Chris Christie didn't just call the former WH doctor to complain, he called her a "hack". Meaning exactly, what, Gov. Christie? That a Republican doctor qualified to monitor the Democratic president's health is a sleazy, untrustworthy quack?

I wonder why this burned him up so much?

I was reading this story earlier today. I hope someone covers it, just because it needs to be covered!

Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) introduced the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2013.

http://blog.mpp.org/tax-and-regulate/members-of-congress-introduce-historic-bills/02062013/

Rachel Maddow and the Ghost of Viet Nam

The current controversy about drone attacks brings to mind once more the profound influence of the Viet Nam War upon American politics. The turmoil of the Viet Nam period closed the door on the New Deal era born of the great Depression, and opened the way for the 30 year dominance of American political thought by Reagan and the GOP. The recent emotional flare up over the use of drones is a reminder that the passions stirred up by Viet Nam remain at the root of liberal thought today, and one cannot dismiss the possibility that they might burst upon the scene once more to thwart the recent awakening of liberals to economic injustice and the plight of the middle class. One thing is clear: regardless of economic issues, a vast majority of Americans will not tolerate a return to attitudes that seem to them “anti-American”. They will turn against any faction that questions America’s moral right to defend itself against external threats, and in doing so, they will open the way once more to conservative domination of the political scene.

I am a great admirer of Rachel Maddow and was taken aback by the vehemence of her reaction to the drone controversy. I know she has certain buttons that when pressed will cause her to light up like a flashing neon sign, fossil fuels for example, and anything at all having to do with George W. Bush. But she is a person of high intelligence who digs into stories more deeply than most reporters. Last night she devoted much of her show to drones and the confirmation hearings for the proposed new C.I.A. Director, Brennan. Her remarks last night shed light on her emotional reaction to drones, and the apparent lack of logic in her reasoning.

My conclusion is that she is not opposed to the use of drones per se. What she opposes is:

1. Use of drones by the C.I.A. instead of the military.

2. How the Executive Branch uses the C.I.A., in particular its secrecy, and the need in her view for more public and Congressional scrutiny of clandestine activities.

3. Any covert use of drones or other lethal force OUTSIDE OF WAR ZONES.

Insofar as I can determine, she considers WAR ZONES to be areas where military action has been previously disclosed to the public and vetted by Congress, as for example in Afghanistan. It’s not absolutely clear, but it appears that she does not consider the border regions of Pakistan to be war zones even though attacks are being launched against U.S. Forces from Waziristan. While she has applauded Obama’s strike deep into Pakistan to kill Osama Bin Laden, it could be argued that while outside any war zone, public and Congressional approval of that particular operation was pretty obvious.

There is much substance in these positions that can and should be discussed, but these involve complex questions regarding the precise protocols and safeguards that should be used in approving drone strikes and other covert operations. These are subjects of great national and international significance that should be considered in a calm and reasonable manner. They are too important for partisan demonstrations and emotional outbursts that accomplish nothing except to make reasonable dialog impossible. In other words, if human nature demands that we be allowed a certain number of “hot buttons”, we should make sure that this is not one of them because the subject matter is too complex and important.

Two main reasons come to mind as to why there are so many “hot buttons” surrounding these issues among liberals, both harking back to the Viet Nam era: (1) Cambodia, and (2) the 1975 Senate Church Committee. Both remain deeply embedded at the root of modern American liberalism.

Cambodia, of course, refers to the secret bombings and military excursions across the border from neighboring Viet Nam -- actions that were vigorously denied by the Nixon Administration but obviously too place. This rightfully stirred up liberal opposition to “secret undeclared wars”, the Viet Nam War itself having been enlarged in a stealthy way, and authorized post hoc by Lyndon Johnson’s phony Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

The Church Committee, chaired by the liberal Democratic Senator Frank Church of Idaho, carried out a rancorous and far reaching Senate investigation of the C.I.A. in 1975-76. With the Viet Nam war at the height of unpopularity and the Watergate scandal unfolding, the Democratic controlled Congress was determined to rein in the Nixon Administration’s conduct of the war and covert activities in general. Senator Church was a thoughtful and responsible Senator, but his zeal to unearth C.I.A. activities, some of which were clearly illegal, quickly evolved into a mission to end all covert activity by an agency that he characterized as a “rogue elephant”.

