Note to Readers: Changes

By GottaLaff

BUMPING THIS UP FOR THOSE WHO MISSED IT:

It's time to update you on what's been going on with TPC's Big Move. We were unable to follow through. As it turns out, our site requires more than we can afford (meaning, paying a lot of money for a server that can handle what we do here).

We may move in the future, we may not. We may play with our color scheme, we may not.

But we have changed our Comments.

We're switching to Disqus, which has some great benefits. Hopefully one will be the ability to moderate better, so that we keep spam and trolls under control more easily.

That's all for now.

Love,

Laffy and Paddy

Executive orders fewer under Obama

Yep Haters, just like Bush.

Despite signing an early flurry of major executive orders, President Obama has been restrained in wielding his White House power having produced fewer executive orders than all but one of his five recent predecessors.

Mr. Obama created a fiscal panel Thursday to tackle the nation's staggering deficit problem when issuing his 43rd executive order - that's 17 fewer than President George W. Bush signed in the same time frame and 29 fewer than President Carter.

But Mr. Obama's use of executive power is likely to change now that Senate Democrats have lost their filibuster-proof majority and Republicans are expected to pick up seats in this fall's midterm elections.

"It is easier to get what you want unilaterally than it is to work with Congress," said Christopher S. Kelley, a professor at the Miami University of Ohio, who noted that President Clinton's executive orders spiked after Republicans took control of Capitol Hill in 1994. "They tried to cut him off, but in the end the president has the prerogative to use them."

To those who have wondered where Organizing for America has been

By GottaLaff

I've actually posted about the increased activity of OFA over the past few weeks, but this is more confirmation of their stepping up the effort to get the White House message out:

The successor to President Obama's campaign group, now a project of the Democratic National Committee, is expanding its online outreach efforts, according to a Democratic official and an advertisement posted on the jobs board at MediaBistro.com.

The notice, posted more than a week ago, seeks full-time "Email campaigners" based in Washington, D.C.; the campaigners will be "responsible for planning, writing, and executing grassroots campaigns to advance the President's agenda for change."

At least they won't get blocked by the GOP.

Did Baltimore make a difference?

By GottaLaff

President Obama went to Baltimore and took on the GOP.

Now the headlines seem to have changed.

Coincidence? Check out these three pieces from today's Roll Call:

Brown Insists He Won’t Be Senate’s Deciding Vote

Democrats and Republicans Agree Health Care Reform Isn’t Dead Yet

GOP Says It’s Willing to Look at Obama’s Jobs Plan

To be fair, #2 post also said:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Sunday that health care reform is not dead and that Democrats are still determined to “shove this down the throats of the American people.”

But it's not dead. He did say that.

Do I sense change, or is it just a figleaf of my imagination?

Progressives and Populists Need to Redefine the Mythical Political "Center"

By GottaLaff

Your Daily Dose of BuzzFlash via my pal Mark Karlin:

There are reports today in Politico that the apparent GOP/Independent "uprising" (and idealistic progressive disillusionment) in Massachusetts is giving the White House second thoughts about cautious, process oriented, incremental change aimed at attracting "the center."

The concept of a fixed "center" in American politics is one of those myths perpetuated by a combination of the GOP, DLC Democrats such as Rahm Emanuel, and the media. America is a nation of evolutionary change. [...]

It is our ability to be innovative, and to be innovative, you have to evolve, change, grow.

If ever there were proof of how the political "center" can be created, it is how the hundreds of billions of dollars and grooming of Ronald Reagan created a perceived and indoctrinated "center" that allowed for the fleecing of the working and middle class that allowed the engorging of the already filthy rich. [...]

Yes, Obama was elected on one word "change," but whether one is a progressive idealist or progressive pragmatist, the corporate media, the GOP, and the Tea Bag organizers were able to turn his cautious approach into something looking like "more of the same." [...]

[I]t's time to return to "change" from the grassroots up and to recreate the "center," as has always been the case as this nation has evolved.

Much more here.

Justice Department Intervenes In Gay Rights Suit For First Time In A Decade

By GottaLaff

This is a good example of why it matters who you support/vote for in any election, and why it is vital that you vote, period:

Yesterday, for the first time in a decade, the Justice Department intervened in a gay rights suit. In August, an openly gay 14-year-old student named Jacob — with the help of the ACLU — sued the Mohawk Central School District in upstate New York because officials “did not appropriately respond to relentless harassment, physical abuse and threats of violence” that Jacob received because of his sexual orientation. NPR reported on some of the harassment to which Jacob alleges he was subjected.

The heartbreaking details are here.

So are the heartening ones, including:

Under Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, the Justice Department has had a dramatically different focus than it did during President Bush’s terms. While the Bush Justice Department was focused on installing political cronies, going after mythical voter fraud cases, and the suppression of minority voters while looking out for the voter disenfranchisement of whites. The Obama Justice Department, by contrast, recently announced that it would also start aggressively going after “banks and mortgage brokers suspected of discriminating against minority applicants in lending.”

"It doesn't matter if I vote. The candidates are interchangeable. Someone else will cancel out my vote anyway." Wrong.

This boy's life was changed because of who Americans elected. He knows the ObamAdministration is looking out for him. He won't feel quite as alone and helpless any more.

He may even feel optimistic that change is in the air, no matter how incrementally, and that there's reason for hope... all because enough people exercised their right to vote.

As frustrated as some of us may be with Obama, this is one time we can come together and unite behind him.

Health care PMS

By GottaLaff

My thoughts on health care reform are a work in progress, so this post may become obsolete by the time it's completed.

I am Laffy. I have health care PMS.

"Hi Laffy!"

I've had health care reform mood swings that no dinky little Bayer Pharmaceutical Inc. Midol pill can remedy. One day I'm given information that has me walking on smoggy L.A. air, and the next, I'm falling to the ground with a thud. Not just any old thud, a resounding thud.

The Conservadems have confiscated my health care iPhone, which means my optimism apps are inaccessible. The Rushpublics have constructed a typically badly designed brick wall, so I keep slamming my liberal noggin on it and am running short of Bayer Pharmaceutical Inc. Bactine. Traitor Joe Lieberman has pulled away my Charlie Brown football so often that even my own cats are pointing and laughing at me.

My emotional state runs the gamut from "We can still do this, it's just the beginning of a very long fight" to "WTF?! Screw Congress, where'd President Yes We Can go? I'm going all Howard Dean, and then I'm gonna go hide under my covers and pout and never vote again"... to, "Well, I do see a few improvements, it's farther than we've gotten in years, so go for it". And then I cry. And scream. And sigh. And start all over again.

Today Senator Bernie Sanders is introducing a single payer amendment. It will go nowhere. But it feeds into my instinct to keep fighting.

This morning on the Stephanie Miller Show, Hal Sparks said of Dems who are feeling impatient, "It's like shaking a baby who is learning to walk and keeps falling, and yelling at him, 'Just do it already! Get up and walk! What's your problem?!'"

And all these conflicting emotions stem from having high expectations and seeing them crash around me. Where did those expectations come from?

This is where I may differ with a lot of you. Most of them didn't come from Obama. I've always seen him as a centrist who is willing to play with the boys and girls I don't like. Don't get me wrong, I've been disappointed by him, but not entirely surprised. He wanted a health care bill passed, but not necessarily a good bill, not the one you and I want. He said as much. He just said it in such a way that convinced us he was for the same bill we were.

But he revealed many a clue that suggested his idea of a good bill and mine differed.

I am more disgusted with Congress. I had faith in the Progressives, and was buoyed by their happy talk. Obama made deals early on that signaled his willingness to compromise away the best parts of real reform. Just as, during the election, he campaigned on escalation in Afghanistan, lowering my hopes for peace, he also worded his health care campaign promises in a way that told me he'd do pretty much what he's doing. But I still wanted to believe my health care wishes would come true, and that the Progressives in Congress could make that happen.

I can't say I'm shocked. And yes, I'm angry, but again, not surprised. Obama promised change, but my early research told me that his words didn't always match his policies. I enthusiastically supported him because I did, and still do, like him and much of what he has done, and come on, the McCain/Palin alternative would have been disastrous. Plus, look what he inherited.

So how do I shake off my health care PMS? Today's mood swing dictates that I fight, that we all should fight, and not give up. We should campaign hard for 2010 candidates who share our goals, we should donate when we can, we should make calls to current Congress members until our dialing fingers fall off, we should do whatever it is we can to make our voices heard.

Because, realistically, taking our toys and stomping home won't accomplish a thing. Crawling under the covers doesn't eliminate cramps and headaches. I'm going to self-medicate with effort, forward thinking, and action. Defeat is not an option. My health care reform PMS can be treated. As I tell my most despondent students, life is fluid. Things never stay the same, they continue to change.

But it's up to us to do everything possible to make that change happen.

I may feel differently in an hour. Damn mood swings.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor makes her mark

By GottaLaff

This made me so proud:

Justice Sotomayor’s opinion in the case, Mohawk Industries v. Carpenter, No. 08-678, marked the first use of the term “undocumented immigrant,” according to a legal database. The term “illegal immigrant” has appeared in a dozen decisions.

Terms like “illegal alien” and “illegal immigrant” are considered pejorative and offensive by immigrants rights organizations. (HT: ImmigrationProf Blog)

Now imagine who Bush would have (and has) nominated.

Done? Good.

Now grab some Pepto and imagine what Lou Dobbs must be thinking.

I'll stop pushing unpleasant thoughts into your noggins now. I'm sure you'll come up with many more all on your own.

Democrats consider new presidential nominating process

By GottaLaff

Time to rock the vote, er, boat:

National Democrats are considering changing the presidential nominating process, by establishing a new primary calendar and deemphasizing the influence lawmakers and political insiders have on choosing the party nominee. [...]

Democrats see an opening to change the system now, because this is "a rare cycle of no apparent Democratic presidential nomination challenge" in 2012 as President Obama is expected to seek a second term, according to the "Draft Report of the Democratic Change Commission," discussed at the meeting. [...]

A commission suggestion would be to allow the first four states that held nominating contests in the January 2008 maintain their early, privileged calendar positions. But these states - Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina - would be directed to delay holding their caucuses and primaries before February 1. All other states would be forbidden from holding their nominating contests until at least the first Tuesday in March.

Another recommendation in the report suggested grouping states by "region or sub-region."

"This would not be a mandatory obligation upon the state parties," the commission stated. "The commission recommends that these clusters be staggered throughout the window to allow for a deliberative process that benefits all voters and caucus-goers through the country."

States parties that abided by the DNC's calendar would be rewarded by getting special perks at the national nominating convention.

The commission also discussed how to reduce the influence of unpledged delegates – lawmakers and party insiders also know as superdelegates – who played a big role in the 2008 nomination contest. [...]

There are disagreements already, of course. Follow the link to read all about it.

The Republican National Committee is also looking at how its party chooses its presidential nominee, and the DNC expressed interest Saturday in working with its political rival on a nomination calendar.

Oh yes, I'm sure the two parties can work together beautifully, as we always do. No problem.

"K" 'bye: Obama v. Lobbyists

By GottaLaff

I love how President Obama does big things with "little fanfare". All that punditiot blather about "celebrity" this and "attention whore" that just make this sweeter:

Hundreds, if not thousands, of lobbyists are likely to be ejected from federal advisory panels as part of a little-noticed initiative by the Obama administration to curb K Street's influence in Washington, according to White House officials and lobbying experts.

The new policy -- issued with little fanfare this fall by the White House ethics counsel -- may turn out to be the most far-reaching lobbying rule change so far from President Obama, who also has sought to restrict the ability of lobbyists to get jobs in his administration and to negotiate over stimulus contracts.[...]

Under the policy, which is being phased in over the coming months, none of the more than 13,000 lobbyists in Washington would be able to hold seats on the committees, which advise agencies on trade rules, troop levels, environmental regulations, consumer protections and thousands of other government policies.

Quietly sticking it to lobbyists and their toxic influence is so much more palatable than swaggering around in a cowboy hat and flight suit like some peacock on crack.

Of course now the K Streeters will be flailing their arms around, screaming bloody murder:

Administration officials remain sanguine, saying the criticism is overblown and arguing that top corporate officers are free to sit on advisory panels as long as they aren't lobbyists. Eisen, in a response letter to the ITAC leaders last month, wrote that "arguments that only lobbyists can bring requisite experience to provide wise counsel . . . are unconvincing on their face." [...]

And though lobbyists are unhappy, some good-government advocates say the policy is sound.

Another campaign promise kept.

Undoing BushCo: Strike against politicization of government by Obama administration

By GottaLaff

For now at least, say buh-bye to "burrowing":

In what may be another small dose of that precious change we can believe in, the Obama administration is taking steps to crack down on one of the Bushies' favored tactics for politicizing government: burrowing.

In the waning days of the Bush administration, we told you about some political appointees who had landed career jobs, with civil-service protections, at their departments -- allowing them to continue to exert influence under the new government, and making them difficult to remove. [...]

[S]tarting January 1, his office will have to sign off every time a political appointee who was appointed during the last 5 years is hired for a career position. Right now, OPM approval is only required during a presidential election year.

Paul Light, an expert on the federal bureaucracy at the Brookings Institution:

... [B]ecause the Obama administration, when it leaves office, will inevitably want to burrow its own appointees into career jobs, "they will rue the day they did this."

For now, though, count this as a strike against the politicization of government that the Bushies raised to an art form.

Chipping away at the toxic BushCo stains. That is change we can believe in.

H/t: muttlikemeblog

Obama change message resonates, poll finds

So howsabout we take that "changey" thing and stick it right into health care? Wonder what the catch phrase will be for the second term.

UTICA, N.Y., June 19 (UPI) -- U.S. voters, especially younger ones, say they believe President Barack Obama is living up to his promise to deliver change, a poll indicated.

The Zogby-Scoop44 poll found nearly two-thirds of voters under 30 polled said Obama's change message has matched his work in the White House, and among those 18-24, 70 percent said they believed this.

Among voters over 30, slightly more than one in four said they don't believe Obama's campaign promises translated into action in office, the poll found. Only 18 percent of those younger than 30 and 5 percent of 18-to-24-year-olds said they shared that view.

The poll found 43 percent of Republicans said they believe Obama's actions are in keeping with his promised change.

(snip)

Two of three women said they believe Obama is keeping his promise of change, compared with 56 percent of men. Most Catholics, Protestants and Evangelical Christian voters agree Obama has brought change but nearly one third of Catholics and Evangelical Christians and a fourth of Protestants "completely disagree."

The poorest voters are mostly likely to agree Obama's actions match his promise. But those with household incomes of $35,000-$50,000 are most likely to believe there's a disconnect between the president's promise and his actions.

Rachel Maddow is an "Agent of Change"

Pretty cool article sprinkled with lots of names you guys should be very familiar with (JMM, Nate Silver etc). Note #22-

The new face of punditry is not some buxom anchor babe but an unconventionally sexy, nearly six-foot-tall nerd who's not afraid to brandish her Rhodes scholar wits on national TV. In the 35-year-old Air America host, MSNBC has found a TV presence motivated not by shoutfests and point-scoring but by probing questions, curiosity and intelligent debate. Maddow's who-cares lesbianism also places her at the leading edge of the image of gay America — that is to say: totally normal.

h/t TV Newser.

"A thoughtful and careful president who doesn't make rash judgments"

By GottaLaff

Just getting my bearings here after a late start at the Bloggy Woggy, so here's an L.A. Times letter to the editor to tide me over:

Waiting can work too

Re “Obama finds the Bush center,” Feb. 24

Barely a month into President Obama's term, Times columnist Jonah Goldberg lambastes the president for not changing all of President Bush's policies.

I'm guessing that Goldberg is an academic policy wonk with little or no experience in the real world.

As a Marine platoon sergeant, I learned never to change anything immediately when I took over a platoon. I watched how the platoon functioned and how the men interacted. Most successful businessmen follow the same guidelines when being put in a new position of management.

Obama's decision to not change Bush's policies immediately are by no means an endorsement of those policies, as Goldberg would like us to think. Rather, it is the sign of a thoughtful and careful president who doesn't make rash judgments and decisions based on his gut.

That's something that was missing in the Oval Office for the last eight years, and something that is always missing from Goldberg's columns.

Here's what comes to mind whenever I see Jonah Goldberg's name mentioned:

Of course, I meant that with all due respect.

National Security Adviser Jones: "It's my job to make sure that minority opinion is represented...I'm going to tell him what I think."

By GottaLaff

What a difference one election makes. Never, ever again do I want to hear that one presidential candidate is the same as another, so it makes no difference which one gets someone's vote. Think about Bush's time in office. Now take a look at what you get with President Obama:

President Obama plans to order a sweeping overhaul of the National Security Council, expanding its membership and increasing its authority to set strategy across a wide spectrum of international and domestic issues.

The result will be a "dramatically different" NSC from that of the Bush administration or any of its predecessors since the forum was established after World War II to advise the president on diplomatic and military matters, according to national security adviser James L. Jones, who described the changes in an interview. [...]

Jones, a retired Marine general, made it clear that he will run the process and be the primary conduit of national security advice to Obama, eliminating the "back channels" that at times in the Bush administration allowed Cabinet secretaries and the vice president's office to unilaterally influence and make policy out of view of the others.

"We're not always going to agree on everything," Jones said, and "so it's my job to make sure that minority opinion is represented" to the president. "But if at the end of the day he turns to me and says, 'Well, what do you think, Jones?,' I'm going to tell him what I think." [...]

New NSC directorates will deal with such department-spanning 21st-century issues as cybersecurity, energy, climate change, nation-building and infrastructure. Many of the functions of the Homeland Security Council, established as a separate White House entity by President Bush after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, may be subsumed into the expanded NSC, although it is still undetermined whether elements of the HSC will remain as a separate body within the White House. [...]

The national security process, he said, will also be "transparent to its clients" inside the administration, with meeting agendas and outcomes made available to "the whole community" in real time. [...]

Jones said he sees an administration filled with colleagues rather than competitors. Since Jan. 20, "I've had more meetings with the secretary of state and the secretary of defense than I've had in my entire lifetime," said Jones, who served as Marine Corps commandant, NATO military chief and, under Bush, a special Middle East envoy.

You can almost hear the smile in his voice, even in print.

She's "never seen as many people of color in the briefing room"

By GottaLaff

Change. Change. Change:

Politico reports that the Obama administration’s first press briefing yesterday “was one of the most crowded ever –- and more diverse than ever too, with about a dozen black reporters, veterans and newbies among them.” There were four black media outlets represented, including three monthly magazines who have hired their first White House reporters to cover Obama.

American Urban Radio Network’s April Ryan [...] said she had never seen as many people of color in the briefing room as yesterday.

Gee, just like real America. Who'da thunk it?

VIDEO-- President Obama speaks at State Dep't: "America's moral example" will guide policy

By GottaLaff

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Here is the video of President Obama's speech at the State Department. That would be the very same one that got the "rousing ovation" that brought the crowd to its feet.

He's not so much a breath of fresh air as a hurricane. Hurricane Barack.

President Obama's new Oval Office dress code

By GottaLaff

Change. Transparency. Cool:

A photo of President Obama in the Oval Office this morning making phone calls to foreign leaders is especially interesting because it's clear he's instituted a new dress code: The new president is not wearing a suit jacket.

It was a rule during the Bush administration that no one ever enter the Oval Office without a jacket.

That was probably so Cheney could hide his firearms more easily.

VIDEO: A Letter to My Unborn Children on Inauguration Day

By GottaLaff

So sweet, so heartfelt, so meaningful, so Obama Era:


H/t: Hilz

VIDEO: David Plouffe wants our help moving this country forward

By GottaLaff

I love when David Plouffe e-mails me. He's always willing to hear my side of things. In the e-mail he sent me today, he linked me to this video.

Change is coming.