Buck Naked Politics

Sen. Ensign's Family So Very Generously Paid $96,000 to Senator's Mistress

by bartleby the scrivener | ...and it was strictly out of concern for her and her family's welfare, it seems. (The New York Times)  Sadly -- as David Stout writes at The New York Times -- this generous gift is "sure to provide grist for political detractors," of whom I am one.

A statement by [Ensign's] lawyer, Paul Coggins, on behalf of the Mr. Ensign, a Republican from Nevada, said that in April 2008 the senator’s parents each gave $12,000 apiece to Cindy Hampton, her husband, Doug, and two of their children in the form of a single check for $96,000.

“The payments were made as gifts, accepted as gifts and complied with tax rules governing gifts,” the statement read. Under federal tax regulations, $12,000 is the most that a person can receive as a gift from any one person without having to declare or pay taxes on it.  (NYT)

Politico speculates that this revelation "seemed intended to head off growing questions about whether Ensign violated federal law by failing to report what Doug Hampton called a severance package worth more than $25,000 to his wife Cynthia, who left Ensign's campaign staff on April 30, 2008." (Politico) 

Krugman Told Us So -- Too Small Stimulus Package Proving Inadequate to Turn Economy Around

by Bartleby | Back when the stimulus bill was still being debated, Paul Krugman worried that Obama's plan would prove inadequate to get the economy moving, and that Obama would eventually find himself in the untenable position of having to ask for another stimulus.  [See:  Swift, Bold Action Required: Krugman; The Economic "Stimulus" Package; Krugman on the Stimulus Package: It's Too Little. Will Obama Realize This Too Late?]  Once again, it looks as if Paul Krugman has been right all along and Obama's advisors, wrong.

Today Krugman writes:

"As soon as the Obama administration-in-waiting announced its stimulus plan — this was before Inauguration Day — some of us worried that the plan would prove inadequate. And we also worried that it might be hard, as a political matter, to come back for another round.

Robert McNamara

by Bill Kavanagh:  Robert McNamara’s death this week at age 93 brings up a host of emotions that haunt most Americans of a certain age.  His role as the primary architect of American involvement in the Vietnam conflict during the 1960’s will be, despite all his other work, McNamara’s historical legacy.  Reflecting on that role also appears to have been the ethical shadow that preoccupied the latter half of McNamara’s life.

The decision to send half a million American boys to Vietnam in 1965 to fight a major Cold War conflict over a continuing civil war had consequences far beyond that country’s borders over the intervening decades.  The fierce resistance of the Vietnamese, a growing American domestic disillusionment with our involvement, and an increased press scrutiny of the escalation led to a decision by Lyndon Johnson not to stand for re-election in 1968, to the rise of an American political insurgency, to a questioning of an Imperial Presidency, and to the fall of many another American icon.   

Get Your Pitchforks Ready: Corporate Welfare Recipient Economy-Buster AIG Wants Federal "Compensation Czar" Kenneth Feinberg to Give His Blessing to Another Round of Giant Executive Bonuses

by bartleby the scrivener| AIG wants to give giant bonuses to its executives -- because there's just no way its executives are getting as much out of showing up for work as they expected (or deserve).  The Washington Post reports:

American International Group is preparing to pay millions of dollars more in bonuses to several dozen top corporate executives after an earlier round of payments four months ago set off a national furor.

The troubled insurance giant has been pressing the federal government to bless the payments in hopes of shielding itself from renewed public outrage.... The request puts the administration's new compensation czar on the spot by seeking his opinion about bonuses that were promised long before he took his post.  (WaPo)

As Truthdig observes:  "The closest we’ve come to a pitchfork moment in this whole economic crisis was the last time AIG tried to shower its employees with bonuses. You may recall that the financial giant was rewarded with $180 billion in federal funds after losing more money than any company ever did before and helping to ruin the world economy. "

Headline Round-up

by Deb Cupples |  Today's New York Times has a story entitled, "Democrats Say CIA Deceived Congress for Years."  Duhhhhh. On that note, The Washington Independent tells us:

On June 26, six seven Democrats on the committee — Anna Eshoo (Calif.), John Tierney (Mass.), Rush Holt (N.J.), Mike Thompson (Calif.), Alcee Hastings (Fla.) and Jan Schakowsky (Ill.) [Update: I received an early version of the letter. Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.) also signed it] — wrote to Panetta, “Recently you testified that you have determined that top CIA officials have concealed significant actions from all Members of Congress, and misled Members for a number of years from 2001 to this week.”

