President Obama's Saturday Address On Healthcare

First, here's Robert Reich on the Public Option, this is about 2:25, and he breaks it down into the most simple of terms. Very helpful.



Here's President Obama. This is about 4 minutes long and wonderful.

Pres. Obama Kicks In On Health Care

This is but an intro to what he might talk about on Wednesday (BE SURE and watch it Wednesday).

Here ya go, and he is just warming up. From Cincinnati today:

Obama Absolutely Hits the Mark in Colorado Today

These two excerpts from his speech/town hall meeting in Grand Junction today are absolutely powerful and help to explain a LOT about what is and is not intended.

These are just *must watch*.

The LGBT Community Doesn't Get It

What I have to say, many of you won't like. Sorry. Politics are ugly, and having worked on issues in the sausage machine (v. those that have not), I think I have a bit of a different spin on the recent events.

Perhaps no one will like what I have to say. Fine. But you need to understand that just because you don't like it doesn't make it less true.

And before I continue, let me make my position as clear as possible: I support equal rights for ALL people. I support legal marriage for lgbt+ people, though I prefer ALL marriages be civil contracts with a "marriage" being considered a religious affair--an event by choice in whichever church (or other entity) you prefer.

*****

1. Recently there has been a monstrous fight over the Department of Justice (DOJ) response to litigation where DOJ supported the horrid Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) because DOJ responds to federal suits against federal laws. You may not like that, but tough. That is what DOJ does. And if we begin to have DOJ NOT respond to federal litigation in defense, we become the past Bush Administration. What if DOJ doesn't defend court opinions on global warming, huh?

And NO, that is not different. They do or they don't.

As to the language used in the DOJ DOMA brief, it was horrid. Worse than horrid (you get a good sense of it here, in a previous post, where John Dean and Rachel Maddow discuss it). This is the same vile language spewing forth from every rabid right wing literalistic Christian lap dog that you can name, bar none. It's even worse than many. It makes Rick Warren look like a near Saint (and if you have been here for long, you know what I think of that man).

I do NOT want a current DOJ like the old DOJ. I don't want the Gonzales support for torture manipulated by the president. If the DOJ screws up, I want the president free to replace it's head and others. This means, as Obama has said he would do, a presidential hands-off on DOJ. And I concur.

Does that mean that Obama shouldn't hear from hell hounds like me that his DOJ head went WAY beyond in its language in defending? No. It MEANS that you call not only Obama on the point, but the offender himself. It means you register a blistering response, as I did (did you?), to DOJ's outrageous language and seek redress. And if you haven't, do it. And if you won't, then go away. You are politically irresponsible and useless.

No one is here to help you with your issues. DO IT yourself. It doesn't come from the cosmos.

Does it mean Obama needs to be blamed for this? NO. He cannot micromanage an entire nation. Get over it. Stop whining and start doing something about it (see above para).

2. Regarding the US military "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (Clinton.. and believe me it could have been worse) policy, it's a ridiculous, harmful, and seriously unwise policy from a US Security standpoint that has NO place now or in the past not to mention all the other crap that goes with it. In polling (even by the most conservative of credible pollsters which Gallop is), the American public agrees.

So, why hasn't Obama just used his pen (which he actually CAN do in this case) to undo it? Good question and I, like Dean in the above cited MSNBC vid with Maddow, doesn't know either. There may be political reasons that exist we all are unaware of. If so, I don't have a clue, factually, what it (they) might be.

But I do know that often, politically, you let rest one thing for another so something moves through realizing that you only have 3-5 issues that you can realistically support and get through at one time. Given the NO Party's (read GOP) reaction to everything Obama and Democratic Party, it is not impossible to imagine that that some horse trading is going on not only within the Democrats but aside it with the GOP.

Has it ever occurred to you that if health care is passed, more might be likely to accept other things the pres does given the enormous support for national health care of some kind (which is well above polling for ALL other issues and clearly the issue of the day, and on the other hand, if not gotten by the public, your issues are moot entirely for the public)? Are you out there supporting this and advocating for it? If not, you should be, it's good politics.

