Cons Are Afraid. I Am Well Pleased.

If anyone’s wondering if Obama’s administration is too conservative, moseying over to the other side of the aisle for a look at the sturm und drang should lay your fears to rest:

The Washington Post has an item today highlighting the fact that some conservative activists are concerned because the Obama transition team includes plenty of liberals. Imagine that.

To some staunch conservatives watching President Bush relinquish the reins of power to President-elect Barack Obama, a few too many ardent liberals are now crashing the gates.

Some well-known Democratic activists are advising Obama on how to steer federal agencies, including a few whom conservative Republicans fought hard to keep out of power in the Clinton administration. They include Roberta Achtenberg, a gay activist whose confirmation as an assistant housing secretary was famously held up by then-Sen. Jesse Helms (N.C.), and Bill Lann Lee, who was hotly opposed by foes of affirmative action and temporarily blocked from the government’s top civil rights job.

Conservatives fear that some of these Obama transition advisers are too far left on the political spectrum and are a sign of radical policies to come.

“It is disturbing,” said Roger Clegg, a conservative opponent of Lee’s appointment who is now watching the Obama advisers at the Justice Department. “The transition team as described to me was made up of nothing but people on the far left. Though Obama is more moderate, that makes you wonder what kind of advice the president is given, and what range of choices he’ll be given when it comes time to make appointments.”

That probably shouldn’t make me as happy as it does. But watching them quake in fear as liberals pour in to fix the damage they’ve done just makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

Cons Are Afraid. I Am Well Pleased.
{advertisement}

Reports of Rick Warren's Dining with Gays Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Pastor Rick Warren, defending his homophobia:

“I have many gay friends. I’ve eaten dinner in gay homes.”

And:

Q: Are you homophobic?

WARREN: Of course not. I have always treated them with respect. When they come and wanna talk to me, I talk to ‘em. When the protesters came, we served them water and donuts.

A former homophobe says horseshit to the first. And here’s an interesting little example of Rick Warren “talking to” and “dining with” gays:

In December of the previous year, I wrote a letter to Warren outlining my plan to bring a group of gay and lesbian couples, and their children, to visit his Saddleback Church over Father’s Day weekend. I expressed our intent to attend worship on Sunday, and my hope that he and some families in his congregation would share a meal with us in an effort to reach beyond our differences and focus instead on the commonalities we share as parents and people of faith. In due course, I began a series of phone conversations with Warren’s chief of staff. Over the next several weeks, we agreed that eight of our families would eat lunch on June 16 with Warren, his wife Kay, and six of their staff members. After the family meal, eight people from our group would then convene for a 90 minute conversation with Warren, his wife, and the six other church leaders. Here’s where it gets interesting.

The week before our visit, Newsweek senior editor Lisa Miller published an article that contained a single sentence about Warren’s upcoming get-together with a bunch of gay dads. Suddenly, the tone and demeanor from those paid to protect Warren’s public image began to deteriorate.

First, we were told that things had changed and Warren and his wife “might” attend the meal and forum. A few days later, Warren posted a message on a religious blog saying that he never intended to meet with our families. Once we arrived in California, I called his chief of staff to discuss final details. Implausibly, I was told that Saddleback had now decided to only feed the eight people from our group who were going to be in the meeting, but not our children or spouses.

I pushed back by expressing my opinion that it was not very Christ-like to renege on our covenant after we had already traveled thousands of miles from Texas. “We’ll discuss your visit again and call you back,” they said. An hour later they telephoned – this time with a much more serious tone. I felt like I was negotiating a nuclear arms deal rather than the breaking of bread and some fellowship among families. With seeming reluctance, they finally settled on feeding everyone but announced that now only four Saddleback staff members would attend and that Warren and his wife would not be among them.

They made a new offer. Warren had decided to preach from one of Saddleback’s satellite facilities, 45 minutes away from the main campus. He would sit down with my family for ten to fifteen minutes after the early service, if we agreed to attend. I accepted that offer and on Sunday morning we waited near our seats at the conclusion of church.

Eventually, I heard Warren call out my name. As I turned to greet him, he hugged me, my partner, and our three children . . . and then walked away. No conversation. Minimal eye contact. Just an awkward hug and he was gone.

