August 31st, 2006
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Steven Gerber: Joe Biden, East Jerusalem and A Divided Israel
As has been widely reported in the news this week, during Vice President Biden's trip to Israel, the Israeli Interior Ministry announced plans to build 1600 new homes in East Jerusalem. This has been described by some as a slap in the face by the Israeli Government of the Obama Administration's attempt to restart peace negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians. However, what many commentators have missed is that the row over settlements during Vice President Biden's trip to Israel is not between Israel and the U.S. Rather, it is between different segments in Israeli society and indicative of a deeper problem. A small, but vocal, segment of Israeli Jews has asserted its view of Judaism – one in which the most important overriding concern is that God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people. This group of Israelis asserts its worldview while the majority of Israelis – secular and religious – have remained quiet in recent years. In the case of East Jerusalem, this plays out so that rather than negotiate the status of Jerusalem as part of a peace agreement, these Israelis who seek control over the entirety of the Land of Israel aim to enclose the Old City of Jerusalem by a Jewish buffer zone of Jewish enclaves between and within Palestinian neighborhoods. This will effectively prevent Jerusalem from ever being divided or from ever being claimed as a Palestinian capital. Over the last few years, these Israeli Jews have manipulated Israeli law to evict Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem neighborhoods such as Sheikh Jarrah with no reparations or alternate living situation provided. The pretense on which the families have been evicted is that these homes were owned and occupied by Jews prior to 1948. Jews were allowed to reclaim property … [Link]
Daily Kos: Party of Vitter, Ensign, and Sanford wants Massa investigation
Never mind that within Republican ranks sit the following incumbents: David "Diapers" Vitter John "I screwed my top aide's wife (and she was also a staffer!)" Ensign Mark "Hiking the Appalachian Argentine Trail" Sanford Never mind that just 48 hours ago Republican House Leader John Boehner's leadership office was embracing Eric Massa's conspiracy theory and telling people to watch Glenn Beck to find out all about it. Forget all that, because Republicans are now positioning themselves as the voices of truth and righteous indignation on all matters sexual — as long as they have to do with former members of Congress…from the Democratic Party: GOP wants Massa ethics probe reopened WASHINGTON — House Minority Leader John Boehner wants the House ethics panel probe of former Rep. Eric Massa to be reopened. The Ohio Republican said Thursday there are many unanswered questions surrounding the sexual harassment allegations that were made against the New York Democrat. Boehner (BAY'nur) said he plans to file a House resolution on the matter later Thursday. Next thing you know, Boehner will claim that Massa's resignation was part of a conspiracy to cover up the truth, and he'll hold up Republicans as the paragon of transparency because their sex-scandal plagued incumbents decided to stay in office. Well, if Republicans want to have a "sex-scandal" debate between the parties, by all means, bring it on…with the widest stance possible. They can scream about Eric Massa's resignation…as long as they explain their incumbents, Vitter, Ensign, and Sanford. [Link]
Daily Kos: House Dems to ban earmarks to for-profit companies
The news: House Dems are moving to eliminate earmarks that appropriate funds for the direct benefit of for-profit companies. The method: The adoption of a rule banning such earmarks by the House Appropriations Committee. The reason: The PMA lobbying scandal, recently investigated by the House Ethics Committee. The committee's report concluded that no direct relationship could be established between campaign contributions and earmarks, but clearly everyone's still concerned that there's a relationship, anyway. Hence the new rule. Will it work? Well, sort of. Here's what the watchdogs had to say: The good government advocates believe that the Senate will likely take up the slack from the House. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, said Wednesday he does not plan to impose any such ban. His position was seconded by Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Thad Cochran, R-Miss., who argued members' right to earmark funds is protected by the Constitution. "The Senate hasn't been as haunted by the ethics problems, so they don't feel like it is their scandal to have to worry about," [Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington executive director Melanie] Sloan said. Yeah. Well, that and the fact that there are other ways to direct spending: The ban won’t apply to universities and non-profit institutions. It also won’t apply to items in bills that aren’t technically appropriations earmarks, but function in much of the same way. For example, the narrowly-targeted items that were included in the Wall St. bailout bill, like the repeal of a tax on wooden arrows , or the porky items from the stimulus bill , wouldn’t be banned. And unlike the earmarks in appropriations bills, which are subject to strict disclosure rules, it’s almost impossible to figure out who sponsored or is benefiting from the earmark-like items in non-appropriations bills. Then again, … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: John Brown: Public Diplomacy: The World Should Be Teaching Us, Mr. Kristof
