Sen. Stupid err….Rand Paul (R-Ky), doesn’t think that the opinion of the Supreme Court makes something constitutional….or not:
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.”
Interesting. Then perhaps we should revisit Bush v. Gore. Or Citizens United. Oh that it were so….
As Ashby notes, the Supreme Court is indeed the ultimate authority on the constitutionality or lack thereof, of a thing:
Actually, that’s exactly what it means. For all intents and purposes, when the Supreme Court declares something constitutional, it will remain as such until the Supreme Court declares otherwise or the constitution is amended.
Mike Vanderboegh, a wingnut blogger who among other things, was responsible for the Fast and Furious mess, continues to pose harm to this country with his idea of achieving a dubious sort of fame. Via Media Matters, emphasis mine:
Mike Vanderboegh, the ex-militia blogger who calls himself one of the "midwives" of the Operation Fast and Furious scandal, recently predicted that if the Supreme Court declared the health care reform bill to be constitutional, it would lead to violent insurrection against "government tyranny."
The blogger posted the statements, which come from a recent unpublished interview, the same day the House of Representatives voted to find Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over his unwillingness to release documents related to Fast and Furious.
In the excerpts Vanderboegh posted on his blog "which deal with the decision today," he says of a then-potential decision upholding the health care law, "You may call tyranny a mandate or you may call it a tax, but it still is tyranny and invites the same response." He further predicts the response of his ilk: "If we refuse to obey, we will be fined. If we refuse to pay the fine, we will in time be jailed. If we refuse to report meekly to jail, we will be sent for by armed men. And if we refuse their violent invitation at the doorsteps of our own homes we will be killed -- unless we kill them first. ... I am on record as advocating the right of defensive violence against a tyrannical regime."
Vanderboegh gained fame in 2010 when he urged his readers to respond to the passage of health care reform by breaking the windows of Democratic offices, then took credit after vandals struck several such offices. The Alabama-based blogger has previously been part of the militia and Minuteman movements, and leads the Three Percenters, a group which claims to represent the three percent of gun owners who "who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act" but will instead, "if forced by any would-be oppressor, ... kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution."
Vanderboegh was one of the first to break the story that ATF whistleblowers said that they had been ordered to knowingly allow gun trafficking suspects to take weapons across the border into Mexico. The operation was intended to allow law enforcement to identify other members of the trafficking network that for years has directed assault weapons into the hands of Mexican cartels, with the goal of bringing those cartels down. He has said that he and a fellow blogger were the "midwives of the scandal" who introduced the whistleblowers to congressional investigators. He has theorized that the operation was part of a secret plot against the Second Amendment directed from the highest levels of government.
In a slip of the tongue, Gov. Bobby Jindal briefly referred to “Obamneycare,” the mocking label Republican opponents of Mitt Romney in the GOP primaries used to describe the Affordable Care Act, in a call promoting Romney’s efforts to repeal the bill.
Yesterday, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Oh) vowed to repeal the healthcare law if it's upheld by the Supreme Court:
“We've made it pretty clear and I'll make it clear one more time: If the court does not strike down the entire law, the House will move to repeal what's left of it.”
Really Mr. Boehner? Boehner knows full well that this is purely bluster since the House can take no action on this that would become law until after the election, and then only if the 113th Congress is also a Republican congress.
So Boehner is bluffing, but that won’t be the case if Romney wins. If Romney wins, the first thing Republicans will do is repeal the ACA.
That said, we need to thoroughly educate the public on the benefits of the ACA so that it becomes unpopular to cry “repeal”. And more than that, we need to make sure that not only does President Obama win a second term, but that the House and Senate are both under Democratic control by a healthy majority!
“Wow, the Supreme Court passed @ObamaCare. I guess @JusticeRoberts wanted to be a part of Georgetown society more than anyone knew.”
Also, Donald, the Supreme Court didn’t “pass” anything. They upheld the ACA as constitutional. Geez……… But, hey, thanks for reminding us that the Roberts Court isn’t known for their non-partisan rulings.
From the opinion of the Supreme Court in the section on the mandate [of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)], the Court has upheld the mandate as a tax:
“Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it.”
