Reporting from Washington and Beijing – In a decision that could roil trade tensions with Beijing, President Obama agreed Friday to impose hefty tariffs on tires imported from China.

The decision came after the U.S. International Trade Commission, a federal agency, determined that a surge of Chinese-made tires had disrupted the domestic market and cost thousands of jobs in the U.S.

Within 15 days, the U.S. would add a duty of 35% in the first year, 30% in the second and 25% in the third on passenger vehicle and light-truck tires from China. That is less than the 55% tariff recommended by the trade panel, but analysts said it would still be large enough to keep most Chinese tires out of the competitive U.S. market.

“The president decided to remedy the clear disruption to the U.S. tire industry based on the facts and the law in this case,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement.

The decision was a victory for the United Steelworkers union, which filed the complaint in May. The union represents about half of the more than 30,000 tire production workers in the U.S.

Victory for the union… loss for everyone else. Hundreds of years of economic theory and reality showing this kind of shit is bad for everyone involved isn’t enough for Obama and friends. Selling the many down the river for a short term benefit for the few.

“Unfortunately, there are some elements here who will call this protectionism,” Shi said. “But I don’t think it will have that much of a negative impact. The volume of trade is still very large.”

Other analysts disagreed, saying Beijing would take the decision very seriously. Some in the Chinese tire industry warned of retaliation.

There’s definately a part of me that wants China to retaliate. Bring on Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act Part 2.

Related posts:

1. China tells US what’s up: Don’t devalue the dollar!
2. China threatens to sell off their USD reserves
3. Timothy Geithner gets laughed at, unfortunately not off the stage

The White House is facing mounting pressure from lawmakers to work harder to rally flagging public support for the war in Afghanistan.

With casualties rising, the administration is struggling to persuade voters that the war can be won or is worth the human and financial costs. Afghanistan is President Barack Obama’s top foreign-policy priority, but recent polls show that a majority of voters oppose the war for the first time since the conflict began eight years ago.

The Afghan war’s shifting political fortunes could make it harder for the administration to sell the public on the need for further expanding the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama has already agreed to send 21,000 American reinforcements, pushing U.S. troop levels there to a record 68,000, and the top American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is expected to ask for tens of thousands of additional troops later this month.

Related posts:

1. Obama keeping the military industrial complex well fed
2. Obama approves sending 12,000 troops to Afghanistan.
3. More endorsement of war by the “peace candidate”

“Marijuana is dangerous and has no medicinal benefit.”
– White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske, at a Fresno, Calif., press conference yesterday (http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/1553061.html )

Not again.

In fact — and it’s getting a little tiresome to keep repeating it — the esteemed Institute of Medicine, American Nurses Association, American Public Health Association, American Academy of HIV Medicine, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Lymphoma Foundation of America, American Academy of HIV Medicine, and dozens of other medical organizations recognize marijuana’s medical value.

What’s more, President Obama’s own statements on the campaign trail about marijuana’s medical efficacy run counter to his new drug czar’s statements yesterday.

We need to stop this in its tracks. Would you please speak out against this ridiculous, outdated argument:

1. Please use MPP’s online action center at http://control.mpp.org/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=SplashPage&id=358 to e-mail the president about the drug czar’s statement.

2. Please call the drug czar’s office at (202) 395-6700 to politely complain that we’re still hearing this sort of nonsense.

We need to make sure the drug czar receives the message loud and clear that the anti-science Bush era is over.

Thank you,

Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.

P.S. As I’ve mentioned in previous alerts, a major philanthropist has committed to match the first $2.35 million that MPP can raise from the rest of the planet in 2009. This means that your donation today at http://control.mpp.org/site/Donation2?idb=0&df_id=1180&1180.donation=form1&s_src=NA_072309 will be doubled.

Related posts:

1. That didn’t last long: DEA raids San Fran Medical Marijuana Clinic
2. NJ Senate to Vote on Medical Marijuana Bill on Monday
3. White House Czar Calls for End to ‘War on Drugs’

Dear bile,

I just returned from this year’s National Conference on Volunteering and Service in San Francisco, an outstanding event where more than 4,000 service leaders gathered to celebrate our achievements and plan the path forward.

