Hurricane Irene, Eric Cantor, and the right-wing hostage-taking politics of emergency relief

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Hurricane Irene, currently a Category 3 slamming the Bahamas, is heading directly for the U.S. It is expected to make landfall in North Carolina on Saturday:

Airline flights and events were canceled or postponed in advance of
Hurricane Irene, a dangerous storm that is expected to bring widespread
damage, power outages and flooding from North Carolina to New England.



A
hurricane warning was issued Thursday for coastal North Carolina from
Little River Inlet north to the Virginia border, including the Pamlico,
Albemarle and Currituck sounds, the National Hurricane Center said. 

At a time like this, of course, it is essential that government emergency services, particularly federal, be ready to help those areas that need relief. Think of the people who will need food and shelter, the infrastructure that will need to be repaired and possibly rebuilt, the devastation that may soon come.

Think back to Katrina. We learned a lot from that catastrophe, did we not?

Well, not all of us.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor didn't -- or at least doesn't care.

Just as Republicans held the country hostage over the debt ceiling ("give us what we want, or else"), Cantor is now doing the same over disaster relief (some of which may be needed in his home state of Virginia, which is in Irene's path). As his spokesperson explained, "Eric has consistently said that additional funds for federal disaster relief ought to be offset with spending cuts."

It's one thing to demand offsets in theory, or even at the negotiating table, quite another to do so with a major hurricane bearing down, with a natural disaster possibly at hand. It would be like if a dying man desperately needed a blood transfusion but you refused to give him any unless he gave you his house and car. (Which is actually how health care works in the U.S., but let's not go there.)

This was Cantor's response to the earthquake that caused significant damage along the east coast, including in Virginia, it's his response to Irene, and it's his response to disaster relief generally. No money unless money is cut elsewhere. In other words: Give us what we want, or else. And you can be sure he won't agree to cuts to military spending. He just wants to cut programs he's ideologically opposed to -- relatively insignificant funding for, say, public broadcasting, or more significant funding for the poor and those who otherwise are vulnerable and need government help, like Social Security and Medicare.

Consider the message he's sending to the people along the east coast, in Irene's path. We'll help you but only if we can also weaken programs that help you. You get some disaster relief, but, otherwise, fuck you. That's what this comes down to. (Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, has pre-emptively declared a state of emergency. Cantor apparently doesn't give a shit.)

This is cruel and unusual. As Steve Benen provides perspective:

A while back, during a different debate, John Cole noted, "If these guys were comic book villains, no one would buy it because
it’s just too over the top." It's a sentiment that comes to mind all the
time.



Tom DeLay never went this far. No one
has ever gone this far. U.S. officials have always put everything else
aside when families and communities are hit and need a hand, but now,
thanks to the new House Republican majority, those principles have been
cast aside.



*****



We can obviously hope for the best when it comes to Hurricane Irene, but
at this point, Republicans are apparently intent on literally adding
insult to injury.

"Adding insult" is a nice way to put it. This is ugly ideological extremism operating as insensitivity to suffering, political hostage-taking with lives and livelihoods in the balance.

In 2011, it's the Republican way.

Robert Gates: The Bravest Person in Washington?

By Peter Henne

Like many inside the Beltway, I gasped this morning as I read the front page of The Washington Post. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has announced plans to cut "thousands" of positions in the DoD, including numerous contractor jobs and the entire Joint Forces Command. One of the few constants in this region is the defense industry; the expanding federal government resulted in numerous firms specializing in government contracts, especially in defense and intelligence. I suspect that many people in this area--including those who loudly denounce US military spending--secretly assure themselves that, if all else failed, there would still be a contractor's job waiting for them.

I am of mixed feelings about this. As someone who has worked with this industry, I know that government contractors perform valuable services for the government, and make up for shortcomings in the federal hiring process. Also, the Joint Forces Command plays an integral role in ensuring the military services work well together. At the same time, the government has become dependent on private contractors to an extent likely unintended by anyone, and a great amount of money can be saved by stream-lining DoD offices.

