David Vitter...racist (VIDEO)

Courtesy of Wonkette. Senator David "Diaper" Vitter refuses to condemn the Louisiana Justice of the Peace who refused to marry a interracial couple. In fact, he goes out of his way not to do so, when every other Politician in Louisiana (Republican and Democrat alike) has done so.



...and...



Maybe a guy who gets caught canoodling with D.C. Hookers shouldn't be telling other people how to be happy, or who to love.

President Obama's Health Care Web Pitch (VIDEO)

Can you smell what the Barack is cooking??? (VIDEO)

Never necessary, but fun nonetheless....

The Fireside chat for October 17, 2009

There's A Rep for that (VIDEO)

Obama's Remarks at San Francisco DNC Fundraiser (VIDEO)

Not much of it, but...



The complete text is here.

A better telescope of the good stuff is right here.

The President's Speech in New Orleans (VIDEO)

Wish I could've gotten the whole Town Hall, but we do what we can.

Incidentally, a 4th Grader asked the President why does everyone hate him. I'll post video as soon as I can get it. Until then, it's at TPM.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

UPDATE: 4:42pm Pacific. Here's the video.

When my fellow Liberals lose their minds...

From Huffington Post. Actual headline:

Is Obama Uncomfortable Around Women?

Amy Siskind, 10.15.2009

President and Co-Founder of The New Agenda

Despite much talk of hope and change, President Obama seems largely tone-deaf to women and women's issues. Post-racial country -- yes. Post gender inequality -- not so much.

First act signed...Lilly Ledbetter Act. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. First Supreme Court Nominee, Sonia Sotamayor. His head of the Domestic Policy Council, head of his Communications Office, his head of Homeland Security (HOMELAND SECURITY!!!), all women...yet he's uncomfortable.

CNN: WHAT THE--?!?!?!? (VIDEO)

CNN did nothing wrong here. They put up a good report...

...but Jesus H. Christ.

Count me as assuming the worst:

Three lines of hate... (VIDEO)

MSNBC: Obama's Speech at the Human Rights Campaign Banquet (VIDEO)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Fireside chat for October 10, 2009

WaPo: Dumbest...blogposting...ever.

I like Ezra Klein's work, and all...but...

America has already gotten used to Obama. It's common to talk about the "overexposure" of the first African American president in history. It's ordinary to see him hedging on important political priorities, and failing to please his most ardent supporters. It's normal to see him called communist by his enemies and spineless by his friends. America, to its credit, has adjusted to its first black president with ease and swiftness.

But the rest of the world hasn't necessarily done the same. This prize, which came as Obama contemplates a troop build-up in Afghanistan and hectors the international community on financial regulation and global warming, suggests that there is some reservoir of relief and amazement for America's young president. The international gushing may seem absurd to us, as the schoolyard lionization of an older brother often seems funny to a sibling, but it can be used to our advantage. Leaders in allied countries no longer run against America, and now the Nobel Committee is attempting to welcome America back as the leader of the free world. And it didn't cost us anything. Would that life told more jokes like that one.

Are you freakin' kidding me? Ease and WHAT?!?

Looks to me like the rest of the world is way used to Obama, its this country that has to catch up.

MSNBC: Obama's Speech on the Consumer Protection Agency (VIDEO)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The World is watching...

The news that President Barack Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Prize for Peace has got tongues a-waggin’ and keyboards a-clickin’ just about all over the world. To me, the most extreme negative reaction to this news should be mezzo-mezzo; a “meh” if you will. If the Republican Party-slash-conservative movement had any brains left in it that’s how they would have played it.

Instead, we got Rush Limbaugh:

Nobel Gang Just Suicide-Bombed Themselves.

…and…

They love a weakened, neutered U.S and this is their way of promoting that concept. I think God has a great sense of humor, too.

We got David Frum:

From the age of 20, Barack Obama has collected acclaim, awards and prizes not for his accomplishments (which have always been rather scanty), but for his potential. You think with the guy nearing 50 and elected president of the United States that the prizes for “most promising young man” would cease. But no! The Nobel Committee has just awarded him one more.

We even got a little racism from Erick Erickson (Redstate.com)

I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota for it, but that is the only thing I can think of for this news. There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period.

From the left, the response hasn’t been a hell of a lot better. The most quoted thing I’ve read has been douchebags like Glenn Greenwald (and yes, I reserve my right to call him a douchebag):

We're currently occupying and waging wars in two separate Muslim countries and making clear we reserve the "right" to attack a third. Someone who made meaningful changes to those realities would truly be a man of peace. It's unreasonable to expect that Obama would magically transform all of this in nine months, and he certainly hasn't. Instead, he presides over it and is continuing much of it. One can reasonably debate how much blame he merits for all of that, but there are simply no meaningful "peace" accomplishment in his record -- at least not yet -- and there's plenty of the opposite. That's what makes this Prize so painfully and self-evidently ludicrous.

Some guy named Jesse Berney (Huffington Post Blogger):

Barack Obama's presidency is 17 days younger than my daughter, and she just figured out how to put Cheerios into her mouth. The Norwegian Nobel Committee made a grave mistake.

Jake Tapper (ABC News...the links to his Twitter account, of which this is a tweet):

Apparently the standards are more exacting for an ASU honorary degree these days.

To top it all off, we even heard from the effin' Taliban:

We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan.

Which made Rush follow up with this:

Something has happened here that we all agree with the Taliban and Iran about and that is he doesn't deserve the award.

