First Thoughts
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Unemployment at 9.5%: Right before the long July 4th weekend, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this morning that the U.S. economy lost 467,000 jobs in June, and that the unemployment rate is now 9.5%, a 26-year high. Expect Republicans -- once again -- to pounce on these numbers and question the stimulus (but they’re also forgetting that the economy lost 3.1 million jobs in Bush’s last year in office; in Obama’s first five months, the total loss has been 1.9 million). Not surprisingly, of course, Obama will today talk about jobs, innovation, and the economy at 2:20 pm ET. These remarks will follow a closed-press meeting with business leaders. Later in the afternoon, the president departs to Camp David to begin his July 4th holiday.
*** Home cookin’ at the town hall? Did the White House get a tad carried away in its attempt to stay on message at yesterday's town hall? Says the Washington Post, "Of the seven questions the president answered, four were selected by his staff from videos submitted to the White House Web site or from those responding to a request for ‘tweets.’ The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be members of groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence." Then again, Republicans who are pouncing on this news have probably forgotten when only party faithful were even allowed into Bush town halls and rallies. Still, the optics here for Obama -- someone who usually doesn’t shy away from answering tough questions -- aren’t good. For those complaining that Obama is being held to a different standard than Bush, remember that he set his own standard, and that's why the media is pushing back so hard on him.
*** Operations Khanjar (Strike of the Sword): According to NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski, the U.S. Marines announced last night that 4,000 Marines and 650 Afghan military launched a major offensive in the Helmand province of southern Afghanistan -- aimed at driving out the Taliban to "secure the population from the threat of Taliban and other insurgent intimidation and violence." It is the first large-scale operation of its kind under the new emerging U.S. military strategy for Afghanistan. Unlike previous operations in the country, Mik says, the Marines intend to set up a series of bases and remain in Helmand. The objective is to create long-term security and stability that will enable the local Afghans to establish legitimate government. In other Afghanistan news, Mik reports that American officials believe that the Taliban has kidnapped a U.S. soldier in another part of that country.
*** North Korea and Russia: But Afghanistan isn’t the only international issue the White House is closely following today. Also on its radar screen is a potential North Korea missile launch tied to July 4. “Asked if North Korea is likely to conduct a July 4 Taepodong-2 test, as occurred in 2006, Gen. Renuart said in an interview this week with The [Washington] Times at Northern Command headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, ‘I think we ought to assume there might be one on the Fourth of July and continue to be prepared and ready.’” And then there’s Obama’s upcoming trip to Russia. The Wall Street Journal writes, "Obama will explore with Russian leaders a longstanding proposal by Moscow to install U.S. missile-defense components on Russian soil, aimed at growing threats such as the Iranian and North Korean missile programs. The White House and Kremlin do expect progress on negotiations to reduce strategic nuclear warheads to about 1,500 for each side.” Bottom line on the Kremlin visit: If the Russians insist missile defense needs to be a part of the nuke talks rather than a parallel discussion, then it'll be hard to call this part of the trip a success.
*** 2009 vs. 1993-1994: The narrow passage of the House energy bill had many Republicans drawing parallels to 1993-994, when contentious legislation (BTU, gas-tax increase) helped the GOP take back control of Congress. But there’s one big difference between then and now: Back in 1994, Democrats had controlled the House of Representatives since the 1950s; now they’ve controlled it for less than three years. The energy vote victory, National Journal’s Ron Brownstein writes, “suggests that Democrats learned something from their 12 years in the minority, when they watched narrower Republican House majorities, however reluctantly, surmount their differences to pass almost all of their party’s agenda. ‘The example of 1994 looms over everything,” says White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. ‘We learned that if we don’t hang together, we die separately. It brought unity and pragmatism to the party.’” One could argue Rahm lives by the following credo: WDCDin'94 (What Did Clinton Do In '94?), and then he advises the president to do the opposite. Speaking of ’94, Politico notes that several members of that GOP freshmen class (Sanford, Ensign) have been caught up in affairs or sex scandals.
*** The GOP’s brand problem: This Washington Post piece has a fascinating take on why Norm Coleman lost to Al Franken: It’s all about the Republican Party’s brand. "[S]ome Republican strategists said the Coleman defeat ought to generate a broader reexamination of the party's status rather than simply a review of its legislative tactics. 'For [Coleman] to lose to Al Franken has to be a wake-up call to Republicans that the brand is what brought Coleman down,' GOP strategist John Feehery said. 'Hopefully that will spark a bigger strategic discussion about how to prevent the brand from bringing other people down.'" In 2010, we'll get some good tests about the state of the GOP brand in the Ohio (Rob Portman) and Missouri (Roy Blunt) Senate races.
*** My Bodyguard (or not): Will the drip-drip end up being South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford’s undoing? Earlier this week, of course, Sanford gave that bizarre interview to the AP, in which he admitted more contacts with his Argentine mistress than he previously revealed, and then said he had “crossed the lines” with other women. (The interview became more damaging when the audio was released. It was one thing for folks to read the excerpts; it was another to listen to Sanford.) Now comes a report from the State newspaper noting that Sanford left the governor’s mansion without a security escort 38 times in 2008, and 39 times in the first six months of this year. “Those trips are about one-third of the 195 trips Sanford made from the mansion, with or without security, over that 18-month period… The information was obtained from security logs provided to The State newspaper under open-records laws.”
*** Happy Fourth of July: Finally, we won’t be publishing our morning note tomorrow, although we’ll update the Web site as news warrants. We’ll see you bright and early Monday morning. Have a happy and safe holiday. And for some good holiday reading, check out this Wall Street Journal story about cracking Thomas Jefferson’s code. “For more than 200 years, buried deep within Thomas Jefferson's correspondence and papers, there lay a mysterious cipher -- a coded message that appears to have remained unsolved. Until now…” Could this be the next plotline for Nicholas Cage?
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 124 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 488 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** The meaning of 60: It lasted 238 days beyond Election Day and eventually entered all four seasons, but the never-ending Minnesota Senate race finally came to a conclusion yesterday, after the state Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Al Franken's favor and after Norm Coleman conceded hours later. Most significantly, yesterday’s developments resulted in Democrats obtaining a filibuster-proof majority -- 60 votes -- in the Senate, and Dems want to have him seated by as early as Monday. Having 60 votes will shift the balance of power from the Republican Maine-iacs (Collins and Snowe) to the Joe Liebermans, Ben Nelsons, and Mary Landrieus, meaning that the upcoming fights over health care and energy will be on Democratic turf. Remember that stimulus debate back in February? Does anyone doubt it would have been different (in size and composition) had Franken been in the Senate then? As Rahm Emanuel told the New Yorker then, “No disrespect to Paul Krugman [who wanted a larger bill], but has he figured out how to seat the Minnesota senator?”
*** The Democrats’ challenges: Indeed, had Franken been in the Senate then, you could have probably added some $30-$50 billion to the size of the $787 billion stimulus; that was the cost of getting one more GOP vote, Susan Collins. But Democrats jumping for joy right now might want to temper their enthusiasm a bit. For one thing, conservative/moderate Democrats haven’t always been easy votes to get. In fact, in the health-care debate, Dem senators like Max Baucus and Kent Conrad have been cool towards a public/government insurance option. Second, given the health problems of reliable Democratic votes like Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, it will be a challenge for Democrats to make sure they have 60 votes at a particular time. Yesterday's Franken news ironically coincided with Byrd’s release from the hospital, and it’s been more than a year since all 100 senators voted on a bill. So forget Harry Reid; getting to 60 is the hands of medical professionals, not political ones.
*** So what do Republicans do? Their initial spin is, “OK, no excuse time. Democrats have it all -- the House, the White House, and a filibuster-proof Senate.” It's almost as if Republicans want to start their "change" campaign now. And that's what will be interesting to watch: Will they completely wash their hands of governing, and simply sit back like a columnist or talk radio host and just criticize, er, campaign? They can't obstruct on a party line vote, but they can rant. But can the Republicans keep this up for over a year and just sit by as a group, or do a handful of them (the Maine-iacs, Voinovich, Mel Martinez, Lugar, maybe Grassley) start going their own way and possibly work with the White House?
*** Other odds and ends: This is now the first time since the 95th Congress (1977-1979) that one party will have had 60 or more votes in the Senate; Democrats had 61 at the start of that Congress. Also, this wasn’t the longest contested election. Per NBC’s Marcie Rickun, the Senate Historical Office says the 1974 Wyman-Durkin race went through several stages of recount battles before the Senate finally declared the seat vacant at the end of July, 1975. Then, a new election was called, which took place on September 16, 1975. And there was an even LONGER Senate vacancy in Illinois in the 1920s... Finally, what does the future hold for Norm Coleman? Will he run for governor in 2010? Remember that Coleman lost statewide to a wrestler (Jesse Ventura) and a comedian (Al Franken), and probably wouldn’t have won the lone race he did win without a death (Paul Wellstone’s), though in that race he did beat a former vice president (Walter Mondale). Coleman's concession speech had "I'm running for office again soon" written all over it. The Republicans need a strong candidate for governor thanks to Tim Pawlenty's retirement, and because Coleman stayed and fight, he probably can raise a decent chunk of change nationally.
*** Chuck Schumer’s legacy: One other thing worth pointing out in the Franken-Coleman news: In his two cycles as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Democrats were able to pick up a whopping 14 Senate seats (six in ’06 and eight in ’08). And when you add Arlen Specter’s switch earlier this year, that means that Democrats went from having just 45 senators in 2006 to 60 today. That’s a remarkable two cycles.
*** Back to health care: Turning to an issue that Democrats hope Franken’s Senate vote will help them with -- health care -- President Obama holds an online town hall on the subject in Annandale, VA at 1:15 pm ET. Per the White House, questions will come from a live audience, as well as online communities like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Valerie Jarrett will moderate the forum. By the way, don't think it went unnoticed that in the president's congratulatory statement and Franken's victory statement last night, both mentioned energy and health care. Coordinate much?
*** Where in the world is … Manuel Zelaya? Ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya traveled to Washington, DC, late yesterday, according to multiple sources. He was in New York earlier yesterday to meet with the United Nations. It's not clear where or who the ousted president met with in Washington last night. But it was made clear to us this morning that Zelaya has since left both Washington and the country. We're efforting more details.
*** Cable catnip, part 2: We knew that Todd Purdum’s critical profile of Sarah Palin would get lots of attention. What we didn’t know was that it would immediatley start a public war between Bill Kristol/Randy Scheunemann and Steve Schmidt. As Politico’s Martin writes, “William Kristol … touched off the latest back-and-forth Tuesday morning with a post on his magazine’s blog … pointing a finger at Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign manager. Kristol cited a passage in Purdum’s piece in which ‘some top aides’ were said to worry about the Alaska governor’s ‘mental state’ and the prospect that the Alaska governor may be suffering from post-partum depression following the birth of her son Trig. ‘In fact, one aide who raised this possibility in the course of trashing Palin’s mental state to others in the McCain-Palin campaign was Steve Schmidt,’ Kristol wrote. Asked about the accusation, Schmidt fired back in an email: ‘I'm sure John McCain would be president today if only Bill Kristol had been in charge of the campaign. After all, his management of [former Vice President] Dan Quayle’s public image as his chief of staff is still something that takes your breath away,’ Schmidt continued.” Folks, be sure to read the whole piece; it only gets better…
*** The Sanford story gets weirder: Finally, as he’s trying to save his job -- not to mention his marriage -- what was South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford thinking when told the AP yesterday that he had “crossed the lines” with other women besides his Argentine mistress? “‘Without wandering into that field we'll just say that I let my guard down in all senses of the word without ever crossing the line that I crossed with this situation,’ he said, referring to his affair with Chapur.” This guy is letting his mid-life crisis play out in public. Meanwhile, the Washington Post chooses to "go there" in a piece about Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, the once and future governor, delving into the rumors about him.
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 125 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 489 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Sonia’s good news, bad news: Here’s the bad news for Sonia Sotomayor: Yesterday, with the Supreme Court’s New Haven ruling, was her toughest day as a SCOTUS nominee since her "wise Latina" comment produced that political/media frenzy a few weeks ago. But here’s the good news: If yesterday is as bad as it's going to get -- and most expected the Supreme Court to reverse Sotomayor and her 2nd Circuit panel in the New Haven case -- then she's still well on her way to winning confirmation. What’s more, the court’s 5-4 ruling (along the usual conservative/liberal split) gives her 2nd Circuit panel decision plenty of cover. Now, it's all about the confirmation hearing and how the Republicans go after her. But as we learned with John Roberts’ and Samuel Alito’s hearings, it’s more than likely that she’ll say absolutely nothing controversial during these hearings.
Video: Guest host Alison Stewart talks about the case with NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg.
***
So apparently there aren’t enough political ads? But while the New Haven case was yesterday’s main focus, the Supreme Court’s other action Monday -- to hear additional oral arguments in Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission on Sept. 9 -- could very well have a profound effect on American politics. According to experts, the court’s decision to revisit the case could result in overturning the campaign-finance law that corporations, unions, and other special interests can’t air political ads 30 days before a primary and 60 days before the general election. "This has the potential to be a blockbuster," Michael E. Toner, a former chairman of the FEC, told the
Washington Post. He added that the issues have implications for "the whole architecture of the federal campaign financing system." Regarding this action and the New Haven case, talk about the legislating from the bench!
*** Iraq withdrawal: Although it’s been overshadowed largely by other news (Michael Jackson, Bernie Madoff, Iran), today is the deadline for U.S. soldiers to withdraw from Iraqi cities. However, as NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski reports, most of that withdrawal has been completed a day ahead of today’s deadline. Yet the withdrawal also comes as we learned that four U.S. troops died from combat-related injuries. And it also comes with a new CNN poll showing that just 34% approve of the Iraq war, that 73% agree with the decision to withdraw U.S. troops from the major Iraq cities, and that a majority believes the withdrawal will increase the violence in Iraq.
Video: President Obama declares military coup of Honduran president illegal; Ahmadinijad wins Iran vote recount; U.S. troops pull out of Iraq. NBC's Brian Williams reports.
***
Gibbs’ two pledges: Yesterday on MSNBC’s Hardball, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs made two pieces of news. One, regarding Gitmo, he said the Obama administration would absolutely go to Congress first to get approval of holding detainees indefinitely. Two, Gibbs pledged repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” by the time Obama runs for re-election.
*** Today’s cable catnip: Riddle us this: How is Sarah Palin
going to be able to run for president when so many other Republicans, especially those who worked on the McCain campaign, are more than willing to criticize her? Todd Purdum has a piece
in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, in which former McCain campaign aides unload on her -- again. "They can't quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be," Purdum writes.
