Obama blames economy for election losses but misses the point

U.S. President Barack Obama's statement yesterday that the majority Democrats had taken a "shellacking" in Tuesday's election because of the tepid economic recovery was shocking. Sure, if in the two years since Barack Obama took office with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, the U.S. economy had completely turned around and U.S. industries were crying for more workers, the opposition Republicans probably would not have won 60 seats to control the House of Representatives. Economic success would most likely have enabled the Democrats to retain a portion of the popularity they achieved in 2008, when Obama led his party back into the White House on a wave of public disgust over the performance of the Bush administration. But for all his vaunted political skills, Obama has repeatedly misread the American public since taking office. U.S. voters did not turn the Republicans out of the White House merely because the economy had been disastrously mishandled by his predecessor, they elected the first black president to repudiate the seemingly gleeful lawlessness of the Bush administration. The George W. Bush presidency broke a long list of the country's most-cherished legal principles and traditions -- eviscerating the constitutional separation of powers, overruling the U.S. Bill of Rights, disrespecting the sovereignty of other nations, ignoring the Geneva Conventions. For all the good Obama has been able to accomplish in reforming the way the country regulates itself, he has decidedly failed to address the biggest problem -- the one that has left the United States unsure of how to function. Bush and other officials in his administration, including former Vice President Dick Cheney, must be called to answer for their abuses of power. An investigation doesn't necessarily mean anybody is guilty of anything, although it seems so, it just means the United States is not afraid to examine its conduct and make corrections when warranted. The Congress should set up a commission, with the power to compel witnesses to testify, to figure out what went wrong during the Bush administration and how to prevent it from happening again. That is the only way for the United States to regain its footing as an international leader and for Obama to redeem his presidency.

Warrantless wiretapping illegal? Obviously!

Sometimes, in our contemporary, contentious legal environment, it's hard to be sure that common sense will prevail in the end, as it should. But if today's federal court decision in San Francisco is any indication of what's ahead for the U.S. government in the aftermath of the disastrous administration of George W. Bush, there's still hope that things will be put right, or at least as right as they can be. We're talking, of course, of U.S. District Court Judge Vaughan Walker's decision today that the Bush-era warrantless wiretapping program was illegal. The chief judge of San Francisco's federal bench issued a 45-page ruling finding that the eavesdropping on the Al-Haramain charity based in Oregon was "unlawful surveillance" and the government was liable for damages, according to the New York Times. Compensatory damages could be as high as $20,000 for each of three individuals whose calls were intercepted by the National Security Agency, and as much as $200,000 each in punitive damages, according to one of Al-Haramain's attorneys, Jon Eisenberg of San Francisco, the Times said. The government has not announced whether it would appeal the ruling, which rejected a major tenet of the Bush administration's war on terror started after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Bush administration had long contended, and the Obama administration had agreed implicitly, that the president had the power to override the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a 1978 law requiring the government to obtain warrants from a secret court before it engaged in domestic espionage, and that it did not have to answer questions about it. The government contended Al-Haramain's challenge should be dismissed because requiring federal officials to respond could reveal national secrets. Instead, Walker issued a summary ruling in favor of the charity. Eisenberg said the ruling was "was an “implicit repudiation of the Bush-Cheney theory of executive power,” according to the Times. "Judge Walker is saying that FISA and federal statutes like it are not optional. “The president, just like any other citizen of the United States, is bound by the law. Obeying Congressional legislation shouldn’t be optional with the president of the U.S.” A spokeswoman for the U.S. Justice Department, Tracy Schmaler, said the Obama administration had already made it more difficult for the government to invoke the so-called "state-secrets privilege," as it had in the Al-Haramain case. Now, she said, the privilege could only be invoked when it was "absolutely necessary to protect national security,” the Times said. The Justice Department has not yet said whether it would appeal.

