When the Rubber Hits the Road

GOP weapon: Obama earmarks pledge

By LISA LERER & CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN | 1/26/09 8:57 PM EST - Politico.com

As Barack Obama meets with Republicans Tuesday, some in the GOP have enlisted an unlikely ally to derail his $825 billion stimulus plan – Barack Obama.

They’re using Obama’s pledge to keep earmarks out of the massive bill to criticize Democrats in Congress – saying projects like family-planning funding and arts spending in the House version are exactly the kind of pork-barrel spending Obama promised he’d fight.

“Many conservatives are just getting upset that Barack Obama comes into office talking about change and his first big initiative is a massive $800 billion dollar pork barrel project,” said Brian Darling, director of U.S. Senate Relations at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “If he wants to cut wasteful spending the first the thing he should do is veto his own stimulus bill.”

At issue is a list of programs that Republicans say will do little to stimulate economic recovery, including $21 million to sod the National Mall, $50 million to fund the National Endowment of the Arts and $650 million for digital TV coupons. Republicans also have seized on millions that would be spent under the bill to expand family-planning services in the states.

The projects are a fraction of the massive spending bill – and Democrats dispute that they’re pork. But the items have given Republicans a hook to rally opposition to the bill, on conservative talk-radio and elsewhere.

And they’ve put Obama in an uncomfortable spot. He swept into Washington promising to find a new way of doing business in the Capitol, one that would be more focused on bipartisan compromise and less on wasteful special interest earmarks.

(more...)

----
Now the bullshit is starting to draw flies. First putting someone in Treasury who doesn't pay his taxes, next clearly breaking your pledge against lobbyist working in your administration, but now, one of the few things which gained you votes among the GOP, cutting pork spend. Are you going to stand up for what you ran on or will you crumble like everyone else? Stand up to Pelosi now or she is going to make you her bitch for the next 4 years.

Heavy is the head which wears the crown

CURL: Obama press aide gets bashed in debut

Joseph Curl (Contact)

Friday, January 23, 2009- Washington Times.com

The White House press operation got off to a fumbling and stumbling start Thursday, with the day's opening briefers insisting on being identified only as "senior administration officials," followed swiftly by the new president's spokesman accidently outing one of the secret aides less than two minutes into his first White House briefing.

Although President Obama swept into office pledging transparency and a new air of openness, the press hammered spokesman Robert Gibbs for nearly an hour over a slate of perceived secretive slights that have piled up quickly for the new administration. It wasn't pretty.

"Why did the administration believe it was important for the American people not to know the name of the two senior administration officials who briefed us this morning on Guantanamo?" one reporter asked in the packed and steaming hot briefing room just off the White House West Wing.

"I hope that you all found the exercise that we did this morning helpful," Mr. Gibbs offered helpfully.

"Do you know," the reporter followed, "that you've used ... one of those senior officials' first names several times in this briefing?" A very long pause ensued.

"I do," the spokesman said, his cornflower-colored tie suddenly looking a bit too tight. "Are we allowed to repeat that name?" Mr. Gibbs answered by citing as precedent of Brazilian soccer stars being known only by a single name - sure to one day be a classic White House non-answer.

Then it got uglier.

"How is it transparent," another reporter asked, "when you control the only image of the re-swearing - there's nobody in there but four print reporters, there's no stills, there's no television? And the only recording that comes out, as I understand it, is one that a reporter made, not one that the White House supplied."

(More...)

-----
It's not so easy, now is it? Better give the press everything it wants from you or they will turn on you quicker than snakes on a plane.

Good news, Princess Caroline has realized that only one tax dodge can make it into government at a time, especially if you are a political lightweight. Don't know or care who will take up the post but I am very glad it's not a Kennedy with no credentials. Now if only Minn. could get it double-counting head out of its ass we can get the show started.

Hypocrisy meter:
5 of 10, should be higher as its so soon into the administration but I am feeling generous.

The clock starts now

Dear Mr. President,

I wish you the best for the sake of our whole country and even the world. Watch your enemies but keep a closer eye on those who may call themselves friends...yes I mean you Pelosi and Reid.

Welcome to Mos Eisley*

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH JANUARY 16, 2009

Meet Obama's Loyal Opposition

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL for the Wall Street Journal

"I do not work for Barack Obama." Mitch McConnell, Senate minority leader? No. Ben Bernanke, Fed chief? No, again.

Try Harry Reid, huffing at the idea anyone calls the shots on Capitol Hill other than him. What was that about "change"?

The president-elect used that word on the campaign trail in the context of bipartisanship. To that extent, he's doing a fabulous job. Some of the gushiest quotes about him are emanating from Republicans, giddy at his outreach.

But the "change" Mr. Obama really needs is to avoid the fate of the last two Democratic presidents, both sabotaged by their own majorities. So far, not good. Mr. Obama has yet to assume office, and already his own party is beating his priorities like a conga drum.

When the incoming Democratic president asked the outgoing GOP president to request the second $350 billion in rescue money, Mr. Bush graciously complied. At which point the Democratic majority informed the Democratic president that he'd see not a dime until they decided how to spend it. After all, giving Mr. Obama control over his own Treasury funds would rob them of a pot that they could earmark for Detroit, or bankruptcy judges, or local institutions.

When incoming Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag proved reluctant to commit Mr. Obama to specific uses of the money, Florida's Sen. Bill Nelson accused him of spouting "mumbo jumbo." North Dakota's Sen. Kent Conrad, fresh off dictating the shape of Mr. Obama's stimulus tax cuts, had to intervene. In a last-ditch effort to rally Democratic support, Mr. Obama was forced to agree in writing to commit up to $100 billion to homeowners. Even so, nine of his own senators yesterday voted to deny him the funds.

Speaking of the stimulus, the Obama team, trying to shelter the party from accusations of profligate spending, initially capped the package at (a whopping) $775 billion. At which point Mr. Reid explained, publicly, that at least 20 of Mr. Obama's own economists felt it should in fact be at least, $800 billion -- maybe even $1.3 trillion! Five impoverished Democratic governors chimed in that anything less than $1 trillion really wasn't worth it. At last count, Mr. Obama had been talked up to $825 billion (and rising).

As to the makeup of the stimulus bill, Mr. Obama directed at least $300 billion go to tax cuts. This was partly to fulfill a campaign pledge, partly to sweeten the deal for Republicans, partly because his economic team might actually believe it a good idea -- especially business provisions.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein pronounced herself "concerned" (uh-oh) that so much might go to Americans, over appropriators. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi informed the incoming president that, duh, he should be raising taxes. Rep. Charlie Rangel, who heads Ways and Means, and knows it, decreed $300 billion a maximum, not a minimum. At last count, that number was $275 billion (and falling).

"I love earmarks," said House Majority Whip James Clyburn, as he griped that the president-elect had banned them in the stimulus. Mr. Obama wants no whiff of pork that might further sour a wary public. Mr. Clyburn is nonetheless leading a House rebellion against the edict. After all, it's only fair Democrats get to buy votes with stimulus dollars.

"There will be no earmarks in the stimulus. Nada. Zero. Zilch," said a Reid spokesman. The majority leader might have made the comment himself, had he not been busy reassuring Nevadans that he'd just go around the ban by leaning on Obama agencies to deliver dollars to his state's projects. Meanwhile, Mr. Reid is making as his first present to the president a pork-riddled public-lands bill that includes $3.5 million for a city's birthday party, $5 million for botanical gardens, and $3 million for a "road to nowhere" in (where else?) Alaska.

(more...)

*wretched hive of scum and villainy

------

Good luck with this rabble 44, you're going to need it.

Memories of Zoe & Kimba

Tax problems may plague Obama's treasury pick

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS – 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Capitol Hill grilling is likely for Timothy Geithner, President-elect Barack Obama's pick to head the Treasury Department, after public revelations he failed to pay $34,000 in taxes several years ago.

Senate Democrats are pressing to schedule a quick confirmation hearing for Geithner on Friday, hoping to tee up swift approval of his nomination on Inauguration Day. But newly released information about the tax goofs by Geithner, regarded as a brilliant financial markets specialist well-positioned to deal with the nation's considerable economic problems, could complicate the process.

Republicans have yet to sign off on expediting the hearing, although senior Democrats expressed confidence that the disclosures would do little to slow Geithner's path to confirmation. At least one Republican, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, said he had "no problem" with Geithner.

Still, the disclosures virtually guarantee a tough hearing for Geithner before the Senate Finance Committee, which is considering his nomination.

