What recession?

The husband of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says the Republican Party’s lavish spending on her wardrobe during the presidential campaign was “out of our control.”

In the May issue of Men’s Journal, Todd Palin was asked about the more than $150,000 that the Republican National Committee spent on clothes, accessories and beauty services for the GOP vice presidential nominee. He defended his wife, saying she was focused on preparation for her debate with Joe Biden.

“She never went to Saks, or any of that stuff,” he said. “You come into a campaign late, you put all your trust into the team, you got people who are working on VP ops for a long time, and we’re just focused on debate prep. I couldn’t give a rat’s (expletive) about clothes. Please. I mean these are my Sunday go-to-meeting jeans!”

Sarah Palin and Republican presidential nominee John McCain faced a storm of criticism over the tens of thousands of dollars spent at high-end stores to dress the Alaska governor and her family. Some of the purchases included a $75,062 shopping spree at Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, one for $49,425 from Saks Fifth Avenue and $4,902 at Atelier, a stylish men’s store.

The buys were a stark contrast to Sarah Palin’s image as a “hockey mom” who calls herself part of an average, middle-class American family.

Sarah Palin has said she neither wanted nor asked for the wardrobe.

Some of the clothing was returned immediately because it was the wrong size, or for other reasons, the McCain-Palin campaign said at the time. The Republican National Committee has said the remaining items would be donated to charity.

Todd Palin told the magazine that his wife had been through tough campaigns before becoming McCain’s running mate.

“You got to remember, it’s not like they just plucked us off the fishing boat with scales still under our nails, you know?” he said.

Todd Palin, a champion snowmobiler racer, also told the magazine about his temporary Secret Service protection during the campaign.

“They liked cruising around with me,” he said, “because we went to the Arctic Cat snowmachine factory and then drove up to North Dakota, went to a Penn State-Michigan football game, went to a NASCAR race. Rough duty, hanging out with me.”

The Men’s Journal issue reaches newsstands April 10.

Source

I want an iPod

President Obama gave Queen Elizabeth an iPod during their private meeting at Buckingham Palace, the BBC reports. “It contains footage of her state visit to the US in May 2007. The Queen has given the president a silver framed photograph of herself and her husband. The official picture is what she gives all visiting dignitaries.”

The gift exchange was closely watched, the Wall Street Journal reports, “ever since the British press took high exception to the modest presents the Obamas gave Gordon Brown and wife on their visit to the White House last month: a box set of DVDs, allegedly in the wrong format, and a couple of models of Marine One for the Brown boys.”

Source

If you’re not going to be a virgin, learn what birth control is!

Bristol Palin, the 18-year-old daughter of Sarah Palin whose pregnancy during the presidential campaign made headlines, taped an interview for Greta Van Susteren’s “On The Record” on Monday night.

Both Bristol, appearing with her 2-month old baby Tripp for the first time, and her mother expressed skepticism about abstinence-only programs which her mother backed when running for governor in 2006.

When Van Susteren mentions abstinence in discussing Bristol’s surprise pregnancy, Sarah Palin responded: “It sounds naive. Life happens.”

Bristol also said that “everyone should be abstinent but it’s not realistic… [sex] is more and more accepted among kids my age.”

Bristol also warned about the dangers of teen pregnancy and said that she should have waited 10 years before having children.

“Of course I wish it would happen in like 10 years so I could have a job and education and my own house… But he brings so much joy. i don’t regret it at all.”

At the end of the interview, Sarah Palin gave a passionate speech against the fairness doctrine, which has been painted by conservatives as a prerogative of Democrats. She lauded a few members of the media whom she admires for asking tough questions – and all of whom happen to work for Fox News: Van Susteren, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck.

“Any attempt to squash these voices… that’s a threat to our democracy.”

Source

The last people that need it!

When President Obama outlined on January 8 the rationale for the economic stimulus bill, “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” he clearly identified the men and women most in trouble:

Nearly two million jobs have now been lost, and on Friday we are likely to learn that we lost more jobs last year than at any time since World War II. Just in the past year, another 2.8 million Americans who want and need full-time work have had to settle for part-time jobs.

The House-Senate compromise, however, cuts funds for extended health care coverage for the unemployed; cuts $30 billion in aid to state governments to prevent reductions in social services to the poor and out-of-work; and also cuts a special “Making Work Pay” tax holiday from $500 to $400 for an individual, and from $1,000 to $800 for a couple, for low-to-middle-income workers still hanging on to their jobs

Amid all the cutting, however, one group emerged unscathed: the upper-middle class, the not-quite-super-rich, but certainly not on the ropes. Most of these folks, in terms of income and employment, are what could be called the un-needy, a group clearly distinct from those Obama identified as the core target of the legislation. The “compromise” legislation includes $70 billion, or just under 10 percent of the whole package, to be used expressly to take care of these affluent people.

In fact, these lucky men and women make so much money that they fall into the ever-expanding grasp of the alternative minimum tax (AMT). The AMT was originally designed in 1969 to prevent the nation’s millionaires and billionaires from using tax loopholes to pay zero income tax. That year, 155 very wealthy taxpayers paid no federal tax whatsoever. This year, if the law remains as it is currently crafted, the AMT would, through bracket creep, apply to as many as 25 million taxpayers, including those making in the $85,000 to $250,000 range, depending on how many deductions they claim (the more deductions, the more likely the AMT comes into play).

There is a strong case to be made that the AMT was never intended to apply to people in these income categories – for example two public school teachers married to each other — and Congress in recent years has repeatedly passed temporary one-year “patches” postponing the downward reach of the tax provision.

Some economists argue, however, that patching the AMT is one of the least effective ways for Congress to stimulate the economy and create jobs. As the Huffington Post has reported, the Congressional Budget Office and Brookings-Urban Institute Tax Policy Center have both described the AMT as a poor use of federal dollars.

Why then has Congress added the $70 billion AMT patch to the bill, while cutting other expenditures right and left?

The most obvious answers are 1) the people who make $80,000 to $250,000 are influential and vocal in pressing their complaints to Congress; 2) an AMT-induced tax hike would produce an outcry; 3) and people in this class have become the most contested “swing” voters in elections — running the gamut from presidential to state legislative elections.

Once these upper-middle-class voters were a reliably Republican constituency, but over the past generation, Democrats have made major inroads, evinced in the success of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and Barack Obama in the well-to-do suburbs of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and along the entire California coast.

A major consequence is that leaders of both parties are vying intensely for this crucial segment of the electorate — Republicans to staunch the hemorrhaging, Democrats to speed it up. Thus, the $70 billion AMT patch has become inviolable.

Source

Bailed out Bankers Testify

The eight chief executives from bailed out Wall Street banks are testifying today before Congress. The CEOS will be quizzed aggressively on how they have used more than $160 billion in taxpayers’ money. Watch the hearing live here… See below for a list of paraphrased quotes from the hearing.

JP Morgan CEO: We Bear Some Responsibility For The Current State Of Financial Markets…

Bank Of America CEO: We Are Lending… We Intend To Pay The TARP Funds Back… We Play A Supporting Role In The Economy…

State Street CEO: Myself And Six Other Members Of Our Leadership Team Are Forgoing Incentive Compensation…

Citigroup CEO: We Continue To Reach Out To Homeowners… The World Is Changing Very Fast… I Want To Say Something About The Airplane That Was In The News… We Need To Do A Better Job of Acknowledging The New Reality… My Salary Should Be $1 A Year Until We Return To Profitability…

Wells Fargo CEO: We’re Americans First, Bankers Second… We Made A $3 Billion Profit Last Year…

Chairman Barney Frank: If You Want To Give Back The Money, We Will Take It

Cut the nuclear crap. Literally.

Some Senators have stealthily stuffed $1 billion for nuclear weapons into the recovery bill. The only thing this will stimulate is an arms race. It must go.

The Senate bill now contains language authorizing $1 billion “for weapons activities” at the sprawling nuclear weapons complex of laboratories and factories run by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), including new construction, new projects and new computers. The House bill does not contain this funding, for good reason.

Military spending is notoriously poor at stimulating the economy. Studies show that investing in mass transit, education or state and local government projects generate far more economic activity than money spent on weapons. There are, in addition, three other major problems with using this emergency legislation for non-urgent and unnecessary nuclear weapons purposes.

First, this is a stealth increase in the nuclear weapons budget. The government currently spends at least $52 billion each year on nuclear weapons and related programs, according to a new study by the Carnegie Endowment. This is an unconscionable amount in any year, but particularly outrageous during this profound economic crisis. Of this amount, the NNSA got $9.3 billion last year. The Senate would give the agency a $1 billion bonus–free money above and beyond its normal budget. It is an 11 percent increase for weapons programs at a time when hospitals, schools and state governments are forced to slash their budgets and lay off workers.

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability provides a complete NNSA budget breakdown on their website. They are mounting a public campaign against this give-away.

Second, this weapons increase comes without any presidential plan for the size, composition, or mission for the 5,200 nuclear weapons currently in our stockpile. We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world–or any nation therein–many times over. But the Bush Administration planned to expand nuclear weapon production, plans that could cost $200 billion over the next two decades, according to Bill Hartung at the New America Foundation. Giving a nuclear bonus to the weapons complex now is an attempt to force start this expansion, box in President Obama, and create facts on the ground that he will find more difficult to reverse.

Finally, this is a nuclear earmark manipulated in Senate backrooms. There is not a record of who put these funds into the bill, nor any justification for why this amount and why now. The culprit, however, is suspected to be a senator who has no intention of voting for the bill. This is not transparency; this is hypocrisy. No member of Congress should be allowed to vigorously oppose the recovery bill with one hand and stuff nuclear pork into it with the other.

Source

Whats in your wallet?

Now it’s time to make a deal on economic stimulus: Key members of the Senate and House are in talks to craft a final bill. They hope to reach an agreement ASAP.

Whatever they come up with, there’s a good chance it will closely resemble the version passed Tuesday by the Senate.

The Senate provisions carry more weight because the Senate, unlike the House, cannot pass a final package without the support of a few Republicans. Only three Republicans voted for the Senate bill. Should the final package’s cost or contents be substantially different, those Republican votes could be lost.

So using the Senate as a guide, we took a look at what the financial rescue package might mean for you.

Here’s a rundown of many of the measures that would benefit individuals directly. It’s likely that many, if not all, of these measures will make it into the final package. CNNMoney.com will update this list as negotiators hammer out a final deal.

Make Work Pay Credit: The bill provides a $500 credit per worker and a $1,000 credit per dual-earner couple. The full credit would be paid to people making $70,000 or less ($140,000 per dual-earner couple). It would also be refundable, which means that even very low-income families who don’t make enough to owe income tax would be able to claim it. Estimated cost: $139.4 billion.

One-time payments to those who don’t work: For seniors who don’t work, as well as disabled veterans and retired railroad workers, the bill provides a one-time $300 payment. Estimated cost: $17 billion.

Break for higher income families: The bill includes a one-year provision to protect middle- and upper-middle-income families from having to pay the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT was intended primarily for high-income taxpayers but has in recent years threatened to engulf those lower down the income scale. Estimated cost: $70 billion.

Temporary credit for car buyers: The bill would let those who buy a car in 2009 deduct the interest they pay on their car loan as well as the sales tax charged in the purchase. The full deduction would be available to those earning less than $125,000 ($250,000 for joint filers). Estimated cost: $11 billion.

Temporary credit for home buyers: The bill doubles the size of an existing temporary home buyer credit to $15,000. It also would allow all home buyers to claim it. And it removes the requirement under current law that the credit be paid back. Estimated cost: $39 billion.

New college credit: The bill introduces the American Opportunity Tax Credit, a $2,500 credit for higher education expenses. The full credit would be available to those making less than $80,000 ($160,000 for joint filers). Estimated cost: $10.3 billion.

Pell Grants: The bill increases the maximum Pell Grant by $281 in the 2009-10 academic year and by $400 in the 2010-11 academic year. Estimated cost: $14 billion.

Child care credit: The bill increases eligibility for the child care tax credit by lowering the income threshold that must be met to $8,100. That will allow lower income families to claim more of the credit. Estimated cost: $7.2 billion.

Earned income tax credit: The credit will be temporarily increased from 40% to 45% of qualifying earnings for low-income families with three or more children. It also includes a marriage penalty relief provision for couples who qualify for at least a portion of the credit. Estimated cost: $4.6 billion.

Direct lifeline benefits

Health insurance help for the jobless: The bill includes provisions to help eligible jobless workers pay for health insurance under Cobra. Cobra coverage allows newly laid off workers to keep health insurance provided by their former employers for a period of time.

One of the provisions offers a government subsidy — 50% of premiums for 12 months — to help out-of-work Americans pay for healthcare. Estimated cost: $20 billion.

Another provides states funding to help pay for expanded Medicaid rolls for workers who’ve lost their jobs and can’t afford health care on their own or can’t get Cobra coverage because their former employer doesn’t offer a health care plan. Estimated cost: $87 billion.

Unemployment benefits: The bill provides jobless workers with an additional 20 weeks in unemployment benefits, and 13 weeks on top of that if they live in what’s deemed a high unemployment state, of which there are about 30 currently. Estimated cost: $27 billion.

In addition, the weekly unemployment benefit will temporarily increase by $25 on top of the roughly $300 jobless workers currently receive. Estimated cost: $8.8 billion

Plus, the first $2,400 of benefits in 2009 would be exempt from federal income taxes. Estimated cost: $4.7 billion.

Also included in the bill is an incentive for states to provide unemployment insurance coverage for part-time workers and for workers who quit their jobs for compelling family reasons. Estimated cost: up to $2.6 billion.

Food stamp payments: The bill includes a provision would increase food stamp payments by 12%, so a family of four would see an additional $71 on top of the $588 per month they receive currently. Estimated cost: $16.5 billion.

Help for needy families: The bill provides $2.3 billion to states to create a contingency fund through 2010 for the welfare program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which provides cash assistance to the needy. Estimated cost: $2.3 billion.

Source

Stimulus

resident Obama took the fight for his economic stimulus package to the American heartland today, traveling to Elkhart, Ind., for a town hall meeting in a city where unemployment has soared to 15.3 percent, twice the national average.

“The situation we face could not be more serious . . . ,” Obama told his audience in Elkhart, which has suffered as companies such as the Monaco Coach Corp. and Keystone RV Co. have cut their payrolls. “So we can no longer afford to wait and see and hope for the best. We can no longer posture and bicker and resort to the same failed ideas that got us into this mess in the first place — and that the American people rejected at the polls this past November.”

Obama’s proposal for a massive government spending program is headed for a crucial test vote in the Senate today, and the administration is hoping that an intensive push will help win approval in the upper chamber.

Following the town hall in Elkhart, the president this evening will have a prime-time news conference to urge leaders of the Senate and House to come to terms quickly on a final version of the stimulus plan.

if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf )
{
placeAd(‘ARTICLE’,commercialNode,20,’inline=y;’,true) ;
}

<!–
if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf )
{
document.write(‘</div>’) ;
}
// –>

Officials at the U.S. Treasury, meanwhile, postponed until tomorrow plans to unveil a new rescue package for the financial industry, instead focusing their energy on lobbying for the broader stimulus proposal pending on Capitol Hill.

The Senate has scheduled a procedural vote late this afternoon on the stimulus package to determine whether a compromise struck this weekend, which removed about $100 billion in spending from the bill, will persuade enough Republicans to support the measure.

Even if senators approve the bill, which carries an $827 billion price tag, they face the daunting task of negotiating a final bill with the House, which passed its own version last week with far more spending proposals and fewer tax cuts. Democratic aides warned yesterday that it could be difficult to get the stimulus to the president’s desk by Congress’s self-imposed deadline of Friday.

The administration’s top economic officials said yesterday that, as negotiations on the stimulus bill progress, Obama is interested in restoring support for education and for cash-strapped state and local governments — measures that were stripped out in the Senate version of the plan.

To persuade enough moderate Republicans to vote for the measure, leaders also added tax credits for home and auto purchases, and provided relief from the alternative minimum tax.

Still, the administration downplayed differences between the House and Senate measures, saying it was critical that Congress act swiftly.

“The most important thing is to get this done for the sake of an economy that lost 600,000 jobs in one month,” Lawrence H. Summers, director of the National Economic Council, said yesterday on ABC’s “This Week.”

The plan has come under intense criticism from many Republicans, who have called it unfocused and wasteful. They also have complained that they have been locked out of the bill-writing process, despite Obama’s public efforts to reach out to Republicans.

“I know we’re in trouble. I know America needs a stimulus. We need tax cuts. We need to spend money on infrastructure and on other programs that will immediately put people to work. But this is not it,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“You need to get it right. You don’t want to spend these precious taxpayer dollars in the wrong way,” Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Christina D. Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, warned that if a large stimulus plan were not enacted, it would have a “catastrophic” impact on the economy. “I feel very strongly it’s in our hands, that if we can get this package through, we can turn it around and be back on the road to growth,” Romer said on CBS.

“The center of this stimulus bill is massive, unaccountable government spending, and the American people are tired of it,” countered Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) on NBC.

Administration officials have emphasized that the economy needs both the stimulus package, which is aimed at creating millions of jobs and reviving consumer spending, and the financial system rescue plan, which is supposed to loosen the credit markets that provide the loans for homes, cars and businesses.

The rescue plan will lay out how the government intends to spend the second half of the $700 billion that Congress approved in October. It will attack the core issue facing banks: the toxic assets backed by failing mortgages and other loans that are weighing down their balance sheets and freezing up the lending markets. The administration will aim a one-two punch at this problem by insuring the losses on some of the bad assets while providing incentives for private investors to buy others, sources in contact with the administration said.

The rescue package is also expected to expand a Federal Reserve program to aid the trading of assets that finance the commercial real estate and residential mortgage markets. In addition, it will lay out a way for the government to invest in banks through bonds or preferred shares that could eventually give the government partial ownership if the banks don’t pay back the aid. Administration officials are expected to detail clear guidelines for how financial firms can get this money, as well as how the government will expand oversight.

But the administration is not as far along on the part of the rescue plan that would spend $50 billion to $100 billion to help homeowners and may reveal only the broad outlines of that tomorrow.

One idea being considered is to have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac set standards for how and when lenders should modify loans for homeowners facing foreclosure, according to two industry sources familiar with the matter. These sources cautioned, however, that the plan was highly fluid.

Washington post

No mail saturdays?

Massive deficits could force the post office to cut out one day of mail delivery, the postmaster general told Congress on Wednesday, in asking lawmakers to lift the requirement that the agency deliver mail six days a week. If the change happens, that doesn’t necessarily mean an end to Saturday mail delivery. Previous post office studies have looked at the possibility of skipping some other day when mail flow is light, such as Tuesday.

Faced with dwindling mail volume and rising costs, the post office was $2.8 billion in the red last year. “If current trends continue, we could experience a net loss of $6 billion or more this fiscal year,” Postmaster General John E. Potter said in testimony for a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee.

Total mail volume was 202 billion items last year, over 9 billion less than the year before, the largest single volume drop in history.

And, despite annual rate increases, Potter said 2009 could be the first year since 1946 that the actual amount of money collected by the post office declines.

“It is possible that the cost of six-day delivery may simply prove to be unaffordable,” Potter said. “I reluctantly request that Congress remove the annual appropriation bill rider, first added in 1983, that requires the Postal Service to deliver mail six days each week.”

“The ability to suspend delivery on the lightest delivery days, for example, could save dollars in both our delivery and our processing and distribution networks. I do not make this request lightly, but I am forced to consider every option given the severity of our challenge,” Potter said.

That doesn’t mean it would happen right away, he noted, adding that the agency is working to cut costs and any final decision on changing delivery would have to be made by the postal governing board.

If it did become necessary to go to five-day delivery, Potter said, “we would do this by suspending delivery on the lightest volume days.”

Source

Obama listened to us about Warren

New Hampshire Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, a vocal gay rights leader, will open President-elect Barack Obama’s inauguration with a prayer on Sunday’s kick-off event at the Lincoln Memorial.

“I am writing to tell you that President-Elect Obama and the Inaugural Committee have invited me to give the invocation at the opening event of the Inaugural Week activities, We are One, to be held at the Lincoln Memorial,” Robinson wrote in an email to friends.

The announcement comes after weeks of outcry from the gay community over Obama’s choice of evangelical, anti-gay pastor Rick Warren to deliver the inaugural invocation.

“It’s important for any minority to see themselves represented in some way,” Robinson said in an interview with the Concord Monitor. “Whether it be a racial minority, an ethnic minority or, in our case, a sexual minority. Just seeing someone like you up front matters.”

Robinson is the first openly gay diocesan bishop in the Anglican Communion. “God never gets it wrong. The church often takes a long time to get it right. It is a human institution, but one capable of self-correction,” Robinson told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. “I believe in my heart that the church got it wrong about homosexuality. There is great excitement in my heart to be living in a time when the church is starting to get it right.”

Robinson said he would love to sit down with Rick Warren but believed that the California pastor has “perpetrated lies about the gay, lesbian and bisexual community.”

Source

Hillary Clinton Getting sworn in

Sen. Hillary Clinton appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today for a hearing on her nomination as Secretary of State.

Clinton fielded an array of non-contentious, often friendly, questions from Democrats as well as Republicans, signaling the likelihood that she will be confirmed swiftly.

The committee is currently on break. The hearing will resume at 2 PM ET.

Watch:

Read the full text of Clinton’s prepared statement here.

Clinton expressed sympathy for Palestinians in her confirmation hearing, a rare and tricky move for American politicians. “The suffering of Palestinian and Israeli civilians,” Clinton said, “… must only increase our determination to seek a just and lasing peace agreement.”

Questioned on her history of poor management skills, Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she won’t actually run the State Department — deputies will.

“This is to me one of the most important questions,” she replied. “I decided to fill a position that had not been filled although it had been created ten years ago, and that was the deputy for resources and management.”

As secretary, Clinton said, “you get consumed by the crisis of the moment.” Even “with the best intentions to deal with management,” she said, the secretary routinely spends her time on more immediate concerns, “on Gaza, or Iran, or on Russia and the Ukraine pipeline.”

Clinton said she had called on Jack Lew, a former director of the Office of Management and Budget, to fill the position. James Steinberg, she said, had agreed to leave the deanship of the Lyndon Baines Johnson public policy school in Austin, Texas, to help manage the department as well.

Addressing her Senate confirmation hearing, Clinton also promised to push for stronger U.S. alliances around the globe.

“We must build a world with more partners and fewer adversaries,” said the woman that President-elect Barack Obama took for his administration’s leading diplomatic job.

“America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own,” Clinton said, “and the world cannot solve them without America.”

Borrowing a phrase meant to signal a move away from the militarization of U.S. foreign policy, Clinton said, “We must use what has been called `smart power,’ the full range of tools at our disposal,” she said. “With `smart power,’ diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.”

She credited Secretary of Defense Robert Gates with stimulating debate about the role of diplomacy and other civilian institutions’ role in fighting the global war on terror, endorsing his call for providing the State Department with more resources and a bigger budget.

She assured the committee that if confirmed, the State Department “will be firing on all cylinders” — applying pressure when needed and looking for opportunities to advancing U.S. interests.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the committee, said in opening the hearing that he welcomed Clinton’s nomination, calling her “extraordinarily capable and smart.”

In his opening remarks, Sen. Richard Lugar, the panel’s ranking Republican, praised Clinton, calling her “the epitome of a big leaguer” who is fully qualified for the job and whose presence at the State Department could open new opportunities for American diplomacy, including the possibility of improving the United States’ image in the world.

But Lugar also raised questions about the issue of Bill Clinton’s fundraising work and its relation to her wife’s new post. Lugar said that the only way for Clinton to avoid a potential conflict of interest due to her husband’s charity is to forswear any new foreign contributions. The Indiana senator said the situation poses a “unique complication” that requires “great care and transparency.”

The Washington Independent‘s Spencer Ackerman is liveblogging the hearing.

In remarks prepared for delivery, Clinton promised to use “smart power” and push for more U.S. partnerships around the globe.

“America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America,” she said. “I believe American leadership has been wanting, but is still wanted.”

Borrowing a phrase meant to signal a move away from the militarization of U.S. foreign policy, Clinton said, “We must use what has been called `smart power,’ the full range of tools at our disposal. With `smart power,’ diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.

A team of roughly ten advisers helped Clinton prepare for the hearing, from deputy designates Jim Steinberg and Jack Lew, Wendy Sherman, and campaign policy aide Jake Sullivan to her Senate foreign policy staffer, Andrew Shapiro.

Source

Obama’s Dog Search

The Obama family is planning to get either a labradoodle or a Portuguese water hound, the President-elect said Sunday.

George Stephanopoulos asked about the dog on ABC’s “This Week,” saying he was passing along a question from Barack Obama’s daughters sitting in the control room: “What kind of a dog are we getting and when are we getting it?”

“While you were getting made up,” Stephanopoulos told Obama, “they went into the control room and played director and producer. And they actually gave me a question they want me to ask you. You know exactly what it’s going to be.”

“They seem to have narrowed it down to a labradoodle or a Portuguese water hound … medium-sized dog, and so, we’re now going to start looking at shelters to see when one of those dogs might come up.”

“So, you’re closing in on it?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“We’re closing in on it. This has been tougher than finding a commerce secretary,” the President-elect said.

Source

Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General?

President-elect Barack Obama has approached CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Sanjay Gupta, to be the country’s next surgeon general, the cable news network said Tuesday. CNN said it has kept Gupta from reporting on health care policy and other matters involving the incoming Obama administration since learning he was under consideration for the post.

A Democrat with knowledge of the discussions over the surgeon general spot cautioned that there was not yet a final decision on who would fill the post. The person spoke on a condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media on the matter.

Obama’s transition office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Gupta hosts “House Call” on CNN, contributes reports to CBS News, and writes a column for Time magazine. He is a neurosurgeon and is on the faculty at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta. During the Clinton administration, he was a White House fellow and special adviser to then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The surgeon general typically isn’t heavily involved in shaping an administration’s policy, but it can be a very effective bully pulpit. Past surgeons general have proved instrumental in battling tobacco and AIDS.

Having such a well-known TV personality could bring the surgeon general attention not seen since C. Everett Koop help the position under President Ronald Reagan. Koop is best known for pushing to make AIDS a public health issue rather than a moral issue, and Reagan faced pressure to fire him. Koop has said Reagan never interfered.

CNN said Gupta would not comment on the discussions and released a statement that said, “Since first learning that Dr. Gupta was under consideration for the surgeon general position, CNN has made sure that his on-air reporting has been on health and wellness matters and not on health care policy or any matters involving the new administration.”

CBS News is a unit of CBS Corp.; CNN is owned by Time Warner.

Source

The Economist Endorses Obama

The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence. But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama’s inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. Yet it is one America should take, given the steep road ahead.

Frickin’ HILARIOUS

Sarah Palin is a “Whack Job?”…Well her Campaign Thinks So

One of John McCain’s advisers recently called his running mate Sarah Palin a “diva” after she went off-script at a rally, and suggested she was looking after her own political future over the current campaign. Now another adviser ups the ante in a conversation with the Politico’s Playbook, labeling Palin a “whack job.”

News Orgs Investigate Possibly Fatal ’64 Car Crash Involving John McCain

From Huffington Post…

For the past two months, a major American magazine and an allied news service have been engaged in a legal battle with the United States Navy over records that they believe show that John McCain once was involved in an automobile accident that injured or, perhaps, killed another individual.

Vanity Fair magazine and the National Security News Service claim to have knowledge “developed from first-hand sources” of a car crash that involved then-Lt. McCain at the main gate of a Virginia naval base in 1964, according to legal filings. The incident has been largely, if not entirely, kept from the public. And in documents suing the Navy to release pertinent information, lawyers for the NS News Service allege that a cover-up may be at play.

“Plaintiffs have also obtained documents showing that law enforcement officers were ordered back to the accident scene to retrieve personal physical effects. The Navy has never publicly acknowledged this information,” one document reads. “This request involves federal government activity, as it addresses what may be an attempt by the Navy to protect by concealment the involvement of a former Navy officer, sitting Senator and Presidential candidate in a serious incident involving the injury or death of another human being.”

The first request for information concerning duty assignment logs to Portsmouth Naval Hospital — where McCain was allegedly brought after the accident — came in the form of a Freedom of Information Act request on August 28, 2008. The Navy acknowledged receipt of the request and advised that it had located the relevant information a few weeks later, only to deny the FOIA on grounds that it didn’t prove an “imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual” or satisfy the criteria of “a breaking news story of general public interest.”

“The patient admission record logs that you seek are exempt from release,” wrote G.E. Lattin, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General, “as information in personnel and medical files, as well as similar personal information in other files, that if disclosed to a requestor, other than the actual person in which the information is pertaining to or next of kin, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

NS News Service and Vanity Fair appealed the decision and asked for expedited treatment of the case, as the end of the presidential election loomed. But the Navy denied that request as well.

“It appears to be a deliberate refusal to provide clearly releasable information concerning assignments to Portsmouth Naval Hospital,” wrote legal representatives for the two news organizations. “Allowing the Navy to extend its time to respond beyond a date when the documentary facts of this matter would be available for public consideration prior to the national election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008 would violate the spirit, as well as the provisions of the FOIA.”

Staff for National Security News Service and the company’s lawyer both refused to discuss the proceedings. And there are only parcels of information concerning the story that can be gleamed from the court documents.

At a minimum it seems clear that Vanity Fair and NS News Service have launched an investigation “disclosing first-hand witnesses’ recollection of an automobile accident in which then Lt. John S. McCain III was involved. Those witnesses specifically recall McCain’s assignment to that [hospital] facility with the other person involved in the accident.” This episode in McCain’s life has, it seems, not been made public, and the plaintiffs suggest that the Navy may be attempting to actively restrict information about the incident.

“The subject matter of the documents is a matter of current exigency to the American public,” reads a document filed by legal representatives for the news service, “because the requester is preparing a current news report addressing whether the Navy continues to conceal the involvement of a Navy officer in a serious automobile accident in July 1964.”

COLIN POWELL

I’m SPEECHLESS OVER THE ENDORSEMENT!!!!!! I’M READY FOR A CHANGE

Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama Part 2

Colin Powell Endorses Obama!

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced Sunday that he will break with his party and vote for Sen. Barack Obama. “He has both style and substance. I think he is a transformational figure,” Powell said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

“I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities — and you have to take that into account — as well as his substance — he has both style and substance,” Powell said. “He has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president.”

Powell noted that McCain has been a good friend for 25 years, but expressed disappointment in the “over the top” negative tone of the GOP campaign, as well as in McCain’s choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the vice presidential nominee.

“Now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president,” Powell said. “And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.”

He also harshly criticized some of McCain’s campaign tactics, such as the robocall campaign linking Obama to former 1960s radical Bill Ayers.

“Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed up terrorist, but then why do we keep talking about him? And why do we have the robocalls going on around the country trying to suggest that because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow Mr. Obama is tainted. What they’re trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings. And I think that’s inappropriate. Now, I understand what politics is all about, I know how you can go after one another and that’s good. But I think this goes too far, and I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It’s not what the American people are looking for.”

