March 12, 2009
THURSDAY'S MINI-REPORT.... Today's edition of quick hits:
* Madoff, go directly to jail.
* Three consecutive good days on Wall Street? Haven't seen that in a while.
* Muntadar "shoe thrower" al-Zaidi is sentenced to three years behind bars.
* Obama issues his first signing statement. The NYT cited law prof David Golove, who specializes in executive powers, and who concluded that "the prerogatives invoked by Mr. Obama were relatively uncontroversial." Tim Fernholz has a good item on this, too.
* Under Bush, the FDA was a complete mess. Under Obama, Margaret Hamburg will help fix it.
* Americans trust government more than businesses to fix the economy. (On a related note, Kevin Drum had a fine post on what happens next.)
* The vetting process has apparently tripped up another key Treasury Department nominee. Unless his transgression was really serious, I'm beginning to think the administration is going to have to drop their standards a little.
* Speaking of nominations, the right fought very hard to derail Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, and Deputy Attorney General David Ogden. Their efforts were for naught.
* CBS News' Chip Reid drops the pretense of objectivity.
* Apparently, the House Blue Dog Caucus wasn't a big enough hurdle to governing; now we're getting a Senate version.
* I'm beginning to think the LA Times' Andrew Malcolm isn't good at his job.
* I really loathe voter-suppression tactics like these.
* Obama will be the first president in over 100 years to skip his first Gridiron Dinner.
* Jim Cramer will appear on "The Daily Show" tonight, but not before he tries to lower the temperature on their "feud."
* My new favorite oxymoron: "Fox Facts."
* Rick Santorum thinks "the fundamentals of American economy is [sic] still strong." He wasn't kidding.
* Raise your hand if you think Michael Steele knows anything about music.
* And finally, reader J.M. alerted me to this amusing story about prominent Illinois Republican Gary Skoien, whose wife beat the hell out of him when she found him at home with two prostitutes at 1 a.m. Skoien said it was a big misunderstanding: "No money was exchanged. Nobody was naked."
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
—Steve Benen 5:30 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (41)
The fundamentals of Little Ricky Santorum's brain are still negligible.
Posted by: K on March 12, 2009 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK
after 3 good days in the market I'm tripping over all these pundits and right wing bloggers congratulating President Obama on the market's applauding of his economic policies...
Posted by: Andy on March 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM | PERMALINK
In regards to the shoe-thrower. They've been having discussions on NPR (BBC World have your say) about whether or not the sentence is too long.
The discussion was rather boring and the comments ranged from: "He's a hero and should be let go" to the typical right wing response of "President Bush was a hero and the shoe-thrower should get life in prison"
Why not do something Bush did himself: Scooter Libby did something good for Bush (Valerie Plame incident)but George W. could NEVER publicly say that. So he waited and commuted the sentence.
Well Al-Zaida did something good for Maliki (embarrassing Bush) but the Iraqi president could NEVER publicly say that. So he can now commute his sentence. ... and stick it to Bush a second time.
Now that would be sweet.
Posted by: Bruno on March 12, 2009 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK
Regarding Cramer, apparently he has a history of much more egregious acts than what Stewart has been mocking him for. Make sure to read the article on DailyKos linked to here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/5/16720/74815/703/705113
The greed, depravity, and utter criminality that has taken over Wall Street was way beyond even my wildest imagination.
And to think the wingnuts still blame the financial calamity on Fannie and Freddie and losers who bought too much of a house.
Posted by: citizen_pain on March 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK
Why is it amusing when a man's wife "beat the hell out of him?" Abuse is abuse, regardless of the sex of the abuser.
Posted by: John on March 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM | PERMALINK
PLEASE. Isn't there some way to stop this insanity of the so-called "moderate" Democrats. Obama is a moderate. They are conservatives ... or self-serving nitwits, or something. Just not "moderates."
Posted by: Greg Worley on March 12, 2009 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK
The real story about the nominees who get bounced for misdeeds should be that they're actually getting bounced at all.
During the Bush years, all that mattered was that they were properly robotic followers of the Great Leader. The only response to either incompetence or malfeasance was a bored shrug.
So I think we're actually still ahead of the game here, in spite of what the drooling bobble-head class might say about it.
Posted by: Curmudgeon on March 12, 2009 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK
Rick Santorum thinks "the fundamentals of American economy is [sic] still strong." He wasn't kidding.
If they are not strong, what hope is there that the stimulus will be successful?
Posted by: marketeer on March 12, 2009 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK
I just got notification about the winning anti-Rush billboard from the Democratic contest. The slogan is, "Americans didn't vote for a Rush to failure." That was a favorite of many around here and elsewhere, and I'm glad it won too. (I sent in "We want vision, not division" which sounds nice but didn't mention Rush.) They'll put one or more up "in his hometown" which I guess is that joint in FL although his business/media HQ (of the excrement in narrowcasting nutwork) is still in NYC I suppose.
