A handshake deal is reached around the table

By Carl

Now, I'm against most bailouts, but this industry is in hard times:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Another major American industry is asking for assistance as the global financial crisis continues: Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and Girls Gone Wild CEO Joe Francis said Wednesday they will request that Congress allocate $5 billion for a bailout of the adult entertainment industry.

“The take here is that everyone and their mother want to be bailed out from the banks to the big three,” said Owen Moogan, spokesman for Larry Flynt. “The porn industry has been hurt by the downturn like everyone else and they are going to ask for the $5 billion. Is it the most serious thing in the world? Is it going to make the lives of Americans better if it happens? It is not for them to determine.”

Francis said in a statement that “the US government should actively support the adult industry's survival and growth, just as it feels the need to support any other industry cherished by the American people."

Look, boob jobs ain't cheap. This is clearly an industry that is desperate for assistance. It needs to be firmed up and a hard injection of capital is probably just what the doctor ordered after his examination.

Sales reports do seem to indicate that things are sagging in porn. Market penetration is way off, and their assets simply aren't what they used to be. Of course, prior years' results could have been artificially inflated, but my suspicion is we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg.

The hole is deep, my friends. I've studied reams of data which suggest that at least half the adult stars blew their chances to sock away a little for retirement and will have to press their noses to the grindstones in order to make ends meat.

In the true spirit of American capitalism, these pioneers of prurience have opened wide and bared their assets for the shot, just the shot, at a peak market.

But as we all know, markets have their ups and downs, and no doubt right now, porn is at its bottom. However, with a brief respite, and this stimulus package, I have no doubt that as interest rises, this market too shall begin to swell and grow.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Vote for Simply Left Behind in the Weblog Awards.

**********

Needless to say, there's much more on this oh-so-sexy story over at Memeorandum. Check out Think Progress, which notes that Bush's '08 stimulus package stimulated the porn industry. -- MJWS

Sign of the Apocalypse #62: Joe the Plumber, war correspondent and pro-Israeli propagandist

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Seriously.

This is the second time that Samuel "Joe" Wurzelbacher has made our SOTA list. First he got a book deal, now he's off to war, sort of:

TOLEDO, Ohio – Joe The Plumber is putting down his wrenches and picking up a reporter's notebook.

The Ohio man who became a household name during the presidential campaign says he is heading to Israel as a war correspondent for the conservative Web site pjtv.com.

Samuel J. Wurzelbacher (WUR'-zuhl-bah-kur) says he'll spend 10 days covering the fighting.

He tells WNWO-TV in Toledo that he wants to let Israel's "'Average Joes' share their story."

That's right, he's being sent over to cover the war for Pyjamas Media's TV arm -- that is, for a right-wing media outlet.

But just who are these Israeli "Average Joes"? Will he really be interviewing average Israelis, many of whom are far more critical of their own government's actions than Israel's defenders, like Joe himself, in the U.S.? I suspect not. More likely, he'll be interviewing his Israeli counterparts, carefully chosen, right-wing regurgitaters of official government propaganda. See, he'll tell his all-too-eager right-wing American audience, these Israelis really want war just as much as you do. Not that Joe himself is smart enough to figure this all out for himself. He's just a tool, a pawn, in the larger propaganda war that Israel and its American allies are waging. (And I say this as someone who, in the past, has been extremely supportive of Israel and her various military excursions, arguing that it has a right to, and that it must, defend itself.)

What would be far more instructive would be to send Joe off to meet some average Palestinian Joes, those who may or may not much care for Hamas but who certainly don't like the Israelis invading them. Perhaps Joe could, for example, ask one of these average Palestinian Joes how he feels about the Israeli attack on that U.N. school. Perhaps he could even talk to someone who lost a loved one in that attack.

But, no, Joe is one of Israel's more mindless supporters, and all we'll get from him -- not that I'll be watching -- is some all-too-predictable pro-Israeli spin.

The situation in Gaza is complicated. A resolution to the current conflict, not to mention to the larger problem, will be difficult to achieve, to say the least. In his own pathetic way, Joe the Plumber just makes it all worse.

Activists find ways to stay involved

By Carol Gee

People all over the world have protested for one side or the other in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. AlterNet reported that, "An unprecedented number of Americans question Israel's actions in Gaza.* (1/6/09). Activism, protest, organizing -- there are legitimate activist organizations as well as illegitimate ones. The following story refers to the sometimes very dark and terrible side of protest. On 1/6/09, McClatchy reported on a "Cross burned in yard of man who helped troubled youth."*

"People are getting ready"# to be actively involved in helping to get our nation back on track during these very dark times. Our president-elect has invited this. The official working website of the incoming administration is here: The Obama-Biden Transition Team.

"Grassroots for Obama" was spawned by his campaign in the blogosphere. Communication on the web is also done through e-mail. Activists probably receive a lot of e-mails. I am not even a real "activist," in the classic sense, and still my box is usually full. These are tough times* and there are lots of needs. The e-mails, while absolutely legitimate, are unsolicited. I have no idea how I have gotten on these lists. I find the range of good causes heartening and interesting, however. A few examples follow:

• Blago -- Grainger@GraingerTerry.com: Phil Molfese is the contact. The cause is a "citizen group to hold demonstration" outside of Governor Blagojevich's office, 100 W. Randolph St., Friday at noon. They will ask the governor to resign. I will not be attending but you might want to show up.


• Media Bias -- Sarah Coles wanted me to know about "the top 5 trend predictions for political communications and political media under the Obama presidency," via Skewz (www.skewz.com), the first user-driven political media aggregation site for exposing media bias. I joined Skewz, an interesting twist, and intend to post biased pieces as I find them.

If I were a young person, I would also find all the the communications perfectly normal, but I am a granny. Millenials are activists, very involved with each other and with their communities, their nation and the world. I am by no means a milennial, but I do get a lot of e-mails from Michelle and Barach, and David Plouffe at Barack Obama.com, where I have posted just a few times. The Democratic Strategist explains:

. . . there is probably a good reason why Obama has decided to keep his personal organization and its vast electronic relationship with millions of supporters intact instead of disbanding it or folding it into the national or state Democratic parties. This officially nonpartisan network will work overtime to keep the bipartisan grassroots engaged in the struggle in Washington, and deploy pressure accordingly. This formidable organization is a tangible asset that should not be dismissed or minimized.

