Above: President Obama removes one of terrorism’s biggest recruiting tools.

Read about it here, & a discussion about whether it’s the right thing here.

Today I heard Rush Limbaugh on the radio call this move a “political” one.

To which I say: well, duh.

But not ‘political’ in the way Rush is meaning (appeasing the left).

For too long we have failed to capitalize on the United States of America’s greatest weapon: the idea behind this country & the ideals it champions.

The Guantanamo Bay prison represented a step off of the path of those ideals. It said loudly to the world, “do as we say - not as we do.” Closing the prison sends a - yes, political - message around the world that we are better than that. & that our legal system can be effective in terms of meting out justice - even against those who would call for our destruction.

Some discussion on Talk 102.3 this morning brought to mind an analogy. Styles, et al were discussing what to do with the Guantanamo prisoners - & how we can’t have them mingle with the “normal” prison population, because they wouldn’t last longer than 2 seconds. They noted that America-bombers & child rapists are subject to the prisoners’ “own form of justice.”

That’s a perfect way of looking at the mindset behind the creation of Guantanamo.

The problem with the system is that it doesn’t leave room for justice. It keeps terrorist suspects off the streets .. but because we’ve thrown them down a legal rabbit hole, one that’s in my view ultimately self-defeating, many of the legitimate terror cases will never be given true justice.

Closing Guantanamo takes away a terrorist recruitment tool, & joins the battle where it really should be fought, & ultimately will be won - not in a physical location, but rather inside the minds of everyone around the world.

& there’s nothing that says we can’t hold a suspect extra-legally. But those cases should be both temporary & reserved for the very few, ones which we have clear-cut evidence on, & not just people picked up off the battlefield, or arrested in cases of mistaken identities who have languished in Gitmo hell for years.

We as a people are far smarter than that, & it’s a breath of fresh air to have someone in charge who realizes this.

(I should also note that I have the utmost confidence we are perfectly capable of housing these prisoners on U.S. soil. The fears of “well, what if we have a prison break?” can be dispelled if you think through logically the scenario about exactly how much damage a person in handcuffs & an orange jumpsuit could really do while on the run).

We need to have faith in our country, & the multitude of legal precedents of our criminal justice system.

We should not be afraid to try these cases based on evidence & the rule of law, & the rights that our Founding Fathers believed to be inalienable - not just to American citizens, but to the entire human race.

I, for one, would rather die while upholding my great country’s ideals than give those ideals up in the name of security.

FURTHER READING:

RedState says of Rep. Jack Murtha’s offer to house the Gitmo detainees in his district:

“I’m sure the people of his district are ready to greet Khalid Sheikh Mohammed with open arms and casseroles.”

How classy. & what’s your solution, again?

Newshoggers says of Bush’s choice to go outside our legal system:

If they’d just stuck with the existing definitions, all the Gitmo detainees against whom they could build a real case under the actual rules of law, without torture and without rigging the courts, would have been tried as POW’s already. If found guilty, the death penalty would have been warranted in some cases. I would personally have had no problem with that. That it hasn’t happened is a failure of the Bush administration, no-one else. They have proven themselves incompetent to shepherd America’s national security.

& Andrew Sullivan says

“Housing detainees in the US might not be the politically safe thing to do, but it is the only ethical and lawful action. I don’t see why American prisons are incapable of handing Gitmo detainees – they house domestic terrorists already. And how housing detainees in maximum security prisons impacts the American citizens residing nearby is beyond me.

…

What do we gain by keeping detainees at Gitmo? I understand that Republicans might find some political advantage in opposing Gitmo’s closure, but don’t see a logical reason for keeping it open. Trying detainees won’t appear legitimate unless we bring them under the American system, and if we do that some very bad men will go free. But that is Bush’s failing, not Obama’s. This was inevitable the minute the Bush administration decided to authorize torture.”