Posted by: Neil B ♪ ♫ on March 12, 2009 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK
The voter supression thing is weird to me. I know that voter fraud is negligible and that Republicans are only pursuing these laws as a means to win elections (as opposed to a real desire to limit voter fraud). But on the other hand, making someone show photo ID to vote doesnt seem terribly onerous.
I mean, I carry my photo ID everywhere I go. Voter registration is more of a hardship on me than showing ID, and even that isnt that hard.
Posted by: TG Chicago on March 12, 2009 at 5:55 PM | PERMALINK
Can anybody look at photos of MC Steele and Humpty Hump and seriously say that it's not the same guy?
Posted by: hells littlest angel on March 12, 2009 at 5:58 PM | PERMALINK
Why do news outlets insist on quoting the maximum possible sentence when reporting on people accused of crimes? (As in, "Madoff faces up to 150 years. . . .") I understand it's dramatic and all, but except in murder cases, or cases in which the defendant has a long prior record, it's not very common that an absolute maximum sentence gets handed down. That's especially true in the federal system, where judges operate within a highly-formulaic set of sentencing guidelines that tightly circumscribe sentencing options.
Wouldn't it do us all a much better service for reporters to say something like, "Madoff faces a likely sentence of 25 to 30 years. . . ." (or whatever)? Is it really that damn hard to be honest and accurate?
Posted by: Andy on March 12, 2009 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK
Can anybody look at photos of MC Steele and Humpty Hump and seriously say that it's not the same guy?
Hmm...maybe Multiple Personality Disorder is the explanation we've all been searching for. It would explain how one person can believe a woman has an absolute right to choose, except when the state says she doesn't.
Posted by: dr. bloor on March 12, 2009 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK
Interesting point about Jim Cramer over at Salon...yeah, I know Jon Stewart, Mr. Cramer--and believe me, you're NO Jon Stewart--indeed you are about deceit and pretense while Stewart is about getting real. Cramer was fairly annoying on the Martha Stewart show earlier today. Kept going on and on about how everyone (not just poor people) should be able to hold onto their house and not have it drop in value...yeah, have some heart, America. Rich people deserve a break too. It was also sickening to watch him elicit Martha Stewart's sympathies--said something like: "...you and I understand this need (to keep their homes) more than anyone else, don't we?"
Oh,please--I'm sure they're doing just fine.
Sheez--how out of touch!
Hope Jon Stewart rips him to shreds.
Posted by: Insanity on March 12, 2009 at 6:06 PM | PERMALINK
LATE BREAKING NEWS (I saw it early this morning):
Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston have broken up. They apparently will not be marrying this summer, after all.
Details at ?
peace,
st john
Posted by: st john on March 12, 2009 at 6:07 PM | PERMALINK
"No money was exchanged. Nobody was naked."
Did he mention anything about diapers?
Posted by: dr. bloor on March 12, 2009 at 6:10 PM | PERMALINK
Anyone who takes two hookers home and gets found by a spouse should expect a very strong reaction. If Skoien had been from Texas, his wife would have shot him. But his punch line, "no money was exchanged, no one was naked", should become the Republican motto.
Posted by: jen f on March 12, 2009 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK
I partially disagree on the signing statement. Parts of it, yes, on foreign policy and the military do legitimately underscore Congressional overreach.
Other aspects of the statement, though, seem like Obama raising the banner of “presidentialism.”
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on March 12, 2009 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK
Raise your hand if you think Michael Steele knows anything about music.
This guy is hilariously ridiculous. If/when the RNC cans him, Fox should give him his own variety show. As far as I'm concerned, he's the best RNC Chairmen EVER. They should really keep him. Passing on the hip hop makeover would disastrous for the party. ;)
Posted by: John Henry on March 12, 2009 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK
"* Three consecutive good days on Wall Street? Haven't seen that in a while."
I'm sure it's a result of Bush's economic policies finally coming to fruition. However, should the markets tank tomorrow, that will be entirely Obama's fault.
Posted by: raff on March 12, 2009 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK
Just watching Frank Gaffney on Hardball, where he just threw out among many doozies the notion that Saddam was behind Oklahoma city! Alas he's peddling so much nonsense that neither Matthews or David Corn got around to that whopper. One endlessly circles the question are these guys just deeply cynical liars or just monstrously stupid?
Posted by: Cioran Sellars on March 12, 2009 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK
Just curious...
How hard would it be to have pictures of voters on the voter lists used by election judges?
No ID needed. Link it to motor vehicles and most people would have a picture all good to go.
Oh, but that wouldn't accomplsh the REAL reason for this charade would it?