The letter — which doesn’t explain what those “significant actions” concerned* — asks that Panetta “publicly correct” his May 15 statement that it isn’t CIA “policy or practice to mislead Congress.” TWI acquired a copy of the letter, which comes after CQ reported that committee chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) also nebulously stated that CIA “affirmatively lied” to the committee.

Meanwhile, The Politico focused on matters of far greater national importance -- reporting that Sen. Tom Coburn knew, about a year ago, that his Republican colleague Sen. John Ensign was having an extra-marital affair with a staffer.

Vanity Fair on AIG's Collapse

Via Memeorandum, Vanity Fair has an interesting piece on AIG's collapse.  Here's a small taste:

"[T]he public explanation of A.I.G.’s failure focused on the credit-default swaps sold by traders at A.I.G. F.P., when A.I.G.’s problems were clearly broader. There was the mortgage-insurance unit in North Carolina, United Guaranty, that had taken on all sorts of silly risks in the past two years, lost several billion dollars, and replaced their C.E.O. There were the fund managers at A.I.G., the parent company, who had blown nearly $50 billion on trades in subprime mortgages—that is, they had lost more than A.I.G. F.P., whose losses stood around $45 billion.

"And there was a pattern: all of this stuff had happened since 2005, after an accounting scandal forced C.E.O. Maurice “Hank” Greenberg to resign. Greenberg, who had headed A.I.G. since 1968, was a bullying, omnipotent ruler—one of those bosses who did not so much build a company as tailor it to his character and render it incapable of being run by anyone else. After he was forced out, Greenberg said, 'The new management wanted to prove that they could continue to grow without former management” and so turned a blind eye to all sorts of risks.

"So how come most of the senior management at A.I.G. was left in place by the U.S. Treasury after the bailout? Why were officials, both public and private, so intent on leading others to believe all the losses at A.I.G. had been caused by a few dozen traders in this fringe unit in London and Connecticut?"

See the rest of the story here.

Whatever Happened to Those Banks' Toxic Assets?

by Deb Cupples |  McClatchy tells us:

"In March, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner unveiled a Public-Private Investment Program in which the government and private firms would bid together to purchase toxic assets from banks, freeing them to increase lending and help revive the economy.

"The program's still not operating."

As I recall, the program some high-powered experts viewed the PPIP as a win-win for banks and big investors -- but a major downer for us taxpayers (see here and here) -- as it represented a  funneling of undeserved money to the very folks who drove our nation's financial institutions (and economy) into a deep ditch.

John Cole from Baloon Juice has some suggestions regarding the PPIP:

Are Some Elite GOP Members "Rooting Against" America?

by Deb Cupples |  I'll never forget those first few years after 9/11 (and before Hurricane Katrina), when the Bush Administration, congressional Republicans, and some major media outlets convinced millions of Americans that if they opposed any policy of then-President Bush, they opposed America itself.

By thunderously pronouncing dissenters as "terrorist lovers" or "traitors," the Bush Administration managed to silence many people who disagreed with Bush's policies.

Less than two weeks ago, Glenn Beck (the GOP-friendly pundit on Fox) chatted with ex-CIA official Michael Scheuer -- who basically said that America needs Osama bin Laden to launch another violent attack against our homeland in order to get America back on track.  Even worse, the self-styled patriots at Fox actually allowed the segment to air.  (See video clip below).

With that in mind, I suspect that some elite members of the Republican Party will have severely ugly (and rather hypocritical) reactions to what The Politico reported that House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman recently said:

Congratulations Senator-elect Franken (and How the GOP Lost so Much Credibility)

by Deb Cupples |  Today, political activist, author, and comedian Al Franken (D-MN) is scheduled to be sworn in as a U.S. senator.  Last week, after more than half a year of legal battles with former-incumbent Norm Coleman (R-MN), the Minnesota Supreme Court certified the election results, and Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty signed the certification. 

I'm all for exhausting legal avenues to check the results of close elections.  It's certainly what this Floridian had wanted back in 2000, when then the Bush/Cheney team seemed to be ahead of  Gore/Lieberman by only 537 votes.  For me the integrity of the process can matter more than the results.

And I wouldn't begrudge Mr. Coleman's having challenged the Franken-Coleman election -- if the party of which Mr. Coleman is (or was) a prominent member hadn't been so dead-set against the principle of exhausting legal options during Election 2000.

Public Option Needed, Because Private Insurance Execs Have Been Robbing Us

by Deb Cupples |  The Hill reports:

"The healthcare reform bill that emerges from Congress this year will include a government-run public health insurance option, regardless of the bipartisan negotiations seeking a compromise in the Senate, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday....

"The major sticking point between Democrats and Republicans on the Finance Committee -- and throughout Congress -- has been the public option. Democrats maintain that a not-for-profit, nationwide alternative to private insurance must be made available to "keep the insurance companies honest,' Schumer said. 'We don't trust the private insurance companies left to their own devices and neither do the American people.'

"Republicans counter that any government-run plan could not be a fair competitor and predict that the public option would eventually squeeze private companies out of the market."

It should come as no surprise that industry-friendly politicians are using talking points that clash with reality.

With 47 million Americans lacking health overage, isn't it obvious that private insurers have been squeezing themselves out of the market?  Seriously.  Check out the info below:

Robert McNamara Dead at 93

by Deb Cupples | The New York Times reports:

"Robert S. McNamara, perhaps the most influential defense secretary of the 20th century, who helped lead the nation into the maelstrom of Vietnam and spent the rest of his life wrestling with the war’s moral consequences, died early Monday at his home in Washington, the Associated Press reported, citing his wife, Diana. He was 93, and according to the news agency, had been in failing health for some time."

Our condolences to his family and friends.  Mr. McNamara was Secretary of Defense under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, from January 1961 through February 1968.  You can see a bio here and commentary at Memeorandum.

Wife of M-I-6 Head Blew Husband's Cover on Facebook

The Times of London reports:

"The wife [Shelley] of the new head of MI6 [Sir John Sawers] has caused a major security breach and left his family exposed after publishing photographs and personal details on Facebook....

" Once the Foreign Office had been informed of the faux pas all the material was removed from the internet. The move suggests that MI6 or the Foreign Office had not vetted the information the Sawers family shared over the internet."

Below are a few rather amusing comments from Times readers:

Iran Wants Public Talks with US: What's Really Happening in Iran?

by Deb Cupples |   CNN reports:

"I will go to the United Nations and will invite Obama to negotiations," Ahmadinejad said, adding that such talks would be "in front of the international media, not a sit-down behind closed doors in order to talk about matters."

"The Obama administration has sought dialogue with Iran but also criticized the government for its handling of unrest after disputed presidential elections.

"Last week, Obama said Iran's government must justify itself not in the eyes of the United States, but in the opinion of its own people."

I have no opinion on Iran's recent election, having been thousands of miles away when it occurred.  But given the irregularities during Elections 2000 and 2004, are U.S. officials the best folks to criticize other people's elections?   CNN continues:

Palin Lawyer Tells Media to Not Question Whether Palin Resigned due to Criminal Investigation?

by Deb Cupples |  Note that to the left is the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, written in stone on the outside of the Newseum in Washington, DC.  Not all image-conscious politicians seem to have much respect for this amendment.

While I was enjoying the holiday weekend, the Washington Post (and scads of other media, no doubt) reported that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin plans to resign.  I suppose that's one way for a fading politician to keep her name in the headlines.

Apparently, some people suspect that Ms. Palin is quitting because she's under criminal investigation -- something to do with corruption involving contractors back when Ms. Palin was mayor of Wasilla.  I'm not clear on the speculations or facts.

Ms. Palin denied such speculations.  The Politico tells us:

Happy 4th: Floridians, Please Support the Fair Redistricting State Constitutional Amendment

by Deb Cupples |   Happy Fourth of July.  On this day, I cannot help but think about patriotic duties: one of which is preserving our nation's bedrock principle of one person one vote.

If you're a Floridian, you may have noticed that our congressional and legislative districts were badly gerrymandered.  One result: for the past 10 years, our politicians' essentially have been choosing voters, instead of the other way around.

Please visit Fair Districts for Florida -- and consider downloading, signing, and submitting a petition for a state constitutional amendment that would require fair standards for redistricting. 

