home

Monday Afternoon Open Thread

If nationalization of the banks does not interest you, you may need one of these, an Open Thread.

This is an Open Thread.

< Down the Path To Nationalization? | A. Sullivan v. Reality On "Entitlement Reform" >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Denver right wing radio personality (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by magster on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:57:55 PM EST
    repeatedly referred to Congresswoman as "Vag!na Degette".  His name is Peter Boyles, and he's the main personality on KHOW.

    Looks like he's getting some flack, but not enough to apologize to the Congresswoman.

    If you care, here's contact info:

    630 KHOW-AM
    4695 S. Monaco Street
    Denver, CO 80237
    Main phone: (303) 713-8000
    E-mail form

    Kris Olinger, AM programming, Clear Channel Denver - krisolinger@clearchannel.com
    303-713-8480

    Lee Larsen, market manager, Clear Channel Denver - leelarsen@clearchannel.com
    303-713-8400  

    Clear Channel (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:55:12 PM EST
    and thier Neanderthalization of political discussion project are the real problem here.

    They've bought hundreds of outlets around the country to basically serve up clones of that slob in Denver.

    The real speech threat here is a monopoly of the airwaves.

    Parent

    Seems kinda tame to me.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:11:15 PM EST
    but then again I'm a big fan of making fun of congress-critters.  They've got all the weapons, we've only got ridicule.  Sophmoric and kinda lame joke, yes...but I don't find it offensive.  I would expect a radio personality to be a little more clever...but whatever, that is taste.

    Nobody seemed to mind all the Dick Cheney pen*s jokes...is the vag*na off limits?

    Parent

    Yeah, maybe because I like her that (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by magster on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:23:15 PM EST
    I'm more offended.  

    Just seemed to me, though, to be more of an attack on women in general.  

    Parent

    So, are you a listener? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:37:24 PM EST
    Seems to me this is a station I would avoid if it were broadcasting near me.

    Parent
    It's #4 on my preset control for AM (none / 0) (#16)
    by magster on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:47:25 PM EST
    They have a decent consumer advocacy host right after Boyles.  I don't listen to Boyles though.

    Parent
    Too easy (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by CST on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:30:00 PM EST
    His name was Dick...

    Talk to me when they are making fun of a Gina :)


    Parent

    Wait a minute-you heard broadcast personalities (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by jawbone on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:52:08 PM EST
    referto VP Cheney as Pen!s Cheney or some such thing?

    I never ever heard of such a thing. There have been ugly uses of the word "vagina" on the web, which have made me cringe, but over the air broadcast people saying such things?

    I have never heard a broadcaster use the word "vagina" as a name for any politician.

    The guy in question is not aiming at my demographic, or that of most of the people here, but I can't believe this wouldn't cross some line at the FCC.

    Plus, "vagina" and "Diane" don't even rhyme. Crikey.

    Parent

    "Dick" Cheney (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:53:22 PM EST
    Uh, that's his name. Not the same. Now, Little (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by jawbone on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:54:40 PM EST
    Dickie....

    Parent
    Nah (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:04:54 PM EST
    Dickie does not have quite the bite, it reminds my of a fake turtle neck more than a slur. Anyway people are called dicks and c*nts all the time. More dicks than c*nts though, but as more women assume positions of power c*nt may even wind up being a nickname for Cornelia or something like that.

    At least we will be hearing it more.

    Parent

    On over the air broadcast media? By news people? (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jawbone on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 10:05:12 PM EST
    I've never heard that, seen that, read that in any MCM print media.

    You have?

    Parent

    Not Sure (none / 0) (#61)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:00:37 AM EST
    As CST kindly pointed out is that Gina is a better comparison to Dick than Cornelia.

    Parent
    Link (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:03:02 AM EST
    This links to a comment here, correct? I was (none / 0) (#72)
    by jawbone on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:20:23 PM EST
    asking if any over the air broadcaster has called an elected woman official Vagina Whateverherlastnamemightbe.

