Bill's Big Diamond Blog

Opening for More Candidates in the "Grown Up Wing" of Democratic Party?

If there isn’t room for too much more pointless bickering in the Democratic race and the party faithful don’t come running to the

"grown up wing of the Democratic Party,” what about a late entry by the Nobel Prize winner into the race?

Jack Cafferty is trying to stir up reaction to the suggestion on CNN.

Telecoms and Jay Rockefeller: "I was compelled to cave"

Shorter Glenn Greenwald on Senator Jay Rockefeller’s sellout to immunize telecoms for spying on Americans for the Bush Administration:

Can someone please tell Jay Rockefeller that we
don't actually live in a country where the President
has the definitively dictatorial power to "compel"
and "require" private actors to break the law by
"ordering" them to do so? Like all other lawbreakers,
telecoms broke the law because they chose to, and
profited greatly as a result. That telecoms had an
option is too obvious to require proof, but
conclusive proof can be found in the fact that some
telecoms did refuse to comply on the grounds that
doing so was against the law.

The link to the Qwest story above gets to one of the saddest aspects of the story. The NSA asked these companies to begin spying on us before 9/11, not after, as everyone in the Administration would like us to believe.

Times Coverage Omits Issues and Candidate from CNN Democratic Debate

Sometimes you witness an event and then when accounts of it appear in the news, it’s impossible to tell that they’re about the same thing you saw with your lyin’ eyes. Having watched the Democratic CNN/Black Congressional Caucus debate last night, I’m having one of those experiences this morning as I read the Times and scan other headlines.

Most of the CNN test audience (who all watched the debate) chose former Senator John Edwards as the winner, saying he rose above a petty snit between the frontrunners to effectively discuss issues of economic justice, jobs, housing, poverty, and the unfinished legacy of Martin Luther King. Patrick Healy and Jeff Zeleny’s New York Times account, however, spends its first eight paragraphs on the 'he said/she said' exchange of obscure charges between Obama and Clinton over each other’s integrity, voting records, spouses, business connections, and relative slippery-ness.

Even the photo the Times ran of the debate excluded Edwards (UPDATE- this was on the web- the dead tree version ran several, with some including Edwards as well), as if he hadn’t been on the stage at all, despite his obvious appeal to the live audience in the hall and his standing in the eyes of the test audience. CNN’s senior political analyst, Bill Schneider headlined Edwards “style and his key issues” as the lead in his final thoughts last night, but the Times piece portrayed Edwards as having “to fight to speak,” as if he hadn’t been able to find the breath to be heard over the air conditioning in the hall.

Lost in the Times account, which seems to have set the pace for most other news stories on the debate, is any mention of the difference between the candidates’ positions on addressing the steep decline of the US economy (hint: Clinton- $750 tax rebate, Obama- $500 tax rebate + social security increment, Edwards- massive green jobs program), their relative plans to disengage from Iraq (Clinton-soon, Obama-carefully, Edwards-one year), or their housing programs, (Clinton-5 year interest freeze, Obama-unclear, Edwards-government lending to affected homeowners).

Given the news that European markets have were in free-fall throughout Monday and that Wall St is expected to open in a cruel mood this Tuesday morning, the total omission of reporting on candidates' economic stances might be considered poor reporting, were it not for the significance of spilling ink on Clinton's husband, pro or con. There, the Times made up for any other deficit. Even Bill Clinton's dancing abilities made it into the article.

The celebrity fawning, the horserace, and the mudslinging didn’t seem to much engage people who watched the debate, but it sure dominated coverage of the event this morning. Most newspaper accounts reveled in the details of Clinton’s charge about a slumlord who was connected to a non-profit client of a law firm Obama worked for— and in reporting Obama’s shot at Clinton for serving on Wal-Mart’s board (while she was the first lady of the corporation’s home state).

An on-target discussion about home lenders targeting low-income families of color for subprime mortgages seems to have disappeared from news accounts as well. The question posed was about the relationship between race and marketing by major lenders— and whether the lenders specifically went after communities of color when pushing risky products. Only Edwards offered a direct answer (“Yes”), but each candidate discussed the subprime issue in their response. For all the ink spilled about race vs. gender in the handicapping of the primary battle, a rare and specific debate on race and economics as actual issues didn’t make it into the paper of record this morning.

Next time, I guess it’ll be safer to skip the actual debates and wait for the next spin cycle to tell me what really happened. Obviously, I can’t trust my own eyes and ears.

For discussion, see Memeorandum for more blog reaction.

The Blinkered Comforts of Xenophobia and the Sinking US Dollar

“What should we do if the Chinese start selling dollars?”

That ought to be a question asked of each of the Presidential candidates this month, but it won’t be. Instead, they’ll be asked about undocumented Mexican immigrants and what to do about their presence here in the US.

The nativism that has become a staple of the Republican nominating contest this season obscures the real issue the US has with the world outside its borders. While we sleep, our economy has gone on fire sale— and foreign investors are buying up American companies up at bargain basement prices.

First, government regulators ignored the home mortgage industry’s usurious, duplicitous, and discriminatory lending practices in subprime loan products— and hedge fund managers and CDO department heads then folded all those shakey loans into indecipherably complex securities, which sold widely to American investors. Then, once those securities crashed along with American home prices, the big boys on Wall Street began running, hat in hand, to beg investors from the Middle East and Asia to bring them enough cash to keep their own stocks afloat. Now, our major banks’ new biggest stockholders are more interested in their petrodollars than our US dollars.

Add this investment phenomenon to the fast-falling US currency and to the huge existing investment in dollars by countries like China, and you have to wonder what happens to our economy if the comparatively strong Euro starts looking like a better investment to those Chinese central bankers than does dear old George Washington.

But never mind. Keep chanting, “USA, USA, USA!” Let’s spend all our political energy on fighting immigration and on preening attacks on Iranian mullahs. it’s easier to avoid complex economic worries if one focuses solely on the weighty problems of ferreting out Mexican immigrants working in our diner kitchens and on our construction sites. If we kick them out, at least we can take their dollars back.

A h/t to Maureen Dowd's worthwhile "Red White and Blue Tag Sale"

What About John?

I can't decide if this ad is suicidal, but it sure is funny and true. Somehow, the hype about Hillary and Obama certainly has overwhelmed any issue discussion we hoped might come out of the primaries so far—and Edwards has been far more specific about what he's do as President than either of them.

I guess the natural consequence of that kind of issue-mindedness in our system is obscurity...

H/t to You Decide for the commercial link

Rigging the Polls, Indiana Style

Are you wondering how a minority of status quo voters can hold sway in an election year when most people are now fed up with the status quo? Well, apparently you just exclude enough marginalized people from the ballot to make up the difference.

Indiana has passed a law requiring a valid government-issued photo ID be presented in order for registered voters to cast a ballot. This measure would require any voter not holding a driver’s license or valid passport, mostly young people, poor people, and older people, to go to unusual effort, in advance, to acquire a state ID in order to vote.

Amazingly enough, the Supreme Court looks ready to uphold Indiana’s statute. See Crooks and Liars for more on the case…

Rove Works to Frame FISA Immunity As Terror-Fighting

Karl Rove is working hard to make telecom immunity part of a new FISA bill this year. It's key to keeping the process by which the Bush Administration evaded the FISA law a secret, since it would prevent the telecoms from rolling on the Administration in court. By calling immunity a security issue, Rove wants to frame giving a free pass to telecoms as fighting terror, not as helping to hide civil liberties abuses. His recent speech to the RNC focused on immunity:

"Do they or do they not want our intelligence
agencies to be listening in on conversations
between terrorists in the Middle East who may be
plotting to hurt America?" Rove asked…

He urged the party officials to devise
communication strategies that find "creative and
sustaining ways" to "talk about these contrasts" . . .

Rove also said that withdrawing immunity for
telecom companies would "effectively gut" the
["Terrorist Surveillance"] program.

Glenn Greenwald points out that the Government -- under the old FISA -- is entirely able and fully authorized to "listen in on conversations between terrorists in the Middle East who may be plotting to hurt America." But, no matter, Rove will paint any resistance to total immunity for telecoms as unpatriotic.

Senator Chris Dodd continues to be prominent among Senate Democrats in his stance against immunity. Even while Majority Leader Reid and other Democratic Senate leaders are planning to allow immunity as part of a new FISA deal, Dodd still threatens to filibuster any attempt to do so.

Less courageous are the major Democratic presidential candidates. Neither of them have differentiated themselves on the issue from Senators who are reluctant to offend the well-funded telecom lobby.

An Opportunity to Lower Tensions with Iran

A suggestion by security blogger William Arkin with the WaPo has been largely overlooked by the Administration, but would be well worth keeping in mind…that is, if the intention of the Administration is actually to lower tensions:

…Vice Adm. Kevin J. Cosgriff, commander of
the U.S. Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf,
stressed that the Sunday incident was unusual
because the U.S. and Iran -- including
Revolutionary Guard ships -- "routinely" deal
with each other in these passages.

If Iran wants to claim its innocence, why not
take advantage of its mendacity to start a
professional dialogue between two navies and
set the path to ensure that such incidents in the
future don't escalate to war?

Free Speech Update: Please Check All Opinions at Valdosta State University Door

Welcome to Valdosta State University. Please check your opinions at the door… or take them to the “free speech area” between 12 and 1 p.m. and 5 and 6 p.m., with prior registration.

If you don’t, you may end up like T. Hayden Barnes, who opposed the building of two parking garages with student monies and ended up being “administratively withdrawn” from the university by the administration. They used the fig leaf of a Facebook description on Barnes’ site which the bureaucrats attached to the notice of withdrawal slipped under Barnes’ dormitory door. It called for readers to join in a photo contest, with the text reading, “Shoot it. Upload it. Get famous. Project Spotlight is searching for the next big thing. Are you it?”

The university’s president, Ronald Zaccari, began attending events with a coterie of bodyguards and police officers after the Facebook printout was shown to him and has now announced his retirement, six months early. His flacks cited the Virginia Tech shooting as a precedent for tighter security.

Oh, and if you’re interested in the dangers of Project Spotlight, it’s website tells us that, “The program hopes to enable a new wave of entertainers, journalists and artists to reach their true potential by offering technology, audience and a first-of-its-kind artist-grant program.”

Just be careful about where you attempt to reach that potential.

h/t to flutterecho at Slashdot and the link to insidehighered.com

Open Primaries, Open Debate

The possibility that the race for the Democratic presidential nomination will actually remain in question long enough to force a discussion of candidates’ visions and policies is generating great excitement in the progressive community— and should be doing so among Democrats at large.

Katrina vanden Heuvel writes in her Editor's Cut blog at the Nation:

"Throw polls and pundits out the window." The race
for the Democratic presidential nomination is now
wide open--and candidates will be tested rather than
crowned by the media… And that gives us time to
push from outside to define and sharpen candidates'
stance on issues we care about as progressives.
From a sane and humane immigration policy as we
go to Nevada, a more populist jobs and economics
program as we head into recession, and a sharper
end-the-war strategy to stop the "strategic drift."