Tom Ridge Refutes Cheney, Limbaugh: Transcript (5-24-09)

Former Homeland Security head under Bush, Tom Ridge, distanced himself from Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh. Read the complete CNN's State of the Union transcript. Excerpt below:

KING: It is that last point, Governor Ridge, Dick Cheney says a lot of Americans are alive today because of them. The Obama administration disputes that. You were there, you saw the intelligence. Did those enhanced interrogation techniques save lives, prevent attacks on this country? Is Dick Cheney right?

RIDGE: I never saw the intelligence at that depth. We were a consumer of information. We didn't generate it. But I do believe that since President Obama has released the memos that are substantially redacted, then perhaps there may be information that should be released to show that they actually received substantive information that enabled America to better protect itself. You can't have it both ways. I think that's one of the things that the vice president is arguing. Don't delete or redact parts of the memos to gird your point of view. There may be other information. I don't know what it is that may also support the vice president.

At the end of the day, we haven't been attacked since 9/11 in the United States of America. At the end of the day we've had a lot of professionals working very hard around the world to make sure that it doesn't happen.

[...]KING: Where's Tom Ridge?

Are you in the Rush Limbaugh/Dick Cheney version of the Republican Party or the Colin Powell version of the Republican Party?

RIDGE: I'm in the Tom Ridge version of the party. And my version of the party is simply, when you're asked to serve, as I have been by two Republican presidents -- one gave me a draft notice and sent me to Vietnam and the other called me away from the office I had led as governor, and neither one asked me where I stood on gay rights or abortion. They said, "Will you serve?"

And I think, for the American public -- for the Republican Party to restore itself is not as a regional party but as a national party. We have to be far less judgmental about disagreements within the party and far more judgmental about our disagreement with our friends on the other side of the aisle.

KING: You've used those terms, "need to be less shrill, less judgmental." Who's being shrill? Who's being judgmental?

RIDGE: Well, I think a lot of our commentators are being shrill. I mean, I don't disagree...

KING; Rush?

RIDGE: Yes, I -- listen, Rush Limbaugh has an audience of 20 million people. A lot of people listen, daily, to him and live by very word. But words mean things, and how you use words is very important.

KING: I want to be clear, though. You think Rush is among those being too judgmental, too shrill?

RIDGE: Well, I think -- I think Rush -- Rush articulates his point of views in ways that offend very many. It's a matter of -- matter of language and a matter of how you use words. And it does get the base all fired up, and he's got strong following. But, personally, if he would listen to me -- and I doubt if he would -- the notion is, express yourselves, but let's respect others' opinions. And let's not be divisive.

Let's lead our party based on some principles that have been very much a part of who we are for decades, and let's be less shrill, in terms of -- and, particularly, not attack other individuals. Let's attack their ideas. Let's explain, in a rational, thoughtful, responsible and reasonable way why our ideas and our approach are more acceptable, why they should be more acceptable to the average citizen.

Times Square Opens to Pedestrians Monday

I plan on being there. How about you? (e-mail me if in the neighborhood at Jobrny1-times@yahoo.com):

Shut Down: 42nd-47th In Midtown; 33rd-35th Near Herald Square. Broadway will close in Midtown, from 42nd to 47th streets. And over at Herald Square, no traffic will be allowed between 33rd and 35th streets.

It's about the environment and and a better living environment:

Starting on Sunday, pedestrians will really own a piece of the city.

Broadway will be closed to vehicle traffic for five blocks at Times Square, turning part of the "Crossroads of the World" into a pedestrian mall of throbbing lights, animated billboards and towering skyscrapers. The city believes the move will reduce pollution, cut down on pedestrian accidents and actually increase the flow of traffic.

A second pedestrian promenade will be created from 33rd to 35th streets on Broadway by Herald Square, where Macy's dominates the intersection. The city will try out the pedestrian malls for the remainder of the year, and if things go well it could make the change permanent.

Planners hope that the uncontrolled chaos that has long defined the heart of this city will shift to a gentler landscape, one where a visitor could conceivably use the word "stroll" to describe getting from one side of Times Square to the other.

No one's strolling there now. Crowds press up against each other, body to body, pushing the unlucky onto the street to walk alongside the cars. A sea of yellow cabs trickles foot-by-foot down Broadway. People who want to enter stores play a game of human Frogger, dodging pedestrians going in both directions, getting a toe crushed here and there.

Those caught in the crush of people say some added breathing room would be a welcome change. After spending his 52 years in New York, Carlos Grande hopes the pedestrian walkway can transform midtown into a grand, Old World-style space.

"You go to Europe and it's different. You see people sitting at sidewalk cafes, enjoying life," he says. Settled at a small street-side table already placed by the city on Broadway, he is interrupted by a chirping sparrow that lands by his feet, right by the rushing wheels of trucks.

[...]From 42nd Street to 47th Street, planners hope pedestrians will lounge at outdoor seating and stroll along the avenue. They hope drivers will begin using Broadway between the two promenades only if they're headed right there.

As construction on the project continues throughout the summer, the city has hired an array of musicians, magicians and other performers to keep lunchtime crowds in the area. Next month, they will broadcast the Tony awards on the new Broadway promenade. And in December, the Transportation Department will complete a report meant to help decide whether the setup should be permanent.

- Honor our fallen heroes whatever you do.

Colin Powell Responds to Limbaugh, Cheney: Transcript (5-24-09)

Read the complete Face The Nation transcript. Excerpt below:

SCHIEFFER: Rush Limbaugh said the other day that the party would probably be better off if Colin Powell left and just became a Democrat. Colin Powell said Republicans would be better off if they didn’t have Rush Limbaugh out speaking for them. Where do you come down?

DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: Well, if I had to choose in terms of being a Republican, I’d go with Rush Limbaugh, I think. I think my take on it was Colin had already left the party. I didn’t know he was still a Republican.

SCHIEFFER: So you think that he’s not a Republican?

CHENEY: I just noted he endorsed the Democratic candidate for president this time, Barack Obama . I assume that that is some indication of his loyalty and his interest.

SCHIEFFER: And you said you’d take Rush Limbaugh over Colin Powell. CHENEY: I would.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHIEFFER: Well, there you have it, General. So I guess the first question, are you a Republican?

POWELL: Let me answer it this way, if I may, Bob. Rush will not get his wish. And Mr. Cheney was misinformed. I am still a Republican.

And I’d like to point out that in the course of my 50 years of voting for presidents, I have voted for the person I thought was best- qualified at that time to lead the nation. Last year I thought it was President-now Barack Obama .

For the previous 20 years I voted solidly for Republican candidates. Voted for Ronald Reagan twice. George Bush 41 twice. George Bush 43 twice. I spent eight years in Bush administrations. I served Ronald Reagan for two years. I spoke at the 1996 convention and I spoke at the 2000 convention.

What the concern about me is, well, is he too moderate? I have always felt that the Republican Party should be more inclusive than it generally has been over the years. And I believe we need a strong Republican Party that is not just anchored in the base but has built on the base to include more individuals.

And if we don’t do that, if we don’t reach out more, the party is going to be sitting on a very, very narrow base. You can only do two things with a base. You can sit on it and watch the world go by, or you can build on the base.

And I believe we should build on the base because the nation needs two parties. Two parties debating each other. But what we have to do is debate and define who we are and what we are and not just listen to diktats that come down from the right wing of the party.

SCHIEFFER: Well, why do you think the former vice president said what he said?

POWELL: Well, I assume that was his point of view. But he was misled if he thought I left the party. You know, neither he nor Rush Limbaugh are members of the membership committee of the Republican Party. I get to make my decision on that.

And so I will continue to work in a way that I think is helpful to the country and helpful to the party. And there are good reasons for this. I mean, in the military we have something called after- action reviews. After a battle or after a training exercise you bring all of the leaders in. And you say, what’s going right? What’s going wrong? What did do right or wrong? And how do we move forward?

It’s a no-holds-barred candid discussion of where we are. That’s what the Republican Party needs now. When you look at the results of the election last year, lost the presidency by 10 million votes. Lost that campaign by 10 million votes.

We saw both houses of Congress switch to the Democrats. We saw whole sections of the country move to the Democratic column, Virginia, my state, Democratic. Florida, Nevada, other places.

We looked at all of the demographics of it, a Gallup poll had a series of indicators. And in almost every demographic indicator, the Republican Party is losing. North, south, east, west. Men, women, whites, blacks, Hispanics.

And I think the Republican Party has to take a hard look at itself and decide what kind of party are we?

RNC Head Balks at "Democratic Socialist" Labeling

TPM

Has Michael Steele averted the cultural and political train-wreck that would have come from the RNC's proposed "Democrat Socialist Party" resolution? That's what CNN now reports.

RNC member David Norcross of New Jersey, who had been a sponsor of the resolution, told CNN: "The language is being changed so that the proposers and chairman Steele are on the same page." Steele had opposed this thing from the start, and had sought to avoid the spectacle -- yes, Michael Steele thought this was too goofy.

Iraq bombings kills Americans

Three bombings in Iraq on Thursday killed at least 21 people and wounded more than 50 others[...]the bombings brought to over 60 the number of people killed in a 24-hour period.

The Associated Press reported that three American soldiers were killed on Thursday morning in a roadside bombing in the southern Baghdad district of Dora while they were patrolling near a popular outdoor market.

Obama in a political box over closing Gitmo

President Barack Obama finds himself in a political box — at home and abroad — on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison, and he has prepared a major address on national security in hopes of working out of the tight spot.

Obama was taking on the explosive topic Thursday, a day after the Senate, at the behest of majority Democrats, denied his request for $80 million to close the prison. The 90-6 vote followed a similar move last week in the House and underscored widespread apprehension among Obama's Democratic allies in Congress over the issue.

Couple flees with banks money

Police are looking for a New Zealand couple who disappeared after a bank mistakenly put 10 million New Zealand dollars ($6.1 million) into their account.

The couple, who ran a gas station in the northern city of Rotorua, applied to Westpac Bank for a NZ$10,000 ($6,000) overdraft and had 1000 times that amount paid into their account. The two then withdrew some of the money and disappeared, Detective Senior Sgt. David Harvey said.

Murder plot soap opera in Egypt

A real estate mogul with ties to Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak's son was sentenced to death Thursday for ordering the slaying of a Lebanese pop star in a case that sparked a media frenzy in a country where the elite is often perceived as being above the law.

Hisham Talaat Moustafa, a member of the ruling National Democratic Party, was accused of paying a former Egyptian police officer $2 million to kill Suzanne Tamim while she was in Dubai.

Missouri capital punishment passes legal mustard

As lethal chemicals surged into Dennis Skillicorn's arm early Wednesday, a new era in capital punishment began in Missouri.

The state's new court-mandated and court-approved lethal injection protocol passed its first test without a hitch, according to prison officials who already are preparing to carry out Reginald Clemons' execution next month.

Kris Allen wins American Idol

Kris Allen, the mellow crooner who was considered the underdog, was crowned the winner of the Fox singing competition Wednesday night.

In one of the bigger upsets in “Idol” history, Allen defeated Adam Lambert, the flamboyant rocker whose vocal skills had made him an early favorite.