Well-meaning Nicholas D. Kristof in the The New York Times : "Peace Corps and Teach for America represent the best ethic of public service. But at a time when those programs can't meet the demand from young people seeking to give back, we need a new initiative: Teach for the World. In my mind, Teach for the World would be a one-year program placing young Americans in schools in developing countries. The Americans might teach English or computer skills, or coach basketball or debate teams. … This would be a government-financed effort to supplement an American public diplomacy outreach that has been eviscerated over the last few decades." Mr. Kristof, who wants us Americans to teach English the world over, seems unaware that all too many of us here in the homeland (how we now identify our cry-the-beloved country in these sad post-9/11 times) are incapable of writing a coherent English sentence free of grammatical and spelling errors. And how many of us called-to-duty language missionaries in said homeland, when coaching "debate teams" overseas, could actually be capable of crafting a logical argument, given our 24/7 we-can't-stop-loving-it culture of instant mindless gratification a la Tee-Vee & Twitter & uptalk? "I mean, like you know, whatever" — such is, increasingly, our American contribution to serious world-wide discourse. Well, OK, post-modern language/argument, without oh-so-boring grammar or logic, is maybe that's what we in the New World have to offer to our globalized planet. No problem. (Actually, I'm all for this Americanization, until I read, as I often do, a paper "written" by a computer-savvy US undergraduate that makes absolutely no, I mean absolutely no, sense, not even, dare I say, from a "post-modernist" perspective). In my Foreign Service career, I found many distinguished foreigners who spoke English better than I did (and … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Bob Franken: System Corrections
Sometimes we can find laughs in obscure places. An example would be the "Corrections" section of a newspaper, particularly one of those high and mighty ones like the Washington Post or New York Times. Take this item in the Thursday Washpost: "A Nightclubs listing in the March 5 Weekend section misstated the name of a band performing Thursday at J.V.'S Restaurant in Falls Church. The band is Johnny and the Rebels, not Johnny and the Relics". And here I thought the band maybe played Classic Rock. Or maybe, here in the nation's capitol, it was a group of big time players in government and politics. Because this is certainly the place to find relics. Take the Supremes. No, not the singing group…that's what those of us who are among the DC hip call the justices of the Supreme Court. Maybe, come to think of it, that's who the Post meant by "Johnny (Chief Justice John Roberts) and the Relics". Not that the Judicial branch is one, but certainly the views of Roberts and his SCOTUS legal rationales would..they speak the language of modern mores like Latin does. The corporate campaign finance ruling that inspired the Sam Alito sideshow at the State of the Union address is just one case in point. For that matter, we can probably put the State of the Union tradition into the "Relic" file. If it ever did serve any purpose it certainly doesn't anymore. All it really does these days is offer a showcase into a system that clings to out-of-touch ways that have been so distorted by modern day hustlers that nothing could possibly be accomplished. The problem is the ones needed to make the change are the very ones who benefit from keeping things they way they are now. They have dug themselves … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Rebecca Walker: Richard Goodman's Happy Family
It's One Big Happy Family month here at This Writer's Life. In celebration of the book's paperback release I have asked a number of the writers from " One Big Happy Family: 18 Writers Talk About Open Adoption, Mixed Marriage, Polyamory, Househusbandry, Single Motherhood, and Other Realities of Truly Modern Love ," to reflect upon how things have changed (or remained the same) in their own lives since they wrote their essays over a year ago. Further, I've also asked various writers I admire to discuss their wild, messy, loving, non-traditional families as well. Below, Richard Goodman talks about his happy family: LUCK It was about ten years ago that our D-I-V-O-R-C-E became final, and since that time my ex-wife and I have developed an entirely new kind of relationship. From all that I hear–and sometimes the volume is piercingly loud–ours is clearly the exception, and not the rule. We actually get along and work together quite well. The other day we were talking on the phone and she started laughing. "What's so funny?" I asked, since I hadn't–or at least thought I hadn't–said anything amusing. "We're talking now more than a lot of married couples do." And certainly more than a lot of divorced couples do. We do so because we have a daughter, and we have pledged that she always comes first. I live in New York City, and there is ample opportunity every day to reconfirm how lucky I am to have this kind of communication with my ex-wife. I can see it on Page Six–the flaming gossip section–of the New York Post. If it isn't a daily barrage of hatred between high profile couples like Ronald Perelman and Ellen Barkin, then it's something else, like, "Ex-Wife Drives Sports Car Over Millionaire's Beloved Dachshund." But I don't … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: The Media Consortium: Weekly Diaspora: Immigration Opponents Take a Turn for the Worse