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

“It would be absurd for a ideologically-motivated publication to turn down a shot at political influence to preserve its sense of purity…. But it’s still worth noting that this is roughly how the Bush Administration treated the conservative media - rolling out scoops to partisan outlets, wooing right-wing media types with Presidential face-time, bypassing mainstream outlets in favor of talk radio and Fox News, and so forth. And in the long run, it was good for neither the Bushies nor for conservatism. ”

So far, from what I’ve seen, I don’t expect the President to follow his predecessor’s (all-too-easy) media path.

Watch a discussion expanding on this topic between Douthat & Matthew Yglesias (across ideological lines, if you’re not familiar with them) here.

Earlier on this blog: Another warning to the media on the perils of complacemency.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

[Above: Sunrise, Worth County, Missouri, August, 1975. Photo by my father.]

Click here to view the embedded video.

“The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

This is fantastic news, & should be celebrated by anyone in favor of accountability in all levels of government.

This new tone set by the highest office-holder in the land will hopefully trickle down to the level where NewsChannel 9 reporters & producers live, & will end the end help make our jobs - keeping our government officials honest about what they do in your name - easier.

But it’s not just we journalists who benefit. You, the citizen, do as well.

Many government institutions - state, county, city, & school - have often taken advantage of your ignorance of your rights.

Here’s a link (PDF file) to what your rights are in regards to open records in Tennessee.

& here’s a link (PDF file) to what your rights are in regards to open records in Georgia.

This site has plenty of tools for you to take your own action - not just wait for us to do so.

This development marks a hopeful day for the country.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

“7. The watchdogs are dozing.

The big media companies that once invested in serious accountability journalism are shells of their former selves. The Tribune Co. — in other words, the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune — has slashed its Washington staff by more than half. Newspaper chains such as Cox are fleeing D.C. altogether.

The end result: There are few reporters in this country doing the kind of investigative reporting that hold government officials’ feet to the fire. Think back eight years to the pre-Iraq war reporting and consider the words of Scott McClellan in his otherwise humdrum book.

“The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise,” McClellan wrote. “In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.”

Rigorous reporting is even more important when you have one-party rule in Washington. Democrats, like Republicans, are simply less likely to scrutinize a president of their own. The end result here: Don’t expect the Democratic Congress to investigate the Obama administration or hold a bunch of tough oversight hearings. That means the only real check on Obama is the same one it’s always been — the voters.”

George W. Bush’s was (in part) a failed presidency because of enablers in the media & (particularly) his own party.

This is one mistake we should never repeat.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

(image by Matt Brunson)

Why not pit these 1st 100 days against the grandaddy “100 Days” of them all?

I hope I can follow through & do all 100.

What I plan is this:

Each literal day of the Obama administration will be compared to the corresponding day of FDR’s 1st term. I don’t have exact data for each of the 1933 days but I’m sure it’s out there somewhere on the internets.

I will (try to) post on the day after the ‘day’ in question.

Meaning, yesterday, for both candidates, was Day 1:

Day 1, 1933

Click here to view the embedded video.

Day 1, 2009

Click here to view the embedded video. Click here to view the embedded video.

Both men have ‘groundbreaking’ presidencies - FDR’s for the disabled (though not disclosed at the time) & Obama’s for his skin color. So they cancel each other out there.

Both men came to power in times of great economic crisis, though folks were much, much worse off in March of 1933.

The U.S. was not at war in 1933, but is involved in 2 wars in 2009.

FDR’s line “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself” does not, in my view, have a comparable line in Obama’s speech.

BUT–

FDR loses points - & Obama gets a head-start on this competition - for doing absolutely nothing to help address the crisis with his predecessor. For four months he literally avoided the pleas for help from President Hoover, in order to make his actions look far more consequential. But during that 4-month period (the last time such a gap between election & inauguration existed) the crisis only became worse. By contrast, the transition between President Bush & President Obama was by far the most seamless on record, & the two men bent over backwards to make it so, to both of their credit.

Therefore:

Winner of Day 1: Barack Obama

Further reading: compare several presidents’ “1st 100 Days” here.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Check it out here.

