This is a place where current and ex-students of my "We the People" program can touch base with each other on important current issues. Publish your comments by clicking on "comments" under a post, then "post a comment". You can register, or just post a comment anonymously. WARNING: I make less of an attempt to be "fair and balanced" in this blog than I do in class. Feel free to take me on though, I don't have all the answers and I love to hear your opinions regardless of your perspective.
It is always the poor and disadvantaged that suffer the most in hard economic times. Unfortunately sometimes it goes unnoticed because it isn't "news" that the poor are having a hard time. (Not as much as the new news that the middleclass, upper class, and businesses are taking a hit.)
So, it was nice to see some coverage in the Seattle Times this week. It is sad news however, sadder even that it seems like this place had to close down for a lack of volunteers.
Obama's team had been conducting a review of our policy in Afghanistan for the past weeks and months. The President finally announced his policy this week.
I have a rather mixed opinion of his policy, but for now at least, I'd like to hear your opinions and thoughts - so let me hear them.
What if you are unhappy with what Congress and the President are doing? One answer is look to make change at the state and local level. It is an old argument in America? How much power should the federal government have, and how much authority do states have to resist?
This was an argument that the Framers dealt with in Philadelphia in 1787, Hamilton and Jefferson sparred about in the early republic, that tore the Union asunder in 1861, and continues to this day. In the 20th century, the federal (national) government won most of the important battles and became much more powerful than the states. However, that doesn't mean the pendulum of power cannot swing back to the states.
Here is an example of what some states are doing in asserting States' rights authority in a fight against national actions that are unpopular in their parts of the country.
National Public Radio is doing pretty extensive coverage of the increase in violenc among the drug cartels in Mexico. They are striking fears in a lot of people's hearts, and spreading their reach into the United States.
Cartels Fueling Violence In Mexico Take Root In U.S. : NPR From NPR's' website: Mexican Drug Cartels In The U.S. The presence of Mexican drug cartels in U.S. cities is expanding. Mexican cartels have long had links to marijuana-growing farms in California, and are widening their reach into the Pacific Northwest and the Eastern United States. They also are involved in producing methamphetamines in the United States. The FBI has reported that the Mexican cartels deal only in wholesale distribution in the U.S. -- and farm out street sales to various U.S. gangs. This map shows locations of cartel activity in the United States.
Obama speaking at his second prime-time press conference.
What did you think of the topics and answers discussed tonight?
Update - 9:23 pm: Obama dealt with a lot of complicated issues tonight, but I continue to have a lot of faith in his ability. This mess we are in would be hard for anyone to deal with, but I think his leadership instincts are good, and the general directionof his policies is a good one.
Tonight, he defended his actions forcefully, but not arrogantly. Personally, I'd like to see him pushing for even more radical action, more money spent on the stimulus bill, and more relief for the middle class and the poor. It will be money well spent because it will keep families afloat, and the middle and lower classes are much more likely to spend the money on things they need, thus giving our overall economy a boost.
The government probably should also take temporary control of some of these financial institutions we are spending billions of dollars to keep alive. It doesn't have to mean the government is running the companies, but they can oversee and regulate the business more closely until they get back on their feet.
Don't listen to the people who are screaming about this being socialism - they are necessary measures, brought on by a crisis, that will save and strengthen our market-based economy, while minimizing the suffering of our fellow citizens.
Thank goodness for the Fourth Amendment! When you read stories like this one, it really brings home to you how important our Constitution is.
Hopefully, it will be interpreted by the Supreme Court in such a way that no other public school student will have to submit to the extreme invasion of privacy that Savana Redding experienced in middle school.
Read the article, and give me your reaction. What sorts of restrictions should the Court place on searches by school officials? Keep in mind the following things as you consider your response:
1. The wording of the Fourth Amendment, which was written by Madison's committee long before public schools existed in the United States.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
2. The Court ruled in 1985 that school officials have more latitude to conduct searches than do police. (But this seems so far out of line I'm surprised the case was even appealed to the Supreme Court.)
3. The Court may well decide to write an opinion on this case which much more clearly spells out how the Fourth Amendment applies to public school students.
Anyway, read the article - I think you will be shocked by the extent of the search school officials conducted on Savana Redding.
When someone is convicted of a crime, in this case assault, they are punished according to the law. But should those who attack someone else out of hate for their race, ethnicity, religion, gender, etc. receive stiffer punishment?