The range of kinds of potential involvement in Obama's grassroots bipartisanship is wide. The biggest thing right now, of course, is to be one of the ten people selected to attend the Inauguration as the Obamas' guests. The first guest has just been announced. Quoting Michelle's e-mail:

Cynthia Russell from Newberry, Florida, and her guest will attend the welcome ceremony, Barack's swearing-in, the Inaugural Parade, and our Neighborhood Inaugural Ball.

Cynthia is a builder and has been feeling the impact of the recent economic crunch. She wrote:

"I'm a single woman who has been building homes for over 18 years. I've supported myself and have been able to help out my mother from time to time. Now I find myself wondering how much longer I can hold on and be able to pay my bills and keep the doors open for business. Barack gives me hope. Hope that 2009 will truly bring change to Americans who find themselves in this mess with me."

Earlier a first set of Obama "house meetings" focused on getting people to tell President-elect Obama how to fix health care, is probably the first of many example of many similar efforts to come in the future. Obama coffee mugs were for sale at Christmas time. Michelle's Christmas card suggested donating to your local food bank or to the USO care package program. Filling out a survey (550,000 participated) prompted this recent interesting information:

. . . your ideas about the future of this organization are taking shape. Here are a few things you shared in the survey:

• House meetings were the primary way supporters got involved in the campaign


• People are excited to volunteer around a number of top issues, including education, the environment, health care, poverty, and the economy
• 86 percent of respondents feel it's important to help Barack's administration pass legislation through grassroots support


• 68 percent feel it's important to help elect state and local candidates who share the same vision for our country


• And a staggering 10 percent of respondents indicated that they would be interested in running for elected office

This feedback is essential to our next steps, because this movement is fueled by your ideas and your passion.

I have registered/joined several activist organizations, though I have not contributed money. They include:

1. One.org -- This very active organization looked back at a great 2008. The organization's current effort is a petition drive to ask President-elect Obama to, "In your inaugural address, please make a clear affirmation of your pledge to fight poverty and preventable diseases worldwide, and support that statement with an FY2010 budget request that puts the U.S. on track to meet your historic commitments."


2. WEcansolveit.org -- The We Campaign is a project of The Alliance for Climate Protection -- a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort founded by Nobel laureate and former Vice President Al Gore. The goal of the Alliance is to build a movement that creates the political will to solve the climate crisis.

The New Year is a good time get reconnected to your community.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo"* and Jon#.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Polling Palin: Where she stands for 2010

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Sarah Palin is beloved by conservatives here and there, if not everywhere, but it's not clear what her own state thinks of her when it comes to a possible challenge to Sen. Lisa Murkowski in 2010.

On Monday, Alaska's KTUU-TV reported on a new poll showing Palin a solid 24 points behind Murkowski. The same polling firm gave Murkowski a 27-point lead, according to the right-wing Alaska Standard.

Pretty convincing, no?

No.

A Research 2000 poll conducted for Daily Kos a few weeks ago put Palin ahead of Murkowski by a solid 24 points.

Alaska is a difficult state to poll, as 2008 proved yet again, but 24/27 points one way and 24 points the other? What gives?

As polling guru Nate Silver notes, "this is pretty unprecedented," even for Alaska. What he finds, though, is that the pro-Murkowski polling is dubious. Although he doesn't discuss the firm that conducted it, Dittman Research, he points out that The Alaska Standard, though on the right, is vehemently anti-Palin and pro-Murkowski. How convenient that it would produce a poll according with its preferences.

According to KTUU, Dave Dittman himself criticized the Research 2000 poll, but my sense is to go with Silver on this. Palin may not be ahead by so much -- and there's still a long way to go before the 2010 primaries -- but she undoubtedly poses a significant threat to Murkowski.

Whether Palin runs is another matter. So far, there has been no indication that she intends to. Still, Murkowski is right to be concerned. Palin isn't about to go away anytime soon.

More on Panetta

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I don't have much to add to my thoughts from yesterday on the Panetta-to-CIA pick. He may turn out to be just what the CIA needs, a superb organizational leader with fantastic political skills and an inside track to Obama, or he may, given his lack of intelligence experience, fail miserably either to reform the CIA or to rejuvenate it and to make it even more relevant under a friendlier president.

As with many of Obama's appointees, I'll take a wait-and-hope-and-see approach.

According to Charles Faddis, a "retired senior CIA operations officer," quoted by CQ's Jeff Stein, the reaction to the Panetta pick from the rank-and-file at the CIA has been "overwhelmingly negative":

These are people who are sweating blood everyday to make things happen and living for the day that somebody is going to come in, institute real reform and turn the CIA into the vital, effective organization it should be. To them this choice just says that no such changes are impending and that all they can look forward to is business as usual.

Faddis himself is an Obama supporter, but, to him, "Panetta is not the guy we need to run CIA right now," given that "he knows nothing about intelligence, particularly human intelligence."

Still, Panetta has his prominent supporters, including Sen. Evan Bayh, as well as leading intelligence experts like Paul Pillar and Gregory Treverton. And at The Daily Beast, Leslie Gelb writes that Panetta is a great choice -- and exactly what Langley needs:

The next best thing for the CIA and the best thing for the country is to have Leon Panetta in the job. He is a nonpartisan Democrat, a proven manager, a wise man without being a congenital middle-of-the-roader, and someone who truly knows how to navigate between the political pressures that so dominate Washington without being overcome by them.

As I said, we'll see (though, given that it's the CIA, there's a lot that we won't see).

The key, though, is not so much Panetta as Obama. As Michael Crowley puts it, "[t]he far more important and interesting question is what policies Obama will hand down to the CIA from on high, particularly when it comes to whether we will continue a policy of renditioning terror suspects to other countries for 'interrogation.' Panetta is a hard-liner against torture but he was present at the creation of the rendition practice under Bill Clinton in the 1990s -- but it's Obama's call anyway, not his.

Not to take anything away from what the CIA director does, but it's the president who is ultimately responsible. What is needed, post-Bush, is not just organizational reform, but policy reform, and it is Obama who must be the bringer of change.

A day in the life

By Carl

There's a man I see at the subway station where I exit the system to go to my office.

Let me describe the station: annexed to the Grand Central Terminal is a platform for the 42 Street Shuttle. It's an open air station, in that the token booths... I guess I have to call them Metrocard machines now, c'est dommage... are on a mezzanine, and there are four open stairways leading down to the train platform.

