TPMDC Saturday Roundup
Obama Praises Sotomayor -- And Dismisses Criticism -- In YouTube Address
In this week's Presidential YouTube Address, President Obama discussed his nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, praising her qualifications -- and rebutting the critics:
"There are, of course, some in Washington who are attempting to draw old battle lines and playing the usual political games, pulling a few comments out of context to paint a distorted picture of Judge Sotomayor's record," said Obama. "But I am confident that these efforts will fail; because Judge Sotomayor's seventeen-year record on the bench - hundreds of judicial decisions that every American can read for him or herself - speak far louder than any attack; her record makes clear that she is fair, unbiased, and dedicated to the rule of law."
RNC Address: Daniels Blasts "Imperialistic" Cap And Trade Proposal
In this weekend's Republican address, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels blasted President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi for supporting cap and trade:
"It's become clear that the Pelosi bill has little to do with a cooler planet and everything to do with raising money for the out-of-control federal spending now underway in Washington," said Daniels. "Please excuse us Midwesterners for feeling a bit like the targets of an imperialistic policy, devised in places like California, New York, and Massachusetts for their benefit, at our expense."
Barack and Michelle Obama Headed Out For New York Date Tonight
President Obama and the First Lady are headed to New York for a date tonight to go to a Broadway play, the critically-acclaimed show "Joe Turner's Come and Gone." Earlier today, President Obama went to his daughter Malia's soccer game, which her team won according to pool reports.
Bill Clinton And George W. Bush Meet In Canada
Former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush met for a joint appearance at a forum last night in Toronto, discussing their own and each other's presidencies. The event was mostly cordial, with little criticism of each other -- though Clinton did say U.N. inspectors should have been given more time in Iraq, and Bush should have focused more on Afghanistan. Bush disagreed: "I don't buy the premise that our attention was diverted."
WaPo: Compelling Biography No Guarantee Of Smooth Confirmation
The Washington Post points out that the White House's heavy emphasis on Sonia Sotomayor's personal story is reminiscent of the George H.W. Bush Administration's selling of Clarence Thomas, another person from a minority who came from humble roots. "Since Supreme Court nominations take on all of the attributes of a political campaign, you are selling somebody's life story," said Kenneth Duberstein, who guided the Thomas and Souter nominations. But as we saw from the Thomas hearings, those carefully laid plans can be thrown off course if a personal scandal arises.
Gates Calls For Tougher Sanctions On North Korea
Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual meeting of defense and security officials, Sec. of Defense Robert Gates called for tougher sanctions on North Korea. "They create a crisis and the rest of us pay the price to return to the status quo ante," said Gates. "As the expression goes in the U.S., I'm tired of buying the same horse twice."
Sessions: Rise In Senate Career Is "Ironic"
In an Associated Press profile, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) acknowledged the unlikely path he has taken to becoming the head Republican on the Judiciary Committee, after the committee had killed his nomination to be a judge back in 1986: "It is ironic." He also added. "I was a prosecutor for 17 years and I used to be frustrated by the judicial decisions that I thought didn't make sense. Now I'm in a position to get good judges ... and to me that's really an awesome responsibility."


















Sessions's position is peculiar, one must admit. He's handled it surprisingly gracefully, for a former Klansman.
May 30, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hugo Black, one of most liberal SC justices ever, was a former klansman. The problem with Sessions is I doubt the word "former" applies to him.
May 30, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha-ha, good one!
I didn't know about Hugo Black, wow! Thanks for the education!
May 30, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. Black, an Alabama klansman, was the driving force behind Brown v. Board of Education. He insisted that the ruling be unanimous.
Because of his SC rulings, the state of Alabama would not even allow him to be buried there!
May 30, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, wow! I gotta look this up! Thanks!
May 30, 2009 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you can, check out "the Supreme Court" documentary from PBS. It was sooooooo interesting.
May 30, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's that smell ????
Oh !!!
It's an axe being grinded.
May 31, 2009 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton should not be validating Bush by making joint appearances and such.
May 30, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Naw, it's just what's needed. Without the extensive political maneuvers being employed in the background to keep the debate on message, Bu$h is completely on his own now. He may just let something slip out that hasn't ever seen the light of day and there won't be a repuglican zamboni clean-up machine anywhere near him to get it under the rug fast enough before it sinks in.
May 31, 2009 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
MSM: Yada dotta bedorky diesel donkle... Soto nom doomed.
May 30, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
igk glorpump!
May 30, 2009 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mitch Daniels accusing anybody of imperialism is hilariously ironic (although since it appears Republicans are physiologically incapable of recognizing irony, I doubt he knows it).
In 2006, when he was ramming a bill through the Indiana state legislature to "lease" our toll road to a foreign company for 80 years (YES! 80 YEARS!), he said to an audience that included some protesters, "You're either for this bill or you're against our future."
Asshat.
May 30, 2009 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
i believe what you have described is technically an "assclown," not an "asshat." subtle but important difference.
May 30, 2009 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anyone ask him just how the public would benefit if a foreign company was taking the profits out of state? Sounds more like a drain on tax resources that would be better spent on the needs of the public in the state rather than a company's profit margin. But that's repuglican free-market concepts in action!
May 31, 2009 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Easy. A slice of that money comes back through PACs and lobbyists to fund asshat's campaign. Gotta remember, the IN public is entitled to the best legislators their campaign contributions can buy.
This leads me to wonder how such a practice avoids being called bribery. It's the way campaigns are funded. If it's legal, it can't be called bribery?
Want a master nut to crack? One master nut that when cracked will help crack all other nuts? One nut to rule them all and in the lightness crack them!
Campaign funding.
Free TV? Other socialist conspiries? Fluoridation?
Even if the structure can't be radically changed, maybe its coefficients can be tweaked enough to shift the balance of power.
May 31, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Please excuse us Midwesterners for feeling a bit like the targets of an imperialistic policy, devised in places like California, New York, and Massachusetts for their benefit, at our expense."
Much like texas and the other red states they love to slam liberal states. However, they all seem to have their hand out for government assistance and have no problem accepting coastal state cash. I wish someone had the guts to call them on their b.s., and their with us or against us mentality will get them nothing.
May 31, 2009 6:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point there. Those poor, land-locked red states of Real Americahave to accept socialized handouts from those damn rich, coastal empires of liberal tastes and waste. I wonder if they've ever thought that all those earmarks they receive from the government they detest is a form of socialism - the wealthy states supporting poorer states that can't generate enough of an income flow thru their tax base to meet the basic needs of their citizens.
May 31, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hate to chime in on an old thread... but I've gotta disagree. Many of the landlocked Midwestern states receive less federal money than they pay in taxes. Not a lot of military bases or big defense contractors here.
Of course, that was before the economy went to hell here, so now we're not paying a lot of taxes either.
May 31, 2009 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's keep things in perspective here. Neither Indiana or Texas are land-locked states.
June 1, 2009 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
But as we saw from the Thomas hearings, those carefully laid plans can be thrown off course if a personal scandal arises.
Oh, so Thomas wasn't confirmed?
The Republicans have been supplying the Democrats with a treasure trove of material for attack ads during the next election cycle. If they have any sense (and given the rhetoric that's been flying over the last week, that's a might big if), they'll want to get this nomination over with as little damage as possible.
May 31, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
They can't help themselves. At this point,they're off-script and out of control. The image of an intelligent, acomplished, Ivy-educated African American president nominating an intelligent, accomplished, Ivy-educated Latino woman to the Supreme Court has just completely unhinged them. It represents a devestating psychic blow to all of the assumptions through which they perceive reality and, simultaneously, unleashed the primal fear that is the foundation of those assumptions.
At some level, all of the people who who broke the carefullly coordinated crypto-racist code discipline they'd planned for this campaign and and started broadcasting their racism in the clear last week believe that the only authentically American experience is the white American experience. At some level--and for people like Limbaugh and Tancredo, that level is very close to the surface--they think that all these little brown people are basically just foreigners who are stubbornly and dangeriously resistant to assimilation into Real (white) America but, in any case, what do you expect from people like them?
The very idea of brown people running America generates the same hysterical fear in them that was the norm for whites in apartheid-era South Africa. They are incapable of admitting that everything they'd ever believed, beginning with the belief that a person's melatonin level conveys useful information about him or her, is wrong or even of admitting to themselves that they believe that. So, of course, their response is hysterical. What else could it be?
May 31, 2009 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would have expected that a sense of self-preservation might intrude at some point. Political self-preservation, that is. But perhaps Republicans think they can finally galvanize Good Americans into realizing that the black guy just nominated an illegal Mexican for the Supreme Court, and this will be their path to salvation as a political force.
Strikes me as really stupid.
When Swampland at Time publishes G. Gordon Liddy's remarks about menstruation, someone should realize how deep the shit is that they're in.
But if the reaction to Sotomayor is, in fact, a visceral fear, rationality isn't going to have any effect.
May 31, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink