There's a storm a brewin'...

...and the Obama administration is bracing for it.

Peter Nicholas and Christi Parsons write for the LA Times:

As President Obama remakes his senior staff, he is also shaping a new approach for the second half of his term: to advance his agenda through executive actions he can take on his own, rather than pushing plans through an increasingly hostile Congress.

A flurry of staff departures and promotions is playing out as the White House ends a nearly two-year period of intense legislative activity. Where the original staff was built to give Obama maximum clout in Congress, the new White House team won't need the same leverage with lawmakers.

"It's fair to say that the next phase is going to be less about legislative action than it is about managing the change that we've brought," White House senior advisor David Axelrod said in an interview.

Rahm Emanuel, a former member of Congress who helped establish the Democratic majority in the House, resigned last week as White House chief of staff. His successor, for now, is Pete Rouse, a former congressional aide who has never held elective office.

Rouse won't emulate Emanuel, who was able to negotiate with lawmakers as a peer. Instead, the interim chief of staff will have a more operational role.

Winning passage of legislation wasn't easy for Obama, even with Democrats in firm control of both houses of Congress. Conditions will get tougher if, as expected, the Republicans pick up seats in the midterm election next month, or possibly take control of Congress.

"Whether or not the Republicans take over majorities in one or both houses, the margins will be so much narrower that the strategy of putting together a Democratic bill and picking off a handful of Republicans to push it over the top won't be viable anymore," said William Galston, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

So the best arena for Obama to execute his plans may be his own branch of government. That means more executive orders, more use of the bully pulpit, and more deployment of his ample regulatory powers and the wide-ranging rulemaking authority of his Cabinet members.

(Full Post)

It's sad that this has to happen.
The Obama administration made a valiant effort to to gain bipartisan support for their policies.
But the "party of no" (which is about to become the party of No-er) necessitates more extreme measures.
I, like many, had hoped that President Obama could govern in a far more democratic fashion than his predecessor.
But I now see that power-hungry Republicans will never allow this to happen.

This, of course, is part of the reason it's so crucial that we turn out to vote en masse.
But regardless of the mid-term outcome, it's comforting to know that the Obama administration will be fortified and ready for the coming onslaught.

Editorial

Pastor Rick is my Brother, Too.

By Woodrow Jarvis Hill

To understand why I approve of putting Rick Warren on that stage, I need to go back to an eariler writing of mine, "Abortion is a Moral Choice".
More to the point, I must, first, go back to a section of the article that sparked my writing:

What changed?

I don't remember the day. But that day didn't come until after I'd met people -- surprise! -- who'd chosen abortion. It came after my school friends became parents; after I began having sex and selecting birth control; after I experienced and witnessed sexual harassment.

In short, it happened after pro-choice rhetoric took a human shape. I saw those I loved. I saw myself.

[...]

I didn't "switch sides;" I'm against the notion of "sides" in the first place.

One of the hardest things I have to do, is fight and support for a ruling, and it's support network, that I think was wrongly decided and painfully implemented.

Yes, as I've said before, and will say again -- I think Roe. vs. Wade is bad law.

But it's also right. It's what the law should be, by and large. There is no doubt in my mind that Abortion Rights are proper and important -- and if I ever doubt, all I have to recall is the faces of those women who told story after story of lie before the ruling. Of facing not just coathangers, but all manner of barbarous chemical aborifacants, and the ugly hands of Doctors who did the safer of the underground procedures, but at the cost of a women's dignity and money.

You can't pay me enough to go back to that system. And you can't pay me enough to switch.

And yet, I'm fully aware that the ruling left America behind. It was, sadly, ahead of it's time. It is simply the case that the average American was, at that point, still unaware of the horrorshow of underground abortions. They still thought it was a procedure done, by and large, by "bad girls" -- and that the exception they snuck in, was much like the exceptions many Pro-Life folks give themselves, today, when they get Abortions.

If there had been a National push, a dialog, a way to frame Abortion Rights in similar ways that MLK et.al. framed Civil Rights, and that, indeed, Feminists developed for other parts of the cause, I think our National dialog on abortion would be much different, today. If "we" had worked to not press the right simply in courts and legislatures, it might have come out much as Miscegenation did; since Interracial Marriage was so closely tied to the growing mass consensus that Racism Is Wrong, even though the majority of Americans were against it when Loving vs. Virgina came down, that law was far easier to integrate (pun intended) into the National Landscape.

There aren't many exceptions with Gay Marriage, but there is one rule. There needs to be a dialog. There needs to be words spoken, in public, over and again. There needs to be communication, not just with the unwashed masses, but also with people who oppose the idea. This is how Racism became a non-no -- not because of laws, but because of words and deeds and actions that alerted a sleeping America that there was a horrid wrong being perpetrated on some of her people. The images of attacking dogs, police beating, and water hoses upon peaceful marches weren't just a side-show, they were the show, and the showcase for why action was needed right now. They were the way to open up the dialog .

And just as the people who led the Civil Rights movements, and movements before and since, had to dialog with people diametrically to them, so now have we a change to open up dialog with Pastor Rick Warren. To shift his words and perhaps even his deeds. To provide him with God's Own Truth as to the results of his words and actions on Gay Marriage -- and so much more -- over the last few years. If he is, indeed, a Christian man, as he says, and the harbinger of a new detante and re-focus for Evangelicals, then we who stand for not just openness, but diplomacy and dialog with most, should embrace this furor, build upon the media fury, and expose him to the honest assessment of America; that a man who speaks hate about people who love is a man who misunderstands his own words, and risks hypocrisy -- a sin mentioned far more often by Jesus than Homosexuality; indeed, any sexuality.

I know what you say, "But Woodrow, what if it doesn't work?" Well, perhaps one should ask a certain M. Etheridge how her attempt went, first:

I told my manager to reach out to Pastor Warren and say "In the spirit of unity I would like to talk to him." They gave him my phone number. On the day of the conference I received a call from Pastor Rick, and before I could say anything, he told me what a fan he was. He had most of my albums from the very first one. What? This didn't sound like a gay hater, much less a preacher. He explained in very thoughtful words that as a Christian he believed in equal rights for everyone. He believed every loving relationship should have equal protection. He struggled with proposition 8 because he didn't want to see marriage redefined as anything other than between a man and a woman. He said he regretted his choice of words in his video message to his congregation about proposition 8 when he mentioned pedophiles and those who commit incest. He said that in no way, is that how he thought about gays. He invited me to his church, I invited him to my home to meet my wife and kids. He told me of his wife's struggle with breast cancer just a year before mine.

When we met later that night, he entered the room with open arms and an open heart. We agreed to build bridges to the future.

And now, Warren's church has pulled the "No Homosexuals Need Apply" language from their website.

"All symbols," you might say. The post noting the pulling even goes so far as to imply Obama might have had something to do with the pulling, with (so far as I know) no evidence.

But the entirety of this fight is about symbols! And if someone who is standing as a symbol, takes pains to stand up, and do things that walk back from the nature of what makes him an unacceptable symbol, what then the symbolism?

Perhaps this is the point where we can stop demonizing our opposition as a kneejerk reaction. This is the point where we understand that they are wrong, yet are too also human. That change doesn't have to be about broad symbols and lines int he sand, but about the slow and painful, slogging work of Just Talking. That we take to our rigtheous and right anger, and descend upon the streets as a last resort, after talking and attempting to understand have failed.

Not every fight, not every social ill, not every opponent can be worked this way. But, perhaps -- just perhaps -- Obama looked at Warren, and saw someone who could be changed, who could be led to understand the pain so many Homosexuals see in the American society -- as got a taste of after McClurkin. And he risked all this displeasure, all this anger, to give him that chance.

It seems to have already paid off. We shall see, going forward, if A Change is Gonna Come, indeed. I close with more of Melissa Etheridge's words:

Brothers and sisters the choice is ours now. We have the world's attention. We have the capability to create change, awesome change in this world, but before we change minds we must change hearts. Sure, there are plenty of hateful people who will always hold on to their bigotry like a child to a blanket. But there are also good people out there, Christian and otherwise that are beginning to listen. They don't hate us, they fear change. Maybe in our anger, as we consider marches and boycotts, perhaps we can consider stretching out our hands. Maybe instead of marching on his church, we can show up en mass and volunteer for one of the many organizations affiliated with his church that work for HIV/AIDS causes all around the world.

Maybe if they get to know us, they wont fear us.

National Organization for Women endorses Obama

AFP reports:

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The National Organization for Women (NOW) said Tuesday it had been pushed by the Republicans pick of Sarah Palin as vice presidential nominee to back Democrat Barack Obama for the White House.

"NOW is going to be endorsing the Obama-Biden ticket," NOW head Kim Gandy told National Public Radio (NPR), referring to Obama and his running mate Joseph Biden.

The 500,000-strong women's movement, which "very, very rarely endorses in a general election", broke with its tradition of neutrality after "the addition of Sarah Palin gave us a new sense of urgency," said Gandy.

"She is being portrayed as a supporter of women's rights ... as a feminist when in fact her positions on so many of the issues are really anathema to ours," Gandy said.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain electrified his party's conservative base when he named Palin, a devout Christian and staunch opponent of abortion, as his running mate some two weeks ago.

The move was seen by some as an attempt by McCain to win over disappointed women voters who had backed Senator Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, and also saw her passed over by Obama in favor of Biden.

"There's no question that a lot of women think it's a great thing for a woman to be running for vice president," Gandy said on NPR.

"But they are completely dismayed when they find out her positions.