I do hope, though, that Gates' brave move--doing what he thinks is right for the country--means Congress will no longer be able to play politics with our defense budget. Previous attempts to focus defense spending on critical items have been stymied by Congressional opposition, as seen in the fight over the F-22 fighter. And Republican Senators have placed holds on crucial Presidential appointees in order to ensure defense contracts are steered towards their states, holds which were withdrawn when the public realized what was happening. With the Senate apparently mired in dysfunction, letting the bureaucrats make decisions like this may ironically be more democratic than letting Senators use our national security to enhance their electoral prospects.

That is not to say politicians will--or should--leave Gates alone. Unfortunately, VA Governor Bob McDonnell and Representative J. Randy Forbes--both Republicans--somehow found a way to blame Obama's domestic policies. But people do get worried when their jobs are threatened; communities have a right to question whether the economic impact of these cuts are worth the savings in federal spending. I can only hope that Gates' initiative will lead to a real debate in this country about defense spending, not more cynical political posturing.

Haley's vomit

By Mustang Bobby

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) defended the original Virginia Confederacy History Month proclamation -- the one that omitted the mention of slavery -- and said that the whole kerfuffle about it didn't "amount to diddly."

"I don't know what you would say about slavery, but anybody that thinks that you have to explain to people that slavery is a bad thing--I think that goes without saying," he said, adding "Maybe they should talk to my Democratic legislature, which has done the exactly same thing in Mississippi for years...I'm unaware of them being criticized for it." 

As for the criticism McDonnell faced, including from President Obama, Barbour said: "It's sort of feeling that it's a nit, that it is not significant, it's trying to make a big deal out of something that doesn't amount to diddly," he also said.

The problem for McDonnell, of course: He's been saying for several days now exactly the opposite, apologizing repeatedly for leaving slavery out of the proclamation and calling it a "major omission."

A few points here. First, a Democratic legislature in Mississippi is not to be confused with the same in a place like Massachusetts or Minnesota. Southern Democrats are a wholly different breed, and when the right-wing pipes up and says that Democrats in the South stood in the way of desegregation and it was the Republicans who voted for Civil Rights over the filibusters of Sen. John Stennis and Richard Russell, that's who they're talking about; they may be fewer in numbers after Nixon's Southern Strategy and Reagan Democrats, but they're still there.

Second, as mentioned in the article, Mr. Barbour is doing Mr. McDonnell no favors here by standing up for the original resolution, especially since the Virginia governor practically broke the three-minute walk-back last week when he admitted that leaving out slavery was a "major omission." The best thing that Mr. McDonnell can do now is distance himself from Mr. Barbour and tell him, "Stop helping me."

Third, and this is purely based on a personal reaction, Mr. Barbour's style of delivery -- a combination of televangelist and Boss Hogg -- sounds like all of the good ole boys who used to tell us about "outside agitators" and people who "don't know their place" back in the days of the Civil Rights movement. I know that bigotry can be expressed in any style -- I've heard people who speak in the best manner of the Queen's English spout racist and bigoted crap, too -- but if the Republicans hope to reach out to minorities and independents who think that slavery does amount to more than just "diddly," they need to get a better spokesman.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

More on McDonnell and Confederate Virginia

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I blogged a couple of days ago about Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell's reprehensible decision to declare April 2010 Confederate History Month in that state:

-- Slavery? Check.

-- Rebellion? Check.

-- A bitter, divisive legacy? Check.

-- The antithesis of progress, enlightenment, and America's purported ideals? Check.

Well, the story is gaining national attention, and rightly so, given that it sheds a great deal of light not just on McDonnell himself but on Republicans generally, and on Virginia Republicans in particular, as well as on all those conservatives who seem to sympathize with the Confederacy (and all that it was about).

McDonnell's proclamation asks Virginians to "understand the sacrifices of the Confederate leaders, soldiers and citizens during the period of the Civil War." This goes well beyond asking them to remember the fallen, which perhaps wouldn't have been quite so bad. As the chairman of the Legislative Black Caucus, Kenneth Cooper Alexander, a Democrat, put it, the "proclamation was offensive and offered a disturbing revision of the Civil War and the brutal era that followed. Virginia has worked hard to move beyond the very things for which Governor McDonnell seems nostalgic."

McDonnell has since backtracked a bit, trying to rationalize his decision: "I felt just as I've issued dozens and dozens of other commemorations, that it was something that was worthy of doing so people can at least study and understand that period of Virginia history and how it impacts us today," he said on Tuesday. Sorry, but it won't work. The organization behind the proclamation is the Sons of Confederate Veterans, apologists of the Confederacy, not a reputable academic group with an interest in advancing the study of U.S. history. Indeed, it was that very organization that was behind fellow Republican Gov. George Allen's proclamation calling the Civil War "a four-year struggle for [Southern] independence and sovereign rights." 

The Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates puts McDonnell's decision in its proper Republican context:

The GOP is, effectively, the party of willfully unlettered Utopians. It is the party of choice for those who believe global warming is a hoax, that humans roamed the earth with dinosaurs, and that homosexuals should work harder at not being gay.

That the party of unadulterated quackery also believes that Birth Of A Nation is more true to the Civil War than Battle Cry Of Freedom, is to be expected.

*****

This is who they are -- the proud and ignorant. If you believe that if we still had segregation we wouldn't "have had all these problems," this is the movement for you. If you believe that your president is a Muslim sleeper agent, this is the movement for you. If you honor a flag raised explicitly to destroy this country then this is the movement for you. If you flirt with secession, even now, then this movement is for you. If you are a "Real American" with no demonstrable interest in "Real America" then, by God, this movement of alchemists and creationists, of anti-science and hair tonic, is for you.

McDonnell continues to backtrack, and to spin -- he has apologized for not mentioning slavery:

The abomination of slavery divided our nation, deprived people of their God-given inalienable rights, and led to the Civil War. Slavery was an evil, vicious and inhumane practice which degraded human beings to property, and it has left a stain on the soul of this state and nation.

Well, yes, of course. But he's still either a panderer to his right-wing base or a Confederate sympathizer, or both, and he can't just talk his way out of his proclamation. He deserves all the heat he's been taking. And the American people, it seems to me, should once again take a long, hard look at the Republican Party, and what really drives it.

Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell looks to take Virginia back to its Confederate past

By Michael J.W. Stickings

It's always great when Republicans show their true colours, isn't it? Take what Gov. Bob McDonnell is doing in Virginia:

Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has quietly declared April 2010 Confederate History Month, bringing back a designation in Virginia that his two Democratic predecessors -- Mark Warner and Tim Kaine -- refused to do.

Republican governors George Allen and Jim Gilmore issued similar proclamations. But in 2002, Warner broke with their action, calling such proclamations, a "lightning rod" that does not help bridge divisions between whites and blacks in Virginia.

This year's proclamation was requested by the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

I get that a great many Confederate soldiers died in the Civil War, and they ought to be remembered in some way. But Confederate history? Let's see...

-- Slavery? Check.

-- Rebellion? Check.

-- A bitter, divisive legacy? Check.

-- The antithesis of progress, enlightenment, and America's purported ideals? Check.

Does McDonnell really need to appease his pro-Confederate constituency? Won't the Sons of Confederate Veterans vote for him, and any Republican, regardless?

Or does he just happen to have a real soft spot for the Confederacy, for what it stood (and went to war for), and for all that it continues to represent?

Whatever the case, it's a terrible, terrible decision, a big gubernatorial middle finger to every black person in Virginia, to every person who would have been deemed sub-human by the Confederacy, as well as to every good and decent person in that state and beyond.

But what a truly Republican decision, too -- especially in a state where there is a clear dividing line between the two parties on this issue. At least we know, quite clearly, that Virginia Republicans are pro-Confederacy while Virginia Democrats are trying to bring their state past its ugly past.

Virginians, it seems to me, along with Americans around the country, should consider that when they head to the polls.

