The Dow Jones reached a significant milestone yesterday, and news outlets were abuzz with excitement. Olympia Snowe’s vote for the Baucus bill was plenty fodder for the 24-hour news cycles. But, for Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists in the United States, an epochal event transpired at the White House afternoon that should not slip notice.

As the ethereal sounds of a Hindu priest’s chanting of this Sanskrit prayer from ancient Hindu scripture filled the East Room, President Obama lit the ceremonial White House diya –and he used this Sanskrit word for lamp–with dozens of Asian, Indian and Hindu Americans in attendance. Never before had a sitting U.S. President personally celebrated the Diwali holiday, and with that one gesture, two million Hindu Americans felt a bit more like they belonged–one more reason to feel at home. Maybe that cliche’ that all of our diversity adds unique patches to the American quilt is not as tired as we thought.

Diwali is among the most widely celebrated festivals in India and spans all of the Dharmic religious traditions. Rows of diyas, or earthen lamps, line the homes of celebrants as prayers are offered, and for many, a New Year on Hindu calendars is marked. For the seeker, the spiritual significance is clear: the lamps symbolize the quest for knowledge and goodness that mimics the inner Divine and eradicates the darkness of ignorance and false values. As the President said in his address, of course, one does not forget the joyous merriment Diwali celebrations entail: fireworks light up the dark skies of a new moon night, gifts are exchanged and sweets savored.

Read more…

In a touching gesture, US President Barack Obama will deliver a eulogy at the funeral mass of Senator Edward Kennedy on Saturday.

Quoting White House officials

, The Boston Globe said Obama will deliver a eulogy at Kennedy’s funeral mass, which has been scheduled for Saturday at The Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in the Mission Hill section of Boston.

Kennedy (77), who died on Tuesday after battling cancer, would be laid to rest at the Arlington National Cemetery, along the graveside of his other two brothers- Senator Robert F Kennedy and former President John F Kennedy.

The service will be a private, family-only affair at the national shrine, located just across the Potomac River on a bluff overlooking the capital city, The Boston Globe said.

“The nation’s resting place for its heroes, Senator Kennedy spent more days than most at Arlington visiting the graves of his beloved brothers and paying tribute to the fallen men and women of Massachusetts who gave their lives for our country,” said a statement issued by Kennedy’s office.

Obama, who earlier called Kennedy “the greatest United States Senators of our times”, issued a proclamation according to which US flag shall be flown at half-staff till August 30.

From the Boston Globe:

President Barack Obama will deliver a eulogy at US Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s funeral Mass on Saturday, a White House official has told the Globe.

Kennedy’s funeral will be held at a time yet to be determined Saturday morning at The Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in the Mission Hill section of Boston. Commonly known as the Mission Church, the 1,450-seat basilica on Tremont Street was built in the 1870s. Kennedy prayed there in 2003 while his daughter, Kara, was being treated for lung cancer.

Obama was a political kindred spirit with Kennedy and the two became particularly close after Kennedy endorsed him for president before the Super Tuesday primaries. In a dramatic moment at the Democratic National Convention in August, the ailing Kennedy electrified the crowd with a speech that seemed intended to pass the Kennedy family torch to Obama.

Obama paid tribute this morning to Kennedy, appearing before the cameras to call him an “extraordinary leader” and “one of the most accomplished Americans ever to serve our democracy.”

“Over the past several years, I’ve had the honor to call Teddy a colleague, a counselor, and a friend,” he said. “For his family, he was a guardian. For America, he was a defender of a dream.”

In an effort to douse down a racial firestorm, US President Barack Obama had a glass of beer with professor Henry Gates and police Sergeant, who had arrested the Harvard professor for ‘disorderly conduct’.

Sitting along a picnic table next to the White House’s new swing set, the three were yesterday seen drinking beer from clear glass mugs along and munching peanuts and pretzels served in small silver bowls.

As a later addition, Mr. Obama also invited the Vice President, Joe Biden, to what the US media has characterised as the beer summit.

The momentous occasion was part of Mr. Obama’s effort to calm down the racial firestorm which erupted following the arrest of Gates by Henry Crowly, to which the US President added fuel to the fire by stating that the police acted ’stupidly’.

