No Good Choices

I have followed the civil war in Syria since it began.  Disheartening as it is, the news that Bashir al-Assad authorized the use of sarin nerve gas on his people (likely for a second time) was no particular surprise to me.  While I understand the reasoning behind the Obama Administration's condemnation of the attack and the reluctant decision to consider a military response, I remain undecided as to a proper response to Assad's actions.  Syria is a mess with good guys in short supply.  The fact is that while there are plenty of policy options on the table (invade, bomb a lot, bomb a little, do nothing), none of them are very good choices.   

Those bad choices are made worse by the reluctance of traditional American allies to support us.  This has less to do with the fact that there are no good options or even international criticism of Obama foreign policy than it does with the very painful reality that our Bush-era post 9/11 foreign policy choices were so grossly abusive of our allies. The ways we handled Afghanistan in the years after our invasion have not inspired the world's confidence, let alone our allies.  There, an attack that might very well have had a legitimate purpose, rapidly evolved into a morass of poor planning made worse by the arrogance of American leaders.  But it was our ill-advised invasion of Iraq, driven by the assertions lies that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, that really tipped the balance against the U.S. as an honest broker of foreign policy information.  

Between Afghanistan and Iraq, thousands of people have died as a result of American hubris.  There is a continuing price to be paid for it, as the Obama Administration is learning right now.  In dealing with Syria in 2013, we are reaping the consequences of America's failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.  The world no longer sees the U.S. as a reliable voice of the moral high ground.  Our motives are suspect and our judgment is no longer guaranteed to be trustworthy.

None of this is to excuse the Obama Administration from some errors in the handling of the complex problem that is Syria.  But there was never an obvious or easy policy road in Syria and that reality, combined with our own actions after 9/11, has landed us squarely in this moment.   Given the U.S. domestic political climate right now, I think that President Obama was right to ask for Congressional authorization before he takes military action.  It speaks volumes about our own dysfunctional politics that those conversations have been less about what is needed in Syria than it is has been yet another opportunity for the GOP to throw mud in the President's direction.   These days our own behavior is a cautionary tale about democracy.

In the meantime, the U.N. estimates that more than 6.5 million Syrians have been displaced.  There are thousands of Syrian refugees pouring into camps in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon.  Innocents suffer and die while different factions in Syria maneuver for power.  The Syrian government is a threat to its own citizens.  Just as there seem to be no good choices for the Syrians, there are no good choices for American foreign policy toward Syria.  Worse yet is the reality that in the United States we have lost sight about the source of our foreign policy leadership failure, seemingly anxious to prove decisively that we are no longer fit to lead the world.

Live Blogging the State of the Union

I plan to live blog the SOTU but less than 10 minutes before the big event, it would seem that the national news media is much more interested in a play-by-play of the whole Christopher Dorner mess.  I've turned on the telly to a picture of a burning cabin near Big Bear.  Meanwhile, the House of Reps is filling up with members of Congress, who may or may not be less useless than Dorner....the jury is out on that question.

10:16 pm
That's a wrap.  Time for me to go to bed.  In this way, I can avoid the talking heads on TV.  That's a win.

10:14 pm
Ending on a hopeful note.  I'm still crying about the guns.  And realizing that Biden and Boehner are wearing lilac and coral ties, respectively.  Weird.

10:08 pm
Here comes the guns.

Me: I was so hopeful that Newtown would lead to something.  And it so has not......every day that passes without serious action on background checks and ammo limits, the NRA is winning, America.  And children are dying.  It's a tragedy of our own making.

Obama: 1,000 shootings since Newtown.

Me:  Seriously?  That is messed up.  I am truly ashamed of my nation.

Obama:  "They deserve a vote."

Powerful to hear that line being called in the chamber.  Pretty awesome, actually.  But doesn't change the fact that the NRA holds too many Senators by the short hairs.

10:06 pm
It's a chock-ful of policy speech, ain't it?  Commission for voting......we can fix this.  We can, but will the GOP let us?  I direct your attention to the voter registration bullshit that went on in Republican-controlled states last year.

9:59 pm
Cyber defense.  Good idea.  Maybe even bipartisan?

9:55 pm
Afghanistan draw-down continues.  There's a plan.  Is anyone really hopeful about it?

9:50 pm
Violence Against Women Act.....looking at you, House of Representatives.  I predict: It ain't going anywhere.  Neither is Paycheck Fairness, by the way.  Minimum wage is also a non-starter, though yeah, $9 is a worthy goal.

9:47 pm
Comprehensive immigration reform.  Let's hear it for the Dream Act.  Just so we're clear, the reduction in illegal crossing probably has as much to do with our crap-tastic economy as it does your enforcement at the border, Mr. President.

9:45 pm
"Hey, Mr. President, Science, technology, and math aren't worth a dime if they don't come with creativity and good writing skills," says this high school history teacher.

9:42 pm
High quality pre-school is such a good idea.  So long-term, so helpful to working families.  And so not going to happen in this nation.  We can't keep our kids from getting shot or give new parents decent maternity and paternity leave.  You know we'll keep dropping the ball on pre-school.