This mezzanine is shaped like an "H" and overhangs the platforms on one end. Along these corridors are office buildings with stairways that lead to the subway, one of New York's many hidden attractions.

One corridor leads to two buildings, and is lightly travelled, so lightly that the shops along this walkway have shuttered. There was a locksmith and a shoe store, both long gone and gated now.

Down this corridor, dimly lit with greying grimy walls, stands a emaciated man with an unkempt fro and the wisp of a beard. Usually, he's wearing some bizarre combination of clothing. Today, it was a pair of running tights, and a hoodie sweatshirt.

I understand why he wears what he wears: he gets these clothes donated by the overpriced clothing stores in the terminal itself, who probably throw clothes at him, rather than have him linger in their stores with the high priced running shoes and the double-mark-up shirts. Even his shoes speak of high end, albeit leftovers.

Sometimes I see him practicing karate katas, waving his hands with force and purpose, kicking high over his head, but nearly silently.

I'm sure the cops have warned him. There's usually a cop or three on the platform or on the mezzanine. You could say this is ground zero for the anti-terror forces of the NYPD.

Maybe he practices these forms because in his head he imagines kicking bin Laden in the teeth when he shows up wired and strapped with explosives.

Maybe he feels he needs to keep in shape because down in the subway, when things get tough in the city, is where death happens. Certainly, the number of homeless, which has crept steadily upward since the 90s, is beginning an inexorable geometry of expansion.

Maybe he's just insane.

Sometimes he just stands there. In the summer, he wears worn jeans cutoff at the knees and held up with a rope like Lon Chaney's Wolfman.

Sometimes he sings, but not very often and not very loud.

Sometimes, he's scary, screaming and ranting at everyone and everything, including me when I need to walk past him to get to the bank. I ignore it, of course. I've seen how high he kicks.

He holds court in this corridor, this dingy remnant of better days in corporate America. The fence that separates the mezzanine from the platform is embedded in a concrete knee wall, tiled with, well, white ceramic tile laid in the subway pattern.

A long banquette for his imaginary court.

He never harasses anyone who walks by, apart from the occasional angry running commentary. He never asks or demands spare change, which sets him apart from his homeless brethren and their imitators. He never accepts a handout. I know. I've tried.

And he never looks lost. He always seems to know that he is precisely where he needs to be, when he needs to be there, even when I've seen him patrolling the vaulted main room of the terminal, rummaging through the bins for leftover food.

This is his home, his castle, his palace, this grand and glorious monument to man's inability to remain in one place for very long.

Ironic, ain't it? He tolerates we many, we unhappy many, we band of bummers, because we cook for him, we clean for him, and we entertain him; hundreds of thousands of jesters a day, regaling in our finery. What must he make of us?

The station nominally closes its doors at 2AM for cleaning, but I know, I mean, I know, he's found a spot where he can't be seen and watches his staff cleaning his mansion.

Or maybe he doesn't care to hide himself. Maybe he's allowed by the MTA to wander freely, picking up the leftovers of the food court, sleeping on a bench somewhere because it's warm. I'd like to think so. I'd like to think that this man, whom we might pity, has been allowed the dignity by the bureaucrats and governance to remain in his home.

And yet, I can't help but feel that he deserves better than this Fisher King-like life he leads. Yes, he seems happy enough, and yes, he's refused help from me, but how can we know for sure that he isn't simply overly suspicious? How can we know he doesn't know how to ask for help? Indeed, how can we be certain that anyone's ever been able to ask him properly?

In a country overseen by Republicans for six of the past eight years, in a state run until recently by Republicans, in a city run by Republicans for decades until one finally had the sense to say basta! and became an independent, this man stands as his own monument to the torment and torture of the poorest of the poor, the meekest of the meek, the most trod-upon of our society.

A shining example of Republic-tude. Mental health be damned! We have wars to fight and cronies to enrich! Economic royalists, we say!

For this man's sake, and for the sake of others like him who have no voice, who hold no seat at the table of American politics but who have to live with our laws and our government, I truly pray that the new hope that Obama promises will include him.

By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Vote for Simply Left Behind in the Weblog Awards

Sanjay Gupta for surgeon general?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The WaPo's Howard Kurtz is reporting that Obama has asked celebrity tele-Dr. Sanjay Gupta, he of CNN and CBS fame, to be the new surgeon general.

Now, I'm in no position to question Gupta's abilities as a neurosurgeon or otherwise his medical qualifications. He may very well be an excellent doctor, as he seems to be (he performed brain surgery during the Iraq invasion in 2003). Furthermore, there is no doubt that he is telegenic and that he would make an excellent spokesman for public health issues. And, indeed, what's needed in that position is not so much expertise in medicine as the ability to communicate effectively with the broader public, that is, to inform and teach through the media. (Think C. Everett Koop and his anti-smoking campaign in the '80s.) In this regard, the media-friendly Gupta, a man who is clearly comfortable in front of the camera, seems to be an excellent pick for the job.

And yet.

It seems to me that what is needed in a surgeon general is also someone who can make the case for, or at least someone who is supportive of, a reformed public health care system, given that this seems to be, as many of us hope it genuinely is, one of Obama's main policy priorities. But is Gupta an advocate of such reform? I have my doubts. As he exposed in his critique of Michael Moore's movie Sicko back in July 2007, he seems to be very much a part of, as well as a defender of, the status quo, namely, the corporatized health care system controlled by Big Pharma and the HMOs. As I put it then, he picked apart Moore's movie, avoided subjecting the existing system and/or Moore's critics to similar evaluation, and failed to address the most serious flaws of the American system, namely, the enormous costs even to those with insurance and the utter lack of insurance for millions." So is this really the man who should be the spokesman for public health in the United States?

I see that my friend Steve Benen, while acknowledging (but not making much of) the Moore incident (which occurred on CNN, no less), thinks that Gupta "seems like a strong choice," given that he "would likely be the highest-profile official since Koop, and could conceivably play a valuable role in advancing a reform campaign." Well, maybe. And -- yet again, yet again -- I'm wondering if I should -- yet again, yet again -- give Obama the benefit of the doubt and trust that he knows what he's doing, that all will work out. Like Krugman, though, I just can't quite get past Gupta's "mugging" of Moore -- and that he got it wrong.

