Indefinite Detention? But I Have Soccer Practice at 4: U.S. Politics 2012

love all of the comments-box outrage over soldiers being asked to disarm during leon panetta's speech in afghanistan

hate to be a jerk here but i often wonder if military spouses are not the densest demographic in america

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/03/14/444308/house-republican-leaders-renege-debt-ceiling/

Shakey, reassure me that the triggers will still work, and that the agreed-upon sequestration defense cuts will go through. I'm guessing the House Republicans will get to break the deal with no consequences, and that moderate Dems will cave, and they will make domestic spending cuts instead.

I don't really understand where you're drawing your conclusions from

if the GOP wants to cut MORE domestically than what was originally agreed to, why would the Dems agree to that...? Dems have the GOP over a barrel here. GOP is trying to weasel out of this and resorting to their favorite tactic (one that has also contributed to their being wildly unpopular): threatening a gov't shutdown.

at the most basic level, violating such a hard-fought deal will just make the Dems more inclined to dig in and not pass anything, paint the GOP as negotiating in bad faith, irresponsible, etc. Remember, this is an election year, they will totally grandstand about this shit.

Reid and Blobfish are for sure just pointing and laughing at Boehner by this point. dude has no control over his caucus.

Dems have to control House Dem Minority Whip Hoyer from Maryland

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/hoyer-working-behind-the-scenes-on-major-deficit-reduction-bill.php

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/03/09/hoyer-backpedals-on-raising-eligibility-ages/

Hoyer is under fire for engaging in backroom talks on deficit reduction a year removed from such talks crashing and burning, as well as having a material impact on the stunted recovery. In this discussion, he continued to argue for a deficit reduction package that would essentially replace the trigger cuts due at the end of the year – a kind of Super Committee without the Super Committee rules.

I personally don’t see this happening, and certainly not before the election. The gambit is to put a deficit deal on the shelf so it can be put into motion with minimal accountability during the lame duck session.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74019.html

The top Democrat and Republican in the Senate struck a deal Wednesday that will avert a nasty floor fight over judges and allow the chamber to take up a small business jobs bill Thursday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) planned to brief their respective caucuses on details of the agreement later in the afternoon. But aides said the deal will allow Democrats to move 12 district court judges and two circuit court judges through the confirmation process by May 7.

I have read elsewhere that the "small business jobs bill" contains a number of Republican items aimed at removing Dodd-Frank regulatory rules

Reid and Blobfish are for sure just pointing and laughing at Boehner by this point. dude has no control over his caucus.

I think the story here is that this hurts the Dems worse than it hurts the Republicans, so ... joke's on them? I mean, A crazy Republican caucus means Dems can't pass anything, either, since they need a negotiating party. The crazy caucus actually gives Boehner et al. leverage to force the Dems to further compromise.

Boehner and co. just passed the JOBS bill that is now under consideration by the Senate:

A House-passed bill that aims to make it easier for small businesses to raise money also weakens investor protections and could create the next generation of telemarketing boiler rooms, according a growing number of critics such as AARP and federal securities regulators.

Senate Democrats, in a bid to protect seniors and other potentially vulnerable investors, are working to toughen the legislation. The bill was passed by the GOP-controlled House last week in a rare display of bipartisanship.

But Democrats and the White House also want to make other changes that are running into resistance from Republicans. That puts the bill, which has the qualified backing of President Obama, on an uncertain path.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-jobs-bill-critics-20120315,0,714040.story

Drum vs Greenwald on imprisonment of a Yemeni journalist

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/03/barack-obama-murderous-sociopath

U.S. attacks within Yemen might be bad policy. The entire war on al-Qaeda might be bad policy. What's more, Obama — along with the entire security apparatus of the United States — might be specifically wrong about Shaye. But I don't believe that they're simply making this story up because of a basically inconsequential piece that Shaye wrote two years ago. That just doesn't add up.

Helpful instructions for if you've been targeted for a drone assassination.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Bert2.png

But which do I find more likely? That Shaye is indeed affiliated with al-Qaeda based on evidence that hasn't been made public? Or that Barack Obama is a sociopath who pressures foreign leaders to keep innocent journalists in prison based on the fact that they very slightly annoy him? Call me what you will, but I have to go with Door A.

journalism!

that is truly incredible

I've always wondered how these polls would work out if it were like

"what is barack obama's religion? you get $100 if you answer correctly."

like how much is barack obama ~rhetorically~ a muslim for these people and how many people actually believe he practices islam?

― iatee, Monday, March 12, 2012 2:12 PM (3 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I also imagine that calling Obama a muslim is also sometimes like public support for Palin; a way to annoy liberals and befuddle pollsters.

Hmmm...

http://electionlawblog.org/?p=31583

that is worrisome to me

You're not to be blamed for thinking that.

The crazy caucus actually gives Boehner et al. leverage to force the Dems to further compromise.

you have this backwards. Boehner can't even control his caucus - ergo there is no point in negotiating with him because any deal that he may strike he can't actually deliver on.

and GOP can't just pass stuff themselves, they need at least some Dem votes. so whoever can hold their caucus together better (ie, Pelosi) wins.

life is unbearable.