    That's all.

    There would be suspensions, at the very least. Apologies, etc.

    Parent

    I Like Vag*nas (none / 0) (#75)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 01:09:24 PM EST
    And do not see any problem except in that it makes Boyles look really stupid. If someone called Santorum pen*s Santorum I would also think it made the person calling him look stupid.  

    Maybe he wanted to call her c*nt and used vag*na as a euphemism.

    Otherwise seems unclear and stupid and I do not get the rhyme part.

    Parent

    Anybody ever heard... (none / 0) (#64)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 02:19:35 AM EST
    "Pri@k Cheney" being said on the airwaves? I haven't. That's how "tame" it's been when it comes to the Bush cabal.

    Amazing that Cheney was overheard, on the floor of the US Senate, telling Lehay (wasn't it) to "go fu@k yourself" - which is arguably not nearly as bad as getting shot in the face, or outed as an undercover CIA agent.

    But, even that, is not nearly as bad as the fate that Dick Cheney sent Pat Tillman to in Afghanistan. Tillman was a celebrity pro athlete who subsequently proved to be a proverbial antiwar, irreligious, foxhole atheist, who pre-arranged a personal meeting with Noam Chomsky upon his return stateside.

    But, Tillman was killed there. And, after numerous high level cover-ups it was determined that Tillman was shot by 'friendly fire', in close proximity, three times in the forehead. The coroner's report led the The Aassociated Press and others to conclude Tillman had been murdered.

    I see that as the natural progression of events for anybody who crosses old man Cheney. Obviously, "Pri@k" wouldn't begin to describe him.

    Parent

    C'mon.... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 09:18:55 AM EST
    Where you been for 8 years?  Bill Maher practically makes his living making fun of Big Dick Cheney and the Chimp.

    Vag*na is a proper term, why would the FCC have a problem with it?

    Granted, it is sophmoric humor, and not at all clever...but I can't get worked up about it.

    But is each of our rights to get offended and let the station know or not.  Party on if it bothers you.

    Parent

    Boyles... (none / 0) (#67)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:23:30 AM EST
    ...is actually one of the least offensive talk radio "personalities" that we have here.  But then, compared to the rest of the clinically batcrap insane reactionary nutjobs, that's not hard.  

    Still, this is pretty petty, juvenile stuff to be spouting.  And he is making things worse by refusing to apologize and be done with it.  

    If you'd step out of your echo chamber you'd like totally know that.  :)

    Parent

    LOL.... (none / 0) (#68)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:32:53 AM EST
    Actuually I respect a refusal to apologize more than a Phelps-esque non-sincere canned apology.

    If the guy sees nothing wrong with it, he should refuse to apologize.  No doubt it is juvenile, but perhaps getting worked up about it is as well?  Just don't listen.

    Parent

    Oh... (none / 0) (#69)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:42:45 AM EST
    ...I don't listen and I don't read his newpaper "column" either.  I'm not too worked up about it, but I can understand those who are.  We all have our own hot-buttons.

    I too am getting a little tired of the "non-sincere canned apologies".  Phelps, A-Rod, et al.  The list seems to grow everyday.

    Parent

    Absolutely... (none / 0) (#71)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:54:34 AM EST
    That is freedom in all its glory...I just like to critique the critics, pc police are one of my hot buttons:)

    Parent
    jokes are not universally funny (none / 0) (#34)
    by DXP on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:40:39 PM EST
    when making fun of someone. Some are offended by shot apes and others by sexist slurs. What one finds funny says a lot about one.

    Parent
    Republicans Keep 'Forgetting' To Give Bill Clinton (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by daring grace on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:47:06 PM EST
    his due...Or else they're hoping the rest of us will ignore them as they try and rewrite recent history.