It’s added to this blog’s blogroll.

From the 1st post:

“Our initial new media efforts will center around three priorities:

Communication — Americans are eager for information about the state of the economy, national security and a host of other issues. This site will feature timely and in-depth content meant to keep everyone up-to-date and educated. Check out the briefing room, keep tabs on the blog (RSS feed) and take a moment to sign up for e-mail updates from the President and his administration so you can be sure to know about major announcements and decisions.

Transparency – President Obama has committed to making his administration the most open and transparent in history, and WhiteHouse.gov will play a major role in delivering on that promise. The President’s executive orders and proclamations will be published for everyone to review, and that’s just the beginning of our efforts to provide a window for all Americans into the business of the government. You can also learn about some of the senior leadership in the new administration and about the President’s policy priorities.

Participation — President Obama started his career as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where he saw firsthand what people can do when they come together for a common cause. Citizen participation will be a priority for the Administration, and the internet will play an important role in that. One significant addition to WhiteHouse.gov reflects a campaign promise from the President: we will publish all non-emergency legislation to the website for five days, and allow the public to review and comment before the President signs it.”

& all kidding aside about the above illustration, there is an Abraham Lincoln blog that’s worth checking out.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

“Pheasants Forever (PF) has learned the new President of the United States, Barack Obama, will dine on pheasant today at the inaugural luncheon. The President will be joined by new Vice President Joe Biden, both families, the Supreme Court, as well as the incoming Cabinet and Congress.

“I’m not a guy that believes in signs, but I am pleased to learn our new President has a taste for pheasant; our favorite bird,” said Dave Nomsen, PF’s Vice President of Government Affairs. In an unprecedented show of support for conservation, Obama’s transition team held three meetings with Nomsen and other conservation leaders since his November election victory. Those meetings have focused on the country’s top conservation issues, including the future of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and global climate change.”

More details on yesterday’s lunch menu here.

[Pictured in this post: the pheasant hunters of my family. Top: my late father-in-law & two brothers-in-law, January 1982. Bottom: my father, October, 1970.]

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Above: that horribly mangled & awkward Oath of Office.

NBC and ABC say the flub was Roberts’, while the AP says it was Obama’s.

Chris Wallace wonders:

Click here to view the embedded video.

But calm down, though.

Language Log parses:

“In the embedded clause of the oath, the adverb faithfully is properly positioned after the auxiliary will (1). If you miss the adverb as it is placed in the official wording, you have two more chances for inserting it in a coherent fashion: placing faithfully after the verb execute (2) or placing it at the end of the clause (3):

that I will 1 execute 2 the office of President of the United States 3

Roberts does indeed miss his opportunity to put faithfully in position 1, perhaps thrown by Obama repeating the opening phrase of the oath earlier than he expected. In Roberts’ first attempt, faithfully ends up in clause-final position 3. Obama seems to realize that the placement is wrong, but repeats the first part of the clause all the way through to the verb: that I will execute. There’s no possibility of getting faithfully back to position 1 at this point, but Roberts gets as close as he can by placing it in position 2, immediately after the verb, in his second attempt. Obama ignores the self-repair, however, and ends up repeating the misplaced version that Roberts originally supplied, with faithfully in clause-final position 3.”

Click on this link to learn about another botched oath; the world - or a presidency - didn’t end there, either.

ABC asked Obama about it last night; read what he had to say here.

FURTHER READING: Newsweek’s Dahlia Lithwick on the connection between the Bible used yesterday, two Presidents, & two Supreme Court justices.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Speechwars.com, says there are three words uttered yesterday that made their presidential inaugural address debut (h/t Marc Ambinder). See what they were after the jump.

1. Muslims

2. Nonbelievers

3. Data

The 1st two words I can understand.

The last is somewhat of a surprise to me.

So which words have presidents used most often? Check out this speechwars’ word cloud for the answer.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

[Above: Obama prepares his inaugural speech. Photo by Callie Shell, Time Magazine]

As Steve Clemons points out & I realized when he said it yesterday, there was a factual error in Obama’s inaugural speech:

“Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath.”

