Quantcast
Channel: BuzzFeed News
Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live

Democratic Senator Applauds Filibuster, Will Vote Against Brennan's Nomination

$
0
0

Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) will vote against Obama's pick for the top CIA spot. But the advocate of the old-fashioned filibuster didn't join in Wednesday because Obama deserves “timely up-or-down votes,” his press secretary says.

John Brennan, President Obama's nominee for CIA director.

Image by Alex Wong / Getty Images

Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley will vote against the nomination of John Brennan for director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and applauds Rand Paul's filibuster, a spokesperson in his office told BuzzFeed Thursday afternoon.

Merkley, a longtime advocate for filibuster reform, did not participate in Republican Senator Rand Paul's thirteen-hour stand against Brennan's nomination, because "as a general principle he believes that the president's nominations deserve timely up-or-down votes except under extraordinary circumstances," said Martina McLennan, the Senator's press secretary.

But she added, because of the concerns expressed by Paul over civil liberties and the administration's drone program, Merkley will vote against President Barack Obama's pick for the top CIA spot.

"Senator Merkley has had concerns about the Brennan nomination, including some of the issues that Senator Paul has raised, and for that reason he will vote no in the final vote," McLennan said.

"Senator Merkley applauds Senator Paul for taking to the floor to state his views before his colleagues and the American people, as opposed to waging a silent filibuster," she said. "If Senators are going to block the work of the Senate, they should have the courage of their convictions to stand on the Senate floor and explain why."

Ron Wyden, Oregon's other Senator and a fellow Democrat, was the only member of his party to join Sen. Paul's filibuster Wednesday.

The Senate Intelligence Committee, in a 12-3 vote Tuesday, sent Brennan's nomination to the full Senate for confirmation. The vote is set to take place Thursday afternoon, and is expected to pass.


Democrats Give Excuses For Not Joining Anti-Drone Filibuster

$
0
0

Just one Dem participated in Rand Paul's thirteen-hour filibuster against drone strikes. The defense: “A distraction” that just “didn't feel like a constructive venue.”

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., leaves the floor of the Senate after his filibuster, which only one Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden, took part in.

Image by Charles Dharapak / AP

After just one Democrat participated in Rand Paul's filibuster Wednesday — a thirteen-hour stand against the nomination of John Brennan over administration drone strikes — Senate liberals defended their absence from the floor, calling the filibuster a "distraction" that wouldn't "move this issue forward."

Spokesmen for two Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, including Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, referred BuzzFeed to Wednesday's hearing with Attorney General Eric Holder, where members of the committee from both parties condemned the secrecy around the president's drone program.

"Senator Coons has publicly called for a rethinking of the United States strategy on drones and remains committed to being an active part of that discussion," said Ian Koski, his communications director, "but in his two years in the Senate, he's seen dozens and dozens of filibusters and didn't believe another filibuster would help move this issue forward."

"Filibustering the confirmation of the president's nominee for CIA director just didn't feel like a constructive venue for that discussion," added Koski.

Asked why more Democrats didn't come to Paul's aid, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana said, "Each has his own view. To be honest, I haven't been focused as much on that issue, an da lot of others probably haven't either. I assume that's the reason."

One Senate staffer said Democrats were privately "amused by the whole thing."

"There was a sense the Paul filibuster was a distraction from the real issues of privacy and civil liberties, and was just not an issue worth spending an entire day on in the Senate," said the Democratic staffer. "When Senators are getting ready to break ranks, you feel these tremors before it actually hits, and we didn't hear any of that yesterday."

Sen. Mark Begich, a Democratic from Alaska, said he shared several of the concerns Paul expressed on the Senate floor, but felt that joining the filibuster would have been a distraction from Congress's work on the federal budget.

"I'm grateful that Sen. Paul drew attention to this issue," Begich said. "However, we have important Senate business ahead of us and millions of Americans still struggling to pay the bills. That is my focus."

Asked about Democrats' lack of support for the filibuster, Missouri's Sen. Claire McCaskill offered, "A lot of people weren't in the building yesterday."

Although McCaskill said she took issue with several of Paul's statements — "I'm not 100 percent behind him that we need drone oversight," she told BuzzFeed — she did concede that she respected "his overall theme."

"I really respect that he maybe is going to teach the rest of the Republicans that, if you're going to throw sand in the gears, have the courage to stand up and make a point of view known," she said.

Other Democrats held up Paul as an old-style lawmaker worthy of admiration for his thirteen-hour effort. But despite their appreciation for their colleague, the Senators said they didn't agree with his stance enough to ultimately join him on the Senate floor and buck one of the president's nominations.

"I don't agree with what he said, but I still agree with his right to filibuster," said Michigan's Sen. Carl Levin. "Does the president want to bomb people in restaurants? No. I don't think the president wants to."

Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont, an Independent, said, "I respect anybody who's going to go to the floor and talk for 12 hours to defend his or her point of view. But the lesson is you can do that, but after that, 50 votes should prevail. Obviously I don't think we should be using drones against American citizens in the United States."

But despite retroactive praise from Senators like Sanders, Paul was without much Democratic support Wednesday. Oregon's Sen. Ron Wyden, an outspoken critic of the administration's stance on civil liberties, was the only Democratic member from the upper chamber to join Paul.

The Senate ultimately approved Brennan's nomination Thursday afternoon by a vote of 63-34.

With additional reporting by Rebecca Berg and John Stanton.

National Security And Defense Lose Their Sacred Status For Republicans

$
0
0

Whether it's political calculation or war fatigue, Republicans are more willing to sacrifice a once-core issue.

Image by Charles Dharapak / AP

WASHINGTON — Over the last six months Republicans have undergone a remarkable transition, morphing from a hardline, defense-oriented party to one apparently willing to sacrifice that image for the sake of a high-profile political confrontation with President Obama.

