From The Washington Post:
June 14,2017
The special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election is interviewing senior intelligence officials as part of a widening probe that now includes an examination of whether President Trump attempted to obstruct justice, officials said.
The move by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to investigate Trump’s conduct marks a major turning point in the nearly year-old FBI investigation, which until recently focused on Russian meddling during the presidential campaign and on whether there was any coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Investigators have also been looking for any evidence of possible financial crimes among Trump associates, officials said.....
Read More
Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 14, 2017
Saturday, February 18, 2017
Where Is the Outrage On The Right ??
Trump family’s elaborate lifestyle is a ‘logistical nightmare’ — at taxpayer expense
“Barely a month into the Trump presidency, the unusually elaborate lifestyle of America’s new first family is straining the Secret Service and security officials, stirring financial and logistical concerns in several local communities, and costing far beyond what has been typical for past presidents — a price tag that, based on past assessments of presidential travel and security costs, could balloon into the hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of a four-year term.”
“Adding to the costs and complications is Trump’s inclination to conduct official business surrounded by crowds of people, such as his decision last weekend to host Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for a working dinner while Mar-a-Lago members dined nearby.”
HT- Political Wire
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Restoring the Foundation
The following is from Congressman Rush Holt's newsletter
10/20/14 & 10/24/14
In the days before the Space Race, the skies seemed to be the limit for our achievements. When we broke through that limit, we inspired new ideas and unleashed a whole new set of possibilities. In 2007, a report was released which illustrated our nation’s risk of falling behind our competitors as science leaders, and for a brief moment, it captured the attention of scientists, economists, and lawmakers. I helped write the America COMPETES Act passed in its wake, which authorized a doubling of the budgets at many of our key science agencies.
Seven years later the framework of the COMPETES Act remains mostly bare, with funding of the key science agencies nowhere near their target. Last month, I joined the American Academies of Arts and Sciences in releasing a follow-up report, Restoring the Foundation: The Vital Role of Research in Preserving the American Dream. It details America’s stagnation, with the U.S. now fallen to 10th place globally in research and development investment as a percent of GDP, its lowest point since before the Space Race. It gives concrete recommendations to get back on track by increasing funding for basic research, focusing on university and industry partnerships, and removing barriers that hinder the most effective impact of federal investments in research.
In order to sustain our progress as a nation we must be unafraid, even in fiscally constrained times, to make the necessary investments in our scientific enterprise. Congress should heed the call of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences to restore our foundation.
Equality Marches Forward
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand three U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rulings, which allowed states’ same-sex marriages to proceed. Same-sex marriage is now legal in 30 states – including New Jersey - and in the District of Columbia.
It has been over a decade since the first state, Massachusetts, legalized same-sex marriage. At the time, those opposed to equality were convinced that same-sex marriage would weaken so-called “traditional” marriages and create other social ills. None of these predictions have come true. At various times in our nation’s past, we have acted to expand equal treatment to different groups of people, examining unpleasant truths about our own prejudices. Each time, our nation has been made stronger. As history has shown repeatedly, institutions are strengthened when they treat all people equally, and marriage is no exception.
One Crisis to the Next
This week much of our nation’s media is focused on Ebola. Of course, we must make the greatest effort to treat the affected patients and to prevent the spread of the viral infection to others.
It is a shame that our country lurches from one crisis to the next, whether in public health, public works, crime, or weather, rather than making the on-going efforts in preparation and training. We can show more foresight in building infrastructure, conducting academic research, and setting up organizational prevention and response to problems. With respect to this latest crisis, we have known of the Ebola virus for decades. We could have invested more effort and money in developing vaccines. We could have provided training and rehearsals in every healthcare facility in America in dealing with emerging diseases, contaminations, and poisonings, whether accidental or deliberate. We could have paid to construct multi-use isolation rooms in every part of the country and established protocols for transporting patients there. We still could. Wouldn’t it be better not to be caught surprised and unprepared when a disease appears, a bridge collapses, a storm surge hits a town, or a horrendous crime strikes a large number of people? The problem is not that we cannot afford to do these things.
108 Miles of 36-Inch Pipe
Despite being the most densely populated state in the nation, New Jersey has undertaken significant efforts to preserve environmentally-sensitive land and open space. Unfortunately, because of these land preservation efforts, pipeline companies have looked at these preserved spaces as an appealing corridor, perfect for new natural gas pipeline construction projects.
Earlier this month, the PennEast Pipeline Company officially began the process of obtaining approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to construct a 108-mile, 36-inch diameter pipeline. I have many concerns about how the proposed PennEast pipeline will affect protected areas, open space, and the environment – concerns that are shared by local government officials, including members of the Hopewell Township Committee and Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman. Last week, I wrote to FERC to express my concerns, to request a robust public engagement process, and to ensure the preparation of a full Environmental Impact Statement that would consider whether or not the pipeline should be built. If the proposed pipeline is found to impact negatively the environment or the communities along the route, the project should not be allowed to proceed, or an alternative project plan should be proposed.
“A Cantankerous Press”
When Ben Bradlee became managing editor of the Washington Post in 1965, he believed, journalism was “more than a profession - it was a public good vital to our democracy.” When Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers that revealed unattractive aspects of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and the New York Times was enjoined from publishing them, Bradlee and a few other editors picked up the cudgel and printed the information. In declining to enjoin those articles, District Judge Murray Gurfein wrote, “A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve…the right of the people to know.” The sense of press independence created by the Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in favor of the newspapers would pave the way for the Post’s coverage of Watergate a year later.
It is this same freedom of press which I aim to protect as a cosponsor of the Free Flow of Information Act, which provides protection to reporters and their sources from the federal government in federal courts. This would allow journalists to do their jobs the way Bradlee envisioned it.
“I Am Not a Scientist”
Recently, politicians from Speaker Boehner to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have said they are not qualified to debate the science of climate change, but that they are confident that all plans to deal with climate change would hurt jobs and our economy.