Should one ugly high-profile incident like this disqualify him? Maybe not, and, like I said, he undeniably has a lot going for him. For example, as Kurtz notes -- and this I did not know -- "[h]e was a White House fellow in the late 1990s, writing speeches and crafting policy for Hillary Clinton." That certainly inspires greater confidence, but I need to know more about his position on health care reform, as well as on the existing system that has left millions of Americans uninsured, and about his willingness to work with and in support of soon-to-be health czar and HHS Secretary Tom Daschle, before giving Obama the benefit of the doubt and approving this questionable appointment.

It would be good for the U.S. to have a prominent, highly visible, charismatic, and telegenic surgeon general at a time of reform, not to mention in case of public health emergencies. It's just not clear to me that Gupta is the right choice.

Yet.

Dumb and dumberer

By Carl

I had a feeling this might happen:

Weeks before President-elect Barack Obama chose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to head the Commerce Department, a small group of volunteers with ethics, tax and investigative expertise -- most of them lawyers -- scoured his background looking for embarrassing facts or political problems.

[...]Sources within the transition and the Justice Department said that Richardson had played down the importance of the probe and did not reveal that his office and staff could be at risk. The seriousness of the matter became apparent after the FBI began its own background check on Dec. 2. But Richardson's longtime aides defended his disclosures, noting that subjects under examination by a grand jury are rarely aware of its secret deliberations.

[...]But a source with the Obama transition said Richardson's disclosures to the team were incomplete.

My first reaction when I heard the BillR was considering taking the Commerce job was "WTF?"

Not that he's a bad choice, but as career moves go, this was a no-brainer: stay governor of New Mexico or go be a minor Cabinet official in the Obama administration, when you had already been UN ambassador and energy secretary?

I'd pick governor in a heartbeat, screw the "pleasure of the president" service stuff.

As well, he would have had to deal with Hillary, whom he knifed in the back at the earliest opportunity. Imagine trying to keep her in front of you for two or four years.

If you're going to accept a plum for beating up your old boss' wife, I would think an assignment as ambassador to a nice tropical island nation that has no extradition treaty with the US would be in order. You're 60. You deserve it. You've earned it.

But Commerce Secretary?

And to think, I gave this moron a contribution for governor!

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

More stimulus

By Creature

Just as Obama's stroking egos right now, Republicans are posturing. They need to seem relevant and they have yet to figure out how irrelevant they actually are. That being said, with their posturing taking the form of slowing the stimulus package down (and their sudden discovery of fiscal responsibility) it's hard not to think that they still don't get it. Action is needed to save the economy and that action is now urgent because they sat on their hands for years by refusing to spend or obstructing it. America is in trouble and the GOP better get out of the way or we are all sunk.

(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)

Republicans are so popular

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Today's funny, from TNR's Chris Orr:

Dana Milbank hilariously tallies invocations of Ronald Reagan at yesterday's debate between the candidates for RNC chair. He comes up with a total of 16, which is fewer than the 22 guns that four of the contenders boast of owning in a comical display of yardsticking. But the most delightful burst of one-upsmanship has to be this:

"Let me just say that I have 4,000 friends on Facebook," contributed Blackwell, putting his hand on Dawson's and Anuzis's knees. "That's probably more than these two guys put together, but who's counting, you know?" Acknowledged Saltsman: "I'm not sure all of us combined Twitter as much as Saul."

Anuzis claimed he had "somewhere between 2- and 3,000" Facebook friends, which prompted Blackwell to remind the audience that he has 4,000 friends on the social networking site by waving four fingers behind Anuzis's head.

Damn, they're cool.

Damn straight. (Have I mentioned that I don't Facebook, if I may use it as a verb? (Though I have a page there that I haven't even looked at since shortly after I first set it up way back when.) I also don't own any guns and try not to invoke Reagan (and certainly not in any positive way). Count me out for RNC chair!)

Now might be a good time to post some of the lyrics, from the chorus, of that sarcastic early-'90s classic of teen angst, Nada Surf's "Popular."

I'm head of the class

I'm popular

I'm a quarterback

I'm popular

My mom says I'm a catch

I'm popular

I'm never last picked

I got a cheerleader chick

***

I'm the party star

I'm popular

I've got my own car

I'm popular

I'll never get caught

I'm popular

I make football bets

I'm a teacher's pet

As for the RNC chair wannabes, I bet their moms think they're quite the catches, too. As for whether they've got cheerleader chicks, well, that I don't know, but I doubt.

Tuesday at the bar

By Carol Gee

My Glass Runneth Over with blog material today. The Tuesday's-about-Congress blog theme often makes for a slow party at my keyboard. But not today. I have more than I can manage and the nation's road ahead is slick, so a "digest" will have to do.

United States Senate

Former Senator Barack Obama will make a fine President of the United States, with great potential to restore civil liberties, to restore checks and balances, and to restore the rule of law. One of his most admirable themes is bipartisanship, already cautiously welcomed by the GOP leadership. According to a Yahoo! News story:

The Democratic-dominated Congress convenes Tuesday to confront perhaps the worst Great Depression and to grapple with a hugely ambitious agenda set by President-elect Barack Obama.

. . . This year, . . . with the economy in a worsening recession, Democrats are promising swift action on an as-yet-unveiled $775 billion economy recovery program that is the first order of business for the Obama administration.

. . . With their numbers bolstered by last fall's elections, congressional Democrats are well-positioned to dominate the session.

Senator Joseph Biden may not have cast his last Senate votes, despite his being the vice president-elect due to take office January 20. And he is taking advantage of the expertise available by raiding Rep. Steny Hoyer's staff for his legislative affairs director.

Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid is just too weak to fill his job description. He drives many in the blogosphere virtually "to drink," though I have no clue as to what to do about it.

Senator Hillary Clinton will make an excellent secretary of state, a shoo-in for confirmation, will be strong enough to fill the job description.

Senator Chris Dodd will be a very, very busy chairman of the Senate's Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee in the 111th Congress, looking to assist the auto industry and the financial and housing sectors of our ailing economy.

Senator Al Franken will have to wait to be sworn in as the Democratic Senator from Minnesota, though he has won the race. Even though his opponent, Norm Coleman, will challenge the results in court, Franken will be the 59th Democratic Senator, bring the body close to a tantalizing "filibuster-proof" majority.

Senator Roland Burris (he says) will also be sworn in at some point, speculates Politico, and I agree. Yahoo! News says, "Senate Democratic leaders need to work out a looming confrontation with Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who faces charges of having attempted to sell the seat." And I believe he will run for reelection in 2010.