I get the feeling Rush is mad that he just bought his "I get to bash Obama about the Olympics toy" and now the Nobel Committee's taken it away from him.

It strikes me that both sides are missing the point in all this.

The Nobel Peace Prize wasn’t so much a message to President Obama, as it was to America.

It was…in short, the world telling us that this is our last chance with them.

Martin Luther King was awarded his Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 in the middle of the tumult of the Civil Rights Struggle. He would only (unfortunately) be with us for four more years. It’s not hard to imagine the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys and the Michelle Malkins of their day launching a non-stop assault on the integrity of the award just for giving it to King.

But think about what the award conferred on King; it conferred legitimacy. Not only that, it conferred global legitimacy. It was the rest of Planet Earth telling America that we approve of what Dr. King is trying to do.

The number one criticism of Barack Obama’s award is that he is not deserving of it, at least not yet. But, as the Nobel Committee noted themselves, it’s not about whether he deserves it now:

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."

Again, as with his spiritual predecessor, the President’s award is about global legitimacy. It is another moment wherein the world (at least in the form of the Nobel Committee) is telling America, again, that they approve of what this man is trying to do; and that its time to get your act together.

So what does this do…to the people who hate the President? Is this message going to sink in?

Probably not. If anything, it's going to have the opposite effect in this country.

But the world is watching...

I’m not talking about people with legitimate Political disagreements over policy (like Glenn Greenwald…douchebag though he remains), I’m talking about the people who’s opposition is fueled by the visceral, by his political positions, by his name, and most of all, by the color of his skin; all of whom using the language of violence and threat to make their point.

But the world doesn't care what they think. They just reminded them that they are watching.

They’re watching the threats, the town halls, the guns at the President’s appearances, the Birthers, the Tenthers, the Teabaggers, the Glenn Beck horseshit, the threats against Congressmen and women, the threats against the President himself...

In truth, you want to know when I think the President won the Prize?

The moment Joe Wilson opened his damn mouth.

The moment this lowlife Congressman showed such open, defiant disrespect, unleashing such venom, displaying (sorry to disagree with you, Mr. President) such typical American racism; everything started to change...the health care debate, and the internal political dynamic in this country.

The quiet discussions about violence and threats to the President came out into the open. We had a U.S. Congressman willing to embarrass himself, and embarrass his country to show this in however small a way that he was somehow above or superior to the duly-elected President of the United States.

And the world was watching.

Today, the world decided to send a message right back to America: You did the right thing in electing this man. We respect you for it. We admire you for it.

But how you treat him in the future is going to weigh heavily on how we treat you

What happens now…what happens to our country…if the duly-elected President of the United States, the first African-American (and yes, I count him as one) to hold the position, and Nobel Laureate…is felled by an assassins bullet?

How the world going to look upon us…if we should so cavalierly spit on their judgment?

I don’t think their reaction to us will be kind, nor forgiving. In fact, there’s a part of me that suspects the world will say, “that’s it. You’re on your own.”

The world is watching, and now demands better of us.

And they expect better of Obama, too. Now, granted he has some really solid Foreign Policy successes on his curriculum vitae. Iraq is drawing to a close, however slowly. The President (along with Hillary Clinton and George Mitchell – who deserve a share of this award, if you ask me) is pushing Israel on the Peace Process (and pissing people off). He spoke to both the Muslim world, and to our own racial divide in ways that people are still talking about. He ramped down tensions with Russia. He’s made significant strides in relations with Iran, with a lot more work to come. His work on Environmental policy drew the notice of the Nobel Committee (and the ire of the Right). And his commitment to rid the world of Nuclear weapons is both good Politics, and good Foreign Policy.

Don’t get me wrong, I know there’s a flip side to this coin. He is on a path to accelerate things in Afghanistan (a plan I’m not completely against, to be honest). American Forces have killed far too many civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan (any number greater than one). American Special Forces delivered a lethal warning to Somali pirates (again, which I support). And he has unleashed our drones and our Pakistani allies in Waziristan and the Swat Valley.

The world is watching the President too. Unlike his radical foes, Obama seems to have gotten the message:

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women, and all Americans, want to build -- a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action -- a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century.

These challenges can't be met by any one leader or any one nation. And that's why my administration has worked to establish a new era of engagement in which all nations must take responsibility for the world we seek. We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people. And that's why we've begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons, because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions.

Yes, it is still early in his Administration, and not all of us are satisfied. But there is so much road to go, so many more things to build on and explore.

Can you think of a better man for the job?

I can’t.

(And if you can…odds are they don’t have a Nobel Peace Prize, so…SCOREBOARD!)

HuffPo: The Arizona Threat Matrix...

Obama signs in Arizona vandalized...but with the violent rhetoric on overdrive:

PHOENIX, AZ -- "Kill Obama" was spray painted in purple on campaign signs at two locations in Cave Creek, a suburb of Phoenix, according to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO).

Rejected! (VIDEO)

This was originally posted on TPM (and by extension HuffPo), but I just had to pass it along.

MSNBC: Obama Nobel Acceptance Speech (VIDEO)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

One more thing from Ezra...

From the same article, but a very important point:

[The Compromise] also creates a neat policy experiment: We can see, over time, what happens to state insurance markets that include the national public option and compare them with those that don't. We can see whether the worst fears of conservatives are realized and private insurers are driven out and providers are forced out of business due to low payment rates, and we can see whether the hopes of liberals are right and costs come down and private insurers become leaner and more efficient. Or both, or neither. It's an opportunity to pit liberal and conservative policies against each other, rather than just pitting liberal and conservative congressmen against each other.