The following day we tried to initiate heartfelt conversation with the four Saddleback staff members who managed to show up. From the opening moments it was clear that this was a meeting to save face without any real interest in hearing our stories or getting to know us.

It appears Rick Warren only wants to speak with gays who are “repentant.” Not the icky kind who are married with kids and don’t feel they have to repent for basic biology.

But then, Rick Warren doesn’t understand biology. The Bible doesn’t mention evolution, you see:

WARREN: If you’re asking me do I believe in evolution, the answer is no, I don’t. I believe that God, at a moment, created man. I do believe Genesis is literal, but I do also know metaphorical terms are used. Did God come down and blow in man’s nose? If you believe in God, you don’t have a problem accepting miracles. So if God wants to do it that way, it’s fine with me.

Oh, and in answer to Mike, liberals are most vocal about their disgust when it comes to Rick Warren’s appalling views on gays, but there’s plenty of other reasons we can’t stand him. Let me count the ways:

1. His penchant for believing that God gives us the right to assassinate foreign leaders is spectacularly outrageous.

2. It’s rather incredible that he could find the time to grill Obama on abortion, but “never got the chance” to bring up torture with George W. Bush.

3. And, in fact, thought Bush was deserving of his “PEACE” prize.

4. He equates abortion with the Holocaust.

5. And stands in the way of stem cell research.

6. Not to mention, he himself has confessed that the only thing that separates him from James Dobson is “tone.”

7. Have I mentioned he’s a snotty little shit when he talks to atheists?

8. And thinks Jews are going to hell.

9. Not to mention the enemy of science shit mentioned above.

Do I need to go on, or are we good here?

Rick Warren may have done a few decent things in regards to poor people, but overall he’s the same kind of festering fundie fucktard that’s led this country to believe it can shit on science, human beings, and other countries all in the name of God. And he’s a bald-faced fucking liar, as proved above in reference to his “I talk to gays” and “I dine with gays” remarks.

The more I see, the more I loathe. Obama needs to rethink this one.

Reports of Rick Warren's Dining with Gays Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Despite Warren, Obama's Still On Track

All right. So his taste in pastors* is teh suck, but you have to admit, his taste in Secretaries of Labor is fantastic:

President-elect Barack Obama has reportedly completed his Cabinet with the selection of Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) as Secretary of Labor. Solis, a five-term representative from East Los Angeles, is a progressive leader in the fight for green jobs, as both a “stalwart friend of the unions” and the author of the first environmental justice law in the nation. At this summer’s National Clean Energy Summit, convened by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Solis spoke about her commitment to solving global warming through a clean energy economy for all:

Our nation is at a crossroads right now. We can choose to transition to a clean energy economy that secures our energy supply and combats climate change or we can continue down the same old path of uncertainty and insecurity that we’re currently in. Current economic conditions, particularly for under-served, under-represented minority communities underscore the need to transition to clean energy technology.

The liberal blogosphere, I have to tell you, is in a swoon. Sounds like she’s an excellent choice.

There’s also this music to my ears:

It’s unclear exactly what will take immediate priority on Barack Obama’s to-do list after his inauguration, but it seems clear that Americans won’t have to wait too long before seeing progress on issues relating to science, health, and reproductive rights.

This includes undoing Bush’s “right of conscience” regulation, which has not yet been finalized, but it goes further. The Wall Street Journal reports that Obama is closely reviewing reproductive-health issues, identifying Bush measures in need of reversals.

On abortion and related matters, action is expected early on executive, regulatory, budgetary and legislative fronts.

Decisions that the new administration will weigh include: whether to cut funding for sexual abstinence programs; whether to increase funding for comprehensive sex education programs that include discussion of birth control; whether to allow federal health plans to pay for abortions; and whether to overturn regulations such as one that makes fetuses eligible for health-care coverage under the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Women’s health advocates are also pushing for a change in rules that would lower the cost of birth control at college health clinics.

The reversal on research using embryonic stem cells should come fairly quickly in the new administration, and expect early action on dropping the “global gag rule” and restoring federal funding for family planning to the United Nations Population Fund (which is way overdue).

You betcha.

It’s good to see Obama’s still pretty much viewing things in terms of, “Was it Bush’s idea? Well, then, we already know it’s bad – how do we reverse it?” I love that.

