Archive for the “Policy” Category
Why? Why does a presidential administration that came into office on the diligent labor and fervent hopes of progressives continue to send progressives the message that it doesn’t need them, indeed that it doesn’t even care what they think, that their principles and passions are nothing more than chips to be bargained away as evidence of the White House’s “post-partisan” cred?
Today Barack Obama announced that his nominee to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court will be Elena Kagan, current Solicitor General, former Dean of Harvard Law. After much debate and speculation in the press and online, the decision isn’t really a surprise. It is, however, a major disappointment.
A Supreme Court vacancy is always a huge opportunity, and my personal hopes for Obama’s choice when this one arose could be summed up in just three words: please be bold. I had hoped that with (as it were) strategist David Axelrod whispering in one ear (recently fairly outspoken about the pointlessness of seeking cooperation from the right) and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel whispering in the other (advocating triangulation and expediency, valuing power over principle as ever), for a change Obama might recapture the spirit that animated his campaign and decide that, if the GOP is determined to give him a fight, he’ll make it one with stakes worth winning.
But once again, he didn’t.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Elena Kagan, Glenn Greenwald, John Paul Stevens, judiciary, Obama, progressives, Rahm Emanuel, Senate, Supreme Court
2 Comments »
Just a quick observation prompted by events in recent weeks. These events are unrelated, yet they form a pattern. Together, they put Washington on the hot seat and shine a spotlight on its (questionable) ability to act in the public interest.
Specifically, if…
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Congress, Constitution, energy, government, immigration, media, Senate, Wall Street
5 Comments »
Either way, it’s definitely disturbing, and (a term I don’t often use) un-American.
What is? The fact that the Obama White House has ordered the CIA to assassinate an American citizen, wherever and whenever he may be found. A man who’s been charged with no crime, much less convicted of one.
The ostensible reason? “Terrorism,” of course.
That this is absolutely unconscionable and inexcusable should go without saying. But apparently it doesn’t, since people I know to be smart, thoughtful liberals have been making excuses for it. So let’s talk about it for a bit.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: al-Awlaki, assassination, CIA, Constitution, due process, Glenn Greenwald, Obama, terrorism
5 Comments »
As the health care reform debate enters what appears to be the home stretch (albeit not for the first time), what Washington is offering us (the citizenry) boils down to a choice between bad and worse. The legislation now under consideration, both the Senate bill and the slight variation on same presented as “Obama’s bill,” is the end result of a process that has methodically stripped away almost everything that made this reform effort worth undertaking in the first place. They’ve thrown out the baby and kept the bathwater.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Alan Grayson, Bart Stupak, Blue Dogs, Congress, Democrats, Dick Durbin, health care, insurance, Max Baucus, Obama, Pelosi, progressives, Rahm Emanuel, Reid, Republicans, Senate
4 Comments »
And now, a brief interlude from all the Sherlockiana for a bit of politics and economics. After hearing a radio interview today about a fascinating new book, I’ve done a bit of digging and realized I may have come a bit late to the game, for—at least in England—this book has been gathering serious attention for the better part of a year now. It deserves to do the same here in the U.S.
The interview was with Prof. Richard Wilkinson of Nottingham University, co-author (with Kate Pickett of York University) of The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger. (The title is perhaps a bit less than apt; the authors apparently wanted to call it “Evidence-Based Politics,” which to my ear would have been superior.) Wilkinson and Pickett, epidemiologists both, started out studying data on public health outcomes and wound up with a project much larger than they had originally envisioned. Their data demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that economic inequality within a society, regardless of overall wealth, is the single biggest predictor of a wide range of other social ills, from life expectancy to violent crime and far, far more.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: books, economy, government, health care, inequality, Kate Pickett, Richard Wilkinson, The Spirit Level
8 Comments »
Yesterday’s inbox contained a political e-mail message forwarded by my girlfriend’s parents. They’re not especially political people; their sensibilities (to the extent they’ll even discuss them) tend toward a somewhat mushy moderate conservatism, the kind of folks who instinctively vote Republican, even though the party’s center of gravity has moved far away from them. Indeed, they even said as much in the forwarded message—”you’re much more interested in politics than either of us”—yet they invited a response, practically asking for an informed rebuttal even as they implicitly treated the viral message as credible and worthy of attention.
Which, once I read it, was really hard to believe.
This is the message they forwarded, word for word:
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Congress, conservatism, Constitution, e-mail, government, health care, insurance, Medicare, Michael Connelly, Supreme Court
2 Comments »
I’ve been preoccupied with other affairs lately, and haven’t been much inclined to write blog entries, as the date stamp will attest. However, sometimes events crop up in ways that just demand to be shared and commented upon.
Two news stories this week converged (at least in my mind) to compel the question: just how do we allow so many deluded, deranged, venally twisted cretins to have power over us in public office? How do they get that way, and how can they stand to look at themselves in the mirror?
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Al Franken, Congress, David Vitter, Dick Cheney, equal marriage, Halliburton, Keith Bardwell, racism, Senate, southern states
7 Comments »
In the midst of the cesspool of paranoia and paralogia into which the ranting right is dragging so much of our political discourse these days… the latest iterations thereof being the Fox-driven hypocritical demagoguery about ACORN, and (even worse) the WSJ’s incredible suggestion that this(!) of all things somehow merits a special prosecutor…
…a reader comment about the latter on John Cole’s blog put it all into perspective in a way that can’t help but provoke a grin, and that definitely merits sharing:
…does anyone else think that its great that Obama can have all these Czars and communists in the same administration without them trying to kill each other? Team of Rivals, Fuck Yeah! The man’s a diplomatic genius. After this, solving the Palestinian/Israeli conflict should be a cakewalk.
Really, what more can be said?
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: ACORN, conservatism, Obama
2 Comments »
 Sen. Max Baucus (D-Insurance Industry)
(And thank heaven for that.)
So Sen. Max Baucus’s Finance Committee has finally released a health care “reform” bill, months after every other committee charged with the task. (Or a “Chairman’s Mark” version of one, at least—i.e., something actually readable by laymen [pdf]).
The predictable result? It’s awful. Any Democrat who would vote for a bill that looks like this has absolutely no political sense whatsoever, much less policy sense, and should be drummed out of office on general principle.
Fortunately, most of them seem to realize that.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Democrats, health care, insurance, Max Baucus, Republicans, Senate
8 Comments »
So, where did I leave off?
…That’s right, there was a speech Wednesday night. A pretty significant one, in fact, for reasons I described at some length.
What of it, then?
I can’t deny that it was a very, very good speech. Rhetorically powerful. And yet, what it says about the direction of health care policy, and thus about Obama and the Democratic Party itself… still remains substantially up in the air.
(Even as every pundit who can string three words together attempts to read the tea leaves and tell us otherwise.)
I’ll try to avoid that kind of divination. But opinions? Analysis? I have those.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Blue Dogs, Congress, Democrats, government, health care, insurance, Obama, progressives, Rahm Emanuel, Reid, Republicans, Senate
No Comments »
|
Improve the web with
Nofollow Reciprocity.