Erza Klein on the Public Option Compromise...

Ezra likes it. I'm sensing a trend.

[The Public Option Compromise] gives you an essentially national administrative structure, but also gives states the right to reject the option entirely. It means, in other words, that the blue states get the public option at full strength and the red states get to ignore it entirely.

Nate Silver on the Public Option Compromise...

Nate likes it.

Some of the usual suspects are out this morning with criticism of Tom Carper's compromise proposal to insert a robust public option into the Democrats' health care bill, but allow states to opt out of it by legislative or popular action. I'm not going to call these people out by name because I consider some of them friends and they're doing good, important, productive work. But this compromise is leaps and bounds better than most of the others that have been floated, such as Chuck Schumer's proposal to have a public insurance option that would be forced to negotiate at private market rates.

MSNBC: I'm in... (VIDEO)

And for the record, Keith, I'm in.

Confused? Watch the Special Comment. The complete video is below, take a moment when you can, then donate what you can, when you can. It has the added benefit of being both Political and Chartiable.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Text of the Special Comment is here.

The Fireside chat for October 3, 2009

Lord Knows...

Lord knows I am not the biggest Thomas "six more months" Friedman fan in the world. And I am loathe to mention him in any of my posts, but the crap with that Newsmax scumbag calling for the Military overthrow of the President has put me in a mood, and unforunately, Mr. Freidman has captured it perfectly:

I was in Israel interviewing Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin just before he was assassinated in 1995. We had a beer in his office. He needed one. I remember the ugly mood in Israel then — a mood in which extreme right-wing settlers and politicians were doing all they could to delegitimize Rabin, who was committed to trading land for peace as part of the Oslo accords. They questioned his authority. They accused him of treason. They created pictures depicting him as a Nazi SS officer, and they shouted death threats at rallies. His political opponents winked at it all.

And in so doing they created a poisonous political environment that was interpreted by one right-wing Jewish nationalist as a license to kill Rabin — he must have heard, “God will be on your side” — and so he did.

Others have already remarked on this analogy, but I want to add my voice because the parallels to Israel then and America today turn my stomach: I have no problem with any of the substantive criticism of President Obama from the right or left. But something very dangerous is happening. Criticism from the far right has begun tipping over into delegitimation and creating the same kind of climate here that existed in Israel on the eve of the Rabin assassination.

What kind of madness is it that someone would create a poll on Facebook asking respondents, “Should Obama be killed?” The choices were: “No, Maybe, Yes, and Yes if he cuts my health care.” The Secret Service is now investigating. I hope they put the jerk in jail and throw away the key because this is exactly what was being done to Rabin.

TPM: Sparkman Case Update. It gets worse.

Okay, this has gone from a case of the FBI trying to tamp down wild speculation, to the FBI knowing good and well what's happened here and not wanting any interference in their investigation.

As I've said before, the less the FBI talks, the closer (I feel) they come to getting these guys.

But as I've said, Talking Points Memo has new details, and they ain't pretty:

When Census worker Bill Sparkman was found dead earlier this month, he was naked and gagged, with duct tape over his eyes. Duct tape also bound Sparkman's hands and feet.

...

The word "Fed" was written on Sparkman's chest, setting off speculation last week that the Census worker and part-time schoolteacher was killed in an act of anti-government sentiment.

Sources also told the AP that Sparkman's Census Bureau ID was found taped to his head and shoulder area -- a detail which may add to that speculation.

And as was reported last week, Sparkman also had a rope around his neck which was attached to a tree, though his feet were touching the ground.

According to Weaver, a 2003 Chevrolet S-10 pickup truck, containing Sparkman's clothes, was about 50 yards from the body.

The Fireside chat for September 26, 2009

From the National Journal...

From Jonathan Rauch: if the Airlines worked like our Health Care System...

"Hello! Thank you for calling Air Health Care, the airline that works like the health care system. My name is Cynthia. How can I give you travel care today?"

"Hi. My name is Jonathan Rauch. I need to fly from Washington, D.C., to Eugene, Oregon, on October 23."

"Yes, I'd be happy to assist you with that. It does look like we can get you on a flight on January 23 at 1 p.m. or February 8 at 3 p.m. Which would you prefer?"

"Neither. I need to be in Eugene on October 23. As in, the 23rd of October."

"I'm sorry, we have nothing open on that date. You might try another carrier."

"I suppose I'd better. Who has availability?"

"I'm afraid I have no way to know that. I have no way to look into their systems."

"Who would know?"

"You can call them individually and ask. I'm sure you can find one."

"Look, I don't have time to call two dozen airlines. It's important that I get to Eugene on the 23rd. There must be something you can do."

"Well, it looks like maybe we could squeeze you in on October 26, if you don't mind departing Washington Dulles at 5:35 a.m."

"Good grief. All right, I suppose it will do."

"Great, thank you, I'll be happy to make that booking for you. That's one flight from Washington Dulles to Chicago O'Hare on October 26. Will there be anything else?"

"Wait, hold on. Chicago? I'm going to Eugene. It's in Oregon."

"Yes, sir. The Eugene portion of your trip will be handled by a western specialist. We'll be glad to bring you back from Chicago to Washington, though."

"You mean I have to call another carrier and go through all this again? Why don't you just book the whole trip?"

"Sorry, sir, but you do need to make your own travel appointments. We would be happy to refer you to some qualified carriers. May I have your fax number, please? Before I can confirm the booking, we'll need you to fill out your travel history and send that back to us."

"Cynthia, I have filled out my travel history half a dozen times already this year. I've told six different airlines that I flew to Detroit twice and Houston once. Every time I fly, I answer the same battery of questions. At least a dozen airlines have my travel history. Why don't you get it from them?"

"We have no way we could do that. We do not have access to other companies' records, and our personnel have our own system for collecting travel history."

"But 95 percent of these questions are always the same. Don't you know that every time I fill out one of these duplicative forms I increase the chance of error? Wouldn't it make more sense to hold my travel information centrally, so that everyone could see the same thing?"

"Sorry, sir, we have no capability for that, and we do need to have your travel history at least two weeks before you fly."

"I don't suppose I could fill out these forms online?"

"No, sir. The forms are only about 30 pages, though. Did you have that fax number, please?"

"I don't have a fax machine. No one faxes anymore. Just e-mail me the forms."

"I'm sorry, sir, we don't use e-mail to transmit records and other personal or secure documents. We keep our records on paper."

"What century is this? You think paper is secure?"

"We do keep all your travel records on low-acid paper and in fire-retardant file drawers. When someone needs access to your records, we make a photocopy and put them in the mail. Or fax. How many items of luggage were you wanting to bring?"

"Two."

"OK, good. We suggest you make luggage arrangements with Rapid Air Transport, though of course you're free to use any luggage company you like."

"Luggage company?"

"Yes, sir. You'll need to arrange baggage transport. Would you like a phone number for Rapid, or would you prefer to find your own baggage company? I'm sure Rapid would be pleased to work with you. All you need to do is sign the Personal Travel Records Release form. Where would you like me to mail that?"

"Release form?"

"Yes, sir. You'll need to sign and fax or mail that back to our Travel Records Department so that we can release your travel records to Rapid. Under the privacy rules, we're not authorized to tell them when or where you're flying without your written permission."

"I suppose I couldn't just e-mail you this permission, or grant it online?"

"No. Did you want a list of luggage carriers for your Chicago-Eugene leg?"

"Let me guess. Rapid doesn't operate out West. I have to find a separate luggage company for the second leg."

"Yes, sir."

"And they'll need more copies of all the same paperwork. And they'll ask me all the same questions. And I'll have to arrange to get my travel records to them by mail or fax. And I'll repeat all this nonsense five or six separate times between here and Eugene, because the providers aren't equipped to talk to each other and my records aren't digitized and no two providers use the same system."

"Yes, sir, that's right! Did you have a preferred fuelist, or did you want a reference for a company to provide jet fuel for your flight?"

"Fuelist. That would be a fuel specialist, I suppose."

"We can make a fuel arrangement for you, but please be advised that the fuelist's charge will be billed separately and you will be responsible for it. We'll need to know where to have that bill sent.

"May I have your flight-insurance information, please?"

"Millennium Travel Care, group number 068832, ID number RS-3390041B."

"I'm sorry, sir, we're not in Millennium Travel Care's provider network."

"You're listed on their website. It says you accept Millennium."

"We did until last week. If you like, you can pay out of pocket for your ticket."

"How much would that be?"

"Yes, sir, I'll be happy to get that price for you. That would be $17,885.70."

"What? For a flight to Chicago? Does anyone actually pay that?"

"I'm sorry, sir, I wouldn't know. I can tell you that different clients and insurers pay different rates. For individuals, the rate is $17,885.70."

"Oh."

"Plus tax. And fuel."

"Is anyone else cheaper?"

"Sir, again, I couldn't tell you that. Carriers don't have public rate sheets. Prices are privately negotiated, so there's really no way you could comparison shop."

"Oh."

"Did you want to go ahead, then?"

"No. I DO NOT WANT TO GO AHEAD. I do not want to go anywhere! I want to jump off a cliff!

"This system is insane. It is fragmented to the point of incoherence. Record-keeping is stuck in the 1960s. Communication is stuck in the 1980s. None of the systems talks to the others. Everyone reinvents the wheel at every stage of the process. There is no pricing transparency.

"In a sane, modern system, I wouldn't have to arrange each leg of my flight myself. I wouldn't have to fax documents around, find and juggle multiple providers, fill out again and again what are essentially the same forms every time I use a provider.

"In a sane system, I would call an airline and it would give me a price for the whole trip, not just for one part of it. It would sell me a safe round-trip journey, instead a series of separate procedures. It would have back-office personnel using modern IT systems to coordinate my journey behind the scenes. The systems and personnel would talk to each other automatically. At the press of a button, once I entered a password, they would be able to look up my travel history. We'd do most of this stuff online.

"In fact, Cynthia, I would be able to arrange a whole trip with a single phone call!"

"Sir. Please. Calm down and be realistic. I'm sure the system can be frustrating, but consumers don't understand flight plans and landing slots. Even if they did, there are thousands of separate providers involved in moving travelers around, and hundreds of airports, and millions of trips. Getting everyone to coordinate services and exchange information just isn't realistic in a business as complicated as travel."

"Yes. I suppose I'm dreaming."

"Was there anything else I could help you with?"

"No."

"My goal today was to provide you with outstanding service. Did I accomplish that?"

[click]

Andrew Sullivan: A New Low.

Ugh.

(Oh, by the way...the following is written by Andrew Sullivan. It does not represent a new low for Andrew Sullivan. Way big difference.)

