The Guantanamo prison is a problem with no solution. On the one hand, Congress has stripped all funds to relocate detainees to U.S. prisons. On the other, diplomatic efforts to relocate them to other countries has been an abysmal failure. Despite the administration's best efforts to find an answer to an increasingly frustrating situation, there doesn't appear to be one.

Therefore, we can expect a new executive order allowing indefinite detention of prisoners with periodic reviews. A solution that's no solution at all for a problem with no clear answer.

ProPublica:

The draft order, a version of which was first considered nearly 18 months ago, is expected to be signed by President Obama early in the New Year. The order allows for the possibility that detainees from countries like Yemen might be released if circumstances there change.

But the order establishes indefinite detention as a long-term Obama administration policy and makes clear that the White House alone will manage a review process for those it chooses to hold without charge or trial.

Nearly two years after Obama's pledge to close the prison at Guantanamo, more inmates there are formally facing the prospect of lifelong detention and fewer are facing charges than the day Obama was elected.

That is in part because Congress has made it difficult to move detainees to the United States for trial. But it also stems from the president's embrace of indefinite detention and his assertion that the congressional authorization for military force, passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks, allows for such detention.

After taking office, the Obama administration reviewed the detainee population at Guantanamo Bay and chose 48 prisoners for indefinite detention. Officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that number will likely increase in coming months as some detainees are moved from a transfer category to a continued detention category.

The White House confirmed that an order is being drafted:

A White House official, who asked to speak on the condition of anonymity, later confirmed that the draft order has not yet been given to the president. The official had few details but said the order “would set up periodic review of the detention status of those detainees who cannot be tried,” in either military commissions or federal courts.

In 2008, Guantanamo detainees won the right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in court. The executive order aims to create an executive branch review which would occur separately from the court review and would weigh the necessity of the detention, rather than its lawfulness, officials said.

"Perhaps the dangerousness of the detainee's country of origin could change, or the group that the detainee is affiliated with could cease to exist," one official explained.

Any way you cut it, it's bad, and likely to get worse. This is one of those situations where there's no clear pathway to an end that will satisfy the Constitution and people. On the one hand, it's crazy to think that there are no bad guys in the world. On the other, there's no guarantee these people held at Guantanamo are the bad guys, despite internal reviews and the like.

What do you think should be done about them?

Further proof of the crazy that is our current right wing: Outrage -- OUTRAGE, I tell you -- because President Obama issued this executive order under the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act.

It declares the following:

There is established within the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Council).

Among other things, the purpose of said council is to:

(c) provide recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the most pressing health issues confronting the United States and changes in Federal policy to achieve national wellness, health promotion, and public health goals, including the reduction of tobacco use, sedentary behavior, and poor nutrition;

Only in Right-Winger Land could this be a bad thing. On the one hand, they whine about our spending on health care and on the other, whine about any initiative which actually stands a chance of improving both spending and outcomes.

The Council is comprised of cabinet officers and policymakers, but that doesn't stop the wingers from jumping off into the Imagination Canyon where they opine about what "advisors" the President will appoint, naming Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers as prime examples of the evil about to descend upon our nation. Oh, and Dr. Kevorkian, so as to raise the specter of "death panels" one. more. time.

I could quote them, but then I'd have to link and it's really just too ridiculous to link. If you really want to read the insanity for yourself, try googling the term "lifestyle behavior modification" or "nanny state liberation front."

Of course, this is just a riff on the "big government is bad" set of conservative talking points. They really hate big government until they love it. They don't want to make lifestyle changes, but are outraged -- OUTRAGED -- that Big Government hasn't stopped the oil spilling into the Gulf, sent Superman to clean it up, and restarted drilling in deepwater worldwide.

Of course, if health insurers established such advisory councils (which they have) and altered their policies to encourage and reward healthy lifestyles (which they have), it would be totally okay, because the savings to those insurers would mean cheaper health insurance for the rest of us. Right? RIGHT?

Do these people ever suffer from outrage fatigue? Is there a little blue pill for that?

