Another day, another Obama address to the nation about the debt ceiling

And it’s pretty much the same one he gave last time and the time before that. Debt bad, default bad, compromise good.

WHEN DID THEY AGREE ON THAT? “Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done.”


WHAT MOST AMERICANS DON’T UNDERSTAND: “Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get. How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries.” How can Republicans ask that? With a song in their heart and a large campaign contribution in their pocket.

ALTHOUGH IT’S A LOT EASIER TO HAVE YOUR WAY... AH, YOU KNOW WHERE I’M GOING HERE. He quoted Jefferson: “Every man cannot have his way in all things.”

---

Then John Boehner came out, to rebut the crazy idea that he cannot have his way in all things.

He was amazed that the federal government does not work in exactly the same way as a small business in Ohio. In fact, he was amazed that it doesn’t work like “every other business in America.” Well see, that’s the source of your amazement right there: government is not actually a business.


Now he’s accusing Obama of not taking yes for an answer, just like Obama accused the Republicans last week. Could this all be just a wacky misunderstanding?

SO SAD: “The sad truth is that the president wanted a blank check six months ago, and he wants a blank check today.”

Boehner refers to “the crisis atmosphere he has created”.

AND THE PURPLER THE GOVERNMENT, THE MORE ORANGE THE PEOPLE (OR SOMETHING): “I’ve always believed that the bigger the government, the smaller the people.”

Obama press conference: This is the United States of America, and we don’t manage our affairs in three-month increments

Barack Obama held another press conference today.

DAMMIT, WE’RE GOING TO MAKE THIS RELATIONSHIP WORK! “As all of you know, I met with congressional leaders yesterday. We’re going to be meeting again today, and we’re going to meet every single day until we get this thing resolved.”


ACTUALLY, IN THE 1780s... OH, NEVER MIND. “We cannot threaten the United States’ full faith and credit for the first time in our history.”

DEFINE “GOOD-FAITH”: “Speaker Boehner and myself had been in a series of conversations about doing the biggest deal possible so that we could actually resolve our debt and our deficit challenge for a long stretch of time. And I want to say I appreciate Speaker Boehner’s good-faith efforts on that front.”

BUT MOSTLY MEANER: “We have agreed to a series of spending cuts that will make the government leaner, meaner, more effective, more efficient, and give taxpayers a greater bang for their buck.”


IF BY “DO ANYTHING” YOU MEAN “CUT PAYMENTS TO THE POOR, SICK AND ELDERLY, I WOULD HOPE SO. OR IS THAT NOT WHAT YOU MEANT BY “DO ANYTHING”? “There is, frankly, resistance on my side to do anything on entitlements.”

IF BY “DO ANYTHING” YOU MEAN “CUT TAXES ON THE RICH AGAIN”.... “There is strong resistance on the Republican side to do anything on revenues.”

UNLESS YOU CAVE COMPLETELY. BUT THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN, COULD IT? “But if each side takes a maximalist position, if each side wants 100 percent of what its ideological predispositions are, then we can’t get anything done.” Okay, for Republicans the “maximalist position” is the total refusal of tax increases, but what’s the maximalist position this even-handed phraseology is implying has been taken by the Democrats? Not cutting Medicare and Social Security?

WE’RE NOT THAT FAR-SIGHTED: “The things that I will not consider are a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day or a 180-day temporary stopgap resolution to this problem. This is the United States of America, and we don’t manage our affairs in three-month increments.”


WHAT IT’S NOT GOING TO GET: “It’s not going to get easier. It’s going to get harder. So we might as well do it now -- pull off the Band-Aid, eat our peas.” Or in Rand Paul’s case, vice versa.

ACTUALLY, THEY WON’T PAY FOR THE HIGHWAY EITHER: “I mean, if the basic proposition is ‘it’s my way or the highway,’ then we’re probably not going to get something done because we’ve got divided government.”

HAVE YOU ACTUALLY MET MITCH MCCONNELL AND JOHN BOEHNER? “And so if, in fact, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are sincere -- and I believe they are...”

OBAMA DOESN’T SAY WHICH OF THE PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS DON’T KNOW BETTER: “I will say that some of the professional politicians know better. And for them to say that we shouldn’t be raising the debt ceiling is irresponsible. They know better.” Knowing and caring are of course two separate things.


THERE’S THAT WORD AGAIN: “I think Speaker Boehner has been very sincere about trying to do something big.”

FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN I PROMISED YOU GUYS “HOPE”: “And this is part of the problem with a political process where folks are rewarded for saying irresponsible things to win elections or obtain short-term political gain”.

AGAIN, IF BY “DO ANYTHING” YOU MEAN “CUT PAYMENTS TO THE POOR, SICK AND ELDERLY: “I mean, the vast majority of Democrats on Capitol Hill would prefer not to have to do anything on entitlements... And I’m sympathetic to their concerns, because they’re looking after folks who are already hurting and already vulnerable”. Note that he isn’t expressing any sympathy for the actual “folks who are already hurting and already vulnerable,” just for the concerns of Democrats on Capitol Hill. I’m sure it’s just an oversight.

WELL NOT WITH AN ATTITUDE LIKE THAT, MISTER: “Medicare in particular will run out of money and we will not be able to sustain that program no matter how much taxes go up.”

YA KNOW, AT THIS POINT, I DON’T THINK YOUR WILLINGNESS TO MOVE IN THE DIRECTION OF THE REPUBLICANS IS REALLY IN ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER: “My point is, is that I’m willing to move in their direction in order to get something done.”

YEAH, YOU’D HAVE TO BE A FUCKING IDIOT TO BELIEVE THAT: “I am not somebody who believes that just because we solve the deficit and debt problems short term, medium term, or long term, that that automatically solves the unemployment problem.” So why are you spending all your time on the deficit and none on jobs?

