• Chance to limit warming squandered, says scientist
• World needs to prepare to cope with at least 3-4C rise

Climate change sceptics and fossil fuel companies that have lobbied against action on greenhouse gas emissions have squandered the world's chance to avoid dangerous global warming, a key adviser to the government has said.

Professor Bob Watson, chief scientist at the department for environment and rural affairs, said a decade of inaction on climate change meant it was now virtually impossible to limit global temperature rise to 2C. He said the delay meant the world would now do well to stabilise warming between 3C and 4C.

His comments come ahead of key UN negotiations on a new global climate treaty in Copenhagen next month that the UK government insists should still aim for a 2C goal, despite doubts over whether a meaningful deal can be sealed.

In an interview with the Guardian, Watson said: "Those that have opposed a deal on climate, which would include elements of the fossil fuel industry, have clearly made making a 2C target much, much harder, if not impossible. They've clearly put the world at risk of far more adverse effects of climate change."

The decision of former US president George W Bush to walk away from the Kyoto protocol, the existing global treaty on carbon emissions, sent a message to other countries not to act, he said. "The last decade was a lost opportunity. Elements within the fossil fuel industry clearly had major implications for the Bush administration."

He added: "I think they've clearly been partly to blame, without any question at all. But you have to say it is not just the fossil lobby. Within the US, there is not strong support for the Kyoto protocol in both parties. Even Obama now will have to persuade a still somewhat sceptical Senate that we should be doing this."

The Copenhagen talks are not expected to deliver a legally binding treaty as originally hoped, but could still make progress on issues such as emissions cuts for rich countries and financial assistance for the developing world. A strong agreement rests on how far Obama is willing to push towards strong carbon cuts in the US.

European officials fear the agreement could eventually do no better than return emissions in 2020 to 1990 levels; scientists say they must fall by 25-40% to have a good chance of staying within the 2C limit.

Watson, a former head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said: "I think we will do well to stabilise between 3 and 4C. Even that is going to take strong political action to decarbonise the energy system and to require us peaking greenhouse gas emissions in the next 10 or more years," he said. "We have to make sure we understand what it would mean to see 3-4C. How would we adapt our agriculture, our water resources, coastal protection and human health systems."

A Guardian poll this year showed that almost nine out of 10 climate scientists thought the 2C target would be missed.

The British government last month published a map that laid out the stark details of a world warmer by 4C. It showed that the rise would not be evenly spread across the globe, with temperature rises much larger than 4C in high latitudes such as the Arctic. Because the sea warms more slowly, average land temperature will increase by 5.5C, which scientists said would shrink yields for all major cereal crops on all regions of production. A 4C rise would also have a major impact on water availability, with supplies limited to an extra billion people by 2080.

Watson backed controversial calls for research into geoengineering techniques, such as blocking the sun, as a way to head off dangerous temperature rise – one of the most senior figures so far to do so. "We should at least be looking at it. I would see what the theoretical models say, and ask ourselves the question: how can we do medium-sized experiments in the field?"

Such an effort could divert attention and funds from efforts to cut carbon and switch to cleaner technology, he said. "I think it should be a real international effort, so it isn't just the UK funding it."

United Press International

Today as you celebrate I'd like to thank everyone, from the background singers to the secretaries, for helping to make this truly American art form possible

ArtsJournal

With Michelle, Sasha and Malia and Obama in the White House and in the post-Cosby Show era, people can't say these are the only images out there.

I spoke with leaders in every nation I visited about what we can do to sustain this economic recovery and bring back jobs and prosperity for our people — a task I will continue to focus on relentlessly in the weeks and months ahead

America's white supremacists may be riddled with competing factions but their vile ideas still seep into the mainstream

Just as Barack Obama's election infused the floundering Democratic party with energy, it breathed new life into the bleaker precincts of the American polity. Obama's political progress, coupled with the faltering economy, has stoked the anxious racial panic of the country's most myopic, hateful citizens. As the Southern Poverty Law Centre, the department for homeland security [PDF] and the FBI, have noted, the last 12 months has seen the largest rise in hate group enrollment since the early 1990s: in all its forms – white supremacist, anti-Semitic, anti-government, and more – racist demagoguery is experiencing a vile renaissance.