By Erin Rosa, Media Consortium blogger As grassroots support for the pro-immigration reform March for America grows, anti-immigration groups and their allies are trying to use racial tension to stop the momentum. Opposition groups like NumbersUSA and the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC announced plans this week to partner with Tea Party activists in response to the event, which is expected to draw as many as 100,000 people to the National Mall on March 21. Their hope? To scare the public into opposing a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. NumbersUSA, a mainstream group that was instrumental in defeating reform in 2007, has discussed the idea of calling immigrant women from Mexico "the new welfare queens," while others are spreading paranoia that immigrants are trying to "steal the next election." The White House is holding a bipartisan meeting on immigration legislation this week and the possibility of reform is worrying opponents. They are now desperately attempting to block reform by appealing to frustration and fear. Amplifying hate Along with actions to flood Congress with phone calls and faxes, anti-immigration forces are also spreading misinformation and proposing ways to dehumanize immigrant communities. As Stephanie Mencimer notes in Mother Jones , operatives on the far right are pushing a conspiracy theory that the Obama administration is using immigration to steal the 2012 election. The magazine reports that the WorldNet Daily, a publication which bills itself as "conservative news website," has come up with an elaborate scheme in which a secret "illegal immigrant registration" will "open the floodgates to fraud." That's despite the fact that undocumented immigrants are legally barred from voting in the first place. On top of that, in a conference call organized by anti-immigration group NumbersUSA, an organization that is routinely … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Eboo Patel: Rev. Otis Moss at Obama's Faith Council
I've been to enough policy briefings in DC to know that moments of inspiration are few and far between. Earlier this week, I was lucky enough to witness an exception. At the final meeting of the President's Faith Council, the Reverend Otis Moss Jr, one of the lions of the civil rights movement, remarked: "On this very day fifty years ago, a group of young people gathered to launch the student sit-in movement in Atlanta. Martin Luther King brought his voice and his person, and he went to jail with us. With our idealism and our action, this group of citizens changed the nation and the world." Reverend Moss paused to let his words sink in, looked around the table at his fellow Faith Council members and the senior administration officials who had gathered to be briefed on our final report, and then continued: "Fifty years from now, people will look back at this work that we were a part of, a group of citizens from diverse faith backgrounds working together for the common good. This, too, could change the nation and the world." What a remarkable arc of history Reverend Moss has both witnessed and shaped. A half century ago, he demanded that a U.S. President give people of his skin color basic civil rights. And today, he finished his formal service on a high-profile advisory council, where he was appointed by the first black President. The work he did a half-century ago involved being arrested on the streets of Atlanta. The work he was doing today involved shaking hands with the President in the West Wing. But Reverend Moss was more interested in identifying the common spirit between the two pieces of work, the spirit he believed was at the core of American democracy – participation and partnership. … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Margaret Carlson: Never Trust a Naked Massa in a Tickle Fight
Republican-on-Democrat malice hardly merits a headline after "You lie" was shouted at the president during a joint address to Congress. Democrat-on-Democrat malice is still newsworthy and any Democrat ready to unload on President Barack Obama is an instant hero in some quarters, as former New York Representative Eric Massa found out this week. The Republicans' embrace of Massa is a prime example of Obama Derangement Syndrome, which expresses itself in hating anything that the president likes, even if you once loved it, like a bipartisan commission on the deficit or Medicare cuts. Obama could make Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell vice president and not one Republican vote would change. But Massa became something more as the backbencher used gullible Republicans to go out in a blaze of infamy. Republicans wanted a Democrat to go rogue, and he went rogue big time. Forgotten was Massa's resignation because of a sexual-harassment case before the House ethics committee and lymphoma, which he may or may not have. It was Massa as the conscientious public servant who was "smeared" and "kicked out of Congress" for daring to "buck this all powerful White House" because he was going to vote "no" on Obama's health-care package. Leave aside that he wasn't kicked anywhere but quit and that many potential "no" votes are blithely eating bean soup in the House dining room today with no worries about being smeared. Massa's tale was irresistible — a turncoat willing to single out the son of the "devil's spawn" otherwise known as Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who already was the center of stories about White House palace intrigue. Naked Man Talk Emanuel's evil ways became apparent to Massa in the shower in the House gym, as gripping a scene inside the Beltway as the classic at the Bates … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Joanne Herman: Transgender or Transgendered?
