The Senate version of a bill designed to create jobs, support state budgets and extend various tax credits and benefit programs failed to overcome a Republican filibuster yesterday. Although 56 members of the Democratic caucus voted for the cloture motion (which would end debate on the bill), Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut voted with all the Republicans present to kill it (roll call here). Joan McCarter observed that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

voted yes, without changing his vote, signaling that this iteration of the bill is indeed dead.

Reid followed the vote by attempting to pass the emergency provisions of the bill, the "doc fix," unemployment benefits extension, and FMAP as well as the homebuyer tax credit, as separate bills under unanimous consent. McConnell objected to each, so we're stuck in further limbo.

Extending unemployment benefits should be a no-brainer when the percentage of unemployed Americans who have been out of work for more than six months is higher "than at any time since the government began keeping track in 1948." Without the "doc fix," medical providers' reimbursements for Medicare patients stand to drop about 20 percent. FMAP stands for Federal Medical Assistance Percentage funding, relating to federal government reimbursements for part of each state’s Medicaid spending. The 2009 stimulus bill temporarily raised FMAP payments for states during the recession, with larger increases going to states with higher unemployment rates. Failing to extend this provision will put state budgets under further strain for the 2011 and 2012 fiscal years.

Republicans who blocked this bill claim we should not be adding to the federal deficit. A spokesman for GOP enabler Ben Nelson laid out his views here. Ezra Klein pointed out a few glaring problems with the analysis: the federal budget can't start approaching balance with unemployment at 9 percent, polls show Americans are much more concerned about jobs than the deficit, and the current rate of economic recovery is "far, far too slow to really dent unemployment." Meanwhile, the same senators who claim to oppose adding to the deficit also oppose rolling back tax cuts or tax loopholes for the wealthy in order to pay for extending unemployed benefits, state fiscal aid and tax credits.

I share John Aravosis' view that it was a terrible mistake for President Barack Obama to talk tough about reducing the deficit earlier this year. As Aravosis writes,

[T]he President didn't want to blame Bush and the GOP for the deficit, and he didn't want to sufficiently defend the stimulus and explain to people that they had a choice between a Great Depression and a bigger deficit. [...] If the public understood that the deficit was a) mostly caused by Bush, and b) not nearly as important as staving off a Depression and creating jobs, the GOP would be facing far more pressure not to launch these filibusters at all.

Perhaps no jobs bill passed this week would alter the economy enough to affect the November elections, but if we accept current unemployment levels and don't pass additional fiscal aid to the states, the economy may still be very weak leading up to the 2012 election.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread. From where I'm sitting, the case for filibuster reform has never looked stronger.

Mr. desmoinesdem alerted me to a recent court ruling in Don Henley's copyright suit against Chuck DeVore for two web videos DeVore made during his U.S. Senate campaign in California. Ben Sheffner has been covering the lawsuit at the Copyrights and Campaigns blog.

Henley sued over web videos that set new lyrics to two of his songs. DeVore changed "The Boys of Summer" to "The Hope of November" in a video that mocked Barack Obama, and he changed "All She Wants to Do Is Dance" to "All She Wants to Do Is Tax" in a video that mocked Senator Barbara Boxer.

DeVore claimed fair use on the grounds that the songs he put in his videos were parodies. The problem for DeVore was that legally, "a parody comments on the work itself; a satire uses the work to comment on something else." DeVore wasn't rewriting lyrics like Weird Al Yankovic used to do to make fun of musicians. He was scoring points against Obama and Boxer. If you haven't paid for the rights to use a song, you have to meet a higher legal standard for satire than for parody.

You can download Judge James Selna's ruling here. Excerpt:

Even assuming that "parody-of-the-author" is a legitimate transformative purpose, the Defendants' songs do not satisfy the fair use analysis, as discussed below. "Tax" does not target Henley at all, and "November," which only implicitly targets Henley, appropriates too much from "Summer" in relation to its slight jab at Henley and risks market substitution for "Summer" or its derivatives.