These groups reveal themselves, upon examination, not as aberrations, antithetical to our nation's formal democratic ideals. Rather, the multifaceted chaos of American hate is the stunted, through-the-looking-glass perversion of American pluralism. Though these groups are fueled by bigotry and hatred, their community conforms to models of co-operation and, well, tolerance that are hallmarks of our broader American liberalism.

In a word, these lodestars of American paranoia and violence share the anxiety of white dispossession, an anxiety that trumps doctrinal differences. As I've written elsewhere [http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2009/08/30/tracing_three_decades_of_bigotry_in_the_united_states/] in a discussion of historian Leonard Zeskind's work on white nationalism, these groups inhabit a panicked, racialised nightmare of imperiled entitlement in chilling contrast to the American dream of struggle and accomplishment.

A variety of dispatches from this realm of the feckless and absurd: Over the summer in Arizona, affiliates of the White Aryan Resistance were indicted for a mail-bombing a diversity office, and the leader the Minuteman American Defense was charged with the murder of a Latino man and his nine-year-old daughter. Currently playing on Youtube screens across the country, Pale Horse, a masked member of the Ohio State Militia, exhorts viewers to stockpile food and purchase assault rifles – like the one he cradles in the video – in preparation for the inevitable, imminent Nazification of the US (the preoccupation that quasi-fascist militias have with a creeping Nazism within the US government is a related, fascinating issue). In Brockton, Massachusetts, on the day after Obama's inauguration, a recently radicalized man perpetrated two race-motivated murders.

The list would be endless if one could stomach an accounting of the innumerable meetings by the KKK and similar groups, the political campaigns motivated by anti-semitism, and "POW" events, where groups of likeminded white-nationalists throw a party to raise money for their incarcerated colleagues, considered casualties of an ongoing race war.

It will be argued that the pluralism of American hate can be more precisely described as factionalism. Insofar as this is true it is one of the fortunate outcomes of hate's strident nature. Internecine squabbles over the most imminent of the imminent threats to "real" Americans – are the Jews or blacks or gays or immigrants running the country into the ground? Or is it the guilt-driven progressives that love them who are responsible? – hinder any cooperation between groups. This creates a civilizing discord, at least at the organisational level. The groups rarely form lasting recruitment or programmatic alliances.

But this inability to form lasting partnerships does not diminish the efficacy of their ideas. As the Southern Poverty Law Centre has noted, one of the disturbing hallmarks of this recent surge in hate group activity is the "extent to which it has gained support form elected officials and mainstream media outlets." The names are familiar – Glenn Beck, Rick Perry, David Duke, Pat Buchanan, and, until his unexpected departure from CNN, Lou Dobbs are but a few of the mainstream politicians and pundits ensorcelled by this noxious politics. The conspiracy theories and sophistical arguments endorsed by these men display alarming fidelity with those circulated by multiple hate groups. Beck, in particular, spews an anti-government, anti-minority rhetoric that members of the "patriot" movement, one of the loose signifiers attached to some of these groups, must find refreshingly familiar. Lest we forget, Beck's loyal Fox News audience numbers in the millions.

And so goes the content of our national political debate. Corrosive beliefs travel from the Klavern to the suburbs via our national political media. This fact reveals as naïve my earlier assertion about hate groups being a perversion of American pluralism.

Even as Obama's election has made good on long-delayed promises of equality, the undeniable rise of hate groups and enthusiasm with which their ideas have been adopted by mainstream political pundits proves that these group are a contemptible fulfillment of American pluralism, one more element of the pluralistic society they so ravenously seek to destroy.

White House calls vote 'historic' as Republicans fail to kill off Barack Obama's proposals

Barack Obama's troubled healthcare reforms overcame another obstacle when the Senate voted last night to begin a full debate on the legislation.