I've increasingly been seeing and hearing the word "transgendered," and I have cringed every time. What's wrong with the seemingly subtle difference between saying "transgendered" and "transgender?" Actually, a lot. Readers of my age and older will remember a sad time when this country labeled African-Americans as "colored people." One problem with this label was that it implied something happened to make the person "of color," which denied the person's dignity of being born that way. Today, we are somewhat more enlightened and say "people of color" instead. Most transgender people I know have felt a gender incongruity for as long as they remember, and evolving science says we were probably born feeling like this. The only thing that changed along the way has been our awareness that there are others like us. We didn't "decide" to be transgender. If hearing "transgendered people" is a problem for me, you can imagine how I felt when two different non-transgender friends recently told me independently that they knew a "person who had transgendered." These friends were assuming that all transgender people transition from living in one gender to living in another, just as I did. In reality, only part of the transgender population does this. Other transgender people feel that their gender is part male and part female, or perhaps they feel gender-less. For them, a transition from one gender to another would be pointless. I have found that whenever "transgendered" is being used, it is usually by a person who is not transgender, or by an organization wanting to be inclusive of transgender people, but not yet having a transgender person involved. I'm guessing one or both were true in the case of the Des Moines Register article that I cited in my prior post "Can One be Transgender and Catholic" … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Scott Lilly: Republican Earmarks: Fool Me Twice?
House Republicans will meet today to announce that they are renouncing the use of earmarks. Given that Democrats announced the day before that they were banning the earmarking of federal dollars to for-profit businesses, the only opportunity for one-ups-manship by Republican's was a complete ban. But the Republicans seem to be hoping that no one will remember how we got into this earmark mess in the first place. Even more, they hope no one will remember what they said about earmarks before they won control of Congress and what they did about them after they were in charge. Lets look back to 1991 when Congress was debating new highway legislation. Republicans were so outraged at the inclusion of 500 earmarked highway project they staged an all night talk-a-thon to deride the legislation. Current Republican Floor Leader John Boehner told the C-Span cameras that night, I have only been here 7 months, but during my years of public service I have seen some pretty outrageous activities occur in legislative bodies. But I have never seen anything as outrageous as the 1991 highway bill…. I stand opposed to this legislation because spreading pork around to secure enough votes to pass this turkey is wrong. Congressman Cass Ballenger promised, "When the Republicans control this body, the American people won't have to wait while we squabble among ourselves over how to make the taxpayer foot the bill for pork…" A year later, soon to be Speaker Newt Gingrich told the House "the Democrats…see no contradiction between adding $1.5 billion in pork barrel for the politicians and voting for a balanced budget." In the years leading up to their seizure of power in 1994 it seemed that Republicans care about eliminating pork more than almost anything. But after the election was a different story. Not … [Link]
Texas Politics: Race sparks sharp SBOE debate
Race and discrimination provoked sharp debate between State Board of Education members this morning when minorities tried to specifically identify Hispanic and African America Congressional Medal of Honor recipients. Helen Berlanga, D-Corpus Christi, was ready for the skirmish – pasting… [Link]
Daily Kos: Durbin Tells Progressive Senators They Can't Have the Public Option Vote
With now more than 40 Senators saying they would support the public option in a reconciliation vote, Dick Durbin is trying to put the brakes on the process, saying that liberals may be asked to oppose the amendment [sub req] now that they've said they would support it. Roll Call reports: Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) acknowledged Wednesday that liberals may be asked to oppose any amendment, including one creating a public option, to ensure a smooth ride for the bill. “We have to tell people, ‘You just have to swallow hard’ and say that putting an amendment on this is either going to stop it or slow it down, and we just can’t let it happen,” Durbin, who supports a public option, told reporters. “We have to move this forward. We know the Republicans are likely to offer a lot of amendments, and some of them may be appealing to Democrats, but we have to urge them to stick with the bill.” Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), a leading centrist, suggested Democrats should be able to avoid blowing up a reconciliation package if there is ample negotiation on it before it hits the floor. But Carper appeared to warn his Democratic colleagues that any move to amend the reconciliation bill, however noble the policy aims, would only lead to chaos. That's the same Tom Carper whose contribution to the hcr debate was the deservedly short-lived opt-in, triggered co-op . But regardless of how worthless his contribution to the debate has been, he still gets a vote. As should Senate liberals, who as of yet aren't backing down. But prominent Senate liberals said they are determined to put the public option question to the test when reconciliation comes to the floor. “I think we have got to do everything that we … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Patrick Takahashi: Evolution, Devolution, and Revolution