Major Church sex scandal investigation in Ireland

The thousands of victims of Ireland's child-abuse homes spent decades just trying to get the public to believe them. But even after a mammoth investigation proved the horrors of their youth, many say they are no nearer to real justice.

A nine-year probe into child abuse by Ireland's Catholic religious orders painted a damning portrait of a system that shielded child-molesters from justice and trapped generations of Ireland's poorest children to misery from the 1930s to the 1990s.

World Child Deaths Decline

The World Health Organization says almost a third fewer young children are dying than in 1990.

The global health body says about 9 million children under 5 years old died in 2007, the last year with figures available.

WHO says the number of under-5 deaths was 12.5 million in 1990.

The Geneva-based body says the 27 percent drop shows progress in achieving a two-thirds cut in deaths by 2015. That is one of the U.N.'s so-called 'Millennium Development Goals'.

Newsweek: RNC = "(R)ush-(N)ewt-(C)heney"

"Vampire Banks: Thriving on Death and Taxes"

The Wall Street Journal has a tutorial explaining how banks are holding $122.3 billion in life insurance on workers and retirees with themselves as beneficiaries in order to escape taxes, inflate their earnings and to fund bonuses and pension benefits:

Why is Obama Flip-Flopping on Bush era Law Breaking

The Left is angry with Barack Obama. They think he's betrayed his campaign promises to them. Some have gone as far as accusing him of morphing into his predecessor. Rachel Maddow, in particular, has been very critical. One constitutional scolar on her program accused Mr.Obama of covering up the crimes of George W.

We musn't blame Barack too much. The reality is if the new President wants to survive he has to play the corrupt political game the two-party system has set up. I said this before Obama was elected President. I said the left would be disappointed because they believe one party is better than other. They are not.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Let's Find out who's Telling the Truth: Pelosi or the CIA

This is no small matter. The Speaker of the House of Representatives is calling the CIA liars. Who's telling the truth? We need an answer. Why don't we have a investigation. But who will do the investigation? Can we trust the Congress? I don't think so. The press. They didn't even look into the torture allegations in the first place. Not to mention how the Bush gang started a war under false pretenses. We need an independent group or counsel with individuals of different political persuasions. They will obviously have to have access to sensitive intelligence information, so therefore must be trusted Americans. This commission could also look into whether the Bushies lied about torture. The Obama administration for some time now has wanted this matter to go away. Now we know why. Both parties are implicated. The American people need and deserve answers. You should demand that the government not bury the truth.

Pakistan: The Coming Disaster

Already we are seeing a dramatic rise in refugees in Pakistan due to the war against the Taliban. It is only a preview of the chaos to come in the months to come. All the indications are that the Taliban/religious extremists will take over that country.

It is reminiscent of Vietnam before the fall. If that should happen it would be disastrous for the U.S. and civilized world. Pakistan is already a hot bed for Jihadists. It also believed that Bin Laden, if still alive, resides there along the border with Afghanistan. A victory in Pakistan for the Taliban will guarantee the retaking of Afghanistan. It would also threaten to send Iraq into chaos as well. Given the fact that Pakistan has the bomb we could have a very serious situation indeed. Worst of all al Qaeda would have a free hand to plot against America. And it doesn't seem the government, including the Obama administration, has a clue on how to deal with the dire situation in the Middle East.

Israel's plan to bomb Iran would only make things that much worse. And if Iran retaliates we could see a World War. This is why we need a clearly articulated strategy for dealing with the situation in Pakistan. Dropping bombs on that country is no strategy.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Miss California: A True Leader

Carrie Prejean is exhibiting the kind of leadership and courage not often found amongst politicians. Maybe she should become the leader of the Republican Party. They obviously could use her.

The left is showing it's total lack reason when it comes to the question of gay marriage. They have vilified Prejean as if she joined al Qaeda. They might even hate her more than Bin Laden. All she did was to express her point of view.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

David Gregory was off base on Meet the Press

It is becoming increasingly clear that David Gregory is a second rate interviewer. But his interview of Hamid Karzai was downright irresponsible. At several points he implied that Karzai anti-American. His line of questioning is usually riddled with silly oversimplifications. The Afghan President is not anti-American. He is in fact in a very difficult situation because of U.S. Bombing of civilians in Afghanistan. Although accidental, the bombings nonetheless undermine our support in that country. Karzai made that point on the program. As a result Gregory concluded stupidly that it constituted anti-Americanism. This was probably Gregory's attempt at impressing the Limbaugh crowd.

David Gregory is no Tim Russert. ---

To show you how bad things have gotten. According to Reuters, girls are being poisoned in Afghanistan to keep them from going to school.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Humor that is not funny

Wanda Sykes' humor was not humorous. But neither was that Saturday Night Live skit joking about sleeping with your best friend's mother. We've become a nation without a sense of decency. Everything goes.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Transcript: President Obama’s Missouri Town Hall Meeting (4-29-09)

Read the complete transcript. Excerpt below:

Now, back -- back in November, some folks were surprised that we showed up in Springfield at the end of our campaign. But, then again, some folks were surprised that we even started our campaign in the first place.

(LAUGHTER)

They didn’t give us much of a chance; they didn’t think we could do things differently; they didn’t know if this country was ready to move in a new direction.

OBAMA: But here’s the thing: My campaign wasn’t born in Washington. My campaign was rooted in neighborhoods just like this one, in towns and cities all across America, rooted in folks who work hard and look after their families and seek a brighter children -- future for their children and for their communities and for their country.

It was driven by workers who were tired of seeing their jobs shipped overseas, their health care costs go up...