The controversy that included the offended white police officer and the leading black scholar, who also happened to be an old friend of the President, quickly spiralled into a national issue sparking a fierce debate on racial profiling by law enforcement.

Mr. Obama, however, later backed off from his remarks, and making a surprise appearance at the daily White House Press conference acknowledged that he made a wrong choice of words.

From FoxNews:

After nearly a week of anticipation, happy hour finally arrived Thursday at the White House.

President Obama knocked back some cold beer in the Rose Garden with Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and police Sgt. James Crowley of Cambridge, Mass., the two men at the heart last week of a heated debate over race in America.

Vice President Biden also joined them in a gathering that some dubbed the “beer summit” to clear the air after the recent uproar. Obama described it afterward as a “friendly, thoughtful conversation.”

“I have always believed that what brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart,” Obama said. “I am confident that has happened here tonight, and I am hopeful that all of us are able to draw this positive lesson from this episode.”

The dispute began July 16 when Crowley, while investigating a report of a potential burglary at Gates’ house, arrested the agitated professor on a charge of disorderly conduct. Gates, who is black, accused the white sergeant of racial profiling. The disorderly conduct charge was dropped — but the dispute exploded into a national debate, particularly after Obama said the police had “acted stupidly” in arresting Gates.

From the New York Times:

President Barack Obama played bartender-in-chief on Thursday at a “beer summit” of the main players in a racially charged case that he hoped would be a “positive lesson” in a national dialogue on race.

Obama, the first black U.S. president, said it was a “friendly, thoughtful” conversation over beer at the White House with prominent Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, who is black, and police Sergeant James Crowley, who is white.

Crowley arrested Gates, a well-known documentary filmmaker, for disorderly conduct on July 16 after a confrontation at the professor’s home, sparking a media frenzy as Gates, 58, accused the policeman of racial profiling. Crowley, who had taught courses against racial profiling, denied that.

Obama inflamed the situation by saying he thought police “acted stupidly” in arresting his friend.

“I have always believed that what brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart,” Obama said in a statement after the meeting in a garden outside the Oval Office.

“I am confident that has happened here tonight, and I am hopeful that all of us are able to draw this positive lesson from this episode.”

Earlier today, in an interview with three reporters, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said health-care reform would pass the House and that it would include a public plan. She also said the Blue Dogs were basically resigned to this prospect, and that the Republicans “will do everything they can to stop it, not only because they disagree philosophically, but because they know politically that this is so very powerful” politically. The discussion was a bit disjointed for a straight transcript, but selected excerpts follow.

On the need for a public plan.

We have been very clear about the fundamentals. We do not see real, systemic change in the health-care system if there is not a robust public option. We see that as the way to quality, affordability, accessibility, and universality in health care. If someone has another way, show us, but until that time comes, this is the way we see it.

On the co-op compromise.

I think it might be something additional. I don’t see it as an alternative to the public option.

On the Blue Dogs.

Some of the concerns the Blues have raised are concerns others have raised as well. The public option is going to happen. They recognize that. They may want to put it on their list of concerns about how it will work. But part of what this is is removing misconceptions. One of the misconceptions was that the public option would be funded by the federal government, wouldn’t have to pay back its start-up costs. And that has never been the case. To be a competitor, it will have to be able to compete, be fiscally sound, and be responsible for its administrative costs. It will have advantages, but it has to compete.

Read more here

Goldman Sachs bites Uncle Sam’s hand

The investment bank is fat and happy again, but you wouldn’t know it from its squabbling with the Treasury over the warrants in the TARP deal.

NEW YORK (Fortune) — I’ve always thought that the guys running Goldman Sachs were really smart, not only about making money, but also about projecting a classy image to the world outside of Wall Street. Clearly, I overestimated them.

If there was ever a firm with the motivation — and the money — to be gracious to the U.S. taxpayers who kept it alive when the financial markets were imploding, it’s Goldman. It had a chance to look good and do good for taxpayers and itself and Wall Street for a relative pittance — and has blown it. Horribly.

As you have probably noticed, Goldman is getting attacked for posting record profits and setting aside a record amount for employee compensation about three seconds after it repaid its $10 billion of loans from the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Repaying those loans freed Goldman from pay restrictions on its top honchos, who seem headed for record or near-record bonuses unless things go badly for the firm in the second half of the year.

What you probably don’t know is that Goldman, flush with cash and profits, is squabbling with the Treasury about how much it should pay taxpayers to buy back the stock purchase warrants it gave the government as part of the TARP deal. Talk about tacky.

Had Goldman retained something it was once reputed to have — a sense of short-term sacrifice in return for long-term profit — it would have agreed to pay the government generously for the warrants. It could have announced that on Tuesday, along with its profits, and looked like a decent, concerned corporate citizen instead of Greedhead Central.

The warrants are very valuable, especially with the recent sharp run-up in Goldman’s stock price. The warrants carry the right (but not the obligation) to buy 12.2 million Goldman (GS, Fortune 500) shares at $122.90 each. Goldman’s closing price of $156.84 yesterday put the warrants “in the money” by a bit over $400 million. (That’s the $33.94 difference between $156.84 and $122.90, multiplied by 12.2 million.)

Given that the warrants still have more than nine years to run, they’re clearly worth more than $400 million, because its owner has years of upside. However, because there’s no existing market for such long Goldman warrants, their value is in the eye of the beholder (and the pricing modeler).

Alas, no one would tell me what the government is asking for the warrants or what Goldman is offering for them. “We are in discussions with the Treasury on the buyback of the warrant,” said Goldman spokesman Lucas VanPraag. “The purchase price has yet to be determined…. We believe that taxpayers should get a decent return, and we hope that our discussions with the Treasury will do just that.” The Treasury declined comment.

My estimate — okay, my SWAG (for scientific wild-assed guess) — is that the Treasury is asking for $1 billion to $1.5 billion and Goldman is offering $500 million or so.

Under the law, Goldman, like other early TARP repayers, has the right to force the Treasury to sell back the warrants after a lengthy set of price arbitrations.

When I say that taxpayers kept Goldman alive, I’m not talking about the $10 billion of TARP money or the $12.9 billion of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500) bailout money that Goldman got. The $10 billion was nice, but not necessarily essential to Goldman’s survival, and Goldman says it was holding enough assets and collateral to get all or almost all of the $12.9 billion had the government not bailed out AIG.

Rather, I’m talking about the way that U.S. and foreign governments — in other words, taxpayers — saved the world’s financial system, saving Goldman in the process. Had many of the world’s biggest institutions collapsed, which would have happened without taxpayer aid, Goldman would have been wiped out because the firms that owed it money wouldn’t have been able to meet their obligations.

I’m also talking about the Federal Reserve Board moving with lightning speed last fall to allow Goldman to become a bank holding company. By giving Goldman access to vast amounts of money it was making available to bank companies, the Fed ended panicky demands from Goldman customers that the firm immediately return the cash and securities it was holding for them. That was the equivalent of a run on the bank, which no institution can survive. Stopping it saved Goldman.

Now this is how Goldman shows its gratitude. It could have shelled out a few extra bucks and done the right thing for taxpayers (and ultimately for itself) by exercising good business judgment and looking generous. Instead, it’s behaving in a way that brings to mind one of my favorite Biblical verses, Deuteronomy 32:15: “So Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked…and spurned the Rock of his salvation.” In these ultra-political days, filled with economic pain for so many Americans, that’s not only the wrong way to act, it’s foolish. A word I never thought I’d associate with Goldman.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is confident Barack Obama can be beaten — in a long distance run.

The former Republican vice presidential candidate told Runner’s World Magazine if it came down to a foot race between the two famous politicians, she’d likely come out on top.

“I betcha I’d have more endurance,” Palin said in an interview published on the magazine’s Web site Tuesday. “My one claim to fame in my own little internal running circle is a sub-four marathon. It wasn’t necessarily a good running time, but it proves I have the endurance within me to at least gut it out and that is something.

“If you ever talk to my old coaches they’d tell you, too,” she continued. “What I lacked in physical strength or skill I made up for in determination and endurance. So if [it] were a long race that required a lot of endurance I’d win.”

The avid runner also revealed an accident she had only days before the vice presidential debate last fall, when she fell on a trail while jogging at Sen. John McCain’s Arizona ranch.

