Tag Archives: director

Welcome to the world of hashtag politics — or #politics

Washington (CNN) — When a scuffle broke out at a candidate forum in Nevada last week between supporters of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican rival Sharron Angle, the fight didn’t end after tempers cooled. It simply moved over to the social media website Twitter, where the war of words in this nasty race continued.

One of Angle’s campaign managers, Jordan Gehrke, posted a tweet, a short message on Twitter, that accused Reid supporters of starting the fight. “Check out the video here of Reidbots screaming and heckling,” the tweet said.

The message included a link to a video that appears to show audience members at the forum shouting down Angle. That same tweet also included a hashtag — #dumpreid — made by attaching the # symbol to the message “dumpreid.” Twitter users who clicked on the #dumpreid link were taken to a feed of anti-Reid tweets.

Welcome to the new media world of hashtag politics, where the character attack is compressed into 140 characters — the website’s limit for tweets — and instantly blasted out to a campaign’s long list of “followers.”

“It was inevitable that negative politics would transform itself into social media. That’s exactly what’s happened,” said Larry Sabato, the director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

You don’t even need a complete sentence to change a campaign — just a phrase can change a campaign.
–Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics

“You don’t even need a complete sentence to change a campaign — just a phrase can change a campaign,” Sabato added.

Why pay for an attack ad when you can post a free attack tweet?

One recent Reid attack tweet — “Sharron Angle’s mocks health coverage for ‘autism’” — includes a link to a video that shows the Republican Senate candidate attacking mandates in the new health care law. Is it the tweet or the video that went viral? Answer: both.

Another Angle tweet, “Harry Reid’s plan to save the Nevada economy: coked-up stimulus monkeys,” was both acidic and inventive. Not only did it mock the real use of stimulus money to study the effects of illicit drugs on primates. The buzzworthy phrase “coked-up stimulus monkeys” was picked up by political writers across the country.

Campaign staffers are throwing mud via Twitter too. A tweet from an Angle campaign staffer refers to Reid’s handlers as “13 y/o girls.” And on it goes.

Video: Campaign Twitter wars

Video: Voters in a fighting mood

Michael Patrick Leahy, a Tea Party activist and co-creator of the hashtag #TCOT (or Top Conservatives on Twitter) said, “I think we’re about to enter a new era of American political history.”

Leahy’s “Tweeps” (Twitter slang for his followers) who click on #TCOT are transported to a virtual Tea Party, a nonstop feed where visitors tweet back and forth on the latest news in the conservative movement.

Leary’s website, tcotreport.com, ranks the top conservatives by number of followers on Twitter.

One of those “top conservatives,” former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, has more than 250,000 followers on Twitter. Her tweets go out not only to her legions of fans, but also to the nation’s top political journalists, who are following Palin’s every tweet.

“She can just put out a tweet and generate headlines in the traditional media,” Sabato said.

Those journalists, many of whom are also prolific Twitter users, often “retweet” or redistribute Palin’s tweets to their own lists of followers.

“The retweeting is how it really gets out there,” Sabato added, noting that last weekend marked the 50th anniversary of the first debate in the epic 1960 presidential race between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon.

#timeshavechanged

Welcome to the world of hashtag politics — or #politics

Midterms put focus on Afghan draw-down

Washington (CNN) — Less than a year from the scheduled start of withdrawing some troops from Afghanistan, opinions remain varied about exactly what will happen when the transition begins at the end of June 2011.

The Obama administration has made clear some troops — no one can say how many — will start withdrawing by next July from stable areas where Afghan forces can provide security.

However, questions over how to measure success and whether the almost 9-year-old war is worth the continuing U.S. investment in lives and resources are gaining prominence as congressional midterm elections approach in November.

In interviews with military and political leaders broadcast Sunday, scenarios presented on what happens next year ranged from guarded optimism to serious concern. While most views followed expected party talking points, all appeared grounded in the common belief that success is vital even as they differed on what it would be.

