May 20, 2009

5/20: Whose Side Are You On, Harry?

Liberal bloggers are furious that Senate Dems refused to provide the $80M that Pres. Obama requested to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. They're especially furious about Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) explanation for the decision, in which he declared, "We will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States." Lefty bloggers are outraged that Reid employed the same rhetoric that the GOP has used in criticizing Obama's plans to close Guantanamo. One blogger complains: "Why bother hav[ing] a Democratic Majority Leader if he does stupid things like echo the dumbest of the dumbest Republican talking points on where Gitmo detainees are to be housed?" Another blogger calls Reid "a complete turncoat and an absolutely gutless fool" and declares: "Harry Reid is dead to me." Liberal bloggers didn't like Reid before and they really don't like him now, so they aren't the least bit upset about his weak re-election numbers (although conservative bloggers are licking their chops). In fact, some lefty bloggers are attributing Reid's Guantanamo comments to his low approval ratings at home. David Dayen writes: "No doubt Reid's sudden lack of confidence in the federal prison system and trickle of piss tumbling down his pants has something to do with the low approval ratings coming out of Nevada."

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Conservative bloggers (Allahpundit, Hengler, Faughnan) are praising RNC Chair Michael Steele's speech to RNC members, while liberal bloggers (Lewison, Benen, Cole, Black) are mocking it.
• Conservative bloggers (Allahpundit, Hinderaker, Lowry) are criticizing the new bill placing new restrictions on the credit card industry, which passed the Senate by a 90-to-5 margin yesterday. Liberal bloggers (Hamsher, Cole, A.L.) are defending the bill.
• Conservative bloggers (Erickson 1, Erickson 2, Hawkins, Lopez) continue to criticize the NRSC for endorsing Gov. Charlie Crist over ex-state House Speaker Marco Rubio in the FL GOP Senate primary.

GUANTANAMO: Profiles In Cowardice

Liberal bloggers are furious that Senate Dems refused to provide the $80M that Obama requested to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. In their view, the Dems are only making themselves look weak by embracing the GOP's positions on national security issues:

• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "Dems seem to be afraid of the GOP attacks. It's frustrating to watch."
• Mother Jones' Kevin Drum: "I never expected Barack Obama to be anything other than pragmatic and center left. Still, I confess to feeling a little in the dumps lately over just how much he seems willing to bend and compromise on some key issues. But then I read things like this. [...] And I realize all over again just what Obama is up against. His own party won't support him against even the most transparent and insipid demagoguery coming from the conservative noise machine. The GOP's brain trust isn't offering even a hint of a substantive case that the U.S. Army can't safely keep a few dozen detainees behind bars in a military prison, but Dems are caving anyway. Because they're scared. And then they wonder why voters continue to think that a party that can be bitch slapped so easily might be viewed as weak on national security."
• BooMan: "For my entire life the Republicans have made a political living by arguing that the Democrats don't have what it takes to protect American interests and American security. I always thought they were full of shit. But the Democrats in the Senate are proving the Republicans right, and me wrong. Any organization that is afraid to house Gitmo prisoners in super-maximum security prisons within the United States (for real or political reasons) is too yellow-bellied to protect the United States. If this is all the guts the Democrats have, they should be voted out of power and the Republicans should be re-entrusted with our national security. At least with them, you know that they will fight. The idea that a proud and confident party would shrink from backing their own president on a matter of such profound national consequence because of the illogical and ridiculous fearmongering arguments being advanced by the Republicans is so far beneath my contempt that I cannot stomach it."
• dday: "The problem with Reid's obnoxious, intelligence-insulting backpedal, aside from how easily anyone can discern the party on offense from the party on defense, is that the entire Democratic Party has flat stopped making any argument about national security from the perspective of civil liberties and human rights, and how respecting both ultimately makes us safer. Even if Democrats believe it -- and most of them don't -- they either think it's too nuanced for the country to accept (wrong) or too easily demagogued by the hissy fit stirrers on the right (who are completely discredited). [...] This is not only a losing argument around the world, as the stars fall from their eyes when they witness the same distasteful policies wrapped up in a prettier package. It's also a lose POLITICALLY to strengthen the arguments of your opponents and alienate your supporters. I'm just a DFH who doesn't know how the world works, but it seems to me that the Democrats never succeeded by trying to take issues 'off the table,' only by confronting them and offering a better argument. I guess that makes me unserious."

On the other side of the blogosphere, conservative bloggers are mocking Senate Dems for caving:

• Hot Air's Allahpundit: "I'm embarrassed to admit I didn't grasp the politics of this initially because I didn't think they'd cave so quickly to the pro-Gitmo side; after watching them cave on waterboarding after 9/11 and then the Iraq war, I should have known they'd buckle once another tough security decision landed on their desks. They still want to close it -- eventually, just like [VA Sen.] Jim Webb. They're just suddenly wary of having hardcore terrorists in their own backyards -- again, just like Jim Webb. [...] Credit [OK Sen.] Jim Inhofe for making the Dems choke on this by pushing legislation prohibiting the transfer of detainees to the U.S."
• RedState's Moe Lane: "In light of this news, and in light of Harry Reid's declaration that the detainees should stay out of this country, I look forward to the White House's eventual declaration that actually Gitmo's been sufficiently reformed enough to be used after all. And I look forward even more to all the trained seals who will -- through gritted teeth, no doubt -- endorse such a wise and prudent move on the part of the President. Then again, what else can they do? Vote Republican?"