Senator Ken Salazar's successor, "unknown" Michael Bennet from Colorado, was an early Obama supporter. Bennet has headed the Denver school system, will probably do well enough to get reelected in 2010 as well. Salazar has been tapped to be the new secretary of interior.

Senator Diane Feinstein has no standing to judge Leon Panetta, according to The Reaction's "Creature." And I heartily agree. Nor does Senator Jay Rockefeller, nor Senator Kit Bond, because of their record of caving in time after time to the Bush administration's unlawful and unconstitutional demands regarding warrantless wiretapping, military tribunals, etc. Must the CIA be headed by a spy? Can the director of national intelligence be an ex-admiral? CQ's Jeff Stein, who writes the blog "Spy Talk," makes a very powerful and reasoned argument that Panetta is an excellent choice to lead the CIA, headlining that he "could be the cure for the CIA's ills."

Senator Patrick Leahy, D-VT, will be the very capable chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It will be this committee that holds the hearings to confirm President-elect Obama's top nominees for key Justice Department posts. McClatchy reports that the naming of the most recent nominees (David Ogden, Elena Kagan, Tom Perelli and Dawn Johnsen) signals "An End to Bush Terror Tactics."# To quote:

President-elect Barack Obama signaled that he intends to roll back Bush administration counterterrorism policies authorizing harshinterrogation techniques, warrantless spying and indefinite detentions of terrorism suspects. The most startling shift was Obama's pick of Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen to take charge of the Office of Legal Counsel,

. . . Obama said that he hoped that the four appointees would restore "integrity, depth of experience and tenacity" to the lead federal law-enforcement agency, which has been battered by scandal.

"This is a superb set of appointments," said [Walter] Dellinger, who headed the Office of Legal Counsel from 1993-96 and then served as U.S. solicitor general. "These four are highly accomplished in the profession and bring a stature to the job that will allow them to say no to the president when no is the correct answer."

United States House of Representatives

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is strong enough to fill her job description, and she will have the help of a 20 seat Democratic gain in the House to move legislation forward quickly. According to Yahoo! News, "'We will hit the ground running ... to address the pain being felt by the American people,' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., promised Monday as she welcomed Obama to her office."

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has done a good job since his election to that post, and even though he was always a strong conservative, he is also a realist.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) plans to introduce a constitutional amendment to curtail presidential pardon powers, according to TPM Muckracker.

Rep. Charles Rangel's ethical problems remain, leaving the door of his powerful committee chairmanship a bit up in the air. House Democrats are contemplating a set of rules changes, strongly opposed by the GOP, that will have the effect of markedly consolidating their power to legislate, as well as keep Committee chairs in their seats without term limits.

"Cleaning up the mess" is what we elected Barack Obama to do. But it is also the job of Congress. We cannot let them off the hook, expecting that President-elect Obama will "come in on a big horse" and clean up the town gone bad. Our entire economy has gone bad and it is rapidly getting worse. Upcoming issues are serious and imminent. Legislation will be required in addition to executive orders and leadership. Hearings cry out to be held, bipartisanship is yet to be learned. We look to the individuals named in this post, along with many others not named, to step up and do their jobs.

Reference: A look at the work of the 110th Congress -- Congressional Quarterly (12/30/08)

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo"* and Jon#.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

The sins of wages

By Carl

Four weeks ago, I developed a really nasty sinus infection. The mother of all sinus infections, if you will.

For the past month or so, I've suffered from insomnia of the worst kind, the kind where you are fast and deeply asleep, only to be roused by a coughing jag. Kind of like electing a Bush after eight years of peace and prosperity.

I finally went to a doctor last week ahead of a trip I am taking at the end of this week (which is why I haven't been lobbying hard for the Weblog Awards for Simply Left Behind, but please do vote!), was given antibiotics and sent home to heal.

Heal I have, to a degree. And yet, here I am this morning, awake at 2:30 after three hours of sleep. My thoughts are racing, flitting like fireflies about me. This thought lights up, dims, and another flashes off in the corner of my other eye.

I hate nature.

I woke to a vague recollection of a dream about this contest. At first, I thought I was disturbed by my casual attitude towards it. I cannot deny there is a hypercompetitive part of me that simply will not allow me to fail. This being the slack time in between the election and the inauguration, I thought I'd explore this a little.

As I lay there in the dark, the cat watching me through one eyelid, I let my mind wander. This was not about the contest, to be sure, although I did manage to stroke that part of my id into relaxation.

There's something more. I'm disturbed by what I have allowed myself, and by extension this blog, to become.

Each morning, I sit at a PC, either in my office or at home, and I search for a story to write about. Recklessly disregarding the fact that I really don't care about half the stuff I read online, I choose a topic.

Usually, I search Memeorandum and see what other bloggers are talking about. I admit to a frisson of excitement and satisfaction when I see my name, with my blog or this blog attached to it, listed as commenting on a story. If an orgasm is la petite morte in French, then this is the cigarette afterwards.

Bollocks. That's what's pissing me off about life. I'm tying myself to what other people think and see. I'm letting the world set my agenda for me. I'm taking myself way too fucking seriously.

Now, the practice of writing a blog every day has its charm and its advantages. For one, by forcing myself to write daily, I'm forcing myself to be a better writer, to learn what mistakes I'm capable of and to prevent them. For another, it usually kills about 30 minutes at work, and probably stops me from playing FreeCell.

In 2008, it was too easy to write a blog, and I suspect that by the end of this year, an awful lot of blogs that popped up during the Bush administration will close down. And why not? People aren't as angry. Obama seems to be a decent sort who is committed to turning America around again. It's going to be hard to find something to take umbrage at and write a 3,000 word screed, mixing humour and anger, rage and fear.

Fear. Yes, that's what I want to talk about today. It's odd, but each year around this time, sins and emotions seem to be the backdrop to our lives.

Most sins can be understood in context of satisfying a need: envy, for example, keeps us up to date with what people around us have, and so we increase our odds of breeding by "keeping up with the Joneses," lust provides us with a motivation to collect genetic material from as many mates as possible, and so on.

Underlying all these, I think, is fear. Fear is the mind-killer, as Frank Herbert put it, by way of Huxley.

Fear is, I believe the yan to the yin of love, which I think is the underlying emotion behind all happiness. Blend fear and love, and you pretty cover the emotional gamut of humanity.

