Zandar's Thought Of The Day

The Village effort to change the subject away from Obama's substance in the SOTU speech to how "arrogant" and "uppity" he was for "calling out the Supreme Court" is really starting to grate on my nerves.

[UPDATE 2:13 PM] Double G lays it out.

Right-wing criticisms -- that it was Obama who acted inappropriately by using his  SOTU address to condemn the Court's decision -- are just inane.  Many of the Court's rulings engender political passions and have substantial political consequences -- few more so than a ruling that invalidated long-standing campaign finance laws.  Obama is an elected politician in a political branch and has every right to express his views on such a significant court ruling.  While the factual claims Obama made about the ruling are subject to reasonable dispute, they're well within the realm of acceptable political rhetoric and are far from being "false" (e.g., though the ruling did not strike down the exact provision banning foreign corporations from electioneering speech, its rationale could plausibly lead to that; moreover, it's certainly fair to argue, as Obama did, that the Court majority tossed aside a century of judicial precedent).  Presidents have a long history of condemning Court rulings with which they disagree -- Republican politicians, including Presidents, have certainly never shied away from condemning Roe v. Wade in the harshest of terms -- and Obama's comments last night were entirely consistent with that practice.  While Presidents do not commonly criticize the Court in the SOTU address, it is far from unprecedented either.  And, as usual, the disingenuousness levels are off the charts:  imagine the reaction if Ruth Bader Ginsburg had done this at George Bush's State of the Union address.

The real problem is the Citizens United ruling itself.

If Obama Does Have A Failure Right Now...

...it's the fact he hasn't dealt with the foreclosure crisis in this country at all.

Las Vegas homeowners had the highest U.S. foreclosure rate last year, and California and Florida cities accounted for 17 of the nation’s 20 worst markets as unemployment extended the housing recession.

Rising foreclosure rates in Utah, Illinois, Oregon and Arkansas metropolitan areas showed home-loan distress spreading to “previously insulated areas,” Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac Inc. said today in a report. A record 3 million homes will probably be seized this year, RealtyTrac has forecast.

“The dam will break and we’ll see a significant increase in foreclosures,” Michael Lea, a finance professor at San Diego State University, said in an interview. “The banks can’t continue to hope the economy starts growing.”

The U.S. jobless rate will probably stay at 10 percent in 2010, according to the median estimate of 60 economists in a Bloomberg survey. House prices that gained in the past six months will falter again after the government ends support for the mortgage market, Robert Shiller, co-creator of the S&P/Case- Shiller home price index, said yesterday.

The Federal Reserve’s $1.25 trillion program to buy mortgage-backed securities is set to conclude March 31, raising the risk that borrowing costs will jump. The purchases helped drive the rate on 30-year fixed U.S. home loans down to 4.71 percent in early December, the lowest level in Freddie Mac data going back to 1972.

“There is evidence that we’re entering a new wave of foreclosures, driven more by unemployment and economic hardship than what we’ve seen over the past few years,” James Saccacio, RealtyTrac’s chief executive officer, said in the statement.

Regular readers know I've been talking about the wave of foreclosures coming in 2010.  Guess what?  It's 2010.  And on cue, here they come.  Three million foreclosures this year.  If Obama doesn't do something immediately, 2011 may very well be worse.  And yes, this means this has to go to the top of the list, or the economy is screwed.

Just Stop Talking Already, Rudy

The TPM crew catches Rudy outright lying again on national TV about Obama.  He figures nobody will check.  Nobody in the Village will check or correct him.  There's a difference.

But the larger point is Rudy knows at the time, he'll get away with it.

The even larger issue is why Rudy's still called on as an expert.

If It's Thursday...

...I might remember that today is jobless number day as opposed to SOTU aftermath day too.

470k new claims, 4.6 million continuing claims, but total number of people on jobless assistance is well over 10 million.

Still a big problem.

The Soft Bigotry Of Expecting The Village Not To Be A Bunch Of Morons

Chris Matthews:  still amazed that our African-American president can do things like "talk."