“I was so stinkin’ embarrassed that a golf cart full of Secret Service guys had to pull up beside me,” she said of the fall. “My hands just got torn up and I was dripping blood. In the debate you could see a big fat ugly Band-Aid on my right hand.”

Declaring “sweat is my sanity,” Palin also said some of her worst days on the campaign trail were those when McCain staffers did not schedule time for her to run.

“I feel so crappy if I go more than a few days without running. I have to run,” she said. “A great frustration I had during the campaign was when the McCain staff wouldn’t carve out time for me to go for a run. The days never went as well if I couldn’t get out there and sweat.”

And the bands that keep her going on the long runs? Palin said she kicks off with “old Van Halen and AC/DC” before going into country and ending with “mellow Amy Grant songs.”

When 22 senators started working over the first health care overhaul bill on June 17, the news cameras were pointed at them — except for NPR’s photographer, who turned his lens on the lobbyists. Whatever bill emerges from Congress will affect one-sixth of the economy, and stakeholders have mobilized. We’ve begun to identify some of the faces in the hearing room, and we want to keep the process going. Know someone in these photos? Let us know who that someone is — e-mail dollarpolitics@npr.org or let us know via Twitter @DollarPolitics.

Click here to see who is in the room. A sobering view of how bills are actually crafted in Washington.

From the Baltimore Chronicle:

Senator Max Baucus and the Senate Finance Committee are too corrupted by corporate health industry profiteers donations to give America the health care policy it needs.

Health care is 15% of the U.S. gross domestic product. U.S. health care expenditures, which have been rising rapidly for several years, surpassed $2.4 trillion in 2007, more than three times the $714 billion spent in 1990. The cost of health care is projected to reach $4.4 trillion by 2018. There is a lot of room for corporate profiteering in the increasing cost of health care. The millions the health care industry has invested in Baucus and the Senate Finance Committee could therefore turn out to be very profitable.

Sen. Max Baucus is leading the debate on health care reform from his perch on the Senate Finance Committee. The health industry has heavily invested in him.

According to OpenSecrets.org, over his career he has taken donations from:

• The Insurance Industry: $1,170,313
• Health Professionals: $1,016,276
• Pharmaceuticals/Health Products Industry: $734,605
• Hospitals/Nursing Homes: $541,891
• Health Services/HMOs: $439,700

Baucus has shown his bias and should be removed from leading the health care reform effort by the Democratic Party leadership.

That is a grand total of $3,902,785. Can we trust Baucus to put aside the profits of the industries that have kept him in the Senate? Will he put the people’s necessities ahead of the profits of his contributors? Baucus has shown his bias and should be removed from leading the health care reform effort by the Democratic Party leadership.

What was the industry’s investment in him in 2008?

• Insurance: $592,185
• Health Professionals: $537,141
• Pharmaceuticals/Health Products: $524,813
• Health Services/HMOs: $364,500
• Hospitals/Nursing Homes: $332,826

That is $1,826,652 Baucus took from these industries, and now he can reward them by deforming health care reform.

Learn more about the Senate Finance Committee at their own website. Click here.
Follow all hearings on health care reform at C-SPAN.

President Obama said Wednesday he “absolutely” believes health care reform will be passed by the end of the year, arguing the country will be “worse off” without a dramatic overhaul of the nation’s system.

“We’re going to get it done,”  Obama said in an interview aired Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

President Obama seeks a bipartisan effort:

Even as Obama and the insurance industry move toward open confrontation over the role of government in health care, his administration is telling lawmakers to keep pushing for a bipartisan deal.

Obama on Tuesday dismissed as “not logical” the insurance lobby’s assertion that a new government health plan he backs would dismantle the employer-sponsored coverage most Americans now have. Despite harsh words from the president, senators attending an evening meeting in the Capitol with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said the administration was not ready to abandon the search for compromise.

In case you are wondering if our health care system is broke, watch this video from CSPAN at Oxdown Gazette:

Want to help make sure there is a public plan available for citizens to buy into?
Help Whip the votes with Jane Hamsher’s Firedoglake Whip Count Tool
The Whip County Tool helps you keep track of where your Congress members stand on this issue.