But that's not true: even if the Dems hold their caucus together, they can't just pass things while the Republicans sit things out or argue. They need to make an effort to snag one or two Republicans to get things through. However, because the Republicans are disunited, they have no will/power to cooperate, and are therefore more or happy to go the nihilist route and screw things up. That is, the Republicans don't need or want the Democrats, but the Dems frequently want the Repubs, and sometimes even need them. Ergo, the Dems are more willing to compromise their already compromised legislation to suit the handful of Republicans even humoring them (see: the past three years).

uh all of that is wrong...? the Dems are not in the majority, the GOP are the ones bringing bills to the floor. and they can't pass them unless they get some Dem votes. So Boehner, who can't hold his caucus together AT ALL, either has to find some common ground between Tea Party GOPers and conservative Democrats (which Pelosi is going to fight tooth and nail to prevent) or Boehner has to compromise and make concessions to the Democrats to get some votes while losing some Tea Party votes. Dems have the upper hand here.

fwiw the House hasn't passed jackshit in three years, the GOP have no legislative accomplishments to speak of. The biggest deal they had was this budget ceiling-triggered cut thing and Pelosi totally fucked them on it. Which they are now dealing with.

well another important thing is the senate, which also exists

that thing about the yemeni journalist:

The U.S. government insists that Shaye is no mere journalist. "Shaye is in jail because he was facilitating Al Qaeda and its planning for attacks on Americans and therefore we have a very direct interest in his case and his imprisonment," says Gerald Feierstein, the U.S. ambassador to Yemen. Is that true? I have no idea.

is this the entire statement on this? because presumably that's exactly what you would say if you'd just kept the guy imprisoned so his reportage wouldn't radicalize yemeni villagers who don't necessarily watch charlie gibson. it doesn't even really imply there's Super Secret Al-Qaeda Knowledge. drum seems to think obama's only political interest here is domestic.

well another important thing is the senate, which also exists

right and which the Dems control (at least technically lol). McConnell and Reid know how to cut deals. Boehner does not.

This is not only one of the most unpopular congresses ever but it's done very, very little and is likely to continue to do little. All there is to fight for now is who to blame most, so expect both parties to basically do nothing but manoeuvre. I think Shakey's basically right. If Pelosi keeps discipline and Boehner can't, which party is going to look more responsible, more rational and more concerned with ordinary voters' problems?

well it's not even really that they 'know how to cut deals' it's that they have fewer totally insane people to deal w/

If Pelosi keeps discipline and Boehner can't, which party is going to look more responsible, more rational and more concerned with ordinary voters' problems?

wasn't congress fairly responsible, rational, conerned with ordinary voters' problems before the 2010 elections?

fwiw the House hasn't passed jackshit in three years,

more accurately, the House hasn't passed jackshit in two years, since the GOP took over. Pelosi's legislative record as Speaker was actually pretty good (her problem was things dying in the Senate)

xp

wasn't congress fairly responsible, rational, conerned with ordinary voters' problems before the 2010 elections?

lol well played. altho tbf I think their approval ratings were higher prior to the 2010 elections.

my main point is that I don't think anyone could do substantially better than boehner's doing right now cause his problems are more due to the structural problems that come with an increasingly radicalized party than personal shortcomings

related to how I don't think there could be a strong gop pres candidate today or will be anytime soon

My point is that as de facto spoiler in chief, Boehner is doing just fine doing nothing. All he has to do is crow about all the stuff that hasn't been passed and he not only gains cred but judo flips the blame onto the Dems. You know, for not getting things done under his watch. And of course, since the Dem majority (ha) senate can't exactly pass laws without the House, Boehner's obstructionism by absentia makes him out to be the plug on the deficit genie lamp. Or something. His lack of achievement - besides introducing or encouraging batshit bills that won't go anywhere, even if they make it to the senate to die - is an achievement in and of itself in a climate where doing nothing is considered an attribute by millions.

well it's considered a bad thing by even more millions, which means it's not a very good long-term strategy for controlling congress

I dunno if Boehner's "doing just fine" - he has people visibly gunning for his job (Cantor), a sizable portion of his caucus doesn't like or listen to him, the congressional GOP's approval ratings are in the toilet, and the "throw the bums out" sentiment that swept them into power in 2010 is even more pronounced this time around.

Yeah, but he's doing fine for a fuck-up. And really, long-term strategy does not seem to be a concern on the right these days.

Like, I think public sentiment is throw all the bums out, literally vote out the entire Congress, which of course is not going to happen. So people will vote for the usual fuckers. Again. ANd a few new fuckers will slip in, promising cheap gas, an end to Iran's meddling in Mexico, no birth control for people who have sex with animals, and the repealing the sun.

I don't think boehner's 'doing just fine' I think anyone in his position is fucked, cantor would be too

But there he is. Again, we're not talking long-term strategy here, because these dudes don't look past tomorrow.

Boehner has a good chance at retaining the position of Speaker of the House

I don't think the Dems will retake the House but it's possible Boehner's speakership will be challenged from within if the GOP ranks shift enough

No way to know what the caucus will look and ACT like should the GOP lose in November.

Back to the detaining Yemeni reporter story, another Mother Jones columnist differs with K*vin Drum, who thinks in print about the views, and then sticks with his original take

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/03/obama-and-shaye-will-white-house-explain-its-actions

if boehner hangs on in his post AND obama loses in november, boehner suddenly becomes pretty powerful. if both of those happen and the GOP flips the senate, even more so. nobody looks good running a minority.

if both of those happen and the GOP flips the senate, even more so

huge longshot imho

I don't think it's going far out on a limb to suggest that if Boehner keeps his post, repubs keep the house, repubs win the senate and also win the white house, that he's "doing just fine." The rest of us, on the other hand, will be doomed.

suggest that if Boehner keeps his post = possible
repubs keep the house = likely
repubs win the senate = not so likely
and also win the white house, = SO NOT GONNA HAPPEN