Then, of course, you have the military structure to deal with which is, in and of itself, an entire huge problem in terms of its own culture and structure. It might not be helpful, politically, to the president and dems in getting big ticket items passed to have renegade generals and the like dissing Obama for this move before the path is paved politically. Do I believe it will come and come relatively soon? Yes, I do. And, if for no other reason than national security, I think even homophobes might agree (though I doubt any will speak up as this will just be spun as homo-loving... well you know the lingo... regardless of party).

That we have traded a smart military for a white-supremacist/neo-Nazis military v. lgbt inclusive one is incredulous on all points. AND it does NOT help the country in terms of success, understanding or security.

But really, how many people do YOU know that actually READ?

3. On Obama's announcement today regarding federal benefits for same gender partners, a post was on dKos last night that got a huge amount of response. But if you read through the comments last night (and I re-read today) much is understandably emotional response, not well calculated political response. The former is understandable, the latter isn't and represents, mostly, people who don't get how legislation is made and the grinding until the end process. Obama CANNOT offer domestic partnership health insurance. NOR can he offer equality. And if those minds and bodies as represented on dKos are NOT moved to a political position, you will lose. Plain and simple.

The issue is right, the framing is wrong, yet it sets up the president... the one that CAN actually do something positive in terms of arm bending and signing bills, for not only a fall but places the blame on him for things he cannot do without giving the duty to congress which CAN do something. DOMA is a federal law. Congress makes laws, and congress changes laws. Presidents sign or veto laws.

This is what happens when you have a leaderless movement, nationally (unlike the King movement). If only Harvey Milk was alive today.

But realize, the environmental movement, a much older and broad movement, is likewise fractured, though less so now than 20 years ago. I could have strangled the Sierra Club for some of the inane work (not to mention their ridiculous community-based issues structure) on various issues. BUT, some were good. And some were REALLY good. It's how it goes.

So... my advice? If you want to GET SOMETHING DONE, then get OUT THERE and do it and make sure you have a clue as to what is politically feasible this month, the next and the next, and FIND A LEADER. The anarchistic approach just isn't working and won't and is actually destructive.

I am, frankly, sick of the whining. I understand it, but I am frustrated that no national approach has been put forward by the very movement that needs it most.

I will follow if YOU LEAD.

OMG! Great Stand Up By Pres. Obama... VERY Funny

Takes a moment to load.

Newt's Negs: "The Handshake"

Jed Lewison over at Daily Kos takes on Newt... short and sweet...



And Obama's short and clear response:



And, finally, (update) the newest DNC 1 min commercial... heh. Meet the new boss... same as the old boss...

Scott Ridder Inadvertently Takes on Newt Gingrich

There has been a whole lot of trivial carping lately by Newt Gingrich on President Obama. Newt, who is obviously running for president or, de minimis, testing the waters, has a string of pretty odd things to say some of which are expected attacks, and some of these attacks are just plain strategically wrong and very, very dangerous (enter Scott Ritter. To get right to the Ritter/North Korea/Newt problem, please scroll all the way down to the END of the article for the link).

So first, let's take a look at a few of Newt's recent attacks on President Obama.

First, Newt Gingrich with his pals at enter-
tain-
ment network Fox News and other wingers took on the infamous Obama "bow" to King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz (Photo: Getty Images). Much ado about nothing unless you want to fire up the 'Obama is a Muslim' meme wingers (which was probably the point) or perhaps appear respectful to another world leader as apparently interpreted by Muhammah Diyab, a commentator in a Saudi paper, who, approved of Mr Obama's gesture, and saw it as a clear bow: "Obama wished to demonstrate his respect and appreciation of the personality of King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, who has made one of the most important calls in the modern era, namely the call for interfaith and intercultural dialogue to defuse the hatred, conflict and wars." Okay.

Now, let's put this in perspective, shall we?

On April 25, 2005, the news was abuzz with photos of President Bush strolling through Crawford Ranch holding hands with Abdullah (photo:Gerald Herbert/Associated Press). And while this got plenty of press attention, not a mention of Bush being a Muslim (not that this would matter, but hey, it seems to matter to the wingers) or of ceding some sort of power to the foreign leader. The Bush family has a long-time personal relationship with the Saudi's Royal Family, and as the Christian Science Monitor points out: Fred Jones, the National Security Council spokesman, said hand-holding is an Arab expression of "friendship, respect and trust."

Interestingly, the National Republican Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) is using the Obama photo to fund raise and spinning this in a really interesting way (well, typical for them, but realize it is interesting!).

And of course this Obama bow occurred on the heels of the very hot international issue of Michelle Obama's hugging The Queen. Sheesh.

Then there was the criticism of Obama saying we are not a Christian nation (or any other religion). Dobson and others about had a predictable fit given they just ignore our constitutional history (not to mention contents) most of the time. I am blogging about this tomorrow (Sunday) if you would like to read my thoughts on this.

Of course, all this is far more important than anything else including our standing, internationally, after torture and an illegal war. The GOP always focuses on the hard stuff, doesn't it?

And of course there is the scary matter of Obama actually shaking hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. I have to tell you, this is almost funny:



If you cannot see the video, here is the link.

And don't forget Newt's com-
ment that news on the first family's new dog, Bo, a Portuguese Water Dog, was, "stupid". Well, Newtie boy, you don't get animal lovers, do you? This is probably one of my very favorite Obama Photos.

There is something you missed in the rule book on running for or becoming president, Newtie:

1. Like babies, you MUST love animals and hug and respect them when on the campaign trail.
2. If you become president, don't ever hold your dog up by its ears.
3. When president, get a dog (or cat) and make sure you at least look like you care.
4. And even if you don't stand a chance, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER make mean spirited comments about the White House companion animals. NEVER. It makes you look old, mean-spirited, grumpy, heartless and out of touch. All of which are true in your case, Newt.

Second, Newt Gingrich (who has NO current access to national security information, BTW) takes on the North Korean missile "crisis" lambasting Obama for not having done one of the "several" things he (Newt) would have done as "President Gingrich" to stop the launch. This is the meat of the the obvious conflict between Scott Ritter's fine article, and Newt's ridiculous comments in which he panders to the hawks that have a tendency to know nothing, yet be willing to bomb anyone and everyone into oblivion apparently at mere mention.

But the real issue here is the fact that Newt, unlike Ritter, hasn't a clue about international law and, apparently willing to follow the footsteps of President Bush into the Iraq mess, actually poses a real danger in his ignorance.

Listen to what Newt says, then read Ritter (link below): Here's Newtie Boy prattling on about North Korea.



Ritter was an UN Weapons Inspector from 1991-1998 and a Marine intelligence officer. If anyone understands the North Korean missile situation in perspective, Ritter does because his job was part in parcel with possessing a deep understanding of international law and convention.

And, BTW, Ritter isn't afraid to call out Obama on his errors either, as you will read.

What is terribly, terribly disturbing is that virtually none of the MSM, either television or print news, even framed the missile launch correctly... which is the beginning of the terrible coverage of this missile launching.

So... read Ritter's EXCELLENT piece on this (here at TruthDig), entitled Up, Up and Away: The West’s Hysterical Reaction to North Korea.

Because few if any media outlets even framed this issue realistically, it is critical that we understand this. We don't need to run around bombing people or invading their countries every time we turn around and especially when our actions, as in Iraq, are illegal.

Anyone that thinks our nation is in ANY position right now to send soldiers or anything else to yet another country is flat off their rocker!

April Fools and the Everyday Kind

No, this isn't a joke, but it should be. This from Mother Jones:

As was the case last fall, white evangelical Protestants (19%) and Republicans (17%) are among the most likely to view Obama as a Muslim. Fewer than half in each group -- 38% of white evangelicals and 46% of Republicans -- correctly identify Obama as a Christian.

So, what does this say about Republicans? I will leave you to your own conclusions.

*****

And this is incredibly funny coming from probably the most vitriolic, fact-light uber right persona this side of the increasingly nutty Glen Beck, Ann Coulter, who, apparently, has absolutely no sense of humor. In a rather astounding display of gullibility, Coulter is caught by Media Matters going off the deep end (again). I swear, Coulter is a crack up. Or maybe just cracked up.

*****

And from the Christian right, opposition (again) to the passage of hate crimes legislation. The Washington Post's column God in Government covers the story with the predictable Perkins et. al.:

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, predicts a "wave of federal prosecution." In a fund-raising e-mail sent to supporters on Tuesday, he warned that offended gays could accuse a religious broadcaster, a pastor or a Sunday school teacher who expresses the viewpoint that homosexual behavior is morally wrong and unhealthy.

There's no explaining Perkins especially in light of the New Testament.

All Kinds of News! Pick One!

Interesting news day though no wars began, no nukes went off...

I would suggest if you are at all politically savvy, shooting down the "pipe" straight to the "funny Bill O'Reilly news". I debated on what to call this. The runner up was the cultural hypocrisy news, but heh... The religious right should have a ball with this. eh-hem.

First, the good news:

• The EPA put the bite on Mountain Top Removal coal mining. And about time! Read here, and here.
• Sniffles was adopted, and looks like Skunkie may have a great prospect (not all adopters cut it!) as well! Go here to see these cuties (with nice music).
• President Obama kicked butt last night in his presser.

The odd if not extremely weird liars news:

• Just no explaining this from a certain Bishop of Nigeria and if you could have seen my head tilt in reading this...

We are especially concerned about those who are using large sums of money to lure our youth to see homosexuality and lesbianism as normative. We must consistently and faithfully teach about God’s commands on this ungodly practice and help those with such orientation to seek deliverance and pastoral counsel.

The tiring news:

• [AKA The Bush-like phrasing nonsense news (warning... this is from She From The North)]:

"No, things have changed," she continued. "But complaining? Or whining? Absolutely not. But I am going to call it like I see it. It doesn't do any good to whine about any of this. But I can call it like I see it. Sometimes it gets me in a lot of trouble when I speak candidly, and I speak from the heart and I do such a thing. But I am going to."

(Necessary comment... heh: Right. This one never whines.)

The fun, happy news:

• Well, ya just gotta read it, don't want to parrot it.
  

The interestingly phrased byline news:

• Canada on Top in Sex Ed (actually, it is an interesting article)

The funny Bill O'Reilly news (perhaps I should have put this in the hypocritical category? Believe me, this is pretty dang interesting for oh so many reasons):


The just piss-you-off shameful sucking news:

• And of course it involves Bobby Jindal, exorcist and governor (Grandmere, can't you do something about this politically useless fellow and get him out of our hair?).

The hypocritical news:

• The shocking revelation that teleprompters are used by the very media folks criticizing President Obama for using... teleprompters! (warning: the added video below will make you laugh.. oh noes!)
  

Some News For The Day

For those of you interested in endangered species, the Canadian lynx just got a big boost! Read here.

The woman mentioned in the article, Julie McDonald, also fussed with the listing of a species here which we presently have in court on environmental litigation under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). She did one helluva lot of damage to somewhere between 75 and 100 species while in DOI under Bush.

*****

On a personal note, I have one extremely swollen ankle and not a CLUE what I have done. Looks like it is going to require a clinic visit, so please keep me in your prayers. It is waaaaay owie.

*****

If you don't read one other thing this weekend on the GOP, read this from the Huff Post. It is masterfully written and VERY inclusive. Get a cup of coffee or a glass of your favorite wine, and read it through, clicking on the links. It is fabulously funny in a hehehe kind of way.