Qaddafi Vs Obama: Obama Wins! Democracy For Libyans Begins!

Rebels Storm Qaddafi Compound

Rebel fighters on Tuesday, overwhelming what remained of its defenses, running pell-mell through the grounds and ransacking caches of weapons, as the crackle of gunfire and rumble of explosions spread across a confused and wary Libyan capital in spasms of renewed fighting.

Hundreds of rebel fighters on foot and in pickup trucks moved quickly into the Bab al-Aziziya compound in Tripoli, where smoky fires shrouded the palm trees and bullet-scarred multistory buildings of what the rebels have called Colonel Qaddafi’s last hideout. Many of the rebels searched the buildings room by room, but there was no immediate sign that Colonel Qaddafi or any member of his family was there.

Many of the buildings were looted, and rebel fighters could be seen walking around with high-quality advanced machine guns and, in one case, a gold-plated rifle. Some of the looted weapons were still wrapped in plastic.

CNN showed images of fighters emerging from one building carrying what its reporter was told were medical files of the Qaddafi family. Other footage showed rebels commandeering a Qaddafi golf cart, which they hitched to a truck and paraded down a street.

In what could become a defining image of the day, video footage on Al Jazeera showed fighters scrambling to upend one of Colonel Qaddafi’s favorite sculptures: a giant fist crushing an American warplane. Colonel Qaddafi installed the sculpture in front of a house in the compound that was bombed in 1986 on the orders of President Reagan, at a time when Libya was considered a pariah state. The wrecked building became Colonel Qaddafi’s backdrop for major speeches, including his defiant challenge to the rebels at the start of their uprising six months ago.

Despite rebel claims of a new triumph, it was not clear whether they had complete control of the compound — or for that matter, whether the rebel gains in Tripoli were the beginnings of a decisive victory in the conflict — or the start of potentially prolonged street fighting for control of the capital. Overstated claims of advances by the rebels — including the arrests of two Qaddafi sons that later proved false — have not helped their .

The sound of firefights in the compound could be heard for hours after the fighters first broke through. Al Jazeera reported sniper fire inside, and there were reports that one of the network’s employees had been shot.

A spokesman for the Transitional National Council, the rebel government based in the eastern city of Benghazi, where the uprising began, said that the rebels assumed that Colonel Qaddafi was still in Libya. “We believe that he is either in Tripoli or close to Tripoli,” the spokesman, Guma el-Gamaty, told BBC television. “Sooner or later, he will be found, alive and arrested — and hopefully that is the best outcome we want — or if he resists, he will be killed.”

Russian news agencies reported earlier that Colonel Qaddafi had a telephone conversation with the Russian head of the World Chess Federation, Kirsan N. Ilyumzhinov, who is one of Colonel Qaddafi’s eccentric circle of foreign friends. Mr. Ilyumzhinov quoted Colonel Qaddafi as saying that he was alive and well in Tripoli. Colonel Qaddafi’s son Seif al-Islam, who made a surprise appearance on Monday at a hotel with foreign journalists to refute reports of his arrest, also boasted that his father was safe in Tripoli.

They were the first indications of the besieged leader’s location and condition since the rebels swept into Tripoli on Saturday, in what appeared to be a crucial turn in the Libya conflict, the most violent of the Arab spring uprisings.

Video footage and eyewitness reports from elsewhere in Tripoli depicted heavy clashes around the international airport, which the rebels had claimed to control.

NATO officials in Brussels and London said the alliance’s warplanes, which have been helping the rebels, were flying reconnaissance and other missions over Libya.

“Our mission is not over yet,” said Col. Roland Lavoie, a NATO spokesman, at a news conference in Naples, Italy, urging pro-Qaddafi forces to return to their barracks. “Until this is the case we will carry on with our mission.” Asked if the alliance knew where Colonel Qaddafi was, he said: “We don’t know. I don’t have a clue.”

“The situation in Tripoli is still very serious and very dangerous,” Colonel Lavoie said.

He acknowledged that the urban environment in Tripoli, a city of some two million, was “far more complex” for airstrikes than past targets have been. But he said the alliance had precision weapons at its disposal to enforce its United Nations Security Council mandate, which is to protect civilians from attack.

Elsewhere, rebels claimed they had had seized control of Ras Lanuf, an important Mediterranean oil port, and that loyalist soldiers defending it had fled west to Colonel Qaddafi’s home town of Surt, according to news reports from Benghazi. There was no confirmation of the reports about Ras Lanuf, which has changed hands previously in the seesaw pattern of the Libya revolt.

Additionally, Al Arabiya satellite television reported, rebels killed dozens of pro-Qaddafi troops on Tuesday in a convoy from Surt. There was no independent corroboration of the report. The Pentagon reported late on Monday that its warplanes had shot down a Scud missile fired from Surt.

While rebel leaders said on Monday that they were planning for a post-Qaddafi government, the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Tripoli was a vacuum of power: no cohesive rebel government was in place, and remnants of the Qaddafi government were still in evidence.

Such was the uncertainty that the International Organization for Migration in Geneva said it had delayed a seaborne mission to rescue hundreds of foreigners from Tripoli because “security guarantees and assurances are no longer in place,” said Jemini Pandya, a spokeswoman for the organization. A ship that left the eastern port of Benghazi on Monday, bound for Tripoli, would remain at sea until some level of safety for the mission could be assured but would not dock in Tripoli as planned on Tuesday, she said in a telephone interview.

The BBC reported meanwhile that the Qaddafi-controlled Rixos luxury hotel in central Tripoli, where most foreign reporters are based, had also come under attack on Tuesday, sending some reporters to take cover in a basement.

“There are still some pockets of resistance,” the French foreign minister, Alain Juppé, said in a radio interview in Paris, but he said he believed “the fall of Qaddafi is close.” Along with the United States and Britain, France has played a central role in the diplomatic and military campaigns to oust Colonel Qaddafi and Mr. Juppé said those efforts still needed time “to get to the end of this operation.”

On the diplomatic front, Oman, Bahrain and Iraq said on Tuesday that they formally recognized the rebel authorities, following Egypt, which took the same step on Monday, calling the Transitional National Council the “new regime.” Mohammed Amr, Egypt’s foreign minister, said that the council would take over the Libyan Embassy in Cairo, and would assume Libya’s seat on the Arab League, which is based in Cairo.

It was not clear if the renewed fighting was linked to the surprise reappearance of Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi, whose capture the rebels had trumpeted since Sunday but who walked as a free man to the Rixos Hotel early Tuesday. He boasted to foreign journalists there that his father was safe in Tripoli, his government was still “in control” and that the rebels had been lured into a trap, the BBC and news services reported. The episode raised significant questions about the credibility of rebel leaders, who had claimed to be holding him prisoner.

It was not clear whether he had been in rebel custody and escaped, or was never held at all. Another Qaddafi son, Muhammad, escaped from house arrest on Monday.

The struggle to a impose a new order on the capital presents a crucial test of the rebel leadership’s many pledges to replace Colonel Qaddafi’s bizarre autocracy with the democratic rule of law, and it could have consequences across the country and throughout the Arab world.

Unlike the swift and largely peaceful revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, the Libyan insurrection was the first revolt of the Arab Spring to devolve into a protracted armed struggle, and at times threatened to descend into a civil war of factions and tribes.

A rebel failure to deliver on their promises of justice and reconciliation here in the capital could spur Qaddafi loyalists around Libya to fight on. And an ugly outcome here might discourage strong foreign support for democracy movements elsewhere.

For now, governments throughout the West and the Middle East welcomed the rebels’ successes and pledged to assist them in the transition. The Iraqi government announced Tuesday that it had recognized the Transitional National Council as the legitimate government of Libya. The European Union said on Monday that it had begun planning for a post-Qaddafi era, and Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, flew to Benghazi on Tuesday and met with the rebel leader, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil.


View Larger Map

Sources: CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, Youtube, Google Maps

Governor-Elect Nikki Haley (S.C.) Meets With Congressional Members

Governor-Elect Nikki Haley Meets With Members Of The U.S. House, Senate


South Carolina Gov.-elect Nikki Haley met Monday with the state's freshman-packed U.S. House delegation and its two veteran U.S. senators as they agreed to work on key issues such as deepening Charleston's port and bailing out the state's schools.

Haley met with freshman Reps. Jeff Duncan, Trey Gowdy, Mick Mulvaney and Tim Scott, along with veteran Reps. Jim Clyburn and Joe Wilson and U.S. Sens. Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint. All are Republican except for Clyburn, who will be No. 3 in the Democratic House leadership come January.

"There were no egos in that room," Haley said at a post-meeting news conference with the delegation. "It was a group of people that understood South Carolina needed to come first and it was very much one of great spirit - great energy - in how we are going to get things done."

Cooperation among the delegation has been lacking on some issues lately. Graham and DeMint have disagreed over where to find money for a port-deepening study.

"When the ports came up, it was not: 'We can't do this.' It was 'How are we going to get this done.' They were unified in the fact they understand the ports are vital to economic development," Haley said.

DeMint also opposed a measure championed by Clyburn that would bring $143 million in federal bailout cash to South Carolina schools.

The state will lose the money and up to 2,600 teaching jobs unless Congress intercedes, state Education Superintendent Jim Rex said.

"It can only be fixed by our congressional delegation," Rex said. "They are going to have to pull together because it has to be fixed in the House and Senate."

DeMint said news accounts have mischaracterized his opposition to Clyburn's efforts get the public school bailout cash.

"We talked about it, but we're not sure how to resolve it," DeMint said. "Both of us are supportive of the state getting its fair share."

South Carolina failed to meet criteria in a federal bailout law to qualify. That means other states that met the criteria would have to agree to give South Carolina a break from the laws they followed. "That doesn't mean we're going to give up on it, though," DeMint said.

It was a rare meeting for the delegation.

Clyburn, a Democrat who becomes the delegation's senior member in January, said the last joint meeting of the delegation was in the early 1990s as the state futilely tried to keep the Charleston Naval Base and Charleston Naval Shipyard open.

Haley, who takes office in January as Sanford's term limited two terms end, said she hopes to have meetings with the delegation every three months.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, MSNBC, The State, Youtube, Google Maps

"DADT Not Going Anywhere!", Lindsey Graham Speaks

Lindsey Graham: "Don't Ask Don't Tell Is Not Going Anywhere"


U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted on Sunday that the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy would not be repealed during the remaining weeks Congress is in session this calendar year.

The South Carolina Republican, a proponent of the law banning openly gay service in the armed forces, said definitively that there was no support for repeal on the Republican side of the aisle. He called for an additional study to determine whether the military itself favored overturning the 17-year-old legislation.

"This is a political promise made by Senator Obama when he was running for president," said Graham, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday.

"There is no groundswell of opposition to Don't Ask, Don't Tell coming from our military. This is all politics. I don't believe there is anywhere near the votes to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. On the Republican side, I think we will be united in the lame duck [session] and the study I would be looking for is asking military members: Should it be repealed, not how to implement it once you as a politician decide to repeal it. So I think in a lame duck setting Don't Ask, Don't Tell is not going anywhere."

Graham is, by virtue of the fact that he has served in the military (as a JAG lawyer), widely considered a leading GOP spokesman on defense matters. With respect to DADT, however, it's unclear to what extent his concerns reflect those of his colleagues. While Graham's top ally in the chamber -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- has also moved the goalposts for DADT repeal, others have been more sympathetic to revising or overturning the law. That list includes Sens. Lisa Murkowksi (R-Alaska), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and even Jon Ensign (R-Nev.).






McCain Says "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Is Working


Arizona Republican U.S. Senator John McCain criticized the Obama administration's decision to try to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents gay service members from serving openly in the military, saying Sunday that "the system is working."

"The military is at its highest point in recruitment, in retention, in professionalism, in capability," McCain said on CNN's "State of the Union." "So to somehow allege that this policy has been damaging the military is simply false."

Instead, McCain called the attempt at repeal "a political promise made by an inexperienced president or candidate for president of the United States."



His comments come as two top American defense officials are scheduled to head to Capitol Hill this week to discuss a new Pentagon report gauging the effects of repealing the policy.

McCain, who serves as the ranking Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee was critical of the report.

"I want to know the effect on battle effectiveness and morale, not on how best to implement the change in policy," McCain told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley. "I don't think that's a lot to ask when we have our young men and women out there serving and fighting and tragically some of them dying."

The study will be released Tuesday ahead of the congressional hearings where the committee will hear testimony from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen and the men who led the Pentagon review, Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson and U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham.




U.S. Generals: Don't Rescind Military Gay Ban


The top uniformed leaders of the United States Air Force, Army and Marine Corps warned Congress on Friday that repealing "don't ask, don't tell" now would hurt the military's ability to fight the war in Afghanistan.

The service chiefs put themselves squarely opposed to their civilian bosses on one of President Barack Obama's top legislative priorities. The testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee was likely to bolster congressional opposition to the change.

"I cannot reconcile, nor turn my back, on the negative perceptions held by our Marines who are most engaged in the hard work of day-to-day operations in Afghanistan," Marine commandant Gen. James Amos said, citing a Pentagon survey that found 58 percent of Marines and 48 percent of Army respondents think lifting the ban would have negative consequences.

"Successfully integrating gays and lesbians into small Marine combat units has strong potential for disruption and will no doubt divert leadership attention away from an almost singular focus of preparing units for combat," Amos said.

Gen. George Casey, chief of staff of the Army, and Gen. Norman Schwarz, Air Force chief of staff, agreed.

"Implementation of the repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell' would be a major cultural and policy change in the middle of a war," Casey said. "It would be implemented by a force and leaders that are already stretched by the cumulative impacts of almost a decade at war."

Republican opponents of repeal said the Joint Chiefs' testimony confirmed their argument that lifting the ban would have negative consequences for the military.

"I will not agree to have this bill go forward, and neither will, I believe, 41 of my colleagues, either, because our economy is in the tank," said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee. "Our economy is in the tank, and the American people want that issue addressed."

Even the heads of the Navy and Coast Guard, who said they favor repealing the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, warned that the change must be undertaken cautiously.