Writer James Fallows believes that the conservative members of the Supreme Court are engaged in “a kind of long-term coup”:
“[....]When you look at the sequence from Bush v. Gore, through Citizens United, to what seems to be coming on the health-care front; and you combine it with ongoing efforts in Florida and elsewhere to prevent voting from presumably Democratic blocs; and add that to the simply unprecedented abuse of the filibuster in the years since the Democrats won control of the Senate and then took the White House, you have what we'd identify as a kind of long-term coup if we saw it happening anywhere else.**
Liberal democracies like ours depend on rules but also on norms -- on the assumption that you'll go so far, but no further, to advance your political ends. The norms imply some loyalty to the system as a whole that outweighs your immediate partisan interest. Not red states, nor blue states, but the United States of America. It was out of loyalty to the system that Al Gore stepped aside after Bush v. Gore. Norms have given the Supreme Court its unquestioned legitimacy. The Roberts majority is barreling ahead without regard for the norms, and it is taking the court's legitimacy with it.”
Over the past few years, that thought has occurred to me more than once. Nothing Republicans do would surprise me anymore.
“Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it's done. First pro-life legislation -- abortion facility regulations -- in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
Taegan Goddard notes what we have thought was clear as day all along, saying “Critics have long suspected voter ID laws are not about preventing fraud but about limiting turnout.”
Full Text Transcript of President Obama’s Speech in Durham, New Hampshire on June 25, 2012
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, New Hampshire! (Applause.) Hello, Durham! (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody. It is great to be back in New Hampshire. (Applause.)
A couple of people I want to acknowledge. First of all, wasn't Scott outstanding? Give Scotty a big round of applause for his introduction. (Applause.) I want to thank Todd Allen, who is the principal here at Oyster River High School. (Applause.) And I want to thank our outstanding Senator from New Hampshire, Jeanne Shaheen. (Applause.) And I want to thank all of you. (Applause.)
I know it's a little warm in here. (Laughter.) That’s okay. That's okay. It is wonderful to be back. And I just have so many good memories here in New Hampshire, and I see some familiar faces and folks who were with me when people were still figuring out how to pronounce my name. (Laughter.)
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Mn), in a softball interview with Meghan McCain, makes another of her ridiculous statements that are completely unsubstantiated by the facts:
“The one thing that has shocked me, Meghan, is that when you look at the polling data, the No. 1 area of approval for Obama is his handling of national security intelligence. Well, he’s not from my point of view. He’s the most dangerous president we have ever had on national security.”
Good grief, she is such a nutjob, I do not understand why anyone would ever even be willing to ask her opinion on anything important.
Adding... Bachmann also claimed that President Obama has "revealed the [national security] methodologies we use", and of "beating on his chest", and most insane of all, she said that "he’s been purging the FBI files of anything that could be considered anti-Islamic".
According to a report by the Washington Post, Romney’s company, Bain Capital, was a pioneer in the area of outsourcing:
Mitt Romney’s financial company, Bain Capital, invested in a series of firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by American workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like China and India.
During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. […..]
The Post goes into more detail regarding Bain’s role in outsourcing American jobs, noting that Bain was involved with outsourcing early on:
While Bain was not the largest player in the outsourcing field, the private equity firm was involved early on, at a time when the departure of jobs from the United States was beginning to accelerate and new companies were emerging as handmaidens to this outflow of employment.
Bain played several roles in helping these outsourcing companies, such as investing venture capital so they could grow and providing management and strategic business advice as they navigated this rapidly developing field.
Over the past two decades, American companies have dramatically expanded their overseas operations and supply networks, especially in Asia, while shrinking their workforces at home. McKinsey Global Institute estimated in 2006 that $18.4 billion in global information technology work and $11.4 billion in business-process services have been moved abroad.
While the export of jobs has been disruptive for many workers and communities in the United States, outsourcing has been a powerful economic force. It has often helped lower the prices that American consumers pay for products and created a global supply chain that has made U.S. companies more nimble and profitable.
And naturally, Romney campaign officials have declined to comment (at least until they can decide how to spin it):
Romney campaign officials repeatedly declined requests to comment on Bain’s record of investing in outsourcing firms during the Romney era.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney had the nerve to tell workers at a factory in Ohio last week “for me it’s all about good jobs for the American people and a bright and prosperous future”.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi calls the Republican contempt move against Attorney General Eric Holder an attempt to “stop voter suppression in our country”:
“Contempt of Congress, contempt of Congress. To frivolously use that really important vehicle to undermine the person who is assigned to stop the voter suppression in our country. I'm telling you, this is connected. It is no accident. It is a decision, and it is as clear as can be. It's not only to monopolize his time, it's to undermine his name. To undermine his name, undermine his name as he goes forward to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
You’ve probably either seen the news clips on television, or read something about Congress’ vote to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for supposedly withholding information in the investigation of “Fast and Furious”. And, if you have, there is a very good possibility that you’re confused considering how ridiculous and outrageous this whole mess is.
