John McCain responds to the Tea Party's idea of recruiting Sarah Palin to run against him for his Senate seat, with laughter.

Courtesy of AZ Central: 

McCain, R-Ariz., is expected to officially announce his re-election bid after the first of the year. The New York Times reported Nov. 25 that national "tea party" leaders consider Palin, a former Alaska governor, "their fantasy candidate" to run against McCain in Arizona's Republican Senate primary and hope to persuade her to do so. McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, is deemed too moderate or liberal by many far-right conservatives. 

"Oh, that's foolish," McCain told The Arizona Republic when asked about the talk of a rival Palin candidacy. "Sarah and I have maintained a very close and warm relationship. That's just not in the realm of possibility." 

"I know that they will do everything they can to recruit somebody, but I can promise you it's not Sarah Palin," McCain said.

Well it's nice that they have a "very close and warm relationship" (Whatever that means for Sarah Palin these days), but of course the main reason that McCain's job is because being a Senator is work, and Palin simply does not do work anymore.

In fact according to her staffers, Levi Johnston, she never really did.

McCain might actually lose his seat this next election cycle, but it will NOT be to the creature he helped create back in 2008.

Al Franken endorses Hillary Clinton in 2016, though at first he did not realize he was doing that.

(Franken's somewhat clumsy endorsement comes at the 7:25 mark, but really the whole interview is worth a listen.)

Courtesy of HuffPo:  

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) endorsed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, even if he didn't realize it at first. 

"I think that Hillary would make a great president. I haven't announced that I am supporting her, but -- does this count? I guess? Maybe this counts," Franken said in an interview with MSNBC on Tuesday. 

When asked if he felt he needed to see other potential candidates before endorsing Clinton, who has yet to declare she's running, Franken said he's ready for her to make a move. 

"I think that I’m ready for Hillary," Franken said. "I think that we've not had someone this experienced, this tough, and she's very, very impressive."

I think that right now Franken is my favorite member of the Senate. 

Mostly because I think we are on the same wavelength most of the time. 

Though arguably he is a tad wittier. 

Architect of CIA torture program claims that release of Senate report put his life in danger. Bummer.

Courtesy of TWC Central:  

The "architect" of the CIA's interrogation program, James Mitchell, accused Senate Democrats of putting his life in danger last week when they released a report detailing the program's "brutal" abuses. 

"They issue this report that essentially stirs up all the crazies and all the jihadists. So now we're getting death threats," Mitchell, a retired Air Force psychologist, said during a Monday night Fox News interview. 

"I'm angry about this. They have a foregone conclusion. They put my life in danger. They put the lives of other CIA personnel ... and our families in danger for some sort of morale high ground?" he said. "You can probably tell I'm a little agitated by this. For me, I don't want to die because the Democrats in the Senate don't have the courtesy to ask the CIA to explain what they view as abuses that occurred."

Hang on I'm going to try and gin up a little sympathy.

Nope, don't give a shit.

The Uniform Code of Justice says that military personnel have a duty to disobey unlawful orders.

As a former member of the Air Force this guy should have known that. And as a human being he should have done that.

The Senate report on CIA torture techniques may only be the beginning. Soon there may be pictures.

Courtesy of The Daily Beast:

The Obama administration is withholding hundreds, perhaps even thousands of photographs showing the U.S. government’s brutal treatment of detainees, meaning that revelations about detainee abuse could well continue, possibly compounding the outrage generated by the Senate “torture report” now in the public eye. 

Some photos show American troops posing with corpses; others depict U.S. forces holding guns to people’s heads or simulating forced sodomization. All of them could be released to the public, depending on how a federal judge in New York rules—and how hard the government fights to appeal. The government has a Friday deadline to submit to that judge its evidence for why it thinks each individual photograph should continue to be kept hidden away. 

The photographs are part of a collection of thousands of images from 203 investigations into detainee abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan and represent one of the last known secret troves of evidence of detainee abuse. While the photos show disturbing images from the Bush administration’s watch, it is the Obama administration that has allowed them to remain buried—all with the help of a willing Congress. 

The president may have entered office promising a new era of transparency—and was even prepared to release at least 21 of the photos in 2009. But Obama pulled back at the last minute at the urging of his top commander in Iraq, who worried the graphic images could generate a backlash against U.S. troops.

The possibility that terrorists might get angry enough to launch an attack on American troops of embassies overseas in response to anything released to the public concerning our torture of detainees is bullshit.

As others have said we are actively bombing the crap out of ISIL. If THAT has not convinced them to attack us it is hard to believe that a couple of reports or photos will push them over the edge.

However it just might cause the conservatives defending CIA torture to suddenly go quiet.

One of the reasons that the incident in Abu Ghraib grabbed the public's attention was that the American people were able to see what we were doing and they were disgusted.

I think the same thing will happen this time.

Which in my opinion would be a good thing, and would do much to ensure that we never revisited this type of inhuman treatment again.

In other words, bring-em on.

Apparently Ted Cruz is inadvertently helping the Democrats right now. Update!

Courtesy of TPM: 

While Republican senators were fuming at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) for holding up a $1.1 trillion spending bill aimed at preventing a government shutdown, Democrats saw a silver lining: the move by Cruz and Lee gave Democrats an opening to move a number of President Barack Obama's nominees for federal judgeships and the executive branch. 

What happened was that when Cruz and Lee scuttled a deal between Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that would have allowed lawmakers to leave Washington D.C. for the weekend and come back Monday they gave Democrats a chance to advance Obama's presidential appointees by having to stay in D.C. to deal with the spending bill. 

The extra time over the weekend gave Reid the opportunity to, through the Senate's executive session, file cloture on the nominations and move them sooner than they would have under the deal Reid and McConnell had planned on and that Cruz and Lee blocked. Under the original deal Reid would have had to schedule votes on the nominees later in the upcoming week, when Democrats may not have wanted to stick around to vote.

Was worried Dr. Vivek Murthy might not get confirmed but thanks to @TedCruz, looks like he will. #TopDocNow #SurgeonGeneral
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) December 13, 2014

Courtesy of Politico:

The nominations may take days of procedural votes and a lot energy but are likely to be a boon to the president’s hopes of winning approval of as many nominees as possible before his party loses the Senate. 

“A lot of these people have been sitting in the calendar for a long time. So if this prompts my leadership to stay a little longer to get a lot of nominations done, then I’m happy about that,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) of the unusual Saturday session. 

That's Ted Cruz for you. He always knows exactly where to find his foot. Right next to his molars.

Update: Well the bill passed.

Elizabeth Warren takes to the Senate floor to take on Citigroup and condemn the politicians who seemingly work for them. Amazing speech!

Courtesy of MSNBC:  

“You know,” Warren said Friday, “there is a lot of talk lately about how Dodd-Frank isn’t perfect. There is a lot of talk coming from Citigroup about how Dodd-Frank isn’t perfect. So let me say this to anyone who is listening at Citi – I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn’t perfect. It should have broken you into pieces.”

I cannot remember when the last time was that I wanted to stand up and cheer for a speech on the Senate floor, but I certainly did yesterday.

Elizabeth Warren has now thrown down the gauntlet for her fellow Democrats, and I really don't think they can ignore it. 

And you can tell that Warren really frightens the Republicans by who is coming after her since this speech.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), responding to Sen. Elizabeth's Warren (D-Mass.) criticism of the $1.1 trillion government spending bill's provision that allows banks to take more risk with taxpayer money, on Friday evening went after Warren and other Democrats who sided against the bill. 

"If you follow the lead of the senator of Massachusetts and bring this bill down … people are not going to believe you are mature enough to run the place,” Graham said on the Senate floor. “Don’t follow her lead. She’s the problem." 

"I'm sure on MSNBC you're going to be well thought of, and on the liberal version of talk radio you'll have your moment with that crowd," Graham said, chiding Warren and other Democrats who deplored what has been called a Wall Street giveaway. 

"You're tired, you're frustrated, you're upset about a provision in the bill you don't like," he added of Warren.