*** Honduras vs. Iran: Here's something you should expect to hear a lot of today: What's the difference between getting involved with the Honduras situation and not with Iran? Of course, there are a lot of differences -- including the entire Organization of American States condemning the coup in Honduras; there wasn't that level of international will on the Iranian situation. Also, we have diplomatic relations with Honduras and therefore have leverage with that country. With Iran, zero relations so little leverage? That said, speaking out against the coup in Honduras as forcefully as the Obama administration has will lead to some on the right to criticize him for not doing the same with Iran.
*** The never-ending recount -- by the numbers: Are we going to get a decision today from the Minnesota Supreme Court regarding the state’s never-ending recount? It’s the last day of the month, and we were led to believe the court would have a decision by then. (Remember that the court heard oral arguments on June 1.) With the race still unresolved, here’s a look at it by the numbers:
-- $51.1 million has been raised between Coleman and Franken for the entire campaign
-- $50.3 million has been spent between the two candidates
-- $11 million (at least) has been spent on the recount
-- 2,424,946 votes were cast
-- 312 votes separate the candidates (Franken leads)
-- 239 days since Election Day 2008
-- 34 weeks since Election Day 2008
-- 7 months, 27 days since Election Day 2008
-- 4 seasons seen since Election Day 2008 election
*** Today’s sked: At 2:00 pm ET, President Obama makes remarks highlighting innovative non-profit programs. Also today, GOP Sens. Mitch McConnell, John McCain, and John Ensign discuss their ideas for health-care reform in Houston, TX at the well-known M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 126 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 490 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** The Big Two: Congress is out of town, and Americans are getting ready for the long July 4 weekend. But the Obama White House is busy trying to keep up the momentum for both the energy bill and health-care reform. Yesterday, President Obama gave a five-newspaper interview to energy reporters that was part victory lap after Friday’s narrow House passage, and also part negotiating tactic with the Senate. As for health care, the president will hold yet another town hall on the subject on Wednesday -- this one in Annandale, VA (which has a major online component). This two-track push is certainly putting Republicans a tad on the defensive. What do they focus on? As we’ve noted before, the Obama administration juggling several balls at once makes it difficult for the opposition to focus its fire on all the different balls. Still, you’ve got to wonder: If presented with the choice -- drop the push for energy this year to get votes on health care -- would the White House take that deal?
*** New Haven style? So far, it’s been smooth sailing for Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. In fact, a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows that 62% support her elevation to the nation’s highest court. But today could get somewhat bumpy for her. On the last day of its session, the U.S. Supreme Court today is expected to issue its ruling in the New Haven firefighter case. Serving on the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, Sotomayor denied claims that white firefighters had been discriminated against when New Haven threw out the results of a promotion test because not enough minorities had scored high enough on it. As the AP points out, it’s retiring Justice David Souter’s last day on the court, and he’ll be ruling on a case that impacts the woman trying to replace him -- Sotomayor. Expect the decision to come out around 10:00 am or 11:00 am ET.
Video: The Supreme Court is expected to make a ruling soon in a reverse discrimination lawsuit filed in New Haven, Conn., in which court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that the city acted properly in throwing out a firefighters promotion exam that minority candidates scored poorly on.
***
Iraq is back? Just askin’, but how is it that one of the most significant foreign-policy mileposts/deadlines -- withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraqi cities -- is arriving tomorrow without barely any notice? Indeed, it’s just another reminder that the story that dominated American politics from 2003-2007 has become an afterthought right now. Ironically, as attention has turned to other hotspots, violence has been increasing in Iraq. Still, Gen. Ray Odierno told CNN yesterday that Iraq is ready for the transition. “They've been working towards this for a long time,” he said, per the
Washington Times. “And security remains good. We've seen constant improvement in the security force; we've seen constant improvement in governance. And I believe this is the time for us to move out of the cities and for them to take ultimate responsibility.”
Video: After six years in Iraq, American forces are drastically reshaping their posture – the first step towards withdrawing all combat forces home in 2011. NBC’s Tom Aspell reports.
***
Stonewall, Colombia/Honduras: At 4:25 pm ET today, President Obama and the first lady host an event at the White House to celebrate LGBT Month. It comes one day after the 40th anniversary of Stonewall. And it also comes after the Obama administration has received plenty of criticism from liberals and the gay community for its brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as for not moving yet to overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” As
Adam Nagourney wrote on Sunday, “The conflicting signals from the White House about its commitment to gay issues reflect a broader paradox: even as cultural acceptance of homosexuality increases across the country, the politics of gay rights remains full of crosscurrents.” In addition today, Obama meets with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at 2:15 pm. The two will most likely discuss the military coup in Honduras. Obama already condemned the action, but what will happen next? Apparently, the U.S. played a major behind-the-scenes role to stop this.
*** Rudy and 2010:
If you don’t think Rudy Giuliani is seriously eyeing a bid for New York governor, then you probably didn’t read his
New York Times op-ed last week, in which he called for a constitutional convention to resolve some of the state’s political problems. But more than hint about his gubernatorial intentions, Rudy’s op-ed might serve as a roadmap for others running for governor in 2010. Let’s face it: Two of the nation’s largest states (New York and California) have some serious problems right now, and much of it is due to how these states currently operate. However, one of Rudy’s ideas in his op-ed -- requiring a supermajority to raise taxes -- is one of the reasons some believe why California is in the mess it’s in.
*** Is the end in sight? Finally, the Minnesota Supreme Court has to be ruling soon on the never-ending Franken-Coleman contest, right? GOP Gov. Tim Pawlenty told CNN yesterday that he would abide by whatever ruling the state court makes in the contest, where Democrat Al Franken seems to have an upper hand. "I'm prepared to sign [the certification] as soon as they give the green light," Pawlenty said. “I’m not going to defy an order of the Minnesota Supreme Court. That would be a dereliction of my duty."
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 127 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 491 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Don’t Stop 'Til You Get Enough: As anyone who has turned on a television set in the past 12-15 hours has noticed, Michael Jackson’s passing will overshadow any political news today -- and perhaps throughout the weekend. Of course, that’s probably welcome news to South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, as well as to a Republican Party that was going to have to endure more “What’s wrong with the GOP?” stories. Also, the Jackson news, plus the fact that it’s the Friday before Congress leaves for its July 4 break, makes it a ripe opportunity for a bad news dump. So what/who will it be? Still, politics doesn’t stop. President Obama meets in the White House with German Chancellor Angela Merkel at 10:30 am ET, and the two hold a joint press conference an hour later.
 |
|
Obviously, much of the coverage of today’s bilateral will focus on some of the tension between the two world leaders, particularly over fiscal policy (Merkel has questioned the U.S. spending, while the Obama administration has wondered why Germany isn’t doing more to counteract the global recession). But do note that this is the THIRD personal meeting between the two since Obama became president. The biggest news that Merkel and Obama could make would be on the issue of Iran.