Even more delightful, he chose an actual scientist as his science advisor:

Strong indications are that President-elect Barack Obama has picked physicist John Holdren to be the president’s science adviser.

[snip]

Holdren is well known for his work on energy, climate change, and nuclear proliferation. Trained in fluid dynamics and plasma physics, Holdren branched out into policy early in his career. He has led the Woods Hole Research Center for the past 3 years and served as president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (which publishes ScienceInsider) in 2006.

And, holy shit, an actual marine biologist to head up NOAA:

President-elect Barack Obama has tapped Oregon State University professor Jane Lubchenco, one of the nation’s most prominent marine biologists, to head the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Lubchenco, a conservationist who has devoted much of her career to encouraging scientists to become more engaged in public policy debates, is also a vocal proponent of curbing greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

[snip]

Andrew Rosenberg, who served as deputy director of NOAA’s Fisheries Service under Clinton and is now University of New Hampshire professor of natural resources and the environment, praised Lubchenco as an “absolutely world class scientist.”

“When has NOAA been headed by a member of the National Academy and a fellow of the Royal Society?” he said, referring to America and Britain’s most prestigious scientific societies. “That’s exactly the right signal. It establishes NOAA as one of those key scientific agencies.”

I have to keep rubbing my eyes and pinching myself. After eight years of Bush bumbling, it’s hard to believe we have a President-Elect who’s so intent on getting brilliant scientists into the government. Oh, and if you’ve noticed a definite global warming theme to Obama’s picks, you’re not wrong. That sends a pretty clear signal he intends to solve the problem.

Amazing.

And Robert Gates, despite the worries of some on the left, seems to be leaping in the air, clicking his heels together, shouting “Yippee!” while scrambling to do great things:

Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who will continue to serve under Obama, disputed Cheney’s skepticism. While Gates admitted that shutting down Guantanamo would be difficult, he said that all the potential problems are “solvable.” “I would like to see it closed,” said Gates. “And I think it will be a high priority for the new administration.”

He thinks because mayhap it’s a high priority for him, too?

In his first weeks as Bush’s defense secretary, Gates also argued that Guantanamo needed to be shut down.
According to the New York Times, Gates “urged that trials of terrorism suspects be moved to the United States, both to make them more credible and because Guantánamo’s continued existence hampered the broader war effort, administration officials said.” However, he was overruled by Cheney and then-attorney general Alberto Gonzales. (CAP’s Ken Gude has put together a plan on how to safely close Guantanamo and transfer the detainees.)

[snip]

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said that Gates has already ordered aides to put in place a plan for closing Guantanamo.

Is it me, or does Gates seem a little giddy?

On the whole, Obama’s picks have been superb, he hasn’t backed down from his most important campaign promises in the slightest, and even when he annoys me with some boneheaded stunt (like picking Rick Warren to flap his yap at important ceremonies), he still doesn’t leave me shaking with outrage and revulsion, unlike a certain assclown still parading around the Oval Office.

I’ll take petty irritations served with a heaping helping of good news over never-ending bullshit any day.

*No, that wasn’t a dig at Reverend Wright. I actually liked Wright before he made an utter arse of himself prancing around in front of cameras. No, I was merely getting in one last good swat about Warren.

Despite Warren, Obama's Still On Track

Pastor Warren Earns Obama a Trip to the Woodshed

By now, you’ve probably all heard, ad nauseum, about Obama picking homophobic, anti-choice, pro-assassination, science dissing, neocon-in-moderate’s-clothing total fucking dickweed Pastor Rick Warren to give his inaugural invocation. No one’s happy about it, not even the religious right zealots:

In an interesting twist, plenty of conservatives are mad, not at Obama for inviting Warren, but at Warren for accepting the invitation.

David Brody, a correspondent for TV preacher Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network, reported today that he’s been “flooded with emails and most of them absolutely rip Pastor Warren for doing this.”

Brody doesn’t seem to share their concerns — he asks, “Why can’t a pro-life pastor pray for a pro-choice candidate?” — but he republished a variety of the angry emails.

[snip]

“I have had about all I can stand of Rick Warren’s double standards. WHOSE side is he really on anyway? I’m beginning to think all he cares about are his questionable political connections. When I saw your article announcing his participation in “that one’s” so called inauguration ceremony it absolutely sickened me. It isn’t enough Obama is so full of himself that he “thinks” he’s God. – Apparently now Rick Warren believes he is too. This is a complete mockery of all things sacred.”