REID: He'll Protect You From The Terrorists That Obama Wants To Release In Your Backyard

Liberal bloggers were particularly incensed by Reid's statement that "we will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States":

• TalkLeft's TChris: "Has Reid decided, without the benefit of trials, that the 240 involuntary residents of Guantanamo are all terrorists? [...] Odds are that Reid isn't troubling himself with deep thought. Republicans are having fun scaring their constituents and Reid is playing along."
• Daily Kos' BarbinMD: "In announcing that Senate Democrats won't fund the closing of Guantanamo, Harry Reid fully embraced fear-mongering Republican talking points. Nice job, Harry."
• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "That was the best impression of a fearmongering Republican wingnut that I have seen in a long time."
• Salon's Glenn Greenwald: "Rather than scoff at the inane fear-mongering or point out simple facts to reveal its idiocy, Democratic 'leaders' such as Harry Reid echo the right-wing fears in order to prove how Serious and Tough they are -- in our political debates, the more frightened one is, the more Serious and Tough one is -- and/or because they are genuinely frightened of being called mean names by Sean Hannity ('Harry Reid isn't as scared of this as I am, which shows that he's weak')"
• Oliver Willis: "Why bother have a Democratic Majority Leader if he does stupid things like echo the dumbest of the dumbest Republican talking points on where Gitmo detainees are to be housed? Honestly, I'm surprised the Senate Dems have been able to push anything through with someone as limp as Reid in 'charge'."
• Obsidian Wings' hilzoy: "Oh, and Harry Reid? Try showing some courage. Try leadership. You never know; it just might suit you. This certainly doesn't. [...] I'm disgusted, and ashamed of my party."
• dday: "No doubt Reid's sudden lack of confidence in the federal prison system and trickle of piss tumbling down his pants has something to do with the low approval ratings coming out of Nevada. But more than that, he exhibits the exact same knee-jerk response to Republican fearmongering to which we've grown accustomed -- a weak-kneed backpedal displayed in the name of looking strong and tough."
• BooMan: "The President ran a campaign in which he promised repeatedly to close Guantanamo Bay and to treat the people there within traditional American practices of jurisprudence. He got no argument on that score from Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, or anyone else. But now that the Republicans are trying to frighten people about our ability to keep potentially violent criminals behind bars in this country of a bazillion prisons, Harry Reid is playing a different tune. Now he's a coward. Let me tell you something. This country doesn't need Harry Reid in Congress. We'll do just fine without him. We need him to show courage and help the president do what he promised to do. If he loses his seat as a result, so fucking what? That's what they call a Profile in Courage. There will be no new chapters dedicated to Harry Reid in the next edition of that book. He's a complete turncoat and an absolutely gutless fool. [...] Harry Reid is dead to me."

Meanwhile, conservative bloggers (Malkin, Lane, Antle, Geraghty) are buzzing about a new poll showing weak re-election numbers for Reid.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Who's Afraid Of A Public Plan?

Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias responds to the NC Blue Cross Blue Shield's attack on Obama's proposal to provide Americans with a gov't-sponsored health care option:

"The proposals currently before congress would not, of course, create a government-run health care system. There is, however, a proposal to create a health care system that would include a widely available public health insurance option. The point of this would be to try and see if private industry actually can do better then a government-run insurance plan. After all, if the public option offered rationing and low-quality care, why would anyone sign up for it? Nobody would. That kind of low-quality public option would give private insurance nothing to fear. But what they really fear isn't that a public option would be bad, it's that it would be good -- putting effective cost-controls in place without compromising patient care, thus threatening private industry's business model.

That, however, is one of the best ways at our disposal to make health reform really work. A public option that strives to achieve public goals -- quality care at an affordable price -- will challenge private industry to do a better job. Then competition between plans will drive improvements in quality and efficiency. Without a public option, the risk is that private plans will compete by trying to screen out sick patients. That's a viable root to private sector profits, but it does nothing to improve quality or control costs."

LEST WE FORGET: Texas Constructs U.S. Border Wall To Keep Out Unwanted Americans

From The Onion:

"WICHITA FALLS, TX -- Calling it an essential step toward securing the Texas border and protecting his people's way of life, Gov. Rick Perry announced Tuesday the completion of a 1,953-mile wall designed to keep out millions of unwanted Americans.

According to Perry, the 75-foot-high barricade running along the northern boundary is the culmination of more than 160 years of escalating tensions between Texas and the United States. Though a protective barrier has been under consideration for decades, the Texas Legislature voted unanimously to begin construction on the project immediately following the 2008 presidential election.

'As governor, it is my responsibility to do whatever's necessary to maintain the territorial integrity of Texas,' Perry told reporters during a press conference held inside a sniper tower overlooking Oklahoma. 'If you are a Texas citizen, you shouldn't have to worry about some American coming in here, using your goods and services, and taking away your job.'

'Let the record show I have nothing personal against Americans,' Perry added. 'I just think they should stay in America, where they belong.'"

Posted by Ian Faerstein at May 20, 2009 12:25 PM