The White House described the vote as a "historic" step after the Republicans failed to muster enough support to kill off the proposed reforms.

However, there were indications of more problems ahead for the US president as several senators crucial to winning the vote said they would not support the legislation as it is currently written.

They said this was because of the inclusion of a government-run insurance option, albeit one falling far short of that proposed by Obama after public protests and heavy lobbying by the health insurance industry.

The Senate voted along party lines, with all 58 Democrats and two independents producing exactly the 60 votes necessary to overcome a Republican filibuster.

That opened the way for weeks of what is likely to be robust Senate debate about an increasingly bitter and divisive issue.

The bill drawn up by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, is designed to ensure 94% of Americans are covered by health insurance by – among other things – offering government-run health insurance, alongside private companies, that individual states could opt out of if they objected.

Reid said it was morally right that reform of the US healthcare system, in a country in which half of all bankruptcies are the result of medical bills and half of those are among people who have private health insurance, would now be debated by the full Senate.

"Imagine if, instead of debating whether to abolish slavery, instead of debating whether giving women and minorities a right to vote, those who disagreed were muted, discussion was killed," he added.

Opinion polls have shown that a clear majority of Americans support the inclusion of publicly run health insurance.

But the Republicans have sought to reinvigorate their party after last year's presidential election defeat by rallying opposition to the reforms, arguing that they are socialist, would lead to government bureaucrats controlling which doctors patients saw and would force up taxes.

The chairman of the Republican party, Michael Steele, has said he sees defeating Obama over healthcare as a way of undermining and neutralising his presidency.

But the real challenge for Obama and his allies will be to keep on board those senators who voted in favour of beginning the full debate but said that they would not support the bill as written.

Reid would need all their votes – or to bring on board one or two Republican senators – if the bill is to pass.

The Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, said his party would keep up its fight to kill the legislation, adding: "The battle has just begun."

Read more: Mustangs, Wild Horses, Western Horses, Sheryl Crow Horses, Bureau of Land Management, Ken Salazar, Barack Obama, Cload Foundation, Denver News

Read more: Obama China Policy, Obama Soft on China, Obama China, Dalai Lama, Dalai Lama China, Tibet, Dalai Lama on Obama, Barack Obama, China, World News

For the first time ever, the Senate just voted to begin debate on a comprehensive health insurance reform bill. This was the first big hurdle we had to overcome to pass reform through the full Senate.

The decision was close -- and insurance company lobbyists were working overtime to defeat us -- but your calls this week made a huge difference.

There are more fights ahead, but this is a big victory and I wanted to take a minute to thank you for making it possible.

The Senate is expected to begin debate following the Thanksgiving break. 

Read more: Gerrymandering, Governance, President Obama, Civics, Media, Citizens, American Business, Internet, Politics, One-Party System, Cable News, Global Warming, China, Charlie Rose, Media News

Read more: Harry Reid, Senate, White House, Ted Kennedy, Senate Health Care Bill, Mary Landrieu, Health Care Reform, Obama, Health Bill, Democrats, Senate Bill, Health Care, Blanche Lincoln, Republicans, Politics News

CNN reports:

Proceedings got under way shortly before 10 a.m. Saturday and will last through the early evening.

Around 8 p.m., the Senate will hold a roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture.

Reid needs 60 votes to overcome a certain GOP filibuster attempt and open the chamber's debate on the bill. It also would take 60 votes to close debate that could last for weeks, while final approval of the bill would require only a simple majority.

The full audio of the address is HERE. The video can be viewed online at www.whitehouse.gov.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, November 21, 2009

Hi.  I’m recording this message from Seoul, South Korea, as I finish up my first presidential trip to Asia.  As we emerge from the worst recession in generations, there is nothing more important than to do everything we can to get our economy moving again and put Americans back to work, and I will go anywhere to pursue that goal. 