The Church Committee did great damage to the C.I.A. It decimated the network of local informants and collaborators in sensitive parts of the world that had painstakingly been assembled over a period of 35 years starting in World War II. The damage was deep and lasting. Only after the appearance of Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attack were efforts begun to restore the human component of intelligence gathering, but recruiting and maintaining a reliable network takes many years and the climate in Washington has not been encouraging.

Liberals like Rachel Maddow, understandably upset by the tragic mistake of invading Iraq, are well aware of the colossal failure of C.I.A. intelligence with regard to Iraq’s nonexistent “weapons of mass destruction”, yet fail to appreciate the importance of having a capable intelligence network. The unreliability of C.I.A. sources in Iraq, including shady characters like Ahmed Chalabi and the laughable “Curveball”, has been well documented. Nevertheless, rather than accepting the simple truth that the C.I.A. had no reliable sources in Iraq because the network that had previously existed was destroyed in the aftermath of the Church Committee purge, it was more emotionally satisfying to believe that the “evil” Bush Administration had deliberately falsified or ignored the true intelligence. It never occurred to them that G.W. Bush might never have invaded Iraq had he possessed good intelligence about the alleged weapons of mass destruction as well as what to expect after occupying the country.

Liberals under the spell of the Church Committee fail to appreciate the immense value of good intelligence for national security and the avoidance of conflict. After the human spy networks were dismantled in the wake of the Church Committee, we came to rely more and more on the electronic intercepts and satellite surveillance made possible by advanced technology, but any expert in the field will tell you that there is no substitute for well-placed human informants when it comes to judging the intentions of foreign leaders. History too is full of examples of wars started as a result of faulty intelligence.

Passions stirred by the Church Committee also did great and lasting damage to the Democratic Party. The reaction to indiscriminant liberal attacks on national security activities was swift and hard. Democrats were labeled “soft on national security”, a moniker that has stuck with them through the intervening years and only began to be lifted when the public realized that Obama was killing more members of Al-Qaeda with drone attacks than Bush ever did , finally affirming the reputation of his administration with the killing of Bin Laden. But the public’s suspicion that many liberals are sympathetic to terrorists, unpatriotic, and basically “anti-American” is not far beneath the skin and could easily surface again if the liberals continue to dwell on the C.I.A.’s “evil” activities abroad.

Liberals take easily to the right-wing’s hatred and suspicion of government, especially when it comes to foreign policy. They seem totally unaware that without a widespread renewal of trust and respect for the government, hopes for the progressive domestic agenda they favor are doomed to failure.

The Viet Nam War, along with the social changes that accompanied it, changed the face of American politics. Liberals before Viet Nam were true progressives, born of the Great Depression, a product of the New Deal and the earlier progressive struggles for worker rights, the alleviation of poverty and economic security. They carried those same ideals through World War II and into the postwar world with the Marshall Plan for the reconstruction of Europe, institutions of the United Nations like the IMF and World Bank, and international efforts to aid developing countries and alleviate poverty.

Liberals after Viet Nam largely forgot about economic justice. The causes that inspired them aimed at ending U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts, extending human rights both at home and abroad, and protecting the environment. Their approach to economics was cynical. They were unhappy with our economic system and disapproved of its rapid spread across the globe, but felt it was beyond their reach and comprehension, controlled by sinister forces immune from political influence. Consequently, for the better part of 30 years they were largely oblivious to the growing inequality in American society, the concentration of wealth and political power in fewer and fewer hands, and the extent to which our unregulated financial system was running amuck.

Thanks to the Great Recession of 2008-09, an awakening has begun. A Democrat again occupies the White House --- not one who would go along with the prevailing sentiment and proclaim, as Bill Clinton did, that “the era of big government is over”, but one who framed the issue of our time in these terms:

********************************
“For most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments – wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren't – and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up. ….

Osawatomie, this is not just another political debate. This is the defining issue of our time. This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and for all those who are fighting to get into the middle class. Because what's at stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, secure their retirement.”
*********************************

My great fear is that, just as the tide is beginning to turn in favor of a more progressive agenda, the current generation of liberals will take their eye off the ball and return to the cynical distrust of the U.S. role in the world and the “anti-American” attitudes that will once again turn a majority of Americans against the Democratic Party giving a new opening to conservative forces.

Yes, how dare Dr. Mariano suggest that Chris Christie is morbidly obese just from seeing him on TV? Everyone knows the camera adds 250 pounds.

Chris Mathews you are very much wrong, when you say that under domestic suspects that our government would only send the FBI. When indeed there will always be circumstances where our government will kill an American citizen in the U.S. and not let anybody know about it. So as far as killing Americans either domestically or in foreign countries has to be watched and regulations made.