(APPLAUSE)

... their dreams slip out of reach. It was grounded in a sense of unity and common purpose with every single American, whether they voted for me on Election Day or voted for somebody else. It was energized by every citizen who believed that the size of our challenges had outgrown the smallness of our politics.

My campaign was possible because the American people wanted change. I ran for president because I wanted to carry those voices, your voices, with me to Washington.

(APPLAUSE)

So I just want everybody to understand you’re who I’m working for every single day in the White House. I’ve heard your stories. I know you sent me to Washington because you believed in the promise of a better day. And I don’t want to let you down.

You believed that after an era of selfishness and greed that we could reclaim a sense of responsibility on Wall Street and in Washington as well as on Main Street. You believed that instead of huge inequalities and an economy that’s built on a bubble we could restore a sense of fairness to our economy and build a new foundation for lasting growth and prosperity.

You believed that a time of war we could stand strong against our enemies and stand firmly for our ideals and show a new face of American leadership to the world. That’s the change you believed in. That’s the trust you placed in me. It’s something I will never forget, the fact that you made this possible.

So, today, on my 100th day in office, I’ve come back to report to you, the American people, that we have begun to pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off, and we’ve begun the work of remaking America.

(APPLAUSE)

We’re working to remake America.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, we’ve got a lot of work to do because on our first day in office, we found challenges of unprecedented size and scope. Our economy was in the midst of the most serious downturn since the Great Depression. Banks had stopped lending. The housing market was crippled. The deficit was at $1.3 trillion. And meanwhile, families continued to struggle with health care costs, too many of our kids couldn’t get the education they needed. The nation remains trapped by our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

Now, these challenges could not be met with half measures. They couldn’t be met with the same, old formulas. They couldn’t be confronted in isolation. They demanded action that was bold and sustained. They demand action that is bold and sustained. They call on us to clear away the wreckage of a painful recession but also, at the same time, lay the building blocks for a new prosperity. And that’s the work that we’ve begun over these first 100 days.

To jumpstart job creation, get our economy moving again, we passed the most ambitious economic recovery plan in our nation’s history. And already, we’re beginning to see this change take hold.

In Jefferson City, over 2500 jobs will be created on Missouri’s largest wind farm so that American workers are harnessing clean, American energy.

Obama 100 Days News Conference Transcript (4-29-09)

Read the complete transcript of obama's news conference given on his 100th day as President:

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. With the flu outbreak spreading and worsening, can you talk about whether you think it's time to close the border with Mexico and whether -- under what conditions you might consider quarantining, when that might be appropriate?

OBAMA: Well, first of all, as I said, this is a cause for deep concern, but not panic. And I think that we have to make sure that we recognize that how we respond intelligently, systematically, based on science and what public health officials have to say, will determine in large part what happens.

I've consulted with our public health officials extensively on a day-to-day basis, in some cases an hour-to-hour basis. At this point, they have not recommended a border closing. From their perspective, it would be akin to closing the barn door after the horses are out, because we already have cases here in the United States.

We have ramped up screening efforts, as well as made sure that additional supplies are there on the border so that we can prepare in the eventuality that we have to do more than we're doing currently.

But the most important thing right now that public health officials have indicated is that we treat this the same way that we would treat other flu outbreaks, just understanding that, because this is a new strain, we don't yet know how it will respond.

So we have to take additional precautions, essentially, take out some additional insurance. Now, that's why I asked for an additional $1.5 billion, so that we can make sure that everything is in place should a worst-case scenario play out.

I do want to compliment Democrats and Republicans who worked diligently back in 2005 when the bird flu came up. I was part of a group of legislators who worked with the Bush administration to make sure that we had beefed up our infrastructure and our stockpiles of antiviral drugs, like Tamiflu.

OBAMA: And I think the Bush administration did a good job of creating the infrastructure so that we can respond. For example, we've got 50 million courses of anti-viral drugs in the event that they're needed.

So, the government is going to be doing everything that we can. We're coordinating closely with state and local officials. Secretary Napolitano at the Department of Homeland Security, newly installed Secretary Sebelius of Health and Human Services, our acting CDC director, they are all on the phone on a daily basis with all public health officials across the states to coordinate and make sure that there's timely reporting, that if -- as new cases come up, that we're able to track them effectively, that we're allocating resources so that they're in place.

The key now I think is to make sure that we're maintaining great vigilance, that everybody responds appropriately when cases do come up, and individual families start taking very sensible precautions that -- can make a huge difference.

So wash your hands when you shake hands. Cover your mouth when you cough. I know it sounds trivial, but it makes a huge difference. If you are sick, stay home. If your child is sick, keep them out of school.

To -- if you are feeling certain flu symptoms, don't get on an airplane, don't get on a -- any system of public transportation where you're confined and you could potentially spread the virus.

So those are the steps that I think we need to take right now. But understand that because this is a new strain, we have to be cautious. If this was a strain that we were familiar with, then we might have to -- then I think we wouldn't see the kind of alert levels that we're seeing, for example, with the World Health Organization. OK?

First 100 Days: So Far, So Good

What's so special about the first 100 days. This is really a media hype. It just so happens President Obama's Presidency might have reached it's peak in the first 100 days. He faces lots of problems in the days and years ahead.

One view found in Huffington:

With the glaring exception of the troubled, potentially disastrous bank bailout plan that could undercut any economic recovery, the Obama administration deserves at least an A- when it comes to taking action on behalf of workers.

Then there is view found in the anti-Obama FOXNews:

Even the European press recognize the Obamas’ first 100 days marker as rife with broken promises, crippling debt and bizarre and dangerous domestic and foreign policy, yet that’s not the message you’ll hear from the fawning orgiastic American Establishment Media for the next several days. — You will also likely not hear a peep about Roxana Saberi, Laura Ling and Euna Lee. They’re too much an an inconvenient truth.