Not to worry, Rachel Maddow to the rescue, during 2 segments of her show. Watch this video/segment first in order to learn the basis of the latest wingnut conspiracy theory which got Holder in trouble with the congressional Frothing-at-the-Mouth-Republicans:
The second video talks about the congressional action on Holder yesterday, along with some discussion of the gun control issue. Watch:
Now, Holder’s contempt citation isn’t the end of it by any means, and in fact, the President asserted executive authority in this matter yesterday, and while conservatives would like you believe that this means he was somehow directly involved in the idiocy, it does not necessarily mean that. Steve Benen:
A spokesperson for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the decision "implies" that White House officials were involved in the operation. Fox News' Andrew Napolitano made the same argument on the air: "Executive privilege protects communications with the president, the human being of the president, not with people that work for him and the Justice Department."
No matter what one thinks of the underlying controversy -- and for the record, I think the right's interest in the matter is kind of silly -- it's worth pausing to clarify that executive privilege doesn't necessarily involve communications with the president. Josh Israel noted there are actually "two types executive privilege: the robust 'presidential communications privilege' and the more limited 'deliberative process privilege.'"
The White House may invoke the latter to apply to executive branch officials outside of the president's inner circle, as long as they were involved with the government's decision-making process. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush all asserted executive privilege in matters not involving presidential communications.
And Bush Administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey invoked the same "deliberative process privilege" as recently as 2008, rejecting congressional subpoenas for reports of Department of Justice interviews with the White House staff regarding the Valerie Plame Wilson identify leak investigation.
Republicans, including House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), are well aware of this -- they endorsed the distinction during the Bush/Cheney era -- and have acknowledged that executive privilege is not limited to the president's direct communications.
But they're playing a political game today, hoping you aren't well aware of this.
Now that you’re reasonably well informed you might be tempted to think that since this mess all hinges on both a George W. Bush policy, and a seriously crazy/whacko conspiracy theory by a ridiculous little man wingnut who counts for, well, nothing, that this will all go away soon.
You would be wrong. The contempt vote against Holder is just a step on the way to holding the president in contempt, then going for impeachment proceedings in his second term. They were always gonna do this. They made plans to “lynch them a Negro” ™ back when President Obama was elected or maybe even during the run-up to the election. After all, there was no way the good old boys with power were ever going to be alright with a black man as the president. If you thought otherwise, you were, like myself, deluded.
And, just as it will be a modern form of lynching, so too will it be a modern coup d’etat.
The former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida (also the former co-chair of Rick Scott’s gubernatorial campaign), Tom Slade, on Gov. Rick Scott (R-Fl), and why Mitt Romney has chosen not to campaign with him in an important swing state:
“Rick Scott doesn’t seem to have any political skills at all. I’d give him a B for governing. I’d give him an A for strangeness.”
The governor’s gaffes, along with an approval rating that hasn’t gone above 41 percent in Quinnipiac University polls, may hurt his party’s presidential contender, Mitt Romney. Florida is one of the most competitive electoral battlegrounds, with the past three presidential races decided by 5 percentage points or less. Romney hasn’t campaigned with Scott. [….]
Adding to Scott’s misery: His office is facing a criminal investigation over missing e-mail; the federal government is suing the state over purging voters from the rolls; and the governor recently hired his third chief of staff in 18 months.
But, but, Romney ought to feel some sort of brotherhood with Scott, you know, seeing as how Scott was also a private equity guy:
Scott, 59, moved to Florida about a decade ago while he was running his own private-equity firm. A former chief executive officer of HCA Holdings Inc. (HCA), a Nashville, Tennessee-based hospital operator, he was forced out amid a Medicare fraud investigation that resulted in criminal charges against the company. Scott, who wasn’t charged, said he did nothing wrong.
Adding……..You’d think voters would have clued into Scott considering that Medicare fraud investigation and the resulting criminal charges.