We still don't know very much about the death of Bill Sparkman in a brutal scene in Kentucky. But the far right is obviously concerned that its violent anti-government rhetoric might at some point be implicated. So what do these people do? Notorious homophobe Dan Riehl pre-emptively asks if Sparkman was a gay child predator, because he had an adopted son. He has no other evidence at all.

The Daily Show: Everyone's guilty but Rod...

The best part is the audience laughter.

To paraphrase Jon, Rod comes off very good in his own book.

Part 1:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Rod Blagojevich Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Healthcare Protests

Part 2:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Rod Blagojevich Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Healthcare Protests

Part 3:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Rod Blagojevich Extended Interview Pt. 3
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Healthcare Protests

TPM: White Supremacists know how to buy TV Time...late at night.

So, Orly Taitz's main rival in the Birth--

Naah, let's call it what it is.

Orly Taitz's main rival in the White Supremacist offshoot known as Birtherism has got himself an Informercial. TPM has been doing extensive coverage of the Informercial, complete with a link to the complete program. Video which you will not find here, since I'm not helping their racist !@#% out.

I was going to single out (as I always do) the State of Texas for particular scorn since Lubbock was the first town to air this filth last night. Turns out, I would have been mistaken because (for once) it ain't just Texas. If you are living in one of the following towns, one of your local TV stations may be assisting in an active program to undermine and/or harm the lawfully elected President of the United States:

• Chattanoga, TN
• Memphis, TN
• Shreveport, LA
• Springfield, MO
• Abilene, TX
• Lubbock, TX
• Macon, GA
• Savannah, GA
• Huntsville, AL
• Jacksonville, FL
• Tallahasseee, FL

Wow. It is just me, or is this particular branch of Southern California White Power (and they are based mere , airing this thing exclusively below the Mason-Dixon?

Well, you got me. It ain't just me. TPM figured it out a while ago.

Gary Kreep (perfect name, by the way) of the United States Justice Foundation is based out here in SoCal. Where, I don't know. Five'll get you ten that it's somewhere in Orange County.

The Media Blind spot...

McClatchy Newspapers makes the connection that others do not, and I thank them for it:

President Barack Obama sprinted through appearances on five consecutive news shows last Sunday, but other African-American lawmakers and opinion-shapers have a hard time getting face time on those programs.

Although an African-American is serving as the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, four African-Americans are chairing important House committees and 17 other Congressional Black Caucus members are holding subcommittee chairs, they haven't made many appearances on the Sunday talk-show circuit.

"There hasn't been much change," said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., the chair of the black caucus. "You need a diversity of opinion, of thought, and we're not getting that on the (Sunday) talk shows."

So lemme get this straight...(VIDEO)

School-age children singing to President Obama...bad.

School-age children worshipping (and speaking in tongues) at a cardboard cutout of President Bush...good.

Please, please don't tell me there's not a double standard associated with our current President. And please don't tell me it's not racially based.

Biden at Leisure World... (VIDEO)

I can close my eyes, and I know exactly how to drive to Leisure World (Onley, MD?) from my old house in P.G. County.

TPM: The FBI would like us to calm down...

The FBI is starting to push back against some of the stories floating out there about the Sparkman Murder. (And I'm still calling it a murder. Whether or not he was killed because he was working for the Census is way up in the air, but I doubt, even with these new details, that it was a suicide.)

As long as they're not abandoning the investigation (and they're not), fine. They can work in total secrecy if needs be. Just tell us what you know at the end of the day (by which I mean, the investigation).

Bill Sparkman, the Census worker found dead in Kentucky recently was not found hanging from a tree, according to an FBI spokesman. Rather, David Beyer told TPMmuckraker, Sparkman's feet were planted on the ground. A rope around Sparkman's neck was attached to a tree.

An anonymously sourced AP report said that Sparkman was hanging from a tree, and that he had the word "Fed" scrawled on his chest.

Beyer, a spokesman with the FBI's Louisville, Kentucky filed office, declined to comment on the accuracy of the "Fed" detail. But he was at pains to ratchet back speculation that Sparkman was killed in an act of anti-government sentiment, saying that investigators had not yet determined even whether the death was a homicide.

Previous reporting "left the impression that [Sparkman] was found strung up in a tree because he was a federal employee," Beyer said. "At this juncture that's not accurate." Beyer added that Sparkman died of asphyxiation.

Earlier this afternoon, a state police spokesman told Greg Sargent at the Plum Line that the AP report contained errors, and that Sparkman was "in contact with the ground" when he was found.

Senatespeak...

Following up on Rahm's non-comment today (also reported in the Huffington Post and the Hill), we now have:

Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), saying that Rahm is wrong about the Public Option...

...and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) both saying that we're going to get a Public Option.

Either these three men (only one of whom -- Brown -- I consider a true Liberal) are putting themselves waaay out on a limb here, or...they know something we don't.

Oh, and here is some lovely video of Rockefeller tearing into Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ), calling him a whore for the Insurance Lobby...in Senate-speak, of course:



And finally, according to Huffington Post (whom I'll always kick around, but cite when they have...you know...actual news), the Public Option Amendment is being debated tomorrow.

At the end of the day, Progressives will have one of two things:

Either a Public Option in the Finance Committee Bill.

or...

The names of Democrats who are going to require a Primary Challenge in their next elections.

And if Rockefeller's Amendment doesn't make it this time, worry not. He'll get plenty of other chances when:

They merge the HELP Committee (that has the PO) and Finance Commitee Bills...