Anger, jealousy, hatred, all involve some element of love, even if that element is self-love and not the love for another person. We can delude and rationalize our anger at our spouse or child as "being good for them," but in reality, it's more about us taking care of ourselves than caring for someone else.

But notice also there's an element of fear to that love: by lashing out at those around you, you are warning them that they are scaring you, threatening you in some way. And it doesn't even have to manifest in rage: anger expressed in the most gentle way is still anger and still about fear.

On the flipside, you see joy, openess, and giving, which while all perfectly self-loving, involve far greater blends of love for someone else, and much less fear.

Even in these emotions, there's some fear involved. When you first tell someone you love them, there's always the chance they'll reject you.

Which brings me back to my original message, my original thought, my insomniatic stream of consciousness: what do I fear, by manipulating my energies and thoughts so they conform with what the rest of Blogtopia (© Skippy) is talking about?

Does it really matter to me that my hit counter is ringing every day? Does it make a difference in my life, apart from making me feel a little better about myself?

No, not really. So the question becomes, is that feeling worth it? Is the self-esteem tied up in that stupid little ticker worth the effort of being topical?

I'm not earning a single dime off this thing, yet I write more here in a week than I have in a month in the book I'm supposedly working on to sell.

I'm communicating and yes, that's important to me. I have thoughts and ideas and they need to be expressed, but not on the world's terms.

On my terms.

(Vote for Simply Left Behind in the Weblog Awards.)

Panetta? Why not?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Like Josh Marshall, Andrew Sullivan, and Creature -- three of my favourite bloggers -- I'm not sure what to make of Obama's surprise selection of Leon Panetta to be CIA director. His extensive White House (CoS to Clinton) and Congressional experience should serve him well in a position that is, like it or not, political, but I think the intelligence community is right to be concerned. The question is, after all, just how political is he, just how close to Obama? What is needed at the CIA is integrity and independence, not an extension of the West Wing. Still, like the three mentioned above, I take comfort in the fact that his selection has shaken and stirred the Republican-enabling (and torture-enabling) Democratic intelligence leadership on Capitol Hill, notably Senators Dianne "fratricide" Feinstein and Jay Rockefeller.

Sullivan:

Feinstein and Rockefeller sense a real individual with real clout at the agency, whom they cannot control. There may have been a lack of foresight here in not phoning Feinstein ahead of time. But it is also indisputable that many leading intelligence Democrats were deeply complicit in the Bush torture program and his illegal wire-tapping. It was just as important for the president-elect to pick someone not beholden to them either.

Some are now citing Panetta's appointment as somehow "political" rather than substantive. But it's obvious that Obama has actually found someone both capable of running a bureaucracy as complex as the CIA, of a stature to be approved by the Congress and maintain good relations, and with the good sense to know how interrogation based on torture is never right and much less effective than legal methods.

It remains an inspired choice. And the critics help show why.

I'm not sure how "inspired" it is -- time will tell whether Panetta is the right man for the job or just another Tenet or Goss -- but, as Steve Benen notes in an excellent post on the reaction to the selection, it "has drawn a fair amount of praise from credible voices," including Rep. Rush Holt, former Rep. Tim Roemer, David Corn, and CQ's Jeff Stein.

Once more, as so often throughout the transition, I suppose I ought to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

Stimulus

By Creature

As with most things Obama, we have to wait to see what kind of compromises with Republicans he will make. The tax cuts announced were expected (and Democrat friendly). If anything, $300 billion in tax cuts as 40% of the total package may mean that the spending part of Obama's stimulus will be even bigger than expected (maybe even hitting the trillion mark). Obama's playing politics and stroking egos right now. I don't think he's a Charlie Brown in waiting. His election campaign showed us as much.

(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)

Minnesota Senate Recount -- update 11

By Michael J.W. Stickings

As expected, Minnesota's State Canvassing Board yesterday certified Al Franken's 225-vote lead over Norm Coleman in that state's Senate recount.

In response, Franken (rightly) declared victory.

Prior to the recount, Coleman had a 215-vote lead, which means that the recount saw a swing of 440 votes in Franken's favour.

But is it over? Well, not yet. Or, it depends whom you ask.

Harry Reid: "There comes a time when you have to acknowledge that the race is over. The race in Minnesota's over. Now it's only a little finger-pointing. The certification by the canvassing board, which has been in process for a number of weeks, now clearly shows that Al Franken has won... Coleman will never ever serve in the Senate. He's lost the election. He can stall things, but he'll never serve in the Senate." (But Franken won't be seated yet.)

Mitch McConnell: "The law in Minnesota requires certification from the secretary of state and that can't happen until the conclusion of all legal battles. It's not over."

Reid's "never ever" comment may have been a bit too strong, and, to be fair, if the roles were reversed, it would be the Democrats demanding that the 650 additional absentee ballots be counted. (It's easy to declare victory when your side is ahead.)

As the Star Tribune points out, the results were "unanimously certified" by the Canvassing Board. Still, Coleman intends to file a so-called "election contest" today, which "will prevent Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, under state law, from officially certifying Franken's election until the legal process has run its course."

And to be clear: "Ritchie made it clear that the board wasn't declaring a winner, just certifying the results emerging from the process of recounting about 2.9 million undisputed ballots, thousands of challenged votes and hundreds of wrongly rejected absentee ballots."

I am happy that Franken won, or appears to have won, or is ahead after the recount -- and I do think that in the end he will be certified the winner -- but at the same time Coleman should not be denied his rights to challenge the results (again, put yourself in the other person's shoes for a moment). Unfortunately, that means that the process, and with it the uncertainty, could drag out for some time, but that's the price to pay in a democracy, where getting it right is more important than getting it done quickly.

We on the Democratic side all wish they'd gotten it right in Florida back in 2000. The same standard should be applied to Minnesota in 2008-09.

More Panetta

By Creature

I have no idea if putting a person free of significant intelligence experience in charge of the CIA is a good idea or a bad one, but if doing so pisses off Dianne Feinstein then I'm all for it. Feinstein was a torture enabler and as such she gets no say.

(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)

Leon Panetta

By Creature

Along the same lines as my last post, how sad is it that I'm happy the new CIA Director is against torture? This shouldn't even be a debate, let alone a cause for joy.