PERRspectives: What the health care debate was really about.

Progressive Blog Digest: Will have a ton of links- pro and con -on last night's vote

Blue Gal: Shorter President's Executive Order on Abortion

Demeur: Republican reaction to passage of HCR

Cartoon News: Cartoonist finds nothing funny about tea bag mob

The Bobblespeak Translations: This Week -March 21, 2010

So Stupak got his way. The White House has issued an executive order that will pay homage to the fetus-over-actual-children supporters.

As far as I can tell, all the executive order does is reinforce the language that's already in the bill. It does order HHS to set up regulations to see that funds are not co-mingled in any way that might be used to subsidize abortion - even though they weren't, anyway.

Once again, here in America, one set of religious views has been elevated over everyone else's - to the detriment of women's health. Just once, I'd love to hear a reporter ask Bart Stupak how he reconciles his getting his way with the hallowed American principle of freedom of religion.

After all, his practice of his religion requires that I'm not free to practice mine.

UPDATE: Please donate to Connie Saltonstall's campaign to kick Saint Stupak out of office.

DOWNLOADS: (1145)

PLAYS: (4105)

Embed

Remember Howdy Jindal's abysmal response to President Obama? Well, he's back with more hackery.

You thought Bobby Jindal would have given the ACORN bashing a little more thought, but you see, he's a Stepford Republican, so they all are programmed to give similar responses to conservative stimuli.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) is trying to shore up his anti-ACORN bona fides. The New Orleans Times-Picayune reports today that Jindal issued an executive order barring state funds from going to the community organizing group. However, there’s one small kink in Jindal’s plan:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal issued an executive order to keep any state money from going to the controversy-wracked Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which has its national headquarters in New Orleans.

According to the state’s Division of Administration, no state agencies have existing contracts with ACORN.

Wonkette: Bobby Jindal Also Cuts Off Non-Existent Funding To Those ACORN Blacks

Right wing websites respond in kind. Bobby Jindal Halts Funding Of ACORN

UPDATE: Chad Bower of WWLTV.com contacted me earlier and said that two contracts were just discovered that allegedly would pay state funds to ACORN:

The Department of Social Services has identified two contracts that would allegedly have given ACORN federal and state funds under a tax assistance program, and the Governor's Office has told the department to halt that funding.

{}

The two contracts – one for Southeast Louisiana, lead by Total Community Action, Inc., and the other for Southwest Louisiana, lead by the United Way of Southwest Louisiana – included ACORN as a part of the two groups proposals for the 2009 – 2010 tax season, said Frank Collins, a spokesman with the Governo's Office.

Collins said the proposals included ACORN in the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program, and the group would have received federal funds under the program. Because the contract states that state funds would match the federal funds under the program, the program was in violation of Jindal’s recent executive order.

Collins said the DSS will contact the two coalitions Tuesday and tell them that funding would have to be severed to ACORN because of Jindal’s recent executive order.

I want to thank Chad for emailing me so I could update the story. My post was based on the information that was available at the time and since new news has surfaced I've updated the post. He's still not a bright bulb.

Maybe this sinking feeling in my gut would go away if anyone in the Obama administration bothered to explain the specifics of why they believe indefinite detention is necessary. How can you be so sure someone is too dangerous to release, and yet not have enough evidence to prosecute them?

The Obama administration, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, is drafting an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the facility in Cuba, White House officials are increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may be impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the facility by the president's January deadline.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said there is no executive order and that the administration has not decided whether to issue one. But one administration official suggested that the White House was already trying to build support.

"Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order," the official said. Such an order could be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should be prosecuted or released.

Big Tent Democrat and Glenn Greenwald reactions here.

DOWNLOADS: (2243)

PLAYS: (22771)

Embed

Gen. Petraeus joined FOX News and Martha MacCallum today and gave a blockbuster interview, but probably not the one Fox expected. Once again, he called for the responsible closure of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay. He also said that mistakes were made after 9/11 and that the Army Field Manual is all that we need to use to interrogate prisoners. In addition, he said that we have to have faith in our judicial system and we should try the Khalid Sheikh Muhammads in a court of law.