9:39 pm
Infrastructure, which is something I have been yammering about for years.  Years.  Bridges, roads, energy grid, nationwide wireless.  NOW.

9:34 pm
Climate change.  Lots of clapping, though Boehner still looks like he just sucked a lemon.  Obama linking progress on climate change to strong economic growth.  Name calls McCain, who looks confused since he no longer believes in the climate change that he believed in circa 2008.

9:32 pm
This would be more fun if there were thought-bubbles over the heads of members of Congress.  Someone tell Tim Cook to get on that.

9:28 pm
I like the "manufactured crisis" line.  That's a money quote.  "Deficit reduction alone is not an economic plan." Cha-ching.

9:25 pm
JT thought the Supremes were old.  Good thing he didn't see that trifecta shot of Sanders, Mikulski, and Levin.

9:22 pm
And sequestration, here we go. I so long for him to say, "screw it, no cuts."  Because we don't actually have a spending problem, America.  We have a grow-the-economy problem and budget cuts and fiscal austerity will make that worse.  Just ask Europe.

9:17 pm
The president invokes JFK and the idea that Congress is jointly responsible for progress.  Okay, but I suspect you and Boehner don't agree on what that progress means.  Just saw Paul Ryan and you can be damned sure he doesn't agree.  Blah, blah, compromise, blah. Mitch McConnell looks like a cranky Eeyore.

9:14 pm
JT just caught sight of the Supreme Court and announced, "Damn, they are old." Indeed.

9:10 pm
POTUS! Cantor is right behind him.  I cannot like that man.  I mean Cantor, of course. I want to shove him and smash his glasses.

9:06 pm
And now JT is here to watch. Which is good because I can't live blog and scoop ice cream at the same time.

8:59 pm
FLOTUS in the House.  Cabinet is also here.  White guys. Gah.

8:57 pm
When my hand is forced, I watch MSNBC.  But tonight they have Michael Steele on board. Heading over to CBS.

Making History, Round II

In 2009, I kept JT home from school to watch Barack Obama's inauguration.  It was a making history sort of day, and I wanted my boy to be a part of it.   That it was the first presidential inauguration he would remember was distinct in my mind.  I know that children develop a sense of government and political identity from the first president they remember and I wanted my son's memory and sense of the presidency to be of the nation's first African-American president.

That day felt exciting and full of promise.  In the four years of President Obama's first term, the progress made toward fulfilling the promise was palpable and real.  The Obama Administration has delivered on a range of issues that really matter to me.  From the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (the first bill President Obama signed into law) to his recent willingness to take on gun control, I am pleased with this president.  That's not to say that the work is done, or that things are perfect.  It's just that I feel we are making progress in the right direction.

On election day, as President Obama secured a well-deserved second term, I felt like I could actually breathe a sigh of relief.  I am not under the impression that the next four years will be easy.  There is plenty of unfinished business and dealing with the Tea Party tyrants in the House would challenge the most patient of leaders.  But that's what I value about President Obama: his willingness to express ideas, draft solutions, and get in the weeds.  The ways in which he patiently works to untie the knot that is the contemporary American political system demonstrates an enduring leadership that I greatly value.   He is a grown up and a man of ideas.  He is my son's vision of a president.  In that, I find great hope. 

In Defense of Good Will

More than twenty years ago, Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican, spoke to a group of students about political partisanship and offered up the view that people can and should disagree vehemently.  But, the Senator said, as long as we are all "people of good will" the nation can always move beyond our disagreement toward compromises that lend themselves to successful governance.  I was among the students who heard that message many years ago.  At the time, I found the idea powerful.  In the years since I've never forgotten it.  These days, with partisan bickering the order of the day, it seems more fitting than ever.

For most of the years that I lived in Nebraska, Chuck Hagel was my Senator.  I never voted for him and with great regularity he took positions and cast Senate votes with which I disagreed.  Often, I sent him a letter to explain why he was wrong.  My letters were cordial and careful.  I never expected him to change his mind (and, to my knowledge, he never did).  But, in the spirit of good will, I shared my opinion with my Senator.  

Without fail, at every juncture, his staff responded to my communication with a gracious letter, thanking for me expressing my opinion, and encouraging me to continue to participate in the political discourse.  Over the years, I came to appreciate Senator Hagel's support of such discourse, even when our ideas were at odds.  And let's be clear: we were always at odds.

In the summer of 2002, as I was packing to leave Nebraska, I sent one last letter off to Senator Hagel.  I don't remember the issue, but I'm sure I was disagreeing with something he had said.  In that letter, I let the Senator's staff know that it would be my final communication as my family and I were moving to New Jersey.

When I arrived in New Jersey and got my phone hooked up, one of the first calls we received was from a staffer for Senator Hagel.  She had looked up my phone number and taken the time to call to express the Senator's best wishes for our life in our new home and his regret that my family and I had left Nebraska.  I have never forgotten that phone call, and the spirit that motivated it.  It was clear to me that the Senator was acting in the spirit of good will that I had long valued.

In the years since, I have continued to follow Senator Hagel's career.  When he came to question the wisdom of the Iraq war he had once supported, I respected his willingness to stand up and say as much.  Though I had never voted for him, I was sorry to see him leave the Senate.  I am delighted that President Obama has nominated Senator Hagel to be the nation's next Secretary of Defense.  I expect that Senator Hagel still has some views with which I disagree, but that's not really the point.  What is the point?  The point is that Senator Hagel is a man of good will.  I am confident that when he brings that skill to government service, we'll all benefit.  I hope the Senate confirms his nomination.

Joe Biden Understands

I have long had a soft spot for Joe Biden.  It dates back to his days in the Senate and to the sympathies he always has for blue collar workers, for single moms, for folks just trying to get by and make life a little better for themselves and their children.  He seems to me a guy who loves his family, who knows that bad luck befalls us all, who believes that the best we can do when that happens is to pick up the pieces and move forward, however incrementally, no matter how hard that is.  He knows that we can - and should - help one another.

He comes by this knowledge the hard way, as a man who lost his first wife and a daughter in a car accident and found himself trying to be the only parent to his two young sons, while serving as Delaware's Senator and managing his own grief.  A few months ago, TPM writer David Kurtz wrote thoughtfully about that very event.  

So I watched last night's debate with a pretty strong bias, knowing that Joe Biden may sometimes be a little emotional, may sometimes be a bit of loose cannon, and sometimes the attack dog half of the Obama-Biden team.  Oh, Joe, we might say.  But folks, let's not lose sight of the reality on the table this November.  One of these men is going to be the Vice President; the person who takes over and leads this nation if the unthinkable happens.  For that reason alone, there is no question in my mind that Joe Biden should serve another four years as President Obama's Vice President.  Because Joe Biden is a man who truly knows what it means to do right.

Obama 2012!

I hope that y'all watched President Clinton's Wednesday night speech at the Democratic National Convention.  It was a reminder of the primary virtue Democrats offer to our nation: working together, for the good of us all.  Tonight, President Obama will accept the Democratic nomination for the presidency.  I am proud to have him as my nation's president and I enthusiastically support his re-election.  Full stop.

In the event that you want more details about why I  support President Obama's re-election, I've got a list of first term accomplishments that I am most proud of.  It is not lost on me that these accomplishments came in spite of whole-hearted Republican opposition at every juncture.  Think about what we could have accomplished if the GOP had been willing to work with the Democrats instead of against us.

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

The 2009 Stimulus

Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court

Iraqi War Draw Down

Auto Industry Bailout

Obamacare!

Student Loan reforms that put 600 million dollars back in the hands of college students instead of banks

Ending DADT

Expansion of Food Safety regulation system; we need more, but this is a start

The President's support of marriage equality

Enacting some DREAM Act style reforms for illegal residents brought to the U.S. as children

Is there more to do to get this nation on firm economic and social footing?  Yes, emphatically yes.  And President Obama is the man to help us get that done.  Get yourself registered to vote, folks.  Do it because your fellow citizens are counting on you.  Together, we can't fail.

Ten Other Things

Adam Serwer at Mother Jones has a terrific article with a listing of the big changes that will come about thanks to the Affordable Care Act.  Some of the reforms were immediately available, others will be fully adapted by 2014.  Individually, most of them are popular with Americans, though plenty of us still don't like Obamacare.  Liberals needs to start talking about these individual changes and explaining, over and over again that this is Obamacare.

Supremely Pleased

Yesterday, I got ready to write a post for today's Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act, and I sat before my computer with quiet fingers.  My heart hoped that the Court, the last institution of the federal government to enjoy the confidence of a majority of Americans, would do the right thing.  For me, the right thing was recognition of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.  There were two paths to that conclusion and both looked good to me.  The first path meant recognition that Congress had the power to mandate the purchase of healthcare because of the commerce clause.  The second entailed affirmation that the Congressional power to tax is clearly constitutional and that the mandate wasn't a mandate so much as a fine (or tax) on those who fail to purchase healthcare coverage.  Either way, we get a lot closer to healthcare for everyone in this nation and that is a desirable goal, even if the logistics to get there are mighty confounding.

And yet, Justice Roberts has invariably been such a disappointment to me that I had little hope he would side with Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor.  Though I have great respect for Justice Kennedy, the usual swing vote on the Court, I was convinced that his long-established preference for state's rights would be essential in this case and not good news for ACA.  I had no expectation that the triumvirate of Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas would be the least bit helpful.  These men would've sided with the Confederacy on questions of state's rights.  They weren't about to affirm the ACA on any grounds.  So I had to pin my hopes on Roberts and by golly, that was nerve-wracking.

I did a lot of re-reading yesterday, including a good deal of the oral arguments from the case.  I recalled Justice Ginsburg's cryptic statement a few weeks ago, when she said that the pundits had no idea what the Court planned to do.  I took hope from that.   But I went to bed last night still confused.  This morning, as we came down to the wire, I tweeted what my gut told me: the Court would rule ACA constitutional.   Then I waited with my fingers and toes crossed.  Seconds after the opinion came down, I gave my dad a call.  He was watching CNN screw it up, so I got to tell him that ACA was upheld.  And we were both emotional, which pretty much says it all.