***
Pick your title -- Human Nature, PYT, The Lady in My Life, The Way You Make Me Feel, She’s Out of My Life, The Girl is Mine: Mark Sanford tries to return to some normalcy today, when he holds a cabinet meeting at 12:30 pm. But the calls for him to resign are getting louder now that he’s admitted to visiting his Argentine girlfriend while on a taxpayer-funded trip. “While the purpose of this trip was an entirely professional and appropriate business development trip, I made a mistake while I was there in meeting with the woman who I was unfaithful to my wife with,” Sanford said in a statement yesterday. “That has raised some very legitimate concerns and questions, and as such I am going to reimburse the state for the full cost of the Argentina leg of this trip.” That’s not satisfying some South Carolina Republicans, however. “I think he’s gone, it’s over,” said state Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler Jr., per the
New York Times. “Leaving aside his personal life, when you use taxpayer dollars, that’s what Republicans are all about -- spending tax dollars wisely. This was not spending tax dollars wisely.” The next three weeks are huge for Sanford. If there's a drip-drip of more allegations, then he probably can't hang on. But he's got two things going for him now: 1) Michael Jackson's death, and 2) the July 4th holiday. Both could be disruptions that keep him out of the public eye a tad.
*** Thriller (on Capitol Hill): Perhaps the biggest drama in politics today will be in the House of Representatives, where Democrats are trying to bring to the floor -- and then pass -- the energy/climate change/cap-and-trade legislation. Per NBC’s Mike Viqueira, Democrats last night didn’t think they had the votes to pass the bill. And if they don’t have the votes, they aren’t going to bring it to the floor. Viq adds that the legislation is up in the air as of this morning. Right now, House Democrats plan to move forward with the bill first thing today. But it’s not in the bag. Speaker Pelosi was seen stalking the floor yesterday during votes to button-hole wavering Democrats. Of course, today’s drama sparks this question: If the energy bill is THIS heavy of a lift in the Democratic-controlled House, then how the heck is the White House going to get this bill out of the Senate?
Video: House Democrats just announced that they’ll take a vote on a sweeping climate change bill by the end of the week. Venture capitalist Ira Ehrenpreis discusses why investing in green energy pays off in an economic downturn.
***
Beat It: Speaking to reporters at yesterday’s Christian Science Monitor breakfast, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel listed a few contrasts between this year’s health-care fight and the one that failed in ’93-94 (industry groups are now playing a constructive role in the reform, the House committees drafting the legislation are now working together, and the administration is now allowing Congress to draft the legislation). But here’s another difference: The majority of TV ad spending is SUPPORTING the White House’s health-care efforts -- not OPPOSING them. That’s also true on energy. To put it simply, Harry and Louise are getting overwhelmed right now. The campaign apparatus that serves as Obama’s backstop is like nothing we've seen for a president, well, maybe ever. And that apparatus is probably enough to blunt special interest pressure. We've seen one example already -- the MoveOn TV ad against Dianne Feinstein. It's a message the group and Obama supporters hope is received by other wavering Democrats on health care. Also, the
New York Times has a C.W.-setting piece on how the Obama White House and Senate Democrats are at an impasse over how to pay for health care.
*** Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’: Missing those daily superdelegate counts? The speculation about when states like Iowa, New Hampshire, and Michigan would hold their primaries/caucuses? Come on, admit it -- you miss it. Well, if you are, you can head over Saturday morning to the first meeting of the DNC’s Democratic Change Commission, which has been tasked with reforming 1) the primary calendar, 2) the number of superdelegates, and 3) the caucus system. Presiding over the meeting will be DNC chair Tim Kaine and commission co-chairs Jim Clyburn and Claire McCaskill, and there isn’t supposed to be any big news. The 37-member commission will listen to a presentation of Democratic Party presidential nominations by Rhodes Cook; a look at the superdelegates by Elaine Kamarck; and an examination of the caucus system by Organizing for America’s Mitch Stewart. This is all in the fact-gathering stage, but ask yourself this: How likely is it that this DNC would dramatically change a system that helped launch the president's campaign? Iowa and South Carolina are VERY safe. As for the superdelegate system, well that’s another story…
*** Because I’m bad, I’m bad, come on (or sha-mon): Per Politico, "House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) engaged in a late-afternoon shouting match on the House floor after Obey reportedly rebuffed Waters on an earmark request, aides and witnesses said." More: "Witnesses, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it appeared that Waters pushed or shoved Obey. The pair were seen shouting at each other and had to be separated by members -- who were crowded on the floor casting final votes before heading off to a party at the White House." She wanted him to fund a program in her name. Obey, no fan of projects in members' names -- so-called "monuments to me" -- said no. The scuffle ensued. Will this make Obey a hero on Fox News opinion programs? Stay tuned.
*** Rock With You (and Reagan): Finally, while covering the Reagan White House, NBC's Andrea Mitchell remembers vividly Michael Jackson's photo-op with the late president. Reagan (and Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole) granted him a presidential public safety communication award on May 14, 1984, to thank him for allowing the White House to use his hit song, "Beat it" in a campaign against teen drunken driving. "Well, isn't this a thriller," Reagan said at the time. "We haven't seen this many people since we left China." The Washington Post reported then: "'Just think, you all came to see me,' Reagan added, looking out over the crowd on the South Lawn of the White House."
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 130 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 494 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** In Obama we trust? Maybe now we understand why the RNC was so fired up about last night’s town hall. President Obama, while peppered with tough questions about the issue, got an hour on national TV to make the case that he can be trusted to reform the health-care system. Remember, it's not about winning the debate on whether his way is RIGHT; it's about securing the TRUST of skeptical Americans that he'll take their concerns and go about this with care. And on that score, this is where we probably get why so many of the president's opponents were upset. This format was in the president's wheelhouse. Whether you agree with him or not, it's obvious he has a deep grasp of the issue, and no doubt he only helped his cause. Of course, we don't yet know how many folks watched. But the perception that he got into the details most likely is only a help to him, even if those details become unpopular. By the way, it doesn't appear the president committed any news, though some noted that he continued to leave open the door for supporting a tax on some health-care benefits. Also health care remains in today’s news as liberals and progressives rally for reform on Capitol Hill at 11:30 am ET.
*** Social conservatism hits rock bottom? These certainly haven't been the best of times for social conservatives. Democrats control the White House and Congress. The problems at home and abroad have drowned out social issues (with congressional Republicans deciding to focus their fire on the economy). And now here's perhaps the biggest embarrassment: In less than two weeks, two of their own -- John Ensign and Mark Sanford -- have admitted to committing adultery. Just five years after it helped re-elect George W. Bush, has social conservatism in American politics hit rock bottom? If so, what does that mean for a political party that has largely tied its fortunes to this movement? As we've said before, infidelity is a bipartisan affair, but Republicans tend to receive more criticism because they more often portray themselves as the party protecting family values and marriage. Yet what happens when one can make the argument that the highest-profile example of family values and marriage -- right now -- isn’t a Republican or social conservative, but rather the man who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.? The issue for the GOP at this point is convincing grassroots social conservatives not to lose faith. As one of the leading social conservative voices in the party lamented to the New York Times, “I think there is somewhat of an identity crisis in the Republican Party,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, “Are they going to be a party that attracts values voters, and are they going to be the party that lives by those values?”
 |
|
Video: Governor Mark Sanford, R-SC, resigned today as chair of the Republican Governors Association after admitting his affair with an Argentinean woman. Rachel Maddow is joined by Daily Beast contributor Mark McKinnon to assess the impact on the Republican Party.