Roxana, Laura and Euna. All three American journalists, all women of color, who languish as hostages in foreign prisons of state-based terrorists.

That same media outlet hates the President so much they won't even cover his news conference. Even if it's marking his first 100 days:

President Obama’s prime time press conference will air on one fewer channel this week.

Fox is “sticking with its regular schedule” on Wednesday night, The Associated Press reports, marking “the first time a broadcast network has refused Obama’s request” for airtime.

The press conference, scheduled for 8 p.m. Wednesday, will be Mr. Obama’s third of the year. It will mark his first 100 days in office. ABC, CBS and NBC, along with a multitude of cable networks, will carry the press conference live.

Counting his not-State of the Union address in February, it will be Mr. Obama’s fourth interruption of the prime-time TV schedule. Broadcasters have grumbled, mostly anonymously, about the repeated interruptions. “His economic stimulus package apparently does not extend to the TV networks,” one of the anonymous network types said to The Washington Post in February.

In a statement, Fox said an on-screen graphic would alert viewers to coverage of the press conference on Fox News Channel and the Fox Business Network. The drama “Lie to Me” will air at 8 p.m.

The networks are not required to show presidential press conferences, but they generally take White House requests for airtime very seriously. Millions of viewers who rely on over-the-air TV signals do not have access to cable news networks or C-SPAN.

How has he done with our military. This from Military.com:

Since his inauguration 100 days ago, Obama has made good on his promise for sweeping change in the military, a new tone in the White House's relationship with troops and a personal investment in easing the burden of military service.

But so far his record has been met with controversy, both for its marked consistency with the policies of George W. Bush and for its radical break from the past that some see as reckless.

Obama was quick to apologize for American conduct in the war on terrorism and relations with some of its allies during his trip to Europe in early April. He called for "mutual respect" toward Iran, which commanders in Iraq say supplies deadly roadside bombs to insurgents. And he has agreed to the release of reportedly gruesome photos of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, an action that some insiders claim will worsen morale in a military service only now recovering from the tarnished public perception stemming from that terrible chapter.

Likewise, in his first 100 days Obama has met several times with veterans organizations to assure them of his personal investment in their care. He's taken on the largest defense firms with a sweeping Pentagon budget reform that slashes costly programs at a time of economic turmoil. And he's proven immensely popular with troops in the field; for instance, last month he was given a standing ovation from those serving in Iraq even as he asked them for continued long-term commitments to Afghanistan.

His record on the economy from a foreign point of view. This from the BBC:

His first 100 days contain at least one notable achievement - the $787bn (£539bn) stimulus plan.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, to give it its proper title, was signed into law by the President less than a month after he took the oath of office.

It is the single biggest peacetime spending initiative in US history and was passed in record time.

But it failed to gain the bi-partisan support in Congress that President Obama was looking for and has become a rallying point for Republican opposition.

Rising unemployment

The administration claims that the Act is already having an impact, with the go-ahead given to numerous transport projects, such as road and bridge building. Money has also been used to save jobs in public services, like the police.

But evidence that it is making a big difference is lacking.

In the short term, the Act cannot reverse the recession; all it can do is cushion the impact of rising unemployment and lay the groundwork to support future growth.

The Act will also have one very serious negative effect.

It will add to the spiralling US budget deficit - forecast to hit a massive $1.75 trillion this year.

The polls show what the public thinks of the President's start:

The latest New York Times/CBS poll: “Barack Obama’s presidency seems to be altering the public perception of race relations in the United States. Two-thirds of Americans now say race relations are generally good, and the percentage of blacks who say so has doubled since last July… Despite that, half of blacks still say whites have a better chance of getting ahead in American society.”

More: “Mr. Obama’s 68 percent job approval rating is higher than that of any recent president at the 100-day mark. Mr. Bush had the approval of 56 percent of the public at this juncture. But while Americans clearly have faith in Mr. Obama, the poll revealed something of a disconnect between what the public thinks the president has already accomplished and what it expects him to achieve. Fewer than half of those surveyed, 48 percent, said Mr. Obama had begun to make progress on one of his major campaign promises, changing the way business is conducted in Washington. And just 39 percent said he had begun to make progress on another major promise, cutting taxes for middle-class Americans, even though the stimulus bill he signed into law does include a middle class tax cut.”

The new CNN poll: “The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll … indicates that 63 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is handling his duties as president. One in three questioned in the poll disapprove. Democrats overwhelmingly approve of how Obama is handling his job as president; 61 percent of independents agree. Only 28 percent of Republicans say the president is doing a good job in office.”

Even some of his political enemies have to admit President Obama is doing good:

I’ve been impressed by what he has done. He is a young man but he is extremely gifted. He has acted with strength, I think, and purpose in Iraq and Afghanistan, rebuilt some of our relations around the world and acted very boldly here at home on the economy where we needed him to particularly with the stimulus package.

But it’s early but I would say he is off to a very good start.

Bailed-out Citigroup Wants to Give Bonuses to It's Employees

Where is the outrage this time around. Another major tottering financial institution wants to spit in the faces of the American taxpayer and we expected to just stand for it. The question is whether the Wall St. dominated Obama administration cave in, again.

Citigroup Inc., soon to be one-third owned by the U.S. government, is asking the Treasury for permission to pay special bonuses to many key employees, according to people familiar with the matter.

The request comes as Citigroup is grappling with broad government pay restrictions that could break apart its legendary energy-trading unit. People at that unit, Phibro, are threatening to leave because of pay caps tied to the U.S. bailout of Citigroup. Phibro has been the source of hundreds of millions of dollars in profits for the bank, and has paid out hefty compensation, including a roughly $100 million windfall last year for the unit's leader, Andrew Hall.