I am a scientist, but that doesn't uniquely qualify me to debate climate change. As Members of Congress, we rely on the expertise of others to inform our decision-making about many subjects in which we are not expert. With respect to climate change, I agree with the overwhelming consensus among scientists: the climate is changing largely as a result of human activities, and we can and must act now.
Maybe politicians who are using the “not a scientist” dodge do not realize how insulting it is to scientists. It reflects a dismissive attitude toward evidence, and it uses scientists as a convenient excuse for avoiding political heat. I was on MSNBC with Steve Kornacki last weekend to discuss science, politics, and the intersection of the two.
Sincerely,
Rush Holt
Member of Congress
10/20/14 & 10/24/14
In the days before the Space Race, the skies seemed to be the limit for our achievements. When we broke through that limit, we inspired new ideas and unleashed a whole new set of possibilities. In 2007, a report was released which illustrated our nation’s risk of falling behind our competitors as science leaders, and for a brief moment, it captured the attention of scientists, economists, and lawmakers. I helped write the America COMPETES Act passed in its wake, which authorized a doubling of the budgets at many of our key science agencies.
Seven years later the framework of the COMPETES Act remains mostly bare, with funding of the key science agencies nowhere near their target. Last month, I joined the American Academies of Arts and Sciences in releasing a follow-up report, Restoring the Foundation: The Vital Role of Research in Preserving the American Dream. It details America’s stagnation, with the U.S. now fallen to 10th place globally in research and development investment as a percent of GDP, its lowest point since before the Space Race. It gives concrete recommendations to get back on track by increasing funding for basic research, focusing on university and industry partnerships, and removing barriers that hinder the most effective impact of federal investments in research.
In order to sustain our progress as a nation we must be unafraid, even in fiscally constrained times, to make the necessary investments in our scientific enterprise. Congress should heed the call of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences to restore our foundation.
Equality Marches Forward
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand three U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rulings, which allowed states’ same-sex marriages to proceed. Same-sex marriage is now legal in 30 states – including New Jersey - and in the District of Columbia.
It has been over a decade since the first state, Massachusetts, legalized same-sex marriage. At the time, those opposed to equality were convinced that same-sex marriage would weaken so-called “traditional” marriages and create other social ills. None of these predictions have come true. At various times in our nation’s past, we have acted to expand equal treatment to different groups of people, examining unpleasant truths about our own prejudices. Each time, our nation has been made stronger. As history has shown repeatedly, institutions are strengthened when they treat all people equally, and marriage is no exception.
One Crisis to the Next
This week much of our nation’s media is focused on Ebola. Of course, we must make the greatest effort to treat the affected patients and to prevent the spread of the viral infection to others.
It is a shame that our country lurches from one crisis to the next, whether in public health, public works, crime, or weather, rather than making the on-going efforts in preparation and training. We can show more foresight in building infrastructure, conducting academic research, and setting up organizational prevention and response to problems. With respect to this latest crisis, we have known of the Ebola virus for decades. We could have invested more effort and money in developing vaccines. We could have provided training and rehearsals in every healthcare facility in America in dealing with emerging diseases, contaminations, and poisonings, whether accidental or deliberate. We could have paid to construct multi-use isolation rooms in every part of the country and established protocols for transporting patients there. We still could. Wouldn’t it be better not to be caught surprised and unprepared when a disease appears, a bridge collapses, a storm surge hits a town, or a horrendous crime strikes a large number of people? The problem is not that we cannot afford to do these things.
108 Miles of 36-Inch Pipe
Despite being the most densely populated state in the nation, New Jersey has undertaken significant efforts to preserve environmentally-sensitive land and open space. Unfortunately, because of these land preservation efforts, pipeline companies have looked at these preserved spaces as an appealing corridor, perfect for new natural gas pipeline construction projects.
Earlier this month, the PennEast Pipeline Company officially began the process of obtaining approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to construct a 108-mile, 36-inch diameter pipeline. I have many concerns about how the proposed PennEast pipeline will affect protected areas, open space, and the environment – concerns that are shared by local government officials, including members of the Hopewell Township Committee and Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman. Last week, I wrote to FERC to express my concerns, to request a robust public engagement process, and to ensure the preparation of a full Environmental Impact Statement that would consider whether or not the pipeline should be built. If the proposed pipeline is found to impact negatively the environment or the communities along the route, the project should not be allowed to proceed, or an alternative project plan should be proposed.
“A Cantankerous Press”
When Ben Bradlee became managing editor of the Washington Post in 1965, he believed, journalism was “more than a profession - it was a public good vital to our democracy.” When Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers that revealed unattractive aspects of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and the New York Times was enjoined from publishing them, Bradlee and a few other editors picked up the cudgel and printed the information. In declining to enjoin those articles, District Judge Murray Gurfein wrote, “A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve…the right of the people to know.” The sense of press independence created by the Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in favor of the newspapers would pave the way for the Post’s coverage of Watergate a year later.
It is this same freedom of press which I aim to protect as a cosponsor of the Free Flow of Information Act, which provides protection to reporters and their sources from the federal government in federal courts. This would allow journalists to do their jobs the way Bradlee envisioned it.
“I Am Not a Scientist”
Recently, politicians from Speaker Boehner to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have said they are not qualified to debate the science of climate change, but that they are confident that all plans to deal with climate change would hurt jobs and our economy.
I am a scientist, but that doesn't uniquely qualify me to debate climate change. As Members of Congress, we rely on the expertise of others to inform our decision-making about many subjects in which we are not expert. With respect to climate change, I agree with the overwhelming consensus among scientists: the climate is changing largely as a result of human activities, and we can and must act now.
Maybe politicians who are using the “not a scientist” dodge do not realize how insulting it is to scientists. It reflects a dismissive attitude toward evidence, and it uses scientists as a convenient excuse for avoiding political heat. I was on MSNBC with Steve Kornacki last weekend to discuss science, politics, and the intersection of the two.
Sincerely,
Rush Holt
Member of Congress
Monday, October 13, 2014
The Deficit Is Down and the Deficit Hawks Are Furious
The deficit hawks are perfectly happy to see upward redistribution continue. After all, they and their patrons have been the beneficiaries....
By Dean Baker, Truthout.org:
Continue reading
By Dean Baker, Truthout.org:
Last week, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the deficit for the 2014 fiscal year that just ended was $460 billion, considerably lower than they had previously projected. This puts the deficit at 2.7 percent of GDP. At that level, the size of the debt relative to the economy is actually falling.
Not only is the deficit down sharply from its levels of 2009 and 2010, when it was near 10 percent of GDP, it is below the levels that even the deficit hawks had targeted back in those years. In other words, even if we had followed the lead of deficit crusaders like Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, the deficit would be no lower today.
If anyone thought this would make the deficit hawks happy, they are badly mistaken. They are furious.
Fred Hiatt, the editorial page editor of the Washington Post, fumed about Obama’s “false victory over the deficit,” and warned that if there are no changes in policy, the debt to GDP ratio will soon begin rising again hitting an “insupportable 106 percent by 2039.” One could find similar expressions of outrage from the various Peter Peterson funded organizations like Fix the Debt or the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
This ranting is utter nonsense. If Fred Hiatt had bothered to do any homework he would have discovered that if the debt held by Social Security is included, the current debt to GDP ratio is already 103 percent of GDP, almost identical to 106 percent number that for unknown reasons he asserts is insupportable....
Continue reading
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Did The Cubans Plot To Smear Senator Menendez?
Last night the Washington Post reported that Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) sent a letter to Justice Department officials asking the Justice Department to pursue evidence obtained by U.S. investigators that the Cuban government concocted an elaborate plot to smear him with allegations that he cavorted with underage prostitutes, during his reelection campaign last year.
The reasons given as to why the Cuban government would go through such extraordinary lengths to smear our good senator seems to be a little silly. Menendez who is of Cuban descent, has been a vocal critics of the Castro regime during his tenure in Congress and at the time, was preparing to assume the powerful chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
This alleged plot sounds a bit amateurish and a little to 1960's - 1970's Cold War-ish to believe but evidently it's true. Does the CIA actually still do these things today?
Senator Menendez was on CNN this morning talking about it
The reasons given as to why the Cuban government would go through such extraordinary lengths to smear our good senator seems to be a little silly. Menendez who is of Cuban descent, has been a vocal critics of the Castro regime during his tenure in Congress and at the time, was preparing to assume the powerful chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
This alleged plot sounds a bit amateurish and a little to 1960's - 1970's Cold War-ish to believe but evidently it's true. Does the CIA actually still do these things today?
Senator Menendez was on CNN this morning talking about it
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Faces of the Fallen 2014
![]() |
(www.davegranlund.com) |
6805 U.S. servicemen and servicewomen have died serving our country since 2006 during Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Of those 6805, 16 U.S. service members died during 2014. We should remember them all, as well as, all of those that went before.
Check out the Washington Post to search for the Faces of the Fallen of those heroes that gave their lives so that we may enjoy our freedom and to remember what the meaning Memorial Day really is.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Christie Forgot He Signed Bill Authorizing State University To Use Eminent Domain
I was listening to Governor Christie Monday night on NJ 101.5 FM when a distraught woman called into the "Ask the Governor" program asking whether or not it were true that he signed a bill authorizing Rutgers-Camden and Rowan University to use eminent domain to condemn and confiscate a piece of private property near the university. Christie seemed flabbergasted at the question and assured the woman that he did not sign any such the bill into law.
Apparently the governor forgot that he actually signed the bill into law last September. Yesterday the Washington Post reminded Mr. Christie:
Read More
Apparently the governor forgot that he actually signed the bill into law last September. Yesterday the Washington Post reminded Mr. Christie:
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has apparently forgotten that he recently signed a bill giving a New Jersey state university board the power to condemn private property [HT: Nick Sibilla]:
Asked Monday about a measure giving eminent domain powers to a new Rutgers-Camden and Rowan University joint board of governors, Gov. Christie said he was unaware of such a proposal.
“If a bill like that comes to my desk, I’ll have to take a close look at it,” Christie said, fielding a call from a listener on NJ 101.5′s Ask the Governor radio program. “I haven’t heard anything at this point about eminent domain being given to a university – I don’t think that’s the way it works.”
However, Christie signed the bill into law last month.
Using eminent domain to take private property for transfer to public universities is probably constitutional under the Fifth Amendment, which limits the use of eminent domain to takings that are for a “public use.” Virtually all scholars and jurists agree that government ownership of the condemned property is enough to satisfy the public use requirement. But university takings are still generally a bad idea, for reasons I outlined here and here.
Back in September, Governor Christie also signed a bill enacting an eminent domain “reform” law that actually increases the risk of abusive takings instead of alleviating it. It would be interesting to know whether he has forgotten about that bill as well...
Read More
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Christie's Grand Standing
by Josh Levitt
Buono For Governor
Yesterday Governor Christie participated in a panel discussion with right-wing Governors called "“Republican Governors on What’s Working at the State Level.” But, instead of talking about New Jersey's struggling economy or the 400,000 New Jerseyans out of work, Governor Christie focused on his favorite topic: his inevitable 2016 presidential run. In a move designed solely to appeal to national Republicans, Governor Christie attacked one of his likely 2016 opponents for his foreign policy views. At this point, Gov. Christie is just itching to leave New Jersey in the dust to satisfy his political ambition.
Christie Cites 9/11 in Assailing Libertarian Trend in GOP
By Jonathan Martin//New York Times
Invoking the families of 9/11 victims, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey on Thursdayheatedly denounced the growing libertarian drift on national security in the Republican Party that is favored by Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, and others in the party. “This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” Mr. Christie said on a panel with other Republican governors here. Asked if he was alluding to Mr. Paul, a potential Republican presidential rival, Mr. Christie spoke in deeply personal terms about the impact of the 2001 terrorist attacks on his state. “You can name any number of people and he’s one of them,” Mr. Christie shot back before referring to the more than 600 New Jersey families who lost relatives in the attacks. “These esoteric, intellectual debates — I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. And they won’t, because that’s a much tougher conversation to have.”