***
More on Sanford and 2012: Sticking with Sanford and his troubles, there’s lots of analysis this morning focusing on the bad six months the GOP has had -- particularly for Republicans who have tested the 2012 waters (see yesterday's First Read). A few things to watch for: One, who will pick up the mantle of the pure economic conservative/free market libertarian? Two, will grassroots social conservatives start expressing publicly their outrage over Sanford and Ensign and others and become harder to galvanize for the Republican Party as a whole? Three, do folks like Mitt Romney and Haley Barbour end up getting a big perception bump going into 2012 as the establishment looks for grownups who have been around the national political block before? Speaking of Barbour, he was in New Hampshire yesterday, and today he’ll be in Des Moines, IA for a GOP dinner. He’s an extraordinary fundraiser and helped lead the GOP’s comeback to power in 1994, when he served as RNC chairman. On the other hand, he’s a former lobbyist and Washington insider, as well as an older white male from the Deep South. By the way, thanks to the Sanford resignation, Barbour now has more excuses to travel nationally as he's now chair of the Republican Governors Association.
*** The “Thugocracy”? The news doesn't look encouraging this morning in Iran. Many experts and media reports are now noting what appears to be the new inevitable: that the Iranian regime's crackdown has been a success. That said, this morning, Iran is not a country that is being viewed as a theocracy -- but a good ol’ fashioned dictatorship. Richard Haas of the Council on Foreign Relations (who's not exactly a rhetorical bomb-thrower) called the regime a "thugocracy." And to add evidence to its dictatorship tendencies, check out the L.A. Times report indicating that the TRUE heir apparent to the Supreme Leader is his son. That's how dictatorships act, not republics or democracies. So if the reality on the ground is now that the uprising has been beaten back, what's next for U.S. policy? Right now, it appears any efforts the Obama administration had wanted to make are now on hold (or in the words of one official "on ice"). Robert Gibbs all but said any unilateral efforts were being pushed aside. There is still an open hand on the multi-lateral front (P5+1), but that's always been the case.
 |
|
Video: There were more reports Wednesday of forceful crackdowns on Iranian protesters as the country's leadership said election results will not be overturned. NBC's Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel reports.
Immigration returns: In the past few days, the issues of health care and Iran have dominated Obama’s agenda and public statements. But today, he turns his attention to the thorny subject of immigration reform, as he meets with bipartisan members of Congress at 2:00 pm ET to discuss this subject. The meeting comes a day after Sen. Chuck Schumer (D), who chairs the Senate subcommittee that would write any immigration reform legislation, laid out his principles, and after immigration advocates pressed the Obama White House to make immigration reform a priority -- this year. In a conference call, Bishop Jaime Soto of Sacramento said that the meeting will tell them whether the White House is serious about enacting comprehensive immigration reform or whether it's timid. "Delaying immigration reform will be a mistake," he said, arguing that the country can no longer accept the status quo. The event is a reminder of how this issue has become so difficult for members of both parties. The president won Latinos 2 to 1, has powerful Democratic majorities, and yet admits he might not have the votes to pass comprehensive immigration reform. After today, will Obama use his political capital to make immigration reform happen this year or next?
*** Add energy to the mix, too: Also on the agenda is the issue of energy. As NBC’s Mike Viqueira reported last night, the House is now on course to take up its energy bill on Friday, after a deal was struck between Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Colin Peterson. The pair appeared at a press conference to announce their agreement. Peterson, Viq notes, had been an influential holdout as he sought the best possible deal for farmers. And today, Pelosi, other Dem leaders, and Al Gore will appear at a press rally at 2:00 pm ET.
*** The rest of Obama’s day: In addition to his meeting on immigration, Obama (along with the first lady) participates in a service event at 10:00 am ET at Fort McNair. Per the White House, they will “join hundreds of congressional family members and five national nonprofit organizations … to prepare 15,000 backpacks with books, healthy snacks, frisbees and other items for the children of servicemen and women.” In the evening, the First Couple and Vice President Biden will host a luau on the South Lawn for members of Congress and their families. One other item on today’s agenda: Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will announce that states have already met the goal of obligating 50% of the highway funds in the stimulus by the June 29 deadline.
***
Bernanke's tough day? It could get ugly at a House committee hearing today featuring Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, and the markets could very well over-react to what happens in that hearing room. The issue of what role the government played in pushing Bank of America to buy Merrill Lynch is going to be front and center. And the criticism of the Republican-appointed Bernanke is going to come from Republicans, while Democrats may sit silent or quietly defend him. We'll see.
*** 2009 watch: And also on Capitol Hill today, New Jersey GOP gubernatorial nominee Chris Christie will appear at 11:00 a.m. ET before the Democratically-controlled House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law to testify about million-dollar no-bid monitoring contracts he awarded while U.S. attorney. Per the Star-Ledger, the panel seeks to reform such “deferred prosecution agreements,” like the one Christie gave his former boss John Ashcroft, “worth as much as $52 million,” for monitoring a medical device maker Christie was investigating for Medicare fraud. Democrats are desperately hoping that something comes out of today’s hearing to help the very vulnerable Jon Corzine.
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 131 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 495 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Sanford’s tango: Well, it turns out that South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) wasn’t hiking the Appalachian Trail after all. Instead, he was in -- get this -- Buenos Aires, Argentina. Here’s South Carolina’s State newspaper: "Gov. Mark Sanford arrived in the Hartsville-Jackson International Airport Wednesday morning, having wrapped up a seven-day visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina.” Sanford "said he decided at the last minute to go to the South American country to recharge after a difficult legislative session in which he battled with lawmakers over how to spend federal stimulus money… Sanford said he was alone on the trip. He declined to give any additional details about what he did other than to say he drove along the coastline… When asked why his staff said he was on the Appalachian Trail, Sanford replied, 'I don't know.'" But "Sanford later said 'in fairness to his staff,' he had told them he might go hiking on the Appalachian Trial… It was a long session and I needed a break.'" Our question: Who goes to one of the world's most romantic cities in the world alone? That's going to be the question that nags at many folks following the Sanford story. And since there have been misleading statements for the last three days on this issue, who is going to believe the full story from Sanford now? Don’t cry for me, Argentina…
 |
|
Video: South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford tells a local newspaper he was actually in Argentina, not hiking the Appalachian Trail, as his staff had said Monday.
***
A 2012 curse? Here’s a quick quiz. Who has had the tougher last five months: A) President Obama, B) congressional Republicans, or C) GOPers who might be considering a White House bid in 2012? If you’re answer is C), you’re probably right. Let’s start with Mark Sanford, who
has inspired a new phrase -- “I went hiking on the Appalachian Trail” -- to describe any kind of mysterious disappearance. (Wife’s question: “Honey, where have you been the past couple of days?” Husband’s answer: “I went hiking on the Appalachian Trail.”) Of course, that probably will change now that Sanford was in Buenos Aires. Next, there’s Sarah Palin, who has had a rough last several months; after all, when your spat with a late-night comedian has been the highlight of your 2009, you’ve had a tough year. Then there’s Bobby Jindal, who has since stepped back from the spotlight after his dreadful response to Obama’s address to Congress. John Ensign dipped his toes in the Iowa waters, but then confessed last week to having an affair. And Newt Gingrich got in trouble -- and didn’t do himself any favors among Latino voters -- when he called Sonia Sotomayor a racist. Even the person who was supposed to be the moderate in the 2012 field, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, has gone to work for … the Obama administration.
*** Lesson -- don’t act like you’re running: By process of elimination, the potential 2012 candidate who has probably had the best five months is Mitt Romney, who has delivered a few hard-hitting speeches at Obama but has largely stayed out of the spotlight. And that very well could be the lesson to this story. After all, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton did their best to stay away from the presidential buzz in 2005-2006. We didn’t even know Obama was thinking about a presidential bid until right before the midterms, and Clinton didn’t set foot in Iowa and New Hampshire until after she announced she was running for president in January 2007. On the other hand, John Edwards was running for president as soon as the 2004 contest ended, and that didn’t work out so great for him…
*** Obama’s tougher rhetoric: Turning to the man who hopes there isn’t a 2012 curse on the Democratic side, President Obama covered a lot of ground during his press conference yesterday -- on health care, energy, even his smoking habit. But the issue that dominated, of course, was Iran. He unleashed his harshest rhetoric, saying he was “appalled and outraged” by the violence there. But Obama also maintained those new words shouldn't be interpreted as new policy. “Track what I’ve been saying right after the election. I said that we had profound concerns about the nature of the election… As soon as violence broke out, in fact, in anticipation of potential violence, we were very clear in saying that violence was unacceptable.” And he denied that his new tougher rhetoric was a response to criticism from Republicans such as John McCain. “John McCain has genuine passion about many of these international issues, and I think that all of us share a belief that we want justice to prevail,” he said. “But only I’m president of the United States.” Finally, he clearly didn’t want to publicly make any threat of consequences to the Iranian government.
 |
|
Video: In a midday news conference President Obama says he’s “appalled and outraged” by the actions taken by Iran’s government after a disputed election. NBC’s Chuck Todd reports.
***
Iranian diplomacy: Behind the scenes, there's been some news on the diplomatic front. On the record, the president clearly is doing his best to keep his options open regarding Iran. As the Washington Post's Balz points out, this president always finds a way to give himself wiggle room -- no matter the issue. And that’s clearly the case with Iran. Also, an interesting report in the Washington Times about possible communication between the U.S. (via the Swiss) to the Supreme Leader in Iran (pre-election) sparked this response from a senior administration official, who wouldn't confirm the story: "We have indicated a willingness to talk for a long time and have sought to communicate with the Iranians in a variety of ways. We have made it clear that any real dialogue -- multilateral or bilateral -- needed to be authoritative. Not gonna get into the specifics of our different ways of communicating, but there is an outstanding direct request from the Perm 5 plus 1 that was made on April 8th. The Iranians have yet to respond to that." Couple this with NBC News' Libby Leist's reporting that a State Department official says any BILATERAL diplomatic outreach is now "on ice" and it's clear whatever policy the Obama administration wanted to pursue with Iran has now changed to something that's more multi-lateral.
*** Health care day: The focus of Obama’s Wednesday is on health care. At 2:00 pm ET, he discusses the issue with Govs. Jennifer Granholm (D), Jim Douglas (R), Jim Doyle (D), Mike Rounds (R), and Christine Gregoire (D). Then he participates in a televised town hall on health care, which ABC will televise beginning at 10:00 pm ET. Of course, Obama made plenty of news on the subject in yesterday’s press conference. He suggested, as he has before, that reducing health-care costs is a higher priority than ensuring universal coverage; he advocated for a public/government option to compete with private insurance, but implied that it was negotiable (again, wiggle room); and he issued his strongest challenge to private insurers who are worrying that a government option will drive them out of business. “If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care, if they tell us that they're offering a good deal, then why is it that the government -- which they say can't run anything -- suddenly is going to drive them out of business?” he asked. “That's not logical.” However, Obama did seem to struggle a bit when asked a question about how he could ensure Americans that they would keep their health-care plans if there was a government option. But he replied that businesses are ALREADY dropping their plans…
*** Targeting DiFi: By the way, for those in the chattering class who somehow think health-care reform is in trouble, remember that there is a very sophisticated campaign apparatus that is in place to support the president on this issue. Just ask Sen. Dianne Feinstein about that apparatus. After her comments on Sunday suggesting the president didn't have the votes for health care, she found herself under the rhetorical siege by MoveOn and AFSCME's Gerald McEntee. Is this a warning to other wavering Senate Dems?
*** Just askin’: Was anyone else surprised at the president's downcast rhetoric on the stimulus? He seemed to side with the public polls on this issue, admitting that the recovery act wasn't getting money out fast enough. In addition, he volunteered that he was not pleased how the mortgage assistance program was working. Congressional Republicans will likely attempt to use his surprisingly blunt stimulus talk against him politically. The president is counting on straight talk to buy him more time.
*** A planted questioner? Perhaps the most controversial moment at yesterday’s press conference occurred when Nico Pitney of the Huffington Post got the second question and asked the president a question he had received from an Iranian. Some in the media wondered if Pitney was a planted questioner, and it does appear that the White House wanted him to ask his question. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote, “The use of planted questioners is a no-no at presidential news conferences, because it sends a message to the world -- Iran included -- that the American press isn't as free as advertised.” Politico originally said it was a “clearly coordinated” exchange. Pitney later said he was never promised a question, and Arianna Huffington responded that some in the media “can't seem to understand why the president would have the nerve to call on someone whose Iran coverage has been praised throughout the media, from Charlie Rose to Andrew Sullivan to the Economist.” The ultimate irony to all this? The president didn't really answer the question -- specifically the part that asked him to lay out the conditions at which he'd accept Ahmadinejad's election. (Editor's note: We changed our original headline here from "Planted Question" to "Planted Questioner," because no one is accusing Pitney of asking a planted question.)
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 132 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 496 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Obama’s timeout: In the game of basketball, after your team commits some errors and after the opposition runs off a couple of easy baskets, you'll routinely see the coach make this move: call a timeout. It's intended to settle down the team, get them back to basics, and slow down the opponent's momentum. And that might be the best way to view today’s televised Rose Garden press conference at 12:30 pm ET. As we’ve mentioned before, it's been a tough past week for President Obama. He's been on the defensive on health care, Iran, the economy, and the deficit. Even his poll numbers are coming back down to Earth, although the latest Washington Post/ABC poll has his approval in the mid-60s. So, like a basketball coach watching his team endure a mini-slump, he's decided to call a timeout and reset his message. (Also today, Obama meets with Chilean President Michelle Bachelet and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.)
Video: NBC’s Chuck Todd and The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson discuss the political stakes for President Barack Obama in getting his health care reform plan passed this year.