Wrong number. Find out why after the jump.

It’s 43. That’s because the man pictured above, Grover Cleveland, was sworn in as president on two separate (non-concurrent) occasions.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

[Above: my silhouette, northwest Missouri, 1977-ish. Photo by my father.]

“As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.” - President Barack Obama, yesterday

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Read eyewitness accounts from NewsChannel9ers who were there, as well as listen to some tunes that capture the patriotic spirit of the day, after the jump.

Welcome to Inauguration Day!

This post is meant as a supplement, rather than a primary source, of your inauguration viewing. I’ll be adding pictures & (what I think are appropriate) songs to this post throughout the day (with the newest at the top). If you want to leave a comment with your thoughts about today, feel free to do that, too.

You can watch the inauguration live on the web here.

You can see the inaugural speeches of every past president in our nation’s history here.

I hope you enjoy it. Today is truly an historic day for the United States of America.

UPDATE: Just heard from Calvin on the phone. here’s his (mostly verbatim) remarks:

“this is by far the coolest thing I’ve ever done in my life. to go to barack obama’s inauguration. it was so cool.
we were close enough that I could have thrown a rock and hit the rostrum.
but i couldn’t see him that well, because of the tall people.
we had a jumbotron in front of us, so I was able to watch it there.
the roar from the mall was amazing. we could hear the roar from down there & that would start us roaring up close to the building.
i got here a little before 5 o’clock this morning.
stood three hours in line. they let us in early, at about 8:30.
the invocation  - everybody went into it with a kind of a hestitant ‘what’s he going to say.’ but he did really good. he invoked the gospel & that’s what needed to happen. no matter what you think of his political leanings, when it comes to the gospel, there’s only one way to preach it.
when roberts flubbed the oath, everyone looked around like ‘what did he say?” & everyone started laughing.
any time he talked about us being the greatest country in the world the people around us - including me - just went ballistic & cheered. everyone hooped & hollered. everyone had their mittens on, so when they applauded, it sounded muffled.
colin powell got a huge round of applause.
It was special because all of us were mindful of those who fought so we could live to this day, & who couldn’t be here.”

Here’s a link to Calvin’s personal website with lots of photos from his experience.

Above: 2 shots from NewsChannel9 director Tom Logan.

Update: photo sent to me from Amanda Shropshire.

Look who’s in the thick of it on the Capitol Mall! This was taken yesterday.

Tanya Mendis calls at 9:05am (reminder: she’s NOT working, just there on her own volition). She says she’s “…standing on the west side of the capitol. we got up at 3am to begin our journey & waited - we had no problem getting to the train station, but once we got there a 25-minute trip took us an hour and a half. The trains are literally a sea of people  & there’s excitement in the air. Rndom cheers are popping up everywhere & strangers are becoming best friends. We stood in  line for about 2 housr. By the time we got in position for our tickets, we had to wait two hours .. and it took us 30-45 minutes to get to our position. I’m literally standing directly in front of where the swearing in ceremony is. I’m about three people back from the seated section. I’m going to have an unfettered view. The mall is incredible - it makes you want to cry, the sheer numbers of people is in-credible. & they’re just cheering in the back. In-credible. Yesterday I saw Leamon Pierce, Greg Mack, Warren Mackey (all Chattanooga city council members). Getting in this morning we were in the front 20% of the line. About half of the people who are coming here have not filed in yet. But it’s going to be pretty tight. I am cold, very cold. They’re selling hand warmers out here, 2 for $5, they’re normally 0.99 cents.”

Inaugural lines, e-mailed to me at 9:25am by WTVC director Tom Logan.