On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan defended the planned troop drawdown next year as a necessary part of strategy.

Video: Levin: ‘Mixed picture’ in Afghanistan

RELATED TOPICS

“That date is very visible now,” Levin said, adding: “It’s critical that that date was set to show that it isn’t a blank check, it’s not an open-ended commitment of American troops in the same numbers that we’re going to have there.”

Already, he said, the Afghan army is taking over some aspects of security, which gives a psychological boost to the local population while denying the Taliban insurgents of a propaganda tool.

“When their own people see that, it is going to make a difference,” Levin said. “And when the Taliban sees that they are not able now to just paint this as … a lot of foreign troops present in Afghanistan, but now it’s their own Afghan army, a popular, respected army, that they are taking on more and more during this next year, that that is going to make a difference. That’s a real nightmare for the Taliban to be up against an Afghan-led effort.

On the same program, however, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina worried that the Afghan forces and central government may not be ready to assume the necessary responsibilities within a year.

“[G]enerally speaking, this time next summer, we’re still going to be engaged in one hell of a fight,” Graham told CNN. “We’re going to need every troop we have today, I think, still in Afghanistan next year.”

According to Graham, it will be clear by the end of this year where things stand in Afghanistan.

“If, by December, we’re not showing some progress, we’re in trouble,” he said. “And the question is: what is progress? Without some benchmarks and measurements, it’s going to be hard to sell to the American people a continued involvement in Afghanistan.”

Other Republicans are harsher critics of President Barack Obama’s war strategy, saying that any withdrawal date — regardless of intention — provides a strategic and psychological boost to the enemy.

” … (W)e don’t tell the enemy when it is that we’re going to essentially wave that white flag and say we’re leaving,” former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“No, we’re in it to win it. And if we’re not, then the American public needs to know that, too,” Palin said.

Palin acknowledged the nation was tiring of the war that started in October 2001 in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks that year.

“We want to know that if we’re engaged in such activity where we are protecting our own country, we’re helping to protect our allies, we had better be in it for … the long haul,” Palin said. “But we had better be in it to win it or, no, we’re not going to keep supporting this idea of sending innocents, our young men and women, America’s finest, over there for some futile effort.”

In an interview with CBS conducted last week and broadcast Sunday, Obama insisted the mission to prevent terrorists from operating out of Afghanistan was worth the current deployment, including 30,000 additional U.S. troops he ordered in last year to increase the eventual total to about 100,000.

“If I didn’t think that it was important for our national security to finish the job in Afghanistan, then I would pull them all out today,” the president said.

Top military officials emphasized that the draw-down date is part of a strategy, with the actual number of troops withdrawn depending on conditions on the ground. Asked about remarks last month by Vice President Joe Biden that the figure could be “as few as a couple of thousand” troops, Defense Secretary Robert Gates seemed to agree.

“My personal opinion is that drawdowns early on will be of fairly limited numbers, and as we are successful, we’ll probably accelerate,” Gates said on the ABC program “This Week.” But, again, it will depend on the conditions on the ground.”

At the same time, Gates emphasized that it was crucial for the United States to demonstrate a long-term commitment in order to ensure the trust and cooperation of Afghanistan.

“We need to re-emphasize the message that we are not leaving Afghanistan in July 2011,” he said. “We are beginning a process… and the pace will be set by conditions on the ground.”

He welcomed the prognostication by critics that the Taliban fighters will simply hunker down until next July in order to strike after U.S. troops start leaving, saying: “We will be there with a lot of troops.”

The purpose is to ensure stability in order to turn over control to the Afghan government and people, not to embark on nationwide reconstruction, Gates said.

U.S. efforts will focus on “those civilian efforts and governance that help us in our security objectives,” he said.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the main goal is to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a safe haven for al Qaeda.