    Jonathan Chait's latest example from a Politico interview with Governor Mark Sanford:

    Wrong Answer, Governor Sanford

    Mark Sanford, interviewed by Politico:
    Q: The president is going to promise to reduce the deficit by half. How realistic do you think that is?

    A: What president hasn't done that in like the last 25, 30 years?

    Um, all of them except Bill Clinton?

    Clinton was the only true leader we've (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 07:27:05 PM EST
    had in many, many years. Leaders set the goals and let the people find the way to bring it to reality.

    Politicians use fear to keep the masses in line. Bush used terror; the current administration is using the gloomy long, long road to economic recovery and the promise of many more jobs lost before we get there...not to mention many, many more of our personal earnings will need to go to the banks and big business before we can expect anything to trickle slowly back to us.

    Clinton's optimistic leadership always made me feel safe...even when the road got bumpy.

    Parent

    Did Biden not get the memo? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:25:56 PM EST
    On February 19th, Biden said this to an audience at the CIA, where he presided over the swearing-in of Leon Panetta as the head of the agency:

    "[President Obama] issued an executive order to reverse the policies that -- in my view and the view of many in this agency -- caused America to fall short of its founding principles, and which gave al Qaeda a powerful recruiting tool," Vice President Biden said before administering the oath. "As a result of these orders, we will close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. We will have a single standard across the government for interrogation in armed conflict. And we'll ensure the Red Cross access to all those who are detained in armed conflict."

    Yet, the very next day, the Obama administration
    siding with the Bush White House, contended Friday that detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights.

    In a two-sentence court filing, the Justice Department said it agreed that detainees at Bagram Airfield cannot use U.S. courts to challenge their detention.

    Do they not keep Biden in the loop?

    That Is NOt Contradictory (none / 0) (#48)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:31:00 PM EST
    Following the Geneva Conventions, and a single standard following intl law.

    As much as I am distraught about the ruling I see no contradiction there. Bagram will function as a POW camp with red cross access.

    I would prefer it be shut down.

    Parent

    You assume, of course (none / 0) (#49)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:36:42 PM EST
    that the Geneva Convention is being followed there.

    Parent
    Precedent? (none / 0) (#63)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:37:54 AM EST
    They may've delayed the Bagram makeover (none / 0) (#70)
    by lilburro on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:48:50 AM EST
    as they apparently did the GITMO makeover...

    CCR:

    Contrary to statements by the military, conditions at Guantánamo have not improved for the majority of detainees and are still in violation of the law. In this report, we describe the current conditions of confinement for the men at Guantánamo and make recommendations for bringing Camps 5, 6 and Echo into immediate compliance with "all applicable laws" governing the conditions of confinement of detainees, as required by President Obama's Executive Order.

    The descriptions of ongoing, severe solitary confinement, other forms of psychological abuse, incidents of violence and the threat of violence from guards, religious abuse, and widespread forced tube-feeding of hunger strikers indicate that the inhumane practices of the Bush Administration persist today at Guantánamo, despite President Obama's Executive Order, and should be remedied immediately.



    Parent
    Holbrooke, Afghanistan, Pakistan & India (none / 0) (#1)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 01:39:12 PM EST
    I just saw most of a very recent interview of Richard Holbrooke by Charlie Rose.  Very instructive.  I got the sense from what Holbrooke says that he, SoS, Pres, Gates, Petraeus, etc. all working well together to address issues in this area of the world. The interview provides an excellent overview of what is going on in the region, U.S. approach, etc.

    Saw it too (none / 0) (#29)
    by NYShooter on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:13:07 PM EST
    When Holbrooke (who I actually like) was first appointed to his position, I was a little worried because he's quite an Alpha type of guy, and I thought he might pull a Joe Biden on us.

    But, not to worry, he spoke beautifully, very knowledgeable, respectfully deferred to Hillary, a real Team Player....sounds like we've got a really good bunch over there at State


    Parent

    Didn't Hillary state last week (none / 0) (#33)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:36:44 PM EST
    when questioned, that it was she who suggested to Obama that Holbrooke & Mitchell be appointed to their current positions?

    Parent
    very well could have been (none / 0) (#80)
    by NYShooter on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 02:44:49 PM EST
    Its quite gratifying to see a woman, well grounded, confident, and focused on results, who is not fearful of surrounding herself with powerful people, who might intimidate a less secure individual.

    Its even more gratifying to see those surrounding her have gotten the message and have eagerly signed on.

    Finally, we have a team who will represent us to the rest of the world in a manner that has been missing for so terribly long.

    Almost makes you want to cry.

    Parent

    Andrew Sullivan (none / 0) (#2)
    by lilburro on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:00:46 PM EST
    gets mad when he looks at your Toyota Highlander!

    To the failing economy, Sully sez:  wah.

    I (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:08:36 PM EST
    get mad when I look at Andrew Sullivan - are we even?

    (I also get mad when I look at Japanese cars, but that's another story)

    Parent

    I get mad... (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:17:09 PM EST
    at gamblers who welch...be they in the high stakes pits or the penny slots.

    Parent
    Some of the Very Annoying people (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:45:42 PM EST
    on the left blogs needed a memo to get it through their thick skulls that no, the Senate Dems can't just "make" the Republicans physically filibuster.

    DUH.

    Heh (none / 0) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:49:16 PM EST
    I remember having to school TINS on that years ago. Is that nonsense still going around?

    Parent
    Yup (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 02:51:31 PM EST
    When people spout that line, it makes me wonder if they know anything at all about the Senate, let alone Cloture.

    Parent
    Andgarden, you know ... (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:48:37 PM EST
    they don't.

    Even reporters who cover capital hill seem to get that stuff wrong all the time.

    Of course, in the case of reporters, that could be intentional.

    Parent

    "Intentional" is right and not just for (none / 0) (#60)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 11:45:19 PM EST
    reporters.

    Parent
    I have to dissent (none / 0) (#17)
    by Steve M on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:47:34 PM EST
    the Senate Rules did not emerge in their present form from a burning bush.  The rules, including the filibuster rule, are regularly modified.  No need for a nuclear option - any rule can be amended by a simple majority vote at the start of a new Congress.

    Let's assume that the filibuster itself is not going away, even though technically it only exists by virtue of the majority's continued acceptance.  Still, it is completely within the Democratic majority's power to make a filibuster more politically consequential, if they choose to.

    So the Democrats are kind of pushing it when they try the line, "Don't ask us to require a real filibuster! The rules don't allow for it!"  They wrote the very rules that they're hiding behind.

    In practical terms, this just means that we're going to have to mount an intensive campaign for filibuster reform in advance of the next Congress.

    Parent

    I'm all for changing the rules (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:51:02 PM EST
    to allow for a 60 vote requirement only when confirming judges for lifetime appointments. The Dems haven't proposed that, though.

    Parent
    BTW, (none / 0) (#24)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:54:48 PM EST
    the only effective difference between the nuclear option and what you propose is timing. And there are going to be a fair number of Democrats who will vote against any such proposal.

    Parent
    But, as I read the memo, (none / 0) (#31)
    by dk on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:24:29 PM EST
    all that has changed is that filibustering senators no longer have to speak indefinitely and, instead, only need to indefinitely ask for quorum calls.  

    So, while you can't force one particular senator to read phone books, you could force a group of senators to make quorum call after quorum call, right?  Same difference, in that the effect of both is to shut down the process of legislating, no?

    Parent

    Internationalization... (none / 0) (#12)
    by santarita on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:29:45 PM EST
    One problem in dealing with the large money center banks is that there are a number of stakeholders outside the US that will be affected by whatever decisions the USG takes with regards to those banks.  The stakeholders include banks in other nations, some of which are national banks, and corporations in other countries.  There are a lot of international contracts with international parties.  The takeover by the USG may start a cascade of contract defaults.