I was raised by the kind of good, old-fashioned liberals who believe that they have an obligation to make the world a better place.  In his dotage retirement, my dad spends a good deal of time working at the local senior center helping the elderly poor to get access to decent healthcare and the prescription drugs they need.  That's an expensive prospect in this nation, even with Medicare, and helping little old ladies find a way to live on $800 a month has turned my dad into a radical.  He's not voting for himself when he casts a ballot, he's voting for the poor, the underprivileged, the folks who have been let down by society.  He wants universal healthcare (so do I) and he hopes that ACA gets us on that road. 

Voting outside your own narrow interests is an important thing; the very definition of a just citizen.  Today, Justice Roberts recognized that.  And I am supremely thankful.

Live Blogging the President's Economic Speech

I have to confess that I really debated whether or not to live-blog this speech.  It's not that I don't care what the president has to say.  I do.  It's not that I fear he won't have good ideas.  I am confident that he will have some good policy proposals to ease the unemployment crisis in our nation.  My frustration here ----- and it is colossal frustration ----- is that the Republican party and the media have decided that our biggest problem is debt.  In fact, all this fuming about debt is making the recovery slower and is putting us on target for a double dip recession.  I blame Republicans and Republican leadership.  I blame a news media unwilling to explain the costs of GOP obstructionism.  And I fear that the political crisis in this nation, a crisis of our own making, is not something that Republicans care to fix.

7:10 pm
The president starts with the facts on the table: the political process and Washington are failing us.  President Obama says "we must stop the political circus and help the economy." Amen.

7:15 pm
The president's plan is called "The American Jobs Act."  Sounds about right.  Mitch McConnell looks like he's constipated.  Perhaps he doesn't understand that it's his bullshit that's placed the nation in danger?

7:16 pm
Fixing the transportation system is the first defined element.  Folks are standing. Well, folks who want to take action, anyway.  Hint: They aren't Republicans.

7:20 pm
He's talking about programs that have had GOP support in the past. Any chance the current GOP will be there still?

7:25 pm
The president promotes a middle class tax cut (namely, extending the payroll tax cuts).....it's not Romney's tax cuts on stock dividends, so it actually will benefit the middle class.  President Obama is also promising to cover the costs and not deficit spend.  I could actually care less about this and object to paying lip service to this ridiculous notion.  But it is sot to the GOP nonsense and he does need their votes.  Sigh.

7:27 pm
And now to the tax code...applause from the Democrats.  GOP sitting on their hands. Boehner seems to be in some sort of personal private space. It's like he's not even listening. God knows he's capable of emotion.  What gives, Mr. Speaker?

7:30 pm
And he's taken on the contract payment issue for small businesses.  I hope that mortgage help really happens this time.  Call me a skeptic but sure, let's try.  Nods to manufacturing are also promising.

7:35 pm
He's taking on the anti-regulation, anti-spending dolts and calling out the canards.   Eric Cantor, chief canard, is equipped with a pen and pad of paper, should be taking notes now. I suspect he's about to get schooled.  Obama's defense of good government and the power of community, rooted in the accomplishments of Republican Lincoln, is making my heart sing.

7:40 pm
"The people who hired us don't have the luxury of waiting 14 months" for action.  Yes, yes, yes.  This is a strong speech and he's got a good plan.  Per the president's request.  I'm going to lift my voice for this plan.  I want to be hopeful, I really do.

Required Viewing

A few minutes ago, JT and I sat down to watch 60 Minutes.  We tuned in for the story about polar bears.  Prior to that, there was a story about children, poverty, and homelessness in the United States.  It was an awfully powerful story.  The next time someone tells me that we must take care of our national debt in order to protect the future of our children, I'm going to remember this story and point out that hungry children, children who cannot think and cannot study, who cannot fall asleep because they are hungry, have a greater concern than the fucking national debt.

You can watch the segment for yourself here.  I hope that you will do so.

After JT and I watched it, I dried my tears, turned to him and said "Our nation can do better than this." 

We can, can't we?

Compromise?

I was all prepared to draft up a blog entry that fire-bombed the Obama-GOP compromise on the Bush tax cuts, extension of unemployment payments, and the lot of it when I saw this post by Steve Benen over at Washington Monthly........hmmmmm.

Maybe I should hold off on my condemnation?  It's rather unlike me to shut my mouth just when I'm poised to shout......but hey, why not?

Consider it my holiday gift to you.

Dare to DREAM

It is no secret that I wish for a much more expansive immigration policy in this nation.  I've written about it at length.  In the next two weeks, the Senate may finally vote on the DREAM Act.  This legislation has been before Congress in one form or another since 2001.  The bill has already passed the House and only needs passage in the current lame duck session of the Senate.  It would permit a pathway to legal residency for current illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children, have lived here for more than five years and have completed high school (or earned a G.E.D.).  To actually earn legal resident status, they would have to finish two years of college or military service.

