The House GOP lost a significant vote today that would have extended three provisions of the Patriot Act. It was apparently a miscalculation of their support, and 26 Republicans voted with the Democrats in a bipartisan defeat of measures that critics see as an infringement on civil rights.
Republicans brought up the vote under a special expedited provision that requires a 2/3 vote, thinking they had it. They didn't.
The three measures which would have been extended, but now will presumably expire unless approved by Feb 28th, are: (1) court-approved, roving wire-taps on multiple phones; (2) court-approved access to "any tangible thing," like library records, that might be relevant to terrorism investigations; and (3) secret surveillance of non-US citizens not known to be associated with a specific terrorism organization.
Beyond the importance of that many Republicans supporting civil rights over "Patriotism" hysteria, this also signals a failure of GOP nose-counting and discipline in the House. Or, rather, it may reflect the libertarian streak of some of the new Tea Party crowd.
At any rate, it seems like a win politically for the Democrats.
Ralph
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Monday, February 7, 2011
Nathan Deal's deal: Well, that didn't take long . . .
Some people worried that we shouldn't elect a governor who was under a cloud of such financial woes that he was in danger of losing his home and other major assets to pay off huge debts that would otherwise throw him into bankruptcy.
There was no need to worry about Nathan Deal's finances. We already had seen that, as a congressman, he knew how to work the system and use his influence, knew how to get friends on bank boards to lend him money when they shouldn't, and knew how to get special deals to benefit his business interests and to solve his financial problems.
According to yesterday's AJC, less than a month after Deal was sworn in as governor, his son-in-law, Clint Wilder, went to work as the Georgia Health Care Association's director of program development. Yes, the same Clint Wilder who failed to disclose a previous bankruptcy which made him ineligible for the bankruptcy he was improperly granted last year, leading the judge to reopen the case and invalidate the bankruptcy. The son-in-law's failed business led to Deal's financial embarrassment in the first place, because he had guaranteed loans for Clint and Carrie Deal Wilder's business that failed.
Jon Howell, president of the Health Care Association, praises Clint's qualifications for the job and states that they knew who his father-in-law is but that he didn't talk to the governor about the job because they wanted "to make it clear there was going to be no involvement down at the State Capitol."
Of course not; when we do backroom deals, we cover our tracks and are careful to preserve deniability.
OK, deny all you want, Mr. Howell. But the Georgia Health Care Association is a lobbying organization for nursing homes. The State of Georgia spends more than $1 billion every year paying for care of residents in nursing homes. Regulation of nursing homes is state business; paying for all this care is state business.
Although Wilder's job description does not include lobbying, it's hard to see how Governor Deal would not be very grateful to them for hiring his bankrupt son-in-law. He doesn't need to "lobby." Simply hiring him and paying him a big salary is enough to gain favor. GHCA is not disclosing Clint's salary, but a big one could help a lot -- even indirectly help Gov. Deal, since he's responsible for the business loans Wilder can't repay.
Gratitude in high places -- tell me it doesn't influence decisions. Want to argue that Wilder would have gotten the job anyway, without the known connection? Want to place bets on the chance of Gov. Deal pulling strings to influence legislation that would be opposed by the nursing home lobby?
Come on, folks. This is exactly the kind of thing we predicted -- just not quite so soon. Behind that genial demeanor, Nathan Deal is an operator par excellence.
No need to worry about his financial future.
Ralph
There was no need to worry about Nathan Deal's finances. We already had seen that, as a congressman, he knew how to work the system and use his influence, knew how to get friends on bank boards to lend him money when they shouldn't, and knew how to get special deals to benefit his business interests and to solve his financial problems.
According to yesterday's AJC, less than a month after Deal was sworn in as governor, his son-in-law, Clint Wilder, went to work as the Georgia Health Care Association's director of program development. Yes, the same Clint Wilder who failed to disclose a previous bankruptcy which made him ineligible for the bankruptcy he was improperly granted last year, leading the judge to reopen the case and invalidate the bankruptcy. The son-in-law's failed business led to Deal's financial embarrassment in the first place, because he had guaranteed loans for Clint and Carrie Deal Wilder's business that failed.
Jon Howell, president of the Health Care Association, praises Clint's qualifications for the job and states that they knew who his father-in-law is but that he didn't talk to the governor about the job because they wanted "to make it clear there was going to be no involvement down at the State Capitol."
Of course not; when we do backroom deals, we cover our tracks and are careful to preserve deniability.
OK, deny all you want, Mr. Howell. But the Georgia Health Care Association is a lobbying organization for nursing homes. The State of Georgia spends more than $1 billion every year paying for care of residents in nursing homes. Regulation of nursing homes is state business; paying for all this care is state business.
