Via the Telegraph: Will the Real Man Step Up?

I'm back (sort of) early in light of the President's Afghanistan address tomorrow. The Telegraph is asking the poignant question: "Will the true Barack Obama stand up on Afghanistan?" The answer is likely, no. He's more likely to try to find some sort of a balance point between all positions, and in so doing, may very well fail on one of the cardinal issues of his campaign. The President's decided tendency, when confronted with hard decisions (not unlike many commentators), is to vacillate, waiver and appease. Here is the President's policy statement on Afghanistan in February. Having found that he can't easily accomplish that policy, he is likely to announce tomorrow that he will increase troop levels by 34,000, with an exit strategy pegged at an 8 to 9 year commitment. The President seem likely to set his 'victory' bench marks at what he simply deems achievable. Jake Tapper (ABC News) pulled plenty of this magical-type of thinking out of Gibbs at today's press conference (although he got little in the way of concrete answers). Stay tuned for live blogging of the speech tomorrow.

On a Posting Break until December 2.

The ModCon is on a break while I finish submitting my dissertation proposal and some data analysis. I will return December 2.

UPDATES: Final Results

FINAL UPDATES: Hoffman lost to Owens by 2%, conceding early this morning. Interestingly, some of the same folks who refused to support the local RNC nominee for Hoffman, now appear to be setting their sites on a number of races, including next year's race in FL for Senate. The very moderate/neutral governor, Charlie Crist, has been dominating the headlines and cashflow in that race, but Mark Rubio (a much more conservative candidate) has been gaining ground. This might become the next battlefield in the fight over the direction of the GOP.

As noted here last night, both the Virginia and New Jersey governorships were handily won by Republican candidates. Whether this was a rebuke to Washington or simply voter unhappiness with the economy, seems to be simply a matter of perspective. Democrats are distancing themselves as fast as possible from Deeds and Corzine (despite calling in the big guns to run for them, including multiple, personal appearances by the President), while conservatives (both independent and party-affiliated) are drawing clear conclusions that this was the shot across the bow for Obama and the Democratic-led Congress.

UPDATE 7: Hoffman is down by only 3% now - things are tightening back up. Fox News has called NJ for Christie as well.

UPDATE 6: Hoffman is down by 7% right now.

UPDATE 5: AP Mobile Updates is calling New Jersey for Christie! NJ turns red again. Here's why.

UPDATE 4: Nearly 70% of the precincts have reported in for NJ, and Christie is still up by 6%.

UPDATE 3: With 60% of NJ precincts reporting, Christie is maintaining a 6% lead over Corzine.

UPDATE 2: Right Pundit's is calling it for Hoffman over Owens in New York's 23d Congressional District. This give a victory not just to the GOP, but to the more conservative wing of the GOP which pushed for Hoffman as a candidate for the Conservative Party over the approved GOP candidate.

UPDATE 1: NJ.com and the Star -Ledger are reporting that with 58% of precincts reporting, Christie is up by 50% to Corzine's 44%. A big Republican sweep is looking possible.

The White House downplayed the possibility of a Republican sweep in three important races today: the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey and a traditionally Republican Congressional district in New York.

'"We don't look at either of the gubernatorial races or the congressional race as something that portends a lot for our legislative efforts going forward or our political prospects in 2010," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said at his daily briefing.'

This would be more believable if it weren't for the near certainty that today's briefing would have attributed likely Democratic wins to the overwhelming success of President Obama's policies. The trouble for the White House is that they can't tout that success, so the next best option is to distance themselves from the very candidates that the President has been zealously promoting.

Current results put Bob McDonnell (R) as handily winning the Virginia governor's race by 60%+ to 35%+, far larger than the predicted margin of victory. The latest exit polling has no clear winner for either New Jersey or the 23d district in New York. Exit polling in NJ indicate little influence by President Obama on voter decision-making, and the results in generally blue state will probably be very attributed to the party with the best voter turnout. Currently, Christie (R-challenger) is leading in the exit polls, but with only .003% of polls reporting. Clearly it's going to be a long night in New Jersey. Meanwhile, Hoffman (C) appears on track to win the 23 Congressional district in New York over Owens (D), despite a very late endorsement by the GOP following the withdrawal of the approved Republican candidate, Scozzafava (who subsequently endorsed Owens).

Regardless of the final results, tonight's results will most likely result from a combination of voter dissatisfaction with the administration policies as well as general discontent with the economy (particularly the jobs and property markets). If all three races swing conservative, then it seems likely that a message is being sent. Whether that message is a general cry for help or a cry of anger against the President remains to be seen.

Does the White House Know How to Strategize?

This is third week in a row that Jake Tapper (ABC News) seems utterly mystified at the lack of any real strategy originating from the White House for any of the administration's major policy initiatives.

'TAPPER: Robert, is it the opinion of this White House -- has it been conveyed by this White House to Senate Democrats that the trigger mechanism for the public option would be a better way to get to 60 votes than the opt-in provision?

GIBBS: The President, when Senate Democrats were here last week, the President listened to what their strategy was for moving health care forward.

TAPPER: Robert, did he convey to them, one way or another, what he thought would be a more likely way to get the bill passed?

GIBBS: We listened to what their thoughts were there in the Senate and wanted to hear their strategy.

TAPPER: Seriously, you're not -- okay, so you listened, but the President didn't convey any --

GIBBS: Not that I'm aware of, no.

-jpt'

It would be funny if it weren't so disconcerting.

Vote for Freedom of the Press

Whether you like or dislike the commentary on the Fox cable channel, their news division is out there gathering and reporting on the news just like any other news division. And yet, the White House is trying to treat them like a political enemy. Freedom of the press is one of the most cherished rights in the country, and no administration has the right (or is right) to try to suppress that freedom. Despite some fairly large ideological gulfs between various news agency members, many in the press are rallying to the side of Fox News in defense against the silly (and at times self-demeaning) attacks by the White House. Apparently, the White House thinks that this issue that's not going away any time soon, but I have to wonder why an administration facing so many grave and important decisions is spending its time trying to squelch unfavorable coverage.

The NPR News Blog has a short survey on this issue if you care to vote.

Iran Dithering Over Proposals

While Iran is permitting inspections of the recently -revealed nuclear processing site, near Qom, to go forward, it is by no means certain that it will accept the proposed deal to allow France and Russia to finalize fuel processing. The proposal would ship, either in stages or in bulk, all of Iran's nuclear fuel to Russia and France for final reprocessing. The two countries would ensure that fuel was processed only to the extent required for nuclear medicine. Major concerns about the ability of Iran to either hide reprocessing or to simply continue processing unshipped material (in the case of piecemeal shipments) abound. France has warned that Iran does not seem to be bargaining in good faith, and that it will drag the negotiations out until the process is meaningless. This was born out last week by Iran's decision to postpone a decision. Also of concern is Russia's on-again, off-again bargaining with Iran to directly ship uranium to the country. Whether or not Russian can be relied upon as a partner in this process remains to be seen.

President Obama has stated that Iran is 'on notice to comply' with the plant inspections and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This kind of 'bold' rhetoric has yet to produce results in North Korea, Pakistan or really any country the President has put on notice. It's doubtful that Iran will take much notice of the warnings without some real consequences on the table. France openly scoffed at this language during the G-20 summit, and Russia declared it unhelpful. President Sarkozy seems to have backed off some vis/vis President Obama, holding a telephone conversation yesterday with Obama on Iran, but continues to predict that direct actions (either through strengthened sanctions or turning a blind eye to Israeli action) may be necessary.

UPDATED: No We Won't - Oh Wait, We Will

UPDATE 1: Link here to an interesting editorial on a better use for White House talent.

After throwing the equivalent of a four-year old's tantrum over the posturings of puffed-up opinion commentary on Fox, the White House has decided that it might be in its best interest to allow Administration officials to appear on Fox News shows after all. In the last posting, I discussed the increasingly partisan, and over-hyped coverage on all of the cable news shows (of course, both the left and the right have long concluded that media bias is rampant), and the increasingly competition between the various outlets.

What seems particularly ridiculous is the personal offense the White House seems to feel whenever Beck or Hannity goes off on a rant. I feel little sympathy for much of the sentiment behind those rants, but the President is supposed to be a little thicker-skinned than this. So what is Beck says something ludicrous - ignore it if possible, or rebut with facts. Don't scream, yell and cry for Momma. Like all modern politicians, Obama has made full use of the media when it suits his purposes, even 'permitting' ABC to broadcast, from the White House, a full-throated defense of his approach to health care reform. When the President of the United States engages in a particular attack on one media outlet, ignoring the bias of the very outlet on which those accusations are made (by proxy), he looks the fool.