Citigroup is trying to get U.S. approval for special bonuses for many of its employees. In a meeting earlier this month with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit made the case for the stock-based bonuses. Executives are describing the bonuses as "retention" awards to perk up demoralized employees who the company worries are vulnerable to poaching by rival firms, people familiar with the matter said.

A person familiar with Geithner's thinking said the Treasury hadn't made a decision on whether to allow the bonuses. It is unclear how much Citigroup would pay out in bonuses if the government approved the move. A Citigroup spokesman declined to comment on details of the proposed compensation plans.

Citigroup's request comes after Congress, the public and the president blasted pay practices on Wall Street. Bonuses at American International Group Inc. and Merrill Lynch & Co. ignited political infernos in Washington.

And this has been in the works for some time now:

AIG isn't the only bailed-out financial firm paying big bucks to managers who helped steer their company to near collapse. Citigroup has pledged millions of dollars in bonuses to senior executives for the next few years, despite lawmakers efforts to eliminate such payments.

It's not clear whether the bonuses, which Citigroup says are for 2008 but won't start paying out until 2010, will be allowed. Under compensation rules passed by Congress in mid-February, cash bonuses are barred for top executives at bailed-out banks.

But Citi finalized its bonus program shortly before the new rules were introduced. That might make the payments permissible, though they could be made almost worthless by new tax rules just passed by the House of Representatives and headed for consideration in the Senate. Even so, Citigroup's move in January to set in place bonus payments for years to come raises questions about whether it was trying to evade compensation rules it knew were coming.

Then there is Morgan Stanley which is trying to con Uncle Sucker:

Anticipating restrictions on bonuses, officials at Citigroup Inc and Morgan Stanley are exploring ways to sidestep tough new federal caps on compensation, the Wall Street Journal said.

Executives at these banks and other financial institutions that received government aid are discussing increasing base salaries for some executives and other top-producing employees, the paper said, citing people familiar with the situation.

The discussions are at an early stage, partly because the government has not yet issued specific rules on the bonus payments that will be allowed at companies that received aid under the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, the paper said.

Impeach Jay Bybee

You can send a message that America is a nation of laws. Those who seek to subvert those laws should and will be punished. Today Jay Bybee, tomorrow Bush.

Liberal activists are pressing for the impeachment of federal Judge Jay Bybee over the Bush administration’s “torture memos” in part because there is virtually nothing that President Barack Obama, congressional Republicans or conservative Senate Democrats can do to stop the process from getting under way.

Obama and key members of Congress have weighed in against a “truth commission,” an independent prosecutor and other attempts at war-on-terror accountability. But impeachment is not so easily stymied, especially in its early stages, analysts said.

“If the House votes for it, there’s no way the Senate can avoid it,” a former Senate parliamentarian, Robert Dove, said Monday. “I can’t think of any way of just not acting on it. I assure you, if the Senate could have not acted on the Clinton impeachment, they would not have acted on it…..If the House impeaches, we will have a trial.”

One of the earliest proponents of Bybee’s impeachment, Yale Law School professor Bruce Ackerman [read his Slate article], noted in an interview that Obama — or any president — has no official say in the process. “Constitutionally, it is entirely independent of, and should be independent of, the executive branch,” Ackerman said.

Bybee is in the firing line because, while the top lawyer at the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in August 2002, he approved and signed a legal opinion concluding that so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, including water-boarding, did not meet the definition of torture under federal law.

Some members of Congress are already on board. This from Think Progress:

Over 5,000 of you have taken action in calling for Congress to commence impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee. This afternoon, ThinkProgress spoke with Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) about the campaign. She told us:

jan.gifI would support impeachment hearings for Judge Bybee. ... We’ve already seen that he’s willing to interpret the laws in ways that are counter to the fundamental values of our country. I think that is a proper response.

Jerry Nadler is a powerful member of Congress calling for impeachment:

A top House Democrat said Monday U.S. Judge Jay Bybee "should be impeached" for his role in Justice Department authorization of harsh interrogation methods.

Bybee, who sits on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, was a principal author of Justice Department memos released last week by the Obama administration, which provided legal justification for using such methods as waterboarding and slamming suspects into walls during questioning. Former President George W. Bush appointed Bybee to the bench and the Senate confirmed the appointment long before his participation in the development of the interrogation policy was publicly known.

"(Bybee) ought to be impeached," Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., told the Huffington Post Monday. "It was not an honest legal memo. It was an instruction manual on how to break the law."

Nadler -- a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee and chairman of the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Subcommittee -- is to meet Tuesday with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. He said he would urge the appointment of a special prosecutor.

"Any special prosecutor on torture would have to look at the authors of those torture memos," said Nadler. [John Conyers also is pushing the issue]

A NY Times Editorial called for Bybee's impeachment:

Their language is the precise bureaucratese favored by dungeon masters throughout history. They detail how to fashion a collar for slamming a prisoner against a wall, exactly how many days he can be kept without sleep (11), and what, specifically, he should be told before being locked in a box with an insect — all to stop just short of having a jury decide that these acts violate the laws against torture and abusive treatment of prisoners.

In one of the more nauseating passages, Jay Bybee, then an assistant attorney general and now a federal judge, wrote admiringly about a contraption for waterboarding that would lurch a prisoner upright if he stopped breathing while water was poured over his face. He praised the Central Intelligence Agency for having doctors ready to perform an emergency tracheotomy if necessary.

These memos are not an honest attempt to set the legal limits on interrogations, which was the authors’ statutory obligation. They were written to provide legal immunity for acts that are clearly illegal, immoral and a violation of this country’s most basic values.

[...]These memos make it clear that Mr. Bybee is unfit for a job that requires legal judgment and a respect for the Constitution. Congress should impeach him. And if the administration will not conduct a thorough investigation of these issues, then Congress has a constitutional duty to hold the executive branch accountable. If that means putting Donald Rumsfeld and Alberto Gonzales on the stand, even Dick Cheney, we are sure Americans can handle it.

- Sign the petition.

Gingrich Doesn't Know if Waterboarding is Torture

This is someone who is considering running for President. A college professor and historian.

When Van Susteren asked if waterboarding is torture, Gingrich hemmed and hawed. "I think it's something we shouldn't do," he said, but he qualified his statement, adding, "Lawyers I respect a great deal say it is absolutely within the law. Other lawyers say it absolutely is not. I mean, this is a debatable area." When asked if waterboarding violates international law, Gingrich played dumb:

VAN SUSTEREN: But you said a minute ago that it was torture, waterboarding...

GINGRICH: No, I said it's not something we should do.

VAN SUSTEREN: OK. Is it torture or not?

GINGRICH: I -- I -- I think it's -- I can't tell you.

VAN SUSTEREN: Does it violate the Geneva Convention?

GINGRICH: I honestly don't know.

How is that fellow "Conservative," John McCain, knows that waterboarding is torture and not Gingrich.

But McCain, a former prisoner of war, has repeatedly said that waterboarding is a "horrible torture technique." "One is too much. Waterboarding is torture, period," McCain said last week. Indeed, it is a fact -- and not a matter of "debate" -- that waterboarding is illegal torture. The interrogation tactic violates both U.S. statute and international treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory.

Back in 1997 Gingrich knew what torture was:

As I said in China this spring, there is no place for abuse in what must be considered the family of man. There is no place for torture and arbitrary detention. There is no place for forced confessions. There is no place for intolerance of dissent. While we walked through the Rotunda. I explained to President Jiang how the roots of American rule of law go back more than 700 years, to the signing of the Magna Carta. The foundation of American values, therefore, is not a passing priority or a temporary trend.

If waterboarding is not torture why is Hannity chickening-out in his promise to be interrogated with enhanced methods. Former Communist and noted columnist, Christopher Hitchens, was allowed himself to be waterboarded. What a wuss:

GRODIN: You're for torture.
HANNITY: I am for enhanced interrogation.
GRODIN: You don't believe it's torture. Have you ever been waterboarded?
HANNITY: No, but Ollie North has and talked to me about it.
GRODIN: Would you consent to be waterboarded so we can get the truth out of you? We can waterboard you?
HANNITY: Sure. ... I'll do it for charity. I'll let you do it. ... I'll do it for the troops' families.

Keith Olbermann offered him $1,000 for every second he resisted the 'torture technique:'

There is website that offers Hannity charity donations if he keeps his promise to be waterboarded. Don't hold your breath (pun intended).

Senator Lieberman: Obama off to a "Very Good Start"

This is the same Joseph Lieberman who betrayed his party and supported John McCain for President. Even a neocon, like Lieberman, has to admit that President Obama is doing a good job when it comes to Iraq. Read the complete transcript of CNN's State of the Union (4-26-09):

KING: We’ve been discussing a number of tough issues and there are many more, senator, has he proven you wrong, Barack Obama , in his first 100 days.

LIEBERMAN: First, John, let me thank you for running that tape.

KING: Tape is a dangerous thing.

LIEBERMAN: I have no regrets about supporting John McCain and really what I said then, I meant. Barack Obama is extremely gifted. Coming in at a very difficult time. I was thinking particularly about Iraq and Afghanistan, the war on terror. And McCain, of course, great experience, bipartisan record. Once the election was over, I said I would do everything to support Barack Obama as president. He is our president. I have, but I’ll say this. I’ve been impressed by what he has done. He is a young man but he is extremely gifted. He has acted with strength, I think, and purpose in Iraq and Afghanistan, rebuilt some of our relations around the world and acted very boldly here at home on the economy where we needed him to particularly with the stimulus package.

But it’s early but I would say he is off to a very good start. Maybe the most important thing he’s done overall is that he has restored the confidence of the American people in the American presidency and he has raised their hopes about the future of our country. That is critically important.

Obama spokesperson defeats the President on the torture matter:

KING: Why did the president change his mind? He seems open now to possible prosecution.

JARRETT: No. Let me be clear where the president stands on this. What he has said is that anyone who followed the advice of the Justice Department and did any kind of acts that were within the confines of that advice, he doesn’t think we should prosecute.

The rest of it, he leaves up to the U.S. Attorney General. That is who is supposed to make decisions about prosecution. So I think the president has been very clear and what he said is, we need to be a nation of laws, we need to be consistent, and he leaves it to the attorney general to figure out who should be prosecuted for what.

KING: Who should be prosecuted for what. If it’s not those who acted on the advice they were given, who were told it was legal, what are we talking about here? Are we talking about the attorney general in the previous administration, the CIA director, Secretary Rumsfeld?

JARRETT: You and I aren’t talking about anything. We are going to leave that all up to the attorney general. As you know, the Senate Intelligence Committee is having hearings as well. That is the appropriate place I think for any further investigation. And then the rest we leave to the attorney general.

Senator Feinstein's warning about Pakistan:

FEINSTEIN: Oh, in my opinion, yes. I also think that these bombings, the size of the bombings in Iraq are a real danger signal. And I think that Mr. Maliki has to step up to the plate on this. And it’s going to be very interesting in the next few weeks to see how he handles this. If these bombings continue and there is an escalation of violence, I think it jeopardizes everything the united states is trying to do.