This is an extraordinary moment for our movement, with a new law on the books promising unprecedented federal resources for service; people across the country becoming more engaged in their communities than we’ve seen in a long time; and a President and First Lady in the White House who come from the service world, and who want service and civic engagement to become a part of every American’s life.

So many terrific ideas came out of the event, and you’ll be hearing more about them in the weeks and months to come. But before that, we need you to become a part of this discussion.

Our supporters on the ground are the ones who powered us from the beginning.  And today, it’s your input and your ideas that will carry us forward as we plot out the next steps for this organization – and for the service movement as a whole.

Please fill out this short survey – your feedback will help shape the future of ServiceNation:

http://www.servicenation.org/survey

If you didn’t make it to the Conference, there’s a lot to fill you in on. Here are a few of the highlights from the event:

-    The crowd gave a hero’s welcome to Michelle Obama, the keynote speaker, who talked passionately about the White House’s commitment to service and the need to find innovative ways to expand it.

-    I had the honor of interviewing Maria Shriver, the First Lady of California, about her path-breaking efforts to strengthen service in that state. (More to come about that interview in a follow-up message.)

-   The Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF) announced a week-long October campaign to promote service on all the major TV networks. This is a big opportunity to get new people involved in service, and it’s something we’ll all be hearing much more about in the months ahead. As part of the announcement, we were treated to a terrific concert from Jon Bon Jovi, a longtime friend of the service community who came to the Conference as a representative of EIF.

-    ServiceNation also was proud to host a luncheon for hundreds of service champions.  Melody Barnes, President Obama’s chief domestic policy advisor, spoke movingly about the future of service in America, and all the attendees participated in a strategy discussion led by Arianna Huffington, EIF’s Lisa Paulsen, and Colin Jones, a current AmeriCorps VISTA serving with the program BUILD in San Francisco.

With so many people across the country spending time this week to talk about what’s next for the service movement, it’s absolutely essential that you get involved in the discussion. We want to know more about you, your impressions of the work we’ve done so far, and your thoughts on where we should go from here.

Please fill out the survey today:

http://www.servicenation.org/survey

Thanks – we’ll be following up with more takeaways from the Conference soon.

Alan

The multiple choice sections are limited but there are opened ended areas to let Alan and friends know that we don’t appreciate the move toward national servitude.

Related posts:

1. Facebook partnering with Service Nation
2. Be The Change, Inc asks for blogging opportunity to clarify their position and involvement on National Service
3. My brief interview with BonJoviBarcelona.com about the Service Nation Summit

The Obama administration is fighting to block access to names of visitors to the White House, taking up the Bush administration argument that a president doesn’t have to reveal who comes calling to influence policy decisions.

Despite President Barack Obama’s pledge to introduce a new era of transparency to Washington, and despite two rulings by a federal judge that the records are public, the Secret Service has denied msnbc.com’s request for the names of all White House visitors from Jan. 20 to the present. It also denied a narrower request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sought logs of visits by executives of coal companies.

CREW says it will file a lawsuit Tuesday against the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service.

What he meant was that he’d be totally transparent about what he’s hiding from everyone. See… now everything makes sense.

Related posts:

1. Obama administration looking to ban scary looking guns again
2. Paul delegates reporting that Secret Service confiscated RP materials
3. Another Obama deception: administration looks to subvert bailout rules

President Barack Obama, trying to bolster an economy he says still has a “long way to go,” announced 10 projects aimed at accelerating job creation, according to the administration.

The plans are meant to boost the effectiveness of a $787 billion stimulus measure sought by Obama and approved by Congress in February. The projects, including improvements to parks, highways and veterans medical facilities, will be the focus of recovery efforts during the next three months, an administration statement says.

The projects are intended create or save more than 600,000 jobs, about four times as many as were affected during the first 100 days since the rescue bill became law, the White House release says.

Construction equipment manufacturers Caterpillar Inc. and Deere & Co. are among companies that may benefit from federal contracts for some of the work.

The new projects are being framed as the beginning of a “summer of accelerated Recovery Act activity” by the administration and include new services at health centers in 50 states, work on 107 national parks, improvements at airports, highway locations and veterans’ medical facilities. They will also provide funding for schools to hire more teachers.