We can now expect the inevitable onslaught of reports indicating that “extremists on both sides” have expressed concerns about Warren’s role at the inauguration.

Obama tried to calm the waters with noises about opposing viewpoints and suchlike, but Steve Benen doesn’t find that argument persuasive:

Consider it this way: imagine the Obama White House were to host an inter-faith dialog on the great moral issues of the day. President Obama and his team want a lively discussion with a variety of competing ideas, and invite a wide variety of pastors, including Warren, to participate. There may be some who would say this is wrong — that Warren’s conservative believes should necessarily disqualify him from being invited to the White House. If, under those circumstances, Obama responded by saying, “There are going to be a wide range of viewpoints that are presented — and that how it should be, because that’s what America’s about,” I would agree without hesitation.

But that’s not what we’re talking about here. There’s only going to be one invocation at Obama’s inauguration, and it will be delivered be a conservative who strongly disagrees with Obama on gay rights, reproductive rights, foreign policy, and modern science. I’m a huge fan of diversity of thought, and if Obama and Warren want to have a spirited dialog, I’d no doubt find it fascinating. But this is obviously different.

Steve also points out the great many pitfalls inherent in such a move. I’d just like to add that, while Obama tried to bookend Warren with a more liberal pastor, but that doesn’t change the fact that’s it’s a supremely bad idea in the first fucking place.

And Obama supporters aren’t being shy about expressing their displeasure:

At the Huffington Post, Peter Daou noticed that Obama supporters are expressing their anger at the Change.gov website.

So I dropped in at Change.gov. It’s getting ugly.

Here’s a recent post from somebody named Jacinto Hernandez:

Mr Obama,

I am writing to ask that you return the campaign donations made by myself, Jacinto Hernandez, and my husband, Charles Callahan, to your campaign. Chet and I were passionate supporters– Chet volunteered for weeks at a local phone bank. We attended numerous rallies and fundraisers– including one with your wife, Michelle (see attached picture) That fund raiser was ostensibly held to court support with the gay community. At that fundraiser, Michelle held my my baby and promised to “not forget us.” Yet you have. We worked tirelessly for your campaign– replacing our yard sign when it was vandalized. So why would you betray the gay community- that stood by you– and ask Rick Warren to lead your inauguration, when his anti gay rhetoric is dangerous to our family. He also was a huge proponent of proposition 8, that has endangered our family and has eliminated the civil rights of thousands of Californians.

[snip]

Please remove us from your mailing lists and never ask us for your support again, unless you stand with us and reject homophobia once and for all.

Way to alienate your base, there, Barack. Of course, you may not have realized just how anti-gay Warren is – he did, after all, serve teh gays some water and donuts once.

I’m not as outraged as some – I see this as a spectacular advertisement for the necessity of keeping religion out of politics, and keeping church and state separate, which is all to the good. But I’m definitely miffed. Warren was a despicable choice. Here’s hoping that he discovers a previously unrealized scheduling conflict, or, ahem, decides to spend more time with his family very, very soon.

Update: I ran across this on Daily Kos, and it very nearly cracked me up. The diarist emailed his deeply conservative auntie, and this delightful little exchange ensued:

What do you think of people who are mad that Obama asked Warren to speak?

Interestingly, she didn’t understand that I was asking what she thought about progressives’ anger:

I’m sure there will be plenty of people at my church who are mad, and I will bring this up at Bible Study on Friday and let you know what they say (and I am sure it won’t be good). Like I said, people were mad when Warren had Obama speak at his church. But this just shows me we are wrong to be that way. How can we solve anything if we can’t listen to each other?

My favorite line was her last:

Anyway, it’s just a prayer. It’s not like he’s agreeing with everything Obama says. We’ll get over it.

Heh.

Pastor Warren Earns Obama a Trip to the Woodshed

Science Returns to Washington

I do believe science has finally found a friend:

It’s been pointed out dozens of times that it’s pretty cool to have an adult coming in as president, and today’s Obama press conference — now underway — is a case in point.