REALLY, JOHN BOEHNER? ORANGE DUDE WHO ALWAYS SMELLS OF BOURBON? THAT JOHN BOEHNER? “My experience with John Boehner has been good. I think he’s a good man who wants to do right by the country.” You know, we made fun of George Bush for saying he looked into Putin’s soul...



“This recession has been hard on everybody...” Has it? Has it really? “...but obviously it’s harder on folks who’ve got less.” So why are you so eager to cut holes in their safety net?

(Update: However, Obama calling John Boehner sincere and a good man who wants to do etc is not quite as bad a judgement of character as that of Nick Clegg, who called on Rupert Murdoch today to “do the decent thing.”)

Caption contest

Has anyone made a joke about “P.J.” criticizing forced nudity?

While the firing of P.J. Crowley is certainly ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid, to coin a phrase (or, as Obama would put it, “appropriate and are meeting our basic standards”), since he appended to his remarks about the treatment of Bradley Manning that Manning, who has been convicted of precisely nothing, belongs behind bars, I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for Crowley.

---

Obama on Boehner: “I used to think that it was a tan, but after seeing how often he tears up I’ve come to realize that’s not a tan -- that’s rust.”

---

Out of curiosity, does anyone know where Japan puts the waste from all its nuke plants?

Not that there’s anything wrong with that

Quote of the Day, John Boehner on Barack Obama: “I’m sure I’ll have to give him strokes.”

Meet your new, orange Speaker of the House, America. Who’s crying now?

John Boehner was sworn in today as Speaker of the House,

Give it, Nancy! I said give it!
so I guess I have to start paying attention to John Boehner now, so let’s blog his stupid first speech as stupid speaker of the stupid House of Representatives.

Nancy, look out, he’s behind you, he’s behind you!!!

NOT LIKE THOSE CRAPPY, LAZY ONES – I’M LOOKING AT YOU, MASSACHUSETTS’S SEVENTH DISTRICT: “I am honored and humbled to represent a great, hard-working community in Congress.” (Note to any readers in Massachusetts 7th; I picked that number at random, I don’t even know where you are, except probably in Massachusetts, I’m sure you’re lovely, so no complaints please.)

YEAH, WE’RE ALL REALLY GRATEFUL, OHIO’S 8th: “The people of Ohio’s Eighth Congressional District continue to afford me the privilege to serve, for which I am deeply grateful.” And the privilege of leaving Ohio in the winter, or any time, really. (Note to Ohio... ah, screw it.)

Aaaand, he’s crying.
BECAUSE THERE WON’T BE ANY MORE ROAD MAINTENANCE FUNDING, SO THE CAN WOULD JUST FALL INTO AN ENORMOUS POTHOLE: “No longer can we kick the can down the road.”

BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK HUMBLE, YOU THINK JOHN ANDREW BOEHNER: “The American people have humbled us.”

Humble

OR SELL IT TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER. YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. “Our aim will be to give government back to the people.”

SIZE DOESN’T MATTER: “We will dispense with the conventional wisdom that bigger bills are always better...”

NO PREMATURE LEGISLATION: “...that fast legislating is good legislating”.

HE CAN SOMEHOW GET THROUGH THIS SENTENCE WITHOUT LAUGHING MANIACALLY, THAT’S WHY THEY GAVE HIM THE JOB: “Above all else, we will welcome the battle of ideas, encourage it, and engage in it openly, honestly, and respectfully.”

Fondling the Speaker’s gavel. What, he’s fondling the Speaker’s gavel, why are you snickering?
OR EVER: “We will not always get it right.”

THAT IDEA: I THINK I’LL HAVE SOME MORE NACHOS: “More than a country, America is an idea”.


IT’S THE PEOPLE’S HOUSE? THAT’S GREAT, CUZ THE PEOPLE JUST GOT FORECLOSED ON: “Welcome to the people’s House. Welcome to the 112th Congress.”

Aaaaand, some more with the crying.

John Boehner, the man whose skin color has no rhyme

John Boehner still lacks a widely agreed upon nickname. He was called Boner by his oh-so-imaginative high school classmates, and lately I’ve been seeing Orange Julius. There’s The Great Pumpkin – I just had to google to see if I coined that one (evidently not) – Agent Orange, the Town Crier....

What else have you heard? What did Bush call him? Answers in comments, along with any suggestions of your own.

Headlines of the day from the greatest newspaper ever

The Daily Telegraph today brings us these journalistic gems:

“Silvio Berlusconi Buys 37 Rings for His Leading Ladies.” Meaning $1,850 gold & diamond rings for women MPs. I believe they had to take them from his penis.

“Japanese Woman Sues Google for Displaying Images of Underwear.” Google Street View strikes again. “I could understand if it was just a picture of the outside of the apartment, but showing a person’s underwear hanging outside is absolutely wrong,” she says.

“Hospital Hired Models in Lab Coats and Heels ‘To Attract Men.’” UMass Memorial Health Care hired the models to flirt with men in malls and coax them into having swabs taken for a bone marrow registry. And then billing their insurance $4,300.

“Swedish Medical Students Get Teacher’s Body at First Autopsy.”

“Barack Obama Scoops Bo’s Poop.” Hey, he’s getting off lightly. John Boehner is going to make him eat his.

This was at an elementary school. No one asked him about dog poop. Some student asked how much fun is it running around the White House all day, and he brought up the poop thing all by himself. The children’s response, as recorded by the White House transcript: “Ew!”

One kid asked him for an autograph. He said no.

“Surgeon Made Dominatrix Blush.” Dr. W masturbated after giving Mistress J botox injections at a clinic in, um, Maidenhead.

“Model’s Hair Catches Fire at Rapper Diddy’s Party.” And there’s a video you can watch (I didn’t), because he was webcasting the album-release party. “Diddy has apparently been told not to return to the hotel.”