***
Time to trot out Will.i.am, too? In fact, you could argue that -- on the subject of health care -- he actually first called this timeout yesterday. Monday’s White House announcement on cost savings for prescription drugs seemed to serve as a pep talk for Democrats worried about the chances of passing health-care reform this year. "To those who, here in Washington, who’ve grown accustomed to sky-is-falling prognoses and the certainties that we cannot get this done, I have to … revive an old saying we had from the campaign: Yes we can.” But yesterday's event was also bizarre, because at noon ET and then at 2:30 pm, nobody from the administration could answer how the $80 billion would save money for the government when or if it reforms health care. By 5:00 pm, the White House finally gave us a number -- $50 billion of the $80 billion would be money that could be used to cut down on the cost of the health-care reform effort. Our question: Why not have that number at the ready at noon with the president or even 2:30 pm for Robert Gibbs? It was very odd, very slapped together. Clearly, the White House was desperate to show off some good news on the financial front on this issue after a week of bad news from the Congressional Budget Office. Also, as for the president's use of the "Yes we can" slogan yesterday, it may be a reminder of how much the president misses having an opponent. Right now, his opponent is himself.
 |
|
Video: President Obama’s health care reform plan now has the support of the nation’s leading pharmaceutical trade group, PHRMA, which is pledging $80 billion to lower prescription drug costs for seniors and the U.S. government. Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, discusses how this deal will help lower overall costs. ***
We’ll always have Cairo: Obviously, one of the questions that Obama will receive at today’s news conference will be the GOP criticism about his statements regarding the violence and protests in Iran. But we pose this question: Do you think Republicans would be less critical if Obama had simply stated what he said in his Cairo speech about freedom IN GENERAL in the Middle East? “All people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak you're mind and have a say in how your are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas. They are human rights.” Privately, the White House points to the Cairo speech quite often. But why not simply use these words for Iran specifically? Also, the president may have to answer this question today: Do Iranians have the ability to speak their mind, to say how they are governed, have the confidence in the rule of law and the EQUAL administration of justice? Has the Iranian regime been transparent, have they stolen from the people? If he can't answer in the affirmative for any of these questions, doesn't that mean there should be consequences for the regime in its dealings with the U.S. and the world?
 |
|
Video: Republicans have been lining up to argue that President Barack Obama isn’t saying enough to support the protesters in Iran. A Hardball panel debates whether his response is too timid.
***
Where in the world is ... Mark Sanford? If you're a leader in your party trying to go toe-to-toe with the Democratic administration on fiscal policy, as well as a potential 2012 candidate, chances are that you don't want 1) headlines announcing you've gone missing for several days; 2) your wife saying that she doesn't know where you are but that she isn't concerned; and 3) your spokesman saying you've gone away to clear your head after your stimulus battle. It’s all just … weird, even though Sanford associates insist that he does this all the time. Well, last night, Sanford’s office announced that he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail.
 |
|
“I want to emphasize that this isn't something that either staff or Mrs. Sanford is concerned about,” the governor’s chief spokesman said in a statement. “As we said earlier today, it isn't unusual for the governor to be out of pocket for several days after the legislative session. We knew he would be difficult to reach, and that he would be checking in infrequently.” What’s also interesting is that
two critics most concerned about his disappearance and whereabouts weren’t Democrats, but Republicans -- Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer and state Sen. Jake Knotts. The old saying, marching to the beat of his own drummer, applies as well to Sanford as it does any elected official. How likely, though do folks who march to their own drummer beat end up as nominees for their party?
*** I’m a joker, I’m a smoker… : One thing the media seemed to make crystal clear yesterday and this morning is that the president is still an occasional smoker. In all of the coverage of the president's signing of the tobacco legislation, many reporters made note of the president's past smoking, as well as Robert Gibbs' unconvincing spin that he's constantly fighting this addiction. The White House, of course, won't confirm the president still smokes. But it has not said these words: "He's no longer a smoker." Is it a big deal? No, just one of those presidential oddities that biographers live for. And everyone will want to know: When does he smoke? Is it on the golf course? The Truman Balcony?
Video: Saying "I know how difficult it can be" to stop smoking, President Obama signs a bill substantially strengthening anti-smoking efforts.
***
Let’s talk about sex, baby… let’s talk about you and me: Finally,
Roll Call reports that embattled Sen. John Ensign will address his GOP colleagues at their weekly luncheon. “While no one knows exactly what Ensign will say to his fellow Senators, the move is becoming an increasingly familiar one for embattled Republicans. Sen. David Vitter (La.) and former Sens. Ted Stevens (Alaska) and Larry Craig (Idaho), while facing scandals of their own, went before the Conference to discuss their respective situations.”
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 133 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 497 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Ramping up the rhetoric: As the violence and protests escalated in Iran on Saturday, President Obama stepped up his criticism about what’s happening there. “The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching,” he said in a statement. “We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.” But the toughest domestic political rhetoric on Iran is coming from Republicans. This is one of those cases where Democrats and the White House are wondering what the reaction would be if the roles were reversed -- i.e., Democrats criticizing a GOP administration’s response on foreign policy. Indeed, Republicans regularly beat up Democrats for supposedly politicizing international issues (do remember that the establishment Democratic Party didn’t start truly criticizing the situation in Iraq until two-plus years after the war began). But who’s politicizing now? Also, it's worth noting that the criticism from Republicans is NOT universal. In fact, the GOP establishment on this issue is more divided than the coverage is suggesting.
 |
|
Video: Former foreign policy adviser to President George W. Bush, Dan Senor, discusses whether President Obama's statements to the Iranian government have been delivered with enough strength to convince the Iranian people that America supports them.
***
With friends like these…: So let's get this straight: Barack Obama won last year’s presidential election by seven percentage points (53%-46%) campaigning, in part, for some form of universal health care; his party is about to have 60 votes in the Senate; polls show the country is receptive to overhauling health care; and the president's approval rating is between 56-60%. But Senate Democrats, like Dianne Feinstein, now say that Obama might not have the votes to pass health care? "I think there's a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus," she said on Sunday, per the
AP. The New Republic’s Jonathan Chait may very well have been right a couple of months ago,
when he wrote that Dem-controlled Congresses (during Carter and Clinton) have tended to handcuff Democratic presidents, and that may be happening now. Does anyone think that if a Republican president wanted health-care reform and had a GOP-controlled Congress and 60 Republicans in the Senate, that the reform wouldn’t pass?
*** Good news for Dems on health care? After a week of mostly bad news, advocates for a public/government option got some good news on Sunday, when the aforementioned CBS/NYT poll showed 72% backing a government-administered health insurance plan, mirroring what our recent NBC/WSJ poll found. The CBS/NYT survey also “found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.” Yet a GOP Resurgent Republic poll is out pushing back a bit. According to the poll, more than eight in 10 respondents are very or somewhat satisfied with their care, and 52% say they prefer that their taxes not be increased, even if it means that NOT all Americans get health insurance. One thing to keep in mind on health care polling is that you can always get a result to back up your position on the overall issue. Of course no one wants their taxes increased; of course no one wants to see the best parts of their health insurance changed. So what's the right answer? As one Republican aide put it in an email over the weekend: Everyone likes ice cream, but not everyone likes rum-raisin ice cream. So it’s figuring out the flavor that's difficult. One thing adding to the pressure for Democrats is history and the need to show the country a change. A public/government option may be the only way voters touch and feel "change" in health care.
 |
|
Video: The very latest on the crisis in Iran with NBC's Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel. Then, an analysis of President Obama's on-going domestic challenges with the economy and health care reform.
***
Prescription drugs and tobacco: Sticking with health care, the Obama administration and key Senate Dems seemed pretty fired up over
PhRMA's decision to lower the cost of prescription drugs. "After weeks of secret talks, the pharmaceutical industry trade group voted Friday to dedicate $80 billion to lowering the price of medicines sold to seniors and the government. The unusual offer by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) is part of its effort to convince skeptical lawmakers that it backs major health-care legislation.” The president will tout this announcement today at noon ET at the White House. Also today, at 2:00 pm ET, Obama signs into the law the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
*** Stimulus politics: By the way, today’s piece in the Washington Post about the economy and the stimulus will be a boon to Republican press secretaries today. “The likelihood of severe unemployment extending into the 2010 midterm elections and beyond poses a significant political hurdle to President Obama and congressional Democrats, who are already under fire for what critics label profligate spending,” the paper writes. “Continuing high unemployment rates would undercut the fundamental argument behind much of that spending: the promise that it will create new jobs and improve the prospects of working Americans, which Obama has called the ultimate measure of a healthy economy.”