Defense and national security have been sacred for decades in the Republican Party, and there's no evidence that will change anytime soon. But with Republicans in the House openly supporting the first significant cuts to the Pentagon's budget in more than a decade and members of the GOP Senate leadership team standing with Sen. Rand Paul's filibuster over the use of drones, a shift is now clearly underway.

Indeed how the party handled Paul's filibuster is a clear indication of the shifting landscape.

Although Wednesday's filibuster originally enjoyed only the support of conservatives, once it became clear that the conservative world was watching — and rooting for — Paul, a series of establishment figures rushed to his aid, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republican Conference Chairman John Thune. The Republican party's Senate political arm even raised money off the filibuster.

"He's one of the nicest people in the Senate, and he's always courteous, he's always proper, but he feels deeply, and my gosh, we all fight to uphold those rights," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, one of the party's institutionalists in the Senate and hardly a dove when it comes to national security issues. "Each senator has a right to feel the way they do, and he's sincere, he's dedicated, he's a very intelligent man, and in essence he won. So I thought it was pretty good," he said Thursday.

But Thursday morning also brought a backlash. Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham took to the Senate floor and unleashed a barrage of attacks on their junior colleague.

"To somehow say that someone who disagrees with American policy and even may demonstrate against it, is somehow a member of an organization which makes that individual an enemy combatant is simply false," McCain said, while Graham chastised his colleagues who had joined Paul in his filibuster.

"To my Republican colleagues, I don't remember any of you coming down here suggesting that President Bush was going to kill anybody with a drone … they had a drone program back then, all of a sudden this drone program has gotten every Republican so spun up," he said. "What are we up to here?"

Publicly, Thune and others sought to downplay the significance of the divisions.

"This isn't going to create a huge division among Republicans, no," the South Dakota Republican said.

"I wouldn't characterize it as major. I think there's obviously some differences of opinion within our conference about the drone program, and for most of us — and I was down there last night, mainly defending Sen. Paul's right to be able to get answers to his questions as part of the advise-consent rule of the Senate in the nomination process — and I think it's a legitimate question to have answered," Thune said.

Privately, however, Republicans argue there are indeed divisions, and potentially a broader shift underway in terms of the importance Republicans put on national security issues.

Pointing to the participation in the filibuster by McConnell and Minority Whip John Cornyn — both of whom face potential primary opponents next year — one conservative Republican bluntly said "there's no way those guys would be down there if it wasn't for the primaries.

Others, like Thune and Sen. Marco Rubio, also have potential 2016 presidential bids to consider, and maintaining a strong conservative image is critical for them at this point.

There is also the reality that Republicans simply don't like President Barack Obama and have made it clear they are willing to go to great lengths to confront him and his administration.

But crass political opportunism is only part of why Republicans suddenly are willing to support cutting defense spending or a national security related filibuster.

After all, if pandering to conservatives was all that was at stake, there have been plenty of chances over the last four years to do so. But previous movement leaders in the Senate, most notably former Sen. Jim DeMint, were never able to rally the kind of support that Paul was able to Wednesday evening for far easier political battles over earmarks or spending.

A senior Senate leadership aide acknowledged a shift has occurred, casting it as something of a course correction. According to the aide, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the start of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the party hunkered down into a strongly defense oriented mode.

The Bush administration, meanwhile, used it's considerable political capital, particularly in the in years immediately after the attack, to ride herd not only on the nation but also Republicans as it expanded defense spending and its own authority to fight whatever threats it saw fit.

"The talking points they used on you guys, they were using on us," the aide said, noting that former Vice President Dick Cheney "was up here every week" at the Senate luncheon pushing the conference to maintain discipline.

And it worked: spending on budget spending for the Defense Department ballooned and for years the costs of the wars were kept off the books so as to not break the back of the nation's finances.

At the same time Republican-controlled congresses worked hand in hand with the White House to pass sweeping new counter-terrorism laws, including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and other legislation expanding the executive branch's ability to conduct surveillance domestically.

All of those extensions were done under the threat from the White House that they were needed to stave off menacing outside forces poised to attack America, and opposition was not only frowned upon but punished.

When the late Sen. Arlen Specter raised concerns with warrantless wiretapping, he not only found himself in the cross hairs of neoconservatives and the administration, but his own leadership and colleagues who pressured the then-Republican to abandon his objections.

But after the 2006 election, the fever, so to speak, seemed to break, and with the Iraq war ostensibly over and operations in Afghanistan winding down, Republicans suddenly don't feel so beholden to the national security apparatus.

"Guys are willing to say no, we shouldn't spend so much money on this," the Senate Republican aide said of the shift.

The First Ad Of The 2016 Iowa Caucus

$
0
0

No, really. A Tea Party Super PAC commercial attacks Gov. Bob McDonnell for tax increases in Virginia.

Via: reporting.sunlightfoundation.com

The conservative Patriot Super PAC has made a $4,300 ad buy in Iowa for a television spot against current Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell's potential presidential campaign in three years, according to the the Sunlight Foundation's news blog.

The ad warns voters in Iowa, where the first contest of the presidential primary is traditionally held, that McDonnell "pushed the largest tax increase in Virginia history."

McDonnell, already rumored to be a Republican candidate for 2016, is term-limited and will step down as governor early next year.

The website for Patriot Super PAC says the group is "dedicated to the core principles of liberty and limited government on which our country was founded."

Rand Paul's New Friends

$
0
0

A filibuster, plus friendly relationships with key Senate elders, has made Paul newly popular in Congress, where his father spent lonely decades as Dr. No. “

Image by Charles Dharapak / AP

WASHINGTON — Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has friends all over the spectrum — from establishment conservatives to the freewheeling libertarian devotees of his father — after a nearly 13-hour filibuster of John Brennan's CIA nomination on Wednesday. He's also managed to make two of the Senate's most establishmentarian figures, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, look like outliers, and Republicans are privately grumbling about them.

He's managed, in other words, through showmanship and relationship-building, to finally mainstream his father's lonely brand of contrarianism.

