner and former head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 

The Washington Post  reported today

President-elect  Barack Obama has selected two of the nation’s most prominent scientific advocates for a vigorous response to climate change to serve in his administration’s top ranks, according to sources, sending the strongest signal yet that he will reverse Bush administration policies on energy and global warming.

The appointments of Harvard University physicist John Holdren as presidential science adviser and Oregon State University marine biologist Jane Lubchenco as head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which will be announced tomorrow, dismayed conservatives but heartened environmentalists and researchers.

I love that phrase “dismayed conservatives”.

I haven’t agreed with all of Obama’s appointments – particularly Governor Vilsack for Agriculture  (too invested in ethanol which takes too much energy to produce) – but on the whole, I think that we may finally be back on the right track.

by

Post Thanksgiving Random Thoughts

President Elect Obama has named a large percentage of his Cabinet already including some surprises.  I really didn’t expect Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.  I think it is a smart move, however.  Get the Clintons inside the tent.  I was also a little surprised that Larry Summers was not named to Treasury.  The reason circulated was that this was due to his insensitive remarks about women and our ability to do math and science made while he was President of Harvard. (He also managed to offend many who taught in the Henry Lewis Gates’ Institute for Black Studies.)  If this is true, it shows a surprising sensibility which bodes well for the Obama administration.  On the whole, I feel good about the fact that he is surrounding himself with smart people and expects them to express differing points of view.

Bob Herbert wrote in his column today

Will this new Obama team, as brilliant as it appears to be, begin addressing on day one the interests of those who are not rich and who have not had the ear of those in power?

I think that question hits the nail on the head.  It will be difficult to turn things around after 8 years of benefit only for the rich and powerful and only an illusion for the rest of us.

And what is up with those kids in Mumbai?  They never bargained for a the lives of any hostages or made any political statement or demands.  What did they want?  What cause did they think they were advancing?  It seems to me that they just wanted to act out some violence like in the movies.

Our tree is up although not yet decorated.  I have cards to address and presents to wrap.  Time to try to occupy one’s mind with something other than the current sorry state of the world with hope for the future.

by

Clinton, Obama and Race

I’ve been reading this morning about Mark Penn.  Colbert I. King has an excellent column in today’s Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081502825.html?hpid=opinionsbox1  King dissects the Penn memo on using race and points out that the content could be a conversation between Klan members.

 I started out as a Bill Richardson supporter, but because I’m a political junkie was following all the campaigns.  The more I read about the staff supporting Hillary Clinton, the more I understand how poorly she was served and why she lost.  I have no idea how people like Penn were hired for her campaign, but I suspect they were FOB (Friends of Bill).  The nomination was hers to win and, with the help of her “advisors” hers to lose.  I would have loved to see a woman run for the nomination, but never supported Hillary.  I’m now beginning to understand why I felt uneasy about her. I understand that part of politics in winning, but the idea that someone on her campaign actually thought about using race against Obama makes me feel slightly ill. 

And now the Republicans are making fun of Obama’s vacation and his having been raised in Hawaii as being somehow unAmerican.  Haven’t they noticed that Hawaii is a state?

by

Beginning

So I join the millions of bloggers out there.  It is July 26, the Red Sox lost last night and I’m thinking about politics.

Can anyone explain why Obama is getting grief from some for not being specific enough during his recent Middle East and Eurpopean trip?   If he had offered specific solutions, he would be accused of making foreign policy.  There is a fine line between acting like a President and acting Presidential.  He needed to avoid the former and do the latter and I think he succeeded.