Yeah way to talk down to somebody who is clearly your intellectual superior. 

By the way as you may have noticed from the previous post Warren has at least one well known conservative figure essentially agreeing with her about the Cromnibus bill. Sarah Palin.

Gee I guess we can all look forward to an impassioned ghostwritten Facebook post in favor of Senator Warren. Right?

Right?

Not right?

Anonymous Wikipedia user with IP address that leads to US Senate really does not like the use of the word "torture" to describe what the CIA did to detainees. Keeps trying to change it.

Courtesy of Mashable:  

An anonymous Wikipedia user from an IP address that is registered to United States Senate has tried, and failed, to remove a phrase with the word "torture" from the website's article on the Senate Intelligence Committee's blockbuster CIA torture report. 

The unknown individual has attempted on at least two occasions — first on Dec. 9 and then on Dec. 10 — to remove a line describing the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques as "a euphemism for torture." 

Gee it looks like somebody REALLY doesn't like it when we call torture done by the United States "torture."

Perhaps somebody should have thought of that before they, you know, tortured people.

Just a reminder that Nicolle Wallace is still just a Bush Administration apologist.

Courtesy of The Washington Free Beacon: 

“I think months after 9/11 there were three people who we thought knew about imminent attacks, and we did whatever we had to do, and I pray to God that until the end of time we do whatever we have to do to find out what’s happening,” Wallace said on Tuesday’s Morning Joe. “And the notion that this somehow makes America less great is asinine and dangerous.” 

Wallace also slammed White House Spokesman Josh Earnest for failing to admit that the CIA’s interrogation techniques did not yield information instrumental in finding and killing Osama bin Laden. 

“I have never felt more frustrated with this White House’s inability to speak clearly than I was yesterday when Jon Karl was pushing Josh Earnest to say whether Obama found the information gleaned helpful in killing bin Laden,” Wallace said. 

“That’s what this is about… The notion that what we do affects the behavior of terrorists is a lie. It’s a lie perpetrated by political correctness and by liberals and it’s dangerous.”

I know that when dealing with Sarah Palin we often embrace the adage "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," but in the case of Wallace we need to remember who she is and where she came from.

By the way the Senate torture report says that there were more than three detainees waterboarded and that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times. And the "intelligence" he gave up was absolutely worthless.

What I find most damning is that Wallace's opinion is in direct conflict with her old boss John McCain's position.

The Bush Administration is guilty of war crimes and of lying to the American people. Period.

And nothing that Nicolle Wallace, Dick Cheney, or any other conservative pundit has to say will change that.

John McCain gives impassioned speech in support of the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on CIA torture.

Courtesy of CNN:

Republican Sen. John McCain broke with members of his party Tuesday, lauding the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on torture and decrying the use of torture as having "stained our national honor" and doing "much harm and little practical good." 

McCain, a survivor of torture himself from his Naval service during the Vietnam War, said from the Senate floor that the techniques outlined in the report "not only failed their purpose — to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies — but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world." 

McCain said that while "the truth is a hard pill to swallow...the American people are entitled to it." And he acknowledged that violence against the U.S. from the "Muslim world" is "possible..perhaps likely," but argued that America's enemies "hardly need an excuse" to attack the nation, so the good done by the release of the report should trump any security concerns. 

"This report strengthens self-government and, ultimately, I believe, America's security and stature in the world," he said. 

You know it has been a long time coming, but finally there is something good to report about Senator John McCain.

I have long said, and I still believe, that much of McCain's legacy was  wiped out after he snatched Sarah Palin from the wilds of Wasilla, hosed her off, and plopped her on the national stage.

However at least in this case McCain has partially redeemed himself.

And it is particularly striking considering how many other politicians and Right Wing pundits are reacting to this report.

Of course the next question is what do we do next?

For the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, the answer is obvious: 

“In all countries, if someone commits murder, they are prosecuted and jailed. If they commit rape or armed robbery, they are prosecuted and jailed. If they order, enable or commit torture – recognized as a serious international crime – they cannot simply be granted impunity because of political expediency. When that happens, we undermine this exceptional Convention, and – as a number of U.S. political leaders clearly acknowledged yesterday – we undermine our own claims to be civilized societies rooted in the rule of law.” 