"This marks [Paul's] arrival as a serious national figure in the Republican party, said Steve Schmidt, McCain's 2008 presidential campaign manager, who said Paul would be a "formidable candidate" in 2016.

"He has the ability to gain currency and momentum in the mainstream of the Republican party, and the libertarian wing of the Republican party has historically been a potent one," Schmidt said. "It has been dormant for quite a while. "

Paul's filibuster attracted over a dozen senators to the Senate floor, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. It launched a fundraising push from the NRSC and even got an assist from RNC chairman Reince Priebus, who urged other senators to join the filibuster on Twitter. Most other Senators have praised Paul for the effort, with the notable exception of Graham and McCain, who called the filibuster a "political stunt."

"Either they were drinking a lot at the Obama party or they're just completely dismissive of what was going on," said one senior Republican strategist. "They're living in an alternative universe. I don't get it at all. You have a party where there's all this talk about how divided the establishment is from the grassroots, and then you have John McCain and Lindsey Graham come out of left field with this. People are just scratching their heads."

The strategist called the filibuster "big beyond it just being a big moment for Rand Paul. It was kind of a big moment for the party because you suddenly had people rallying together on a cause of principle."

Another GOP operative called Graham and McCain "just completely out of touch."

"They don't get it," the operative said. "Did they see what was going on across the spectrum of activists yesterday? Lindsey Graham may have just made his job a whole lot harder in 2014."

"Senator McCain is obviously well aware of the politics of this - he just doesn't care," said one McCain aide. "He's doing what he thinks is right. Unlike many of these guys, he's actually been involved in a few national security debates over the years. He knows that jumping on the Rand Paul black helicopters crazytrain isn't good for our Party or our country, no matter what Twitter says."

Apart from the discontent among some of Paul's elders in the Senate, the moment was mollifying for the libertarian army that supported Ron Paul but has been much more suspicious of his son. The Paul blogosphere has lit up with news of the filibuster, though some in the Daily Paul comments are calling it "calculating," and it's bolstered much of the discussion on Reddit. These are the people who organized and fundraised for his father online, and if they're kept at a relatively placated level, they could turn out again in large numbers for Rand himself.

And it was an opportunity for an establishment figure like Mitch McConnell, up for re-election in 2014, to prove his civil liberties bona fides.

Jesse Benton, formerly Ron Paul's campaign manager and now McConnell's re-election campaign manager, said that McConnell hadn't planned to go down to the Senate on Wednesday.

"We didn't know that Rand was planning a talking filibuster but there's been plenty of communication at multiple levels that Rand planned to hold up the nomination," Benton said. McConnell "had let Rand know that he was supportive of the idea of at least holding [Brennan] to 60 votes."

"The leader was watching on C-SPAN like everyone else and we were showing him what was going on on Twitter," Benton said. "Rand's his friend, he really likes Rand, and he was personally inspired by what Rand was doing. He decided he needed to go down and support his friend. It was emotional."

"Rand is very skilled at politics, and he has built relationships with people like Mitch McConnell," Benton said.

Paul told Politico on Thursday that Republicans in favor of drones are "on the wrong side of history" and "I'm not for reading Miranda Rights to people who are shooting at us, but they say America is a battlefield and that's a huge mistake."

The victory was more significant symbolically than in reality: Brennan was confirmed as CIA director on Thursday.

This piece has been updated with comment from a McCain staffer.

Senator Takes Part In Heartwarming Twitter Proposal

$
0
0

Virginia Senator Mark Warner took part in a Twitter proposal between Brett Wanamaker and his press secretary, Beth Adelson. This is the cutest thing ever.


View Entire List ›

Republicans Hit Judd Over Kentucky Residency

$
0
0

National Republicans aren't taking the actress' potential Senate challenge to Mitch McConnell lightly.

WASHINGTON — The National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee is up with a new tongue-in-cheek web ad questioning actress Ashley Judd's Kentucky roots, the latest sign that national Republicans are leaving nothing to chance in Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's re-election.

Questioning whether a candidate actually lives in the state or district they are running in is hardly a new campaign tactic, although it has generally been targeted at incumbents who have spent decades in Washington.

But Judd is a neophyte to politics, and has yet to even formally declare her candidacy in next year's Senate race, and the email, which will go out to the NRSC's donor list, is a clear demonstration that Republicans are taking her seriously.

The email is designed to look like a fundraising pitch for Judd from Democrats.

"Ashley Judd needs your help. Despite the fact that she lives in Tennessee, Judd desperately wants to run for Senate in neighboring Kentucky. I know what you're thinking: how can a person who has said "Tennessee is home," that San Francisco is "my American city home" and that she "winters in Scotland" run for Senate in Kentucky?" the email reads.

"Well, that's where you come in.," it says. Littered with links to "donate" to Judd's campaign, the email also includes photos of the Versailles, Kentucky castle and urges donors to "donate $10,000, $25,000 or $50,000 we can start to piece together a down payment for a house that provides Judd all the amenities that she has grown accustomed to as she jets between Hollywood, Scotland, San Francisco and Tennessee."

Speechwriters? What Speechwriters?

$
0
0

There's only one way for a president or ex-president to compose his work, according to anonymous people around him.

One of many New York Times articles on President Obama's process

One of many New York Times articles on President Obama's process

The New Yorker on Clinton today

The New Yorker on Clinton today


America's Youngest Senator Isn't Very Cool, But He's Trying

$
0
0

Freshman Sen. Chris Murphy tries to figure out how to play up his youth without looking phony. “I'm very careful not to try to use lingo that's above my coolness pay grade.”

Image by Dave Collins / AP

WASHINGTON — Last week, Sen. Chris Murphy couldn't get the new will.i.am and Britney Spears song "Scream & Shout" out of his head.

So, the freshman Democrat from Connecticut took the only action that made sense: He tweeted about it.

It's the kind of thing a mom, reaching for common ground, might say to a carpool of middle-school girls. But even if Murphy isn't that cool, he has little choice but to keep trying.