A change in succession is known to be extreme

From Washington comes word that President Barack Obama has restored the traditional order of succession at the Pentagon in the event of a catastrophe that takes the lives of or incapacitates top defense department officials. In an executive order published quietly on March 1, Obama has done away with a system set up by former President George W. Bush, which had elevated a close adviser of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld ahead of the secretaries of the Army and Navy. The current defense secretary, Robert Gates, a holdover from the Bush administration, supported the old system, according to the New York Times. “After reviewing the issue, the secretary determined that the historical pattern of precedence made the most sense and recommended the president restore the traditional line of succession,” Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, told the Times. The change means that the Army and Navy secretaries return to third and fourth in the line of succession, after the deputy Pentagon secretary. Bush had elevated the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, Stephen Cambone, a longtime Rumsfeld confidante, to the third position on the succession list. Top Pentagon officials said at the time that the change was to ensure that someone with a wide range of expertise, not just with a single military service, would take over if necessary. But other officials said the change was made because of a running dispute between Rumsfeld and Army leadership, the Times said. It sounds reasonable so far. But it would be a lot better than merely reasonable if Obama's decision signals that the White House was preparing to roll back the Bush administration's more serious seizures of power -- such as the evisceration of the separation of powers doctrine -- that were formerly considered unthinkable.

Venezuela's Chavez could lose control of Congress

Venezuelans returned to the streets today in protests over the country's deteriorating economic picture as this year's parliamentary elections drew nearer. Observers say President Hugo Chavez's hold on Congress could be in danger after devaluation of the currency and in the face of water and power outages caused by a severe drought. An opposition legislature could prevent Chavez from ruling by decree, a tactic he has used to make fundamental socialist-inspired changes in the Venezuelan economy, according to the Reuters international news service. Pro-Chavez marchers also took the streets on Saturday in a show of support for the government's aid programs for Venezuela's poor. "Tremble, you oligarchs -- this is the joy of the patriotic revolution," Chavez told his supporters, Reuters said. "The streets no longer belong to the oligarchs." The pro-Chavez march also was celebrating the 11th year of his presidency, which ushered in years of friction with the United States. Chavez called former U.S. President George W. Bush "the devil" at the United Nations in New York in 2006, no doubt because he was briefly removed from power in 2002 by a coup he blamed on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. But Chavez returned to office and has since consolidated government control of the economy, including the state oil company and the judicial system. Chavez gained control of the legislature in 2005 after opposition parties boycotted parliamentary elections, Reuters said.

Lack of information left Massachusetts voters frustrated

Why are so many supposedly informed political pundits confused about why a conservative Republican won Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat in Massachusetts? Can't anyone in Washington spell frustration? Massachusetts voters, among the nation's most liberal, were expressing their disappointment with the suddenly disoriented Democratic Party-dominated government in Washington -- in general -- and the Democratic nominee for senator, State Attorney General Martha Coakley -- in particular. Had the presidency of Democrat Barack Obama not gotten bogged down in behind-the-scenes bargaining on the healthcare bill instead of conducting the public's business in public, Coakley could have been another supporter of what most Americans want -- a single-payer system. Instead, Obama gets a 41st Republican Senator to snipe at him daily and try to obstruct his more-liberal legislative priorities. Of course, Coakley deserves a lot of the blame for her oblivious campaign style, which included a couple of incredible gaffes that made her appear to be an out-of-touch elitist. That is no way to convince regular people to vote for you. By contrast, state Senator Scott Brown, her opponent, drove around the state in a pickup truck, called into talk radio shows around the state and campaigned with local sports figures, according to the New York Times. Is a subtle pattern beginning to emerge? Of course, the real problem with all of this is that the public, even the Massachusetts public, has confused what they see on television with what they used to read in the newspaper and mistaken the nattering nabobs of Fox News-style broadcasting with actual journalists trained to report the news with as little bias as possible. The public is frustrated by the pace of legislating in Congress and took it out on the White House -- as if people simply are not aware of the positive changes that have taken place in the executive branch since Obama became president. The government is clearly making progress toward undoing the eight years of damage done by previous occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. -- the promised closing of the disgraceful Guantanamo Bay prison is imminent and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, another part of the executive branch, has returned to protecting the air and water. Maybe a lot of people think the changes are not happening quickly enough, and maybe they aren't. But George W. Bush was in office for eight years and Obama has been in office for only one. That doesn't seem to be enough justification for returning control of the government to the Republicans.