MATTHEWS: You know, I was trying to think about who he was tonight, and it’s interesting: He is post-racial by all appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he’s gone a long way to become a leader of this country and passed so much history in just a year or two. I mean, it’s something we don’t even think about.

I was watching, I said, Wait a minute, he’s an African-American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is President of the United States and we’ve completely forgotten that tonight — completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don’t think terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard — a very subtle fact. It’s so hard to even talk about; maybe I shouldn’t talk about it, but I am.

No really, he said this. On television.

What a coincidence. As a black man, I forgot Chris Matthews could be a racist idiot.

 It's annoying as hell to see this man blithely talk like this, and yet I am reminded that there are Americans out there that are similarly amazed at what Barack Obama (or any black person, apparently) is able to do.  Like be President, for example.

Still Not Serious About Debt

Yggy has a hell of a point (emphasis mine):

I was watching my boss John Podesta on Charlie Rose last night, but found myself really struck by what David Brooks said, namely his voicing of an all-purpose sense of despair about the long-term fiscal deficit: “I just don’t see a way out of it.”

I’ve said things like that myself in the past, but I think it’s wrong. The way out is actually pretty obvious. You need a combination of tax increases and overall spending cuts, with defense and Medicare on the table. This doesn’t happen because it’s politically impossible. But it’s politically impossible because it’s not really necessary. You can see the lines on the charts easily enough, but it’s just not the case right now that there’s a crisis in the market for US treasury bonds that’s forcing action. And the action that would be needed is the kind of unpopular action that nobody would undertake unless forced.

And that's the real heart of the matter.  Until we're willing politically to make massive cuts in defense and entitlement spending, we'll never solve the deficit issue.  At some point, a President will have to do it.  Democrats aren't about to do this.  But it's important that any Republican calls to balance the budget are met with the truth about our massive increase in war spending.

Republicans want to keep the defense spending and kill entitlements.  Democrats want to do the opposite.  Both are wrong.

Epic Republicans Still Can't Do Math Fail

Johnny Volcano should probably hire better writers, as Josh Marshall points out:

Look at this line from the email John McCain sent out tonight to curry favor with Tea Partiers whose support he needs to keep to ward off a primary challenge from J.D. Hayworth ...

During his first year in office, President Obama and Congressional Democrats have amassed a $12.4 trillion deficit that is growing each day.

$12.4 trillion deficit? Obama? He's borrowed a trillion a month?

And he's from Kenya and he's going to sleep with your nubile daughters.  Besides, your average Teabagger doesn't understand math either.

EPIC FAIL.  By about, oh, $12 trillion bucks or so.

Making The Rounds

Reactions to President Obama's State of the Union address from last night varied.  Maha just wasn't impressed:

I’m going to guess the pundits will grade this speech in the C+ to B – range, except on Fox News, where it will of course have completely failed.

and

OK, but dude, you’ve got to be more visible, more engaged with what’s going on in Congress.

Anyone else want to grade this? I don’t think the speech itself will have much impact on current political momentum.

Chris Cilizza had a good point on health care reform:

While Obama took a cue from former presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton by eating a slice of humble pie after a legislative (or political) setback, he was adamant that health care could not simply fade away in the wake of the Massachusetts special election and challenged Republicans (and Democrats) to bring forward better ideas -- if they had them -- on health care. Left unsaid, of course, is that health care was the President's number one legislative priority and the burden of proof, therefore, rests with him.

E.J. Dionne dissects the speech, but more importantly gets the GOP Plan as well:

Obama had once hoped to be a conciliatory president who heard his critics and his philosophical adversaries. He is still that man. But it was clear that the Obama who addressed the nation on Wednesday understood that he confronts a Republican Party that sees unflinching opposition as blazing a path to victory. We heard a president ready to do battle, and determined to win.

(More after the jump...)

StupidiNews!

• Toyota has expanded its recall of cars that have a stuck accelerator problem to include another 1.1 million cars, bringing the total to 4.2 million vehicles.
• Hillary Clinton signals she will not be a two-term Secretary of State.
• Prosecutors are expected to wrap up their case against Scott Roeder today, and as Roeder's defense begins tomorrow he is expected to testify in his own defense.
• Afghanistan's president warns troops will be needed to secure his country for another 10 to 15 years at minimum.
• In 2007 a bank's trading program went haywire and accidentally cost Credit Suisse $150,000.
  

Last Call

I thought it was actually a very good speech.  Highlights:

From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument – that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts for wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, and maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is, that's what we did for eight years. That's what helped lead us into this crisis. It's what helped lead to these deficits. And we cannot do it again.

Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new. Let's invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let's meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let's try common sense.

To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust – deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we must take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; and to give our people the government they deserve.

(More after the jump...)

Repealin' Appealin'

The Axeman says Obama will call on Congress to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell tonight, and to allow gays to serve in the military.

President Obama will ask Congress Wednesday night to repeal the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that bars gays and lesbians from openly serving in, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod told CNN.

The request will be included in the president's State of the Union address, Axelrod said.

The issue has been a source of contention for heavy hitters on both sides of the issue, who are lining up for a fight.

In a message to Pentagon leadership, Gen. John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it's time to repeal the law.

"As a nation built on the principal of equality, we should recognize and welcome change that will build a stronger more cohesive military," said Shalikashvili. His letter was sent out Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, who supports repealing the policy.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, flatly disagreed with the idea of ending it.

"When it comes to 'don't ask don't tell,' frankly, I think it's worked very well. And we just ought to leave it alone," he said to reporters Wednesday morning.

No Bonehead, it's not working well.  It's not working well at all.  You know who allows openly gay members to serve in the military?  Canada, Britain, Ireland, Germany, Australia, and Israel, not to mention dozens of other countries.  They have yet to implode or to have their military go berserk.  (I mean c'mon, the Israelis do it.  Being gay?  Doesn't get you out of military service there, no sir.)

It's about damn time, too.  Good for Obama.  You back the man on what he's doing that you agree with, and this is just basic human decency.  (Just like Bush, right?)

Advice On Advice

Bob Cesca comes out with a pretty well-reasoned argument about how progressives can win the public over by changing the framing and picking smart battles in a Washington that is still dominated by a political reality.  Change the reality, win the battle.

Yes, to repeat: the president isn't flawless. He clearly could be more progressive on a number of fronts. But as a movement, we could be more effective with how we get him to do that. Here's how.

1) Modulating our loudness. If we're always yelling, then we're easier to ignore. Oh, it's just the left and their screeching again. But if we remain proactive, if we give credit where credit is due and pick our battles, then, when we have to get loud, we get noticed. Rachel Maddow is a good example of modulating her tone. When it comes to the administration, she's always been fair and reasonable, yet tough when necessary. So when she has to yell, it really, really resonates. Her exchange with Jared Bernstein is a perfect example. I think it's safe to say that the White House took very seriously her segment with Bernstein about the spending freeze. Why? Modulation. Dynamics. Fairness.

2) Smart accountability. We have to avoid using right-wing frames and accidentally engaging in arguments that can be borrowed by political enemies. Teaming up with someone like Norquist only elevates Norquist and diminishes us. A similar argument was used by the Obama campaign when arguing against a series of town hall debates with John McCain. Obama had everything to lose and McCain had everything to gain. Do we really want to lend our credibility to Norquist and the teabaggers? Do we really want to send the mixed message that it's okay to join up with someone who wants to drown government, while also trying to convince voters that government can be a force for good?

3) Winning the debate on the ground. How do we make America more progressive (moving the Overton Window)? By changing minds. Yelling at the president won't change the fact that a considerably large chunk of the American electorate is moderate and independent. The Democrats need the middle in order to win because the left simply isn't large enough. But if we systematically and deliberately change minds -- if we're disciplined about taking the longview approach and convincing voters that progressivism is the best way to govern, then we will eventually force politicians to move leftward as the electorate does.

Until then, we need to accept (albeit begrudgingly) the political reality that the president will occasionally have to do things that appeal to the middle in order to get other things done. And some of those things will be progressive. I hasten to note that we don't have to merrily accept all of it (see item #1 above), we should simply keep this reality in mind before we kneejerk ourselves into a spastic mess. You might not like what the president is doing in Afghanistan, and you should continue to make your case against it. But don't take it as a betrayal. Perhaps winning support by being aggressive in Afghanistan will buy the president some votes on a more progressive bill elsewhere.

Now, all of these are great ideas.  So naturally, he's getting pummeled in the comments over at HuffPo because there are things that Obama hasn't done yet that he could of if he had the political will to do so (the repeal of DADT comes to mind.)

It doesn't change the fact that Bob has a point.  The Useful Idiots aren't helping.

Epic Secret Agent Man Fail

This guy, Stan Dai?  One of James O' Keefe's "wiretapping experts".  Watched a little too much 24 there, eh?

They never really had a chance:

The FBI account of the attack reads like a bad script from an episode of the A-team. To me it seems pretty clear that having successfully bamboozled the minimum wage employees of Acorn, the O'Keefe four were rather full of themselves. They don't appear to have considered the fact that the security procedures in place at GSA run facilities are explicitly designed to resist espionage attempts by the KGB, GRU or any other world-class intelligence agency.

We are obviously going to be seeing a lot of RNC attempts to downplay the significance of this episode. I expect to see it being described as a lark, a prank, a bad joke gone wrong. But there really shouldn't be any doubt that the perpetrators understood they were performing a criminal act.

And I'm willing to bet other people knew it was a criminal act too before they tried it.  How deep does this little disgusting rabbit hole go there, The Party Of Law And Order That Is The GOP?

EPIC FAIL.

Now How Much Would You Pay To See Moose Lady Talk?

Via the Rumpies, the answer is increasingly that the number is "negative five hundred forty-nine dollars."

Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips likely assumed that scoring a dinner speech by the former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential candidate would guarantee a huge turnout for his National Tea Party Convention, scheduled to start Feb. 4 at Nashville's Gaylord Opryland Hotel. But according to Tea Party insiders, the tickets for the Palin banquet aren't selling—and some conservative activists who have already paid to attend are now demanding refunds. With the controversial event shaping up to be a potential flop, some Tea Partiers are urging Palin to cancel her speech to avoid a humiliating public relations disaster.

The problems began after news broke that Phillips intended to profit from the convention—which costs $549 a person for access to both the conference and Palin’s banquet, or $349 for a ticket to the dinner alone. With one prominent conservative blogger charging that the event seemed "scammy," several key sponsors yanked their support, including the National Precinct Alliance, the American Liberty Alliance, American Majority, and the Federation for American Immigration Reform. As the rash of bad press continued, this week Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), announced that she’s considering pulling out as a convention speaker. And some Tea Party activists think Palin should join her. According to internal convention planning documents obtained by Mother Jones, Palin will be paid $115,000 to address the attendees—as they dine on steak or lobster. To some Tea Partiers, this lavish affair sounds suspiciously like an exclusive GOP fundraiser and a betrayal of their grassroots movement. (In mid-January, Palin told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly that she will not profit from her appearance at the convention, suggesting she would donate her speaking fee to Republican candidates. But she has not provided any details on that, and a Palin spokesperson did not respond to requests for clarification.)

Last Moose Fan in the room, turn out the lights on the way out.  $549 to hear Sarah Palin talk is something even Teabaggers think is pretty damn stupid.

On Your Best Behavior

Cause we have guests, you see.

House GOP leaders are urging fellow Republicans to control their tempers and avoid any repeat performances of Joe Wilson’s “you lie” outburst at tonight’s State of the Union speech.

House Republican leaders warned rank and file Republican members in a private meeting this morning to show the President “respect” during tonight’s speech, two sources familiar with the meeting tell me.

House GOP leader John Boehner, minority whip Eric Cantor, and leading House conservative Mike Pence all stood up and delivered that message to the closed-door House GOP caucus meeting today.

“All of them talked about how the President is a guest,” one senior House GOP aide who was there tells me.

And every single one of them is aware of how Joe Wilson is a Goddamn American Hero among the teabagger set and raised a million bucks for his campaign because of his outburst.

And every single one of them is thinking "You know, it's probably worth it anyway..."