TOP 100 NEWS SITES
| |||
|
| |||
| |||
|
| |||
| Arlen Specter lets the truth slip out | Michael Tomasky Fascinating little nugget I noticed while I was gone: Arlen Specter, the now-Democratic senator from Pennsylvania, was on Fox News Sunday morning and mentioned apparently in passing that the GOP plotted to stop bipartisanship very early on, before Obama was even sworn in:"I'd like to pick up on what Sen. DeMint says about the process. I think the process was very bad. But the process was really caused, in large measure, by the refusal of the Republicans to deal in any way," said Specter."Sen. DeMint is the author of the famous statement that this is going to be President Obama's 'Waterloo,' that this ought to be used to break the president," said Specter, referring to the political battle over health care. "So that before the ink was dry on the oath of office -- and I know this, because I was in the caucus -- the Republicans were already plotting ways to beat President Obama in 2012." I'd really, really, really like to know more about this. Remember: Obama wanted to reach out to Republicans. Specter was a Republican at the time, and so, as he says, he was presumably there in the GOP strategy meetings as they discussed how they were going to respond to these overtures from Obama.That they want to beat him in 2012 is fine and obvious. They're from the other party. Of course they want to beat him in 2012.But the more interesting question that is raised here is not about the next election but about the legislative process, i.e., doing the job they were elected to do, in the meantime: Was there agreement or consensus among Senate Republicans that they would basically not go along with anything Obama proposed, no matter what it was and without even knowing what it was, as the linchpin of their anti-Obama strategy? That's a very different thing. Because if that is true, then my suspicions (and the suspicions of all of you who more or less share my views on this) are all correct. Anything that Obama proposed was going to be opposed. The GOP never had the slightest intention of trying to find compromise on anything major. I'd love to hear Specter say more on this. And I'd really love it if he had tapes! Even David Broder might be convinced then.RepublicansObama administrationUS healthcareUS politicsUnited StatesMichael Tomaskyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Weather and travel maps Use the maps below to check on the weather forecast and major road closures. news.bbc.co.uk |
What do you put in your lunchbox? Only 1% of the school packed lunches meet nutritional standards. How healthy are your lunch boxes? newsforums.bbc.co.uk |
DPJ's Ozawa Vows a 'Showdown' Ichiro Ozawa, influential secretary-general of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan, declared an "all-out showdown" with prosecutors in a speech Saturday at a party convention, amid a widening probe into his fund-raising activities that included the weekend arrests of three of his associates. online.wsj.com |
Afghanistan elections postponed Parliamentary polls delayed due to lack of funds after pressure to spend more time on electoral reformAfghanistan has postponed parliamentary elections because of a lack of funds, the country's election body said today.The Independent Election Commission said it needed about $50m (£31m) from international donors to meet a shortfall in the estimated budget of $120m for the 22 May vote. The vote will be pushed back to 18 September.The postponement was due to "problems and constraints to get the proper budget", said a commission member, Zekriya Barakzai, who also cited security concerns, logistical obstacles and the need to improve electoral procedures in explaining the delay.The US and other critics had pressed for a delay amid warnings that a vote without major electoral reform could further undermine western support for Afghanistan after the presidential election fiasco in August.Fraud was so widespread in the August poll that UN-backed investigators threw out more than 1 million ballots – nearly a third of the votes cast – forcing President Hamid Karzai into a second round. The runoff was later cancelled when Karzai's main challenger, the former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, dropped out.Some countries are also concerned that maintaining security during a parliamentary election in May would distract the 30,000 US reinforcements and thousands of other foreign troops recently deployed to halt the Taliban's momentum.The west had been pushing for a postponement ahead of an international conference on Afghanistan's future in London later this week, where the early date was set to be an irritant.The UN is holding tens of millions of dollars set aside for Afghan elections in an account, but diplomats have said they will not release the money without reforms.An international diplomat quoted by Reuters called it "a pragmatic and sensible decision which will allow time for reform of the key electoral institutions to enable cleaner parliamentary elections".The election commission did not comment on whether its membership would be changed. The diplomat said the international community would not be pleased if Karzai reappointed the commission's head, Azizullah Ludin, whose term expired on Saturday. Opponents accuse Ludin, a presidential appointee, of favouring Karzai.The parliamentary election could prove crucial as the central government needs to demonstrate that its institutions have public support. MPs once seen as docile have become more assertive. This month they twice rejected most of Karzai's candidates for cabinet posts. Karzai still has to fill 11 posts, including some important portfolios such as public health.AfghanistanMark Tranguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |