“I think public officials need to know if they are going to step over the line, there are going to be consequences…[What Libby did] causes people to think our government does not work for them.” A sadly necessary Capitol corruption update: As you no doubt heard, earlier in the week Scooter Libby was sentenced to thirty months in jail for his lies and evasions in the Valerie Plame case. (Libby has asked for a delay of the sentence, which probably won’t happen. And E.J. Dionne evaluates GOP sentiment for a pardon here — for now, the White House remains mum on the subject.) Meanwhile, on our side of the aisle, pretty obviously corrupt Democratic rep William Jefferson, he with the thousands of dollars stashed in the freezer, is indicted on 16 counts of racketeering, money laundering, and obstruction of justice, mostly involving bribes offered and taken from West African business and political officials. Jefferson is fighting the charges, but the House — wisely — has already moved against him, opening an ethics inquiry into him and setting the stage for his expulsion.
Category: Democrats
“If you win, you gotta have a hoop.”
“Before Rickey Green, a former NBA all-star, played with Mr. Obama in a 2004 Senate campaign fund-raiser, ‘I didn’t think he could play at all, to be honest with you,’ Mr. Green said. But ‘he’s above average,’ for a pickup player, Mr. Green said. ‘He’s got a nice little left-hand shot and some knowledge of the game.‘” Baracksketball? A NYT piece from last week examines Barack Obama’s fondness for the court. “Mr. Obama is left-handed, and his signature move is to fake right and veer left, surprising players used to guarding right-handed competitors.” Hey, that’s my move!
At any rate, my own appreciation for basketball-playing progressive presidential candidates is well-documented. In fact, this reminded me of a similar discussion about Al Gore on Meet the Press in 1999: “‘What left Gore’s hands and arrived at the basket was quite often, well, a brick, clanging off the rim or ricocheting off the backboard with regularity.’ Jim Hudson, a high school teammate, adds, ‘He tended to like the limelight. If he passed it to him to try and get something going, to get a better shot inside, Al would simply go ahead and shoot. When the ball got to him, that’s as far as it got.‘” Global warming or no, would you really want a chucker in the White House in 2008?
TheLeft.com
“What was once seen as a liability for Democrats and progressives in the past — they couldn’t get 20 people to agree to the same thing, they could never finish anything, they couldn’t stay on message — is now an asset,’ Leyden said. ‘All this talking and discussing and fighting energizes everyone, involves everyone, and gets people totally into it.‘” The WP’s Jose Antonio Vargas examines why the Dems are winning the Web War. “‘For Republicans, the Internet is where bad things happen. Take [former U.S. senator] George Allen and his ‘macaca’ moment…You can kind of understand why Republicans have this almost instinctive fear of the Internet, where the mob rules.”
Friends to the Immigrant?
The big news last Friday: Dubya and the Senate came to a deal on immigration reform, although the compromise — supported by Democratic Senators Kennedy, Feinstein, and Salazar as well as Republicans such as McCain, Graham, and Martinez — faces some major implementation issues and potential fire from both sides of the issue. Among the critics: Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama: “Without modifications, the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guestworkers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers.“
Hillary Inc.
“‘Everything has been skewed,’ Clinton says, jabbing her index finger for emphasis, ‘to help the privileged and the powerful at the expense of everybody else!’ It’s a rousing speech, though ultimately not very convincing. If Clinton really wanted to curtail the influence of the powerful, she might start with the advisers to her own campaign, who represent some of the weightiest interests in corporate America.” In a cover story for The Nation, Ari Berman takes a gander at the corporate connections among Hillary’s inner circle, concluding that “[i]t’s hard to see how her advisers’ corporate work doesn’t reflect poorly on Clinton’s progressive claims or create a liability for her with Democratic voters.“
The Revenge of Gore-bot?
“But what if he does? What if he could take who he is now, all that he’s learned, and carry it back into the maelstrom? Could he stay as he is or would he revert? What if he launched a new kind of campaign: no handlers, just the liberated Gore talking about what really matters to him? Would he seem too squishy?” No. He would seem like Al Gore. This week’s Time pushes the 2000 nominee as a potential 2008 Democratic dark horse, and, Lordy, I am so not feeling it. Anybody who argues Gore has “the grassroots appeal of Barack Obama” doesn’t remember the man on stage. Obama can be certifiably electric. Gore is…Gore, in all his stilted, sighing, pedantic glory. I’m thrilled the man has found a happy second career fighting global warming — It’s suited him ever since Earth in the Balance. But, please, by all that is good and holy, keep him out of the Democratic presidential field.
“The Other K-Street.”
“Congressional Republicans have been renowned — and often criticized — for harnessing the clout of special-interest groups and lobbyists to advance their agenda…After the 2006 elections, left-leaning groups now conduct their own, similar meetings to advance the Democrats’ cause.” The WP delves into the new Democratic tinge of the K-Street lobbying world. Hmm. Well, I guess I’ll take a left-leaning lobbyist over a right-leaning lobbyist any day of the week and twice on Sunday, but I would hope the Pelosi House keeps this new K-street bunch at further remove than did their predecessors. Both Democratic reps and liberal interest groups have displayed their reluctance to commit to real campaign finance and lobbying reform in the past when the tide’s swinging their way, and I fear, once the cash starts flying around in earnest, that this liberal-leaning slope will get just as slippery in very short order. You don’t wear the ring, people. You destroy the ring.
The “Go Obama” Party?
“‘I disagree with Obama on the war but I don’t think it is a test of his patriotism,’ Martin says. ‘Obama has a message of hope for the country.‘” Come on aboard, you won’t hurt the horse: Disillusioned Republicans wander over to the Obama bandwagon, including “Power and Weakness” author Robert Kagan. “In an article in the Washington Post, Kagan wrote approvingly that a keynote speech by Obama at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs was ‘pure John Kennedy’, a neocon hero of the cold war…’Personally, I liked it,’ Kagan wrote.” And, really, after seeing what the Republicans have to offer at the first debate last week, can you blame him or anyone else for defecting?
Digging Deeper…
“I continue to hope that the Department will cooperate with the Committee’s investigation, but it is troubling that significant documents highly relevant to the Committee’s inquiry have not been produced.” On the prosecutorial front, Patrick Leahy subpoenas Karl Rove’s e-mails (or at least what’s left of them), and the Justice Department begins its own inquiry into Monica Goodling, to ascertain whether political bias played a part in her hiring decisions. The plot thickens…
Veto-Powered | Benchmarks the Benchmark.
“‘Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure.'” As expected, Dubya vetoed the recent Iraq spending bill passed in Congress, only the second time he’s exercised his veto power (the first being stem cells.) And, with few options at their disposal and a veto-override failing in the House 222-203, the Dems have already dropped their troop-withdrawal timetable, and now look to fashion a compromise using the language of benchmarks. “‘I believe the president is open to a discussion on benchmarks,’ said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin…White House officials are also looking to benchmarks as an area of compromise, but they want them to be tied to rewards for achievement, not penalties for failure.” Um, what achievements would those be, and how would we evaluate them? It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations all over again. Four years after “Mission Accomplished, I don’t see how we can feasibly expect this administration to offer anything other than the same rose-scented lies about the chaos in Baghdad. They have no other setting.