Anita Hill tells CNN’s John Roberts that Judge Sonia Sotomayor is an ‘excellent’ choice for the Supreme Court.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is preparing for a history-making confirmation hearing for Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Another woman who once found herself before that same committee is sharing her views of the president’s nominee.

Anita Hill testified in 1991 in front of the Senate confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas that he made harassing sexual statements to her as her supervisor. She is currently a professor of social policy, law and women’s studies at Brandeis University.

Hill attended law school at the same time as Judge Sonia Sotomayor and supports her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. She spoke to John Roberts on CNN’s “American Morning” Tuesday.

John Roberts: You were a year behind Judge Sotomayor at Yale University Law School. What qualifies her to be the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court?

Anita Hill: Well, if you look at her outstanding record on the bench, you can look at her outstanding academic record. She has a wide variety of professional experience before she got on to the bench. I think she’s infinitely-qualified to be the nominee and we will see during the confirmation process how well she’s qualified to actually receive the vote of the Senate.

Roberts: Much has been made of the fact that she’s a Hispanic woman. How much do you think that plays in to the nomination, her choice, and her eventual confirmation? Is she the most qualified Hispanic judge to sit on the Supreme Court? Or is she the most qualified judge who happens to be Hispanic?

Hill: I think she’s very well-qualified. You know…if you look at her record, if you look at all of the credentials she brings, including all of her background, her incredible life story, I think all of those add to her qualifications. I don’t know if we want to talk about what is the most qualified person in the country. There are a lot of very talented people out there. But certainly no one could question that this woman is not highly-qualified.

Click to read the entire interview here:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (CNN) — President Obama, on the first leg of a Mideast trip, said Wednesday that he is confident the United States and Saudi Arabia can “make progress on a whole host of issues of mutual interest.”

President Obama meets with Saudi King Abdullah on Wednesday in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Shortly after his arrival Wednesday in Saudi Arabia, Obama and King Abdullah went to the Saudi ruler’s farm for a welcoming reception. The two leaders met privately afterward.

Obama said he was “struck by his wisdom and his graciousness. Obviously the United States and Saudi Arabia have a long history of friendship. We have a strategic relationship.” Watch Saudi officials greet Obama »

“And as I take this trip — and I will be visiting Cairo tomorrow, I thought it was very important to come to the place where Islam began and to seek his majesty’s counsel and to discuss with him many of the issues that we confront here in the Middle East,” he added.

Read more…

For all the woofin’ being done by Michael Steele and others about how Norm’s going to be fighting to the bitter end to get back Paul Wellstone’s Senate seat, I strongly suspect that his mind is no longer on the contest and appeal.   He’s already trying to figure out how he’s going to afford the next big legal challenge, the Kazeminy lawsuits, as refinancing his house for the thirteenth time is no longer an option in this crashed real-estate market.   That’s why, as MinnPost’s Cynthia Dizikes notes, he’s asking the Federal Elections Commission to allow him to use campaign funds to pay his Kazeminy legal fees:

The lawsuits, one filed in Texas and the other in Delaware, both allege that Minnesota businessman Nasser Kazeminy had $75,000 sent to Coleman in the form of insurance payments made to a company employing Coleman’s wife, Laurie.

In the request submitted to the FEC, the Coleman team said, “Counsel has been preparing for the potential involvement of Senator Coleman as a witness in the matters, and pursuant to law, preserving documents that may prove relevant.”

[...]

In the Texas case, Paul McKim, the former chief executive officer of Deep Marine Technology Inc., claims that Kazeminy, who is a Deep Marine shareholder, pressured him to overlook the payments. The Delaware lawsuit, filed by other company shareholders, cites McKim as a defendant and basically makes the same allegations, relying on a “confidential informant.”

Now both of the Colemans, as well as Kazeminy, a longtime friend and financial backer of the former senator, have denied any wrongdoing.  There hasn’t been any blatant smoking-gun evidence of any funds being transferred to Coleman or his wife, and neither was named as a defendant in either Kazeminy lawsuit.  But Norm obviously isn’t expecting to remain untouched by the Kazeminy storm — or else he wouldn’t be looking to ensure his lawyers in the case are well-compensated.

Among the finalists are federal appeals court judges Sonia Sotomayor and Diane Wood, and Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to speak by the White House.

Women make up all but one of the top candidates currently being given serious scrutiny, the sources said.

Stay tuned!

Republicans on Saturday kick off a campaign to reshape their party’s image, gathering in Northern Virginia for the first of a series of town hall meetings.

The council’s experts will report back to congressional leaders with new strategies for the GOP.

The goal of the initiative, called the National Council for a New America, is to connect Republican leaders with voters across the country.

“The National Council for a New America is not so much a rebranding effort. It is an opportunity for those of us in office to engage in a conversation, a two-way conversation, with the people of this country,” said Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the No. 2 Republican in the House.

The council planned to meet with voters Saturday in Arlington, Virginia, at a local restaurant that’s supposed to be representative of small businesses across the country.

Northern Virginia is one of the suburban areas that has shifted decidedly in favor of Democrats in recent years — it helped President Obama become the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1964…

…Members of the council include Arizona Sen. John McCain, the former Republican presidential candidate; former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush; former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney; Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal; and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour.

(Click here and view the trailer for Trouble the Water)

… Trouble the Water, Oscar nominee for Best Documentary Feature and winner of the Grand Jury Prize for Best Documentary at last year’s Sundance Film Festival, premieres this month on HBO and is available for rental at Netflix.

Its subject is loosely Hurricane Katrina, but the film is really about a group of people who survived the hurricane, without any help from the government—and frequently despite the government’s intervention against them. One of the main protagonists of the film, Kimberly Rivers Roberts, shot footage of waiting out the storm in the Ninth Ward and of their journey to survive in the aftermath. The documentary intersperses her footage with that shot by the filmmakers, and the result is one of the best documentaries I’ve ever seen.

I watched the film last night; it is difficult to watch even as a distant observer of events because it is so upsetting, keenly evoking the feelings of rage and impotence and sadness and despair first experienced during those days and weeks immediately following the hurricane, and exposing an intimate view of the experience to which a distant observer never had access in the same way. We are in the attic with Kim and Scott and Brian and their family and friends. It is terrifying to watch, partly because one knows the horror that will follow.

And yet—there are things I had never heard. Terrible things. A Navy base with empty rooms turning away victims of the hurricane at gunpoint; our then-president awarding the base for averting a potentially violent confrontation. With the citizens the Navy is meant to protect! When you think you can never be shocked again, there is more, always more.

In the end, almost unimaginably, the film is incredibly inspiring. The people at the center of the film are just, at every turn, emblematic of what makes America great, even as America has withheld so much of what it has to offer from them. I won’t say anything more of the film, lest I rob of its impact. All I will say is this: I urge you to see it.

His first 100 days behind him, President Barack Obama expressed confidence about the next hundred and accelerated his drive toward contentious goals — sweeping health care overhaul, new rules to curb global warming and financial sector reform — even while working to end a recession and two wars.

“I’m pleased with the progress we’ve made, but I’m not satisfied,” Obama said Wednesday in Arnold, Mo., the battleground state he chose to mark the milestone. By evening, he was to hold a news conference from the White House, the third of his presidency aired on prime-time television.

Obama’s intensive schedule for the day demonstrated the degree to which the administration sees both possibility and peril in the symbolic 100-day marker

From The Nation’s Katrina vanden Heuvel:

The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) met with President Obama for one hour in the East Room of the White House yesterday.

CPC Co-Chair, Congressman Raúl Grijalva, said that 50 of the 77 Caucus members attended, and they honed in on two major issues: their commitment to only supporting a healthcare reform bill that includes a public plan option that is “more than a gesture”; and the $83 billion war supplemental.

“It was a serious meeting,” Rep. Grijalva said. “It moved quickly, there was a lot of candor from both sides.”

Presenting the Caucus’ case for healthcare reform were Representatives Yvette Clark, Tammy Baldwin, Jan Schakowsky, and Jim McDermott. Congressman Dennis Kucinich spoke with the President about a single-payer system.

Rep. Grijalva said members made it clear that the Caucus’ support for any healthcare bill hinges on a public plan option that is “robust… [and] competitive with the private sector.” President Obama called himself “an ally”, but said it was up to Congress to deliver him the kind of bill to which the Caucus is committed.

With regard to the $83 billion war supplemental, Rep. Grijalva said the Caucus expressed its concern that “we’re making the same mistake — everything is going into militarization, not institutional reform, human and capital development, healthcare… those kinds of things.” They pointed out to the President that the counterinsurgency strategy calls for 80 percent of the resources to be devoted to non-military/political solutions, and 20 percent to the military. But the supplemental devotes $76 billion for the military and approximately $7 billion for diplomatic efforts and foreign aid.

From the New York Times:

The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday formally declared carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases to be pollutants that threaten public health and welfare, setting in motion a process that for the first time in the United States will regulate the gases blamed for global warming.

The E.P.A. said the science supporting its so-called endangerment finding was “compelling and overwhelming.” The ruling triggers a 60-day comment period before any proposed regulations governing emissions of greenhouse gases are published.

Lisa P. Jackson, the E.P.A. administrator, said: “This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows President Obama’s call for a low-carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation.”

From The Times of London:

The most striking feature of four highly classified documents, drawn up to address “whether certain enhanced interrogation techniques” being used by the CIA on terror suspects constitute torture, is the sheer detail.

Exceeding 100 pages, some of the most senior lawyers from the Bush Administration included all the footnotes and precedents that might be expected of memorandums issued under the authority of the US Justice Department.

The memos relied on a fairly simple legal principle: so long as the interrogators did not cause intense, severe or lasting physical pain and psychological damage, they were not torturing suspects and would therefore be exempt from any prosecution.

As such they provide a manual about exactly how far they could go to stay within the letter – if not the spirit – of the law. For example, the temperature of water used to douse detainees should be no lower than 41F, while exposure should not exceed 20 minutes “without drying and rewarming”. Waterboarding was not supposed to last more than 40 seconds, so, “in the absence of prolonged mental harm, no severe mental pain or suffering would have been inflicted and the use of these procedures would not constitute torture within the meaning of the statute”.

There is evidence of highly questionable intelligence-gathering procedures by US servicemen and support for torture, murder and inhumane treatment

President Bush leant upon this legal advice when asked in 2004 if he had allowed the CIA to torture suspects. “The authorisation I issued was that anything we did would conform to US laws and would be consistent with international treaty obligations,” he said. The same formula was used by Dick Cheney, the former Vice President, who, when describing the use of waterboarding as a “no-brainer for me”, added the caveat that “we live up to our obligations that we’re party to in international treaties and so forth”.

From FoxNews:

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago — As President Obama touched down Friday here for the Summit of the Americas, the White House embraced new calls from Cuba’s Communist government to engage in talks – as well as the possibility that the country could lift press restrictions and free political prisoners as part of those talks.

Raul Castro, brother of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and de facto leader of the island nation 90 miles south of Florida, said Thursday that “everything” would be up for discussion with the Obama administration. He also said the Cuban government may have been “wrong” in avoiding U.S.-Cuba talks in the past.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday that the administration was struck by that language.

“I think the strongest reaction that we all had is the admission that he may have been wrong,” Gibbs said aboard Air Force One as the president flew from Mexico City for the fifth Summit of the Americas. “I think that we were particularly struck by that.”

US President Barack Obama has said the time has come for Iraqis to “take responsibility for their country”.

Mr Obama was speaking during an unannounced trip to Baghdad, his first visit to the country as president.

He was greeted enthusiastically by US troops, whom he praised for their “extraordinary achievements” in Iraq.

Mr Obama also had talks with Iraq’s leaders, and confirmed his plans to withdraw all US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011.

The president flew into Baghdad’s international airport before travelling by road to meet Gen Ray Odierno, the US military commander in Iraq, and some of the 140,000 US soldiers serving in the country.

Mr Obama thanked Gen Odierno for helping to lead what he said was “a very effective operation” in Iraq.

He told about 600 US soldiers gathered at the Camp Victory military base that they had helped Iraq to “stand on its own as a democratic country”.

“That is an extraordinary achievement, and for that you have the thanks of the American people,” he said.

The troops had greeted him with cheers and shouts of “we love you Obama”.

From SpiegelOnline:

During his stay in Europe, everybody seemed eager to be President Barack Obama’s friend. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi threw his arm around the US leader. French President Nicolas Sarkozy seemed to be on Obama’s heels wherever he went during the G-20 meeting in London, the NATO summit in Strasbourg and the EU get-together in Prague. Even Russian President Dmitry Medvedev seemed to be enjoying his proximity to the American superstar.

Now that Obama is in Turkey, however, some political camps — particularly in Germany — have discovered the political efficacy of Obama bashing. While in Ankara, Obama reiterated his support for Turkish membership in the European Union, a position he first voiced on Sunday in Prague. That doesn’t sit well with some.

“Turkey is bound to Europe by more than bridges over the Bosporus,” Obama told the Turkish parliament on Monday. “Centuries of shared history, culture and commerce bring you together. And Turkish membership would broaden and strengthen Europe’s foundation once more.”

It is a sentiment not universally shared in Europe. On Monday, a number of politicians, particularly in Germany, went on the offensive. “It is a meddling in the internal affairs of Europe,” Bernd Posselt, a member of the European Parliament from Bavarian’s conservative Christian Social Union (CSU), blustered in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE. “The EU is not Obama’s plaything. … He should accept Turkey as America’s 51st state instead,” he continued.

Actor and longtime Obama supporter Kal Penn is joining the Obama administration, the White House confirmed to CNN Tuesday.

The actor will be part of the White House Office of Public Liaison, which is run by Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett. Penn will be primarily involved in dealing with Asian American and Pacific Islander communities and the arts community.

Read more on EW.com

Penn’s new gig was first reported by EW.com, which shares parent company Time Warner with CNN.

Penn told EW.com that the new position comes after some soul-searching.
There was “’something aching in me to do something completely different and take a break from the acting thing for a while’” Penn said he told the executive producers of the TV series “House” when he explained his decision to get involved with politics full-time.

The actor also said his interest in politics has deep roots. “I’ve been thinking about [moving into politics] for a while. I love what I do as an actor. I couldn’t love it more. . . . .probably from the time I was a kid, I really enjoyed that balance between the arts and public service.”

“It’s probably because of the value system my grandparents instilled in me. They marched with Gandhi in the Indian independence movement, and that was always in the back of my head. So the past couple of years I thought about it a little more.”

But Penn also is leaving the door open to returning to acting at some later point. “Who’s to say where any path leads? I still have a passion for it. But for the time being, I won’t be acting,” Penn told EW.com

Penn endorsed Obama’s White House bid in late 2007, and was a frequent campaign surrogate on the trail last year.

1. Why 20?

Um, it’s not. In a nutshell, Gordon Brown has invited his fellow G20
members (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany,
India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South
Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the US and whoever happens to hold the
rotating EU presidency, currently the Czechs), plus Spain, the
Netherlands, the respective chairs of the New Partnership for Africa’s
Development, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the African
Union Commission, and the president of the EU Commission. Not to
forget, of course, the heads of the UN, World Bank and International
Monetary Fund. By my reckoning, that makes 29 if you include the hosts
(that’s us). The G20’s regular meetings are for finance ministers and
central bankers from what are described as “systemically important
industrialised and developing economies”; this one is for the leaders
of those economies because the world’s finances, in case you hadn’t
noticed, are in something of a state.
JH

2. Why Spain?

Spain battled to be a G20 member, and won

That’s a very good question. Ditto, the Netherlands. Certainly,
Spain now has a pretty serious economy (the world’s eighth biggest, in
fact) but, as something of a latecomer to both democracy and the
membership of major international institutions, it is not part of the
G20. What seems to have happened is that when the first big
we’re-in-meltdown-what-are-we-going-to-do-about-it jamboree was held in
Washington late last year, France found itself with two seats (as a G20
member, and as then president of the EU). Spain and the Netherlands
lobbied furiously for the spare one, and Spain won. Then the
Netherlands sulked, and because it has a financial sector out of all
proportion to its size, everyone took pity. And, of course, it was only
fair that everyone who attended the Washington party should get an
invite to this one. So there you are.
JH

more here