    Given the international implications, the likelihood is that the USG will not take steps that could start cascading defaults without acting in concert with other governments.  

    The financial crisis is international and the only way to address it is with international coordination.  It will be interesting to see what kind of international cooperation agreements survive when the dust settles.

    Reactor Envy? (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:31:22 PM EST
    Or setting up for target practice?
    BAGHDAD - Iraq Electricity Minister Karim Wahid on Feb. 22 invited France to help Iraq build a nuclear power plant, three decades after Paris constructed a reactor near Baghdad that was bombed by Israeli warplanes.

    "We have had very good relationships with French companies," the minister told AFP in an interview.

    "I am willing to enter into contacts with the French nuclear agency and to start to build a nuclear power plant, because the future is nuclear," he said. "This is my perspective."

    link

    Have they cleared this... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    with their overlords?

    Parent
    Future "existential threat" (none / 0) (#74)
    by jondee on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:40:54 PM EST
    here we come.

    Parent
    Has anyone been following the Obama fiscal respon- (none / 0) (#22)
    by jawbone on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:53:40 PM EST
    sibility summit?

    Yes. (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by indy in sc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:02:30 PM EST
    Very well done imo.  Yet to be seen whether it yields anything constructive, but the closing section was excellent.  I particularly liked Obama's response to the congressman who essentially asked him to reign in Pelosi.  For those who didn't see, Obama's response was basically, sure--the majority needs to be inclusive, but the minority needs to be constructive.

    Parent
    Dow loses another 250 points (none / 0) (#26)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 03:56:34 PM EST
    Dow 6000! (none / 0) (#30)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:13:58 PM EST
    Karl Rove No Show (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:27:07 PM EST
    Looks like Mr Cooperation decided to blow off his subpoena to testify today. Last I heard Luskin agreed that executive privilege no longer an issue and Rove was going to cooperate with Conyers subpoena.

    What's next contempt of congress?

    via emptywheel


    Why bother? (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:45:24 PM EST
    Nothing is going to happen to him anyway. No one will touch him.

    Parent
    Because We Have Laws (none / 0) (#44)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:11:43 PM EST
    And some people in congress believe that Rule of Law should be followed. Not to mention the damage done to Siegelman and BushCo DOJ.

    Parent
    Oh, I agree (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:27:31 PM EST
    but my point is the DEMS will never touch him.  Rove knows where the bodies are buried - it's the only explanation for why they went along with Bush/Cheney/Rove on so many things.

    They will never touch him - rule of law or not.  Their political a$$es are more important to them than the rule of law.

    Parent

    We'll See (none / 0) (#47)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:28:34 PM EST
    "I've Never Had a Helicopter Before..." (none / 0) (#35)
    by daring grace on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:42:03 PM EST
    From Jake TapperAt the Fiscal Responsibility meeting this afternoon the president praised McCain and invited his comments about cutting spending and saving money in the budget.

    McCain reciprocated, praising Obama for having the meeting, and then said, among other things:

    "Your helicopter is now going to cost as much as Air Force One.  I don't think that there's any more graphic demonstration of how good ideas have -- have cost taxpayers an enormous amount of money."

    Said Obama, "I've already talked to (Defense Secretary Robert) Gates about a thorough review of the helicopter situation."

    Added the president, to laughter, "the helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me. Of course, I've never had a helicopter before. So, you know, maybe -- maybe I've been deprived and I didn't know it.But I think it is a -- it is an -- an example of the procurement process gone amuck, and -- and we're going to have to fix it."

    Much BIgger Story (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 05:08:25 PM EST
    This is damage control from an illegal BushCo deal. Bush secretely ordered the helicopter fleet to reward Italy for helping to give Bush fake evidence that Iraq had WMDs. Remember the Niger Forgeries that supposedly proved Saddam was secretly buying yellowcake from Niger to build a bomb?

    The Italian co Finmeccanica does not have the security clearance to build an Air FOrce One Helicopter, so Bush got Lockheed to sign on even though they would have nothing to do with the contract.

    It is quite the juicy scandal. From HuffPo:

    When reviewing the helicopter contract, President Obama can either be actively complicit by continuing with Finmeccanica; he can duck and cover by simply switching to the proper supplier, Sikorsky; or he can use the mandated review of this purchase decision to root out those in military, the aerospace industry and Congress who were willing to compromise the security of all subsequent American presidents so that Bush could cover up his core war crime.

    Well worth the read


    Parent

    Gary Locke for Commerce Secretary? (none / 0) (#36)
    by caseyOR on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:44:20 PM EST
    WaPo just sent me a press alert stating that former Washington governor Gary Locke is now the leading contender for Commerce Secretary.

    A commenter here on TL, (was it oldpro? or shoephone?), mentioned Locke as a choice back when Gregg imploded.

    CNN has it too. (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:45:59 PM EST
    From Wiki (none / 0) (#41)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:52:09 PM EST
    so take it for what it's worth - maybe someone from Washington state can give us more background on Locke.

    In 1982, Locke's South Seattle district elected him to the Washington House of Representatives, where he served as chairman of the Appropriations Committee. Eleven years later, in 1993, Locke made history by becoming the first Chinese American to be elected King County's County Executive, defeating incumbent Tim Hill. In 1996, he won the primary and general elections for governor, becoming the first Chinese-American state governor in North America. He easily won reelection in the 2000 governor's race.

    Democrats criticized Locke for embracing the Republican Party's no-new-taxes approach to dealing with Washington's budget woes during and after the 2001 economic turmoil. Among his spending-reduction proposals were laying off thousands of state employees; reducing health coverage; freezing most state employees' pay; and cutting funding for nursing homes and programs for the developmentally disabled. In his final budget, Locke suspended two voter-passed, pro-school initiatives while cutting state education funding. That same state budget, though, had record-high allocations for construction projects.

    On the national stage, Democrats saw Gary Locke as a rising star and a possible vice-presidential pick. He was chosen to give the Democrat's response to George W. Bush's 2003 State of the Union address. Former Washington Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge announced his plans to challenge Locke (supported by the state's political left) in the 2004 Democratic primary. Talmadge ended his campaign early for health reasons.



    Parent
    Gary Locke was the governor who refused (none / 0) (#42)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:54:38 PM EST
    to negotiate with Boeing and then watched them move their headquarters to Chicago. He started out as King County Executive and did a pretty good job there, but I can't say I was fond of him as governor.

    Parent
    With all due respect (none / 0) (#57)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 11:07:35 PM EST
    Mike Sears, the CFO, was the one who resigned and went to prison for the pentagon scandal and hiring. Condit resigned shortly after, but his role in that mess was never exposed and he was never indicted along with Sears.

    There are other comments in these threads about Locke that will give you the information you need about the Boeing/Locke deals.


    Parent

    Clearly you know enough to not be reading (none / 0) (#79)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 02:24:00 PM EST
    other people's vastly different facts. You are the one who started the Condit discussion, which had nothing to do with the HQ move I mentioned.

    BTW, I know Mike Sears and his wife. Why in heaven's name do you think he would have ever been willing to be the fall guy alone if he was due to take Condit's place and Condit was in on what was happening?  

    The current CEO of Ford, Allen Mulally, was due to succeed Condit and left Boeing when Stonecipher was given the job.


    Parent

    Sleeping Giant Awakening (none / 0) (#40)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 04:49:39 PM EST
    China is preparing to open a new phase in its race for the world's resources by using its huge currency reserves to buy foreign oil and gas companies.

    [snip]

    "Firms will be able to benefit from low-interest loans and, in some cases, direct capital injections," according to China Petroleum Daily.