That is what the law in Washington provides for. Some argue that hate speech (and hateful motives in crimes) should not be a factor in sentencing and the law because of the free speech provisions of the First Amendment. Others believe the laws are reasonable and necessary to protect groups that are the targets of such attacks.
Check this short story out from the (online!) Seattle P-I and let me know what you think.
My opinion: 1. I think Geithner has definately done a poor job of public relations - I think few will dispute that. 2. I was skeptical of Geithner and lead economic advisor Lawrence Summers being chosen by Obama. I think they have both been too closely with the Wall Street establishment and economic theories that favored massive deregulation. Both of these things contributed largely to the mess we now find ourselves in, and I'm afraid they are not willing enough to propose the radical reform and change that is needed.
The counter-arguments, as I see them, are 1) Coraggio's economic ideas are too radical; and 2) we need people in these positions that are intimately acquainted with the world of high finance and Wall Street.
3. It is too early for Obama to ask Tim Geithner to resign. Just because he has mismanaged a few things, we don't know yet that they are major mistakes that will impact the broader economy. Furthermore, Obama's overall economic plan has not had time to work. As of this Sunday morning, we still owe Obama's team the chance to do it's job.
Bottom line: Having said all that, I think time is running out on Geithner to show the nation he is the best man for the job. He has to both perform well, and demonstrate that he cares about ordinary Americans, and not just the desires of Wall Street and the banking system. He will have his chance this week when he announces more details about the banking rescue plan.
For over six years I watched with a deep sadness as the Bush administration tore up our Constitution and the basic values this nation stands for. I followed closely all of the reports of illegal wiretapping, torture, detention of prisoners with no due process, and a deception of the American public about why we went to war in Iraq. Because of the public's fear of another terror attack, we looked the other way as things were done in our name that were a betrayal of our values, principles, and beliefs.
Even though I feel as though I've heard it all before, I'm still shocked and angered to hear one more official detail the extent to which executive power was abused.
This time it is Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was a top aide to then Secretary of State Colin Powell. He describes in the Seattle P-I, that we have knowingly held innocent men in the prison for years in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Can you imagine being in prison on a faraway continent for seven years simply because an invading army had little knowledge of your people and culture and couldn't tell the good guys from the bad guys? According to Wilkerson, when it became apparent that an innocent man was being held with real terrorists:
"It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance."
He contends that Dick Cheney and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney refused to release prisoners that they knew were innocent because it would have been an embarassment and "a black mark on their leadership."
Wilkerson is speaking up this week because Cheney has been mouthing off on cable news - telling viewers that the Obama administration is making America more vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
"I'm very concerned about the kinds of things Cheney is saying to make it seem Obama is a danger to this republic," Wilkerson said. "To have a former vice president fearmongering like this is really, really dangerous."
And it is scary to me that there are still people in this country that will listen to Cheney and believe him, even though his arrogance and self-righteousness in conducting the war on terror squandered all of the good will the world had for us in the days and weeks following the 9/11 attacks.
Ok, this is a tough one to explain, but here goes.
Brief Summary: American International Group (AIG) is a big financial company that insures the investments of other financial institutions such as banks, mortgage companies and the like - it would have gone bankrupt a few months ago if the government had not loaned/given AIG billions of dollars in bailout money to stay in business. It was revealed over the weekend that some of that taxpayer money ($165 million) was given out in bonuses to executives working for AIG.
Why are people upset? 1) AIG is one of the companies responsible for encouraging (and insuring) the high-risk loans caused our economy to tank. 2) Once the government started giving bailout money to AIG, someone ought to have stopped them from paying large cash bonuses tothe executives.
Who is at fault? What can be done? Here are some articles as well as a short video of Obama speaking about the AIG bonuses from this week:
The same tools and tactics that are used in marketing and advertising are used in politics. Check out how the Obama administration has learned to use language to sell its programs and policies.
And of course this did not begin with Obama. In our previous administration we didn't have POW's, but "enemy combatants". There wasn't any torture by the U.S., only "enhanced interrogation techniques." You get the idea. So do all the politicians.
Well the print edition at least. The economy is really hurting the newspaper business, and a healthy democracy should have plenty of news sources that citizens can choose from in order to stay informed.
Newspapers provide much more in-depth news than is presented on an evening television news program. Are the on-line versions an adequate substitute? There are definately pros and cons, but one big downside is that there will be many fewer reporters staffing the P-I's web site.