Virginia governor rescinds protections for gays and lesbians

By Michael J.W. Stickings

TPM:

Gay and lesbian state workers in Virginia are no longer specifically protected against discrimination, thanks to a little-noticed change made by new Gov. Bob McDonnell.

McDonnell (R) on Feb. 5 signed an executive order that prohibits discrimination "on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, political affiliation, or against otherwise qualified persons with disabilities," as well as veterans.

It rescinds the order that Gov. Tim Kaine signed Jan. 14, 2006 as one of his first actions. After promising a "fair and inclusive" administration in his inaugural address, Kaine (D) added veterans to the non-discrimination policy -- and sexual orientation.

I think Kaine's spokesperson, Hari Sevugan, is absolutely right:

It says a lot about the Republican party that they would anoint as their "rising star" someone who in 2010 is actually stripping away from Americans legal protections against discrimination. Bob McDonnell is proving his critics right. He said he'd focus on creating jobs, not social issues. But, one of his first acts as Governor was to make it easier for a fellow citizen to be denied a job and he did so as an adherent to a right-wing ideology that allows for such discriminatory behavior. McDonnell's decision is just plain wrong in any context, but especially so in this economic climate.

With a Republican in the Virginia governor's mansion, bigotry, unsurprisingly, is back with a vengeance.

Republicans use military as a stage prop (yet again)... and this time may have broken the law

Guest post by Rob Diamond

Rob Diamond, a Truman National Security Fellow, is a Senior Vice President at Realty Capital International LLC, a global real estate investment banking and advisory firm. He was previously a Vice President at Bear Stearns & Co. Prior to his career in finance, he served as an officer in the United States Navy, completing deployments in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Ed. note: This post was originally published at The Huffington Post. In December, we published a post on climate change and national security co-written by Rob and Truman Project COO John Powers -- you can find it here.

**********

You did not have to be paying much attention during Tuesday's Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address to notice a young Army staff sergeant in full dress uniform seated prominently right behind Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and enthusiastically applauding and cheering the governor's attacks on Democrats.

Slight problem, you see. That is probably against the law.

Look it up for yourself right here in the Department of Defense (DoD) Directive entitled "Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces." The purpose of this DoD Directive is to mirror the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from engaging in partisan political activity in an official capacity. Since a DoD Directive is considered to be in the same category as an order or regulation, and military personnel violating its provisions can be considered in violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, our Republican friends may have just caused this brave young soldier to break the law. Thank you for that, Governor McDonnell.

Now, my point is not to single out this young soldier for punishment, but rather to highlight the continued use of members of our armed forces as stage props for Republicans. "Mission Accomplished" -- remember that one? Or just consider Sarah Palin's latest attempt to hold a rally (aka "book tour") at Fort Bragg this past November. Well, you can now add "Republican Response 2010" to what is a rather endless list, actually.

It was a Republican administration and Republican-led Congress that sent our military into two wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) that were woefully under-planned, under-funded, and under-equipped. We all know that story. It was a Republican administration and Republican-led Congress that left my generation of servicemen and women with a Department of Veterans Affairs unable to meet the demands of millions of new veterans.

It has taken a Democratic president and a Democratic-led Congress to end the war in Iraq as well as finally commit the troops, resources, and strategy necessary to win in Afghanistan. And yes, it has been President Obama and a Democratic Congress that have given the VA the largest budget increase in its history ($15 billion dollars in 2010) and is working tirelessly to create a 21st-century VA to care for our newest generation of veterans.

I know many of you to my ideological right are already leaping out of your seats and shouting, "well then why were there men and women in uniform at the State of the Union address?" Pretty simple answer, actually. The State of the Union is not a partisan political gathering (as the Republican response clearly is). The State of the Union is mandated in the Constitution, and the entire government -- Republicans, Democrats, independents -- as well the Cabinet and members of the Supreme Court and the Joint Chiefs of Staff all gather to hear the president address the nation. The State of the Union is the exact opposite of a partisan political gathering. It is the heart and soul of our government coming together "from time to time" to address the entire nation on the state of our union.

My point is this -- Republicans love to stand in front of the military. It is about time they try and stand behind us as well.