Cable News Wars Heats Up

CNN aired an ad in the South Florida market tonight with a voice-over by a woman calling herself "... a lifelong Democrat." In the spare ad, she states that she listens to CNN's Anderson Cooper (AC360) because she knows that he "... holds right-wing Republican Congressmen ..." accountable when they "lie." Nothing in the ad says anything about holding left-wing politicians who lie accountable. One comes away with the impression that CNN is now firmly a Democratic organ. The ad is not yet available on the Internet, but will be posted here when it is.

This ad seems to be part of a larger trend for the cable news networks to directly attack each other, head-to-head. Most recently, Fox News and CNN have gone after each other over coverage of the 9-12 (Tea Party) protest in Washington, D.C. on September 12. Both networks covered the protests fairly extensively (having spent part of the day going back and forth between the coverage, my own estimation was that while Fox spent more time and resources on the coverage, both networks covered the event extensively). Fox took out an ad stating that all of the major news networks, including CNN, missed covering the event altogether. Most of the other networks mentioned the event, but did little coverage, but CNN was incensed to be included among this group, and fired back with an ad and reporting directly accusing Fox of lying.

MSNBC aired an ad early in the year, attacking both CNN and Fox, implying that they both were distorting the facts, and siding with (by implication) the Bush Administration. Both networks fired back immediately.

It's difficult to know what to think of these tit-for-tat attacks between the networks, although it does seem clear that most news networks are increasingly turning to new interpretation rather than straight reporting. Once thing seems certain: the conflict is going to continue to heat up for now.

Updated: At Least the Swiss Have Spine

Update 2: Poland and France seem to be backing off its support for the pig (actually, that's an insult to innocent pigs everywhere, but words fail me when it comes to people like him).

UPDATE 1: What makes Poland's objections to the Polanski arrest so strange, is its recent passage of a law requiring the chemical castration of pedophiles prior to release from prison. That's actually a law I would strongly consider supporting (not that Congress would ever countenance such a move, particularly as certain members have engaged in something close), but it seems a tad hypocritical given Polanski's admitted crime.

The Swiss government has rejected an appeal to release Roman Polanski, and has urged the court hearing the extradition request by the United States to do the same. Fortunately, the Swiss seem to be a little more stable than the Hollywood crowd that clamored for Polanski's release, on the grounds that his art outweighs his crime of drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. They also seem to be paying little heed to the French and Polish officials who are behaving as if child-rape is no big deal. From the perspective of 'middle-America' (otherwise known as flyover land) the Swiss are now the protectors of middle-American virtues and common sense. If only Hollywood would reflect even a tithe of that sense.

John Kerry Serving at the Pleasure of His Own Ego

Sen. Kerry is now advocating that President Obama take a good deal of time in deciding whether or not to resource Gen. McChrystal's request for additional troops. McChrystal's analysis of the situation on the ground is fully backed by Gen. Petraeus and Adm. Mullen, who are dealing directly with the mission that was given to them by the President this year. Kerry seems to blame the military leadership for being so bold as to request the resources necessary to fill that mission. Morning Edition reported today on Kerry's 'helpful' suggestion to listen to those ready to challenge 'the Generals,' calling the military leadership "... a lot of yes people who are there to serve at the pleasure of the wrong choice."

Besides being thoroughly insulting to the professional military, Kerry's new position is in direct contrast to the one he held up until a couple of months ago. Apparently calling for something, and being responsible for sourcing it, are two very different things to the Senator.

Student Protests in Tehran

Over one thousand students participated in demonstrations, yesterday at Tehran University and today at Sharif University, as the new semester got underway. 'Iranian Education Minister Kamren Daneshju was visiting Sharif University at the time to mark the new academic year.' They aren't giving up.