A recent New York Times magazine article details just how deserving these young men and women are.  Some of them are in college right now, working toward a college degree that they may not be able to use for legal employment.  Imagine the courage it takes to pay tuition, go to school, and dream of a future when your only prospects are low-paying jobs in the illegal economy.  If the American dream means anything, it means opportunity for people like these students.

I will confess that it made me very proud to learn that many of the students most active in the DREAM movement are enrolled at UCLA, where I went to college.  The Chancellor of their university has spoken out in favor of the legislation.  I wish these fellow Bruins, and the hopes and dreams that they represent, the very best. They are Americans who do their nation proud.  They deserve the opportunities and prospects that the rest of us can so easily take for granted.

Please contact your Senators and ask them to support the DREAM Act.

Of Ignorance and Impunity

One of my favorite Thomas Jefferson quotes is his assertion that “No nation is permitted to live in ignorance with impunity." I think of that often and recently, as discussions about an appeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy have come round again, I've been thinking about it a lot.

The House has already voted to repeal DADT.  President Obama has said that he will sign the bill if the Senate will act.  So repeal of this ridiculous policy feels amazingly close at hand.  If only the Senate will act.

If only indeed.  Earlier this year, the Senate failed to act; many of those who opposed repeal indicated that they preferred to wait until a Pentagon report on the policy came out.  That report came out yesterday and it endorses a repeal.  The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs endorses a repeal.  The Secretary of Defense - a Republican appointee - endorses repeal.  It should be a done deal.

But it's not.  The stupidity of excluding people from serving their nation in the military because of their sexual orientation is not lost on me.  It's not lost on my ten year old son.  It's not lost on a majority of Americans.  But it is lost on a handful of Senators.

Soon enough, the Senate will be out of session.  In January, a new Congress takes office.  The new GOP-controlled House will not support repeal of DADT.  This is our moment.  It may be our last moment for a long time.

Call your Senator and urge him or her to support repeal of DADT.  Do it now.

Mass Confusion

Yesterday's  victory for Massachusetts  Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown has folks wringing their hands, trying to make sense of the senseless.  In the months since Ted Kennedy died, leaving his seat vacant, the general view was that of course the Democrats would retain this seat and with it their 60 seat majority in the Senate.

But politics is never an "of course" business and the Martha Coakley campaign, not to mention the national Democrats aiding her effort, should have known better.  And that's water under the bridge as of today, now that Scott Brown is the Senator-elect for the state of Massachusetts.

Brown's admission to the Senate cloakroom will not give the GOP a majority in the Senate.  It will give them 41 seats to the Democrat's 59 seat majority, a number that looks like a minority to every 4th grader in America.  But the 4th graders among us (not to mention the rest of the nation) don't understand the nonsense that is the filibuster.

For the better part of the last year, the Republicans have been playing filibuster possum, threatening to filibuster nearly every  Democratic-sponsored initiative in the Senate.  The idea of a prospective filibuster is for the minority party to thrown down and stop business in the Senate, thus ensuring that the majority party will negotiate and that the minority party has a real effect on legislation.  Historically, the filibuster is an infrequently-used tactic.  But not these days, when the GOP threatens to filibuster everything in the Senate.  Moreover, the Republicans haven't just been playing filibuster bingo to ensure that a few of their ideas get included in the Democratic legislation.  They've been playing filibuster with one goal: total obstruction, inspired by their the hope that the Obama Administration will fail in it efforts to right the ship of state and move us out of this recession.

The mainstream media hasn't called their bluff.  And, frankly, neither has the Democratic leadership in the Senate.  And now Harry Reid and company are reaping the reward.  One can only hope that our dysfunctional Senate, dysfunctional at the whim of a Republican minority, will now attract the attention (and ire...is it too much to hope for ire?) of the news media and the nation.

It's one thing for Republicans to expect their ideas to be included in legislation. They do have 41 seats in the Senate and they do represent a lot of folks (although, ahem, a minority lot of folks).  But it is quite another to offer no ideas at all and then sit back and hold our Congress hostage at a time when our nation most needs action.  The GOP's win-at-all-cost strategy may succeed.  But our nation will lose.

Our Nobel Endeavor

A single question has been prominent in my mind since President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday.  Since when do we commence to snipe and backbite when one of our own has been honored by the world? 

Every morning when I come downstairs, I pour myself a cup of coffee and then look at my computer.  I check my e-mail to look for NY Times updates from the overnight and then I turn on NPR's Morning Edition.  I've been especially attentive to headlines this past week, as the Nobel Prizes are annouced.  I  like paying attention to that sort of thing.  On Friday, when I saw that  President Obama had won the Nobel Prize for Peace, my first thought was "he doesn't need this." 

By that I meant that Obama's opponents on the right would surely reflexively reject the selection of the president for the prize.  They'd complain that the honor was undeserved, unwarranted, and unearned.  And of course I was correct.  Within the hour, the right began to bitterly regret that our president had been made the recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace. 