“Winona Ryder Claims Mel Gibson Called Her an ‘Oven-Dodger.’” I assumed it was some sort of sexist thing, but it was an anti-Semitic thing. Charming.

Obama press conference: It’s tempting not to negotiate with hostage-takers

Obama held a press conference today, mostly to attack those who criticize his surrender on taxes.

Remember Jon Lovitz as Michael Dukakis in an SNL parody of the Bush-Dukakis debate, saying, “I can’t believe I’m losing to this guy”? I’m guessing every time Hillary Clinton sees Barack Obama speak about the Republicans, she wonders how she could possibly have lost to him. I know McCain does.

WHAT HIS NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS: “My number one priority is to do what’s right for the American people, for jobs, and for economic growth.” And how’s that going?

REALLY? “This is real money for real people that will make a real difference in the lives of the folks who sent us here.”


WHAT SOME WOULD HAVE PREFERRED: “Now, I know there are some who would have preferred a protracted political fight, even if it had meant higher taxes for all Americans, even if it had meant an end to unemployment insurance for those who are desperately looking for work.” The assumption here is that he would have lost the fight. It’s pretty much always Obama’s working assumption that he will lose any fight. And then, funnily enough, he does.

WHAT HE’S SYMPATHETIC TO: “And I understand the desire for a fight. I’m sympathetic to that.” If by sympathetic, you mean condescending.

WELL THAT CAN’T BE TRUE, BECAUSE YOU JUST AGREED TO EXTEND THEM: “I’m as opposed to the high-end tax cuts today as I’ve been for years.”

ALSO IN THE SHORT RUN. YOU KNOW, NOW. “In the long run, we simply can’t afford them.”


THAT MUST HAVE THE REPUBLICANS TREMBLING: “And when they expire in two years, I will fight to end them”.

AND REPUBLICANS’ RESPONSIBILITY IS TO PREVENT THAT. EVIDENTLY. “And my responsibility as President is to do what’s right for the American people.”

HE HAS AN OPTION! YAY! “Now, I have an option, which is to say, you know what, I’m going to keep fighting a political fight, which I can’t win in the Senate”. Well, not with an attitude like that, mister.


“Or alternatively, what I can do is I can say that I am going to stick to my position that those folks get relief, that people get help for unemployment insurance. And I will continue to fight before the American people to make the point that the Republican position is wrong.” Oo, he’ll fight. Well, fight to make a point. Which isn’t so much fighting, in the strict sense of the term, as meekly objecting.

But the reason he can’t fight, is that there would be consequences for people. Er, what did he think running a country was about? “Now, if there was not collateral damage, if this was just a matter of my politics or being able to persuade the American people to my side, then I would just stick to my guns, because the fact of the matter is the American people already agree with me.”

And the reason he can’t win, is that the Republicans are, um, determined. “Well, let me say that on the Republican side, this is their holy grail, these tax cuts for the wealthy.”

“But the fact of the matter is, I haven’t persuaded the Republican Party. I haven’t persuaded Mitch McConnell and I haven’t persuaded John Boehner.” Dude, it isn’t about persuasion.

YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE IS TEMPTING? CHOCOLATE CAKE. “I think it’s tempting not to negotiate with hostage-takers, unless the hostage gets harmed. Then people will question the wisdom of that strategy. In this case, the hostage was the American people and I was not willing to see them get harmed.” So is the concern that the American people will get harmed, or that he’d be blamed for it rather than the hostage-takers?

WHAT HE COULD HAVE ENJOYED: “Now, I could have enjoyed the battle with Republicans over the next month or two, because as I said, the American people are on our side.” And yet, with an entire people, whose leader you are, behind you, you keep losing. Funny that.


WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNACCEPTABLE: “if we had made a determination that the deal was a permanent tax break for high-income individuals in exchange for these short-term things that people need right now, that would have been unacceptable.” So we’ve got surrender on the instalment plan instead.

A VERY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE: “Q: If I may follow, aren’t you telegraphing, though, a negotiating strategy of how the Republicans can beat you in negotiations all the way through the next year because they can just stick to their guns, stay united, be unwilling to budge -- to use your words -- and force you to capitulate? THE PRESIDENT: I don’t think so. And the reason is because this is a very unique circumstance. This is a situation in which tens of millions of people would be directly damaged and immediately damaged, and at a time when the economy is just about to recover.”

HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY: “And I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I’m itching for a fight on a whole range of issues.”

WHAT HE SUSPECTS: “I suspect they will find I am.”

HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY: “I’m happy to have that battle. I’m happy to have that conversation. I just want to make sure that the American people aren’t harmed while we’re having that broader argument.”

HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY: “I am happy to be tested over the next several months about our ability to negotiate with Republicans.”

A SAFE PLACE: “Part of what I want to do is to essentially get the American people in a safe place so that we can then get the economy in a stable place. And then we’re going to have to have a broad-based discussion across the country about our priorities.” And how you’ll surrender them.

AND NOW IT’S EVEN LESS SO: “And that’s going to mean looking at the tax code and saying, what’s fair, what’s efficient. And I don’t think anybody thinks the tax code right now is fair or efficient.”

WHAT HE DOESN’T SEE: “And in that context, I don’t see how the Republicans win that argument. I don’t know how they’re going to be able to argue that extending permanently these high-end tax cuts is going to be good for our economy when, to offset them, we’d end up having to cut vital services for our kids, for our veterans, for our seniors.”

HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY: “But I’m happy to listen to their arguments.”