DeVore had claimed he was mocking Henley as part of the liberal Hollywood elite, but Henley argued in one legal brief that he has given money to some Republican candidates, including John McCain. (Who knew?)

Selna agreed with the plaintiffs' claim that by using the Henley songs in their videos, DeVore's campaign supplanted the market for derivatives of the Henley songs, because "licensees and advertisers do not like to use songs that are already associated with a particular product or cause. [...] This injury is the very essence of market substitution."

While Selna granted the plaintiffs summary judgment on the issue of copyright infringement, he did not issue a finding on whether the infringement was willful. (If so, Henley would have a stronger claim for monetary damages.) Sheffner comments, "I assume there will be a jury trial on the issue of willfulness and damages, unless the parties are able to reach a resolution."

Selna rejected the plaintiffs' claim that DeVore violated the Lanham Act by giving people the wrong impression that Henley had endorsed DeVore's Senate campaign. Sheffner explained in this post why he thought Henley would (and should) lose that portion of the lawsuit.

Other candidates and campaign staffers should review this case before they decide to use copyrighted songs in web ads.

It started so innocently with some off-the-cuffs remarks by Georgia's junior Senator, Johnny Isakson.

"She did a good job," Isakson said of Nevada Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle's remarks to GOP Senators this week. "She's an articulate lady...This was an introduction. It wasn't the kind of speech you would give to the unwashed back home, she was talking to her colleagues."

Fox News reported the remarks and then suddenly, Think Progress and Georgia Liberal jumped all over the Isakson gaffe.

"Sen. Isakson, please address your apology letter to the people of Georgia," Steve at Georgia Liberal wrote.

Then more blogs jumped on the story. Both here and on my site, Georgia Politics Unfiltered, I wrote, "It's nice to know what Sen. Isakson really thinks of his constituents (myself included) back home. We'll see what the so-called 'unwashed' in Georgia have to say in November."

A day and at least four blog posts later, Sen. Isakson has apologized.

Amid rising heat over recent comments in which he referred to voters as the "unwashed," Sen. Johnny Isakson issued an apology Thursday, saying he meant no harm.

"It was a poor choice of words," Isakson said in a statement Thursday. "I didn't mean anything derogatory by it, and I sincerely apologize."

Keefe, Bob (2010-6-17). Isakson apologizes for ‘unwashed' remark. Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved on 2010-6-17.

I guess that shows that we bloggers swing that kind of lumber around here.

On a related note, two Democrats --R.J. Hadley and Mike Thurmond-- are vying for the Party's U.S. Senate nomination in the July 20th primary.  Early voting has already started across the Empire State of the South.

The oil spill off the gulf coast can only be described as one of the worst environmental disasters in American history. And blame for this epic environmental disaster should lay solely on the culprits: British Petroleum.

BP should pay its fair share to clean up the mess they made in the Gulf of Mexico; and yesterday the oil company took a good first step towards being a good corporate citizen [Associated Press (2010-6-16). BP OKs $20 billion escrow fund, halts dividend . MSNBC. Retrieved on 2010-6-17.].

Sadly though, we have two members of Congress who appear not to want BP to clean up its mess or to compensate those individuals whose livelihoods are threatened by this calamitous oil spill.

MSNBC is reporting that Georgia Republican Tom Price is describing the $20 billion escrow account set up by BP as a "brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics."

There's more...

Enjoy.

• We needs a jobs bill.  Period.  Virginia_aflcio: If your roof fell in, what would you do?


• As if SB1070 isn't bad enough, here comes the "anchor-baby" bill. (Restore Fairness)


• It’s Called a Safety Net for a Reason. (The Opportunity Agenda)


• File this under "duh," writes Tarheel74 in Pakistani Intelligence Aids and Arms Afghan Taliban.


• A legislative update from The Media Consortium in their Weekly Audit: Financial Reform Makes Headway, Jobs And Social Security In Jeopardy.

What else is out there?

Think Progress is on to something big today.

The site is highlighting a major gaffe made by U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R - Georgia) during his meeting with Nevada GOP Senate nominee Sharron Angle.

Republicans, who heard Angle's presentation were, to a letter, impressed. "She said she won, she needed money, and wanted to be a part of the team and was glad to be here today," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-GA, who said Ensign also showed a recent Rasmussen poll showing Angle up 11 points against Reid. "She did a good job. She's an articulate lady...This was an introduction. It wasn't the kind of speech you would give to the unwashed back home, she was talking to her colleagues," Isakson recounted.

Turner, Trish (2010-6-15). Reid Opponent Shuns Spotlight, Impresses Colleagues. The Speaker's Lobby (Fox News). Retrieved on 2010-6-16.

Dictionary.com defines "unwashed" as:

pertaining to or characteristic of the common people; untutored, unsophisticated, or ignorant; an ignorant or lower-class group; rabble

And of course, a gaffe is defined as what happens when a politician tells the truth.

It's nice to know what Sen. Isakson really thinks of his constituents (myself included) back home. We'll see what the so-called "unwashed" in Georgia have to say in November.

A couple of the more interesting races to watch for 3rd party movement are in Illinois, where the Democrats and Republicans have both fielded unpopular candidates, and the Green Party is in double-digits with the recent PPP polls.

In the Governor's race, Democrat Pat Quinn has a 27% approval rating; Republican Bill Brady has an obscure 22% approval. On the Senate side, the Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and the Republican Mark Kirk are both at 23% approval ratings. 

The Governor's slate is not quite as bad as it was last cycle, when Blagojevich was running against Topinka. That would have been enough for me, if I lived in Illinois (I once lived in Princeville as a kid), to vote along with 10% of the population, for the Green candidate. The 2006 Gov results were:

Blagojevich 49

Topinka      39

Whitney      10

Whitney polled at 14% in two SUSA polls prior to the 2006 election. The PPP poll for 2010 shows:

Brady (R)  34

Quinn (D)  30

Whitney (G) 9

Undecided  27

Adsman Bill Hillsman is working with Whitney this cycle, so we could see some very interesting ads show up.

In the Senate race, the failed bankster Giannoulias actually bested a very good candidate, David Hoffman, Chicago's Inspector General.

Hoffman would be well ahead at this point, without the Giannoulias baggage. Kirk has been ahead, but he's got his own baggage of "mis-remembering" his military record. Right. So, the perception is that you've got a cheat and a liar as the D-R combo. Enter the unknown.

One is LeAlan Jones, the assistant football coach at Simeon High School. He has focused on helping young people as a journalist and television producer, and now as Green Party candidate to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate.

Voters are having a point of conscience and pulling the lever (in polls for now) for the unknown Green instead of a candidate like Giannoulias or Kirk. Here's the recent PPP Senate polling:

Giannoulias (D) 31

Kirk (R)            30

Jones (G)         14

Undecided        24

Now, the favorable rating of Green is only 2%, so that means 12% of the voters are just voting another choice. But that's not all, as fiscal and social conservative Mike Niecestro is going to jump in the race. 

Niecestro is likely to get some strong traction, as he's pledging to put in his own funds, and run as an Independent in the Senate race:

The 51-year-old west suburban mortgage banker says he has at least one million dollars of his own money to spend. He is a fiscal and social conservative who is not concerned that he might wreck Republican Kirk's chances in November.

"I'm not doing this to be Mark Kirk's spoiler," said Niecestro. "I'm looking to do this to win the seat, and I'm not gonna get into a match with the Republican or Democratic party and try to outwit them and outspend them, because I can't afford to do that. The only thing I can do is use my resources as best as possible to outsmart them."

Its not hard imagining that Niecestro gets into double-digits pretty soon; we'll see how it shakes out.

The NYT's James Risen has got his panties in a wad over the criticism that his NYTimes piece was nothing but a propoganda pos fed to him by Pentagon sources:

Risen didn't take kindly to the blogospheric criticism. "Bloggers should do their own reporting instead of sitting around in their pajamas," Risen said.

Risen wrote the story to be covered-- for its shock value and for its suppossed revalation of untold riches in Afghanistan. It also, and this is the important part, the type of propoganda that is being used to prolong the US stay in the region, where military corporations are reaping profits in the billions. The story is marketed as "good news" that Afghanistan is on the path to a better place, when its really just a good marketing effort told by the Pentagon, through Risen here, to prolong the war.

Its the untold reason why the Pentagon sourced quotes and background information to Risen in the first place. He's not a foolish reporter that didn't understand the role he plays. So, he shouldn't be shocked when he finds out that bloggers point out his role, and that the deception he's provided.

"The thing that amazes me is that the blogosphere thinks they can deconstruct other people's stories," Risen told Yahoo! News during an increasingly hostile interview, which he called back to apologize for almost immediately after it ended. "Do you even know anything about me? Maybe you were still in school when I broke the NSA story, I don't know. It was back when you were in kindergarten, I think."

Does Risen envision a Pulitzer here, for playing a lead role in a cage?

Risen said he heard about the Pentagon's efforts from Milt Bearden, a retired CIA officer who was active in Afghanistan in the 1980s. The men co-authored a book, "The Main Enemy," in 2003, and Bearden is now a consultant working with Brinkley's survey team.

"Several months ago, Milt started telling me about what they were finding," Risen said. "At the beginning of the year, I said I wanted to do a story on it." At first both Bearden and Brinkley resisted, Risen said, but he eventually wore them down. "Milt convinced Brinkley to talk to me," he said, "and Brinkley convinced other Pentagon officials to go on the record. I think Milt realized that things were going so badly in Afghanistan that people would be willing to talk about this." In other words, according to Risen, he wasn't handed the story in a calculated leak. Calls and emails to Brinkley and to Eric Clark, a Pentagon public relations contractor who works with him, were not immediately returned.

Does Risen just not realize the conversation that went down between Bearden, Brinkley and the Pentagon officials?  Why does he imagine that Brinkley was able to convince the Pentagon?

If Risen had started his story with, "Things were going so badly in Afghanistan that Pentagon officials have went on the record with me to tell a story of untold riches that lay under the ground in Afghanitstan..." then Risen might have a point about staying up late pondering the criticism as unfounded.

Watch it here live:

The NPR poll out today is dire for Democrats and Obama.

Democratic firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies conducted a poll of 1,200 "likely" voters in 60 battleground districts that elected Democrats in 2008 (one of the seats is vacant) and 10 districts now represented by Republicans. The full poll, including the list of battleground districts, is here.

Here's an interesting point:

President Obama’s approval rating is at 40 percent in the Democratic districts, but it slightly better at 48 percent in the Republican districts where he outpaced John McCain in 2008.

ie, though likely to lose with Obama baggage are many Democrats in vulnerable CD's, there are some Republican-held CD's where Obama is not such a negative load, and a Democratic challenger might upset the incumbent.

This will be an interesting challenge, as groups like the DCCC are going to have to decide to cut ties with incumbents that are likely to lose, in order to fund challengers more likely to win-- a tall order for an organization that runs on incumbency entitlement to funds. But, it could also make the difference in picking up, or not, 5 or so seats too.

Larry Sabato is at +32 for Republicans.

Swingometer, using the +10 '08 result and the latest Republican +5 generic on Gallup result, is at +39 for Republicans.

Conservative Jim Geraghty has a list of 90 Dems he thinks are vulnerable (about 50 of them make my cut).

Any others?  It's looking like about a toss-up for the Dems to keep the House at this point.