As the youngest member of the United States Senate — an institution whose average member is, at 61, more than 20 years Murphy's senior — Murphy, 39, often seems to be juggling authenticity and professionalism with a certain expectation of hipness. Having recently joined what he calls a "new, young nucleus" of rap-quoting, basketball-playing Senate Gen-Xers, he faces the daily challenge of fitting his admittedly dorky persona into the new mold of the Capitol Hill cool-kids club.

"I care deeply about juvenile justice reform, and gun policy, and health care delivery system reform," he said in an interview with BuzzFeed. "But I also really care about the Boston Red Sox, and good pizza, and —" Murphy paused and looked up at the ceiling as he tried to settle on an appropriate musical artist. "I'm trying to pick which — I'm not going to say Nick Lachey." He giggled, seemingly in on the joke, then relented. "And Nick Lachey as a legitimate mainstream pop artist."

Name-dropping Nick Lachey might be a bit off-trend, but it is the manifestation of a belief Murphy shares with his younger colleagues that Senators are "not supposed to be robots who care only about detailed policy debates."

"We're supposed to be representative of the public, and one of the ways that we show that we are truly representative of what people think is we care about important policy, but we also care about the mundane subjects of life," Murphy said. "If regular people are talking about food and parenting and music and sports, then I think it's appropriate but also probably important that their elected officials talk about the same things too."

On a recent day, that philosophy was evident in a tweet about pizza:


View Entire List ›

The Jobs Report Is Wrong

$
0
0

What headlines say about the monthly jobs numbers is actually no more accurate than chance. A BuzzFeed original analysis.

Months in red are months where initial headlines said the jobs numbers fell short of economists' expectations, but then the revised numbers actually exceeded expectations (or vice versa).

Economists' expectations were drawn from a Bloomberg survey of economists, and jobs figures were gathered from BLS.gov. Final benchmark revisions for the previous March are released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in February of the following year.

"Stunning." "Pleasant surprise." "Easily beat economists' predictions." These are some of the phrases being used to describe February's employment report, which showed 236,000 new jobs created last month. But a few months or a year from now, there's a decent chance we'll have an entirely different perception of today's news.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which releases monthly estimates of job growth based on firm surveys, continually revises these figures as more information streams in. And while the monthly announcements receive the most attention, the revised figures often vary widely from initially reported numbers.

Most jobs-report headlines focus on how the economy performed relative to economists' expectations. So BuzzFeed looked at initially reported figures, economists' forecasts, and final benchmark revisions released annually to find out how often the narrative of performance relative to expectations turned out to be wrong.

A full 50% of the time, the initial perception of the jobs numbers would have been incorrect: Reported jobs growth fell short of economists' expectations, but then the revised numbers actually exceeded them, or vice versa. In other words, if you want to know what today's jobs report means for the economy, reading the headlines is no more useful than flipping a coin.

National LGBT Groups Encouraged Court To Delay Michigan Marriage Case

$
0
0

As a lesbian couple seeks protections for their children, national LGBT rights groups told the court it could be “prudent” to hold off a decision. The couple now will be waiting until the Supreme Court rules on DOMA and Proposition 8.

April DeBoer, second from left, sits with her adopted daughter Ryanne, 3, left, and Jayne Rowse, fourth from left, and her adopted sons Jacob, 3, middle, and Nolan, 4, right.

Image by Paul Sancya / AP

April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse had hoped to leave court Thursday with a ruling that the Michigan constitutional amendment banning them from marrying is unconstitutional. The lesbian couple, who are raising three children together, are seeking to adopt each other's kids — two initially were adopted by Rowse, one was initially adopted by DeBoer — but Michigan law only includes second-parent adoption for married couples.

Following a hearing Thursday, the question will hang in judicial limbo for a few more months — which is exactly what many marriage equality proponents wanted.

Hoping to avoid a marriage case being heard by the more conservative Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, several organizations fighting for marriage equality — including the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal, and National Center for Lesbian Rights — suggested in a December 2012 filing that the court hold off.

The groups wrote that before resolving the Michigan couple's case, "this Court may determine that it is prudent to await decision" in the California Proposition 8 case at the Supreme Court.

Federal Judge Bernard Friedman took the national groups' recommendation Thursday and is holding the couple's case to await word from the Supreme Court before issuing a decision in DeBoer and Rowse's case.

Although the LGBT groups' moves have been out of the spotlight as the DOMA and Proposition 8 cases took center stage, they shed light on the careful approach LGBT legal advocacy organizations have taken in the past couple of years. Although courtroom successes have been plenty in challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, more direct marriage-rights cases have met with mixed results. Courts in the Proposition 8 challenge have found the California amendment to be unconstitutional, but federal marriage equality lawsuits in Hawaii and Nevada were rejected by trial courts.

The Michigan case initially wasn't even about marriage, as the couple only sought to be allowed second-parent adoptions. At the judge's suggestion, however, the couple amended their complaint to directly take on the constitutionality of the state's restrictive marriage amendment, which says "the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."

The case, initially filed in January 2012, came only after several LGBT organizations declined to participate, Dana Nessel, one of the couple's attorneys, told BuzzFeed Thursday. "What they told us is that they refuse to touch anything in the Sixth Circuit [Court of Appeals]."

The fear: they would lose.

Jay Kaplan of the ACLU of Michigan told BuzzFeed Friday that Nessel's assessment was accurate, saying, "If you're going to bring a marriage equality claim, you want to be sure that you're going to be successful at all stages of the process." Of the Sixth Circuit, he said, "There is not a progressive majority on the court."

Still, Nessel said she and a couple other lawyers took on the case pro bono because of "our belief that this is totally unjust."