Christie goes after libertarians — hard
By Aaron Blake//Washington Post
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Thursday offered a clear broadside against Republicans drifting toward a more libertarian view of foreign policy, lumping Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in with them and suggesting they explain their position to victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The House earlier this week narrowly voted against a reduction in funding for the National Security Agency, as libertarian-leaning members from both sides joined together to vote for the amendment. “As a former prosecutor who was appointed by President George W. Bush on Sept. 10, 2001, I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said. Asked whether he includes Paul — a fellow potential 2016 presidential candidate — in his criticism, Christie didn’t back down. “You can name any one of them that’s engaged in this,” he said. “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. … I’m very nervous about the direction this is moving in.”
Christie: NSA critics should talk to 9/11 families
CNN
Opponents of government spying programs should talk to families who lost loved ones in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said at a Republican governors forum Thursday. Asked about the influence of libertarian-minded leaders in the GOP - including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky - Christie said that when it comes to national security, those who oppose National Security Agency programs that monitor Americans' electronic activity were just wrong. "These esoteric, intellectual debates - I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and orphans and have that conversation," Christie said. "And they won't. That's a lot tougher conversation to have." Christie was appearing on a panel of governors that also included Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Mike Pence of Indiana and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. All four are considered potential candidates for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, though the topic did not arise on Thursday.
Christie: Rand Paul 'dangerous'
By Hadas Gold//Politico
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is ripping libertarians - including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). - for challenging government surveillance programs and failing to understand the dangers of terrorism. “This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” the New Jersey governor said on Thursday at a Republican governors forum in Aspen, Colo. “You can name any number of people and (Paul is) one of them.”
Christie vs. Paul: The fight for the future of GOP foreign policy
By Aaron Blake//Washington Post
Shortly after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took to the stage with three fellow Republican governors here Thursday, he derided self-serving politicians who try to be all things to all people and are afraid to alienate anyone. By the end of the session, hosted by the nonpartisan Aspen Institute, Christie put his potential 2016 presidential hopes where his mouth is. And in the process, he set himself apart from — and risked alienating — a very significant and growing swath of the Republican Party led by Sen. Rand Paul: libertarians.
Libertarianism and the coming Republican political war
By Chris Cizzilla//Washington Post
...2. Chris Christie: The New Jersey governor’s condemnation of the creeping libertarianism within the GOP proves two things: 1) He’s running for president and 2) He will do so as a defense-defending hawk in the mold of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The question for Christie is whether he is another incarnation of Rudy Giuliani (tough talking hawk whose moderate credentials doomed him) or a whole new — and more successful — model for GOP candidate. Time will tell — but he’s definitely running. (Previous ranking: 2)
Gov. Christie Joins Anti-Rand Paul Club
By Abby Phillip//ABC News
The anti-Rand Paul club gained a new member: New Jersey’s Republican Gov. Chris Christie. Christie ripped into the Kentucky senator and his cohorts for promoting a “dangerous” libertarian philosophy on national security issues in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. “I just want us to be really cautious because this strain of libertarianism going through both parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said at an Aspen Institute panel of Republican governors in Colorado Thursday night. Asked specifically whether he was referring to Paul, Christie said, “You can name any number of people and he’s one of them.”
Rand Paul to Chris Christie: You need to talk to more real Americans
By Ralph Z. Hallow//Washington Times
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, leading the opposition to drone killing of U.S. citizens and to massive government surveillance of U.S. citizens email and phone records, fired back at fellow Republican Christie Christie, the New Jersey governor, who had attacked the Kentucky Republican for opposing massive government surveillance of U.S. citizens. “If Governor Christie believes the constitutional rights and the privacy of all Americans is ‘esoteric,’ he either needs a new dictionary, or he needs to talk to more Americans, because a great number of them are concerned about the dramatic overreach of our government in recent years,” Paul senior adviser Doug Stafford told The Washington Times. Mr. Christie had told fellow GOP governors in Aspen, Colo., on Thursday that Mr. Paul is part of a “strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought.”
Buono For Governor
Yesterday Governor Christie participated in a panel discussion with right-wing Governors called "“Republican Governors on What’s Working at the State Level.” But, instead of talking about New Jersey's struggling economy or the 400,000 New Jerseyans out of work, Governor Christie focused on his favorite topic: his inevitable 2016 presidential run. In a move designed solely to appeal to national Republicans, Governor Christie attacked one of his likely 2016 opponents for his foreign policy views. At this point, Gov. Christie is just itching to leave New Jersey in the dust to satisfy his political ambition.
Christie Cites 9/11 in Assailing Libertarian Trend in GOP
By Jonathan Martin//New York Times
Invoking the families of 9/11 victims, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey on Thursdayheatedly denounced the growing libertarian drift on national security in the Republican Party that is favored by Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, and others in the party. “This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” Mr. Christie said on a panel with other Republican governors here. Asked if he was alluding to Mr. Paul, a potential Republican presidential rival, Mr. Christie spoke in deeply personal terms about the impact of the 2001 terrorist attacks on his state. “You can name any number of people and he’s one of them,” Mr. Christie shot back before referring to the more than 600 New Jersey families who lost relatives in the attacks. “These esoteric, intellectual debates — I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. And they won’t, because that’s a much tougher conversation to have.”
Christie goes after libertarians — hard
By Aaron Blake//Washington Post
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Thursday offered a clear broadside against Republicans drifting toward a more libertarian view of foreign policy, lumping Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in with them and suggesting they explain their position to victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The House earlier this week narrowly voted against a reduction in funding for the National Security Agency, as libertarian-leaning members from both sides joined together to vote for the amendment. “As a former prosecutor who was appointed by President George W. Bush on Sept. 10, 2001, I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said. Asked whether he includes Paul — a fellow potential 2016 presidential candidate — in his criticism, Christie didn’t back down. “You can name any one of them that’s engaged in this,” he said. “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. … I’m very nervous about the direction this is moving in.”