Charles Pierce on what he terms the “unbridled liberty to be a dick” handed to us all by Republicans:
“In case you haven’t noticed, the Republicans seem to be on a crusade to free Americans to be as dicky as possible to their fellow Americans. It is now okay to be a dick to immigrants. It’s now okay to be a dick to your letter carrier. It’s now okay to be a dick to firefighters and schoolteachers. (Thanks, Scott Walker!) And have I mentioned recently what a colossal dick Rick Santorum is? And he’ll be at the GOP convention this summer. And it’s even okay to be a dick to the president of the United States on his own lawn. The unbridled liberty [to] be a dick is sweeping this great nation.
“The White House never called us about this no one reached out to us and told us this was on its way. And, I mean, if they were serious about a real solution to this problem and not politicizing it then why don’t you reach out to people?We’re trying to work out a real solution.”
As if. As if President Obama has any reason to confer with a person who is not only trying to defeat him, but is a member of the political party which has consistently blocked the Dream Act, consistently blocked immigration reform.
President Barack Obama speaking at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland,Ohio yesterday:
“At stake is not simply a choice between two candidates or two political parties, but between two paths for our country. And while there are many things to discuss in this campaign, nothing is more important than an honest debate about where these two paths would lead us.”
I don't think truer words have ever been spoken. We are at a turning point, and the election of Mitt Romney would be nothing less than a disastrous turn in the wrong direction.
Image via Reuters
You can read the full transcript and watch the video of President Obama’s economic speech in Ohio here.
Watch the full length video of President Obama’s economic speech in Cleveland Ohio on June 14, 2012:
Full Text Transcript President Barack Obama Economic Speech at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland, Ohio on June 14, 2012
THE PRESIDENT:Thank you! (Applause.) Thank you, everybody. Good afternoon, everybody. (Applause.) It is great to be back in Cleveland. (Applause.) It is great to be back here at Cuyahoga Community College. (Applause.)
I want to, first of all, thank Angela for her introduction and sharing her story. I know her daughter is very proud of her -- I know her daughter is here today. So give her a big round of applause. (Applause.) I want to thank your president, Dr. Jerry-Sue Thornton. (Applause.) And I want to thank some members of Congress who made the trip today -- Representative Marcia Fudge, Representative Betty Sutton, and Representative Marcy Kaptur. (Applause.)
Not. During his testimony yesterday in front of the Senate Banking Committee, JPMorgan CEO, Jamie Dimon, got his proverbial ass kicked for making highly risky bets with depositor money and losing billions. Well, okay, not really kicked. More like patted.
Sen. Bob Corker R-TN) all but sung sweet nothings in Dimon’s ear, almost as though he was a treasured infant being lulled to sleep:
“You’re obviously renowned, rightfully so I think, as being one of the most, you know, one of the best CEOs in the country for financial institutions. You missed this, it’s a blip on the radar screen.”
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS)showed concern only for Conservative messaging regarding the free market:
“How you managed JPMorgan is the business of your board of directors, your shareholders, but it does have consequences to those of us who believe in the free-market system, its value, its merit. I have the sense and I hope it’s the case that it is a responsibility you understand. [Your] behavior really matters in our ability to be an advocate for a free-market that creates jobs and economic opportunity and allows Americans to pursue the American dream.”
And then there’s Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), Mr. Tea Party himself, who all but prostrated himself before Dimon, completely excusing Dimon’s actions:
“I really appreciate you voluntarily coming in to talk with us. It is important that we talk about things happening in the industry. It helps us as we look forward and, hopefully, it will contribute to best practice scenarios in industry. I appreciate your emphasis on continuous quality improvement. We can hardly sit in judgment of your losing $2 billion. We lose twice that every day in Washington.”
And now that you’ve read this, you can go back to work knowing that this country is in the tender hands of the wonderfully self-sacrificing citizens serving in our federal government (no red carpet for banksters here!). You know, those who serve with thoughts only of country, not ever dreaming of enriching themselves with hands out for corporate cash.
Oh, and here’s the video for you to watch in case you’re not yet enraged enough:
Jamie Dimon, the current chairman, president, and chief executive officer of JPMorgan, is on Capitol Hill today giving his excuses for the recent JPMorgan meltdown to our do-nothing 112th Congress. This is, I remind you, the same Congress that fought to weaken the Dodd-Frank Act, and blankly refused any other protective measures for our economy after the enormous worldwide financial catastrophe caused by Republicans in 2008.
1) The people who worked for me didn't know what they were doing.