Geithner failed to pay self-employment taxes for money he earned from 2001 to 2004 while working for the International Monetary Fund, according to materials released by the committee Tuesday.

He paid some of the taxes in 2006, after an IRS audit discovered the discrepancy for taxes paid in 2003 and 2004. But it wasn't until much later — days before Obama tapped him to head Treasury late last year — that Geithner paid back most of the taxes, incurred in 2001 and 2002. He did so after Obama's transition team found that Geithner had made the same tax mistake his first two years at the IMF as the one the IRS found he made during his last two years there.

(more...)

----

"These errors were not intentional; they were honest mistakes," -Max Baucus, D-Mont

You know what? Go try telling this to the IRS during an audit, see if it flies for John and Jane America. Unless you are part of the establishment you will have your world ripped apart. "his mistake was a common one for people hired by international organizations and foreign embassies that don't pay the employer share of Social Security taxes"...well not shit, they set the system up so it takes a rocket scientist to fill out anything but the EZ form, why not take this moment to fix the system!

You would have thought those smarter than I would remember Zoe Baird and Kimba Woods; clearly not. Maybe Team Obama is not as sharp as everyone believes.

Scandal Meter : 4 of 10 | The tax code is too confusing for everyone - FIX IT

Stupidity Meter: 7 of 10 | Going to the treasury and still can't get taxed paid correctly +2; Thinking no one would notice the error was corrected just after being nominated +2; Not realizing that the same thing torpedoed 2 Clinton nominees +3

Journalist a just a bunch of breening, self-absorbed, anti-thinkers...kind of like bloggers

Obama's 'first mistakes' mount

By ANDIE COLLER | 1/8/09 5:01 AM EST - Politico.com

Team Obama has made its first mistake — again.

When Gov. Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination as commerce secretary earlier this week, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell declared it “the Obama team’s first misstep.”

But Mitchell had been scooped.

On Nov. 7 — just three days after the election — Los Angeles’ KNBC said Obama’s flubbed joke about Nancy Reagan and séances was his “first misstep.”

On Nov. 14, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban wrote a Huffington Post piece on Obama’s economic advisory team titled “President-Elect Obama’s First Big Mistake.”

And on Nov. 19, Michael Goodwin of the New York Daily News said Obama’s secretary of state dealings with Hillary Clinton might just have been “his first big mistake.”

First-flub spotting has become something of a national pastime since Nov. 4, with the press floating trial balloons as the first victory balloons hit the ground.

On Nov. 5, the American Prospect wondered whether reports that Obama was considering Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the Environmental Protection Agency might qualify as his “first mistake.”

The “first mistake” stories kept trickling in until the week before Christmas, when Obama decided to ask Pastor Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation. Everyone from the Washington Blade to Fox News piled on with versions of the first-big-blunder story.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow called Obama’s choice “the first big mistake of his post-election politicking.”

“Mr. Obama’s First Misstep?” the Hartford Courant asked.

“Obama’s first mistake!” the blogosphere answered.

While the Blagojevich scandal prompted a few more “first mistake” rumblings, the press seemed to have decided that the president-elect’s first mistake had come and gone — until Monday, when NBC gave Team Obama another mulligan.

It is not hard to understand why members of the media are interested in catching the incoming administration’s first real gaffe. “It is the business of the media to find error and point it out — there’s nothing wrong with that,” says Stephen Hess, senior fellow emeritus in governance studies at the Brookings Institution.

Besides, Obama — credited with running a nearly mistake-free presidential race — seemed long overdue for one.

(More...)

That because you are unimportant!

Obama apologizes to Feinstein for his CIA surprise

WASHINGTON (AP) - Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday that President-elect Barack Obama apologized to her for not notifying her ahead of time that Leon Panetta was his pick for CIA director.

His name leaked to the press before Obama informed Feinstein, a California Democrat and incoming Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, who will oversee Panetta's nomination hearing.

"I have been contacted by both President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Biden, and they have explained to me the reasons why they believe Leon Panetta is the best candidate for CIA Director," she said.

Feinstein complained Monday she had not been told about Panetta and expressed doubts he has the necessary experience.

(More ...)

----

This will be common in the new administration as they learn painfully that the little kings and queens don't like it when you don't consult them for even minor details. These spats will play out in the press letting Repubs to gleefully watch from the sidelines.

Scandal Meter:

0 of 10

Pissing Contest:

3 of 10

For a guy who held a press conference everyday after being elected, someone is pretty quite now

BLANKLEY: Being president 101

Early lessons for the incoming administration

....

WashingtonTimes.com

What history may judge more harshly is Mr. Obama's silence (as I write this column) on the Israeli/Hamas war. Even if he speaks by the time this column is published, he has badly mismanged his "Muslim outreach" initiative, which he described during the campaign as important, asserting that he wanted to "reboot" America's relations with the 1.4 billion Muslims. (The term "reboot" itself was an unfortunate choice - given the Muslims' disdain for the human shoe.) He went to Israel during the campaign and said - referring to Hamas rockets hitting Israel - that if such a thing happened to his daughters there is nothing he wouldn't do to stop it. That statement was clearly seen as a green light for Israel to defend itself - whether Mr. Obama intended it that way we will never know.

Then, when Israel took actions two weeks ago, Mr. Obama remained silent. The result in the Middle East was well described by the British Guardian newspaper this weekend: "Obama is losing a battle he doesn't know he's in. The president-elect's silence on the Gaza crisis is undermining his reputation in the Middle East. Barack Obama's chances of making a fresh start in US relations with the Muslim world, and the Middle East in particular, appear to diminish with each new wave of Israeli attacks on Palestinian targets in Gaza. That seems hardly fair, given the president-elect does not take office until January 20. But foreign wars don't wait for Washington inaugurations." Now I, and many other conservatives, always thought Mr. Obama was being unforgivably naive in thinking he could talk us out of the clash of civilizations between radical Islam and the West.

But my views notwithstanding, given Mr. Obama's intentions, his first gratuitous words (in Israel) followed now by his loud silence seem rather obviously destined to undercut his own intentions. If he intends to shrewdly lead the world, he should understand that images of him golfing in Hawaii while saying nothing as Palestinians are being bombed to death are going to be both seen and condemned in the Middle East that he aspires to lead to better days.

Perhaps, like Jack Kennedy's Bay of Pigs fiasco, this will be an early lesson for Mr. Obama in being president 101.

---

Hey 44, you talked almost everyday since being elected, where are you now when there is a tough call to make?

Scandal Meter:

3 of 10 | Not so much a scandal but the lack of leadership is making people start to people notice.

Camalot Redux

Caroline Kennedy fails to impress

Caroline Kennedy's latest attempt to press her case to be the replacement for Hillary Clinton as a senator for New York has been widely criticised in the US media. - BBC News

Ms Kennedy - daughter of former President John F Kennedy - broke weeks of silence on her bid, by giving a series of interviews at the weekend.

But she was criticised for being unknowledgeable on key policy areas, being unable to articulate why she was seeking public office for the first time - and even for possessing a verbal tic.

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Under the headline "Caroline Kennedy no whiz with words", the New York Daily News mimicked Ms Kennedy's speech pattern during the round of interviews.

"Caroline Kennedy, you know, might need, you know, a speech coach, um, if she, you know, wants, um, to be a senator," the paper said.

Totting up the number of "verbal tics" during its 30-minute interview, the paper counted "you know" more than 200 times... and added that "'um' was fairly constant, too".

Asked if President George W Bush's tax cuts on the wealthy should be repealed immediately, Ms Kennedy replied: "Well, you know, that's something, obviously, that, you know, in principle and in the campaign, you know, I think that, um, the tax cuts, you know, were expiring and needed to be repealed," the paper reported.

It consulted experts to give their opinion on her speaking manner. One said it was not necessarily an indication of weakness or doubt, just inexperience. Another advised her to get coaching, to pause more often, and "to listen to her father".

Columnist Michael Goodwin wrote: "The wheels of the bandwagon are coming off. Fantasy is giving way to inescapable truth. That truth is that Kennedy is not ready for the job and doesn't deserve it. Somebody who loves her should tell her."

NEW YORK POST

The New York Post also counted up the number of times Ms Kennedy said "you know" during its interview - 235 times in 41 minutes - "which works out to saying the phrase once every 10.5 seconds," it said.

The speech expert it consulted described it as a "very, very common" verbal tic called a "vocalized pause," and said it was a "Kennedyism" as demonstrated by her uncle.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Associated Press said "Kennedy offered no excuses for why she failed to vote in a number of elections since registering in New York City in 1988".

"I was really surprised and dismayed by my voting record," she told AP. "I'm glad it's been brought to my attention."

AP reported that "since word of her interest leaked out in early December, Kennedy has faced sometimes sharp criticism that she cut in line ahead of politicians with more experience and has acted as if she were entitled to it because of her political lineage".

In response, Ms Kennedy said: "Anybody who knows me knows I haven't really lived that way. And I think that in my family, I come into this thinking I have to work twice as hard as anybody else. Nobody's entitled to anything, certainly not me."

----

NY Governers, like this in many other states, are free to choose anyone they like, but NY is not 'keeping it classy' but annointing this light weight into a seat someone should at least fight for. Great, her dad got his brains sprayed all over her mom's pink Chanel and her brother died in a plane crash before he could be the chosen one, let's make her a Senator.

Hypocricy:

2 or 10 | This shit is being par for the course for Dems and GOP but at least 43, Jeb, and Hillary got themselves elected! Screw your Murkowskis, Kennedy and Biden (ok, they are just trying to set that last one up)

It's sad all the funny SNL people who died but not this un-funny man

Funny Business in Minnesota

In which every dubious ruling seems to help Al Franken.

Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victor.

Mr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on "counting every vote" wants to shut the process down. He's getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies.

Under Minnesota law, election officials are required to make a duplicate ballot if the original is damaged during Election Night counting. Officials are supposed to mark these as "duplicate" and segregate the original ballots. But it appears some officials may have failed to mark ballots as duplicates, which are now being counted in addition to the originals. This helps explain why more than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote. By some estimates this double counting has yielded Mr. Franken an additional 80 to 100 votes.

This disenfranchises Minnesotans whose vote counted only once. And one Canvassing Board member, State Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson, has acknowledged that "very likely there was a double counting." Yet the board insists that it lacks the authority to question local officials and it is merely adding the inflated numbers to the totals.

.....

----

Sweet baby Jesus Minnesota, you are more retarded than Florida. How anyone could have selected Al Franken to represent them in the Senate make as much sense why he was even on SNL. This guy has failure written all over him. At least it's exposing the Democrats as the hypocrites they are. All politicians by definition are hypocrites, not just Dems, but they more than likely tend to think their shit dont stink...and this is a massive turd of a shit!

I didn't vote for 44 but I wish him well, this site is not dedicated to slamming him, just catching the lies and hypocrisy inherent but overlooked by the MSM, I will try to be as fair as I can but Al Franken can DIAF. It's not because he's a Dem, or Liberal, or had a popular book about Rush Limbaugh...it's because he is unfunny.

44 is not funny but that's ok, he's not a comedian.

Hypocrisy Meter:

10 of 10

Team Obama dabbles in drama

By ROGER SIMON | 1/6/09 4:24 AM EST (POLITICO.COM)

For an outfit known for its lack of drama, Team Obama has become a downright thrill show.

Bill Richardson! Rick Warren! Rod Blagojevich! Roland Burris! Talk about a ride through the fun house.

President-elect Barack Obama doesn’t bear responsibility for all these speed bumps on the road to a better, happier, more respected America, but he certainly bears responsibility for some of them.

Obama’s selection of Bill Richardson for secretary of commerce didn’t seem like an awful idea. Richardson certainly has accomplished some things in his life, and he wanted an administration job really, really badly. He wanted to be vice president and didn’t get it. He wanted to be secretary of state and didn’t get it. So he lowered his sights to “Anything in the Cabinet Whatsoever,” and he got it.

Exactly why Obama felt he had to give Richardson something is unclear. Maybe it was an act of compassion. Maybe Richardson had threatened to hold his breath until he turned blue. In any case, he got the nomination.

But Richardson clearly did not get the vetting that is supposed to go along with it.

(more from Politico)

------
Vetting process are hard, everybody has skeleton in the closet, but when your new boss has asked for full disclosure if they can't make it to the light of day don't step up to the plate.

You have to assume that Transition Team 44 just thought that since Richardson ran for President all the dirty laundry would have already come out...really can you blame them. Not much of a scandal but looks bad for Dems.

Scandal Meter:
44 - 2 of 10
Dems - 6 of 10