That’s one of the main reasons I took this trip.  Asia is a region where we now buy more goods and do more trade with than any other place in the world – commerce that supports millions of jobs back home.  It’s also a place where the risk of a nuclear arms race threatens our security, and where extremists plan attacks on America’s soil.  And since this region includes some of the fastest-growing nations, there can be no solution to the challenge of climate change without the cooperation of the Asia Pacific.

With this in mind, I traveled to Asia to open a new era of American engagement.  We made progress with China and Russia in sending a unified message to Iran and North Korea that they must live up to their international obligations and either forsake nuclear weapons or face the consequences.  As the two largest consumers and producers of energy, we developed a host of new clean energy initiatives with China, and our two nations agreed to work toward a successful outcome at the upcoming climate summit in Copenhagen – an outcome that leads to immediate action to reduce carbon pollution.  And I spoke to young men and women at a town hall in Shanghai and across the internet about certain values that we in America believe are universal:  the freedom of worship and speech; the right to access information and choose one’s own leaders. 

But above all, I spoke with leaders in every nation I visited about what we can do to sustain this economic recovery and bring back jobs and prosperity for our people – a task I will continue to focus on relentlessly in the weeks and months ahead. 

This recession has taught us that we can’t return to a situation where America’s economic growth is fueled by consumers who take on more and more debt.  In order to keep growing, we need to spend less, save more, and get our federal deficit under control.  We also need to place a greater emphasis on exports that we can build, produce, and sell to other nations – exports that can help create new jobs at home and raise living standards throughout the world. 

For example, if we can increase our exports to Asia Pacific nations by just 5%, we can increase the number of American jobs supported by these exports by hundreds of thousands.  This is already happening with businesses like American Superconductor Corporation, an energy technology startup based in Massachusetts that’s been providing wind power and smart grid systems to countries like China, Korea, and India.  By doing so, it’s added more than 100 jobs over the last few years. 

Increasing our exports is one way to create new jobs and new prosperity.  But as we emerge from a recession that has left millions without work, we have an obligation to consider every additional, responsible step we can take to encourage and accelerate job creation in this country. That’s why I’ve announced that in the next few weeks, we’ll be holding a forum at the White House on jobs and economic growth. I want to hear from CEOs and small business owners, economists and financial experts, as well as representatives from labor unions and nonprofit groups, about what they think we can do to spur hiring and get this economy moving again.

It is important that we do not make any ill-considered decisions – even with the best of intentions – particularly at a time when our resources are so limited.  But it is just as important that we are open to any demonstrably good idea to supplement the steps we’ve already taken to put America back to work.  That’s what I hope to achieve in this forum.  

Still, there is no forum or policy that can bring all the jobs we’ve lost overnight.  I wish there were, because so many Americans – friends, neighbors, family members – are desperately looking for work.  But even though it will take time, I can promise you this:  we are moving in the right direction; that the steps we are taking are helping; and I will not let up until businesses start hiring again, unemployed Americans start working again, and we rebuild this economy stronger and more prosperous than it was before.  That has been the focus of our efforts these past ten months – and it will continue to be our focus in the months and years to come. 

Thanks. 

Ineluctably, a worm is turning deep inside President Barack Obama's policy of constructive engagement. Mr Obama needs something, somewhere to go right. He has filled audiences in Berlin and Cairo with hope. He has deployed his rich family history to shine a beam on all manner of problems. But there comes a point where vision must give way to results.

A change of tone was implicit this week on his Asian tour. He found a steelier voice on Iran, warning that its refusal to accept the offer of enriching its uranium overseas could trigger international sanctions "within weeks", and he claimed that his twin-track approach of negotiating while ramping up pressure was attracting extraordinary international unity. Extraordinary unity? The administration needs China and Russia to get fresh action approved by the UN, but the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, made no public mention of sanctions at all, while the Russians have been deliberately vague, and their military establishment continues to regard Iran as a good neighbour. The deep reservations of both Moscow and Beijing about sanctions are likely to make the next round symbolic – travel bans, rather than anything affecting oil and gas. There is little iron inside the velvet glove.

China is more likely to stand firm on North Korea, but Mr Obama's determination to isolate a regime which lurches from firing rockets to negotiation could be scuppered by the need to deal with an approaching famine there. Towards the end of his tour, the US president showed welcome flexibility over the hated American military base on the island of Okinawa, but then triggered a great row back home with the misconstrued low bow to the Japanese emperor. China used Mr Obama's appearances like an exotic foreign film, dubbing over his critical utterances on human rights and currency misalignments and turning up the volume for the warm words. So China got what it wanted; the remaining question is whether Mr Obama got anything in return. There was no bankable pledge to revalue the yuan, only a commitment to working closely in partnership on economics, climate and Iran. This slow-burn diplomacy is valuable, but it is no substitute for cutting deals in the political-capital stakes.

No one expects the waters to part when Mr Obama arrives. His difficulty in making headway reflects the miserable foreign policy legacy of George Bush. Afghanistan's continuing military stalemate continues to weaken the American hand. The pressure to show solid results is rapidly building, but Mr Obama must not allow it to force him into rash muscle-flexing, which will lead to a familiar destination of more conflict. Mr Obama needs to hold his nerve and stay true to his instincts.

Sharon Y. Bowen, of New York, to be a Director of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation for a term expiring December 31, 2012, vice Todd S. Farha.

Orlan Johnson, of Maryland, to be a Director of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation for a term expiring December 31, 2011, vice Armando J. Bucelo, Jr., term expired.

Elizabeth L. Littlefield, of the District of Columbia, to be President of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, vice Robert A. Mosbacher, resigned.

Mary Sally Matiella, of Arizona, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Army, vice Nelson M. Ford.

Paul Luis Oostburg Sanz, of Maryland, to be General Counsel of the Department of the Navy, vice Frank R. Jimenez.

Harry K. Thomas, Jr., of New York, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Republic of the Philippines.

Kathleen S. Tighe, of Virginia, to be Inspector General, Department of Education, vice John Portman Higgins, resigned.

Solomon B. Watson IV, of New York, to be General Counsel of the Department of the Army, vice Benedict S. Cohen, resigned.

President Obama said, “These talented and dedicated individuals will be valued additions to my administration as we work to put our country back on the path to prosperity. I look forward to working with them in the coming months and years.”

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals today:

Maria Sally Matiella, Nominee for Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management, Department of Defense
Mary Sally Matiella has 29 years of Federal employment, working in accounting and budget positions with the Army, Air Force, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, and Office of the Secretary of Defense.  She most recently served as Assistant Chief Financial Officer for Accounting at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and has previously served as Chief Financial Officer for U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Staff Accountant for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), and Financial Manager for the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.  Over her Federal career, Ms. Matiella has worked on military installations in the United States, Panama, and Germany. She received her Bachelor of Arts degree and M.B.A. from the University of Arizona.

Paul L. Oostburg Sanz, Nominee for General Counsel of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense
Paul L. Oostburg Sanz is currently the General Counsel of the United States House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services where he has advised on the passage of the annual National Defense Authorization Act; detainee policy; the activities of the Department of Defense to counter the illicit narcotics trade; matters related to the Southern Command, and international legal issues.  From 2001-2006, he was the Deputy Chief Counsel for the Democratic Staff of the Committee on International Relations in the House (HIRC) where he focused on foreign and security assistance as well as the Western Hemisphere, in addition to his counsel responsibilities.  From 1999-2001, Mr. Oostburg Sanz clerked for the federal district court in San Juan, Puerto Rico.  In 1994, he conducted political party training in South Africa during the first all-inclusive national elections, as a Project Officer for the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. From 1991-1993, he served in the Peace Corps in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa, teaching English in secondary schools.  Mr. Oostburg Sanz holds a J.D. from Harvard Law School, an M.P.A. from the Woodrow Wilson School of Princeton University, and a B.S.F.S. from the School of Foreign Service of Georgetown University.