Posted by: toowearyforoutrage on March 12, 2009 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK
Saddam behind OK city ... I suppose since not a parody (?) it's the idea, try to pin the blame as far away as possible instead of admitting that fellow right-wing kooks can and will do stuff like blow up evil government facilities (since it isn't drowned in the bathtub yet ...)
As for Chip Reid of CBS: he "was questioning Robert Gibbs about health care spending when he made this catty aside": "Democrats...also raising their ugly heads today." It seems to me, "also" could have meant in addition to the Republicans? What else do we know about him?
Bristol and Levi: pitiful "family values" no? And that baby, yes we've seen pics but still very mysterious ...
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on March 12, 2009 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK
"No money was exchanged. Nobody was naked."
It sounds like if his wife hadn't beat him, with no money exchanged, the hookers were just about to do it anyway.
Posted by: Big Time Patriot on March 12, 2009 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK
Saddam Hussein responsible for Oklahoma?!?
These people have gone off the deep end.
The republicans have been taken over by the 90's militia movement. The fat ass old rednecks running around in the woods with their army surplus outfits and AR-15's, playing GI Joe, on the hunt for black UN helicopters.
God save us.
Posted by: citizen_pain on March 12, 2009 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK
Chip Reid of CBS [...]"Democrats...also raising their ugly heads today." It seems to me, "also" could have meant in addition to the Republicans? Neil B, @19:15
Neil, to me it sounded like he was channeling Sarah Pailin -- both the "also" and the raising of the ugly head (which she said about Putin, whose ugly head she could watch from Alaska, should he ever dared raise it that far)
Posted by: exlibra on March 12, 2009 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK
Three consecutive good days on Wall Street?
I wonder if that's because the economy is fundamentally sound. Perhaps it's because the omnibus bill was passed so soon after the stimulus package, so everyone knows that all those companies won't have a worse 2009 than 2008. Perhaps it's unrelated to anything important, the way that the large decline since November is unrelated to Obama's winning the election -- just another of those temporary stampedes that the investors engage in from time to time.
Posted by: MatthewRMarler on March 12, 2009 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINK
"CBS News' Chip Reid drops the pretense of objectivity"
He used a not-uncommon expression. It has nothing to do with his "objectivity". Geez, lighten up already.
Posted by: Robert Earle on March 12, 2009 at 9:15 PM | PERMALINK
* Three consecutive good days on Wall Street? Haven't seen that in a while.
please, please tell us oh all-knowing rightwing loons ...cramer, kudlow, CNBC cranks, etc., etc... what was it Obama said this week to make the stock market go up?
What's that you say right wing loons...Obama can only make the stock market go down! I did not know that.
Posted by: pluege on March 12, 2009 at 9:30 PM | PERMALINK
I've said this before, but there's good reason to raise it again. The ending line of the piece on Chip Reid -- who I know nothing about, wouldn't have even known the network of -- is "So there you have it: Chip Reid and Kent Conrad are, at this very minute, in a tree, kissing each other."
And of course, earlier in the day there were several comments about David Vitter with the 'obligatory' diaper reference.
Apparently some of us have our own version of IOKIYAAR -- that it is okay to make sexual jokes about your specific kinks if you are a Republican.
Hell, we're still getting Larry Craig bathroom jokes -- sometimes pinned to the whole Republican Party.
Now I have no problem with pointing a finger at hypocrisy -- if Vitter made a speech about 'family values' I couldn't complain if someone wondered if he was wearing his diapers when he made it, or if he got secretarial help from a hooker. It would be close to my own line, and I hope I wouldn't do it, but I couldn't bitch if someone did. (I find no excuse whatsoever for the Chip Reid joke -- and will admit I'd be glad to be sitting in a tree with either ND Senator, both of whom are very attractive men.)
But let's try it in reverse. Now I have my own favorite kinks -- I'd guess a lot of you do too, maybe minor ones. I've mentioned my bisexuality many times, have said that the only reason it is unlikely I have met Larry Craig is geographical and maybe a different type of preferred men's room -- I've never had sex in an airport men's room because I've rarely been in airports. But one I haven't mentioned will make my point clearly. (I'm going to skip a couple of lines because what I will be saying is not workplace-safe.)
************
I happen to be fond of playful golden showers -- I stress playful because I personally am not into any form of s&m or d&s -- giving or better receiving, more hetero than gay. Okay, so I am the world's most insignificant person, it doesn't matter what I admit about myself. But let's get really fanciful and imagine that Gov. Patterson had been so impressed by my blog comments that he'd named me to replace Hillary. And that I then posted the sentence above.
Then imagine that a Conservative blogger, a Malkin, a Schlussel, a Reynolds saw this and every time she or he mentioned me it was as Sen. "Yellow Face" Benton. Every commenter here would be complaining, damning her, and arguing that my 'eccentricity' was purely personal and had no relation to my positions on an issue.