I'm a little embarrassed to admit then my first response was to place the prize in the context of contemporary politics.  I think highly of the prize, not only for the blessing it bestows on people who are working hard to make their world a better place, but also because the prize has the effect of advancing political causes that are meaningful and deserve advancement.  There are many instances of this, so I'll cite just one: in 1984, the Nobel Committee awarded the prize to Bishop Desmond Tutu, a black South African opponent of apartheid.  At the time, apartheid had no shortage of supporters (including our own government).  The Prize gave Tutu and his cause another measure of world legitimacy and it significantly helped to move forward the anti-apartheid movement, especially in terms of world opinion.  In 1993, the apartheid system officially came to an end, and two more South Africans, Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk, were awarded the Nobel that year.  I'm glad that the Nobel Committee honored Tutu along the way; his receipt of the Prize in 1984 served as a significant contribution to the end of apartheid.

While I can certainly understand a respectful disagreement with the president and his political goals, I've had about enough of the bitter sniping that seems to govern the rhetoric of some of our nation's political leaders.  This crowd (Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, and their disciples) approve of absolutely nothing the president does.  If President Obama said the sky was blue, I've no doubt that they'd disagree.  This is not a debate of ideas or even ideologies.  This is shouting tantrums by ideologues.  And it does not make us better.

Does President Obama deserve the Nobel Prize?  The Nobel committee certainly thinks as much.  A reading of the Prize committee's statement on the award makes very clear that the committee is awarding the prize to President Obama because of the manner in which he has re-positioned the United States as a member in good standing of the world community.    We must make amends for the behavior of our nation during the Bush years.  That Obama brought his so-called "star power" to bear in his speech to Cairo and his trip to Africa is fine by me.  He has begun the process of  mending our frayed diplomatic ties with the world.  It's a noble mission; one we must undertake.  If President Obama prevails, our nation and our world will be better for his efforts.  And if he fails, we'll all pay the price.  President Obama won election to the presidency by persuading a majority of Americans that, "Yes we can."  I would add that we must. 

We must.

Live Blogging the Health Care Address

Regular readers (hi Mom!) will recall that last fall I took to live-blogging the presidential debates.  The election put an end to that brand of fun.  But as I started thinking about President Obama's address to Congress, I thought it might be fun to live-blog the madness.

Our helpful assistant blogger is my 9 year old son.  And before you doubt his credentials, I want you to think about the behavior of the Republicans in Congress.

In comparison, the kid looks incredibly serious and well-qualified.

I'll start by disclosing my bias:  I want universal, single-payer healthcare.  I am completely aware that is not going to happen in this round of reforms, if ever.  I'll settle for a public option plan to compete with private insurers; some sort of serious effort to control costs; and a real commitment to real universal coverage: insurance for every person in this nation.

And yes, I know that's probably unrealistic.   The sins of the national news media not withstanding, the Obama Administration handled August badly.  I want the president to get Congress back on track and provide some leadership on the issue, explaining to the nation why we must reform our health care system and offering some serious proposals to help make it happen.

The first issue:  whose coverage to view?  I'm going with MSNBC because I like Brian Williams, David Gregory and Rachel Maddow.  But if they let Keith Olberman talk........I'm gone.  He's a monstrosity.

7:58 pm
Just saw John Boehner.  I hope to hell that he keeps up with his insurance premiums because that kind of suntan has skin cancer written all over it.

8:00 pm
MSNBC is letting Olberman serve as our narrator.  I'm off to CNN.  Wolf Blizter.  Gah.  JT just explained to the cats: we don't like this guy either but he's better than that other dude.  Michelle Obama wearing sleeves tonight.

8:04 pm
CNN opting to show the Clinton speech from 1992...teleprompter trouble that year.  And no reform that year either....coincidence?

8:12 pm
The man of the hour turns up.  JT's only question: Will he shake his wife's hand?  Wife looks pissed off that he didn't shake her hand.  Uh oh.

Caught sight of Senator Tim Johnson from SD who knows his way around the healthcare system as a result of a recent serious illness.  Interesting to hear what he and his staff have to say about reform.

8:18 pm
The economy blah blah blah getting better blah blah blah still need to help folks looking for jobs blah blah blah.

JT:  I thought this was supposed to be about healthcare.

Exactly.  Let's get to it, Mr. President.

Props to Representative John Dingell and an Obama vow to be the last president to propose healthcare reform.  Starting strong.

8:21 pm
Obama: "we are the only advanced democracy who allows such hardship for its citizens."  Amen.

8:23 pm
JT: "Insurance companies let people die?  That's bad."  From the mouths of babes.

8:27 pm
Congress is getting strokes so far...."you've worked hard."  Okay, but I want some heads to roll.....and Obama just said, "The time for bickering is over....we must show the American people that we will do what we were sent here to do."   That's more like it.

The plan:
1.  Security and stability for those who have insurance.
2.  Insurance for those who need it.
3.  Cost control.

I'm in.  Tell me more.

8:32 pm
Insurance marketplace exchange idea is interesting, I guess.  But it's not really going to solve our problems and he knows it.  We need more than a marketplace.  Plus....4 years?  Dude, that's not soon enough.

8:35 pm
He's gonna require everyone to get care with a hardship waiver for low income folks and small businesses.....okay, but I'm not convinced that will do the trick and it's costly.  Massachusetts has been bleeding cash to make that happen.