Cross-Posting from Revolutionary Road (quoting article from BBC):

Tehran students protest on campus

Today at 10:53am

'BBC:Students in Iran have demonstrated against the government at Tehran University on the first day of the new academic year. Footage posted on websites showed several hundred people chanting slogans against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Eyewitnesses said students were not allowed into an official ceremony attended by a government minister to mark the start of term. Reports say a large number of police officers were in the area. One eyewitness, Mehdi, told BBC Persian that around 200-300 people had gathered in Tehran university by 1030 local time. "Demonstrators were holding up green balloons and chanting slogans such as 'Government of the coup, resign! Resign!' and 'Down with the dictator'," he said. A counter demonstration was staged by supporters of the president, who was re-elected in a disputed election in June. There were no reports of clashes between the two factions. In the aftermath of the election, Iran witnessed widespread anti-government demonstrations alleging vote-rigging and calling for a re-run of elections. Correspondents says sporadic clashes and arrests since then have underlined how deep and unresolved the crisis and divisions in Iran remain. Government and security forces have cracked down hard on the protests and have initiated mass trials of leading figures in the reform movement who supported Mr Ahmadinejad's rivals for the presidency.'

UPDATES: Is Gen. McChrystal Being Muzzled?

UPDATE 1: Defense Secretary Gates has said that he will formally receive Gen. McChrystal's troop request by the end of the week, but that the report will stop there until the President and his staff are 'ready to consider it.' Apparently, doing more than one thing at a time only goes so far. Meanwhile, Gen. McChrystal has stated that there is no rift between he and the White House, and that he welcomes the debate. He also warns that taking too long to decide on the troop request will, in essence, be a decision to lose any hope of defeating the Taliban. Hopefully, we'll have a decision in two weeks, after the UN and G20 hoopla are over, but I'm not holding my breath.

From Gen. McChrystal's report to the President:

'"The situation in Afghanistan is serious; neither success nor failure can be taken for granted. Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall situation is deteriorating. We face not only a resilient and growing insurgency; there is also a crisis of confidence among Afghans in both their government and the international community that undermines our credibility and emboldens the insurgents. Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align with us against the insurgents.

"Success is achievable, but it will not be attained simply by trying harder or 'doubling down' on the previous strategy. Additional resources are required, but focusing on force or resource requirements misses the point entirely. The key take away from this assessment is the urgent need for significant change to our strategy and the way that we think and operate."'

The problem may be that the President is too boxed in by promises on Afghanistan, health care, stimulus-spending, and most especially, his party supporters, too develop a coherent and winning strategy.

'Obama, who issued a new war strategy for Afghanistan just six months ago, has signaled he will change it again.

"One of the things that I'm absolutely clear about is you have to get the strategy right and then make the determinations about resources," he said last week. "You don't make determinations about resources, and certainly you don't make determinations about sending young men and women into battle, without having absolute clarity about what the strategy's going to be."

Anthony Cordesman, a Center for Strategic and International Studies analyst who went to Afghanistan, has rebuked the White House for vetoing McChrystal's request before it even arrives.

"Quite frankly, it would probably be just as well if people in the National Security Council and the White House made their judgments after they get the assessment they need rather than try to resource constrain an assessment in a way that can lose the war," he told reporters.'

Compare this thinking with the 'new' strategy on Afghanistan issued in March:

'So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just.'

There's just no way to do (and pay for) it all. Gen. McChrystal is probably feeling like he has a target painted on his back right about now, and that's the wrong approach. He was given a mission (albeit a vague and self-contradictory one), and has given his professional assessment as to the best way to meet that mission successfully. Now political game-playing seems to be cutting his legs out from under him. When commentators wonder if Afghanistan is the new Vietnam, they may be right, but not in the way they're thinking. Our involvement in Vietnam would have been far more successful, if Congress had not constantly tampered with the mission, and the means by which that mission was resourced and fulfilled. If the same tendency toward 'mission-creep' grips this Congress and White House, Afghanistan will indeed resemble Vietnam. The President needs to clearly state his mission objectives for Afghanistan, properly resource those objectives per the recommendations of the professional tasked with carrying them out, and then let those professional succeed. Anything less is disingenuous.

The Color Purple

Resurgent Republic has published the results of an extensive polling of self-identified Independent voters, with an eye to the 2010 elections. As has been evidenced in a number of recent polls, these voters (who are often the determining factor in national election cycles) still like President Obama, and generally support him. Support for specific policies however, is steadily slipping, particularly as pertains to fiscal policies.
The most intriguing results related to questions about support for Congress that were aimed at predicting outcomes in the 2010 Congressional election cycle. Here, Independents are generally united - they want to throw the bums out. Charlie Cook writes about these results in the National Journal Magazine.

'A whopping 48 of those Democrats -- eight more than the size of their party's majority -- are from districts that voted for both Bush and McCain. That America is very different from the Democratic base in blue America, and it sees many major issues very differently.

Resurgent Republic's findings corroborate a growing view that the cumulative impact of Democratic missteps has reached a critical mass, with Obama receiving some damage and with Democrats in Congress and the Democratic Party receiving much more. Critics point to the Troubled Asset Relief Program; the takeovers of banks and auto companies; an economic stimulus package that they see as ineffectual and stuffed with pork; and climate-change and health care reform efforts as all being contributing factors to Democrats' decline.

The 17-point advantage that Democrats enjoyed in the January Gallup Poll (when "leaners" were included) shrank to 5 points in August. Their edge on the generic congressional ballot test has vanished, according to most national polls. For three years, Democrats enjoyed high single-digit or low double-digit leads on this question -- a very good indicator of which direction (and how hard) the political winds are blowing as a congressional election nears.

What we are seeing is an electorate growing just as disgusted with the Democratic majority as it did with the Republican one in 2006. The mounting ethics problems of House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., combined with ongoing allegations about House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha, D-Pa., and others on his panel threaten to make matters still worse for their party.'

The poll results also match up with other polling, which consistently place the Republican brand within the statistical margin of error of the Democrats. In general Congress is strongly disfavored across the board. The running average reflected in the daily RCP average has consistently placed Congressional approval at -30 or lower for an extended period. Since January, no single poll has placed the Congressional approval at better than -15. This does not bode well for the 2010 election cycle. Looking at these results, it's doubtful that the Republicans can regain either the House or the Senate (after all, some of them are the bums that voters want to shed), but 29-37 House seats, and several Senate seats up for re-election (think Reid and Dodd), are vulnerable. We may end up with a deadlock in Congress starting next January, and that may be the best thing for the country. It would force bipartisanship to accomplish anything, and would push the President toward the centrality he campaigned on. Purple states (and voters) may lead the way next year.

Poll	Date				Approve			Disapprove		Spread
FOX News	9/15 - 9/16				27			64		-37
Associated Press/GfK	9/3 - 9/8				28			69		-41
Gallup	8/31 - 9/2				31			63		-32
CBS News	8/27 - 8/31				26			58		-32

See All Congressional Job Approval Polling Data

UPDATED: A Pox On All

Update 1: As expected, the sanction of Rep. Wilson passed the House on a largely partisan basis. The hyperbole involved was enough to choke a horse. Hypocrisy marches on.

For all I know, the sanction of Rep. Wilson for the shout heard 'round the world last week, is fully justified. What's bothering me is the sheer hypocrisy. Democrats loudly booed, hissed and called out at President Bush during the 2004 and 2005 State of the Union addresses. Sen. Reid famously called Bush a loser and a liar (several times) later apologizing via a surrogate. Nancy Pelosi is refuses to sanction or take the gavel from Rangel, despite multiple investigations into tax evasion and corruption, but she'll happily sanction a man who did what she herself participated in a few years ago? This is the very definition of political hypocrisy and the reason so many voters say 'a pox on both your houses.

UPDATED: Iran Starts Fifth Trial over Post-Election Unrest - Cross-Post

UPDATE 1: We'll talk .... about anything that doesn't matter to you.

(cross-posted from Revolutionary Road).

Iran starts fifth trial over post-election unrest

Share

Today at 7:05am

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran began a new trial Monday of people accused of fomenting street unrest after a disputed presidential election three months ago, official media reported.

Six people were in the dock for Monday's court session, including a well-known student activist, Abdollah Momeni, the IRNA news agency said.

Iran last month began four mass trials over post-election events against more than 100 people, including senior reformers and former government officials, charged with orchestrating opposition protests in a bid to undermine the Islamic Republic.

The opposition has denounced the court sessions as "show trials." Reformist former President Mohammad Khatami last month said trial confessions by moderates were made in "extraordinary conditions" and were invalid.

The June election, which was followed by huge opposition protests, plunged Iran into political turmoil and exposed deepening divisions within its ruling elites.