Although Wilder's job description does not include lobbying, it's hard to see how Governor Deal would not be very grateful to them for hiring his bankrupt son-in-law. He doesn't need to "lobby." Simply hiring him and paying him a big salary is enough to gain favor. GHCA is not disclosing Clint's salary, but a big one could help a lot -- even indirectly help Gov. Deal, since he's responsible for the business loans Wilder can't repay.
Gratitude in high places -- tell me it doesn't influence decisions. Want to argue that Wilder would have gotten the job anyway, without the known connection? Want to place bets on the chance of Gov. Deal pulling strings to influence legislation that would be opposed by the nursing home lobby?
Come on, folks. This is exactly the kind of thing we predicted -- just not quite so soon. Behind that genial demeanor, Nathan Deal is an operator par excellence.
No need to worry about his financial future.
Ralph
A great metaphor
Former Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) is known for using colorful language. In an interview today on CNN's "State of the Union," he got off perhaps his best yet metaphor.
Simpson was co-chair of the president's Debt Commission, which was charged with recommending a plan for dealing with the national debt. He was chiding congressmen who want to do it by attacking small-time savings, like earmarks, fraud, waste and other minor contributions without tackling Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Defense.
Without addressing those "big four," Simpson says, "anything else is just"
What a great line !
Ralph
Simpson was co-chair of the president's Debt Commission, which was charged with recommending a plan for dealing with the national debt. He was chiding congressmen who want to do it by attacking small-time savings, like earmarks, fraud, waste and other minor contributions without tackling Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Defense.
Without addressing those "big four," Simpson says, "anything else is just"
"a sparrow belch in the midst of a typhoon."
What a great line !
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Egyptian protestors: concenssions not enough
Mohamued Shelbaya, an Egyptian international arbitration lawyer, called into The Huffington Post and offered the following feedback on the government’s concessions:
They didn’t do any concessions other than those that were already in the speech by the president and vice president because they didn’t agree to lift the Emergency Act as an act. They simply said they would lift the state of emergency, which is a simple legal characterization of what the situation in the country is, when the situation metabolizes, which is basically what they’ve been saying for the past thirty years.The other points were basically points that were all taken out of the speech of president's, i.e. the not running [for] reelection [in] September and the modifications of Article 67 and 66 of the Constitution.
After reading the first AP report about the meeting of the Eqyptian VP with representatives of the protestors, I was too ready to believe a real solution was emerging. The AP and I were both not sufficiently knowledgeable or critical. Let's wait for further developments.
Ralph
Dr. Denmark at 113.
Years ago, I marveled at stories of pediatrician Dr. Leila Denmark still in practice at 103. She retired then but is still living at 113 -- reportedly the 7th oldest living American. Somewhat frail, she now lives with her daughter in Atlanta.
She was a pioneer as one of the early women in medicine, being the only woman to graduate from the Medical College of Georgia in the Class of 1928.
She dispensed no-nonsense, practical advice about child-rearing along with medicine and had a loyal following of mothers, whose daughter's are now raising their own children according to Dr. Denmark's wisdom.
A remarkable woman.
Ralph
She was a pioneer as one of the early women in medicine, being the only woman to graduate from the Medical College of Georgia in the Class of 1928.
She dispensed no-nonsense, practical advice about child-rearing along with medicine and had a loyal following of mothers, whose daughter's are now raising their own children according to Dr. Denmark's wisdom.
A remarkable woman.
Ralph
Loud-mouth Newt gets it wrong . . . again
As of Sunday morning, the news out of Egypt sounds promising. The newly appointed Vice President Omar Sulieman has met with opposition representatives and made major concessions, including: guaranteeing freedom of the press, releasing detained protesters, ending the emergency security laws, and setting up a committee of judiciary and political figures to propose constitutional changes. Short of forcing Mubarak to resign immediately and leave the country (we tried to persuade him to do that and he was obdurate, apparently), this should bring hope of real change, as long as it's clear that Sulieman is in charge and has the power to effect these changes.
Of course, it remains to be seen whether these promises will actually be carried out. It appears that restrictions and some attacks on journalists continue. The shift in U.S. position toward active support for a speedy, but gradual, transition of power indicates that we favor this approach and perhaps helped orchestrate it.
The Obama administration has been an active behind-the-scenes force, encouraging change and Mubarak's stepping down but forging it in a way that makes for an orderly transition instead of chaos or the risk of the Muslim Brotherhood stepping into a leadership vacuum. Putting pressure on a flawed but former ally to step down, while still recognizing the important role he has played as an important Middle East stabilizing force -- sounds like the right stance for us to take, and most Republican leaders have respected that and held back on criticizing Obama.
Not so, our own presidential candidate (he indicated last week that he will set up his campaign headquarters in Atlanta) Newt Gingrich, whose narcissistic mirror is telling himself that our country needs him to save it from the liberals and the wimpy internationalists, who are too weak in opposing Islamic extremism. Here's what he said on Sean Hannity's show last week, warning that Egypt could "go the way of Iran" and fall into the hands of an Islamic extremist dictatorship:
In short, Newt is forging his stance to appeal to the right-wing war hawks who love nothing so much as war. In other words, we ignore the people's needs and just get rid of their leaders -- thus controlling them by threats and fear. These are the hawks who led us to invade Iraq, who would have us bomb Iran, and throw our weight around in all the other hot spots in the Middle East. In short, they think only the U.S. can determine the right course in the Middle East and that Obama's approach of building bridges of respect and partnership is weakness.
That's what we need. Another hot-headed hawk in the White House.
Try another mirror, one that's not made out of your own magical thinking. Listen to someone besides yourself.
Oh, darn, I forgot. The is no one besides yourself. That's the problem.
Ralph
Of course, it remains to be seen whether these promises will actually be carried out. It appears that restrictions and some attacks on journalists continue. The shift in U.S. position toward active support for a speedy, but gradual, transition of power indicates that we favor this approach and perhaps helped orchestrate it.
The Obama administration has been an active behind-the-scenes force, encouraging change and Mubarak's stepping down but forging it in a way that makes for an orderly transition instead of chaos or the risk of the Muslim Brotherhood stepping into a leadership vacuum. Putting pressure on a flawed but former ally to step down, while still recognizing the important role he has played as an important Middle East stabilizing force -- sounds like the right stance for us to take, and most Republican leaders have respected that and held back on criticizing Obama.
Not so, our own presidential candidate (he indicated last week that he will set up his campaign headquarters in Atlanta) Newt Gingrich, whose narcissistic mirror is telling himself that our country needs him to save it from the liberals and the wimpy internationalists, who are too weak in opposing Islamic extremism. Here's what he said on Sean Hannity's show last week, warning that Egypt could "go the way of Iran" and fall into the hands of an Islamic extremist dictatorship:
I think this is a period of tremendous challenge and is a sign of the general failure of our strategy of not dealing with radical Islamists and not being honest and aggressive of what's going on around the world.He charged that Obama's administration had not taken the Middle East seriously, suggesting that Obama should not have given that 2009 speech in Egypt, "geared toward repairing America's relationship with the Muslim world."
In short, Newt is forging his stance to appeal to the right-wing war hawks who love nothing so much as war. In other words, we ignore the people's needs and just get rid of their leaders -- thus controlling them by threats and fear. These are the hawks who led us to invade Iraq, who would have us bomb Iran, and throw our weight around in all the other hot spots in the Middle East. In short, they think only the U.S. can determine the right course in the Middle East and that Obama's approach of building bridges of respect and partnership is weakness.
That's what we need. Another hot-headed hawk in the White House.
Newt -- your mirror lies to you.
We do NOT need you as president !!!!!
You are not the "fairest one of all."
Oh, darn, I forgot. The is no one besides yourself. That's the problem.
Ralph
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Bush's risk of indictment for war crimes
Huffington Post is reporting that George Bush can't go to Switzerland because of the threat of legal action for ordering torture.
Ralph
GENEVA, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Former U.S. President George W. Bush has canceled a visit to Switzerland, where he was to address a Jewish charity gala, due to the risk of legal action against him for alleged torture, rights groups said on Saturday. . . .Criminal complaints against Bush alleging torture have been lodged in Geneva, court officials say.
Human rights groups said they had intended to submit a 2,500-page case against Bush in the Swiss city on Monday for alleged mistreatment of suspected militants at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. naval base in Cuba where captives from Afghanistan, Iraq and other fronts in the so-called War on Terror were interned. . . .
[There is a growing movement] to hold Bush accountable for torture, including waterboarding. He has admitted in his memoirs and television interviews to ordering use of the interrogation technique that simulates drowning. . . .
Reed Brody, counsel for Human Rights Watch said:
I understand why Obama declined to call for an investigation of this and other crimes and malfeasances of his predecessor. I have no interest in seeing Bush behind bars -- but it is abhorrent to me that history is being rewritten and that we will take no official action to deplore what was done in our name. At least this kind of action puts it in the historical record -- like the Chilcott Inquiry in Britain that has investigated how they wound up invading Iraq along with us."I'm surprised he (Bush) would even consider visiting a country that has ratified the torture convention and which takes its responsibilities seriously," said Brody.
"I think George Bush's world is a very small place at the moment," he said. "He may enjoy some kind of impunity in the United States, but other countries will not treat him so indulgently."
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