At the presser, Obama made his “green team” official: Steven Chu, a physics Nobel laureate, is his new energy secretary. Carol Browner, the former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is the head of a new policy council to coordinate climate, environment and energy issues. And Lisa Jackson, the chief of staff for New Jersey’s governor, is head of the EPA.

“My administration will value science,” Obama said, in what sounded like a pointed reference to his predecessor. “We will make decisions based on facts.”

After eight years in a wasteland, I feel as though I’ve finally reached the oasis and been handed a tall glass of cool, fresh water.

Science and facts.

Sweet!

Science Returns to Washington

Anti-Torture General Praises Eric Holder

Glenn Greenwald, who has spoken out passionately and often against the abuses of the Bush Regime, recently interviewed retired Rear Admiral John Huston, who himself has been battling to bring America back to sanity. I’ll let Glenn take over the intro:

Ten days ago, twelve retired Generals and Admirals met with key members of the Obama transition team — including Attorney General-designate Eric Holder and White-House-Counsel-to-be Greg Craig — in order, as the Associated Press put it, to “press[] their case to overturn seven years of Bush administration policies on detention, interrogation and rendition in the war on terror.” One of those military officers was John Hutson, a retired Rear Admrial [sic] with the U.S. Navy and current Dean and President of the Franklin Pierce Law Center.

You should listen to the interview in its entirety, of course, but I just wanted to highlight this bit:

GG: Now, one of the things that I thought was encouraging about this meeting, and the reports that arose from it, was that they sent the Obama team; that is, they sent extremely important officials that are going to play very influential role. They didn’t send low-level functionaries. They sent Eric Holder, who will probably have as much of a role as anybody else in determining how these rules are ultimately written. What was your impressions of their posture, their resolve to do the right thing here, walking away from this meeting?

JH: I have to tell you, I was really impressed. I’m not easily impressionable, I guess. But I think we all were. They were well-informed, they asked good questions, they played Devil’s advocate in a very effective way, asking the kinds of questions that you just asked, and what about the ticking time bomb — all those questions that you hear.

They knew the issues, and were very, very engaged. We had a long meeting, much longer than we expected, because they wanted to plumb the depths of these issues, so that they’d be able to respond to the nay-sayers, to the critics of these policies. And, I was just tremendously impressed, I have to say. Eric Holder was terrific; he was super.

Two things. One, these sorts of things have never been said about Bush’s lackeys, so the contrast is stark – very, very encouraging. Two, Eric Holder is “terrific” and “super” in the estimation of this very wise and credible former admiral.

So can Firedoglake please just shut the fuck up about Holder now? When you’re cheering on Karl fucking Rove, and you’re the only people in the universe aside from the Cons who seem to have a problem with him, your credibility isn’t just shattered, it’s been chopped, puréed , spread thin, left to dry, incinerated, and then had its ashes scattered in the depths of space.

Anti-Torture General Praises Eric Holder

No Fucking Comparison

President-Elect Obama once again reduces me to tears of joy:

President-elect Barack Obama’s reported selection of Dr. Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy is a bold stroke to set the nation on the path to a clean energy economy. Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, is the sixth director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a Department of Energy-funded basic science research institution managed by the University of California. After moving to Berkeley Lab from Stanford University in 2004, Chu “has emerged internationally to champion science as society’s best defense against climate catastrophe.” As director, Chu has steered the direction of Berkeley Lab to addressing the climate crisis, pushing for breakthrough research in energy efficiency, solar energy, and biofuels technology.

At Berkeley Lab, Chu has won broad praise as an effective and inspirational leader. “When he was first here, he started giving talks about energy and production of energy,” Bob Jacobsen, a senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab, told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2007. “He didn’t just present a problem. He told us what we could do. It was an energizing thing to see. He’s not a manager, he’s a leader.” In an interview with the Wonk Room, David Roland-Holst, an economist at the Center for Energy, Resources and Economic Sustainability at UC Berkeley, described Chu as a “very distinguished researcher” and “an extremely effective manager of cutting edge technology initiatives.” Roland-Holst praised Chu’s work at Lawrence Berkeley, saying “he has succeeded in reconfiguring it for a new generation of sustainable technology R&D, combining world class mainstream science with the latest initiatives in renewable energy and climate adaptation.”