View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Fox News, Huffington Post, McClatchy Newspapers, PBS, Youtube, Google Maps

Lindsey Graham Slams Obama On Terrorism: "Neuter Iran"

GOP Senator Lindsey Graham: Consider Neutering Iran's "Ability To Wage War"

A leading Senate Republican voice on defense issues said Saturday the United States should consider neutering Iran's navy and air force if Tehran does not halt its nuclear program.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, speaking at the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada, told reporters that there will come a point where Iran's nuclear program will reach the state that a conventional limited air strike "won't take them out."

"We're probably even past that point," he said.

"Instead of a surgical strike on their nuclear infrastructure, I think we're to the point now that you have to really neuter the regime's ability to wage war against us and our allies. And that's a different military scenario. It's not a ground invasion but it certainly destroys the ability of the regime to strike back."

The United States believes Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran claims its program is for peaceful purposes.

The senator said that if the United States did attack Iran's navy and air force, Iran could retaliate with unconventional attacks on U.S. forces in Afghanistan and launch terrorist attacks in other parts of the world.

"You can expect that," he said. "You can expect, for a period of time, all hell to break loose. You must have to almost plan for that. And weigh that against the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran and what that means to the future of the world."

Graham told reporters he believes there still is time for economic sanctions to work, but he says the sanctions currently in place are not "crippling."

"If [the Iranians] don't believe we will hit the military, if they believe that's not a possibility, then I think our ability to turn this around is very limited with sanctions."

President Obama should be "bolder," he said, targeting Iran's refined petroleum products, which he said is a key economic vulnerability of the regime.

Graham said he wishes Obama "would call in our Russian and Chinese friends and say, 'Listen, we're all in this together. There is no upside to a nuclear-armed Iran. Containment doesn't work. It's a nightmare for all of us. Please help me. If you don't, I'm going to have to go another way' and just let everybody begin to know that the other way is a growing reality.'"

Graham said he does not know when Iran will achieve "redundant" nuclear capability, "but I think it's probably not multiple years."

"This whole debate about how long -- I can't give you a definitive answer," he said, "but I can tell you every day is a day to be used one way or the other. And every day that goes by and we're indifferent, and less decisive, then that's a day lost."

Nuclear talks between Iran and world powers have been stalled since October 1, 2009, when the two sides last met in Geneva, Switzerland.

The European Union has proposed the two sides meet again in mid-November back in Geneva. Manouchehr Mottaki, Iranian foreign minister, has said that November 15 had been suggested for a meeting date.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Iran is ready to hold talks, but has warned that the Islamic republic won't yield any of its international rights to peaceful nuclear energy development, according to reports by state media.

A Council on Foreign Relations paper published in March said two developments raised suspicions over whether Iran's program is just for peaceful purposes.

It cites the September 2009 "revelation of a second uranium enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom --constructed under the radar of international inspectors," and a U.N. nuclear agency report that "detailed Iran's potential for producing a nuclear weapon, including further fuel enrichment and plans for developing a missile-ready warhead."




"Neuter" Iran Over Nukes, U.S. Senator Says


A U.S. lawmaker sent ripples through an international audience Saturday saying his country should be prepared to launch a military attack on Iran that would "neuter" the hard line regime.

But Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who was in attendance, said a military attack on Iran would have negative fallout, and that international sanctions are preferable.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said Saturday his party would support military action against Iran that would destroy its ability to fight back while allowing its people to rise up.

Graham surprised attendees at the Halifax International Security Forum with his hawkish rhetoric, saying an attack could cripple Iran's nuclear program as well as its armed forces.

The U.S. and its Western allies, including Canada, believe Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon. Tehran maintains it is peacefully pursuing nuclear power to meet its energy needs.

Graham noted that international sanctions are beginning to work on Iran, but says U.S. President Barack Obama should make it "abundantly clear" that all options are on the table.

"So my view of military force would be not to just neutralize their nuclear program, which are probably dispersed and hardened, but to sink their navy, destroy their air force and deliver a decisive blow to the Revolutionary Guard," Graham told a panel.

"In other words, neuter that regime."

Graham said the last thing his country needs is another war, but the last thing the world needs is a nuclear-armed Iran.

Asked about Graham's tough proposal, MacKay told a later panel: "No question there would be a negative reaction to that course of action. Although I know that has perhaps provoked some of the hottest discussions in the hallways."

MacKay said collective international sanctions can be used to fight Iran and change the country's thinking. He said sanctions are aimed at the regime, not its people.

Graham created the biggest buzz at the second annual security conference that MacKay is hosting in his home province. Graham serves on six senate committees, including armed services, homeland security and veterans' affairs. He also serves in the U.S. military as an active member of the Air Force reserves.

"Nobody would like to see the sanctions work any more than I would because I'm still in the military and I get to meet these young men and women on a regular basis and I know what it's been like for the last nine years," he told an audience of foreign politicians, diplomats and academics.

"And if you use military force, if sanctions are not going to work, and a year from now it's pretty clear they're not going to work, what do our friends in Israel do?"

Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak said "we are still in the stage of diplomacy and sanctions" but that Iran remains a threat.

"Based on experience and looking at the example they're using, which is probably the North Korean example, you can easily see the basic objective is to defy, defeat and deter the whole world," said Barak.

"I will be happy . . . to end up finding myself wrong, based on future developments, but I wonder whether this is the case."

A fellow U.S. senator, Democrat Mark Udall, said he wasn't willing to completely support Graham because what he was advocating would have "worldwide repercussions."

"I'm not willing to put my support behind that step here in a theoretical context, but I think you've got to keep every option on the table and let the Iranian regime know that we're deadly serious, not just as the United States of America, but as a world community," Udall told Graham and his other fellow panelists.


Sources: CNN, CTV, News.Ca.Msn, Youtube

Lindsey Graham's Ultimatum To Dems: Climate Change Or Immigration?

Senate Dispute Endangers Climate Change Bill


Long-awaited Climate Change legislation was put on hold by its authors Saturday when a dispute over Immigration politics and U.S. Senate priorities threatened to unravel a bi-partisan effort that took months of work.

Voicing regrets, Sen. John Kerry said Saturday he is postponing the much anticipated unveiling of comprehensive energy and climate change legislation scheduled for Monday.

The Massachusetts Democrat made his announcement after a key partner in drafting the bill, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, threatened to withhold support if Senate Democratic leaders push ahead first with an immigration bill.

Graham is angry that Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is considering that. Legislation to overhaul immigration laws and grant legal status to millions of long term immigrants unlawfully in the country could create problems for Republicans in the midterm elections. It's a top priority for Hispanic voters — and most Republicans are opposed. Reid's idea amounts to a "cynical political ploy," Graham asserted.

Kerry tried to assure environmentalists and other backers of the climate bill that the delay will be short. The legislation aims to cut emissions of pollution-causing greenhouse gases 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. It also likely will expand domestic production of oil, natural gas and nuclear power.

"We all believe that this year is our best and perhaps last chance for Congress to pass a comprehensive approach," Kerry said in a statement.

"Regrettably, external issues have arisen that force us to postpone only temporarily."

Kerry, Graham and Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman have spent more than six months working on the bill they had hoped to unveil Monday. White House energy adviser Carol Browner praised the three senators, reiterating that the Obama administration wants the energy and climate bill done this year.

Graham's threat to back away from the coalition came Saturday in a letter to Senate leaders.

He said putting immigration at the top of the legislative priority list would derail efforts to find common ground on climate change, a difficult issue involving critically important economic priorities. And he warned that Republican lawmakers would not take kindly to being put on the spot with Hispanics. Many in the Republican Party's political base are adamantly opposed to 'amnesty' for illegal immigrants.

"Moving forward on immigration — in this hurried, panicked manner — is nothing more than a cynical political ploy," Graham said. "Let's be clear, a phony, political effort on immigration today accomplishes nothing but making it exponentially more difficult to address in a serious, comprehensive manner in the future."

Kerry praised Graham's work on the climate legislation, saying the Republican "helped to build an unprecendented coalition of stakeholders from the environmental community and the industry who have been prepared to stand together behind a proposal."

Kerry said he deeply regrets that Graham "feels immigration politics have gotten in the way and for now prevent him from being engaged in the way he intended."

Lieberman also praised Graham's work, and said he's disappointed that "allegations of partisan politics will prevent us from introducing the bill on Monday as planned."

Pushing immigration ahead of climate legislation would disappoint and anger environmentalists, who see this as their best chance in recent years to pass a bill addressing global warming. But Reid told fellow Democrats this week he wants to pursue legislation that would offer legal status to many unlawful immigrants before tackling climate change.

Hispanics voted heavily Democratic in 2008, and they've been disappointed with President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats for not following up on campaign promises to reform immigration laws. Reid is up for re-election this year and trailing in polls in Nevada, where Latinos are an important constituency. With Democrats facing a tough political climate in the midterm elections, energized Hispanic voters could make a difference in several states.

In a statement Saturday that was both conciliatory and noncommittal, Reid said he is committed to passing both immigration and energy this year.

"Immigration and energy reform are equally vital to our economic and national security and have been ignored for far too long," he said.

Both measures will require bipartisan support, Reid said, "and energy could be next if it's ready." Comprehensive immigration reform requires significant committee work that has not yet begun, he noted.

Reid said he appreciates Graham's work on both issues, but added: "I will not allow him to play one issue off of another, and neither will the American people. They expect us to do both, and they will not accept the notion that trying to act on one is an excuse for not acting on the other."

A spokesman said Reid would continue to consult with Kerry on building bipartisan support for a climate bill.

The House last year narrowly passed a bill creating a system to cap emissions blamed for global warming, but has not acted on immigration. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has long said the Senate must vote before the House on an immigration bill.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, MSNBC, Meet The Press, Youtube, Google Maps

Lindsey Graham: "Pelosi Has Dems Liquored Up"

Graham: Pelosi Has House Dems "Liquored Up On Sake" Ready For "Suicide Run"


Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Monday used language that compared House Democrats' efforts to pass healthcare reform legislation to a Japanese kamikaze mission.

"Nancy Pelosi, I think, has got them all liquored up on sake and you know, they're making a suicide run here," Graham said on the Keven Cohen Show on WVOC radio in Columbia, S.C.

Graham is a staunch opponent of healthcare reform despite his efforts to work with the White House on issues such as terror trials and immigration reform.

The South Carolina senator also used strong language against White House senior adviser David Axelrod this weekend for criticizing Republican arguments about healthcare reform.

"Senator [Scott] Brown [R-Mass.] comes from a state that has a healthcare plan that's similar to the one we're trying to enact here," Axelrod said on ABC's "This Week". "We're just trying to give the rest of America the same opportunities that the people of Massachusetts have."

Graham responded "The American people are getting tired of this crap...No way in the world is what they did in Massachusetts like what we're about to do in Washington."


View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Meet The Press, Mediaite, Youtube, Google Maps

McCain Introduces Bill To Split Medicare From Reconciliation Process

McCain Bill Will Aim To Split Medicare From Reconciliation


On the verge of a procedural fight over health care, Arizona Sen. John McCain, the Republican's presidential nominee in 2008, said Sunday that he plans to introduce legislation that would prevent Congress from changing Medicare through a process that only requires a simple majority in the Senate.

“Social Security cannot be considered in reconciliation,' McCain said on NBC's "Meet the Press," referring to a rule established in the 1970s by veteran Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.). "We should do the same thing with Medicare. (Sen.) Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and I will be introducing legislation: Entitlements should not be part of a reconciliation process -- i.e., 51 votes. It’s too important. … Let’s start over. … It’s not too late.”

Democrats are trying to cut hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare to pay for their health care bill, something that wouldn't be possible under McCain's proposal.

McCain also took exception with some of the deals cut with industries and individual senators to build support for the various bills. He cited protections for the pharmaceutical industry that would block the reimportation of prescription drugs and preserve a favorable reimbursement structure for drug makers under Medicare.

"These are unsavory deals," McCain said. "People object to the process as much as they object to the product."

The Arizona senator also rejected the suggestion that Democrats genuinely wanted to work with GOP lawmakers.

"There is no doubt in my mind that this is a center-right country, and this administration is governing from the left.," McCain said. "We need to start over,"


View Larger Map

Sources: Politico, Google Maps

Lindsey Graham Wants John Brennan To Step Down

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Lindsey Graham: Brennan Has "Lost My Confidence"


Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) Sunday joined the GOP chorus calling for the removal of John Brennan, a special assistant to the president for counterterrorism.

“He has lost my confidence,” Graham said on “Fox News Sunday,” criticizing Brennan both for his role in giving Miranda rights to the accused Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, as well as his recent comments suggesting that the 20 percent rate of terrorists returning to the battle field is not that bad.

Asked if he thought Brennan should resign, Graham replied: “I think it would be better to have a new person in that job.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

View Larger Map

Sources: Fox News, Politico, MSNBC, Meet The Press, Google Maps

GOP Comeback Watch: Decision 2010

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

What's Next For The "Party of No"?


The GOP’s strategy failed to derail health-care reform, now all but certain to pass. Reihan Salam on how Republicans can turn their opposition to political advantage—and clean up in 2010.

Plus, our Big Fat Story presents six takes on the CBO's health-care math.

Though Congress hasn't passed health-care reform legislation just yet, Senate Democrats have cleared what many believe to be the highest hurdle by getting all 60 members of the caucus to unite behind the Reid bill. So while congressional Republicans will continue to maneuver, we can safely say that President Obama has all but achieved his most vitally important legislative goal.

If the final legislation looks anything like the Reid bill, it will most likely prove a very grave and very expensive mistake, one that depends on a number of rosy scenarios coming to pass. But for most Democrats, the flaws in the legislation are immaterial. The key goal was to establish the principle that the federal government is responsible for covering all Americans, and that's happened.

In a sense, the Democrats have finally avenged the death of Bill Clinton's bid for universal coverage, which set in motion the 1994 Republican congressional takeover and all that followed. Even Evan Bayh, the moderate Democratic senator from Indiana who is far from a party loyalist, reportedly couldn't stand the thought of Republicans gloating over the defeat of health-care reform the second time around. All of the wonky debates you've heard about the virtues and the limits of the various proposals were ultimately a sideshow.

There were better and cheaper ways to get to universal coverage, but they all involved alienating a powerful Democratic constituency. Think of the last few months as "Health Care II: Liberalism Strikes Back" and you'll have a better understanding of what was really going on. This must be a sweet, sweet victory for Democrats with long memories.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

But there's one small problem. While Sen. Ben Nelson is on board, thanks in part to a sweetheart deal for the good people of Nebraska, a majority of voters aren't. The latest Rasmussen survey finds 55 percent opposed and 41 percent in favor. And of course the opposition isn't spread evenly across the map.

The President's numbers have been particularly weak among non-college-educated whites, among whom only a third believe that health-care reform will make a positive difference in their lives, according to a poll sponsored by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

These voters are heavily represented in the swing districts that Republicans need to take back the House. One can imagine the Republicans running a scorched-earth campaign calling for a complete rollback of health-care reform, but that's unlikely. The Obama White House is going to pivot to push its spending-driven jobs agenda to blunt the most effective line of attack from the right, namely that private-sector job growth remains extremely weak.

Democrats will keep on attacking Republicans as the "Party of No." But as voters grow increasingly skeptical of Obama's scattershot efforts to remake the American economy, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Republicans running in 2010 will have to build an agenda centered on spurring job growth. Among other things, candidates could call for using stimulus funds to fund payroll-tax relief and an expanded investment tax credit. This agenda should also include proposals for trimming entitlement spending, but it probably won't.

During the debate over health-care reform, congressional Republicans emerged as the most dogged defenders of the Medicare status quo.

In part, this reflects the fact that those non-college-educated voters who aren't thrilled with President Obama are the same swing voters who weren't thrilled with President Bush's calls for reforming Social Security. A large and growing number of Republican voters consider the middle-class welfare state LBJ built to be as American as apple pie.

This poses a serious problem for tax-cutting Conservatives over the long run. But it's not going to get resolved in 2010.

What Republicans can offer is a check on overreaching Democrats, and that might be more than enough.


Sources: The Daily Beast, MSNBC, Morning Joe Show, Today Show

GOP Warn Dems Of Climate Bill Political Backlash In 2010

GOP Warns Of Harsh Climate On Energy Bill


Senate Republicans warned Monday that the bruising fight over health care reform could deliver a knockout blow to another Democratic priority: passage of a climate change bill in 2010.

With a united Democratic Caucus, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was able to get to cloture on health care without a single GOP vote. But Democrats aren’t united on climate change, and the bitter battle over health care has left even sympathetic Republicans with little desire to help — a dynamic that would likely doom the bill to legislative failure.

“It makes it hard to do anything because of the way this was handled,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Graham didn’t elaborate, but he didn’t have to — the fierce partisan fights during the past few weeks have torn away at the Senate’s clubby decorum, raising temperatures, fraying nerves and creating what one Democratic senator has called a “very high” level of distrust among members.

Graham’s words carry serious weight with supporters of climate change legislation because the South Carolina Republican has emerged as a leader on the issue in the Senate, working with Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on a bipartisan bill.

Other potentially “gettable” Republican senators also sounded discouraging notes Monday.

“Right now, I would say that cap and trade is stalled,” said Maine Sen. Susan Collins.

“Cap and trade has been delayed by the health care debate almost indefinitely,” said Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar. “The question will be how many more battles members of Congress want to take on in an election year.”

“I give it a very low chance,” said Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a potential GOP target for bill supporters. “What it comes down to is our ability to work together as a body. And right now, the indicators are not very positive for climate change.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) equivocated over the weekend, when asked whether Democrats could pass a climate bill next year. But Kerry — one of only two senators to attend this month’s U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen — lashed out at naysayers Monday, saying the Senate would deliver on the promises President Barack Obama made there.

“Not a chance in hell that after the president put American prestige on the line in Copenhagen that the Senate is going to give this issue anything less than a major push,” Kerry said. “This is big — big — bigger than any individual agenda. Big. The 111th Congress is not a one-trick pony incapable of tackling more than one big issue, and the cost of tackling climate change would only grow if the Senate got weak-kneed and kicked the can down the road. Not going to happen.”

As Kerry noted, House members put themselves on the line when they approved a climate bill earlier this year. But the health backlash is only the latest roadblock in the Senate, and it’s not at all clear that supporters will be able to clear all — or even any — of them.

“It will take a lot of work,” said Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). “We need to take a break around here and step back before we try anything of any controversy.”

The bill has scheduling issues: Climate ranks at the end of a long list of Democratic priorities for 2010, behind both a jobs bill and financial reform. It has international issues: The contentious negotiations in Copenhagen provide little, if any, boost for a bill back home.

And it has caucus unity issues.

Manufacturing-state Democrats are demanding border tariffs to protect energy-intensive industries from unfair foreign competition.

“If we don’t do this right, a company in Lima, Ohio, shuts down and moves to Wuhan, and we lose jobs,” said Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown.

And the sweeteners necessary to get Republicans on board — like expanding off-shore drilling and adding incentives for nuclear energy — could alienate liberal Democrats worried about the environmental impacts.

“The drilling would be very hard for me,” said New Jersey Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg. “Because even if they agree not to drill off the coast of New Jersey, that doesn’t protect us from the coast of Virginia, Delaware or other places.”

A handful of Democrats want to dump the cap-and-trade concept entirely.

Earlier this month, Collins and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) released legislation that would replace cap and trade with a system that would offer direct consumer rebates to offset increased energy costs.

Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) has been pushing to move energy legislation that passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in June — and leave behind the cap-and-trade proposal he opposes.

“We’re going to have wasted a year, in my judgment,” he said. “My hope is when the calendar turns and January comes, we’ll have the opportunity to be able to grab and seize the progress that was made in the energy committee.”

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have pronouced dead a climate bill introduced earlier this year by Kerry and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), because of the partisan way it passed through Boxer’s committee. Instead, Kerry, Graham and Lieberman have been getting input from members across the Senate as they attempt to craft a bipartisan climate bill. The legislation must contain the right trade-offs to satisfy the long list of regional energy, economic and employment issues raised by Democratic lawmakers.

At the same time, they are trying to figure out how to steer their proposal through tricky procedural hurdles. At least two more committees — Finance and Commerce, Science and Transportation — plan to mark up portions of the sweeping bill. And the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, which also has jurisdiction over the legislation, is headed by Arkansas Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln, a moderate who’s called cap and trade “a real problem.”

And other key Democrats have their own list of issues with the bill.

“I’m not one of those who stands against the climate bill, but I want to see it happen in a way that’s fair and gives West Virginia a chance to survive,” said West Virginia Democratic Sen. John Rockefeller, who wants billions in additional funding for new coal technologies.

But not everyone was so dour Monday. Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin said the health care fight has taught Democrats that they can be “cohesive” and work together despite their differences. “What we’ve done here strengthens us for next year,” he said.


Sources: Politico

Graham Slams Obama Admin For Using "Seedy Chicago Politics"

Graham: Dems Engaging In "Seedy Chicago Politics"


Saying the White House and Congressional Democrats were using “backroom deals that amount to bribes,” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham slammed Democratic efforts to pass health care reform.

Speaking Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union, Graham, R-South Carolina, took issue with a campaign trail pledge made by the Obama campaign to change how things work in Washington.

Obama and his team “ran a brilliant campaign,” Graham told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King,” but they're doing a lousy job governing the country, in my view.”

“You know, change you can believe in,” Graham said referring to a frequent theme of Obama’s underdog presidential campaign, “after this health care bill debacle, [that] has now becoming an empty slogan. And it's really been replaced by seedy Chicago politics, when you think about it, backroom deals that amount to bribes.”

Acknowledging that those were strong words, Graham backed up his assertions by pointing to a number of attributes of the health care reform bill now under consideration in the Senate. “This bill personifies the worst of Washington,” Graham said Sunday.

Referring to one of the biggest accounting scandals in recent memory, Graham said the bill was characterized by “Enron accounting techniques.”

The South Carolina Republican said that the House and Senate are not likely actually to impose cuts on the amount the Medicare program pays doctors. “So when you put that into the health care mix, this thing doesn't save money; it costs money. And that's phony,” said Graham.

The Republican senator also said that Congress is not likely actually to cut $470 billion from the Medicare program, a move that finances roughly half of the Senate bill’s costs over the first ten years.

“We will start forgiving those cuts to doctors and hospitals,” Graham told King. “So it is Enron-accounting. It is a sham.”

Graham also faulted the Senate bill for beginning to collect taxes immediately in order cover its costs but only paying out benefits during six of its first ten years after passage.

And the often soft-spoken Republican let loose on a provision in the Senate bill that involves the federal government in paying for long-term care insurance.

Graham quoted fellow Senator Kent Conrad, D-North Dakoka, who had described the new long-term care program “a Ponzi scheme of the first order,” a program “that Bernie Madoff would have been proud of.” Graham added, “So any Democratic senator who votes for this bill is a co-conspirator to one of the biggest Ponzi schemes in the history of Washington.”

And Graham took issue with a sweetheart deal Senate Democratic leaders negotiated with conservative Democrat Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Under the deal, the federal government will foot the bill in perpetuity for any additional Medicaid costs incurred by Nebraska as a result of passing the health care reform bill.

“Is it constitutional?,” Graham asked Sunday about the deal negotiated by Nelson. “I want the attorney general of South Carolina to look at this.”

Appearing earlier on State of the Union, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod defended the deal top Senate Democrats made with Nelson in order to secure the crucial 60th vote necessary to get the bill through the chamber.

“I think every senator uses whatever leverage they have to help their states. That's the way it's been. That's the way it will always be,” Axelrod said to King. “And people want their legislators to advocate for their states.”



View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, The Daily Beast, MSNBC, Google Maps