From Reykjavik with Love

— By Joe Kloc

| Sat Nov. 20, 2010 5:01 AM PST

— Courtesty Ronald Reagan Library

On the afternoon of October 11, 1986 in Reykjavik, Iceland, nuclear weapons negotiations between Ronald Reagan and Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev over the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) reached an impasse. Reagan insisted on being able to develop and test SDI, his space-based missile defense system commonly referred to as Star Wars. But Gorbachev refused to give in. He couldn’t return to Moscow saying he agreed to let the Americans pursue such a weapons project. Reagan countered that SDI was strictly for defense and that the US would share its technology with the Soviets. At this point, as Reagan adviser Jack Matlock recalled to historian Richard Rhodes, Gorbachev "exploded":

"'Excuse me Mr. President," he said, "but I cannot take your idea of sharing SDI seriously. You are not willing to share with us oil well equipment, digitally guided machine tools, or even milking machines. Sharing SDI would provoke a second American revolution! Let’s be realistic and pragmatic."

As it turns out, Star Wars was anything but realistic. The $44 billion project was effectively abandoned in the 90s with its feasibility never firmly established. Russia probably assumed that if the US had Reykjavik to do over again, it would jump on the chance to push a treaty through. But as the current debate drags on in Washington over ratification of New START—a treaty that would reduce Russian and US deployed strategic warheads by 30 percent—the situation is beginning feel eerily similar to Reykjavik.

Since April when Obama met with Russian president Dimitri Medvedev and signed New START, he has been battling against Republicans led by Arizona senator Jon Kyl to get the treaty ratified, spending billions to upgrade the current US nuclear program. 
One of the latest efforts to appease Republicans is a 10-page list of “declarations" (PDF) issued by the Senate to tell Russia how the US plans to interpret the treaty. As Ron Rosenbaum points out in Slate this week, in "Section A, Paragraph 5, Subsection B [of the document] the US denies any obligation to tell the Russians about 'any satellite launches, missile defense sensor targets and missile defense intercept targets, the launch of which uses the first stage of an existing type of United States [missile].'" Upon reading this, the Russian equivalent of the Senate foreign affairs committee withdrew it's support of the treaty. According to Rosenbaum, Russia has declared it will back out of New START if it feels the US is "using its language to mask a [ballistic missile defense] program." In short, getting the treaty ratified in the US might end up killing it in Russia—and for essentially the same reason the first START treaty was killed decades ago. It's hard to imagine this detail is lost on Republicans.
As Obama pointed out in a press conference this week, every president since Reagan has been able to get some sort of arms-reduction treaty though Congress, usually with widespread bipartisan report. It's no surprise the Russians are wondering what is going on in Washington right now. Are Republicans actually going to kill the New START treaty to spite Obama? (As military affairs analyst Alexander Goltz put it in the Washington Post, "if START is not ratified, the [2009] Nobel Peace Prize would look very funny indeed.")
Toward the end of their last day in Reykjavik, Gorbachev and Reagan realized they weren't going to come to the historic arms-reduction agreement they had both been hoping for: 

Reagan: This is a very strange situation. You want a ten-year period. I won’t give up SDI. But both of us insist that the most important issue is eliminating our nuclear arsenals.

Gorbachev: Equality is essential at every stage…If one of us won and the other lost, that would come out at the next stage and the loser would leave everything in a ruin.

Joe Kloc is an editorial intern at Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here. To follow him on Twitter, click here. Get Joe Kloc's RSS feed.