Unfortunately I do not believe that is going to happen here, especially with the Republicans about to take  back the Senate.

So what other option do we have?

Well Anthony Romero of the American Civil Liberties Union has a novel idea.

Pardon the torturers: 

The Obama administration could still take measures to hold accountable the officials who authorized torture. Some of the statutes of limitations have run out, but not all of them have. And the release of the Senate’s report provides a blueprint for criminal investigations, even if that’s not what the intelligence committee set out to do.

But let’s face it: Mr. (President) Obama is not inclined to pursue prosecutions — no matter how great the outrage, at home or abroad, over the disclosures — because of the political fallout. He should therefore take ownership of this decision. He should acknowledge that the country’s most senior officials authorized conduct that violated fundamental laws, and compromised our standing in the world as well as our security. If the choice is between a tacit pardon and a formal one, a formal one is better. An explicit pardon would lay down a marker, signaling to those considering torture in the future that they could be prosecuted. 

Mr. (President) Obama could pardon George J. Tenet for authorizing torture at the C.I.A.’s black sites overseas, Donald H. Rumsfeld for authorizing the use of torture at the Guantánamo Bay prison, David S. Addington, John C. Yoo and Jay S. Bybee for crafting the legal cover for torture, and George W. Bush and Dick Cheney for overseeing it all. 

While the idea of a pre-emptive pardon may seem novel, there is precedent. Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson pardoned Confederate soldiers as a step toward unity and reconstruction after the Civil War. Gerald R. Ford pardoned Richard M. Nixon for the crimes of Watergate. Jimmy Carter pardoned Vietnam War draft resisters. 

The spectacle of the president’s granting pardons to torturers still makes my stomach turn. But doing so may be the only way to ensure that the American government never tortures again. Pardons would make clear that crimes were committed; that the individuals who authorized and committed torture were indeed criminals; and that future architects and perpetrators of torture should beware. Prosecutions would be preferable, but pardons may be the only viable and lasting way to close the Pandora’s box of torture once and for all. 

This is something that I admit would never have occurred to me, but it would be quite the spectacle don't you think?

Could you imagine the outrage that would come from the conservatives over this?

Fox News broadcasts would consist simply of one long primal scream.

What do you think?

Democrats lose their final Senate race in Louisiana last night. And you know who gets the credit right?

Courtesy of the AP: 

Republican Rep. Bill Cassidy has denied Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana a fourth term, calling his Senate victory "the exclamation point" on midterm elections that put Republicans in charge on Capitol Hill for President Barack Obama's last two years in office. 

With nearly all votes counted, unofficial returns showed Cassidy with a commanding victory in Saturday's runoff as he ousted the last of the Senate's Deep South Democrats. In the South, Democrats will be left without a single U.S. senator or governor across nine states stretching from the Carolinas to Texas.

Of course this is just the latest win in a string of victories for the Republicans who essentially ran the board this election cycle.

The Republicans were able to convince the barely attentive voters that President Obama was an abject failure and slime any Democrat who had dared work with him to pass legislation. Resulting of course in the loss of several Senate and Congressional seats.

Landrieu was doomed from the very start.

However that is the factual explanation for what happened.

In Sarah Palin's world she done did it.

Yeah of course she was trying like crazy to get Bill Cassidy's conservative opponent Rob Maness elected up until the official November, at times even seeming to be blissfully unaware that he had no shot, but she showed up in that airport hangar for Cassidy (She even got all dressed up.), and  that is all she wants people to remember.

When the chips were down and her candidate was crushed like a ball of soggy wet tissue paper, she suddenly decided that Bill Cassidy was her guy all along and she went to work for him. Which in her case meant a Facebook post or two, and showing up in an airport hangar in her "trolling for men in bars" outfit.

I mean if she had not shown up to support Cassidy who knows whether he could have pulled off this victory or not? (Spoiler alert:  He would have.)