Woody Guthrie, “This Land Is Your Land”

“Our mental furniture is being rearranged. The advent of Obama’s presidency brings the African American experience to center stage but does so in a way that allows society to congratulate itself on having come so far. The implications for black Americans are even more profound, because seeing Obama in the White House obliterates any logic behind self-imposed limits on imagination and ambition. These are huge impacts — making it ironic that, in the end, race is likely to be secondary in defining Obama’s place in history.” - Eugene Robinson

Excerpts from Eisenhower’s & Lincoln’s inaugural addresses.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Marian Anderson on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

Charles Ives, “Variations on America”

“Most interesting and exciting inauguration since Reagan’s first in 1981. I may actually watch this one (I think the last one I watched was Bush I in 1989). And for my fellow Republicans who are bent out of shape, get over it. Face it: we’re just jealous we don’t have a guy with his particular skill set right now. Same way the Democrats were a little jealous of Ronald Reagan way back then. And if your problem is that the mainstream media’s ridiculous heavy-handed fawning over the new president makes you physically ill, well, that’s what Fox News is for. Avoid Chris Matthews like the plague. And most of the others as well.” - A Fish in the Percolator

Click here to view the embedded video.

Elton John, “Philadelphia Freedom“

Click here to view the embedded video.

Jay & the Americans, “Only in America”

“What Obama understands - and it’s worth reiterating - is that his presidency is a unique combination of one man and one very specific moment in time. We are witnessing the collapse of an old ideological order, the end of the 1960s, and the implosion of conservatism as an intellectually coherent governing philosophy. Into this wasteland, created by some hideous combination of evil enemies abroad and clueless leaders at home, this man arrives. Without the events of 2003 - 2006, Obama would not be president. And after the Bush catastrophe, we are immensely lucky he is. Alone, he is impressive - and would have made a good president at any time in the next few decades. But now, in this moment, with this set of gargantuan problems, at a time when Americans need desperately to believe again in their country and their constitution and theor president … well.

I don’t really believe in any grand idea of providence, and don’t believe that America is somehow more blessed by the divine than any other (that notion is absurd to my Catholic mind). But this week is testing my agnosticism.” - Andrew Sullivan

Click here to view the embedded video.

Bob Dylan, “Last Thoughts on Woody Guthrie”

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Animals, “I’m Gonna Change the World”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Richie Havens, “Freedom” (from Woodstock)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Max Roach, ‘Freedom Now Suite’

Click here to view the embedded video.

Mahalia Jackson, “Didn’t It Rain”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Bob Dylan, “Chimes of Freedom”

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Byrds, “Change Is Now”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Neil Young, “Campaigner” (live last year in Amsterdam)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Woody Guthrie, “There’s a Better World a-Comin’”

Above: Louis Armstrong & Duke Ellington, “the Beautiful American”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Above: Richard Nixon’s advice, August 8th, 1974.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Above: Gil Scott-Heron: “Ain’t No Such Thing As Superman”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Above: a fascinating piece about the role of slaves & the U.S. Capitol, which aired on PBS Friday night.

It provides a stirring context to what will happen there tomorrow - especially the story about the statue atop the Capitol, which is particulary inspiring.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

A total of four NewsChannel9 employees are in DC right now for the inauguration (they’re not on the clock, they’re each on vacation to witness history).

I hope to hear from them a little later this afternoon.

So check back for an update.

UPDATE #1:

What the train lines look like in DC this afternoon, from NewsChannel 9’s Tanya Mendis (who, again, is not on the clock working, but sent this on her own volition).

I went to the Bill Clinton’s 1993 inauguration & the experience weaned me off of going to any in the future. Traffic is a nightmare - I can only imagine how worse it’s gotten in 17 years.

If you want to do anything - say, go get a cup of coffee - be prepared to be in your car for at least a half hour each way.

& inauguration night? We threw up our hands & stayed in. Not worth it.

But - I hope the folks from Channel 9 that are there are having fun.

Hopefully I’ll have more updates later.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

A great segment with Mark Shields & David Brooks on the PBS NewsHour Friday, which included these nuggets (emphasis mine):

“JIM LEHRER: Remarkable time in our country, David?

DAVID BROOKS: It is. Even as the economic mood goes down, the political mood really does go up.