Martha tried to give him the ticking time bomb scenario to justify torture and he really didn't bite. He did say maybe an Executive Order could be appropriate, but that it really wasn't necessary. Petraeus repudiated pretty much most of what Limbaugh Republicans and the Rove/Newt/Cheney Party have been saying.

(rush transcript)

MacCallum: Where do you think those people should go?

Gen. Petraeus: Well, it's not for a soldier to say. What I do support is what has been termed the responsible closure of Gitmo. Gitmo has caused us problems, there's no question about it. I oversee a region in which the existence of Gitmo has been used by the enemy against us. We have not been without missteps or mistakes in our activity since 9/11 and again Gitmo is a lingering reminder for the use of some in that regard.

MacCallum: What about the concern that a Khalid Sheikh Muhammad or anybody of that ilk might be tried here in a US court and the possibility that some of the treatments that were used on them that they could go free.

Gen. Petraeus: Well, first of all, I don't think we should be afraid of our values we're fighting for, what we stand for. And so indeed we need to embrace them and we need to operationalize them in how we carry out what it is we're doing on the battlefield and everywhere else. So one has to have some faith, I think, in the legal system. One has to have a degree of confidence that individuals that have conducted such extremist activity would indeed be found guilty in our courts of law.

MacCallum: So you're confident that they will never go free.

Gen. Petraeus: I hope that's the case.

MacCallum: (Ticking time bomb scenario)

Gen. Petraeus: ....T here might be an exception and that would require extraordinary but very rapid approval to deal with, but for the vast majority of the cases, our experience downrange if you will, is that the techniques that are in the Army Field Manual that lays out how we treat detainees, how we interrogate them -- those techniques work, that's our experience in this business.

MacCallum: So is sending this signal that we're not going to use these kind of techniques anymore, what kind of impact does this have on people who do us harm in the field that you operate in?

Gen. Petraeus: Well, actually what I would ask is, does that not take away from our enemies a tool which again have beaten us around the head and shoulders in the court of public opinion? When we have taken steps that have violated the Geneva Conventions, we rightly have been criticized, so as we move forward I think it's important to again live our values, to live the agreements that we have made in the international justice arena and to practice those.

Wow, there was a lot in that interview. I couldn't transcribe it all. He admits that we violated the Geneva Convention. Is he saying that the Bush/Cheney administration failed our "value system" in their leadership in the two wars and how America responded to the 9/11 attacks?

He obviously is against torture. He is also saying to let the chips fall where they may in prosecuting these detainees and use our legal system to try terror suspects. Martha didn't go into the military commissions, but if they come here, just let them stand trial. All the conservatives and Republicans anointed Gen. Petraeus as the true leader of the wars when George Bush decided he didn't want to take the heat on the war any longer.

Remember when to question him was sacrilegious? Will they now disavow what he is telling them today?

After the interview, the other Fox host predictably tried to intimate that Petraeus was working for Obama now so, ya know, he's in the tank for him. Whatever happened to listening to the generals on the ground being critical to our "victory" in Iraq? He said that our values as a country do change in a time of war -- a scary notion -- so Bush is just all right. Don't they ever give up with their Bush-hero worshiping?

How long will it take Rush Limbaugh to lash out at the General? What about Newt and Rove?

Bushsecrecy.org

Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix...President Harry S. Truman

Harry Truman understood the importance of open government in a free society.

George W.Bush does not.

From the first days of his administration, President Bush has taken steps to tighten the government's hold on information and limit public scrutiny of its activities. Expansive assertions of executive privilege, restrictive views of the Freedom of Information Act, increasing use of national security classification, stonewalling in response to congressional requests for information - all these were evident even before the September 11 attacks. Since then, the clamps on information have only tightened.