The duplicity of Lisa Murkowski, and why moderates should wash their hands of her.

This editorial was written by Fairbanks resident and political activist Sean McGuire. And it comes to us courtesy of the Fairbanks Newsminer:  

Let’s go back four years to August 2010. In what many view as the biggest upset in Alaska political history, Sen. Murkowski was defeated in the primary by the far-right candidate, Joe Miller. She was beaten fair and square. 

What did she do? She spent the next two-plus months running around Alaska pleading with Native Alaskans and moderate Democrats to save her political life with a write-in campaign. She promised she would represent those moderate voters’ interests. Sen. Mark Begich didn’t attempt to interfere; he let Alaskans decide who they wanted. In the end, Natives and Democrats did indeed save her. 

During the next six years, Alaska’s two senators apparently worked well together, collaborating on many issues and voting the same way more than any other split-party senators in the nation. 

Fast forward four years to this election. Sen. Begich, the champion of the Natives — overwhelmingly endorsed by AFN, and a true moderate — was fighting for his political life. 

What did Sen. Murkowski do? When Begich was most vulnerable, she stuck a knife in his back, going on TV and saying she didn’t have a good partner in the Senate. And just as dishonorably, she betrayed all those moderate Democrats who had come to her rescue when her political life was hanging by a thread. 

Politics is a nasty business. But in my opinion, the dishonor Sen. Murkowski displayed is several levels deep. It’s not only that she betrayed those who saved her. There’s a longstanding tradition in the U.S. Senate: you don’t turn on your colleague in an election.

There's more but I think that this really captures the meat of Mr. McGuire's point.

And it is quite a valid point.

Murkowski has demonstrated herself to be a cagey political operative, who quickly calculates where she needs to position herself in order to retain her Senate seat and garner support for the future.

When she needed moderates, she was moderate. And when she believes she needs conservatives, well...she IS still daddy's little girl.

Clearly she recognized that the Republicans would most likely capture the Senate in this elections cycle, and positioned herself accordingly. I am sure in her mind Begich's lost Senate seat is simply an acceptable casualty in her strategy to gain more power.

And she has indeed gained that power.

She will now be given the chairmanship of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which will allow her to once again campaign for the opening of ANWR, even as we are faced with information about climate change which should dissuade any reasonable person from even entertaining such an idea. (To be fair Mark Begich also promoted the opening of ANWR. You really cannot get elected up here if you are against it.)

The President will of course veto the proposal and it will never happen, but it is once again a move that puts her in alignment with the Republican platform.

And there she will remain right up until it works against her in retaining her seat, and then my friends we will see the Murkowski's political chameleon act once again.

We deserve better that is for sure, however I reiterate once again that Murkowski will undoubtedly hold onto her seat right up until she no longer wants it, or until some unforeseen scandal knocks her out of the running. 

Because that's just the way things work in Alaska.

You will never guess who the Tea Party is hoping to recruit to run against John McCain in 2016. But then again, maybe you will.

Courtesy of The New York Times:  

And in their most audacious plans, Tea Party groups are preparing to recruit challengers to run against high-profile Republicans they accuse of betraying them — as they did when they toppled Eric Cantor, the former House majority leader. 

At the top of their list of potential targets are politicians like Senator John McCain of Arizona, a proponent of an immigration overhaul. Their fantasy candidate: Sarah Palin, Mr. McCain’s former running mate, who now spends much of the year at her home in Scottsdale, Ariz. Two prominent conservative activists, who spoke anonymously to reveal private discussions, said leading Tea Party figures planned to reach out to Ms. Palin to see if she was interested in running against Mr. McCain.

Hey that's what you get when you endorse your girlfriend to run for President and not your former running mate.

Personally I think it would be a kick in the ass to watch Palin go up against John McCain in Arizona. One can only imagine the oppo research he could use against her if she dared to challenge him.

However I think that John McCain, and the rest of Arizona, can relax. 

Once again being a Senator is a J-O-B and Sarah Palin hates those.

