John Warner, Republican Senator from Virginia, proves that sometimes even the other side is occasionally right. He has come out in favor a national speed limit to conserve gas. He joins Jackie Speier, a Democratic congresswoman from California in calling for a revised speed limit. This has also been talked up by progressive radio talker, Ed Shultz, as a sensible way to reduce consumption.
Amidst yesterday's Constitutional carnage, there was one event that had to buck up even the hardiest cynic: the sight of an ill man, under treatment for one of the scariest and often fatal forms of cancer, making his way to the well of the Senate to be present for a cloture vote to ensure that hundreds of thousands of elderly Americans don't lose their choice of doctors (or worse) of choice due to a political snafu.
ThinkProgress has the coverage, including the embedded video from C-SPAN of Senator Kennedy making his return to the Senate floor for the first time since he was diagnosed brain cancer.
Although Warner's bill has been blocked for years, the Republican senator tried again Wednesday as he introduced his measure with Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as a co-sponsor.
In a nation, where appeasement is condemned, Americans are anxious. The people have been pacified for so long they can no longer recall what it means to be other than indulged. On June 6, 2008, Congresspersons, uncomfortable with the notion that they might have to use the rod, concluded, for now, it is better to spoil the already pampered Americans. Lawmakers said, as they have so often, "Let them eat oil!" After all, the people love petroleum.
Capping greenhouse gas emissions will hurt Americans, American families, the American economy, America, etc.
As supporters of the Climate Security Act call on Congress to "Act Now!" to tackle climate change, the corporatist, fossil fuel-lovin’ right-wing of the Republican party has a ready response: doing something will do far more harm than good. Regulating emissions will raise energy prices at a time of economic uncertainty, hurt American families (especially the poor), and export jobs overseas. In short, it will cripple the American economy.
That quote is a line from Bob Herbert's very incisive column this morning, entitled Doing the Troops Wrong. The column is in support of the new GI Bill introduced by my junior senator, Jim Webb. The title is derived from the attitutes of the Bush administration and John McCain in opposition.
This is an action diary. I want to you to read the column. Perhaps you can cut and paste it into an email or print it out for a fax, highlighting the key passages.
You know, if we could pilot the political way-back machine to 1851 and change just one thing about Virginia’s cobbled-together Constitution, it would be the ridiculous prohibition against a governor "succeeding himself" (and no, that’s not code for some sort of pornographic act). Now don’t get us wrong — we have nothing against executive-office term limits (without them, the Oval Office would probably still be occupied, "Futurama"-style, by Ronald Reagan’s glass-encased head). But c’mon — this mandated ditching of our beloved (or beleaguered) leader after four years, whether we like it or not, has been a royal pain in the Commonwealth’s collective kiester for over 150 years.
Robert Lopez served 8 years in our military, fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as a tank commander. He was told he'd get his whole education bill paid for when he got out of the service. Mr. Lopez has fought and sacrificed for our country but like so many others, Mr. Lopez has faced the bleak reality of a government that has turned its back on its veterans.
That is why Senators Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel proposed a new GI Bill, which would bring back WWII-style standards of providing vets with full tuition, room and board. And that is why 51 senators have signed on, including 9 Republicans like John Warner, giving this GI Bill tremendous bi-partisan support.
But it isn't enough. Faced with unprecedented filibusters, the only way to ensure Senate passage of the GI Bill is to get 60 cosponsors. So far, John McCain has refused. The same McCain who insists he supports our troops. The same McCain who is voting lockstep with the Bush administration (who have also resisted this bill). We need to get John McCain to do the right thing. We need him to sign now and signal to other Republican leaders that we should be strongly behind our vets.
Virginia Senator Jim Webb has been working for months to pass legislation providing benefits to todays post 9-11 service members. His efforts have been stalled by the gop for obvious political reasons. Why would they want to give the freshman senator a huge legislative victory in his first term supporting the troops. Webb has convinced Republican John Warner, former chairman of the Armed services committee to co-sponsor this important bill. and sign on.
Senator Webb is CALLING OUT John McCain to support the troops
OK, so, in the next week I will have the chance to meet with Senator John Warner on business related to my profession. My profession is not related at all to international politics or anything broadly political. My profession has nothing to do with that.
Powerful, majestic, and massive currently carrying 25 million patriots. We've sailed through rough waters and clear skies -- from port to port: Iowa to Georgia, Hawaii to Alaska, Virginia, Wisconsin to Colorado, to name only a few. And at every port of call we bring more on board: nurses and teachers, artists and lawyers, factory workers and farmers, businessmen and women, and veterans. Gathering speed as we approach our destination: our moment in history to wrest power from some of the most powerful people that the world has ever seen. It's exciting and exhausting, frustrating and joyous.
And our voyage now needs be tested by the Winds of Distraction and Fear.
In his letter to Barack Obama yesterday, Senator John Warner acted surprised and outraged that such equipment shortages could occur in Afghanistan--especially under his watch as "a former Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee."