President Obama at NATO: "And Today We Stand United in Afghanistan"

The White House Blog

Posted by Jesse Lee on November 20, 2010 at 06:53 PM EST

President Barack Obama holds a bilateral meeting with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan at the Feira Internacional de Lisboa in Lisbon, Portugal, November 20, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

At the NATO Summit in Portugal, the chief concern was the future of Afghanistan, and the role of America and our allies in that future.  At the press conference afterwards, the President explained the consensus:

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Good afternoon, everyone.  We have just concluded an extremely productive NATO summit, and I want to thank our hosts, the government and the people of Portugal, for their hospitality in this beautiful city of Lisbon.  And I thank my fellow leaders for the sense of common purpose that they brought to our work here.
For more than 60 years, NATO has proven itself as the most successful alliance in history.  It’s defended the independence and freedom of its members.  It has nurtured young democracies and welcomed them into Europe that is whole and free.  It has acted to end ethnic cleansing beyond our borders.  And today we stand united in Afghanistan, so that terrorists who threaten us all have no safe haven and so that the Afghan people can forge a more hopeful future.
 At no time during these past six decades was our success guaranteed.  Indeed, there have been many times when skeptics have predicted the end of this alliance.  But each time NATO has risen to the occasion and adapted to meet the challenges of that time.  And now, as we face a new century with very different challenges from the last, we have come together here in Lisbon to take action in four areas that are critical to the future of the alliance.
 First, we aligned our approach on the way forward in Afghanistan, particularly on a transition to full Afghan lead that will begin in early 2011 and will conclude in 2014.
 It is important for the American people to remember that Afghanistan is not just an American battle.  We are joined by a NATO-led coalition made up of 48 nations with over 40,000 troops from allied and partner countries.  And we honor the service and sacrifice of every single one.
With the additional resources that we've put in place we're now achieving our objective of breaking the Taliban’s momentum and doing the hard work of training Afghan security forces and assisting the Afghan people.  And I want to thank our allies who committed additional trainers and mentors to support the vital mission of training Afghan forces.  With these commitments I am confident that we can meet our objective.
 Here in Lisbon we agreed that early 2011 will mark the beginning of a transition to Afghan responsibility, and we adopted the goal of Afghan forces taking the lead for security across the country by the end of 2014.  This is a goal that President Karzai has put forward.
I've made it clear that even as Americans transition and troop reductions will begin in July, we will also forge a long-term partnership with the Afghan people.  And today, NATO has done the same.  So this leaves no doubt that as Afghans stand up and take the lead they will not be standing alone.

Black Republican: Black Caucus preaches victimization and dependency

By Gautham Nagesh - 11/20/10 05:23 PM ET

Congressman-elect Allen West (R-Fla.), who said he plans to become the only black Republican in the Congressional Black Caucus, accused the organization of failing the black community by promoting dependence on government welfare programs.
"The Congressional Black Caucus cannot continue to be a monolithic voice that promotes these liberal social welfare policies and programs that are failing in the Black community, that are preaching victimization and dependency, that's not the way that we should go," West said on Fox News Friday. "And those are not the types of principles that my mother and father raised me with in the inner city of Atlanta, Georgia."
West is one of two black Republicans elected to Congress during the mid-term; Tim Scott (R-S.C.) declined to join the CBC after it said it would welcome both men. West said despite his criticisms, his deceased parents would be "absolutely appalled" if he chose not to join the caucus.

"I think it's important that we have varying perspectives and insights that can challenge in the Congressional Black Caucus, and I think it will make things better for the Black community as we go forth in the 21st century," he said.
West also accused Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) of playing the race card and employing double standards in his defense of Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who was convicted on ethics charges by a House panel this week. West said Lewis failed to come to his defense when he was the subject of racist attacks during his Congressional campaign.
"I think it shows this duplicitous standard, this hypocrisy where there are certain rules that apply to everyone else but those same rules don't apply to the left," West said.

Pittsburgh Bans Natural Gas Drilling Over Fracking Threat

16 November 10

The Pittsburgh City Council today unanimously adoped a first-in-the-nation ordinance banning corporations from drilling for natural gas within city limits, a direct response to the threats to drinking water and public health posed by hydraulic fracturing methods used widely by drilling companies to extract natural gas from the Marcellus Shale. 