So she is not going to run. However it is nice of the New York Times to confirm how much time Palin is spending in Arizona. Not that we all here at IM did not already know that.

Before he leaves the Senate Alaska's Mark Begich would like to do something about those SuperPAC robo-calls.

Courtesy of The Hill:

Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) is taking a departing shot at super-PACs following his defeat in the Alaska Senate race. 

 Begich introduced legislation Thursday that would add super-PACs and other outside groups to the list of groups that must comply with the National Do Not Call Registry. 

His legislation, titled The Do Not Disturb Act, would also keep people on the list from receiving robocalls and "push polls," which are surveys that attempt to get a desired result with leading questions. 

"I have long been an advocate for protecting Alaskans’ privacy and for limiting the ability of outside groups to spend endless amounts of money on our elections,” said Begich, a member of the Commerce Committee. 

“I heard from Alaskans all across the state during the campaign, and enough is enough. My bill will allow individuals to opt out of receiving these sorts of pestering phone calls from super-PACs and similar groups,” he added. 

If Begich is successful this may be the most impactful, and welcome, legislation that he has ever introduced.

As I have mentioned before the number of calls I received from pollsters, recorded campaign messages, and other interested parties, was completely overwhelming.

I quite literally hated the sound of my phone ringing. It seemed like it was never a call that I wanted to take.

Personally I think this is a good step, but I would also like to see something done about the advertisements that pop up on every YouTube video that I tried to watch this last few months, and the avalanche of television advertising that seemed to use up every second of commercial airtime since August.

And it is no wonder that Begich is the one to spearhead this effort.

I think it is pretty clear that he lost this race solely due to the efforts of outside groups, and that without the interference of the folks like Karl Rove and the Koch brothers he would have almost certainly retained his Senate seat.

Instead we are stuck with a political whore bought and paid for with corporate money, who has little interest in anything that Alaskans need or want, and is solely focused on pleasing his masters.

Senate vote on Keystone XL oil pipeline fails to pass.

I just watched this thing crash and burn on MSNBC.

It would not have made any difference anyway, as it is almost a certainty that the President would have vetoed it once it came to his desk.

You don't get the Chinese to buy into reducing fossil fuel emissions and then immediately sign off on a big oil pipeline project designed to transport some of the nastiest dirtiest oil on the planet across the country.

Here is more from the New York Times: 

The battle over approving the pipeline, which will carry petroleum from the oil sands of Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas, ultimately became a proxy war for the Louisiana Senate seat, where Ms. Landrieu and Republican Representative Bill Cassidy are locked in fight for votes in their oil-rich state ahead of the Dec. 6 runoff election. 

Ms. Landrieu — who, if re-elected, will lose her coveted position as chairwoman of the energy committee when Republicans take the Senate majority next year — spent the past few days working furiously to round up Democratic support for her bill, which she had hoped would be her last, best chance of holding on to her Senate seat. 

On Tuesday morning, she was at least one vote short of the filibuster-proof 60 votes she needed. And despite cajoling, persuading, browbeating, and making an impassioned plea to her colleagues during a closed-door lunch — which one attendee described as “civilized but pretty contentious” — Ms. Landrieu, who has so often bulldozed her way to success through sheer force of will, came up just short.

I feel badly for Senator Landrieu, I really do. However I really do not think the passage of this bill would have made one bit of difference in her runoff with Cassidy.

And to be honest I would rather lose another Senate seat than see this project go forward.

Mark Begich concedes.

Courtesy of Alaska Dispatch:  

After holding on to dwindling hope for days, Sen. Mark Begich on Monday conceded he had lost his U.S. Senate race to Republican Dan Sullivan. 

With the concession coming nearly two weeks after the Nov. 4 general election and with few votes left to count, the statement was largely a formality.

As you know I already called this race the day after the election.

The reason I did that is because even though I may be an optimist, I am still a realist and I knew the numbers simply did not add up.

However I would be lying if I did not admit that a part of me secretly hoped that I was wrong and would have to eat crow. Crow would taste so much better than bitter defeat.

Mark was a good guy, and a hard worker for Alaska, who actually understands the people and lives they live up here in the Last Frontier.