Why don't we start following the same rules ourselves?
Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) on March 12, 2009 at 9:53 PM | PERMALINK
Whew Prup, that's a lot of work into a comment - it's amazing the effort and dedication of the commenters here, seriously - it's like Wikipedia! WikiPAdia...
Well, about Steele, the funniest thing is, he said he wouldn't be providing popcorn for the opposition ... good Lord, day after day I feel like I'm sitting under a very buttery popcorn avalanche! And I want more cow bell too!
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on March 12, 2009 at 10:13 PM | PERMALINK
"* Muntadar "shoe thrower" al-Zaidi is sentenced to three years behind bars."
I think what this incident really shows us is how free Iraq has become.
Posted by: mcc on March 12, 2009 at 10:24 PM | PERMALINK
Muntadar "shoe thrower" al-Zaidi is sentenced to three years behind bars.
You'd think Bush would protest this rather harsh sentence. It's his place to do so, I would think. Michael Savage says Bush has no character at all. Let's have a bipartisan round of applause for Michael Savage.
Posted by: Luther on March 12, 2009 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINK
Stewart just destroyed Cramer and CNBC. I actually feel sorry for Cramer. Not really. Gawd. For one shining moment everything was right with the universe. I gotta go clean myself up.
Posted by: Scott F. on March 12, 2009 at 11:27 PM | PERMALINK
In Letter to Bishops, Pope Admits ‘Mistakes’
Mistakes? What mistakes?
I only smell the stench of papal infallibility here:
The blog posting said the pope wrote that he had been “saddened” that “even Catholics, who should have been better able to understand things,” instead seemed poised with “a hostility ready for the attack.” He added that he thanked “the Jewish friends who quickly helped remove the misunderstandings and to re-establish the atmosphere of friendship and trust.”
And here:
In news accounts this week, Archbishop Antonio Franco, the apostolic nuncio to the Holy Land, said Benedict would not enter the Holocaust museum at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem because it had a contentious plaque criticizing Pope Pius XII for not doing enough to help save Jews during the Holocaust.
Posted by: koreyel on March 12, 2009 at 11:43 PM | PERMALINK
On Gary Skoien - I live in the Chicago suburbs where the Republicans used to be a powerful force, but more in the Rockefeller - Bob Dole version, not the Newt version. Support for public schools (many fled the city of Chicago) and handgun control is strong among both parties. So Skoien comes in and immediately tries to unseat incumbent Republican office holders who were "too liberal". His scorched earth style was largely responsible for Melissa Bean winning a congressional seat as Democrat in 2004 against Phil Crane despite George W. Bush winning 56% of the presidential vote in the district.
This couldn't happen to a better "values" candidate.
Posted by: sublime33 on March 13, 2009 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK
@TG Chicago, picture id requirement for voting is bad because not all people have or can easily get a picture id.
you may remember back in november a bunch of nuns couldn't vote because they didn't have picture id's (indiana, i think). i remember reading a story at that time about an old lady in arizona who couldn't vote for the first time in 70 years because she didn't have a picture id and couldn't get one -- she had no birth certificate and the elementary school she attended is long gone.
picture id does not make voting more secure than it already is.
no one should be barred from voting due to an unnecessary hurdle.
Posted by: karen marie on March 13, 2009 at 12:27 AM | PERMALINK
Citizen Pain, thanks for the link about Cramer.
It was very enlightening.
Posted by: tko on March 13, 2009 at 2:20 AM | PERMALINK
J.M. alerted me to this amusing story about prominent Illinois Republican Gary Skoien, whose wife beat the hell out of him when she found him at home with two prostitutes at 1 a.m. Skoien said it was a big misunderstanding: "No money was exchanged. Nobody was naked."
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
What can we possibly add after you've written that? Except that possibly there's another Republican converting to (no money was exchanged) Socialism.
I was just sooooo happy to read it WASN'T a Dem.
Posted by: MarkH on March 13, 2009 at 3:11 AM | PERMALINK
"No money was exchanged. Nobody was naked."
Republicans dont need to be naked to have a good time. Some wear not one, but two neoprene suits! Hell even David Vitter wasn`t naked. And if no money was exchanged then when can we expect an announcement for the two new members of the IL supreme court?
Posted by: rt on March 13, 2009 at 5:59 AM | PERMALINK
I'll bet the shoe thrower will have an unusually pleasant visit to jail. Fellow prisoners, jailers and administrators will see his actions as noble and go out of their way to make his stay as comfortable as possible: extra food, a soft mattress, never a hassle. It should be the equivalent of the American country club federal prisons but for entirely different reasons.
All hail Muntadar "shoe thrower" al-Zaidi!
Posted by: anonymous on March 13, 2009 at 7:17 AM | PERMALINK