Talking Points Memo

Simple Facts

2010-02-10T05:30:49Z

The problem for the GOP congressional leadership on the Hill is that when you put the facts together it's clear that it didn't occur to them that anything to do with Abdulmutallab's handing was a problem until days later when Dick Cheney started gunning them up over the red herring of 'mirandizing' him.

So basically all the stuff about what Brennan told them or didn't tell them in that briefing is beside the point. They knew exactly how Abdulmutallab had been handled. And they didn't think it was a problem until days later when Dick Cheney told them it was. Then they went back and came up with a story about how if they only would have known they would have been screaming to high heaven.

We'll have more on this on Wednesday.

History

2010-02-10T01:22:19Z

Okay, Bob Dylan performing live at the White House tonight as part of a celebration of the music of the Civil Rights movement.

Not sure what else to say beside that.

(Lotsa others beside him, needless to say.)

Can't help but remind me of this...

"But even the president of the United States

Sometimes must have

To stand naked."

Watch it live after the jump.

JOIN THE LIVE CHAT

VISIT WHITEHOUSE.GOV

Presented By:

Comcast Business Class

Look at your bill and
find out how much your
business can save
with Comcast Business Class.

Internet, Phone & TV for $99.
Learn More

Ads by Pheedo

A Key Tell

2010-02-10T00:54:25Z

You've probably heard of Lt. Dan Choi, a gay West Point graduate and New York National Guardsman, who was recommended for discharge after publicly coming out of the closet and becoming an advocate for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He's become a very public advocate for repeal all across the media over the last year.

He's now back on duty with his National Guard unit.

As you can read in the piece at TPMMuckraker, it doesn't seem to stem from an explicit change of policy at the Pentagon. But it does seem like a sign of which way the winds are now blowing, and an assumption, based on last week's events, that Choi's discharge may never go through.

Backhanded Compliment

2010-02-09T23:16:43Z

TPM Reader JS cautions against the White House engaging Sarah Palin:

A classic moment indeed: I think you must be very careful about encouraging the behavior manifest by Gibbs today.

Obama and the White House (with the notable exception of Emanuel) have generally managed to stay well above this kind of snarky behavior. Palin took snark to a new level at the Tea Party Convention, but the White House (until today) made it very clear which side was taking the high road.
If a truly weak, illiterate, uneducated, incompetent Sarah Palin manages to bring the White House down to her level of discourse, we have no hope for any kind of intelligent national dialogue. Gibbs represents the Office of the President. He should know better than to dignify Palin and her trash talk with any comment or acknowledgment whatsoever.

I've seen this same sentiment expressed a few times about Gibbs' stunt. Not sure I agree. Your thoughts?

At A Whole New Level

2010-02-09T23:07:32Z

Chris Matthews has gotten to a whole new level on how crazy Sarah Palin is, calling her "frightening" a short while ago on Hardball for her discussing President Obama needing to "declare war" on Iran to buoy his political standing. An even more dramatic moment came a moment later, though. Palin's so crazy now that even Mark Halperin thinks she's nuts and out of her depth. Truly a watershed moment.

Presented By:

Comcast Business Class

Look at your bill and
find out how much your
business can save
with Comcast Business Class.

Internet, Phone & TV for $99.
Learn More

Ads by Pheedo

Staggering

2010-02-09T23:00:49Z

I'm not sure how reliable this number is, or could be, but Haiti has raised the death toll from the January earthquake to 230,000.

Let's Talk

2010-02-09T19:53:43Z

Steny Hoyer says his members are ready to debate the GOP Shadow Budget, asks why Republicans don't seem to want to discuss it.

Give The Man A Hand

2010-02-09T19:50:20Z

A classic moment during today's press briefing when Robert Gibbs flashed his palm to show he'd written "Hope" and "Change" there, among other reminders, a la Sarah Palin. It might have even overshadowed the President's surprise appearance in the briefing room.

Presented By:

2010-02-09T19:50:20Z

Gettin' His Dialectic On ...

2010-02-09T19:05:25Z

This happened last week. But it was just too classic to let slip into the ether. GOP Chairman Michael Steele was up at Harvard last Wednesday. And a questioner got on his case about him and his party referring to the health reform bill as "socialism" and asked him to defend the language.

This was clearly a dangerous moment. Since it prompted Steele to take a shot at discussing Marxist theory. My favorite part was his arguing that the word was right because the Senate bill meant taking over the health care "means of production."

Watch the video.

President or Bag Man?

2010-02-09T17:40:36Z

Presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty showed up to give a speech to GOP activists in Alabama on Friday. But he didn't just bring himself. He also carried with him a $100,000 check for the state Republican party from a mystery donor.

No one's saying who it's from. And it's also not clear what the check needed a chaperone rather than just being sent in the mail.

What's the Deal with The Ryan Budget?

2010-02-09T16:15:44Z

We've been reporting and writing a lot about Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) "shadow budget" over the last week. And I wanted to take a moment to explain some of the reasons why.

As I've noted before, Ryan is the Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee. So he's the House Republicans' chief budget writer. Later in the Spring, the Republicans will come up with their official alternative budget. And it will be written, like this one, by Ryan, in consultation with the other Republican members of the Committee. In other words, it's sort of a 'shadow budget' or first draft of the Republican budget. And among a lot of other things it calls for deep cuts in Social Security benefits, partial privatization of Social Security and big shift of taxes to the middle class and abolition of Medicare in favor of vouchers which seniors will use to purchase private health insurance.