Christie: NSA critics should talk to 9/11 families
CNN
Opponents of government spying programs should talk to families who lost loved ones in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said at a Republican governors forum Thursday. Asked about the influence of libertarian-minded leaders in the GOP - including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky - Christie said that when it comes to national security, those who oppose National Security Agency programs that monitor Americans' electronic activity were just wrong. "These esoteric, intellectual debates - I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and orphans and have that conversation," Christie said. "And they won't. That's a lot tougher conversation to have." Christie was appearing on a panel of governors that also included Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Mike Pence of Indiana and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. All four are considered potential candidates for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, though the topic did not arise on Thursday.
Christie: Rand Paul 'dangerous'
By Hadas Gold//Politico
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is ripping libertarians - including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). - for challenging government surveillance programs and failing to understand the dangers of terrorism. “This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” the New Jersey governor said on Thursday at a Republican governors forum in Aspen, Colo. “You can name any number of people and (Paul is) one of them.”
Christie vs. Paul: The fight for the future of GOP foreign policy
By Aaron Blake//Washington Post
Shortly after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took to the stage with three fellow Republican governors here Thursday, he derided self-serving politicians who try to be all things to all people and are afraid to alienate anyone. By the end of the session, hosted by the nonpartisan Aspen Institute, Christie put his potential 2016 presidential hopes where his mouth is. And in the process, he set himself apart from — and risked alienating — a very significant and growing swath of the Republican Party led by Sen. Rand Paul: libertarians.
Libertarianism and the coming Republican political war
By Chris Cizzilla//Washington Post
...2. Chris Christie: The New Jersey governor’s condemnation of the creeping libertarianism within the GOP proves two things: 1) He’s running for president and 2) He will do so as a defense-defending hawk in the mold of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The question for Christie is whether he is another incarnation of Rudy Giuliani (tough talking hawk whose moderate credentials doomed him) or a whole new — and more successful — model for GOP candidate. Time will tell — but he’s definitely running. (Previous ranking: 2)
Gov. Christie Joins Anti-Rand Paul Club
By Abby Phillip//ABC News
The anti-Rand Paul club gained a new member: New Jersey’s Republican Gov. Chris Christie. Christie ripped into the Kentucky senator and his cohorts for promoting a “dangerous” libertarian philosophy on national security issues in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. “I just want us to be really cautious because this strain of libertarianism going through both parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said at an Aspen Institute panel of Republican governors in Colorado Thursday night. Asked specifically whether he was referring to Paul, Christie said, “You can name any number of people and he’s one of them.”
Rand Paul to Chris Christie: You need to talk to more real Americans
By Ralph Z. Hallow//Washington Times
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, leading the opposition to drone killing of U.S. citizens and to massive government surveillance of U.S. citizens email and phone records, fired back at fellow Republican Christie Christie, the New Jersey governor, who had attacked the Kentucky Republican for opposing massive government surveillance of U.S. citizens. “If Governor Christie believes the constitutional rights and the privacy of all Americans is ‘esoteric,’ he either needs a new dictionary, or he needs to talk to more Americans, because a great number of them are concerned about the dramatic overreach of our government in recent years,” Paul senior adviser Doug Stafford told The Washington Times. Mr. Christie had told fellow GOP governors in Aspen, Colo., on Thursday that Mr. Paul is part of a “strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought.”
Monday, May 27, 2013
Memorial Day - Faces of the Fallen
![]() |
(www.davegranlund.com) |
323 U.S. service members died during 2012 & 2013 in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, 6,648 since the War on Terror began following the September 11th, 2001 attack on our country. We should remember them all as well as all of those that went before.
Check out the Washington Post to search for the Faces of the Fallen of those heroes that gave their lives so that we may enjoy our freedom and to remember what the meaning Memorial Day really is.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Escort says Menendez prostitution claims were made up
It's about time we put this issue to bed (pun intended) and get on with the act of governing down in Washington.
From the Washington Post:
Read more
From the Washington Post:
An escort who appeared on a video claiming that Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) paid her for sex has told Dominican authorities that she was instead paid to make up the claims and has never met or seen the senator, according to court documents and two people briefed on her claim.
The woman said a local lawyer had approached her and a fellow escort and asked them help frame Menendez and a top donor, Salomon Melgen, according to affidavits obtained by The Post.
That lawyer has in turn identified a second Dominican lawyer who he said gave the woman a script and paid her to read the claims aloud. The first lawyer said he found out only later that the remarks would be videotaped and used against Menendez, the affidavits say.
The escort was one of two women whose claims initially seemed to confirm a tipster’s allegations that Menendez had patronized prostitutes while vacationing in the Dominican Republic. The tipster, who last spring began e-mailing allegations to a government watchdog group and the FBI, said he had evidence that Menendez had relations with underage prostitutes and participated in sex parties arranged by Melgen, his friend and political backer....
Read more
Monday, May 28, 2012
Faces of the Fallen
![]() |
(www.davegranlund.com) |
118 U.S. service members died during 2012 in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom we should remember them all as well as all of those that went before.
Check out the Washington Post to search for the Faces of the Fallen of those heroes that gave their lives so that we may enjoy our freedom and to remember what the meaning Memorial Day really is.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Remembering The Faces of the Fallen This Memorial Day
Faces of the Fallen is a collection of information about each U.S. service member who died in Iraq and Afghanistan during Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
This information is updated at least twice monthly from military releases, news service reports and local newspaper stories. The photographs come from news services, local newspapers and family members and published online @ Washingtonpost.com
This information is updated at least twice monthly from military releases, news service reports and local newspaper stories. The photographs come from news services, local newspapers and family members and published online @ Washingtonpost.com

Sunday, February 27, 2011
Sunday Must Reading
I've come across a few articles posted on different websites over the past couple of days that should be must reading for those that support the rights of union members, both public and private, to engage in collective barganing.
They deal with what is going on in Wisconsin and public opinion on what's happing, not only in Wisconsin , but also across the country. These posts can be found on Forbes.com's Policy Page blog by Rick Ungar, ThinkProgress.org and from the Washington Post's Plume Line blog by Greg Sargent.
Rick Ungar's post over at Forbes is titled "The Wisconsin Lie Exposed - Tax Payers Actually Contribute Nothing to Public Employees Pensions" informs us that public employees in Wisconsin fully fund their own pension system... the state adds no tax payer money to the fund contrary to what people have been hearing.
They deal with what is going on in Wisconsin and public opinion on what's happing, not only in Wisconsin , but also across the country. These posts can be found on Forbes.com's Policy Page blog by Rick Ungar, ThinkProgress.org and from the Washington Post's Plume Line blog by Greg Sargent.
Rick Ungar's post over at Forbes is titled "The Wisconsin Lie Exposed - Tax Payers Actually Contribute Nothing to Public Employees Pensions" informs us that public employees in Wisconsin fully fund their own pension system... the state adds no tax payer money to the fund contrary to what people have been hearing.
"Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining
agreements to “contribute more” to their pension and health insurance plans.
Accepting Gov. Walker’ s assertions as fact, and failing to check, creates the
impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from
taxpayers. They are not. Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin’ s pension and
health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state
workers. "
Over at ThinkProgress they post, "Top 10 Disastrous Policies From The Wisconsin GOP You Haven’t Heard About" where they talk about how:
"...Walker’s assault on public employees is only one part of a larger political program that aims to give corporations free reign in the state while dismantling the healthcare programs, environmental regulations, and good government laws that protect Wisconsin’s middle and working class. These lesser known proposals in the 144-page bill reveal how radical Walker’s plan actually is..."And Finally Greg Sargent's Plume Line post over at the Washington Post, "Public employees not such an easy scapegoat after all" informs us that according to recent Gallup Poll "...Public employees are turning out to be far harder to scapegoat in the public mind than many predicted..."
* Among those who make less than $24,000 annually, 74 percent oppose the proposal, versus only 14 percent who favor it.
* Among those who make $24,000 to $59,000, 63 percent oppose the proposal, versus only 33 percent who favor it.
* Among those who make $60,000 to $89,000, 53 percent oppose the proposal, versus only 41 percent who favor it.
* Among those who make $90,000 and up, 50 percent favor the proposal, versus 47 percent who oppose it.
Sargent concludes:
"...For all the attention being lavished on the likes of Chris Christie and his supposedly successful formula of targeting public employees as the new "welfare queens," the bigger and more interesting story is that they aren't turning out to be such easy targets, after all."
Take a look at these articles and see what you think, I really believe they are must reads. If the radical right-wing and the GOP are successful in stripping public workers of their rights, it wont be long before they attack private sector worker looking to eliminate overtime, health, pension and other long standing rules.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Politicians' reputations can be buried by snowstorms; If you're a politician, beware of snow. It can bury a career.
Very good Op-Ed by the Washington Post's Eugene Robinson that discusses the potential danger that politicians face when they downplay the negative effects that weather, in this case snow storms, can have on their reputations.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie are learning that lesson the hard way, as their angry constituents dig out of last weekend's blizzard. Bloomberg is being hammered for the city's slow and incompetent response, especially in the outer boroughs; Christie, for jetting off to Walt Disney World just before the storm dumped nearly three feet of snow in parts of his state.
The two beleaguered officials - both of whom are rumored to have national ambitions - should have had a consultation with Marion Barry.
In January 1987, Barry kicked off his third term as mayor of Washington with a trip to Southern California for the Super Bowl. While he was getting a manicure and playing tennis at the posh Beverly Hilton, the voters who had elected him were being buried under 20 inches of snow. The city was utterly paralyzed - streets unplowed, buses immobilized, subway barely running. The mayor continued to frolic in the sun.
Are you getting any of this, Gov. Christie?
Finally, Barry came home. He wanted to survey the situation, so he had to tour the city by helicopter; his limousine, he explained, would have gotten stuck in the snow. His aerial assessment: "We're not a snow town."
Unbelievably, that wasn't Barry's first unfortunate encounter with winter weather. In 1979, barely into his first term, he was vacationing in Miami when an 18-inch snowfall shut down the city. When he got home, a reporter asked how people were supposed to get to work. "Take a bus," Barry said. Informed that the buses weren't running, Barry modified his advice: "They can walk."
It's unlikely that anyone will top Barry for grossly mishandling the aftermath of a snowstorm - and anyway, it was white powder of a different kind that led to his downfall. But his is hardly the only example.
In 1979, Michael Bilandic was expected to cruise to reelection as mayor of Chicago. He had the support of the Democratic machine, which usually guaranteed victory. But a series of big snowstorms that winter turned "the city that works" into "the city that couldn't get to work," with some neighborhoods left unplowed for weeks. Minorities and working-class whites felt particularly neglected.
Jane Byrne, an unlikely challenger in the Democratic mayoral primary, took advantage of Bilandic's missteps by filming campaign ads on snowbound streets. She won narrowly - and went on to become the first woman to serve as Chicago's mayor. Bilandic spent the rest of his career in the worthy obscurity of the state appellate bench.
Paying attention, Mayor Bloom-berg?
Snow can make voters forget all the good things you've done. Bill McNichols, who served as mayor of Denver for 14 years, is generally given credit for the city's cosmopolitan growth. But a blizzard deposited two feet of snow on Christmas Eve 1982 - when city workers were at home with their families, not out clearing impassible streets and airport runways. How many Denver residents had their holiday travel plans ruined? Enough to get McNichols bounced out of office a few months later.
Snow eventually melts, but hardened hearts may not.
In the op-ed, Robinson talks about the potential damage that this weeks massive snowstorm may have caused to both Governor Chris Christie (away in Disney World) and Mayor Michael Bloomberg (perceived indifference) reputation of being competent and in control of whatever situations that may arise. He qualifies his opinion by detailing the effects that other major storms had on the careers of politicians in cities like Washington DC (Marion Barry 1987), Chicago (Michael Bilandic 1979) and Denver (Bill McNichols 1982), each lost their bids at election or re-election because of how voters in those cities perceived how well or not so well they handled their particular snow crisis.
It's a good read that I hope others can learn from (are you reading this Gerry?):
The two beleaguered officials - both of whom are rumored to have national ambitions - should have had a consultation with Marion Barry.
In January 1987, Barry kicked off his third term as mayor of Washington with a trip to Southern California for the Super Bowl. While he was getting a manicure and playing tennis at the posh Beverly Hilton, the voters who had elected him were being buried under 20 inches of snow. The city was utterly paralyzed - streets unplowed, buses immobilized, subway barely running. The mayor continued to frolic in the sun.
Are you getting any of this, Gov. Christie?
Finally, Barry came home. He wanted to survey the situation, so he had to tour the city by helicopter; his limousine, he explained, would have gotten stuck in the snow. His aerial assessment: "We're not a snow town."
Unbelievably, that wasn't Barry's first unfortunate encounter with winter weather. In 1979, barely into his first term, he was vacationing in Miami when an 18-inch snowfall shut down the city. When he got home, a reporter asked how people were supposed to get to work. "Take a bus," Barry said. Informed that the buses weren't running, Barry modified his advice: "They can walk."
It's unlikely that anyone will top Barry for grossly mishandling the aftermath of a snowstorm - and anyway, it was white powder of a different kind that led to his downfall. But his is hardly the only example.
In 1979, Michael Bilandic was expected to cruise to reelection as mayor of Chicago. He had the support of the Democratic machine, which usually guaranteed victory. But a series of big snowstorms that winter turned "the city that works" into "the city that couldn't get to work," with some neighborhoods left unplowed for weeks. Minorities and working-class whites felt particularly neglected.
Jane Byrne, an unlikely challenger in the Democratic mayoral primary, took advantage of Bilandic's missteps by filming campaign ads on snowbound streets. She won narrowly - and went on to become the first woman to serve as Chicago's mayor. Bilandic spent the rest of his career in the worthy obscurity of the state appellate bench.
Paying attention, Mayor Bloom-berg?
Snow can make voters forget all the good things you've done. Bill McNichols, who served as mayor of Denver for 14 years, is generally given credit for the city's cosmopolitan growth. But a blizzard deposited two feet of snow on Christmas Eve 1982 - when city workers were at home with their families, not out clearing impassible streets and airport runways. How many Denver residents had their holiday travel plans ruined? Enough to get McNichols bounced out of office a few months later.
Snow eventually melts, but hardened hearts may not.
Read More >>> Here
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Public Still Trusts Obama More
Heading into next year, I find this poll from the Washington Post/ABC News intriguing. I see it as an indication of more gridlock coming out of Washington as both sides of the political process try to one-up each other in an attempt to gain the upper hand next year, leading into the 2012 Presidential campaign.
From Political Wire -
Meanwhile, just 41% of those polled say the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives is a "good thing," while 27% say it is a "bad thing," and 30% say it won't make any difference.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
The Washington Post - Editorial: Soft on terror? Not this president
Hat tip to my Facebook friend Jorge Santos-
THERE IS, it seems evident, more than enough blame to go around in the botched handling of the botched Christmas bombing. Not for some Republicans. With former vice president Richard B. Cheney in the lead, they have embarked on an ugly course to use the incident to inflict maximum political damage on President Obama. That's bad enough, but their scurrilous line of attack is even worse. The claim that the incident shows the president's fecklessness in the war on terror is unfounded -- no matter how often it is repeated.
These critics have set up a straw Obama, a weak and naive leader who allegedly takes terrorism lightly, thinks that playing nicely with terrorists will make them stop, and fails to understand the threat that the United States faces from violent extremists. Mr. Cheney said that the incident had made "clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war." Likewise, Republican Study Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.) called on Mr. Obama to "recognize that we are at war with a murderous enemy who will not relent because we heed political correctness, acquiesce to international calls for deference or close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay." Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano "and the rest of the Obama administration view their role as law enforcement, first responders dealing with the aftermath of an attack. And we believe in a forward-looking approach to stopping these attacks before they happen."
There are two ways to show how baseless these attacks are: examining Mr. Obama's words and examining his actions.
Words first. "Evil does exist in the world," Mr. Obama said in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. "Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms." In his weekly radio speech Saturday, he disposed of the war-vs.-law-enforcement canard, pointing out that in his inaugural address he made it clear that "0ur nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred and that we will do whatever it takes to defeat them and defend our country, even as we uphold the values that have always distinguished America among nations." "
But actions speak louder, and Mr. Obama's actions -- often at the cost of enraging his party's liberal base -- have also demonstrated tenacity and pragmatism blended with a necessary reassessment of the flawed policies of his predecessors and a recommitment to the rule of law. He wants to close the Guantanamo Bay prison, which is all to the good given its stain on the national character, but he has delayed that goal until acceptable alternatives can be found. He has brought criminal charges against some terrorists, but he has also sent others to be tried by military tribunals. He has invoked the authority of the executive to have lawsuits dismissed because they risk exposing state secrets. In addition to the new troop deployments, he has aggressively used predator drones to strike at terrorists, including outside Afghanistan. Even before the failed attack, his administration has been working aggressively with Yemeni authorities to deal with extremists there.
It is possible to disagree with the administration's decision to bring criminal charges against the suspect in the failed airplane bombing, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, although we think that was the proper course. It is possible to fault, as we have, some of the administration's public statements in the immediate aftermath of the attack. And as the president has acknowledged, the incident revealed failures in intelligence and in security screening that must be urgently identified and corrected. The country would benefit from a serious and bipartisan effort in Congress to ensure that the lessons of the Christmas attack are learned. A groundless campaign to portray Mr. Obama as soft on terror can only detract from that effort.
The Washington Post
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Sunday, January 3, 2010
THERE IS, it seems evident, more than enough blame to go around in the botched handling of the botched Christmas bombing. Not for some Republicans. With former vice president Richard B. Cheney in the lead, they have embarked on an ugly course to use the incident to inflict maximum political damage on President Obama. That's bad enough, but their scurrilous line of attack is even worse. The claim that the incident shows the president's fecklessness in the war on terror is unfounded -- no matter how often it is repeated.
These critics have set up a straw Obama, a weak and naive leader who allegedly takes terrorism lightly, thinks that playing nicely with terrorists will make them stop, and fails to understand the threat that the United States faces from violent extremists. Mr. Cheney said that the incident had made "clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war." Likewise, Republican Study Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.) called on Mr. Obama to "recognize that we are at war with a murderous enemy who will not relent because we heed political correctness, acquiesce to international calls for deference or close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay." Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano "and the rest of the Obama administration view their role as law enforcement, first responders dealing with the aftermath of an attack. And we believe in a forward-looking approach to stopping these attacks before they happen."
There are two ways to show how baseless these attacks are: examining Mr. Obama's words and examining his actions.
Words first. "Evil does exist in the world," Mr. Obama said in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. "Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms." In his weekly radio speech Saturday, he disposed of the war-vs.-law-enforcement canard, pointing out that in his inaugural address he made it clear that "0ur nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred and that we will do whatever it takes to defeat them and defend our country, even as we uphold the values that have always distinguished America among nations." "
But actions speak louder, and Mr. Obama's actions -- often at the cost of enraging his party's liberal base -- have also demonstrated tenacity and pragmatism blended with a necessary reassessment of the flawed policies of his predecessors and a recommitment to the rule of law. He wants to close the Guantanamo Bay prison, which is all to the good given its stain on the national character, but he has delayed that goal until acceptable alternatives can be found. He has brought criminal charges against some terrorists, but he has also sent others to be tried by military tribunals. He has invoked the authority of the executive to have lawsuits dismissed because they risk exposing state secrets. In addition to the new troop deployments, he has aggressively used predator drones to strike at terrorists, including outside Afghanistan. Even before the failed attack, his administration has been working aggressively with Yemeni authorities to deal with extremists there.
It is possible to disagree with the administration's decision to bring criminal charges against the suspect in the failed airplane bombing, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, although we think that was the proper course. It is possible to fault, as we have, some of the administration's public statements in the immediate aftermath of the attack. And as the president has acknowledged, the incident revealed failures in intelligence and in security screening that must be urgently identified and corrected. The country would benefit from a serious and bipartisan effort in Congress to ensure that the lessons of the Christmas attack are learned. A groundless campaign to portray Mr. Obama as soft on terror can only detract from that effort.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Despite clear progress, media declare health care reform nearing "life support"
Despite passage of health care reform bills in House and Senate committees and the endorsement by major medical organizations of congressional Democrats' reform efforts, numerous television pundits have suggested that President Obama's health care plan is in serious jeopardy.
As The Washington Post observed in a July 20 article: "Cable news programs repeatedly declare the president's health care program is teetering or embattled despite a week in which [President] Obama's proposals were endorsed by the doctor and nurses associations and committees in both legislative chambers passed major bills." Indeed, despite passage of health care reform bills by the House Ways and Means Committee, House Education and Labor Committee, and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and endorsements of congressional Democrats' reform efforts by the American Medical Association and American Nurses Association, numerous television pundits have suggested in recent days that Obama's health care plan is in serious jeopardy.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Lessons from the Bush Years
1. Presidents set the tone. Don't be passive or tolerate virulent divisions.
2. The president must insist that everyone speak out loud in front of the others, even -- or especially -- when there are vehement disagreements.
3. A president must do the homework to master the fundamental ideas and concepts behind his policies.
4. Presidents need to draw people out and make sure bad news makes it to the Oval Office.
5. Presidents need to foster a culture of skepticism and doubt.
6. Presidents get contradictory data, and they need a rigorous way to sort it out.
7. Presidents must tell the hard truth to the public, even if that means delivering very bad news.
8. Righteous motives are not enough for effective policy.
9. Presidents must insist on strategic thinking.
10. The president should embrace transparency. Some version of the behind-the-scenes story of what happened in his White House will always make it out to the public -- and everyone will be better off if that version is as accurate as possible.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The LA Times and Washington Post endorsed Obama
The LA Times and The Washington Post endorsed Barack Obama for President today here's an excerpt from the LA Times:
We may one day look back on this presidential campaign in wonder. We may marvel that Obama's critics called him an elitist, as if an Ivy League education were a source of embarrassment, and belittled his eloquence,as if a gift with words were suddenly a defect. In fact, Obama is educated and eloquent, sober and exciting, steady and mature. He represents the nation as it is, and as it aspires to be.
We may one day look back on this presidential campaign in wonder. We may marvel that Obama's critics called him an elitist, as if an Ivy League education were a source of embarrassment, and belittled his eloquence,as if a gift with words were suddenly a defect. In fact, Obama is educated and eloquent, sober and exciting, steady and mature. He represents the nation as it is, and as it aspires to be.
Palin Only Visits "Pro-America" States
According to the Washington Post, Gov. Sarah Palin "made a point of mentioning that she loved to visit the 'pro-America' areas of the country, of which North Carolina is one. No word on which states she views as unpatriotic."
She also said she no longer watches the news.
Said Palin: "But yeah, sometimes you do get depressed watching what it is that they're reporting and the spin and some of the distortion of what our message is and what we stand for. Sometimes that, that gets draining."
She also said she no longer watches the news.
Said Palin: "But yeah, sometimes you do get depressed watching what it is that they're reporting and the spin and some of the distortion of what our message is and what we stand for. Sometimes that, that gets draining."
- Political Wire
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)