8:37 pm
And now he takes on the myths......first up death panels.  He's talking to you Sarah Palin; says "It's a lie.  Plain and simple."  Congress cheers.

Says no coverage for folks who are here illegally.  I don't approve, because I am compassionate that way. 

And a member of Congress just yelled back at the president.  Did he call him a liar? Nancy Pelosi is not amused. My 9 year old is shocked.

Update: Yes, Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina did call the president a liar. 

8:40 pm
He's pointing out that the big 5 insurance companies need more competition and must be held accountable.  That sort of language makes the GOP happy.  And for now, I'll live with it.  Because he just said that he wants a public option to be in the marketplace.

Yes.  By God, yes.

8:50 pm
Obama promises to protect Medicare.  GOP sits on their hands.

8:53 pm
He notes that defensive medicine contributes to rising costs; mentions malpractice reform but doesn't commit.

Obama says the costs of reform will be less than the tax cuts for the rich passed by the last Administration.  Looking at you, George W.  Ouch.

8:55 pm
Obama says his door is open for those with new ideas.  But he won't stand by and endure those who misrepresent the plan; those who want to get in the way of reform.  Says, "Know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it."  Says he will call out the deceivers...strong language.

I hope to hell that he means it.

8:58 pm
Closing with Teddy Kennedy, calling health care "a moral issue" about "social justice" and "the character of our country."  Says Teddy was driven by "something more" "a passion born of his own experience" and Kennedy's concern about those who didn't have health care, a feeling that isn't partisan.  I'm sold.

The final words were emotional: "we did not come here to fear the future.  We can meet history's test."

It was an impressive appeal to take some action for the common good.  Let's hope that we can rise to the challenge.

Fear Factor

A few weeks ago, JT and I were listening to NPR and a reporter made mention of American detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay. JT said to me, "Wait, I thought that President Obama closed that place. That's a bad place."

In January, I had explained to my son why it was necessary to close Gitmo. Things like our Constitution, its pledge of habeus corpus, our need to stand for the rule of law....all of them figured prominently in my explanation of why President Obama's pledge to close American facility at Guantanamo was a very good idea. I'm not alone in understanding this reality. But I might as well be, if the U.S. Senate is any indication.

Nearly every day for the past month, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell has made a speech on the Senate floor, complaining about President's Obama's intention to shut down the American detention facility at Guantanamo. McConnell makes the same dubious argument each day: Gitmo keeps us safe. It's a simply ridiculous argument. For one thing, we don't actually know how dangerous the folks at Gitmo are because we haven't had trials for most of them. In the absence of clearly stated legal charges and application of the rule of law, we don't know. I suspect that most of the 241 people being detained at Guantanamo are probably bad guys. But the only way to be certain about that is to have trials and let the sun shine on their deeds. If the evidence points to guilt, we can lock them up in any one of the many high security federal prisons we currently maintain. Those places hold scary prisoners now and will hold them in the future. They can certainly accommodate additional bad guys. And if there is not enough evidence to convict Gitmo detainees of crimes, then we should set them free. Because that's how we treat those found non-guilty: we let them go.

I wish I could point the finger at Republicans alone, but they aren't the only party guilty of foolish thinking on this issue. Tuesday, Democrats removed funding to close Gitmo from a military budget bill. The Democratic Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid, pledges that once the Obama Administration presents a plan for closing the base, the Congress will debate the provision and, presumably, allocate the funds. This act constitutes a Democratic party willing to yield to Republican fear-mongering about Guantanamo. I am disappointed in their shortage of courage and their lack of leadership.

I believe in the promise of the American constitution and its pledge of equal treatment under the law. I believe that being confined to a prison without counsel or knowledge of the charges against you is a violation of human rights. I know it's a violation of the U.S. Constitution. I believe that my nation must stand for a handful of principles. Foremost among them is the rule of law. And the law on this issue is clear. Startlingly clear. So clear that my 9 year old understands that what's gone on at Gitmo is wrong; he understands that we must close this shining example of American hubris.

Americans have long held dear the principle that protection of our freedom and liberty is worth dying for. Every day that we hold prisoners at Guantanamo Bay without presenting charges and scheduling trials for them, we make a mockery of that principle and those who died defending it. And in doing so, we demonstrate a stunning degree of hypocrisy to the rest of the world. It is that hypocrisy which places us at risk in this world. And I, for one, refuse to be governed by fear.

Opposition to What?

As the Obama Administration shepherded a stimulus package through the Congress and then followed up with a budget plan identifying priorities for the next few years, I have to confess that I've been shocked at the degree to which Republicans seem to actively wish for him to fail.

I understand the idea of being a loyal opposition; of supporting an alternative solution to our national problems and advocating for that view. I can certainly respect Republicans who cast a vote against the stimulus package because it does not represent their preferred solution to the recession. But that is not what the GOP is doing. They are opposed to the Obama plan primarily because it's not their plan. But they have offered little in the form of an alternative solution, instead trotting out tired and failed policies.