With respect to the Taliban and particularly in both Afghanistan, as well as Pakistan, I think the takeover of the Swat Valley, the movement up north is a very serious thing. The fact that, despite the fact that we provide money for the Pakistani military, they have done nothing to stop this Taliban advance, I think, causes me great concern that Pakistan may be in very deep trouble. And I would think that -- and most of us, I think, do agree that Pakistan is sort of Ground Zero for terror today and that this thing has to get sorted out and sorted out quickly or you could lose the government of Pakistan and Pakistan is a in nuclear power and that concerns me deeply.

Iranian President on ABC's 'This Week': Transcript (4-26-09)

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was interviewed by George Stephanopoulos on ABC's ' This Week'. Read the complete Transcript:

STEPHANOPOULOS: During the last administration, no other world leader next to you was as critical of the American administration as Mr. Chavez. Yet, look at this picture right here.

Is this a picture that you would like to see, you and President Obama? And what do you think the Iranian people would think of you and President Obama meeting, shaking hands, engaging in conversation?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, we are calling for peace and security for all. We would like international relations to be based on justice and friendship. Wherever a hostile relationship turns into friendship, that would make us happy.

STEPHANOPOULOS: President Obama says that's exactly what he wants right now. He says he wants a new beginning in a relationship with Iran. He sent a message to the Iranian people on the occasion of the Nowruz holiday where he called Iran a great civilization.

He talked about the Islamic Republic of Iran, where he signaled that he wasn't interested in regime change, and he talked about his vision for the United States/Iranian relationship.

OBAMA: It's a future where the old divisions are overcome, where you and all of your neighbors and the wider world can live in greater security and greater peace".

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you share that vision?

AHMADINEJAD: You need to appreciate that the American administration, 29 years ago, unilaterally cut its relations with Iran. In the past 29 years, different U.S. administrations have opposed the Iranian people. Now they say that we have given up that enmity. That's fine.

We have welcomed such comments. But an administration which, up until yesterday, was saying that I'm going to kill you, and today says that I'm not going to kill you, is that sufficient?

STEPHANOPOULOS: So there is change, though. What will Iran do in response? The United States has said that the United States is ready to talk with Iran and the other great powers -- Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China.

Are you prepared to sit down at those talks without preconditions?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, previously, first of all, I sent a congratulatory message to Mr. Obama. This was a major decision, although the Iranian people were very much dismayed with the conduct of previous U.S. administrations. And I was criticized here at home, in Iran.

Nevertheless, I did that. I am yet to receive a response.

With the European group and the American group, we will talk. We have announced as much that we are going to negotiate. But...

STEPHANOPOULOS: When will you join those talks?

AHMADINEJAD: ... again, based on justice and mutual respect.

Well, after everything is said and done -- well, planning needs to be made and timetables need to be set.

We believe in talking, in negotiating, based on sincerity and respect and justice. But the U.S. administration severed its relations with us.

Video: Bull Goes on Rampage in a Supermarket

This is absolutely hysterical. Imagine going shopping and then suddenly you are being chased down the aisle by a bull. Don't believe it could happen. See for yourself.

Salaries on Wall St. Back to Normal Despite Crisis, Bailout

This demonstrates again that Wall St. has not learned it's lesson and don't give a damn about public opinion or the state of the economy. It also demonstrates that the U.S. government is nothing but a tool of the big banks and financiers:

The rest of the nation may be getting back to basics, but on Wall Street, paychecks still come with a golden promise.

Workers at the largest financial institutions are on track to earn as much money this year as they did before the financial crisis began, because of the strong start of the year for bank profits.

Even as the industry’s compensation has been put in the spotlight for being so high at a time when many banks have received taxpayer help, six of the biggest banks set aside over $36 billion in the first quarter to pay their employees, according to a review of financial statements.

If that pace continues all year, the money set aside for compensation suggests that workers at many banks will see their pay — much of it in bonuses — recover from the lows of last year.

“I just haven’t seen huge changes in the way people are talking about compensation,” said Sandy Gross, managing partner of Pinetum Partners, a financial recruiting firm. “Wall Street is being realistic. You have to retain your human capital.”

Brad Hintz, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein, was more critical. “Like everything on Wall Street, they’re starting to sin again,” he said. “As you see a recovery, you’ll see everybody’s compensation beginning to rise.”

In total, the banks are not necessarily spending more on compensation, because their work forces have shrunk sharply in the last 18 months. Still, the average pay for those who remain — rank-and-file workers whose earnings are not affected by government-imposed limits — appears to be rebounding.

Of the large banks receiving federal help, Goldman Sachs stands out for setting aside the most per person for compensation. The bank, which nearly halved its compensation last year, set aside $4.7 billion for worker pay in the quarter. If that level continues all year, it would add up to average pay of $569,220 per worker — almost as much as the pay in 2007, a record year.

[...]Compensation is among the most cited causes of the financial crisis because bonuses were often tied to short-term gains, even if those gains disappeared later on. Still, as profits return, banks do not appear to be changing the absolute level of worker pay — or the share of revenue dedicated to compensation.

Historically, investment banks have paid workers about 50 cents for every dollar of revenue. The average is lower at commercial banks like JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, because they employ more people in retail branches where pay is lower.

But every dollar paid to workers is a dollar that cannot be used to expand the business or increase lending. Some of that revenue, too, could be used by bailed-out banks to pay back taxpayers.

Wall Street, of course, has a long history of high wages. Not all that long ago, most investment banks were private partnerships, and the workers were also typically the owners. Even when those firms began listing their shares on public stock exchanges, a standard was set in which half of their revenue was paid out to workers.