A blog about politics.

Just now in Portland, Maine, Obama had a message for his Republican detractors:

And now that [health care reform's] passed, they're already promising "We're going to repeal it." They're going to run on a platform of repeal in November. And my attitude is, go for it. You try to repeal it. I want -- I want these Members of Congress to come out of Washington, come here to Maine and tell Mr. Milliken there, "You know what? We're going to take away your tax credits, essentially raise your taxes."

But a new Gallup/USA Today poll shows Obama has not yet enjoyed much of a bounce from one of the biggest legislative victories in American history. The poll was taken between Friday and Sunday and found. per Susan Page:

• Obama's standing on four key personal qualities, including being a strong and decisive leader and understanding the problems Americans face in their lives, has dipped. For the first time since the 2008 campaign, he fails to win a majority of people saying he shares their values and can manage the government effectively.

• Twenty-six percent say he deserves "a great deal" of the blame for the nation's economic problems, nearly double the number who felt that way last summer. In all, half say he deserves at least a moderate amount of blame. The blame directed at his predecessor, former president George W. Bush, hasn't eased, however: 42% now give Bush "a great deal" of blame, basically unchanged from 43% last July.

• By 50%-46%, those surveyed say Obama doesn't deserve re-election.

Read the full poll results here.

          

Late Lunch Break: Acedia's End

Jimmy Breslin once defined "acedia" as "slow fullness at high noon." This video will end that, if you forgive the fact that it has absolutely no place on Swampland. This is Rye Rye's "Bang," featuring M.I.A.

Baltimore got it going on.

          

TIME 100

As most of our readers know, every year we do a big dead tree edition on the 100 people that mattered most in the past 12 months. Today, the 200 nominees are up. Let the voting for the most influential person of 2009 begin. Will it be President Obama? Sarah Palin? Nancy Pelosi? Katheryn Bigelow? Rahul Singh? Sandra Bullock? And, yes, as South Korean pop star Rain proves most years, this really is a straight popularity contest: the winner is the one with the most clicks.

          

Afghan president Hamid Karzai will be coming to Washington in May. Over the weekend, he met with President Obama in Kabul, saying:

I welcome you on behalf of the Afghan people and express the gratitude of our people for the help that America has given us in the past eight years, for the assistance given.  And I hope that this process will continue into the future towards a stable, strong, peaceful Afghanistan that can sustain itself, that can move forward into the future with confidence and better hopes.

Three days later, Karzai is singing a different tune, accusing "foreigners," a.k.a. the U.S. and its western allies, of corruption and attempting to undermine Afghan democracy. From the New York Times:

"Foreigners will make excuses, they do not want us to have a parliamentary election," a defiant Karzai told a gathering of election officials. "They want parliament to be weakened and battered, and for me to be an ineffective president and for parliament to be ineffective. . . You have gone through the kind of elections during which you were not only threatened with terror, you also faced massive interference from foreigners. . . Some embassies also tried to bribe the members of the commission. . . There was fraud in the presidential and provincial election, with no doubt there was massive fraud. This wasn't fraud by Afghans but the fraud of foreigners, the fraud of Galbraith, of Morillon and the votes of the Afghan nation were in the control of an embassy."

Spencer Ackerman has the response from Peter Galbraith, the former U.S. ambassador. If things continue down this path, the May meeting at the White House should be interesting.

          

Karl Rove's Advice For The Tea Partiers

Stay independent. Weed out the kooks. Get a focused message. From today's Wall Street Journal:

My advice to them is to keep their distance from any single party and instead influence both parties on debt, spending and an over-reaching federal government. Allowing third-party movements to co-opt the tea partiers' good name, which is happening in Nevada, will only serve to elect opponents of the tea party philosophy of low-taxes and fiscal restraint. It could also discredit the tea party movement.

A small fraction of the tea partiers' leadership are ambitious individuals who haven't been able to hold office in either the GOP or Democratic Party. Some are from fringe groups like the John Birch Society or the remnants of the LaRouchies. Others see the tea party movement as a recruiting pool for volunteers for Ron Paul's next presidential bid.

If tea party groups are to maximize their influence on policy, they must now begin the difficult task of disassociating themselves from cranks and conspiracy nuts. This includes 9/11 deniers, "birthers" who insist Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., and militia supporters espousing something vaguely close to armed rebellion.

Read the entire column here.

          

This is painful to watch, almost in the same way that watching Corey Haim do that True Hollywood special was painful to watch. According to The Hill, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., spoke at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee. Thankfully, the military assures us that Guam will not tip over and capsize.

As The Hill notes, "Like other islands, Guam is attached to the sea floor, which makes it extremely unlikely that it will tip over, even if there are lots and lots of people on it." See Johnson's explanation of his comment here.

H/T Stuart Zechman and Adam

          

Re: When Mitt "Repeal" Romney...

Michael, I'm reading Swampland while I'm on vacation (doesn't everyone?), and your post reminded me of a story that I did on Romney and the Massachusetts health care plan back in November, 2007.

Indeed, he and Kennedy had been close allies in bringing universal coverage to the state. Here's how it came about:

Read More…

          

Rainbows And Unicorns

A message from your friends at the Republican Senatorial Committee:

(And check out the hipster Ryan McGinness-like graphics at the end. Is Williamsburg in play in 2010?)

UPDATE: In other April Fools news, BarackObama.com is selling "Health Reform is a BFD" T-shirts.

          

Yesterday, in a post about President Obama's offshore oil drilling plan, I noted that the "candidate of change" had once talked out of both sides of his mouth on offshore exploration. He condemned John McCain for wanting to expand offshore oil drilling one day, and then said another day that he was open to expanding it. So it goes.

But despite his occasional message duplicity, Obama has largely succeeded in avoiding the impression that he will change positions just to pander for votes. This is a political talent Obama has that Mitt Romney has historically lacked. In recent months, Romney has made great strides in actually presenting himself more like he is, saying recently at a book event that he should have stuck to his "power alley" in 2008, that is his expertise in business and economics, and not spent so much time trying desperately to remake himself into a social conservative hero. "I think that one of the things that's very important in running a campaign is to make sure that you're known for the things that really motivate you," he said. (Can't say I didn't tell you so, Governor.)

And yet, Romney seems unable to avoid his penchant for wild swings in his public presentation. Exhibit A is the over-the-top statement that Romney put out after Health Care Reform passed, which is remarkable for both its vitriol and lawyerly delicacy. (You have to read it a couple times before you realize that most of the venom is not directed at the policy but the process.) Gail Collins takes a borderline gratuitous (really, more about the dog?) shot this morning at Romney along these lines, since it was Romney after all who got a similar health care reform set up in Massachusetts. There are some differences between the Romney plan and the Obama plan--one is state, one is federal, one 70 pages long, one takes longer to read, as Romney's website points out. But overall, it is hard to argue that they are entirely different animals, as Kate points out below. Both are based on the freedom-killing principle of an individual mandate.

Reading Collins' piece, I was suddenly taken back, as if in a dream, to a more wondrous time, for me at least, during the 2008 Iowa Straw Poll at Ames. Back then, Romney was on a different tack, arguing that his past embrace of Ted Kennedy's health care vision for Massachusetts was something of a badge of honor. This really happened. I have video, though I must apologize for the shaky camera work and poor audio quality.

One of the most interesting questions of the coming Republican primary season is which Mitt Romney will show up. Will it be the Romney he is, a geeky wonk, who knows business, overflows with competence and is driven by an eager call to service? Or will it be the micro-marketed Romney, who thinks he can become in the moment whatever his spreadsheets tell him to become? I have my opinion about which one could create a real threat for President Obama in 2012. But I am not sure Romney has made up his mind.

          

Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

Official White House photo by Pete Souza

--John Broder and Clifford Krauss, among others, scratch their heads over offshore drilling.

--Tom Schaller says everybody's a bit right.

--China signals willingness to play ball on Iran sanctions.

--Sino-American relations warm.

--The RNC gets a potential rival.

--The spending scrutiny continues.

--The Family Research Council takes flight.

--Bill Halter has raised $2 million in one month, a bad sign for Blanche Lincoln.

--Matt Lewis says Rick Santorum may benefit from low expectations. The expectations are low.

--How close did we come to talking about PawlentyCare?

--Corker breaks from the script.

Read More…

          

Allison Lefrak is a Washington lawyer who represents the last of the Russian detainees, Ravil Mingazov, 43, in the Guantanamo Bay detention center. Her client's habeas corpus hearing is in two weeks and Lefrak was on the phone with him last week when he told her that inmates in his block – Camp 4, the most compliant detainees – were gathering unopened food and beverages for victims of the earthquake in Haiti. The U.S. military is using the Marine base as a staging area for humanitarian relief for Haiti. Though the inmates can't see the effort from their area, their lawyers are very familiar with it since it's being done from next to where the attorneys stay when they're down there. Some counsels have told their clients about what's going on and the denizens of Camp 4 have limited television privileges and have seen some of the devastation on the news.

“What our client was telling us is it seems so wasteful for all this food to be thrown away and with the Haiti relief mission next door it was common sense to ask to give it to them,” Lefrak told me in a phone call today. Apparently, even unopened food and beverages are discarded. So far the camp guards have not been facilitating the donations, so they're starting to pile up, she added. “My client told me, ‘I hope this story gets out I hope people realize that they're all not just a bunch of terrorists and we have hearts, too,'” Lefrak said. I contacted public information officers at Guantanamo Bay for comment and I'll post when I get it.

Update:
I just heard from Commander Brook DeWalt, director of public affairs for joint task for Guantanamo, who says that most meals are served buffet style and while there are certainly leftovers, they aren't easily or obviously packaged to be sent over to Haiti. He said the prisoners do eat communally and have bottled water and beverages that they theoretically could compile but that there's usually just an adequate amount given for the population. He also added that as flights have resumed direct into Port-au-Prince and the port has semi-reopened, the U.S. military is no longer using Gitmo as a staging area for relief work.

          

Like Politico's Ben Smith, I was sent by Republican National Committee Spokesman Doug Heye a long list of Democratic National Committee expenditures. I was hesitant to post them (they are below) because the RNC couldn't provide the Federal Election Commission links to each of the searches and the DNC disputed at least one item: the catering charge at the Elysian which wasn't at the Bahamian beach resort but, rather, the Elysian Hotel in Chicago.

I wasn't about to spend all afternoon executing FEC searches for these charges myself to verify them so I called DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan. Hari wouldn't confirm the expenses but he did note that none of them were particularly controversial. He's right. In going through these expenses the most striking thing is how very milquetoast they are: they're exactly the kind of expenses you'd expect a political fundraising organization to incur. I can understand why the RNC sent them out: having been raked over the coals for their expenses the last few days they believe that the DNC should be subject to the same scrutiny. The problem is there's no $2,000 charge at a club called “Voyeur” which pops out of this list. Hilton, Sheraton, a Dallas Cowboys game, chauffeured cars, the Mount Vernon Inn Restaurant and the Lucky Strike Bowling alley are all pretty much how I imagined political parties wined and dined top donors (okay, maybe for the Dems a Patriots game would've been less surprising). Sorry, Doug, but my decision to ultimately post these came down to the fact that they don't include a smoking gun.

Read More…

          

Four quick bullet points on Judge Vaughn R. Walker's decision today in Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Barack Obama. (See pdf of ruling here.)

1. The judge's opinion is pointed and fiercely critical of the Obama Administration's Justice Department lawyers. At one point the judge dismisses the government's "impressive display of argumentative acrobatics." At another point, the judge says the government's arguments "take a flying leap and miss by a wide margin."

2. The judge claims that the Obama Administration is attempting to place itself above the law. "Under defendants' theory, executive branch officials may treat FISA as optional and freely employ the [State Secrets Privilege] to evade FISA, a statute enacted specifically to rein in and create a judicial check for the executive branch abuses of surveillance authority." He dismisses this argument.

3. It is difficult to square the Justice Department's use of State Secrets in this case with President Obama's stated position on state secrets. In a press conference on April 30, 2009, Obama said the following:

I think it is appropriate to say that there are going to be cases in which national security interests are genuinely at stake, and that you can't litigate without revealing covert activities or classified information that would genuinely compromise our safety. But searching for ways to redact, to carve out certain cases, to see what can be done so that a judge in chambers can review information without it being in open court — you know, there should be some additional tools so that it's not such a blunt instrument.

Read More…

          

KBH Is Staying Put

Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson had pledged to resign her Senate seat in her bid for Rick Perry's governor's mansion. She lost the GOP gubernatorial primary last month to Perry and today announced that, in fact, she will not resign -- as first reported by Reid Wilson over at Hotline. She intends to serve out her term which expires in 2012, putting on hold the aspirations of at least half a dozen Republicans and Democrats looking to replace her. The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza has some pretty good ideas about why she changed her mind. So, Hutchinson officially becomes the first 2012 Senate retirement in a year that otherwise looks tough for Dems who are defending 24 of the 33 seats up that cycle.

          

Mitt Romney and the Nuance Trap

One advantage the GOP had in the health debate was its total disregard for nuance when it came to messaging. Again and again, Republicans over-simplified provisions in the Democratic plan and convinced a lot of Americans that reform was bad in the process. They said the bill would gut Medicare by slashing half a trillion dollars in funding. That sounded pretty bad to a lot of seniors, especially those who didn't hear Democrats explain that much of the cuts would come from subsidies to private insurers in Medicare Advantage and wouldn't have any effect on federally mandated benefits. No, slashing Medicare is a much easier sell. Republicans also said the bill would raise taxes. Yikes - in this economy? That sounded pretty bad too, especially to those who didn't hear Democrats explain that additional payroll taxes would only affect the rich and taxes on expensive health plans wouldn't kick in for years and could actually result in higher wages, according to some health care economists. Yeah, higher taxes is a more potent message.

Well, now Mitt Romney - who some believe is the front runner for the Republican nomination in 2012 - finds himself in the same conundrum the Democrats were in throughout the past year. He's trying to explain the gritty details of how the health reform he implemented as governor of Massachusetts is different than the one President Obama just ushered in on a national scale.

Romney is and will continue to have a hard time with this task.

Read More…