The opposition says more than 70 people were killed in the unrest. Officials estimate the death toll at up to 36 people including members of the Islamic Basij militia, which helped the elite Revolutionary Guards quell the protests.

"The fifth ... trial of detainees accused of recent unrest and riots began in Tehran's Revolutionary Court this morning," IRNA said.

"Six people accused of being involved in the recent Tehran unrest appeared in the dock in the presence of their lawyers," it added.

An indictment read out at the trial appeared to focus on "false reports" spread via the Internet in a bid to stir unrest.

"The Islamic revolution of Iran has always been facing psychological warfare and destructive propaganda ... by internal and external enemies," it said, suggesting U.S. financial support for such activity.

"They (Iran's enemies) have used all the latest technology to reach their aims, including the Internet," the ISNA news agency quoted the indictment as saying. "It was one of the important methods to provoke the people ... "

The election and its turbulent aftermath plunged Iran into deep internal crisis. Rights groups say thousands of people, including senior pro-reform figures, were arrested after the poll, though most have been freed.

The moderate opposition says the June 12 poll was rigged to secure President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election. The authorities deny it.

Hardliners have portrayed the opposition protests as a foreign-backed bid to undermine the Islamic government system.

(Writing and additional reporting by Fredrik Dahl; editing by Matthew Jones)

Call to Remembrance

We remember so many people today whose lives were set on a new course eight years ago. My friend, Todd Beamer, who was a year behind me at Wheaton College is first among them for me. He reminded us all that even in death, one can change lives and live out faith. We also remember the many who died at the Pentagon that day and subsequently, and in New York City. I remember these men and women, the members of the IL-ARNG 1544th Transportation Company, and all who have sacrificed over the last eight years.

Some suggested actions: sponsor a Gold Star Family, donate to TAPS, or sponsor a memorial site, or participate in a memorial.

The first video below is written as a request for forgiveness, but the lyrics have haunted me since learning it days after the 9/11 attacks. The second is from the Brahm's 'A German Requiem.'

No Labor on Labor Day

A rather grim assessment of the job market on Labor Day:

'-- The unemployment and "underemployment" rate is 16.8 percent -- this includes the officially unemployed plus all part-time workers who'd prefer full-time jobs, as well as discouraged and demoralized job-seekers who have stopped looking for work. ... What's most ominous is not today's job market; it's the outlook. After the 1981-82 recession, unemployment dropped steadily from an annual average of 9.7 percent in 1982 to 7.5 percent in 1984 and 5.5 percent in 1988. The descent this time is expected to be much slower. In 2014, the unemployment rate will still average 7.6 percent, forecasts IHS Global Insight, which predicts a peak of 10 percent early next year. Reducing unemployment requires an economic expansion fast enough to absorb today's jobless plus the natural growth of the labor force. Most forecasters expect a tepid recovery will only gradually dent unemployment, despite slowing labor force growth. "The 1982 recession was largely caused by the desire to break the back of inflation," says economist Nigel Gault of IHS. "Once the (Federal Reserve) was comfortable it had broken inflation, it lowered interest rates, and economic growth took off." Interest-sensitive sectors -- autos and housing -- propelled recovery. By contrast, today's slump results from financial crisis, Gault says. The Fed has already cut interest rates, which will probably go up. As overborrowed households repay debt, their spending will be sluggish. The weak recovery then retards new jobs.'

The data in the article are backed by the September 4 release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. At best, we may be seeing a very slow recovery - at worst, a jobless one.

How Many Czars Does it Take to Screw in a Lightbulb?

(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/CHRPOD/ICN10109019801~Portrait-of-a-Man-Said-to-Be-Tsar-Peter-the-Great-1672-1725-Posters.jpg)

Yup, we've got yet another Czar appointment, although we lost one in the middle of the night (Van Jones). How many of these officially paid and appointed, but not Senate-approved, officials are we going to have (currently 28-34 depending on accounting)? It feels almost as if we're getting a whole fourth branch of government that is outside the normal checks and balances system.

'President Barack Obama is to name auto adviser Ron Bloom as the administration's manufacturing czar Monday, responsible for creating policies to boost the long-struggling industries. Bloom will keep his responsibilities overseeing Obama's auto task force, which has shrunk dramatically since General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC emerged from bankruptcy.

"Ron has the knowledge and experience necessary to lead the way in creating the good-paying manufacturing jobs of the future," Obama said in a statement.

The White House said Bloom would work with the departments of treasury, energy, commerce and labor to put manufacturing policies into place and develop new programs.'

Calls for Rangel to Step Down from Chairmanship

Jackie Kucinich reports at Roll Call that Rep. Boehner has asked that Rep. Rangel step down while ethics investigations into Rangel's serial memory problems are ongoing.

'Boehner’s request comes a week after reports that Rangel failed to disclose $600,000 in assets as well as tens of thousands of dollars in income on his 2007 financial disclosures. ...

“As chairman of the powerful House committee, entrusted with the responsibility of writing the tax laws that affect every law-abiding American citizen, you, along with the Speaker and other leaders of the majority party, have an obligation to help set the pace when it comes to standards of official conduct,” Boehner wrote. “By relinquishing the gavel voluntarily while the Ethics panel does its work, you would demonstrate your respect for this obligation.”

A spokesman for Rangel said Republican attempts to remove Rangel from his post are ill-timed, saying the ethics committee should be allowed to finish its investigation.

“Congress has a comprehensive, bipartisan process for reviewing any allegations made against a Member — the House ethics committee. Chairman Rangel himself initiated the request for the committee to review the allegations made against him,” the spokesman said. “Any action by the Minority Leader or others to prejudge the outcome of that bipartisan process would unfairly undermine the work of the ethics committee.”'

Rangel has repeatedly been under the gun for 'forgetting' to disclose numerous funding sources and to pay taxes, and has been protected by the House Democrats from investigations until recently. While the Ethics Committee is now formally investigating Rangel, Speaker Pelosi has stated that she will not discipline him unless and until he is found guilty by the committee. Perhaps the strangest aspect to this entire matter are the tough and punitive IRS rules, slipped into the health care bill, which would target even accidental tax violators. So far, he's unwilling to put himself through the same ringer he's demanding that other taxpayers be put through.

'Rangel's bill would:

* Punish those who fail to alert the IRS to potentially questionable tax exemptions.

* Bar the IRS from waiving penalties against taxpayers who clearly erred in good faith.

* Double fines in certain circumstances.

"The bill raises penalties and eliminates many of the reasonable defenses that taxpayers have always been able to use when honest mistakes are uncovered," one lawyer told The Post.

In fact, the bill increases fines "in some cases even for honest mistakes," the expert added.

Republicans yesterday ripped Rangel's attempt to go after taxpayers, given his own failure to pay taxes on rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic and his extensive reporting problems with his financial-disclosure statements to Congress'

Perhaps the Vice-President Needs a Personal Fact-Checker

(or at least someone to stop him from rambling on and on).

Vice-President Biden's robust defense of the stimulus package yesterday, raised some eyebrows when the glowing report mentioned nothing of the myriad of complaints coming from those who are supposed recipients of the funding:

'Biden, Obama's chief stimulus cheerleader, proudly pointed to more than 2,200 highway projects Thursday funded by the program, but didn't mention the growing frustration among contractors that infrastructure money is only trickling out and thus far hasn't delivered the needed boost in jobs. ...

Transportation Department Inspector General Calvin Scovel said last month he will examine the Federal Aviation Administration's process for selecting programs for the $1.1 billion in grant money. His announcement came after his office discovered that the Obama administration used stimulus money to pay for 50 airport projects that didn't meet the grant criteria and approved projects at four airports with a history of mismanaging federal grants.

And Biden praised the more than 2,400 military construction projects paid for with stimulus money, but ignored the millions of dollars in savings the Defense Department lost because it hasn't competitively bid many of the jobs.

The Defense Department frequently awards no-bid work to small contractors for repairs at military bases under the stimulus, costing taxpayers millions of dollars more than when businesses compete for the work, an Associated Press analysis of 570 such contracts found.'

The problem is, the stimulus was supposed to be a quick shot in the arm to protect against rising jobless rates, and boost spending. While the rate of unemployment growth has fallen, total jobless numbers continue to rise, hitting 9.7% nationally by the end of August. And, as Biden himself acknowledged, the final implementation of the stimulus will be rather slow (stretching out over two years by most estimates). There doesn't seem to much point to a stimulus that doesn't stimulate in the short run. After that point, the economy would be expected to slowly recover on its own.