Court OK’s Corporate Campaign Spending

Stephan:  I believe history will look back on this decision as the tipping point that ended democracy as we have known it. It all just becomes a money contest now -- even more than it already has been -- pandering to the meanest political understanding. You can see the way it is going to go by looking at FOX News, the World Wrestling Foundation of journalism. It is essentially a propaganda dispenser for demagogic sensoid driven right wing causes and, as such, commands the largest viewing audience because it trades in the basest emotions: hate, envy, frustration, and anger. The large corporate pocketbooks will purchase programming targeted at those same emotions to serve its own ends. This is a truly horrible day for the country. The political whoring will now know no bounds. This is judicial activism at its worst.

WASHINGTON – A sharply divided Supreme Court ruled yesterday that labor unions and corporations can spend unlimited amounts to influence federal elections, throwing out a ban that had been in effect for 63 years and adding an explosive new element to this year’s midterm elections. The 5-to-4 ruling dismayed lawmakers and public interest groups that fought for decades to limit the influence of wealthy special interests in politics. But it cheered those who have railed against what they see as government control of free speech in election campaigns. The decision also could provoke changes in Massachusetts law, which bans corporate spending to influence an election. Campaign finance specialists said that while the high court opinion specifically applies to federal races, the First Amendment issue cited in the ruling could end up preempting state laws or enabling new lawsuits to challenge them. The court said that corporate and labor union spending amounted to free speech and should be constitutionally protected. ‘The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said in the majority opinion. The justices left in place the dollar limits for contributions to candidates by individuals and political action committees. In […]

Read the Full Article

No Comments

Obama Pressing for Protections Against Lenders

Stephan:  Here is an example of what I mean about the fall-out from the Massachusetts election. If lending protections get thrown overboard, like the public option, we should take that as a clear sign 2010 is likely to be a painful and difficult year. Maybe I am just depressed by all this tonight. Maybe it is because I drove up the main highway between Phoenix and Sedona to see my brother in the hospital (yet again) and for long stretches did not have cell coverage -- there is not a single comparable main road anywhere in Europe where such electronic lacunae exist -- or maybe it is my day long struggle with the healthcare system to do the obvious and needful. Whatever the reason I see all of this as self-inflicted, and a sign of worse to come. I think we, in America, are all going to have to focus on the local if we want any quality of life to survive. I don't see it coming from the Federal government. It will be a very different country, and I do not see that as a good thing, merely a strategy to preserve what little we can.

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Tuesday stepped into the middle of a fierce lobbying battle by reinforcing his support for an independent agency to protect consumers against lending abuses that contributed to the financial crisis. The president’s move also signaled a tougher line and a more direct role as Congress weighs an overhaul of banking regulation. The financial industry and Congressional Republicans have singled out the administration’s proposed consumer agency in particular, hoping to greatly weaken if not kill it. With liberal Democrats and Web commentators fighting just as hard for a strong independent office, the issue is becoming the central flashpoint in the debate over regulation. Mr. Obama personally weighed in on Tuesday in a one-on-one meeting at the White House with Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Reports last week suggested that Mr. Dodd might drop the consumer agency from the emerging Senate bill in order to attract support from Republicans and some centrist Democrats on his committee, but Democratic aides disputed that. Some Democrats in Congress and the administration describe a possible fallback position that would give enhanced consumer protection powers to existing federal regulators, perhaps […]

Read the Full Article

No Comments

Jobs Bill: New Senate Math Means Rough Road

Stephan:  The loss the Democrats sustained in Massachusetts, an amazing act of self-mutilation, is going to make it almost impossible to get anything done in 2010. The Senate 60 vote super-majority requirement, which appears nowhere in the Constitution, and did not exist until about 40 years ago, virtually assures gridlock in the Senate, particularly given the blatant way the Congress -- both Senators and Representative -- has become little more than the purchased agency of special interests. Unless something suddenly strengthens the spine of the Democrats in both houses, look for a gutting of the already largely gutted healthcare legislation, protection for special interests, a continued bleeding of money to the rich, and further degradation of the American middle class. And we all need to be clear: this is the result of individual citizens who could not look past their personal pet peeves with Obama. They are the ones who voted Brown into office. He is going to be a hard right Senator, because he sees this as the way to the Presidency. I think this is a very dark day for the country.

WASHINGTON — The road for another stimulus bill just got tougher following Tuesday’s election of Republican Scott Brown to the Senate in Democratic stronghold Massachusetts. After health care, Congress’ next big priority is to pass something that shows voters in an election year that they’re on top of the nation’s unemployment scourge. But the Democrats’ loss of a filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate throws hurdles onto an already rocky path toward a new stimulus bill aimed at saving jobs. Given how controversial the first stimulus package remains, passing a new jobs bill, or ‘second stimulus,’ was never going to be easy. Republicans have especially targeted the first stimulus package as a prime example of the kind of big government spending they aim to end. ‘There is a reason the nation was focused on this race,’ said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. ‘The American people have made it abundantly clear that they are more interested in shrinking unemployment than expanding government. They are tired of bailouts.’ Experts and policy analysts say the Republican win in Massachusetts will shore up Republican opposition to anything that looks like big spending. ‘I think it’ll be very hard,’ […]

Read the Full Article

No Comments

Democrats Reconsider Healthcare Possibilities

Stephan:  Some Democrats believe they could win Republican support for limited changes...' The Republicans smell the Democrats weakness and Obama's plummeting power to influence the Congress. Why would they cooperate on anything with mid-term elections coming up? I predict we are going to see a massive drop-off of engagement in the under 40 electorate, who will turn their backs in disgust. I hope I am wrong, and will read this comment a year from now and be amused by my befuddlement, but that's the way it seems to me. And without those millions of young men and women Obama will be a one-term President.

WASHINGTON — President Obama and congressional Democrats are rethinking their healthcare strategy in the wake of a Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, giving serious consideration to abandoning the comprehensive approach in favor of incremental steps that might salvage key elements of the package. Now without a filibuster-proof Senate majority, which was lost in the GOP victory, some Democrats believe they could win Republican support for limited changes to the healthcare system, including restrictions on insurance companies and new initiatives to restrain costs. Obama appeared to endorse such an approach Wednesday. ‘I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements in the package that people agree on,’ the president said in an interview with ABC News. ‘We know that we need insurance reform. The health insurance companies are taking advantage of people,’ Obama said. ‘We know that we have to have some form of cost containment because if we don’t, then our budgets are going to blow up. And we know that small businesses are going to need help so that they can provide health insurance for their families. Those are the core — some of the core — elements of […]

Read the Full Article

No Comments

Hot Air

Stephan:  I remember years ago reading a geopolitical paper, I can't remember who wrote it, but it must have been about 1980 or 81, in which the author argued that just as physical organisms reach a point where their systems break down and they die, so physical political and cultural entities do the same. Reading Jared Diamond's Collapse and Barbara Tuchman's March of Folly, I have come to believe this may be true. It isn't any one thing, just the aggregate of millions upon millions of little decisions. Perhaps we should see the creationists and the climate change deniers as examples of this process. Both are clearly disdainful of science, as being just another opinion thus undermining our ability as a nation to make rational decisions.

The small makeup room off the main floor of KUSI’s studios, in a suburban canyon on the north end of San Diego, has seen better days. The carpet is stained; the couch sags. John Coleman, KUSI’s weatherman, pulls off the brown sweatshirt he has been wearing over his shirt and tie all day and appraises himself in the mirror, smoothing back his white hair and opening a makeup kit. ‘I kid that I have to use a trowel, to fill the crevasses of age,’ he says, swiping powder under one eye and then the other. ‘People have tried to convince me to use more advanced makeup, but I don’t. I don’t try to fool anyone.’ Coleman is seventy-five years old, and looks it, which is refreshing in the Dorian Gray-like environs of television news. He refers to his position at KUSI, a modestly eccentric independent station in San Diego whose evening newscast usually runs fifth out of five in the local market, as his retirement job. When he steps in front of the green screen, it’s clear why he has chosen it over actual retirement; in front of the camera he moves, if not quite like a man half […]

Read the Full Article

No Comments