The Daily Strike-5/21/09-Beyond "Obama v. Cheney"

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. This will be the last full Daily Strike until next Tuesday, so you better savor it! Have a pleasant Memorial Day weekend!

OBAMA AND CHENEY: The Washington chatter class is abuzz today because of dueling national security speeches from President Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney. To a certain extent, both speeches are pretty much exactly what you'd expect. President Obama, his voice echoing through the halls of the National Archives, tried to do what he does best: provide insight and context on a thorny political issue. Obama has been plagued in the past couple of weeks by a series of scandals relating to detainee treatment at Guantanamo Bay. First, Obama decided not to release photos of apparent detainee abuse, which upset his allies on the left. Then, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi got into trouble by suggesting that the CIA misled her on interrogation techniques during a 2002 meeting. Finally, Congressional Republicans have mounted a successful effort to block funding to close the facility at Guantanamo Bay, claiming that doing so would cause terrorists to be relocated "into our communities." Just like he did with his speech on race in Philadelphia in March 2008, President Obama explained why these smaller issues underlie the large question of how we treat detainees consistent with our constitutional values and principles.

The President argued that the previous administration created a hastily conceived mess at Guantanamo Bay. As a result, America's image has been tarnished abroad, and terrorists have been given a new recruiting tool. He said that it's easy to make political hay out of this issue, but as President, he has to make some tough choices. That means, some detainees will have to be tried in U.S. federal courts. He also, in typical Obama fashion, shot down some of the most childish Republican attacks. To critics who say that putting terrorists in American prisons presents some kind of danger, Obama stated that no person has ever escaped from a maximum security prison in this country. He also, most importantly, used the setting of the National Archives to illustrate the importance of adhering to the fundamental constitutional principals that have kept our country safe.

Cheney, speaking at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, gave his standard "Obama is making our country less safe" speech. He levied a bunch of pretty harsh attacks on the President, saying that Obama has made the country vulnerable to another terrorist attack. I'll let you judge for yourself, but these statements indicate to me that Dick Cheney is mildly psychotic:

“If liberals are unhappy about some decisions, and conservatives are unhappy about other decisions, then it may seem to them that the President is on the path of sensible compromise,” Cheney said. “But in the fight against terrorism, there is no middle ground, and half-measures keep you half exposed.” “You cannot keep just some nuclear-armed terrorists out of the United States, you must keep every nuclear-armed terrorist out of the United States. Triangulation is a political strategy, not a national security strategy,” Cheney said. “There is never a good time to compromise when the lives and safety of the American people are in the balance. “

The mainstream media will almost certainly debate who "won" today's debate. I don't think that's quite the right way of looking at it. You could say that Cheney won because he clearly wants to have a dialogue on these matters for a number of reasons, while Obama almost certainly does not. He has much bigger fish (the economy, energy, health care) to fry. On the other hand, I think Obama comes out of this relatively unscathed. He is going up against one of the most unpopular politicians in the country, and he made an effective, mature case for his administration's policies on the national stage. Hard to see how that can be a bad thing.

THE HOUSE: Let's move on to Congress, because I'm sure most of you, like me, are already tired of this Cheney/Obama story. The House of Representatives got a lot of work done today in advance of next week's Memorial Day recess. In fact, it looks like they'll be able to zip out of town a day early. The House was supposed to begin the day by voting on the conference report on the military procurement bill, but got sidetracked by some political posturing. Republicans offered a privileged resolution demanding an investigation into Nancy Pelosi's statement that the CIA misled her. The presiding officer at the time, Rep. Clay of Missouri, ruled that the resolution did not constitute a question of privilege. The Republicans sought to appeal the ruling of the chair, and lost on an almost pure party-line vote. Every Democrat voted to protect their beloved Speaker. Only two Republicans crossed the aisle and opposed the investigation, Reps. Jones (NC) and Paul (TX). Both of these men are among the very few anti-war Republicans in Congress, and probably are sympathetic to most criticisms of the CIA.

