BY TAYLOR MARSHHere we go again. "We don’t have enough capacity right now to deal with it -- and it’s not just the troops," Obama, D-Ill., told a crowd in Cape Girardeau,[...]
Read The Full Article:
A few weeks back, I sat down with Tom Daschle to talk about his new book on health care, his idea for a Federal Health Board, and the difficulties of reform. The interview is up at The Prospect today. Easy political lede thought: Daschle, who's close to[...]
Read The Full Article:
Hillary Clinton's win last night in West Virginia has resulted in a superdelegate declaring for support for Hillary today:
Tennessee Automatic Delegate Vicky Harwell announced her support for Hillary Clinton today. Harwell, of Pulaski, is president of the Tennessee Federation of Democratic Women.
"Hillary's decisive victory in West Virginia is the latest evidence that she is the strongest candidate to take on John McCain and win back the White House," Harwell said. "Hillary has the plans, leadership and experience to deliver real results as President."
Hillary got 40 pledged delegates in the TN primary while Obama got 28. Breakdown of Tennessee's 85 delegates below:
Tennessee will send 85 delegates to the Democratic Convention in August. Based on results of the state's Feb. 5 presidential primary, won by Clinton, the New York senator gets 40 committed delegates, while Obama gets 28.
The remaining 17 superdelegates go officially uncommitted, though some have stated publicly who they intend to support.
The four declaring they will back Clinton are Bill Owen of Knoxville, a Democratic National Committee member; Elisa Parker, vice chairwoman of the state party; Jimmie Farris of Memphis, widow of former state Democratic Chairman William Farris; and Myron Lowery, a Memphis city councilman.
The four declaring they will back Obama are U.S. Reps. Steve Cohen of Memphis and Jim Cooper of Nashville, along with state House Speaker Pro Tempore Lois DeBerry of Memphis and former state party Chairman Will T. Cheek of Nashville.
The nine other previously selected Tennessee superdelegates, including Gov. Phil Bredesen and former Vice President Al Gore, have declined to state a preference.
No exaggeration there. While we appreciate the deeper meaning of winning a PVI +10 R district in terms of what it means for November, so do they. There's no writing off our analysis. Check out the headlines:
Newsmax: GOP Loses Congressional Election, Faces Bloodbath in Nov.
Hot Air: Disaster: Democrat beats Republican in Mississippi special
election; Update: Panic time, say Boehner, Cole
Red State: Clean House at the NRCC
RCP: GOP Stunned By Loss in Mississippi
NRO:We Are Totally Frakked [Mark Krikorian]
Add this to the mix:
This whole statement is an admission by Cole that he does not now how House Republicans can win in November as a group, so each member better protect himself or herself. To his credit, Cole has been warning his members that they need to run as outsiders this fall, but beyond that general admonition, the Oklahoma Republican can't show them a path to victory. It's an extraordinary statement by the head of a national campaign committee, but it is not one that's going to inspire any warm feelings from his GOP colleagues.
Stunning? Only if you haven’t been paying attention in recent weeks.
Sickening? Yes, if you are a Republican.
US News: Mississippi Burning
The message is clear: Voters are angry with the Bush-Cheney administration, and some punishment is forthcoming. The economy, the war in Iraq, and the president's bull-headedness on the environment and energy are all in play
First Read: House GOPers Stomping Mad Over Prospects
House GOP leaders huddle at 11 a.m. today. That will be watched closely for any possibility of a coup or insurrection against leadership in the wake of this third consecutive loss of a GOP seat.
Imagine that... a consensus. The MS-01 special election bodes disaster for the GOP in November. Couldn't happen to a nicer minority party.
House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers' (D-MI) response to Karl Rove's offer to testify by letter: Nope.
The committee wants Rove to testify about his role in the prosecution of ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), but Rove has refused to appear for a hearing, instead offering to speak privately with staff off the record. He modified that offer to testify by letter.
But Conyers says that's a no-go. If Rove is willing to create a record with a letter, he argues, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be willing to sit down with staff for an on-the-record interview. Conyers says the committee is prepared to offer "other possible accommodations, such as providing a list of initial questions that may be asked," but there must be a live interview and a transcript. Conyers again mentions the possibility of a subpoena should talks break down.
So now the ball is in Rove's court.
May 14, 2008
Via Fax and U.S. Mail
Mr. Robert D. Luskin
Patton Boggs LLP
2550 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037-1350
Dear Mr. Luskin:
We are writing in response to your May 9 letter with respect to the invitation to Karl Rove to testify before the House Judiciary Committee concerning the politicization of the Department of Justice, including allegations regarding the prosecution of former Governor Don Siegelman. Because your letter appears to reflect several misunderstandings concerning the subjects we wish to question Mr. Rove about and concerning Committee procedures, we hope that this letter will clarify these matters and help avoid the use of compulsory process. Our position remains, however, that since your client has made a number of on-the-record comments on these subjects to the media, and in light of your (now modified) statement that Mr. Rove would be willing to testify, we can see no justification for his refusal to speak on the record to the Committee. Please contact Committee counsel or respond in writing no later than May 21 as to whether your client will make himself available to the Committee for questioning.
As our previous letters have made clear, the Siegelman case is a principal reason for our invitation to Mr. Rove. But as we have also explained, that issue cannot be separated from the broader concerns about politicization within the Department and the U.S. Attorney firings, and Mr. Rove has made on-the-record comments to the media about all these interrelated matters. This is different from the case of Harriet Miers, who has not made such public statements and has not been linked to the Siegelman case. As we have made clear, Mr. Rove can decline to answer specific questions based on privilege or other grounds, which are most appropriately addressed on a question-by -question basis, not by a refusal to appear altogether.