Oh dear muppety Odin, how does he continually fail to learn anything? It doesn’t fucking matter whether the Republicans “win that argument,” because it’s not an argument, and anyway you’ve said, several times in this press conference, that they’ve lost the argument, as shown by the polls. It’s not an intellectual discussion. To paraphrase Sean Connery, he brought a well-reasoned disquisition to a gun fight. And plans to keep doing so in the future. You’d think all the bullet holes in his policies would be enough of a fucking hint by now.


And by the way, my lame duck-droid governor, Mr. Schwarzenegger, has called a special session of the Legislature so that he can push yet again his proposal to end vision care for poor children. So fuck all Republicans, is what I’m saying.

On why he doesn’t think the R’s will hold raising the debt ceiling hostage: “But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower.” Has he ever MET John Boehner? Does he not remember Newt Gingrich? Of course a Republican speaker of the House can stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower.

What will be different when these temporary extensions end in two years? “we will have had two years to discuss the budget -- not in the abstract, but in concrete terms.” Oh good, more “discussion.” “And I think it becomes pretty clear, after you go through the budget line by line, that if in fact they want to pay for $700 billion worth of tax breaks to wealthy individuals, that that’s a lot of money and that the cuts -- corresponding cuts that would have to be made are very painful.” First, they don’t want to pay for the tax breaks. They don’t care about paying for the tax breaks. I thought we’d established that. Second, would the very painful cuts be to the wealthy? No? Then they don’t care. They do not fucking care.

And then he got down to really bitching about his critics on the left: “This is the public option debate all over again. So I pass a signature piece of legislation where we finally get health care for all Americans, something that Democrats had been fighting for for a hundred years, but because there was a provision in there that they didn’t get that would have affected maybe a couple of million people, even though we got health insurance for 30 million people and the potential for lower premiums for 100 million people, that somehow that was a sign of weakness and compromise.” Well, let’s see, first you said you wanted it included, and then when the other side objected, it wasn’t included. What’s your definition of compromise, if that isn’t compromise?

I DON’T KNOW, SEEMS TO WORK PRETTY DAMNED WELL FOR THE REPUBLICANS: “Now, if that’s the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles, then let’s face it, we will never get anything done.” As opposed to getting everything done the Republicans want done. “People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position...” I know I’m feeling terribly satisfied right now. “...and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are and how tough we are”. As opposed to your feeling sanctimonious about how pure your intentions are and how realistic you are.

Have you noticed how Obama is never so sanctimonious as when he’s castigating the left for being so sanctimonious?


“This country was founded on compromise.” Er, the American War of Semi-Independence? (Update: Rick Perlstein writes on his Facebook page, “Give me liberty or give me illness.” “Loosen my restraints somewhat or give me death.”) “I couldn’t go through the front door at this country’s founding. And if we were really thinking about ideal positions, we wouldn’t have a union.” Oh, I see, the compromise of slavery. That’s your standard for a really good deal, is it? I guess the unemployed should be happy the Republicans weren’t demanding a repeal of the 13th Amendment. Yet.

Obama press conference: Taking a shellacking

This afternoon Obama held a press conference on the subject of how it’s all the economy’s fault.

THOSE WHO HAD BOTH WON AND LOST? HOW VERY ZEN: “Last night I had a chance to speak to the leaders of the House and the Senate and reached out to those who had both won and lost in both parties.”

LIKE WHEN BIDEN GETS INTO THE BOURBON: “I can tell you that some election nights are more fun than others.”

MOSTLY THEY SAID “WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN MY BACKYARD?” “Over the last few months I’ve had the opportunity to travel around the country and meet people where they live and where they work, from backyards to factory floors. I did some talking, but mostly I did a lot of listening.” Obama is renowned for his listening skills.

What Obama has learned during the course of all this listening, is that “People are frustrated -- they’re deeply frustrated -- with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hope for their children and their grandchildren.” See, they’re not frustrated with him, it’s with the economy. And not even the trend of the economy, but the pace of that trend. So it’s all good.

WAIT, THERE’S A REASON? “There’s a reason we have two parties in this country, and both Democrats and Republicans have certain beliefs and certain principles that each feels cannot be compromised.” Funny, I’m pretty sure we have more than two parties. I mean, I voted for candidates from three parties yesterday.

ALTHOUGH ONE SEEMS TO HAVE A MONOPOLY ON TRI-CORNER HATS: “As I’ve said before, no person, no party, has a monopoly on wisdom.”

WHAT HE DO BELIEVE: “I do believe there is hope for civility.”

IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE HE’S TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE ECONOMIC SITUATION HERE: “And that’s because I believe in the resiliency of a nation that’s bounced back from much worse than what we’re going through right now -- a nation that’s overcome war and depression”. So get bouncing, America.


AP’s Ben Feller asks if “who do you think speaks to the true voice of the American people right now: you or John Boehner?” Oddly, Obama never addressed that important question, although I guess if we hear the true voice of the American people and it’s either unsettlingly robotic or choking back tears, we’ll have the answer.

If you were waiting for a big admission of his shortcomings, here it is: “And we were in such a hurry to get things done that we didn’t change how things got done. And I think that frustrated people.”

WHAT HE’S NOT GOING TO ANTICIPATE THAT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO, WAIT, WHAT? “Well, what is absolutely true is, is that without any Republican support on anything, then it’s going to be hard to get things done. But I’m not going to anticipate that they’re not going to support anything.”

Jake Tapper asks the big question: “what does it feel like?” Obama: “It feels bad.”

WHAT THE SMARTEST THING FOR US TO DO IS: “I think the smartest thing for us to do is to see if we can get Democrats and Republicans in a room who are serious about energy independence and are serious about keeping our air clean and our water clean and dealing with the issue of greenhouse gases”. So, not a very large room. Which saves on the cost of heating it. See, where’re half-way there?

POSSIBLY THE MOST DISTURBING-SOUNDING SENTENCE OBAMA HAS EVER UTTERED: “Cap and trade was just one way of skinning the cat; it was not the only way.”