Solomon B. Watson IV, Nominee for General Counsel of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense
From 1989 until 2005, Solomon B. Watson IV served as General Counsel of The New York Times Company.  As General Counsel, Mr. Watson was responsible for the management of the legal, governance, and compliance functions of the company and its operating units. Mr. Watson joined the legal department of The Times Company in December 1974, and became Corporate Secretary in 1979.  Mr. Watson was also a member of the company's management executive committee. Mr. Watson retired from the company as Senior Vice President and Chief Legal Officer in December 2006.  Mr. Watson, member of the New York and Massachusetts State Bar Associations, was an Associate in the Boston law firm of Bingham, Dana & Gould before joining The Times Company.  Among other professional activities, Mr. Watson was a member of the Advisory Board of the Agent Orange Settlement Fund. Mr. Watson holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in English from Howard University and a Juris Doctorate degree from Harvard Law School. Mr. Watson served in the U.S. Army as a Lieutenant in Military Police Corps from 1966 to 1968 and was awarded the Bronze Star and Army Commendation medals for service while stationed in Vietnam.

Kathleen S. Tighe, Nominee for Inspector General, Department of Education
Kathleen S. Tighe is currently the Deputy Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. She assists the Inspector General in overseeing the office, evaluating priorities, and collaborating with the Department, Congress, and the public.  She previously served as Counsel and Assistant Counsel to the Inspector General at the General Services Administration for fourteen years.  From 1988 to 1991, Ms. Tighe was a Trial Attorney in the Fraud Section of the Department of Justice Civil Division.  She litigated cases under the civil False Claims Act and related statutes. Prior to her government service, Ms. Tighe was in private practice with the law firm Lewis, Mitchell & Moore in Vienna, Virginia where she practiced government and private contract litigation.  She earned her B.A. with distinction from Purdue University in 1976, her M.A. in international relations from American University in 1979, and her J.D. with honors from George Washington University in 1983.

Orlan Johnson, Chair, Nominee for Board of Directors of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation
Orlan Johnson is a Partner in the Business Department of the Law firm Saul Ewing LLP.  His practice focuses on general corporate and securities matters, complex business transactions and federal and state regulatory issues in business and securities transactions including proxy solicitations, bankruptcy, equity and debt offerings.  Prior to joining Saul Ewing, Mr. Johnson was Of Counsel at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP where he served as co-head of its regulatory practice in the Washington, DC office.  Previously, he served as a Staff Attorney and Branch Chief in the Division of Investment Management for the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Mr. Johnson is an adjunct professor of law at Howard University School of Law where he has taught Securities Regulation classes.  Mr. Johnson received his B.A. from Andrews University and his J.D. from Howard University School of Law.

Sharon Y. Bowen, Nominee for Vice-Chair, Board of Directors of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation
Sharon Y. Bowen is a corporate partner in the New York office of Latham & Watkins LLP.  Ms. Bowen has counseled clients and handled transactions in a wide range of industries, including financial services, retail and REITs on both domestic and international matters.  She has represented some of the leading investment banks, corporations and private equity firms.  Her breadth of experience encompasses many areas such as finance, acquisitions, private equity and corporate governance.  Ms. Bowen serves as Co-Chair of the firm’s Diversity Committee and Chair of the Diversity Hiring Subcommittee.  She serves on the Boards of Northwestern Law School (Chair), the New York City Economic Development Corporation, the New York Lawyers for the Public Interest and PENCIL, and was selected to the DirectWomen Board Institute.  She has also served on various city, state and national bar association committees and is a frequent speaker at industry events. Ms. Bowen earned her undergraduate degree from the University of Virginia, with distinction, and J.D. and M.B.A. from Northwestern University.

A PROCLAMATION

American families are the foundation on which our Nation is built. Their expressions of unconditional love and dedication sustain family members and support our Nation's communities. During National Family Week, we celebrate the inclusive spirit of American families and applaud the commitment of those family members who encourage us to reach new heights.