I say if anyone can handle Iran its Kerry. He can snob them and bore them to the table.Or maybe call his own countrymen "ghenjis khan" again.

This war on weight is absurd too sweety. Mr.Christe may be quite portly but that is none of your concern.The "medical media" are worse than the ladies at the club about being nosy and legalistic.Get out of people's kitchen for heaven's sake!!! Good gosh at the bully tactics.Some men are quite handsome that are husky.

Hide the smokes, the ham hock, your money and your SUV. Nothing is sacred with these people.

did the wing nuts get prohibition back?

we need a cocktail moment

"* Is it odd that Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R) considers newspapers his "greatest fear"? Yeah, I'd say that's pretty odd."

Actually, the media is close to our greatest problem, but certainly not in the way this kook thinks.

Deb and Magnolia are ignoring the cries of distress from their sisters in Stepford who want them to come home.

Menendez defends himself: "Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) defended his relationship with Florida doctor and political donor Salomon Melgen in an interview with Univision on Friday, saying he didn't do anything on his friend's behalf that he doesn't regularly do for others."

What is Menendez's defense for having sex with a minor in the Dominican Republic?

Rachel is such a hypocrite. When the Anthony Weiner sex scandel broke what did Rachel report on that night? Past sex scandels of Republicans with narry a word about Weine.

Anything to add? Consider this an open thread

I get nauseous when these bigoted hit and run trolls come on and post blatant kkk fiction , then scream at everyone "IT IS ALL THE TRUTH" .... when in fact it is kkk fiction from their childhood they are presenting , so I am going troll hunting , please excuse me

FROM TODAY

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/08/16899282-a-contradictory-rnc-message-on-race-and-diversity?lite

scott-3860658

And I can see that you have not a clue about the truth of the matter. Pre Great society the Black family was intact with and the black community was strong with Black owned businesses. What is about FACTS you seem to take issue with?

Yes , before the great depression , it was just a garden of eden for the black community

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewood_massacre#Razing_Rosewood

1923

The Miami Metropolis listed 20 blacks and four whites dead and characterized the event as a "race war". National newspapers also put the incident on the front page. The Washington Post and St. Louis Dispatch

the town was completely destroyed and evacuated by those friendly white folks of that wonderful time period

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/banished/pierce.html

On August 19, 1901, white residents in Pierce City Missouri (spelled "Peirce City" until the early 1920s) ignited a 15-hour rampage with weapons stolen from a state militia arsenal and violently banished the town's 300 black residents. Three black men were lynched.But evidence has since revealed that some townspeople wanted to follow the lead of nearby Monett, which had expelled its African American population seven years earlier. To explain what had happened to Pierce City's black population, the St. Louis Post-Dispatchdescribed the town as "Monettized."

THAT IS JUST 2 OF 1000'S MORE!!!!!!

* Did the economy contract in the fourth quarter? Maybe not: "The U.S. trade deficit shrank in December to its narrowest in nearly three years, suggesting the economy did much better in the fourth quarter than initially estimated."

For the first time in over three years, the U.S. Gross Domestic Product shrank. Between October and December of 2012, the GDP had a negative growth of 0.1. Also Obozo’s ‘tax the rich’ plan that many idiots believed in is now taxing the middle class.
The problem with the American economy is that Obama and his media can't fool it. Happy talk and spin and distractions about contraception don’t create jobs or growth.

Thanks to all you fools who believed his lies. Romny would have made a much better president but all you morons fell for Obozo’s and the liberal medias ‘hate the
wealthy’ campaign

Talk about getting off of subject!! The Iranians have screwed the world, time and time again. They held American hostages until Reagan's election freed them, and they continue to hold American as a hostage country under their bizzare rule. End of story....be scared of the regime in control of Iran!

If LePage would stop saying foolish things that make him look bad, then there would be less for the newspapers to print about him. But then, nothing is ever LePage's fault, the blame always goes to someone else.

" a device designed specifically to prevent a blackout failed and plunged the game into darkness."

I've done industrial electrical work for over forty years so I know a little about this stuff.

The device they are talking about is about the size of a loaf of bread and it for protecting downstream cables and equipment like transformers . Prevent is the wrong word. They provide protection from under voltage, over voltage, over current and short circuits.

These devices are wired to the main circuit breaker that will be as large as you refrigerator. If the device senses a problem, it will turn off the main circuit breaker the same way as you turn off a light switch and the light goes off.