Pittsburgh City Council President Darlene Harris said her biggest concern about natural gas fracking involves the threat to people's health posed by water contaminated by Marcellus drilling. She noted that the gas industry's claims about creating the thousands of jobs isn't worth the risk.

"They're bringing jobs all right," Harris told CBS News. "There's going to be a lot of jobs for funeral homes and hospitals. That's where the jobs are. Is it worth it?"

Beyond its innovative approach to fighting the fracking threat, the ordinance - drafted by the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) - seeks to limit the claim of "personhood" by corporations and to elevate the rights of property owners and other living, breathing citizens above the interests of corporations.

According to Pittsburgh Councilman Doug Shields, who introduced the measure, “This ordinance recognizes and secures expanded civil rights for the people of Pittsburgh, and it prohibits activities which would violate those rights.  It protects the authority of the people of Pittsburgh to pass this ordinance by undoing corporate privileges that place the rights of the people of Pittsburgh at the mercy of gas corporations.”
CELDF summarizes the main threats posed by fracking in the Marcellus shale region:
"Energy corporations are setting up shop in communities across Pennsylvania, to drill for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation.  The gas extraction technique known as “fracking” has been cited as a threat to surface and groundwater, and has been blamed for fatal explosions, the contamination of drinking water, local rivers, and streams.  Collateral damage includes lost property value, ingestion of toxins by livestock, drying up of mortgage loans for prospective home buyers, and threatened loss of organic certification for farmers in affected communities."

This is a great bit of news in the fight to hold the natural gas industry accountable for its dangerous fracking activity.  Far too many communities in Pennsylvania and across the U.S. have had their water supplies, health and property rights threatened by natural gas development. 

Congratulations to Pittsburgh for taking a stand. With the foolish rush to rapidly expand natural gas drilling well under way, it will take a lot more communities speaking up to defend themselves in order to alert the rest of the country that natural gas is hardly the energy panacea its proponents claim. 

Orrin Hatch: Healthcare mandates are 'clearly unconstitutional'

By Gautham Nagesh - 11/20/10 12:22 PM ET

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) argued on Friday that under the Constitution the government cannot force consumers to buy health insurance and said he has joined a legal challenge of the individual mandate in Florida.
"This is not an activity, this is forcing people to buy something they may or may not want to buy and forcing them to buy a certain level of something that they may not want to buy also," Hatch told Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. "If the government can do that to us -- in other words, if Congress can do that to us, then there's nothing that the government can't do to us."
Hatch said there are currently 20 states contesting the individual mandate and he expects another ten states to join the effort before the end of the year as a result of the election. He also questioned the legality of the "job-killing" employer mandate and said he has filed legislation that would repeal both mandates.
"If we could pass those two bills, that means the Democrats are going to have to sit down with us and work out health care in a way that doesn't bankrupt the country, which is what their bill's going to do," Hatch said.
"And I don't know really anybody, including many Democrats, who won't admit that it's a disastrous bill. It's going to cost us way more than it's going to -- than it will benefit us. And in the end -- and in the end, it could bankrupt the country. It could certainly hurt this country very, very badly."

Hatch said all the Democrats have done during four years in power is push for a "God-awful government-controlled health care system" that they already know isn't going to work in hopes of eventually convincing the public of the necessity of a single-payer healthcare system.
"In other words, socialized medicine, and have the almight federal government run it all for us!" Hatch said.
"Now if we do that, my gosh, we deserve what we get. And I've got to say, we're not going to do that," he added.
Hatch closed by chiding the Democrats for not solving the nation's problems despite having a firm control on the upper chamber.
"You had 59 Democrats. I mean, my gosh, what more do you need?"

Interesting Comment

What interesting timing to see the words of Senator Hatch, as I'm carefully making my way through multiple reads of the health care law to confirm how truly bad it is and provide both the summary and the reasons why costs will be higher and taxes will be higher. Yes, Senator Hatch, we must get rid of PPACA / HCERA.

We must replace it with Improved Medicare for All via single-payer health care. It's not a matter of convincing the public. It's a matter of informing the public. Anyone who knows the facts wants a health-care-for-all system.

Many Americans will be reading these testimonials. If you read them now, you'll have a positive feeling about a health-care-for-all system is all about … compliments of Americans living and working all over the world.
www.mforall.org/pages/Testimonials

And ours will be the best.
www.mforall.org/pages/Best

And now that so many answers are in the process of being documented to people's questions and concerns, we will shortly be one step closer to having Improved Medicare for All.
www.mforall.org/pages/Answers

We must do what is right for our JOBS and our HEALTH.

We will have a health-care-for-all system. We will have this procedure: "Show your card and get care." It will NOT be government-run health care, but it will be much simpler.
http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Complexity_or_Simplicity#flowchartofcomplexity
http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Complexity_or_Simplicity#flowchartofsimplicity

I walked into your office in June 2007 and delivered a letter to your staff. Sometime in the coming months I or another representative of the single-payer movement will be making another visit to your office to drop off a follow-up letter to that one. Read it carefully, because we want our jobs back, and we want much better health.

And … since this is the most conservative, the most fically responsible way, to get health-care-for-all, your constituents will expect not only your support, but also your promotion of Improved Medicare for All.

Bob Haiducek,
Bob the Health and Health Care AdvocateBY Bob Haiducek on 11/20/2010 at 14:27

Sen. Sherrod Brown: Obama must stand up to GOP on extension of tax cuts

By Gautham Nagesh - 11/20/10 11:32 AM ET

President Obama must stick to his guns and refuse to concede on extending the Bush tax cuts to the highest income bracket, according to Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
Speaking on MSNBC's "Hardball" on Friday, Brown said Republicans such as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker-elect John Boehner (R-Ohio) have shown they have no interest in anything but the failure of the Obama administration, which is why he shouldn't make major concessions to them on the tax cuts.
Brown argued GOP leaders have done nothing but say no to President Obama since the day after his inauguration despite his much larger electoral victory, which is why the Democrats shouldn't be afraid to respond in kind.
"I'm not saying no to the Republicans, but I'm also not -- I'm also saying we're not going to do more tax cuts for the rich, more deregulation of Wall Street, more job-killing outsourcing free trade agreements," Brown said. "Those things don't work for the American public. They don't work in Cleveland or Toledo or Mansfield or Dayton, and they don't work for the whole country."
Brown also disputed reports of infighting in the Democratic caucus and denied that liberals view the president as weak. He argued Obama must do more to draw the distinction between the two parties and claimed the GOP has slapped the president's hand whenever he has reached out to them.
"Whenever you lose an election, there's second guessing, there's disappointment, there's anger, there's anxiety, there's, How are we going to face the next few months?" Brown said. "The president will lead. The president's strong. The president needs to step up and make the distinction better."
Brown pushed for Obama to take a leadership role on policy involving trade, jobs, healthcare, budget and taxes to differentiate himself from the GOP. He said he would be happy to run on a platform in two years similar to the one that first got him elected in 2006 and vowed notto  vote to extend the tax cuts to the wealthiest tax bracket regardless of the political landscape.

Homeland Security chairman to TSA: 'Reconsider' pat-downs

By Kevin Bogardus - 11/20/10 09:09 AM ET

House Democrats have asked the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to “reconsider” agency screeners’ new invasive pat-downs of airline passengers.

In a letter Friday to TSA Administrator John Pistole, Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Shelia Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said the agency should rethink the new screening procedures in light of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday, typically the busiest travel time of the year.

“While we agree that security measures should be enhanced in the wake of recent attempted terrorist attacks on the aviation system, we are concerned about new enhanced pat down screening protocols and urge you to reconsider the utilization of these protocols. With Thanksgiving Day marking the beginning of the busiest travel season of the year, this request is timely,” Thompson and Jackson Lee write in their letter. 

  The new pat-down screenings have faced a public uproar as airline passengers have complained about their invasiveness. Combined with new body scanners at security checkpoints that capture naked body images, the TSA has found itself under increased public scrutiny.