My Administration is committed to helping American families meet the demands of modern life, increase their self-sufficiency, and achieve their full potential. Ten days after taking office, I established the White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families, led by Vice President Biden. This Task Force is focused on raising the living standards of working families across the country. In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provides a broad spectrum of support to families experiencing difficult times. It boosts child care and Head Start programs, essential not only to a child's future but also a parent's peace of mind in the workplace. Health care reform will provide security and stability for American families with insurance and affordable options for uninsured Americans.

As we continue to grow as a Nation, we must also be engaged members of our larger family, composed of our neighbors, our colleagues, and the community where we live. We must appreciate the diversity of other families' traditions; we must reach out to help families in need; and we must take more responsibility for the care and development of all children, not just our own. In this season of Thanksgiving, we are grateful that, at our best, America is a collection of strong families, standing united to make our Nation a place of hope and opportunity for future generations.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim November 22 through November 28, 2009, as National Family Week. I invite States, local communities, and individuals to join together in observing this week with appropriate ceremonies and activities to honor our Nation's families.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of November, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

BARACK OBAMA

On Wednesday night, Senate leadership unveiled their final health reform package. It's a great bill that accomplishes President Obama's core goals for reform: provide more security for those who have insurance, guarantee affordable coverage options for those who don't, and rein in the cost of care for American businesses and families.

And it accomplishes all of this while reducing the deficit by as much as $777 billion over the next 20 years.

Now, we're in the final sprint toward reform, and the next challenge is already here.

Today, senators are listening carefully to see how constituents react to the bill and how we want them to proceed. So it's our job to make sure they hear quickly and unmistakably: Move forward!

On Saturday, the Senate faces a close vote on whether or not to begin debate, so it's critical to weigh in right away. Click here to call your senators now.

Just tell whomever answers the phone where you live and that you support the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- and want the Senate to begin discussing it right away.

After you've called, click here to tell us how it went:

http://my.barackobama.com/SenateVote

Many senators have worked tirelessly to get us this far, and they deserve our thanks. But it is crucial that every senator knows that we are counting on them to stand up to the insurance industry and support reform -- and that we will be right there standing with them.

We're getting so close, and your incredible work is a big part of why we've been successful so far. Let's keep it up and get this job done.

Thanks,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

All right, it would have yucked me out pretty majorly if something like this had been produced under Bush. But hey, the guy is under 50 and athletic. I do wonder, though, if he caught it on the first take.

I'll confess to you that it took me a few takes the other day to nail the one tricky riff on Can't Ya Hear Me Knockin'. But as those of you who are guitarists will know, it's harder to play on an acoustic. You should hear me play it on my Tele with the fuzz turned up and one or two (not more!) bourbons in my belly. You'd think it was Keef himself.

Anyway, props to Brees and Polamalu and that other guy (all right, he's DaMarcus Ware, but he's not nearly as famous as the first two). And by the way, are the Saints killin' it or what? I have tickets to go see them mash the Redskins on Dec. 6.

And in further football news, will tomorrow mark the end of the maize-and-blue road for the Great Satan? For the record, I will say that if it were up to me, I'd have him back at West Virginny in a heartbeat. I won't go into the fullness of my views on the current coach for the sake of not offending my home state compadres in a furrin' newspaper. Just suffice it to say that I'd like to see RichRod return to Morgantown. And I'm sure many Michiganders would agree with me.

The Senate is expected to vote Saturday on whether to take up [health reform] legislation. The majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, refused to say Thursday whether he had the 60 votes needed to clear that procedural hurdle.

While the guts of the Senate and House bills are similar, Mr. Reid came up with a new method of financing coverage, not found in any other major health bill. His proposal would significantly increase the Medicare payroll tax for high-income people.

The Senate and House bills would provide coverage to millions of the uninsured by expanding Medicaid and subsidizing private insurance for people with moderate incomes.

The Senate bill would spend $821 billion over 10 years on Medicaid and subsidies. The House bill would spend 25 percent more: $1.03 trillion over 10 years...

Mr. Reid and other Democratic leaders said that the unveiling of the bill, hatched in his office, had given them political momentum going into the first test vote. Despite solid Republican opposition, the Democrats said they were confident they could enact some kind of national health insurance program, a goal that has eluded politicians for more than 75 years. But Congress appears highly unlikely to meet President Obama's goal of finishing work on the bill this year.