Plus, there is something about a newspaper - very portable, you can easily browse through it and find information you might miss otherwise.
Oh, I love anything that bashes cable news shows. Last week, Jon Stewart got everyone talking when he highlighted all the bad financial advice financial news network CNBC has given out in the past couple of years. This article gets to the point a lot of people are making - with 24 hours a day to fill up, the cable news networks insert a lot of stuff that is not hard news, but instead promotes personalities and stories that fall more in the category of "iinfo-tainment".
They have a right to broadcast what they like, it's a free press. But you and I also have a right to turn it off and find find better sources of news.
Especially when those words define the legal status of an individual. For all of the years that the Bush administration waged a "war on terror," it detained people it claimed were dangerous in places like Guantanamo Bay. They claimed these detainees had no due process rights under U.S. law because they were being held outside of the United States. They also claimed that the Geneva Accords and other international law did not apply to them because they were not "prisoners of war".
In other words, calling them "enemy combatants" allowed the U.S. government to hold these prisoners without trial, or any other basic rights or procedures that we as Americans believe are essential to a system of justice.
Finally, the Obama administration has announced that it will cease to use this term. It may seem trivial, but in this case, it is an important step back toward living up to our ideals of constitutionalism.
Washington State is scheduled to execute an offender for the first time in years. What are your thoughts about use of the death penalty in our state and in our nation.
Pakistan and Afghanistan are seen by many (including the Obama administration) as the most important nations in the fight againsst terrorism. Al-Queda and the Taliban operate in the mountainous border between the two nations.
Instability in those countries will have a direct impact on the U.S., and therefore, the political troubles of these nations are very much our concern. Here are two developments that highlight some of the difficulties in those nations.
The teacher's unions are usually solidly behind Democrats in the world of politics because they usually offer prescriptions of more money and smaller class sizes to improve public schools. Obama, while supporting those things, has also spoken in the campaign and this week of his desire to see more experimentations with charter schools and increased accountability for teacher performance. These items often make the education establishment nervous. Check out these resources to see what you think about Obama's proposals:
Presidents face tough decisions and have to live with the consequences. No one is particularly proud of the fact that Congress loaded up this bill with 9,000 pet projects (earmarks) at the request of individual members of Congress.
Obama campaigned against earmarks. He is making an exception by signing this bill. Should he have stuck to his principles and vetoed the bill or would that have made his overall fight to fix the economy more difficult?
Presidents certainly have to rely on Congress to get lots of big things done, but they also have authority to issue executive orders, rules, and policies for how to run the executive departments that have the force of law.
President Bush used (and in my opinion sometimes abused) these powers to promote his agenda. Today Obama reversed two troubling policies of the Bush years.
2. Obama also said that he will be much more cautious and conservative in his use of presidential signing statements. Obama Says He’ll Cut Back on Tactic Bush Used to Sidestep New Laws President Bush used these infamously to ignore provisions of certain laws Congress passed that his administration opposed. (For example, when signing the bill passed outlawing the use of torture, humiliating, and degrading treament of prisoners, he wrote in a signing statement that the CIA would not be bound by the rules of the law.)
Is this good advice? Are we helping to create a generation of well-educated students or are we wasting the time of young people and smothering their love of learning? That is the subject of a recent column in the Seattle Times: Homework hater's spiel makes sense.
As a teacher and a parent, I think there is a point to this article, but the reporting here is a bit simplistic - I suspect reading Kohn's books would point out that not ALL homework is bad, but that a lot of the stuff we teachers give out is unnecessary. (I made it a policy when I became a teacher years ago to avoid giving my students "busywork". I don't know how well I've adhered to that policy, but I try!)
Keeping in mind that U.S. Constitution saays that our government was designed to promote the general welfare and that our Washington State Constitution declares education to be the "paramount duty of the State", check this article out.
What are your thoughts on how well our education system is designed? Do you think it has lost its focus as the author cited in the article does?
Jerry Large is a columnist with the Seattle Times. He posted a thoughtful commentary on the assault, by a police officer, of a 15 year old girl that had been taken into custody. (See previous post.) His article mainly deals with how adults should react to teens who are acting out, but for those of you looking for connections to constitutional prinicples, this case certainly deals with the "rule of law" and "due process." Can you explain how?