We all know what evolution is, except that only 40% of Americans believe in the Darwinian kind. Not particularly surprising, but only 21% of those who did not complete high school believe in evolution, while 74% of those who have at least some kind of postgraduate schooling do. Devolution in the federal sense is the return of rights to states, but for the purpose of this discussion, let us use the biological definition, that is, backward evolution, or for society, a lowering of our lifestyle. Before the Grand Recession, I would guess that less than half thought that, perhaps, our civilization had peaked and will now decline. Today, I would not be surprised if more than half of Americans have an uncomfortable feeling that the combination of Peak Oil, Global Warming and our broken government is so severe that, while our economy will soon get better, there is a distinct possibility that we might have experienced the best, and future generations, beginning with our children, will only see a decline in their future life. I continue to be one of those who feel that giving up is not an option. Sure, after the second energy crisis in 1979 we should have known better and thirty years ago initiated that crusade to convert from the fossil fuels to renewable energy. Keep in mind, though, that the Greenhouse Effect was only in the vocabulary of academics, even though Svante Arrhenius in 1896 already began warning of global warming. He was the first Swede to win a Nobel Prize, and as President Barack Obama was in the latest group, you must know that this award is given in Sweden. Anyway, a primary reason why we never got our act together three decades ago is that in 1998, the real price of oil actually … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Valerie Taliman: Stop the Racist Attacks on Our Children
Just as we think we're making progress, another hate crime rears its ugly head. And this time, it's against our children. Last week the website UsedWinnipeg.com ran an advertisement headlined "Native Extraction Service" with a photograph of three young Native boys. The service offered to round up and remove First Nations youth like wild animals, and "relocate them to their habitat." The text of the ad read: "Have you ever had the experience of getting home to find those pesky little buggers hanging outside your home, in the back alley or on the corner??? Well fear no more, with my service I will simply do a harmless relocation. With one phone call I will arrive and net the pest, load them in the containment unit (pickup truck) and then relocate them to their habit." They're talking about our children. The message is clear: Native people are like pests or vermin, and can be disposed of by simply calling a free service to have them "extracted." It was the cyberspace equivalent of a "Wanted" poster, reminiscent of bounties once paid for Indian scalps in the old West. And in my view, it's a classic hate crime, carried out for the sole purpose of inciting racism and hate against indigenous peoples. First Nations leaders from Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak said they want police to investigate the ad as a hate crime. They are joined by an outcry from Native leaders in Washington state and Indian country at-large who know that hate often translates to violence. Ironically, the photo that UsedWinnipeg.com posted on its site was stolen from Longhouse Media , a nonprofit arts and media organization based in Seattle, Wash., with a stellar record for making quality films about Native people by Native people. Those three minors labeled as "pests" actually won awards … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: MJ Rosenberg: Biden to Israelis: You Are Endangering Our Troops
Laura Rozen in Politico reports on a story appearing today in Israel. It is about the effect that Prime Minister Netanyahu's announcement of new West Bank settlements — during Vice President Biden's visit — could do to the United States. It is written by a top Israeli journalist, Shimon Shiffer, in the conservative Yedioth Achronoth, the largest circulation newspaper in Israel.. People who heard what Biden said were stunned. "This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden castigated his interlocutors. "What you're doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace." Yesterday's announcement of 1600 new settler units was the tip of the iceberg. Today Israel announced another 50,000 settler units in Jerusalem. What a way to treat Joe Biden, who has been so close to Israel for 30 years that he's practically a kibbutznik. It all makes me suspect that Israel is just faking its fear of Iranian nukes. If Israel was really concerned it would place its relationship with the United States above the political desire to suck up to settlers, religious fanatics and rightwing lunatics. Clearly, it does not. More on Joe Biden [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Alexandra Juhasz: Conclusions Re Learning from YouTube
This post provides some context to understand the thinking behind and learning from my 2007 Media Studies course, Learning from YouTube , recently featured in the "coolest college courses" slideshow on this page. In this 2009 essay, " Learning the Five Lessons of YouTube : After Trying to Teach There, I don't Believe the Hype," for the on-line journal, International Journal of Learning and Media , I look back on my zany, "cool," course and itemize the limits on learning often left unobserved in the celebration of this "DIY Revolution." Number one on my list: " DIY is new media's latest buzz-word1: "prosumers" mashing up the Simpsons, Jessica or Bart; YouTubers uploading streams of lonely video. Bollocks! Let's do pay mind to the buzz-cocks. DIY2 is nothing new. While web 2.0 may radically expand access and distribution of media to its erstwhile viewers, DIY was once punk, and it meant much more than friendly citizen-practitioner." More on YouTube [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Marc And Amy Vachon: Sharing The Chores: Be Your Own Marriage Ref