Even though CIA Director Leon Panetta has said only 50 to 100 al Qaeda figures remain in Afghanistan, Mullen made clear that a hard fight remains to enable the Afghan government to defeat Taliban insurgents who harbored al Qaeda in the past.

“We’re at a point now where over the course of the next 12 months, it really is going to, I think, tell the tale which way this is going to go,” Mullen said, later adding: “Certainly the longterm goal is to make sure that, with respect to the population in Afghanistan, that there’s a governance structure that treats its people well. … But to say exactly how that’s going to look and what specifics would be involved, I think it’s just way too early.”

Influential Democrats, meanwhile, signaled the growing impatience in their ranks for a war effort that continues to inflict an economic and human toll.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the ABC program that she hopes that next year’s withdrawal brings home more than the “couple of thousand” troops Biden had predicted.

At the same time, Pelosi acknowledged “it’s not going to be turn out the lights and let’s all go home in one day.”

Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts told CNN that Obama was determined to bring the conflict to a new phase that allows a U.S. drawdown.

“He is also determined not to undermine his own effort and not to undermine the military effort on the ground, and the sacrifice that our troops have made,” Kerry said. “The president is not going to suddenly pull the rug out from under the very efforts that we’ve all been engaged in over these years. That would be folly. And I don’t see him doing that.”

Graham, who has sided with Democrats on some issues, expressed concern that some anti-war elements of both the political left and right could undermine the war effort.

“You know what I worry most about: an unholy alliance between the right and the left,” Graham said. “That there are some Republicans who are not going to take a, you know, do-or-die attitude for Obama’s war. There are some Republicans that want to make this Obama’s war. … There will be some Republicans saying you can’t win because of the July 2011 withdrawal date, he’s made it impossible for us to win, so why should we throw good money after bad?”

Graham added that liberals could also refuse to back the president’s plans in Afghanistan.

“You’ve got people on the left who are mad with the president because he is doing exactly what [former President George W.] Bush did and we’re in a war we can’t win,” Graham said, adding: “My concern is that, for different reasons, they join forces and we lose the ability to hold this thing together.”

Midterms put focus on Afghan draw-down

Roman Polanski freed: Can he travel anywhere?

By

Peter Grier,

Could a $1.50 marijuana joint doom Prop. 19 in California?

By

Patrik Jonsson,

McChrystal incident a ‘learning moment’

Washington (CNN) — Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s resignation as top commander in Afghanistan on Wednesday should be looked at as a learning lesson, a former general said.

“We will all learn from it, and it will be a learning moment for the military as well as for people in Washington,” said retired Army Gen. Russel Honore, a CNN contributor. “It will remind all of those in uniform that we live by a code of conduct, and we live by a uniformed code of military justice. … It will remind us of that pledge and that oath that we will obey those [civilian] officers appointed over us.”

President Obama accepted McChrystal’s resignation “with considerable regret” and nominated Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command, to take his place.

The moves come in the wake of politically explosive remarks about about key administration officials — including Vice President Joe Biden — made by McChrystal and his aides in a Rolling Stone magazine profile of the general to be published Friday.

The consequences of McChrystal’s resignation is a positive thing, a foreign policy expert said.

“I think the consequences frankly are more positive than negative,” said Steve Clemons, the director for the American Strategy Program at the nonpartisan New America Foundation.

He noted Obama’s decision sends a clear signal that the mission will continue.

“Obama is indicating that he doesn’t want to shift at all, at least in the time being, the military strategy,” Clemons said. “It’s a very strong signal that this was not about strategy.”

Clemons added that to some degree, replacing McChrystal with Petraeus showed the president is doubling down on the counterinsurgency approach.

Video: Gen. McChrystal arrives at White House

Video: McChrystal article author speaks out

Video: Obama ‘did the right thing’

“Petraeus really knows at a granular level the entire operation, and he’s familiar with not only the entire operation; he’s been meeting with these people regularly in both Pakistan and Afghanistan sides. So he’s wedged into this,” he said.

CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said Petraeus was tapped to lead the mission because he knows the strategy and can go tomorrow and pick it up.

“And because he has the credibility of the United States Congress and around the world,” King added.

But how are service members in Afghanistan taking McChrystal’s resignation?

“While some blow off speculation that the general may be replaced as ‘back-home talk,’ the fact remains that they are fighting in this hostile swath of Afghan desert by the general’s design, waging a brand of counterinsurgency campaign that bears his [McChrystal] signature,” Time magazine’s Jason Motlagh reported Wednesday from Marjah, Afghanistan.

Marine Lt. Colonel Brian Christmas, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 6th Infantry Regiment, told Motlagh that news of McChrystal’s predicament is, for now, “outside [the] box.”

“However, if changes up the chain of command start to undermine the counterinsurgency strategy that he’s following, he adds, ‘then that becomes a real concern,’ Motlagh wrote.

“Another officer agreed that given the slow progress, ‘any [potential] loss of momentum’ arising from the general’s departure would be “bad for the mission.”

McChrystal incident a ‘learning moment’

Kagan notes label KKK and NRA as ‘bad guy’ organizations

Washington (CNN) — A conservative magazine suggests Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is “hostile” to gun owners, based on notes she wrote in the Clinton White House in 1996.

The notes were released last week by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library. Kagan worked in the White House Counsel’s office in 1995 and 1996. Kagan, 50, was nominated to the high court May 10 by President Obama, and her confirmation hearings begin June 28.

The disclosure coincided with the release Friday afternoon of about 80,000 more documents.

A March 1996 document is likely to stir conservative anger. In it, she labeled the Ku Klux Klan and the National Rifle Association as “bad guy” organizations.

The issue was a pending bill, the Volunteer Protection Act, which gave some volunteer workers from a range of nonprofits a measure of liability protection from lawsuits. Kagan expressed concern that certain groups might be included in a “Cumulative List” of tax-exempt groups that would be covered under the proposed law.

Kagan addressed her handwritten thoughts, based on a conversation with Clinton aide Fran Allegra, who responded that day that neither the KKK nor the NRA was on the list provided by the Internal Revenue Service. Allegra gently advised his colleague, “We probably need to be careful about suggesting ‘bad’ organizations will qualify for the provision bill as it would suggest we are allowing ‘bad’ organizations to qualify for tax-exempt status.” The measure was passed into law in 1997, but ultimately vetoed by Congress. Allegra is now a federal judge.

The National Review first reported about the notes, and asked on its website, “Is Kagan so hostile to gun rights that she would compare the top gun-rights organization in the United States with a viciously racist hate group?”

The White House issued a response Friday.

“Kagan’s notes from a conversation with DOJ Attorney Fran Allegra track an earlier memo Allegra sent to her outlining which organizations would be shielded under volunteer and nonprofit liability legislation,” said White House spokesman Ben LaBolt. “Allegra’s memo notes that neither the KKK nor the NRA would be shielded from liability under the bill, after Democrats in Congress and others raised concerns that the provision swept too broadly. It’s simply not credible to suggest that these jotted down notes represent anything but preliminary research on legal questions about what organizations would be covered under the legislation, and the organizations discussed reflect the public debate over the legislation at that time.”

The guns rights group also reacted to the Kagan notes Friday.

“How can the NRA respond to something that bizarre and outrageous?” NRA’s Director of Public Affairs Andrew Arulanandam said in an interview with CNN. “This is precisely the kind of stuff that needs to be aired out in the confirmation hearings, a complete airing out of where she stands on our issues.”

Some 160,000 pages of documents are being reviewed from Kagan’s four years in the Clinton White House, during which, in addition to being in the counsel’s office, she also served as an adviser on the Domestic Policy Council from 1997 to 1999. Papers from those stints have been released the past two Fridays, revealing a lawyer with a politically tuned, pragmatic approach to issues like abortion, gun control and tobacco regulation.