The lawmakers say members “expressed concern” about the pat-down procedures when they were briefed on them in September. They ask Pistole for a number of documents, such as a privacy impact assessment, regarding the new pat-down procedures and say TSA screeners need more training, citing an inspector general report detailing weaknesses in the agency’s training program.

Thompson and Jackson Lee criticize the agency in their letter. They say TSA should have done a better job of informing the public about the new screening procedures while also making sure to better protect their civil rights.

“Before implementing this new more invasive pat down procedure, as a preliminary matter, TSA should have had a conversation with the American public about the need for these changes. Even before that conversation, TSA should have endeavored to ensure that these changes did not run afoul of privacy and civil liberties,” they write. 

VIDEO: Weekly GOP address

By Bridget Johnson - 11/20/10 09:34 AM ET     

VIDEO: Obama's weekly address

By Bridget Johnson - 11/20/10 09:32 AM ET     

Citing Reagan, Obama pushes Senate to move stalled arms treaty

By Kevin Bogardus - 11/20/10 06:00 AM ET

President Obama cited a Republican hero Saturday as he called on senators to approve a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia.

In his weekly radio address, the president said having the Senate ratify the START Treaty before the end of this year is crucial to America’s national security. Obama said the agreement follows in the tradition of President Ronald Reagan and his negotiations with the then-Soviet Union over reducing both countries’ stockpiles of nuclear arms.

“To ensure that our national security is protected, the United States has an interest in tracking Russia’s nuclear arsenal through a verification effort that puts U.S. inspectors on the ground. As President Reagan said when he signed a nuclear arms treaty with the Soviet Union in 1987, ‘Trust, but verify,’” Obama said.

The president said in his address that the treaty would help the United States verify the size and scope of Russia’s nuclear arsenal. The agreement would put U.S. inspectors on the ground in Russia and also cut by a third the number of both countries’ deployable nuclear weapons while America will keep “a strong nuclear deterrent,” according to Obama.

Yet the treaty has been stalled over concerns from Republican senators. Several have sought more information on the agreement from the White House while others, like Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), have worried that U.S. nuclear arms are falling into disrepair.

In his address, Obama cited support for the treaty from GOP luminaries, such as former Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Jim Baker. He also noted Kyl’s concern and said his administration has committed at least $85 billion over the next 10 years to modernize America’s nuclear arms infrastructure.

The president said both parties should be able to come together and support the arms treaty with Russia. Failing to ratify the agreement would be a “gamble” with U.S. national security, according to Obama.

“The choice is clear: a failure to ratify New START would be a dangerous gamble with America’s national security, setting back our understanding of Russia’s nuclear weapons, as well as our leadership in the world. That is not what the American people sent us to Washington to do,” Obama said.

McConnell: 'Economy barely has a pulse' yet Dems don't get tax-cut message

By Gautham Nagesh - 11/20/10 06:00 AM ET

Despite their drubbing at the hands of the Republicans in the midterm elections, Democrats have still not acknowledged the public's message by focusing on policies that create jobs, according to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

In Saturday's weekly GOP address, McConnell accused Democrats of using the final days of the lame-duck session to focus on a number of controversial issues at the expense of extending the Bush tax cuts for all Americans, including immigration, environmental regulations and a reorganization of the Food and Drug Administration. The tax cuts expire at the end of the year; Democrats have vowed not to extend them for the highest income tax bracket.

“Democrats put off all these things until after the election, along with the most basic task of funding the government. By focusing on them now, and not on legislation to promote job creation and reduce spending, they’re showing where their priorities lie," McConnell said.

McConnell argued Congress' No. 1 job must be passing bills that focus on job creation, which means preventing tax hikes. He pledged the GOP would work with anyone from either party supportive of that goal.