Credibility deficit could doom Bernanke renomination

It might be funny, if the economic crisis wasn't so painful to so many, to hear U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke complain about efforts in Congress to overhaul the government's financial regulatory system. Bernanke was sharply critical of a Senate proposal to transfer much of the Fed's authority to regulate banks to a new consumer protection agency, according to the New York Times. Bernanke wrote an opinion column on the Washington Post Web site warning Congress and taxpayers unhappy about the nearly trillion-dollar bailout of the financial sector to leave the Federal Reserve system alone. "Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation," Bernanke wrote. But Bernanke, appointed by former U.S. President George W. Bush in 2006 and nominated by U.S. President Barack Obama to a new 14-year term beginning next year, has a lot of explaining to do. Particularly, he needs to explain why the Federal Reserve and executive branch regulators were seemingly asleep at the controls when the financial system tanked. It was fairly obvious even to lay people that the overheated housing market, where financial institutions were allowed to make thousands of bad home loans and then sell those bad loans to other institutions as securities to back even more bad loans, was headed for a crash. So, why didn't regulators -- and Bernanke, the lead expert -- stop such practices before it was too late?

Endangered polar bears get a little protection

News from Washington that the U.S. Interior Department had proposed protections for the entire range of the country's endangered polar bear population is yet another indication that the change at the White House signals major changes in policy for the world's most powerful military and economic giant. Thursday's announcement opens 60 days of public comment on the proposal, which designates more than 200,000 square miles of land, sea and ice along Alaska's north coast as critical habitat for the U.S. polar bear, according to the New York Times. A final rule is expected to be adopted June 30, 2009. Only 3,500 polar bears in the United States on land or U.S. territorial waters have been able to survive the loss of habitat blamed on global warming, which has melted the polar ice they live on. “Proposing critical habitat for this iconic species is one step in the right direction to help this species stave off extinction, recognizing that the greatest threat to the polar bear is the melting of sea ice caused by climate change,” said Thomas Strickland, the assistant interior secretary for fish, wildlife and parks under President Barack Obama, who took office in January. The previous administration under George W. Bush had declared the polar bear endangered due to melting ice and commercial activities but declined to take further steps to protect the creatures or their habitat, the Times said. If adopted, the new proposal would not remove the habitat from development but would require companies or government agencies to demonstrate that their activities will not negatively impact the species. Still, companies and environmentalists attacked the proposed regulations for opposite reasons. Commercial interests threatened to try to block the rules as being too broad and environmental groups complained they were too lax. In fact, the new rules are part of a settlement of a lawsuit filed by conservation groups that complained that the Bush administration had failed to designate protected habitat when it declared the polar bears endangered, the Times said.

U.S. wants additional two-month delay in terror trials

With the second of two U.S.-requested 120-day delays in the start of military trials for suspected terrorists at the Guantanamo Bay prison, the Obama administration says it will request an additional two-month postponement, the Reuters international news service reported Wednesday. In a legal filing in a challenge brought by accused Sept. 11 conspirator Ramzi Binalshibh in a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., federal prosecutors asked for the delay on the grounds that the Military Commissions Act, under which the trials are being conducted, "may be substantially amended" in the next two months and because, Reuters said, the government may decide "to prosecute [Binalshibh] in federal court." Binalshibh is accused of being a go-between between al-Qaida leaders and the Sept. 11 hijackers. He was captured in Pakistan in 2002 and held by the CIA four years before being sent to Guantanamo Bay. He is scheduled for a competency hearing on Sept. 21 before a miltitary judge at Guantanamo to determine if he is mentally competent to stand trial and to represent himself, as he has requested. The federal appeals court filing was in response to Binalshibh's effort to block the competency hearing scheduled and to have the military commissions system declared unconstitutional. In it, the government contends that the appeals court cannot intervene in Binalshibh's case because there has not yet been a decision and, even if there was, he first must appeal through the system of military commissions set up by former U.S. President George W. Bush. Congress is considering proposals to overhaul the commission system to bar statements made under harsh interrogation and to limit to use of hearsay evidence. Of course, the legal moves reflect more than the usual maneuvering in court proceedings. They actually represent what is perhaps the most difficult task faced by the Obama administration -- maintaining the continuity required in federal prosecutions while trying to reverse the Bush administration's most ill-advised policies.

"Captain" Hugo aims rhetorical phasers at Barack Obama

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez criticized U.S. President Barack Obama as "lost in the Andromeda Nebula" on Sunday after Obama said the United States had been asked to do more to restore the president of Honduras, who was ousted in a coup last month. "We are not asking you to intervene in Honduras, Obama," Chavez said on his weekly television show, according to the Reuters international news service. "On the contrary, we are asking that 'the empire' gets its hands off Honduras and get its claws out of Latin America." The Venezuelan leader has been highly critical of United States' involvement with Latin American countries and repeatedly accuses Washington of trying to dominate the region. He claims the United States had advance knowledge of the Honduras coup in June and had arrangements in place to fly deposed President Manuel Zelaya out of the country from a U.S. military base. Obama has denied the charges, which does not necessarily mean they're untrue. But Chavez, for his part, is no stranger to bombastic rhetoric. He frequently launches into tirades against what he called U.S. imperialism and, remember, he's the guy who called former President George W. Bush "the devil" at the United Nations in 2006. Chavez is known to be angry about an agreement between the United States and his neighbor, Colombia, that grants access to military bases for U.S. troops to help in the fight against the drug trade, Reuters said. Chavez claims the agreement makes it easier for the United States to attack Venezuela to steal its oil reserves, and is actively purchasing Russian armaments to beef up his armed forces. "This is just the start of an imperial military expansion," Chavez said. The Venezuelan president called on the United States to withdraw from its longtime base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and from the Soto Cano airbase in Honduras.

You could learn a lot from a politician

Did it strike anybody else as odd to hear U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lecture the Kenyan government about corruption yesterday during a visit to Nairobi? Clinton, who met Wednesday with government leaders and attended the annual African Growth and Opportunity Act conference, told a town hall meeting at the University of Nairobi that corruption in Kenya's government was preventing the country from developing economically. "The fact is Kenya has not fulfilled its economic promise," she said, according to the Cable News Network (CNN). "I believe it has not realized . . . a functioning democracy." Clinton acknowledged her message was "harsh," but how could it not be after the country's violence-marred 2007 presidential election. President Mwai Kibacki claimed re-election after a 2008 runoff against opposition leader Raila Odinga, now the country's prime minister, who was forced to flee the country during the campaign because of attacks against him and his supporters. The prime minister post was created for Odinga to settle the dispute, but not before hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and 1,300 killed in post-election violence forces. Clinton said the message about corruption was coming from U.S. President Barack Obama, whose father was born in Kenya, CNN said. Yet true as her words might have been, it still was weird to hear them from Clinton, whose husband, Bill, was impeached in 1998 over a White House sex scandal. Only the second U.S. president ever impeached, Bill Clinton was tried in the U.S. Senate but survived the largely partisan vote to remove him from office and completed his second term in office. Maybe self-righteousness just goes with holding high office. Of course, it's not nearly as ridiculous as hearing ex-President George W. Bush lecture other countries about free elections.

North Korea's tests missile, Obama gets angry

While domestic policy changes are unfolding daily, U.S. residents hoping for a about-face on foreign policy issues may have to wait a little longer. President Barack Obama took a step back into the Cold War-era on Sunday, calling for nuclear-armed North Korea to be "punished" for firing a test missile into the Pacific Ocean. Obama, speaking in Prague on his first European trip since assuming the presidency in January, called the missile test a "provocation" that violated international norms, according to the New York Times. Obama called for a "strong international response" to the firing of the missile, which fell harmlessly in the Pacific Ocean a few hours before Obama's speech before 20,000 in Prague. "This provocation underscores the need for action -- not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council -- but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons,” Obama said. “Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.” Obama said blocking North Korea's pursuit of missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons was part of his effort to limit the spread of such technology. He said he was still pursuing a missile defense syestem for Europe, including Poland and Czechoslovakia, but linked it to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weaponry. "As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven,” Obama said. Russia is opposed to the missile defense, which was proposed by former president George W. Bush. Here's hoping the Cold War is not going to be defrosted.

Problem solved: Venezuela wants Gitmo detainees

Problem solved. Just when it looked as if there was no way out for the United States short of living up to its principles and accepting never-convicted inmates when the detention center closes at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base on Cuba, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced Thursday that his country would be willing to accept any former prisoners. "We would not have any problem with receiving a human being," said a government news release quoting an interview gave to Al-Jazeera television on Wednesday, according to Cable News Network (CNN). Chavez also said he hoped the United States would return the land on which the naval base is located to Cuba. The United States acquired the land for the Guantanamo base in 1903 after the Spanish-American War of 1898. Then-President George W. Bush opened the detention center in 2002 to hold what he characterized as "enemy combatants" captured in the so-called war on terror. The new administration of Barack Obama, which took over the White House in January, has not disclosed its plans for the prisoners when the detention center closes. Obama has pledged to close the prison.