TPMDC Morning Roundup
Cheney Says GOP Shouldn't Moderate Itself, Stresses "Our Commitment To The Constitution"
During an appearance on a right-wing talk radio show, former Vice President Dick Cheney said the Republican Party should not moderate itself. Cheney explained: "This is about fundamental beliefs and values and ideas ... what the role of government should be in our society, and our commitment to the Constitution and constitutional principles."
Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama will be speaking at 11:30 a.m. ET from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, on the subjects of job creation and job training. At 3:15 p.m. ET, he will meet in the Oval Office with Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA).
Biden In Delaware Today; No Public Events
Vice President Biden is spending the day in Wilmington, Delaware, where he will have private meetings. He does not have any scheduled public events.
Solis Heading Up Spanish-Language Town Hall On Swine Flu
Sec. of Labor Hilda Solis is headlining a Spanish-language town hall event on Univision, to inform the public about the government's efforts on controlling the H1N1 flu. She will also be joined by officials from the Department of Homeland Security and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The event is at 12:15 p.m. ET, and will be webcast live at WhiteHouse.gov.
Obama's Proposed Cuts Meet Criticism From Congressional Dems
The Washington Post reports that President Obama's proposed $17 billion in budget cuts -- which are being criticized by many news outlets as a miniscule reduction -- are already meeting stiff resistance from Democrats in Congress, who individually have a stake in one program or another. Said Stephen Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense: "What all this is going to come down to is whether this administration is willing to put the political capital and shoe leather into holding Congress to these cuts."
Social Conservatives Attack GOP's New "National Council"
The Politico reports that the GOP's new town-hall initiative, the National Council for a New America, is coming under fire from social conservatives for focusing too much on economic issues and not talking about moral issues. "It's a losing proposition to try to divide social and economic conservatives," said former Ohio Sec. of State Ken Blackwell. And Mike Huckabee lamented that "we think it is necessary to form a 'listening group' to find out what Americans think we should be fighting for."
Palin Cancels Dinner Appearances To Deal With Flood Damage
Sarah Palin has cancelled her planned attendance of two high-profile Washington dinners this weekend, in order to handle serious flood damage in Alaska. Palin had been slated to co-headline with Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) at a Friday night Republican Governors Association event, and was going to attend the White House Correspondents' Dinner on Saturday as a guest of Fox News. First Dude Todd Palin will appear in her place instead
| TOPICS: Barack Obama, Budget, Dick Cheney, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, Swine Flu
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
They got a lot of water! I hope it's like the beach! Yay!
May 8, 2009 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
our commitment to the Constitution and constitutional principles
God damn it, Dick, you just blew my expensive new irony meter all to hell.
May 8, 2009 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, no--he's serious, now. He's just referring to the Special Double-Secret Emergency Constitution that he had Addington write for him. He approved it using the extraordinary powers granted to him by the old Constitution as the Fourth Branch of government and deputized to act on behalf of the first branch exercising the unlimited power conferred in time of war upon the Unitary Executive.
Yes, unbknownst to all of us who were under the impression that there was a transfer of power under the quaint Old Constitution, Cheney is, in fact, still Warlord and Sole Autocrat for Life of the United States.
So, you see, what he's saying actually makes perfect sense.
May 8, 2009 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! No fair investigating the sins of the Cheney administration!
Deep thought: If Cheney wasn't part of the executive branch, how can he claim executive privilege?
May 8, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This is about fundamental beliefs and values and ideas ... what the role of government should be in our society, and our commitment to the Constitution and constitutional principles."
I dang near spewed my coffee all over the keyboard reading this! Yes, indeed, Steve, your irony meter must be about destoyed. But in a perverse way, Cheney is telling the "truth" as he sees it..in his view the government has the right to torture, to throw you in jail if you are an "enemy combatant" and throw away the key. Those ARE his fundamental beliefs and values and ideas, and sadly the Republican base is in lock-step with him and sees nothing wrong with it.
May 8, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I forgot which particular book I read it in, I can only guess Woodward, the phrase,
"Powell thought Cheney had the fever." (Wait, I Googled it, it's in Plan of Attack, alright.) Now, without any snark, I'm wondering how bad he's got the fever. This stuff about how whoever's lecturing us believes in the Constitution, the implication being that we and others don't, is something the real nuts say. Near the level of claiming the CIA is beaming radio waves into their heads. This is warned about in government circles, seriously, watch out for the wackos raving about their Constitution (that if they would read it, most couldn't distinguish it from the bleeding Magna Carta or Gettysburg Address.)
I'm serious. Cheney may be half way around the bend. No joke, no snark.
May 8, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go ahead DICK keep purifying (putrifying?) your Grandparents and Old peoples' Party. Ya know if you make the tests for party membership that tight you stop being a party and start being a sect.
May 8, 2009 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think of them more as a cult myself.
May 8, 2009 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sarah Palin is the only person, I think, that Obama genuinely dislikes. You could tell when O met all those Gov's during the transition. Joe Biden met with Palin, Obama had nothing to do with her. She wouldn't be doing many photops with him period.
May 8, 2009 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's just jealous cause I'm pretty! Yay!
May 8, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Honk! Honk! Honk!
[my way of saying, Yer a looker, darlin! :-) ]
May 8, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I think that honor goes to Cheney. The way his manner and tone changed when he talked about him on that 60 minutes interview convinced me.
May 8, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney has made so much money in the private sector that it has allowed him to be detached from reality. Most of the people who will be led astray if they follow his advice aren't so fortunate.
On the one hand, I am happy to watch the Republican party implode, but on the other, the country would be better served by two rational political parties.
May 8, 2009 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fear not. I see the Dems splitting into the Blue Dogs and the Progressives and the GOP taking over for the Independent/Green parties as spoiler. Still two parties. More of a re-alignment than real party shift.
May 8, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that's going to happen. I don't see the party in the majority splitting. Why would the Blue Dogs splinter off only to be a minority party? They have power in the majority and they're not going to give it up.
And we all know about the good ol' boys club in congress (as evidenced by their support for Lieberman even after he lost the primary) the progressives certainly won't be kicking anyone out.
I always thought the moderate Republicans would leave the Republican party, but now I'm starting to think the wingnuts might be the ones to leave. They're already deep in the minority so they have nothing to lose and I don't think they're really as loyal to the party as the moderates. Yeah, I think we'll have an official Conservative Party by the end of the next decade.
May 8, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can totally see it happening, over the course of several years. But I'm really hoping not because whichever of the new parties I ended up in, I'd be a despised extremist--either in the despised right wing of the Democratic People's Party or the despised left wing of the Republicrats.
Or worse still, I'd have to give up paying attention to anything in politics until a month before election and become a partyless GDI swing voter who gets all my voter information from fifteen or thirty second political ads.
May 8, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the other hand, if there was a competitive leftist party (e.g., an American Social Democratic Party), a competitive center-right party (e.g., the current Blue Dogs/Maine Republicans), and a crazy rump right (the Hannity Party?) it would probably be much easier for me to volunteer and vote my conscience without worrying about giving a vote to a Republican.
One reason I defend Obama is because, if he is successful, it will inevitably pull the electorate leftward, even if not as far as leftward as I would like. I'll be happy when my general election choice is between a Kucinich-style Democrat and a Clinton/Obama-style Dem.
May 8, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dick, is this the same constitution that, in your view, made you a fourth branch of government unto yourself and accountable to no one?
Is this the same constitution you and your "boss" wiped your asses with for eight years?
And what are these conservative "principles" that everyone talks about but doesn't define?
May 8, 2009 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
He must be talking about the "Constitution" he and Libby drew up and kept in the dossier on his desk.
The Cheney Constitution provided for all sorts of stuff like torture, spying on Americans, indefinite detention without charges, and fabricating intelligence and lying to the public.
Happy to clear up the confusion for you.
May 8, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, they're pretty simple.
1. Lower government spending (except for faith-based initiatives and the military).
2. Less government intrusion into the lives of private citizens (unless you're gay, Muslim, or in any way socialist).
3. Higher educational standards for our children (including teaching them that global warming is not real, evolution is just a theory, and abstinence is the only possible course of action).
4. Lower taxes.
May 8, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
... or unless you happen to disagree with their political views - oh wait, that's what they call socialist. sorry.
May 8, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Add to the list: "unless you're gay, Muslim, in any way socialist, or insist on making end-of-life medical decisions on your own."
May 8, 2009 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hell, these people want to prevent you and your spouse from using birth control. You're giving them way too much credit if you think they're merely bigots. These people are radical authoritarians with a medieval conception of morality.
May 8, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed. A fourth branch of government was certainly a surprise to constitutional scholars, teachers of 12th grade government, and the population at large - who knew? Then there's the whole "the rules don't apply to my office" thing, and "the law is what I say it is."
How could one be anything but proud to defend these "values" and "principals"?
May 8, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
1. Moral issues? The GOP doesn't have any morals or any standing to speak on moral issues. And conservatives who are only worried about "moral issues", are ignorant of the fact that government does not dictate morality, that is the choice of the individual. Otherwise its "goverment interference in people's private lives"
2. It may be a losing proposition for Republicans, but it's a winning proposition for Democrats and the American people.
May 8, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is a great idea for the Republican's to listen to the dude that had an 18% approval rating pretty much his entire tenure in office.
They just need to kick all the moderates out and then they can win elections again.
May 8, 2009 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Could this backlash against Cantors group be a bunch of staged phony outrage to paint the group as moderates or do you really think it's another case of them eating their own?
May 8, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
A few years ago, I would have said that yes, it could all be a plan to make them look moderate. Today, however, I don't think so. It is really hard to stop shooting once you get into that circular firing squad.
All this eating their own is each politician trying to be the one to save the Republican party, I think.
May 8, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
How is it that Repbulicans claim they want limited government but want to dictate who I marry, what my values should be, and what I should do with my body? That to me is more intrusive than raising my taxes?
May 8, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, how silly can you be? They don't want limited government for you, they want it for them. After all, if they limited government for everybody, how could they milk it for money in their odd combination of fascism for us and socialism for them?
May 8, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we're going to see the moderate Republicans try to build a separate identity, much like the blue dogs have done in the Democratic party. What will be interesting to watch is how much Limbaugh/Hannity etc. go after them as the moderates move toward distancing themselves from the conservatives.
May 8, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
A not so rhetorical question: If the commander in chief has unlimited powers in times of war, e.g. U.S. Civil War (suspension of habeas corpus), and World War II (detention of all West Coast persons of Japanese descent), what is wrong with him/her ordering obvious violations of the various amendments (search and seizure) and violation of laws and treaties concerning torture? I know Justice O'Conner wrote "The President doesn't get a blank check", but isn't this exactly what has been not too subtly referred to by both Bush and (especially) Cheney? And isn't this the question which has not as yet been answered by a court? Just a thought.
May 8, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink