Rachel Maddow reports on the deadly snow storm that had dumped feet of snow on upstate New York in a matter of hours and contrasts that emergency with the Missouri governor's pre-emptive panic over the potential for violence in St. Louis. watch
Rachel Maddow shares a photo of someone facing a daunting quantity of snow to clean up - a "state of emergency" amount of snow, and teases to and upcoming segment about another state of emergency over something less apparent. watch
Mark Collette, investigative reporter at the Houston Chronicle, talks with Rachel Maddow about a deadly leak at a DuPont chemical plant in Texas and the alarming lack of information about the nature of the leak at the time and still today. watch
Rachel Maddow points out that one thing Senate Democrats could have been doing instead of going through the empty show of holding a meaningless vote on the Keystone XL pipeline is approve Loretta Lynch, President Obama's nominee for Attorney General, whil watch
Rachel Maddow notes that the ultimate outcome of the Keystone XL pipeline bill was foreseeable, whether by vote or veto, and was not likely to help Mary Landrieu’s campaign either way, so why did Senate Democrats waste valuable time with it? watch
Rachel Maddow notes that the newly announced House Republican committee chairs have a remarkable consistency about them, suggesting that maybe Republicans no longer feel that diversity is important to electoral success. watch
* Israel: "Two Palestinians stormed a Jerusalem synagogue, opening fire and using knives and axes to attack Jews praying inside, officials said Tuesday. Four rabbis were killed -- including three dual U.S.-Israeli nationals -- and six other people wounded."
* Afghanistan: "A suicide attack targeted a base for foreign contract workers in Kabul on Tuesday morning, killing at least two security guards, the authorities said. The attack involved a truck laden with gravel and explosives, which detonated near the gate of the base in the northeastern part of the capital around 6:30 a.m.... The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack."
* Not good: "Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) has declared a state of emergency and activated the state national guard in anticipation of a grand jury decision in the shooting of Michael Brown by Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson. But when asked Monday night if he was ultimately responsible for the coming response to any protests that might follow the decision, Nixon emphatically and loquaciously demurred."
* Look for a Keystone vote in the Senate in the early evening, perhaps even within the next half-hour. With Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) opposed, proponents are struggling to get to 60.
* Third time's the charm?: "A lawyer has agreed to take on House Speaker John Boehner's lawsuit against President Barack Obama, though such a case has yet to be filed at all. George Washington University legal scholar Jonathan Turley agreed to represent Boehner and House Republicans in their possible future legal action against the president, NBC News' Mark Murray reported Tuesday afternoon. Turley is a frequent commentator on MSNBC and other news networks."
* Ebola: "The international effort to stamp out Ebola in West Africa is gaining ground, but the war is far from over. 'We are nowhere near out of the woods yet,' President Obama told reporters Tuesday at the White House as he met with national security and public health advisers, including Ebola response coordinator Ron Klain."
* Another vote to watch: "The Senate is scheduled to vote Tuesday night on whether to consider legislation to end a once-secret National Security Agency program that systematically collects records of Americans' phone calls in bulk. But opposition to the bill has been mounting, and there remains no guarantee that it will receive the 60 votes it needs to move forward."
A strange sort of assumption has taken root inside the Beltway, which is likely to be quite consequential in the coming weeks. The assumption is odd, but simple: President Obama using executive-branch powers on immigration would make Republicans really angry, ergo, President Obama should not use his executive-branch powers on immigration.
The result of this line of thought is a shift in responsibilities: if GOP lawmakers flip out, shut down the government, refuse to govern, and ponder impeachment, this will be entirely the president's fault. After all, the argument goes, Obama knew governing would make Republicans angry, but he chose to govern anyway.
David Brooks endorsed the thesis in a column today, insisting the president "has been superaggressive on the one topic sure to blow everything up."
I sympathize with what Obama is trying to do substantively, but the process of how it's being done is ruinous.
Republicans would rightly take it as a calculated insult and yet more political ineptitude. Everybody would go into warfare mode. We'll get two more years of dysfunction that will further arouse public disgust and antigovernment fervor (making a Republican presidency more likely).
Let me get this straight. There's a policy problem. Congressional Republicans have chosen to ignore the problem. Obama has the legal authority to address the problem without Congress, just as many of his predecessors have done. But the president should let the problem fester anyway, Brooks tells us, because Republicans would see governing solutions as an "insult."
Is this how a superpower governs in the 21st century? Federal policymaking crawls to a halt because a radicalized party had its feelings hurt by the big bad president? The one who's a meanie for having the audacity to see a problem and try to fix it while a do-nothing Congress gives itself another vacation, sees its productivity drop to unprecedented levels, and prioritizes stunts over problem-solving?