The material is a prelude to Kagan’s much-anticipated appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Republicans on the panel continue to express deep concern that the weekly document releases provide little time for members to explore her work as a government lawyer, and whether they offer any clues about how she might rule as a justice on the nation’s highest court.

“We must be convinced that someone who has spent the better part of her career as a political advisor, policy advocate, and academic — rather than as a legal practitioner or a judge — can put aside her personal and political beliefs, and impartially apply the law, rather than be a rubberstamp for the Obama or any other Administration,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said in a floor speech Friday. “The Clinton library documents make it harder — not easier — to believe that Ms. Kagan could make that necessary transition.”

The White House has fashioned a low-key campaign to get Kagan confirmed, trying to avoid any public controversy that could derail her elevation to a lifetime job on the bench. The Clinton-era documents have been released on Friday afternoons, and Fridays generally are slow news days.

Obama officials have refused to make Kagan available for interviews since her nomination, and she has spent her days meeting privately with senators and prepping for the hearings in a small office in the White House complex.

If confirmed, Kagan would succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. Before stepping down from daily involvement, she was the administration’s solicitor general, and personally argued six cases before the Supreme Court. She has no judicial experience, and conservative critics have been eagerly scanning Kagan’s record in government service and academia for signs of her possible judicial philosophy.

Kagan notes label KKK and NRA as ‘bad guy’ organizations

House looks into MMS restructuring

(CNN) Washington — The House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources questioned high-ranking officials from government agencies, nongovernmental organizations and private companies Thursday about how to best divide up the troubled Minerals and Management Service, the government agency that oversees offshore drilling, which has come under greater scrutiny since the Deepwater Horizon incident on April 20.

Acting MMS Director Bob Abbey was one of the witnesses. He said the Gulf oil spill disaster has forced everyone involved with offshore drilling to reconsider their preparedness.

“There’s no doubt that the spill response plans that have been previously submitted by the operators in the outer continental shelf will need to be reviewed and amended based upon the lessons that we now have learned,” said Abbey. “So the lessees and the operators will be required to go back, revisit their spill response plans and to come in with something that will give not only those of us who are now working in the Minerals Management Service, but the American public, a little more confidence about their abilities to control or contain any future spills,” he said.

In May, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar unveiled plans to divide the agency’s energy development, enforcement and revenue collection divisions, saying they have “conflicting missions.”

The Interior Department’s Office of Inspector General is “presently in the process of identifying gaps, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement in MMS operations and regulations, with a focus on the permitting process, the inspections and enforcement programs, environmental and safety requirements, and the regulations governing post-incident review or investigation,” the department’s acting inspector general told the subcommittee Thursday.

Mary Kendall said any plan moving forward “needs to be well thought out and considered before hasty action is taken” to avoid “unexpected and unintended consequences” in a reorganization.

“While the Office of Inspector General has not, in the recent past, conducted any rigorous review of MMS’ governing regulations, during the course of other work that the OIG has done we have gained an understanding of some of the regulatory challenges that face MMS,” said Kendall.

Democrat Jim Costa, the subcomittee chairman, said, “When it comes to regulations, we must, I think, ask the hard questions on how we strike a proper balance between the role of government and the role of the private sector.”

In late May, MMS Director Elizabeth Birnbaum left the agency under a cloud after a series of allegations of misconduct by MMS employees. A report by the Interior Department’s inspector general revealed that federal inspectors overseeing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted meals and tickets to sporting events from companies they monitored.

Salazar called the allegations of MMS corruption “evidence of the cozy relationship between some elements of (the agency) and the oil and gas industry.”

He pledged to follow through with the Interior Department inspector general’s recommendations, “including taking any and all appropriate personnel actions including termination, discipline and referrals of any wrongdoing for criminal prosecution.”

House looks into MMS restructuring