Your letter also suggests that we address written questions to Mr. Rove, which may reflect a misunderstanding of Committee procedure. Although we do often address written questions to witnesses, that occurs after live testimony, which is critical in order to allow the follow up and give-and-take that is necessary to inquiries of this nature.
Since you indicate Mr. Rove is now willing to submit written answers to questions, which by definition would be recorded in a manner similar to a transcript, we do not understand why he would not submit to providing transcribed answers to live questions, as he has done in media interviews. We are willing to consider other possible accommodations, such as providing a list of initial questions that may be asked. But your suggestion that the Committee be limited to written answers is unacceptable.
We hope you and your client will reconsider the decision not to testify on a voluntary basis. Please direct any questions and your response to the Judiciary Committee office, 2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 (tel: 202-225-3951; fax: 202-225-7680).
John Conyers, Jr.
Linda T. Sánchez
Chair, Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
Member, Committee on the Judiciary
Member, Committee on the Judiciary
cc: Hon. Lamar S. Smith
Hon. Chris Cannon
If you thought the nomination campaign was too steeped in identity politics, don't expect the[...]
Read The Full Article:
That is the real umbrella story in the Middle East today ? the struggle for influence across the region, with America and its Sunni Arab allies (and Israel) versus Iran, Syria and their non-state allies, Hamas and Hezbollah. As the May 11 editorial in the Iranian daily Kayhan put it, ?In the power struggle in the Middle East, there are only two sides: Iran and the U.S.?Yes. At what point do warmongering media propagandists lose their right to utterly prostitute themselves on behalf of an amoral, ruthless and utterly incompetent executive branch in search of new conflict in an attempt to disguise its myriad failures?
For now, Team America is losing on just about every front. How come? The short answer is that Iran is smart and ruthless, America is dumb and weak, and the Sunni Arab world is feckless and divided. Any other questions?
If he becomes the Dem nominee, will Obama try to win West Virginia? For better or worse, we?ll guess that he won?t. No, a Democrat doesn?t have to win the state. In 2000, Gore lost West Virginia to Bush by 6.3 points (Kerry lost it by 12.9). But he would have gone to the White House with New Hampshire, or Ohio?or with Florida. (Or with Colorado, or with Virginia?states Obama will likely contest.) But this morning, Dowd dumbly presents West Virginia as ?a state [Obama] will need in the fall.?
Asked at his news conference why voters who are concerned about the environment should support him over Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton, Mr. McCain said that his proposal was ?doable? and that his rivals ?have never to my knowledge been involved in legislation nor hearings nor engagement in this issue.?Read and learn, o corporate media cousins.
He did not mention that in 2007, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama were co-sponsors of an emissions-curbing bill that he introduced with Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut. In addition, Mrs. Clinton went with Mr. McCain and other senators on a 2004 trip to Svalbard, a Norwegian archipelago, to see the effects of global warming. Mr. McCain mentioned that journey in a speech Monday on climate change, but he did not mention that Mrs. Clinton was one of those who went along.
There has been so much death and destruction in the news this week: the Myanmar government continues to stymie outside efforts for recovery from the cyclone, China is struck by a gigantic earthquake, tornadoes cut a swath of destruction across the United States, and here in my own state of Florida, there are over 108 wildfires burning at last count.
You've got to wonder if there is a Mother Earth, because if there is, she seems to be royally pissed at the humans who seem intent on messing up her tidy abode. Perhaps this latest run of natural disasters is her way of getting revenge on the clueless homo sapiens who seem to think they can destroy the habitats of other species with impunity.
Most of the world (with the notable exception of the Bush administration) seems to be concerned with the effect we are having on climate change and working toward ways to ameliorate it, but few of us think about extinction of species and decreasing biodiversity on a regular basis.
Although the rate of extinction has increased, at an unprecedented rate, due to climate change, habitat loss and other man-made insults, the good news is that new life forms are still being discovered.
This week, a new species of trapdoor spider has been identified, and the scientist named it after his favorite musician and political activist. Myrmekiaphila neilyoungi is biologist Jason Bond's homage to Neil Young.
Another scientist previously named a newly discovered species of whirligig beetle Orectochilus orbisonorum, after Roy Orbison. Apparently it was so named not because the scientists thought it was a particularly pretty woman, but because it appeared to be wearing a tuxedo, and the scientist thought the look was evocative of Orbison's trademark garb.
I'm thinking these guys have access to much better drugs than I, but that's another essay entirely.
These are obviously great honors--not many people can stomp on a spider walking across the floor, and upon inspection of the carcass, say: "Shit, that one had my name on it!"
My question: If scientists were to name a newly discovered species after you, what would it be and why?
On May 12 and 13, respectively, Fox News and the LosAngeles Times uncritically reported attacks by Sen. JohnMcCain's campaign on Sen. Barack Obama for voting against an emergency supplemental appropriationsbill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which also included provisions forveterans, withoutnoting that McCain himself votedagainst legislation that would have funded troops in the field and care forveterans. These examples fita pattern documented by Media Matters forAmerica in which[...]
Read The Full Article:
If he really cared about the troops, he would have quit the Presidency.AP:US President George W. Bush said in an interview out Tuesday that he quit playing golf in 2003 out of respect for the families of US soldiers killed in the conflict in Iraq, now in its sixth year. [...]
Read The Full Article: