Tag Archives: mother

America Unhappy Over Obama’s Lack of Magic Iraq Wand

by RudolfGraves Posted on June 24, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

President Obama’s conduct of foreign policy continues to get bad reviews:

Dissatisfaction with President Obama’s conduct of foreign policy has shot up among both Republicans and Democrats in the past month, even though a slim majority supports his recent decision to send military advisers to Iraq to confront the growing threat from militants there, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The survey suggests that most Americans back some of Mr. Obama’s approaches to the crisis in Iraq, including majority support for the possibility of drone strikes. But the poll documents an increasing lack of faith in the president and his leadership, and shows deep concern that further intervention by the United States in Iraq could lead to another long and costly involvement there.

….“I voted for him because he said, ‘Give me four more years and I will fix everything,’ but nothing is being fixed,” Michelle Roberts, 34, a Democrat from Salem, Mass., said in a follow-up interview. “I understand he wants to fight terrorism, but send in robots, drones. Don’t send in our troops. Our men and women are dying for what?”

This poll really demonstrates the schizophrenia of the American public. If you read through the individual questions, you’ll see that substantial majorities approve of nearly everything Obama has done related to Iraq. Majorities believe the US shouldn’t take the lead in world conflicts; they don’t believe we should have left troops behind in Iraq; they don’t think the US has a continuing responsibility to Iraq; they specifically don’t think the US has a responsibility to fight ISIS; they approve of sending 300 advisors; they very much disapprove of “sending ground troops” into Iraq; and overall, a plurality thinks Obama is doing the “right amount” to address the violence in Iraq.

And yet, the public disapproves of Obama’s handling of Iraq by 52-37 percent.

In other words, Iraq is like the economy: it doesn’t really matter what the president is doing. If the economy is good, the public approves of his performance. It it’s bad, they disapprove. Likewise, if the world is peaceful, they think the president is doing a great job. If it’s not, they don’t—even if he’s pretty much doing everything they think he should be doing. Basically, we all want the president to wave a magic wand and make everything better. No wand, no approval.

Continue reading here – 

America Unhappy Over Obama’s Lack of Magic Iraq Wand

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on America Unhappy Over Obama’s Lack of Magic Iraq Wand

Awlaki Assassination Memo Finally Released

by AnnabelCorrigan Posted on June 23, 2014

Mother Jones

A federal court has finally released the Obama administration’s memo justifying the targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen living in Yemen who was apparently a top Al Qaeda operative. I think we mostly knew this already, but the memo confirms that the decision to kill Awlaki was based primarily on the Authorization to Use Military Force passed a few weeks after 9/11:

“We believe that the AUMF’s authority to use lethal force abroad also may apply in appropriate circumstances to a United States citizen who is part of the forces of an enemy authorization within the scope of the force authorization,” reads the Justice Department memorandum, written for attorney general Eric Holder on 16 July 2010 and ostensibly intended strictly for Awlaki’s case.

Among those circumstances: “Where high-level government officials have determined that a capture operation is infeasible and that the targeted person is part of a dangerous enemy force and is engaged in activities that pose a continued and imminent threat to US persons or interests.”

I’ve never taken a firm stand on the decision to kill Awlaki. Everything I’ve read persuades me that he was, indeed, a high-ranking Al Qaeda operative, and a dangerous one. If we were engaged in a normal war, there would be no question about our right to treat him like any other enemy combatant.

But we aren’t engaged in a normal war, are we? There’s no specific enemy, no specific battlefield, and no way of knowing if and when the war is over. The AUMF is open-ended, both in time and geography, and is famously vague about just who it authorizes the president to make war against. It specifies “those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,” and that takes in a helluva lot of ground.

Thus, the problem I’ve always had isn’t specifically with the targeting of Awlaki, but with the fact that the targeting was based on such a flimsy legal pretext. However, despite the fact that I’m disappointed in Obama’s decision to interpret the AUMF widely, most of the blame on that score should be directed not at Obama, but at Congress. The AUMF is now more than a dozen years old, and it’s long past time for Congress to emerge from its fetal crouch and write a new law specifically designed for our present circumstances. Among other things, it should address the president’s ability to target American citizens for killing. If Congress wants to give the president that power, it should debate and pass a law and the courts should rule on its constitutionality. That’s the rule of law. And regardless of whether I liked the law, I’d accept it if Congress passed it, the president signed it, and the Supreme Court declared it constitutional.

Instead, as usual, Congress prefers to do nothing. This leaves them free to kibitz if they don’t like what the president is doing, or to simply avoid having to take a stand at all. It’s shameful.

Read the full Justice Department memo here.

Source:

Awlaki Assassination Memo Finally Released

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Awlaki Assassination Memo Finally Released

Is a Government Shutdown Over Coal in Our Future?

by Oleksajp9 Posted on June 20, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Brian Beutler thinks Republicans are likely to force yet another government shutdown, this time over the EPA’s proposed restriction on coal-fired power plants. But unlike the last shutdown, which came last September because it literally seemed like their last chance to prevent Obamacare from taking effect, they have more leeway this time around:

I think history and reason both suggest they will not shut down the government before the election—but that their vehement interest in emitting as much carbon pollution as possible, combined with the likelihood that they’ll win several Senate seats in November, presages a dramatic confrontation between Republicans Congress and the White House either right after the election or early next Congress.

….The crucial difference between last September and the coming one is that Republicans (particularly the hardline/opportunist faction) were staring down the imminent launch of the Affordable Care Act on October 1, 2013….The EPA rule is nothing like that. Or, at least, it isn’t there yet. If Republicans cave now, or simply punt a confrontation over it until after the election, they’ll have sacrificed nothing other than the opportunity to pants themselves in front of God and everyone a month before the election. And if they win a bunch of seats in November, their hands will be strengthened when they actually do go to the mattresses during this year’s lame duck session of Congress or in early 2015.

This makes perfect sense. That doesn’t mean Republicans will do it this way, of course, since common sense has been in short supply in the GOP caucus lately. Still, the recent election of relatively non-insane folks to the House leadership suggests just enough adult presence to keep the yahoos in line and the government open at least through November. After that, it’s anyone’s guess. If they’re really going to do it, though, it might be best to wait until late next year so they can force all their presidential candidates to weigh in. That should do maximum damage to the GOP brand, which seems to be their real goal here.

More: 

Is a Government Shutdown Over Coal in Our Future?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is a Government Shutdown Over Coal in Our Future?

About Half of Obamacare Exchange Enrollees Were Previously Uninsured

by AntoniaHUW Posted on June 19, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A new Kaiser survey shows that 57 percent of those who bought health insurance on Obamacare exchanges were previously uninsured. That’s about 4.5 million people who gained private insurance via the exchanges, and the vast majority of them say they would have remained uninsured if not for Obamacare. If this number is correct, it suggests that the number of newly insured by the end of the year will be a little higher than I’ve projected before—perhaps around 11-13 million.

But is it correct? Sarah Kliff provides the chart on the right showing the wildly different estimates from different sources, and explains that much of the divergence is due to different organizations asking different questions:

McKinsey asked people to identify the insurance they had “most of the year” in 2013….The RAND estimate relies on the research firm’s ongoing American Life Panel….It found that, when it reached out to them mostly in early March, that 36 percent of those who had exchange coverage were, in earlier surveys, uninsured.

….Health and Human Services has estimated 87 percent of certain Obamacare enrollees lacked coverage when they signed up. This figure comes from a question on Healthcare.gov….The Kaiser Family Foundation report….asked survey respondents this question: “Before you began coverage under your current health insurance plan, were you covered by a different plan you purchased yourself, were you covered by an employer, by COBRA, did you have Medicaid or other public coverage, or were you uninsured?”

To a certain extent, there is no right answer. The basic problem is that the pool of uninsured has a lot of churn: people are covered for a while, then lose their jobs, then get another job, etc. So if you had insurance last August, but lost your job and signed up for Obamacare in November, do you count as previously uninsured? According to McKinsey, no. According to Kaiser, yes.

My own guess is that the Kaiser methodology is probably the closest of the four to what we’d normally think of as “uninsured,” and its sample size is big enough to be reliable. In any case, when you combine these surveys with the Gallup results, the most likely number seems to be somewhere around 50 percent. Given the inherent subjectivity of the topic, that’s probably about as good an estimate as we can get. There’s just no reliable way to get precision any higher.

Source:  

About Half of Obamacare Exchange Enrollees Were Previously Uninsured

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on About Half of Obamacare Exchange Enrollees Were Previously Uninsured

Low Inflation Continues to Disappoint Inflation Hawks

by JurgenCisco Posted on June 18, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Perhaps you’ve read that inflation is up recently. Last night, for example, NBC News breathlessly told me that the price of eggs had gone up 13 cents over the past year. Does this mean that the inflation worries we’ve been hearing about continuously for the past four years are finally coming true?

I’d be happy if they were, since I think higher inflation would do the economy some good. Sadly, though, inflation remains well anchored. Despite the higher numbers of the past two months, the Fed’s latest projections have increased by….one tenth of a percentage point. Or, if you take the average of their range, by one twentieth of a percentage point, from 1.55 percent to 1.6 percent.

And how about 2015? They’re projecting 1.75 percent. And 2016? A whopping 1.8 percent. In other words, they believe that we’ll continue to undershoot our inflation target for at least the next three years.

At the same time, their projection of GDP growth has plummeted from 2.9 percent to 2.2 percent. And their projections for 2015 and 2016 continue to hover around an anemic 3 percent.

So: we have low growth, low price inflation, low wage inflation, and unemployment is still high. This is really not an environment in which spending cuts and lower deficits are the answer. More here from Mark Thoma.

View article: 

Low Inflation Continues to Disappoint Inflation Hawks

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Low Inflation Continues to Disappoint Inflation Hawks

Has Hillary Clinton Evolved on Foreign Policy?

by UUQDannneuo Posted on June 18, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton says she disagreed with President Obama about the drawdown in Afghanistan; about arming Syrian rebels; and about getting tougher with Vladimir Putin. (She also thought we should have supported Hosni Mubarak more consistently and should have taken a softer line with the Israelis.)

At the same time, she also acknowledges that she made the wrong call on Iraq. This prompts an obvious question: Has the disaster in Iraq changed her approach to foreign policy at all? Presumably the answer is yes. At least, I hope it is. If the Iraq debacle doesn’t change your mind, what would?

And this prompts a second question: Are there any concrete cases from the past few years in which her approach was less hawkish than it would have been a decade ago? Can she name one example where the Hillary of 2002 would have recommended intervention but the Hillary of 2009-12 recommended caution?

Maybe I’m wrong, but it strikes me that the answer is no. This is one of the reasons that Democrats need more primary choices in 2016. I’ve never really had anything against Hillary Clinton, but I’m hesitant about nominating someone who, as near as I can tell, acknowledges poor judgment on Iraq but hasn’t let that actually change her views on much of anything. Maybe at her next town hall meeting, we could skip the endless nonsense about Benghazi, “dead broke,” evolution on gay marriage, and so forth, and instead ask whether her foreign policy views have changed at all since 9/11. I’m not a huge fan of all of Barack Obama’s foreign policy choices, but the more I hear from everyone else—including Hillary Clinton—the more I appreciate even the modest restraint that he’s demonstrated. It’s apparently a rare thing.

Continue at source: 

Has Hillary Clinton Evolved on Foreign Policy?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Has Hillary Clinton Evolved on Foreign Policy?

Happy Tuesday! Here Is a Video of Thousands of Noisy, Rampaging Ducks

by IleneAugustin Posted on June 17, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Enjoy.

From:  

Happy Tuesday! Here Is a Video of Thousands of Noisy, Rampaging Ducks

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Happy Tuesday! Here Is a Video of Thousands of Noisy, Rampaging Ducks

Yet More Benghazi Conspiracy Theories Are Only a Day Away

by RoseanneQVJ Posted on June 17, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After a year of planning, US commandos have captured one of the militia leaders thought to be a ringleader in the Benghazi attacks. For political junkies, however, it was the 17th paragraph of the Times story that drew the most attention:

Mr. Obama’s Republican critics, who have sought to portray the Benghazi attack as an administration cover-up and efforts to prosecute those responsible as weak, were cautious in their initial response to news of Mr. Abu Khattala’s capture.

Indeed. I wonder just how long that caution will last? I’d give it no more than 24 hours. More than likely, it’s just a publicity stunt meant to draw attention away from the IRS/EPA/ISIS/Iran. Amirite? In turn, all of those things are publicity stunts meant to draw attention away from Benghazi. It’s like a finely tuned Swiss watch, isn’t it?

By the way: does anyone know why this guy is referred to as Mr. Abu Khattala on all references in most news stories? It’s never shortened. I’ve never noticed that with any other Arabic name.

UPDATE: Sorry about that. I thought I had seen “Mr. Abu Khattala” used repeatedly elsewhere too, but apparently not. Only in the New York Times, where it’s house style.

View original:  

Yet More Benghazi Conspiracy Theories Are Only a Day Away

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yet More Benghazi Conspiracy Theories Are Only a Day Away

Why Is the Abortion Rate Down Since 2008?

by DeneseLamble Posted on June 17, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

National Review‘s Michael New is unhappy with Guttmacher’s latest report on the abortion rate:

Last week, the Guttmacher Institute released an analysis of the recent decline in the incidence of abortion. Overall, the abortion rate declined by an impressive 13 percent between 2008 and 2011 and reached its lowest level since 1973. This Guttmacher analysis joins a chorus of pundits — including Andrew Sullivan — who were quick to credit contraception for this decline in the abortion rate. And like most Guttmacher studies, this analysis is quick to downplay pro-life laws and other pro-life efforts.

…There is less than meets the eye here, however. The author finds that fewer women under 30 at risk for an unintended pregnancy were forgoing contraception. Yet the decline was slight — only three percentage points.

…The author makes a fair point that the abortion decline was fairly consistent throughout the country….However, the study presents a false dichotomy between either crediting legislation or crediting contraceptives for the falling abortion numbers….The link between abortion attitudes and abortion incidence is not well documented. That said, the shift in public opinion is still worth considering.

Well, look: the abortion rate in America has been steadily declining since 1973. Trying to figure out why it dropped specifically between 2008 and 2011 is a mug’s game. There’s just nothing unusual going on that even requires an explanation. It’s true that the post-1973 decline continued at a rate that was slightly higher than before—but so slightly that it’s just as likely to be statistical noise as anything else.

Both sides should probably stand down in the face of the long-term evidence. Most likely, neither contraceptives nor state laws nor public opinion played a substantial role that was any different from the role they’ve played since 1973. Over the long term, there’s less teen pregnancy, more use of contraceptives, and, as near as I can tell, barely any change in public opinion at all. Beyond that, who knows?

See original:  

Why Is the Abortion Rate Down Since 2008?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Is the Abortion Rate Down Since 2008?

Lead and Crime: Schoolyard Fighting Edition

by BrittAfford Posted on June 17, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

If lead exposure in childhood produces more aggressive behavior later in life, you’d expect lead exposure to be highly correlated with later rates of violent crime. And it is. But you’d also expect to see increases in violent behavior all along the spectrum. Not just rapes and murders, but ordinary bar fights and punching out kids in school hallways. Unfortunately there’s not much data on this stuff. Unless it rises to the level of cops being called and charges being filed, bar fights just aren’t tabulated anywhere.

But it turns out that schoolyard fights are. And guess what? They’ve been steadily decreasing ever since 1993, just as you’d expect. It’s too bad we don’t have earlier data, so we could see if high-school fighting rose in the 60s and 70s, but this is still an interesting data point that supports the lead theory. It’s not just the most violent crime that’s declined over the past two decades, it’s also the more prosaic types of less intense violence.

See original article here: 

Lead and Crime: Schoolyard Fighting Edition

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lead and Crime: Schoolyard Fighting Edition