The Washington Stakeout takes a weekly look at the Sunday talk show guests and tries to ask good questions of the guests we think we have a chance of questioning. We’d like your help!
By the end of the day on Friday we’ll post to the blog the list of guests we’re aware might be taking part in the Sunday talk shows, if we think we can make it out. We’d like you to post your well-thought out questions as comments to that post, or email us atquestions@washingtonstakeout.com.
Remember, we’ll have questions of our own, and it isn’t guaranteed who we’ll get to question or how much we’ll be able to ask. But your well-thought out questions, preferably well-cited, are welcome and we’ll be sure to give credit where credit is due if you like.
[originally published on Washington Stakeout on Dec. 6, 2009; posted on posthaven Nov. 13, 2015]
Is the Afghanistan War Violating the Constitution?
We asked: “You, as all senators, are pledged to uphold the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8says that Congress has the power ‘to declare war’. Aren’t we operating in an unconstitutional manner?”
Feingold stated that Congress “should actually be declaring war in such situations” (which — perhaps unintentionally — implies which way the votes would go) and that he’s raised the point many times. But he refrained from explicitly calling the current situation unconstitutional. Feingold added: “We did have a resolution on this Afghanistan war in the beginning that clearly authorized this action even though it wasn’t a formal declaration of war. But that doesn’t mean you can just stay in a place forever without any sort of renewal of it.”
We asked Feingold: “Helen Thomas asked Obama at his first news conference if he knew of any country in the Mideast which possesses nuclear weapons. He said he didn’t want to ‘speculate’ (see video). Senator: Do you know of any country in the Mideast that has nuclear weapons?”
Feingold initially responded: “I’m not free to comment on that.”
However, after further questioning, he changed.
Question: “Why can you not say that Israel is a nuclear power, Senator?”
Feingold: “I basically think it is, but I’m not somebody who is privy to all the details on that. Pakistan clearly is, Pakistan concedes it, admits it.”
Question: “Do you have an estimate as to how many nuclear weapons Israel would have?”
Feingold: “I do not.”
While Feingold should almost certainly have been more forthright — he is on the Select Committee on Intelligence as well as the Foreign Relations Committee — he was more willing to basically acknowledge the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal than many establishment politicians, for example, see Stakeout’s questioning of John Edwards.
Feingold Dodges Question About Getting CBO Numbers on Single Payer
Perhaps most significantly, Feingold did not respond to repeated questioning about why he hasn’t gotten the Congressional Budget Office to “score” a single payer healthcare program.
He did say some nice things about the plan, which would take the insurance companies out of their central role in the system by having a single entity that would cover everyone. But such support is rhetorical. What’s been needed is for the Congressional Budget Office to come out with numbers assessing what people like former New England Journal of Medicine editor Dr. Marcia Angell’s have been arguing: that it’s the only way to cover everyone and control costs.
Our questions: “Have you tried to ask the Congressional Budget Office for an assessment to verify or falsify that [Angell's assertion]?” and “But why not get the CBO to crank the numbers?” went unanswered.
"Without education, people will accept anything. Without education, what you'll have is neo-colonialism instead of the colonialism like you have now. Without education, people don't know why they're doing what they're doing, you know what I mean? You might get people caught up in an emotionalist movement, might get them because they're poor and they want something and then if they're not educated, they'll want more and before you know it, we'll have Negro imperialism."
In the Democracy Now segment, Bobby Rush is shown eulogizing Hampton. Democracy Now noted that he's currently a congressman, but didn't note that a certain Barack Obama attempted to oust him in 2000. Rush had said of Obama: "He went to Harvard and became an educated fool."
[originally published at husseini.org on Dec. 4, 2009]
That would be a good start, but perhaps not very likely given that Hasan has now apparently killed so many.
A little over ten years ago Zeynep, whom I would later befriend, was vacationing in her native Turkey. An earthquake hit, killing thousands. For weeks she helped with the rescue efforts, digging for survivors amid the devastation and stench of death.
When she got back to the U.S., she was traumatized, literally smelling the bodies at times. Her doctor recommended she see a post-trauma specialist.
After a time the therapist kept telling her it "wasn't her fault" -- Zeynep kept saying she knew that -- it was an earthquake. This happened over and over. It turned out the therapist worked with alot of Vietnam War veterans and would tell them of their war experiences "It's not your fault". Zeynep would later write:
I pointed out that people who are truly not at fault often know that and do not need to hear it 30 years later. If a man is having crying fits and nightmares three decades after a war, there is a possibility that something really was his fault and that the last thing he needs to hear is "it's not your fault." Maybe he needs to say he was indeed at fault, that he was guilty. Is there a way to redemption without acknowledgment of guilt?
The right and much of the establishment typically derides therapy as engaging in moral relativism. But now you have much of the establishment, Schieffer is but a tiny example, engaging in a massive moral relativism.
Killing is bad -- at home. It's good in Iraq and Afghanistan.
People should not kill. Except when we tell them to.
People should feel bad about killing. Except when we say they shouldn't.
And: We need to look forward when it comes to crimes by U.S. officials. But we must ensure prosecution when it comes to the 9/11 attacks.
This system cannot stand, because it can't stand its self.
[originally published at husseini.org on Nov. 25, 2009]
(About the Sash remix: Enola Gay was name of the U.S. plane that dropped an atom bomb on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. It was named after Enola Gay Tibbets, the mother of the plane's pilot, Paul Tibbets; Little Boy was the codename of the bomb itself, hence the line "Enola Gay, is mother proud of little boy today?" This song is from OMD (Orchestral Manuvers in the Dark) and remixed by Sash to include audio such as Robert Oppenheimer saying "Now I am become death, destroyer of worlds," quoting the Bhagavad Gita.)