And I’m personally very excited about it, and excited about the day, but even excited about the mood that has already happened. I mean, Obama talks about changing the tone. He really has. Republican senators are saying they hear more from Obama than they did from Bush. He’s had conversations with conservatives, with liberals.

And he’s demonstrated he’s not a guy who is partisan.

…

Now, what I mean by that, with some people, when you disagree with them, you get the sense that it’s like a little status battle, that their side is a little better than your side.

And he has absolutely none of that, in part because he is so self-confident. But there’s no status. It’s not a cultural war. Like, with the Clintons, there was a little cultural war, with the Bushes. There was a little status. You know those Democrats, you know?

But, with him, there is absolutely none of that. And, therefore, disagreement doesn’t carry a lot of the emotional baggage that it might otherwise.

JIM LEHRER: What about the expectations saying — there’s already stories now, oh, the expectations are so high, there is no way in the world that the country cannot be anything but disappointed with Barack Obama, because the expectations are so high.

MARK SHIELDS: Boy, we will find an angle, won’t we?”

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

An era is ending in presidential politics.

How will an historian in 2109 view that era?

I’ve been thinking it over this past weekend, & here’s my best guess.

The period ending tomorrow, January 20th, 2009, began in 1960, with the presidential election between the two men you see above, Richard M. Nixon & John F. Kennedy.

I would argue that every president, & every candidate who sought & failed the presidency, were doing so in the shadow of one of these two men.

The ‘culture war’ that we’re so sick of is a clash that truly began almost 50 years ago, with this election.

Each man represented a different thing to both their supporters & to the American story: one emphasized our aspirations & ideals, & the other claimed to represent the views of so-called “real Americans.” Both men affected the course of our nation’s history in positive & negative ways.

Here’s how this era will be looked at (on a purely presidential level) as a Shakespearean 5-act play:

Act I: 1960-1968

John Kennedy & Richard Nixon are the 1st men of the World War II generation. The torch was passed. Kennedy won a tight race - some would argue with the help of some funny business. Kennedy is assassinated about 1000 days into his presidency, but not before winning our nation’s biggest victory of the Cold War, & setting up our nation’s biggest defeat. LBJ continues the JFK legacy, & Barry Goldwater - while losing badly - outlines ways his side is marking its turf.

Act II: 1968-1972

Richard Nixon’s remarkable political comeback to win the presidency in 1968. His “southern strategy” reveals one way to win the presidency, a way that will be emulated & perfected for the next three decades, & which capitalized on the divisions created by the Vietnam War.

Act III: 1973-1980

Richard Nixon discovers the limits of presidential power the hard way. He once again campaigns successfully against his opponent (a Democrat who failed to tap into the Kennedy charisma). But Watergate reveals the dark qualities of his psyche. Jerry Ford is unable to keep the presidency because he doesn’t live up to Nixon’s example, & Jimmy Carter wins the presidency because he is no Richard Nixon. Because Carter is no JFK, though, he himself fails to win re-election.

Act IV: 1980-1992

Richard Nixon was the John the Baptist to Ronald Reagan’s Jesus (extending the analogy further, one could say Goldwater was Reagan’s Isiah. Reagan combines Kennedy’s charisma & the divisive, “regular folks vs. the other” electoral techniques of RichardNixon to win 2 presidencies, & assure election for his Vice President, George W. Bush. Walter Mondale & Michael Dukakis fail to win the presidency because they lack Kennedy’s charisma.

Act V: 1992-2008

The rise (& fall) of the boomer presidents. Clinton & Bush appear as two sides of the same coin. Both reflect their generation’s solopsism in ways they don’t realize. Clinton is elected because his charisma comes closest to Kennedy, but his oversized ego & sexual amorality (like Kennedy’s) led to his downfall. By the same token, George W. Bush uses the tried-&-true Nixon method to win the White House, but the presence of two Nixon-era pols (Cheney & Rumsfeld) who are out to restore the presidency to Nixon’s vision of executive power & secrecy, ultimately lead to one of the worst presidencies in American history.

