Welcome to the RedState Morning Briefing Summary, now with FAQ!
As you know, today is a special edition of RedState Morning Briefing, as it's Hitler's birthday! OK, so they're not celebrating Hitler's birthday. They're also quite silent on the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing (that was yesterday). Let's see what's on their tiny minds this morning.
Obama National Intelligence Director Declares Terrorist Threat Over
Now, it’s true that in the rapid, multifaceted mobilization against terrorism that took place in late 2001 and early 2002, there were a vast number of decisions made quickly on the basis of incomplete information; it’s only natural that as the anti-terror effort has become part of the permanent institutions of government, there would be some rethinking of which of those emergency measures to make permanent and which to put back on the shelf. Maybe exposing detainees to caterpillars or pushing them against a "fake, flexible wall" or "Grasping the individual with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, in a controlled and quick motion" are horrors beyond our imagining these days - as opposed to things most of us would associate with grammar school - but it’s far more frightening to me to hear the DNI telling us that we’re too safe these days to worry anymore about the need to get intelligence quickly out of captured terrorists.
Notice the failure to mention waterboarding or the detainees who died from their interrogation. What I find really interesting here, is that the author, Dan McLaughlin, admits that our anti-terrorism panic was formed in fear, ignorance and panic and then essentially goes on to lament that we aren't still operating in fear, ignorance and panic.
Vitter, DeMint, et al: time to go Patrick Henry on Obama’s assault on conservatives
OK, so first they start off by whining that we are not freaking out and torturing people and spying on our own citizens, and then they go over the fucking top with this:
It is now officially time: burn the Obama brownshirt agenda to the ground. Sift the ashes. Grind the shards into powder.
Browshirts? Really? WTF are they talking about?
Now, the official Obama administration policy is that being a conservative makes you a threat to the security of America (actual report in pdf form here). Being a military veteran makes you doubly suspect as a dangerous subversive. It is clear from Napolitano’s non-apology when cornered on it, that the directive came from higher up [i.e., Obama himself], and further, that they have no intention of backing down on it.
Yesterday, seven GOP Senators (some of our favorites) sent a letter to Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano. It was a sharply toned letter, with pointed, well-formed questions that indeed demand answers that all of America would like to hear. Warner Todd Huston has the details, including the text of the letter and the signees.
Vitter is one of their favorite Senators? Is is the whores or the diapers that appeals to them most? The DHS report is widely available and says none of what has been claimed by sites like these. "Obama himself"?! This report was produced by the Bush administration.
This lie has "rallied the troops" and getting their ignorant base whipped up is all their really care about, truth be damned. I consider this smear against legitimate DHS efforts their tribute to the 168 people who died in the OKC bombing (including children, yay!).
The mendacity of this ongoing hissy fit over nothing (at least nothing real) cannot be overstated.
The Downside For Dodd In Outraising His Opponents By $1 Million
Campaign fundraising numbers for the first quarter of 2009 were release a few days ago, and Chris Dodd came in with a $1.05 million haul, well ahead of his challengers (Caligiuri at about $45k and Simmons not reporting any significant fundraising). Generally when a three decade incumbent out-raises his potential challengers by a million dollars in a quarter, even if his challengers got in the race late in the reporting period, it is considered positive news and a good sign.
Not so for Chris Dodd. Even after reading this account in the Connecticut Post and follow-up from other news outlets, I though it must be a typo or some sort of misunderstanding, but I was wrong. Of his million dollars raised from nearly 400 donors, a mere $4,250 from only 5 individual donors came from Connecticut voters. That is right...only 0.4% of Dodd’s cash raised came from the individuals he represents.
Dodd is not in good shape, politically. The "money coming from out of state" only matters for Democrats, though. This is fear and jealousy. There is still time for Dodd to recover his support and an early lead in fundraising can only help.
Who Should Have the Final Say About Your Medical Care: Your Doctor, or Government Bureaucrats
Callie’s mother filed suit in 2007, arguing that the state had no right to contradict the orders of her personal physician and limit her treatment. However, because Callie receives her medical treatment under Medicaid, the joint federal-state administered health coverage program for low-income individuals and families, Georgia officials argued that Callie’s care was subject to rationing, as state bureaucrats’ need to ensure Medicaid resources were allocated "fairly" superseded her doctor’s care prescription or her personal medical needs.
More healthcare fearmongering. Rightwingers hope to keep up the drumbeat of fear over "government rationed healthcare" to insure that most people don't have any healthcare.
Not mentioned in the article are the fact that Medicaid budgets are strained due to the Bush economy — an economy that would be less likely to recur if we could get national health care costs under control. Treating the uninsured in emergency rooms is not the way to do that. I'll bet you a substantial sum that Jeff Emmanuel (the author) has health insurance and, therefore, couldn't care less whether Callie (the subject of the article) gets the health care or not. Notice how he manages to work in a completely irrelevant swipe at the stimulus package:
From state governments to the federal legislators and bureaucrats who had a hand in writing and passing President Barack Obama’s 2009 "stimulus" bill, more and more officials are beginning to make the public argument that it is not a trained doctor with years of experience and personal knowledge of a patient’s medical history and needs who should have final say when it comes to patient diagnoses and prescriptions, but some nameless, faceless bureaucrat inhabiting a cubicle in some nondescript government building, with nothing but an agency-developed cost-effectiveness spreadsheet to guide them in determining what is and is not medically appropriate or necessary for every patient seen within their jurisdiction.
Next up: why the state must have legal control over women's bodies.