2) The people who worked for me didn't know what to do when things went bad because they didn't know what they were doing in the first place.
3) The people who worked for me didn't know how to manage the things that went bad because they didn't know what they were doing in the first place.
4) We were replacing some of the people who didn't know what they were doing in the first place with some new people who didn't know what they were doing in the first place, either.
And, 5) Jesus Christ On My Private Jet, I hired me some meatheads.
President Obama slams Romney’s campaign for being focused almost solely on blame:
“You can pretty much put their campaign on a tweet and have some characters to spare.
The challenge is because folks are still hurting right now, the other side feels that its enough for them to just sit back and say, “’things aren’t as good as they should be and it’s Obama’s fault”.
The good news is, the American people generally agree with our vision. If you just put in front of them, issue after issue and you present the Democratic approach and the Republican approach, we win.”
Rick Santorum’s ‘rousing’ endorsement of Mitt Romney yesterday:
“Governor Romney is a tremendous improvement. I think we could have been even more of an improvement, but that’s, you know, that’s, that, that, that, that issue was passed. Uh, Governor Romney is an important and dramatic improvement, and that’s why we’re behind him.”
Via Ezra Klein, the growth of government during recessions.
Again via Ezra Klein, quoting Ben Polak, chairman of the economics department at Yale University, and Peter K. Schott, professor of economics at the Yale School of Management, emphasis mine:
There is something historically different about this recession and its aftermath: in the past, local government employment has been almost recession-proof. This time it’s not. Going back as long as the data have been collected (1955), with the one exception of the 1981 recession, local government employment continued to grow almost every month regardless of what the economy threw at it. But since the latest recession began, local government employment has fallen by 3 percent, and is still falling. In the equivalent period following the 1990 and 2001 recessions, local government employment grew 7.7 and 5.2 percent. Even following the 1981 recession, by this stage local government employment was up by 1.4 percent...
Without this hidden austerity program, the economy would look very different. If state and local governments had followed the pattern of the previous two recessions, they would have added 1.4 million to 1.9 million jobs and overall unemployment would be 7.0 to 7.3 percent instead of 8.2 percent.
Ezra also makes the point that Republicans are responsible for the increases after the last three recessions:
Note that a Republican was president after the 1981, 1990 and 2000 recessions. Public-sector austerity looks a lot better to conservatives when they’re out of power than when they’re in it.
At a Tea Party event yesterday, the Party’s co-founder, Amy Kremer, declared that Gov. Rick Scott’s (R-Fl) illegal voter purge is necessary because, according to Kremer,
“If the Democrats cannot win it [an election] fair and square, they will steal it.”
As Steve Benen noted this morning, Kremer made this oh so ironic remark without a “hint of irony”. Benen also pointed out that “87% of Scott's purge list is made up of minorities, minority voters tend to support Democrats, and the scheme is being executed five months before Election Day, the partisan motivations behind the governor's agenda is rather transparent”.
On Fox News Sunday today, Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-In) on the possible impact the outcome of the Wisconsin recall election could have on the November elections:
“ It would be, I think, a huge mistake for Republicans to misread Wisconsin as some kind of great harbinger [for November]. I don’t see it that way at all.”
That said, I liked what Rude Pundit had to say about it (emphasis mine):
1. It was a failure. By nearly any measure (other than the mostly symbolic state senate victory), the recall election of Scott Walker was an abject failure. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise, who tries to sell a narrative of "one step at a time" or "we unified people in the effort," is trying to convince you that it's okay to nail the whore with the mouth sores. It is a lie to say anything other than "It was a failure."
2. Accepting our failures does not mean that we cannot learn from them. For, yes, yes, the lessons are clear and they ought to be mighty kicks in the head to the Democratic Party.
3. For one, shitloads of money will win. We knew this, but we still clung to the perverse notion that unified people can overcome shitloads of money. The fact that Walker and Republican interests outspent Tom Barrett nearly 10 to 1, with 70% of the pro-Walker funding coming from people like Karl Rove and the Koch brothers is just another clear example that the Citizens United decision was merely a pretext for rich conservatives to flood the zone with cash. It can work on our side - remember, Barack Obama kicked John McCain's ass with fundraising. But the world is different now, and wealthy Democrats will have to construct a machine that's stronger than the bulldozer of the right.
4. Democrats can't unify worth shit. No, it's not that the President needed to campaign in Wisconsin, but howzabout Biden? Howzabout someone with some authority behind them that's not David Axel-fucking-rod? Howzabout spending a little time educating the many people in Wisconsin who didn't sign the recall petition as to why the recall was a good thing, since exit polls showed that most badger-humpers didn't want it in the first place? Jesus, howzabout a small demonstration that the union vote shouldn't be taken for granted?
5. We have to nut up and go after them with a savagery that would make a tiger shark shit itself. How bad does it have to be? You might have read about or seen Barrett condemning Walker for a particularly harsh ad. Did you check out the actual ad about crime in Milwaukee? A blurred photo of a dead two year-old? That's some terrible shit. And it didn't appall people enough to turn against Walker. No, it worked. So we have to be at least that brutal. And don't be a pussy and say that we shouldn't stoop to their tactics. You use the tactics that succeed or you lose.
6. But, really, at the end of the day, it all comes down to shitloads of money.
Mitt Romney on President Obama’s call for aid to the states, in the interest of preventing layoffs to essential personnel such as police and firefighters (and to avoid, in the process, creating more unemployed people):
“He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people. ”
There was really only one message from the Wisconsin recall election, and that was that it’s all about the money.
Paul Krugman pokes Mitt Romney at the Netroots Nation conference:
“If you don’t know multiple people who are suffering, then you must be living in a very rarefied environment. You must be maybe a member of the Romney clan, or something. ”
“It is difficult to achieve peace in Afghanistan as long as there is safe haven for terrorists in Pakistan. It is very important for Pakistan to take steps. It is an increasing concern, the issue of safe haven, and we are reaching the limits of our patience.”
This has become an increasingly important issue in Afghanistan as the terrorists attack our forces and then run over the border to Pakistan. Reuters:
He was speaking in the Afghan capital Kabul where he held talks with military leaders amid rising violence in the war against the Taliban.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also implicitly defended Washington's use of drone strikes against suspected militants, just days after one of them killed Abu Yahya al-Libi, al Qaeda's second-ranking leader, in northwest Pakistan.
"We will always maintain our right to use force against groups such as al Qaeda that have attacked us and still threaten us with imminent attack," Clinton said in Istanbul at a meeting of the Global Counterterrorism Forum, a U.S.-and Turkish-chaired group.
Pakistan has termed the attacks as illegal and a violation of its sovereignty. The United States has long pushed Islamabad to do more to help in the war against militancy.
Panetta urged Pakistan to go after the Haqqani militant network, one of the United States' most feared enemies in Afghanistan, and said Washington would exert diplomatic pressure and take any other steps needed to protect its forces.
The Obama campaign is calling for Mitt Romney to place his money in a blind trust to avoid any appearance of conflict, via MSNBC, emphasis mine:
Swiss bank accounts. Money hidden in the Cayman Islands. Bain capital income.
The Obama campaign warned Thursday that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney will have full access to those three pots of money unless he puts his investments in a federally-recognized blind trust.
Seizing on the Romney campaign’s announcement Wednesday that the candidate would only turn his holdings over to a federal trust if and when he becomes president, the Obama campaign claimed that Romney’s decision not to do so sooner underscores the point they’ve been trying to make about him: He’s wealthy, which makes him out of touch, and sometimes evasive about his wealth, which makes him untrustworthy.
Because Romney’s current blind trust isn’t recognized by federal standards, under which trusts are overseen by the Office of Government Ethics, it isn’t really “blind” because Romney’s personal attorney, with whom Romney can easily communicate, oversees it, Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt asserted today during a conference call with reporters.
(Politicians will place their personal assets in blind trusts to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest when they direct government funds to the private sector.)
“Romney has claimed that his investments were in a blind trust which was managed by his personal attorney. This gave him the appearance of keeping his investments at arms’ length. It’s also how he denied responsibility for investments in a Swiss bank account, Chinese companies, companies that do business with Iran and tax havens in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands,” LaBolt said.
The Associated Press reported Wednesday that Romney’s attorney R. Bradford Malt sold off stock in the Chinese companies and others that traded with Iran beginning in 2010 as the presidential election neared.
Romney’s lack of transparency over the trust raises other questions about his wider financial dealings, such as how close he remains to Bain Capital, Obama counsel Robert Bauer said on the call. Last week, Romney disclosed more than $2 million in new income from Bain, which he has not led in nearly a decade.
“Could it be that he’s still providing services in some sense even though he said he ceased providing services to Bain in 1999?“ Bauer asked.
Romney still hasn’t produced his tax returns, and it’s doubtful that he’ll be willing to give up that much control over his money prior to the election, given his inclination to control freakiness.
Obama Press Secretary Jay Carney (press gaggle June 6) on raising tax rates on upper-income Americans:
“President Clinton, in 1993 -- and I'm old enough to say this from experience because I covered him -- passed a budget plan that included raising rates on upper-income Americans. At the time, Republicans in the House and the Senate, including the very leaders that we have today, decried that budget plan as one that would cause a recession, economic decline, increase deficits, all the worst possible outcomes. What happened? The longest peacetime expansion in American history, 22 million jobs, and a situation where the middle class saw its incomes rise, not just for the wealthiest Americans.
Let's fast-forward to the eight years prior to President Obama taking office. Those same Republican leaders supported policies that led to a situation where the record surpluses that President Clinton bequeathed on his successor were transformed into record deficits when President Obama took office. The prescription that the Republicans put forward has been tried and it was a woeful failure. ”
Carney also pointed out that the president does not support the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent, saying that President Obama “will not extend ... the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent.” When a reporter continued to press him on the issue of a short-term extension, Carney responded, “He will not -- could I be more clear? -- he will not support extension of the upper-income Bush tax cuts.”
After Republicans successfully blocked the passage of the equal pay bill in the Senate today yesterday, a very irritated Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) took to the podium to enjoin women to “foment our own revolution” and continue the fight for equal pay:
“We’re going to foment our own revolution. So I say to the women out there in America, let’s keep this fight going! Put on your lipstick, square your shoulders, suit up, and let’s fight for a new American revolution where women are paid equal pay for equal work, and let’s end wage discrimination in this century once and for all!”
Republicans framed the measure as a useless bureaucratic roadblock that would have hindered free enterprise and helped trial lawyers. Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) called the bill a “war on free enterprise.” But Heller’s record on women’s issues is far from stellar: He previously voted against Paycheck Fairness when he was in the House of Representatives and also voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair pay act, another pay equity bill.
Pay discrimination isn’t some fantasy of the left — it actually prevents families from higher earnings. On average, women make 77 cents to a man’s dollar. And that’s happening while more women are becoming the primary breadwinners or dual-earners in their family and a larger number of women with high degrees entering the job market.
Over her lifetime, the average woman loses enough in wages to feed a family of four for 37 years.
The Paycheck Fairness Act has become an election issue, as well. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), who is challenging Heller, cited his opposition as a sign that he is one of the warriors in the ongoing battle to destroy women’s rights. In Missouri, the Senatorial candidates have also butted heads on Paycheck Fairness (all three Republican candidates opposed the bill). And in the Presidential election, President Obama has come out strongly in favor of the bill, while Mitt Romney has kept silent on the issue.
“Government should treat all citizens impartially, without regard to wealth, race, ethnicity, disability, religion, sex, political affiliation or national origin. We oppose all forms of invidious discrimination. Sexual orientation is not an appropriate category. ”
“I can just hear it now Wednesday, all those people poured all this money into Wisconsin. If you don’t show up and vote, they’ll say, ‘See, we’ve got it now. We’re finally going to break every union in America, we’re going to break every government in America, we’re going to stop worrying about the middle class. … We got our way now, we got it all. Divide and conquer works.’ ”
I'll definitely be watching Wisconsin tomorrow, because I know that this is not really about a state or even about that ass, Gov. Scott Walker (R), specifically, but rather about the plutocracy, as the 1 percent seeks to run the world their way, and the hell with the the lower classes. Where goes Wisconsin, goes the country.
repeal
The FBI file concerning the person known as ‘
President Barack Obama speaking at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland,Ohio yesterday:
of us who believe in the 
forward and, hopefully, it will contribute to best practice scenarios in industry. I appreciate your emphasis on continuous quality improvement. 
Jamie Dimon, the current chairman, president, and chief executive officer of JPMorgan, is on Capitol Hill today giving his excuses for the recent JPMorgan meltdown to our do-nothing 112th Congress. This is, I remind you, the same Congress that fought to weaken the Dodd-Frank Act, and blankly refused any other protective measures for our economy after the enormous worldwide financial catastrophe caused by Republicans in 2008.
Recent Comments