1. A year or so ago, the State Supreme Court ruled that California's ban on same-sex marriage was a violation of the California State Constitution (not necessarily the U.S. Constitution).
2. So, some 18,000 same-sex couples were married in the Golden State until a proposition was put on the ballot in November (Proposition 8) that amended the CA State Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. And same-sex marriage became illegal in California once again.
3. This week however, proponents of gay marriage are before the Californai State Supreme Court again, this time asking the court to strike down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional.
Confused yet? Before you try to make up your mind, check out the information in the article below from the Christian Science Monitor. There are a lot of issues and arguments on both sides of the issue you may need to consider before being informed enough to understand this legal issue.
(I say "legal issue" as opposed to "moral issue", because whether or not your morals push you in one direction or another on this issue, you have to remember that we are a nation of laws, and the rule of law must be respected - even if the law is confusing and it is easy to let emotion get in the way on controversial issues. The complex system of checks and balances that exists within California State government must be kept in mind here. So, in my case, I think two adults that love each other and want to make a lifetime commitment to each other should be able to do so regardless of their sexual orientation. However, that needs to be done within the rule of law, in accordance with the California State Constitution.)
There has been a lot of talk about the video recording of a teenage girl being brutally attacked by prison guards in a King County jail. Keeping in mind that the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, were these guards using reasonable force or did they violate this young prisoner's rights by using excessive force? Read the article(s) which has a link to the video of the incident.
Some definitions you may find helpful that I found on the web:
EXCESSIVE FORCE - A law enforcement officer has the right to use such force as is reasonably necessary under the circumstances to make a lawful arrest. An unreasonable seizure occurs when a law enforcement officer uses excessive force in making a lawful arrest. Whether force is reasonably necessary or excessive is measured by the force a reasonable and prudent law enforcement officer would use under the circumstances.
Inmates are protected from cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. In order to prove a violation under the Eighth Amendment, [plaintiff] must show that [defendant] unnecessarily and wantonly inflicted pain on [him/her]. A use of force against a prison inmate that was applied in a good faith effort to maintain or restore discipline is not ―unnecessary and wanton, but force applied maliciously or sadistically to cause harm is unnecessary and wanton.
I suppose it is always easier to just say that we are in "tough economic times", but this article in today's Seattle Times tries to help us understand the difference between a recession and a depression
Federalism at times requires the effective cooperation and coordination of federal, state, and local officials. In this case we see how the F.B.I. is helping the Seattle area get a handle on gang activity in our area: Gang membership up in Seattle, FBI says Seattle Times Newspaper
Also of related interest: Gangs: Once a member, it is difficult to get out Pictured: Marcus Harden, a 6-foot-5 former Rainier Beach football star, is an intervention counselor at Seattle's Madrona K-8 school and mentors gang-involved youth.
The extent to which the government under the Bush Administration was prepared to sacrifice the ideals of a free and open democracy were shown to us in more detail by two news stories that appeared today.
The first involves how many videotapes of waterboarding by our government were destroyed and the second about a legal memo written by the infamous John Yoo attempting to justify the President having the sole authority to overturn freedom of the press and put the nation under military rule after the September 11th attacks.
The number of major legal errors committed by Bush administration lawyers during the formulation of its early counterterrorism policies was far greater than previously known, according to internal Bush administration documents released for the first time by the Justice Department yesterday.
filibuster - the practice of refusing to surrender the floor during a debate to prevent the Senate from voting on a proposal.
cloture - a rule of the U.S. Senate stipulating that debate on a legislative proposal be cut off and the proposal voted upon by the full Senate if sixty members agree.
Why are the Democrats afraid of Republican filibusters in the Senate? If the Democrats have strong, sound legislation that will help this nation, they should not allow the threat of a filibuster cause them to water down and weaken a bill.
Below are a couple of commentaries suggesting this very thing. The arguments are well made and I hope the leadership in the Senate pays attention. The filibuster has it's place, and is an important tool for a minority that is being bullied by a majority, but if a minority of senators are holding up legislation that Americans approve of, their filibuster will not ultimatelly succed.
If 40 Senators are actually willing to mount a filibuster, against Obama's health plan, his housing plan, or any other legislation, they have that right. I think the battle should be joined. Americans want action from their government, and the spectacle of a filibuster might actually engage more of the public in the legislative process.
(And this works both ways - a few years ago, when Republicans were complaining that the treat of Democratic filibusters were preventing conservative judges from being confirmed they should have called their bluff - lets get these debates out in the open!)