[originally published at husseini.org on Nov. 13, 2009]
Pacifica's Democracy Now (the most important daily show in the U.S.) had Lt. Dan Choi on this morning.
They played from his speech at the gay rights rally:
But of all those things that are worth fighting for, love is worth fighting for. Love is worth it. Love is worth it. ... We love our country, even when our country refuses to acknowledge our love. But we continue to defend it, and we continue to protect it, because love is worth it. Love is worth it!
If you believe it, say it with me. Love is worth it! Love is worth it! Love is worth it! Love is worth it!
Like so many others, I joined the military because my country beckoned me. "Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country."
All told he used the word "love" 21 times in the Dem Now segment. (My friend Windy remarks that maybe it's actually who in your country you can do that's the issue.)
It's sad that the hosts of Dem Now didn't (as I should say I suggested) ask him how waging war is consistent with this "love" he is screaming about.
As such, they fail. They fail as representatives of a network founded by pacifists, as liberals dedicated in open inquiry and as journalists capable of asking real questions to their guests.
Presumably if the "left" has its way there will be no one in the military except gays -- we'll have an all-gay army.
Reminds me of an old Bill Murray bit after the Soviets invaded, of all places, Afghanistan:
President Carter has proposed the drafting of women, and everybody's all worked up about it. Personally, I don't see what they're complaining about. Women in the armed forces could be the best thing that ever happened to this country.
Let's say we have a war with Russia and the women fight. If we win, that's OK. And if we lose, we can say to the Russians: "Wow, you beat a bunch of girls. You must be really proud of yourselves. You Russians are real tough guys, yeah." Can you imagine how embarrassed the Russians would be?
[originally published at husseini.org on Oct. 13, 2009]
As politicos left the Sunday morning talkshows this week, I asked about money in politics, specifically, from insurance and finance and if politicians were not doing the bidding of Wall Street in the healthcare debate.
Snowe: “Nothing to do with the contributions I receive”
Landrieu: “I’m not carrying water for the insurance companies.”
I asked Sen. Mary L. Landrieu (D-La.), if health insurance mandates don’t amount to a subsidy for the insurance companies. She claimed “What we’re trying to do is find the most cost effective way to cover everyone in America.” Which is odd, since single payer (Medicare-for-all) is widely recognized as being the most cost effective of any method currently being discussed because it gets rid of the massive overhead of the insurance companies — see PNHP’s backgrounder. Instead, Landrieu insisted that private insurance be central to any plan. She said: “I’m not carrying water for the insurance companies.”
Rockefeller: “Don’t worry about the insurance companies”
Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), was asked the same question about mandates being subsidies, he said: “Don’t worry about the insurance companies, believe me we’re going to take care of them.” He dismissed a Medicare-for-all proposal as being too ambitious while criticizing insurance companies practices. Even though Rockefeller comes from a wealthy family, he raises money for his campaigns and the number one sector isfinance and insurance. He dismissed the relevance of the poor performance of the Massachusetts plan plan — see PNHP’s crit — saying that it didn’t have a public option, which Rockefeller called “magic.” Rockefeller seemed to correct me about driving being a right when we digressed on that, from my cursory look around, he might be right legally.
Finally, Rockefeller criticized the Senate Finance Committee, but declined to single out its chair, Max Baucus, “on TV.”
Pawlenty
Republican Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said that government doesn’t do healthcare well, but said he still supports Medicare and Medicaid. When I asked about other government programs being allowed to do bulk purchasing, like the VA does, Pawlenty raised concerns about the government being a monopoly. A presidential aspirant, I asked Pawlenty if Israel had nuclear weapons; he spoke generally about telling the “truth” while not actually saying that Israel has nuclear weapons.
Sam Husseini is the founder of WashingtonStakeout.com. Research and web help from Matthew Bradley. Camera and video work by Brandon Kramer.
[originally published on Washington Stakeout on Sep. 15, 2009; posted on posthaven Nov. 13, 2015]
The lengthy applause should be an opportunity for quick thinking analysts to debunk and explain what is being said and done during presidential speeches.
As a basis, in 2003, just before the Iraq invasion, the Institute for Public Accuracy (where I work) did this in text form for Bush's State of the Union address. I should note, parenthetically, that this is one of many documents that shows how absured a notion it is for people to claim that we know Bush lied only after the invasion of Iraq; infact, anyone who cared to knew that Bush was lying before the war.
In 2003, it took sleepless days to assemble the crit online. This week, IPA did it in real time with Obama's healthcare -- or sickcare as my friend Jabari Zakiya likes to call it -- speech.
Contemporaneous crits should be done via audio and video by media outlets purporting authentic independence, rather like Colbert's "The Word" segments, or even the comments onMystery Science Theater or pop-up videos. Entertainment TV has produced alot of things to try to pack more dubious "substance" into less time -- authentic news (as opposed to phony corporate news) needs to go far beyond to get real substance to people in a factual, concise, witty fashion.
In the case of presidential speeches it is made easier since there's the lengthy, vacuous applause providing the air time -- and the White House frequently release partial text shortly before the speeches, giving the analysts a head start.
[originally published at husseini.org on Sept. 11, 2009]
Mac is the very talented eldest son of my friend Windy. At his first day at a new school today, he noticed the principal being hypocritical and had the gall to point it out. Read the details in his first blog entry.
[originally published at husseini.org on August 25, 2009]