Vice President Joe Biden, who later today will present Obama with the administration’s latest economic stimulus goals, said a “good foundation” was laid in the first 100 days of the Recovery Act.

“We plan to build on that foundation and accelerate our efforts so we can accomplish even more,” Biden said in a statement. “We’re going to get more dollars out the door, more shovels into the ground and more money into the pockets of workers and families who need it most.”

Glad I can help out Caterpillar and Deere. And all those people to get busy work hanging out at 107 national parks. I’m glad that the government puts the cart in front of the horse by expecting a healthy economy to spring up from putting people to work rather then people fulfilling the demand of labor of a healthy economy.

Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson must be to the politicians like Slim Whitman’s Indian Love Call is to Martians.

Related posts:

1. Michael Moore’s eco-fascism
2. The increasingly corporatist state: Obama names Aneesh Chopra as US government CTO
3. Why the stereotype that businessmen would be good politicians is dangerous

The Obama administration’s new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting “a war on drugs,” a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.

In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation’s drug issues.

“Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them,” he said. “We’re not at war with people in this country.”

The Obama administration is likely to deal with drugs as a matter of public health rather than criminal justice alone, with treatment’s role growing relative to incarceration, Mr. Kerlikowske said.

The administration also said federal authorities would no longer raid medical-marijuana dispensaries in the 13 states where voters have made medical marijuana legal. Agents had previously done so under federal law, which doesn’t provide for any exceptions to its marijuana prohibition.

James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, the nation’s largest law-enforcement labor organization, said that while he holds Mr. Kerlikowske in high regard, police officers are wary.

“While I don’t necessarily disagree with Gil’s focus on treatment and demand reduction, I don’t want to see it at the expense of law enforcement. People need to understand that when they violate the law there are consequences.”

1. You can’t convince people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product’ because that’s impossible and just as ridiculous as a ‘war on terror’ or ‘war on a tactic.’ They see it as a war on them because it is. Drug and products exist only because people desire them. You must go after the actor behind the drug or product. The user or seller or manufacturer. Whenever you prohibit something you will enveitably make that problem worse and cause negative side effects you didn’t account for. Whether that be drugs, guns, prostitution or fast food.
2. While forced treatment is likely better than forced incarceration you will still have asset forfeiture happening. You’re still forcing people to do something against their will for what was likely a consensual, non-violent, voluntary ‘crime.’
3. Treating it as a ‘health’ issue doesn’t make me feel any better. Health in general but specifically mental health has been a tool used by violent fascist governments throughout time to remove those who they disagreed with. Many states in the USA practiced eugenics before Hitler or anyone else. Many regimes would use vague mental ‘disorders’ to lock up political advisories in padded rooms and in most countries including the United States you can be held practically forever without the same well documented legal rights that a normally imprisoned individual has. Not that that always helps.
4. Medical-marijuana dispensary raids? Oh yes because that promise was so well kept. I’m totally going to just ignore all of Obama’s lies and believe his drug ‘czar’ on this one.
5. This has been said many times but… czar? Really? Must they be so blatantly power hungry? I’ve no doubt these guys think of themselves as little emperors. It’s sick.
6. Even if treatment goes up will incarceration go down? Will he ask Obama to release/pardon all or some or even one of the non-violent federally held drug ‘criminals?’ The USA has the largest prison population both in total number of prisoners and per capita. The prison system is one of the fastest growing industries. To make room for non-violent drug offenders California last I heard was planning on releasing violent prisoners out early. Seems wrong on several levels.
7. Oh… and what about obeying the actual laws of the land Mr. Kerlikowske? You know… the US Constitution? The 9th and 10th Amendments. Would you be so kind as to point out the section in Article 1 that gives congress the power to pass such prohibitions?
8. Of course James Pasco is wary of the proposed changes. As he says: “I don’t want to see it as an expense of law enforcement.” What he really means is that he doesn’t want the war on drugs to shrink because then he may not get the funding or get to use his fun SWAT equipment as much. Can’t have a reduction in the police state. Gotta keep them boys employed. Can’t make it look like they aren’t enforcing the rule of law. Even though they are breaking their oath to be peace officers and to the Constitution regularly.