The House then voted on the aforementioned military procurement conference report, and approved it unanimously, 411-0. The bill heads to President Obama's desk for his certain signature. That will make four major bills that the President signs this week. Usually a unanimous vote signifies a toothless bill. In this case, the bill is certainly not toothless. It will go a long way in protecting against military cost-overruns.

Next, the House moved on to a bill reauthorizing spending for the Federal Aviation Administration through 2012. The bill makes some small changes to FAA policy. For one, fuel tax for airlines will increase. Fees for use of passenger facilities will go up by a few dollars. The FAA, under this legislation, will be forced to renegotiate a contract with the Airline Traffic Controllers union, which will result in a pay increase for ATC workers. The bill also mandates that airports implement new standards for fire protection. I'm a big fan of all of these provisions, especially since they were featured as talking points against the bill by these guys.

Before the vote on final passage, the House took roll call votes on a couple of amendments. The first, offered by Rep. Burgess (R-TX), expressed the sense of Congress that FAA whistle blowers should be protected. It passed unanimously. The next amendment, offered by Rep. McCaul (R-TX) prohibits funds in the bill from being used to name a project after a member of Congress. This is one of those pointless anti-corruption amendments. Who cares if we name things after members of Congress? The amendment was agreed to 417-2. I expect we'll be seeing the "Jim Moran" (D-VA) and "Nick Rahall" (D-WV) statues popping up soon. The House rejected a Republican motion to recommit by a vote of 154-263. 28 Republicans voted against their own motion, while 11 Democrats voted yes. The bill passed by a vote of 277-136. 37 Republicans joined all but 4 Democrats in voting yes. The dissenting Democrats were Bright (AL), Cohen (TN), Minnick (ID) and Sestak (PA). The Senate will take up their version of the measure in the coming month.

THE SENATE: The Senate today finished work on its version f the war spending bill. This morning, Senators voted 94-1 to limit debate and amendments on the bill. The only "no" vote came from staunchly anti-war Democrat Russ Feingold. The key difference between the House and Senate versions was the Senate's inclusion of money for the IMF. Conservatives claimed that this money was unnecessary in a war funding bill (as if they would EVER want to spend money on the IMF). Democrats saw the funding as an important investment to help cure the global economy. Senator Jim DeMint offered an amendment stripping the IMF money out of the bill. The amendment was defeated 30-64. Interestingly, three Democrats voted for the amendment. Senator Bayh (IN) voted against it, presumably because it wasn't "fiscally responsible." Both Senators Sanders (VT) and Feingold (WI) voted against the money because they recognize that the IMF is a corrupt entity.

The vote on final passage of the bill was 86-3. The no votes were from Sanders (I-VT), Feingold (D-WI) and Coburn (R-OK). Those first two were because of principled war opposition. Coburn objected to the IMF money.

The Senate also agreed to a bunch of amendments by unanimous consent, including one from fear-loving Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Lindsay Graham (R-SC) which prohibits President Obama from releasing torture photos. The House and Senate versions of the war funding bill will have to be reconciled during the recess. I don't expect conference negotiations to be too contentious. I'll guess that the bill makes it onto Obama's desk in 2 weeks time.

So there you have it, folks. Congress is in session for 5 weeks, they pass two major pieces of housing legislation, an important credit card reform bill, and an overhaul of military procurement rules. Not too shabby at all. The next few months are when the big ticket items like health care and energy will come up. We will be there with you every step of the way.

The Daily Strike-5/10/09-WHCD

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. Lady Strike and I just got back from Syracuse, where Joe Biden's commencement address at the university was the big fuss. He even took some time to visit Lady Strike's elementary school! Now let's get to the weekend in politics.

WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENTS DINNER: If you haven't already watched Obama's speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner, I highly recommend it. I don't know who was writing those jokes, but they were spot on. My favorite part was when he ribbed Michael Steele, goofy chairman of the Republican National Committee. He certainly took the overconfident Steele down a peg. He also ridiculed himself, Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Dick Cheney and House Republican Leader John Boehner.

Everyone attended the event from politicos to Hollywood stars. The lead comedian this year was Wanda Sykes, not exactly a safe choice. She said that she believed Rush Limbaugh was the 20th 9/11 hijacker. If that had been said at last year's event, Secret Service would have her in a dumpster somewhere.

SUNDAY TALK SHOWS: Won't Dick Cheney just go away? One of the most hated men in America seems to think that it's to his advantage to go on talk shows every week and accuse the sitting President of endangering his own country. Today, Cheney spoke with Bob Scheiffer of CBS' Face the Nation. Cheney says that he's speaking out because Obama has "moved to take down a lot of those policies we put in place to keep the nation safe for eight years." It's amazing that Cheney can get away with this. Cheney himself always said that war critics were "emboldening the enemy." Isn't saying that America is less safe because of the President's actions a good way to embolden the enemy? Cheney also took a swipe at former Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell, saying that he was "no longer a Republican." Quite frankly, I hope Dick Cheney does one of these interviews every week. The most hated man in the country is saying that one of the most respected men in the country is not welcome in his political party.

Speaking of people I want to see on TV every week, how about former House Speaker Newt Gingrich? Gingrich, on Fox News Sunday, said President Obama was the most radical pro-abortion President in our history (even though Obama has changed one abortion policy since he's taken office). He also called the torture debate "as bitter a partisan attack as the McCarthy era." PLEASE make sure these two guys are on TV every Sunday. The Democrats will win every election for the foreseeable future.

Other Sunday talk show guest included John McCain, who wants his party to be more inclusive as long as they agree on "core principles." If the core principles are far out of the mainstream of American thought, how can the party possibly be inclusive? Not the best day for the Republican Party on the airwaves.

That's it for tonight, we'll see you tomorrow morning for the Weekly Strike. We'll talk about another busy upcoming week in Congress, and a new administration health care initiative. Leave some comments!

The Daily Strike-4/20/09-Faux Spending Cuts/CIA Visits/Senate Returns

Good Monday evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. A busy day in Washington, let's get to it. Make sure you're fully informed on the upcoming week in politics by reading The Weekly Strike below. Also, don't forget to post your comments! The best comment will be featured in Friday's Daily Strike!!

THE WHITE HOUSE: President Obama had his first full cabinet meeting this morning at the White House. The only missing member, as we noted earlier, was HHS nominee Kathleen Sebelius who is expected to be confirmed some time in the next week. Obama touted the $100 million in spending cuts he's instructed agencies to take in the coming weeks. Republicans mocked the President (and rightly so) for touting cuts that amount to a minuscule percentage of the federal budget. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs defended the President by saying he "sending a message." Gibbs scoffed at the notion that $100 million wasn't a lot of money by telling CBS' Chip Reid that "only in Washington is that not a lot of money." That is just totally dishonest. In fact, I heard George W. Bush use the same line. It ISN'T a lot of money, and we shouldn't mislead the American people into thinking that it is. Furthermore, we should be focusing on reviving the economy and creating jobs rather than capitulating to the "reasonable centrists" in Congress with tiny agency budget cuts.

The President ventured this afternoon to the CIA headquarters this afternoon to address the rank and file. He thanked them for their service in helping to protect the American people. He also said that he understood that they sometimes act with one hand tied behind their backs. The United States operates under the rule of law, unlike our enemies, and thus we don't do certain things that may make intelligence gathering easier. Over the long term, Obama said, we will defeat our enemies because we're on the better side of history. The President is still is facing harsh criticism for releasing CIA torture memos last week. Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss said that Obama "overstepped his bounds." The vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Kit Bond (R-MO), said Obama's decision undermines the CIA intelligence-gathering process. In this case, I'm fully on the President's side. As I said yesterday, most of this information was already known, and the American people have the right to know about it.

This wasn't the only criticism leveled at the President today. Two of the least popular and most maligned politicians in the country, Newt Gingrich and Dick Cheney, said that Obama is emboldening our enemies by shaking Hugo Chavez's hand. If I had a nickel for every time these two hacks have said similarly ludicrous things, I would be...um....very wealthy.

CONGRESS: Hooray! Congress is officially back in session. At least one branch, that is. The Senate returned this afternoon to vote on three assistant attorney general nominees, and to cut off debate on ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill. All three justice department nominees were confirmed:

-Tony West by a vote of 82-4. Dissenting Republicans were Bunning (KY), Chambliss (GA), Isakson (GA) and Shelby (AL). What did he do to the state of Georgia?

-Lanny Breuer by a vote of 88-0.

-Christine Varney by a vote of 87-1. Bunning (KY) was the lone dissenter.

Hill's nomination was just advanced moments ago by a vote of 73-17. All opposition was from Republicans, who stalled his nomination because of his past work as ambassador to North Korea.

The House is back in session tomorrow. Two important developments happened today off the floor. First, budget committee staffers in both chambers say that conferees could be named this week to reconcile that House and Senate versions of the budget resolutions. Once the conferees are appointed, the conference will take place. The major sticking point will be on whether to include fast-track "reconciliation" procedure to make it easier to pass health care reform. Reconciliation, for those of you new to the blog, is a special procedure that calls for committees to adjust mandatory spending to pre-set levels. A reconciliation bill is not subject to a filibuster, meaning it would only require 51 votes to pass the Senate. The House had reconciliation in its version of the non-binding budget resolution, but the Senate did not. If I had to guess, they will include reconciliation language in the final version.

On that same subject, the chairmen of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, Ted Kennedy, and Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, outlined a timeline to pass health care reform legislation. The two committees hope to mark up a comprehensive bill by mid-June. This most important part of this announcement is the willingness of Baucus and Kennedy to work together to create one bill. This was not the case during Clinton's health care reform effort in 1993.

That's it for tonight. Before we go, I bring you our second edition of the Big Picture's Corner. He was reacting to Obama's call for minuscule spending cuts. Very good insight here. See you tomorrow!

What's particularly poor is that cutting $100 million means cutting jobs. That's a huge thing that just isn't understood enough, which is that all of this spending isn't just flushed down the toilet, it actually pays people. Now, perhaps the money could be better spent, more equitably distributed, on better priorities, but it's completely insane just to oppose "spending" in a time when the economy is so under-capacity.

That could be part of a series of "Things the Mainstream Media Refuses to Understand":

1. What spending actually MEANS

2. That Tax Cuts are by far the most fiscally irresponsible thing you can do, the biggest cause of deficits

3. That deficit spending is neither bad nor good - it completely depends on WHAT the money is being spent on, and especially when the economy is drastically under capacity, it's most likely good unless it's tax cuts.

4. The only way to close the budget deficit short and long term is to eliminate unnecessary tax breaks and useless subsidies, and use that money to invest in the American people, in good jobs, and sustainable job producers.

5. (and most important) The majority of Americans care far far more about their job, their pay, their benefits, their bills, and their long-term prospects than they do about tax cuts, "spending" or other stupid obsessions.

The Daily Strike-4/13/09-Cuba/Easter Egg Hunt/Cheney

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. Make sure you read up on the previous post so that you know what's on tap this week in politics. Also, please leave some comments. We will post the most insightful comment in Friday's Daily Strike.

CUBA: As we mentioned earlier, President Obama announced a major change in U.S. policy in Cuba. He lifted all restrictions on the ability of individuals to visit relatives, as well as to send them their remittances. Cuba is such a lightning rod issue politically, mainly because the Cuban-American community holds significant political power in the perennial swing state of Florida. The reaction from a couple leading Cuban-American politicians were surprisingly favorable (contrary to what I guessed in the previous post). Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ) both expressed approval of the plan. The plan also got compliments from two unlikely sources. Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), the leading fiscal conservative in the House, expressed strong approval to the plan. He advocates opening up trade with Cuba for economic reasons. On the other side of the coin was Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota. Usually a populist who tends to be somewhat of a protectionist, he has also been an advocate for opening up relations with Cuba. I guess Cuban relations is one of the few issues that doesn't break down neatly along party lines.

EASTER EGG HUNT: I enjoyed watching President Obama play with little kids at the White House Easter Egg hunt. A lot of commentators have noted how Presidential Obama has looked in the past couple of days. He calmly handled the Somalian pirate crisis, he gets a cute little dog named Bo, and now he plays with kids on the White House lawn. Not that this stuff should be important to people like us, but or those who are only tangentially interested in politics, this has to seem pretty appealing. Then again, people in the mainstream media always seem to know what the "folks" are thinking, and they never really do.

CHENEY: Remember when Dick Cheney said that Obama's actions have made America less safe? Well today, CNN came out with a poll testing whether American agrees. It doesn't. 72% of respondents said that Obama's actions have not made America less safe. 26% (including a majority of Republicans) think otherwise. Most notably, a large majority of independents disagree with Cheney. I'm sure this will be another incident of pundits saying that the public is "divided along party lines," but what they never mention is that there are significantly fewer Republicans than there were a few years ago. Most people who are willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt have already switched parties or become independents, so it's only natural that Republican views will be vastly different from the American public as a whole.

NY20: A quick update from New York's 20th Congressional district race. Democrat Scott Murphy now leads by about 25 votes with absentee ballots outstanding from two counties (as we mentioned earlier). The latest development is that Jim Tedisco is challenging a lot of absentee votes of people who have out of state addresses. The law does not prohibit these people from voting in New York, as long as they register at a New York address. A lot of these people are snow bird Jews who migrate to Florida during the winter. Murphy's camp pointed out that the challenged ballots disproportionally have names like "Cohen." This one's gonna be a doozy.

That's it for today. See you tomorrow!

The Daily Strike-3/15/09-Not-So-Lazy Sunday

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. A busier Sunday than usual, so let's get caught up on the day in politics.

SUNDAY SHOWS: Today was a very interesting day on the Sunday talk-show circuit. The most notable interview was former (ahh, that still feels good) Vice President Dick Cheney's sit-down with CNN's John King. Cheney said several news-making things. First, he reiterated his claim that President Obama's policy decisions on torture, Guantanamo and extraordinary rendition is making America more succeptible to terrorist attack. I don't understand how he can get away with saying this stuff.

He also claimed that the Iraq war had largely succeeded in its objectives, that Bush should not be blamed for the economic crisis, and that Obama is using the bad economy to justify a massive expansion of government. In the course of the interview, he also noted his distaste at his former boss for his decision not to pardon Scooter Libby, and his "love" of Rush Limbaugh. All I can say is, thank God this man is no longer in a position of power.

The other talk-shows mostly dealt with the economy. News came out last night that AIG was still paying out millions in bonuses, despite the fact that they've taken billions in federal bailout dollars. Members of both politically parties, obviously, were quick to express their outrage. I was particularly disappointed, though, with White House Economic Council Larry Summers, who said that there was nothing the government could do about AIG because the bonuses were "part of contracts." Hopefully this creates more justified anger at Wall Street. I, for one, don't care if they entered into the contract. If you're taking federal money, you better use it wisely. It's a shame that the government, mostly the Bush administration but also a bit in the current administration, has set no conditions on financial institutions.

SMALL BUSINESS: The other big economic news was the apparent announcement tomorrow of an aid package for small business. The President and Secreatary of the Treasure Timothy Geithner are expected to announce that $730 million of the economic stimulus bill will be to used to cut lending fees for small businesses. The plan is designed to allow small businesses to have increased access to credit, so they can borrow, expand and hire more workers. I'll be interested to see how Republicans react, since they constantly base their economic arguments on what the impact will be on small business.

One thing that this policy reminds us is that we've become so immune to large numbers in the past few months. $730 million really isn't a lot of money when you consider that we spent $1.1 billion in stimulus money for comparative effectiveness research in health care.

HEALTH CARE TAX: The New York Times reported yesterday that the administration is willing to consider taxing health care benefits to pay for access for the uninsured. Obama's economic advisor Christina Romer claimed that Obama does not want to take that route. It would be a difficult thing to do, considering that he hammered John McCain last fall for a simillar proposal. I think there are other ways to save on health care spending that wouldn't directly hit consumers, such as decreased payments to private medicare advantage programs, increased funding for preventative care, and of course, increased income taxes on the wealthy.

That's it for today. Join us tomorrow morning for the Weekly Strike. If you haven't already done so, make sure you are an official follower of this blog. Also, we'd love to see some comments!