    [snip]

    The possibility of a Chinese state subsidy for overseas acquisitions may ring alarm bells in Western economies. Four years ago, CNOOC tried to buy an American oil company, Unocal, and succeeded in outbidding its main US rival. But the Chinese firm eventually withdrew its offer amid opposition from American Congressmen. They opposed the idea of a private US firm falling into the lap of a state-owned company, bankrolled by the Chinese Communist Party.

    This time, China may calculate that Western governments are in a weaker position to object. They are, after all, spending billions on taking over their own companies, notably the banking sector.

    link

    Good to have a lot of cash on hand and little debt these days, not to mention the next year or two.


    Wonder how long Gibbs will be able to (none / 0) (#51)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 08:45:34 PM EST
    hold onto his job. He has a really hard time not letting out the big secrets...like what is going to happen to social security.

    Omigod, Gibbs sees SS insolvent now? (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Cream City on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 10:00:08 PM EST
    He had to backtrack a bit from that "it already has crossed the line" line, but he believes it.  He is a true believer so does not know the facts -- Helen Thomas is closer, putting SS solvency at 2040, but projections go even farther out than that.

    You're right, Gibbs' inability to finesse this reveals the falsity of the glib talk of others trying to get around it:  SS is a target.

    And that will make Obama a one-termer.  There were a lot of nonvoters who can be brought back out to overwhelm the overstated "youth vote."

    Parent

    Who was the former Daschle staffer who helped BO (none / 0) (#54)
    by jawbone on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 10:20:06 PM EST
    realize that voting to confirm Roberts would be politically damaging to  his presidential ambitions? Rouse?

    Yes, Pete Rouse.

    Who will tell Obama that messing with SocSec will be detrimental not only to his political standing, but also to the security of all Americans?

    I caught moments of the Q&A at the fiscal summit today, and Obama did seem, for the first time I've seen him without a teleprompter, relaxed and in his element.  He did not hem and haw as much, which made it much more comfortable for me to watch him.

    But clarity of his vision, that I haven't seen yet. Maybe he's working it out.

    Bill Clinton knew for years what he wanted to achieve. He made adjustments to deal with conditions on the ground (like the Repub takeover), but he had a clear agenda. Which he made every effort to enact.

    I do not know yet what Obama's agenda is. And he has new conditions to deal with, so maybe he's winging it, making major adjustments before he can tell the public. Tough times for a newbie to executive responsibilities. Good luck, Mr. Prez.

    Wish us luck!

    Parent

    CC, you're too kind... (none / 0) (#58)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 11:29:35 PM EST
    I submit that Gibbs does know "the facts", as well as you or I or Helen Thomas. I mean who doesn't know that? Even far right-wing ideologues know.

    It's just bee-zare to hear the Obama administration pretending not to know the same thing the GOP leadership pretends not to know.

    Parent

    And Obama will no longer be a "young guy" by then. He'll be, what, 51 - yikes!

    Parent
    Iran's Jews Speak (none / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 01:52:09 PM EST
    Or at least one prominent one does. Not what you would think..
    Still a mystery hovers over Iran's Jews. It's important to decide what's more significant: the annihilationist anti-Israel ranting, the Holocaust denial and other Iranian provocations -- or the fact of a Jewish community living, working and worshipping in relative tranquillity.

    Perhaps I have a bias toward facts over words, but I say the reality of Iranian civility toward Jews tells us more about Iran -- its sophistication and culture -- than all the inflammatory rhetoric.

    That may be because I'm a Jew and have seldom been treated with such consistent warmth as in Iran. Or perhaps I was impressed that the fury over Gaza, trumpeted on posters and Iranian TV, never spilled over into insults or violence toward Jews. Or perhaps it's because I'm convinced the "Mad Mullah" caricature of Iran and likening of any compromise with it to Munich 1938 -- a position popular in some American Jewish circles -- is misleading and dangerous.