On Thursday, however, Friedman put the case on hold. The main reason for the delay is because many observers are expecting the Supreme Court to give some guidance to lower courts on whether laws that classify people based on sexual orientation — like the marriage bans — should be subjected to a closer scrutiny when examined by courts. If so, a type of heightened scrutiny will apply and governments will need to show an important reason for the laws. If not, rational basis applies and governments need only show a legitimate reason for the laws.

Although Nessel said she understood the judge's reasoning, she added, "I think we have such good arguments under rational basis, that we could have won under that."

"I have every confidence in the world that we're going prevail and that Michigan's marriage amendment is going to be struck down as unconstitutional [and] gays and lesbians won't be second-class citizens," she said, acknowledging, "We were really hoping that today would be the day."

Although LGBT organizations — led by the ACLU and supported by Michigan LGBT groups, the Human Rights Campaign and others — are supporting the couple's claim, a brief filed with the court in the case urges the initial, far more limited solution to the case. Although the couple is now seeking equal marriage rights, as well as second-parent adoption rights, the LGBT groups' brief focuses only on the latter solution.

Explaining, Kaplan, the ACLU attorney, said, "There might be other ways to reach this conclusion. You don't need to necessarily decide the marriage issue." He added, though, "If you choose to do so, we support marriage equality."

Looking forward at the Supreme Court's consideration of DOMA and Proposition 8, however, Kaplan said that regardless of the specific strategy in the Michigan couple's case, it shows the national movement on marriage equality.

"It's demonstrating the incredible momentum and progress," he said. "The fact that a state like Michigan, which has one of the most restrictive amendments in the country — the fact that a court would be looking at the constitutionality of that shows how much this issue is moving along."

DeBoer and Rowse's Complaint

LGBT Organizations' Brief


View Entire List ›

The House Republican Conference Wants Its Offices To Look Like A Startup

$
0
0

Motivational posters and bright-hued walls. “It's simple until you make it complicated,” one poster reads.

WASHINGTON — The House Republican conference has updated its Capitol Hill offices to look like an Internet startup, apparently hoping to inspire party rebranding with redecorating.

A video posted by the House Republican conference reveals an office with Google-colored walls and peppy motivational posters, such as:

"Passion Never Fails"

"Passion Never Fails"

Source: s.startupvitamins.com


View Entire List ›

Nobody Liked The White House Tours That Much Anyway

$
0
0

The tours have a thoroughly average 3.5 stars on Yelp. “Worst club in DC. And I got caught planking on secret service car,” wrote one reviewer.

6th grade students in Waverly, Iowa, pose for a photo on March 6, 2013. The class had their upcoming visit canceled as the White House suspended all tours.

Image by St. Paul's Lutheran School, Karen Thalacker / AP

With this week's announcement that the White House would suspend tours indefinitely because of spending cuts, would-be tourists can take solace in the fact that the tours are apparently not that great.

In fact, they average only 3.5 Yelp stars, with reviews detailing long lines, a too-short tour that's difficult to schedule, and security guards who won't even let you plank on secret service cars.

Here are some of the complaints:

The lines are too long.

The lines are too long.


View Entire List ›

Other Anti-American Samira Ibrahim Tweets Emerge

$
0
0

The Egyptian activist thought that the U.S. was funding the Muslim Brotherhood in North Africa to help Israel. And called for Egypt to expel all Israeli citizens.

An Egyptian protestor holds a picture of Samira Ibrahim in Cairo last year.

Image by MOHAMMED HOSSAM / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Egyptian activist Samira Ibrahim, whose award that was to be presented by Michelle Obama and the State Department was deferred due to a number of anti-Semitic tweets that came to light this week, tweeted more explicitly anti-American conspiracy theories in January that have not yet come to full public attention.

The Weekly Standard reported that Ibrahim, who was to receive an International Women of Courage award at the State Department from Michelle Obama and John Kerry for her work in outlawing forced "virginity tests" in Egypt, had sent tweets celebrating terrorist attacks on Israelis and describing the Saudi ruling family as "dirtier than the Jews." She also tweeted in praise of the 9/11 attacks.

But there are other Ibrahim tweets that were similarly anti-American as well as being even more conspiracy-minded, according to translations provided to BuzzFeed by to Egyptian activist Mina Rezkalla.

In a thread from January 5, Ibrahim argues "MB failed in the Emirates and it is going to fail in any country as long as there isn't signal from the US to them... the green light to the MB is only in North Africa." She says in her next tweet that "US is controlling the Gulf (Gulf countries) and play for the benefit of Israel .. MB play in North Africa for the benefit of Israel."

In another thread from January 11, Ibrahim is in a Twitter conversation with a man who says that Egypt and Iran should form an alliance to target Israel. Ibrahim says, "the current regime doesn't consider Israel an enemy but rather considers Iran an enemy. You are right, I wish there is a military alliance between Iran and Egypt." She tweets that an alliance with Iran would be a "million times better" than the alliance with the U.S.

And there was more anti-Israeli content as well. On August 5, Ibrahim called for Egypt to expel all Israelis from Egypt immediately ("1-review Camp-David 2- put the defense minister on a trial 3-change the army's leadership 4- expel any person who holds Israeli citizenship from Egypt immediately"). She also tweeted on August 5, "Egyptian media is inciting against Palestine instead of Israel. #whoring."

The State Department announced that it was deferring Ibrahim's award until further review, after originally saying it believed that Ibrahim had been hacked. Ibrahim herself, after originally claiming she had been hacked, has taken to Twitter to say "I refuse to apologize to the Zionist lobby in America regarding my previous anti-Zionist statements under pressure from American government therefore they withdrew the award."

Asked how the U.S. Embassy in Cairo could have overlooked the tweets while vetting Ibrahim for the award, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland referred BuzzFeed to yesterday's and today's press briefings.

South Carolina Blog Co-Owner Could Primary Lindsay Graham

$
0
0

“A wolf can hide in sheep's clothing for only so long,” says Mace.

Via: facebook.com

WASHINGTON — The first woman to ever graduate from the Citadel — who is also the co-owner of a controversial South Carolina political blog — is weighing a primary challenge to Senator Lindsey Graham in 2014, two Republican sources suggested Saturday.

Conservatives have long mulled a challenge to Graham, seen in some circles as too establishmentarian for the state's conservative grassroots, and allies of Senator Rand Paul — whose filibuster last week Graham denounced — hope State Senator Tom Davis, who backed Paul for president, will enter the race. But another conservative candidate could be Nancy Mace, best known in local political circles as the partial owner of FITSNews, whose name is short for "Faith In The Sound" after a George Michael lyric and which has for several years served as the center ring of the state's sometimes hallucinatory political circus.

"She's got an inspirational personal narrative, a gorgeous young family, the right ideological mooring and all sorts of political connections. Oh, and her name fits nicely on a 4X8," FITSNews founding editor Will Folks said in an email. "Obviously I'm a little biased, but there's a lot to like about her as a potential candidate in the event Tom Davis decides to stay out of it."

In a separate email, Mace didn't rule out a run, though she downplayed its likelihood.

"I would like to see someone credible step up to the plate and challenge Graham," she said.

"I'm a hard working small business owner and a mother who loves her children very much," Nancy Mace told BuzzFeed on Friday. "And when I see something that is wrong, I am not afraid to speak up. Public office may very well be something I consider one day, but the US Senate might be a bit much."

Mace wrote a book about her experiences at the Citadel, In The Company Of Men: A Woman At The Citadel and her firm publishes FITSNews, which found itself at the center of the state's politics when Folks — former Governor Mark Sanford's former press secretary — claimed during the 2010 race for governor that he'd had an affair with candidate Nikki Haley. She denied it, and the backlash helped elect her.

Graham's opposition to Rand Paul's filibuster "hurts him not only in South Carolina, but nationwide," Mace said. "He continues to illustrate just how out of touch he is with the conservative movement. A wolf can hide in sheep's clothing for only so long, but eventually you see its teeth revealing its true nature. Senator Graham's recent conservative charade, coincidentally just before his next re-election, may very well be over."

CORRECTION: Mace is FITSNews' co-owner, and FITS stands for "Faith In The Sound." An earlier version of this story misstated both points, due to an editing error. (3/9/2013).


Bolton: Romney, Republicans Losing On National Security

$
0
0

“The entire Republican party has spent four years making a huge mistake really retreating from its historic role as the main advocate of sound national security policies.”

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton attends a rally of groups opposing Iranian President Ahmadinejad's speech at the United Nations General Assembly last fall.

Image by Mario Tama / Getty Images

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton — a leading Republican hawk and former top adviser to Governor Mitt Romney — said Sunday that Romney lost in part because he and his party have abandoned their traditional aggressive posture on national security.

"I would have stressed national security issues more," Bolton told WABC's Aaron Klein of Romney's campaign. "I don't fault the Romney campaign alone for that, though. I think the entire Republican party has spent four years making a huge mistake really retreating from its historic role as the main advocate of sound national security policies. And in that sense the campaign's unwillingness to take on Obama's failed foreign and defense policies was symptomatic of the problem of the party as a whole."

Republicans have signaled broad acceptance of President Barack Obama's withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq, of deep cuts to defense spending in the congressionally mandated "sequester," and have in fact lately challenged Obama from the left on drone policy.

"I don't know whether that would have won the election or not," Bolton said. "But I think people want a president who is going to go to Washington and defend America's interests internationally. The American people are very pragmatic. They know they are not going to pore over the intricacies of foreign and defense policy. But they expect a president who will stand up for them internationally. And I think they respect that. It's what they've looked for that in presidential candidates. I think Romney could have provided that and I am just sorry we didn't have more of it."

How Ashley Judd Can Win

$
0
0

The staffers who ran campaigns for Eastwood, Bono, Schwarzenegger, and Franken say the actress can win if she gets in early, stays local, and works like hell. Celebrity status can be like “a huge tire around the neck,” says Padberg.

Image by AP

If Ashley Judd wants to get serious about running for U.S. Senate, she'll have to do in Kentucky what her predecessors — and she has many — did before her to get out of Hollywood and into politics.

Clint Eastwood and Sonny Bono; Arnold Schwarzenegger and Fred Thompson; Al Franken and, of course, Ronald Reagan all faced the same criticisms that they were just lightweights playing their latest roles. But they all won, according to the people who ran their long-shot races, by following roughly the same formula: starting early, staying local, and preventing their celebrity from weighing "like a huge tire around the neck" on the campaign trail.

Although Judd has yet to start the process in earnest — she will reportedly declare herself a candidate for the Kentucky Senate race in May, "around Derby," according to a report in The Huffington Post — the actress and longtime political activist might have what it takes to beat Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, say former staffers to celebrities who made the transition in decades past.

"She sounds like she's a serious candidate," said Eileen Padberg, who ran Clint Eastwood's campaign for mayor of Carmel, California, in 1986. "Most people think name identification is the only thing that can win you a campaign. For a celebrity, it's the opposite. They need to show substance, and that's what she needs to do now."

Bill Lacy, the director of the Dole Institute of Politics, worked for three celebrity candidates: Ronald Reagan, who had a career in film and radio before making it to the California Governor's Mansion and, later, to the White House; Fred Thompson, the lawyer who became a movie star before he ran for Senate in 1994; and Sonny Bono, the singer and actor who was elected mayor of Palm Springs in 1988 before winning a seat in the House six years later.

"The advantage that Sonny and Fred and Ronald Reagan had — and that Ashley Judd will have — is that they've played on a big stage for high stakes," said Lacy.

The most recent actor to follow the path Judd hopes to pursue is Senator Al Franken, the onetime radio personality and Saturday Night Live star, who was able to parlay his entertainment career into a razor-thin victory in 2008, carrying the day by a mere 312 votes. His success in Minnesota cleared the path to the Senate for Judd, but those close to Franken say they can easily imagine how the actress could falter with voters in Kentucky.

In the four months since Judd has begun to lay the groundwork for a potential campaign, Republican opponents have attacked her as a "Hollywood liberal" who isn't committed to Kentucky. Although Judd has family roots in the state — she says they stretch back to the Civil War — a web ad, released this month by Karl Rove's Super PAC, lays into the actress for keeping her current home in Tennessee.

To avoid that same line of criticism, Franken moved his Air America Radio show from New York to Minnesota in 2005, two years before he launched his campaign.

"If she's serious about doing this, certainly one lesson is that she's gonna have to move to Kentucky full-time right now," said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a close friend of Franken's since 1988. "You can't wait until the campaign actually starts."

Although Judd has not said she will move to Kentucky, she has reportedly taken meetings with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and with party leaders like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. But those who remember Franken's tireless door-to-door campaign in Minnesota say that a tour through Washington, D.C. — at this stage in the game, early as it may be — may not strike a chord with local voters.

"He was working his ass off," said Ornstein. "That meant not just boning up on some of the specific issues that might face Minnesota — it meant traveling all over the state all the time."

Gerry Sikorski, a former congressman from Minnesota and an early supporter of Franken's campaign, remembers a candidate who made it clear early on "in thought, word, and deed, that he was very serious."

"He spent a lot of time in people's kitchens, at feeding lots, in American Legion clubs, in church basements; he'd meet people for lunch, breakfast, and dinner, and every time he'd spend an hour and a half or two hours with them."

During his mayoral campaign, Clint Eastwood made a deliberate choice to keep his operation local, despite growing interest from media outlets well outside Carmel. "He refused to do any outside news commentary, so we didn't talk to the Japan News or the L.A. Times or anything," said Padberg. "He really stuck to the plan, which was to only talk to local news, and we tried to get people in town to understand that he was very serious."

Voters in Tennessee connected most with Fred Thompson when he traded in a traditional stump speech — "driving from place to place in a decorated van, dressed in a suit," said Lacy — for a more homegrown routine.

"At one point Fred came to me and said, 'I'm not comfortable on the stump. Let me dress down a little bit, put some cowboy boots on, and get in a pick-up truck,'" Lacy remembered. "I thought he had lost his mind. But it worked."

Franken, too, kept his campaign inside the state. His campaign events would stay small in scale; he'd hold an auction for the state party, raffling off one of his wife's apple pies — "the best apple pie imaginable," says Ornstein — or one of his famous United States maps, which he is able to draw freehand in just a few minutes from memory alone.

"He used his genius to relate to people. And god knows he didn't just have a few things that he had said in the past that wouldn't be helpful for any candidate — he had books full of things," Sikorski said. "F-words are not generally that helpful. But all that was pushed aside."

But for his opponents from both parties, Franken's celebrity made for opposition research of the quickest and easiest variety.

At the state's Democratic-Farmer-Labor convention in June 2008, one of Franken's colleagues in the party, U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, dug up a piece he had written for Playboy in 2000. The article, titled "Porn-O-Rama," was satire, but McCollum called it proof positive that her party's potential nominee was a misogynist. Franken nearly lost his spot on the ticket.

"It took some effort to neutralize that," said Ornstein.

For Eastwood, too, his entertainment career was like "a huge tire around the neck" during the entire campaign, Padberg said. "In the beginning, we talked seriously about whether or not it was even possible for him to win."

But what helped every successful celebrity candidate was the early interest they showed in politics long before their campaigns for public office. Franken had written skits and books on politics and helped fundraise for other Democratic candidates in Minnesota; and Thompson had been the minority counsel on the Senate Watergate Committee and represented the plaintiff in a well-known case against Tennessee Parole Board chair Marie Ragghianti.

Judd has her own extensive résumé in politics and humanitarian work. She has traveled to Africa for the global health organization YouthAIDS; she has a public policy degree from Harvard; she worked with the progressive group EMILY's List last year to help elect more female candidates; and she has stumped for both of Barack Obama's presidential campaigns.

But a former aide to Arnold Schwarzenegger — the star of the Terminator films who had served on the president's Council on Physical Fitness and been active in California politics before he served his two terms as the state's governor — suggested that Judd's humanitarian experience may not cut it in a campaign for national office.

"What he had done was very specific to California politics and the issues facing California," said Adam Mendelson, who worked on Schwarzenegger's reelection campaign and has stayed with the former governor in various capacities since. "When people see celebrities doing global charity work, I don't think they see that as a direct connection to the day-to-day responsibilities of legislating."

When and if she decides to make her candidacy official, Judd will have to make the case that she is qualified for the upper chamber. But the last thing her opponent should do, Lacy warned, is "make fun of a person because they're an actor."

"McConnell and his campaign should do anything but not take Ms. Judd seriously," he said. "That's one of the reasons Fred won — his opponent spent so much time laughing at him for being a celebrity that he never got around to giving a reason why he shouldn't be elected to the Senate."

Correction: Sonny Bono was elected mayor of Palm Springs in 1988. An earlier version of this article misstated the date.

Why Everyone Hates The White House Beat Now

$
0
0

BuzzFeed's new White House reporter explores the declining prestige of his “soul-killing” assignment.

The White House press corps is seen as Obama arrives to speak.

Image by Charles Dharapak / AP

WASHINGTON — Freshly minted White House reporters these days are facing a surprising question from many of their fellow D.C. scribes: Why would anyone want that job?

Although often thought of as the most prestigious beat in political journalism, the White House is increasingly seen as a newsless land of "stenographers" — a dead end for young, ambitious reporters hoping to carve out a niche, and a constant target of criticism by the partisan public. Veteran members of the White House press corps bristle at the criticisms, even as they acknowledge the beat has lost some of its allure as the obstacles have increased.

Peter Baker, who covers the White House for the New York Times and was a correspondent there for the Washington Post during the Clinton years, said that for journalists comfortable in the chaos of Capitol Hill, the transition to Pennsylvania Ave. can produce something akin to culture shock.

"It's not a place that's easy to generate real scoops. Unlike on Capitol Hill, where you can roam freely and find 535 generally willing sources, plus hundreds of aides, lobbyists, and others, in the White House you face physical and information constraints that make it hard to break out," Baker, who has been a central figure in the coverage of a Times-reading president, told BuzzFeed. "It can be frustrating and soul-killing to listen to the same talking points and spin sessions day after day."

But while the most common journalistic criticism of White House reporters is that they serve as "stenographers" for the administration — dutifully writing stories about whatever the press secretary chooses to talk about — Baker said the quality of coverage is more a function of the journalist than the building.

"There's a myth that all we do is take leaks on a silver platter. So the challenge is to be creative not just in uncovering information the press office doesn't want to give out, but also in taking the information that is available and writing about it in a way that goes deeper below the surface and gives readers a better, sharper analysis of what's really going on," Baker said. "It's only stenography if you choose it to be."

Well-crafted analysis is often the best an enterprising reporter can do. The administrations of both George W. Bush and Barack Obama earned reputations for granting exceptionally little access to the press in an effort to tightly control the news cycles. That reality has been in place long enough to make its way even into fictional representations of the job.

"The White House is where news goes to die. Everything is canned, these perfectly prepared statements," the reporter at the center of the Netflix miniseries House of Cards tells her editor, turning down the White House gig. "It's a prestigious job, Zoe," he protests in response.

"It used to be, when I was in ninth grade," Barnes sneers. "Now it's a graveyard. The only halfway interesting thing they do is serve a big dinner party once a year where they pat themselves on the back and rub shoulders with movie stars. Who needs that?"

The reporters who work the beat defend its value — but not always in the terms outsiders imagine. Olivier Knox, now chief Washington correspondent for Yahoo, said his time covering the White House was often spent debunking the public perception that his seat in the briefing room automatically made him an expert on the commander-in-chief.

"For eight years, whenever people outside the Beltway found out that I covered the Bush White House, they would ask one or both of these questions: Have you ridden on Air Force One? What's the president really like?" he said. "They really highlight two of the pitfalls about the beat: First, it can be a thrilling, even intoxicating beat – but requires a level head to do properly. Second, it's not like we hang out socially and he forgets we're reporters. We don't know what a president is really like."

What's more, McClatchy's Steve Thomma, incoming president of the White House Correspondents Association, said the nature of the beat makes it a magnet for criticism by both fans and antagonists of whoever occupies Oval Office.

"There's no doubt that partisans feel the White House press corps should be tougher when the other party has the presidency," he said. "In the Bush years, liberals wanted the press corps to be more aggressive. And now it's the opposite."

But he doesn't think that criticism extends to the "vast universe of people."

A more pressing problem, Thomma said, is that the White House now looks at the rise of social media and sees a way to circumvent reporters to get their message out. Meanwhile, the televised briefings — which have become a daily D.C. Twitter staple — tempt journalists to make their names by asking provocative questions that might produce viral footage.

"One of the things that has definitely changed in the years I've been doing it is the televising of the briefings," he said. "It made the questioning by reporters part of a story. Much more so than it had ever been. So people started criticizing the questions and the way the questions were asked, regardless of what was in the the answers reporters were getting."

Still, the best reporters on the beat have developed their own survival guides.

Knox said he managed to rise above the deadening nature of the beat by broadening its scope.

"The best way to cover the White House is not to cover the White House. You have to reach out to Congress, to career staff at government agencies, to foreign diplomats — you're looking for overlap in information without an overlap in agenda," he said. "One of Ari Fleischer's favorite dodges was to say, 'When we have something to announce, we'll announce it.' Well, actually, when the Bush White House had something to announce on foreign policy, quite frequently a foreign country announced it."

Baker takes heart in the fact that, for all its challenges, the White House is still one of the most important stories in the world — and said it's incumbent on the reporters to get over the obstacles.

"On the White House beat, you have to do more with less," he said. "But if we can't make the president of the United States an interesting story, then we're not trying hard enough."

And Thomma, who has collected a number of journalism awards over the years, said there are ways to beat the system, but he wasn't keen on revealing them.

"That is going to require me giving a rival advice on how to compete," he quipped. "That part you're just going to have to learn by yourself."

Democrats Gear Up To Bash Paul Ryan's Latest Budget Proposal

$
0
0

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee looks to hit Republicans again on cuts to Medicare.

Image by J. Scott Applewhite, File / AP

WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul Ryan won't debut his new budget until Tuesday, but Democrats are already eyeing the plan as a front of attacks for political races in 2014.

Guy Cecil, the executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said in a conference call with reporters Monday that the proposals in Ryan's previous budget proposal "were really a disaster for Republican Senate candidates around the country" in 2012 — and Ryan's new plan, which aims to balance the federal budget in a decade, would have similar problems for Republicans.

"The fact of the matter is, they continue to support policies that are out of touch with most Americans," Cecil said.

Democrats look poised to again target cuts to Medicare in particular, for which Ryan took flack as Mitt Romney's running mate on the GOP ticket for president. Ryan defended the cuts on the campaign trail in joint events with his mother, who is enrolled in the program.

Ryan's new budget plan is expected to maintain the cuts to Medicare pitched in his previous budget, or roughly $700 billion worth of cuts.

"In strictly political terms, the Ryan budget will be a gift that continues to give throughout the 2014 cycle for Democrats," Geoff Garin, a top Democratic pollster, said on the conference call.

Here's What The Average Cable News Host Looks Like

$
0
0

Spolier: The average cable news host is a pretty white man wearing lipstick.

What happens when you morph together the faces of 32 cable news hosts?

What happens when you morph together the faces of 32 cable news hosts?

This...

This...

BONUS: Some of the best morphs.

Soledad O'Brien + Chuck Todd

Soledad O'Brien + Chuck Todd


View Entire List ›

Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images