(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)

Quote of the Day

By Creature

"This is an excellent day for those who believe in presidential adherence to the rule of law [...]" -- Digby, reacting to Obama's great pick of Dawn Johnsen to head the DOJ's Office of Legal Council. It's a sad day when we cheer presidential adherence to the rule of law, but such is the state Bush & Cheney have left us in.

(Cross-posted at State of the Day.)

Plenty of time to tamper with stuff --

By Carol Gee

-- by the "party of whiners#," as Paul Krugman names the GOP. The next couple of weeks provide plenty of time for our current "Sarah Palin-like president" - #Lawrence Wilkerson's term - (OCP) to make hiring mischief#, to be inept, burnish his legacy#, and defend his record# of failures. I cannot wait to say goodbye to all that. The Republicans were defeated.

The past week has provided an opportunity for Israel to invade Gaza with impunity from OCP, a NYT analysis asserts. Despite world-wide protest, the current administration has come down almost entirely on the side of Israel. Ironically, there is every possibility that United States citizens protesting against either Israeli or Palestinian violence will have their civil liberties violated. They can easily be monitored by some arm of the government* for their potential as so-called "terrorist threats." If Maryland police could dream it up you can imagine that some other set of cowboys would try it.

While most Republicans will flee DC for the inauguration, Frank Rich's recent New York Times op-ed column, "A President Forgotten But Not Gone," reminds us painfully that OCP will still be in town until the White House changes hands. His piece is a searing indictment of OCP's failed presidency, along with a very perceptive analysis of the personality of OCP. And the Bush dynasty may not be over; Bush 41 is now touting Jeb for the top job#. "NO! NO! NO!," exclaims my regular contributor, Jon.

Put your money in gold# -- A study released last month by Celent , a Boston-based firm that provides independent information and advice to financial services companies, produced a "Fraudlent 'Credit Crisis' paves way for economic disaster#" MensNewsDaily headline that, to quote:

The analysis, Flawed Assumptions about the Credit Crisis: A Critical Examination of US Policymakers, concludes that the result of the unjustified massive federal intervention in the economy could be similar to the economic crisis in the Weimar Republic of 1922, where disastrous hyperinflation made the currency worthless and threatened the nation’s political system and stability.

. . . Paulson had claimed that, by mid-September, when he persuaded President Bush to go public with demands for Congress to approve a $700-billion bailout plan, the financial system had “seized up,” credit markets had “froze,” and interbank lending had been “substantially reduced.”

But none of this was true. “The freezing of the credit markets that Secretary Paulson cites is not visible” in the data, the Celent report shows . . .It declares, “Doubtlessly, a number of the leading financial institutions in the US are in serious trouble, as are a number of the leading industrial firms. However, credit difficulties surrounding a specific set of firms is not the same as a problem in the credit markets in the aggregate.” The study says that, “A clear and cogent analysis of the credit crisis has not been presented by policymakers, despite the fact that unprecedented levels of public funds are being deployed.” As a result, the “massive injection of funds could well exacerbate the problem rather than help.”

Fighting the Last Depression# -- "Banks have plenty of money; this is a crisis of confidence," is Time Magazine's analysis. Authors Lawrence and Ari Officer warn that the administration (s) should not fight this crisis like it is another Great Depression. AlterNet posits in similar posts# that the "credit crunch was a myth perpetuated to sell a trillion-dollar scam#." We will see how long it lasts after being exposed to the light of day.

Gates has guts -- Walter Pincus' article, "Pentagon Chief sees opportunities in Russia and the War on Terrorism," is a very welcome way for all of us to get some practice bridging out of the administration of OCP and into some sanity. We have just a couple more weeks to wait.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Silence is golden?

By Carl

Maybe. And maybe not:

"If I were Obama, I wouldn't want to talk about it either. Frankly, it's a lot more comfortable to let this one hang on the president," said Edward Walker Jr., who served as U.S. ambassador to Israel from 1997 to 1999.

"I don't think he wants to be tagged at this point with either advocating the Israeli response or condemning it because our (U.S.) interests are sort of torn on this one," added Walker, an analyst with the Middle East Institute think tank.

Pro-Israeli comments by Obama risk upsetting the Arab world even before he takes office. Comments that seem critical of Israel would anger its American supporters.

Rock, meet hard place. It's not that Obama doesn't care about what's going on in the region, or that he doesn't have an opinion. Indeed, he's voiced foreign policy opinions before this (specifically on the Mumbai attacks), but these have hardly been statements of ongoing policy or binding opinions. In Israel, he would be held accountable after he takes office. Silence seems to be golden.

Presumably, the uptick in violence in the Gaza region is deliberate. Israelis and Palestinians both have a reason to test Obama's foreign policy from day one, given the crazy rumours that abounded when Obama was a candidate: Obama is secretly Muslim, will take the oath on the Koran, that sort of stuff.

You see, the problem with the Big Lie (via Goebbels) is that someone will believe it, no matter how insane the rumour is, and usually that someone is insane enough to take innocent people with him. In a situation as incendiary as Israel and Palestine, it only takes one crackpot to set off the entire region. Ask Ariel Sharon.

Right now, on this issue as on so many issues that Obama is faced with, his demeanor must be that of the horseshoe crab: apparent immobility from above, but if you flip one over the feet are scurrying like mad. My guess is Obama has people in the Middle East on fact-finding missions to try to determine the extent of the problem and that he is receiving the same daily briefings that Commanderguy is getting.

Which leads to silence NOT being golden. I also get the sense, given Obama's desire to hit the ground running, that he has people not only finding fact, but expressing reassurances and leaving impressions of precisely what he plans to do. I would not want to start my presidency with this hanging over my head and having to play catch up with the Israeli and Palestinian governments, such as it is.

One can only guess at what Obama's thoughts are, and he's been shrewd to show his hand only to those who really need to see it.

Personally, my solution would probably be as simple as the following: Reassure Israel that America stands ready to defend her interests; however, make it perfectly clear that readiness is predicated on Israel finding the strength within herself to begin negotiations in earnest with the Palestinians and other antagonistic parties. I would suggest this was precisely the stance that Bill Clinton took, and he came as close to finding peace in the Middle East as any president.

You see, it's been decades since American interests were aligned completely with Israeli interests. Indeed, the OPEC embargoes of 1973 and 1979 were in large part retaliations against America for her support of Israel. The Arabic world couldn't beat Israel on the field of battle, so the battle was brought into the oilfields.