Minority Leader Boehner and the rest of the House leadership are working to have it both ways -- on the one hand saying that Ryan's budget is full of great GOP ideas and ways the GOP would kick butt on the deficit (which is a play to the base and pundits who haven't read it) but also insisting it's not the official GOP budget so he and his caucus aren't on the spot to justify what it contains. In other words, the question is whether the entire 2010 congressional mid-term is going to be fought out as a colossal bait and switch gambit.

So why is it so important?

For two basic reasons.

First, all evidence suggests that the Ryan budget is in fact what the great majority of the House Republican caucus believes and supports. It was the plan in 1994. It surfaced again with overwhelming support in 2005 and repeatedly, though with less fanfare, since then. And they have a very decent chance of becoming the majority party in the House next year. Second, and even more important, the Republicans have been running all year as the party to dramatically cut deficit spending. And the simple truth is that if you want to significantly move the needle on deficits and you rule out tax increases, you simply have no choice but to embrace a Ryan-like budget. There's no other way to get the kind of money they claim they're going to trim. No way.

And here's where you get to the essential political question and the issue that is likely to define 2010. In the second half of 2009, Republicans went very quickly -- perhaps a tad too quickly for their own good -- from a party seen as hopelessly in the wilderness to one with a very reasonable shot at becoming the governing party. And that's taken the rhetoric that was being thrown around easily and made it extremely relevant to find out whether they were serious about any of that rhetoric. Because again, it all comes down to this budget.

The political press seldom has much appetite for digging beneath the toplines or any of the policy specifics. But for the reasons, I stated above it's critical to know where Congressional Republicans stand on the Ryan Budget. It's just not enough to say they're not sure. The stakes are too critical.

In terms of the politics of 2010, the White House's main strategic aim is to change the political landscape from a referendum on Obama and the Democrats into a choice between Democratic and Republican agendas. To the extent that the issue stays Obama/Dems, Yes or No, in such a severe recession, that's catastrophic for the Democrats. A choice election is a very different thing.

So a key question for 2010 is going to be how effectively the White House is going to be able to do that and how effectively the Republicans will be able to keep their actual policy positions off the table -- which they're now desperately trying to do.

And on top of that, there's one more wrinkle. How much room does the White House have to frame the election around opposition to tampering with Social Security and Medicare? Possibly not quite so much as some assume. Contrary to what some people think, the move toward fiscal retrenchment didn't start with Scott Brown's victory or the president's sagging poll numbers at the end of the year. The White House was signaling much, much earlier that 2010 would be the year of fiscal retrenchment. And to that end the White House has strongly supported the fiscal/deficit commission supported by Sens. Conrad and Gregg. And the folks from that crowd are very big on major 'reforms' of entitlements. President Obama hasn't gone there directly. But he's cozied up pretty close. So another question to follow is just what policy and political decision the White House makes. Do they maintain the ambiguity in their own position on 'entitlements' or clarify that and draw a red line between where they are and where the Republicans stand?

On all these points, press failure to report the policies the Republicans are actually running on can pretty much be assumed. It's happening now. And House Republicans are already up in arms that they're being pressed on their support for privatizing Social Security and abolishing Medicare.

Voters need and deserve to know where each side stands on these issues. Because it's what is on the table in the 2010 election.

Reading Is Fundamental

2010-02-09T15:18:36Z

Sarah Palin favorably cites Pat Buchanan column that says opposite of what she thinks it says.

It dovetails almost seamlessly with Stephen Colbert's Sarah Palin "satire" last night. Watch.

As long as we're on Palin, Jon Stewart had some fun with Palin's "mavericky notecard hand-scribbled buzzwords." Watch.

Are You a TPM Fan?

2010-02-09T14:44:02Z

If you can't make it nonstop to TPM every day, there's no better way to keep up on our biggest stories and breaking news than becoming a fan of TPM on Facebook. Just look: all your friends are doing it! Just click the button below, one click, and you're in.

And we really appreciate it.

Talking Points Memo on Facebook

TPMDC Morning Roundup

2010-02-09T14:13:29Z

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC): A contribution from my leadership PAC is "a seal of conservative approval." That and the day's other political news in the TPMDC Morning Roundup.

Uncle! ... Sorta

2010-02-09T01:25:15Z

Sen. Shelby (R-AL) released his blanket holds on Obama nominees this morning -- but he's maintaining his holds on a few unnamed nominees he says are directly related to "the Air Force tanker acquisition until the new Request for Proposal is issued."

Shelby statement after the jump ...

"The purpose of placing numerous holds was to get the White House's attention on two issues that are critical to our national security - the Air Force's aerial refueling tanker acquisition and the FBI's Terrorist Device Analytical Center (TEDAC). With that accomplished, Sen. Shelby has decided to release his holds on all but a few nominees directly related to the Air Force tanker acquisition until the new Request for Proposal is issued. The Air Force tanker acquisition is not an 'earmark' as has been reported; it is a competition to replace the Air Force's aging aerial refueling tanker fleet. Sen. Shelby is not seeking to determine the outcome of the competition; he is seeking to ensure an open, fair and transparent competition that delivers the best equipment to our men and women in uniform. Sen. Shelby is fully justified in his concern given the history and current status of this acquisition."