He says eliminating Don’t Ask Don’t Tell shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

WHAT HE DOESN’T THINK ANYBODY DENIES: “So I don’t think anybody denies they think we’re in a ditch. I just don’t think they feel like we’ve gotten all the way out of the ditch yet. And to move the analogy forward that I used in the campaign, I think what they want right now is the Democrats and the Republicans both pushing some more to get the car on level ground. And we haven’t done that.” In this analogy is the Auto Club China?

Hans Nichols of Bloomberg asks “if you’re going to have John Boehner over for a Slurpee”. Obama: “they’re delicious drinks.” Boehner would get an orange Slurpee, of course.

WHAT THERE IS A INHERENT DANGER IN: “There is a inherent danger in being in the White House and being in the bubble. I mean, folks didn’t have any complaints about my leadership style when I was running around Iowa for a year.” So maybe you should be doing that, then. Also, you didn’t have a leadership style per se because you weren’t actually a, you know, leader yet.

WHAT THEY WERE ABLE TO DO: “And they got a pretty good look at me up close and personal, and they were able to lift the hood and kick the tires”. They did what you to you now? Show us on this Tonka truck where the Iowans touched you.

WHAT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE’VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT IS: “And one of the challenges that we’ve got to think about is how do I meet my responsibilities here in the White House, which require a lot of hours and a lot of work, but still have that opportunity to engage with the American people on a day-to-day basis, and know -- give them confidence that I’m listening to them. Those letters that I read every night, some of them just break my heart. Some of them provide me encouragement and inspiration. But nobody is filming me reading those letters.” Well, they should probably get right on that.

“But, I mean, I think it’s important to point out as well that a couple of great communicators, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, were standing at this podium two years into their presidency getting very similar questions because the economy wasn’t working the way it needed to be and there were a whole range of factors that made people concerned that maybe the party in power wasn’t listening to them.” Well, to be fair, Clinton had someone behind the podium giving him a blow job, and Reagan was staring off into space waiting for the director to tell him to get on a horse.

So evidently, presidential popularity is entirely a function of the economy and nothing to do with his policies. He could be Reagan or Clinton or Millard Fucking Fillmore. I’m pretty sure this is exactly the message the American people were hoping for from him.

WHAT HE’S NOT RECOMMENDING: “now, I’m not recommending for every future President that they take a shellacking...”


Although about the time President Palin takes office, Bristol should be giving birth to little baby Shellac.

NOW HE’S JUST TALKING ABOUT EVOLUTION TO PISS THE REPUBLICANS OFF: “But I do think that this is a growth process and an evolution.”

WELL, THE SEX JUST IS’NT THAT GOOD ANYMORE: “And the relationship that I’ve had with the American people is one that built slowly, peaked at this incredible high, and then during the course of the last two years, as we’ve, together, gone through some very difficult times, has gotten rockier and tougher.”

WHAT MAKES HIM COME AWAY FEELING SO MUCH MORE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THIS COUNTRY: “because when I travel around the country, even in the toughest of these debates -- in the midst of health care last year during the summer when there were protesters about, and when I’m meeting families who’ve lost loved ones in Afghanistan or Iraq -- I always come away from those interactions just feeling so much more optimistic about this country.” Well that makes it all okay.

The Pledge to America (just like the Pledge of Allegiance but without Richard Stands)

The Republican Party leadership assembled, as is traditional, at the Tart Lumber Company (“Everything to Build Anything”), to solemnly issue a Pledge to America. It is as unserious a political document as has ever been put forth by a major political party at a major lumber company “Supplying Northern Virginia builders with quality lumber building materials and hardware since 1951”) in American history.

John Boehner is built out of quality building materials and hardware

It begins by denying the legitimacy of the American government. It’s worth quoting at length:

In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent. An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down long-standing laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people. An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.

That paragraph accusing the majority party of being a dictatorship is followed in the very next sentence by a complaint about “a polarizing political environment”.

Was there a coup that didn’t make it into the papers, when those elites “self-appointed” themselves, possibly while we were all distracted by the World Cup? If the R’s can state as a fact that the elected (but unchecked) executive and the elected (but compliant) legislature are thwarting the will of the people, they must have some means of determining the will of the people that’s superior to democratic elections, and I can’t wait to hear what that is. Magic 8 Ball? Sarah Palin’s Twitter feed? If elections are now discredited as a means of ascertaining the will of the people, why should an election won by the R’s be accorded any greater legitimacy?

OH, I THINK IT CAN: “The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated.”

They pledge to honor the “original intent” of the Constitution, especially the 10th Amendment.

PRIVATE? YOU MEAN THE MASONS, DON’T YOU? “We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.”

WHISPER? OH, YOU’VE GOT THE VOLUME ON THE TV YOU’RE WATCHING FOX NEWS ON SET AT 2 AGAIN, DON’T YOU? “Voices in and out of government whisper that our standing as the world’s leader of democracy and economic growth is ending.”

CHENEY SECRET ENERGY TASK FORCE, RING ANY BELLS? “What’s worse, the most important decisions are made behind closed doors, where a flurry of backroom deals has supplanted the will of the people.”

They say they have a plan to “create jobs, end economic uncertainty... end the attack on free enterprise”. Did no one tell them that the essence of the free enterprise system is economic uncertainty?

They will stop job-killing policies and the job-killing agenda, job-killing tax increases, the job-killing health care plan, and job-killing mandates. They really like the adjective “job-killing,” is what I’m saying.

They also really like the adjective “common-sense,” as in “We must put common-sense limits on the growth of government”. Of course decisions on the growth of government are entirely political decisions, there is no such thing as a “common-sense” size of government. The phrase “common-sense” is intended to put their ideological positions beyond discussion.