That America resisted the urge to jump ship and take our economic interests with us has never really been properly appreciated by Israel or her champions here in America, I think. Nonetheless, as it turns out, support for Israel has other facets to it, from a strategic point of view, that make having Israel a firm ally important. One very important reason is stability. Imagine if we had jumped ship and sided with Egypt under Nasser, or Syria. Or Iran. Or Iraq, for that matter.

The violence must stop. The slaughters on both sides of civilians must end. Now. One can only hope that Barack Obama will be the president to do just this.

(Cross-posted at Simply Left Behind.)

God is great

By Capt. Fogg

The explosions look like fireworks but with the bright white stars headed downwards rather than up. Oh Jesus, it's white phosphorus, I said to myself when I realized what I was seeing. I've raged about such weapons when the US used them and it makes me sick to see Israel using them too. Burning phosphorus does horrible things to people.

They shelled everyone in Gaza... they shelled children and hospitals and mosques and in doing so, they gave us legitimacy to strike them in the same way,

said Senior Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar. Of course the hospitals and schools and even the mosques are ammunition dumps and launching pads for the thousands and thousands of missiles Hamas has launched and is launching indiscriminately into Southern Israel for the very purpose of provoking an attack which, seeing as they are hiding in schools and hospitals and apartment houses would generate the kind of inadvertent martyrdom Hamas , in its self-righteous cowardice, likes to assign to innocent people. They're still firing them into towns and villages and still refusing to stop even if it allows a cease fire and the end of the killing.

Of course, it's hard to cite something as a provocation when it follows your prior provocation, but the chain of provocation and response is so long, any party can pick a beginning that suits their arguments -- and of course they do.

Is the Israeli response disproportionate? Of course, but if someone fires a bullet at you would you limit yourself to firing only one in return -- and of the same caliber? I think not. Would we have given Germany back to the Germans or Japan back to the Japanese had they persisted in firing hundreds of rockets at us every day of the week? HaveHamas's rocket attacks and suicide bombing attacks been entirely against civilians? Of course. Have Israeli embargoes and draconian restrictions followed massacres? Yes, and around and around we go.

Is this kind of insanity the ineluctable result of two religious cultures claiming the same ground for religious reasons? In any event, I'm not a believer in any peaceful solution that will allow all concerned to lead decent, secure lives. If Israel were to turn over all territory taken after neighboring states tried to annihilate them, I have no doubt that every square inch would be used as a base of operations to once again attempt to kill every Israeli and every shot would come from behind a screen of women and children. So far, that's just what has happened.

There has been a tense and angry peace between Israel and other neighboring countries, but I see no hope for a Palestinian state in addition to Jordan, unless it's willing to accept Israel's existence -- and Hamas is not about the acceptance of Israel.

Hamas' strategy is to provoke Israel into vicious insanity - and it works. As they haven't the manpower or the weapons for anything but barbaric terrorism against innocent civilians, they depend on getting sympathy through the sacrifice of their own innocent citizens - and it works and as long as it works, they're not going to fix it.

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Your new DNC chairman

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine.

A fine pick, if you ask me, not least because of his close relationship to the soon-to-be president and because of his popularity in a key swing state.

Then again, as MyDD's Bob Brigham points out, he's hardly an ideal party chair. DWT notes that it's yet another sign that Obama is "putting all the levers of power in the hands of conservative Democrats."

As has often been the case during the transition, though, I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. I just wouldn't want the DNC to become nothing more than Obama '12, that is, for the party apparatus to devote itself almost exclusively to Obama's political ambitions, however much I may support those ambitions. Democrats need to secure and hopefully expand their majorities in Congress, after all, as well as to make gains at the state level. I just don't know if Obama's man at the DNC is the right man for that job.

Just another day in the life and death of Iraq LXXXVI

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, so far it's been a bloody 2009 in Iraq.

On Friday there was this (anti-Sunni). And yesterday there was this (anti-Shiite):

A suicide bomber infiltrated a crowd of Shi'ite pilgrims and blew himself up, killing at least 35 people and wounding at least 79 at a Shi'ite shrine in Baghdad on Sunday, Iraqi officials said.

Words fail me at the moment.

Minnesota Senate Recount -- update 10

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Following up on my post from yesterday...

CNN: "A state election board on Monday will announce Democrat Al Franken has defeated Republican incumbent Norm Coleman in Minnesota's U.S. Senate race, state officials told CNN Sunday... The canvassing board on Monday will say a recount determined Franken won by 225 votes, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie told CNN."

Expect a challenge, or at least an initial show of defiance, even if Harry Reid wants Coleman to concede ASAP.

Pity poor Virginia

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Terry McAuliffe wants to be your governor. He's got the money, the ego, and the Clinton connections, and he'll be a formidable candidate. And maybe, just maybe, he has what it takes to be a successful governor of a purple state, and maybe he'd be able to turn it blue. Then again, maybe he'll just end up tripping around in his own spin, as usual, unable to distinguish the truth from what passes through his lips in a continuous stream of partisan happy talk.

Sorry, I just don't much like the guy, loyal Democrat though he be.

**********

For an especially critical take, make sure to read Booman on McAuliffe: "He's a glorified bagman... the nuts-and-bolts-guy of the DLC's corporatocracy. If he holds a progressive idea anywhere in his head, it is merely a branding decision that makes him distinct from George Allen-Republicanism."

The Reaction in review (Jan. 4, 2009)

A weekend's Reactions that deserve a second look: By The Numbers

Sunday

By Carol Gee: "George, the Worst" -- Comparing our soon-to-be-ex-president's record on the rule of law with our president-elect reveals that Obama stands to come out on top.

By Libby Spencer: "16 more days" -- Libby celebrates that "the grownups are in charge again," with "The American Recovery and Reinvestment plan."

By Creature: "Truth in Comics" -- The Dow is down, the economy is in the tank, and we were ready for 2008 to be over.


Saturday

By Michael J.W. Stickings: "Just another day in the life and death of Iraq LXXXV" -- Michael takes a good hard look at the reduction in current casualty counts, noting that "the context is that Iraq remains an incredibly violent place."

By Michael J.W. Stickings: "Quote of the Day: Allawi on Bush's "utter failure"... -- Michael ironically concludes, "Bush thinks history will vindicate him and his policies (and the Iraq misadventure in general), but I suspect history will prove Allawi right."