[snip]

It’s hard to decide if the selection of Dr. Chu is more remarkable for who he is — a Nobel laureate physicist and experienced public-sector administrator — or for who is not. Unlike previous secretaries of energy, he is neither a politician, oil man, military officer, lawyer, nor utility executive. His corporate ties are not to major industrial polluters but to advanced technology corporations like AT&T (where he began his Nobel-winning research) and Silicon Valley innovator Nvidia (where he sits on the board of directors). Chu is a man for the moment, and will be a singular addition to Obama’s Cabinet.

Phenomenal. And he’s not the only excellent choice – Obama’s putting together a Green Dream Team that’s showing in no uncertain terms that he’s serious about getting global warming under control and transitioning us to a green economy. Carol Browner, who may be heading up a new National Energy Council and will definitely be part of the Administration, sees environmental regulations as market opportunities. Lisa Jackson, who may head up the EPA and is co-chair of the energy and natural resources transition team, is more of a mixed bag, coming highly recommended by some environmentalists and condemned by others, but New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine has no doubts she’s be awesome. Alas, I know nothing much at all about the women he’s chosen to become Secretary of Energy and the chair of the President’s Council on Environmental Quality, but the fact that the Chamber of Commerce is screaming bloody murder tells me we’re probably looking at emerald green choices:

“What you’ve got are people who are committed to moving forward with regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, which we believe is a huge mistake,” William Kovacs, vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said in an interview.

Yup. Definitely on the right track.

So, we’ve got a Nobel Laureate and several people who are dead-serious about making green a go. They’re the real deal.

Contrast this with Bush’s buffoonery, and you’ll see there’s no fucking comparison:

Currently, representatives from 190 countries are meeting in Poznan, Poland for an international climate change conference to work on the successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which President Bush refused to ratify in 2001.

In an interview with AFP in Poznan, Paula Dobriansky, the chief U.S. delegate, said that she has no regrets on the Bush administration’s climate change record. If she could change anything, Dobriansky said a better job could have been done in articulating Bush’s “message”:

I think this issue (climate change) is important, we care about it greatly. Looking back, if there was anything that maybe I would have hoped, it’s that we could have done a more effective job in getting our message out, in other words, (in) public diplomacy.

Spin couldn’t have saved Bush’s record on climate change. In fact, according to the annual Climate Change Performance Index published today, the U.S. is ranked as having the third worst record of 60 countries in tackling greenhouse gas emissions.

[snip]

It is shameful — but not surprising — that the U.S.’s chief climate representative believes that Bush’s biggest mistake on climate change is bad PR.

Somehow, methinks Obama’s Green Team is going to be a lot less talk and a lot more action. Finally, America will be ready to lead the way on containing climate change and taking care of this gorgeous planet.

Awesome.

No Fucking Comparison

Obama Brought Down Blagojevich (Indirectly)

This delights me to no end:

Federal investigators have been focused on Rod Blagojevich for several years, but it was a deeply ironic series of events three months ago that led to yesterday’s dramatic fall.

In a sequence of events that neatly captures the contradictions of Barack Obama’s rise through Illinois politics, a phone call he made three months ago to urge passage of a state ethics bill indirectly contributed to the downfall of a fellow Democrat he twice supported, Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich.

Mr. Obama placed the call to his political mentor, Emil Jones Jr., president of the Illinois Senate. Mr. Jones was a critic of the legislation, which sought to curb the influence of money in politics, as was Mr. Blagojevich, who had vetoed it. But after the call from Mr. Obama, the Senate overrode the veto, prompting the governor to press state contractors for campaign contributions before the law’s restrictions could take effect on Jan. 1, prosecutors say.

Tipped off to Mr. Blagojevich’s efforts, federal agents obtained wiretaps for his phones and eventually overheard what they say was scheming by the governor to profit from his appointment of a successor to the United States Senate seat being vacated by President-elect Obama. One official whose name has long been mentioned in Chicago political circles as a potential successor is Mr. Jones, a machine politician who was viewed as a roadblock to ethics reform but is friendly with Mr. Obama.

So, in an indirect way, Blagojevich’s fiasco may not have come to pass were it not for Obama’s commitment to ethics reform. Once Obama intervened and the bill became law, Blagojevich had to scramble to collect as many campaign contributions as possible before the law took effect. The governor’s efforts garnered the attention of federal investigators, who in turn tapped Blagojevich’s phone, which in turn produced stunning evidence of brazen corruption.

Talk about the law of unintended consequences, eh? I doubt Obama’s displeased with the result. Annoyed and upset that a Dem could be as astoundingly stupid as Blagojevich, certainly, but corruption is corruption, and it’s nice to see a bill that Obama championed doing its work in unexpected ways.

Of course, our “liberal” media is taking the opportunity to try to proclaim Obama tainted by dirty Chicago politics. Somehow, even championing this ethics reform bill is a sign to them that Obama’s mired in the filth. They’re joining a chorus of wingnuts and Cons who see this as the next best thing to Ayers. I have a feeling the public will be just about as impressed: a few scattered nutcases will spin conspiracy theories, and the rest of the country will yawn. Guilt-by-association games are losing their lustre for the majority of us.

(Here’s my plan for a better country: I think we need to peel off the few decent journalists remaining, pair them with the three or four sane Republicans still standing, and use them as the nucleus for creating a strong press corp and a worthy opposition party. The dross can be shipped to a hermetically-sealed compound on some remote island, where they can lie, smear, and bullshit each other to their heart’s content. Call it a paradise for fucktards. Of course, it wouldn’t last long: such a high concentration of gasbags in one place would probably lead to spontaneous combustion within a month or two.)

Here’s one of the reasons I don’t think this attempt to play Pin the Scandal on the President-Elect will succeed:

This is pretty interesting: An Obama aide points out to us that the Obama transition team has just rolled out an innovative new feature on its Web site, hoping to carry through on the President-elect’s campaign promises of greater government transparency.

It’s a page entitled “Open For Questions,” in which anyone can submit questions to the transition and, subsequently, to the administration.

The rub, though, is this: The public is able to vote on how much they’d like certain queries to be a priority, and the voting tally is visible — which means it’ll be tougher for the Obama team to not answer questions that participants clearly want answered.

The man has no fucking fear. None. So, between the fact that he’s the one who kept that ethics legislation from dying, and the fact that he’s preparing to expose his government to more sunshine than the White House has possibly ever seen before, I don’t think the media clowns and greater wingnuttia combined are going to be enough to harm him. Bill Clinton stepped into Reagan’s shoes long enough to claim the title “Teflon President,” but I think they’re both going to have to move over for our Adamantium President.

This shall be fun to watch.

Obama Brought Down Blagojevich (Indirectly)

This Is Why I Should Read Slobber and Spittle More Often

Cujo359 gets interesting email:

As a member of so many political e-mail lists, I occasionally receive an interesting one. Such a message arrived in my inbox yesterday. It’s purportedly a memo sent by John Podesta, the Obama transition team’s co-chair, about transparency during the transition process. It reads like a policy memo, so presumably that’s what it is. I don’t really know any more than that, but the content is interesting and, if it turns out to actually be the Obama Administration’s policy, refreshing:

MEMORANDUM
From: John Podesta
To: All Obama-Biden Transition Project Staff
Date: December 4, 2008
Re: “Seat at the Table” Transparency Policy — EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

Overview:
As an extension of the unprecedented ethics guidelines already in place for the Obama-Biden Transition Project, we take another significant step towards transparency of our efforts for the American people. Every day, we meet with organizations who present ideas for the Transition and the Administration, both orally and in writing. We want to ensure that we give the American people a “seat at the table” and that we receive the benefit of their feedback.

Accordingly, any documents from official meetings with outside organizations will be posted on our website for people to review and comment on. In addition to presenting ideas as individuals at www.change.gov, the American people deserve a “seat at the table” as we receive input from organizations and make decisions. In the interest of protecting the personal privacy of individuals, this policy does not apply to personnel matters and hiring recommendations…

The rest is at Cujo’s place. This idea of participatory democracy is going to take some getting used to after George “Bubble Boy” Bush and Dick “Man-Sized Safe” Cheney.

So far, I likes it.

This Is Why I Should Read Slobber and Spittle More Often

Note to Obama: Geithner Needs a Spanking

Occasionally, people whom you choose to do important things for you based on the fact that they’ve done well in the past gang aft agley when they get your nod. That’s when you either must smack some sense into them, or give them the old heave ho.