Below are the well written commentaries. And if you have never seen the classic movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, you may want to check out the short scene of Jimmy Stewart as Mr. Smith, staging a one-man filibuster in the 1939 classic film.
President Barack Obama gave his first speech before a joint session of Congress tonight. In language that often channelled Franklin Delano Roosevelt, he urged the government and the American people to act "boldly and wisely" in the face of our current economic crisis.
His performance was impressive and he showed that he still has an ambitious, yes even audacious, program to confront America's most serious problems.
Most viewers will likely conclude that the tone of the speech was what it needed to be: serious and sober in recognizing the problems confronting the nation, yet inspirational and optimistic about the ability of the American spirit to rebuild anew.
What did you think? In case you missed it, click below:
I'm happy it passed, but I'm disappointed that it got watered down in order to make three Republicans happy.
Senators Olympia Snowe, Arlen Spector, and Susan Collins were the only Republicann Senators who voted for the package; the number of Republican members of the House that voted for it: zero. Not one. Thanks for the bipartisan effort G.O.P.
What we need now, is to lean harder on the Congress (especially the Republicans) to stop using the same old tired political rhetoric about governement wasting tax dollars. (Many of these people are the same ones that blew over a trillion dollars on the Iraq War, tax cuts for the rich, and a Wall Street bailout that held almost none of the companies or executives receiving the money accountable.) Those who voted for change and for Obama need to remember that he never said that he could accomplish anthing without us. We need to be engaged - writing lettters, making phone calls - whatever it takes to make our government understand that we demand action, and demand action now.
We cannot allow conservatives to dominate the debate in this nation by carping on relatively small provisions of otherwise important legislation. All of us will have to pay for the consequences of the misguided pressure they are putting on our government.
STAY INVOLVED PEOPLE!!!
If you didn't hear or see the President's weekly radio address, I've included it here. He closes with a nice quote from John F. Kennedy:
"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men. Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers. Pray for powers equal to your tasks."
Barack Obama took back control of the debate over the economy, and I believe, will have convinced a lot of Americans that he is leading us in the right direction in the face of the economic crisis.
He showed a mastery of the issues at hand that was refreshing compared to what we have been used to hearing the last eight years.
Read the story and see the video of the first bill Obama signed as President. It makes it easier for women to sue for discrimination and pay in the workplace.
(By the way, you may notice one of our Senators, Patty Murray, standing among the key lawmakers behind the President - she played an important role in promoting this bill.)
It is about time! Good luck to Michael Steele as he seeks to redeem the image of the Republican Party, the G.O.P., and yes, the "Party of Lincoln". It is going to take more than a non-white face to attract more voters though. Republicans have to show that they care about more than tax cuts that favor the rich and an intolerant brand of Christianity. If the party is really going to open its arms to all of America, it has got to take a good look at America, and respond with policy positions that help all Americans.
No more gay bashing. No more racially charged code language in campaign ads that play on white fears of things such as "urban crime" and "welfare queens". No more stigmatizing all Latinos, Asians, and Africans by fanatical crusades against illegal immigrants. No more unanimous opposition to economic stimulus bills. No more lies and misrepresentations of intelligence data to scare Americans into unnecessary wars.
Good luck Mr. Steele - you've got your work cut out for you.
The economic crisis that began in the housing and financial sectors of the United States has sparked a world-wide economic downturn. Here are some stories from the BBC about how Russians are reacting to the hard times. One wonders how Vladimir Putin and the government he still retains tremendous influence will react to political expression aimed at his administration.
Kudos to Dave Upthegrove for taking on a small, but unfair practice favoring student-athletes over other students in UW admissions.
Equality of opportunity is a core American value, and must be defended in places big and small.
In tough economic times, equal access to higher education is more important than ever. If we don't have room for every deserving student at our state universities (and we should!) let us at least make decisions on the basis of academic merit.
It is a good sign when the American people have optimism about an incoming President, and Barack Obama seems to be enjoying a higher level of confidence in him than any incoming President in quite a long time.
While 79% of those surveyed said they were feeling optimistic about life over the next four years according to a poll conducted by the New York Times, the most encouraging statistic is that 58% of those who voted for John McCain said they were "optimistic" about an Obama administration.