“Time is running out. But it’s not too late for both parties to work together and prevent this massive tax hike from going into effect. It’s not too late to focus on the priorities of the American people," McConnell said. “Americans spoke loudly and clearly on Election Day. We owe it to them to show we heard them — to work together to get this done."

Earlier in his address McConnell poked at the administration over the Recovery Act in the face of an unemployment rate that remains nearly 10 percent.

“Here was a bill that was supposed to create millions of jobs and keep unemployment from rising above eight percent," McConnell said. "Yet, since Democrats passed it nearly two years ago, more than three million people have lost jobs and the economy barely has a pulse."

The democrat party may have degenerated into a communist fifth column intending to destroy our republic but they do go down fighting. The lame duck session is a perfect example. Republicans need to wake up and get ready to fight back with the same intensity. Get rid of rules that democrats don't live by where Republicans step down but democrats cling to their jobs. Republicans better learn to close ranks and back each other up like the democrats do. Just get as mean as them and get in their faces. Answer their propoganda with details and facts about what made the USA great. Counter their sound bites every single time. Use this lame duck session manuevering to highlight their degeneracy.

BY MPRanger on 11/20/2010 at 06:51

Wonderful.

Share a website with you ,

put this url in google sirch

(http://www.aamall.us )

Believe you will love it.

We accept any form of payment

BY P546 on 11/20/2010 at 06:56

That's because tax cuts don't do diddly.
Or didn't YOU get that message over the past 10 years, and after these cuts were handed out in the first place, McConnell?

BY Detroit Mark on 11/20/2010 at 07:04

My husband's company has invented a new technology that would give the water sanitation industry their newest innovation since 1909, but he can't get the funding for manufacturing his sensors.: Investors are worried about the impact of Obamacare and taxcuts due to expire. BY Mrs. merrill on 11/20/2010 at 08:00

The Democrat Leadership continues to push their failed policies of over regulation, increased taxes and mandates, increased benefits for illegal non citizen aliens, and wealth redistribution on a grandiose scale against the wishes of the electorate..

SHAME ON THEM ! BY FAILED OBAMANOMICS on 11/20/2010 at 08:27

"That's because tax cuts don't do diddly…unless they are YOUR taxes. I guess mark from the land of no more cars…You would like someone else's taxes to go up while yours stay the same???? Sounds fair to me…NOT!!!!

BY tbinstl on 11/20/2010 at 08:30

The economy is so weak there will not be any fresh and spirited spring crocus this year if taxes are raised on the venture capitalists and existing small business owners. They are not and will not hire and invest in such a cold political climate. The banks are not in a position to lend in this environment because of the overhang from mortgage and credit card defaults . We have a lot of people with a 16 or more years of education sheep skin, but who have never run anything, led anyone, or managed a budget, who lose 60 plus seats and talk down to those who have produced and who have hired and made the country prosperous. Vote pro business. 

BY graham on 11/20/2010 at 08:40

Let the Bush tax cut end for the rich only or they can move to another country. We'll replace their labor by importing workers from India and China. The rich know their income will get taxed even more if they move to another industrialized country. 

BY phillyflav on 11/20/2010 at 08:42

And there are some 40 millionaries who have stated they don't wish to continue the, "tax cuts", they were given…If after 10 years, and when the unemploment rate started at a little over 4%, and the tax relief was instituted and the unemployment rate is now almost 10%, why should they be continued…Oh, that's right the d's were in power since 2007 and took the WH since 2009. To much spending, sure was. Of course there was none of that going on from 2001 thru 2007…Really! Now McConnell wants to "work together". Money talks, BS walks. Wall Street and the bankers want to be deregulated again and be allowed to "fleece" the public just like they did before. Politicians care about their bank account, not ours…OOhhh, never mind… BY SASQUATCH on 11/20/2010 at 08:59

Secret Service breaks silence on JFK Murder

A Secret Service agent who witnessed the JFK murder breaks his silence to @westwingreport.

Listens: 626

by nhagerwtop posted about 5 hours ago from ÜT: 39.191858,-77.187785