From Politico:  

He doesn’t have the votes — yet — but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and fellow Democrats projected confidence they could clear the first hurdle for health reform, a rare Saturday vote to open debate on the sweeping measure.

Reid also got one piece of good news as Republicans at least tentatively dropped their plans to force a reading of the 2,074-page bill, in exchange for a daylong debate, starting in the morning and culminating with a vote at about 8 p.m. Saturday...

Most senators said they had yet to read through the entire bill — or the summaries that their staff members were preparing. Reid’s plan would expand coverage to 94 percent of Americans through a government-run health insurance option — allowing states to opt out — and other features, all while reducing future federal deficits by $130 billion during the next 10 years, according to a Congressional Budget Office report.

“I just like the numbers,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who pledged to read “every word.” “I love the deficit reduction...

From the Editorial Page of the New York Times: 

An expert panel’s recommendation that mammography screening to detect breast cancer be scaled back has caused consternation among women and doctors and prompted some attempts to connect the results to the debate over health care...

It is important to keep the findings and recommendations in perspective. They are guidance for women and doctors. The decision about whether to be screened is properly left to each woman — to determine with the help of her doctor what risks and benefits she is most comfortable accepting...

Opponents of the health care reform bills moving through Congress have seized on the new recommendations as evidence that the government is seeking to put bureaucrats between you and your doctor or that it would ration care by denying coverage for some mammograms that are now covered.

There is virtually no chance that any insurers, either public or private, will deny coverage to anyone based on these recommendations. Government and industry officials have said that explicitly and, in fact, every state but Utah requires private insurers to pay for mammograms for women starting in their 40s...

The only part of the reform bills that could affect mammography would only make them more accessible...

When her supporters defend her, they say things like "I support her because I love the Constitution" (as if most Americans don't?) or "She is a true Patriot" (as if people on the far-left can't fit the same category?)

I wish I could take credit for the below insight, but I actually found this on a blogger response after this MSNBC First Read article and felt compelled to share it, as it sums up the reality pretty well.

1) REAL AMERICANS believe that life is a sacred gift from God not to be thrown away  (referencing anti-abortion)

That would be Christians, the Pope, the Vatican, and Islamic extemists. TRUE AMERICANS found this country on the complete divorce of church and state

2) REAL AMERICANS believe you should be judged on your character, not the color of your skin (reference to opposing affirmative action)

TRUE AMERICANS believe clear historical crimes and ills have created disadvantage economically and educationally and may have been instituted by the state needs to be redressed so that children of those held back that helped build this country can attain a measure of balance and true equality. In short, only an ostrich with head in sand would deny your past is a contibuting part of your present.

3) REAL AMERICANS believe homosexuality is an abomination that should not be tolerated (referencing GLADD) This is not part of our constitution but is a definitely shared by Islamic extremists and terrorists.

TRUE AMERICANS believe all Americans are equal and have the liberty to pursue their lives and hapinness and not be fettered or denied that ability by anyone including the majority. If so, the majority would have continued to vote not to end slavery even while any human realized it as morally wrong both here and worldwide.

4) REAL AMERICANS believe in the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. (implying Liberals don't)

TRUE AMERICANS believe in that right but also believe that it must be exercised in a manner that does not infringe on law enforcement ability granted by the consitution or threaten or harm fellow citizens also constitutional rights.

5) REAL AMERICANS believe you work for what you get, not have the other taxpayers give it to you (opposed to welfare)

TRUE AMERICANS believe the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people and create the environment and foundation upon which growth derives. This has always been the case for years under Reagan, Clinton, Obama, and others before.

Only a UNREAL AMERICAN will imply that other TRUE AMERICANS are not real simply because they do not share that worldview. Perhaps those REAL AMERICANS lack true patriotism and are selfish or insecure when it comes to building up the country rather than dividing us even as they wear their flags on their sleeves to validate their love of country.