Tim Geithner is earning hisself a long walk off a short plank:

You’ve probably already read about this, but if not, here’s the new article saying that Obama’s choice for treasury, Tim Geithner, is trying to oust Republican regulator, FDIC chief Sheila Bair. When you see it put like that, it sounds good right? But actually, it’s downright politically bizarre. First, Geithner is saying she should be ousted because she isn’t a team player. Except that the media (and even unnamed members of the Obama team) have made a fetish out of the idea of having a “team of rivals” who will hash out ideas from all sides. “Team player” has almost become an insult in the last few weeks — after all in politics it’s often it’s another word for …. (gulp) partisan. Now, Bair is a Republican, which according to the conventional wisdom would make her a most coveted member of the post-partisan Obama administration, but which might explain why she isn’t considered a good team player. Except the complaint isn’t that she’s a loyal Bushie. It’s that she is overly concerned with main street and homeowners and demanding too much accountability from the financial sector. In other words, she’s behaving too much like you might wishfully expect a Democrat to behave. I don’t know the details of the “problems” obviously and perhaps there’s more to it than meets the eye. But the whole thing doesn’t scan politically any way you look at it.

No, it really doesn’t. I have to admit that the appellation “Republican” these days inspires an instinctive revulsion, but after I get done wincing, I take a closer look. And so far, I haven’t seen anything wrong with Bair aside from that pesky little R by her name. In fact, she’s doing what many Democrats have said we should do when it comes to the bailout.

Allow me to sum up a complicated post so I can get to Ian Welsh’s delightful analysis: Citigroup wanted to buy out Wachovia for $2.2 billion and needed FDIC aid. Wells Fargo offered $15 billion and didn’t need any help. Financial genius is not needed to understand which makes more sense to taxpayers. Citigroup stumbled badly, needed rescuing, and Bair was ready with the rope – on certain conditions:

Again, Bair held out for concessions as the Fed and Treasury sought to shield Citigroup from losses in its holdings of toxic assets. Bair insisted on getting preferred shares for the FDIC in the New York-based bank. She also demanded that Citigroup agree to implement mortgage modifications according to a model developed by her agency.

We’ll allow Ian to take over the commentary:

It’s hard to comment on this, because the cupidity and stupidity quotient is so high it’s turning into a black hole that sucks all reason out of the room.

First: This proves that Citi was not a good bank to buy Wachovia. You want strong banks to take over weak ones. Citi taking over a bank with impaired assets of its own would have been the lame helping the crippled and it would have still wound up needing a rescue.

Second: Bair held up the Citi deal (250 billion dollars of bailout) in an attempt to make sure that taxpayers got at least some collateral and to demand Citi helped ordinary people. That indicates Bair was doing her job, which is to protect ordinary people, not to give free money to corporations for nothing in return. The people not doing their jobs were Paulson and Geithner, who wanted to give money to a failed corporation without any meaningful protection for the taxpayer.

Geithner and Paulson: “Our job is to give banks as much money as they need to succeed, while leaving the same people in charge, and not asking for enough collateral so that taxpayers could ever recover their money”.

Bair “my job is to help banks, but at the same time to protect taxpayers and try and help ordinary Americans”

What this proves to me is that Geithner’s personal judgment is awful. He was on the wrong side of all of these arguments, the side that said “just throw money at the problem and don’t demand any meaningful change, any meaningful taxpayer protection or any meaningful help for homeowners”.

He was, simply, wrong. He wanted to do the wrong things.

Bair wanted to do the right things. Granted, she didn’t go as far as I’d like, but given she was in negotiation with “give away everything Hank and Tim”, I don’t think she can be blamed for that.

Bair’s judgment, in every case listed, was better than Geithners. EVERY SINGLE TIME.

If there is more to this story, and a damned good reason why Geithner should prevail, now would be the time to clue us in. Because from where I’m sitting, it looks like little Timmy is throwing a hysterical fit because he didn’t get his way, and we’ve had more than enough of that already.

I just want to point out a little something to Obama here, because I know he has an army of folks keeping up on what the blogs say, and it’s just possible they got this far:

When you have people at Firedoglake defending a Republican and calling for the Democrat to be thrown out on his ear, attention should be paid. Just sayin’.

I await further developments with interest.

Note to Obama: Geithner Needs a Spanking