Here, Public Citizen chronicles and documents the administration's obsession with secrecy, as well as the steps we, and others, are taking to fight it. By clicking on the links provided here, you can reach up-to-date summaries of each of the administration's major secrecy initiatives, with additional links from those summaries to key documents, such as executive orders, congressional materials, judicial decisions, and legal briefs filed by both sides in the court battles raging over these issues. We'll also provide links to other resources on the web, as well as information about how you can use the Freedom of Information Act to take on government secrecy yourself.

In the long run, we don't think Americans will put up with a government that operates on the principle of keeping them in ignorance. The more light we shine on these, the better. More

Liar, liar, Grampa McSame pants on fire. Clearly, McCain is not used to the YouTube generation where you can no longer lie without a bunch of bloggers furiously fact-checking. And the facts for McCain, they don't look so good.

Progressive Accountability:

McCain Defended Opposition Of Federal MLK Holiday By Saying He Supported Arizona's State Holiday. During a press availability in Panama City, Florida, John McCain said, "I have supported hundreds of pieces of legislation, which would help Americans obtain an equal opportunity in America. I am proud of that record, from fighting for the recognition of Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday in my state to sponsoring specific legislation that would prevent discrimination in any shape or form in America today." [McCain Press Availability In Panama City, Florida, 8/1/08]

• FACT: McCain Supported Republican AZ Governor's Decision To Rescind MLK Holiday. ABC News reported, "In Arizona, a bill to recognize a holiday honoring MLK failed in the legislature, so then-Gov. Bruce Babbitt, a Democrat, declared one through executive order. In January 1987, the first act of Arizona's new governor, Republican Evan Mecham, was to rescind the executive order by his predecessor to create an MLK holiday. Arizona's stance became a national controversy. McCain backed the decision at the time." [ABC News, 4/3/08]

• FACT: McCain Supported Gov. Evan Mecham's Decision In 1987 To Rescind Martin Luther King Jr. Day. As reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer, "In a vote likely to haunt him for the rest of his public career, McCain voted against 1983 legislation establishing the third Monday in January as the federal holiday marking King's birthday. Back home in Arizona, he supported Gov. Evan Mecham's decision in 1987 to rescind an executive order creating a state holiday for King, but later reversed his position." [Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/16/08]

• FACT: McCain Voted Against Creating Martin Luther King Holiday. In 1983, McCain voted against a motion to suspend the rules and pass a bill to designate the third Monday of every January as a federal holiday in honor of the late civil rights leader, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The motion passed 89-77. [HR 3706, Vote 289, 8/2/83; CQ 1983]

He's tried to back pedal that this was some youthful ignorance on his part, but he was 48 years old when he voted against the MLK holiday. As much as I'd like to characterize 48 as youthful--and trust me, nothing would make me happier, that just isn't going to fly.

(full disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign)

I wanted to report back on my post from Friday, warning that Gov. Schwarzengger was about to cut over 200,000 state worker's salaries down to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 -- a ploy in a political game being played by the Governor. He's trying to hold state workers hostage to try and place pressure on the Democrats instead of the Republicans who are holding up the budget.

Today, I have good news and bad news. It's Arnold's birthday. No, that's not the good news.

The good news is that over 28,000 of you stepped up and signed the petition to Schwarzenegger. The same day, he delayed signing the executive order that would have put the policy into effect.

The bad news is that he only delayed it to Thursday.

We delivered your petitions to the Governor on Monday and created a funny, snarky video you can see above, about our adventure trying to get someone to accept the darn petitions. It helped to have an Assemblymember along with us and a bunch of cameras and reporters, or else we would have been sent straight to the mailroom.

We have about 24 hours until the Governor signs the executive order. Which means we still have time today to pressure Arnold to stop holding state workers hostage to his political budget negotiation games.

On behalf of hundreds of thousands of state workers, please pick up your phone right now and call Arnold. Click here for the phone number and a form to report back your call.

UPDATE: We've already received some interesting call reports, like this one from Gary:

Staff member tried to convince me that things will be alright with our finances because my partner, who is a teacher, can get a zero-interest loan since the banks know that the employees will be getting the money eventually. I told her that we didn't want to be pawns in their political games and that the governor & legislature need to work it out. She said she would pass it along.