    NYT via Laura Rozen

    Speechwars: State of the Union, Inaugural Speeches (none / 0) (#77)
    by daring grace on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 01:58:12 PM EST
    This is a nifty site for playing with (she says as she has wasted part of an afternoon when she should be working but is waiting to go pick up her cat who is recovering at the vet's from a neutering procedure). Sorry! Too much info and too much tea consumption in the last two hours...

    You can type in a word and the site produces a graph showing if (and how many times) the word was uttered by a president (and by which ones) in various speeches.

    I was surprised (a little) to see how the word 'god' played out down through our history. And the word 'treachery' which, for some reason, also came to my mind.

    Their list provides the word pirates (and British, Muslims and Soviet which covers a lot of territory ) among others.


    Fun! (none / 0) (#78)
    by jbindc on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 02:07:12 PM EST
    Presidents have said "America" 1197 times in their speeches and "freedom" only 685 times.

    Parent
    So.... (none / 0) (#81)
    by jbindc on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 02:48:38 PM EST
    Is "oversight" not really that important to Dems anymore (unless of course, it involves the auto companies)?

    The main investigative committee in the House has not held a single hearing this year.

    Despite the fact that the government is steering hundreds of billions of dollars to financial firms and has approved the spending of hundreds of billions more, the House Oversight Committee is one of two panels  in the lower chamber that have yet to hold a hearing in this Congress. The other is the Homeland Security Committee.

    The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, now under the control of Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), is scheduled to have its very first hearing on Thursday.

    Republicans charge that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) disarmed the committee -- and its investigative power -- in the wake of a Democratic White House. While President Bush was in office, Democrats on the committee held several investigations.

    "Speaker Pelosi gutted this committee," said the panel's ranking member, Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).
    Issa defended Towns in the face of having "no money, no staff and no members," but he questioned Pelosi's commitment to rigorous oversight under the Obama administration.

    "She could have gutted the ability for Henry Waxman to do oversight two years ago if she wanted to," Issa said. "But it wasn't until President Obama took office that she did so."

    For Issa, the move is a dangerous one, and one that's indicative of taking the cop off the beat at a time of unprecedented federal spending.

    "To neuter the only impartial committee right now is absurd," Issa said.

    As chairman of the Oversight Committee from 2006 until last year -- when he forced Energy and Commerce panel Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) to give up his gavel early -- Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wielded significant influence, investigating everything from the Bush administration's use of e-mail to private security contractors in Iraq to steroids in Major League Baseball.

    And when the financial crisis blindsided Washington last fall, Pelosi tapped her home-state colleague -- along with Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) -- to lead the initial investigations into what happened.

    Waxman held six hearings over the holiday recess in between the 110th and 111th Congresses, including probes into the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the cause and effect of the bailout of American International Group (AIG), the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the role that hedge funds, federal regulators and credit rating agencies play in the financial sector.

    The committee's scheduled topic for its first hearing of the year on Thursday: an examination of the Excluded Parties List System, a federal database intended to prevent persons and businesses ineligible to receive federal contracts due to past misconduct from receiving new awards, according to the committee.



    Durbin tells Burris to resign (none / 0) (#82)
    by jbindc on Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 04:22:14 PM EST
    Link

    Sen. Dick Durbin urged Sen. Roland Burris on Tuesday to quit his job as the junior senator from Illinois, but the embattled senator has no plans of leaving the Senate.

    In a private meeting that lasted nearly an hour, Durbin told Burris that the growing controversy over his appointment would make it difficult for him to continue serving in the Senate. Durbin also expressed disappointment that Burris did not reveal his extensive contacts and his fund raising efforts for the ousted Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who appointed him to the seat on Dec. 30.

    "I told him that under the circumstances, I would consider resigning if I were in his shoes," Durbin said. "He said he would not resign. That is his conclusion. At this point, I suggested to him that he had to do everything in his power to bring all the facts out as completely as possible."

    Durbin warned Burris that he would lose a Democratic primary if he were to run in 2010, but Burris said he has not made a decision on whether to run next fall.