Sure many of Mark's votes were in line with President Obama, but much of those votes were ultimately beneficial to the people of our state.

Sullivan does not work for us, and his votes in the Senate will be guided by outside forces. And trust me, few of those will ultimate be of benefit to Alaskans.

Senator Elizabeth Warren receives new job, that illustrates her importance to the future of the Democratic party.

Courtesy of Politico: 

Senate Democrats have enlisted progressive firebrand Elizabeth Warren to be a member of their leadership team, giving a major platform to a liberal icon just a week after Democrats took a beating at the polls and lost control of the Senate. 

Harry Reid, the incoming Senate minority leader, had engaged in private talks with the Massachusetts freshman to create a special leadership post for the former Harvard professor, and the leadership elections Thursday solidified the new Democratic team.

The title will be strategic policy adviser to the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee — a specially created position that puts Warren into a much more prominent position in the Senate hierarchy. 

In the new position, Warren is expected to serve as a go-between to liberal groups to ensure their voice is part of the leadership’s private deliberations. She would be part of the messaging and policy team. 

Some see this appointment by Reid is a move away from bipartisanship,  but let's face it the Republicans are not really ever going to work with the Democrats anyhow. Unless of course the Democrats agree to acquiesce to every one of their demands.

However Warren's take no shit personality scares the bejeezus out of the Republicans, and that endears her to the liberal base which is only growing bigger everyday.

I think this might just be Harry Reid's way of sticking his thumb in the eye of the conservatives.

But do you know what would send them right over the edge?

Having Warren's name appear on the ballot alongside Hillary's in 2016.

Oh, that would be glorious.

After day of counting absentee ballots AP calls Alaska Senate race for Dan Sullivan.

Courtesy of Politico:  

Republican Dan Sullivan has won the Alaska Senate race, ousting Democratic incumbent Mark Begich, according to The Associated Press, which called the race for Sullivan late Tuesday night following the first day of counting early and absentee ballots. 

Sullivan leads Begich by 7,911 votes, according to the latest tally. Even though Begich gained some ground on Tuesday, and thousands of ballots are left to be counted, the AP said “the results indicated that Begich could not overcome Sullivan’s lead.” 

“I am deeply humbled and honored to be chosen by my fellow Alaskans to serve them in the United States Senate,” Sullivan said in a statement. “From day one we told our supporters that we would run a campaign that Alaskans could be proud of, and that’s what we did.” 

Begich’s campaign is not conceding, the AP reported. 

As I think some of you are aware I essentially determined that Mark Begich did not have a chance of  pulling out a victory here the day after the election.

In response I received a rather ugly e-mail accusing me of essentially being a traitor and of hurting his chances by writing him off before the ballots had been counted. I am not sure how my post could make ballots magically disappear but apparently I have incredible powers of which I remain blissfully unaware.

Look I doubt there are too many people up here that wanted Mark to win more than I did. Hell I even had the only Mark Begich sign for several blocks around.

But facts are facts, and as progressives we respect the facts.

This election was obviously for sale, and in the end the Democrats simply did not have the money to compete.

It is clear to everybody that Dan Sullivan is a Koch whore, and he is certainly not the only one representing us in Washington.

And look who finally came out to connect her name to Sullivan now that it is no longer a political liability.

So where exactly is Sarah Palin going to be on Monday?

I'm sure that none of you have yet forgotten Palin's deer in the headlights response to Hannity calling her out over what job in politics for which she might be willing to campaign.

In order to make it sound that she was much tool busy "protecting the freedom of Americans" by supporting candidates and making public appearances, Palin rattled this off:

"Saturday I'll be in Louisiana, tonight I am very pleased to hear that at the College Inn in New Orleans we have a unity effort going on there right now with Colonel Rob Maness and his supporters, in that race against Mary Landrieu, joining with the..the winner of the GOP you know that open jungle primary that..uh..Louisiana has, we will see Cassidy and Maness, and their supporters come together to make sure that Mary Landrieu, and her participation in this lawlessness, these felled policies of Obama's, that they don't get back to Washington D.C.. We'll have the GOP there and we'll do that by unity. So I want to participate in things like that to help."

Now Palin made those remarks on Friday, November 7th, however in an article written the next day about the event, they listed the attendees as follows: 

Maness will formally endorse Cassidy during a star-studded Republican rally in Baton Rouge on Monday that will feature presumed presidential candidates Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Gov. Bobby Jindal. 

U.S. Sen. David Vitter, state Sen. Elbert Guillory, state Rep. Paul Hollis, 6th Congressional District candidate Garret Graves, former U.S. Rep. Jeff Landry, and LAGOP chairman Roger Villere will also attend the "Unity Rally."

A "star studded" rally demonstrating unity, yet Palin who not only bragged about attending but almost made it sound like the event was her brainchild, is not among the listed participants.

Now why is that?

Could it be that she lied? (Well of course it could she does that all of the time.) OR could it be that she is simply not considered a "star" in Louisiana Republican circles?

Hmm, well I guess we'll know after Monday.

As I said before perhaps the most vicious battle will not be between the Republicans and Obama, but rather between the Republicans and the Republicans.

Courtesy of The New York Times:

 As most Republicans were taking a victory lap the morning after the elections, a group of conservatives huddled anxiously in a conference room not far from Capitol Hill and agreed that now is the time for confrontation, not compromise and conciliation. 

Despite Republicans’ ascension to Senate control and an expanded House majority, many conservatives from the party’s activist wing fear that congressional leaders are already being too timid with President Obama. 

They do not want to hear that government shutdowns are off the table or that repealing the Affordable Care Act is impossible — two things Republican leaders have said in recent days. 

“If the new Republican leadership in the Senate is only talking about what they can’t do, that’s going to be very demoralizing,” said Thomas J. Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative advocacy group that convenes a regular gathering called Groundswell. Any sense of triumph at its meeting last week was fleeting. 

“I think the members of the leadership need to decide what they’re willing to shut down the government over,” Mr. Fitton said.

The positive thing to take away form this is that the GOP may be so distracted by infighting that they are unable to get anything done. And they will certainly have a difficult time getting the votes together in order to pass legislation.

However on the negative side this means that establishment Republicans will be wary of making any deals which  might indicate weakness in the eyes of the rabid Right Wing and ensure primary challengers when they come up for reelection.

Ultimately this stand off may simply indicate that even with significantly higher numbers, and the Senate on their side, that the conservatives will be just as ineffectual at leading as they have been in the four years since John Boehner first picked up the Speaker's gavel.

John McCain strongly suggests that he will run for reelection in 2016. Because, oh why the hell not?

"Whoa Nelly, I'm gonna win it this time."

Courtesy of AZ Central:  

Veteran U.S. Sen. John McCain reiterated Thursday that he is "seriously considering" and "leaning towards" a 2016 re-election bid. 

"We were talking to our longtime supporters -- many of whom have been with us for many years and we're grateful for their support -- about the options, and what we see as the future of the party in Washington and here in Arizona," McCain said. "We're getting a lot of their input as to whether I should run for re-election or not. They know that I am seriously considering it, and leaning towards it." 

McCain, R-Ariz., made the remarks to reporters after a breakfast meeting with political allies at the Ritz-Carlton, Phoenix, at 24th Street and Camelback Road.

Sure why not? I mean what does Arizona deserve more than to have Methuselah representing them in Washington D.C.?

In 2016 John McCain will be eighty years old.

Not to be an "ageist" but if the old bastard were a horse they would not even bother putting him out to pasture they would just shoot him in the head and be done with it.

Personally I don't know how the old fossil can bring himself to show his face in public anymore. If I were the one who had released the Wasilla Wendigo on this country I would have done the honorable thing long ago and committed seppuku.

It looks like Johyn McCain's goal is to die on the Senate floor.

Actually he should consider himself lucky. If he and Palin had been elected, he would have died in his sleep from "mysterious causes" way back in 2009 or 2010.

That is unless he had been willing to go for a plane ride in Alaska.