It's a NON-PARTISAN group, whose efforts will benefit voters from both parties.  Whichever political party may have control now, that control could be reversed in the future -- thus, denying millions of Florida voters a voice -- unless fair standards are applied to the process now.

Health Care Reform not as Costly as Previously Thought; Dodd Explains Public Insurance Option

by Deb Cupples |   Say what you will about Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn) and his questionable ties to the financial industry.  At this point, Sen. Dodd seems to be on the right side of the health care reform issue -- as he was on the Telecom Amnesty issue.

Two days ago, Sen. Dodd and Sen. Ted Kennedy sent a letter to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which 1) states that a recent health-care reform bill would not cost as much as previously thought, and 2) outlines a public-insurance option.

Apparently, the Congressional Budget Office has found that the cost of implementing the new bill would be $611 billion over 10 years.  I'm not sure what the original estimate was, but it reportedly was significantly higher.

That $611 billion is about 18% less than the $750 billion that our politicians (at the urging of George Bush and Henry Paulson) hurriedly funneled to Wall Street execs who had driven their companies -- and our nation's economy -- into a ditch year.

Krugman Comments on the Nearly Half-Million Jobs lost in June

by Deb Cupples |  The Bureau of Labor Statistics tells us that our nation lost 467,000 jobs last month -- the unemployment rate is at 9.5%.  The number of unemployed persons has increased by 7.2 million since our recession started in December 2007.

In a piece entitled "That 30s Show," Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman expresses  (understandable) concern:

"Since the recession began, the U.S. economy has lost 6 ½ million jobs — and as that grim employment report confirmed, it’s continuing to lose jobs at a rapid pace. Once you take into account the 100,000-plus new jobs that we need each month just to keep up with a growing population, we’re about 8 ½ million jobs in the hole."

52 Banks Fail so Far This Year

by Deb Cupples |  CNN tells us:

"Seven banks were shut down by authorities Thursday, pushing the tally of failed banks for 2009 to 52, more than doubling the failures in 2008.

"Six regional banks in Illinois and one in Texas closed their doors, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

"The rash of Illinois failures are interlinked: All six banks were controlled by one family and followed a similar business model that "created concentrated exposure in each institution," according to the FDIC.

"The agency said that the six failures stemmed from the banks' investments in collateralized debt obligations and other loan losses.

Of course: isn't the reckless investment in CDOs at the root of most financial institutions' need for a bailout -- that and executives' routinely looting the various shareholders' money pots?   Memeroandum has commentary

John Bolton's Call for Israel to "Help" Moderate Iranians -- by Bombing Iran

by Damozel | Here's some neocon "logic" for you:

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, with no other timely option, the already compelling logic for an Israeli strike is nearly inexorable. Israel is undoubtedly ratcheting forward its decision-making process....With regime change off the table for the coming critical period in Iran's nuclear program, Israel's decision on using force is both easier and more urgent. Since there is no likelihood that diplomacy will start or finish in time, or even progress far enough to make any real difference, there is no point waiting for negotiations to play out.  (John R. Bolton in WaPo)

Here's the best bit:

Lady in Red: Why Media Shouldn't Leave Palin Alone

by Damozel | With all due respect to Deb, I'm all for continuing scrutiny of any potential candidate in the next election cycle.  Here's why:

Since Election Day, Palin has made only infrequent jaunts to the Lower 48 and has no public plans to cross the political Rubicon into Iowa or New Hampshire. But her oftentimes dysfunctional campaign experience does not seem to have swayed her from seeking national office.

In a recent interview with "Runner's World" magazine, the avid long distance runner was asked if there was a part of her that would have been reluctant to leave behind the Alaskan landscape and move to Washington, D.C., had the outcome in November been different. Notably, Palin did not use the past tense in her response. She was instead rather blunt in acknowledging that a future move to the nation's capital is something she can envision.

"Alaska would be hard to give up because it is such a part of who I am. So much of my life revolves around the great outdoors that that would be kind of tough," Palin said. "But on the other hand, I think of being in D.C. and in a position to promote physical fitness and the benefits of making good decisions health-wise and being an example to others, and I know that could do some good for our country."  (much more at cbs news)

Anyway, Palin's too richly entertaining to leave to her own devices.  On with the show!