"The idea that she opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest -- those kinds of positions are completely out of step with American women and once they find out about those positions, they get a little less excited about a woman running for vice president," Gandy said.

NOW was due to formally announce its endorsement of the Obama-Biden ticket later Tuesday at a news conference.

(Link)

Whatcha' gon' do Hillary?

During the Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton asked her supporters if they were in this for the values of the party, or just in it for her.

In an article for HuffPo, Lisa Gans points out why now is the time for Hillary to prove that she meant it.

Women, and people who care about women, should be afraid of this Republican ticket. They should be affronted by the Republican's appeal for support to the very people whom they sees to harm. And they should look to Hillary Clinton to make clear the distinctions between herself and the Sarah Palins of the world. John McCain and Sarah Palin are people who can be counted on to repair any cracks in the glass ceiling made by Hillary and countless others, and roll back progress made by and for women over the past half century. Hillary is in a unique position to point out that this Republican ticket proposes to pack the Supreme Court with radical conservative judges, take away a woman's right to chose, blur the line between Church and State, jeopardize Social Security, and cut social programs whose beneficiaries are primarily women and children.

Yet, following the announcement of Palin as the VP nominee, Hillary Clinton released the following tepid statement: "We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate."

During the debates against Barack Obama, a man with whom she voted approximately 90% of the time in Congress and with whom she shares a basic set of values, beliefs and core political principles, Clinton did not hold back her pointed criticisms of the man she hoped to defeat. It is now time for her to unleash her oratory power and, in this case, well-deserved indignation, against John McCain and his choice for vice president.

John McCain and Sarah Palin are the antithesis of everything that both Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton stand for, and everything that Hillary Clinton has fought for during her political career. I have been an Obama supporter from the start, but I always knew that, if Hillary turned out to be the nominee, the Supreme Court would be safe from justices who would seek to prevent women from maintaining control over their own bodies and reproductive decisions. I knew that the fight for healthcare, education, social security, and support for our nation's veterans would be in capable and concerned hands. And, I had the comfort of knowing that the unilateralism that has been the hallmark of the Bush foreign policy would come to an end and that we would once again reach out to our allies. These are the common causes that should spur Hillary on to step forward and make the difference she clearly can in shifting the tone and substance of the media coverage of this campaign. As a woman who has become a feminist icon with serious track record on issues relating to women and children, she is needed at the front lines, a place where she told us during the primaries she has always been.

(Full Article)

Malcolm, Albright reconcile. Support Obama...

Sam Stein wrtites for The Huffington Post:

Several of Hillary Clinton's most influential female supporters, urged members of the pro-choice, pro-female candidate group, EMILY'S List to overcome their grief over Clinton's loss and throw their support behind Barack Obama. There were tepid and then more sustained cheers.

Speaking at group's annual luncheon celebrating in Washington D.C., Ellen Malcolm, EMILY's List's founder and director, offered a highly personalized plea for Democratic unity, saying that the possibility of a John McCain presidency outweighed political grudges.

"I have been meandering my way through the various stages of grief: sadness, bargaining, anger, and my personal favorite dessert," she said to a crowd of approximately 900. "And so for the sake of my waistline as much less the sake of the party and country, I will follow Hillary Clinton and say it is time for the party to come together."

The crowd applauded. Later in the event, former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, another Clinton supporter, declared that "we are all in one campaign now" and "the reality is that this year the Democratic Party produced not one but two candidates who are qualified to win in November." She was greeted with a more enthusiastic reception.

(Full Article)

Moving on to the challenges ahead...

Thank you Senator Clinton for doing the right thing.



I have my own thoughts about what could/should have been added to that speech (no mention of Obama's record on women's reproductive rights? Or the strong women in his family? His mother? His grandmother? Michelle? His daughters?), but overall I was happy to see such a full-throated endorsement and step toward healing the rift in the party.

I hope that Hillary's supporters will follow her example and realize that this is not about which candidate you liked more, but about the larger cause of making sure the Democrats take back Washington in the fall.

Steinem reconciles...

Margery Eagan writes for The Boston Herald:

The feminist icon whose writings inspired thousands of American women to a passionate support of Hillary Clinton said yesterday she was not at all crushed by Hillary’s loss and believes her race has “absolutely” been good for women. But she now not only supports Democratic nominee Barack Obama, she’ll volunteer for him, too.

“I think she changed forever our understanding of the possibilities of leadership,” Gloria Steinem said of Hillary in a Herald interview after a morning appearance here. “She showed such courage in the face of a media that was trying constantly to get her out of the race and all the misogyny . . . She put up with that with grace. She enlarged my vision.”

Steinem also said she’d be happy in an America where Nancy Pelosi remains speaker of the House, Hillary runs the Senate and Barack Obama is president.

(Full Article)


Let's hope this is the beginning of a trend!