For more details on the survey complete with graphs, check out the link:
I think this commentary gets it right - it is time for the U.S. to ask Israel to share some of the blame for the tragedy of the Middle East and realize that even the use of overwhelming military force will not solve their security concerns in the long run - they are only making more enemies and radicals in the Arab world. True, Hamas is an organization that has not respected human rights of Israelis and has defied international law by its attacks on civilians, but Israel and the U.S. must facilitate talks.
Ezra Klein does a nice job on his blog of giving a short simple explanation of how each side finds the other at fault for starting the latest round of violence. Who Started It?
Here they are - the winners of the State Finals of the "We the People" Competition for the 2008-2009 school year. I think they did a great job, and I hope the video will help all other "We the People" students learn some things about how to prepare for competitions.
Congrats to Gig Harbor students and their great teacher, Ken Brown!
Well, not exactly. The votes are not counted until January 6th, 2009 after the new Congress is sworn in, and the ballots are counted that body. However, apparently according to this story, the AP has confirmed that the Electors actually voted for the candidates they pledged to vote for.
I'm really hoping that a 28th Amendment will be added to the Constitution soon, to get rid of this relic of the 18th century.
I wonder if he gets the message now? I fitting end to the Bush presidency, and an image that will probably endure throughout history as a symbol of the cluelessness and foolishness of the U.S. doctrine of pre-emptive invasion.
According to CNN:
The shoe-thrower -- identified as Muntadhar al-Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist with Egypt-based al-Baghdadia television network -- could be heard yelling in Arabic: "This is a farewell ... you dog!"
While pinned on the ground by security personnel, he screamed: "You killed the Iraqis!"
Here are some news stories I collected that I thought were relevant to issues of the Presidency, political parties, Congress, the rights of a defendant (who is accused of being a terrorist) being held at Guantanamo, and federal/state relationships.
And oh, by the way, they are saying that we are officially in a recession. As if we couldn't tell....
Obama Promises Governors That Federal Help Is on the Way PHILADELPHIA — With the economic crisis tearing holes in most state budgets, President-elect Barack Obama promised the nation’s governors on Tuesday that he would come to their aid with an ambitious program to build or repair roads, bridges, schools and other public projects.
Summoning state executives from across the country here, Mr. Obama sought to forge a bipartisan approach to the nation’s economic problems. He was met with pleas for a rapid infusion of federal money to create jobs, help those without health coverage and balance recession-ripped budgets.
In Guantánamo case, a judge tightens the screws on the US csmonitor.com Washington - A major battle is brewing in federal court here over the well-established legal requirement that the government must turn over any exculpatory evidence it has uncovered to an accused criminal it is seeking to imprison.
But what if that person is a suspected terrorist being held as an enemy combatant at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba?
That's the issue before US District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who is presiding over a high-stakes legal dispute involving allegations that US intelligence agents secretly sent a man to Morocco for 18 months of torture before transferring him to prisons in Afghanistan and then Guantánamo.
ATLANTA (Reuters) - Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss won a run-off election in Georgia on Tuesday, CNN said, denying Democrats the chance for a 60-seat "super majority" in the Senate that would have enabled them to pass legislation virtually at will.
Obama’s team of stars: Can he manage it? Some inner-circle conflict can be of help to a president, but building a sense of teamwork will be key. President-elect Barack Obama has earned accolades from Democrats and Republicans alike for the high-powered national security and economic teams he has unveiled.
Choice for U.N. Backs Strong Action Against Mass Killings - NYTimes.com: "President-elect Barack Obama has chosen his foreign policy adviser, Susan E. Rice, to be ambassador to the United Nations, picking an advocate of “dramatic action” against genocide as he rounds out his national security team, Democrats close to the transition said Sunday."
Along with nominating Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State, General Jim Jones for National Security Advisor and retaining Bush's Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, Obama will make Susan E. Rice a high profile appointee today.
And I think it is great news. According to the NYTimes:
To reinforce his intention to work more closely with the United Nations after the tensions of President Bush’s tenure, Mr. Obama plans to restore the ambassador’s post to cabinet rank, as it was under President Bill Clinton, according to Democrats close to the transition. While the cabinet consists of 15 department heads, a president can give other positions the same rank for the duration of his administration.
I'll try to post more on this after the announcement this morning.