Related posts:

1. Obama’s “drug czar”, Gil Kerlikowske, declares marijuana has no medical value
2. Cops use excessive force, plant drugs
3. John Stossel: Legalize All Drugs

http://www.nydailynews.com/…

The government agency that bungled the Hurricane Katrina response has yanked a kiddie coloring book from its site called “A Scary Thing Happened” that depicts the burning twin towers on the cover – with a plane heading straight for one of them.

On page 12, the stomach-churning 9/11 image is repeated not once but three times, complete with flames – for kids to color.

“You might hear about it again and again on the T.V. or radio or read about it in the newspaper,” it says on the page.

The Federal Emergency Management Association pulled the downloadable coloring book from its site last week — before a White House genius gave New York a 9/11 flashback by buzzing the city with one of the presidential planes and an F-16 jet.

“FEMA is currently reviewing all web content designed and posted by the previous administration,” said FEMA spokesman Clark Stevens.

The coloring book is rather silly. I don’t care really that it was created or removed besides it was a waste of money. I’m really just posting this to provide a mirror. Enjoy.

Related posts:

1. Obama administration looking to ban scary looking guns again
2. What happened at the Paulson / bank heads meeting?
3. Whatever Happened To Inflation Targets?

The Obama administration will ask Congress for another $83.4 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the end of September, Democratic congressional sources said Thursday.

The request is expected to pay for those conflicts for the rest of the 2009 budget year, two Democratic congressional sources said.

The money would bring the running tab for both conflicts to about $947 billion, according to figures from the Congressional Research Service.

More than three-quarters of the $864 billion appropriated so far has gone to the war in Iraq, where most of the U.S. troops involved in those conflicts have been deployed, the agency estimated.

Since taking office in January, President Obama has announced plans to shift troops out of Iraq and beef up U.S. forces in Afghanistan, where American troops have been battling al Qaeda and Taliban fighters since al Qaeda’s 2001 attacks.

The additional money is needed “to fund the new strategy in Afghanistan and fund the process in Iraq that will lead to a drawdown of all of our combat troops,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

About $75 billion of the requested funds would pay for military operations, with the rest going to diplomatic programs and development aid.

The measure is likely to be the last supplemental request submitted to Congress to pay for the wars.

Likely the last supplemental request? Is it the last just like the DEA raids in California were to stop?

Related posts:

1. It is good to be part of the Military Industrial Complex
2. Obama approves sending 12,000 troops to Afghanistan.
3. Obama ‘approved 13,000 more troops’ to Afghanistan

Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF’s litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration’s made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue “would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security.” As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It’s an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration “invoked a legal tool known as the ’state secrets’ privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court.” He was right then, and we’re dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it’s the Department Of Justice’s second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way.

Previously, the Bush Administration has argued that the U.S. possesses “sovereign immunity” from suit for conducting electronic surveillance that violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA is only one of several laws that restrict the government’s ability to wiretap. The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes.

Again, the gulf between Candidate Obama and President Obama is striking. As a candidate, Obama ran promising a new era of government transparency and accountability, an end to the Bush DOJ’s radical theories of executive power, and reform of the PATRIOT Act. But, this week, Obama’s own Department Of Justice has argued that, under the PATRIOT Act, the government shall be entirely unaccountable for surveilling Americans in violation of its own laws.

This isn’t change we can believe in. This is change for the worse.

Do I need to repeat myself about how I don’t think this is the change people were expecting?

I caught this comment on Slashdot about this story that I really liked.

It is my position that Bush was a horrible president because he weakened our constitution, was an ugly warmonger, and spent money like it was water.

It is my position that Obama is about the same with the only difference being who gets some of the wastefully spent money.

Both “sides” treat the populace like we’re their own public goatse waiting patiently to get stretched just a bit wider by some Republican prick or a Democratic cock.

If only that could be the image people imagined when someone said “Republican” or “Democrat.” Third parties would have no problem getting into office. Perhaps that could be the attack plan for 2012. Splice in a single frame of goatse.cx once in a while during R and D presidential debate feeds.

Related posts:

1. EFF and ACLU warrantless surveillance lawsuit thrown out by federal court
2. Obama thinks surveillance laws of the Patriot Act is just swell
3. Obama Administration defends warrantless wiretapping