THAT’S A BIG IF: “If we’ve learned anything over the last two years, it’s that we cannot spend our way to prosperity.” Unless we buy winning lottery tickets, of course.

Some details: Freeze net hiring of “non-security” federal employees; permanently end bailouts; end taxpayer funding of abortion forever; keep prisoners in Guantanamo forever. Every bill will “contain a citation of Constitutional authority,” and be put up on the web three days before Congress votes. Small businesses can deduct 20% of their income. A congressional vote on any regulation affecting more than $100m in economic activity. Kill Fannie & Freddie. End stimulus spending immediately (which would leave many projects half-finished, Kevin Drum points out).

PRIDE AND DIGNITY? HAVE THESE PEOPLE EVER ACTUALLY HADA JOB? “for our workforce, there is no substitute for the pride and dignity that comes with an honest day’s work and a steady paycheck.”

ALSO, “WHERE’S THE REMOTE?”: “The trillion-dollar ‘stimulus’ spending bill has made ‘where are the jobs?’ a national rallying cry”. That’s a really odd rally.

JUST LIKE GEORGE CLOONEY: “Washington’s out-of-control spending spree needs no introduction.”

THEY PROMISED WHAT NOW? “Instead of putting the brakes on Washington’s spending habits as they promised, President Obama and Democratic Leaders have...”

A FACT-BASED CONVERSATION: “We will have a responsible, fact-based conversation with the American people about the scale of the fiscal challenges we face, and the urgent action that is required to deal with them.” Will have, future tense, because as everyone points out, they aren’t willing to name a single program (except TARP) that they plan to cut.

DAMN THE ‘60s! “Earlier this year, House Republicans launched the YouCut initiative to combat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress.” I just love that use of the word permissive.

THE ONE THING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANTED: “The American people wanted one thing out of health care reform: lower costs, which President Obama and Democrats in Washington promised, but did not deliver.” Just one thing, lower costs. Not access for the uninsured, not coverage of pre-existing conditions, certainly not single fucking payer.

AND YET THE MINORITY ALWAYS SEEMS TO WIN: “The House of Representatives continues to move further away from its roots as a deliberative body, toward a centralized power structure where the majority does whatever it needs to win at all costs.”

“We will launch a prolonged campaign to transfer power back to the people and ensure they have a say in what goes on in the Congress.” This prolonged campaign will evidently involve... wait for it... a web site. Power... transferred.

They will fight extending Miranda Rights to foreign terrorists.

Missile defense, because, oo, Iran, scary. Sanctions on Iran, which “has declared its determination to acquire a nuclear capability”. That is a true but wilfully misleading statement, which 90% of people will read as saying that Iran has declared a determination to acquire nuclear weapons.

We will “establish operational control” of the border, whatever that means, “and prohibit the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from interfering with Border Patrol enforcement activities on federal lands.” I’m not sure what that means, but I’m going to guess it means that the border fence can violate environmental laws.

A LITTLE SOMETHING FOR JAN BREWER: “We will reaffirm the authority of state and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of all federal immigration laws.”

YES, BECAUSE REPUBLICANS WOULD NEVER DO THAT: “We will fight efforts to use a national crisis for political gain.”

Status

Chuck Grassley should die because he cannot afford health care, and John Boehner should go broke because he gets sick. If you agree, join us in posting this as your status for the rest of the day.

Pretty clear

Nancy Pelosi says the CIA lied to her, explicitly denying that there had been any waterboarding. John Boehner thinks he can prove that she is lying by this simple but deadly logic: “When you look at the number of briefings that the Speaker was in and other Democrat members of the House and Senate, it’s pretty clear that they were well aware of what these enhanced interrogation techniques were.” When you have eliminated the impossible – the CIA failing to tell the truth at multiple briefings – whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

Stand-up Obama

Obama, at the NerdProm: “In the next hundred days, our bipartisan outreach will be so successful that even John Boehner will consider becoming a Democrat. After all, we have a lot in common. He is a person of color. Although not a color that appears in the natural world.”

Read his entire gig here.

Or watch it. Part I



Part II

Of political sideshows, legitimate governments, and the fine art of Karzai-confronting

Another, late contender for Name of the Day: Nelson Mandela’s grandson, Mandla Mandela, running for election to the South African Parliament.

---

John Boehner pens an op-ed piece for the Post accusing the Obamahoovians of a “carefully calculated campaign” to distract people from their nefarious budget with all this talk about Rush Limbaugh. A budget that “increases taxes on every American”. “Something is wrong,” he says, “when the discourse in Washington is more focused on a political sideshow than, say, the fact that Congress is attempting to terminate a school choice program that serves thousands of needy children in the District of Columbia...” Oh, he does hate him some sideshows, does John Boehner.

---

Hillary Clinton stood next to Mahmoud Abbas today, saying that his regime was the “only legitimate government” of the Palestinian people. Abbas’s term of office expired eight weeks ago.


She described the Israeli government’s plans to demolish scores of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem as... those of you with delicate sensibilities may wish to skip to the next paragraph... “unhelpful.”

During her trip, she said that “The two-state solution is the inevitable, inescapable outcome of any effort” but she also said that the US would support any Israeli government. So what she’s saying is that it’s okay to give unflinching support to Netanyahu while he works against the outcome she claims to be working towards, because that outcome is inevitable and inescapable. So that’s okay then.

---

Speaking of legitimate governments, there’s an article in the WaPo on Karzai and the debate, largely between Karzai and the Obamatonians over the timing of presidential elections in Afghanistan (Obama clearly wants Karzai out, but it’s very unclear, at least to me, what sort of government he wants in Afghanistan and who it would be run by. Gosh, isn’t it nice that he’s learned so much from Bush’s mistakes like, for instance, not having an exit strategy in Iraq?). The WaPo author, Pamela Constable, says Karzai, while “once perceived as a charming leader and famous for wowing tribal elders and international conferences, has grown increasingly unpopular and remote as his government becomes tarred as weak and corrupt.” It’s not “tarred” as weak and corrupt, it actually is weak and corrupt. Some of that has to do with all the “wowing” of tribal leaders, many of whom are strong and corrupt.

