Last Call

You know you've made it big in Washington when your cause has industry lobbyists.

If there's one group of people who get their way in Washington, it's lobbyists.

Now, advocates of marijuana legalization may have a reason to cheer that political reality: They're getting their own marijuana lobby group.

And just Big Pharma and Big Oil lobby for greater leeway for their businesses, so too will Big Marijuana push for their industry to be given the freedom to succeed.

Aaron Smith, executive director of the newly formed National Cannabis Industry Association, says that marijuana legalization is "looking inevitable."

Smith told McClatchy news service: "It's pretty clear that the medical marijuana industry is becoming recognized more and more by the mainstream as a fully legitimate part of the economy."

Legalization "didn't happen in 2010, but it's likely to happen in 2012," he added. "It's going to be relatively soon we're going to see states move from medical marijuana into broader legal markets. And the federal government needs to catch up. Frequently the American people are ahead of the Congress."

Don't think legalized pot is going to be big business?  Look at the beer and cigarette giants.  Sure, there will still be specialist makers of these products (cigar makers, microbrewers, etc) but look how much beer and cigarettes pull in as far as profits and taxes.

I don't see legalized pot being any different.

The Whale Room At The Big Casino

In Vegas parlance, the biggest gamblers are called "whales":  they drop six-figure bets, have lines of credit, are treated like royalty by the staff, and blow a whole weekend gambling what would be an entire lifetime's worth of earnings for a regular American.  The financial world equivalent of the whale room at the biggest casino of them all?  The derivatives kings of Wall Street.

On the third Wednesday of every month, the nine members of an elite Wall Street society gather in Midtown Manhattan.

The men share a common goal: to protect the interests of big banks in the vast market for derivatives, one of the most profitable — and controversial — fields in finance. They also share a common secret: The details of their meetings, even their identities, have been strictly confidential.

Drawn from giants like JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the bankers form a powerful committee that helps oversee trading in derivatives, instruments which, like insurance, are used to hedge risk.

In theory, this group exists to safeguard the integrity of the multitrillion-dollar market. In practice, it also defends the dominance of the big banks.

The banks in this group, which is affiliated with a new derivatives clearinghouse, have fought to block other banks from entering the market, and they are also trying to thwart efforts to make full information on prices and fees freely available. 

Why let anybody else into the club?  More derivatives dealers means more competition and less margin for the trading houses.  And these are the true "whales"...they buy and sell the American economy.  This shadow market is worth hundreds of trillions of dollars...and everything else is just background noise.  And since the meltdown two years ago, the entire derivatives machinery is controlled by a handful of banks who have locked everyone else out.

The Justice Department is "looking into it" of course.  But you're mad if you think anything will happen.

There's just too much money involved.

Steele Trying To Decide

RNC chair Michael Steele will supposedly make an official decision to run again for the position or not public tomorrow.

In an email sent to RNC voting members send last night, Steele announced a "private conference call" for the GOP leaders nationwide who will determine who leads the RNC for the next two years.

Steele has yet to announce whether he'll seek a second term as the field of Republicans interested in replacing him fills up. Politico reports "key supporters" of Steele expect he'll decline to run again.

That field got one name longer Friday when former RNC deputy chair Mary Cino formally entered the race for chair. Cino's name has been floated for weeks, and her bid enjoys the support of Vice President Dick Cheney as well as other big names from the Bush era.

As amusing as Steele has been, nobody's about to give him any credit for the Republican victories in 2010.  It's actually a bit of a shame.  Despite his many gaffes and attention-grabbing antics,  all Steele did was prove beyond a doubt that the real power in the Republican party rests not with the RNC, but the coalition of Super-PAC donors and fundraisers like Karl Rove's American Crossroads outfit.

In effect, these outside groups have completely taken over the RNCs duties in all but name.  It was happening anyway, but the Citizens United decision sealed that deal.  Steele was just there for show, but he put on a good one while he was there.

Playing the Devil's advocate, if Steele really was in charge, and responsible for the Republicans' substantial midterm victories, do you think letting him stay on would be a problem?  I don't.  Steele's a figurehead and he knew it.  But now the RNC is looking for somebody more substantial going into 2012.

Part of me is disappointed to see an African-American politician rise to the top like this when he was so obviously being used.  But the other part of me knows that Steele allowed himself to be used as a counter to Obama from the beginning.

I've said Steele was gone a number of times and I've been wrong so far, but that just meant he was more useful as a figurehead rather than a scapegoat.  This time I believe he'll step down.

Took Them Long Enough

With all the non-stop attention on Bernie Sanders's theatrics and the guilty pleasure of "the President's own party" opposing it, it seems the Village has finally noticed that there are those on the right who oppose Obama's tax deal as well.

Many conservative activists are particularly upset that the measure would add almost $900 billion to the deficit - although they all support the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, arguing those would spur economic growth.

Many conservatives, including Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota, are also concerned because the measure would increase some taxes, pointing to the resumption of the estate tax, as well as extending the unemployment compensation for the long-term unemployed without any offsetting spending cuts.

Bachmann told CNN's American Morning Friday she would not vote for the package as it is currently drafted.

"It ramps up spending in a big way, and it also ramps up deficits, and we are seeing a real difficulty with selling the treasury bonds," she said.

Leaders of the Tea Party Patriots group are asking each of their members to call five members of Congress urging them to vote against the proposal.

"The Deal" or 'The Tax Deal' as it is becoming known around the country between President Obama and Congressional Leadership is problematic. This is a deal that needs to be opposed," says the group on its website.

"I am very upset. It is a direct breach of the Republican pledge not to add to the deficit," the Tea Party Patriots' National Coordinator Mark Meckler told CNN.

I could have told you this would be the real Republican reaction to the deal, and I said as much earlier in the week.   Anyone who has been paying even basic attention to the Tea Party in the last year should have known that there was no way they would allow increased deficit spending, or a bipartisan win for President Obama, and sure as hell no way they would allow something that did both to go by unchallenged.

The same conservatives who are gleefully taunting progressives saying that the President has abandoned them are the same ones who have failed to notice that Republicans are doing the same to the Tea Party.  And that latter fight is going to be far more ugly.

Snowed In

A major blizzard in the Midwest has dumped enough snow this weekend in Minneapolis to actually collapse the roof of the Metrodome.

A blizzard warning remains in effect in parts of Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota where heavy snow caused the roof of the Metrodome in Minneapolis, Minnesota, to collapse, a spokesman for the Minnesota State Patrol said Sunday.


The National Weather Service issued an alert Sunday for parts of the three states and regions along the Mississippi River, warning travelers of hazardous conditions caused by heavy snow, fierce winds and subzero temperatures.

In Minneapolis, the roof of the city's 64,000-seat football stadium caved in, its iconic dome no longer visible after more than 17 inches of snow blanketed the Twin Cities since Friday.

Concerns about the stadium's Teflon-covered inflatable dome surfaced Friday night, prompting officials to postpone a football game between the New York Giants and the Minnesota Vikings.

I'm sure Green Bay fans are laughing their asses off.  Perhaps the dome will be ready for Monday night's game, or not.  Hell, I'm sure the Packers would let the Vikes use Lambeau Field if the dome wasn't reinflated, just to piss them off.

Stockholm Syndrome

News reports coming in of a pair of car bombs in Sweden, possibly linked to the country's military involvement in Afghanistan or editorial cartoons depicting Mohammad as a terrorist.

Two blasts rocked the center of Stockholm on Saturday in a possible attack inspired by Sweden's presence in Afghanistan, killing the bomber and wounding two other people, police and media said.

Swedish news agency TT said that 10 minutes before the first blast, when a car exploded near a busy shopping street, it received an email with threats over the Swedish presence in Afghanistan and over a years-old case of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad by a Swedish artist.

Police spokesman Kjell Lindgren said the car exploded at peak shopping hours at 5 p.m. (12 p.m. EST). About 10 to 15 minutes later another explosion took place on a street 300 meters (984 ft) away.

A man was found dead near the second explosion and two people with minor injuries were also found nearby.

Asked if the man blew himself up in some way, Lindgren said: "It is possible."