Powell also spoke passionately against the insinuations by some Republicans that Obama is a Muslim.

“Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian,” he said. “But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, ‘He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.’ This is not the way we should be doing it in America.”

Following the interview, Powell told reporters outside NBC’s Washington studio that McCain “is essentially going to execute the Republican agenda, the orthodoxy of the Republican agenda with a new face and a maverick approach to it, and he’d be quite good at it, but I think we need more than that. I think we need a generational change. I think Senator Obama has captured the feelings of the young people of America and is reaching out in a more diverse, inclusive way across our society.”

Powell charged that the Republican focus on William Ayers and Obama’s religious affiliations were damaging America’s image abroad.

“Those kinds of images going out on al Jazeera are killing us around the world,” he said. “And we have got to say to the world, it doesn’t make any difference who you are or what you are, if you’re an American you’re an American. And this business of, for example a congresswoman from Minnesota going around saying let’s examine all congressmen to see who is pro America or not pro America, we have got to stop this kind of non-sense and pull ourselves together and remember that our great strength is in our unity and diversity. That really was driving me.”

Powell continued, defending Obama against McCain’s latest charge that the Democrat’s policies are quasi-socialist:

We can’t judge our people and hold our elections on that kind of basis. Yes, that kind of negativity troubled me. And the constant shifting of the argument, I was troubled a couple of weeks ago when in the middle of the crisis the campaign said ‘we’re going to go negative,’ and they announced it. ‘We’re going to go negative and attack his character through Bill Ayers.’ Now I guess the message this week is we’re going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there’s nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying les, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that I don’t think is accurate.

Asked whether he still considers himself a Republican, Powell responded, “Yes.”

Robert Gibbs told reporters that Obama called Powell to thank him for his endorsement and express how honored he was to have it.

Obama “said he looked forward to taking advantage of his advice in the next two weeks and hopefully over the next four years,” Gibbs said in an email to the traveling press. “They talked for ten minutes.”

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, John McCain said he respectfully disagreed with Powell’s decision, but “this doesn’t come as a surprise.”

In fact, aside from their shared history as Republican military men, Powell’s endorsement is significant due to the fact that McCain has repeatedly singled him out for lavish praise. In a July New York Times interview, McCain described the former secretary of state and Joint Chiefs chairman as “a man who I admire as much as any man in the world, person in the world” when answering a question in which Powell was not brought up. Meanwhile, near the same time as that interview, McCain was reportedly considering Powell as a potential running mate.

McCain’s high opinion of Powell as one of the “most credible, most respected” men in America is not merely an election-year spasm, either. When asked in 2001 if he would have chosen Powell for a Cabinet position had he succeeded in his first presidential run, McCain said “oh, yes.” During two December 2000 appearances on NBC Nightly News, McCain described himself as “exuberant” over Powell’s selection as secretary of state, which he predicted would secure “a beneficial effect on the conduct of American foreign policy.” McCain added in another TV appearance that President Bush was “blessed” to have Powell working for him. In 2003, when Powell faced criticism from Newt Gingrich over his plan to travel to Syria, it was McCain who rose to the secretary’s defense on MSNBC’s Hardball, when he said: “I think it’s appropriate that Colin Powell is going there.”

Even at the end of Powell’s somewhat frustrating tenure in George W. Bush’s inner circle of policy advisers, McCain praised his overall performance, saying: “When he took the helm at the State Department nearly four years ago, I was confident that Secretary Powell would lead with honor and distinction … I have not been disappointed.” And in a CBS interview during this year’s primary race, McCain suggested that one of President Bush’s chief failures “was not to listen more to our military leadership, including people like General Colin Powell.”

The praise has not only run in one direction, as Powell described McCain the “toughest man I’ve ever met” last year. But in the end, what sounded like a compliment could have been the beginning of the end. During this summer’s conflict between Russia and Georgia, Powell criticized McCain for being, in essence, too mindlessly tough. When asked by CNN’s what McCain meant when he said “We are all Georgians now,” Powell demurred. “One candidate said that, and I’ll let the candidate explain it for himself.”

When pressed for further opinion, Powell distanced himself from McCain’s staunchly pro-Georgian line. “The fact of the matter is that you have to be very careful in a situation like this not just to leap to one side or the other until you take a good analysis of the whole situation,” Powell said, tamping down the rush to herald the rise of a new Soviet threat.

“The Russian Federation is not going to become the Soviet Union again. That movie failed at the box office. But they do have interests. And we have to think carefully about their interests.”