People often ask us how a couple can truly share in doing the housework, and caring for the kids. Forget all the theories about teamwork and the lofty aims to create a real partnership. How do they do it for real? It seems a whole lot simpler and clearer to expect one parent (typically Mom) to take charge — to direct the other "junior" parent and "apprentice" housekeeper (that would usually be Dad) to "help" out as needed. Mom maintains the upper hand at home, and Dad listens. Easy, right? But what happens if you don't particularly relish all the baggage that comes with this domestic caste system? Keeping one parent as the primary nurturer and house manager means one of you is always making the decisions – big and little – and is saddled with the endless job of juggling the to-do list while the other parent gets relative freedom until the boss calls. And life isn't so rosy for the unburdened parent either, maintaining a kind of serfdom in his own home – jumping to the demands of a master or trying to avoid these in the name of a little peace and quiet of his own. But still, having one of you in charge steers you both clear of the negotiations that would have to take place if you really decided to be equal teammates in raising your children and doing the chores. The way this works is to approach them as a puzzle – a huge, challenging 10,000 piece jigsaw puzzle – that requires two to solve. Together, you're up against a host of obstacles – tricky pieces labeled "real men don't bake cupcakes," or "what will my neighbors think?" or "but Susie always wants Mom to put her to bed," or "you're so much better … [Link]
The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed: Robert Naiman: House Afghanistan Debate: What Kucinich Accomplished
Yesterday, at long last, there was a vigorous debate about the war in Afghanistan on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. The legislative vehicle was a resolution introduced by Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich calling for U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Afghanistan by the end of the year. But House critics of the war have long been agitating for a real debate. This is the debate that should have been held – at least – last fall when the Administration was considering sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, or – at least – when the Administration announced its plans to send more troops. If the House had held this debate while the Administration was mulling its decision, the Congressional airing of arguments against military escalation and in favor of political and diplomatic solutions would have attracted a lot more attention, and could have affected the decision. No doubt, the possibility that a Congressional debate then might have affected the policy was a key motivation for some in the House leadership not to allow this debate to occur then. But it is much better for the House to debate now than not to debate at all, or to fail to debate the policy until the question of money is on the floor, a point emphasized by Rep. Howard Berman, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who vigorously opposed the resolution but vigorously supported the debate. Pro-war views are hardly lacking venues for making their case, meeting in church basements, passing out flyers on the sidewalk. Pro-war views dominate the mainstream media. It's dissent against the war that has to fight to be heard. Yesterday, dissent was heard. Of course, the House debate on Afghanistan didn't get the media play yesterday that the Eric Massa soap opera did, … [Link]
AMERICAblog News: GMAC bailout may be even more expensive
At this point though, does anyone really have a sense of what the billions upon billions means anymore? After a while, the numbers all sound like a blur . Not that it's a good thing, but it's how it is. Also, as bad as this GMAC news may be, somehow they don't inspire the fury that the Wall Street banks do. Again, not to excuse GMAC but they didn't appear to be as arrogant, as overpaid or as destructive to the overall economy. They're still under fire yet the real problems from Wall Street have bounced back with enough money to throw money at Congress and derail reform. Not to excuse GMAC or those who may have failed to properly monitor their situation, but somehow I'm a lot more concerned with Wall Street trashing reform than with GMAC. In a new report, the Congressional Oversight Panel said it is "deeply concerned" that the Treasury Department has not insisted that GMAC "lay out a clear path to viability or a strategy for fully repaying taxpayers." To date the government has dished out $17.2 billion for GMAC, giving taxpayers a 56 percent stake in the credit arm of General Motors. The latest infusion of federal funds for GMAC came in late December, shortly before the lender announced a fourth-quarter loss of $5 billion. While the watchdog acknowledged that the government bailout of GMAC "played a major role in supporting the domestic automotive industry," the Panel cautioned that the bailout "came at great public expense" and may also have obstructed "the growth of a more competitive lending market." If "more competitive lending market" means the same Wall Street banks who are blocking reform, then I don't care. There's too much concentration with the big banks and spoon feeding them even more business to … [Link]