...When the Final Senate Bill hits the Floor...

...and in the Conference Bill merges the House Bill (with a PO) with whatever the Senate passes.

It's the 3rd Quarter people...

...or Seventh Inning, depending on your sports metaphor.

TPM: New details on the Sparkman Murder, and none of them necessarily good...

1) Sparkman, a part-time Census Worker found dead on September 12th may not have been hanged, as his body was in partial contact with the ground.

2) Sparkman was apparently warned by a retired Trooper not to do his work in some parts of rural Kentucky.

"I said, you're going into rural Kentucky, isolated areas. Be careful over there -- people may not understand that you're there to gather statistics."

Sparkman's death, to me, is still looking like a homicide, but an Anti-Federal Hate Crime motive is still way up in the air.

TPM hires Huffington Post's Headline Writers...

So, we have this story, currently on TPM's Blog:

Don't Blame the White House?

Rahm: Public option will not make it through the Senate.

But click the story, and you see this headline:

Emanuel Pessimistic On Public Option In Senate

And further down the story, comes the key 'graph:

Appearing on Charlie Rose last night, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel sounded less than optimistic that the Senate's health care reform bill would include a public option.

"I think the Senate's been clear what the prospects [are]," Emanuel said. "That doesn't mean in the House, they're not gonna come to the table and demand it."

He also wouldn't say for sure whether there will be a public option in the final legislation.

"It has to be what the conference has to negotiate," he said.

How is this news?

I don't need TPM participating in the same kind of hackery that Huffington Post does occasionally, and the SMSM does nearly all the damn time.

The story is the story. Nothing changed from before this story was written. It was coming down to Conference before this. It's coming down to Conference after. Rahm just confirmed it, that's all.

"Assembled Thugs, Dictators, and Hypocrites."

Just Andrew Sullivan reacting to the Neocon's view of Obama's speech from yesterday.

As with much of the rest of the Obama presidency, we do not know yet. But I agree with Packer that so far, Obama seems more JFK than LBJ in foreign affairs (except that it was his predecessor who revealed the limits of swagger in global politics rather than himself). So far, it appears that the Israelis, playing the game they think is still apposite, have no interest in cooperating with the US. Netanyahu believes his contempt for the American president is risk-free because Israel has a lock on the US Congress on the issues that matter to it. Obama's counter is to reiterate his views on the settlement question and to up the ante by proposing final status talks right away. We have no idea where this will end up. And it will be impossible to call Netanyahu's bluff if the Palestinians decide to miss yet another opportunity. But it's a process, and the US is still very much in the game. And one suspects Netanyahu has not yet absorbed the shift going on - even in Congress.

MSNBC: Rachel Maddow on the Census Killing (VIDEO)

"I don't think Federal Law Enforcement would still be involved, a week and a half after the body was been found if there wasn't still that very serious concern..."

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Justice Department isn't saying jack, which is fine. Work the case. Nail down the details. Tell us when you've got something.

HuffPo: Census Worker murdered...

From the Huffington Post, via the AP.

And yes, I blame the extremist rhetoric of Glenn Beck and Michelle Bachmann for this happening.

The FBI is investigating the hanging death of a U.S. Census worker near a Kentucky cemetery, and a law enforcement official told The Associated Press the word 'fed" was scrawled on the dead man's chest.

The body of Bill Sparkman, a 51-year-old part-time Census field worker and occasional teacher, was found Sept. 12 in a remote patch of the Daniel Boone National Forest in rural southeast Kentucky. The Census has suspended door-to-door interviews in rural Clay County, where the body was found, pending the outcome of the investigation.

Investigators are still trying to determine whether the death was a killing or a suicide, and if a killing, whether the motive was related to his government job or to anti-government sentiment.

MSNBC: Obama's Speech before the United Nations 9/23/2009 (VIDEO)

Okay, I guess what separates this one from the speech yesterday is the topic, the length, and the fact that he went to the other chamber, the Security Council.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The full text of the speech can be found here.

And remember, he's still under indictment... (VIDEO)

Yeah, I'm talking about the newest star of Dancing with the Stars, Tom Delay...

...aka Hot Tub Tom...

...aka The Exterminator...

...aka The Hammer...

Good times.

This has been making the rounds, so why not join in?

Finally got ahold of the proper format, so FB Friends, forgive me for repeating.

Protect Insurance Companies PSA from Will Ferrell

Ambinder: All about Afghanistan...

Ambiner says the President was "ratfucked".

Literally.

And wouldn't you know it was Bob Woodward who did the...well, deed.

As he made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows, President Obama made one thing clear when asked about whether he'd send more troops to Afghanistan: the question was moot because Gen. Stanley McChrystal, his top commander in Afghanistan, hadn't yet asked requested any more troops.

But in McChrystal's confidential assessment, which was leaked to the Washington Post this weekend, the general makes clear his intention: "Broadly speaking, we require more Civilian and military resources, more ANSF, and more ISR and other enablers."

In plain language, that sounds like a request for more troops.

And so now, the president has been taken hostage, thanks to the leaker -- and it must have been an experienced leaker, because the timing was exquisite. So long as there is deniability -- so long as the White House exercised control over the framing of the report -- the president retained some measure of control over the political balance. Whoever leaked the document decided that the Commander in Chief did not deserve the latitude that he had claimed. The colloquial term for this in Washington is, and you'll pardon me, that the president was ratfucked.