Although Presidents are considered "lame-ducks" in the last part of their tenure in office, they can still weild a lot of power. In fact, in the closing days of an administration, there is often a rush to enact as many rules, regulations, and PARDONS as possible. First, here are some of the executive actions Bush is trying to get in place that are controversial:
There is the potential for a violent revolution against a democratically elected government in Thailand, as it has been charged with corruption. Now the government seems to be losing the support of the Army.
While in Washington D.C., they are trying to figure out how to keep Ford, G.M., and Chrysler from going bankrupt; and as the Obama team is searching for a way to create 2.5 million new jobs over the next two years, closer to home we may have a $5 billion dollar budget shortfall in the Washington State.
"The University of Washington and other institutions are trying to figure out ways to plug a yawning budget gap. Officials at several universities are already talking about raising tuition by 10 to 15 percent next year — perhaps $1,000 per student. That would require lawmakers to lift the current limit on schools of 7 percent in tuition increases annually."
President-Elect Obama has promised to close down the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But we should not forget that there have been so many principles of freedom, justice, and human rights that were tossed aside by the likes of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzalez, John Ashcroft, and George Bush that it is important not to forget what was done in the name of the United States of America since September 11, 2001.
A recent documentary called Torturing Democracy recalls all of this and I highly recommend viewing it. It is an important reminder about why respect for the rule of law is so important.
While it has been aired on PBS stations, the entire film can be viewed on-line. Below is a clip describing the technique known as waterboarding, that Bush Administration officials have refused to categorize as "torture".
Another good report on this story - it points out what a travesty of justice the Bush Administration created in dealing with terror suspects - especially those held in Guantanamo Bay. 5 Detainees Ordered Released From Guantanamo : NPR
News reporters have uncovered the decisions that Obama has settled on for some of his key Cabinet post. In this report by NBC, the effect of some of Obama's recent pics, including Timothy F. Geithner for Treasury Secretary are analyzed.
HillaryWatch: It is being reported this morning that Hillary Clinton has chosen to accept the position of Secretary of State in the Obama Administration. Clinton Is Said to Accept Secretary of State Position - By PETER BAKER and HELENE COOPER Two confidants said Hillary Rodham Clinton would give up her Senate seat and accept the nomination for secretary of state after talks with the president-elect.
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow took a look at what sort of drama will or will not be a part of Barack and Hillary working together.
Election spurs 'hundreds' of race threats, crimes Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting "Assassinate Obama." Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars. Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America. From California to Maine, police have documented a range of alleged crimes...
The YouTube Presidency 44 washingtonpost.com Today, President-elect Obama will record the weekly Democratic address not just on radio but also on video -- a first. The address, typically four minutes long, will be turned into a YouTube video and posted on Obama's transition site, Change.gov, once the radio address is made public on Saturday morning.
Big rallies are scheduled for today across the country in response to the propositions in three states (including California) that voted to ban gay marriage.
These events were organized very quickly with the help of modern technology. The first article explains how the younger generation is waging politics 2.0:
Is divided government preferable to one-party rule? Units 3 and 4 are taking a pretty close look at this in their speeches, and here is an op-ed piece by a skeptic of the Democrats being in control. Will Obama’s Congress Be Too Friendly? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/opinion/10ehrenhalt.html?th&emc=th
Meanwhile, one of my favorite liberal columnists, Paul Krugman, ponders whether Obama will transform our American government in response to the financial crisis the way FDR did with the New Deal. Franklin Delano Obama? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/opinion/10krugman.html?th&emc=th
Finally, former Nobel Peace Prize winner, Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who worked non-violently to end apartheid, discussed what he thinks Obama's election means to the world. The Man of Tomorrow -- His election has turned America's global image on its head. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110702896.html
This guy's really good at crunching the poll numbers. If you want a preview of what to look for in the election returns Tuesday, this is a great guide.
Well, not so much my reflection, but some interesting ones I've seen on the web in the past few days:
Why would someone want to be President of the United States? With all of the pressure and criticism that comes with the job, don't you think you'd have to be a little nuts to want the job? The New York Times explored what kind of psyche pursues the presidency.
Coverage of "Race and the Election" has interesting stories from MSNBC looking at how this election (and a possible Obama victory) could impact the issue of race in America.
Should ministers have the freedom to encourage their parishioners to vote for one candidate or another? Is it protected by freedom of expression, or should such ministers have their tax-exept status taken away? NPR looked at the issue: Political Endorsement From The Pulpit : NPR
Have you heard about the skinhead, Neo-Nazi, white supremacists that were arrested for plotting to kill 88 at a predominately black school, and then try to kill Obama as their finale? It is scary that there are nuts out there with guns who want to kill people because of the color of their skin.
In 2008.
I don't get it.
There was also a kid at a gun show that shot himself this past week, and singer/actress Jennifer Hudson had four family members killed by gunmen in Chicago. It makes you wonder about gun controal and the Second Amendment.
The First Amendment protects even stupid and hateful expression up until the point a crime is commited. When these people are arrested, they must still be given due process rights. And, of course, as a part of the police power of government, we need to prevent murders.
The secret service did a good job on this and other threats Obama has faced. It does bring up the issue of whether the hate groups out there are benefiting from Obama's success. You can read or listen to a fascinating story by NPR at:
I would love to have us change to a system of popular vote for the President, and I'm shocked that it didn't happen after the 2000 election. If the popular vote determined the presidency, Al Gore would have been the President, receiving over a 1/2 million votes than George W. Bush.
Unfortunately, there are many interests in the nation that benefit from the Electoral College: small states, rural voters, and the Republican Party.
The biggest problem, in my opinion, is that presidential elections only happen every four years, and people forget about the issue as more urgent matters deserve the government's attention. But, taking a chance on a someone becoming president that doesn't have the support of a majority of the voters is a big problem.
I wish there were more pressure on our government to change the Electoral College.
One of the big cases from the Supreme Court's last term was District of Columbia v. Heller. It was the big gun rights case. Apparently some of the more conservative judges are saying they think the court made a poor decision. It was a 5-4 vote, and there was an article about it in today's New York Times.
I've been waiting desparately for someone of stature in this campaign to say what Colin Powell said Sunday morning.
Thank you General Powell, for reminding not only your party, but all of America, what this country is all about.
THE DAILY BANTER.COM: Muslims Are Americans Too: "As Colin Powell poignantly pointed out, Arab Muslims have served America just like every other racial, religious and ethnic minority. It is a crying shame anyone needs to point this out."
This is a 7 minute clip from Meet the Press. He addresses the "Muslims are Americans" issue somewhere after the half-way point.
I just got home from work and read this article about 17 Guantanamo Bay prisoners finally being released after 6 years. They did nothing wrong, but were turned in (sold out) by Pakistanis that wanted the $5,000 bounty the U.S. government was offering.
So now, after last year's Boumediene v. Bush decision, they had the right to make a habeas corpus appeal to a U.S. judge, and the judge ordered them to be released.
Unfortunately for these folks, the Justice Department wants a "stay" in the ruling (keeping them imprisoned) in a separation of powers argument. They say the judicial branch doesn't have the authority to tell the government to settle these 17 people in the United States.
The Roberts Court is back at work as of today, the first Monday in October, which is the day the Court is required to begin hearing cases again after a summer break that began in late June. Some interesting cases and decisions are already coming down from the court:
High court refuses to hear racial profiling case csmonitor.com The US Supreme Court has declined to hear the case of a man who was kicked off an American Airlines jetliner in Boston because a flight attendant thought he looked like a Middle Eastern terrorist.
This doesn't seem right to me. The guy was clearly treated very badly by the airline, and won his case, only to have it overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Let me be clear - I'm against the death penalty, and I am not in favor of this man being executed. However, I can certainly see why the Court refused to hear this case. It seems like a real stretch to say that one's fair trial rights were violated because of a bible reading in the jury deliberation room. Maybe there are some details I'm missing here, but it sounds like they were standing on pretty shakey legal ground when the defendant filed this suit.
Finally, from a few days ago, the Court refused to reconsider a controversial ruling from last term: Court Won't Reconsider Ban on Execution for Child Rape The Supreme Court yesterday declined to revisit its June decision that imposing the death penalty on child-rapists is unconstitutional, although two justices said they would have reopened the case and two others sharply criticized the majority.
The Supreme Court has been on summer break since the end of June. However, the Supreme Court begins its new term every year on the first Monday of October - That's tomorrow!
Read about what cases are on on the court's docket here:
This organization does a great job of researching the claims made by candidates running for office. Click below to see the run-down of misinformation that was aired during the V.P. debate last night.
It is always the poor and disadvantaged that suffer the most in hard economic times. Unfortunately sometimes it goes unnoticed because it isn't "news" that the poor are having a hard time. (Not as much as the new news that the middleclass, upper class, and businesses are taking a hit.)