Investigations were continuing to see if the two incidents were linked, he said.

More on this as it comes in.

[UPDATE] CNN is saying that Swedish authorities believe this was a failed terrorist bombing, and that the intended destruction could have been much deadlier.

Not A Really Nice Guy

Here's a shocker:  Richard Nixon was a nasty, paranoid bigot.  No, really.

In a conversation Feb. 13, 1973, with Charles W. Colson, a senior adviser who had just told Nixon that he had always had “a little prejudice,” Nixon said he was not prejudiced but continued: “I’ve just recognized that, you know, all people have certain traits.”

“The Jews have certain traits,” he said. “The Irish have certain — for example, the Irish can’t drink. What you always have to remember with the Irish is they get mean. Virtually every Irish I’ve known gets mean when he drinks. Particularly the real Irish.”

Nixon continued: “The Italians, of course, those people course don’t have their heads screwed on tight. They are wonderful people, but,” and his voice trailed off.

A moment later, Nixon returned to Jews: “The Jews are just a very aggressive and abrasive and obnoxious personality.”

At another point, in a long and wandering conversation with Rose Mary Woods, his personal secretary, that veered from whom to invite to a state dinner to whether Ms. Woods should get her hair done, Nixon offered sharp skepticism at the views of William P. Rogers, his secretary of state, about the future of black Africans.

“Bill Rogers has got — to his credit it’s a decent feeling — but somewhat sort of a blind spot on the black thing because he’s been in New York,” Nixon said. “He says well, ‘They are coming along, and that after all they are going to strengthen our country in the end because they are strong physically and some of them are smart.’ So forth and so on.

“My own view is I think he’s right if you’re talking in terms of 500 years,” he said. “I think it’s wrong if you’re talking in terms of 50 years. What has to happen is they have be, frankly, inbred. And, you just, that’s the only thing that’s going to do it, Rose.” 

Oh, and of course this guy ended up as President.  I'd like to think we've come a long was since 1972.  In many ways we have.  In other ways however, we're backsliding dangerously.

Still, a pretty stark reminder about the people in power.  We like to think that in a perfect world, nobody as corrupt as Nixon would ever end up in power.  Sadly, thousands of years of history teaches us otherwise, and America is no different in that respect.

Epic Reach Out And Touch Someone...To Pieces Win

The US Navy reminds us of the difference between a "firearm" and a "gun".  Firearms kill people at 100 feet.  Guns kill people at 100 miles.

In the near future, US Navy ships won't use explosive cannons. They will destroy targets 100 miles away with the monster 33-megajoules railgun shown in this video. In the words of Rear Admiral Nevin P. Carr: This "really changes several games."


Right now, Navy railguns could only reach targets 13 miles away. The new railgun reaches any target 100 miles away in six minutes using 33-megajoules of energy, an unprecedented tactical advantage over conventional weaponry like cannons and cruise missiles. To give you an idea of the magnitude of the impact, a megajoule is "roughly equivalent to a 1-ton car traveling at 100 mph." Imagine the effect on a target.

According to the program manager at the Office of Naval Research, Roger Ellis, the gun will eventually reach enemy vehicles and structures 200 miles away with perfect accuracy, using a GPS-based targeting system. Ellis also says that "eliminating explosives from the ship, which brings significant safety benefits and logistical benefits." They just need a constant source of energy in the ship, like diesel engines or a nuclear reactor.

Yeah, not exactly effective against terrorists but...it's a freakin' railgun.  It's still cool.  Just need an 80-ton mech to mount her on...

EPIC WIN from a tech standpoint however.

Angels And Demons

People forget sometimes that one of the oldest diplomatic states on Earth is Vatican City, and apparently they have WikiLeaks-based problems with embarrassing cables just like everyone else.

Among the documents were cables showing that relations between the Vatican and Ireland deteriorated sharply as the Holy See appeared to ignore a commission looking into complaints of physical and sexual abuse of children by Irish priests.

One cable from earlier this year says the Vatican was angered by the way the Murphy Commission -- which was looking into the how complaints of abuse had been handled by the Church and Irish government -- sidestepped normal diplomatic channels.

The commission had written directly to the Vatican to seek information and requested a meeting with the Vatican's representative in Ireland. The Vatican envoy did not respond, according to the cable.

The cable was one of several published Friday by the Guardian newspaper in London.

The Murphy Commission was appointed after another inquiry issued a report in May 2009 detailing horrific abuses, including 325 alleged cases of abuse by priests, and concluding that the problem was endemic.

"The Vatican believes the Irish government failed to respect and protect Vatican sovereignty during the investigations," the charge d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See, wrote in February 2010.

"Adding insult to injury, Vatican officials also believed some Irish opposition politicians were making political hay with the situation by calling publicly on the government to demand that the Vatican reply."

But the cable added: "Much of the Irish public views the Vatican protests as pettily procedural and failing to confront the real issue of horrific abuse and cover-up by Church officials."

I'd have to side with our ambassador to the Vatican on this one.  The situation that the Murphy Commission is dealing with is about as ugly as it gets, and nobody stalls quite like the Vatican does.  Granted, Ireland has much larger problems to deal with right now with their economy locked into austerity freefall and their government on the verge of collapse, but it's still pretty damn important to note what's going on there.

Openly pressuring the Vatican on something like this is a pretty bold move, but I certainly can't blame the Irish for doing so.

Turn On The Lights, Watch The Roaches Scatter Part 48

At least one district judge is siding with the banks in Foreclosuregate, but only because the judge believes state courts have the authority to stop fraudulent foreclosures, not federal ones.

GMAC Mortgage LLC, after defeating a bid by homeowners in Maine who sought a federal court order blocking sales and evictions, can sell foreclosed homes in the state.

U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby, at a hearing yesterday in Portland, Maine, declined to grant a temporary restraining order that a plaintiff’s lawyer said would have kept GMAC from selling foreclosed homes and evicting residents.

The judge said his decision hinged on the power of federal courts to stop proceedings in state courts, where foreclosures take place. He said individual homeowners who face losing their homes in a foreclosure sale can go to state court to stop the sales, he said.

“This decision is based on the limited authority federal courts have,” Hornby said.

The Maine case, filed in state court in October and moved to federal court by GMAC in November, involves five homeowners who are suing GMAC, claiming the company relied on defective court documents in seizing homes. The plaintiffs are seeking to represent Maine homeowners who are facing foreclosure by GMAC or who lost their homes in a GMAC foreclosure during the past six years and whose case relied on false documents, according to court documents.

GMAC had agreed to suspend foreclosure sales and evictions in the state until the judge ruled on the request for the restraining order, Andrea Bopp Stark, a lawyer for the plaintiffs said. That agreement expires yesterday.

In other words, GMAC moved the case to federal court because they knew they would win, but the decision means these individual homeowners have to go to state court now to stop each foreclosure separately.  That's going to be a logistical nightmare, and everyone knows it.

I wouldn't expect GMAC to restart foreclosures right before Christmas in Maine, but we'll see.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• Convicted mega-fraudster Bernie Madoff's son Mark has committed suicide.
• Rep. Ron Paul will the chair of the House committee that oversees the Federal Reserve, which Paul has vowed to get rid of.
• An Alaska judge has ruled against Joe Miller recount case, leaving Sen. Lisa Murkowski the winner.
• China's overheating economy is showing signs of major inflation.
• Suppliers suggest the iPad 2 will have front and rear facing cameras.

Last Call

Don't look now, but gas prices have hit the $3 a gallon mark and are on the rise again.  But that's not the real news.

The average national price of gas rose over the last week to $2.98 a gallon, up from $2.90, according to AAA’s Daily Fuel Gauge Report. Although specialists say prices have probably peaked for the month, the price at the pump is now 35 cents a gallon higher than a year ago.

The Oil Price Information Service has estimated that consumers will pay $34 billion this month for gasoline, up from about $27.6 billion in December 2009 — money that might have been spent on holiday shopping.


Michael P. Niemira, chief economist for the International Council of Shopping Centers, said that retailers did not yet appear to have been significantly hurt by higher gasoline prices. “It doesn’t seem to matter that much because we are getting accelerating economic activity, which is an offset,” he said.

Mr. Niemira also noted that the top 20 percent of households with the most income accounted for nearly 40 percent of retail spending, and that group had benefited from a rising stock market over the last year. 

The rest of us don't have money to buy very many Christmas presents this year.  Perhaps the rising cost of gas thanks to oil speculation might have something to do with it.

Realignment Strategy

OK, I thought this was great.

Going To The Dogs

If Obama is letting Big Dog pinch hit, you know things are deadly serious.  Bill Clinton spoke today in favor of the Obama tax deal, and if anybody can twist arms in favor of getting this thing done, it's him.  I honestly didn't expect Obama to play the Clinton card, but it means he's 100% committed to getting this deal through Congress.  Here's some of what the former President had to say:

I have reviewed this agreement that the president reached with Republican leaders, and I want to make full disclosure. You know, I make quite a bit of money now, so the position that the Republicans have urged will personally benefit me. And on its own, I wouldn't support it, because I don't think that my tax cut is the most economically efficient way to get the economy going again. But I don't want to be in the dark about the fact that I will receive the continuation of the tax rates.

However, the agreement taken as a whole is, I believe, the best bipartisan agreement we can reach to help the largest number of Americans and to maximize the chances that the economic recovery will accelerate and create more jobs, and to minimize the chances that it will slip back -- which is what has happened in other financial collapses, like what Japan faced, and something that we have to avoid in America.

Why do I say that? Because clearly, the extension of unemployment [benefits] -- which gives people a percentage of the income they were previously making -- that money will be spent, and it will bolster the economy through the next couple of years. Secondly, the conversion of the Make Work Pay tax credit, which the President passed before, which went to 95 percent of the American people, converting that into a $120 billion one year payroll tax relief act is, according to all the economic analysis, the single most effective tax cut you can do to support economic activity. This will actually create a fair number of jobs. I expect it to lower the unemployment rate and keep us going.

Thirdly, one thing I haven't seen much about in the reports, this agreement will really help America over the long term, because it continues the credits for manufacturing jobs related to energy coming into America. And I'll remind you, just in the last two years, there have been 30 high powered battery factories, either opened or presently being built in America, taking us from 2 to 20 percent of the world's share of that, and we're gonna probably be at 40 percent by 2014. This is a really important thing, bringing manufacturing back to America, because it's a huge multiplier to create new jobs.

So in my opinion, this is a good bill, and I hope that my fellow Democrats will support it. I thank the Republican leaders for agreeing to include things that were important to the president. There's never a perfect bipartisan bill in the eyes of a partisan. And we all see this differently. But I really believe this will be a significant net plus for the country. I also think that in general a lot of people are breathing a sigh of relief that there's finally been some agreement on something.

He's got a point.  With unemployment benefits already expiring for people, there's a lot of urgency to get a deal done.  The larger point however is that the Republicans are the ones blocking legislation, and if it wasn't for their intransigence we wouldn't be in such a time crunch right now.   There are some good things in this deal.  The cost for some is high, but the cost of doing nothing is also massive if we allow legislation to expire.

It's good to see Obama using Clinton as a resource, but I have to openly wonder why it took until now to get the President to do this.  You've had two years.

Bernie Sanders Goes Old School

If you're going to filibuster, actually do it.

About three hours ago, just as he took the Senate floor, Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) staff, tweeted: "You can call what i am doing today whatever you want, you it [sic] call it a filibuster, you can call it a very long speech..."

And he's been speaking, almost uninterrupted, ever since.

It's a filibuster as filibusters were originally intended -- and, as such, makes a mockery of what the filibuster's become: a gimmick that allows a minority of senators to quietly impose supermajority requirements on any piece of legislation.

Joined at different times by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Sanders has been decrying the Obama tax cut plan for bailing out the wealthiest people in America. "How can I get by on one house?" Sanders railed, sarcastically. "I need five houses, ten houses. I need three jet planes to take me all over the world! Sorry, American people. We've got the money, we've got the power."

And he's doing what he feels needs to be done, even though I think this is a mistake, and that the Dems aren't going to get a better deal.

But at least he's standing on his principles and is trying to force negotiations.

Another Unkind Cut

At least they are waiting until after January, but TJ Maxx parent company TJX is laying off some 4,400 employees in 2011.

The company said the workers will hold their jobs through the holiday season and into late January. It plans to offer severance and other assistance to the workers.

"While I believe this move makes us a much stronger company and will benefit TJX in both the near-term and long-term, it was not an easy decision as many positions will be eliminated and it will be difficult for our affected associates," said Chief Executive Carol Meyrowitz, in a press release.

The Framingham, Mass.-based company also said it is converting 91 A.J. Wright stores into T.J. Maxx, Marshalls or HomeGoods stores. TJX will close the remaining 71 stores as well as A.J. Wright's two distribution centers and its home office, the company said.

No demand, no need for retailers, no retail jobs, lower demand as the survivors tighten their belts.  Fun, huh?

And on the cycle goes.

Can't Win For Losing

David Brooks thinks losing pretty much every vote on his agenda, being publicly rebuked by House Dems on the tax deal and people actually asking if Obama is still relevant meant a good week for the President.

The fact is, Obama and the Democrats have had an excellent week. The White House negotiators did an outstanding job for their side. With little leverage, they got not only the unemployment insurance, but also an Earned Income Tax Credit provision, a college scholarship provision and other Democratic goodies. With little leverage, they got a package that could win grudging praise from big-name liberal groups like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Center for American Progress.

Moreover, Obama has put himself in a position to govern again. The package is popular. According to the most recent Gallup numbers, 67 percent of independents and 52 percent of Democrats support extending all the tax cuts. Higher numbers support extending the unemployment insurance. Obama is reminding independents why they liked him in the first place.

He only needs to work on two things. He needs to explain his method better than he did in his press conference. It is entirely consistent to support a policy and be willing to move off of it in exchange for a greater good or a necessary accommodation. That’s called real life.

Then he’s got to bring this networking style to the larger issues. It’s easy to cut a deal that explodes deficits. It’s harder to cut one that reduces them. But there are more networks waiting to be built: to reform the tax code; to reduce consumption and expand productivity; to reform entitlements.

Washington doesn’t know how to handle coalition-building anymore; you can see consternation and confusion all around. But did anybody think changing the tone was going to be easy? 

Only one problem there, Dave.

Obama didn't "get" any of those.  And Republicans blocked all the other things on his agenda all but killing them completely because they realized that Obama really does score a win for the reasons Brooks mentioned if he can get this deal worked out.  The deal will therefore be changed.  House Dems aren't going to move on the estate tax cut, and Republicans are increasingly against the payroll tax cut.

Compromise is needed, yes.  If this deal passed as is, it would be a good week for Obama, especially if that meant DREAM Act, DADT repeal, and START ratification was done as well.

But what Brooks still is incapable of understanding is that the Republicans will never allow such a win for Obama.  So it really doesn't matter what House Dems think in the end:  Senate Republicans will run out the clock no matter what Obama does and then the Republican House will introduce their own tax plan and force Obama to sign it or else.

I don't know how this counts as "compromise" but apparently Brooks is unaware of the definition of the term.

Triangulation Nation: Taxing My Patience Edition

All the serious problems facing this country right now and Barack Obama wants to use the fierce advocacy of the bully pulpit to...simplify the tax code?!?

President Obama is considering whether to push early next year for an overhaul of the income tax code to lower rates and raise revenues in what would be his first major effort to begin addressing the long-term growth of the national debt.


While administration officials cautioned on Thursday that no decisions have been made and that any debate in Congress could take years, Mr. Obama has directed his economic team and Treasury Department analysts to review options for closing loopholes and simplifying income taxes for corporations and individuals, though the study of the corporate tax system is farther along, officials said.

The objective is to rid the code of its complex buildup of deductions, credits and exemptions, thereby broadening the base of taxes collected and allowing for lower rates — much like a bipartisan majority on Mr. Obama’s debt-reduction commission recommended last week in its final blueprint for reducing the debt through 2020.

Doing so would offer not only an opportunity to begin confronting the growth in the national debt but also a way to address warnings by American business that corporate tax rates and the costs of complying with the tax code are cutting into their global competitiveness.

Mr. Obama signaled his inclination in off-the-cuff remarks on Wednesday as he was defending the tax cuts deal negotiated with Congressional Republicans this week. “We’ve got to have tax reform,” he said.

Economic and political advisers say the process is in its early stages, and Mr. Obama ultimately could decide against such action, given the pitfalls, both political and substantive. In the past, any effort to alter the tax code has provoked powerful opposition among interest groups, and the picking of winners and losers.

Yet proponents within the administration and among some outside advisers say that Mr. Obama, by putting tax reform atop the national agenda, could seize an opportunity to take the offensive in dealing with the newly empowered Republicans in Congress, repair his strained relations with business and embrace a potentially powerful theme heading into his re-election campaign. 

I have to admit, the Times' Jackie Calmes does a laudably efficient job of packing in all the Villager tropes on this story in the first 300 words or so:  Bipartisanship Village style (giving into Republican demands),  the Catfood Commission are the smartest people on Earth,  it'll be good for his re-election campaign and my personal favorite, Obama needs to give businesses more because they are being crushed under taxation despite the fact that last quarter resulted in record nominal profits for them.

I'm not sure where the whole tax simplification thing came from as far as Obama's concerned, but you notice the Catfood Commission tax scheme (lowering taxes on the rich more than makes up for the deductions they'd lose, but the middle class would pay more due to lost deductions despite the lower rates, and the poor would pay more due to a higher rate) seems perfectly okay with Obama, at least in theory.  Thay may not be what he means, of course we have no numbers, but I don't hold it as a good sign.

The larger problem is the fact we have larger problems than simplifying the tax code right now.

Never The Right Time For Some

As I keep pointing out, two-thirds of America want to see DADT repealed.  Republicans keep saying "Oh yes, we support this."  Defense Secretary Robert Gates says the time to repeal is now as 70% of the military has no problem with letting openly gay military members serve.

And I expect Republicans to keep taking hostages.  It's what they do.  But Democrat Joe Manchin is a special case for opposing it in yesterday's vote.

Manchin said the Senate testimony from military branch chiefs last week -- most of whom said they were opposed to repealing the ban, but that they could implement it if asked to do so -- was part of his decision not to back repeal for the time being.

"My concerns, as highlighted in the recent defense survey and through the testimony of the service chiefs, are with the effect implementation of the repeal would have on our front line combat troops at this time," he said.

Manchin said he is "very sympathetic to those who passionately support the repeal," but added that he needs more time "to visit and hear the full range of viewpoints from the citizens of West Virginia."

Besides, Manchin added -- if supporters of repeal are upset with the Senate vote, they can always go talk to President Obama about ending DADT discharges with a stroke of his pen.

"While I may disagree with a repeal of DADT at this time, some believe that President Obama, as Commander-in-Chief, if he so chooses, has the authority to suspend discharges under DADT, if he deems it a matter of national security," Manchin said. "If this is correct, and the President was to make such an order, while I may disagree with it, I would respect his authority as President to do so."

And he's right.  Of course, if Obama does do this (and he can) the next homophobic Republican President to come along will undo it immediately, hence the point of binding legislation.  Which Manchin can't bring himself to actually vote for, despite being "sympathetic".  He can't make a moral decision without talking to more of his constituents.

This is the same mealy-mouthed crap we keep hearing from "moderate" Republicans.  The timing is wrong, or more consultation is needed or I'm unsure, yadda yadda.

What's Joe Manchin's price for doing this?  What does he want for taking hostages?  Hey, give him some credit:  he's using what's worked for the Republicans for years now.

StupidiNews!

• Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in absentia as he continues to serve his prison sentence.
• London students continue a second day of destructive protests as Parliament has voted to triple University tuition.
• Attorney General Eric Holder is angrily denouncing proposed Senate legislation that would end all civilian trials for terrorists.
• Bernie Madoff's "unstoppable" hedge fund has lost 60% of its value since Madoff's arrest two years ago.
• Switching your broadband ISP makes little to no difference in satisfaction, according to one survey.