An administration official pointed to several sentences in the review that prioritize fleshing out of a new strategy, including this line from the executive summary: "Additional resources are required, but focusing on force or resource requirements misses the point entirely. The key take away from this assessment is the urgent need for a significant change to our strategy and the way that we think and operate." But Obama bears some responsibility for the predicament he is in. During the presidential campaign, he called Afghanistan the "good war." He repeatedly promised to give "commanders on the ground" the utmost consideration. In March, he announced what he called a "new strategy," one that called on NATO to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. "That's the goal that must be achieved."

Leaving aside the real constraints of domestic politics -- a skeptical Democratic Congress and a war-weary public, the heart of the internal administration conflict is whether a plausible Afghanistan strategy exists in universe. Simply put, the White House -- principally Vice President Biden and Gen. James Jones -- don't want to commit more troops to the region unless they can prevent the Taliban from taking over the government, now and in the future. Biden, in particular, argued against a "counterinsurgency for counterterrorism" strategy as overambitious and unsustainable. The deeply flawed election in Afghanistan, which, most importantly, was seen as deeply flawed by the Afghans, seems to have been the breaking point: the central government was not only corrupt, not only weak, and not only barely legitimate outside of Kabul; it was so weak and so corruptible that it would not even be able to sustain the standing army that NATO troops were desperately trying to train. Who was the U.S. fighting for? A weak, inept, ineffectual and ultimately disposable government? Implicit in this argument is that a strategy predicated on there being an alternative to the Taliban is like a hamster spinning on a wheel. In that case, removing the incentives for the Taliban to be radicalized and destroying the leadership of Al Qaeda -- basically, bribing people and killing people, and doing so indefinitely, but with irregular and special operations forces -- is the alternative. The Biden alternative focuses on the intricate connections between India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Briefly put, Pakistan facilitates the Taliban and various insurgencies in Afghanistan because it preserves the option of living space to the north -- part of the grand goal of turning Pakistan into a haven for Islam. Kashmir's fate is crucial to this dynamic. But India won't talk about Kashmir; Pakistan won't -- can't -- truly cut off ties with the Taliban until Kashmir is dealt with -- and the U.S seems to have no leverage whatsoever.

What are the alternatives? An intense, low-level war of attrition between NATO forces and the Taliban forever? Or a concerted effort by the US, Russia, Iran and China to essentially force India and Pakistan to resolve the Kashmiri dispute, combined with massive amounts of direct aid to Pakistan, combined with a massive influx of intelligence assets into the region, combined with the bribing of willing and bribable Taliban commanders? Basically, instead of focusing on Afghan civillians, this strategy would make it as expensive as possible for a Taliban leader to decide not to ally with the United States. In other words -- counterterrorism as counterinsurgency, and not the other way around.

As Washington synthesizes the new report and tries to gauge its effect on the administration, speculation naturally redounds to the source of the leaker. Various theories have been put forth; let's put aside Occam's razor and assume that McChrystal and his staff didn't just give the document to Woodward. Theory one: Woodward traveled with Gen. Jim Jones recently, so Jones gave him the report. Probably not: the trip was in July, before the review was finished. Admiral Mike Mullen's staff, anxious about White House dithering, leaked the report with Mullen's blessing. Probably not: Mullen shares Jones's concerns about mission drift and is counseling caution. The more probable communities of suspects: senior Pentagon civilian holdovers, lifers, who've cooperated with Woodward before and who have a stake in McChrystal's counterinsurgency doctrine; war planners at Centcom, or the large cadre of defense consultants with clearance.

This leak [is] not, in other words, a shot in an ongoing conflict between the military and civilians. It's between those who are invested in the success of McChrystal's endeavor and those who harbor growing concerns about over-investing in a strategy that might not work.

I don't know if the President is as boxed into a corner as Ambers says he is. Sounds to me like he's drawing a line in a sand, and demanding a strategy before he commits to anything; but he does want to get the people who hits on 9/11. He repeated as much on Letterman last night.

But, of course, things are coming to a head, and maybe not in the way people expect.

The Hill: Warning Shot...

Harry Reid (yeah, that Harry Reid) lays down the law:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) gave Republicans his most direct warning to date that he is prepared to use a procedural maneuver to pass healthcare reform with a simple majority.

Reid told Republicans that he would prefer to pass healthcare reform under regular order but warned that he would not hesitate to use budget reconciliation if the legislation stalled in committee. The Senate Finance Committee began marking up a sprawling healthcare reform bill on Tuesday morning.

“If we can’t work this out to do something within the committee structure, then we’ll be forced to do reconciliation,” said Reid, who said the tactic would be used as a “last resort.”

As blockbuster as this is being treated by both The Hill and Huffington Post, it's nothing he hasn't said before. Besides, this is more of an admonition to keep things moving, rather than threatening over a particular part of the bill (i.e. everyone's favorite whuppin' boy, the Public Option).

MSNBC: Obama's Speech before the United Nations 9/22/2009 (VIDEO)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Good morning. I want to thank the Secretary-General for organizing this summit, and all the leaders who are participating. That so many of us are here today is a recognition that the threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing. Our generation's response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it - boldly, swiftly, and together - we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.

No nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent drought and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees. The security and stability of each nation and all peoples - our prosperity, our health, our safety - are in jeopardy. And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.