She writes that Obama “finally confronted Karzai in a phone call about his frequent complaints over civilian casualties at the hands of coalition forces and air raids.” Which tells you something less than pleasant about Obama: he not only “confronted” Karzai over his oh so unreasonable objections to the killing of innocent Afghan civilians, but evidently leaked the fact to the press, thinking that standing tall for America’s right to bomb civilians made him look manly and presidential (or should I say preznidenshul?). I’d give a lot to see the transcript of that conversation.

A tougher job

John Boehner explains that while America is a “center-right country,” voters often “don’t see us as the center-right party. I think we have to be more effective in how we communicate our principles”. See, it’s not the policies – it’s never the policies – it’s just that they’re not communicated well enough.

“We have a tougher job than our friends across the aisle. They’ve been offering Americans a free lunch for the last 80 years, rather successfully. Those of us that believe in a smaller, more accountable government, we have a tougher time making our principles relevant to the American people.”

Yes, the Democrats have been offering a free lunch and the Republicans have been offering a shit sandwich.

And not even a free shit sandwich.

State of the Union Address: Spreading the hope of freedom (in 357 days)

Transcript.

6:08 Bush just waggled his eyebrows


and winked


at Congress. Which I’m sure makes them feel special and tingly all over.

I didn’t catch which members of the Cabinet and Congress are staying away to carry on the work of government should there be a terrorist attack or Cheney get hold of an Uzi. (Update: it was Dirk Kempthorne. Had anything of that nature happened, it would have been President Dirk Kempthorne.) (Let me repeat that: President Dirk Kempthorne.) Also, I believe Atrios is sitting this one out in case every blogger’s head explodes.

Both Bush twins, however, are there for the first time. Should there be a terrorist attack or Cheney get hold of an Uzi, the genetic line would be extinguished.

6:12 Bush says the economy is going through uncertainty, and Cheney’s head suddenly jerks.

6:12 Boehner: this is an intervention: you are spending too much time in the tanning salon.

6:13 He says that some people wouldn’t object to paying higher taxes, and “The IRS accepts checks and money orders.” Also, the blood of the innocent and the howls of the damned.


6:15 “American families have to balance their budgets, so should their government.” Wait, I’m supposed to be balancing my budget? Uh oh.

6:22 He wants to “liberate children trapped in failing schools”. PS 23 and Martin Luther King Jr High School: the new axis of evil.

6:24 If we don’t pass the free trade agreement with Colombia, we will “embolden the purveyors of false populism in our hemisphere.” Meaning Hugo Chavez, of course, although ABC’s cameras went amusingly to John Kerry.

6:27 Greenhouse agreements will only work if every country on the planet signs and none gets a “free ride.” Especially on public transportation, which he mysteriously left out of his half-hearted laundry list of measures to reduce global warming.


6:34 “We’ve seen wedding guests in blood-soaked finery staggering from a hotel in Jordan”. Of course, the US has soaked more than our share of finery, bombing or shooting up weddings on several occasions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
(Update: Eli at LeftI is all over this one too.)

6:37 We are “spreading the hope of freedom.” Afghanistan is now “a young democracy where boys and girls are going to school.” Um, right.

6:44 Al Qaida is on the run in Iraq. Just like last year and the year before that and the year before that. A lot of running, is what I’m saying.

It’s hard to find anything to say about this, it’s all very stale. “Return on success,” other bits of leftover rhetoric.

6:46 He asks Congress to fully fund the troops. ABC zooms right in on some guy who’s yawning, sitting next to a woman in uniform.

6:49 A failed Iraq would embolden the extremists. That’s the second use of “embolden.”

6:52 Iran (which he’s been accusing in rather vague terms of being behind everything we don’t like throughout the Middle East) should “come clean about your [he refers to it in the second person] nuclear intentions and past actions”.


6:56 “America opposes genocide in Sudan.” In case anyone was, you know, asking.

6:57 The US is leading the fight against “global hunger.” Which I think is when you really want a globe for dinner, with maybe a Triptik for dessert.

He never actually said what the state of the union is, although he did say if we did blah blah blah the state of the union will remain strong.

Well that was an hour well spent.

If you’re going to San Francisco, Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair

The agreement forming the new Hamas-Fatah Palestinian government includes a standard phrase that there is a right to resist Israeli occupation. The United States opposes this, a State Dept spokesmodel saying, “The national unity government’s platform reference to the right of resistance is disturbing and contradicts the Quartet principles of renunciation of violence”. So it is official US policy that Israeli occupation of and military actions in Palestine may not be resisted.

The LAT has an editorial about the 2,264 ethnic Japanese people that the US took from Latin America, mostly from Peru, during World War II and interned in Texas. 13 countries cooperated with the US in this mass kidnapping, usually without putting anything down on paper, since it so blatantly violated international law. A few of them were exchanged for Americans captured by Japan, some were still interned in 1948, and very few were ever allowed to return to the countries that had connived in their seizure. When the US started paying reparations to interned Japanese-Americans in 1990, it refused to pay these internees (eventually some did get paid, 1/4 as much) for the reason – which the LAT doesn’t make clear enough – that they had been... illegal immigrants.

Moving on without any ironic segue whatsoever, Republicans are gearing up to object to any move to close down Guantanamo and move those prisoners into US military brigs on the mainland. Various congresscritters are saying they don’t want them in Florida or South Carolina or wherever. Says John Boehner, “If Democrats seriously want to import known terrorists -- captured in the field of battle against American troops -- perhaps we can set them up with a nice sunny spot in San Francisco?” Sunny spot? Has he ever been to San Francisco?