"Republicans would rightly take it as a calculated insult"? Here's a crazy thought: grown-ups in positions of power and authority shouldn't fall to pieces so easily. Republicans have spent six years trying to destroy the Obama presidency. They remain committed to sabotaging every major White House initiative. They've voted to repeal Obama's signature domestic policy initiative several dozen times for no particular reason other than partisan posturing. They shut down the government and quite literally threatened to crash the global economy, on purpose, unless their demands were met in the 2011 debt-ceiling crisis.
And yet, President Obama didn't see any of this as a "calculated insult" and he remains eager to work with the wild-eyed partisans who've rebuffed every attempt at governing.
So why is David Brooks complaining so bitterly about the president's behavior?
Rush Limbaugh is now telling his audience the federal government "damn well needs to be shut down" because President Obama intends to take executive actions on immigration policy. Erick Erickson is thinking along the same lines, pushing for a shutdown in a blog post, and reminding his Republican allies that their party has never actually faced adverse consequences from their previous shutdowns, so they have no incentive to back off now.
All of this appears to be causing some anxiety for GOP leaders on Capitol Hill.
As we discussed yesterday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is counting heads and coming to the realization that he may not have the votes needed to keep the government's lights on. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is "worried" about the direction of the debate and circulating materials to his members arguing against a shutdown standoff.
And Politicoreports that Republican leaders in both chambers are scrambling to find a way out of the mess.
Republican leaders have intensified their planning to prevent a government funding showdown, weighing legislative options that would redirect GOP anger at Barack Obama's expected action on immigration and stave off a political disaster, according to sources involved with the sessions. [...]
Speaker John Boehner, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and their top aides and deputies are mulling several options that would give Capitol Hill Republicans the opportunity to vent their frustration with what they view as an unconstitutional power grab by the White House -- without jeopardizing the government financing bill.
Let's note for the record that neither Boehner nor McConnell are especially strong leaders who demand the loyalty and fealty of their members -- this isn't a situation in which Republican leaders simply tell the rank-and-file members how it's going to be, with an expectation that the conference will fall in line. Today's GOP leaders simply don't have that kind of influence over their ostensible followers.
Instead, they're floating a series of alternatives intended to placate the far-right while preventing another self-imposed crisis.
It was just last month when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) sat down with the editorial board of the Cincinnati Enquirer, which raised the question of global warming. McConnell said he doesn't know whether or not climate change is real because -- let's all say it together -- "I'm not a scientist."
But that was last month. Today, McConnell has discovered that he's a science enthusiast after all. Rebecca Leber reported this morning:
In remarks on the Senate floor, hours before a vote on a bill that fast-tracks construction of the [Keystone XL pipeline], McConnell pointed to the "science" supporting the legislation.
"Those who took a serious look at the science and the potential benefits reached the conclusion long ago," he said Tuesday. "They understand that the whole drama over Keystone has been as protracted as it is unnecessary. We hope to turn the page on all of that today."
Oh, I see. When Republicans want an oil pipeline, it's incumbent on policymakers to take "a serious look at the science."
But when policymakers are asked to address a global climate crisis, a political party is comfortable playing dumb?
Today's installment of campaign-related news items that won't necessarily generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:
* Outgoing Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) called Sen.-elect Dan Sullivan (R) to concede the race. The net gain for Republicans in the 2014 Senate now stands at eight seats.
* In the year's final Senate race, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) is facing Rep. Bill Cassidy (R) in a Dec. 6 runoff, and in the latest twist, the NRA's Legislative Action lobbying arm is running attack ads against the incumbent. There's ample evidence that the centrist Democrat is being swamped on Louisiana airwaves.
* In a big surprise, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced yesterday that Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) will be the new chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He was not considered one of the finalists for the position.
* And speaking of Pelosi, the House Democratic conference unanimously chose to keep the Minority Leader in her current post.
* To the surprise of no one, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) is wrapping up his tenure as chairman of the Republican Governors Association, though it's unclear who'll next take the reins.
This was supposed to be the day when the superintendent of public schools in Gilbert, Arizona, would present a plan (pdf) for redacting the kids' honors biology textbooks. The Tea Party majority on the school board voted last month to remove references to abortion from the books, which have been in use for several years now in the district. The board ordered the superintendent to figure out how to do it.
"The cheapest, least disruptive way to solve the problem is to remove the page," said board member Daryl Colvin.
Board president Staci Burk told the Arizona Republic that parents had already volunteered to help with the redacting, whether by tearing out the pages or cutting out the paragraphs with scissors or blacking them out with a Sharpie. Even after voters undid the Tea Party majority in the elections this month, Burk told us that she expected the superintendent to report back today with a plan for carrying out the board's order. "I don't believe there will be any more discussion on the textbooks," she said.
The board may have failed to account for the opinion of the superintendent herself. read more