*** You gotta know when to hold’em, know when to fold’em: Back in April, we wrote that Norm Coleman -- by taking his appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court and delaying what seems to be the inevitable -- lost his chance to bow out gracefully. Now with the state Supreme Court’s ruling perhaps days away, Matt Bai made an interesting observation in the New York Times magazine. “It used to be that when a candidate lost by a few suspect votes, the first question that arose was whether he would seek a rematch… Now, it seems, the first question anyone asks — at least since the 2000 presidential quagmire — is for how long you intend to fight the results in court.” Bai then makes this conclusion about American society in general: Fewer and fewer people are good losers. “Being fired from a job becomes the beginning of a negotiation, while a routine school suspension instantly goes to appeal. In part, this is probably the inevitable reckoning for a culture that gives trophies to every Little Leaguer because, as the saying goes, we’re all winners.”
*** Kennedy goes to bat for Dodd: In Connecticut, Ted Kennedy has cut a TV ad for vulnerable Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, who’s up for re-election next year. “Quality health care as a fundamental right for all Americans has been the cause of my life, and Chris Dodd has been my closest ally in this fight,” Kennedy says to the camera in the ad. “Today more than ever, we have a real opportunity to bring healthcare reform to Connecticut and all across America, and I believe that with Chris Dodd’s leadership, our families will finally have accessible, affordable health care.” It's rare to see any glimpse of Kennedy on camera, so no doubt this was the ultimate favor for Dodd to ask. Follow this 2009 push carefully by Dodd. One gets the sense he's pulling out all the stops this year to see if he can improve his changes significantly this year. If he can't, he's got plenty of time to change his mind about re-election, right?
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 134 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 498 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** The week that was: Let’s be honest: This has been a pretty tough week for an Obama White House that so far has seen more good days than bad ones. Republicans and conservatives -- including now Paul Wolfowitz! -- are criticizing the administration for not speaking out more forcefully about what’s happening in Iran (even though many experts side with the White House’s wait-and-see approach). New polls, including the latest NBC/WSJ survey, showed the public’s concern about the rising deficit and the government’s intervention into GM. Gay-rights advocates remain disappointed at the White House. And last, but certainly not least, congressional Democrats and liberals are now beginning to panic about their chances of passing health-care reform this year. As a result, Republicans are feeling more emboldened than ever to go after the president.
*** A turning point or an over-hyped blip? Of course, we’ve been here before, right? During the presidential election, the media continually asked, “Why isn’t Obama leading by more in the polls?” and he went on to win by the widest margin for a Democrat since 1964. Also during the campaign, there was the thought that disappointed Hillary supporters wouldn’t vote for him, which didn’t turn out to be true in November. And earlier this year, Democrats worried about the fate of Obama’s stimulus, which ultimately passed. So the current round of doubts hasn’t fazed the White House. "These days happen once every couple of months," a senior administration official told the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder. "They are almost like clockwork." That said, now five months into office, Team Obama has now entered a new -- and more difficult -- phase in which the glow from the campaign and the inauguration is gone. As NBC/WSJ co-pollster Peter Hart (D) says, “There is no more smooth sailing for the administration. They are going to have to navigate in pretty choppy waters.” The campaign was easier for Obama to recover from a rough patch because there was an opponent. But who is the opponent now?
*** Well, we guess that’s settled then: In Iran today, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a gathering at the Tehran University that the presidential election was fair and transparent and that all four candidates stand firmly behind the Islamic Republic, NBC’s Ali Arouzi reports. The supreme leader said the candidates' arguments were only on policy, and he said enemies of the state are trying to break people's trust in the system and are doing this with the help of the foreign media. Khamenei went on to say that the election was free and transparent and absolutely free of any fraud whatsoever. And he issued this warning: The protesters are acting illegal and will be dealt with if they continue. What’s more, Arouzi notes, the thousands of people in the crowd were ardent supporters of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, and they were shouting death to America and death to the United Kingdom after the supreme leader blamed outside forces for fueling the protests.
Video: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei defends his country’s recent presidential election and blames Western countries for trying to stir up chaos in Iran. NBC’s Richard Engel joins the Morning Joe gang to discuss the latest developments.
***
The administration’s pushback: Meanwhile, back in the U.S., Reps. Howard Berman (D-CA) and Mike Pence (R-IN) have introduced a bipartisan resolution expressing support for the Iranian dissidents and condemning the violence there. The House will vote on the resolution today. More congressional Republicans, in fact, appear comfortable criticizing the administration’s position here. Of course, events over the next few days could determine whether we see the president ramp up his rhetoric. But the White House is privately pushing back on the growing perception that the president's isn't speaking out enough, and it reminds us they talked plenty about democracy in the Middle East (see the Cairo speech). Yet what’s happening in Iran, the administration says, is organic democracy. But the United States intervening in Iran -- even rhetorically -- undermines that organic democracy, it says. Any association to the U.S. opens up the dissidents to charges that they are pawns of the United States.
Video: Sen. John Kerry, D-Ma., and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., discuss the tone President Barack Obama should take with regard to events in Iran.
***
If you wish upon a Starr: Now that Ken Starr is now supporting Sonia Sotomayor, is there anyone in America who thinks she won’t get confirmed? Per NBC’s Pete Williams, Starr, the conservative lawyer who led the Whitewater prosecution against Bill Clinton, confirmed news reports that he backed Sotomayor during a question-and-answer session in California. "I stated that I supported the nomination,” he said in an email to Williams. “I also indicated that a variety of issues needed to be explored at the confirmation hearings including her comments about policy making and her -- now famous -- 2001 speech at UC Berkeley." That speech, of course, was when Sotomayor said a wise Latina woman would more often then not reach a better conclusion in judging then a white male.
*** Pelosi’s poor poll numbers: Here’s a final thought for the weekend: Lost in the news about Obama’s job rating and the concern about deficit were the abysmal NBC/WSJ numbers for Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She and Rush Limbaugh now share similar negative personal ratings. That's fine for a talk radio personality (maybe even helpful), but it’s a disaster for a speaker of the House. Simply put, this is not sustainable for her politically. Sure, the White House and others will say, “Relax, she's taking the arrows for the president.” And there's lots of truth to that, but she's also letting a lot of these attacks stick. And she isn't fighting back publicly. And one wonders if that lack of public pushback is allowing this negative perception to gel. Her margin of error, politically, continues to shrink. Washington isn't a loyal town and when the going gets tough, the unpopular baggage gets tossed under the bus -- something the speaker may know. But so far, she's seems content to let these negatives rise without pushing back. Does that need to change or is it in the best interest of the president's agenda?
*** Obama’s day: At 9:30 am ET, the president delivers remarks at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast. Later, he visits a non-profit organization (at 1:00 pm ET) and then delivers remarks at the White House (at 3:15 pm) to promote and discuss fatherhood and mentorship. Among the folks participating with Obama are professional athletes DeWyane Wade, Antwan Randle El, and Etan Thomas. (Of course, we have to ask -- who is vetting these guys? Wade has separated from his wife, who has accused him of infidelity and abandonment of their children.) Obama also has penned an essay in Parade magazine on Father’s Day. Finally tonight, Obama addresses the Radio and TV Correspondents Dinner.
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 137 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 501 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