And yet, we can reverse it. John F. Kennedy once observed that "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man." It is true that for too many years, mankind has been slow to respond to or even recognize the magnitude of the climate threat. It is true of my own country as well. We recognize that. But this is a new day. It is a new era. And I am proud to say that the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history.

We're making our government's largest ever investment in renewable energy - an investment aimed at doubling the generating capacity from wind and other renewable resources in three years. Across America, entrepreneurs are constructing wind turbines and solar panels and batteries for hybrid cars with the help of loan guarantees and tax credits - projects that are creating new jobs and new industries. We're investing billions to cut energy waste in our homes, buildings, and appliances - helping American families save money on energy bills in the process. We've proposed the very first national policy aimed at both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks - a standard that will also save consumers money and our nation oil. We're moving forward with our nation's first offshore wind energy projects. We're investing billions to capture carbon pollution so that we can clean up our coal plants. Just this week, we announced that for the first time ever, we'll begin tracking how much greenhouse gas pollution is being emitted throughout the country. Later this week, I will work with my colleagues at the G20 to phase out fossil fuel subsidies so that we can better address our climate challenge. And already, we know that the recent drop in overall U.S. emissions is due in part to steps that promote greater efficiency and greater use of renewable energy.

Most importantly, the House of Representatives passed an energy and climate bill in June that would finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy for American businesses and dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One committee has already acted on this bill in the Senate and I look forward to engaging with others as we move forward.

Because no one nation can meet this challenge alone, the United States has also engaged more allies and partners in finding a solution than ever before. In April, we convened the first of what have now been six meetings of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate here in the United States. In Trinidad, I proposed an Energy and Climate Partnership for the Americas. We've worked through the World Bank to promote renewable energy projects and technologies in the developing world. And we have put climate at the top of our diplomatic agenda when it comes to our relationships with countries from China to Brazil; India to Mexico; Africa to Europe.

Taken together, these steps represent an historic recognition on behalf of the American people and their government. We understand the gravity of the climate threat. We are determined to act. And we will meet our responsibility to future generations.

But though many of our nations have taken bold actions and share in this determination, we did not come here today to celebrate progress. We came because there is so much more progress to be made. We came because there is so much more work to be done.

It is work that will not be easy. As we head towards Copenhagen, there should be no illusions that the hardest part of our journey is in front of us. We seek sweeping but necessary change in the midst of a global recession, where every nation's most immediate priority is reviving their economy and putting their people back to work. And so all of us will face doubts and difficulties in our own capitals as we try to reach a lasting solution to the climate challenge.

But difficulty is no excuse for complacency. Unease is no excuse for inaction. And we must not allow the perfect to become the enemy of progress. Each of us must do what we can when we can to grow our economies without endangering our planet - and we must all do it together. We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.

We also cannot allow the old divisions that have characterized the climate debate for so many years to block our progress. Yes, the developed nations that caused much of the damage to our climate over the last century still have a responsibility to lead. And we will continue to do so - by investing in renewable energy, promoting greater efficiency, and slashing our emissions to reach the targets we set for 2020 and our long-term goal for 2050.

But those rapidly-growing developing nations that will produce nearly all the growth in global carbon emissions in the decades ahead must do their part as well. Some of these nations have already made great strides with the development and deployment of clean energy. Still, they will need to commit to strong measures at home and agree to stand behind those commitments just as the developed nations must stand behind their own. We cannot meet this challenge unless all the largest emitters of greenhouse gas pollution act together. There is no other way.

We must also energize our efforts to put other developing nations - especially the poorest and most vulnerable - on a path to sustainable growth. These nations do not have the same resources to combat climate change as countries like the United States or China do, but they have the most immediate stake in a solution. For these are the nations that are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet - famine and drought; disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources. Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both. It will do little good to alleviate poverty if you can no longer harvest your crops or find drinkable water.

That is why we have a responsibility to provide the financial and technical assistance needed to help these nations adapt to the impacts of climate change and pursue low-carbon development.

What we are seeking, after all, is not simply an agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions. We seek an agreement that will allow all nations to grow and raise living standards without endangering the planet. By developing and disseminating clean technology and sharing our know-how, we can help developing nations leap-frog dirty energy technologies and reduce dangerous emissions.

As we meet here today, the good news is that after too many years of inaction and denial, there is finally widespread recognition of the urgency of the challenge before us. We know what needs to be done. We know that our planet's future depends on a global commitment to permanently reduce greenhouse gas pollution. We know that if we put the right rules and incentives in place, we will unleash the creative power of our best scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to build a better world. And so many nations have already taken the first steps on the journey towards that goal.

But the journey is long. The journey is hard. And we don't have much time left to make it. It is a journey that will require each of us to persevere through setback, and fight for every inch of progress, even when it comes in fits and starts. So let us begin. For if we are flexible and pragmatic; if we can resolve to work tirelessly in common effort, then we will achieve our common purpose: a world that is safer, cleaner, and healthier than the one we found; and a future that is worthy of our children. Thank you.

Letterman's Top Ten (VIDEO)

10. Heard the lady with the heart shaped potato was gonna be here.
9. Thought it would be fun to watch someone else get heckled
8. Something to do with that whole cash for clunkers deal
7. Every president since Teddy Roosevelt has done it
6. Someone offers you 600 bucks you take it ladies and gentlemen
5. We told him Megan Fox would be here
4. Needed some time to hang out before check in time at his hotel
3. I have no idea
2. Said yes, without thinking, like Bush did with Iraq.
1. Wanted to congratulate Dave on the big Emmy win.