How come the WaPo quoted only part of a pro-war banner held by counter-protesters in Washington, “You dishonor our dead on Hallowed ground” (meaning Arlington), and left out the words above that, visible in a picture in the LAT, “Go to hell traitors”?

The WaPo, in an unrevealing article about how McCain is joined at the hip with the Iraq war, quotes a stump speech in Iowa, in which he claims that the people fighting us in Iraq aren’t really interested in Iraq per se: “I am convinced that if we lose this conflict and leave, [the terrorists] will follow us home. It’s not Iraq they are trying to take.” Then why don’t they just skip the Iraq segment of what McCain calls “this titanic struggle between good and evil” and come here now?

He’s that simple

I don’t know why Senate Republicans were so unwilling to debate the war, leaving it to House Republicans like John Boehner (R-Joe’s Tanning Salon) to unleash such devastating analysis as “If we leave, they will follow us home. It’s that simple.” See, you didn’t think it was that simple, but it really is that simple. He warned that “We will give Iran free access to the Middle East” and that “al-Qaeda and terrorist sympathizers around the world are trying to divide us here at home. Over the next few days we have an opportunity to show our enemies that we will not take the bait.” For example, one way he’ll express his determination not to be divided here at home is by accusing Democrats of taking Al Qaida and terrorist sympathizers’ bait.

Tears of a clown

Boehner went on: “We are engaged in a global war now for our very way of life. And every drop of blood that’s been spilled in defense of liberty and freedom from the American Revolution to this very moment is for nothing if we’re unwilling to stand up and fight this threat.” So if we withdraw from Iraq, we’re going to have to fight the British for our independence again. It’s that simple.

Speaking of blood spilled for nothing, on Monday John McCain invoked Vietnam, saying that he was worried about a Tet Offensive in Iraq, “you know, some large-scale tact that could then switch American public opinion the way that the Tet Offensive did.” McCain thinks American public opinion still supports this war, that’s just how not at all completely out of touch with reality he is.

Gen. Aboud Qanbar, the guy Maliki put in charge of the Baghdad crackdown over American objections (that’s him on the left at a meeting with American military people, well-prepared in case they start shooting rubber bands at him),


has announced some of the measures he’ll be taking. Curfew will now start at 8 instead of 9, which I’m sure will make all sorts of difference. The borders with Iran and Syria will be closed for three days, starting at a date to be announced, which should be a mild inconvenience. They’ll open mail and eavesdrop on phone calls. There will be “emergency trials.” Anyone occupying a house illegally should move out within the next 15 days. That one would be enforceable if they had records which they don’t have and about a million more troops. In other words, Qanbar is as big a blowhard as Maliki.

An act of state terrorism with hostage-taking

Josh Narins, temporarily unable to post on his own blog, points to the findings of a Program on International Policy Attitudes poll taken in Iraq, showing that support for attacks on American forces is now 61% (92% among Sunnis), but that only 37% want those forces to withdraw within the next 6 months. Josh comments that you’d think 100% of the people who want to attack us would want us out now, but in fact 24% want us to stay and be attacked.

He also points out that in today’s print NYT, the article on Mark Foley goes most of the way down the right-hand column on page one, but doesn’t mention the fact that the page Foley was emailing is male until after the jump to page 18, in the 10th paragraph.

Condi Rice will be visiting Israel this week. She will discuss with Olmert “creative means” to undermine Hamas and strengthen Abbas. You know what’s sure to strengthen Abbas’s position? Having everyone know that Olmert and Rice will discuss “creative means” to strengthen his position.

Since Abbas’s position is to be strengthened at the expense of the elected parliament, this plan sounds an awful lot like a coup.

Russia is directing a major, and I mean major, hissy fit at Georgia, which just arrested 4 alleged spies – or as Russia put it, committed “an act of state terrorism with hostage-taking.” What’s fun is that Putin is accusing Georgia of acting like Stalin and Beria (both of them Georgians), and thinking they’d be protected by “foreign sponsors,” meaning the US. No, I’m not sure how we got in the middle of this thing either. Russia still hasn’t pulled all its troops out of Georgia, which has only been independent since 1991. Putin is now threatening to continue its occupation, and has ordered those troops to “shoot to kill” if their bases are threatened.

Hastert and Boehner are admitting that they might have been told something about Mark Foley months ago, but they can’t remember exactly what, because accusations of sexual predation are so darned unmemorable. I suspect Hastert’s career as a Republican leader is over, and the R’s may lose a House seat or two more than they’d expected, which is kind of unsatisfying, like Al Capone being jailed for tax evasion.

In an interview with CNN, Secretary of War Rumsfeld says of intra-Muslim violence that “[t]he overwhelming majority are not violent extremists” and indeed that “the overwhelming majority in that faith are getting tired of it and don’t like it and are tired of seeing their families killed by extremists.” I could see how that would be tiresome.

Much of the interview seemed to consist of Rummy trying to say that there was no proper measurement of success for anything he’s been trying to do for the last five years. How convenient for him. His reforms of the Pentagon? “I would say that it’s attitude and culture as much as anything else.” Are we, as he famously asked, creating more terrorists than we’re killing? “[T]here aren’t metrics for it. It’s not knowable. The answer is not knowable, so I don’t ask it overtly.” How do we measure if we’re winning in Iraq?

SEC. RUMSFELD: You can look at the things that are on the plus side. You can look at the things that are on the minus side.

MR. SESNO: But take it as a whole.

SEC. RUMSFELD: Each person has to look at it in the aggregate and say what they think about it.

So it’s all subjective. He may not know anything about war, but he knows what he likes.