In fact, Senator Warner was so incensed by the situation that he was Determined to Get to the Bottom of It. Therefore, he self-righteously demanded of Senator Obama that the Presidential candidate provide him with
the essential facts of when – the dates – the unit was deployed, to which brigade combat team, or other unit it was assigned, the name and current location of the captain, or other military personnel who shared the facts with you, so that committee staff can debrief them.
The tone is of one who is incredulous--who sincerely expects that Senator Obama is making this whole thing up. It appears that Warner doesn’t actually expect to be challenged on this.
By now, you've doubtless seen the nutters frothing at the mouth over the story of the unnamed Afghanistan vet Army Captain related in the last debate by Barack Obama.
One of the dramatic moments in Thursday’s Democratic debate came when Senator Barack Obama — in making the case that Iraq was the wrong place to launch a war — cited an Army captain in Afghanistan who told him of a rifle platoon that lacked manpower, ammunition and Humvees. As Mr. Obama recounted, the soldiers looked for captured Taliban weapons as it was easier to be armed that way than "to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief."
Conservatives pounced on the story, questioning its authenticity. Senator John Warner of Virginia, the ranking Republican and former chairman of the Armed Services Committee who has endorsed Senator John McCain, wrote to Mr. Obama on Friday seeking more details. Senator Warner wants to find out of the story is true -– and, if so, who might be responsible for any lapses. He said that he will also raise the issue with Army Secretary Peter Geren and Army Chief of Staff William Casey when they testify next week before his committee.
Warner approaches the issue with something less than the all-out foaminess of the wingnut bloggers, of course. But the clear implication is that he doesn't believe the story, and if it does turn out to be true, then somebody other than the Ship of Fools Warner's cast his lot (and his legacy) with must be found to blame.
Well, Brandon Friedman at VoteVets has one suggestion, Senator Warner: You.
Why you?
Because this act of stumbling around, claiming you've never heard of such a thing rings a little hollow, given that VoteVets came right to you in May of last year, with the story that this same damn thing was happening all over Afghanistan. Right into your living room, in fact:
"Bring me your Captain," Senator Warner?
How about you bring us your answer to this one, first?
The VRWC wingnutia brigade has been all up in arms over the anecdote Obama told about an Army Captain with a poorly equipped and undermanned platoon. For those who are interested, here is the video.
Transcript:You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon -- supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.
And as a consequence, they didn't have enough ammunition, they didn't have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.
On the Senate floor, earlier today during the Intel Authorization debate:
What we always have to remind our colleagues and the American public is that these companies have volunteered. They're not in this for a profit motive. There's some compensation for expenses. They're not unlike the men and women in the Armed Forces, all of whom today are in uniform because they raised their right arm and volunteered. And we cannot ask these companies to subject themselves to the uncertainty and the threats associated with legal processes, and it just... we're going to lose a very important component here of what I call the American Spirit: volunteerism. Whether it's in the corporate world, or whether it's in the Armed Forces, or in any other number of activities, we're a nation known as people who step forward and volunteer. And this is a clear example of how these companies cannot continue under the situation that persists today, because the directors of those companies -- their corporate boards -- have an obligation to their stockholders, and it's a stretch to say to the stockholders that a part of the volunteerism that we're doing to serve the cost of freedom here in the United States should be subjected to a lot of court suits.
So I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important thing. We've got to remind our colleagues about the -- well, I'm proud of what this chamber did. They voted it through very clearly.
This is very nearly the most incoherent babble I've ever heard on the Senate floor. We can't subject these companies to uncertainties and threats because they volunteered?
Why not?
What do the wingnuts say every time we express concern about them throwing our men and women in uniform into the Iraq meat grinder?
"They volunteered."
So there you have it, folks. If you're just some poor sap who volunteered for the Armed Forces, it's your lot in life to be tossed to the wind, to face whatever uncertainties and threats the president wants to subject you to.
But hey, if you're a corporation, well, that's different! A truly valuable citizen like you can't waste your beautiful mind on something like that! Why, just think of what the bereaved families stockholders would say about that! My goodness!
Senator Warner, you're going out a real chump. Way to piss on the uniformed services and reduce your legacy to little more than some curmudgeonly babbling.
Alaska, Arkansas and Missouri. They don't exactly rank with Haight Ashbury, the Village and Dupont Circle as hubs of liberalism.
So why were sportsmen from those states gathered in the Dirksen Senate Office Building today to announce their groups were signing on to a letter to Congress calling for climate action?
"Grandkids aren't Democrats or Republicans," said National Wildlife Federation President Larry Schweiger. "They're just grandkids."
Barbara Boxer is desperate for having Global Warming legislation under her belt. Can there be a better explanation for her strong championing of the fatally-flawed Lieberman-Warner Climate (in) Security Act? (For a great discussion of CISA's/Coal-Subsidy Act's flaws, see this commentto a post by Environmental Defense at Grist defending CISA.)
Thus, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Boxer has reacted angrily to the Friends of the Earth ad campaign voicing reason re Lieberman-Warner
The battlelines are being drawn when it comes to what makes sensible legislation to respond to Global Warming. Sadly, the lines are being drawn among the environmental community, with Global Warming Deniers, Skeptics, and Delayers watching the developing battle with amusement.
legislation under her belt. Can there be a better explanation for her 
