Caption contest, 1/15
January 15th, 2009 7:11 pm by
(Via the New York Times.)
(Via the New York Times.)
What do you get when you cross a Hummer with the Batmobile? From CNN:
The Secret Service has unveiled the new presidential limousine, to debut on Inauguration Day next Tuesday.
“Although many of the vehicles’ security enhancements cannot be discussed, it is safe to say that this car’s security and coded communications systems make it the most technologically advanced protection vehicle in the world,” Nicholas Trotta, Assistant Director for the Office of Protective Operations, said in a statement.
Any guesses as to what some of the secret “security enhancements” are?
With all numerous Gazans recently killed by Israel’s assault, the Gazans have apparently run out of places to bury people. Always eager to help, the Israelis have started to cremate the Gazans, often in advance.
From the Washington Post this morning:
A spate of retirement announcements by Senate Republicans this year have further complicated attempts by GOP strategists to begin rebuilding a party devastated by across-the-board losses in recent elections.
The latest departure news came yesterday, when Sen. George V. Voinovich of Ohio said he has decided not to seek a third term in 2010, citing a desire to “step back and spend the rest of our time with our children and grandchildren.” Voinovich joins Republican Sens. Sam Brownback (Kan.), Christopher S. Bond (Mo.) and Mel Martinez (Fla.) on the sidelines heading into the 2010 election. So far this year, no Democrats have announced plans to retire after the current Senate term.
The rapid pace of Republican retirement announcements has dispirited many in the party who thought the 2008 election, in which the party lost seven or eight seats (depending on the outcome of the Minnesota contest), marked the GOP’s nadir.
Obviously, I’m happy with the idea of improved Democratic electoral prospects in 2010, but there’s pressing business in the meantime — and I was looking forward to the possibility of nervous Republican senators (specifically, those up for re-election in ‘10 in states Obama carried last November, as Voinovich was) helping Dems over the 60-vote filibuster hurdle on important legislation.
Chris Bowers at Open Left still holds out hope, saying that “retiring Republicans appear far more willing to support Democratic legislation than those who seek to stay in the Senate” — and explaining the logic as follows:
When Republicans are determined to leave the Senate, their leadership seems to lose control over them. This makes sense, as who cares about future retribution if you are leaving the camp altogether?
I’m not so sure. Even if the retiring Repub senators aren’t officially under their party’s control, they’re still likely to be looking for GOP favors in their post-congressional careers. And Nate Silver at Five Thirty Eight crunches his formidable database and comes back with a different conclusion than Bowers:
On the whole, though, there doesn’t seem to be much movement. Perhaps old senators — like most old people — are fairly set in their ways. Perhaps also they are voting their conscience — but being Republicans, they have a fairly conservative conscience.
Most of the key pieces of the Obama agenda, moreover, are fairly popular — the “big three” agenda items of the stimulus, health care, and energy policy certainly included. If I’m Obama, I’m not sure I wouldn’t rather have someone like Voinvoich or Martinez subject to the usual electoral constraints on these issues than being free to vote their conscience.
I’m inclined to agree with Nate. Their conscience is the last thing I want these fuckers to be voting.
Can you tell I’m resisting the urge obligation to navel-gaze about the meaning of Obama’s evolving economic plan? Fortunately, I’ve stalled long enough for something else to turn up (via a Reuters story at TPM):
U.S. President George W. Bush will deliver a televised farewell address to the American people on Thursday night, the White House said.
Bush, who leaves office on Jan. 20 when Barack Obama is sworn in, will give a 10-15 minute speech in front of an audience in the East Room of the White House, press secretary Dana Perino said Monday.
. . . “It’s not something where he’s trying to refight old battles. It’s a very thoughtful, forward-looking speech in which the president will share the lessons he learned in office and his views on the future,” Perino said.
The White House has asked the major television networks for a slot to broadcast his address, but an exact time has not yet been set.
Just between you and me, if Dubya wants the majors to broadcast his final flatulence — not to mention have anyone watch — he’s going to have to think outside the box for ways to liven the speech up a little bit.
I’m thinking guest stars… Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson, something like that. But I’m open to other suggestions.
An interesting story hitting the wires from the Washington Post this afternoon:
Senior Bush administration officials are preparing to ask lawmakers for the second half of the $700 billion financial rescue package despite intense opposition in Congress and then have President Bush use his veto if the request is voted down, three sources familiar with the matter said.
Atrios immediately read this as Dubya trying to get his clumsy hands on the cash even though there’s almost no time left in his term, so I guess this part must have been added in a subsequent revision by the Post:
The initiative, which is being coordinated with the Obama transition team, may be taken within days, the sources said, speaking on condition of anonymity because no announcement has been made.
. . . Under the emergency rescue legislation approved by Congress in October, the administration must inform lawmakers that it wants access to the second installment of $350 billion. Unless Congress passes a resolution rejecting the request within 15 days, the Treasury can begin to tap the funds. If Congress does turn down the request, the president could veto the resolution and then the Treasury could proceed.
The plan now being crafted by the Bush administration is not finalized. By unsheathing the veto threat, the Bush administration could make it more likely that the Obama administration would get the rest of the rescue funds. Only if Congress overrides the veto would the money be blocked. A congressional source said advocates of the plan are now exploring whether there are enough votes in the Senate to override a veto.
“There have been discussions between the administration and the transition about how to proceed should the president-elect determine that he wants to have those funds available on January 20th,” said Robert Gibbs, spokesman for the Obama transition team. “No final decisions have been made, but we want to be ready to act if needed.”
Hmmmm. Could it be that with 10 days left to go, the Bushites have finally decided it’s okay to do something for the good of the country? Or do they have some ulterior motive (as usual)? And how does this play into Obama’s strategy regarding his stimulus proposals — is he willing to let Congress bat it around because he’s looking forward to having a separate slush fund to work with? Inquiring minds want to know.
(Cross-posted at Firedoglake.)
This headline from the Israel’s attack on Gaza really just says it all: Gaza Children Found With Mothers’ Corpses. I’m really not sure what more Israel can do in the way of war crimes before anybody on Capitol Hill says “Enough!”
“The statement said a team of four Palestine Red Crescent ambulances accompanied by Red Cross representatives made its way to Zeitoun Wednesday where it “found four small children next to their dead mothers in one of the houses. They were too weak to stand up on their own. One man was also found alive, too weak to stand up. In all, there were at least 12 corpses lying on mattresses.””
I just wish our Pols would be more honest and finish the typical apologia statements around Israel’s actions and say “I support Israel’s right to defend itself regardless of the means and of the cost in innocent human life.”
Leon Panetta to head the CIA? What a weird pick. He’s a nice enough guy (I’ve met him twice), and certainly knows his way around D.C. Unlike Feinstein, I don’t fault him for his lack of intelligence bureau experience - I’d consider that a positive, given the recent abject failures of the CIA.
However, he strikes me as sort of a party apparatchik, certainly of the more competent sort, whereas I think the job requires somebody with some fire in the belly, who is willing and able to do some ‘clearing out of the deadwood.’ More importantly, the head of the agency needs to change it’s focus and direction, to move away from Cold War legacy things like signal intelligence back to old-fashioned field agents and counter-insurgency work.
I really don’t see Panetta doing more than filling the seat and filling out paperwork. D.C. Buddy has a higher opinion of the man (knowing him a bit better as he does), and feels Panetta will help in getting $ and intelligence-related legislation through Congress. But after Daschle, this is the next most disappointing pick for me.