For the first time in almost 50 years, we have a president taking office who is not shaped by one of these two men (or one could argue that he’s learned the right lessons from both & left the wrong lessons behind). I find it quite remarkable - especially since I believed baby boomer presidents would dominate the White House for most of my adult life.

It’s the end of an era.. this era, anyway.

What do you think?

Would you chop up history in a different way?

Post a comment!

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

(image by Matt Brunson)

Click here to view the embedded video.

From Politi-Fact:

Barack Obama made 510 promises when he was running for president, a list that is stunning in its scope and leaves almost no part of the executive branch untouched, according to a new analysis by PolitiFact.

The analysis found that Obama made more than twice as many promises as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, whose campaign pledges were examined by other news organizations. Bush made 177 promises in 2000 and Clinton made 204 in 1992, as reported by the Knight Ridder Washington Bureau (now McClatchy).”

The site promises (heh) to keep track of them all.

I’ll check on a regular basis.

& just wondering: did “I promise to quit smoking” make the cut?

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

A portrait of the president-elect by Dean Lancaster, Age 12 (see more pictures here)

Dear President Obama,

Here is a list of the first 10 things you should do as president:

1. Fly to the White House in a helicopter.
2. Walk in.
3. Wipe feet.
4. Walk to the Oval Office.
5. Sit down in a chair.
6. Put hand-sanitizer on hands.
7. Enjoy moment.
8. Get up.
9. Get in car.
10. Go to the dog pound.

— Chandler Browne, age 12, Chicago

See more kids’ letters to the President-elect here.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

“The President-Elect and I believe that foreign policy must be based on a marriage of principles and pragmatism, not rigid ideology. On facts and evidence, not emotion or prejudice. Our security, our vitality, and our ability to lead in today’s world oblige us to recognize the overwhelming fact of our interdependence.” - Hillary Clinton, testifying before Congress today.

That was, of course, well-received, but there were signs today the ride might be a bit bumpier than she’d like.

To which I say: good.

Marc Ambinder has her full opening statement & more analysis.

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Above: clips of Presidents 43 & 44 on the Sunday talk shows yesterday.

I thought Obama’s handling of Cheney’s point was deft.

& thought the opposite was true for Bush’s labored defense of torture.

What do you think?

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

I’m happy to report Cass Sustein, the co-author of the book above, has been selected by the President-Elect to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Click here to read why that’s a good thing, & here to read why conservatives should be pleased.

& click here to read my earlier Vote08 post (from June 23rd) when I said, “For the record I like this approach, & hope whoever’s eventually president will recognize the pragmatism inherent within it.”

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Hey, remember the Iraq war? Sure you do!

Good thing it’s about wrapped up, right? You can go on & pay attention to other things, right?

Wrong.

Thomas Ricks, author of one of the best books on the beginnings of the Iraq fiasco, has two predictions about the immediate future of the conflict that in my view are dead-on, & they’re not what Obama or his legions of fans likely want to hear:

“1. Obama’s first year in Iraq is going to be tougher than Bush’s last year. Three reasons for that: First, three rounds of elections are scheduled in 2009, and those tend to be violent in Iraq. Second, the easy U.S. troop withdrawals have been made, and the pullouts at the end of this year will be riskier. Finally, none of the basic existential problems facing Iraq have been answered-the power relationships between groups, leadership of the Shiites, the sharing of oil revenue, the status of the disputed city of Kirkuk, to name just the most pressing ones. Compounding the problem will be the incorrect perception of many Americans that the Iraq was all but over when Obama took office.

2. Despite the conventional wisdom that the war is nearly over, Obama’s war in Iraq may last longer than Bush’s, which clocks in at a robust 5 years and 10 months. “So now you back in the trap–just that, trapped,” to quote Big Boi and Dre. My best guess is that we will have at least 35,000 troops there in 2015, as Obama’s likely second term is winding down.”

What do you think?

Post from: The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08