On top of that, more than one Republican in Congress and the chattering classes has actively expressed the desire to see Obama's plan fail. As if that failure would have no costs. As if that failure doesn't represent the failure of our nation. It's one thing to believe that Obama's plan is not a solution; to believe that there are better options to explore. But to actively wish for his plan to fail? That's just perverse.

And it's not just perverse. It's wrong. As President Obama is reminding Americans of their strength and their durability, as he is busy reminding us that we can succeed; that we can overcome this challenge, the GOP is hoping that we don't.

They aren't offering any actual solutions to the recession; they are just saying no to the ideas on the table. Memo to the GOP: more of the same failed policies (I'm talking to you, tax cuts for the rich, off-budget wars, and stimulus checks) is NOT a solution. It's just recycling of failed ideas. The kind of recycling we must reject.

I am loath to invoke 9/11 because I am tired of the many ways that George W. Bush and his Republican allies in Congress beat us down with that idea anytime we dared to question them. But in the aftermath of September 11, we came together as a nation and we sought to support one another through the darkness. Democrats didn't actively wish for George Bush to fail as our commander in chief because they knew that if he failed, we failed as a nation.

And I wish that Republicans would understand that lesson today. If President Obama's solutions to our problems fail, our nation will suffer. And that suffering isn't abstract: its effects will be seen in real people's lives. The same real people who voted for Obama because they found something profoundly meaningful in the idea of hope.

Failure will not bring redemption to the Republican party. It will bring disaster to the nation. And I hope that's something that none of us wants.

Lilly Ledbetter

Yesterday, at a White House signing ceremony for the law that bears her name, Lilly Ledbetter looked proud. She should be.

After nearly 20 years of work at Goodyear Tire and Rubber in Alabama, Ledbetter discovered that her male co-workers were being paid more than she earned. They did the same job she did, but the men made more money, in some cases 40% more than Ledbetter was earning. It was a classic case of discrimination and Ledbetter filed a lawsuit which asked Goodyear to make amends. In keeping with federal law of the day, the courts eventually awarded Ledbetter $300,000 in damages, plus back pay for the last two years of discrimination. That's as much as one can receive for an equal-pay lawsuit. It includes no back-pay for missed pension contributions or Social Security benefits. But Ledbetter was happy. Justice had been served.

Until Goodyear appealed the case (and the chutzpah of that is just astonishing). Their argument? The statute of limitations on Ledbetter's claim ran out 18 months after the discrimination began. Of course, Lilly Ledbetter didn't discover the discrimination until 19 years into her employment at Goodyear and so she, and her lawyers, confidently argued that such an interpretation of the statute was unreasonable. The law had never been interpreted that way before. But in 2007, with two Bush appointees on the bench, the Supreme Court made a sharp departure from the previous understanding of the law. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court sided with Goodyear. Lilly Ledbetter was told that she should have filed her case 19 years ago, when Goodyear first began to violate the equal pay for equal work laws.

Never mind that Ledbetter didn't know back then that she was being treated unjustly. According to the Court, Ledbetter didn't have a claim.

The Democratic majority in Congress immediately took action to make the equal pay statue crystal clear. The new provision provided that the statute of limitation starts ticking anew each time an employee receives a paycheck in which there is an equal pay disparity. Congress didn't change the amount of money an employee could receive (that remains capped at $300,000 and two years worth of back pay....no matter how long the discrimination continued). The bill passed in the House but was defeated in the Senate by a Republican filibuster.

This month the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act came before Congress again. This time, it was passed by the House and Senate. And yesterday, President Obama made it the first bill he signed into law. Lilly Ledbetter was there to see it happen.

Nina Totenberg of NPR tells more of the story ----- a 5 minute listen that is well-worth your time. But let me conclude by saying this is just why I voted for President Obama, who seems to have a very keen understanding of the phrase, "and justice for all."

Go Away

In a recent interview on NPR's Tell Me More, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales spoke about the Obama Administration's pledge that the United States will not engage in the use of torture when questioning detainees. If you can stomach it, the whole interview is to be found here. Much of it caused me to rage at my radio but nothing made me as furious as Gonzales' whole-scale dismissal of Obama's pledge that the United States will not use torture. Gonzales objected, arguing that once we outlaw torture we'll have no one to blame but ourselves if the bad guys come for us.

Bullshit.

Just. Bullshit.

I hadn't quite realized just how exhausting it was to wake up every day in a nation governed by people who were rapidly undermining all that my country stood for. But in the 8 days since Barack Obama took the oath of office and moved into the White House, my relief has been palpable. And it's not just that we finally have a grown-up in charge.

It's that we have a grown up with principles in charge. A leader with an Administration who understands that the United States cannot survive the next century unless we stand for something and act on those principles. And standing for human rights is a pretty sound principle on which to stake our future.

I am tired of Republicans holding the nation hostage to fear. And the majority of the nation, the people who proudly cast their ballot for Barack Obama, they are tired of it as well. So, Mr. Gonzales, I am done hearing from you. You had your turn and you screwed up. In case it's not already clear, please take your fear mongering elsewhere. Go away.